It was revealed on the news that the University
of Sydney had cancelled the June talk by the
Dalai Lama.

This raises the question - is Sydney University
committed to free and open debate?

As far as I'm aware the Dalai Lama does not
bring politics into his talks - so the only
reason that I can think of why the university would
take this step - is that China forms a key
international student market for Sydney University
and funds various university activities. The
University did not want to take the risk of
the topic of China's relentless efforts to suppress
Tibetan culture being raised.

Is this a desirable stance for a university to take?

No, it isn't a desirable decision if it is purely a political or economic reason Lexi.

However, it may be the Uni was worried about possible violence from some of the Chinese students?

Apparently Tibet is a delicate subject amongst the Chinese.
The Dalai Lama has always called for China to free Tibet...thus he is not a popular figure in that country.

Don't forget where Universities get most of there money Government.

No more explanation needed.

The Uny has far more important things on its plate Lexi.
Like near poisoning young women in forced drinking binges.
Young Liberals putching walls and being aggressively sexist.
No time to talk to a man about a more peaceful world.

Susieonline, if they were worried about the Chinese students they had
a good reason to go ahead and demonstrate to them that in a democracy
you can complain about something, but you have to respect other
peoples opinions.
That surely is at the base of any academic institution.

If it was true that it was cancelled because of Chinese pressure you
have to wonder if there are Chinese government agents among the students.

I feel that student's need to protest the
action taken by the university. The
university has taken away the right of
university members to engage freely in the
exchange of ideas. It has taken away intellectual
freedom from its students. It has not upheld the
university's elementary intellectual and social
responsibilities. And it must not be allowed to
get away with it without any outrage from its
students.

The university has an Enterprise Agreement (following
an earlier outcry) where management restored intellectual
freedom to the agrement along with another cause -
commiting it to antidiscriminatory employment practices.
Management must be made aware that there is a huge
gap between their rhetoric and policy. They can't profess
to be for intellectual freedom - and ban pander to China's
dictates. It's becoming very hard to believe the extent
to which Sydney university manages to still feel entitled
to publicly profess the traditional liberal -humanist
values - and yet subvert them so completely.

cont'd...