I have been Dorian Abbot-ized: that is, a presentation in which I was going to participate with two other faculty, scheduled for this Friday at the University of Amsterdam, has been cancelled by the organizers because of my political views on the war between Israel in Hamas.
And, like Dorian’s case at MIT, our scheduled discussion had nothing to do with either Israel or Palestine. That is, we were deplatformed not for what we were supposed to talk about, but for views Maarten Boudry and I had independently expressed elsewhere—views that were apparently offensive to the organization that cancelled our discussion.
Our discussion was supposed to center on a paper I wrote with Luana Maroja for The Skeptical Inquirer, ‘The ideological subversion of biology“, which dealt with the distortion of six areas of evolutionary biology by well-meaning people whose ideology did not comport with biological reality. It had nothing to do with war in the Middle East.
The organization that deplatformed me and two other professors was Betabreak, a science discussion group at University of Amsterdam. You can reach its website by clicking the banner below.
Everything was fine until we were informed yesterday on WhatsApp that the discussion was cancelled. The organizers didn’t contact me directly, but sent the cancellation to one of my hosts, so I’ve redacted his/her name in the indented message below, which is otherwise exactly as my host received it. “Dr. Boudry” is Maarten Boudry, a Belgian philosopher with whom I collaborated on a paper about religious belief several years ago.
Here is the official cancellation:
Hi NAME REDACTED,
I’m sorry to inform you that unfortunately we will have to cancel the event on Friday. I’m sorry it’s so last minute, but in light of the information from Dr. Boudry, many of the members in the committee did not feel comfortable giving Dr. Coyne and Dr. Boudry a platform given their stances on the Palestine/Israel conflict. Another fear is how it would reflect on us as a committee and that we might be blackballed at UvA/AUC. We understand the irony of this considering this is the very issue that Dr. Coyne wrote his article about, however the group decided we can’t host this event given the current political climate. Again, I’m very sorry that we have put so much time and effort into organizing this for nothing, I’m disappointed as well.
A bit of background: Betabreak had voted to invite me and the other participants previously, but then backed out when they discovered Maarten and my “stances on the Palestine Israel conflict.” (Presumably this is because we are both sympathetic to Israel.) At that point they apparently decided that such a stance was sufficiently unpalatable to disallow us from discussing science in their forum. Betabreak also noted that it was is worried about how they’d look if they hosted the event and whether they’d get “blackballed” at their university.
Note that Betabreak is a “science discussion platform,” and that’s what we were going to do: discuss evolutionary biology and the way it’s misconstrued by the public.
But enough—one of the main purposes of this post is to solicit reader reaction to what happened. I thus ask readers to give their honest reaction to the deplatforming above. Be aware that some comments might be picked up and quoted by the press in the Netherlands, so I ask you to be civil and rational (no profanity!)
Thanks!
Oh, here is the poster put out by Betabreak advertising the now-cancelled event.
My first thought was that I am profoundly saddened by this shameful and spineless decision. My second was that Spinoza must be turning over in his grave.
Spinoza was also excommunicated for views back in the day. So its more like history has gone full circle
It’s very sad, this development. Please note that the majority of the Dutch people thinks this is a disgrace. People who shout tend to have a major influence on what’s happening in the Netherlands right now. I’m sorry!
I got the same impression on the majority, but I think it’s time for that sane majority to take a clear moral stance and not cooperate in any way with any organization that engages in these bigotry-driven cancellations. Disagreements are always welcome, but outright cancellation and boycott of anyone who is sympathetic to Jews and their self determination is profoundly antisemitic, even if many of today’s antisemites try to brand it as not, so that they may avoid the negative consequences of their bigotry.
Society, in the Netherlands and elsewhere, must not fall for that ugly trick. Any organization that acts like that should be protested against. They allegedly fear the negative drag of not cancelling Jews? They should know that in cooperating with the antisemites they’ll receive a greater negative press.
