|
September 20, 2005
Whilst away in Melbourne I wondered about the approaching chill in academy concerning academic freedom in Australia. Things do seem to be closing down a bit. I had in mind this case about Professor Andrew Fraser, an associate professor in public law at Macquarie University in Sydney, who was banned from teaching at the university earlier this year, after making a series of statements about race, crime and culture.
Banned from teaching? Why? Fraser is a good teacher by all accounts. Are not universities places where academics can raise ideas freely as a means of fostering discourse, engendering debate and enriching the community? What is going on at Macquarie University? You can hear the conservatives ask: 'is this the way the ideological grip of liberals and leftists on the university campus is going to be maintained?' By banning unpopular rightwing views.
The issue I was wondering about was, why did the university not act to protect the ethos of the liberal university? Why is the university so lacking in courage that it cannot publicly defend the ethos of a university. This ethos is described by Amy Gutman as:
"... the freedom of professors and students to read widely and explore topics in all their complexity, to think critically and debate issues where there are grounds for reasonable disagreement, and to imagine and express new ideas and new worlds without fear of reprisal or retribution."
Some comments on this episode can be found over at Catallaxy Suprisingly, these libertarians appear to support the ban. What has happened to their open society?
More background can be found over at Larvatus Prodeo and Catallaxy.
Lo and behold it is reported by the ABC that Deakin University in Melbourne has bowed to legal threats, reversing a decision by its law journal to publish a defence of the White Australia policy by controversial academic Andrew Fraser. Fraser argues that the latest science confirms racial differences and vindicates the founding fathers' attempt to preserve Australia as an Anglo-Saxon bastion. Why not let this be publsihed and pulled to bits by lefty critics? Isn't open public debate, scrutiny and testing claimsd what a university is about?
The Australian says that Sally Walker, Deakin University's vice-chancellor, wrote in a letter to Professor Fraser yesterday that, "On the basis of (legal) advice, I have to inform you that I have directed those responsible for the Deakin Law Review not to publish your article." My my. This is the corporate university. So what were Walker's reasons?
In her letter, Professor Walker says that she has advice that publishing Fraser's article, ''Rethinking the White Australia Policy', would "...breach the federal Racial Discrimination Act, which prohibits racial vilification." In a media statement, Professor Walker added:
"Universities are charged with a responsibility of encouraging open public debate and scrutiny. However, universities are not exempt from the law, nor should they be."
Racial vilification? According to news reports Fraser's 6800-word article, was accepted by two anonymous academic reviewers. What is going on?
There is some commentary by John Quiggin, and Larvatus Prodeo on this.
I have no brief to preserve Australia as an Anglo-Saxon bastion, given my commitment to a multicultural Australia. Nor do I accept Fraser's views that sub-Saharan Africans living in Australia are a crime risk as they have much lower IQ's and "significantly more testosterone" than whites; that Australia is creating an Asian managerial-professional "ruling class", and that the abolition of slavery in the US can be used as example to demonstrate a link between an expanding black population and increases in crime.
If Fraser's article meets the academic standards of the two anonymous academic reviewers of the Deakin Law Review, then it should be published. By censoring the article he Deakin University authorities have placed a constraint on academic freedom and kissed the liberal university goodbye.
My judgement is that the silencing of Associate Professor Fraser is being done because his views are categorised as "unacceptable" by liberals. Yet it is only a short to step to say that the views of a professor of Islamic studies are unacceptable because they are found to be promoting "terrorism"? Or that the views of a professor of international relations are unacceptable because they "encourage" attacks on Australian troops in Iraq? Or that the views of an economics professo rare unacceptable because they "incie" violence against multinational corporations.
I can sense the big chill coming.
|
or are the views of a Professor viewed as a danger to bottom lines depedndent on overseas full-fee paying students? Macquarie's small-l liberal students couldn't be more than 15% of the population in a Uni siutated in the electorate of Bennelong (oh savage irony), and it's been a long time since Uni admin has taken notice of a small group of student politicians... A fine time to take a stand, me thinks... But as for the Deakin publication, they've got folks in that Uni advocating torture - a bit of the Bulletin's "For the white man only" schtick shouldn't be anything out of the ordinary.