fn <strong>the</strong> last edition <strong>of</strong> 14'its Student <strong>the</strong> contenlious issue <strong>of</strong>academic freedom <strong>of</strong> speech was raised. ..\re <strong>the</strong>re. or should lherebe, limits on what ma] be freell said al our universitr and in oursociet) ?A few points need to be made: 'l he first point is that one <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong>pillars <strong>of</strong> academic freedom is. as <strong>the</strong> Vice ( hancellor reminded uslast week's mass meeting,'<strong>the</strong> right to choose what will be tauqht'.One <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> reasons behind this is lhe specific manner in r,r hich aneducational institution operates. l,ecturers and tutors have apowerful and privileged access to an almost captile audience.Students, in turn. <strong>of</strong>ten har-e an uncritical respect for <strong>the</strong> integril-v<strong>of</strong> those who teach <strong>the</strong>m. For this reason alone it is essentiai weexercise great care in deciding'what will be taught'.Racism. for example. is out - completely and $,ilhoutexception. No amount <strong>of</strong> liberal 'freedom <strong>of</strong> speech' canultimately justify <strong>the</strong> propogation <strong>of</strong> bigotry
frShsevrchf;nnsThe international relations debate:IettcrrAttack on Campbell 'lacks tolerance'This Ietter refers to ! oureditorial'Relating to <strong>the</strong> FarRight' published in <strong>the</strong> April28th editi on <strong>of</strong> ll itsStudent.It is acknon'ledged that <strong>the</strong>gist ol ) tlur summarl, ol' <strong>the</strong>article published b1' Mr RKCampbell in <strong>the</strong> SADF journalPurutu.s is accurate. However.vour 'critical anall'sis' ralsesseveral questions <strong>of</strong> principle.First, is it ci<strong>the</strong>r justified orlair to lable an entire academicdepartment (as an institution ol'this U niversity) as ei<strong>the</strong>rsuhscrihing l(). ()r propagat ng.as a bod1,. a specific idcologicalperspective'lSecorrd. il a ntcrrbcr ol thisl)cpartnrcnt r)r anv o<strong>the</strong>r. $crrlto puhli:h utr article e()ntairrirlgequalll.' extrcnrist lclt rieus (in<strong>the</strong> light ol y0ur appear ror dlimit to academic tolerance)would you argue also for <strong>the</strong>exclusion <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong>se academicsfrom this canrpus'lThird. surely your concern lor<strong>the</strong> 'spirit <strong>of</strong> free inquiry andcuriosity' could not, bydefinition. be tolerant <strong>of</strong>'censorship ol' any kind'lIn <strong>the</strong> tourth place, is youropinion <strong>of</strong> all members <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong>Department <strong>of</strong> InternationalRelations (and it is noted thatnonc 15 e\empt Irom \()Llrallcgations) hased on a perr,lnalknou'ledge and or expe rience ol'<strong>the</strong> acadcmic qualifications.acadcmic s ritings. coursecontent. indir idual ideologicalpolitical conr ictit'rns and cxtramuralcommitment <strong>of</strong> eachmember ol this Departrnent'.'l-rlthh. ir crrtical anallsis trtcmotional hr pcrbolc ptrssiblc(or e\,en wortnwnlle) or are vouin \ ()ur rcuCti()n ()nenlngy oursell'lo similar accusations olintolerance and emotionalirrationalitr"lThese are questions which.personallv. it is deeply regretted.in <strong>the</strong> light <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> serious slurwhich is now cast on aninstitutron <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> Unirersitr,were not consrdered.Despite <strong>the</strong> lact that Mr RKCampbell is <strong>the</strong> most juniormember <strong>of</strong> this Department andhas <strong>the</strong> status 0f a temporarymember<strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> <strong>University</strong>' stafl'and <strong>the</strong>refore cannot claim torepresen<strong>the</strong> Department in anvway. it is lhe case thal extremistviews <strong>of</strong> any colour tend towards<strong>the</strong> irrational and eventually <strong>the</strong>absurd. One would have thoughtthat Mr Campbell had providedsull'icient rope in his article, rvithwhich students. imbued with <strong>the</strong>'spirit <strong>of</strong> ob.jective inouiry andFree speech has no limitsOne need not share MrCampbell's sympathy forSADF action in Angola, orsecurity police activity inSouth Africa, to take issuewith your attack on MrCampbell's article in lL'it.vStudent V'ol <strong>35</strong> No 8You suggest some intereslinglimits to <strong>the</strong> principle <strong>of</strong>academic tolerance and byimplication, <strong>the</strong> principle <strong>of</strong> l'reespeech generallv. You proceed tojustily <strong>the</strong>se curbs in much <strong>the</strong>same way as <strong>the</strong> spokesmen <strong>of</strong><strong>the</strong> far right: <strong>the</strong> idea is that <strong>the</strong>protection afforded by academictolerance extends only to thosewho express what Vorster wouldcall'responsible'opinion andnot to take those who wouldindulge in'blatant falsification'and 'propaganda'. -fhus thcgovernment generously allowspress freedom but reminds usthat 'freedom' is not 'license'.I suggesthat it is a contradictionin termr (() argue that freeacademic expression must becontrolled by sell. appointedguardians ol <strong>the</strong>'truth'. whe<strong>the</strong>r<strong>the</strong>y be right or lelt wing.Your relerence to <strong>the</strong> IRIIcssal' topic on'total strategy',strateg!', betravs a degree <strong>of</strong>ignorance. Virtually, everysource recommended for research on <strong>the</strong> topic, includingpublications <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> Institute <strong>of</strong>International Affairs, is sharpll'critical <strong>of</strong> total strategy.Finatly. I notice that youra<strong>the</strong>r disparagingly describe <strong>the</strong>head <strong>of</strong> department as an'internationally acclaimed conservative'.Presumably, ln accordancewith your.notion <strong>of</strong>selective academic freedom, <strong>the</strong>Pr<strong>of</strong>essor too. should be'restrained' from teaching <strong>the</strong>error which inevitably arisesfrom his conservatism. Suchrestraint will. no doubt. be one<strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> first fruits <strong>of</strong> our eventualliberation. I hope this prospectwill spur all progressive studentsto redouble <strong>the</strong> struggles for rruefreedom in this country.M Osborne IR llCreche messDear Mr Do Please SeeMy mo<strong>the</strong>r is a very cleverperson. However. she sez u arevery stupid. becoz u donunderstand why <strong>the</strong>re shood be acreche on campus. lf she is cleverand u are stupid, whv are u atcurrosrtr'. could hang hrrn.s ithout sccking to slander lllnrenrbcrs ol thc l)epartntent ()l'rr hich hc is :r singlc .lunrtlrnrember. and or to dcnigratc t heinst it ut io n.I he tonc ol lt;ur article. lhcnature ol lour allegations. as*ell as )()ur suggested rcmedl.arc et s()urcc ol'decp concern an_dlnsult to those in this[)epartment and elsewhere rvhtlarc conrmi(ted to propagating'tree' academic inquirl andbroadranging discussion rvithin<strong>the</strong> t'rame*ork <strong>of</strong> a scholarl.v"study and understanding olinternational politics. But moreimportant. your lack ol'tolerance and 1'our advocacl ol''exclusion' politics is counter to. but can wetolerate militarism?Congratulations on yourscathing attack on KeithCampbell's mindlessly rightwingarticle (ParatusApril 1983).I have no wish touse a steam-roler to crush agnat (no matter howobnoxious), but a couple <strong>of</strong>comments need to be addedto your o<strong>the</strong>rwise comprehensiveattack.Firstly, M r Campbellpr<strong>of</strong>esses to be a militaryhistorian. For this reaosn. hisfailure to bolster his soeciousarguments with any facts mustbe treated very severely indeed.You mentioned Mr Campbell'sstrange description <strong>of</strong> Malayaand Kenya as true democracies.but what about <strong>the</strong> sweepingclaims that Britain has'repeatedlv'resorted todetention rvithout trial. and that<strong>the</strong> ANC has been trying to'subvert' South Africa for'overTV lectures slatedIs this Maths or TV games?The Maths and Stats I courseconsists <strong>of</strong> a series <strong>of</strong> TVlectures, <strong>the</strong> quality <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong>lectures is poor and someeven border on hyper poor.To compound this problem: il'vou don'l undersland a point in<strong>the</strong> lecture you can't stop and askquesitons. you have to wait for a'Droo in Tut'which is attendedo) tutors (people rvho passed <strong>the</strong>course <strong>the</strong> prcvious vear) or youcan rvait for vour tutoriallect u reDuring <strong>the</strong> seventh week <strong>of</strong>eachunit a test counting 25Va is held.The test is a multiple choicewith negative marking. Theanswers are marked on a com-^,.-/ .,^,1 ^^-1.^A L,,.L^thc proud tradition ol thisl-lnircrsitl As a bastion ol'libcralisnr uithin a controllcdcxclusir ist. intolcratrt and censorcds
Change language