This article is from the source 'guardian' and was first published or seen on . It last changed over 40 days ago and won't be checked again for changes.
You can find the current article at its original source at https://www.theguardian.com/education/2017/nov/07/free-speech-violence-british-universities-jo-johnson-america
The article has changed 6 times. There is an RSS feed of changes available.
| Version 0 | Version 1 |
|---|---|
| Free speech on campus: could US violence spread to British universities? | Free speech on campus: could US violence spread to British universities? |
| (3 days later) | |
| “This idea might be comical if it were not so dangerous,” says Dr Cheryl Hudson, a lecturer in US political history at the University of Liverpool, of the higher education minister, Jo Johnson’s, recent demand that all British universities guarantee free speech on campus or face fines. | “This idea might be comical if it were not so dangerous,” says Dr Cheryl Hudson, a lecturer in US political history at the University of Liverpool, of the higher education minister, Jo Johnson’s, recent demand that all British universities guarantee free speech on campus or face fines. |
| Johnson’s move followed much-publicised attempts by student unions and campaigners to ban high-profile speakers — including the feminist writer Germaine Greer and the former Ukip leader Nigel Farage — from speaking at universities because of their controversial opinions. | Johnson’s move followed much-publicised attempts by student unions and campaigners to ban high-profile speakers — including the feminist writer Germaine Greer and the former Ukip leader Nigel Farage — from speaking at universities because of their controversial opinions. |
| A few days later came the revelation that Chris Heaton-Harris, a Tory MP and whip, had written to all universities asking for details of what they were teaching about Brexit. | A few days later came the revelation that Chris Heaton-Harris, a Tory MP and whip, had written to all universities asking for details of what they were teaching about Brexit. |
| As controversial as these developments are, they seem less alarming if you compared them to America, where rightwing extremist provocateurs are suing universities to be allowed to spout white supremacist rhetoric on campus in the name of free speech. | As controversial as these developments are, they seem less alarming if you compared them to America, where rightwing extremist provocateurs are suing universities to be allowed to spout white supremacist rhetoric on campus in the name of free speech. |
| Last month, the University of Florida spent $600,000 (about £460,000) on security so that a white nationalist, Richard Spencer, could safely give one of his speeches espousing the creation of a white “ethno-state”, accompanied by supporters sporting swastikas. | Last month, the University of Florida spent $600,000 (about £460,000) on security so that a white nationalist, Richard Spencer, could safely give one of his speeches espousing the creation of a white “ethno-state”, accompanied by supporters sporting swastikas. |
| The university had tried to ban Spencer, but backed down when he threatened a lawsuit based on the first amendment to the US constitution protecting his right to free speech. Protests against him on campus were vociferous. Later that day, three men shouted “Hail Hitler!” and fired a gun at protesters; they were arrested by Gainesville police and charged with attempted homicide. | The university had tried to ban Spencer, but backed down when he threatened a lawsuit based on the first amendment to the US constitution protecting his right to free speech. Protests against him on campus were vociferous. Later that day, three men shouted “Hail Hitler!” and fired a gun at protesters; they were arrested by Gainesville police and charged with attempted homicide. |
| Spencer’s supporters are currently suing Ohio State, Penn State and Michigan State universities after they denied him a venue on campus, citing public safety concerns. | Spencer’s supporters are currently suing Ohio State, Penn State and Michigan State universities after they denied him a venue on campus, citing public safety concerns. |
| The incident at the University of Florida followed violence at the University of California at Berkeley in February over Milo Yiannopoulos, an “alt-right” agitator and former Breitbart senior editor invited to speak there. | The incident at the University of Florida followed violence at the University of California at Berkeley in February over Milo Yiannopoulos, an “alt-right” agitator and former Breitbart senior editor invited to speak there. |
