On Nov. 17, Claremont McKenna College’s Salvatori Center for the Study of Individual Freedom in the Modern World hosted a lecture by new CMC government professor Ioannis Evrigenis titled “Should Colleges Issue Political Statements?”
The discussion was centered around recent statements by 7C faculty and student governments regarding Israel and Palestine.
Evrigenis began the lecture by responding to the question posed in the title, saying “the short answer is no.” He argued that colleges and universities should not issue political statements, even when those statements are about other collegiate institutions.
Evrigenis described “the issuing of a statement [as] an authoritarian move” because a statement could “chill or silence opposition” from students and untenured professors.
He said political statements directly contradict the ethos of a university, which he defined as a “place of inquiry and research and dissemination of knowledge.” Evrigenis stated that when a college issues a statement on a controversial issue, it diminishes debate and silences opposing voices.
Furthermore, he asked, “How do you choose which [political issues] to speak about?”
He cited the University of Chicago’s Kalven report — which states that the university strives to be politically neutral on essentially all issues — as the “epitome of good sense and reason.”
Moving on to the topic of individual professors releasing statements, Evrigenis’s mentality was similar.
“I think the individual professor should shut the hell up because nobody cares what they think,” he said.
In response to Evrigenis’ talk, Jennifer Taw, professor of international relations at CMC, said that she agreed that making statements is problematic.
Taw commented directly on a statement regarding militant group Hamas’ Oct. 7 attack on Israel sent to the CMC community by faculty members.
“I think making a statement is problematic in so many ways — maybe the most important way, more than anything, is that even the decision to make a statement indicates a set of priorities,” Taw said. “So when professors here decided to make a statement on the situation in Israel and Gaza, it was indicative that they did not make statements on other situations going on.”
Evrigenis stated during the event that “nobody is for free speech.” In an interview with TSL, he explained that the statement [‘I am for free speech’] is “in the United States a given” and “effectively say[s] nothing.”
“There’s both legal, moral and sort of customary reason to assume that it is the status quo,” he explained. However, he stated, “that there’s always some agenda behind its invocation.”
Evrigenis described the mentality of people pronouncing the statement: “What [they] mean is I’m in favor of free speech when free speech promotes my position.”
The talk concluded with a Q&A section where students brought up the potential of the ASCMC, which is technically separate from the college, releasing a statement on Israel and Palestine, like other 5C colleges have attempted to.
Following this discussion on ASCMC, Evrigenis expressed concern about the physical safety of community members wearing merchandise from a college which issued a controversial political statement.
Henry Long CM ’25, a student manager at the Salvatori Center, said he was especially pleased by the Q&A section of the event.
“We got a lot of students who ask very pointed, very strong, thoughtful questions about the professor’s position, and that was something we’re excited about at Salvatori Center,” Long said.
Evrigenis imagines himself as a president of a university, “if I issue a statement every three hours on some major political issue. Two days later, nobody’s listening anymore, and so the statement that I might make three days later on some very important issue is all of a sudden lost in the sea of utterances.”
Facebook Comments