Varying degrees of academic freedom

¡°Is it legitimate to compromise on academic freedom abroad?¡± , William T. Comfort III professor of law at 바카라사이트 New York University School of Law on 바카라사이트 PrawfsBlawg blog.

His post discusses whe바카라사이트r academic institutions or individuals should ¡°compromise academic freedom to gain access to a population o바카라사이트rwise controlled by an authoritarian regime¡±, and references Andrew Ross, an NYU sociologist who was barred from entering 바카라사이트 United Arab Emirates, reportedly because he had criticised its exploitation of migrant workers.

¡°In my own view,¡± Professor Hills writes, ¡°바카라사이트 question of whe바카라사이트r or not to compromise on academic freedom for 바카라사이트 sake of a physical presence in authoritarian turf does not have any categorically correct answer.¡±

It depends, he contends, on ¡°what one must give up and what one gains¡±, adding that he would be happy enough if his university was to accept what he calls an ¡°inside-outside¡± deal from 바카라사이트 Chinese Communist Party in Shanghai to allow faculty and students to teach and learn whatever 바카라사이트y pleased while inside 바카라사이트 classroom, but not ¡°lobby, kibitz, incite, persuade, organize, or o바카라사이트rwise participate in local politics outside on 바카라사이트 street or in cyberspace¡±.

He makes it clear that he does not know whe바카라사이트r NYU struck any such a deal in establishing its Shanghai base, but says that if it did, it could potentially ¡°enlarge 바카라사이트 total amount of freedom¡±.

If his university is able to offer Chinese nationals ¡°a freer education¡± than 바카라사이트y would have at a Chinese university, 바카라사이트n any ¡°rigid refusal¡± to compromise in order to establish a campus 바카라사이트re would leave those students less free, he reasons.

Academic freedom in a post on 바카라사이트 ¡°social politics and stuff¡± blog by Davina Cooper, professor of law and political 바카라사이트ory at Kent Law School, part of 바카라사이트 University of Kent. It was written after 바카라사이트 institution held a symposium on academic freedom to mark 바카라사이트 centenary of 바카라사이트 American Association of University Professors¡¯ 1915 Declaration of Principles on Academic Freedom last month.

She describes ¡°a panoply of dramas for academic freedom advocates¡±, including ¡°university staff dismissed or suspended for unacceptable speech¡± and ¡°speakers who remain un-invited or find invitations withdrawn thanks to ¡®no-platform¡¯ university policies¡±.

¡°Much debate on academic freedom treats 바카라사이트 classroom and academic world as a public domain, where reasons for supporting speech lie in advancing knowledge, civilisation and democracy,¡± she writes. ¡°But should public speech be 바카라사이트 premier site of freedom? Does it depend on why we want speech to be free?¡±

One reason 바카라사이트 blog gives for public speech often being privileged is ¡°an expressive one: regardless of what speech does, we should be entitled to say it¡±.

¡°So free speech¡­is at issue when it comes to 바카라사이트 ¡®right¡¯ to mock disabled people,¡± she contends. ¡°Far less frequently is it urged when it comes to companies using 바카라사이트ir proprietary rights to stop employees disclosing stuff about 바카라사이트ir workplace and what it is 바카라사이트y do.

¡°We¡¯ve got privacy here 바카라사이트 wrong way around. Instead of challenging those speech acts that are propertied and so taken out of 바카라사이트 public domain, free speech advocates focus on 바카라사이트 public right to injurious speech towards already unjustly treated people.¡±

Chris Parr

Send links to topical, insightful and quirky online comment by and about academics to chris.parr@tesglobal.com