What is now wrong with Cornell and the other Ivies?

The Cornell Free Speech Alliance (CFSA) sees the university's recent leadership change as an opportunity for constructive engagement. After three years of justified criticism, and having raised awareness of crucial campus issues, CFSA now aims to propose and support reforms to restore Cornell's commitment to excellence.

The Problem at Cornell and Other Ivies

For decades, Cornell University has been one of the premier universities in the world. It and the other Ivy League schools have established themselves as the standard of excellence in college education with outstanding reputations in virtually every discipline imaginable.

The citizens of the United States have come to expect high standards of performance in all aspects of education, learning, and leadership from Cornell.

What has happened to change this perception? More pointedly, what has detracted from the quality of education at Cornell, created embarrassing unrest on campus, and prompted investigations by multiple congressional committees?

First, Cornell lost sight of the most basic purpose of the university: to pass on the accumulated knowledge of past generations and to incrementally add to that knowledge.

Cornell instead prioritized the mission of trying to eradicate generations of racial disparity in university education in one generation. This disparity has many causes, some of which are best addressed by the government, and others that can only be addressed by parents and students themselves during their Pre-K to 12th-grade education.

Next, the resulting, inevitable mission creep expanded the scope of Cornell’s goals beyond university education, to eventually encompass criticism of every aspect of American history and culture. Such a mission emboldened political activist academics at Cornell. Cornell’s recent administration embraced and encouraged campus political activism to implement the grandiose mission. The other Ivies took similar actions.

The result: a dominant philosophy of “diversity, equity, and inclusion” (DEI) that served as a guiding principle for every university action—even when that principle was at odds with the basic purpose of the university.

DEI and how it has been implemented

At first glance, DEI certainly appears to promote excellent concepts. However, when these concepts are defined and implemented in the way they have been at Cornell, other Ivies, and other so-called “elite” institutions, they invariably create an environment and culture that are detrimental to learning, mutual respect, and discourse.

Diversity has been interpreted at Cornell as being one-dimensional centering primarily (if not purely) around ethnicity. However, the diversity of the country and the rest of the world is becoming increasingly multidimensional. To judge and make decisions on the basis of only one aspect of a person’s identity is counterproductive.

However, this is what Cornell and the other Ivies have been doing to the detriment of the university community. Advancements in society have occurred because of diversity of opinion. Centuries ago, everyone “knew” the sun revolved around the earth. It was the people who had a different idea who were able to advance scholarship and collective knowledge.

It wasn’t even that long ago that everyone “knew” that women did not deserve to vote. Without the diversity of opinion against the accepted dogma, society would not have advanced beyond that view. Cornell needs to seek diversity on all dimensions to retain its leadership in education and society.

Equity has been applied at Cornell as equality of outcomes. This is factually nonsensical. How can we accept that the best athletes should be selected for the football team, that the gold medal should be awarded for the most outstanding performance, and, yet, at the same time, reject meritocracy when it comes to identifying the best new scientist/professor or administrator?

Cornell should emphasize equality of opportunity and provide mechanisms for its students and academics to improve themselves and the world. However, the school should not seek to create false equal outcomes with grade-leveling or adjusting criteria for acceptance to meet other arbitrary standards. Likewise, Cornell should select its new leaders in administration or academics based on merit and excellence, not based on irrelevant diversity criteria.

Inclusion has been misconstrued into using arbitrary definitions to divide the student population, the country, and the world into oppressors and oppressed people. Also, historically successful societies have been classified as colonizers and assigned oppressor status.

Moreover, individuals and groups, and even entire countries and societies, are locked into their predetermined category forever based on an arbitrarily-selected time period that varies from group to group.

These interpretations of “diversity,” “equity,” and “inclusion,” have birthed a massive bureaucracy and overwhelming administrative bloat to inflict this distorted vision on all members of the Cornell community. This bureaucracy infuses rules, formal and informal sanctions, and procedures throughout every aspect of the university. These mechanisms have stifled free speech, academic inquiry, research, and academic integrity to force fit everything into the “DEI mold.”

The natural outcome of these policies is a self-important administration and bureaucracy that seeks to establish increasingly voluminous rules and procedures for inflicting DEI on all aspects of the Cornell community.

The hiring process has been structured to mandate (“unofficially,” of course) that all new hires in teaching capacities in all disciplines accept and advocate for the new “religion” of DEI. Students have become extremely reluctant to voice opinions that do not conform to the accepted dogma. They also reasonably conclude that adherence to DEI precepts is a prerequisite for achieving the best grades possible. This is true even in STEM courses that should be based on clear-cut “right” and “wrong” answers.

The inevitable has occurred; students and faculty have become advocates of political and social positions that conform to the DEI concept. This problem has manifested itself most visibly in campus hatred for fellow students because they have arbitrarily been placed by faculty and administrative dogma into the category of oppressor. The DEI dogma creates an adversarial environment that stifles education, learning, and creativity.

Cornell is rapidly degenerating into an institution of indoctrination rather than education and inquiry, where academic freedom disappears, replaced by an environment in which everyone robotically (and sometimes unwillingly) nods in agreement with the “approved” positions.

A large number of current administrators and faculty have been recruited using DEI guidelines. As such, returning the university to an environment that welcomes academic excellence and inquiry rather than conformity won’t be easy. Nor will it be easy to return Cornell to its historic position as a world leader in education and scientific inquiry and investigation.

CFSA’s Call for Reform

CFSA has proposed a path for the university to follow to restore its place as a bastion of academic inquiry. This is a path that will value differing opinions rather than punishing them. It is a path that will help Cornell regain the respect of the world community and eliminate the need for investigations by Congress.

CFSA’s recommendations can be found in our report titled “Lifting the Fog: Restoring Academic Freedom & Free Expression at Cornell.” In summary, CFSA recommends that Cornell adopt policies to protect free speech and academic freedom, including the Chicago Statement and Kalven Committee Report, while fostering viewpoint diversity.

The recommended policies would safeguard students' and faculty's rights to express their views without compulsion, ensure due process for alleged infractions, and eliminate DEI requirements in non-relevant courses, all aimed at promoting a more open and diverse intellectual environment on campus.

Neither the administration nor board have publicly acknowledged our policy recommendations.

Cornell University was one of the pioneers in the US of secular, coeducational university education, open to all races, combining studies in the humanities and the sciences at a large scale in one institution that was relatively affordable and open to all. Cornell was also a pioneer in promoting university-sponsored research in the United States.

Cornell’s credo, as exemplified by Ezra Cornell’s words “I would found an institution where any person can find instruction in any study,” was revolutionary in the 1860’s and widely copied throughout higher education.

Campus political activism and DEI have eroded Cornell’s historical credo of “any person, any study” and have replaced it with the credo of Diversity, Equity and Inclusion. It is ironic that “any person, any study,” a simple race- and outcome-blind statement, hews far closer to the American ideal than DEI, a complex race and outcome-obsessed dogma.

We believe the time is ripe for the new administration to reverse this erosion, jettison DEI, and restore Ezra Cornell’s words to their rightful place as the credo of Cornell University.

CFSA is committed to help in any way we can.

A Final Note

CFSA welcomes Interim President Kotlikoff’s University Statement, “Freedom and responsibility” kicking off the academic year on August 26, 2024, and intending to support campus free speech, open inquiry, and the integrity of the relevant university regulations. In light of recent incidents violating the regulations, such as the Day Hall graffiti, CFSA calls for President Kotlikoff to back up his words with prompt, transparent disciplinary actions against violators. Failure to take disciplinary action will render the statement meaningless.