I really don’t think anyone who isn’t antisemitic should ever comply with organizations like that, and if indeed this is the majority stance in the Netherlands, I would expect Betabreak to really struggle to find audience for future events, speakers who’d accept their invitations etc., at least until a proper apology and a sincere move to mend that which they have broken take place.
For a community of scholars to throw away an opportunity to discuss and debate ideas for the basest of political reasons gives the lie to what they they claim their institutions does. Our universities have lost their reputations as a place of learning and intellectual refinement; in terms of what thought they allow to be expressed, they are becoming madrassas. The academy there, as it is in many places here, are frauds. They are not interested in open debate, only obedience to preferred viewpoints. The termites are destroying the very foundations of the Enlightenment.
Perfectly well said.
A little hyperbolic, I’m afraid. Only excuse is I’m fed up, exasperated, disgusted with this kind of hypocritical nonsense from people who should do better. Plus I hadn’t had my morning coffee yet. So I lashed out.
Still, it IS shameful as others have said, and I’m glad to see the talk will go on, albeit in very different circumstances.
Yes, you spoke strongly, but also fairly considering the current trend of capitulation and the shutting down of open discourse. Whether through cowardice or through deliberate censoring of “wrong” thinking, it’s dangerous and must be called out and fought against. You are obviously a reasoned and thoughtful person to have reconsidered how you expressed your thoughts, but I don’t think you crossed a line – and I love your termite analogy. Bottom line, passion is needed to at least attempt to counteract the tsunami of efforts to limit open expression and to hobble free speech.
You should suggest to them to consider if things were reversed how they would feel. Would they be happy for other institutions to stop them from speaking, teaching, etc, because of their political views? If they answer in favour of such censorship you have your answer, and their names should get widely shared such that wishes may come true. You might also recommend some reading to them on the history of National Socialism.
Agreed. Well said.
Perhaps the university should simply announce that they are now governed by sharia law.
I’m so sorry. But I’m not surprised. How utterly disgraceful.
So sad. I hope they will offer to refund your travel expenses.
The people who invited me (not the University) already paid for airfare and put me up, and had previously arranged two events for me. One is this cancelled discussion, the other is a talk on science versus religion (which was requested) scheduled to take place on Thursday.
In 1975 when I was a biology major in college, some students held an ad hoc symposium about E.O. Wilson’s just-released Sociobiology. The student organizers criticized the book because it claimed that humans had the same innate drives as other animals. Some of these students were science majors, but when it comes to ideology, what today we call woke, all humans succumb to their cognitive biases. Now evolutionary psychology has become the boogyman, the target of those who wish to believe that the human brain is infinitely malleable; that humanity can be molded through education and other cultural means to end tribalism/racism, and war. All noble goals but with the merest, if any, scientific evidence that these are achievable.
Now that I’m reading The Ideological Subversion of Biology, I see you’re way ahead of me…as expected.
Yes agreed! If anything Mr Coyne is now in the company of Spinoza, that might make him feel a little better.
How very disappointing, Jerry. I now question the scientific respectability of the U of Amsterdam, in general, and of Betabreak, in particular. The Betabreak organizers should be ashamed and embarrassed, especially in light of their purported goals.
+1
This is a disgraceful and distressing situation. It is particularly alarming that the “science discussion platform” of the University of Amsterdam should be frightened of being blackballed by that very same University because they issued an invitation to Prof Coyne and Dr Boudry to speak on an issue that is of vital importance to science as it is practised today. Can a University actually go as far as blackballing a reputable organisation simply because some of its members claim to be offended by views that have nothing to do with science? What does that say about freedom of speech and thought in Dutch academia?
I very much hope that a different organisation in possession of a conscience and a pair of balls might be prepared to step in and offer Prof Coyne and Dr Boudry an alternative platform for their discussion.
It’s not clear from the statement whether the organizers themselves found Jerry and Boudry’s views unpalatable, or if they feared that others who do find them unpalatable would take actions against the organizers. I am thus not sure if they are canceling the event out of animus towards Israel, or out of fear of repercussions against them from anti-Israel activists. It could, of course be both. Neither motive speaks highly for the principles of the organizers.