| In September, Spencer, who graduated from the University of Virginia, organised the Unite the Right rally, which took white nationalist marchers carrying torches and chanting “Jews will not replace us” on to the historic university campus of his alma mater, in Charlottesville, Virginia, with the university authorities helpless to stop it. There were passionate counter protests on campus on the night of the torchlight march, though peaceful. But there was violence near a public park the following day as white supremacists, many with clubs and pepper spray, shouted Nazi slogans. The day ended with an anti-discrimination protester being rammed in a car driven by a suspected neo-Nazi, and killed. The university has since passed a rule banning open flames on campus. | In September, Spencer, who graduated from the University of Virginia, organised the Unite the Right rally, which took white nationalist marchers carrying torches and chanting “Jews will not replace us” on to the historic university campus of his alma mater, in Charlottesville, Virginia, with the university authorities helpless to stop it. There were passionate counter protests on campus on the night of the torchlight march, though peaceful. But there was violence near a public park the following day as white supremacists, many with clubs and pepper spray, shouted Nazi slogans. The day ended with an anti-discrimination protester being rammed in a car driven by a suspected neo-Nazi, and killed. The university has since passed a rule banning open flames on campus. |
| In the US, highly offensive public speech with overtly racist, sexist or homophobic content, or even hints of violence, is invariably protected by the first amendment to the constitution. But some American academics believe you have to draw a line somewhere — so now, ironically, it’s leftwingers trying to keep rightwingers out. | In the US, highly offensive public speech with overtly racist, sexist or homophobic content, or even hints of violence, is invariably protected by the first amendment to the constitution. But some American academics believe you have to draw a line somewhere — so now, ironically, it’s leftwingers trying to keep rightwingers out. |
| “Some have this idea that the first amendment is like a sacred text and we have to worship it … the university didn’t invite Nazis on to campus but they went along with it, [saying] you just have to ignore them – but that’s exactly how fascism got a grip in Germany in the thirties,” says Thomas Auxter, professor of philosophy at the University of Florida and lead organiser of the protest against Spencer’s visit. | “Some have this idea that the first amendment is like a sacred text and we have to worship it … the university didn’t invite Nazis on to campus but they went along with it, [saying] you just have to ignore them – but that’s exactly how fascism got a grip in Germany in the thirties,” says Thomas Auxter, professor of philosophy at the University of Florida and lead organiser of the protest against Spencer’s visit. |
| Spencer had not been invited to speak by the university or any of its student groups – he rented a hall on campus, which the university said it was obliged to allow him to do as it has no restrictions on who can rent the facility. | Spencer had not been invited to speak by the university or any of its student groups – he rented a hall on campus, which the university said it was obliged to allow him to do as it has no restrictions on who can rent the facility. |
| “I’m not a free speech absolutist, I don’t believe all ideas deserve an airing,” says Leigh Raiford, associate professor of African American studies at Berkeley. She petitioned for faculty and students to cancel classes as a way of boycotting Berkeley’s so-called Free Speech Week, which was billed as featuring Yiannopoulos; Steve Bannon, Donald Trump’s former chief adviser; and Ann Coulter, an ultra-conservative social and political commentator. Despite the university spending $1m on security, the event, due to be held in September, fell apart before it even began. | |
| Could there be similar ugly spectacles in Britain if Johnson has his way on free speech in universities? Unlikely, says Matthew Williams, professor of criminology at Cardiff University, who specialises in hate crime and hate speech. While Williams does not favour speakers being barred from campuses, neither does he want to end up with the kind of incendiary speeches and confrontational lawsuits causing chaos in America, if Johnson pushes his agenda. | Could there be similar ugly spectacles in Britain if Johnson has his way on free speech in universities? Unlikely, says Matthew Williams, professor of criminology at Cardiff University, who specialises in hate crime and hate speech. While Williams does not favour speakers being barred from campuses, neither does he want to end up with the kind of incendiary speeches and confrontational lawsuits causing chaos in America, if Johnson pushes his agenda. |
| Williams is confident Britain can strike a balance, given its “strong and sensible” laws against hate speech, which don’t exist in the US. These are chiefly based on the Public Order Act of 1986, which made it an offence to use threatening, abusive or insulting words or behaviour or display such written material with the intent to stir up racial hatred, and which is deemed likely to do so. The word “insulting” was later removed and further legislation in 2006 and 2008 added hatred based on religion and sexual orientation. | Williams is confident Britain can strike a balance, given its “strong and sensible” laws against hate speech, which don’t exist in the US. These are chiefly based on the Public Order Act of 1986, which made it an offence to use threatening, abusive or insulting words or behaviour or display such written material with the intent to stir up racial hatred, and which is deemed likely to do so. The word “insulting” was later removed and further legislation in 2006 and 2008 added hatred based on religion and sexual orientation. |
