Transcripts For CSPAN Pacific Research Institute- Universiti

CSPAN Pacific Research Institute- Universities Diversity Free Speech July 14, 2024

Department in san francisco. It is just over one hour. I just want to set the scene for our event today. They are going to be talking to us about the administrative bloat and running universities, the deepening ideological skew as faculties aggravating the problem of campus conformity, University Enrollment is already starting to decline because of demographic reasons, and of course, the issue of the Oberlin College dispute where the bakery was awarded 44 Million Dollars in damages, which was a very exciting thing and the people at Oberlin College are beside themselves. Charles cousin went to oberlin and it turned her into a marxist communist. Im not a big fan of oberlin. Steve hayward is the senior resident fellow of the institute of Governmental Affairs at uc berkeley and a visiting lecturer at the Uc Berkeley Law School and of course a senior fellow at pri. I heard steve back in december 1991. He was our second hire. Steve has been affiliated with us for a very long time. He was a Ronald Reagan distinguished professor at pepperdine and also was the first conservative professor in a special program at university of colorado boulder 20132014. I think the most exciting thing about stevie as he is one of the people behind powerline. If you dont read powerline every day, you should. The best thing on saturday morning is the weekend pictures. Charles and i were in hysterics every saturday morning looking at the week in pictures that steve sends out. If you dont get it, you must. Our other speaker worked with larry silverman. We were with him in corsica a few years ago for one of his conferences which was great fun. He clerked for Supreme Court Justice Clarence thomas. He has been a fulbright distinguished chair in italy, the university of chicago, he has written several books and he hails from philadelphia. When his wife doesnt want to go on trips with him, his mother is very keen to go. They are going to machu picchu in peru very soon. Please welcome our panelists. Dr. Steven hayward, and Professor John yoo. [applause] are we using this might . Are using this mike . Yes, it is live. What john and i thought we would do is have a bit of a conversation, i will throw out a few initial propositions and we will have some backandforth. Then we will take some questions from the audience and see where it goes. I thought that was better than just giving standard speeches. Sally gave me headlines and i think i will dilate them slightly. College today, beyond the headlines one of my old mentors used to have sufficient paranoia, which holds that no matter how bad you think things are, its invariably the case that when you look closer, you find out that things were even worse than you thought. In the case of administrative bloat on College Campuses, people think that is what is running up the cost of universities, the number of administrators has soared much faster than faculty, they are all paid very large salaries. That is true, however there is a second part of it, which is, and theres been a little bit of work on this, it has made the press, and even the New York Times. The administrators tend to be even worse than the faculty when it comes to deranged radicalism. A lot of these deans of diversity and inclusion, remember diversity on College Campus means people look different but think the same. A lot of them are drawn from some of the more politicized ideological departments. Your average college liberal professor is relatively sane compared to a lot of administrators. Its especially true at private liberal arts colleges. Sally made mention of the Oberlin College verdict. If youre not following it closely, you might be wondering why did the court find a private college liable for the actions of students off campus. . One of the chief reasons was that the dean of students, an advisor to the president for diversity and inclusion, participated actively in the student protest, help the students organize, passed out their flyers, sent lots of incriminating emails about how awful the bakery was. Reinforced the harassment about some totally bogus charges. The nice thing about america is that we still have trial by jury. The jury in that part of ohio did not take too kindly to all of this. I think that the remedy and i will come back to this in a couple of minutes is just about every university ought to fire half of their administrators. It would matter which have. Health things would get better if you fire half the administrators. There are few universities that have announced cutbacks in administrative positions. The reason for that is declining enrollment. We are already seeing a decline in enrollment, and that is putting a downward pressure on tuition. You have not seen colleges cut their sticker price, but the actual price you pay is falling fast a lot of universities. That will get worse for demographic reasons. Think back 1011 years ago and the financial crisis. The birth rate fell by quite a lot. So the pool of young people that colleges need to draw on to fill up their classes is starting down, and its really going to go off the cliff and another four or five years. Colleges know this, so that will put more downward pressure on tuition and the ability to price. That is going to make a lot of them have to say we cannot afford these 300,000 administrators, so we will see. I hope that is what happens. The second thing is, we have a science dataocial showing that college and university faculties, which have always been liberal, for decades and decades, this is not a new thing. There was always a certain quotient of visible radicalism. That is where radicals should be. If they wreck a few English Departments, thats better than having them out on the street. The problem with universities is their borders are porous, and sometimes these guys sneak out. Who would not have preferred that barack obama remained a law professor, right . There used to be at least some conservatives around. 15 20 of faculties overall. You can find one or two in social sciences. That number has dwindled dramatically. It has been cut by about two thirds. The reasons for that are complicated and disputed. The point is that colleges are more of an echo chamber than they have ever been. In practice, it grows out of what you know as groupthink. The more people with a common opinion, especially and ideological opinion spent time together, the more radical and narrowminded they get. Thats why you see these repeated instances on College Campuses where students or a faculty member or anybody unreasonable is too mild a word. It is completely insane and off the hook. That is a big problem. I think it has two consequences. One that is obvious and wellknown, one less so. The first consequence is, the number of students majoring in the humanities and social sciences has also been plummeting in the last 25 years. The number of history majors has fallen off the cliff, english majors, philosophy. But also Political Science is holding its own, but ought to be doing better in some ways. Economics is the one exception. Of course that is the most robust and successful of the social sciences. And also the one where you find the most libertarians and conservatives and nonleftist professors. For the most part, i think that is correct. I think there is a connection there. A lot of people say students are not majoring in history anymore because they are more concerned about getting a job. They want to study stem subjects and business and economics. There may be some truth to that. Although there is a reason to dispute that. I think it is because the increasingly radical content of those humanities and social Science Department simply turn off a lot of students. The majority of students are not radical or leftist themselves. The majority of students are not. The Largest Group describe themselves as moderate, to some extent. I mentioned economics. A curious thing is happening right now that i think the canary in the coal mine, at a number of prominent universities, columbia, m. I. T. , im trying to think of where else have applied with the federal government to change their official classification. Its a funny little thing i did not even know existed. It has to do with various bureaucratic ways they are classified. Economics departments are classifying themselves as stem, like engineering or physics or chemistry. Why are they doing that . I think part of it is that even liberal economists who are datadriven, they look around at the other social sciences and humanities and say we dont want to be in the college of arts and sciences with all these loons. We wouldve rather be in the more rigorous part of the university. I think it is the canary in the coal mine. I think you are seeing a de facto divorce