The National Association of Scholars (NAS) welcomes the resignation of James Ryan from the presidency of the University of Virginia.
President-Emeritus Ryan was a dedicated proponent of imposing the discriminatory ideology and political agenda of “diversity, equity, and inclusion” (DEI) on the University of Virginia and its members. Any reasonable observer would judge that he would be at best ineffective in overseeing the dismantlement of DEI from the University of Virginia, and quite possibly would attempt to use administrative means to prevent that dismantlement from going into effect. His continued employment placed the University of Virginia at real risk both of violating federal law and of forfeiting federal aid to the University. The University of Virginia is better off for his resignation, which allows for the appointment of a new president who can be expected to put real effort into removing the illegal, immoral, and discriminatory bureaucratic apparatus of DEI entrenched within the University of Virginia.
Much of the news commentary seems to be a debate as to who was primarily responsible for President Ryan's resignation—the federal government, the state government, the University of Virginia Board of Visitors, or President Ryan himself. Everyone responsible deserves credit for forwarding correct policy. It would be most generous to believe that President Ryan determined in his conscience that he would best serve the University of Virginia by resigning; we will take that to be what happened, absent proof to the contrary.
A great many college presidents and deans will be ineffective, or positively sabotaging, when faced with the requirement to remove DEI from their institutions. America needs a new body of university presidents and deans who are prepared to undertake this new mission. The trouble, of course, is that the ideologically extreme education establishment has conducted its purge of academia so thoroughly that there are very few mission-aligned people with administrative experience in higher education. When Ryans resign, there most likely replacements will be more Ryans—unwilling reformers and/or saboteurs.
Education reformers must prepare a body of mission-aligned personnel ready to serve as university presidents or deans. In a few years, the heads of the new civics institutes will be plausible candidates for such positions—but there are a handful of such institutes, and thousands of colleges. Education reformers should assemble a list of candidates for high academic positions with experience outside of the academy—but aware that they will need to tame a deceptive and sabotaging academic bureaucracy. We need people to serve as university presidents who know we need to remove DEI, and know that the existing bureaucrats will seek to foil such reform any way they can. This new generation of university presidents will still need to learn on the job exactly how to achieve the necessary reform. But knowing what needs to be done is the sine qua non; they can acquire the experience.
All the Ryans should go. Our challenge is to make sure we have successors ready who are determined to uproot DEI from our colleges.
Photo by Jürgen Hamann on Adobe Stock
