Freedom of Speech must be protected on college campuses, but a large, open field or a group-chat would suffice if the only function of the university was to provide a location for the free exchange of ideas. The product they are selling, at exorbitantly high prices, is education.
In Defense of Jay Hartzell and UT Austin Administration
May 3, 2024
By Andrew Samaras
On the evening of April 23, I was fully captivated, as were the minds of many, by the coverage of demonstrations and rallies unfolding on the campuses of Columbia, Princeton, and Yale Universities. The president of Columbia, Minouche Shafik, had recently been hauled before Congress to be interrogated. Columbia’s response to the protests was being criticized for being weak and ineffectual. Meanwhile, the student activists were criticizing campus administration for not immediately and unequivocally endorsing their agenda and acceding to their demands, which at that point were still nebulous, and remained so until days after the onset of the events. Amidst the noisy coverage, my mind turned to my Alma Mater, the University of Texas at Austin. As a graduate of the not-so distant past, and as a former casual participant in the protest culture as it appears both on campus and online, I knew that similar events on the UT campus were imminent. Having attended the school of business while current president Jay Hartzell was the school’s dean, I was aware of his reputation among students then, and so I expected that the response to such protests here would be markedly different from the coastal schools. I did not predict, however, the pure chaos that would follow, or how wholly it would capture national attention just a few hours later, at one of my former favorite campus study spots—the ample green South Mall, shaded by the imposing shadow of that grand tower, in the heart of downtown Austin.
That same Tuesday evening at the UT campus, unbeknownst to me, the wheels of the next day’s events were already in motion. At that very moment, resources were being allocated, social media was ablaze, mass texts and emails were being sent, tents were purchased, speakers were scheduled, and troops of law enforcement were being mobilized to respond. The board was set. Negotiations failed, alternative event options were ignored, and warnings went unheeded, so President Hartzell turned to the Texas Department of Public Safety for assistance against the impending commotion. The Palestine Solidarity Committee, a since-suspended student organization that was the main organizer of the UT protest, was not interested in staying their plans. Affiliated with the same, well-funded national groups who appear to be behind most of the campus demonstrations, their plans for UT were intended to mimic those of their ivy league cohorts. All they had to do was wait the night.
News broke Wednesday afternoon that pro-Palestine protestors on the UT campus were being arrested in droves. By the evening shows, people’s opinions were mostly made up. Anyone following the story is familiar with the viral images and disturbing videos of students, faculty, and a cameraman being tackled to the ground, and of police in riot gear and on horseback arresting students and outside demonstrators. The response to what seemed to have started as a peaceful protest appeared unnecessarily cruel, and taken on their own, they do not instill confidence that the university is embodying the value of freedom of speech which it claims to champion. By Wednesday night, the rallying crowd had moved outside of the Travis County Jail, decrying their treatment and eagerly awaiting the release of their comrades, which would come a few hours later. President Hartzell issued an evening statement clarifying rules for protesting on campus, and commending the administration while justifying its response to the situation. Demonstrations continued throughout the week, with many faculty joining students in condemning the actions taken by the university and its president.
The events of the following weekend and of this Monday do not spell an end to the turmoil; they spell escalation. Student associations and a local mosque have committed publicly to continuing the student movement and collecting bail donations for arrested demonstrators. On Monday, 79 protestors were arrested in an attempted installation of a “liberated zone” on campus, complete with folding tables chained together around a central tent village, so that the practical demonstrator no longer has to commute to the picket line. As I write this, over 130 people have been arrested at the University of Texas at Austin during the two main events. The university has stated that many if not most of the protestors were not affiliated with UT. There have also been reports that bricks and “strategically placed rocks” were not the only weapons brandished by the protestors. Apparently, multiple firearms were also confiscated, though thankfully, they were not used. One is left to wonder, what is the strategic significance of throwing horse excrement at police, or abusing and threatening school staff, to the cause of starving Gazan children. But never mind, Hamas and Iranian government officials have endorsed them, so it seems the antics are impressing someone. Meanwhile, the other, actually peaceful protests at UT have proceeded non-stop and without incident, as students have exercised their rights to free speech and classes have continued. These have not garnered news coverage and have not resulted in arrests.
President Hartzell has been roundly criticized by students and faculty alike, and the vote of no-confidence movement he is facing could indeed prove to be a far more credible threat than the one facing Speaker Johnson. One wonders in this situation what a university president could possibly do that would not result in calls for their resignation, whether from dismayed onlookers and politicians wanting swift action, or from the incensed students and faculty at their flank, criticizing the “militarized” response and the impingement on their freedom to assemble peacefully. The issue of campus protests, and by extension campus ‘occupations’, whether by activists in tents or by police on horseback, is fraught and requires perhaps more nuance than today’s activist can muster. A leader in the position to have to manage an institution through this situation is dragged through the terrains of several loaded issues, such as the Israel-Palestine question, the issue of freedom of speech, the real and insufferable rise in antisemitism worldwide, the downward trend in educational standards at elite universities, and the chronic national affliction that is the moment when police confront unarmed protesters. But in fact, these are discrete issues and must be addressed separately before clarity can really be found.
Although the UT protests have their links to all these issues, not all of them are relevant when critiquing the administration’s or president’s response to the climate on campus today. The ethical implications of the war Israel is waging on Hamas, and the resulting Palestinian suffering are as irrelevant to the university response as it would be if Catholic activists were blockading the lawn in opposition to the free condoms available at the student services building. UT is not required to hold a position on the Israel-Palestine question; in fact, holding political positions is antithetical to the sacred charge of the institution of the university. Embracing politics or ideology comes at a high cost to the sincere pursuit of knowledge. The responsibility of places of higher learning, which the students or parents pay for, is to produce an establishment capable of safely delivering a bias-free and high-quality education to its students. There is no doubt that the sustained protests on Columbia’s, NYU’s, and USC’s campuses, to name only a few, are interfering with the safety and educational quality of those schools.
