  | 
      | 
  
    The DePaul  Dismissals  
       
A major symposium on academic  freedom at the University   of Chicago on October 12  drew a crowd of nearly 2,000 people to an event which lasted over four hours  (audio of the speakers is available at academicfreedomchicago.org). 
 
Moderator Tariq Ali began by  noting that the event was inspired by the denial of tenure to Norman  Finkelstein, and declared that the event was meant to say, “There is where we  stand, and this is what are going to defend.” 
 
Noam Chomsky called  Finkelstein a scholar “whose work has received the highest praise by some of  the most distinguished scholars in the field where he has worked.” Chomsky  argued that “truth poses a serious barrier to the policies carried out by state  power.” For that reason, “The assault on academic freedom has deep roots and  ominous portent.” 
 
Akeel Bilgrami, philosophy  professor at Columbia,  noted that Finkelstein’s “academic career has been completely ruined...unless  some university decides to make its reputation in the most honorable way” by  hiring him. He declared that Finkelstein “has produced brilliant and  painstaking research.” 
 
Tony Judd of NYU noted that for  Norman Finkelstein, without tenure, “the act of speaking out...took very  significant courage and has exacted a very significant price.” Judd said he is  so alarmed by “the nature of university cowardice in our time.” 
 
John Mearshimer of the University of Chicago expressed alarm that “outside  forces have intervened in academia in hiring and tenure decisions,” cancelled  speeches, and “they have put pressure on university presses not to publish  controversial books.” According to Mearshimer, “the case for his tenure was  open-and-shut.”  
 
Evan Lorendo, a DePaul  student, called the student protests a “transformative experience.” Lorendo  noted, “We run the risk of a self-censoring faculty who are not publishing or  saying what they believe....What kind of environment is this?” He said a  faculty member came up to them and said, “After seeing what they did to  Mehrene, the fear is rising.” 
 
Mehrene Larudee said, “Those  of us who care most about academic freedom are those who believe there is some  specific truth that will be snuffed out. Most often, it is some kind of truth  about injustice.” She added, “If the truth about the Israel/Palestine conflict  is lost, there will never be peace and justice.” Larudee said, “If we only  defend the academic freedom of those with whom we agree, it may not be there  for us.”  
 
Norman Finkelstein argued that  in “the search for truth, a fundamental prerequisite is liberty” and “Outside  the university, outside the classroom, you should be free to speak your mind  like any other citizen in our society.” Finkelstein asked, “What are the proper  limits of civility, which any professor has to respect?” He declared, “Inside  the classroom, as my students know, I am quite conservative and old-fashioned.  It is not a soapbox, it is not a lecturn for indoctrination and toeing the  party line. In the classroom, your responsibility as a professor is to  stimulate. At a public lecture, it’s quite different. It’s to convince.” He  obsered, “In my personal case, the issue of my conduct in the classroom never  arose.” 
Finkelstein added, “there is a  time honored tradition for shouting the emperor is naked.” Finkelstein  concluded, “Emily Post’s rules of etiquette, however real the question, is a  meaningless sideshow, or a transparent pretext for denying a professor the  right the teach on the basis of his or her political beliefs.” 
 
For the complete summary of the academic freedom  symposium, go to collegefreedom.blogspot.com. 
	    
	  	 | 
     |