Libertarian Librarian

On February 14th, the Center for Ethnic Studies at the University of Wisconsin-Parkside emailed a draft of their letter of support of Ward Churchill to UW-Parkside's governance and staff email lists. Between those two lists, virtually every faculty and staff member at UW-Parkside would be reached. The final letter was emailed to UC-Boulder several days later (February 18th, I believe). The text is as follows:


To Members of the University of Colorado-Boulder Board of Regents,

What Professor Ward Churchill is experiencing sends a message to faculty throughout the United States: watch what you think, write, and say. It could cost you your job. Rather than silencing Professor Churchill, we in academe should be examining why and how his views produce the responses they do. Our role in the university is to explore such responses from multiple perspectives, and to situate them in the historical context of the relationship of the United States with other countries and with its own indigenous peoples. Silencing Professor Churchill because of the questions he raises is a contravention of the principles of free and open enquiry we are committed to as academics.

The University of Wisconsin-Parkside's Center for Ethnic Studies, and other faculty and academic staff, therefore ask the University of Colorado-Boulder Board of Regents NOT to terminate Professor Ward Churchill's employment as a tenured faculty, and to invite him to resume chairing UC-Boulder's Center for Ethnic Studies. This is the right and just thing to do.

The Center for Ethnic Studies


Thirty-one individuals signed onto this letter, twenty-four of them current faculty here at Parkside, and two more, also faculty, were added after the initial letter was sent to the UC-Boulder Board of Regents. The academic disciplines represented ranged across the humanities, social sciences and physical sciences. There were also a few academic staff members on the list, and, as far as I can determine from the titles given with each signature, not a single student.

Upon reflection, and a little research, I decided to write a similar letter of support for Larry Summers, the embattled President of Harvard University. I believed there to be some interesting similarities in the two cases, and though the Summers' case did not receive the same kind of national attention, I was curious how my colleagues would react to a freedom of speech case, or an "academic free speech" case if you prefer, when the speaker was an administrator rather than a faculty member and where the subject of controversy was discrimination against women in the sciences. So, I sent the following email to the goverance and staff email lists at UW-Parkside:


Dear Colleagues:

In light of the recent email supporting embattled professor Ward Churchill, I have drafted the following letter of support for Larry Summers, the embattled president of Harvard University. The cases are similar, though Summers' comments were less inflammatory than Churchill's, he indicated in advance he was trying to be provocative, and he has apologized for any offense caused. Despite this, many critics, including a large number in academia, are calling for his censure and/or resignation. Faculty/staff/students at UW-Parkside are invited to add> their names to the letter. Simply respond to this email. I hope to send the letter to Harvard's governing board by the end of the week.

Thank you,
Nick Weber
University Archivist and Academic Librarian

----------------------------

To the President and Fellows of Harvard College:

President Lawrence Summers' recent comments at NBER have resulted in his being roundly criticised and in calls for his censure and resignation. Such a response sends a message to the administration, faculty and staff of academic institutions throughout the United States: watch what you write and what you say. Controversial approaches to controversial topics may cost you your job. Rather than silencing or condemning President Summers, the university community should be examining why and how his statements produced the responses they did--precisely the initial purpose of Summers' remarks. Our role in the university is to explore such responses from multiple perspectives, and, if we find the argument unconvincing or offensive, to find evidence and argumentation to rebut and disprove the hyposthesis. Simply silencing President Summers because of the questions he raises, or the positions he takes, is a contravention of the principles of free and open enquiry we are committed to as members of a community that advocates for intellectual curiosity and rigor.

We, the undersigned members of the University of Wisconsin-Parkside academic community, therefore ask the President and Fellows of Harvard College to continue to support President Summers. We also hope that neither the administration nor the faculty of Harvard will ask for> President Summers' resignation, nor censure him for his remarks. President Summers should continue to lead Harvard University into the 21st Century. This is both right and just.

The University of Wisconsin-Parkside academic community:

Nicholas Weber
University Archivist and Academic Librarian


I sent this letter (slightly revised for typos, spelling errors and without the the concluding "The University of Wisconsin-Parkside academic community" to avoid the implication that everyone at Parkside agreed with the letter) this morning to James Houghton, Jr., the senior Fellow of the Harvard Corporation. In addition to my own, there were seven other signatures, including three faculty members (all of whom also signed the Churchill letter), two staff members and two students.

Labels: Oh That Ivory Tower