versus Academic Freedom Author(s): Arthur O. Lovejoy Source: The American Scholar, Vol. 18, No. 3 (SUMMER 1949), pp. 332-337 Published by: The Phi Beta Kappa Society Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/41205209 Accessed: 23-03-2015 16:52 UTC

Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp

JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact [email protected].

The Phi Beta Kappa Society is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to The American Scholar.

http://www.jstor.org

This content downloaded from 192.12.13.14 on Mon, 23 Mar 2015 16:52:27 UTC All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions Communismversus Academic Freedom ArthurO. Lovejoy

The question here under discussionis a society,is to furnishto othermen the re- specificand limitedone. It is not the ques- sultsof the investigationsof disinterested tionwhether the CommunistParty should expertsin the severalprovinces of thought be "outlawed,"or its membersbe denied and knowledge.The existenceof the pro- the ordinaryrights of citizenship.That is fessionrests upon the assumptionthat it is a questionwhich concernsall citizensas useful,and even needful,for societyto citizens,and it will be settledby thepolitical maintainsuch a body of trainedinvestiga- and judicial processes of constitutionaltors, and to be informedas to the con- democraticgovernment. The questionis clusionswhich they may individuallyor certainlynot whethercommunism in the collectivelyreach. Society, therefore, is not - purely economic sense the completely gettingfrom the scholar the particular serv- centralizedgovernmental control of pro- ice whichis the principalraison (Tetre of - ductionand distributionis a worse or a his calling,unless it gets from him his bettersystem than competitive private en- honestreport of whathe finds,or believes, terprise.The issueto be consideredin this to be true,after careful study of the prob- symposiumrelates to educationalinstitu- lems with which he deals. Insofar,then, tionsonly: Are theresufficient reasons for as facultiesare made up of men whose holdingthat adherentsof the Communist teachingsexpress, not the resultsof their Partyshould be excludedfrom the teach- own researchand reflectionand that of ing bodiesof schoolsand universities?The theirfellow-specialists, but ratherthe opin- presentcontribution to the discussionwill ions of other men- whetherholders of be stillfurther limited to the questionas it publicoffice or privatepersons from whom concernsuniversities. I shall contend that - endowmentsare received- just so far are irrespectiveof the answersto be givento colleges and universitiesperverted from any of the other questionsmentioned - theirproper function. This, of course,does thereare cogentreasons against admitting not meanthat experts are infallible,or that membersof the Communist Party in Ameri- othermen are under any compulsionto ca to universityfaculties. But to make accepttheir conclusions. It meansonly that thosereasons clear it is necessaryfirst to one specificand (it will be admitted) considerwhat kind of institutiona uni- highlyimportant organ of the intellectual versityis, forwhat ends it exists,and what lifeand rationalprogress of thecommunity is prerequisiteto the performanceby pro- cannotfunction at all unlessit is leftfree fessionalscholars of thespecific social func- to functionby its own method- whichis tionassigned to them. the methodof open-mindedinquiry and The distinctivefunction of universityof frankand unhampereddiscussion, car- teachersand of the institutionsin which ried on by men dedicatedto the scholar's they serve, in the economy of modern life and speciallytrained in the disciplines to whichthey devote themselves.* O ARTHUR O. LOVEJOY is now profes- sor emeritusof philosophyin JohnsHopkins University.He initiatedin 1913 the move- *This paragraphwas writtenin 1920and printed mentfor the of the American in the Nation of thatyear; it is the morepertinent organization here Associationof UniversityProfessors, was the because it was thenmade the basis of a criti- first of the its cismof the trusteesof an Americancollege for ac- secretary Association, president from a an endowmentfor a in 1919, and has beenchairman or a member cepting "capitalist" specialprofessorship to be devotedto showing"the of manyof itscommittees to investigatecon- fallacies of socialism and kindred theories and ditionsaffecting academic freedom and tenure practices."I havenow added onlythe words "hold- in individualinstitutions. ersof publicoffice." 332

This content downloaded from 192.12.13.14 on Mon, 23 Mar 2015 16:52:27 UTC All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions AMERICAN SCHOLAR FORUM

