Institutions of the brain dead…Albanese is a classic example. Contorted by Qatarie money, money, money, sidelined from reality, and churning out fodder for the Islamic cause.
Sack universities and burn their books.

Nuremberg Dan,

"Sack universities and burn their books." Haven't had a decent book burning since, when was it, 10th May 1933.

The far right always view academia with suspicion, it challenges their notions of social order, and that can't be tolerated in their ideal world.

"When academics recycle century-old conspiracy theories about Jewish power and influence, they are not exercising academic freedom. They are failing to distinguish legitimate political critique from antisemitic thinking that has no place in scholarly discourse." When has that rubbish been mainstream academic thinking? Not in my lifetime. The author, had he lived in another age, would have been totally outraged with the heresy of some academics, who said the earth was round, and not flat. I'm sure he would have joined the chorus calling for their immediate destruction!

Among the worst offenders are Australian "National" University and University of Canberra.

ANU is like an extra federal department, propagandising for all it's worth, for open-borders net-zero. No lie is too big for them.

UC has just released a book on Albanese's First Term, which consists of 30-plus academics and "stakeholders", all running the same line. No contrary opinions get a guernsey.

Steve come down to earth.

The Canberra book is part of a series of the long-running Australian Commonwealth Administration publications. It is edited by the hugly acclaimed journalist, the 81 year old Michelle Grattan, look at her CV, hardly a raving commie as you of the extreme right like to categorise anyone with an opinion that doesn't gel with your world view.

Bonger 1405, the Koala Kid.

Pinochet was the efficient expert at university crowd control. It was a regular event for bodies to wash up on the Chilean coast after his thinning out processes necessitated the manual ejection of excess freight over the Pacific at three thousand feet.

I’m more excited at the prospect of demolishing universities following the book burning ceremonies: That has a sophistication to it.

Whether or not this article provokes a lot of written debate, it certainly invokes the need to think about what it advises.

Paul
Would you consider racist abuse based on false stereotypes directed at other racial minorities to be acceptable behaviour by university staff, so long as it is not “mainstream academic thinking”?

Hi Rhian,

I think there are racists working at Bunnings, just as there are racists work at universities. But I don't class universities as racists organisations, based on a minority of thinking/opinions, no more than I consider Bunnings a racists organisation for the same reasons.

I've got this ridiculous idea. Maybe Steve S can back up his claims with some facts.

Nuremberg Dan,

Pinochet, another one of your folk heroes, or just a member of the family, Uncle Augusto. I know you would totally disagree with dropping excess cargo out of a plane at 3,000 feet.... more like 10,000 feet and make sure the jobs done properly.

Hi Paul

I agree there are probably racists working in most medium to large employers, and that doesn’t necessarily mean they are racist organisations. And I agree that most universities are not intrinsically racist. But the surge of threats, intimidation, doxing and bullying directed at Jewish students and academics in recent years is extensively documented, including in this Parliamentary report released last year.

http://www.aph.gov.au/Parliamentary_Business/Committees/Joint/Human_Rights/AntisemitismAusUni/Report

To extend your Bunnings analogy, it would not be acceptable if racist staff bullied Muslim co-workers and threatened or abused customers wearing hijabs.

I think Professor Schwartz’s main point in this article, though, is not the failure of universities to curb antisemitism directed at staff and students, but the misuse of the principle of academic freedom to fail to enforce professional standards appropriate to the subject under consideration. He cites the use of antisemitic tropes by academics as an illustration, but presents it as part of a wider problem. There should be no place for flat-earther theory in teaching geology, and there should be no place for antisemitic tropes in teaching politics.

There are many more racists among those bleating racism than there are actual racist people.
University indoctrination had a lot to do with that outcome.
They're the simpletons with University degrees who are too stupid to even understand their own thinking.

Bonger 1405, Como Estes senior…

#… ust a member of the family, Uncle Augusto..#

Your a clairvoyant!

Great man was Uncle. Related to that other Spanish speaker in the Phillipines, uncle Ferdinand and Aunty Imelda; had a fetish with shoes she did, thousands of them scattered all over the place: a few Leftist bodies on occasions, some with shoes on. Looked kind of funny really.

Hi Rhian,

"I agree that most universities are not intrinsically racist. But the surge of threats, intimidation, doxing and bullying directed at Jewish students and academics in recent years is extensively documented, including in this Parliamentary report released last year."

I would agree universities are intrinsically "left wing", and the ME situation, like all situations has been reduced to a left/right confrontation issue, when the reality is not that clear. For me its not an ideological issues at all, but rather a socio-economic struggle with a lot more complexity thrown in. Religiously one side happens to be Muslim, and the other Jewish, that's where the religious aspect starts and finishes, but religion can be a focus for some, and a rallying point.

I believe a small minority of students and faculty at universities are responsible for the surge in antisemitic racism on campus. What can be done about it, that's the difficult question.

What can be done about it, that's the difficult question
Paul1405,
Make the lecturers accountable !

Rhian's last comment gets closest to what Schwartz is actually arguing.

The issue isn't whether universities are "left wing", or whether most academics are racist. It's whether universities are still willing to enforce professional and disciplinary standards, rather than retreating behind "academic freedom" whenever judgement is required.

Academic freedom has never meant that anything said by an academic is automatically protected. It protects competent, evidence-based scholarship within a field. It does not protect recycling conspiracy tropes, turning classrooms into activist spaces, or institutions campaigning for political outcomes.

Ironically, this is exactly what many critics on the right would want if the dominant views being constrained were their own. Enforcing standards only becomes "authoritarian" when it limits positions people sympathise with.

That's why the flat-earth analogy matters. No one would tolerate flat-earth theory in geology, not because it's controversial, but because it fails basic standards of evidence. Schwartz's point is that the same principle should apply elsewhere: disagreement is fine; incompetence is not.

So the answer to Paul's question of what can be done is much more boring than purges or censorship, and much harder:

universities need the courage to say no when teaching or research fails disciplinary standards, and yes to rigorous debate without partisanship.

It protects competent, evidence-based scholarship within a field.
John Daysh,
Unfortunately for society, that includes social engineering ! Woke, political correctness in particular & now hate speech laws aimed 99.9% at caucasians yet the bulk of that does not come from them !

Oh come on Paul, I'll respect UC and Michelle Grattan, the minute they start relating to the common people, not the beltway interests of the top 20%.

I don't owe them respect, simply because they have influence, and I don't. Nor should I falsely [automatically] be smeared as far right. Have a look at the book chapters by Allen and Coates, they are just straight out government propaganda. The book is uniform in its choice of "voices".

Japan's leader just won a landslide vote - genuinely from the people. In Australia, voters know perfectly well, the Labor/Green and Liberal/Teal cartel stands against the people. Hence the huge but reluctant drift to ON.

Hi Paul

I think there is overwhelming evidence that recent hostility to Jews on campus has frequently crossed the line between legitimate criticism of the actions of Israel, and antisemitism. And even if only a small minority of students is actively antisemitic, it is still unacceptable.

But to repeat, I don’t think this is Professor Schwartz’s main point. John Daysh has summarised the issue well – it is not about purges or censorship, but maintaining academic standards.

When I went to university decades ago, I was taught by tutors and lecturers from across the ideological spectrum, from Marxists to anarcho-capitalists and some interesting flavours in between. They disagreed fiercely but could do so coherently and productively because they all abided by the same basic rules of reason and evidence. To me, that is the essence of academic freedom.