in universities taking place. Especially big research universities. We are moving toward a situation where you are going to have a university that is stem subjects, economics, business, prelaw, Political Science, and the rest of the university, humanities and social sciences which will wither and die. Everyone will understand they are all crazy people. Fewer students will want to be in those departments, and that will be interesting. I will mention a couple of remedies. I already mentioned firing administrators. Second, one thing to do is figure out ways to create competition within universities. A lot of you are familiar with things like the Hoover Institution at stamford. The James Madison center at princeton that was founded 20 something years ago. Arizona State University has set up its own new school on economic thought and political thought that is independent of traditional departments. It now has a competitive curriculum with traditional departments. Faculty are not happy about that, but the Legislature Said this is going to happen. That was nice. Another idea that has been floating around is somebody needs to step up and start a new university or two. We havent seen Something Like that since brandeis, which was 70 years ago. Finally, i wont say the craziest idea, but the one that is most remarkable not remarkable, but unconventional, and this is something the Trump Education Department might pick up just to scare people and say, what is all this fixation with a bachelors degree . Why dont we create some alternative way of certifying that someone is educated and capable, like we do for example with the cpa exam. So you can take alternative methods of education, online classes, study on your own. The Kim Kardashian approach to passing the bar exam. [laughter] we should experiment with these things. Part of the story is the cartel of accrediting agencies and the nature of reinforcing that you are nothing if you dont have a ba. Maybe create a competitive avenue. That the world that wants to employee people want snow. Lot of employers use the ba as a screening mechanism to find young people that show they can create a course of study, and thats not bad. Maybe we should be even bolder than that. I will stop there. I want to thank Stephen Sally for inviting me to join you today. Getting steve to join berkeley is probably the only thing i have done on behalf of ideological diversity at berkeley other than continuing to exist and not leave the campus. [laughter] you can be the judge of whether it has been successful. I quite agree with the diagnosis. Let me also say i am not a , scholar of Higher Education policy. I think i am here more because, unlike Robinson Crusoe on the island. You are just curious, how did he survive, and what lessons can we draw just by looking at how he made it on the Desert Island . I am very happy to share stories. Everything i see from being one of the few conservatives at berkeley quite comports with everything that steve gave in his diagnosis of what is wrong with the universities, the academic bloated personnel. I think i read a figure, for every one new professor added to a faculty, universities are adding more than 10 administrators, over the last 2030 years. There has been a huge rise in tuition. Often subsidized by the federal government, proved very cheap student loans. Universities are not using them to add professors. They are using them to add things to attract students like better dorms, gyms, several universities have added water amusement parks to their campuses. I always thought eating bad food was part of the college experience. I would not have met my wife had it not been for bad food on College Campuses, because we had to go out somewhere to eat. One thing i would emphasize that steve did not emphasize as much, though he did mention it, i think one of the main problems with Higher Education today is the elevation of identity politics and racial diversity and gender diversity, above all other values at the university. I think if you look at what the university was before, and this is where it started and now it is spreading to other parts of society. You have a Great University like berkeley, maybe a secondplace kind of place like stanford. [laughter] just teasing. The idea was you wanted to have a faculty that did the very best research for the benefit of society. At the same time you want students to surround those faculty so they can learn from the very best. The best professors were not doing the best teaching. They were doing cuttingedge research. They were teaching the students around them to learn how to take their place and do that. I think that has been replaced at most of the Top Research Universities by a desire to meet racial and gender diversity goals. Once that becomes the highest value of the university and other values take second place, universities start to suffer. You should add that at oberlin, it wasnt just an administrator, there were a lot of faculty involved in this lynch mob mentality to go after this bakery which had done nothing wrong from the case i read. The most important thing for a to achieve now is diversity. I think at berkeley, we spend many millions of dollars on racial and diversity bureaucracy. 1 million could put about 50 undergraduates free through berkeley. Instead, we are choosing to spend taxpayer money on gender and racial diversity issues. Every school, every department has an officer who is paid to do this every time you do a search for a new faculty member, you have to write a lengthy report about how it meets gender and racial diversity goals. Of course, we get to the terrible scandals in admissions now. Look at Harvard College. One or two people came up to me before the event who admitted secretly they had gone to Harvard College like i did. [laughter] i cannot believe the amount of distortion that has gone on in the admissions process to hit certain racial diversity goals to the extent that you take asian students in particular, of the the five criteria that students are measured on, they are in the top quintile of the fifth is personality where asian students suddenly rank at the bottom. No stereotypes there. [laughter] even though the harvard admissions director admitted most of the students had never been interviewed. I think asians have no personality will come to a big surprise to the billion and a half people in china and the other billion in india that might be eating our economic lunch these days. What do you do about it . What is the remedy . I differ with steves idea of disassociating i think its true in terms of diagnosis that universities can live in this world and even prosper, because what they are selling is a selling is a credential used by businesses to hire because it shows that students can crawl through the mud and cracks of universities and they are so disciplined and can persevere, they can do anything a corporation wants them to do. I can see why you would say why do we over from these leftwing crazy people at universities who are just performing credentialing function . Lets move the credentialing function somewhere else. I know they do things like this in germany and other countries. Im not sure its a great idea. My little effort at reform is inspired by being one of the few conservatives at yale law school. We have something called the Federalist Society in law schools. The head of the berkeley federal society is over there. She just graduated. She is alive, too. She didnt get killed off by anybody. This is a debating club. It brings conservative ideas to law schools, libertarian and conservative ideas. I would have to say that was the only exposure, the only time i heard about scalia and thomas was at Federalist Society events, not in class. One thing we could do with reform is rather than complain about bureaucrats and how much money the university of spending, try to create programs to bring speakers and visiting faculty to expose some students to conservative ideas and get a debate going. Donate toof you that schools, the best thing you can do we all want to support our alma maters. We dont have to give a blank check to the university to say spend another lazy river amusement waterpark to attract the best students. Instead, give money and focused ways to programs like i think the one steve is running, and there is another one from brad, to bring conservative speakers to campus. More and more can actually hear them. This is where the universities have to step up, in a setting where there is no riot, where police are going to allow people who are so scared of hearing different ideas that they want to engage in violence to suppress it. Unfortunately, berkeley witnessed two of those, and it has been spreading all over the country. That is right think, alums if you want to get money to universities, i want to give money to the University Enrollment<\/a> is