In God and Man at Yale, William F. Buckley, Jr.,
reasoned, “A responsible, reflective man must, soon in life, cast
his lot with the Communists or against them… If he and others
like him embrace certain values, as civilized men who recognize
that they are ‘involved in mankind,’ they must cherish and advance
them with fervor.” While Communism may have receded from the
international stage since the book’s printing in 1951, evil and
intolerance have not, and Buckley’s prescription for the
responsible, reflective man involved in mankind still holds true
today. A man must necessarily elect to be either for or against
tyranny; any attempt to adopt some falsely impartial stance on the
question of totalitarianism is, frankly, idiotic.
Although Yale’s stance on various issues might vary according to
the wishes of the alumni to whom it’s held accountable, it’s
relatively safe to say that most of Yale’s past and present
students would take for granted that the administration would have
made its choice as responsible, reflective men and come out as
anti-tyranny. But then why would it have admitted Sayed Rahmatullah
Hashemi, the unrepentant mouthpiece and propagandist for a bunch of
would-be Nazis? They were different only in that they were too lazy
and stupid to effectively oppress their own people — they worked
four-hour days. Personally, I would prefer the Yale administration
to be anti-Taliban, just as it should be anti-Nazi, but if
Hashemi’s admission to a nondegree special student program and
presumed admission to the regular student body this spring is any
indication, it seems the heads of our University don’t think they
need to choose a position at all.
Perhaps the best indication of the thought process behind
Hashemi’s admission can be seen in just-departed Dean of Admissions
Richard Shaw’s explanation of the decision in the New York
Times Magazine puff piece that broke the story: Shaw described
his impression of Hashemi as a “a person to be reckoned with and
who could educate us about the world”; he recalled that Yale had
missed the chance to enroll “another foreigner of Rahmatullah’s
caliber,” saying, “We lost him to Harvard…I didn’t want that to
happen again.” While it would be hilarious in a kind of entirely
depressing way to find out what foreigner Shaw considered to be of
“Rahmatullah’s caliber,” the fact is that it apparently never
occurred to any of the involved parties that, surprise, people
might have a problem with Yale equipping the Taliban’s frontman
with the tools to consolidate and reshape Afghanistan’s government
as he saw fit. It was just another totally awesome admissions grab.
High five, guys!
Yes, high five for casting this decision in the most purely
mercenary terms and entirely abdicating your moral responsibilities
as administrators, as the public representatives of every member of
this university, and as human beings. As Benno Schmidt, former Yale
president, put it in one of Wall Street Journal columnist
John Fund’s series of articles on the issue, this admissions
decision is predicated on little more than “amorality and
cynicism.” Hashemi is a barbarian and a mutant, but Yale should
probably be a little more worried that the individuals entrusted
with the stewardship of the University’s student body and with
transforming a bunch of social defectives with high SAT scores into
leaders of men have shown that they don’t know even how to be men
properly, much less leaders. The official response to this
controversy has been to go into media lockdown, presumably in the
hope that people will magically forget that this administration has
made it look like the only thing Yale stands for and really
believes in is coming in third on the U.S. News & World
Report college rankings. How does it reflect on us when the
heads of a university trusted to produce articulate, thoughtful
graduates can’t even manage to offer a convincing defense of their
decision?
In his preface for the twenty-fifth anniversary edition of
God and Man at Yale, Buckley identified what distinguished
Yale from a comparable state school: its sense of mission. What is
Yale’s mission now? To lose in the rankings to Harvard and
Princeton — again? I think congratulations are in order for Yale’s
current administration, which, in its amoral admissions zeal, has
managed to thoroughly debase Yale as an institution. Maybe Buckley
puts it best: “For the educator, complacent in his ivory tower, to
scorn affiliation with a cause he considers to be noble…is
unmistakably to forswear a democratic responsibility, and to earn
for himself the contemptible title of dilettante and solipsist.”
Yale’s administration should not deny Hashemi admission to the
undergraduate student body this spring — it should expel him now.
Maybe then Yale can regain its sense of mission and once more
become involved in mankind.
