Harvard, The Left, United States — August 11, 2011 12:36 am

Swamy’s Freedom of Speech

By

One of India’s most prominent politicians has recently come under public scrutiny due to a petition started by a group of Harvard undergrads and graduate students. (As of today, the petition has 440 signatures—including mine.)

Following the Mumbai bombings last month, Swamy wrote an article in the popular Indian newspaper Daily News and Analysis entitled “Analysis: How to wipe out Islamic terror.” (The primary suspects in the bombing are the Indian Mujahideen, a Muslim terrorist group.) In the article, Swamy asserts that “Muslims of India are being programmed by a slow reactive process to become radical and thus slide into suicide against Hindus.” He proposes a multi-step process to destroy Islamic terrorism that includes forcing all Muslims to “acknowledge that their ancestors were Hindus” in order to vote.

Subramanian Swamy also happens to teach economics at the Harvard Summer School, and used to be a member of the Harvard Department of Economics.

Subramanian Swamy, who teaches at the Harvard Summer School

The students’ petition notes that Swamy’s claims “disparage and cast suspicion on the entire Muslim community in India,” and calls on Harvard to “repudiate Swamy’s remarks and terminate his association with the University.”

A spokesperson for the university originally promised to give the matter “serious attention.” But after an outcry by civil liberties group Foundation for Individual Rights in Education, another Harvard spokesperson declared 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,” implying that the university would not take any action against Swamy.

Although I have signed the petition asking for Harvard to repudiate Swamy’s anti-Muslim assertions, I am also a firm believer in free speech and freedom of expression. Indeed, I believe that Swamy has the right to say, write, or publish anything he wants—including offensive remarks about Muslims.

However, this petition does not call for Swamy to be arrested, tried, banished, or silenced. It simply asks Harvard to discontinue its association with an offensive figure, noting that “Swamy’s comments cast doubt on his ability to treat a diverse community of students with fairness and respect.”

After all, Harvard University is a place of education first and foremost. Just as Harvard has the right to prohibit people from teaching who have demonstrated that they are unethical or simply ineffective educators, it should also dissociate itself from those who actively espouse discriminatory and dangerous views towards a group that makes up a significant percentage of the Harvard population.

Former President Larry Summers certainly acted well within his legal right to free speech when he noted that discrepancies in academic performance between women and men might be biologically based. However, the faculty and administration of the University decided that Summers’ remarks were inappropriate based on his position as a powerful force in the educational world; they pressured his resignation.

Harvard’s non-discrimination policy states that “Any form of discrimination based on race, color, … religion, … national or ethnic origin … unrelated to course requirements is contrary to the principles and policies of Harvard University.” Swamy’s stated views towards Islam surely color his interactions with Muslim students in his classes—I know that I personally would feel uncomfortable studying under someone who viewed my religion as institutionalized terrorism.

And whether or not Swamy identifies the religious backgrounds of the students in his classroom, he has already demonstrated his inability to treat those who disagree with him with respect: in an interview, he called the petitioning students “Communists; they are all pro-Soviet.”

Given his stated opinions, I cannot imagine that Swamy would treat all of his students with equivalent respect.

Harvard cannot interfere with its employees’ right to free speech. However, it must ensure that its students have a just and unbiased educational experience. Allowing Swamy to continue teaching at the Summer School compromises Harvard’s non-discrimination policy and the fair education of its students.

Photo credit http://professor-kannan.blogspot.com/2011/04/i-was-fortunate-to-attend-dr.html

Related posts:

Israel's New Security Dilemma
Sweat the Small Stuff
The Road to 1,144
New Faces in Washington: Meet the Senators (Part II)
  • Paul Schied

    Sandra, you say that “I know that I personally would feel uncomfortable studying under someone who viewed my religion as institutionalized terrorism.” I have to ask: would you really? Or would you march into his office and challenge his views? I know that many people would squirm in their seat and avert their eyes in such a situation, but I find it hard to believe that you would be one of them. I know that if some professor called my religion institutionalized terrorism I would jump at the chance to argue with him.

    More to the point of your post though, isn’t it somewhat of a leap to say that Swamy’s political views “surely color his interactions with Muslim students.”? Is it not possible to have a personal view on something and keep that view separate from your professional responsibilities? I feel totally comfortably saying that Green Bay Packers fans are pieces of garbage, but I’m confident that I could avoid discriminating against them in a professional or educational setting. If Swamy refuses to allow Muslims into his courses or harasses them in class, then I fully agree that he should be fired. But if he merely holds an unpopular opinion on something unrelated to his professorial responsibilities, then Harvard would be remiss to terminate his employment.