They are at least aware that suppression of debate was precisely the issue that was to be addressed at the event, hence the irony.
GCM
Based on the little context we have, it sounds to me like the hosts are concerned about a backlash against them, rather than being directly bothered by Jerry and Boudry’s statements. It seems. That could just be smoke.
Our early communications from the group that cancelled us did not mention any fear of repercussions against them, only our “stance” on the war. Of course the two are connected, for why would there be repercussions unless they were hosting people with the “wrong” views? Note that I didn’t say anything about the group having an animus against Israel, for I just don’t know. All I can infer is that our views on Israel would have stirred up considerable trouble.
The University of Amsterdam has been closed yesterday and will be closed today because the pro-Palastinian protests have become rather violent last week, creating a lot of damage of university property. This is the light in which we should see this decision, it seems to me: people would were just afraid that the event might attract more riots.
I am not saying this is a good thing (they could have taken extra safety measures, and if I am right, this is what they should have communicated more clearly), but I think this is the background to understand what is going on
If that was the case, then they should have said that and saved themselves reputational damage. In fact, there was a vote taken among the students and the vote was against us because of our views and because they might be blackballed. Given that, your claim that “this is the background to understand what is going on” reads to me like “this is the real reason that they voted against you.” And I’m afraid the “context” you provide is simply an alternative explanation confected to make the deplatforming look innocuous.
This is extraordinary for a self-described “science discussion group”. As Greg said, the cancellation perfectly illustrates the sort of thing the discussion was to be about, the infusion of ideology into science. Shameful.
Indeed. If this compact self-reference were in a work of realist fiction then it would be considered too contrived.
Well, from the Betabreak website, it appears to be a fully student led and run organization without any faculty oversight or sponsorship. At least no faculty member is listed on the website as far as I could see. Maybe the kids could use a little adult help to think things through?
Seems par for the course these days. Of course, one’s stance on some political issue should have no bearing on the discussion of another issue. On the other hand, while the plan was not to discuss the war, it was to discuss how biology had been infiltrated by ideology, so not too dissimilar to how academic discussion in general has been infiltrated by ideology.
Having said that, one’s stance on some political issue should have no bearing on the discussion of that political issue either, if the point is to discuss it, rather than to virtue-signal.
Not being willing to engage in civil discussion is usually a sign that one knows that one has no valid arguments.
And this is happening at a time when some universities consider it appropriate to tolerate actual crimes (such as trespassing) as long as the “right” people are committing them.
Shameful.
My condolences to you and your fellow speakers on being blackballed. Bètabreak seems to have scrubbed its site of any reference to your discussion and to have disabled their contact information. If they were hoping to avoid controversy by deplatforming you, I hope they get their just deserts.
The organizers should be ashamed for giving in to the heckler’s veto and should resign from their organization in disgrace at their intellectual cowardice.
I am surprised that a Dutch university would behave as my experience is that they are open to debate. However, this is a malaise that is spreading. We have already had capitulation here in Ireland by Trinity College Dublin, giving in to student demands. This has spurred on an encampment in University College Dublin but so far the university has not conceded anything, long may that last.
Maybe, take the time to visit Haarlem, a beautiful town only 10 minutes on the train from Amsterdam.
Haarlem has the Frans Hals Museum. Worth a visit.
I think it was Trinity College Dublin where Maryam Namazie pulled out of a talk there, because they put all sorts of restrictions on her – at the behest of Islamists.
This is embarassing and shameful. The irony is that these students and other protesters and cowards claim to do this in light of justice/fairness/what have you along that vein, yet what they are doing is the exact opposite and it doesn’t take much to figure that out. Yet they seem blind to their own actions.
