Stanford Professor Dr. Jay Bhattacharya warned against the "dangerous" potential consequences of the university’s recent move to remove "harmful language" from its websites and computer codes.
Stanford University explained the goal of its new "Elimination of Harmful Language Initiative" is to remove racist, violent or biased language. The banned words were put into different categories like ableist, gender-based, and culturally appropriative.
Bhattacharya, a naturalized U.S. citizen, acknowledged that Stanford had good intentions with the initiative, but he said it was disappointing to see a list of "banned words," especially the term "American."
GREG GUTFELD: STANFORD UNIVERSITY IS NOW THE PLACE FOR LANGUAGE CASTRATION
"I can understand where they're coming from. What they're trying to do is create an atmosphere of respect for other people," Bhattacharya said on "The Ingraham Angle" Wednesday. "But this is such a ham-handed way to try to go about it."
The list offers alternatives for the banned words. For example, Stanford categorized the term "immigrant" as a "reductive description" and encouraged using the phrase "a person who has immigrated" instead.
The guide also suggested saying "U.S. citizen" rather than the word "American" because there are other countries in the Americas.
Bhattacharya referred to himself as an "immigrant" and explained to host Sean Duffy that the title of "American" is part of his identity. One of the happiest moments of his life, he said, was becoming a naturalized citizen at 20 years old.
"I am proud to be an American. That word means a lot to me," he said, explaining that he's been at Stanford for 36 years as a student and then a professor.
"I like this word, it’s part of my identity, it’s part of who I am – [for it to be] forbidden, is crazy. It is not actually going to foster respect."
He suggested a better solution would be to have productive discussions about ideas and potentially problematic language so that students can be better equipped to address and understand them.
He argued banning people from saying certain words is counterproductive.
"I see a list of words like that, and I want to say those words," Bhattacharya said. "I can't be the only one."
Bhattacharya said many of his colleagues are also unhappy with the initiative, and he warned banning words is dangerous.
"This comes at a moment where we have the federal government looking to suppress speech. You have major universities trying to control the words that you say," he said.
"It just makes people think what's gone wrong with great universities like Stanford."