  • http://profiles.google.com/skornkob Sandra Korn

    Paul, I would probably feel very uncomfortable and THEN march into his office.

    Perhaps I fail to understand the depths of emotion involved in football fan-hood, but I find it hard to believe that even the most avid Patriots fan would call Packers fans “terrorists” in a newspaper and legitimately suggest disenfranchising them until they admitted to being Patriots fans. I have no evidence that Swamy has treated any Muslim student in a class with disrespect, but there also seems to be overwhelming evidence that he does not respect Muslims or Islam. It seems almost inevitable that some student will end up hurt, offended, or at the very least, uncomfortable, because of his stated opinions. (hell, if I were in Swamy’s class right now I would feel uncomfortable knowing that he had written an anti-Muslim piece in a major paper!)

  • R. Venugopal

    Swamy’s son in law is a Muslim and he has very good relations with him….The views he expressed are to be viewed in the context of the need to have a political strategy to combat terrorism…I am not aware that he called Islam institutionalised terrorism, neither did he ask Muslims to repudiate their religion….he only calls for Muslims to acknowledge that all Indians have a common ancestry and for the disenfranchisement of those who dont
    Now you can debate whether this is the right strategy, but there is no way you can argue that Swamy is a religious bigot who will treat Muslim students unfairly….
    Swamy is a maverick …but he is a professional to the core….
    It wouldnt matter much to Swamy should Harvard discontinue its association with him…Harvard would be the loser, in my opinion…

  • Pingback: Sandra Korn on Swamy’s Freedom of Speech « The Harvard Political Review

  • VD

    Respecting or not respecting is purely a right of individual. If you have an agenda to convert whole world in darul islam & Kill non beliver, No body respect you. To wipe out terrorism is anti muslim? So musli

  • R. Venugopal

    This is what Swamy wrote in his article:
    We need a collective mindset as Hindus to stand against the Islamic terrorist. The Muslims of India can join us if they genuinely feel for the Hindu. That they do I will not believe unless they acknowledge with pride that though they may be Muslims, their ancestors were Hindus. If any Muslim acknowledges his or her Hindu legacy, then we Hindus can accept him or her as a part of the Brihad Hindu Samaj (greater Hindu society) which is Hindustan. India that is Bharat that is Hindustan is a nation of Hindus and others whose ancestors were Hindus. Others, who refuse to acknowledge this, or those foreigners who become Indian citizens or those foreigners who become Indian citizens by registration, can remain in India but should not have voting rights (which means they cannot be elected representatives).
    I dont see any “hatred” or “lack of respect” for islam here for Islam here. I only see Swamy outlining emergency political measures to safeguard Hindu society which is under great danger from terrorism.
    By the way, we may recall that George W Bush, the former President of the United States went on record immediately after the 9/11 tragedy, that he would believe Pakistan’s sincerety about combating terror only after he saw some concrete actions. Swamy wants the Muslims to acknowledge their common roots as proof of their sincerety. .

  • R. Venugopal

    This is what Swamy wrote in his article:
    We need a collective mindset as Hindus to stand against the Islamic terrorist. The Muslims of India can join us if they genuinely feel for the Hindu. That they do I will not believe unless they acknowledge with pride that though they may be Muslims, their ancestors were Hindus. If any Muslim acknowledges his or her Hindu legacy, then we Hindus can accept him or her as a part of the Brihad Hindu Samaj (greater Hindu society) which is Hindustan. India that is Bharat that is Hindustan is a nation of Hindus and others whose ancestors were Hindus. Others, who refuse to acknowledge this, or those foreigners who become Indian citizens or those foreigners who become Indian citizens by registration, can remain in India but should not have voting rights (which means they cannot be elected representatives).
    I dont see any “hatred” or “lack of respect” for islam here for Islam here. I only see Swamy outlining emergency political measures to safeguard Hindu society which is under great danger from terrorism.
    By the way, we may recall that George W Bush, the former President of the United States went on record immediately after the 9/11 tragedy, that he would believe Pakistan’s sincerety about combating terror only after he saw some concrete actions. Swamy wants the Muslims to acknowledge their common roots as proof of their sincerety. .