I wonder – is it their education that is lacking (based on the troves of misinformation that is being peddled they all seem pretty ahistorical) or is it that they have no back bones? I am astonished – how can they not see that what they are doing is pitiful? It is what repressive regimes do, but these thought police students are doing it preemptively before the regimes themselves demand it – they act like self appointed loyalists but without an official regime. They must not have been exposed to any innoculating literature what so ever (Solzhenitsyn, Koestler, Orwell et al).
Shameful.
I agree with all of the comments above. But I can’t help but be amused by the delicious irony of being deplatformed from giving a talk on the challenges that occur when politics and science intersect by a group that either disagrees with two of the presenters on an issue having nothing to do with science, or is afraid of the social and reputational consequences of hosting a discussion with presenters with whom their colleagues or students might disagree … politically. All by a group advertising the discussion with an image of science and politics shaking hands. Bill Maher or Monte Python could have me rolling on the floor laughing with a routine about this decision by Beta Break. The irony is compounded by the reason for deplatforming in a country that was the home of Anne Frank and her martyred family.
+1
Well, that is truly disappointing. I still think of the Netherlands, perhaps mistakenly, as a bastion of tolerance, but I guess that was in the past. I think it incredibly rude to let you travel all the way there, and do all the work preparing for the talk, only to cancel at the last minute. I also agree that it is ironic, because, although your paper deals with ideology distorting science, in a larger sense it is about politics trumping freedom of speech. Perhaps there is some other organization, a congregation maybe, that would like to give you a platform for this talk?
I had that idea about the Dutch and WWII as well. But I just read this:
https://www.annefrank.org/en/timeline/126/the-introduction-of-the-yellow-badge-in-the-netherlands/
According to the Anne Frank house, that whole Dutch standing with Jews thing was over stated and what did happen in this regard passed quickly.
I became prejudiced about European countries based on the fraction of each’s Jews murdered in the Holocaust. Holland does not have good optics—73%:
Netherlands
Jewish population of the Netherlands in May 1940: 140,245
Deaths: 102,000
https://encyclopedia.ushmm.org/content/en/article/jewish-losses-during-the-holocaust-by-country
From a book summary of Fahrenheit 451:
Doesn’t seem so far fetched now does it? How long before public debate is abandoned?
We really need a new, hard-hitting adaptation of Fahrenheit 451. I re-read it a couple years ago, and it’s still so timely, right down to the robot “dogs” with flamethrowers that the firemen have.
Fantastic. Masterpiece. Agreed on the need for a hard-hitting adaptation.
Pfff – I don’t even know where to begin – fear of free expression is one thing – but dialectical political warfare using people as objects in transformation (Hermetic alchemy) is evil. Don’t fall for the dialectical bait.
Here’s an idea : give the talk at a bistro somewhere like the old days of the coffee houses? I for one would like that better than a dismal seminar room – hangin’ out with a coffee in an old building or somesuch, getting into the ideas…
Good luck!
“And so the dialectic continues.”
-Delgado and Stefancic
Critical Race Theory – An Introduction, p.66, 3rd Ed., 2017
#DeplatformingBreedsFear
#VoltaireFTW
#LetTheManSpeak
Post edit deadline addition:
“Not to have a correct political point of view is like having no soul […]”
-Mao Zedong / Mao Tse-Tung
On the Correct Handling of Contradictions Among the People
(February 27, 1957)
1st pocket ed., pp. 43-44
See also marxists dot org, or free ebooks in various collections….
…. Emily Drabinski’s The Politics of Correction takes on a new light, does it not?