already starting to decline because of demographic reasons, and of course, the issue of the Oberlin College<\/a> dispute where the bakery was awarded 44 Million Dollars<\/a> in damages, which was a very exciting thing and the people at Oberlin College<\/a> are beside themselves. Charles cousin went to oberlin and it turned her into a marxist communist. Im not a big fan of oberlin. Steve hayward is the senior resident fellow of the institute of Governmental Affairs<\/a> at uc berkeley and a visiting lecturer at the Uc Berkeley Law School<\/a> and of course a senior fellow at pri. I heard steve back in december 1991. He was our second hire. Steve has been affiliated with us for a very long time. He was a Ronald Reagan<\/a> distinguished professor at pepperdine and also was the first conservative professor in a special program at university of colorado boulder 20132014. I think the most exciting thing about stevie as he is one of the people behind powerline. If you dont read powerline every day, you should. The best thing on saturday morning is the weekend pictures. Charles and i were in hysterics every saturday morning looking at the week in pictures that steve sends out. If you dont get it, you must. Our other speaker worked with larry silverman. We were with him in corsica a few years ago for one of his conferences which was great fun. He clerked for Supreme Court<\/a> Justice Clarence<\/a> thomas. He has been a fulbright distinguished chair in italy, the university of chicago, he has written several books and he hails from philadelphia. When his wife doesnt want to go on trips with him, his mother is very keen to go. They are going to machu picchu in peru very soon. Please welcome our panelists. Dr. Steven hayward, and Professor John<\/a> yoo. [applause] are we using this might . Are using this mike . Yes, it is live. What john and i thought we would do is have a bit of a conversation, i will throw out a few initial propositions and we will have some backandforth. Then we will take some questions from the audience and see where it goes. I thought that was better than just giving standard speeches. Sally gave me headlines and i think i will dilate them slightly. College today, beyond the headlines one of my old mentors used to have sufficient paranoia, which holds that no matter how bad you think things are, its invariably the case that when you look closer, you find out that things were even worse than you thought. In the case of administrative bloat on College Campus<\/a>es, people think that is what is running up the cost of universities, the number of administrators has soared much faster than faculty, they are all paid very large salaries. That is true, however there is a second part of it, which is, and theres been a little bit of work on this, it has made the press, and even the New York Times<\/a>. The administrators tend to be even worse than the faculty when it comes to deranged radicalism. A lot of these deans of diversity and inclusion, remember diversity on College Campus<\/a> means people look different but think the same. A lot of them are drawn from some of the more politicized ideological departments. Your average college liberal professor is relatively sane compared to a lot of administrators. Its especially true at private liberal arts colleges. Sally made mention of the Oberlin College<\/a> verdict. If youre not following it closely, you might be wondering why did the court find a private college liable for the actions of students off campus. . One of the chief reasons was that the dean of students, an advisor to the president for diversity and inclusion, participated actively in the student protest, help the students organize, passed out their flyers, sent lots of incriminating emails about how awful the bakery was. Reinforced the harassment about some totally bogus charges. The nice thing about america is that we still have trial by jury. The jury in that part of ohio did not take too kindly to all of this. I think that the remedy and i will come back to this in a couple of minutes is just about every university ought to fire half of their administrators. It would matter which have. Health things would get better if you fire half the administrators. There are few universities that have announced cutbacks in administrative positions. The reason for that is declining enrollment. We are already seeing a decline in enrollment, and that is putting a downward pressure on tuition. You have not seen colleges cut their sticker price, but the actual price you pay is falling fast a lot of universities. That will get worse for demographic reasons. Think back 1011 years ago and the financial crisis. The birth rate fell by quite a lot. So the pool of young people that colleges need to draw on to fill up their classes is starting down, and its really going to go off the cliff and another four or five years. Colleges know this, so that will put more downward pressure on tuition and the ability to price. That is going to make a lot of them have to say we cannot afford these 300,000 administrators, so we will see. I hope that is what happens. The second thing is, we have a science dataocial showing that college and university faculties, which have always been liberal, for decades and decades, this is not a new thing. There was always a certain quotient of visible radicalism. That is where radicals should be. If they wreck a few English Department<\/a>s, thats better than having them out on the street. The problem with universities is their borders are porous, and sometimes these guys sneak out. Who would not have preferred that barack obama remained a law professor, right . There used to be at least some conservatives around. 15 20 of faculties overall. You can find one or two in social sciences. That number has dwindled dramatically. It has been cut by about two thirds. The reasons for that are complicated and disputed. The point is that colleges are more of an echo chamber than they have ever been. In practice, it grows out of what you know as groupthink. The more people with a common opinion, especially and ideological opinion spent time together, the more radical and narrowminded they get. Thats why you see these repeated instances on College Campus<\/a>es where students or a faculty member or anybody unreasonable is too mild a word. It is completely insane and off the hook. That is a big problem. I think it has two consequences. One that is obvious and wellknown, one less so. The first consequence is, the number of students majoring in the humanities and social sciences has also been plummeting in the last 25 years. The number of history majors has fallen off the cliff, english majors, philosophy. But also Political Science<\/a> is holding its own, but ought to be doing better in some ways. Economics is the one exception. Of course that is the most robust and successful of the social sciences. And also the one where you find the most libertarians and conservatives and nonleftist professors. For the most part, i think that is correct. I think there is a connection there. A lot of people say students are not majoring in history anymore because they are more concerned about getting a job. They want to study stem subjects and business and economics. There may be some truth to that. Although there is a reason to dispute that. I think it is because the increasingly radical content of those humanities and social Science Department<\/a> simply turn off a lot of students. The majority of students are not radical or leftist themselves. The majority of students are not. The Largest Group<\/a> describe themselves as moderate, to some extent. I mentioned economics. A curious thing is happening right now that i think the canary in the coal mine, at a number of prominent universities, columbia, m. I. T. , im trying to think of where else have applied with the federal government to change their official classification. Its a funny little thing i did not even know existed. It has to do with various bureaucratic ways they are classified. Economics departments are classifying themselves as stem, like engineering or physics or chemistry. Why are they doing that . I think part of it is that even liberal economists who are datadriven, they look around at the other social sciences and humanities and say we dont want to be in the college of arts and sciences with all these loons. We wouldve rather be in the more rigorous part of the university. I think it is the canary in the coal mine. I think you are seeing a de facto divorce in universities taking place. Especially big research universities. We are moving toward a situation where you are going to have a university that is stem subjects, economics, business, prelaw, Political Science<\/a>, and the rest of the university, humanities and social sciences which will wither and die. Everyone will understand they are all crazy people. Fewer