The below information was extracted from various articles found online, most notably WECT News Television.
Dan Johnson, an Associate Professor at UNCW’s School of Health and Applied Human Sciences, recently posted “Blow Up Republicans” on Facebook. Just to be clear, Dan Johnson is a liberal. How far left? We have no idea, but his statement would indicate on the fringes of the far left.
According to the President of the Student Government Association, Robert Fensom, the statement “Blow Up Republicans” did not meet the threshold of being a true threat.
A University spokesperson stated, “no matter how upsetting and distasteful such comments may be, they are expressions of free speech and protected by the First Amendment unless they represent a true threat.
Bottom line is no action against Dan Johnson is currently being considered by the University.
Are there double standards at UNCW? Has the University been completely politicized? Does equity, fairness and justice suggest it only applies where the University wants it to? Let us examine the questions and you can decide.
At a recent meeting, when a student asked UNCW Chancellor Sartarelli if UNCW could visibility support the Black Lives Matter campaign on campus, he responded that this would be “difficult” because in his words, “All lives matter.”
In December 2020, in a move to express disapproval of certain actions (it is assumed these actions were his response to the question) of UNCW’s Chancellor, José V. Sartarelli, the Faculty Senate supported a vote of censure for Sartarelli. The vote was 51 for, 20 against.
“Unlike a vote of no-confidence, which can be a precursor to the resignation or dismissal of an administrator not deemed fit to hold a position, a vote for censure expresses the faculty’s disapproval of Sartarelli’s actions.”
So in this first example, we have “All lives matter” vs. “Blow up Republicans”. Do you think Dan Johnson realizes that many of the students at UNCW, and potentially even students in his classes, are registered Republicans?
Let us look at one final example. On May 29, 2020, Mike Adams, also a UNCW Professor, issued a message that was aimed at Governor Cooper for keeping North Carolina under a hard lockdown due to the pandemic. We will be among the first to admit a better choice of words could have been used to make his point. It took only a few days for the Student Body and Faculty to generate 60,000 signatures calling for his dismissal. Subsequently, Professor Adams was given the option to retire or be fired. Professor Adams did retire, and later his death was ruled a suicide.
The question here is not what words were spoken, but does an individual have the Constitutional Right to speak freely?
Here we have a liberal Professor saying “Blow up Republicans.” We also have what we will assume are right leaning UNCW Faculty Members, with one saying, “All lives matter,” and the other condemning the Governor’s decision-making processes. If logic was applied here, you can see that no threat was implied by the Sartarelli or Adam’s comments. If implied threat is the benchmark being used to determine free speech, the simple post “Blow up Republicans” of the three, by far possesses the greatest threat.
Unfortunately, UNCW allegedly is not the only University in the United States exhibiting what is allowed to be spoken on one end of the political spectrum, and what is not allowed to be said by anyone on the opposite end of that spectrum. Fortunately for the most part, this rule of law (and we use this term loosely) has been confined primarily to University and College campuses. However, this provides some great insights into what America will look like if the progressive agenda of the current Administration is not curtailed. The following are political agenda items that would pave the way for the entire country to be one large university campus:
- Pack the Supreme Court to always receive favorable rulings.
- Washington DC and Puerto Rico become states to add four additional liberal Senators, and several additional House Members to guarantee all proposed legislation is made into law.
- Federalize the National Voting Laws, eliminating all States’ rights to establish rules, policy and guidelines for all future elections.
- Censorship by Big Tech, being the judge and jury on what can and cannot be said on various social media platforms.
