The new academic year takes off today. It follows a painful one: with reorganisations at S&T, UCT-ATLAS and ITC, many colleagues have silently left the UT while hoping for a permanent contract. It’s anything but a celebratory time. Yet at the same time, I don’t think we should lapse into pessimism, but rather value and appreciate what we still have.
Turning this into an event, combined with the 700-year anniversary of Enschede, feels like the right moment to celebrate our local role as a university in this region. But I do criticise the choice to invite outgoing prime minister Dick Schoof to this event. There is valid criticism of his role as a politician. While he as an individual isn’t always personally to blame, it is his position and the enablement he provided that make him a controversial figure.
When speaking about this to colleagues, and just like in the recent U-Today column, I often hear the response that we should stick to our principles of academic freedom and allow discussion and debate. And yes: I agree, we should! But here comes the essential nuance: this is not the occasion for debate and discussion.
The opening of the academic year is meant to celebrate academic achievements, not their destruction. Even then, you could still use the moment for dialogue. But in reality, the invitation points towards a keynote speech by Dick Schoof. In what world does that constitute a moment of dialogue and debate?
I’m not pleading for some kind of Nuremberg Trial in the Wilminktheater as an alternative, since I do believe we should remain in dialogue. But in light of the forced layoffs and harsh budget cuts in our UT community, platforming someone as the keynote speaker who enabled a government of hostility and anti-academic policies feels wrong. Especially when this same government refused dialogue with academics for months, only opening up after the threat of strikes.
That’s why I will attend the alternative opening of the academic year instead.
