Tuesday, August 02, 2005

Freedom of speech vs responsibility of speech

There was a rather interesting item on the news last night about how Macquarie University in New South Wales had suspended one of their lecturers for racist statements that he had made (and potential racist lectures, too, I think). The lecturer, Andrew Fraser, had written to one of his local newspapers early last month about what he saw as the need to prevent non-white people from immigrating to Australia. Oh, and not just that, but he says that African migration increases crime, HSC results point to a ruling class of Asians, criticises the government for allowing 'thousands' of people who 'can not assimilate into society' into Australia, that black people are not as intelligent as white people, and that all of this 'threatens' the social, political and economic interests of 'ordinary' Australians (who I have yet to meet one of - we're a mighty strange bunch, diverse as they come, so please let me know if you find an 'ordinary' Australian so that I can pay an admission fee to see them!).

At first when I heard him commenting on immigration on the news last night, I thought, 'Oh, another idiot American.' But no! I read this morning that he's Canadian-born, which just doesn't seem right - Canadians are meant to be tolerant and nice and like the New Zealanders of the Northern Hemisphere! But no! This is not so for Professor Fraser (which punctures my dreams about Canadians really *lol*). This guy has been lecturing at Macquarie University for 29 years, has lived in Australia for that time and should know that Parramatta has *always* had issues with crime, no matter who's there.

Anyways! Just when you thought that the Australian government was getting too much criticism for being far too tough and evil towards people who seek refuge here in our wide brown land, up pops someone to say, 'No, no, you let everyone in and that's BAD! Only white people should be allowed to live in Australia!' (which is ultimately what people who support such an ideology are saying). He went on to stand by what he'd said in the letter to the newspaper on the news last night, which disturbed me greatly - how can people honestly believe such things anyway? And why on earth was he saying them publicly? I know one or two people who think similar sorts of things, but would NEVER say so publicly.

Since this all came to light, Macquarie University suspended him from lecturing (I don't blame them, really, especially considering that he used their name and his position there when signing off on the letter - something that would make it seem like something more of an academic thought than an extreme right-wing opinion). Insanely enough, Macquarie University has been coping more flak for suspending him than he has for expounding such racist and vilifying opinions!

Far from being criticised for holding these opinions, he's actually being supported for using freedom of speech and expression! WTF? Supporters of Professor Fraser are saying that Macquarie University is penalising him for expressing his views (if he was just expressing his own views, he shouldn't have signed the letter with his position and the uni's name, simple as that). Others are saying that he's 'just starting a debate' that's healthy for the community to have. Hmmm, nothing healthier than inflaming racial hatred, is there not *cough, cough* Dr Brendon Nelson, Federal Education minister, also supports the push for Professor Fraser's reinstatement to lecturing (although he said that he does not support that view - just that the professor should be able to express them without risking his job!), and the way that the Sydney Morning Herald has reported on it makes me wonder about their position on the matter.

Okay, I may sound bizarre saying this, but Professor Fraser is getting way too much sympathy! I don't believe that he should be verbally bashed or something like that, but to give him support for voicing opinions regardless of their content and potential impact is irresponsible and hurts freedom of speech. Of course we argue strongly for freedom of speech and expression (which actually aren't part of Australia's constitution), BUT... come on! There has to be a point where you draw the line. If this was just some average Joe Blow on the street spouting forth such opinions, people wouldn't hesitate to call him a racist. However, Dr Nelson says, "But (they should) nonetheless respect the fact that he, as an academic, has a right to express it."

Being an academic does not free you from the responsibility of caring for the community and those around you. In fact, it gives a greater responsibility. It's important to have freedom of speech, but in and with that freedom we also have responsibility. Responsibility to others around us, our community, our world. A responsibility to not hurt or harm, or cause that to happen. We have a responsibility to be thoughtful and careful with what we say, and think through things in a balanced manner. An academic, or anyone else for that matter, shouldn't going around slandering other races and religions under the guise of 'expression.'

As Professor Di Yerbury, Vice-Chancellor of the university, told ABC radio, "We're an international, multi-cultural community... it's about tolerance, harmony, cross-cultural decency. It's about my students knowing that whatever race or origins or cultural backgrounds or religion they are they have a right to feel as safe and as comfortable and as respected and as free from abuse as anybody else on our campus..."

Thank God for the opinion piece, Speaking out of turn is not free speech by Gerard Henderson that appeared on the Sydney Morning Herald's website today (http://smh.com.au/articles/2005/08/01/1122748579322.html). It starts out: "The concept of academic freedom is in the news again. And again, civil libertarians are stepping forward to say academics should be entitled to say absolutely anything they want to say - irrespective of how inflammatory, offensive or false their comments may be..." and part of its final words are as such: "The concept that the existence of modern democracies depends on the unfettered right of academics to free speech is a myth. It is also a myth to suggest that universities were ever a sanctuary for pure intellectual freedom... Academic freedom has often been invoked to protect the incompetent and the unsuitable."

(The article also gives a bit of history into the matter, and how the letter to the local newspaper appeared nearly a month ago. And, as Henderson points out, it probably would have just been taken as the rantings of another right-wing conservative. Considering that Fraser said that the entry of migrants into the Parramatta-Bankstown area had caused the 'distinctive national identity' of 'Anglo-Australians' to be eroded, and that black people and Muslims weren't anything like the white people who settled and built this country (having stolen it from the black people originally here...), it'd be easy to assume that he was just another off-his-rocker old fart who had a passion for John Laws and Parliamentary Question Time when John Howard's talking.)

No comments: