BY ROSS JACKSON
As the 2024 presidential election approaches, the importance of academic freedom in higher education and its broader societal implications are a primary point of focus and debate. Academic freedom, defined as the principle that scholars can engage in teaching and research without fear of censorship or retribution, is a cornerstone of democratic societies. It enables intellectual critique, fosters informed debate, and challenges authoritarian tendencies that threaten democracy.
In recent years, threats to academic freedom have increased, even in liberal democracies like ours. The Academic Freedom Index highlights significant declines in academic freedom in the United States and the United Kingdom, underscoring the political nature of these threats. Political platforms, particularly those of the Republican Party, have increasingly criticized higher education, focusing on ideological concerns. This politicization of academic freedom is evident in recent debates over race and policy in educational curricula.
In an article for the new volume of the Journal of Academic Freedom, “Academic Freedom and Society: Intellectual Critique or Violent Revolution?,” that I coauthored with Jacqueline and Brian Heath, we describe how academic freedom is not merely a privilege for elites but also entails an obligation for informed social action. Among other rights, academic freedom allows academics to expose governmental lies, analyze actions, and speak truth to power. However, the ability to exercise academic freedom is often stratified by tenure status, race, and gender. Tenured professors, predominantly white males, enjoy greater freedom to dissent, while nontenured faculty, women, and people of color face significant obstacles and pressures to conform.
It is worth considering that the suppression of academic freedom is often linked to propaganda, which governments and political entities use to shape public opinion and maintain power. Propaganda relies on generalities like patriotism and tradition, which cannot withstand informed critique. Academic freedom poses an existential threat to would-be authoritarian regimes that rely on propaganda, as it empowers individuals to challenge and resist oppressive narratives.
The upcoming presidential election presents a critical moment for reaffirming the role of academic freedom in preserving democracy. As political tensions rise, the potential for authoritarianism increases, making it imperative for academics to exercise their freedom to critique and engage in civil discourse. Academic freedom ensures the ability to bring light to societal concerns and engage in meaningful debate. It agitates against the status quo and challenges those in power, making it a vital social function. Without academic freedom, societies are at greater risk of descending into totalitarian regimes based on propaganda.
It is imperative to recognize the importance of academic freedom in safeguarding democracy. Academics must continue to speak out to prevent the erosion of this right. By doing so, we contribute to upholding the principles of democracy and social justice, ensuring that the voices of informed critique endure, even in the face of authoritarian threats.
Ross Jackson is associate professor of business at Wittenberg University.
“It agitates against the status quo and challenges those in power, making it a vital social function.” What does? Academic freedom? I agree that this is truly valuable service to society. Let’s have more of that please! But academic freedom is not a necessary precondition for its presence or abundance. Further, when you say ‘academic’ do you refer to someone employed by an institution? I don’t. Not only. And when not in the employ of a university or college, are academics enabled to contribute to HE as you describe? Could one make a career of it, support a family or community, when not a faculty employee?
It is not about academic freedom. It is about the freedom of academics. It always has been. Step outside the boxes and agitate (don’t bargain), challenge (don’t assume), and perform your vital social function (don’t cloister in union offices). Without the freedom of academics, the institutional tools of our inheritance will continue to splinter us, interfere with us, and be used as authoritarian armament against us. Without the work of academics, these tools are nothing. Unionphiles think this reality makes their bargaining position stronger. It does. But dig deeper and notice how it makes my position stronger still.
Try this on for strength. Race, religion, ethnicity, gender, sex, alma mater, neighbourhood, dialect…have all operated as conditionals. Such gates will always be with us, I suppose. The question is how wide are the gates, or, put another way, how much room is there inside for: women, Jews, blacks, Protestants, tattoos, WASPs, Wiccans, and Warlocks?
So, which is easier to widen, which can make more room?
a) A model of centuries-old institutional employers as gatekeepers whose remittance hobbles us all and academics to the point that we seek autoworker labour unions to protect ourselves from our own universitas.
b) A new, openly formed professional gatekeeper that licenses and supports academics in their service and stewardship, as they exercise independent professional prerogative across all aspects of their contribution to higher education.
Thank you for your work. My full response to it is here: https://bit.ly/AcadFreeNotFreeAcad