Andy Sabai on the Barrett Visit

Andy Sabai (Sa-bye) is co-chair of the UW Oshkosh Campus Greens. Below is the letter he sent recently to the Oshkosh Northwestern. He writes with a maturity and ability to see the big picture that is sadly missing from some faculty and administrators who have chosen to comment on this situation.

A Response to the Kevin Barrett Visit Controversy

by Andy Sabai

There are many emotions and opinions that have bubbled up to the surface over the Campus Greens inviting Kevin Barrett to speak on campus October 26th. The Campus Greens have come under fire for bringing this controversial figure to the University of Wisconsin Oshkosh. Unfortunately the release of this information was abrupt and did not include our reasons for hosting him.

First, it is important to understand what the Campus Greens are. Our organization is devoted to progressive change through political means. Beyond supporting Green Party candidates, we will work to support legislation that follows the four pillars of the Green Party: Peace and nonviolence, grassroots democracy, social justice, and ecological wisdom. We will hold politicians responsible for the legislation they support, and also work to educate the public as to the importance of these issues and how they can help.

Because we wish to educate the public about what we feel are the overstepping of the legislature's boundaries in calling for the firing of Kevin Barrett, we decided to invite him to come speak to our fellow students, faculty, and the community directly. Few people know any details of his views and the context in which this controversy began. We do not support or condemn his hypothesis on who is responsible for the tragic events of September 11, 20001--views that to my knowledge he does not even teach in class. Our opinion is that the state legislature should not impinge on the academic freedom given to professors, no matter what their full time status. The truth of Kevin Barrett's views will be decided by his peers, students, the public, and most of all history. This is the process of academic thought. The legislature does hold the purse strings on the university, but they should not be given the right to manipulate what university employees can discuss inside or outside the campus.

I am disappointed by many of the university staff who hope that this issue just go away. It will not. Kevin Barrett's view may be a far flung example of one idea that government wants to suppress, but many would also suppress stem cell research and mandate the teaching of creationism. If we have brought embarrassment to this institution by allowing one man to speak his mind, then I have grossly overestimated the strength and purpose of this university.

The condemnations of individual teachers by bureaucracies are some of the most embarrassing episodes of western history; e.g. Copernicus, Galileo, and John Scopes of the Scopes Monkey Trial fame. Of course, history and science have shown they were right. If they had been wrong they would hardly be worth mentioning, like Felix A. Pouchet who tried to show that the spontaneous generation of bacteria could happen. He was proved wrong by Louis Pasteur whose work was driven by his political and religious views as much as science.

The Campus Greens invitation to Mr. Barrett has already sparked debate as to the boundaries of academic freedom, the role of state government in this area, and whether or not he has a valid argument. I am proud to be a part of creating this dialogue. Those in the state capital are welcome to engage too, but they have no right to use their power to try to silence this kind of academic discussion.