> even Bret is willing to support the idea that "others will argue that this actually protects academic freedom since diversity statements can be little more than political litmus tests thinly disguised."

No, you're wrong. You just took his statement out of context. He did not say he supports it; he only acknowledged the existence of that view. Specifically, his full statement was:

> "Controversy there is likely to be more complex,

> with some seeing this as a political infringement on the traditional prerogative whereby departments chose their members and thus an infringement on academic freedom;

> alternately others will argue that this actually protects academic freedom since diversity statements can be little more than political litmus tests thinly disguised."

Acknowledging opposing views is one of the key things you learn in academic and argumentative writing. It is not the same thing as support.

I think it's pretty disingenuous that you decided to remove the word "alternatively" in this accusation.