This, I suggest,is what may be called systemessentially similar to that which the basic "philosophy"of academicfree- now existsin the . dom. Such freedomis not morenecessary 3. That systemdoes not permitfreedom for the communityat large thanfreedom of inquiry,of opinion,and of teaching, in general- of speech,of the press,of reli- eitherin or outsideof universities;in it the gion,of politicalaction. But for universities, political government claims and exercises and forthe guildof scholars,it is literally the rightto dictateto scholarswhat con- vital;without the Luft der Freiheitthey clusionsthey must accept, or at leastprofess cannotexist as universitiesand as mem- to accept,even on questionslying within bersof thatguild. It is no luxurygenerously theirown specialties - for example, in philos- grantedby therest of society to a privileged ophy,in history,in aestheticsand literary classof eccentricscalled professors; for if it criticism,in economics,in biology. is indispensableto themfor the carrying 4. A memberof the CommunistParty is on of the taskallotted to them,and if the thereforeengaged in a movementwhich performanceof that task is itselfindis- has alreadyextinguished academic freedom - pensablein a civilizedsociety, then the in manycountries and would if it were maintenanceof the scholar'sintellectual successfulhere - resultin the abolitionof freedomshould be a matterof concernto such freedomin Americanuniversities. all enlightenedmembers of society.But the 5. No one,therefore, who desiresto main- protectionof thisessential condition for the tainacademic freedom in Americacan con- dischargeof theirfunction is for scholars sistentlyfavor that movement, or give in- in universitiesa primaryand special con- directassistance to it by acceptingas fit cern.It is as muchan obligationas a right. membersof the facultiesof universities, Freedomof teachinghas been won, to the personswho have voluntarilyadhered to considerabledegree in which it has been an organizationone of whose aims is to won in all reputableinstitutions, by a long abolishacademic freedom. and hard struggle,and everynew threat Of thesefive propositions, the first is one to it should encounterthe determinedof principle.For thosewho do not accept resistanceof theentire academic profession. it, the conclusion does not follow. The argu- Now one reasonwhy I thinkthat mem- mentis addressedonly to those who do bers of the CommunistParty should not acceptthat premise. The second,third and be appointedto universityfaculties is that fourthpropositions are statementsof fact. I hold thisbelief in the indispensabilityof I submitthat they cannot be honestlygain- academicfreedom. Yet I findother pro- said by any who are acquaintedwith the fessedbelievers in it who draw fromthat relevantfacts. With respectto the second, belief preciselythe opposite conclusion. it willbe notedthat it doesnot say thatthe From an identicalpremise, contrary con- Americansection of the CommunistParty sequencesare inferred.I must therefore try seeks to overthrowour presentform of to stateas clearlyas I can the argument government"by forceand violence."That whichappears to me to showthat the em- is at leastdenied by mostAmerican Com- ploymentof Communistteachers is inimical munists;it is not directlypertinent to the to academicfreedom. It is a very simple specificissue of academicfreedom; and, at argument;it can bestbe put,in the logician's the date of writingthis, it is a question fashion,in a seriesof numberedtheorems: which is before the Federal courts for 1. Freedomof inquiry,of opinion,and judicial determination.But whateverthe of teachingin universitiesis a prerequisite,means by which AmericanCommunists if the academicscholar is to performthe proposeto accomplishtheir end - whether functionproper to his profession. by peacefulor (if a favorableopportunity 2. The CommunistParty in the United arises) by violentmethods - no one who Statesis an organizationwhose aim is to reads the manifestoesand publicationsof bringabout the establishmentin thiscoun- the Partycan have any doubt about the try of a politicalas well as an economic natureof the end. It is to set up in thç 333

This content downloaded from 192.12.13.14 on Mon, 23 Mar 2015 16:52:27 UTC All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions THE AMERICAN SCHOLAR