students will want to be in those departments, and that will be interesting. I will mention a couple of remedies. I already mentioned firing administrators. Second, one thing to do is figure out ways to create competition within universities. A lot of you are familiar with things like the Hoover Institution<\/a> at stamford. The James Madison<\/a> center at princeton that was founded 20 something years ago. Arizona State University<\/a> has set up its own new school on economic thought and political thought that is independent of traditional departments. It now has a competitive curriculum with traditional departments. Faculty are not happy about that, but the Legislature Said<\/a> this is going to happen. That was nice. Another idea that has been floating around is somebody needs to step up and start a new university or two. We havent seen Something Like<\/a> that since brandeis, which was 70 years ago. Finally, i wont say the craziest idea, but the one that is most remarkable not remarkable, but unconventional, and this is something the Trump Education Department<\/a> might pick up just to scare people and say, what is all this fixation with a bachelors degree . Why dont we create some alternative way of certifying that someone is educated and capable, like we do for example with the cpa exam. So you can take alternative methods of education, online classes, study on your own. The Kim Kardashian<\/a> approach to passing the bar exam. [laughter] we should experiment with these things. Part of the story is the cartel of accrediting agencies and the nature of reinforcing that you are nothing if you dont have a ba. Maybe create a competitive avenue. That the world that wants to employee people want snow. Lot of employers use the ba as a screening mechanism to find young people that show they can create a course of study, and thats not bad. Maybe we should be even bolder than that. I will stop there. I want to thank Stephen Sally<\/a> for inviting me to join you today. Getting steve to join berkeley is probably the only thing i have done on behalf of ideological diversity at berkeley other than continuing to exist and not leave the campus. [laughter] you can be the judge of whether it has been successful. I quite agree with the diagnosis. Let me also say i am not a , scholar of Higher Education<\/a> policy. I think i am here more because, unlike Robinson Crusoe<\/a> on the island. You are just curious, how did he survive, and what lessons can we draw just by looking at how he made it on the Desert Island<\/a> . I am very happy to share stories. Everything i see from being one of the few conservatives at berkeley quite comports with everything that steve gave in his diagnosis of what is wrong with the universities, the academic bloated personnel. I think i read a figure, for every one new professor added to a faculty, universities are adding more than 10 administrators, over the last 2030 years. There has been a huge rise in tuition. Often subsidized by the federal government, proved very cheap student loans. Universities are not using them to add professors. They are using them to add things to attract students like better dorms, gyms, several universities have added water amusement parks to their campuses. I always thought eating bad food was part of the college experience. I would not have met my wife had it not been for bad food on College Campus<\/a>es, because we had to go out somewhere to eat. One thing i would emphasize that steve did not emphasize as much, though he did mention it, i think one of the main problems with Higher Education<\/a> today is the elevation of identity politics and racial diversity and gender diversity, above all other values at the university. I think if you look at what the university was before, and this is where it started and now it is spreading to other parts of society. You have a Great University<\/a> like berkeley, maybe a secondplace kind of place like stanford. [laughter] just teasing. The idea was you wanted to have a faculty that did the very best research for the benefit of society. At the same time you want students to surround those faculty so they can learn from the very best. The best professors were not doing the best teaching. They were doing cuttingedge research. They were teaching the students around them to learn how to take their place and do that. I think that has been replaced at most of the Top Research Universities<\/a> by a desire to meet racial and gender diversity goals. Once that becomes the highest value of the university and other values take second place, universities start to suffer. You should add that at oberlin, it wasnt just an administrator, there were a lot of faculty involved in this lynch mob mentality to go after this bakery which had done nothing wrong from the case i read. The most important thing for a to achieve now is diversity. I think at berkeley, we spend many millions of dollars on racial and diversity bureaucracy. 1 million could put about 50 undergraduates free through berkeley. Instead, we are choosing to spend taxpayer money on gender and racial diversity issues. Every school, every department has an officer who is paid to do this every time you do a search for a new faculty member, you have to write a lengthy report about how it meets gender and racial diversity goals. Of course, we get to the terrible scandals in admissions now. Look at Harvard College<\/a>. One or two people came up to me before the event who admitted secretly they had gone to Harvard College<\/a> like i did. [laughter] i cannot believe the amount of distortion that has gone on in the admissions process to hit certain racial diversity goals to the extent that you take asian students in particular, of the the five criteria that students are measured on, they are in the top quintile of the fifth is personality where asian students suddenly rank at the bottom. No stereotypes there. [laughter] even though the harvard admissions director admitted most of the students had never been interviewed. I think asians have no personality will come to a big surprise to the billion and a half people in china and the other billion in india that might be eating our economic lunch these days. What do you do about it . What is the remedy . I differ with steves idea of disassociating i think its true in terms of diagnosis that universities can live in this world and even prosper, because what they are selling is a selling is a credential used by businesses to hire because it shows that students can crawl through the mud and cracks of universities and they are so disciplined and can persevere, they can do anything a corporation wants them to do. I can see why you would say why do we over from these leftwing crazy people at universities who are just performing credentialing function . Lets move the credentialing function somewhere else. I know they do things like this in germany and other countries. Im not sure its a great idea. My little effort at reform is inspired by being one of the few conservatives at yale law school. We have something called the Federalist Society<\/a> in law schools. The head of the berkeley federal society is over there. She just graduated. She is alive, too. She didnt get killed off by anybody. This is a debating club. It brings conservative ideas to law schools, libertarian and conservative ideas. I would have to say that was the only exposure, the only time i heard about scalia and thomas was at Federalist Society<\/a> events, not in class. One thing we could do with reform is rather than complain about bureaucrats and how much money the university of spending, try to create programs to bring speakers and visiting faculty to expose some students to conservative ideas and get a debate going. Donate toof you that schools, the best thing you can do we all want to support our alma maters. We dont have to give a blank check to the university to say spend another lazy river amusement waterpark to attract the best students. Instead, give money and focused ways to programs like i think the one steve is running, and there is another one from brad, to bring conservative speakers to campus. More and more can actually hear them. This is where the universities have to step up, in a setting where there is no riot, where police are going to allow people who are so scared of hearing different ideas that they want to engage in violence to suppress it. Unfortunately, berkeley witnessed two of those, and it has been spreading all over the country. That is right think, alums if you want to get money to universities, i want to give money to the Campus Police<\/a> department to protect conservative speakers on campus. That is the most effective donation you could give. I do want to say, because it is true, berkeley will never live down its long reputation going back to the Free Speech Movement<\/a> before. However, berkeley is actually