Furthering racial liberalism in UK higher education: The populist construction of the ‘free speech crisis’ (original) (raw)
Related papers
2021
This paper was written for the doctoral course/module Education Policy at the University of Glasgow. The UK Department for Education’s ‘Higher education: free speech and academic freedom command paper CP 394’ (henceforth HEFSAF and referenced in-text as (DfE, 2021) was initially published in February 2021 and is under consideration before Parliament. The HEFSAF proposes to strengthen academic freedom and freedom of speech within the context of English higher education. As a member of the higher education community, I feel that, in time, the implications of such a proposed policy can reach further than England. This paper attempts to illuminate how the HEFSAF furthers cultural hegemony. Specifically, this paper argues that the policy represents an expansion of neoliberal and neoconservative cultural hegemony within the context of UK higher education by inflaming pre-existing culture wars that focus on the conflation of the ideas ‘academic freedom’ and ‘free speech’. I choose the lens of hegemony and more specifically cultural hegemony in part due to the notion of repressive tolerance. In discussing radical teaching, Brookfield and Holst (2011:109) make reference to Marcuse (1965) and repressive tolerance, arguing that a person’s upbringing is steeped within a particular ideology that manifests itself in the choices that they make when presented with a range of perspectives on a particular topic. As a result, such a person may choose a perspective that most aligns with their ‘ideological conditioning’ (ibid) which to them might appear as common sense and/or ‘normal’. Consequently, an educator’s role is to ensure all ideas are considered critically and fully, and this can extend to the awareness, studies and understanding of education policy by educators. Discourse used within policy can represent the political nature of the day; specifically, the language used within policy can help educators to understand how ideas and identities are constructed to then understand how cultural hegemony ‘is secured and contested, and of the prospects for emancipatory social change’ (Olssen, Todd & O’Neil, 2004:36).
Academic Freedom in Higher Education, 2024
In recent years, there has been much attention paid by the media and by politicians to the alleged free speech ‘crisis’ at universities in Britain, with ‘woke’ students and left-wing academics blamed for the shutting down of freedom of speech and academic freedom on campus. This increased media spotlight on student activism and controversies around platforms afforded to certain speakers has led to calls for stronger intervention to ‘protect’ free speech, resulting in the Conservative Government introducing new legislation that passed in May 2023. This chapter historicises this contemporary ‘moral panic’ about freedom of speech at British universities, demonstrating that for over 50 years, the issue of who should be allowed a platform on the university campus has been a contested issue. Many of the tropes that we see used today have an older lineage, going back to the 1960s.
Neoliberal antiracism and the British university
Radical Philosophy, 2020
The combination of entrenched racism, the structural legacies of slavery and colonialism, and neoliberal austerity, together with far-reaching changes in the way students and teachers are encouraged to understand the purpose, provision and 'consumption' of higher education, has exacerbated the crisis of the public university in the UK and beyond. Needless to say, its consequences are being magnified and intensified with unprecedented speed by the impact of Covid-19 and the government's responses to it. The short articles that follow, along with further articles that will be collected in a dossier in a forthcoming issue, aim to engage with some of the many aspects of this complex and highly charged situation.
No Platform: A History of Anti-Fascism, Universities and the Limits of Free Speech
2020
This book is the first to outline the history of the tactic of ‘no platforming’ at British universities since the 1970s, looking at more than four decades of student protest against racist and fascist figures on campus. The tactic of ‘no platforming’ has been used at British universities and colleges since the National Union of Students adopted the policy in the mid-1970s. The author traces the origins of the tactic from the militant anti-fascism of the 1930s–1940s and looks at how it has developed since the 1970s, being applied to various targets over the last 40 years, including sexists, homophobes, right-wing politicians and Islamic fundamentalists. This book provides a historical intervention in the current debates over the alleged free speech ‘crisis’ perceived to be plaguing universities in Britain, as well as North America and Australasia. No Platform: A History of Anti-Fascism, Universities and the Limits of Free Speech is for academics and students, as well as the general reader, interested in modern British history, politics and higher education. Readers interested in contemporary debates over freedom of speech and academic freedom will also have much to discover in this book.
