University campuses have long been used for debates on global conflicts and sites for demonstrations and protests. Students usually use their freedom of expression to take sides and express their opinions on war crimes, conflicts, genocides, and other political issues at local and international levels. With little intervention from people outside the campus.
However, debates on the genocide in Palestine have been subject to scrutiny and censorship, particularly after October 7.
Students openly supporting Palestine have faced consequences for expressing their opinions. For example, some were assaulted with Islamophobic threats, and others lost their jobs over statements about conflict. At the University of California, Berkely, a law professor, published a Wall Street Journal against students who oppose Zionism titled "Dont hire my anti-Semitic Law students"Their personal information has been leaked online, and many Republican leaders in the US, for example, have threatened to revoke the visas of such international students.
Many Jewish students, on the other hand, got death threats and have been harassed just for being Jewish.
Speaking on political issues has never really affected the safety of students and their future careers to this extent.
So, should universities regulate student speech and stop political debate? Should they ban students from taking sides on international issues?
In my opinion, no. That is because Universities are one of the few places where political debate and disagreement can occur between educated individuals in a civilized and scholarly manner. One of the primary missions of universities is to induce discussions and debates, help students find a voice of their own, and build strong opinions. As well as learn to accept diversity in views. How to listen and respond to points of view that differ from what they think.
Therefore, I think campus administrators must ensure the safety of campus spaces and the diversity of student voices so they can come together, protest, and learn from each other.
They should also place boundaries for protection from external actors and internal harassment. Where the students must not be punished for siding with Hammas or Israel and other political stances. But hate speech and violence should be prohibited, especially within campus boundaries. Campus leaders would have to communicate the consequences of assault and hate language clearly and promote a more tolerant culture.
They must then make significant efforts to defend their students from politicians and other institutions for using their right to free speech.
What do you think? How can universities protect students' freedom of speech and ensure their safety simultaneously? Should they work for safety and freedom of speech, or must one be sacrificed?
This is a very tricky blog and actually force me to think so what I understand is actually striking a balance between freedom of speech and safety on university campuses is a complex and delicate issue. On the one hand, universities have a long-standing tradition of upholding free speech and open debate, which are essential for fostering critical thinking and intellectual growth. On the other hand, universities also have a responsibility to ensure the safety and well-being of their students, faculty, and staff. As, In our last class we studied many forms of power (negative and positive both). So, here there is a kind of hidden power like students can talk openly and without any fear but then acutually in real case they can't.
And by answering to your question so yes, universities should encourage to give the students freedom of speech as they have power a kind of access to extra resources with the help of that they can. And again to protect the students some policies should be made. But here univities does have enough power, this is government who can. But, How should campus administrators navigate the fine line between promoting a diverse range of voices and protecting students from external threats or harassment? What measures can they take to foster a tolerant and inclusive environment?
I think you have brought up a very tricky thing to navigate. Definitely, students should be allowed to protest and have the right to free speech, but this. I believe, would only work if we consider universities to be politically neutral institutions. Ideally, universities should, as you have said, be safe places where one cane express their opinions and hold onto their beliefs without harrassment and coersion from external and internal factors. However, many universities have highly problematic origins, things that have been brushed under the rug rather than being aptly dealt with. In addition to this, donors and major financial contributors for many universities all over the world have very morally grey foundings and rises to fame (for example the Rockerfellers and other old money families like the Carnegie's). These donors then have a lot of say over the proceedings of universities, and many are then included in their board of trustees. I think that along with the problems you have highlighted, this becomes another very important problem in allowing for freedom of speech.
I've also explored how problematic money and philanthropy in education can be in my blogpost here, I'd love to hear your thoughts!
It's distressing to witness how discussions on the Palestine conflict have led to threats and repercussions for students. I firmly believe in upholding freedom of speech while ensuring a safe campus environment. Universities should foster respectful debates without fear of violence or hate speech. It's a balancing act that demands clear policies and unwavering support from campus leaders. This issue underscores the urgent need for institutions to protect students while nurturing an environment where diverse opinions can peacefully coexist.
We had a similar discussion in class too, regarding religion. In Pakistan, we all know that freedom of speech is not fully excercise, however after coming to LUMS and in LUMS classrooms most instructors do give you that authority.
Thank you for sharing your insights Rania. It is very important to engage in these debates especially considering the political climate of the world right now. Just recently, I read that a junior at Brown University was shot along with his friends for taking a pro Palestine stance. Keeping this news in mind, your title caught my eye. It is a very delicate balance between the two then. More often , I believe even in the most progressive of institutions, it becomes an option. For eg, if we consider the story of this young man. He was studying at one of the most prestigious universities in the world, residing in what one can say the most developed country in the world. Yet, he was not granted safety and shot by the zionists. It is then important to ask ourselves that is there anything close to freedom of speech existing in the world right now? Also, do the pros of speaking up and voicing your thoughts outweighs the risks attached to it or is it the other way round?
The delicate balance between ensuring students' freedom of speech and their safety on university campuses is indeed a complex and pressing issue. I believe universities should establish clear boundaries, defining the line between expressing political opinion and engaging in hate speech or incitement to violence. moreover, there should be educational initiatives that emphasize the importance of respectful dialogue and understanding diverse perspectives. Also, establishing support systems and legal assistance that can help students who face threats and harassment.