Free Speech has its limits ... even at the LSE

I've always been proud of the fact that I graduated from the London School of Economics. I had a great experience in my undergraduate years there (1995-1998) intellectually, interacting with the wonderfully bright and diverse student body, making some good friends and enjoying the city of London. I admired the energy of the school and the fact that they were attracting the bets faculty in social science there, in the UK anyways. But tonight, I have to say that I'm less proud of my LSE degree and here's why.

Earlier today, I blogged about the advice given to prospective Asian PhD students by Erik Ringmar, an ex-LSE lecturer who's now a professor in National Chiao Tung University in Taiwan. Upon reading his blog further, I began to realize why he had left LSE to go teach in Taiwan.

To cut a long story short, he gave a speech in early 2006 to an incoming undergraduate 'class' and also wrote certain things in his newly started blog that were interpreted as being 'defamatory' to his employer i.e. LSE. He was reprimanded by the head of his department, George Philip as well as the director (equivalent to the VC or president) of the school, Sir Howard Davies, former head of the FSA in the UK because of his actions and was subsequently forced to resign (or at the very least, was put in a position that made it very difficult for him to stay at LSE) his tenured position at LSE.

You can read the contents of his Open Day speech here. Find anything controversial? If you do, please let me know which part. Apparently the part which the LSE authorities found offensive was the following:

The LSE is often referred to as an ‘elite’ institution. What does that mean? In a way the elitism follows from what I just said. The School is lucky enough to be able to pick the very best scholars and the very best students. Then we put the two together in the same place and make the scholars teach the students.

This is a great idea, of course, but also one that in practice may be difficult to realise. After all, the greatness of a scholar is measured in terms of output — that is, research. It is more than anything the number of books and articles written that matters to academic promotions. If you want a high-flying academic career you have to publish.

This means that the first-class teachers usually will have their minds elsewhere than on undergraduate teaching. They might be away on conferences, and even if they are not absent in body, they may be absent in mind. This is too bad of course. In fact it could indeed be that students have more opportunities for interaction with faculty members at lesser institutions — like the London Metropolitan University, say — where research is less heavily emphasised. I don’t know.

What I do know is that the in-class student experience often differs very little between the LSE and a place such as the London Metropolitan University. This may surprise you but it something students tell me. Instinctively I rebel against this conclusion, but I have come to believe that the students who make this point are correct.

Think about it! The kinds of courses taught at undergraduate level are pretty much the same everywhere you go. The courses use the same kinds of reading lists, with the same kinds of books, set the same kinds of exam questions … The lecturers too are not that different from each other. This is easily explained. Often after all we went to the same universities.

I have a friend at the London Metropolitan University who I did my PhD with. He is a very charismatic person. I cannot really, hand on my heart, say that I know that I’m a better lecturer than him. Most likely we say more or less the same things in our lectures. And he is funnier.

He goes on to say that LSE is a great place to be in because of the diverse and intelligent student body:

Let me suggest to you why transferring down would be a mistake. What makes the LSE unique not only in Britain but in the world as a whole — and into a vastly different kind of institution than all of its local competitors — is the quality of its student body. We are able to recruit some of the smartest, most interesting, intelligent, rich, successful and all-round attractive people on the planet. That is, we are able to attract people just like you!

Nothing wrong in this, right?

Not according to the LSE authorities. You can read about the aftermath here. Suffice to say, he hasn't asked to given another Open Day speech.

Erik received tremendous support from the student body and I'm sure that the LSE authorities, namely George Philip (Head of the Government Department), and Howard Davies (director), are ruing their decision to put pressure on Erik Ringmar.

I expected something like this to happen at UM. Indeed, it did happen at UM with regards to our friend, Azmi Sharom, which we've blogged about here and here.

What I did not expect was something like this from my alma mater, the LSE, a place which was full with leftist 'radicals' in the sixties, a place with a great tradition of intellectual inquiry and scholarship, a place of 'refuge' as Erik Ringmar pointed out in his speech.

I am deeply disappointed with the actions of the LSE administrators. I will shortly write the the following people at the LSE expressing my disappointed at their actions.

Sir Howard Davies
Director
First Floor, Columbia House
LSE
Houghton Street
London WC2A 2AE
UK

Professor George Philip
Department of Government
LSE
Houghton Street
London WC2A 2AE
UK

In addition, I will also write to the Office of Alumni Relations to express my disappointment at the curbing of free speech on the part of Erik Ringmar.

Office of Development and Alumni Relations, U708
LSE
Houghton Street
London
WC2A 2AE

I'd encourage all LSE alumnus to do the same and all those who agree with me that Erik Ringmar was unjustly treated.

You can email Erik Ringmar to express your support here: erik@ringmar.net

I still have a high regard for LSE as an academic institution but certainly, in my eyes, it has lost some of its lustre in light of this incident.