This is the fourth in a series of local columns that seek to defend higher education against recent political attacks.
In my last op-ed, I drew on my 18 years of teaching experience to emphasize the importance of educators resisting the pressure to shape their courses around current political trends. Unfortunately, this is exactly what we are being asked to do when it comes to topics like race, gender, and sexuality.
For many Mississippians, the simplest response is apathy: you may feel these things don’t affect you, so you don’t care whether they are discussed in the classroom – or you may even believe they shouldn’t be discussed at all.
Regardless of where you stand, I urge everyone to oppose political interference in course content. Here are two key reasons why.
First, once we allow politics to dictate what can and cannot be taught, it becomes easier for more subjects to be declared off-limits. Even if you don’t mind seeing race, gender, and sexuality stricken from the curriculum, consider what happens when the political winds shift – as they always do, and the topics you care about are the ones banned.
Some will argue that this is simply turnabout: the “left” restricted certain topics, and now the “right” is doing the same. But that mindset only worsens the problem. The solution isn’t to silence more voices – it’s to make space for all of them. If you believe certain subjects have been unfairly excluded, support efforts to bring them back. The goal should be open dialogue on all topics, not selective silencing. Ignoring or banning ideas helps no one.
Second, this debate connects to a timeless principle shared across cultures and faiths: do unto others as you would have them do unto you (i.e., The Golden Rule). If you want the freedom to teach or discuss ideas you consider vital, you must be willing to extend that same freedom to others – even when you disagree with their views. Pastor Martin Niemoller’s famous post-World War 2 poem illustrates the danger of silence in the face of censorship:
First they came for the Communists
And I did not speak out
Because I was not a Communist
Then they came for the Socialists
And I did not speak out
Because I was not a Socialist
Then they came for the trade unionists
And I did not speak out
Because I was not a trade unionists
Then they came for the Jews
And I did not speak out
Because I was not a Jew
Then they came for me
And there was no one left
To speak out for me
The message is clear: we must stand for what is right, not only for what affects us personally. If we don’t, we risk the day when the tables turn and there’s no one left to defend our voices.
Dr. Raymond E. Barranco is professor of sociology at Mississippi State University. He earned his Ph.D. in Sociology from Louisiana State University, and his work has been published in multiple criminology and sociology journals. Dr. Barranco invites readers to send feedback and sociology-related questions you’d like him to address in this space to [email protected].
You can help your community
Quality, in-depth journalism is essential to a healthy community. The Dispatch brings you the most complete reporting and insightful commentary in the Golden Triangle, but we need your help to continue our efforts. In the past week, our reporters have posted 34 articles to cdispatch.com. Please consider subscribing to our website for only $2.30 per week to help support local journalism and our community.
You can help your community
Quality, in-depth journalism is essential to a healthy community. The Dispatch brings you the most complete reporting and insightful commentary in the Golden Triangle, but we need your help to continue our efforts. In the past week, our reporters have posted 34 articles to cdispatch.com. Please consider subscribing to our website for only $2.30 per week to help support local journalism and our community.
