Displaying posts published in

2016

The Architecture of Intellectual Freedom By Peter Wood

https://www.nas.org/

Peter Wood is the president of the National Association of Scholars.
Recent campus protests and, more importantly, the often anemic responses to those protests by responsible campus officials, have once again put a spotlight on issues of intellectual and academic freedom. In the past, the National Association of Scholars has been quick to point out infringements of these freedoms and to join larger discussions about the underlying principles.
We decided in the episodes that began in September 2015 to take a step back. We did so because the circumstances seemed to have provoked as much confusion among defenders of academic freedom as among its would-be opponents. Responses in the form of vigorous declarations that the university should uphold academic freedom as a cardinal principle seemed to us inadequate in light of the radical denials of that principle in word and deed by the campus activists. Some of these activists claim the mantle of academic freedom even as they violate it in spirit and in substance. And clearly some college officials who purport to uphold the principle of academic freedom have proved feckless when put to the test.

A restatement of principles means little if it fails to engage the minds and imaginations of members of the community who must bring those principles to life. Have academic and intellectual freedom become merely stuffed eagles brought out on ceremonial occasions for display? We think that, though weakened, they are still alive, and that what may help them recover is some good counsel to the people whose job it is to help them thrive.

That counsel takes two parts. The first is this document, which attempts to restore the contexts of academic and intellectual freedom. The second is a separate document that builds on this one to explain how these principles should be applied to liberal arts education.

The argument in this first document is that intellectual freedom is a foundational principle of American higher education, but it is not the only foundational principle. To understand intellectual freedom accurately, it must be considered as part of a complex whole that sustains the university.

Notable & Quotable: Campus Censorship ‘Yes, we should mock these little tyrants who fantasize that their feelings should trump other people’s freedom. But we must go further.’

From remarks by Brendan O’Neill, editor of the online magazine Spiked, at the “What Cannot Be Said” conference at the University of California, Irvine, Jan. 23:

This censorship is more insidious than the old censorships. It is vast and unwieldy and can turn its attention to almost anything: magazines, clothing, monuments, jokes, conversational blunders. It’s as if students feel they deserve their own personal blasphemy law to protect them from scurrilous comments or images or objects. . . .

Campus censors can’t be held entirely responsible for this therapeutic censorship. In fact, in many ways they are the products of a culture that has been growing for decades: a culture of diminished moral autonomy; a culture which sees individuals as fragile and incapable of coping without therapeutic assistance; a culture which treats individual self-esteem as more important than the right to be offensive; a culture that was developed by older generations—in fact by the fortysomethings and fiftysomethings now mocking campus censors as infantile and ridiculous.

Yes, we should mock these little tyrants who fantasize that their feelings should trump other people’s freedom. But we must go further than that. We must remake the case for robust individualism and the virtue of moral autonomy against the fashion for fragility; against the misanthropic view of people as objects shaped and damaged by speech rather than as active subjects who can independently imbibe, judge and make decisions about the speech they hear.

Chaos in Libya a Growing Draw for Extremists, Report Warns Islamic State, al Qaeda using the chaos since the overthrow of Moammar Gadhafi to seize territory By Alan Cullison

WASHINGTON—Libya is emerging as a new destination of choice for extremists, as both Islamic State and al Qaeda have used the chaos since the overthrow of Moammar Gadhafi to seize territory and parts of the economy, a report by a security consulting firm said.

Wednesday’s report warned that Libya could become a dangerous new base for terrorist groups because of the country’s ungoverned hinterlands, long, porous borders and huge oil reserves.

Already, the absence of law and proliferation of weapons and violence in Libya “have allowed violent extremist groups such as the Islamic State and al Qaeda to thrive,” said the report by The Soufan Group, founded by a former U.S. government official who investigated the 2001 terror attacks.

Suspected Boko Haram Attack Kills 10 in Nigeria’s Chibok Three suicide bombers struck northeastern town where Islamist group had kidnapped 276 teenage girls By Gbenga Akingbule

Three suicide bombers, all women, killed themselves and 10 other people during an attack on Wednesday in Chibok, the northeast Nigerian town where Boko Haram kidnapped 276 teenage girls from a school in 2014.

