OPINION: UC Davis Chancellor Schooled in Freedom of Expression, Diversity of Thought, and Inclusion

Last week the Globe reported on Turning Point USA founder Charlie Kirk, who was invited by the local TPUSA chapter to speak at U.C. Davis March 14th. Ahead of his speech, the Sacramento Bee published an inflammatory article by Bee opinion assistant Hannah Holzer in which she said, ‘Another fascist speaker is coming to UC Davis,’ and claimed Charlie Kirk had openly called for lynching trans people. Holzer posted this same statement on Twitter, then deleted it. The Sacramento Bee altered the original article first saying, “An earlier version of this column included a reference to trans people that Charlie Kirk has strongly denied. His denial has been added to the column.” The Bee eventually issued an apology.

Making the situation worse, U.C. Davis Chancellor Gary S. May added fuel to the violence, rather than calling for calm and adult behavior, in a video he published ahead of the event:

Charlie Kirk vehemently denied he ever made the lynching statement, and announced he may sue the Sacramento Bee for libel.

The Globe was contacted by numerous UC Davis alumni, who expressed disgust with the Chancellor in particular, as well as the students who tried to shut down the TPUSA/Charlie Kirk event. One of the alumni, who is also a UC Davis employee, sent the Globe a thoughtful written op ed, but asked to remain anonymous over concerns of retribution.

Here it the op ed:

UC Davis Chancellor Schooled in Freedom of Expression, Diversity of Thought, and Inclusion

On March 14, The University of California, Davis published the statement Controversial, Student-Led Event Goes On As Planned, referencing an event organized by Turning Point USA at UC Davis. It is a suspicious headline given the summary states an officer sustained an injury when he was jumped on from behind and pushed to the ground, windows were broken and buildings were vandalized by protestors.

But as an employee, and former student, I was not surprised. This was expected. The familiar condemnation of hate and violence only applies to certain groups at the university, as does the leadership’s version of inclusion.

What was most glaring was the contrast between the speaker, Charlie Kirk, and the Chancellor regarding their views on freedom of expression, an appreciation of diversity of thought, and inclusion. Preceding the event the Chancellor distributed a video where he encouraged students and employees to not attend the event, as opposed to Charlie Kirk who gave priority to people with opposing beliefs to come to the front of the line for questions. The Chancellor filled his video with derogatory remarks, calling the speaker hateful, loathsome, divisive and an advocate for violence. Similar language was included in an opinion article in the Sacramento Bee, but the paper later issued an apology to correct misleading claims.

Chancellor May should do the same.

I would encourage others to view the event online to see the disconnect between the Chancellor’s message and the reality of what took place at the event. It is shocking. What I heard was a refreshing  exchange of ideas, many I agreed with and others that helped me understand different perspectives. The remarks and discussions were respectful and the intent seemed genuinely focused on helping others. There was no advocating for violence despite the Chancellor’s claims. Instead, the speaker ended the event with a call to remain peaceful and not engage with the protestors on the way out.

I walked away from the experience with some important questions. Who was the purveyor of hate and intolerance? Why would the Chancellor and others on the campus go to such lengths to portray the speaker as a villain? Why would he encourage an empty room instead of a fruitful discussion? Why would he not mention that while some expressed concerns about the event, others were thrilled to hear the perspective presented? Why was the approach and outcome so different when Chancellor May hosted his own controversial speaker, Ibram X. Kendi, who calls for active discrimination?

It is no coincidence that when Chancellor May speaks about freedom of expression at the university, he describes it  as “something we are obligated to uphold” instead of celebrating how the exchange of ideas is foundational to the growth, strength, and success of the students. That when we listen, especially when we disagree, we start to appreciate that we have more in common than others would like us to believe and that together we can achieve more than independently. That hate can be extinguished when we listen and try to understand each other.

The opportunity to listen to new perspectives and ideas is what attracted me to work at the university in the first place. Sadly, that is not what exists in the illiberal and divisive environment that exists today at UC Davis.

It is clear that Chancellor May’s vision of inclusion and standing against hate do not apply to all at the university. Take for example the threats received by the students that organized the event. Imagine how other like-minded, or even open-minded students felt about attending the event after hearing the Chancellor’s remarks in his video.

I would consider myself one of those open-minded people, so when the Chancellor says “As Aggies, this is who we are,” I could not disagree more.