FNL
HomePage
Editorial Board
E-mail FNL
FNL Archives
MIT HomePage

ACTA Declares College Faculty
"Weak Link" in War on Terrorism

Jean Jackson

On November 11, 2001 the American Council of Trustees and Alumni (ACTA), a conservative nonprofit organization co-founded by Lynne Cheney and Joseph Lieberman, published a report titled “Defending Civilization.” Arguing that “our universities are failing America,” the report characterizes U.S. college faculty as the “weak link” in the war on terrorism. The report identifies 40 university faculty members and cites 115 statements and incidents on college campuses in support of its claims. Inadequate teaching of Western culture and American history, the authors (Anne Neal and Jerry Martin) contend, has resulted in students and faculty failing to understand what is at stake in the fight against terrorism, and as a consequence universities participate in undermining, rather than aiding in the defense of civilization. Four MIT professors, including myself, were identified, some of our statements apparently obtained from a September 20, 2001 MIT press release, “Students rally for peace on McDermott Court,” favorable in tone, about a student-initiated peace rally on September 20th. (Wayne O’Neil [Emeritus] and Hugh Gusterson also participated in the peace rally; Noam Chomsky’s remarks were obtained from another source. Professor Balakrishnan Rajagopal also participated in the peace rally.)

The report elicited substantial response from the media, including electronic publications, in the form of articles, op-ed pieces, and letters to the editor (write to jjackson@mit.edu for references). The media reaction I’ve seen has been mostly negative, perhaps in part because newspapers have a stake in preventing censorship, but also, surely, because the report lists names of people alleged to have “un-American” agendas, and this country has had previous experience with lists of purportedly unpatriotic individuals. The negative nature of the response seems to have prompted ACTA’s subsequent decision to remove the report from its Website and post a new one, with the names excised (http://www.goacta.org).

Although parts of the report are downright silly (some of the quotes – all of them out of context – cannot be seen as unpatriotic by any stretch of the imagination: “ignorance breeds hate,” for example), such publications and the responses they provoke need to be taken very seriously. The culture wars over university curricula were being fought long before September 11th, as were the larger debates over education in general and the causes of what some see as the nation’s decline in moral fiber, its sense of collective identity, and the corrosive effects of secular humanism. The ACTA report’s language is familiar. But the seismic changes the country is undergoing mean that the frame within which such criticism takes place has been radically altered. Accusations about aiding the enemy during a period like the present cannot be ignored as simple hyperbole, or inner-beltway partisan rhetoric. During times characterized by insecurity (bomb-stuffed shoes on the airplane passenger to your right), confusion about the enemy (terrorist cells differ in major ways from armies, and President Bush having to explicitly state that we are not fighting Islam), devastating economic effects of the attacks themselves permeating the country – when those accused of not defending civilization are also spoken of as “giving ammunition” to America’s enemies, as said Attorney General John Ashcroft on Dec. 6th, clearly the implications of these debates have changed. (On December 6th Ashcroft asserted that those who criticized the extraordinary powers sought by the executive branch are in fact aiding the terrorists, eroding our national unity, and giving ammunition to America’s enemies.)

It seems to me that especially at such times as these we need to remember that freedom of speech requires allowing unpopular people with unpopular things to say their chance at the podium. And to remember that the essence of a humanistic education is acquiring the ability to consider different points of view – to know how to step back from a philosophy or dogma or moral system and critically examine it. In this respect, of course, universities, like educational institutions in all societies, are at odds with the objective of teaching children and youth about right and wrong, good and bad, however these are defined. But a society aspiring to democratic governance, its elected officials chosen by an educated citizenry, must particularly make sure its pedagogical institutions educate the next generation of citizens to question the prevailing wisdom, to explore multiple lines of analysis, and to debate different points of view, even in times of national crisis.

This does not mean one should not form an opinion, nor does it imply assuming a moral relativism. I tell my students that investigating and understanding the reasons behind a given action in no way excuse it. Moral evaluation may or may not be part of description, analysis, and interpretation, and when it is, it must always be kept conceptually distinct. Educated citizens must be able to evaluate the morality of a given doctrine or event and work to alter situations that are morally unacceptable. The ACTA authors appear to believe that efforts to understand the attacks are equivalent to excusing them, but nothing could be further from the truth.

People differ regarding the degree to which we in fact live in a free society, but no one can dispute that those freedoms we do have were gained at great cost and are maintained at great cost. Free speech and free inquiry mean that I will defend ACTA’s right to publish such a report as well as my right to protest it. Open debate is one of the foundations of our democratic traditions, and no matter what one’s political position, we should surely oppose any attempts to claim that dissent is tantamount to treason.

Benjamin Franklin stated, also at a time of crisis, “They that give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety.” Cheney’s preface to the ACTA report states that at a time of national crisis we need to encourage the study of our past, to know the idea and ideals on which our nation has been built. Franklin would seem to be a good place to start.

FNL
HomePage
Editorial Board
E-mail FNL
FNL Archives
MIT HomePage