I defend your right to disagree with me; will you do the same?
Exploring the limits of the defense of the academic freedom
“No, that’s not what I’m saying,” I said, trying to keep the exasperation out of my voice as the conversation continued to go in circles leading nowhere. “Of course, they have every right to hold that position and to write and publish on it. But at the same time, you need to understand how it looks to us when it is brought into the classroom when it’s not relevant to the course material, and used with little context as the only example”.
Amid a tumultuous year of Antisemitic incidents at the law school, we - the executive board of the Jewish Students Association - were meeting yet again in the spring with the now former Dean of the law school, this time with a list of action items that included removing content related to Israel from a mandatory course on Canadian Indigenous Legal Orders. This was not the first time I had found myself spinning in circles on this topic in a meeting with the former Dean. I would begin by explaining why something was (a) problematic and (b) not relevant to the context where it was placed, and end up defending the rights of professors to hold and promote these views, just not necessarily in the classroom. These defences were not merely formulaic. I firmly believe in the importance of well-reasoned, intellectual debate, and in that vein, defend the right of others to disagree with me. Part of why I think this is because of the importance of freedom of expression, but a more significant factor is because I - like everyone else - am frequently incorrect, and I need to be afforded the opportunity to have fair and frank discussions and debates in order to learn. However, like all things, the forum for these debates has its time and place, and is not appropriate in all circumstances.
Defining Academic Freedom
Academic freedom was the tagline of these conversations with the former Dean. His defence of claims made by professors in the Indigenous Legal Orders course of Israeli apartheid was that professors have the right to espouse these views under the purview of academic freedom. While I in no way disagree with this, it does not equate to the right to promote these views in courses unrelated to the situation in the Middle East or where that perspective is not presented in its proper context. This is not to say that Israel is never relevant. Both Judaism and Indigenous religious beliefs are tied to the land, and comprehensive discussions regarding land claims occur in both Canada and Israel.
The notion that academic freedom is not unlimited is not merely my perspective, in the American Association of University Professors’ 1940 Statement of Principles on Academic Freedom and Tenure, it states explicitly:
2. Teachers are entitled to freedom in the classroom in discussing their subject, but they should be careful not to introduce into their teaching a controversial matter which has no relation to their subject. Limitations of academic freedom because of religious or other aims of the institution should be clearly stated in writing at the time of the appointment.
There is no universally accepted definition of academic freedom. The above is just one example. A common thread among definitions, however, is that academic freedom does not extend to professors orating on irrelevant material. Given that we live and study in the West, in a moment where there is no uncontroversial conversation about Israel, this material is among the most likely to fall into the category of controversial matter bearing little or no relation to the subject, outside the context of courses that specifically deal with that part of the world. This is not to mention that in a course about Canadian Indigenous Legal Orders, there are presumably more relevant examples than those drawn from a nation thousands of kilometres away, situated in a very different geopolitical climate.
Professors should be able to engage in controversial debates and comparisons outside the topics they are teaching. However, doing this on class time where - though they may have a captive audience - it requires introducing material not related to the subject matter of their course, falls outside the scope of academic freedom. Forums exist beyond the lecture hall for professors to engage in these discussions through academic journals, popular magazines, or social media.
The premise behind academic freedom is to allow universities and professors to set their curriculum without State interference. This freedom is necessary if we want to - and we absolutely should want to - engage in conversations on complex and controversial topics. To do this, professors need the freedom to use language and cover areas that may be sensitive to some students. But once again, these forays into controversy must be balanced against the requirement to stay on topic.
Under no accepted definition is academic freedom available in every instance of controversial speech. Just as it is deemed disruptive for a student to interject during a class, and go on a diatribe about an unrelated topic, faculty using their class time to digress on subjects and arguments unrelated to their course, even arguments I agree with, erode the quality of their teaching.
I want you to disagree with me.
Well, maybe that’s a stretch. My life would, of course, be much easier if everyone agreed with me. And of course, I like to be right most of the time, but as a human, I need to be wrong at least some of the time. I have and will continue to defend the rights of others to disagree with me. But my defence of my opponents is not without nuance.
If your form of disagreement is to stand there and shout at me that Israel is a racist endeavour, I cannot defend that, nor should I be expected to. How and when an argument is presented are key contextualizing factors that determine my response, and willingness to defend the right of my opponent to disagree with me. Screaming that a hotdog is a sandwich in the middle of a funeral service, is neither the method nor moment to engage in that dispute.
However, I will defend your right to debate difficult topics like Israeli policy, the merits of different approaches to equity and diversity, and even the limits of academic freedom - regardless of whether I am open to changing my mind. I will defend them so long as they are brought to the appropriate forum.
All I ask in return is that I am extended the same courtesy.
I need to be free to disagree with you too.
We are living in a moment that is at once highly critical and extremely averse to criticism. There is a rush to pass judgment along the lines of moral orthodoxy while simultaneously enforcing a mental rigidity that interprets intellectual disagreement as a sweeping personal attack.
My feedback loop conversations with the former Dean fell precisely into this trap. The criticism levelled at the forum where comments were made, was interpreted as an attack on the identity of those making the comments. It wasn’t.
While I will go to task defending the rights of others to disagree with me, the constant requirement to do so has made it impossible to advocate for myself and other students. We must regain trust in our ability to differ in opinion without discarding our objective. We need to relearn the art of civil discourse - which, yes, involves debate and disagreement.
Like everyone else, I need the liberty to disagree with things going on, and express that disagreement without it being perceived as an attack on the persons with whom I disagree. We need to engage in conversations that address the limits of academic freedom for all professors in all subjects, regardless of the identity of the professor or the sensitivity of the material.
We, on North American campuses, need to recognize a baseline, whereby we can acknowledge conflicting stances, and discuss them in a framework that allows for dissenting opinions, recognizes objective truths, acknowledges subjective experiences, and comprehends the right to make a statement as divorced from the appropriate place for that statement to be made.
If you enjoy what you read here, consider subscribing, and sharing with your friends and family. You can also find me on Twitter, Facebook, and Instagram.