Newsletter

January 2012

Over The Line

Scott Jaschik

In an unusual move, Harvard University’s Faculty
of Arts and Sciences voted this week to eliminate two summer school courses in
economics because of anti-Muslim statements the instructor made in an op-ed
published in India.

When word about the op-ed spread in July, some
Harvard studentsdemanded
that Subramanian Swamy be fired.At the time, Harvard pledged to look
into the situation, but noted that it is "central to the mission of a university
to protect free speech, including that of Dr. Swamy and of those who disagree
with him."

But faculty members this week cited the
nature of his statements as justifying the move to kill his courses rather than
permit him to return to Cambridge.

The op-ed ran inDaily News & Analysis.
The piece, a response to a bombing by Muslim terrorists in Mumbai, said that
India could wipe out terrorism by taking certain steps, such as declaring India
a Hindu state where "non-Hindus can vote only if they proudly acknowledge that
their ancestors were Hindus," or demolishing mosques, or banning conversion from
Hinduism to any other faith.

Swamy was once an economics professor at
Harvard, but he returned to his home in India, where is an outspoken
nationalistic politician. But he has come back to Harvard each year to teach in
the summer school.

The faculty vote on Swamy’s courses came during
what is typically a routine review (and approval) of the slate of summer school
offerings. In this case, the faculty approved the courses only after removing
the two Swamy was to have taught.

Harvard faculty meetings are closed to the press
except for representatives ofHarvard Magazine(the alumni publication)
andThe Harvard Crimson(the student newspaper).An account of the
meetinginHarvard Magazinesaid that the economics department chair,
John Y. Campbell, told the faculty that his economics colleagues considered
Swamy to be "competent" to teach the courses, and that none of the students who
took his courses last summer had complained about him. The only student who
mentioned the op-ed in a class evaluation rated the course favorably. The
department had "expressed its view that it would not take a collective position
on academic freedom or on matters of speech, hate speech, or Harvard’s
reputation – issues on which there were a wide range of views, in this case,
within the department," Campbell was quoted as saying.

The proposal that eventually carried – to
decline to authorize Swamy’s courses – was made by Diana L. Eck, a scholar of
India’s religions. According to theHarvard Magazineaccount, she
stressed that this was much more than an issue of a professor having some
controversial views. She called Swamy’s views "destructive" and said that his
ideas involved limiting the human rights of others and denying freedom of
religion. In light of the nature of his comments, she also wondered why his
courses hadn’t been "quietly dropped," rather than included in the proposed
offerings for the coming summer.

She also quoted from a letter she and other
Harvard faculty members sent to President Drew Faust last summer. The letter
said in part: "Freedom of expression is an essential principle in an academic
community, one that we fully support. Notwithstanding our commitment to the
robust exchange of ideas, Swamy’s op-ed clearly crosses the line into incitement
by demonizing an entire religious community, demanding their disenfranchisement,
and calling for violence against their places of worship. Indeed, India’s
National Commission for Minorities has filed criminal charges against Swamy,
whose incendiary speech carries the threat of communal violence. When Harvard
extends appointments to public figures, it behooves us to consider whether the
reputation of the university benefits from the association. In this case,
Swamy’s well-known reputation as an ideologue of the Hindu Right who publicly
advocates violence against religious minorities undermines Harvard’s own
commitment to pluralism and civic equality."

Under Harvard’s governance system, the faculty
vote is final, and does not require administrative approval. A spokesman for the
university released only a brief statement: "Members of Harvard’s Faculty of
Arts and Sciences each year vote to approve or amend the course list for the
Harvard Summer School. Yesterday, the faculty voted to approve the curriculum
for the Summer School for the coming summer session with the exception of two
courses, about which there was considerable discussion."

On his Twitter feed,Swamy said that the vote at
Harvard was "nothing serious," explaining that "non-economists at Harvard don’t
like my views on how to protect India."

Citing Eck and a colleague who also wanted his
courses dropped, Swamy also tweeted: "I have been held accountable at Harvard
for what I write in India. This means India studies’ [Michael] Witzel and Eck
are accountable in India. Healthy?"

The Foundation for Individual Rights in
Education has spoken out against Harvard’s taking any action against Swamy on
the basis of his op-ed. The organization’sblognoted that Swamy’s op-ed calls
for radical social change in India, but FIRE noted that American principles of
free expression extend to calls for radical social change. As an example, it
cited the legal right for people to call for the United States to become a
communist country.

"We tolerate the widest possible range of
political, social, cultural, and religious views because, for one thing, we
trust in the marketplace of ideas to eventually sort it all out," the blog post
said.

Inside Higher Ed, December 8, 2011.