Do our nation's universities value open debate, free inquiry, and intellectual pluralism? The case of Mark Moyar suggests not. Armed with a B.A. summa cum laude in history from Harvard University, a doctorate in history from Cambridge University, a published book, a contract for a second book, and stellar letters of recommendation from some of the world's most distinguished historians, Moyar applied for jobs at colleges and universities across our nation. Five years and more than 150 applications later, he still had not landed a tenure-track job. Ordinarily, schools would be vying with one another to hire a young scholar with such credentials, talent, and promise. So why was Moyar different?
A revisionist historian of the Vietnam War, Moyar uses previously unexamined evidence to argue that the United States was justified in going into Vietnam, that the war was winnable, and that the controversial "domino theory" is a credible one. Presented in his meticulous 542-page book Triumph Forsaken: The Vietnam War, 1954-1965 (Cambridge University Press, 2006), the first of two volumes on the subject, his reappraisal of Vietnam has earned him considerable praise from academics, journalists, politicians, and war veterans. "I know of no scholar more dedicated to bringing a thorough and accurate portrayal of America's involvement in Vietnam than Mark Moyar," wrote Senator James Webb, who earned a Navy Cross, a Silver Star, two Bronze Stars, and two Purple Hearts during his own service in Vietnam. "Everyone who is interested in a full picture of that oft-misunderstood war should be grateful for his effort."
Unfortunately for Moyar, history departments across the nation were anything but grateful for his alternative perspective on Vietnam. When he applied for jobs, he usually did not receive so much as a preliminary interview. Where he did manage to get an interview, he was passed over in favor of candidates with scholarship on such topics as "The American Film Industry and the Spanish-Speaking Market During the Transition to Sound, 1929-1936," or "Attire, Hygiene, and Discourses of Civilization in Early American-Japanese Relations." At some institutions, the discrimination was more overt. When the history faculty voted on his candidacy at Texas Tech, fifteen out of twenty professors found him "unacceptable." At Texas A&M University, an anonymous faculty assessor opined that his presence "would hurt the reputation of the school." And when he interviewed at the U.S. Air Force War College, a professor told him that he was "full of s**t." So much for scholarly debate.
The story of Moyar's job search points to a systemic problem within academe, which tends to treat certain views (e.g., that Vietnam was an unjust, unwinnable war) as sacrosanct, while dismissing opposing views as unmentionable heresies. Interviewing students, professors, and administrators on campuses across the country, MPI fellow Evan Coyne Maloney explores the damaging effects of this ideological monoculture in his forthcoming feature-length documentary film Indoctrinate U. A scorching exposé of how our nation's colleges and universities use institutional mechanisms to promote certain views while censuring others, Indoctrinate U is a rallying call for reform, a passionate argument in favor of genuine academic freedom and intellectual pluralism. It is essential viewing for academics, trustees, students, parents, taxpayers, and anyone else interested in knowing what our colleges and universities are doing with our minds and our money.
Indoctrinate U does not yet have a distributor, so MPI has organized a campaign to promote the film. We ask only that you visit the film's official website, view the trailer, and sign up to request a screening in your area. The more requests we get, the better the chance that Indoctrinate U will come to your town or city soon.