The attackers, suspected members of Boko Haram’s Islamist insurgency, struck a market, as well as two residential neighborhoods, said eye witness Bitrus Mark.

Residents of the small town helped carry at least 30 injured people to a nearby clinic, according to local bystander Emmanuel Samuel, who helped tally the number of people killed.

At least 219 of the schoolgirls taken from Chibok in April 2014 remain missing, even as Nigeria records successes in the wider war on Boko Haram. This time last year, Islamic State-allied insurgency controlled a section of Nigeria the size of Belgium. Now, Boko Haram has been chased into hiding, although the group continues to lash out by attacking ordinary people in public places.

French Justice Minister Christiane Taubira Quits Over Terror Proposals Ms. Taubira resigned over plans to allow dual citizens convicted of terrorism to be stripped of French nationality By Noemie Bisserbe and Stacy Meichtry

PARIS—France’s justice minister resigned Wednesday after a clash with President François Hollande over his proposal to adopt a constitutional amendment stripping some homegrown terrorists of their nationality.

Christiane Taubira “agreed on the need to put an end to her mandate as the debate on the constitutional amendment opens in Parliament today,” the president’s office said. The president appointed Jean-Jacques Urvoas, a senior lawmaker, to succeed Ms. Taubira.

Her departure highlights the fault lines within Mr. Hollande’s Socialist Party over his strategy for tackling terrorism. His government has imposed a raft of state-of-emergency measures—permitting police to conduct warrantless raids and detain people without court orders—that critics say contrast with the French Republic’s status as a beacon of civil liberties.

However, it was Mr. Hollande’s recent decision to strip terrorists of their nationality—an idea long supported by France’s right-wing parties—that opened the divide with Ms. Taubira.

“I’m leaving the government over a major political disagreement,” Ms. Taubira said, after tweeting: “Sometimes you resist by staying, sometimes you resist by leaving.”
In December, the French government unveiled a proposal for constitutional amendments that would shield the state-of-emergency measures from legal challenges and strip dual citizens of their French nationality if they are convicted of terrorism.

French law already allows the government to take away citizenship from convicted terrorists if they are born abroad. But Mr. Hollande was under pressure from France’s right-wing parties to go further.

Teaching the UN Secrretary General about human nature Did he really say that? Paula Stern

Secretary General Ban Ki-moon committed an egregious error a few days
ago. He woke up and got out of bed. He shouldn’t have. Had he remained
in bed, perhaps, perhaps, he might have managed to get through the day
without saying something exceedingly stupid.

Before a meeting of the UN Security Council, Ban Ki-moon justified
terrorism. That’s right, he said it was “human nature.” His exact
words were “It is human nature to react to occupation.”

Human nature to stick a knife in someone’s head or ram a car into a
baby carriage? Honestly, I have no idea what kind of society Ban is
from but I’m thinking it (and he) needs to be reprogrammed.

Human nature?

The Leap of Trump As the GOP nominee or President, he would be a political ‘black swan.’

Financial analyst and our contributor Donald Luskin has described Donald Trump as a “black swan” over the political economy. He’s referring to an outlier event that few anticipated and whose impact is impossible to predict. As the voting season begins in Iowa, this strikes us as a useful way for Republicans to think about the Trump candidacy.

We’ve been critical of Mr. Trump on many grounds and our views have not changed. But we also respect the American public, and the brash New Yorker hasn’t stayed atop the GOP polls for six months because of his charm. Democracies sometimes elect poor leaders—see the last eight years—but their choices can’t be dismissed as mindless unless you want to give up on democracy itself.

The most hopeful way to interpret Mr. Trump’s support is that the American people aren’t taking decline lying down. They know the damage that has been done to them over the last decade—in lower incomes, diminished economic prospects, and a far more dangerous world. But they aren’t about to accept this as their fate.

