It's important to give credit where it’s due – especially in places where it's not due very often.
For example, the world of education, where "woeness" has eclipsed public discourse, free speech and the right of anyone right of extreme leftism to express thoughts that don't align with progressive ideals.
But now, enter the University of Chicago, which is under fire for defending a faculty member who vocally criticized diversity-based hiring practices.
In a letter responding to calls to fire Associate Professor Dorian Abbot for having expressed his apparently offensive views, University of Chicago President Robert Zimmer declared that his school will “defend vigorously any faculty member’s right to publish and discuss his or her ideas,” adding, “We believe universities have an important role as places where novel and even controversial ideas can be proposed, tested and debated.”
“For this reason, the University does not limit the comments of faculty members, mandate apologies, or impose other disciplinary consequences for such comments,” Zimmer continued in the missive. "The University is committed to creating an inclusive environment where diversity is not only represented but individuals are empowered to fully participate in the exchange of ideas and perspectives."
In a separate letter dated earlier this month, Abbot, a tenured professor at the university, had dared to question the school’s recently implemented diversity-based hiring protocols as potentially discriminating against more qualified candidates by employing certain people on the basis of race, as well as creating an environment in which "anyone who tries to dissent on certain issues is immediately assumed to have racist or otherwise bigoted motives, which prevents the intellectual exploration of that issue, particularly the implications and consequences of proposed policies.”
Abbot went on to praise the efficacy of diversity on college campuses, but iterated that a focus on diversity should also apply to “a larger variety of types of diversity, including political, religious, and viewpoint diversity,” as opposed to just race and ethnicity.