VII
The main elements of academic freedom are securely
established in those
countries which recognize and
respect the principles of intellectual and
political free-
dom. Academic freedom does not
exist in dictatorship
countries, or in countries which practice thought-
control. This suggests that while
academic freedom has
its own special characteristics, it is invariably part
of
a larger pattern of human freedom. Furthermore, just
as the other
rights which modern man claims are sub-
ject to
the manifold pressures of a complex, problem-
ridden, changing world, so does the right to academic
freedom
encounter powerful pressures which weaken
or challenge the concept, and
indeed, on some occa-
sions and in some
places, threaten its very existence.
Some difficulties result, in the United States, from
the very structure of
the system of higher education
which is, in reality, no system at all.
There is no na-
tional ministry of education,
and the role of the na-
tional government in
education at all levels is largely
limited to making and administering
financial grants.
For the public institutions the power of control
rests
in the fifty state governments, and in the governing
boards
created by these governments. For the private
institutions the power of
control rests in the boards
of trustees. Some measure of conformity with
minimum
general standards is achieved through the several re-
gional accrediting associations, and through
the efforts
of national professional associations in specialized
schools and colleges, such as those of law, medicine,
pharmacy,
architecture, and journalism. But on the
whole, variety and local control
are the central features
of the American system of higher education. While the
spirit of localism may serve to insulate problems, in-
cluding violations of academic freedom, it
also encour-
ages a chaotic tendency for the
locally autonomous
institution to proceed on an
ad
hoc basis free from the
restraining influence of centralized standards
of per-
formance. The still very
considerable administrative
power of the typical American college or
university
president, exercised locally in a self-defining sit-
uation, gives a willful or determined man
great scope
in which to operate with respect to his institution's
personnel.
In varying degrees throughout the world, the pro-
fessor's academic freedom is often under pressure from
all sorts
of external forces—political parties and fac-
tions, politicians, economic interests, religious
groups,
patriotic organizations, racial and national origins
groups,
and many others. In most institutions the influ-
ence of alumni and private donors is persistent and
may be very
weighty. In many countries, and especially
in the United States, there is a
wide-spread, latent
anti-intellectualism in large segments of the
population
which, under certain conditions, may contribute to the
outside pressures which challenge or weaken the aca-
demic freedom of the teachers. In a broader sense it
may be
noted that, in the nature of their calling, pro-
fessors deal with new ideas, and it is often painful to
work
with new ideas in areas where popular values
are deeply entrenched.
Furthermore, the remarkable
expansion of the social sciences in recent
years has had
the result of involving professors more and more with
public issues on which large segments of the population
are deeply divided.
Such issues as those involving war
and peace, labor relations, regulation
of the economy,
public ownership, and basic political change are
likely
to be highly combustible.
During the period following World War II the out-
standing political fact on a global scale was the pro-
tracted Cold War between the communist and
demo-
cratic communities of nations,
particularly between the
United States and the Soviet Union. The severe
pres-
sures generated by the Cold War
exerted a profoundly
disturbing impact upon educational institutions. In
the
United States the Cold War led to the imposition of
various forms
of loyalty oaths, which many professors
regarded as invidiously insulting
to them, to legislative
investigations, and sundry purges. In addition,
and
again particularly in the United States, the post-World
War II
period witnessed an agonizing conflict over race
relations, and the
colleges and universities were deeply
involved in situations growing out of
this conflict. In
many institutions the freedom of professors to take
sides in this struggle was sharply challenged, and ad-
ministrative reprisals were by no means unknown.
Many
censure actions of the American Association of
University Professors, for example, were by-products
of
tensions generated by the race issue.
Finally, all over the world, the decade of the 1960's
was a time of serious
student dissatisfaction and unrest.
In many places student dissent ripened
into disruption
and violence, and led to stern measures on the part
of
institutional administrations and governments. There
were large-scale
police actions at such distinguished
institutions as the University of
California in Berkeley
and Columbia University in New York, and
massive
military intervention against students in such cities as
Paris, Mexico City, and Tokyo. The academic freedom
of the institution as a
whole was inevitably drawn into
the maelstrom of issues which large-scale
student vio-
lence created.
Like so many other freedoms, academic freedom is
experienced unevenly in the
contemporary world. It
is securely established in some countries, and
scarcely
exists in others, and in between the extremes it exists
in
varying degrees of amplitude and security. Where
academic freedom is
well-defined and respected, the
teaching profession understands that the
principle pro-
tects the professor against the
devastating conse-
quences of arbitrary
dismissal. It is recognized that the
teacher can be dismissed only for
adequate cause, as
established in a proceeding which measures up to
the
requirements of due process, including a hearing before
a tribunal
consisting of his academic peers. It is well
understood that the security
of the professor depends
not so much upon the substantive definition of
what
constitutes adequate cause, as upon the procedures
which are
followed. That proper procedure is an in-
dispensable element of justice in the life of the state
is a
commonplace observation. Proper procedure is
equally essential if academic
freedom is to remain a
viable concept.
