Why is speech silver and silence golden?
Freedom of expression is integral to any education institution so that free and open discussions can take place without fear of being silenced or interrupted for holding different views. This is the deliberative aspect of democracy- where the space for holding respectful and meaningful debates includes all and widens worldviews. The gruesome murder of Samuel Paty, a history teacher in a quiet suburb of Paris, last Friday afternoon (16 October) strikes not only at the heart of liberal and secular freedoms but also at the epicentre of learning - “the classroom”.
Teaching Freedom of Expression
About five years ago, I was teaching a small group students on: “what the so-called clash of civilization thesis (Islam vs West) does to liberal values like the freedom of expression?” To inform this discussion, I talked about the attack on the Charlie Hebdo office (2015) and I showed some of the controversial cartoons of the Prophet published in 2006 that led to this incident. I selected the ‘milder’ ones as some of the cartoons could be rather offensive even to those who were not practicing Muslims. Equally, I also showed cartoons from the International Holocaust Cartoon Competition - the Iranian newspaper Hamshahri’s satirical take on Zionism and response to Charlie Hebdo’s interpretation of freedom of expression.
While the students were engaged in a lively discussion, I noticed from the corner of my eye two students talking to each other. Soon, they left the classroom. I didn’t question them, I never do, as they have the freedom to leave if they are unwell or need the restroom. At the end of the class, the same students returned and they complained to me that they found the lecture very offensive. I should not have shown the cartoons of the Prophet, they said. I held my ground as an academic, and very politely asked them why they felt offended, when our discussion was taking a clear stance against Islamophobia and the selective interpretation of freedom of expression by some Western newspapers. Their response was that it was offensive to their religious sentiments. To this comment, I replied that, “well, then you should have said that. And I would definitely have given you the space to speak. This is a university, and we are committed to ensure that all our students feel that they can express their identity, their viewpoint without inhibition and without being silenced by others.” I also told them, that this is a ‘safe space’ but tomorrow they would be in the real world with more hostile and vociferous viewpoints. The seminar was therefore a good opportunity to hone their debating skills, and hold up their view in a deliberative manner, I explained. The students, seemed convinced with what I said. And we left amicably, and in fact one of them continued on my other modules.
Yet, somehow, once I returned from the classroom to my office in the department, I was a bit shaken. Did I go wrong? Maybe, I should have been more careful in a multicultural classroom in London? I had taken the same lecture in Surrey and Berlin before but there was no such reaction there. I spoke to one of my colleagues, who is a expert on student relations. He assured me that I was right and I had conducted myself very well. He mentioned that some students could hold their religious beliefs very strongly, but in general all academics in the university were inclusive and many did not hesitate to condemn extremist views of any form.
When I heard of the fate of Samuel on the radio, I was imagining how he would have conducted his class. He did warn students that the images could be offensive (something I started doing only after the incident). Perhaps, he just wanted to have an open discussion on “freedom of expression” without hurting anyone.
Why is Freedom Expression under threat at Universities and Schools
What is “freedom of expression”? And why is it becoming more precarious at schools and universities in UK, France or indeed in India. There are number of reasons for this, and indeed the wider political context of right wing populism, Islamophobia, abuse on social media, Trumpism (is that even a word?) is unhelpful. However, there are more specific reasons related to our education sectors:
Silent ‘students’ in Schools: Recently the UK government produced two contradictory legislations. In 2019, The UK Higher Education Authority, in charge of UK universities launched a guidance to protect lawful free speech and empower students and universities. Meanwhile, the Department for Education in charge of UK schools just a few weeks ago advised schools NOT to teach any extreme political views, including anti-capitalism, as this goes against the freedom of expression. What this means is that for a good 12 years the schooling system disciplines students around norms of ‘silence’ and when they enter a university they don’t have the language or the skills to ‘speak’ in a deliberative environment. Students of different faiths, race, ethnicity, political views should not just have the space but the essential skills to hold a meaningful and respectful discussion. Silence breeds violence, especially the violence of abuse on social media.
De-radicalising the ‘Academic’: Universities for some time have been struggling to preserve their autonomy against forces of markets and illiberal governments. Hungary’s Central European University, India’s Jawaharlal University are the most vivid respondents of these changes. Within this struggle, the distinction between an academic and teacher has become less evident. Yes, both are in the job of pedagogy but they are not just providing a stipulated service. They are scholars who can develop, introduce and inspire radical views. The French Revolution, English Radicalism, the Young Bengal movement would not have charged for ‘reform’ without the radical teacher-student exchanges Henry Derozio, Albert Mathiez would have had in their 19th century classrooms. Today, in India, academics who hold left leaning views are called ‘urban naxals’-a derogatory oxymoron used to belittle their political agency to couch-potato activism and to warn of the dangers of their teaching.
Knowledge-making in the virtual classroom: Finally, where is knowledge made and distributed? It is not in the library of shelves and books. Why did some students in Samuel Paty’s class feel the need to share what happened in their class with people who had nothing to do with it? Why did they discuss their ideas of “what is right and wrong” outside the class?. A generation, perhaps, more comfortable in virtual worlds of posts, comments, tweets, whatsapp groups, fake videos and misinformation. Within this context how do we keep the sanctity of the classroom at school or university? How do we tell our students that there are multiple truths to embrace, but there are lies disguised as truths that kill? Knowledge today is floating like ether, it is everywhere but not in our grasp for long.
Je suis Samuel, because the classroom, the teacher, the student must be protected to save democracy, education, freedom!
