From: "Nowlan, Bob" <RANOWLAN@uwec.edu> Date: Thu, 11 Sep 2008 10:18:47 -0500 Subject: In relation to the question of 'political neutrality . . .' Message-ID: <7A17A445D0203848B157E8D70D1AC77E46400D117D@CHERRYPEPSI.uwec.edu>
Friends, sfpj:
I've been working, on and off, in my own limited way, to insure that we
as well as students maintain maximum space for free expression and free as
sembly, including in relation to political positions we may identify or ali
gn with or represent, since about a week ago. As you likely know the UW Sy
stem has been working to make greater efforts that in the past to visibly a
nd audibly spread the word about the extent of legal restrictions that prev
ail in Wisconsin and affect what happens on UW campuses pertaining to polit
ical advocacy for candidates in contested, partisan elections. However, I
continue to maintain some concerns over the potential for a slippery slope
here if these restrictions are not read, interpreted, and enforced precisel
y and in the narrowly limited ways they are actually designed. So, for ins
tance, in _The Spectator_ article of today about this topic, a student, ide
ntified as a representative of the College Republicans, can be quoted, seem
ingly in alignment with statute, to endorse the position that 'political ne
utrality' is required of faculty. Which is not the case. A particular for
m of political advocacy for a particular kind of end at a particular time a
nd in a particular context is so restricted. I suggest that others too mi
ght want to monitor tendencies to overreach here and maintain a critical su
spicion about when and where and how and why as well as by whom emphasis on
this particular statutory matter is brought to our--and especially the pub
lic's--attention. See below my note to Teresa O'Halloran, UWEC Affirmativ
e Action officer, with a link to _The Spectator_ story.
Best,
Bob
________________________________
From: Nowlan, Robert A.
Sent: Thursday, September 11, 2008 10:06 AM
To: O'Halloran, Teresa E.
Subject: Just a follow-up
In re this story:
http://media.www.spectatornews.com/media/storage/paper218/news/2008/09/11/N
ews/System.Defines.Campaigning.On.Campus-3425379.shtml?reffeature=textema
iledition
Just as a follow-up to the one student's comment, although most of us recog
nize what is meant by these kind of restrictions, and how to work with them
, many fields of study today reject the possibility of ever being 'politica
lly neutral' (this is something which is, in other words, an illusion, a fa
lse and manipulative pretense, which is intellectually, ethically, and even
professionally irresponsible to pretend to promote or adhere to). But of
course that does not mean there is any need to promote particular candidate
s or ballot positions while carrying out the duties of one's professorial p
osition. The problem with the idea of 'neutrality' is broader--and deeper-
-than that. Let's put it this way--if I were to claim I was, or could be,
'neutral' about anything of any significance in any intellectual, professi
onal field I work in--critical theory, cultural studies, critical studies i
n cinema and media, gltb/queer studies, etc.--I'd be laughed at as absurd,
and everything else I had to say or write would be quickly and fully discre
dited. I just hope that the University will not put faculty in positions w
here they have to violate foremost premises, commitments, and practices of
the very fields of knowledge they are professionally trained and accredited
to represent in order to support this kind of restriction.
Bob Nowlan