An important legacy of the late Cai Yuanpei, president of Peking University from 1917 to 1922, and one of the most respected educators in modern Chinese history, is the emphasis on diversity in academia. The faculty of the illustrious university under his tenure included Western-educated progressive thinkers who were at the forefront of the May Fourth Movement, and ultra-conservative classical scholars who had remained loyal to the feudal system that was just overthrown.

But the example Cai set for academic freedom is largely forgotten in Hong Kong, where he chose to spend the remaining years of his life. The controversies surrounding the appointment of a pro-vice-chancellor at the University of Hong Kong (HKU) and various incidents of confrontation at Hong Kong Baptist University, Chinese University of Hong Kong and some other institutions of higher learning have shown that tolerance of diversity is seen as a betrayal of academic freedom by the majority of student activists and many faculty members.

University authorities could have lessened the tension by being more transparent in their decision-making process. In the case of HKU, the leaking of the contents of a tape recording of a meeting of its governing body, the HKU Council, has added fuel to the fire.

But even if the council had made the effort to explain in detail the reasons for its decision, would anyone have listened? Probably not, because the opposing students and faculty members seem dead set on maintaining their respective stances. They have shown every sign that they will not accept any viewpoint, however well it is presented, that is different from their own.

A statement by a member of the faculty in defense of the council was widely derided by the "liberal" faction and dismissed as nothing more than a whitewash for the authorities. There is no room at Hong Kong's universities for diversity of ideas!

Cai must have recognized in his time that the closing of the mind to challenging ideas is detrimental to the quality and credibility of scholastic work. An op-ed column by Arthur Brooks, president of the American Enterprise Institute, in the New York Times (NYT) cited recent research which shows that the rejection of diversity of ideas is posing a threat to the standard of higher education in the United States.

According to the article, the researchers found evidence of discrimination and hostility within academia toward conservative researchers and their viewpoints. The authors of the research paper write:"Increased political diversity would improve social psychological science by reducing the impact of bias mechanisms such as confirmation bias, and by empowering dissenting minorities to improve the quality of the majority's thinking."

The problem, as the research shows, is rooted in an unfair hiring system dominated by "liberal-minded" professors and administrators. Results of a study, cited in the NYT article, show that 79 percent of the social psychologists surveyed admitted they would be less likely to support hiring a conservative colleague than a liberal scholar with equivalent qualifications.

This is apparently the issue that was the concern of the HKU Council in rejecting the appointment as pro-vice-chancellor of Johannes Chan Man-mun, who has known connections with the "pro-democracy" parties in opposition.

Tolerance of diversity is an attribute that has been widely credited for Hong Kong's past successes. This is becoming even more important now as the city is facing new challenges - such as a rapidly ageing population and a widening income gap - that require innovative solutions. These problems simply cannot be solved by old ideas, no matter how well they served Hong Kong in the past.

To be sure, not all new ideas work. Some of them, like the suggestion to ban trams from Central to ease traffic, may even sound ridiculous. But there is no reason to question the ulterior motive of someone putting forward an idea that is different from yours.

The Innovation and Technology Bureau proposal was a case in point. The opposition parties never produced a coherent argument against the proposal which they so vigorously objected to in the legislature.

University students, faculty members and their allies in politics need to be reminded that to be liberal, as they all claim to be, is to be tolerant of diversity in ideas as well as in lifestyle. Their behavior, unfortunately, shows that they are no better than the mindless extremists whom they have vowed to fight.

The author is a veteran current affairs commentator.

(HK Edition 11/10/2015 page9)