National newspapers have been giving Brown a few backhanded compliments these past few weeks. The Associated Press released an article Feb. 5, later printed by the Washington Post and other national outlets, on the new Group Independent Study Project this semester called "Modern Conservatism in America." Steven Calabresi, visiting professor of political science from Northwestern Law School, is the faculty adviser and main lecturer for the GISP. Columnists Joan Vennochi of the Boston Globe and Ed Fitzpatrick of the Providence Journal subsequently took notice. Both wrote columns commending the University for finally abandoning its single-minded liberal agenda and, in an unprecedented act of academic tolerance, allowing, as Vennochi put it, "a tiny beachhead in a sea of academic liberalism."
First, we would like to clarify the situation for the AP and newspapers that have their facts wrong. This course is not offered by the University, as their articles suggest, but instead is a GISP — a collaborative effort by a group of students and Calabresi.
We hope that national newspapers and media outlets will not be too alarmed that the GISP on conservatism is a product of the liberal freedoms enabled by our hippie New Curriculum.
Both columns give Brown a slap on the back for finally deeming conservative philosophy "worthy of academic debate" in a portrait of Brown as an uncritically liberal environment. Professor of Economics Glenn Loury, whose political views have traversed the political spectrum throughout his career, wrote in an e-mail to the editorial page board that, while Brown is certainly liberal-leaning, "there is a robust representation of conservative thought on campus and among faculty." These articles, Loury continued, are merely "trafficking in stereotype," embracing the familiar and easy narrative that Brown is hostile to political conservatism and academic disagreement.
The reading list for the GISP is comprehensive but by no means dissimilar to academic life at Brown. To label these readings and course content as an innovation in Brown's curriculum is seriously misguided. Any political science or economics concentrator will recognize Hayek's "The Road to Serfdom," Milton Friedman's "Capitalism and Freedom" and von Mises's "Capitalism versus Socialism," among many other familiar works on the syllabus. This is no indictment of the GISP, which we find quite intriguing. Yet, we take issue with the statement of the GISP's co-founder, Terrence George, that "the history of intellectual conservatism at Brown is a history denied."
We are proud of the intellectual and political diversity of many of Brown's academic institutions. The Political Theory Project and its student group, the Janus Forum, offer courses, lecture series, debates and discussions on important issues of contemporary political philosophy from all sides of the spectrum. Two years ago, for example, Janus featured a discussion with controversial Bush administration official John Yoo, and the Lecture Board hosted former Arkansas governor Mike Huckabee, a conservative political figure with whom Brown students interacted respectfully and amiably. The Herald has consistently offered a platform for columnists who represent a more conservative political stance to bring balance to the opinions page.
Social sciences students must become experts on economic liberals Adam Smith and John Locke, as well as many of the thinkers in the GISP's syllabus.
True, Brown is a hotbed of social liberalism and, to an extent, we can laugh at the stereotype of our institution as a liberal paradise. Ultimately, though, these crude and untrue stereotypes hurt the University — they portray a false image of us as intellectually incurious and self-righteous students disinterested in legitimate academic debate or tolerance.
Editorials are written by The Herald's editorial page board. Send comments to editorials@browndailyherald.com.