Freedom of Speech in Universities
Routledge eBooks, 2023
2023 addition: This book explores tensions regarding freedom of speech and extremism in the UK university sector. Among its contributions are an analysis of major philosophical ideas regarding freedom of speech; a critique of populist binaries which frame debate about universities; a review of empirical research regarding student and staff views about freedom of speech; and a sensitive discussion of our ethical responsibilities in using language. Since the publication of this book in 2021, three major escalations have taken place of the phenomena we identified in the UK higher education sector. Firstly, there has been an increase in political and media commentary about the supposed chilling of speech on campus. This escalation is illustrated in the media by a few striking and disturbing examples of adversarial use of language on campus. A prominent example is the case of Kathleen Stock, former Professor of Philosophy at the University of Sussex, who resigned from her post in October 2021 following student protests regarding her views on gender identity. Secondly, these commentaries have been amplified and strengthened by the use of emotive, ambiguous vocabulary such as ‘culture wars’ and ‘woke’ (Scott-Baumann, 2023). Such terms are used to ridicule attempts to increase the range of voices on campus through, for example, decolonising historical narratives or providing guidance on how to reduce discrimination. This language increasingly frames, and constrains, the ongoing public debate about the role of universities in this and other liberal democracies. Thirdly, these phenomena have culminated in long promised legislation, the Higher Education (Freedom of Speech) Act 2023, which imposes penalties on universities and students’ unions which are deemed to be failing in their duty to uphold freedom of speech. The impact of this legislation is yet to be seen. It is likely to create many difficulties for the Office for Students and universities, as the legally enforceable stipulations about freedom of speech on campus will conflict with universities’ existing duties to limit free speech and protest (one such duty is the counter terror policy known as Prevent). A constant feature in this free speech debate, both before and after 2021, is the lack of practical suggestions for how to discuss complex topics. Many of us in society experience difficulties in speaking with reasonable honesty, because of the polarised nature of much talk that takes place both off and online. In this book we give clear advice about how to identify and neutralise such polarities, through the model of a ‘community of inquiry.’ Scott-Baumann follows this in her 2023 book with explanations of how to use democratic group processes within and beyond the classroom and in Westminster, for finding one’s voice. We hope our work offers a positive way forward, for universities and wider society, rather than the dominant simplistic debate about whether there should be more or less free speech. Alison Scott-Baumann and Simon Perfect October 2023 Freedom of speech and extremism in university campuses are a major source of debate and moral panic in the UK today. In 2018, the Joint Committee on Human Rights in Parliament undertook an inquiry into freedom of speech on campus. It found that much of the public concern is exaggerated, but identified a number of factors that require attention, including the impact of government counter-extremism measures (the Prevent Duty) and regulatory bodies (including the Charity Commission for England and Wales) on freedom of speech. This book combines empirical research and philosophical analysis to explore these issues, with particular focus on the impact upon Muslim students and staff. It offers a new conceptual paradigm for thinking about freedom of speech, based on deliberative democracy, and practical suggestions for universities in handling it. Topics covered include: The enduring legacy of key thinkers who have shaped the debate about freedom of speech, the role of right-wing populism in driving moral panic about universities, the impact of the Prevent Duty and the Charity Commission upon Muslim students, students' unions and university managers Students' and staff views about freedom of speech, alternative approaches to handling freedom of speech on campus, including the community of inquiry This highly engaging and topical text will be of interest to those working within public policy, religion and education or religion and politics and Islamic Studie
‘Whiteness is an immoral choice’: the idea of the University at the intersection of crises
Higher Education, 2022
Universities in the global North are shaped against intersecting crises, including those of political economy, environment and, more recently, epidemiology. The lived experiences of these crises have renewed struggles against exploitation, expropriation and extraction, including Black Lives Matter, and for decolonising the University. In and through the University, such struggles are brought into relation with the structures, cultures and practices of power and privilege. These modes of privilege are imminent to the reproduction of whiteness, white fragility and privilege, double and false consciousness, and behavioural code switching. In particular, whiteness has historical and material legitimacy, reinforced through policy and regulation, and in English HE this tends, increasingly, to reframe struggle in relation to culture wars. This article argues that the dominant articulation of the University, conditioned by economic value rather than humane values, has been reinforced and amplified during the Covid-19 pandemic. The argument pivots around the UK Government policy and guidelines, in order to highlight the processes by which intellectual work and the reproduction of higher education institutions connect value production and modes of settler-colonial and racial-patriarchal control.
