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.