These are just plain opinions; they can be rejected, refuted, argued against or accepted. These words are not meant to impose my ideals upon anybody , and they are not going against the law of the diversity of thoughts~~

Thursday, 19 January 2012


                                Academic freedom is the belief that the freedom of inquiry by students and faculty members is essential to the mission of the academy, and that scholars should have freedom to teach or communicate ideas or facts (including those that are inconvenient to external political groups or to authorities) without being targeted for repression, job loss, or imprisonment.

Enough said.

                 To voice out whatever one thinks right, without fear. This is the right that is considered most democratic, the freedom sought for.

              We had had enough talks about freedom. We had discussions, we had demonstrations, pickets, rallies for freedom all around the world. People wants freedom, most likely more than anything. Freedom of speech, freedom of work, freedom of almost everything. And also freedom to walk around people ,naked, freedom to do sins , and freedom of every law implied. We ain't no free world, are we?

           History told us that nations broke into wars, for freedom. Wars are devastating, full of bloodlust, and a war is expensive.  Thus, freedom costs life, numerous lives, money and time. See? Freedom itself is not free. Expect less of it.

               Academic freedom is not the same. A war is an unlikely option for the fighters of academic freedom.  Academic freedom is  for academicians, students, professors and teachers. Stupid people are not given this academic freedom, because they are not intellectuals, instead,  they are given freedom of stupidity . Hah, whatever.

          Sorry for such nonsense, this is my academic freedom to express whatever I want . People of the past centuries had been fighting for the same thing; for academic freedom. The authority in European countries; the churches exerted a significant limiting influence upon academic curricula and research, until the end of the 19th century. Any ideas or theories by academicians that contradict the authority will be censored or banned, rejected or just accepted, partially. Remember Galileo Galilei? His theory about heliocentrism contradicts the religious authority, and he was put into house arrest  until the end of his life.

                  Europeans went past their monstrous prime, and emerged as a centre of education and academic freedom of the world. The intellectuals can say anything or critic anyone without fear, they can write books without being banned, they can implant an ideology in the students' brains, the only thing they can't do is to order the students to kill a politician, although that is somehow plausible. It seems that the developed countries managed to hold to the principles of academic freedom, while our country is still stuck in the 19th century.
Prof. Aziz Bari

            The question about academic freedom is; what are we gonna do with it , once the freedom is acquired? This sounds rather silly , but it is something we need to think of. The Egyptians once thought that once the President, Anwar Sadat went down in 1981, things will be better with the iconic Hosni Mubarak. They hoped of changes in bureaucracy, a better lifestyle, and yes, freedom, but they were wrong.  They had to fight to overthrow Hosni Mubarak in later years, who cheated them on the promises of freedom. And now , they are still deciding on what to do with the freedom they acquired, still in process.  We need to know how to handle this freedom, because one does not simply lay in front  of a university's  gate at 2 a.m. without knowing how to handle freedom they fought for. One does not simply go to rallies, get beaten to the death, without a basis of what they are fighting for.

              Will the freedom gives way for lecturers to endorse false ideologies and plant a rebellious stand among students? Will this freedom allow people to justify sins they do, like in the case of Seksualiti Merdeka? Freedom, freedom. I am a pessimist, I have the rights to be pessimistic.

            We need to be careful, because unpleasant things do happen. We need to think of the unthinkables . When the Western people set their people free, men and women misused the concept of freedom. It was supposed to be the freedom to speak of what is right, but today, it is merely speaking of things they want. 50 years ago, they were speaking against racism and about religious rights, but now they are talking about same-sex marriages and adultery . Freedom of speech is supposed to be freedom to speak something right; the truth, but people went wild. They think that they are free to do whatever sin they wanna do. They are not free. Freedom has its limits, it is expensive and difficult.
nothing to do with freedom

            To the government, giving academic freedom is dangerous. It is like giving freedom to a lion caged in a zoo. The zoo kept the lions since they were cubs; the zoo loves the lions, but still, they are dangerous. The lions however have the rights to roam free and rule the jungles, and the zoo is obligated to free them. It is their right to be free, isn't it? Let's say that the zookeepers felt very guilty of imprisoning the lions, they decided to free them. Free them, at the zoo, open their cages in public to demonstrate freedom. That allows the lions to roam the zoo freely and probably the city next to it. The lions will harm the people. Perhaps, the lions will kill the zookeepers first , than feast on the citizens. Thanks to the genius zookeepers for the unlimited freedom. Things might be different though, if the lions released were fed with Whiskas and Friskies. To avoid the unwanted damage, the zoo must release the lions at the jungle; their rightful place. They can have their freedom, but at the rightful place.

           This comparison is not fair , as academicians are not lions, they are not wild in nature. Academicians speak of the truth, and because of that , we should give them freedom. But, are they really truthful?
                 We need freedom because we are humans ,we have our rights and ideas, but we still need restrictions , because we are still greedy animals with a habit of self-destruction. We do not need AUKU, but at the same time we do not want the justification of sins and lies.
             Freedom itself has its limits. Expect less of it.


No comments:

Post a Comment