Papeles de Europa
Este artículo examinará el rol de las universidades británicas al educar tanto a sus estudiantes como a las comunidades que las rodean sobre el “otro”, usando el multiculturalismo y el Movimiento por la Libertad para combatir la ignorancia hacia “el otro”. Desde que tuvo lugar el referéndum del Brexit en junio de 2016, se han incrementado considerablemente el discurso y los delitos basados en el odio hacia el “otro” en el Reino Unido, tanto a nivel verbal como a través de los medios de comunicación social, por no hablar de las agresiones de carácter físico hacia inmigrantes y minorías étnicas. Los estudios más recientes sobre este fenómeno social indican que este incremento ha sido claramente avivado por las imágenes y el lenguaje exhibidos en los medios de comunicación británicos. Por lo tanto, el objetivo de este artículo es considerar el impacto de los medios de comunicación en la conceptualización del “otro” y explorar qué están haciendo las universidades británicas para enfrent...
Critical spaces: processes of othering in British Institutions of Higher Education
2014
Global recession and the economic crisis have affected contemporary British society in predictable ways. But this age of austerity has also unveiled the continued sinister machinations of whiteness. While not necessarily homogeneous, austerity rhetoric, as it is currently conventionally deployed, works to perpetuate white masculinist privilege and further entrenches the normative value of whiteness, while simultaneously masking and marginalizing those ethnic minority populations traditionally othered from mainstream sociopolitical discourse. More specifically, recent austerity measures adversely affect the situation of women and the future of feminist theory and practice in British higher education. This paper investigates and problematizes the deployment of austerity discourse within higher learning for its perpetuation of the normativity and hegemony of a masculinist whiteness, which further disadvantages (white) women and disrupts the practice of feminism(s) in academia.
Speaking up for what’s right: Politics, markets and violence in higher education
Feminist Theory, 2017
There is a siege on universities on both sides of the Atlantic. 1 The far right is targeting academics and their social justice work, bolstered by a mainstream suspicion of 'experts' and 'elites', and a general rightward political shift. There is a white supremacist, alleged serial sexual harasser and abuser in the White House, a hardline English government and a 'new normal' that involves overt and unrepentant sexism, racism and other forms of discrimination. I have written about the feminist classroom as a 'safe space', and the need to protect our most vulnerable students. I have considered how the neoliberal university suppresses the capacities required to do this. I have theorised an 'institutional economy' of sexual violence, exploring how institutional (non-)responses are shaped by neoliberal rationalities. In this piece, I discuss how the market framings of sexual violence in the university interact with our contemporary political field and growing hostility to progressive work. Universities are key neoliberal institutions. In neoliberal systems, the role of the state is to safeguard the market through deregulation and privatisation: the rhetoric is that the social good will be ensured by the unfettered operation of market forces. We are all expected to maximise our speculative value within multifarious systems of rating and ranking. Universities supply knowledge commodities for 'self-betterment' and economic growth, and to support state relations with capital. Market logics are strongly evident in the metrics academics labour under, the emphasis on higher education as an investment with a return, the ideas of student as consumer and lecturer as commodity. These sit alongside a continuation of older forms of governance: Louise Morley (2012) describes the climate of contemporary HE through a binary of archaism and hyper-modernism. Universities, like neoliberalism itself, deliver the discourse of a meritocratic free market but continue to work in favour of the ruling class. Sexual violence in UK universities made its way on to the agenda after the 2010 National Union of Students (NUS) report Hidden Marks, which found that one in
Current Sociology, 2024
This article traces the mainstreaming of the idea that there is a ‘free speech crisis’ in the United Kingdom, from its emergence in the 2010s to the Free Speech Act of 2023. We argue that ‘free speech’ is initially constructed during this period in opposition to an imagined ‘uncivilised’, ‘external’ Muslim other. However, by the end of the 2010s, the threat to ‘free speech’ is imagined as much more widespread, and as coming from ‘inside the West’, where a new enemy is identified alongside the ‘uncivilised Muslim’: the ‘woke’, censorious ‘snowflake’. This new enemy of free speech is cast in populist terms: as part of an illegitimate elite or proto-elite. This discursive shift occurs, on our account, because the rhetoric of a ‘free speech crisis’ paradoxically becomes an increasingly powerful way for right-wing political actors to deny political legitimacy to those opposed to their political positions. By locating those opposed to them as against the incontrovertible Western Enlightenment good of ‘free speech’ itself, these right-wing actors racialise the speech of others as ‘uncivilised’ and therefore outside of politics in a way that silences critique.