Photo credit: Wikimedia Commons, John Phelan

From Princeton’s Nassau Hall and Dartmouth’s Baker Library to the streets of Claremont McKenna and Yale, American colleges across the country have witnessed protests of racial injustice that silence dissent and opposing viewpoints. Deans, presidents, faculty members, and student leaders have all been forced to apologize and even resign for the mere crime of saying things that were perceived to be “offensive.”

Brandeis University is no exception. In the column that I write for The Justice, Brandeis University’s independent student newspaper, I recently pointed out the impractical and misguided nature of many of the demands of Concerned Students 1950. This group of students protests an apparently intolerable culture, founded in allegedly active attempts by Brandeis administrations, faculty, and students to deny the existence of its black students.

In my article, I mentioned that many of their demands, including purposely admitting a set quota of black students, granting tenure to professors specifically because they are black, and allocating more funds to black student organizations, seem to suggest a preference of race over merit and fairness. In response, many have told me that Brandeis’ legacy of “social justice” dictates that the University should increase the set percentage of black students admitted to the school. Some of these students have even told me that I do not know how it feels to be discriminated against by the educational system due to the fact that I am a Jew. As on other points, these students are incorrect, and Brandeis students who espouse such views should read up on the history of their own school: Brandeis was founded as a direct response to educational discrimination against the Jewish community.

Brandeis University was founded on the premise that racial quotas are wrong. As late as the 1970s, Jewish students were not accepted to major universities on the basis of their ethnicity. Brandeis was established in 1948 by prominent Jewish figures and academics as an alternative to these universities, as a place where all worthy students, regardless of race, ethnicity, or religion, could complete their studies. Brandeis was founded as a merit-based university. To institute a 15% admittance quota for black students is a gross violation of Brandeis’ founding principles.

This hypocrisy aside, the main problem with their movement is not its demands, but its tactics. Part of these protesters’ demands is that Brandeis implement mandatory diversity training for faculty and racial awareness and inclusion curriculums throughout all campus departments. Not surprisingly, the protesters want to be the ones to dictate the content of these programs.

From the outset, the protesters have asserted that anyone who questions their activities and demands, even from places of genuine interest or self-education, is violent (this is explicitly spelled out in their Q&A guide) and possibly racist. Anyone who remains silent, according to them, contributes to the racism against black students on campus and is also racist. Thus, the only way to not be a violent racist is to unconditionally agree with the protesters; any dissent or skepticism will lead to your being labeled a hateful bigot. As a result, many students feel afraid to speak out about the protests. Students who have any qualms about these protests have been intimidated by the protesters and their supporters into reluctant silence.

These practices have continued after the publication of my article. Expectedly, I have already been labeled a racist. One student kindly informed me that I am not a “real” Jew because my article did not align with her perception of Jewish values (admittedly, the student stated that her idea of Judaism is modeled after the philosophy of Malcolm X, so her understanding of Judaism is suspect). Instead of offering logical responses to my arguments, protestors have repeatedly told me to examine my “white fragility.” According to several accounts, the protesters have been posting on social media that any person who shares my article is a racist “white supremacist” and that the protesters will de-friend and ruin the reputation of those who do so.

I have received dozens of comments and messages from current students and alumni of all backgrounds expressing their gratitude that I decided to write what they believe, but are too afraid to publicly acknowledge. Students have come up to me on campus to inform me that they applaud my “bravery” — all for writing an article. Such is the state of free speech on college campuses.

The idea that I must be wrong, that I must be fueled by hate, and that I should not be allowed to voice my dissent because my views “offend” these protesters is misguided and goes against the very principles upon which Brandeis University was established. Dr. John H. McWhorter, a black professor at Columbia University, wrote in the Wall Street Journal on November 27, “But where the protesters’ proposition is ‘If I am offended, I am correct,’ the proper response is, quite simply, ‘No.’”

The claim that opposing views offend the protesters and their allies does not automatically afford them the right to shut down these views and proclaim the correctness of their own viewpoints. Many public figures, including some on the left of the political spectrum, such as Fareed Zakaria and President Obama, have also spoken out against university students’ intolerance of opposing ideas, which is exemplified by a recent Pew poll showing that 40% of millennials favor banning words they deem “offensive.”

Such blatant efforts to silence opposition of any kind are deplorable. Academia is supposed to be about the consideration of opposing points of view; these students are attempting to mandate the exact opposite. Moreover, if these protesters fully believe they are in the right, what do they have to lose by engaging with those who disagree with them? How else do they expect to gain the support of those who are skeptical of their movement?

The protesters’ claims do posses a certain extent of legitimacy and have the admirable intention of addressing racism in the United States. Yet this does not mean that people with differing views should be excluded from the conversation. Asking protesters to explain their positions is neither racist nor violent. These protesters’ demands will affect all Brandeis students, both present and future. As such, all students should be allowed to have a say in the matter.

In my conversations with supporters of the movement, many people seemed to echo the refrain: “Yes, I don’t support some, many, or all of the demands. Yes, I don’t even like their tactics. But I still support them because racism exists, others support them, and they told me that I should.”

To this, I say that students should not support this movement’s demands simply because others implore them to do so. Students should not silence their doubts for fear of reprisal. The fact that racism exists does not mean these demands are the best way to address it. Students should examine the protesters’ demands for themselves and come to their own conclusions. Only through critical thought can a campus culture of intellectual openness and diversity be maintained. It is up to all of us to end the trend of intolerance that is rising on college campuses. Adding to the diversity of thought on crucial discussions is something that should be welcomed, not abhorred.

Dor Cohen is a senior and student leader at Brandeis University. He is an alumnus of the ZOA Student Leadership Mission to Israel.

This article was originally published here.