BY JOHN AUBREY DOUGLASS

There is much to worry about as we approach 2024: attacks on academic freedom, on free speech, on open societies, and attempts to degrade democracy, and not just here in the United States. As I discuss in my article “Here and Abroad, Universities Face an Autocratic Playbook” in the recent issue of Academe, there are stories in almost all the corners of the world concerning the importance of academic freedom and the general concept of universities as unique and valuable autonomous or semi-autonomous institutions under attack.

The war in Ukraine, systematic suppression of faculty and student voices in Russia, jailing of the same in China and Turkey, restraints on academic freedom in Hungary and elsewhere, and now the horrific events in Israel and Gaza—all bring home the reality that academics must navigate through the political and harsh realities of the world.

Universities and their academic communities are often caught in the middle. And it is not always simply a matter of external political forces. Here at home, for example, there is consternation over the proper response and role of American universities to voice a determined opinion on the seemingly intractable conflict in the Middle East.

We have the juxtaposition of largely student-led demonstrations and anger that demands carte blanche support of Israel and its military response in the aftermath of Hamas’s brutal assault, and at the same time adamant pro-Palestinian sympathizers worn out by decades of diplomatic failures and concern over the havoc now unfolding in Gaza.

Add to this mix the fact that alumni and others are pressuring university leaders and faculty to make pronouncements of fealty to Israel (not so much yet for Palestinians) in this moment of tragedy, accompanied by demands to censor faculty- and student-organized events and speakers not properly aligned with their views and by threats to withhold donations at several US universities.

If one believes that universities should be open spaces for civil and informed discussion and debate, then this is not a good development. Thus far, one result is that the nuances of a complex geopolitical conflict, and the tragic human consequences, are seemingly lost, and, one might say, intolerance tolerated—at least at the time of writing this blog.

These incidents are different from right-wing, DeSantis-style attacks on universities but with similar consequences: chipping away at the autonomy that serves as the basis for academic freedom, trading open debate with threats of ostracism, and pressure for universities to choose sides.

As the latest issue of Academe details, many of the political challenges universities face in the United States have been at the state level. That said, here is another scenario to contemplate: what if Donald Trump regains the presidency and both houses of Congress have a Republican majority, or even a slim margin in one? Keep in mind the strange anomaly that even if Trump is convicted of a federal crime, he can still serve as president, perhaps while in prison or with an ankle bracelet? More uncharted territory. Then there are the threats of Trump pardoning Trump for any convicted federal crimes.

This possible scenario, of Trump in some form residing in the White House, would be cataclysmic for universities, for academic freedom, and for global science networks, not to mention civil liberties in a nation once exalted as a great example of democracy. And there is the likely detrimental realignment of the international order.

Trump has no detailed domestic policy agenda at the moment. His current campaign platform is largely a set of grievances regarding his election loss to Joe Biden, slashing nonmilitary discretionary federal funding that includes higher education, promises of massive regulatory cuts, a plan to gut federal agencies of civil servants and install loyal adherents to his cult of personality, and clinging to an isolationist, America-first foreign policy.

Trump has made it clear: with new assumed powers he will go after his real and imagined enemies. In short, it all adds up to an existential threat to universities, to civil society, while providing an encouraging message to current and wannabe autocrats of the world.

However, there are lots of reasons to think this precipice scenario is highly unlikely. Center-left and -right voters are the majority, and, despite current polls, will likely have tired of the antics and chaos of Trump or a Trump clone presidential candidate. Then there is Congress, which in the past largely ignored his draconian budget cuts (although not before passing a $2 trillion tax cut that largely went to the wealthy); one might hope they would do so again, even if he somehow claws greater spending powers over agencies such as the National Institutes of Health.

Real and wannabe autocrats worry about universities as potentially powerful hubs of political opposition and sedition; they seek to control the leadership and the management of universities, to surveil and determine what can and cannot be taught, and to intervene in what faculty are hired and fired, and sometimes jailed. Technology is aiding the most extreme examples of oppression, led by China but with Russia and others catching up.

Returning to the home front, I generally have faith that the United States will avoid the “Trump returns” scenario. But I think most practical people do understand that, unfortunately, to paraphrase Sinclair Lewis’s 1935 dystopian novel, it can happen here.

John Aubrey Douglass is a senior research fellow and research professor of public policy and higher education at the Center for Studies in Higher Education in the Goldman School of Public Policy at UC Berkeley. His most recent book is Neo-Nationalism and Universities: Populism, Autocrats, and the Future of Higher Education (Johns Hopkins Press, Open Access via Project Muse).

Articles from the current and past issues of Academe are available online. AAUP members receive a subscription to the magazine, available both by mail and as a downloadable PDF, as a benefit of membership.