quite a bit better, especially a lot of these private liberal arts colleges like oberlin, like sarah lawrence. Harvard and yale, for that matter, that behaved disgracefully. The current chancellor, when they left said we are going to shut down ben shapiro, she said no youre not. The school was running a deficit. She said, i will take whatever i will spend whatever it takes to make sure his free speech rights are not it ends up being boring and dull. One of the problems with the campus at berkeley is it has porous borders. I showed up and i realized the night before schapiro was going to show up, a truck showed up and installed the barriers around the perimeter and created an opening to have crowd control. They brought out an immense police force. Chancellor crist was going to be darn sure they did not want a repeat of the milo riot. Good for her, i think she deserves all the praise for that. And we were mad at her for that, because she spent all the money conservatives do get some blame here. Not responsible conservatives, but i could see Berkeley Students<\/a> inviting someone like milo or ann coulter, they want to stick it in the face of the campus admission. They want to get the most they want to get the most outrageous, most frequently provocative person. I kind of understand. It is sort of if students on the left invited people from the nation of islam to speak. There would be a campus explosion. Conservatives should try to aim may be like a bench. Outcome of people who are not just there who would like a riot. I think the problem is with ann coulter or milo, they have an interest in things getting shut down. I would like Heather Mcdonald<\/a> or Steve Hayward<\/a> show up at and engage in an intelligent debates with the other side. That is the point. There was a book a couple years ago called becoming right, how campuses shape young conservatives. It was by two sociologists by the university of san diego which means they are totally clueless. They interviewed students at two campuses. Harvard and the university of colorado boulder. They also talked a lot about places like berkeley, santa barbara, ohio state. I will restate the question. Why is it that you will get students, conservative students want to have milo or ann coulter at a place like berkeley, but not yale or harvard or princeton . Its not just because those are elite ivy league schools, is because they have what Harvey Mansfield<\/a> conspicuous conservativism. You have the William F Buckley<\/a> program at yale that has a speaker almost every week. By the way, the reason there was a speaker almost every week is that after that ridiculousness at yale over halloween costumes, lots of alumni quit giving money to colleges and started giving it to programs. The point is that for students who have no conspicuous conservativism, it is quite understandable that they want to give the middle finger to the campus. John at heart, i am a conservative and a pessimist and we are fighting a losing battle to maintain the idea that we should study the best that has ever been written and try to advance the frontiers of knowledge, but its hard to see turning the universities around, admittedly. Even if we have a program, people bring conservative speakers to campus, having been the Berkeley Campus<\/a> 4 i just , i cantmy 25th year see any way to turn the ship around. If anything, in the last 10 years the left has added another generator engine on and turbocharged into the wilderness. I dont see how we can prevent the direction things are going, im afraid to say. First of all, i have the attitude of the late hungarian friend of mine, things are serious and not yet bad. That might be too optimistic. He was a college professor, by the way. Great timing. Clearly wrong. [laughter] a couple of thoughts. One, the good thing about human nature is that it is on our side. That manifests itself in a couple of ways. Almost all students grow up and start paying taxes. Its a sobering moment for a number of students and usually educational. Not for all of them, but for some. Even in myne is experience there are some usually the brightest of the leftist students, they are actually eager to learn Something Else<\/a> and kind of tired of the narrow conformity of the left. Thatt think it takes much. You will not turn them around but it doesnt take that much to create a different dynamic. Thats my experience at berkeley and boulder. The most fun ive had are the liberals have told me directly they wanted to hear Something Else<\/a>. By the way, to respond to it, not to go off on it now, but at some point i read an article that most conservative academics, its not just the ideology that differs, its the method and manner of teaching in the classroom thats different. Not universally true, and i would say half true for a lot and more. Even liberal students understand that and see that. I actually dont think my standard line about this, and i think this is true in a larger sense, one of us is worth 20 of them. You dont need very many of us to have an effect on Good Students<\/a> who are serious about their education in the humanities and so forth. There are several more dimensions of this i could go through. I will just give you a little angle that i have had some fun with. Longest time i was writing an article that i would call one sheer for Ward Churchill<\/a>. I dont know if you remember that guy, hes kind of famous, he was the crazy guy, the chairman of the Ethics Studies Department<\/a> in colorado who got caught saying that people in the twin towers of 9 11 deserved it. He got fired after that, though not for being crazy. Thats the real reason. They said it was plagiarism and that his scholarship wasnt any good. Ok. They really fired him because he was an embarrassment to the university. The last people want is for sunlight. Why one sheer for Ward Churchill<\/a> . One of the reasons that so many students do flock to these radicalized departments of critical theory, gender studies and all the rest is that for all of their jargon and ideology, they are asking the question what is justice . They do engage the passions of students in a way that a lot of Political Science<\/a> and sociology courses dont. What do you get these days . Modelingregression without coherent, straightforward discussions of justice. Things that conservatives are good at, i think, Education Field<\/a> fashioned way the talks to students trying to form their souls in serious ways, the competition is not just ideological but silent stylistic. Maybe thats too much. Being a professor at law school, we dont want anything to do with peoples souls. [laughter] we are trying to beat that out of them, actually. [laughter] sure. Its interesting to me that you see the hope in students. I worry more about the faculty, from an internal perspective, when i was hired there were still what i would call new deal liberals. Professors that were liberal but thought lets have a diversity that we can agree with, ideological diversity because it was fun to have people of lots of different views. Socrates and plato are teaching, they dont want all the people in their symposia to think like them. You want to advance ideas by having a critical examination by as many different people and views as possible. I think thats disappearing if it hasnt wholly disappeared from most departments. In a lot of these social sciences and humanities departments you have people that dont believe in ideological diversity anymore. They wont hire conservatives. I think that when i retire, which will be when i die many years ago many years in the future, i hope, they are not kicking me out of there although if there is a good buyout i would think about it. I would be shocked if they replace me with another conservative. I think that the faculty today dont believe they think that what they are doing with diversity is just the right answer. So you would never have people who would think the wrong thing. I think the right thing these days is racial and gender diversity. You are right, the students are hungry for lots of different opinions, but at the same time it think you see facultys constricting what are considered legitimate points of view and legitimate arguments for scholarship. We should take to some questions and comments now. In the couple of hands back. Im going to let you pick them, tim. I saw the first hand in the back. Run back there. That seems to be the most active table. I dont know. Helen, you must have gotten into them about something. Ok. My name is marianne. I worship and administration of the. My late uncle was at m. I. T. He said that the international has ass office at m. I. T. Many administrators as the whole pta in that was in the 50s. The second thing i would like to say is i do challenge mr. Hayward on one thing, that the english professors can do that much damage there than on the street. The problem