“Something strange is happening at America's colleges and universities.” So began the provocative cover story of The Atlantic's September 2015 issue. The piece, “The Coddling of the American Mind,” by Greg Lukianoff and Jonathan Haidt, dove head-on into a relatively recent, yet highly contentious, debate gripping American campuses—that of campus free speech.
What strange phenomenon had Lukianoff and Haidt identified? “A movement is arising,” they claimed, “undirected and driven largely by students, to scrub campuses clean of words, ideas, and subjects that might cause discomfort or give offense.”
According to the duo—a constitutional lawyer and a social psychologist—students at campuses across the United States were increasingly calling for censorship surrounding topics that are likely to cause offence, and therefore emotional distress, to some students.
In the year since The Atlantic story ran, the debate over controversial speech on campuses has only intensified. At Yale, students called on two faculty members to resign after one sent an email to students questioning the need for a warning about culturally insensitive Halloween costumes. Emory University was divided in the spring after pro-Trump messages were chalked on campus. This September, students at the University of Chicago expressed outrage after their Dean of Students wrote in a welcome letter that his institution's commitment to academic freedom meant it opposed safe spaces and trigger warnings.
In each case, the debate is seemingly polarized between two camps. On one side are those arguing that universities need to prioritize the feelings and experiences of students, and rid campuses of offensive expression that could threaten students' emotional well-being. Opposing them are those who claim that freedom of expression is essential to preserve the university's role as an intellectual space of discussion and open debate.