• Hamline University’s decision to not renew the contract of an art history lecturer who showed an image of the Prophet Muhammad in class is an example of “cancel culture” – a response that is disproportionate to the speech in question.
• Hamline’s communications about the incident, which downplayed free expression and academic freedom, were also an example of “cancel culture”.
• Hamline’s student newspaper, the Oracle, engaged in “cancel culture” by deleting a statement from the chair of the Department of Religion defending the lecturer.
• Actionable items to address this type of “cancel culture” include: not firing, disciplining, or non-renewing teachers based on violating sectarian religious rules unless the teachers and students know up front they’re under those rules; not condemning pedagogically appropriate and on-point teaching to soothe sectarian demands; and not issuing vague, ambiguous, and unworkable speech “standards”.
• Student newspapers at non-sectarian schools should not delete defenses of speech because some people think it’s offensive to disagree about whether the speech is offensive.
• The Hamline students’ response to a lecturer showing a picture of the Prophet Muhammad was disproportionate and censorial, and can be fairly called “cancel culture”.
• Demanding that the lecturer be fired, not renewed, or disciplined is wildly disproportionate and should not be condoned.
• Saying “as a Muslim I find visual depictions of the Prophet offensive and blasphemous” is not cancel culture.
• Throwing around the word “Islamophobia” is censorial, entitled, and ignorant, but not wildly disproportionate.
• The criticism of the lecturer is indecent, as the lecturer showed sensitivity and explained the pedagogical context.
• This incident is a huge culture war victory for the anti-progressive Right.
Published January 5, 2023. Visit The Popehat Report to read Ken White’s original post.