  • Ketan

    I think there are two separate issues here: the right to freedom of expression (correlative to a duty on the part of the state, or educational institutions, or even people, to recognize that right and therefore not to interfere with speech within certain acceptable bounds), and the desirability of having an academic environment in which people can express their views without fear of reprisal. It seems to me that people have a right to free expression against their government. If there’s a similar right against educational institutions, it seems much weaker – hence the government would have been unjustified in prosecuting Larry Summers for making the comments he did, while Harvard could permissibly force him to resign for doing the very same thing. 

    So the question there is whether Harvard forcing him (and in this case Swamy) to resign would violate Summers’ (or Swamy’s) right – not whether Harvard should, all things considered, have forced him to resign. But that’s an important question in its own right. Certainly we don’t want educational institutions dismissing people whenever the express politically or morally unpopular views. But it does seem that there is a level at which a view can be abhorrent enough that it is desirable for an educational institution to fire its proponent. But where to draw the line is a hard question – advocating genocide certainly crosses the line, but does advocating the destruction of places of worship? I’m inclined to say yes, but I’m not entirely sure. (This is not to say I doubt whether Swamy is a bigot. Clearly he is.)

  • http://craniumcastle.com/user.php?login=nikitag&view=history Beth Rosas

    This post was very nicely written, and it also includes a lot of useful facts.

  • R. Venugopal

    A bigot, to put it simply, is someone who is intoerant of any opinions differing from his own. Often, people who have firm convictions are mistaken for bigits.  Swamy has firm views about Islamic terrorism but he is always open to debate the issue with people having differing views and indeed has done so in an India today conclave.  
       

  • Ramnarayan V

    this matter has to be viewed in the context of thousands of years of indian civilization.india is the birth place of several religions and hinduism which actually is not a religion accepts that there are more than one way of worship and all of these lead to god.therefore hindus cannot have any quarrels with those converted to christianity or islam. however, if any one claims his or her religion alone is the truest of the religions and all others need to be converted, or else killed,cannot live in harmony with the rest. mr swamy is only emphasising this point.what is wrong with it?

  • Paul Schied

    For the record, I’m a Bears fan, but that’s not important.

    My point was not that football and religion are the same. You say that there is “overwhelming evidence that [Swamy] does not respect Muslims or Islam.” I would respond by saying that, even if this is true, it does not mean that he necessarily discriminates against students. That is the only pertinent question here: is he discriminating against or harassing students? He does not need to intellectually respect all of the ideas and beliefs of his students. I don’t respect all of the views posted to this blog, but I make an effort to publish anything that fits the HPR’s standard of critical analysis.

    We have to think of the cost/benefit here. The benefit of firing Swamy is making ourselves (and our Muslim peers) more comfortable. The cost is chilling the speech of Harvard academics. To me, that cost is too high. Harvard promises its students and its community an open, honest intellectual discussion. It does not promise to make us comfortable. 

  • ShadrachSmith

    The problem with Islamist politics is that they demand that the government use its power to kill people for freedom of thought. That is a very bad thing…morally.

  • AKM

    Harvard is a center for fascists of the left. How can they allow a center for Islamic studies funded by Saudi money when what the Koran preaches is 1,000 times more hateful than what Swamy is saying. Harvard’s policy is that it is OK to preach / teach Islamic doctrine of hate, violence, and sexual perversion, but no intelligent discussion can be allowed which remotely resembles a criticism of Islam. Most of the leftist have a psychological problem. They want to believe that they are superior / more enlightened than others but actually they are people with defective intelligence and values. Poor Ms. Korn is a small pawn in the game played by mentally imbalanced liberal arts faculty of Harvard. I hope Ms. Korn will grow up some day from her juvenile and immature thinking. I have no such hope for Harvard professors. They are too old and too set in their ways.

  • Helping you grow up

    Sandra, you are showing your prejudice by implying that Dr. Swamy will be prejudiced aganist Muslims whereas the fact is that he has had many Muslim students with not one complain from any one. Please do not make up facts to support your prejudice. This is what the Germans did to jews! You are too immature to think that people can have an academic discussion — your personality is black and white, which is par for the course for all extreme leftists and all extreme rightists, for that matter.

  • JaiHind

    Sandra Korn is one of Bin Laden’s private whores.

  • JaiHind

    Beth Rosas likes to suck Saudi cock.

custom writing