A transcript of a message from President Kornbluth to the MIT community can be found here. Overall, the message appears to be accurate, although I personally believe that encampments that violate content-neutral rules should be removed promptly:
Hello, everyone.
As you are likely aware, campus communities nationwide are grappling with conflicting opinions regarding the war in the Middle East – and MIT is no exception.
I want to share my perspective on the current situation and what I believe is at stake.
On Sunday night, around 30 students set up approximately 15 tents on the Kresge lawn. They displayed signs – some critical of Israel, some expressing support for the Palestinian people, and demanding that MIT sever research ties with Israel. They have consistently voiced their commitment to these beliefs.
From the beginning, this encampment has clearly violated our procedures for registering and reserving space for campus demonstrations – rules that are unrelated to content and are in place to ensure freedom of speech for all.
Throughout the week, more tents have been added. The students have at times been noisy, but the situation has remained peaceful. For example, after the first day, the protestors agreed to limit noise after 7:30 pm, considering that other students are focused on end-of-semester assignments.
However, there have been rallies with bullhorns and loud chanting. Some chants have been interpreted by members of our community as advocating for the elimination of Israel. Other chants have been particularly troubling to me.
I believe these chants fall within the realm of protected speech, according to our principles of free expression. However, as I have emphasized before, there is a distinction between what we have the right to say and what we should say as members of a community.
What sets this situation apart from past protests is the presence of two opposing groups on campus, both experiencing grief and in stark disagreement with each other. These opposing loyalties extend to faculty and staff as well.
To prevent further escalation, we are closely collaborating with our Student Life team, faculty members advising the students, and our campus police. As a precaution, MITPD is on-site 24/7 at my direction.
The situation is fluid, but that is the current scenario.
Senior leaders and I have engaged in extensive discussions with individuals representing a wide range of viewpoints. We have received numerous messages from students, alumni, parents, faculty, and staff.We are being urged to take sides, while simultaneously being accused of taking sides. Some insist that the encampment should be dismantled immediately, while others argue it should be allowed to remain; some believe discipline is not the solution, while others believe it is the only solution.
The spectrum of opinions appears irreconcilable.
Given the circumstances, my primary focus on our campus is to safeguard the physical well-being of our community and ensure that everyone at MIT can pursue their academic endeavors without hindrance.
To support this objective, I want to clarify certain aspects of MIT’s operations and establish boundaries that will facilitate coexistence:
- First: I commend the peaceful nature of the current situation. However, this has not been the case at several other institutions where clashes have occurred between different groups.
To emphasize to all parties involved: violence and threats of violence are absolutely unacceptable on our campus. Those who violate this trust should anticipate severe consequences.- Second: Rules have been breached. Individuals who infringe upon our regulations – including those regarding the time, location, and manner of protests – will face disciplinary measures.
- Third: I will not compromise the academic freedom of our faculty in any field of study. Our faculty represent a diverse range of perspectives that contribute to an environment dedicated to broadening our students’ minds. Faculty members routinely collaborate with counterparts worldwide, including those in Israel – and all research conducted on our campus is transparent, publishable, and accessible to investigators globally.
MIT adheres to stringent protocols to ensure that all funded research aligns with MIT policies and U.S. laws. Within these standards, faculty members have the essential academic freedom to seek funding for research in their respective fields.
In an open academic setting, it is acceptable to inquire about a researcher’s work and funding sources. However, such inquiries should never escalate to intimidation or harassment.
- Fourth and finally, I want to address the encampment directly.
We have listened to the perspectives of our protesting students. The sorrow and anguish surrounding the tragic loss of life and suffering in Gaza are deeply felt. We have chosen not to intervene with the encampment out of respect for free expression. However, there is concern about the potential for outside protestors to cause disruption. The encampment is occupying space that was reserved for other members of our community. Additionally, ensuring the safety and security of the encampment is consuming a significant amount of staff time that could be used for other essential tasks. We have a responsibility to the entire MIT community, and sustaining this level of effort is not feasible. We are open to discussing how to bring an end to the encampment, as this form of expression needs to conclude soon. For my perspective on why such encampments may not be considered protected free speech, whether at public or private universities, please refer to this post. It is important to note that my son is an MIT student but is not involved in the Israeli-Palestinian debate, so my judgment on this matter is not influenced by his presence on campus.
Source link
