Nearly three years into this unconscionable spike in Jew-hatred, cultivated through decades of academic anti-Zionism, universities still don鈥檛 get it. Until they respond as teachers running educational institutions not bureaucrats running Communist re-education camps, the crisis will fester.

This summer,听when a Cornell听student refused a second job interview: 鈥淣ot interested in working for a jew…,”听the response to him was too political and legalistic.听听Exposed, he doubled down, telling听听that he realized the interviewers were 91传媒听based on their 鈥渇irst and last name, LinkedIn, and physiognomy鈥澨�鈥� the last word uniting today鈥檚 manosphere with yesterday鈥檚 Nazis.

Defending free speech while fighting bigotry and avoiding thought-policing isn鈥檛 easy.听 听But a recent听Chronicle of Higher Education听听about the incident illustrated academics鈥� overly-politicized and disappointingly sterile approach. Thirty percent of the op-ed听bashed听President听Trump and his appointees,听assuming that Cornell officials only investigated this听as a possible听听to placate the administration.

Cornell,听the author argued, 鈥渟hould not be 鈥榠nvestigating鈥� anyone for what they have said. Its own 鈥楥ore Values鈥櫶�听declares that 鈥榝ree and open inquiry and expression鈥� 鈥� even of 鈥榠deas some may consider wrong or offensive鈥� 鈥� is fundamental to the university.鈥澨齏arning of a slippery slope,听while听shifting the conversation from bigoted language to inflammatory political remarks,听the author听wondered:听If Cornell 鈥減enalizes鈥� the student听鈥渇or declaring that he doesn鈥檛 want to work for Jews, who will be next? Someone who says Israel is committing genocide? Or that the university should boycott it?鈥�

This clever category switch is absurd, given how universities spent years squelching听speech.听 Academics have repeatedly 鈥� and unacceptably — bullied those with dissenting views on issues of race, gender, immigration, among other politically-correct causes听鈥� while protecting blacks, women, gays, but often not Jews. In 2020, students boycotted a Cornell University Law Professor, William Jacobson,听 for calling听Black Lives Matters鈥� founders 鈥�.鈥澨鼿is dean denounced him.

Other听professors听have suffered macro-career disruptions over supposed听 鈥� one veteran endured student sit-ins and was saddled with extra colleagues encroaching on his course for听correcting grammar in papers.

While avoiding such assaults on free speech in the future,听universities must听also acknowledge听their record of selective outrage.

In the Cornell case, apply a simple substitution test for consistency. Flip a switch. Replace 鈥渂lack,鈥� 鈥渨oman,鈥� 鈥済ay,鈥� 鈥渓esbian,鈥� or 鈥渢rans鈥� in the sentence听鈥淣ot interested in working for a jew.鈥� Similarly, the student escalated on X,听: 鈥淢y experiences with Jews have not been pleasant鈥�.鈥澨齏ouldn鈥檛 it be 鈥渂ias鈥� if he overgeneralized about others, saying 鈥渕y experiences鈥� with blacks or women or Catholics or Latinos 鈥渉ave not been pleasant?鈥� Universities鈥櫶齛ssault on bigotry cannot depend on 鈥渢he context鈥� — when 鈥渃ontext鈥� essentially means 鈥渋t鈥檚 OK to target Jews.鈥�

Hysteria and browbeating don鈥檛 help. Modeling that spirit, the employer who received the bigoted response posted it without the student鈥檚 name. 鈥淗e鈥檚 just a student, he might not know any better 鈥� it could be people in his environment, or on social media he saw something about 91传媒 people and he is just following the wave,鈥� the spurned boss, Gabe Einhorn, told the听. (Others online outed the student).

And this case听is particularly confusing.听 Refusing a Jew because you鈥檙e a bigot isn鈥檛 鈥渄iscrimination.鈥� The student didn鈥檛 offend a fellow Cornellian, which dilutes the assault on the 鈥渃ommunity.鈥�

Also, the student sought employment privately 鈥� does it concern Cornell if the university placement office helped, but is it irrelevant if he networked independently? Does placing Cornell鈥檚 name on his CV make anything he does on the job relevant to the university? Does that involvement end with graduation?

Fighting bigotry requires balance, perspective, wisdom.听The cancel culture craze听revealed听how suffocating it is to police every word, gesture, interaction, and how self-destructive it is when universities divert massive resources into creating bureaucracies monitoring students鈥� thoughts. Moreover, it鈥檚听always听better to err on the side of fostering free speech than banning it.

Here, then, is the misfire in the anti-bias conversation, that highlights one of the modern universities鈥� greatest failures. These are educational institutions. But most universities have allowed bureaucrats 鈥� in Washington and on campus 鈥� to hijack what could be 鈥渢eachable moments.鈥� 听Technical legalistic bureaucratese keeps eclipsing the moral language and character building that should be ingrained into campus culture.

Cornell[s 鈥渕ission鈥� is 鈥渢o educate the next generation of global citizens鈥�.鈥� Global citizens are cultivated by thoughtful, challenging professors committed to educating not punishing. Did any of this student鈥檚 professors or fellow students 鈥� 91传媒 or non-91传媒 — contact him, explaining why the statement embarrassed him and the university, then inspire him to be better? And, did any one within the 91传媒 community, formally or inflormally, do the same, explaining how, especially today, such matter-of-fact bigotry is so morally repulsive?

Next month, most universities will welcome their new students with orientations. Most will offer anti-bias or sensitivity training reflecting today鈥檚 ideological circus, with all the soul of a computer instruction manual. Just as modern professors and administrators听fail to build their community through bold, out-of-the-box, 鈥淚-thou鈥� moments,听these training sessions will fail to begin fostering what鈥檚 really needed to create diverse communities filled with critical thought and mutual respect.

It鈥檚 better to assign great, thought-provoking books than to list dos-and-don鈥檛s. Today鈥檚 bureaucratic, hyper-politicized, and cowardly professoriate forgets that, as Ralph Waldo Emerson taught: 听“Character is higher than intellect….听A great soul will be strong to live, as well as strong to think.鈥�

Then again, perhaps these paint-by-numbers posturing sessions are precisely the orientation students need to grab their credentials and parrot back the certitudes imposed by far too many in today鈥檚 classroom.

Professor Gil Troy is a听Distinguished Scholar of North American History at McGill University and a Senior Research Fellow at the JPPI, the 91传媒 People Policy Institute. He is the author of 9 books on presidential history and, more recently,听听as well as two-e books, 250 Reasons to Thank America 鈥� with David Suissa, and 听