UnitedStates a systemmodeled upon that that the Mendelian - gists-namely, theory, of the SovietUnion a so-called"dictator- thebasis of all modernscientific genetics, is ship of the "(in reality,of a a "bourgeoisdeviation" not to be tolerated. Partycommittee) in accordancewith the It is thissort of régimethat an American principlesand programset forthin the Communistis committedto defending,and writingsof Lenin and Stalin.And those wouldintroduce into the United States. Any- writings,as well as the actual practiceof professionalscholar of whomthis is trueis theSoviet government, make it abundantly disloyalto the spiritof scienceand to one clearthat the system admits no limitto the of the mostbinding obligations of his pro- authorityof the one-partystate not fession,and should have no place in an merelyto restrictfreedom of thoughtand Americanuniversity. expressiongenerally, but also positivelyto It will perhapsbe objectedthat the ex- prescribeto writersand scholars,including clusionof Communistteachers would itself universityteachers and members of research be a restrictionupon freedom,of - opinion institutes,what opinionsthey must profess and of teaching wz., of the opinionand and teach. teachingthat intellectual freedom should be The casesof Nicolai Vavilovin genetics abolishedin and outsideof universities;and and of Varga in economicsare the best- that it is self-contradictoryto argue for knownevidence of this;they are farfrom the restrictionof freedomin the name of being the only examples.The formeris freedom.The objectionhas a speciousair doubtlessalready familiar - at all eventsit of but it is in factan - logicality, absurdity. should be to readersof The American The believerin theindispensability of free- Scholar fromthe article(in the Saturday dom,whether academic or political,is not Reviewof Literature,December u, 1948) therebycommitted to the conclusionthat theeminent by Russian-American geneticist it is hisduty to facilitateits destruction, by ProfessorH. J.Müller; but it is pertinentto placingits enemiesin strategicpositions of recalltwo sentencesfrom this article, whose power,prestige or influence.Those enemies author was himself,before 1937, senior oftenargue in just thisfashion: we (they geneticistin the Instituteof Geneticsin sometimesare frankenough to tellus) will Moscow: "Certainit is thatfrom - 193601 if or insofaras we have the power- put Sovietgeneticists of all rankslived a lifeo an endto thefreedom in which believe; terror.Most you of thosewho were not im and you,just because you believein it, can or were prisoned,banished, executed, forced in consistencydo nothing(except talk, so to enterother lines of work"- or publicly longas you are allowedto talk) to stopus. to recant the "errors"into which their But theconception of freedomis notone own researches,and thoseof theirfellow- which impliesthe legitimacyand inevita- specialists,had led them. bilityof its own suicide.It is, on the con- Has theAmerican Communist Party eve trary,a conceptionwhich, so to de- denouncedthis of terrorin say, reign science finesthe limit of itsown applicability;what or repudiatedthe whole authoritariancon it impliesis thatthere is one kindof free- ceptionof the State whichwould permi domwhich is inadmissible- the freedom to politicalfunctionaries, having no trainin* destroyfreedom. The defenderof or in the sciences liberty competence upon whicl of thoughtand speech is notmorally bound theypronounce, to compelinvestigators ii to enterthe fightwith both hands tied be- thosesciences to teach what,as scientists hindhis back. And thosewho would - deny theyknow to be false or else?The Com suchfreedom to others,if have munist - - theycould, Party avows or boasts that it no moralor logical basisfor the claimto membersare subject to an "irondiscipline" enjoythe freedom which would mustfollow the they deny. they "Partyline"; and the Anyonewho would set up such a claim CentralExecutive Committee of the Com mustcome into court"with clean munist of the hands"; Party SovietUnion has now but no one who is lendingaid to an inter- officiallydefined the partyline for biolo- nationalpolitical movement which has al- 334

This content downloaded from 192.12.13.14 on Mon, 23 Mar 2015 16:52:27 UTC All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions AMERICAN SCHOLAR FORUM readydestroyed the freedom of universitiesof "capitalistsociety" and makinglife un- whereverit has attainedits objectives,and pleasantfor the bourgeoisie(including his mustbe expectedto do so whereverit may colleagues). A writerin the CoTmnunist attainthem in the future,can come into (1937), RichardFrank, says: "Only when the academiccourt of equity with clean teachershave really masteredMarxism- hands. Leninism,will theybe able skillfullyto in- It is, then,first of all, to safeguardaca- ject it into theirteaching at the leastrisk demicfreedom that members of the Com- of exposureand at thesame time to conduct munistParty should be excludedfrom uni- strugglesaround the schools in a truly versityteaching positions. They are allies Bolshevikmanner." In short,a Communist of themost threatening enemy of thatfree- teacherin a schoolor a universitymay be dom now existingin the world; and, even expectedto be in fact,first and lastand all thoughat presentthey have no prospectof the time,a secretpropagandist and an in- suppressingit in America,they cannot be defatigableintriguer in the interestof the dependedupon to carryon theirprofes- one cause to which he is devoted.Such sionalactivity in a freeinstitution by the personsare hardlyideal membersof teach- methodand in the spiritof the scientific ing bodies. investigator.If theyare consistentand de- The second consequencewhich follows votedparty members, the conclusionsthey from the fundamentalconviction of the expresswill conform to theshifting dictates Communistis therejection of thegenerally - - of theparty line whichis to say thatthey acceptedcode of morals.Lenin wrote and will not be conclusionsresulting from the his followersnaturally act accordingly- freepursuit of knowledge,uninfluenced by that"morality is entirelysubordinate to the extraneouspressures and irrelevantmotives. interestof the class war. . . . Communist - But thoughthe first and in itselfsuf- moralityis identicalwith the fightfor the ficient- reasonfor exclusionis the incom- consolidationof the dictatorshipof the patibilitybetween political communism and proletariat."Conspicuous among the "bour- loyaltyto academicfreedom, there are other geois" virtueswhich the properlyindoc- reasonsnot less conclusive.To understand trinatedCommunist thus discards are can- them,it is necessaryto readthe authoritative dor and veracity.When it will servethe statementsof the party and its leaders on the cause,mendacity is notonly permissible but obligationsof partymembership, and also to a duty;"it is necessary,"as Leninelsewhere appreciatethe actual temper generally char- wrote,"to use any ruse,cunning, unlawful acteristicof its members.A sincereCom- method,evasion, and concealmentof the munist- and of the burningsincerity of truth"which can helpto hastenthe triumph mostof themthere can be no question- be- of the cause. Now truthfulnessis, doubt- lieves,as theprotagonists of theParty have less,not universally and conspicuously char- taughthim to believe,that the one supreme acteristicof politiciansof any party.But it end,to whicheverything else mustbe sub- is a virtuewhich ought to be peculiarly ordinated,the glorious consummation of all esteemedand cherishedin universities.In humanhistory, is theworld revolution. The the professionalcode of the scholar,the valueof thisend is in hiseyes so greatthat man of science,the teacher,the firstcom- the use of any meanswhich seem likely mandmentis: Thou shalt not knowingly to promoteit is not only justifiedbut misrepresentfacts, nor tell lies to studentsor obligatory. to thepublic. Those who notmerely some- From this convictiontwo consequences timesbreak this commandment, but repu- result.The firstis thatany positionwhich diate any obligationto respectit, are ob- he mayhold - in a school,a tradeunion, or disqualifiedfor membership in any - viously any other organizationis conceived by body of investigatorsand teacherswhich himas primarily,not to say solely,instru- maintainsthe elementaryrequirements of mentalto this end, to be used eitherfor professionalintegrity. proselytizingor for troublingthe waters To say thesethings is notto say thatthe 335