My suspicions of the night of the 23rd were that my alma mater and President Hartzell would not be acquiescent to similar demonstrations at the 40 Acres. UT-Austin boasts an endowment on par with the ivy’s, but their donors’ political inclinations are not likely to converge with much frequency. This is the school, after all, whose booster club notoriously held its athletics program hostage for decades. It seemed to me that a business-minded president like Hartzell with a strong donor backing could likely, with confidence, make the controversial decision to act instead of playing impotent. The result has been a complete route of any attempts to occupy the campus or overwhelm UTPD’s limited response capacity. That the donors of the University of Texas are more agreeable to the administration’s actions than are the students is a reality that may not hold up over time, but it is also irrelevant to the overwhelming question. Did the university’s response to the protests serve its charge to educate its students and provide a safe academy for pursuing knowledge? My answer is yes. Yes, and in fact, this may be the most valuable teaching moment for these students up to this point.
Many outraged advocates decry the “militarization of campuses,” but requesting law enforcement assistance is no more militarization than federal buildings were militarized following the events of January 6th,2021. The securing or even over-securing of an area leading up to an event that could veer out of control is not militarization, it is wisdom. A person believing the protests to be patently peaceful would likely scoff at this comparison until learning that the university had to report threats against staff and the school to the authorities. It may have seemed ridiculous to compare what is happening on campuses to the January 6th insurrection, until videos surfaced of Columbia protestors smashing windows and occupying Hamilton Hall. There is clearly a concerted effort here to make a statement that cannot be ignored by school leaders, and there also seems to be a significant amount of collaboration between the organizing bodies nationwide. As President Hartzell is navigating this issue, he must assume that the accomplishments of protestors on more relaxed campuses are the intentions of those on stricter campus.
The fact is that the university cannot take protestors at their words that their marches, ‘liberated zones’, and ‘occupations’, will be peaceful. Instead, the wise response is to prepare for the possibility of chaos. Many believe that it is acceptable to block streets filled with parents on their way to pick up their children; the riots in Seattle in 2020 were said to be peaceful; MAGA Republicans claim that the January 6 insurrection was nonviolent. Even events that start peaceful can devolve into violence when emotions run hot enough. This caution is especially necessary when the university is also charged with protecting its Jewish students from any real threats to their safety on campus. Unfortunately, law enforcement response has not always been strategic toward the goal of campus safety. Too frequently, officers have engaged in haphazard arrests while neglecting to escort Jewish students who feel threatened back to their dorm rooms. The administration, however, is only responsible for its decision to seek help under the circumstances; it is not accountable for the recklessness or brutality of law enforcement, where such claims are legitimate.
While the true origins, the timing and collaboration, and in some cases even the organizers of the campus protests remain a mystery, and while methods employed by the demonstrators are often questionable, there is a valid freedom of speech concern at play here. The right to peacefully assemble in protest must be protected, and dissent sometimes means breaking minor rules like curfews and noise restrictions. This freedom must be doubly protected on university campuses where the freedom to try the boundaries of acceptable speech is so necessary for the development of free-thinking adults. Ideally, all students would have open-mindedly informed themselves on the issue, observed the extremes, and thoughtfully chosen the people they linked arms with and pitched tents next to before pledging themselves to the cause. Nevertheless, even an ignorant Pro-Palestine or pro-Israel protestor should maintain their level of passion and engagement with the issues, and continue to openly display their views, chant, and debate, without the need for police presence. Unfortunately, however, the organizing groups have chosen the rallies with the most hateful slogans, proudly displaying enemy flags, and causing the most disruption, as their model. As such, the University of Texas has not interfered with countless other protests and rallies on its campus, even those that committed minor infractions against university policy, but it has rightfully intervened when the stated goals were to interfere with the education of their classmates.
Freedom of Speech must be protected on college campuses, but a large, open field or a group-chat would suffice if the only function of the university was to provide a location for the free exchange of ideas. The product they are selling, at exorbitantly high prices, is education. Every other concern must be weighed against that metric. Both freedom of speech and campus safety are integral to providing a quality education, but this relationship is not frictionless. Although administration has favored security over permissiveness given the apparent alternatives, their actions have still prioritized education and have not amounted to suppression. No professor was arrested for signing the letter of no-confidence against President Hartzell, and countless peaceful protests, lectures, and events continue to take place on campus without incident.
Nothing about what happened at UT Austin since April 24th has been pleasant, but when the images are horrifying, it is easy to feel like there is more to complain about than to be thankful for. The administration and president have demonstrated a dedication to giving education primacy over political and ideological concerns at UT. Doing so has meant continuing to provide a top-tier education during difficult times, and being mindful of the pitfalls that have devalued education at more high-profile universities, causing turmoil on their campuses and toppling many of their leaders. It has meant successfully fostering a culture on campus of free expression and harboring the views and passions of both Palestinian students, whose families are currently enduring tremendous hardship in Gaza, and Israeli students who were in Southern Israel when Hamas invaded on October 7th. It has also meant not making idle threats when securing campus against the anti-Semitic disruptions to education present at other universities, in the form of exclusion zones as well as terrorist-glorifying paraphernalia and graffiti. Today, I am thankful to be a Longhorn and to have experienced the tremendous diversity of thought and opinion that permeates the 40 Acres.
Pursuing Reality with Andrew Samaras 