THE WAR ON ACADEMIC FREEDOM
Big Brother in the Ivory Tower following approval of H.R. 3077
by Nirit Ben-Ari
Since 1965, the US Department of Education has funded programs in American
universities under Title VI of the Higher Education Act. Title VI has
provided grants to promote area and international studies centers, as well
as Foreign Language and Area Studies (FLAS) grants. This year the House of
Representatives moved to revisit the old act and revise it according to
"national security" needs. The new International Studies in Higher
Education Act (H.R. 3077), approved on Sept. 17, 2003 by the House
Subcommittee on Select Education, in effect re-writes Title VI. It has
since been passed by the full House.
An "Advisory Board" to Monitor the Classroom
The new Act would create an oversight "advisory board" that will link Title
VI funding to students training for careers in national security, defense
and intelligence agencies and the foreign service. The 11 members of the
new International Education Advisory Board are to be appointed in
consultation with "homeland security" agencies. The board has the mandate
to dictate curricula, course materials assigned in class, and the faculty
who are hired in institutions that accept Title VI funding. The board would
make recommendations to make sure programs under Title VI reflect national
needs related to homeland security.
Edward Said no, Bernard Lewis yes
In preparation for the rewriting of Title VI, on June 19, 2003, the House
Subcommittee on Select Education held a hearing on "International Programs
in Higher Education and Questions about Bias." It's worth quoting Dr.
Stanley Kurtz of the Hoover Institute, whose influential testimony and
recommendations at the hearing translated into the revised act. He focused
in particular on post-colonial theory and the work of Edward Said, in which
(he said) "Said equated professors who support American foreign policy with
the 19th century European intellectuals who propped up racist colonial
empires. The core premise of post-colonial theory is that it is immoral for
a scholar to put his knowledge of foreign languages and cultures at the
service of American power." He also sited Arundhati Roy, Robert Fisk and
Tariq Ali as examples to texts being taught that need to be balanced with
authors such as Bernard Lewis and Samuel P. Huntington.
Higher education in the service of "national security"?
Kurtz expounded in the hearing: "We know that transmissions from the
September 11 highjackers went untranslated for want of Arabic speakers in
our intelligence agencies. Given that, and given the ongoing lack of
foreign language expertise in our defense and intelligence agencies, the
directors of the Title VI African studies centers who voted unanimously,
just after September 11, to reaffirm their boycott of the NSEP [National
Security Education Program], have all acted to undermine America's national
security, and its foreign policy. And so has every other Title VI-funded
scholar in Latin American, African and Middle Eastern Studies who has
upheld the long-standing boycott of the NSEP... Congress can insure that our
defense and intelligence agencies have access to well-trained linguists by
redirecting the twenty million dollar post-9-11 increase in Title VI
funding to the Defense Language Institute. The Defense Language Institute
would then be in a position to fund scholarships for college graduates to
do advanced language training, leading to full time jobs in our defense and
intelligence agencies."
The new act is expected to be taken up by the Senate in January.
Links:
http://inthesetimes.com/comments.php?id=488_0_2_0_C
http://edworkforce.house.gov/press/press108/09sep/hr3077psub091703.htm
http://inthesetimes.com/comments.php?id=488_0_2_0_C
Kutrz testimony
Current Issue