,
29 tweets,
8 min read
Read on Twitter
Lots of people justifiably criticizing Bret Stephens' latest iteration of his "woke kids these days" columnizing. As they point out, the notion that Yale or other elite institutions are representative of all higher ed is ridiculous. nytimes.com/2019/08/02/opi…
To draw conclusions from an extreme outlier like Yale is simply bad argumentation. Plus, the portrait he paints of student life and behavior is not only untrue at Yale, it's unrecognizable to those of us who have worked outside of elite universities. 
There is, however, something interesting going on that Yale embodies. Unfortunately Stephens is not a good enough thinker or writer to dig deep and identify it. I want to talk about why Amy Chua and Jed Rubenfeld explain more about what's going on at Yale than what Stephens says.
Stephens is writing about a new book, The Assault on American Excellence by the former dean of Yale Law, which Stephens paraphrases this way. "A revolt of the mediocre against the excellent few." Guess which side of the divide Bret Stephens thinks he's on.
Stephens quotes Anthony Kronman (former Yale Law dean) at length here, to try to encapsulate the argument. I haven't read Kronman's book, but let's assume Stephens is being as accurate as possible, given that he's championing the book.
Here's the thing. There's no doubt that there's unrest at Yale and Yale Law School in particular. This is an observable phenomenon that Stephens thinks he's diagnosing here.
I'm going to agree with Stephens. He's correct that faculty with the "right" politics and engaging in performative moves towards inclusion and diversity has not silenced the criticism. He thinks this is because "radicals" can't be pleased. He's wrong. He's not looking deep enough
Campus activists are also recognizing that performative moves towards inclusiveness and diversity aren't enough because the true root of the problem is how people like Stephens define and then enforce the meaning of "excellence." Here's where Amy Chua enters.
In elite spaces, excellence is defined by achievement, like an Ivy League degree, top law school admission, or even, I don't know, a Supreme Court Clerkship. Even as Yale has gestured towards inclusivity, gatekeepers like Chua/Rubenfeld have enforced a status hierarchy.
If you are inside the group you are excellent by definition. This is how Chua (a "liberal") could write an op-ed touting Kavanaugh for the Supreme Court. They are members of the tribe. Their mutual excellence is assured by their proximity to each other. It's self-reinforcing.
Chua/Rubenfeld have been reported to have outsized influence on which students get the most prestigious clerkships. They are the gatekeepers of excellence. I have not doubt that they believe themselves capable and justified in fulfilling this role. They know they're elite.
Just coincidentally, one of the young law graduates who deserves a prestigious Supreme Court clerkship (with Justice Kavanaugh, no less) is Chua and Rubenfeld's daughter. This after she declared she was not in a position to take a clerkship because of her commitment to the Navy.
It does not matter how "liberal" the politics of Yale Law faculty are if they are unwilling to address the systemic problems of their privilege. This at its heart, is what some Yale students are questioning. insidehighered.com/blogs/just-vis…
Yale students are correctly identifying a disconnect between the values Yale claims and the values it embodies. They are recognizing that "inclusion" is not sufficient when that inclusion does not come with access to the underlying dynamics of power.
Bret Stephens, Amy Chua, the former Yale law dean, Jon Haidt (blurbed the book with Chua) may see themselves as well-meaning defenders of excellence, but they are, in reality, guarding a system of privilege to which many people have been historically denied access.
Stephens article illustrates how inclusion is never going to be sufficient, and indeed, gestures towards diversity will not mollify those who seek a more "radical" solution to the problems of inequality. In a way, I agree with them.
Where I disagree is that those challenging that system are somehow undermining excellence. If that system begets excellence, I've got a rainbow colored donkey that craps diamonds living in my backyard. (Just checked, nope.)
This culture of "excellence" as defined by those who already hold (and cling to) the levers of power is total bullshit. There is nothing inherently more excellent about these people.
Those "excellent" people turned a blind eye to 40 years of harassment by appeals court judge Alex Kozinski, as @Dahlialithwick covered in Slate. slate.com/news-and-polit…
@Dahlialithwick The dilemma for Yale students is that to truly dismantle the system which they correctly find so troubling, they must voluntarily undermine the privilege they have gained access to by gaining admittance into Yale law. insidehighered.com/blogs/just-vis…
@Dahlialithwick Because the work of tearing down the system in which you're seeking to rise is so hard, battles end up being fought over t stripping the name of one of American history's greatest monsters from a place of honor on campus. It's worth doing, but it's a band-aid on an axe wound.
@Dahlialithwick Stephens is not thoughtful enough to see the underlying conditions. He's too invested in his notion of the meritocracy to give thought to the possibility that he and his ilk may not be so excellent, that they're being propped up by a system that tilts the world in their favor.
@Dahlialithwick Once, just once, I would love for the keepers of the meritocracy to actually have to compete on even ground with everyone else. Deep down, they know they'd be crushed. This is why they defend their turf with such ferocity. They're terrified.
@Dahlialithwick Holy crap, I am hot over this. It's infuriating.
@Dahlialithwick In sum: Amy Chua using her position to help secure a Supreme Court clerkship for her daughter with a man credibly accused of sexual assault (and who lied during his confirmation hearing) is far more troubling than any student protests at Yale.
@Dahlialithwick Going back to Stephens' nut graph we can see how dense he is being, either unintentionally or not. Students are not demanding equality of outcomes. They are merely asking for a chance, and think dismantling some of the most obvious symbols of inequality may help, but it won't...
@Dahlialithwick It won't help because the so-called "excellent" will defend their turf to the death. The rhetorical move here of claiming those seeking equality can't be satisfied is an admission that the gatekeepers will do nothing to cede power, even as they won't admit they hold power.
This is why Stephens has to portray the institutions and the important principles they uphold as being besieged by "radicals." It is a rhetorical slight of hand. What's disappointing is how many people fall for it, including many "liberals." It's always about the power, folks.
Clearly someone with a lot more followers than me retweeted this, so here's a link to a book that will help students grow up to not write as badly as Bret Stephens. amazon.com/Writers-Practi…