This content downloaded from 192.12.13.14 on Mon, 23 Mar 2015 16:52:27 UTC All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions THE AMERICAN SCHOLAR

economicand even the politicaldoctrines that they do not desire,and would not, of communismshould not be presented evenif theyhad thepower, introduce here and freelydiscussed within academic walls. the authoritariansystem of one-partygov- To treat them simply as "dangerous ernmentwhich exists in the SovietUnion, thoughts,"with which students should not with its negationof both academic and be permittedto have any contact,would politicalfreedom. They belongto theParty, give rise to a plausiblesuspicion that they theywill perhapssay, because they believe are taboobecause they would, if presented, merelyin the economicdoctrine and the be all too convincing;and out of thatsus- (professed)ultimate social ideals of com- - picionyoung Communists are bred.These munism a "classlesssociety" in whichthe doctrines,moreover, are historicalfacts; for law of distributionwill be "fromeach ac- betteror worse,they play an immensepart cordingto his ability,to each accordingto in the intellectualand politicalcontrover- his need." I shall believethem when, and siesof thepresent age. To denyto students only when,they prove by acts as well as meansof learningaccurately what they are, wordstheir genuine opposition to thewhole and of reachinginformed judgments about politicalsystem of the U.S.S.R.; and this them,would be to failin one of themajor proofwould requireof them, other - among pedagogicobligations of a universityto things,a frankpublic admissionthat both enablestudents to understandthe worldin intellectualand politicalfreedom are ruth- which they will live, and to take an in- lesslysuppressed under that system, and a telligentpart in its affairs.All departmentspublic denunciation of such suppression;a ofeconomics or of politicalscience, or both, demandthat the Party condemn as undemo- shouldoffer coursesin whichthe principal craticthe program of a "dictatorshipof the writingsof Marx,Engels, and the contem- proletariat,"with its denialof the rightof porarytheorists of communism are read, and politicalagitation and actionto all but one theirreasonings and those of theiroppo- party;and an insistencethat the American nentsare closely analyzed,discussed and partydeclare, and show by itspractice, that evaluated,under instructors learned in the it acceptsno obligationto subjectits policies literatureof thesecontroversies, and capable to the "Partyline" as prescribedby Mos- of dealingwith it in the cool and critical cow,or by anyinternational organization. of temper the manof science.An essential I shouldnot anticipate that, if any Ameri- partof such coursesshould be an examina- can partymembers should in goodfaith tionof communismin give practicein theSoviet such evidenceof loyaltyto the principles and of its and Union, program methodsin of intellectualand politicalliberty, they internationalrelations. From timeto time, would have a veryhappy time with their membersof theCommunist Partyshould be "comrades."For they would conclusively invitedto speakbefore students; but they convictthemselves of the heresiesof "re- should be introduced,not as unbiasedand visionism"and "right-deviationism,"and objective investigatorsof economic and align themselveswith the DemocraticSo- politicalproblems, but as cialists-who,to thetrue of Lenin - partypropagan- disciples dists andpropagandists of a partyof which and Stalin,are even moreodious than the all members are expectedby it to adhere unabasheddefenders of "capitalism."What strictlyto the partyline of the moment, is certainis thatsuch heretics,if such as laid down a any by groupof politiciansin are,for reasons of expediency, whose evident temporarily Moscow, and admittedmo- tolerated,do notcontrol the Party; but that, tive is to increasethe power of the party by theirnominal adherence to it, methods theygive organizationby any (including furtheranceto aimsof which(if theirpro- suppressionand misrepresentationof facts) testationsare honest) which seem to they deeply disap- them serviceableto that prove.The only convincingevidence that purpose. they do not share those aims would be There I are, suppose,some American resignationfrom the Partyand abstention membersof the Party who will protest fromany assistance to it. 336

