ON CAMPUS
campusreview.com.au
Free speech?
Auckland VC refuses to remove
white supremacist material.
By Kate Prendergast
T
he vice-chancellor of Auckland
University has declined to take down
white supremacist material from
campus, citing free speech.
As first reported in the university’s student
magazine Craccum, Professor Stuart
McCutcheon has described the material
as “unfortunate”, but since the posters and
stickers do not classify as hate speech, he says
there is no basis to remove them.
The material, distributed around the
law school, quad area and general library,
directs people to a website that advocates
for the revitalisation of a Eurocentric and
patriarchal culture. Its mission is “to build a
new generation of capable, young white
men who will assume the mantle of re-
taking control of our own country”, and it
warns that New Zealand’s culture is being
degraded by consumerism, globalisation
and corrupt politicians.
The website reveals the material was
disseminated as part of a nationwide
“stickering” campaign.
“Our membership have been getting the
word out and stickering our message in
multiple cities up and down the country.
There is an alternative to our broken society.
European men are waking up!”
For some, these nationalist sentiments
resonate with those espoused by the
gunman behind the Christchurch massacre,
who killed 51 people in March.
“I think there is a balancing act – and
it’s particularly important at a university
– between the rights of the people to
free speech and the rights of people not
to be upset by things,” McCutcheon told
Craccum. “I do not think that the Education
Act applies here because as best as I can
26
ascertain these posters do not represent
staff or students exercising their statutory
right to academic freedom.
“However, the posters themselves are
not illegal ... The question then is whether
a University is a place where a variety of
opinions can be expressed (within the
law) or whether we should prevent the
expression of any opinion that might be
hurtful to others (of which this example
would be one, but so might be opinions on
abortion/right to life, euthanasia, religious
issues of various kinds and so on).
“My view is that free speech (within the
law) is a right that should be cherished in
a democracy, and therefore that a wide
variety of opinions should be tolerated.”
Earlier this year, the university chose to
allow the now disbanded Auckland University
European Students Association to host an
orientation day stall, despite accusations it
promoted white supremacist values.
Various student groups and organisations
opposed the vice-chancellor’s position
on the recent matter, with some staging a
protest calling on the university to do more.
This is not the first incident of white
supremacy propaganda on the Auckland
campus. Another spate occurred earlier this
year following the Christchurch terror attack.
Some students fear there is a growing
movement and are actively avoiding going
to campus.
Dr Rhys Jones, a senior medical lecturer,
also spoke out against the university’s
refusal to act proactively.
“This type of thing does make it less
safe for people of colour, people who
are subject to racism and other forms of
bigotry,” he told RNZ.
He also pointed out that the university’s
response could harm its reputation in the
eyes of international students.
“This might actually play into a decision
to maybe not come to the University of
Auckland if they see that as a potential threat.”
The Auckland University Students’
Association (AUSA) has moved
independently to take down the posters,
and is engaging the university’s security
and Campus Life, a service that works to
promote student inclusion.
AUSA has also asked the university’s
security to be on the lookout for who is
behind the material’s dissemination.
“We strongly disagree with the vice-
chancellor’s view on this and are glad that
university security have, to their credit, been
removing the stickers and posters,” AUSA
wrote on a Facebook post on its page.
“Yes, we operate in a context of free
speech, but we also strive – at the same
time – for a university that is truly safe,
inclusive and equitable for all as well. These
individuals may have the freedom to put
these up but they should know that they do
so against our university community, against
what we stand for, and that we have the
freedom to take them down, to condemn
them and to deny them any power by
ignoring them.
“It’s not right that members of our
university community should feel unsafe
and threatened in this, our second home.
“This shit’s not on.”
The VC is not opposed to the removal
of posters, however, saying there’s really
not much he can do if students wish to
take this action.
“I am, and have always been, utterly
opposed to any form of discrimination,
prejudice or hate speech. Anyone who
knows me, knows that to be true. It is
something I have stated in public on
numerous occasions,” he said.
“I also believe that freedom of expression
– within the law – is something that is
fundamental to, and ought to be cherished
by, a democracy such as ours.
“It is therefore not possible for me to say,
as some would wish me to, that ‘I support
free speech, but only for those whose
opinions I agree with.”
University leaders are under increasing
pressure to placate both conservatives
concerned that higher education is treating
students as fragile “snowflakes” in need
of constant protection from dangerous
ideas; and those who prioritise individuals’
wellbeing and safety, and an inclusive and
welcoming community. ■
Campus Review has chosen not to
publish the name of the group behind
the propaganda.