For two years I have served at the University of Texas at Austin on the faculty
committee on “academic freedom and responsibility,” a pairing of concepts that
is common in higher education. While there is a fairly broad consensus on what
“freedom” means, competing conceptions of “responsibility” lead to two very
different ideas about the appropriate role for professors in public life.
On one side is the conventional (which tends to be cowardly), and on the other
is the principled (which tends to be progressive). Norman Finkelstein, the
controversial DePaul University political scientist, is in trouble because he
not only believes in, but puts into practice, this principled interpretation.
The conventional view is that professors should be free to investigate any
question and go in any direction the truth, as they see it, takes them. But in
speaking and writing publicly about their conclusions, faculty should be
responsible – which in practice usually means not upsetting people with real
power. Faculty who pursue esoteric, self-indulgent, and/or irrelevant research
generally will not be bothered (because no one really cares what they are
doing), nor will those whose conclusions about relevant subjects are in line
with views of the powerful (because their work helps reinforce the structures
of power).
The principled view is that faculty members – who have an extraordinarily
privileged position in society, being paid to learn and convey that learning to
others, with considerable autonomy that is rare in this corporate-capitalist
economy, at a more-than-livable wage – have a responsibility to pursue
research addressing relevant questions that are meaningful in the lives of real
people, especially the most vulnerable struggling for justice. That kind of
research is likely to lead to trouble (because it challenges the prerogatives
of the powerful to rule as they please).
In other words, academics pursuing their work in responsible fashion (in the
principled sense) are the most likely to be labeled irresponsible (in the
conventional sense).
Such is Finkelstein’s fate.
The controversy over Finkelstein’s tenure case at DePaul puts on public display
the clash of those conflicting definitions of responsibility. He is an
accomplished scholar (many who disagree with his Finkelstein’s conclusions
acknowledge the quality of his research) and a superb teacher (even his
detractors acknowledge his classroom skills). The political science department
voted 9-3 and the college committee 5-0 in favor of tenure. But the College of
Liberal Arts dean then wrote a letter undermining those endorsements, which
suggests that the strong support for Finkelstein among his peers may be ignored
by the university’s top administrators, who are expected to decide in June.
By the promotion standards of universities such as DePaul, Finkelstein clearly
deserves the job security that comes with tenure. But we all have a stake in
his fate – if we want universities to be a place where critical thinking is
encouraged.
Finkelstein has been a provocative scholar since graduate school, when he dared
to critique Joan Peters’ 1984 book From Time Immemorial, a fraudulent attempt
to discredit Palestinian claims to their land occupied by Israel. Displaying
considerable courage in the face of those happy to use Peters’ book to justify
undermining the legitimate aspirations of the Palestinian people, Finkelstein
challenged the bogus factual claims of the book and embarrassed those in the
political and academic establishment who had praised the book.
From there, Finkelstein has pursued research not only about the
Israel/Palestine
conflict but the Holocaust and the politics of reparations. His recent books and
public comments have only increased the numbers who would like to silence him
and the intensity of those campaigns. Finkelstein’s critique of the work of
Alan Dershowitz has upped the ante; the media-savvy Harvard law professor has
made it a point to torpedo Finkelstein’s career.
I have never met Finkelstein, though I did once interview him over the phone for
a radio program I produced about Middle East issues. I have listened to, or read
transcripts of, interviews with him, and I find him contentious but consistently
insightful. I have read his well-researched and well-reasoned books on the
Middle East and found them helpful in my work. I’ve concluded that Finkelstein
is (1) probably not temperamentally suited for the role of a facilitator or
mediator, and (2) unquestionably a first-rate intellectual doing important work
to bring to light sometimes harsh truths about the way power is exercised in
this world.
In short, Finkelstein is using his academic freedom responsibly.
Yes, he is polemical in public, sometimes harsh toward opponents, maybe even a
bit cantankerous at times, which leaves me wishing Finkelstein were a colleague
at my university. If I were a student at DePaul, I would sign up for any class
he was teaching. We could use more like him in academic life.
When personnel decisions at DePaul are made next month, if Finkelstein’s name is
not on the list of those granted tenure it will be no doubt a difficult day for
him and a tragic one for anyone who cares about free and responsible
intellectual inquiry.
In the United States there are fewer and fewer spaces where truth-telling is
possible. Electoral politics has become a poll-driven, sound-bite enterprise.
Mass media specialize in the superficial and shallow. Universities, though
dominated by corporate money and the corporate mentality, still provide one of
the few remaining spaces for open and honest engagement. Protecting that space
is important not only for those of us in the privileged position of faculty,
but for the society more generally.
If Norman Finkelstein is denied tenure by DePaul, it won’t be because he was
irresponsible but because he took his responsibility too seriously. If he is
denied tenure, the loss will be not only Finkelstein’s and DePaul’s but also
the larger project of real academic freedom and responsibility.
Jensen is also the author of The Heart of Whiteness: Race, Racism, and White
Privilege and Citizens of the Empire: The Struggle to Claim Our Humanity (both
from City Lights Books); and Writing Dissent: Taking Radical Ideas from the
Margins to the Mainstream (Peter Lang). He can be reached at
rjensen@uts.cc.utexas.edu and his articles can be found online here..
Writings 
For two years I have served at the University of Texas at Austin on the faculty
committee on “academic freedom and responsibility,” a pairing of concepts that
is common in higher education. While there is a fairly broad consensus on what
“freedom” means, competing conceptions of “responsibility” lead to two very
different ideas about the appropriate role for professors in public life.
Subscribe to this comment's feed