This content downloaded from 192.12.13.14 on Mon, 23 Mar 2015 16:52:27 UTC All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions AMERICAN SCHOLAR FORUM

All the foregoingrelates to futureap- Communistdoctrine and practice,arc you pointmentsto Americanuniversity facul- willingto give proofthat you do so by ties.There remainsthe question,raised in resigningfrom the Party? - the Universityof Washingtoncases on A negativeanswer to the firstquestion whichI have been askedto comment- as would be evidenceeither of almostincred- to what should be done with respectto ible ignoranceor (moreprobably) of false- presentmembers of facultieswho are on hood; eitherwould be sufficientground for permanenttenure. The issue of present removal.Affirmative answers to all theother Party membershiparose clearly only in questionswould eliminateany legitimate two of thethree cases. In one of the cases, groundsfor dismissal,so far as the instant the evidencewas conflicting,and the dis- casesare concerned; negative answers to any missalwas apparentlybased on differentof themwould justifydismissal. Since I do alleged grounds.In the two others,both not knowwhat answers would be givenby teachersfrankly admitted present mem- thesetwo teachers, I cannot express an opin- bershipin the CommunistParty. There ion aboutthe proprietyof theaction taken are, however,some indications,in the withrespect to themby the University;I rathersummary report of the testimony can only regretthat (so far as the record publishedby the University,that they are thusfar published shows) the questions were "Communists"of the unorthodoxsort re- not put. ferredto in the precedingparagraph. Un- In thethree other cases, in whichthe only fortunately,it does not appear that the substantiatedcharge was thatof pastmem- crucialquestions which would have elicited bershipin the CommunistParty, it is grati- theiractual positionswere expresslyput fyingto findthat this was not heldto be a to them:(i) Are you awarethat the polit- groundfor dismissal.The Administrative ical programof the CommunistParty is Code,in enumerating"the reasons for which the setting-upof a one-partydictatorship, persons having tenure may be removedfrom and that,wherever it has attainedpower, it the facultyof the University,"did not,by has establishedsuch a dictatorship,in which any naturalinterpretation of its language, both academic and politicalfreedom are includesuch membershipamong those rea- suppressed?(2) Do youreject this program, sons; and the well-groundedAmerican and will you publiclydeclare that you re- aversionto ex post facto legislationpre- ject it? (3) Do you also rejectthe teaching vailed in the decisionof thesecases. The of Lenin (stillto be foundin currentParty Boardof Regents,however, in my opinion, publications)that a partymember should, actedunwisely and unfairlyin imposingan whenit will servethe interest of themove- unnecessarystigma upon these teachers, who ment,resort to "any ruse,cunning, unlaw- admittedlyhad voluntarily withdrawn from fulmethod, evasion, and concealmentof the the Party some years earlier,by putting truth"?(4) If you rejectthese features of themon probationfor two years.

The Mandarinsand the Pariahs Max Lerner

O Recentlyassistant to the publisherof PM, Readingthe reports of thefaculty commit- afterthat columnist on theNew YorkStar, and tee and the Presidentin the Universityof now on the New York Post,MAX LERNER cases,I could not escape the was of scienceat Williams Washington professor political disquietingsense of imperfectmen (as all College from1938 to 1943.Mr. Lerneris the heretics Mind and of us are) excommunicatinggodless authorof Ideas forthe Ice Age, The withbell and book and candle.And thereis Faith of JusticeHolmes and, most recently, Actionsand Passions. a grimand somewhatbreathtaking note in 337

This content downloaded from 192.12.13.14 on Mon, 23 Mar 2015 16:52:27 UTC All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions