The Furman Free Speech Round Up (August)

For Paladins and Friends

Welcome to our August newsletter. The Furman Free Speech Alliance is a rapidly growing group of alumni, parents, and friends who are concerned about Furman University’s deteriorating campus climate for free speech, academic freedom, and viewpoint diversity.

Each month, we update you on what’s happening at Furman and what actions we’re taking to defend free speech on campus.

---

---

Looking Back:

Reflecting on my own time at Furman (2017-2021), late summer reminds me of heading back to campus — before everyone else — for Resident Assistant (RA) training. I served on housing staff for two years, and overall, it was a good experience. I learned a lot, but the training was horrible. 

That was to be expected, of course. Standard compliance training is always boring. It is no different for Furman RAs, who are put through sessions on how to mediate roommate conflict, and help students acclimate to life on a college campus, recognize when students are depressed, and other similar subjects.

I knew that. 

What I didn’t know, however, was that I would also be subjected to political brainwashing and forced speech. This mandatory part of RA training at Furman is called “Dins Dialogue.” 

Furman describes Dins Dialogue as: 

A signature initiative of Furman’s Intergroup Dialogue (IGD) Program which was created so that students, faculty, and staff could learn how to have conversations about identities that unite and divide us. Dins Dialogues Peer Facilitators receive ongoing development in dialogic pedagogy and facilitation skills that prepare to be thought and conversation leaders on campus and beyond. Dins Dialogue Workshops create spaces for participants to engage with one another across differences of race, gender, sexuality, class, faith and politics in ways that promote mutual understanding, compassion, and social change.

Here’s what that means in practice. Students like me — some as young as 18 or 19 years old — are made to sit in a circle in one of Furman’s classrooms. Then, other students ask each of them to introduce themselves with their name and pronouns. If (as I did) a student refuses to state his pronouns, then the peer facilitators will insist on it, question his “privilege,” and indicate that they may need to report him to the proper authorities. 

After that, the “dialogic pedagogy” ensues. Students are forced to sort themselves into groups in the classroom according to criteria as harmless as their favorite color and as serious as their sexual preferences. On top of the fact that some of these questions are deeply uncomfortable and inappropriate, the “social change” that the facilitators are primarily interested in is for white, male, straight, wealthy, Christian, conservative students to feel privileged and guilty. 

Why? Because they’re white, male, straight, wealthy, Christian, conservative students, of course. 

Dins Dialogue is a perfect example of the difference between Furman’s expressed commitment to dialogue and the reality of life on campus. Furman’s administration puts out press releases and signs statements to the effect that is interested in free speech, but in practice the university subjects students to political indoctrination. 

---

One Stat You Should Know:

62% of Furman students say that they would feel very or somewhat uncomfortable expressing their views on a controversial political topic to other students “during a discussion in a common campus space such as a quad, dining hall, or lounge.

---

Looking Ahead:

This month, for the first time in four years, Furman students are heading back to campus in the middle of a presidential election cycle — a contentious one at that. Regardless of partisan preferences, everyone can agree that this election is important, and that’s especially true on Furman’s campus. 

Why? 

Because since the last election — thanks in part to the Furman Free Speech Alliance — Furman has been vocal about its commitment to fostering productive dialogue and facilitating free speech on campus.

In the last year alone, the administration launched the “On Discourse” initiative to “foster a culture that celebrates curiosity, inquiry, empathy, and respect.” The faculty and board of trustees also voted to adopt a new statement on “freedom of inquiry and expression.” Moreover, President Davis bragged about both these moves in an op-ed in the Post and Courier. 

This rhetorical support for free speech is welcome, but the real test of Furman’s resolve will come this fall. 

How will the administration “facilitate dialogue” in this heated political environment? What will the administration do if students bring in a conservative speaker and other students deface advertisements for the event (as happened last year)? How will Furman respond if the election is contested? 

All these questions and more could be put to the test. We will keep you posted as Furman proves its commitment to free speech in real time. 

---

---

In the Network:

We are currently looking for more members to join our Board of Advisors. Members on the Board of Advisors will help us make key decisions in the coming months as we continue to work toward our goals. If you are interested in learning more, please don’t hesitate to reach out to us at: furmanfreespeech@gmail.com.

---