Scholarly criticism, particularly from the political right, is too often mischaracterized as a threat to academic freedom, says Robert J. Lieber, a professor of government and international affairs at Georgetown University. "The problem is much less acute in some disciplines than in others," he writes, "but the resulting effects truncate the kind of critical engagement, or the sifting and winnowing of serious ideas, that best reflects the ideals of the university."
In Middle East studies, for example, denunciations of America's foreign policy from scholars on the left are common, says Mr. Lieber. Not surprisingly, he says, a good deal of professorial writing and speaking on those topics has been subject to criticism. In turn, many Middle East scholars "have complained about what they consider to be intimidation and threats to academic freedom."
Mr. Lieber says such "expressions of concern exhibit a great deal of hyperbole." As he writes, "Criticism of such judgments is fair game … Indeed, such criticism can even be unfair, but cases in which moderate, conservative, or right-wing criticism has led to genuine infringement on academic freedom—through censorship, punitive action, or dismissal—are very hard to find."
John J. Mearsheimer, of the University of Chicago, and Stephen M. Walt, of Harvard University, took plenty of flak for their essay in the London Review of Books last year criticizing the influence of "the Israel lobby" in American politics. But neither author's career was hurt by the criticism, says Mr. Lieber. In fact, the duo was offered a lucrative book deal to expand on the essay, he notes.
Similarly, he says, others point with alarm to the conservative activist David Horowitz's controversial book The Professors: The 101 Most Dangerous Academics in America (Regnery Publishing, 2006). But "whatever the merits or lack thereof in his critique, Horowitz's book is not taken seriously within the academy, and there exists little evidence that academic freedom has been infringed by his condemnations," says Mr. Lieber.
The scholars who experience real threats to academic freedom, he argues, are the ones "who do not share the dominant sympathies, ideologies, and beliefs" that characterize their discipline. Such scholars become "marginalized, often excluded, and thus isolated and even stigmatized," writes Mr. Lieber. "What is insidious about this marginalization," he says, "is that the ideas and writing of these scholars are less subject to critical engagement."
The article, "Sifting and Winnowing: The Uses and Abuses of Academic Freedom," is not online. Information about the journal is available through Blackwell Synergy.