Odds are you haven’t heard of Ttile VI of the International Studies in Higher Education Act of 2003 – but if it passes the Senate, it’ll be an enourmous loss for academic freedom and free speech.
It already passed the House last fall (it’s bill number is H.R. 3077 – follow that link and then click on “printer friendly display” to read the bill’s text), and is expected to come up in the Senate soon. If it becomes law, what Title VI will do is creat an “International Higher Education Board,” which will review International Studies programs at universities and reccomend to the Secretary of Education and Congress which programs should continue getting grants.
According to Stanley Kurtz, a proponant of Title VI,
So goverment appointees will review academic programs to decide if they’re patriotic enough to continue recieving funding. So much for free speech.
Since this bill, if passed, is expected to come down hardest on academic critics of Israel, most of the American Jewish lobbying organizations are in favor of it. Even so, there’s been some opposition. From The Forward:
“This bill is bad both on its merits and because of the way it makes us look,” said a senior official with a major Jewish organization, who spoke on condition of anonymity.
Controversy over the bill burst into the open last month at the annual assembly of the Jewish Council for Public Affairs, a consultative group that brings together 123 local community relations councils and 13 national Jewish agencies, most of which support the bill. A resolution supporting the bill was proposed, but not approved, at the parley, after Harvard law professor Alan Dershowitz, speaking from the podium at one of the sessions, described the legislation as a “far-right-wing effort underway to allow for governmental monitoring of Middle Eastern studies at American universities.” […]
Opponents of the bill say that an advisory board made up of political appointees will become partisan and therefore ideologically motivated. The advisory body will be composed of “people who want to engage in a witch hunt,” said Rashid Khalidi, who directs Columbia University’s Middle East Institute.
Proponents counter that the board will not dictate criteria for objectivity and balance, but merely serve as a “repository for complaints,” said the ADL’s Lieberman, although it will be in a position to recommend withdrawing funds from problematic grantees.
Further reading: op-ed in The Jewish Journal; comment from the ACLU.
But don’t bother looking for a comment from FIRE, the right-wing group that likes to pat itself on the back for protecting campus free speech. As of today, months after the House passed H.R. 3007, FIRE still hasn’t said a word about it. When they say they’re against censorship, they’re apparently not including censorship from the right.
UPDATE: Go read Juan Cole’s blog for a more detailed, informed anti-Title-VI post. Juan also has suggestions for writing or faxing your senator. (Link via Raznor in the comments.).
Juan Cole has written about this here and it includes reasons why this is also bad for national security.
The link for the bill itself leads to a defective web page.(It doens’t display on my IE or Netscape. ) Are there other good links to read bills?
Based on Raznor’s link and information Amp posted, sounds like at best the bill would create and fund an advisory board that does nothing. That’s my interpretation of their claim the board would act only as a “repository of complaints”. In this case, we waste government money on something pointless.
At worst, this advisory board will trample on freedom of speech. In this case, we use government money to creep our way toward fascism. This sounds like the more likely outcome.
Not a good bill.
Two things.
One, I wish people would realize countries/nations/nationalities/ethnic groups/religious groups/any groupings of people are not the same as the individuals who happen to be grouped into them. Happen to – significantly.
Two, regarding the fascist-ization of our government: I found out while traveling last week that at Newark Airport (otherwise known as Liberty International Airport with unbelievable irony,) immigration processing now includes retinal scans for foreign nationals coming in without immigrant visas. As far as I know, these aren’t done for everyone yet – but I think it’s still really disturbing. And kinda pointless too… For one thing, what database of retinal scans of known and especially of unknown criminals is there to compare the tourists’ scans with?
lucia: unfortunately, that’s just the way the LOC works – their links never stick around – you’ve got to go to the main website
http://thomas.loc.gov/
& then type in HR 3077 in the Bill Number search field…. you’ll get a couple of entries – choose the latest
LiL: retinal scans? are you sure? i only ask because the FBI only recently got its national fingerprint database functional & running – like you mentioned, i’m wondering whether they’ve actually amassed a similar (& working) database of retinal scans… i’m not skeptical that they would *want* such a database – just that they actually have the tech to do so
lastly, i realize it all depends on yr definitions but i tend to think this government went fascist a long time ago – let’s ask someone who knows:
“Fascism should rightly be called Corporatism
as it is a merge of state and corporate power.”
-Benito Mussolini
jam,
Mussolini is going to paint a nicer picture on fascism than what it entails because he’s fascist. But I don’t believe him. When Democratic leaders start getting jailed, like as happened in Franco’s Spain, for example, I’ll be willing to call America Fascist.
jam: yes, retinal scans. I mean, what else can it be when you look into a thing that shines a light in your eye and then they take a picture? They did it to the person I was traveling with – I have the good fortune to travel in possession of a green card so I am in the club…
Raznor: I agree, I can’t quite call America fascist yet – not until we can’t sit around talking, in blogs, on the street, wherever, as freely as we do. However, corporatization is a good point – that and campaign finance practices have pretty much killed free speech in the news already. Not surprising that academia is the next target, where free speech is in a tenuous state already because of current hiring practices/constraints – and where administrators behave in increasingly corporate ways – as if it was a reasonable expectation that universities should turn a profit.