is that there was just an english professor at uc davis who basically told students to go kill policemen. This guy hasnt been fired. The third thing i would like to i just witnessed a student from high School Getting<\/a> a scholarship by a republican womens group. The student wrote in the essay that i as a teacher think that the essay was about a third grade essay. Ok. ,y comment about english wrecking the English Department<\/a> is a price not a big price to pay to keep people of the streets. The strong i was being facetious. Its no longer confined to the crazy english or critical studies department. I dont know if you saw this, just in the last couple of weeks i guess there is some website or algorithm or search engine, im not sure what, but it can sweep of every newxt york times article from the last 20 years to select certain terms and words to see how often they are used. All of the jargon of Higher Education<\/a> left, like intersectionality, white foremacy, all the graphs the last four or five years, into theow has this gotten New York Times<\/a> . A lot of these people from these departments were graduated and hired by the New York Times<\/a>. Facebook, twitter, this is how we know they are censoring people. One of the Youtube Channels<\/a> taken downh lips of the hitlers era to teach. They took that down. It was a history teaching tool and they took it down from youtube he can as they are they idiots . They marinate in stuff. Youre right, my comment is a little bit flip, but to the that ithat it was true was confined to the classroom and kids would graduate and about out and get jobs and be more sensible, theres less reason to think that now. I want to defend steve a bit. And this doesnt happen often. But you kind of reference that here. Theres a kind of deal, even a strong understanding, you do see this diverse city push really primarily taking place in the softer disciplines, where it is harder to observe who is good or bad as a scholar. I think you really dont see this in physics or the sciences. There are administrators who are im sure constantly demanding it but i dont think that you see this kind of level of demand for diversity or at least its implementation in the hard Science Department<\/a>s. Once that happens, if that were to happen, i would become really worried about the quality of our universities. If you look at these International Rankings<\/a> of universities, despite averaging we are saying, american universities are far and away better than any other universities in the world. But i think a lot of that has to do with the performance of our hard Science Department<\/a>s that constantly when all of these nobel prizes, continuously make discoveries leading to Great Innovation<\/a> in technology and in the economy and i dont think they are ranking them based on the quality of their english faculties or history departments. One of the few things that gives me great confidence, when i review the applications of foreign students we get thousands of applications from china every time i see a Chinese Students<\/a> transcript i see marxist leninist thought one, required class. Then i think maybe we will stay ahead of them for a few more centuries if every student in china is forced but then i wonder maybe its a good idea for berkeley, maybe they will start requiring marxist and leninist thought at american universities and our great advantage will disappear. I would like to weigh in on what seems to be your conflation racially inspired admissions and gender inspired admissions, as if they were coequal evils. Im here to tell you i have a daughter who graduated with honors from bucknell in Mechanical Engineering<\/a> and management. Shes doing astronomically well on her own. However she was bitterly disappointed when she was rejected from cornell and uc berkeley. In the theory of experimentation, she took Summer School<\/a> courses taught by cornell prefer professors at cornell and uc berkeley professors and it both courses she got an a plus, beat out everybody in the class. At uc berkeley she got a plus in chemistry and the professor came up and said my dear, i dont know where you go to college but i will personally write a letter of recommendation for you to come to uc berkeley and my ghter stood up, all 58 five foot eight inches tall. She said sir i have already been rejected here once, you wont have the opportunity to do it again. Obviously there will be you willl cases where see discrimination. Im not saying that did occurred here. Im sure that berkeley would love to have more women students and faculty if they could. I would bet that what has this is a longer story, but i think what has happened is that we have moved away from a system which i think of as a very meritocratic system based on sat scores, test scores, performance and courses, we have totally moved away from that to a system of holistic evaluation of applicants which i am afraid is really just a cover to allow Admissions Officers<\/a> to consider race. Hats one second, look at the other College Admissions<\/a> scandal we havent talked about. The one about eyeing your way into college by suddenly finding a sailing prodigy and your family at high schools without sailing teams. Of course it was usc that was mostly involved in this. Thats another i just like teasing. Stamford. Berkeley has not been involved yet. I like teasing our competitor schools. Shows is nott that that these things go on, it shows that when you move off of wheretocratic system anything counts, of course you are going to have all kinds of gaming of the system. These people are just more obvious than others because they just bribed people. But you will start having lots of competition flow into these other areas. Who is going to do better at that, actually . Who is going to be better at sending their kids to third world countries to build Sanitation Systems<\/a> or become really good at us or or art . I think its going to be wealthier people. The unfortunate thing, i think, is that the new system of admissions that all these schools are moving to the university of chicago doesnt use sat scores anymore, which i find incredible. The university of chicago of all places. Once they move away from a more meritbased system of admission, you will have all kinds of excuses and unexplainable results. Whats going to happen is officers will be using this as a cover for social engineering. True for several years now that more women than men are going to college. Its more skewed at private liberal arts colleges, for sometimes its 6040 women to men. The second and third tier liberal arts colleges, seems like as a million of them. Have ahey really struggle. You talk to Admissions Officers<\/a> and they are terrified of going below that ratio because they get so many more applications from women. Place likef a berkeley, which gets 120,000 applications per year. You can even it out more. Going beyond the aggregate, its true that women outnumber men now in law school, nationwide. I think they are close to even in business schools. On the whole list, the education masters phd, thats 80 women. Going down to the other end of the scale, physics, engineering, chemistry, its 20 women. You can do the bar as they go from 80 education and you really do see that sort of you are not supposed to talk about these things, we are embarrassed about it. But i know women who are stellar in science and i said you know what . Women are the simplest it play that game. Not that game, but take advantage of that. One lady professor at a very pro prestigious Engineering Department<\/a> in iowa was up for tenure. Imcalled me up and said getting some opposition. She had written one oped article, a long list of impressive publications. Scientific journals of hydrology. She called me up and said that the dean said there was trouble with my tenure review and approval because i wrote one oped articles about Climate Change<\/a> that were not following the orthodoxy. I said look, go into your dean and tell them you know, i know that all the Science Department<\/a>s want women professors. If you dont want to give me tenure, let me know now and i by 5 00 another job this afternoon. Which i think is true by the way. Anyway, good luck to your daughter. And people like that. In reference to the admissions scandal, how do you see all of this Going Forward<\/a> with the decline in enrollment . More of this kind of abuse . Or do you see it selfcorrecting . Protection, please. With the harvard case and there is another companion case from the board of the Pacific Legal<\/a> foundation where they are yorking up students in Public Schools<\/a> because the mayor is trying to introduce racial quotas for the magnet schools in new york city. Something they used to do here at global high in san francisco. There are these two cases moving forward. I think that the Supreme Court<\/a> will