Paul Alivisatos is president of the University of Chicago: Students demanded that we side against Israel, violating the core principle of institutional neutrality.
It’s sad that he shut it down for any of the false reasons mentioned. It was peaceful. “disruption”, what if Charle Kirk or Trump were giving a speech on campus and they were being disrupted, I’m sure they would not have shut it down. They shut it down for one reason, they don’t like free speech that upsets rich donors.
Old Spartan
2 years ago
Good for him for getting the protest shut down. And compare this result, and this statement, to the disgraceful actions and commentary by Northwestern University and George Washington U. Students are not in charge. They are not free to disrupt whenever and whenever they please. And there should be repercussions to those who caused the problems.
Suppose the protesters had no demands on the university. Then, the principle of institutional neutrality would not have been at issue, but it still would have been appropriate to shut down a demonstration that violated rules and disrupted the campus. I like the concept of institutional neutrality, but I think his reasoning is inadequate.
JackBolly
2 years ago
What Mr Alivisatos didn’t mention were the faculty involved in the campus disruption – these employees should be subject to discipline upto and including termination.
A largely unasked question is becoming glaring: Is Illinois doing all it should to use artificial intelligence to make government cost less and work better? So far, the evidence says no.
It’s sad that he shut it down for any of the false reasons mentioned. It was peaceful. “disruption”, what if Charle Kirk or Trump were giving a speech on campus and they were being disrupted, I’m sure they would not have shut it down. They shut it down for one reason, they don’t like free speech that upsets rich donors.
Good for him for getting the protest shut down. And compare this result, and this statement, to the disgraceful actions and commentary by Northwestern University and George Washington U. Students are not in charge. They are not free to disrupt whenever and whenever they please. And there should be repercussions to those who caused the problems.
Suppose the protesters had no demands on the university. Then, the principle of institutional neutrality would not have been at issue, but it still would have been appropriate to shut down a demonstration that violated rules and disrupted the campus. I like the concept of institutional neutrality, but I think his reasoning is inadequate.
What Mr Alivisatos didn’t mention were the faculty involved in the campus disruption – these employees should be subject to discipline upto and including termination.