LiL: wow, retinal scans… the future is now, no? i guess they are building the database as we speak….
Raznor: you’re absolutely right – i was being simplistic – we aren’t living in fascist Germany or Mussolini’s Italy here in US – however, i do believe that the collusion of state & corporate power has reached a degree never before seen in history (& while Mussolini might find this a nice picture, i certainly do not) – i have been wondering lately how to think about such terms as fascism when national borders no longer mean what they once did
union leaders & other democratically-minded folks in other countries are jailed & murdered all the time – more & more often this happens when they engage in actions that anger or threaten US corporations &/or interests – take Coca Cola in Colombia for example
what is the relationship between these incidents & the freedoms some of us here in the US enjoy? can it be said that such freedoms are predicated upon the maintenance of fascist (&/or overtly oppressive) conditions in other countries? & if so, what does that mean for understanding terms like “democracy” (if this is what we’re assuming we have here in the US)? these are some questions that have been bumbling about in my head lately…
lastly, i do not believe that the freedoms in the country are enjoyed by one & all – free speech, for instance, is not enjoyed by all – we might not be living in a fascist state, & yes we haven’t seen any Democrats put in prison yet (tho why they would be is beyond me – not many of them voice any kind of real opposition to what’s going on) – but i do know of people who have been beaten, shot, & imprisoned for voicing their political beliefs – we don’t hear about them as often because they aren’t rich white men on the floor of congress but i believe they matter all the same – the recent police violence in Miami is a good example, as is the case of Camille Viveiros (who luckily finally won his case, but not until after a long & expensive legal battle) – again, if our democracy is one that only allows freedoms to a certain class or sector of society, how does this alter our understandings of what democracy means?
i realize that you may have a very specific definition of fascism in mind, & i would be very interested in hearing it – i am trying to figure these things out & clear definitions always help…
Me, I think Amerikkka’s been fascist since Day 1 of its existence…..
That’s one of the reasons I am a (gasp) one-worlder fem-symp commierad anarchist. Fuck nation-states!!!
Long thoughts that I’ll try to make concise because I don’t have much time:
I think we in America really don’t know what it’s like to be genuinely oppressed. That’s a good thing. Although there is abuses of power and general anti-democratic underpinnings that are becomin alarmingly normal (Guantanamo, PATRIOT Act, etc.). But these are not universal, so I hesitate to say we have a totalitarian system, which I believe to be central to any Fascist state.
So we should be thankful we’re still in a Democratic, non-totalitarian state. But that is not to say that we shouldn’t be alarmed by a growing move to totalitarianism. The Bush Administration, while still democratic, acts in a way that is bizarre to non-totalitarian regimes, in that they are intensely secretive and are governed by a pure Machiavellianism that has not been seen in mainstream politics since the founding of the country.
Anyway, I have works to do. I might post about this in my own blog, but if you’re interested, here’s my thoughts on the growing influence of the religious right I wrote a couple months ago.
hmmm… i’m hesitant about responding – first, we’re not really “on topic” anymore (tho we could easily swing it back in that direction: Israel/US support/censorship at home/etc.) – but also, i just went to check out Raznor’s website & i see that he is in the final week deadline of writing a thesis, so i’m sure he doesn’t really have the time to engage in an extended discussion (btw, his essay on the religious right is definitely worth reading)
but i guess i’ll post my main thought, in case anyone wishes to continue this: Raznor writes that “we in America really don’t know what it’s like to be genuinely oppressed” – i think that’s true in some ways, at least insofar as it pertains to those of us posting on blogs & the like – i’ve been smacked around by the cops before, but i wouldn’t say i’ve ever experienced genuine oppression – however, i think a good case could be made that there are many people (millions in fact) in the US who have more than a passing familiarity with genuine oppression
i’d be interested in hearing where folks would draw the line concerning what constitutes totalitarianism – i agree with Raznor that what we have in the US is not a totalitarian system – as he points out, whatever oppression exists in this country is not yet “universal” – but, barring universality, when does the level or frequency of incidents of oppression become such that we would stop referring to them as exceptions to the rule, so to speak, & begin to see them as the rule itself? & again, what becomes of our understanding of terms like totalitarianism when viewed past the fiction of national borders? given the power of such entities as the WTO/IMF/etc. is there a point at which we would begin to speak of a global totalitarianism?
pdm: re: “fuck nation states!” – i’m right there with you – i tend to regard nationalism as one of the bigger problems facing the world today – i was wondering if you could elaborate on the term “one worlder”? i’m unfamiliar with it
note to the Alas A Blog moderators: if i’m veering too far off-topic, feel free to tell me – i’m new to all this blog stuff & i couldn’t find a policy or guideline on your site – cheers
I am dissappointed that a bill that could effect virtually every college in the country has gotten so little attention from the major media.
The Bill is a threat to Academic Freedom. The house pass the measure by a voice vote. I believe we should know who in Congress supports the bill and who doesn’t.
Do we really want this type of goverment monitoring.
Any one who supports this bill, opposes Academic Freedom?
Pingback: Brayden King
Pingback: scribblingwoman
Pingback: Arete
Pingback: Arete
Pingback: Arete
Pingback: Arete
Pingback: scribblingwoman
Pingback: Arete
Pingback: Geekery Today