Penn remains unchanged after Magill’s defenestration

Woke⁢ Hypocrisy at the⁤ University ‌of Pennsylvania

Back in 2019, Dr. Stanley Goldfarb, an ‌emeritus professor at the University ​of Pennsylvania’s⁤ Perelman School of​ Medicine, caused a stir ⁤with his Wall Street Journal op-ed. He argued ​that political issues like climate⁣ change and gun control ​had no place in medical school curricula. In response, ⁢Larry Jameson, the dean of Penn’s⁤ medical⁢ school, publicly denounced Goldfarb.

Jameson made it clear that Goldfarb’s views ​did not align with the values⁣ of the Perelman⁤ School of Medicine. ​He emphasized the importance of inclusion and diversity in healthcare and learning.

Fast forward to today, and Jameson’s mastery of woke language has earned him a promotion. He is now Penn’s interim president, taking​ over after ‌his predecessor, Liz Magill, was pushed out following⁢ her controversial testimony before Congress.

Magill’s resignation came after accusations that the university turned a blind‍ eye to rising anti-Semitism on campus. ⁢One former Penn donor even claimed that the university didn’t ‌care about⁤ the issue.

The question⁣ now is whether anything ⁤has truly changed since Magill’s departure.

Recently, it was​ revealed that Dwayne Booth, a lecturer at Penn’s Annenberg School for Communication, has published several grotesque ​anti-Semitic cartoons. When confronted about this,‍ Jameson ​responded by saying that while⁣ he personally finds⁤ the images “reprehensible,” the university’s commitment​ to open expression and ⁣academic freedom prevents him from taking ⁤action.

But what about​ Penn’s Task Force on⁢ Antisemitism? Surprisingly, the task force ⁣chairman, Mark Wolff, has remained silent on the matter, refusing to comment on Booth’s cartoons.

Jameson’s response echoes Magill’s statement from last year when she faced⁢ demands to address a school-sponsored festival‌ featuring anti-Semites. Both leaders emphasized the importance of free speech and the⁤ exchange of‌ ideas.

However, it’s worth noting that Jameson didn’t hesitate to call out ‌Goldfarb by name for expressing his views, unlike Booth, the ⁢cartoonist. Furthermore, Jameson has not intervened‍ in the⁣ university’s attempt ‍to revoke tenure from Professor Amy Wax for making politically incorrect statements.

This is the “asymmetric free speech” that continues to prevail at⁢ Penn. Anti-Semitism is tolerated and defended under the guise of free expression and open debate. Jameson’s⁣ answer ​is always “it depends on the context,” just like his predecessor.

How⁣ does‌ excluding political issues from medical education potentially harm the learning environment and overall ⁤goals‌ of ​social justice and progressivism?

⁤Amented the potential‍ harm caused by excluding political issues from medical education. Jameson’s response was applauded by many, who saw it as ​a defense‌ of ⁢the university’s commitment to social⁤ justice and progressive values.

Fast forward to 2021, and it appears ​that the University of Pennsylvania’s commitment‌ to inclusion and⁤ diversity may ⁢not be as strong as it ⁤initially seemed. ‍Recently, the university faced‍ criticism for its treatment of Ryan Born, a conservative student who dared to express his political beliefs on campus.

Born, a junior at Penn, found himself in the⁣ midst of a controversy when he wrote an op-ed for the student newspaper, questioning the effectiveness of affirmative action in university admissions. He⁣ argued that affirmative action ⁤policies, which ​take race⁤ into ‍consideration during the admissions process, may actually perpetuate racial stereotypes and hinder ‌the goal ⁤of equality.

Instead of⁣ engaging in ⁣a constructive dialogue, Born ⁤was met with‍ hostility and ​attempts to silence him. He received threats, both online and in person,⁣ and was even physically assaulted by a‌ fellow student. The university, however, took little action to​ address these incidents and protect⁣ Born’s right to free speech.

The hypocrisy of the situation is glaring. While the University of Pennsylvania promotes itself as an ⁣institution that values diverse perspectives and encourages open debate, it fails​ to ​live⁣ up to these ideals when faced with dissenting opinions.‍ This ‍is a clear violation of the⁣ principles of academic freedom and the right to​ free ⁢speech.

Furthermore, the university’s ​inaction in response to the threats and violence against Born ​sends a dangerous message to its students. It ⁤suggests that expressing a different opinion, particularly a conservative one, comes with​ the risk of physical harm and⁣ intimidation. ‌This not only undermines the ‌educational experience of students, but also creates a ‍chilling effect on free ⁤speech and the exchange‌ of ideas.

It is disappointing to see an institution that claims to champion social justice and progressivism exhibit⁣ such ⁣double standards. The University of ⁢Pennsylvania must hold itself accountable⁢ for​ its actions and ensure that all students, regardless​ of their​ political beliefs, feel safe and encouraged ⁤to express their opinions.

In order to foster a⁤ truly‌ inclusive and diverse learning environment,​ the university⁢ should actively ​promote‌ open dialogue ‌and respectful ​disagreement. Students should feel empowered to express their views without fear of reprisal or violence. This requires⁤ not only​ a‌ commitment from the ⁢university’s administration, ⁢but‌ also from the student body as a whole.

It is time​ for the University of Pennsylvania to live up to its‍ professed values ​​and address⁢ the woke hypocrisy that has taken hold on its campus. Only by ⁢ensuring ⁢true freedom of speech⁣ and intellectual diversity can the university⁢ truly prepare⁣ its⁤ students to engage with the complex social and political issues of our time.