Harvard Progressive Suggests Replacing Academic Freedom With Academic Justice
Lest one think this is just a one off, a single thinker in the wind, a lone wolf, this is the way the hardcore leftists think not just around the country, but around the world, especially those who think of themselves as the intellectual elite
(Daily Caller) If this Harvard University student got her way, free speech on campus would be abolished and professors with dissenting views fired, because radical leftism is the only permissible political philosophy and the First Amendment is a barrier preventing modern colleges from fulfilling their proper role as indoctrination camps.
Her name is Sandra Korn. She is a senior at Harvard and columnist for the Harvard Crimson.
In a recent column, Korn unambiguously insisted that the university should stop guaranteeing professors and students the right to hold controversial views and pursue research that challenges liberalism.
Here is part of her screed
…Student and faculty obsession with the doctrine of “academic freedom” often seems to bump against something I think much more important: academic justice.
Leftists love throwing around the word “justice”, which is a stand in for “do what we say, think like we think, write what say. You are not allowed to think, say, write, or live in any other way.” This always involves restricting freedom. If anyone gets out of line, they need to be vilified, silenced, fired from their jobs, and have their lives destroyed.
Yet the liberal obsession with “academic freedom” seems a bit misplaced to me. After all, no one ever has “full freedom” in research and publication. Which research proposals receive funding and what papers are accepted for publication are always contingent on political priorities. The words used to articulate a research question can have implications for its outcome. No academic question is ever “free” from political realities. If our university community opposes racism, sexism, and heterosexism, why should we put up with research that counters our goals simply in the name of “academic freedom”?
This is the same reasoning that has Warmists attempting to shut down anyone who fails to follow the dogma of the Cult Of Gore. And, of course, this all means hating Israel
In this case, discourse about “academic freedom” obscures what should fundamentally be a political argument. Those defending the academic boycott should use a more rigorous standard. The ASA, like three other academic associations, decided to boycott out of a sense of social justice, responding to a call by Palestinian civil society organizations for boycotts, divestment, and sanctions until Israel ends its occupation of Palestine. People on the right opposed to boycotts can play the “freedom” game, calling for economic freedom to buy any product or academic freedom to associate with any institution. Only those who care about justice can take the moral upper hand.
Boycotting Israel and supporting Palestinians is all the rage amongst Leftists. The fact that they are supporting people who refuse to recognize Israel and want to wipe the nation of the face of the Earth, fire mortars, rockets, and bullets into Israel,along with sending suicide bombers to Israel, seems to be immaterial to these Israel hating Leftists.
The end result she advocates is censorship, no diversity of thought, a loss of freedom. This is what Progressivism (nice fascism) is about.
In a report on the recent Supreme Court decision reversing parts of Arizona’s immigration law, NBC’s Matt Taibbi gave extensive
Michael Ledeen and PJ O’Rourke agree: the secret to understanding Obama is that he is typical politically correct apple-polishing teacher’s pet of a student that was insufferable in school, and remains so today.
I suppose we couldn’t get past the one-year anniversary of the crime against Democrat Representative Gabrielle Giffords without some Old