Dr. Patton is the president of Middlebury College and a scholar of South Asian history, culture and religion.
In my inaugural address as the new president of Middlebury College a year and a half ago, I spoke of my hope to create a robust public square on campus. I said that I wanted Middlebury to be a community whose members engage in reasoned, thoughtful debate openly and without fear, where we are resilient in argument and generous to those we disagree with, and where the conversational circle expands to take in more and more people. I had no illusions about how difficult and messy it might be to achieve these goals, but I also had no doubt that we needed to pursue them.
We experienced a hard test of these aims in early March, when student demonstrators at Middlebury shut down a speaking event featuring the political scientist Charles Murray. A rash of similarly disturbing incidents on other campuses this spring has reminded us of the fragility of the principle of free expression and why all of our institutions, but especially our institutions of higher learning, must be vigilant in safeguarding it.
At Middlebury’s commencement last month, as I shook the hands of 550 graduating seniors, it was difficult to overlook the challenge that lies before them. These young people—our newest alumni—are a remarkable group, full of promise and hope. But the unfortunate reality in America today is that they are embarking on their life’s journey at a moment when our nation is sharply divided—politically, economically, culturally, and in seemingly every other way. As historian Jon Meacham said to our graduates in his commencement address, “A decade and a half into the 21st century, what do we love in common? The painful but unavoidable answer is: not enough.”
It was precisely this dynamic of polarization that played out when Charles Murray came to Middlebury. Students from a conservative campus group, the American Enterprise Institute Club, had invited him to talk about his 2012 book “Coming Apart,” which explores the roots of class division in white America. In publicizing the event, the students had cited the need for vigorous discussion and asked the community to listen to Dr. Murray and challenge his ideas. His 1994 co-authored book, “The Bell Curve,” which linked race with IQ, has long been the focus of controversy and served as the backdrop for how many on campus saw the event.
A number of groups at Middlebury were upset by the prospect of Dr. Murray’s appearance and asked the administration to cancel the event. In the spirit of a robust public square, we thought it was important to allow students and others in the community to engage with Dr. Murray about the issues on their minds.
Students protested when Dr. Murray took the stage. They prevented him from speaking and went on to disrupt attempts to continue the program, including a question-and-answer session moderated by Prof. Allison Stanger, via video feed—a backup plan that we had created to ensure that the talk could continue even if it was disrupted in the hall. Later, when Dr. Murray, Prof. Stanger and a Middlebury administrator left the building, a crowd of about 20 people, most of them outsiders but some students as well, physically confronted them and surrounded their car. Prof. Stanger was injured in the melee.
Like many at Middlebury, I was deeply upset by these events. As a community of learners, we must extend the same privileges and rights of speech to others as we would ask others to extend to us. Given my call for more resilient conversations and debate, the disruption of Dr. Murray’s talk was especially disheartening.
The college immediately asked independent investigators to give us an impartial account of what happened. They reviewed photographic and video evidence, interviewed a number of eyewitnesses and gathered other statements and accounts. Their work provided the basis for disciplinary proceedings under the college’s long-established, community-based judicial procedures. The college charged a number of students with violating policies that prohibit disruptive behavior at community events and that call on students to “respect the dignity, freedom and rights of others” and forbids “violence or the use of physical force.”
The Community Judiciary Board (which is made up of students, faculty and staff members) heard the most serious of these charges, made the final determination of wrongdoing and assigned sanctions. Neither I nor anyone in the senior administration had the authority to impose penalties unilaterally.