Americans aren’t Japanese or Europeans—at least not yet. Mr. Trump’s promise to “make America great again” is for many patriotic voters a rallying cry for U.S. revival. In that sense it is motivated more by hope than by the “anger” so commonly described in the media.

UN HUMAN RIGHTS COMMISSIONER OMITS COMBATING “ANTISEMITISM” FROM LESSONS LEARNED ON INTERNATIONAL HOLOCAUST COMMEMORATION DAY

On January 27, 2016, the International Day of Commemoration in Memory of the Victims of the Holocaust, UN High Commissioner for Human Rights, Zeid Ra’ad Al Hussein, downplayed the unique genocidal targeting of Jews in the Holocaust by equating all of the victims of the Nazis. In the words of the statement, which only mentions Jews once: “Groups of women, men and children – Jews, Roma, Slavs, disabled people, political dissidents and others – were singled out as enemies, and deemed somehow less than human.”

The statement claims that the lesson of the Holocaust is “the need to continue to combat racism and religious or ethnic intolerance in every form,” but the High Commissioner had nothing to say about the specific religious intolerance which caused the death of 6 million Jews – antisemitism.

WHITE HOUSE SECRETLY DROPPED $10M CLAIM IN IRAN PRISONER DEAL BY JOEL SCHECTMAN & YEGANEH TORBATI

WASHINGTON (Reuters) — Nader Modanlo was facing five more years in federal prison when he got an extraordinary offer: U.S. President Barack Obama was ready to commute his sentence as part of this month’s historic and then still-secret prisoner swap with Iran. He said no.
To sweeten the deal, the U.S. administration then dropped a claim against the Iran-born aerospace engineer for $10 million that a Maryland jury found he had taken as an illegal payment from Iran, according to interviews with Modanlo, lawyers involved and U.S. officials with knowledge of the matter.
The surrender of the U.S. claim, which has not previously been reported, could add to scrutiny of how the Obama administration clinched a prisoner deal that has drawn criticism from Republican presidential candidates and lawmakers.

A Washington-based spokesman for the Justice Department declined to comment on discussions over the $10 million, which the jury found that Modanlo was paid to help Iran launch its first satellite in 2005. Modanlo says the money was a loan from a Swiss company for a telecoms deal.
In the prisoner swap, five Americans held in Iran were released at the same time as seven Iranians charged or imprisoned in the United States were granted pardons or had their sentences commuted. The deal accompanied the Jan. 16 implementation of a landmark agreement that curbs Iran’s nuclear program in exchange for sanctions relief.

UN Learns Holocaust Remembrance Showmanship. Not the Lessons of the Holocaust. by Anne Bayefsky

Analogizing Palestinians to the Jewish victims of the Nazis: that’s how the UN is marking this week’s “International Day of Commemoration in memory of the victims of the Holocaust.” The epicenter of modern antisemitism on a global scale is not somewhere over there, but in the middle of Turtle Bay.

For public tour groups, and their busloads of impressionable American students from around the country, the UN ‘s permanent “Palestine” exhibit has now been arranged to be within a few feet of the UN’s permanent Holocaust exhibit.

This week’s activities follow suit.

On January 25, 2016, a temporary exhibit called “Holocaust by Bullets” was opened in the UN visitors’ lobby. The painstaking research of the French organization Yahad-In Unum substantiates how two million Jews were shot to death in the presence of normal folks all over Europe.

But “Holocaust by Bullets” follows the UN’s December exhibition, which is titled “Palestinian Children: Overcoming Tragedies with Hope, Dreams, Resilience and Dignity.” That month-long display in the visitors’ lobby consisted of scenes of Palestinian children suffering from “devastating” wanton, unprovoked Israeli “operations.”

Father Patrick Desbois opened Yahad-In Unum’s exhibit by explaining that his team locates the bodies of Nazi victims and then honors the dead. He is driven to ensure that Europe does not bury “all its values” by building its future on unacknowledged and unvalued human beings in mass graves.