The case for local university neutrality

 

Tower Hall, San Jose State University by Daderot, CC0, via Wikimedia Commons

 

The Foundation for Individual Rights and Expression (FIRE) believes colleges shouldn't take political/social stances on issues that don't threaten their core mission, if they want to preserve free speech and scholarship. (We wish San Jose State could've read this, years ago...)

Some have argued universities have a duty to cast aside neutrality and, for example, declare certain politicians fascists. But this kind of political grandstanding undermines the central purpose of the university: the pursuit of truth, a process that requires debate and discussion. This process can’t happen when a university’s leaders put a proverbial thumb on the scale. Instead, it’s in the most fraught times that university leaders most need to draw a line in the sand against censorship and intimidation.

While the current climate feels unprecedented, history tells a different story. In the late 1960s, America was on fire — literally and figuratively. Protests erupted, generational divides widened, and a divisive president presided over a deeply unpopular war in Vietnam that claimed tens of thousands of lives. Amidst the chaos, the president of the University of Chicago convened a faculty committee to determine how the institution should respond to burning political and social upheaval.

Their answer was simple yet compelling: the university, as an institution, must remain neutral. … [T]he mere act of taking an official position on an issue stifles dissent — and, again, undermines the primary reason for the university’s existence.

Critics have argued that neutrality is impossible because everything is political, from school calendars to core curricula. By that logic, even declining to make political statements is a political act. But this merely serves as a rhetorical trap designed to justify disposing of neutrality altogether.

America already has plenty of division and distrust. Institutional neutrality is a critical tool for fostering academia’s only peaceful path through the storm: honest debate.

The Kalven Report’s authors made clear that the university must take a position when its mission is at stake. For example, they must defend academic freedom when governments attempt to silence professors. But that’s entirely different from taking a stand on which side was “right” in Vietnam, or is “right” in the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. …

Neutrality does not mean that universities will play no part in grappling with social and political questions. … But rather than acting as an advocacy organization, the university is a community of learned advocates with the freedom to agree or disagree with one another. Administrators must intentionally avoid becoming the former so they can function as the latter. …

Most faculty understand this. Two-thirds of faculty members agree that colleges and universities should remain neutral on political and social issues, according to FIRE’s 2024 Faculty Survey Report. The issue of neutrality is especially salient for adjunct instructors, who lack the tenure protections of their full-time peers. As FIRE notes in its Scholars Under Fire report of attempts to sanction professors for speaking their minds, adjuncts — who account for 70 percent of all faculty — are particularly prone to speech-related terminations. An astounding 54 percent of attempts to sanction adjuncts result in termination, compared to 21 percent for all scholars. The most vulnerable faculty have the most to lose when universities take sides.

FIRE has taken a proactive stance on institutional neutrality, discouraging universities from taking up ill-advised “collective positions” on divisive issues. The University of North Carolina SystemVanderbiltHarvardYale, and Dartmouth — and, of course, the University of Chicago — have all adopted official positions on institutional neutrality, and we’re leading the fight to get more colleges on board.

Institutional neutrality is key, but it is not the be-all and end-all. It’s an important slice of a well-diversified portfolio of pro-free speech policies — but just one slice. Universities must also refrain from punishing students and faculty for dissenting views amid sky-high tensions and changing political winds. Sometimes this is an uphill battle against political and social pressure. It’s vital nevertheless.

Read the whole thing here.

Follow Opportunity Now on Twitter @svopportunity

We prize letters from our thoughtful readers. Typed on a Smith Corona. Written in longhand on fine stationery. Scribbled on a napkin. Hey, even composed on email. Feel free to send your comments to us at opportunitynowsv@gmail.com or (snail mail) 1590 Calaveras Ave., SJ, CA 95126. Remember to be thoughtful and polite. We will post letters on an irregular basis on the main Opp Now site.

Costi Khamis