Ideology, utopia and Islam on campus: How to free speech a little from its own terrors
Ideology, utopia and Islam on campus: How to free speech a little from its own terrors
复制标题
校园里的意识形态、乌托邦和伊斯兰教：如何让言论自由，摆脱其自身的恐惧
DOI：
10.1177/1746197917694183
复制
发表时间：
2017
期刊：
影响因子：
--
通讯作者：
Alison Scott
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Alison Scott
在许多英国校园里，一个占主导地位的叙事是“恐惧”，这是政府反恐政策的一部分，是一种基于恐惧的意识形态。特别是穆斯林，被认为在校园里有激进化的风险，受到怀疑使他们自我审查。此外，无平台化的学生游说团体创造了一种乌托邦式的、理想化的氛围，试图减少异议。自我审查和无平台化正在减少大学表达意见的多样性，但没有证据表明校园内存在非法行为。斯宾诺莎、穆勒和汉娜·阿伦特要求各种形式的言论自由以建立一个健康的社会，而言论自由问题是“防止”的关键，它压制了与主流政府叙事不同的意见。在英国脱欧和特朗普的浪潮中，现在的挑战是如何从建制派意识形态和学生乌托邦的钳子中获得言论自由，哪怕是一点点。在意识形态和乌托邦的极端之间是一个必须填补的真空;如果我们不用言论自由和讨论来填补它，其他人就可以用激发恐惧和怀疑的故事来殖民它。同样，在法律（规定规范）和国家对法律的指导（适用）之间自然存在真空。如果我们不利用辩论来谈判这一真空的内容，它将充满恐惧的官僚主义，甚至是一种例外状态。真空需要被填补。在这两种情况下，我们都需要积极地回收每一个讨论、辩论和质疑的“真空”，以尝试理解我们当前的文化想象，并发展一个更好的想象。
A dominant narrative on many British campuses is ‘Prevent’, which is part of the government’s counter-terror policy, an ideology based on fear. Muslims, in particular, are considered to be at risk of radicalisation on campus, and being under suspicion makes them self-censor. Additionally, the no-platforming student lobby creates a utopian, idealised atmosphere that seeks to reduce dissent. Self-censorship and no-platforming are reducing the diversity of opinions expressed at universities, yet there is no evidence of illegality on campus. Spinoza, JS Mill and Hannah Arendt demanded various forms of free speech for a healthy society, and the free speech issue is the key to ‘Prevent’ which suppresses opinions that are different from the dominant government narratives. The challenge now, in the tide of BREXIT and Trump, is how to free speech, even a little, from the pincer grip of establishment ideology and student utopia. Between the extremes of ideology and utopia is a vacuum that must be filled; if we do not fill it with free speech and discussion, others can colonise it with stories that inspire fear and suspicion. Similarly, a vacuum exists naturally between laws (that set norms) and state guidance on laws (application). If we do not use debate to negotiate the contents of this vacuum, it will be filled with the bureaucracy of fear and even a state of exception. A vacuum demands to be filled. In both cases, we need to actively reclaim each ‘vacuum’ for discussion, debate and questioning in order to try and understand our current cultural imagination and develop a better one.