eventually take one of the two. If you look at the lineup of the justices, there are at least four that would vote to strike down the use of race in College Admissions<\/a>. Its actually quite bizarre as a matter of Supreme Court<\/a> precedent that race can only be used by the government when it has the most compelling interests. Race is basically the only way you can achieve the interest. Havenly two big areas they recognized this our wartime and College Admissions<\/a>. Are wartime and College Admissions<\/a>. Such an anomaly. I think the justices thought it would be an elite opinion. I think its a real anomaly and aberration in our constitutional jurisprudence and i think these five justices, assuming chief Justice Roberts<\/a> of votes the way he has in the past, no guarantee assume that but i if those justices vote consistently with their past that they will use one of those cases to strike down the use of race, which i think would be a good turning point to restoring or at least turning the direction of the ship back towards a more meritocratic university system. So how did we get meritocracy in the first place . That was the creation of elite universities. They wanted standardized tests. And then one day they said racial, ethnic, gender distribution results, they were not happy with it. Notwithstanding that, is the university the place where you start to fix the problems of minorities who have bad schools . Bad family life . Taking those problems more seriously. Whats happening right now is there have always been exceptions to meritocratic rule. Athletes, musicians, people injured,. As we learned, we can exploit the the i like the phrase side door, bribing a sailing at stanford. The public reaction has not been surprising to me. Had suspected there was something rotten going on across the board. Im picking this up a lot of ,laces, berkeley and elsewhere that you might say the liberal elite establishment at universities is now rethinking the idea of meritocracy directly. People openly speaking maybe meritocracy is not where institutions should be structured and organized. I think that if follow that in practice, especially since we cant use race as a factor, its going to create chaos. I have no idea where that is to go, but i dont think it will be good. I was wondering if you could comment on the work that Mitch Daniels<\/a> is doing at purdue, with his reform there and how he has been able to control costs and bring bureaucracy under control. If that is not a model of a sign of hope for improvement. It absolutely is a model. Hes been the president therefore 10 years now . Tuition has not gone up a single dollar. They froze tuition. He did exactly what you would expect a republican with a business background to do. We dont need the cars in our fleet where have of them are not used half the time. All of these not hiring lots of people. Im all asking hello, why cant this be copied . I had one very brief conversation with him a while ago. I wish he was more aggressive in the way that john silver was a few years ago at austin. There are a couple of things there were he has tried to bring in sensible people, but he is playing it straight and god bless them for that. But there ought to be a model for people and sooner or later people will wake up to that by necessity. I think you are right that the departure from meritocracy is responsible for both the recent admissions scandal and theg rick singer claims of bias against asianamericans at harvard. What a possible solution be to require the admissions process to be more transparent . So that it was clearer to the the selectionw was being made . Which might push towards a more merit taste process . Or is it hopeless to think that the admissions process can be made transparent in this country . I want to do . At or im going to argue for, suggest, and watch peoples heads explode, for the really elite places like harvard and bel, lets set a baseline to a qualified applicant. Whatever the test score might be. You can also allow room for the way, i myself am putting it this way is a double negative, im not uncomfortable with some aspects of holistic consideration students. A bad school with a good test score, maybe dont test well, you have interesting grades and recommendations from teachers who are serious who say that this person my people to do the work. You get a qualified pool of people and then you admit them by lottery. Lets do that. To universities dont want do that. Part of legacy admissions, we knew this through the harvard discovery process. This person gets flagged because this persons parents will be fixed donors. Its wholly corrupt, right . By the way, if im a minority hardly anye minorities at harvard 50 years ago you look at that in say wait a minute. It may not solve your problems, but that is an unjust privilege. Im not uncomfortable with some ways of trying to puzzle this out. It has its problems, but lets go to a lottery system in the end game and then it is a lot more honest. Crazy,ink this is a crazy idea. Having a lottery . [laughter] be like powerball. Drawings on national television. What are you talking about . But i think that dan is right in the sense that, say berkeley, what they could do is take the data off, the identifying off of files and have the confidence to say here are all of the people we admitted this year. Here are their scores. And if we are so proud of the values they will never do it. I would just use if i was an admissions officer i would just use meritocratic data, sat and course performance to correct for socioeconomics. As he said, some people have different obstacles to face in terms of quality schooling. If the universities think that eating a good sailor should put you in a College Freshman<\/a> class, then admit it. That would be interesting. Like a purdue could do this. The university of Higher Education<\/a> is a market. The one maybe area to hope for is that some people theory predict that there should be some institutions that will have a counter to the whole cycle and emphasize these kinds of values so you could see a Mitch Daniels<\/a> or someone saying that they will make the system transparent, theoretically a face start admitting all the people that the other universities are not admitting because of their , but just ace goals verse of the goals, these others should cross her. That used to be the story about how the university of chicago became a Great University<\/a>, because they wouldnt play the game. Now they are the Big University<\/a> coming out the gate saying they wont use sats anymore. Thank you. One of the concerns that i have these days is about the attitude of students on campus about free speech. When i was an undergraduate ring the free speech era, students wanted to be they wanted no limits on what they could be exposed to. Or could expose themselves. Now there seems to be a significant, i hope minority, but a Significant Group<\/a> of students on campus essentially demanding to remain ignorant. What do you suppose is the origin of this change. What you call save space culture and so forth . There are several routes to it that are deeply ideological. I could walk through them. There are doctrines that say that free speech is merely a tool of power and thats why it should be suppressed, theres no such thing as free speech. Another doctrine says that free speech actually satisfies the old principle of physical harm. There are documented studies saying that when someone is upset on a College Campus<\/a>, Blood Pressure<\/a> is stressful, it goes up. My responses really . Is the knowledge that my low is talking more stressful than milo is talking more stressful than a midterm exam . I did have some fun with this, especially with liberal students. I have them look at the port huron statements. The founding document of the students for democratic society. They picked this up really fast. Whats the disposition of the documents . Oneant to grow up, responsibility, dont want administrators looking up for us looking out for us. They want to take responsibility by the way, its antisay space. From the left, just the contrast of this position between the radical students then and now, i bring this up and the point is, its embarrassing to students now. I do think it is the minority or crazy about all this. Its an awful lot of pressure on students to conform. Theres a lot of survey data from students that show that they are afraid to share their opinions. Most students say that a lot of college now consists of no go zones. You dont even need official censorship anymore. People are self censoring and thats terrible. I was just reminded, i forgot to issue our trigger warning at the beginning of this event. I start my class by saying that be filledclass will with triggers and i will give one at the beginning of the semester. My line is that i dont do microaggressions, i