Vanderbilt chancellor Daniel Diermeier sat down with Jewish Federation of Greater Nashville CEO Rabbi Dan Horwitz to discuss his philosophy of principled neutrality and campus activism.
Diermeier began by outlining the professional trajectory that led him to Vanderbilt in July 2020. “Timing is everything in life,” he quipped, before explaining what attracted him to the school. “I wanted to be at a university where there was a real possibility for, hopefully, positive impact. And I felt the fundamentals that Vanderbilt had, and the city of Nashville had, were just phenomenal.”
Using the metaphor of a band, Diermeier said what makes Nashville unique is the blending of different skills and talents. “People from different backgrounds play different instruments, have different talents, come together and create something they couldn’t do on their own.”
Horwitz asked Diermeier to explain the concepts of principled neutrality and how it is applied at Vanderbilt. “Everything we do is grounded in a sense of purpose,” said Diermeier. He said Vanderbilt’s purpose is to create a setting for “transformative education and pathbreaking research.” He said that in order to accomplish those goals, it is important to have the freedom to pursue ideas wherever they lead, even if those ideas run counter to conventional thought.
Diermeier outlined the three pillars that support those goals. First is what he calls “open forum,” a traditional commitment to free speech and open discourse. In practice, this allows for speakers on campus who can present a diversity of ideas and opinions and provides for criticism and debate.
The second pillar is “principled neutrality,” or what Diermeier says other campuses call “institutional neutrality.” He says in some ways, this idea runs counter to open forum. “Principled neutrality is about what the university’s position should be. And the core belief is that if the university doesn’t have a duty to speak on something, it should remain silent.”
Practically speaking, he said that means on issues not core to the university’s functioning, the university will remain silent. “Why? Because we want to create as broad as possible an environment for students to explore things on their own, and for faculty to engage their research,” he said.
He called the third pillar a “Vanderbilt special,” which is a commitment to civil discourse. “It means we treat each other with respect, we use arguments and reasons. We want to be fact-based in our discussions. And we never want to forget we are members of the same community with the same purpose and grounded in the same value.” All students sign onto this commitment when they first arrive on campus.
Diermeier outlined how principled neutrality functions in practice using the example of the Boycott, Divest, Sanction movement sweeping colleges across the country. BDS calls for a boycott of businesses that have anything to do with Israel, or to call for the university’s endowment to divest of any businesses with interests in Israel. “Whenever we have that, we go back to our values,” he said, “Institutional neutrality tells us that any calls for boycott, divestment, or sanction is inconsistent with institutional neutrality.”
The concept of institutional or principled neutrality is not the norm on college campuses. Diermeier said Vanderbilt is one of three or four universities nationwide that subscribe to it. He cited Harvard as another campus that is beginning to utilize the principle. “We wish it had gone a little farther, but, boy, do we love the movement,” he said, and mentioned that others are exploring it as well.
Other topics explored during the hour-long conversation included how the university deals with hate speech and differentiates it from free speech and the faculty’s role in principled neutrality. Diermeier cited the 1967 Calvin Report which first detailed the concept and why it is a key in fostering deeper, more meaningful higher education. “The Calvin Report said that the reason why you want to have a position of neutrality on political issues is because otherwise you create a chilling effect where people are afraid of running afoul of the party line.” In other words, faculty and students can take positions, but institutions cannot.
In addressing the immediate aftermath of Oct. 7, Diermeier said he believes the overall responses were appropriate. He referenced the many vigils, meditation walks, discussions inside and outside the classroom as evidence of an overall adherence to the university’s values. “It doesn’t mean that everybody agreed. It doesn’t mean we didn’t have passionate discussions. But I was extremely proud of our students,” he said.
Diermeier then outlined the events in March when 27 students pushed their way into Kirkland Hall, which was undergoing renovations. In the ensuing rush, a security guard was injured as students attempted to force their way into Diermeier’s office. Staff prevented the forced entry and students sat outside the office. After discussions with Metro police, the three students who had pushed the security guard were arrested and charged with assault. There were also a few students expelled and some suspended following the incident.
In an opinion column in the Wall Street Journal, Diermeier defended the university’s actions. “I laid out what we did and why we did it. And there was very much an emphasis on values and the need to enforce them. You set your values and then you have to live by them.” He added that the response to the column was very strong, though he said some faculty members were not happy.
In the wake of that incident, students began setting up tents, resulting in what Diermeier said was the country’s first such campus encampment. Without any precedent for handling the situation, he said the administration talked to students and set guidelines for behavior. In the following weeks, the encampment remained civil and as the end of the school year neared, and the space was needed for commencement, the students were asked to leave and they did. The spring semester also saw a visit by the Israeli Ambassador and the former prime minister of the Palestinian Authority, and a celebration on the first night of Passover.
The chancellor took questions from the audience, most focusing on various aspects of principled neutrality. Diermeier returned to the central notion that once an institution determines its values and communicates them out, it is imperative to enforce them. Not only that, but those values provide a backstop of sorts that helps with decision-making.
In closing, Diermeier looked toward the future and his recently renewed contract which keeps him at Vanderbilt until 2035. “One thing that this whole thing has done for us is that what we stand for is clearer and people know about it more. The second thing I should say is that I’m very excited about Nashville. I’m excited about the vitality of the city and the community. We want to play an important role there…We want to be a great partner for the community…I could not be more optimistic about the city, the region, the state, and we’re going to lean in on that.”
The Jewish Observer is published by The Jewish Federation of Greater Nashville and made possible by funds raised in the Jewish Federation Annual Campaign. Become a supporter today.