The freedom to criticize our leadership is cherished. This professor should never have been suspended for legitimate and legally protected behavior. I hope she seeks legal remediation for this.
The chancellor was texting about her to the lt gov’s chief of staff, as per the article. That’s fairly damming – there’s no legitimate reason for the lt gov to get involved with a university professor.
There’s also no legitimate reason an opioid expert should be weighing in on political topics in a lecture. That’s not what the people taking her course payed for.
I’m as left as they get- but I’d be pissed too if she was lecturing on political bias. And that’s IF she even was.
If you read the guardian article, students barely remembered the lt gov being mentioned, and it was in the context of medicine, which the lt gov has made a habit of inserting himself into.
Also: A professor criticizing an elected official wrt their specialty is how the system is supposed to work. Experts ought to call out bullshit when they see it. An elected official using their office to silence that critique is gross at best and unworthy of our democratic ideals
I’m not even necessarily on the other side of whatever argument you want to make. I just was pointing out that it didn’t make sense. I am also not going to put words in your mouth and try and extrapolate what you truly meant.
No, this is false. That way lies fascism. Anyone with expertise, academics included, has a responsibility to call out elected officials who are acting badly or advocating bad policies.
Elected officials have a responsibility to the people, one of which is to not punish private citizens for speaking their mind.
I mean holy fuck. Abuse of power doesn’t get much more obvious then this.
Many many disciplines in academia discuss current events, society and politics. Universities (and those they educate) provide valuable research and data that governments should use to help guide their decisions and policymaking.
Also, in a free society government shouldn’t be able to crack down on academics (or anyone) for being critical. Thats is free and healthy democratic society 101.
Second, in this case, it was an expert on the opioid crisis pointing out that the lt. governor had made policies that made it harder for people with opioid addiction to get help or be safe without being prosecuted. And that naturally this had the effect of people not pursuing treatment that could potentially land them in legal trouble. She wasn’t commenting on the personal life of Dan Patrick, she was commenting on his policies and the consequences of those policies on a subject that was the topic of her lecture and her field of research.
I think that some (most) professors have far too much leeway and impunity to do almost whatever they want, which can and has created many issues within higher education. I also think that topic should be talked about far more than it is. But if you can’t see the issue with this story, I don’t know what to tell you.
Texas has policies regarding opioids, its treatment of people with addiction and it’s enforcement of drug laws that directly contribute to the crisis. For example, Lt. governor Dan Patrick is responsible for laws that remove protections for people seeking help with addiction, which naturally results in fewer people seeking help. His office is currently stalling a bill (that passed in the Texas House) to declassify fentanyl test strips as drug paraphernalia. These decisions obviously have an impact on the opioid crisis, which was the topic of her lecture.
From the article:
According to one student who asked to remain anonymous for fear of retaliation from the school, some students wondered if it was when Alonzo said that the lieutenant governor’s office was one of the reasons it’s hard for drug users to access certain care for opioid addiction or overdoses.
A second student who also asked to remain anonymous for the same reason said Alonzo made a comment that the lieutenant governor’s office had opposed policies that could have prevented opioid-related deaths, and by doing so had allowed people to die.
A third student who also spoke on the condition of anonymity said Alonzo talked about how policies, like the state’s ban on fentanyl test strips, have a direct impact on the ability to prevent opioid overdoses and deaths. A push to legalize the test strips died earlier this year in the Patrick-led Senate despite support from top Republicans, including Abbott.
Much of research is supposed to inform the public about issues and risks that we face as a society and examine the effects of decisions, including political decisions.
I have ties to this university, and I asked my colleagues who are still there. It sounds like professors at A&M are really shaken by this revelation and the other brouhaha around the failed hiring of Kathleen McElroy. I wouldn't be surprised if professors start abandoning the university in droves.
I have a colleague who works at a state school in Florida who said at an online virtual panel a few months ago that "the Great Resignation" had her institution down 30% of all staff/faculty roles because of COVID. I audibly gasped hearing that. But also, she's dead wrong - that isn't the COVID Great Resignation anymore, that's the consequence of DeSantis eroding professor autonomy and tenure protections in the state of Florida. Texas appears soon to repeat these issues.
I misread that 30% as 3% at first, and was like, "That's not so ba...oh. OH. Oh shit."
The thing is, to folks like DeSantis, that's probably a good thing. They don't want people to be educated. They want to scare off anyone who might challenge the points of view they want taught. Chilling effects like this are a bonus to them.
I fully clutched my pearls when I heard that 30% figure. You just simply cannot run a large state, public university to scale when you're down that many critical staff members. Something is suffering there.
I go back and forth whether it's really the case that politicians like DeSantis are big-picture minded enough to actively downgrade the quality of education across a state like Pol Pot did in Cambodia, to discourage critical thinking and increase dogmatic loyalty. Instead, I think it's more likely that people like DeSantis are myopically cruel and just want to hurt a subset of people so badly that they don't see the larger consequences.
Anyway, regarding Texas A&M, it's quickly about to no longer be the largest university in America in the next two years. The former president was so unpopular there and she introduced such huge changes to the institution (a big reason why I left) that they just can't be undone with a new university president. This is such a mess that I can't imagine who on God's green earth will take on this role. Chancellor Sharp is unlikely to hire anyone with a spine to dissent to him and the good ol' boys who exert quiet influence over the school. And anyone with half a lick of ethics and integrity is going to see the institution as radioactive at this point. I can't help but predict that only grifters will self-select into the president's chair. A&M is going to race itself to the bottom.
when the Texas Department of Public Safety offered to install a chain-link fence near the riverbank last year, they welcomed the idea. The fence even had a gate with a lock so Hugo could continue fishing on the river
...
state troopers began patrolling the riverbank and National Guard members sped through their property to reach the river. Then came the rolls of concertina wire that cut off their access to the river altogether.
The other conclusion I drew from the article is that Republicans don't want to witness their cruelty first-hand. The Republican woman who helped the pregnant immigrant injured by the concertina wire responded with compassion. They'll do that when it's right in front of them. But so long as the cruelty is happening far away, to people they don't know and can't see, it's fine.
texastribune.org
Oldest