Book Review: “The Coddling of the American Mind”

Before my daughter was born, my wife and I purchased a book called “40 Ways to Raise a Nonracist Child.” This was about 23 years ago. About five years before that, I was a student in college where there was a nascent, but robust movement to be politically correct in the way one spoke, wrote and interacted with others. The overarching idea was a simple one: treat each other with respect. Yes, identities often mean differences, but those differences shouldn’t be marginalized and made to feel like an “Other.” Most of these ideas grew out of the post-Civil Rights era where equality of opportunity changed into a kind of pursuit of happiness for groups who constructed their own identities that stood in opposition to a larger society. These were groups whose identities would often be punished for expressions, ideas, or political demands that were thought of as deviant (both in the sociological and pejorative sense).

Identity politics writ large was seen as not only in opposition to, but a direct threat to a culture where essentially white males with power ruled in most sectors of society. The backlash was swift (and profitable) for the likes of AM radio talkers who found an audience for their Orwellian Hate Week — that’s lasted decades.

In The Coddling of the American Mind, Greg Lukianoff and Jonathan Haidt examine the effects the good intentions of identity politics had on the children of Gen Xers. The verdict? Well, it’s not good — but there’s hope. The authors argue that the rise of anxiety, depression, suicide, violence, and political polarization has to do with the convergence of identity politics, post-9/11 obsession with safety, iPhones, and social media. These factors manifest themselves on university campuses (and the larger society) in terms of tribalism where oppressors and victims are in a prolonged battle for justice and power. Microagressions become macroagressions through the amplification of grievances on social media. But this isn’t a one-way power struggle. The right has learned more than a thing or two about identity politics, social media, and feeling aggrieved. Indeed, if there’s danger to society from all this coddling, one can see it expressed in state power to “protect” victims from oppressors by building walls, banning Muslims from entering the country, rolling back reproductive rights, rights for LGBTQ folks, and feeling it’s fine and dandy to utter derogatory words in the name of free speech. And while the authors do devote a couple of chapters to polarization from the right, their real critique centers on children who express their political views from a leftish point of view — and the parents and university administrators who enable them with iPhones and safe spaces.

Now, I used to teach at the college level, so I can say from experience that the level of coddling has increased. Students often expect to be rewarded with an A for substandard work, controversial topics are frowned upon for fear that 1. One may get a bad review on both your teaching evaluation or Rate My Professor. 2. Someone will record you on their phones and load part of your lecture on social media for public shamming. 3. You’ll get the dean or another administrator following up on a complaint from a student who felt you weren’t being respectful to (insert whatever you want here). And since many professors work as part-time faculty, they have zero job protections when complaints are lodged. So, they often keep the tenor of their classrooms quiet, bland, and safe.

These are the same sort of fears that keep comedians from performing at college campuses but makes it really attractive for right-wing trolls to show up to talk about their ideas — which are just not-so-thinly veiled insults designed to trigger outrage. All this is to say that I’m not ignorant of these changes, nor am I immune to their stifling effects. However, while the authors do highlight how good intentions sometimes lead to bad ideas, they spend far too long critiquing the pernicious effects of safetyism of the so-called iGen (or Gen Z). And while their critique isn’t without merit (or, at times, accuracy), it often falls prey to what the authors critique: the amplification of individual incidents as a reflection of long-term trends. This is not to dismiss the entire book, because there is much to learn and, yes, agree with. For example, a big problem with universities today is the rise of the administrative class. This is a neoliberal group of people hired to increase the bottom line of a school’s budget. If you smell corporate culture in this description of neoliberalism, you’re not wrong. Now that students are seen as consumers who spend a lot of cash to attend a university, it is incumbent upon administrators to keep the customer happy. That means spending more money on amenities — and hiring people to keep those students happy with the “experience.” That means spending priorities are in areas like new buildings, better dorms, workout rooms, upscale food courts, security services, counseling, and, of course, hiring more administrators. See anything missing? That would be hiring more full-time professors.

Part of all this coddling comes from the lack of full-time faculty. That’s not to say there aren’t full-time professors at these schools, it’s just that with the rise in the administrative class, there was also a rise in adjunct professors at most schools. Adjuncts are basically migrant workers who have no real contracts, no job security, receive low pay, some lack health benefits, and there are a few who are homeless. So, on the one hand, you have a class who have enriched themselves by towing a corporate line (call them the 1%), and on the other hand, you have a class made poorer by the same policies (call them the 99%). In the middle are students. They are there to learn about the world, develop critical and analytical skills, and get ready for careers that run the gamut from highly professional to service industry work. The cost of higher education is soaring with tuition, living expenses, and other incidentals beyond the reach of most middle-class folks. Loans are taken out to cover costs, but the return on the investment is often iffy — especially if a student majors in the humanities or social sciences. Considering how loaded some students are with debt, it makes me wonder how widespread this coddling is.

While I found The Coddling of the American Mind instructive at times (and there were many moments where I agreed with the authors), I found their methodology to be rather sloppy. This book is designed for the general reader, but as a piece of social science, the variables they often set up to test are spurious. However, as a line of argument, the book is more effective in making a point. The evidence they use to make their big point is a case of correlation implying causation, but it’s almost impossible to ignore parts of the book where their examples mirror both behavior and symptoms that seem to afflict Gen Z more than another generation. Now, why that’s the case could be explained by other factors than the good intentions of adults who coddle their children.