only go in for fulltilt macro aggressions. [laughter] i agree with everything steve said about why free speech is declining on campus, but one other element that i think he mentioned that should be thrown in there is a think all of you are to blame for raising the children the way that you raise them these days. Because a lot of students, i find, dont want the number one thing they dont want to do is offend anybody else. They are so worried about sensitivities to the point where they are not willing to say may the sharpest thing or the to advance the discussion because they are worried that someone else will be offended. One thing i have noticed in my years of teaching is that the discussion, i have to push them harder to say things, to interrogate their ideas to their logical conclusions because people are so worried about offending each other. Hearings, students were completely worried i think that anything they said from middle school on would be used against them in the confirmation hearings. You are seeing a lot. But the kavanaugh hearings themselves are a product of this , this kind of environment and culture that we are living in now. I think that students themselves are responsible for this free speech, this antifree speech attitude on campus. Along with the faculty. We have time for two or three more questions. Want to thank you both. It has been a fantastic discussion. I noticed that in the discussion there is a tendency to refer to the universities as though they are monolithic. I wonder if you could address the issue of private versus public universities. What different rules should apply to the issues we are discussing . And among private universities, distinguish between those who take government funding, say like stanford, taking a tremendous amount, and say hillsdale, which takes note government funding . Hills theyll yeah, ive been many times. You fly to detroit, turn left out of the airport and drive 200 years to brigadoon. Its a wonderful place, its way out in the middle of nowhere. [laughter] its kind of siberia, cold in the winter. Hillsdale has to be good or no one would go there, right . Hillsdale and grove city are the only doing serious colleges that dont take federal funds. There might be one or two others. Privatention that colleges are worse than public universities . And big universities . Thats true for a bunch of reasons. A private university, i think they have more latitude to have a speech code. There is the old civil rights law, if you take federal funds you are bound by a lot. They had that in admissions for harvard. But i also think that a good example is that most of the administrators at berkeley, i have met a lot of them and some of them come from places like i have been with the current dean or provost of the chemistry department. Hes not one of these crazy ideologues. The dean at oberlin, one of the administrators comes from i looked up some of her work last night. She comes from one of the crazy academic departments that teaches all the fringe there hes and the private universities tend to have more people like that. Its not uniform, you could find exceptions. There are some deans at berkeley that i dont want to meet. But that is one difference. But yeah, a Public University<\/a> university actually, in this stage we have the letter that says even private universities are here i dont know the legal angle. Public universities have to obey the first amendment. They try not to but they have to. Ultimately, you can see them and you can force them to. California, prop 209, the use of race was even more obvious and pronounced before prop 209. To thatmissions prior were always 15 to 18 at berkeley and after 209 asians are about 35 to 40 of the class. They are still cheating at the asgins, but they cant cheat blatantly as they used to. Thats harder to do it a private university. Right . Big public state universities , all of these administrators, they dont want their heads to stick out above the grass. All of Higher Education<\/a> is moving in the direction of state universities in this way. You would expect private universities to be more diverse and outcome. Some are really bad, right . But then there could be space for private universities to emphasize and return to a more conservative style of education that should prosper when everybody else is making a mistake. Oddly, you might find a source for hope and reform in a smite smaller private college that can show the benefits of acting against the herd mentality. Thanks for being here. Im going to reward you both with a really easy question. Much, if there is a limit, should a university have to spend on security when controversial speakers come to campus . Background ofthe two in the instances. The milo incident, and then the high security at the ben shapiro. Both events. T there was no security at the milo event. There was incredible security, supposedly 600,000 at the ben shapiro. How much should a university be expected to pay. I dont have a good answer. Is a reasonable expense. Coming back to campus, i was talking to the chancellor. Part. Fraught on his he kept announcing speakers that would come with him and then one day Charles Murray<\/a> was coming and i thought, i doubt that. I would say i wouldnt go with that. I told the chancellors office. I said obviously hes trying to fleece donors. The chancellor was cool and said tell us what we need. Fess, it was a fraud on his part. Wrote brokee the fever. The contingent answer is that you should spend whatever it takes to maintain the authority of the campus to control the campus. Theres no objective figure for that. Muche lawyer in me has a more pragmatic answer that actually works. Ould say that you should it will have a great effect of paying for security and reducing the number of protests. All the time that you need to spend on security, the dollar shelley transferred from the Diversity Inclusion<\/a> office dollar for dollar. I like that better. [laughter] atim going to be debating berkeley against a very leftwing professor and i hope im going to have the appropriate security. I sort of have been thinking im not a National Name<\/a> but it is sort of worrying. Steve will be there. We will turn up so you have two supporters. Oh good, good. Harvey mansfield, 86 now, still teaching and very much with it, we were attending our goddaughters graduation from harvard last may. Charles was a student of harveys. Twice as was i but he doesnt come to any of my graduations. It was his 65th year graduation last year. He did tell charles that when he replace they will never harvey with a conservative, so he has to go on for ever and ever and then john will go on for ever and ever at berkeley. A wonderful event. I want to thank everyone for coming. Particularly to steve and to john, you, for an excellent job. [applause] be with us later today when Supreme Court<\/a> Justice Ruth Bader<\/a> ginsburg delivers remarks in little market, arkansas. Part of a special lecture series hosted by the Clinton Foundation<\/a> and school of public service. Live Coverage Today<\/a> at 7 30 eastern. Have beenograms showcasing whats available every weekend on cspan two and tonight its bestsellers. Melinda gazed discusses her life and work with women around the world. You can see that tonight starting at 8 p. M. Eastern on cspan 2 and enjoy book tv every weekend also on cspan 2. We have been showing you American History<\/a> tv programs as a preview of whats available every weekend on cspan3. Tonight the cold war. Speakers include cancer francis gary junior, whose fathers plane was shot down by the soviet union. He takes us on a tour of the cold war museum. Later, edward r. Murrow narrates a film on nato and Austin Carson<\/a> discusses his book secret wars, covert conflict in international politics. Watch that tonight at 8 p. M. Eastern on cspan3. Last week Queen Elizabeth<\/a> agreed to suspend parliament for five weeks at the request of boris johnson. There will be questions about this, with a way forward during Prime Minister<\/a> special time. You can see live tomorrow starting at 7 a. M. Eastern on cspan 2. Campaign 2020, watch our live coverage of the president ial candidates on the campaign trail and make up your own mind. Campaign 2020, your unfiltered view of politics","publisher":{"@type":"Organization","name":"archive.org","logo":{"@type":"ImageObject","width":"800","height":"600","url":"\/\/ia801009.us.archive.org\/13\/items\/CSPAN_20190903_163300_Pacific_Research_Institute-_Universities_Diversity__Free_Speech\/CSPAN_20190903_163300_Pacific_Research_Institute-_Universities_Diversity__Free_Speech.thumbs\/CSPAN_20190903_163300_Pacific_Research_Institute-_Universities_Diversity__Free_Speech_000001.jpg"}},"autauthor":{"@type":"Organization"},"author":{"sameAs":"archive.org","name":"archive.org"}}],"coverageEndTime":"20240716T12:35:10+00:00"}

© 2025 Vimarsana