Testing our tolerance

Most people would agree that tolerance and respect for others are valuable virtues. This is especially true in a pluralistic society like ours, where diverse viewpoints call for open-mindedness and patience. The point of contention, then, seems to arise over how best to foster these desirable qualities among individuals. \nWhile we might not always agree on ways to encourage tolerance, we can surely point to measures that are just plain wrong. Take the example of Bergen Community College, which is attempting to introduce a “civility” code with the expressed intention of encouraging diversity of thought on campus. \nThe code requires students to “embrace and celebrate differing perspectives intellectually” and to assist “individuals who are less fortunate.” Failure to comply with the code will lead to school judicial hearings. \nWhile the notion of a civility code may seem innocuous, its potential effects on free speech are very troubling. For one, students who are offended by certain ideologies may be required to “embrace” views quite different from theirs. Some professors likened it to a situation wherein a conservative student could be forced to “celebrate” the ideas of Michael Moore, or a liberal student the views of Ann Coulter. We also see possibilities for overly sensitive religious types who might be tempted to report violations every time their faith is challenged. As it stands, there is a thin line between tolerating someone’s views and reluctantly accepting them, and this code teeters close to the edge.\nFurthermore, threatening students with judicial consequences for refusing to accept the code seems futile. This brings up the larger issue of how exactly college officials expect to enforce such an arbitrary code of conduct. There is no doubt that in a country where people are habitually offended, devising a universal standard of civility will be easier said than done. \nUnderstanding the college’s egregious attempts at fostering civility and respect for others requires us to contextualize the code. The college, located in New Jersey, is reeling from several racial incidents including attempts by neo-Nazis to distribute brochures and other hate material during a public forum. College officials have stated that they view a “civility” code as a means of countering hate and promoting a “positive learning environment.” Unfortunately, this knee-jerk reaction to bigoted actions does little to foster diversity and tolerance. Indeed, one should question the merits of believing that signing a piece of paper will make people more respectful of others. It seems that requiring all students to accept a civility code may actually exacerbate racial tensions by emphasizing differences rather than similarities among students. \nA student code that encourages tolerance should be the goal of every college campus. However, a code of conduct should remain just that – a voluntary measure. Forcing all students to embrace and celebrate differing ideologies is an insult to the intellect of students. Additionally, such artificial attempts at cultivating open-mindedness only help to further the divide between students, thereby pitting them against each other. It should be evident that the only antidote to bigotry and hatred is an educational process that encourages freedom of expression and speech, not one that stifles it.