On April 7th, as the controversy surrounding Jordan Peterson’s visit began to unfold, I described
 the circumstances as “more pushback than I expected at Linfield, but no cause for concern.”
Unfortunately, I was mistaken. Dr. Peterson’s visit to McMinnville unveiled cause for serious
 concern about the future of Linfield College, and shed light on the fundamental problems facing
 American higher education.

Admittedly, numerous parties were at fault for Peterson’s eventual disinvitation. Among other 
issues, my own excitement for his visit led me to advertise the event too zealously. I quickly
 learned about Linfield’s delicate publicity policies.

However, even accounting for the consequences of our mistakes, it was unreasonably difficult 
for Linfield’s Young Americans for Liberty chapter to host Dr. Peterson on campus. Linfield’s
 bureaucratic gears turn slowly for student efforts that aren’t in line with ‘social justice’ ideals, a
 common trend in higher education. If we had invited an intersectional feminist to speak instead, 
events likely would have transpired differently.

Certain faculty and students continue to malign YAL and our intentions. In turn, community
 members are afraid to publicly support or acknowledge us. Some have asked for their names to
 be scrubbed from the club’s activities due to fear of social or academic persecution.

We are left to wonder why the college shows minimal interest in addressing the ongoing scare 
tactics, or in protecting our student group from harsh accusations. I would prefer to avoid
 crafting a victim narrative, but campus discourse so heavily favors a conception of “oppressors 
versus the oppressed” that an appeal to victimization becomes one of the only viable methods for 
communicating a problem.

The college is not blind to these issues, and some faculty are already pushing to introduce more 
variety on campus. Jordan Peterson’s talk could have been used to showcase their initiative – a 
wasted opportunity.

After he was disinvited, our YAL chapter managed to relocate the event, fund it completely and 
pull it off without incident over the course of one weekend. A college campus should be the
 most conducive space possible for promoting student efforts and allowing ideas to flow. It pains
 me to say that the opposite turned out to be true.

Outside of Linfield’s stifling atmosphere, the community made its voice heard on April 24th.
Respectfully and clearly, they said this: Dr. Peterson’s lecture was a valuable learning 
experience which deserved support.

The Falls Event Center (an incredible venue) was packed with nearly 400 attendees. The questions
posed were insightful, the donation effort was a stunning success, and the speaker received two
 standing ovations. The mismatch between Linfield’s reaction and that of the broader community
indicates that the college made significant errors in its assessment of the situation.

The bulk of the problems here were caused by hyper reactionary behavior from a radical
 minority of students and professors. For example: English professor Reshmi Dutt-Ballerstadt. 
She treated our group uncharitably, so my response to her will be in plain terms.

Dutt-Ballerstadt repeatedly described our efforts as a threat to student safety in staff memos, 
interviews and class time activities. In an article published to the school paper, she asserts that 
our events “greatly threaten ‘safe spaces’ for our students, staff and faculty who belong to
 marginalized groups and violate our ethos of upholding mutual respect.” That’s a bold
 accusation, which some of her followers took very seriously. She didn’t stop her act there.
 During at least one school day, Ballerstadt reportedly taught from off campus due to “concerns 
for her safety.”

YAL students experienced an immediate negative effect on our campus life. We’ve seen the
 phrase “transphobic piece of s**t” scrawled across a blackboard. Implications of nazism and
 white supremacy have been leveled at us in public settings. I’ve been branded an “alt-righter.”
 One student expressed concern that his grade in Dutt-Ballerstadt’s class may suffer if she found 
out that he attended our events.

The comical reality seems to be that my tuition pays for Dutt-Ballerstadt to feign terror, convince 
her students through video chat that I represent a threat to their well being, and organize them 
in order to keep people away from YAL events. Linfield’s “commitment to diversity” rings hollow 
when toxic ideologues are allowed to exert such unchecked power against well-meaning
 student efforts.

Our group was barely large enough to mount a defense. In a classroom setting, group support is 
not available, so dissenting voices are often too afraid to be heard. This stagnates Linfield’s
 marketplace of ideas. Students need to feel like they have some protection against tar and 
feathering tactics when they speak out. If colleges can’t make that promise to individuals who
 fall outside of the typical liberal arts political/cultural sphere, those demographics will feel
 alienated, and enrollment numbers will continue to depress.

That is why Linfield’s YAL chapter began. We don’t want to see the school we love go down a
 dark path any longer.