Freedom of expression and the right to dissent are liberties upon which this country is founded and are vital to any learning institution. But these liberties do not include the right to violent dissent, something six Northwestern alumni recently felt the need to point out after they learned of the faculty position former weather underground leader Bernardine Dohrn holds within the law school.
The alumni did not withdraw contributions to NU because they disagreed with Dohrn’s politics or her stance against the Vietnam War. They do not deny her right to free speech or her opinions. But they rightfully contend that a criminal who planted bombs in government buildings, held a place on the FBI’s 10 Most Wanted list, hid from the government for a decade and 30 years later has shown no remorse, does not belong on a law school’s faculty.
NU has every right to keep Dohrn on its faculty. But doing so sends a clear message of the university’s priorities – diversity of thought comes before respect for the laws of our country.
Different viewpoints are essential to education, but those viewpoints must not conflict with the central message behind which a school stands. At an institution dedicated to teaching the legal system of our country and its upholding, there is no place for someone who has not shown consistent respect for its importance.
Tolerance and second chances lie at the very heart of the United States, but second chances are for those who want or ask for them. To date, Dohrn has not said she was wrong or made a mistake. She has not claimed to have seen the error of her ways. That she has, for the present time, set aside her old tactics and is working within the boundaries of the Constitution does not mean we must ignore her past disregard for it.
Whether Dohrn makes a contribution to the Law School is not the relevant issue. Does any contribution outweigh the integrity of the institution and the integrity of the law? Her presence at the school says breaking the law can be condoned if the cause appears noble and happened outside an arbitrary statute of limitations. And beyond that, it says well-respected learning institutions will respect, reward and maybe even glorify these actions, placing people who commit them in positions of power and influence. This message is not only morally questionable but also dangerous at a time like the present.
NU must think carefully as we inch deeper into a conflict that may not garner such steadfast support in the weeks, months and probably years to come. Dohrn may maintain that she does not advocate violence, but when it comes to critiquing government and foreign policy, her track record does not display a strong regard for safe and legal tactics of dissent. That she did not aim to kill when detonating bombs does not diminish the peril of her actions, which jeopardized the safety of all involved and stretched the limitations of civil disobedience.
The university undoubtedly will continue to defend her. Law School Dean David Van Zandt referred to Dohrn as “a valuable and contributing member of our community.” But at the very least, a few important questions must be posed. Does Dohrn still encourage these tactics as a satisfactory form of dissent? Would she do it again? How would she advise a student to combat the Bush administration’s military action in Afghanistan? These questions take on an immediate and realistic importance in the world after Sept. 11.
To no longer support Dohrn now that the country bears wounds of vastly more serious and deadly terrorism may give the appearance of bending to the public’s will or the alumni’s purses.
But the character of a learning institution, especially one devoted to the legal profession, is much more vital than appearance. Sept. 11 aside, a domestic terrorist who has shown no remorse for her actions has no place in a school of law, period. Does the Law School truly put diversity of viewpoints before rights and responsibilities as citizens of this country? If so, its administration might be well-advised to take another look at the Constitution and its students a closer look at their education.
