In an article published on February 19th titled “The Right-Wingification of UT Continues,”, the Austin Chronicle asserted that “Texas Republicans’ efforts to control what is taught at the University of Texas passed another milestone last week.” This is nothing new from the left, for the pattern has been the same since the beginning of the Trump era: anything right-wing is evil and authoritarian.
The Chronicle is specifically concerned with UT’s decision to consolidate several departments, including, but not limited to, the Department of American Studies, the Department of African and African Diaspora Studies, and the Department of Women’s, Gender, and Sexuality Studies into a single department. The Chronicle cites one professor as stating, “There can be no reason for this decision, other than an authoritarian takeover of Texas’ flagship university.” If said professor,a professor of American Studies and Women’s, Gender, and Sexuality Studies, can think of no reason why a fiscally conservative government would consolidate three similar departments into one, then perhaps she has no business being a professor at the flagship university in the state of Texas. But should we expect anything less from the left?
It should also be remembered that the University of Texas is a public institution, funded in large part by the taxpayers of the state of Texas. Universities cannot afford to waste valuable tax revenue on superfluous departments when consolidated ones suffice. When elected officials and appointed regents exercise discretion over publicly funded institutions, that is not authoritarianism; that is the simple civic responsibility of the government. Using such discretion to responsibly allocate taxpayer funds is not equivalent to intellectual suppression. If anything, it is the very mechanism by which public institutions remain public rather than becoming insulated enclaves responsive only to internal academic factions.
Ironically, part of the outrage over the consolidation of these departments seems to rely on conservative logic. The Chronicle states, “UT has offered courses on African Studies since the late 1960s, and all top-tier universities have departments devoted to ethnic and gender studies in this day and age.” This is an appeal to tradition and longevity, from the same voices that routinely dismiss appeals to tradition in debates over culture, law, and politics.
The Chronicle refers to the decision as part of a “nationwide, right-wing attack on higher education, particularly the teaching of race and gender.” But it ought to be asked: why are gender and racial studies so integral to higher education? Why is the removal of these departments such a great offense that the University of Texas at Austin can no longer be given the prestige it rightly deserves? These programs are inherently ideological in nature and are for people who subscribe to said ideology. Yet the Chronicle also condemned the School of Civic Leadership as being ideologically driven. So which is it? Are ideologically driven departments allowed at public universities or not? The Chronicle cannot have its cake and eat it.
The Chronicle also assumes a motive that is simply not given. It assumes that the decision is ideological, when that assumption simply does not fit the actual narrative. Three other departments –the Department of French and Italian, the Department of Germanic Studies, and the Department of Slavic and Eurasian Studies– are also being consolidated. Yet the Chronicle only cites statements from the other four departments being consolidated, because it is easier to present this as an ideological move rather than a practical move if we ignore the practical decisions.
If the motivation for the consolidations were political or ideological, we might expect President Davis to offer political justifications for the decision or to mount an attack on the programs themselves. President Davis specifically states that the consolidations concern resource allocation and the university’s organizational structure, not values or ideology, political or otherwise. Rather than carefully considering the reasoning behind the decision and providing direct quotations from President Davis, they resort to personal attacks, implying that he has no academic background and should therefore not be making these kinds of decisions. Again, should we expect anything less than personal attacks from the left? For the record, President Davis is a Harvard Law School graduate and has a long history of working with the university.
Of course, the left will call the stated reasons a cover for political motivations, but what the Chronicle, as well as the leftist body of students at UT, fails to realize is that nothing is being shut down. These departments are being consolidated, not closed. If a student wishes to major in gender studies, he or she may do so under this new arrangement. The Chronicle even admits that “He [Jim Davis] did not say whether they will lead to layoffs.” Further, President Davis says in his announcement that “these subjects can continue to be researched and taught in the broader context of other fields, classes, disciplines, and departments.” If this really were some grand right-wing offensive, we might expect a situation similar to that of Texas A&M, a school typically thought of as having a more conservative campus culture, wherein they shelved their related programs entirely. But instead at UT, we don’t see closure, we see consolidation. The name on the department seal might change, but the words on the degree remain the same. And yet this move is somehow a right-wing, authoritarian ploy to destroy gender studies and sexuality studies.
UT is and always will be a highly regarded, prestigious institution, with or without these consolidated departments. Likewise, just as the left cannot tell the difference between men and women, they can’t tell the difference between a public university making a practical decision and the resurrection of Fascism itself. Where there is no loss, the left will always invent it. The Chronicle can call this move whatever they want, but the fact of the matter remains: UT is not under attack by the right.
