What do boycotts have to do with academic freedom?

The pretension of wrapping political critique in academic garb will end up curtailing the right to criticize - as if people who do not enjoy academic freedom should not express their opinions.

By Asher Maoz

A university lecturer calls the naval commandos who raided the Mavi Marmara cold-blooded murderers. Another lecturer refuses to permit a student returning from reserve duty to enter the classroom in uniform.

A third tells his students that he does not believe reserve duty in the territories justifies absence from class - but he is prepared to excuse the absence of students who attend a protest at a checkpoint. Yet another lecturer calls for a boycott of Israel because of the occupation. His colleague calls for an academic boycott of Israeli universities, including the one that employs him. Another lecturer's students claim he silences them when they disagree with him.

Or the details could be changed: Perhaps one lecturer calls soldiers
who evacuate settlers "Nazis." Another forbids a Muslim student from
entering the classroom because she is wearing a veil. A third gives no
special consideration to a student called up for reserve duty to
evacuate a settlement outpost, but does so for a student who is absent
because he went to help thwart an evacuation. And a fourth calls for a
boycott on Israel or its universities because the "treasonous"
government is prepared to give up parts of the homeland.

What all these scenarios have in common is the pretension that they
are protected by academic freedom. But their true common denominator
is that they have nothing at all to do with academic freedom. Some of
these incidents are protected by freedom of speech, not academic
freedom. Others contravene academic freedom.

Let's take criticism of the government: In a democracy, freedom of
expression and criticism must be zealously guarded. But what does this
have to do with academic freedom?

Indeed, the claim of academic freedom in these matters is somewhat
arrogant, as if the faculty were above the people. After all, in a
democracy, the voice of a professor is equal to the voice of every
other citizen, and rightly so. The pretension of wrapping political
critique in academic garb will end up curtailing the right to
criticize - as if people who do not enjoy academic freedom should not
express their opinions.

Academic freedom goes beyond freedom of expression, and is intended to
respond to the needs of the academic community. It is the freedom to
study, publish and teach. This is the only way the search for
scientific truth can be protected. That is how academics differ from
employees of any other institution.

But no one has a monopoly on truth. Thus to protect the search for
truth, academics must not suppress the opinions of others, whether
students or colleagues - because they too are entitled to academic
freedom. Neither may academics force their opinions on others or do
harm those whose opinions differ from theirs. The power of academic
discourse lies in persuasion, not coercion.

But the greatest threat to academic freedom is the academic boycott.
This weapon - even if those who preach it are trying to target
government policy - strikes a mortal blow at the freedom to research
and develop, because it cuts the scholar off from sources of funding
for his research and from colloquy with colleagues, which is essential
to academic research.

Nor can we ignore the fact that those who call for a boycott will not
be harmed by it themselves. They will enjoy the best of both worlds -
both the rights conferred by belonging to the boycotted university and
the right to exemption from the very boycott they advocate.

The writer is a professor of constitutional law at Tel Aviv University