As a public facing academic I get a lot of heat from people who feel I should automatically agree with them. When I don't some folks shrug, other get mean. The mean ones draw from a quiver of tactics designed to disrupt, upset, and silence. Depending upon the issue, a person's perspective, and their degree of engagement some people think targeting another person is an acceptable practice. They work to undermine their target with the intensity of a religious zealot. I am likely naïve. I think it is possible to disagree without threatening and attempting to disturb one's adversary.
Academic freedom should be able to protect faculty from such attacks.
Academic Freedom
“The members of the University enjoy certain rights and privileges essential to the fulfilment of its primary functions: instruction and the pursuit of knowledge. Central among these rights is the freedom, within the law, to pursue what seems to them as fruitful avenues of inquiry, to teach and to learn unhindered by external or non-academic constraints, and to engage in full and unrestricted consideration of any opinion.” From UBC statement on academic freedom.
“Academic freedom includes the right, without restriction by prescribed doctrine, to freedom to teach and discuss; freedom to carry out research and disseminate and publish the results thereof; freedom to produce and perform creative works; freedom to engage in service to the institution and the community; freedom to express one’s opinion about the institution, its administration, and the system in which one works; freedom to acquire, preserve, and provide access to documentary material in all formats; and freedom to participate in professional and representative academic bodies. Academic freedom always entails freedom from institutional censorship.” From CAUT academic freedom policy statement.
All members of the university community, enjoy a degree of academic freedom and the freedom of expression. Faculty, given our role in research and teaching have a particular attachment to, and reliance upon, the concept of academic freedom. It is what allows us to test the boundaries of thought, it allows us to consider ideas that may be uncomfortable even distasteful or offensive. It may not be a perfect concept, but it has been the best way to ensure freedom of thought and action within liberal democratic societies. Its a hedge against tyranny.
There are all manner of attacks against academic freedom. No one, left, right, or otherwise is untainted by efforts to shut down someone else’s ability to speak or act. An accuser will claim the accused is causing some one or some group harm. As a consequence the accused has no right to continue as they were. Sometimes accusers want an apology, sometimes they want a penalty, often they want retribution. Social media is filled with performatively violent accusers. Far more subtle are the accusers who mask the disruption within the discourse of civility and use institutional processes to undermine and threaten those they accuse.
I am a university faculty member with a long record of speaking publicly to news media and on social media. I am not immune to arrows of complaint. Several times in my career I have had to file police reports on anonymous threats sent by mail, emailed to me, or left on my office voice message machine. It is chilling to know there are ‘normal’ folks out there who find it acceptable to threaten bodily harm against a person they disagree with.
Throughout my teaching career, like many colleagues in First Nations teaching and research, I have been the recipient of complaints filed with my department head. These complainants have targeted the peer reviewed readings assigned (too political), methods of instruction (not rigorous, thus biased and unfit), and even research projects on public education my students had been assigned to do (again, too political). Each time this happens the institutional wheels kick into play. Thank goodness we have a faculty union as they help with information and support, especially when facing spurious complaints.
These kinds of interventions are about trying to reach in and interfere with how one presents and engages publicly and professionally. They are not attempts at debate and dialogue - they’re about control and silencing. They are often framed as technical complaints, ie calling into question the suitability of readings, assignments, projects, or perspective of instructor. From the right, from the left, from whomever, it all boils down to the same thing - an attempt to bend the outcome to the wishes of the intervenor through intimidation.
There is a need to have processes in place to mange complaints. They need to be clear, consistent, and designed to prevent vexatious acts. I appreciate that it is hard to set criteria to prevent those using process to score points, as these processes require good faith engagement.
Having the courage to act from one’s principles is a value I strive to follow everyday.
“Damn the torpedoes, full speed ahead!”
