Concerns have been raised for academic freedom and community relations after scholars engaging in public discourse on Gaza and Israel's colonial-settler state violence come under fire.
I think the Dean was troubled by what had taken place and wanted to put matters right. More generally the problem is that the New Zealand state does not respect academic freedom, press freedom, or political freedoms in general, as you, Jon Stephenson, Nicky Hager and many others can attest from their own experiences. New Zealand institutions, including the media and academia, lack the fierce belief in democracy that is necessary to inspire one to defend basic political rights and freedoms. I put that down to colonialism and the insidious influence of the monarchist system. Others may have different explanations, but regardless of the causes of political intolerance in this country, in the end New Zealand will have to open up to rational and constructive political dialogue. "Mick Hall In Context" is an important move in that direction, for which we can thank you - and perhaps also the apparatchiks at RNZ?? : )
New Zealand universities have always been vulnerable to political pressure. When I graduated from Canterbury university with the only 1st Class Honours degree in my year, I assumed that I would be given the Schlich Memorial Prize for "Best Forestry Student". Wrong. It went to a fellow student who gained 2nd Class Honours and the explanation given to me was that he was an accomplished rugby player, which the faculty thought should be recognized along with his academic achievements. I accepted that, but years later the Dean confided in me that the real reason was that the NZ State Forest Service (as it was at the time) had demanded that I not be granted the prize because of my publicly professed republican beliefs. “Plus ça change, plus c'est la même chose“.
As for the IINZ website, Dr Sheree Trotter is recorded as having posted 33 articles for a sum total of zero comments. Is it the case that no one is interested in what she has to say, or is it that IINZ doesn't want to encourage any kind of reasoned debate?
That's a shocking admission by the Dean Geoff, but I guess we should never be surprised about how much political reach these reactionary elements have.
I think the Dean was troubled by what had taken place and wanted to put matters right. More generally the problem is that the New Zealand state does not respect academic freedom, press freedom, or political freedoms in general, as you, Jon Stephenson, Nicky Hager and many others can attest from their own experiences. New Zealand institutions, including the media and academia, lack the fierce belief in democracy that is necessary to inspire one to defend basic political rights and freedoms. I put that down to colonialism and the insidious influence of the monarchist system. Others may have different explanations, but regardless of the causes of political intolerance in this country, in the end New Zealand will have to open up to rational and constructive political dialogue. "Mick Hall In Context" is an important move in that direction, for which we can thank you - and perhaps also the apparatchiks at RNZ?? : )
New Zealand universities have always been vulnerable to political pressure. When I graduated from Canterbury university with the only 1st Class Honours degree in my year, I assumed that I would be given the Schlich Memorial Prize for "Best Forestry Student". Wrong. It went to a fellow student who gained 2nd Class Honours and the explanation given to me was that he was an accomplished rugby player, which the faculty thought should be recognized along with his academic achievements. I accepted that, but years later the Dean confided in me that the real reason was that the NZ State Forest Service (as it was at the time) had demanded that I not be granted the prize because of my publicly professed republican beliefs. “Plus ça change, plus c'est la même chose“.
As for the IINZ website, Dr Sheree Trotter is recorded as having posted 33 articles for a sum total of zero comments. Is it the case that no one is interested in what she has to say, or is it that IINZ doesn't want to encourage any kind of reasoned debate?
That's a shocking admission by the Dean Geoff, but I guess we should never be surprised about how much political reach these reactionary elements have.