As the United States prepares for its midterm elections, debates over whether professors and academic organizations should engage in politics have intensified. In an opinion article published by Inside Higher Ed, John K. Wilson argues that political expression is central to academic freedom rather than an exception to it.
Wilson points to criticism of the American Association of University Professors after it endorsed political candidates for the first time in its century-long history. He maintains that the organization has a responsibility to oppose politicians and legislation that threaten academic freedom, arguing that political endorsements can represent a direct expression of its core principles.
The article also challenges the view that academic freedom exists only to shield scholarship from politics. Wilson cites Tammi Rossman-Benjamin, director of the AMCHA Initiative, who criticized the AAUP’s endorsements and the Middle East Studies Association’s report on nearly 200 alleged cases of retaliation against university employees over pro-Palestinian speech and activism, most of them outside the classroom.
According to Wilson, protecting scholarship requires defending scholars’ ability to express political ideas without retaliation. He argues that academic freedom contains no exception for political activism and has historically been used to protect professors whose views were unpopular with those in power.
The article traces this principle to several historical cases. In 1894, the University of Wisconsin defended Richard Ely’s right to express views supporting the labor movement and teaching about socialism. Wilson also cites the dismissals of Edward Bemis from the University of Chicago, Edward Ross from Stanford University and Scott Nearing from the University of Pennsylvania. He says these cases influenced the AAUP’s 1915 Declaration of Principles, which extended academic freedom beyond teaching and research to include controversial political expression outside the classroom.
Wilson further criticizes efforts to challenge “political” scholarship, including questions posed in an Aug. 3 letter associated with the Trump administration’s Compact 2.0 initiative. The letter asked colleges how they would promote intellectual pluralism, address ideological imbalance and ensure that scholarship remained focused on advancing knowledge.
The author argues that political and social goals are not inherently contrary to scholarship. He says universities should encourage intellectual pluralism while rejecting attempts by administrators or government officials to determine which political or social perspectives are legitimate. In his view, efforts to suppress political ideas threaten academic freedom, intellectual diversity and institutional neutrality.
Sources: Inside Higher Ed.