How academics dodge the blame

“As authoritarian forces rise worldwide, academics are quick to blame politicians. LSE HE Blog Fellow Tamas Ziegler dismantles three myths that let scholars off the hook As authoritarian pressures mount on universities worldwide, a familiar pattern emerges: academics distance themselves from responsibility for what’s happening to their institutions. The blame is placed entirely on external political forces, while internal compromises, accommodations, and bad faith decisions remain unexamined. This collective self-exoneration rests on several comforting myths about academic life under autocratic pressure. These myths allow scholars to avoid confronting uncomfortable questions about their own choices, their institutions’ complicity, and the ways academic cultures themselves enable authoritarian encroachment. Below, I examine three of the most persistent myths and argue that until academics acknowledge their individual responsibility in sustaining these illusions, universities will remain vulnerable to authoritarian sway. Myth #1: Blame it on the government This myth offers an appealing narrative, and it’s not entirely without foundation. Governments do bear responsibility for constraining universities under autocratic rule. However, in many cases we find that scholars are complicit. For example, since 2010, Hungary has systematically dismantled the independence of its top universities and research institutes. By seizing assets, installing government loyalists to lead these institutions, and founding pseudo-academic institutions , the state has effectively traded academic freedom for political control. While some academics resisted, others became complicit under financial and professional pressure. This long-term assault has hollowed out the country’s intellectual life, subverting academic institutions to politics. For example, at the University of Debrecen, authorities granted Vladimir Putin an honorary title in 2017, only revoking it years later on a technicality rather than moral grounds. The headquarters of Magyar Tudományos Akadémia (MTA), the Hungarian Academy of Sciences Similarly, senior scholars at the Hungarian Academy of Sciences supported the government’s seizure of their own buildings , while university senates approved the transfer of eleven institutions and billions in assets to Orbán-linked public foundations. This multi-pronged attack has effectively traded scholarly integrity for political alignment. While collective action occasionally secured victories, such as the successful defence of international relations programmes in 2015, many subsequent protests were weakened by internal collaboration. When governments demand certain actions of universities, academics and their boards and senates have the right to refuse such demands. Leaning too heavily towards power and money is not a morally justifiable position. Academic leadership requires a willingness to sacrifice status for principle. Senior management must uphold the standards of academic freedom even at the risk of their own removal. Yet, the burden does not rest on them alone; if a government moves to purge critical leaders (such as the Trump administration attacking Ivy League and other universities in the US), the scholarly community’s complicity with such demands is a betrayal of their own institutional autonomy. One could find positive examples, though. For instance, in 2019, when the Bolsonaro administration attempted to slash funding for sociology and philosophy departments, the academic community organized massive nationwide protests that forced the government to restore funds and abandon its defunding plan. This indicates that resistance to authoritarianism is a collective moral obligation, not just an individual sacrifice. Myth #2 Attacks on academia come only from the political right It is not only the authoritarian right that undermines academic freedom, mainstream academia often downplays the role of other groups – and even offers well-reasoned arguments about the danger of viewpoint diversity. The swing towards authoritarian liberalism stems from decisions made by individuals within universities under the guise of academic freedom. Hegemonic departments and faculties did not emerge out of nowhere: they were built by individual academics that inspired a cult-like following. Conformism has been promoted by people within academia. In some countries such as the United States, there also exists an activist, authoritarian leftist environment that arguably poses a threat to free academic inquiry. This mentality has also spread to Europe. At my own institution, just a few weeks ago, an Israeli professor from Hebrew University was shouted down and prevented from giving his lecture on diversity in Israeli society. Against this backdrop, we need a consensus on pluralism within academia. Scholars such as Tyler J. VanderWeele and David Horowitz have presented proposals that could be good starting points for further discussions. Implementing such principles could bring us closer to a Magna Charta Libertatis Academicae , where scholars and academic citizens accept the foundational value of intellectual diversity. Myth #3: Scholars should leave moral integrity at the door My final myth is a strange idea: that academics should avoid divisive topics, stay out of politics , and focus solely on their scholarly pursuits. This idea is based on a version of the Humboldtian ideal, which imagines scholars as distant observers analysing society without taking sides. However, we cannot build a democratic academic environment without scholars defending the moral principles that underpin our societies. We cannot fight authoritarianism by remaining silent. In the 21st century, our role as academics is undergoing a change: scholars’ voices are becoming weaker, while others, such as activists, influencers and celebrities, are taking over. If scholars retreat from the public sphere, we are effectively surrendering our institutions to authoritarians. The so-called elegant scholar, who only shares opinions in private and tailors views depending on the audience, is actually a craven figure. It is the personal responsibility of academics to find forums where they can engage with society and communicate our positions effectively to the public, rather than only in copyright-protected journal articles hidden behind paywalls. Of course, this does not mean professors should become activists within the classroom – but I believe we have a responsibility outside academia as well. The risk to all academia In these three myths we can see a failure of individual responsibility. And this should serve as a warning to all of us: we have a duty to uphold academic integrity, and if we fail in this, we become complicit in the consequences that follow. Authoritarianism will not stop at our doors, and if we capitulate, we risk losing our own academic freedom, not just that of those we have failed to defend. Main image: Wally Gobetz on Flickr This post is opinion-based and does not reflect the views of the London School of Economics and Political Science or any of its constituent departments and divisions. The post How academics dodge the blame first appeared on LSE Higher Education .

Summary generated from the RSS feed of LSE Higher Education Blog. All article rights belong to the original publisher. Click through to read the full piece on blogs.lse.ac.uk/highereducation.