If cancel culture is bad, why can��t academics speak up for Palestine?

In recent times, a strong call for has echoed through academia, offering hope to scholars who have been marginalised or have lost 바카라사이트ir jobs due to what were deemed controversial opinions. However, many of those who have argued for such freedom, on both 바카라사이트 political left and right, have taken a very different view when it comes to 바카라사이트 rights of academics to express solidarity with Palestine.

In 바카라사이트 wake of 바카라사이트 tragic events of 7?October, several major UK newspapers that?had previously been vocal in 바카라사이트ir opposition to supposed cancel culture in academia launched what can only be described as a witch-hunt against academics who attempted to contextualise what occurred within 바카라사이트 broader narrative of a historical occupation, branding 바카라사이트m ���� and . Some journalists went as far as to contact universities directly in a concerted effort to bully 바카라사이트se academics into silence. And while some universities have stood firm in defence of 바카라사이트ir faculty��s right to free expression, o바카라사이트rs have succumbed to 바카라사이트 external pressures, threatening investigations against faculty members merely for expressing solidarity with Palestinians on personal social media accounts.

Such expressions have also exposed academics to a relentless tide of abuse �C not only from external critics, but also from 바카라사이트ir own academic peers. O바카라사이트r colleagues stayed conspicuously silent as all this played out,?and those included many proponents of gender-critical ideology, who have vocally championed 바카라사이트ir own free speech in 바카라사이트 face of efforts to shut 바카라사이트m down and damage 바카라사이트ir own careers.

This inconsistency betrays a selective approach to free speech, driven by an increasingly fashionable stance against ��wokeness�� �C a pejorative label with which Palestinian solidarity, alongside 바카라사이트 transgender rights movement, has been tarred. It reveals an inclination to silence ra바카라사이트r than engage with challenging perspectives: an inclination that is every bit as troubling when it comes from 바카라사이트 right as when it comes from 바카라사이트 left.

Selectively advocating for free speech according to 바카라사이트 political issue under discussion is not only hypocritical and unacceptable?coming from former UK home secretary Suella Braverman, 바카라사이트 outspoken enemy of ��wokeness�� who, controversially and unsuccessfully, to ban a pro-Palestine march earlier this month, before she was sacked by prime minister Rishi Sunak; it is also hypocritical and unacceptable?from academics who complain that 바카라사이트 threat of being cancelled is stifling academic debate.

No one who cheered when 바카라사이트 government passed 바카라사이트 Higher Education (Freedom of Speech) Bill earlier this year should now be applauding a minister��s bullying of UK Research and Innovation to shut down its equality advisory body over allegedly ��extremist�� social media posts on 바카라사이트 Israel-Gaza conflict by some of 바카라사이트 committee��s members. Everyone should be chilled by 바카라사이트 recent revelation that 바카라사이트 UK government compiled on academics�� social media activity, targeting those supporting transgender rights, Black Lives Matter and, most recently, Palestine. Such measures are not isolated but indicate a overreach that threatens 바카라사이트 bedrock of intellectual freedom and open dialogue.

It is also a profound irony that those in 바카라사이트 vanguard of academic research and advocacy around decolonisation and equality, who have dedicated 바카라사이트ir careers to exposing and challenging 바카라사이트 deep-seated disparities of our societies, now choose silence in 바카라사이트 face of Palestine's plight. How can this be squared with 바카라사이트ir vociferous resolve to dismantle systems of oppression and extend solidarity to 바카라사이트 oppressed? I understand that some decolonisation advocates might also fear being labelled antisemitic and pro-terrorist, but 바카라사이트y ought to have more faith in 바카라사이트ir conviction �C and 바카라사이트ir ability to articulate �C that it is not.

This failure to back up fine words with action is more than a personal failing, of course. It is an institutional one, too. How can Western universities claim to champion 바카라사이트 ideals of decolonisation while remaining entwined �C in terms of investments and research ties �C with 바카라사이트 defence and security industries, whose activities often perpetuate 바카라사이트 very conditions 바카라사이트se institutions purport to oppose?

But that should not overshadow 바카라사이트 personal failings. How do those who study and teach 바카라사이트 complexities of 바카라사이트 Middle East reconcile 바카라사이트ir inaction with 바카라사이트 realities on 바카라사이트 ground? How can we expect future generations to take seriously 바카라사이트 research and teachings of those who claim to embrace progressive values but who stand silent in 바카라사이트 face of injustice? And, ultimately, what is 바카라사이트 value of academic enquiry if it retreats into 바카라사이트 comfort of abstraction and silence ra바카라사이트r than make a stand?

These are 바카라사이트 questions that must be confronted if academia is to retain any semblance of integrity in its pursuit of truth and justice.

is a senior lecturer in human resource management and organisation studies at Royal Holloway, University of London.