Opinion
28th March 2025
Seeing only darkness and missing the light
Following the Office for Students’ fining of the University of Sussex over its handling of the case of Professor Kathleen Stock and its guidelines suppressing open debate on issues around gender identity, one might expect Free Speech and Freedom of Conscience campaigners to be greatly relieved and even to dare consider the tide might be turning against the repressive practices of Pseudo-Liberalism. Certainly, I find it encouraging.
However, I still feel very much on my own, as I have seen no reference to this important event in the correspondence which comes into my Inbox every few days from one of the more vigorous campaigners. Instead, she continues to grumble about trivial signs of weakness in society rather than seeing this important return to what matters in securing the future of freedom in public life.
I might be concerned if a judge really lost touch with reality to the extent of believing a fictional character were real. However, while it might give journalists something to write about, it’s not really the end of civilisation if a judge sees symbolic value in such a character. We have different opinions about cultural symbols, real or imagined and we are free to use whatever illustrations we want in making our point. The writer might have disagreed with the judge in question, but it hardly matters in the scheme of things. Similarly I might be mildly concerned if public money is wasted on gestures by public servants in misguided self-help exercises, but I’m far more concerned that it shouldn’t be used to promote one side of a political or moral controversy.
However, I’m far more interested in supporting healthy aspects of society than in finding something to grumble about. Upholding free discussion of opinion in higher education and censuring those who try to suppress it is far more worth celebrating than grumbling about the follies of the misguided. Why can’t the professional grumblers see that? Perhaps because they are professional grumblers?
However, while the University might still wish to appeal, my gut feeling is that the OfS will have made a thorough study of the issues involved and there is probably little prospect of anything more radical emerging from that process than a reduction in the fine. The principle has, I am confident, been established, and academic freedom restored. Those who want to browbeat society into accepting their unjustifiable opinions without question have been defeated by calm reason. Of course, if there were real evidence for their opinions they would be the ones quietly confident. In general, we can judge the soundness of an opinion in inverse proportion to the noise which must be made to maintain it. No one campaigns in support of gravity, the speed of light, or other aspects of Relativity. Empty vessels have always made the most noise.
So I am greatly relieved to see common sense prevail. I sense the tide has turned and although some areas of life, particularly in business, local government, and the media, have still to catch up, the cause for which this site exists, will gradually prevail over the extremists on both sides. As time passes we shall see, but the OfS finding offers quiet hope.