| But Williams does say that Heaton-Harris’s letter to vice-chancellors struck him as “quite terrifying”. With lecture material increasingly being digitised, he is concerned about the prospect of members of government being able to scour professors’ teaching content for signs of partisanship. He worries that routine teaching materials that foster robust, open debate in class could appear overly-opinionated when reviewed out of context by someone with a political motivation. Rather than protecting students’ freedom of thought, it casts the shadow of “Big Brother” over higher education, he says. | But Williams does say that Heaton-Harris’s letter to vice-chancellors struck him as “quite terrifying”. With lecture material increasingly being digitised, he is concerned about the prospect of members of government being able to scour professors’ teaching content for signs of partisanship. He worries that routine teaching materials that foster robust, open debate in class could appear overly-opinionated when reviewed out of context by someone with a political motivation. Rather than protecting students’ freedom of thought, it casts the shadow of “Big Brother” over higher education, he says. |
| Hudson adds that the Heaton-Harris letter is “a clumsy attempt to monitor intellectual debate”, saying that although the full purpose of his letter is not clear “it will certainly look sinister to academics.” | Hudson adds that the Heaton-Harris letter is “a clumsy attempt to monitor intellectual debate”, saying that although the full purpose of his letter is not clear “it will certainly look sinister to academics.” |
| She adds: “Johnson’s determination to regulate universities and punish those who do not observe whatever his definition of free speech is is pretty suspect and a heavy handed approach to freedom.” | She adds: “Johnson’s determination to regulate universities and punish those who do not observe whatever his definition of free speech is is pretty suspect and a heavy handed approach to freedom.” |
| Frank Furedi, professor emeritus of sociology at the University of Canterbury, agrees. “I’m really against state intervention in the lives of universities even when it’s proclaiming the need for freedom. It creates a precedent,” he said. | Frank Furedi, professor emeritus of sociology at the University of Canterbury, agrees. “I’m really against state intervention in the lives of universities even when it’s proclaiming the need for freedom. It creates a precedent,” he said. |
| Kathryn Ecclestone, visiting professor of education at Sheffield University, agrees in principle with Johnson’s opposition to, as he put it, “groups that have sought to stifle those who do not agree with them” on campuses. She also shares his concern about barring speakers “in the name of so-called social justice”. | Kathryn Ecclestone, visiting professor of education at Sheffield University, agrees in principle with Johnson’s opposition to, as he put it, “groups that have sought to stifle those who do not agree with them” on campuses. She also shares his concern about barring speakers “in the name of so-called social justice”. |
| But she does not fear that flagrant neo-Nazism will rear its head like in America.“I think the spectre of the horrible right wing over there is just about extreme cases,” she says. | But she does not fear that flagrant neo-Nazism will rear its head like in America.“I think the spectre of the horrible right wing over there is just about extreme cases,” she says. |
| However, she is suspicious of a government that “on the one hand pontificates about free speech and yet has implemented the anti-terrorism Prevent strategy – the controversial government programme aimed at diverting people from terrorism before they offend. | However, she is suspicious of a government that “on the one hand pontificates about free speech and yet has implemented the anti-terrorism Prevent strategy – the controversial government programme aimed at diverting people from terrorism before they offend. |
| While it’s difficult to predict where the events of the past few weeks will lead, Ecclestone believes there is cause for concern: “I think the government’s willingness to intervene and tell higher education what to do about freedom of speech is extremely worrying. It might seem benign, but it’s not.” | While it’s difficult to predict where the events of the past few weeks will lead, Ecclestone believes there is cause for concern: “I think the government’s willingness to intervene and tell higher education what to do about freedom of speech is extremely worrying. It might seem benign, but it’s not.” |