Students march through London demanding free speech (Mark Makela/Corbis via Getty Images)
![](https://unherd.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/01/andrew-doyle-100x100.jpg)
An unspoken maxim looms over the free speech crisis in our universities: it is only ever denied by those whose views fall in line with the current orthodoxy. For all its faults, and there were many, Britain’s previous government recognised this, and passed its Higher Education (Freedom of Speech) Act in May 2023. But was it all in vain?
On Friday, the new Education Secretary Bridget Phillipson notified Parliament of her intention “to stop further commencement” of the Act and “to consider options, including its repeal”. Few further details are provided, other than her awareness of “concerns that the Act would be burdensome on providers and on the OfS [Office for Students]”. Upholding campus free speech, it seems, is just too much of a hassle.
During the dying days of the Conservative regime, many of us feared that this new Labour government would use its new powers to continue waging its culture war, and this is not the first red flag. Phillipson had already announced her intention to compel free schools and academies to teach the national curriculum, and that it will be rewritten under the guidance of Professor Becky Francis, an academic whose publication history has a clear activist bent. While head of UCL’s Institute of Education, she launched the Centre for Sociology of Education and Equity, which prioritises “equity and social justice” in schools. The emphasis on “equity” rather than equality is telling: it is a keystone of intersectional ideology, meaning that equality of outcome is sought over equality of opportunity.
In light of this, it makes sense that the next step would be to ensure that dissenting views continue to be stifled in higher education. After all, the introduction of the Higher Education Act was a much-needed attempt to make sure that universities uphold freedom of speech and plurality of opinion. It requires universities to guarantee academics the freedom “to question and test received wisdom” and “to put forward controversial or unpopular opinions” without risk to their livelihoods or future job prospects. It protects visiting speakers from being disinvited for controversial views. And it demands that governing bodies formulate a Code of Practice which upholds these responsibilities, and that these are annually brought to the attention of all students. The intended effect, suffice it to say, is to cultivate a more intellectually open climate by promoting academic freedom and the importance of free speech within the law.
In a sense, it is disappointing that such ideas require legislation at all. Partly this is due to an activist contingent within academic circles that has become adept at intimidating colleagues into silence. The result has been the development of a new monoculture in higher education in which self-censorship is rife. A 2020 report, for instance, found that one in three Right-leaning scholars censor themselves “for fear of consequences to [their] career”. A further study in 2022 found that three in four conservative academics occasionally self-censored while at work.
But censorship isn’t binary, and Left-wing academics are also increasingly at risk, notably those who are sceptical about activists’ demands that the highly contested belief in “gender identity” ought to supersede biological sex in matters of public policy. As far back as 2011, Julie Bindel was officially “No Platformed” by the National Union of Students (NUS), when delegates at the LGBT conference passed a motion called “This conference believes Julie Bindle is vile”. They couldn’t even be bothered to spell her name correctly. In the decade to come, she would be joined on the list of undesirables by a number of leading feminist thinkers: Linda Bellos, Selina Todd, Kathleen Stock and Jo Phoenix, to name a few.
Join the discussion
Join like minded readers that support our journalism by becoming a paid subscriber
To join the discussion in the comments, become a paid subscriber.
Join like minded readers that support our journalism, read unlimited articles and enjoy other subscriber-only benefits.
SubscribeTest
Yes, we’re back in the game.
An excellent article from AD, excoriating the simple-mindedness by which Labour thinks it can “end the culture war, right here”.
There is always something which can be described as a culture war. Climate Change is now a culture war.
It is through cossetted childhoods characterised by over-protective parenting, an emphasis on ‘virtual socialising’ via excessive screen time and a corresponding immersion in children’s fantasy fiction and cinema…
…which has resulted in this generation of 18-35 year olds utterly obsessed with the merger between their embodied sexual being and the virtual avatars they take from computer games, fantasy TV/cinema, and the Internet community themselves.
In effect, they never rebelled as teenagers in the old ‘tribes’ connected to pop music and fashion. Instead, they’ve adopted a Maoist approach where rather than create their own identity from rebellion they demand change to any of the social or cultural precepts that predated them.
Maybe their approach to ending the culture wars is to eradicate the enemy.
It was abvious that usual Labour woke, lefty, gender policies would come to the fore after election.
Since 90% of this country establishment including uncivil service, education and MSM are woke lefties, we should not be surprised.
Starmer is just pretended center dad covering far left policies of Labour.
When he gives votes to 16 years old idiots and non citizens we are royally fu**ed.
I love uk, but maybe time to bail out of Islamic Republic of Britain.
Everyone continues to have the right to free speech.
You will also continue to feel the consequences of your bigoted rantings.
Carry on.
What are bigoted rantings ?
Julie Bindel is a rockstar!
Ever since the “History Man ” type acdemic dominated the humanities departments in the late 1960s, there has been censorship. When there was only censorship of Conservative thought , middle class left wingers did not mind. Now middle class left wingers are being censored, they mind.
The History Man – Wikipedia
The Left just can’t help themselves… The Right can’t either…