But I digress…
What a shame! It is a significant mistake and sets a bad precedent to deplatform speakers, once invited, unless there is real fear of actual violence. Those at the U of Amsterdam who would care about how this looks might be inspired by the Kalven Report at Jerry’s University, which addresses the issue of how a university should be a home for those who express political views, but no body of it should endorse such views as that creates an environment that silences other voices:
https://provost.uchicago.edu/sites/default/files/documents/reports/KalvenRprt_0.pdf
I’d recommend that everyone over there who is concerned to read every bit of it (it isn’t very long), but here is a salient quote:
“The university is the home and sponsor of critics; it is not itself the critic. It is, to go back once again to the classic phrase, a community of scholars. To perform its mission in the society, a university must sustain an extraordinary environment of freedom of inquiry and maintain an independence from political fashions, passions, and pressures. A university, if it is to be true to its faith in intellectual inquiry, must embrace, be hospitable to, and encourage the widest diversity of views within its own community. It is a community but only for the limited, albeit great, purposes of teaching and research. It is not a club, it is not a trade association, it is not a lobby.”
Even if there is a real fear of actual violence, speakers should not be deplatformed, for that would mean that anyone who makes a credible threat of real violence decides who is allowed to speak and who isn’t. That is capitulation. Rather, the response is for the state to prevent violence no matter what.
+1
I know that quote – thanks for “bumping” it – saved to my quote repository for handy reference.
#QuotesAreGreat
I’m surprised. I guess I’m too old to have internalized the current intolerant climate, although I’ve certainly read about it enough.
I also didn’t know that the Israel/Palestine conflict had become a deal-breaker. I know there’s controversy but has it really come to cancelling people on an unrelated topic?
I notice that it’s a student/young people’s group. That’s very discouraging. It shows that the next generation is going to be very intolerant indeed. So discouraging.
Yep. Maybe the university should provide at least a little adult supervision with a faculty advisor.
Outrageous — shameful — and I hope they are reimbursing you for your expenses.
But more to the point
This situation highlights the insidiousness of cancel culture — in academia, and beyond. You are being cancelled:
1. Even though the focus of your talk has nothing to do with the political issue of concern
2. Ostensibly at least, not because the organizers themselves oppose providing you an opportunity to speak, but because (they claim) they are afraid of what others will think about them and what hosting you will do to their reputation.
In other words, it isn’t enough that no one can be permitted to voice the unacceptable views, it is not permissible to even associate with someone who in other contexts has voiced the unacceptable views.
This is how the intellectual terrorism of cancel culture has its effects. People are fearful of even associating with someone who holds “unacceptable” views because they are fearful of what others will think of them. Never underestimate the power of social and professional shunning and the difficulty that most people have in standing up against the bullies with even a modicum of courage.
But yeah — cancel culture isn’t real. Well — not as long as you toe the party line.
Seems to me that antisemitism is alive and well in Amsterdam. I expect the University of Amsterdam is in thrall as well to the rabid students supporting Hamas and are spineless like many other so called “centres of learning excellence” On a positive note, at least you will not have to worry about possibly being subjected to personal safety risks from an ill informed vocal part of the audience. I do hope that your visit is not completely ruined.
Science in Amsterdam has lost a valuable opportunity to learn some real truth and knowledge.
Commiserations with you and colleagues for all the energy and time you have no doubt spent planning this discussion.
Thanks. I never really feared for my safety, though!
This is meant to tag comment #20: “Intellectual terrorism of cancel culture”… What an evocative and accurate description of this pattern in action. Again and again we see it and this time so close to home as it happens to the host of this website. There is a Masterpiece show called “World’s on Fire” aired on PBS a year or so ago. Not to sound overly dramatic, but each time I hear another story like what Jerry is currently experiencing in Amsterdam, my mind returns to the first season of that show. There are two schoolgirls who are best friends in Germany just prior to the breakout of WWII. One is enraptured by the propaganda of the 3rd Reich and ultimately turns her best friend in for the crime of not falling prey to the lies. It is a horrifying scene when this innocent adolescent is dragged away during an interrogation by the school officials. What sickens me is how words like “tolerance”, “safety”, and “inclusion” are used to defend acts that are anything but tolerant, safe, or inclusive. Such gutless hypocrisy!
I find it disturbing that so many Western universities seem to care more about the appearance of far Left ideological purity than the pursuit and dissemination of knowledge. Why do they collapse into cancellation like a house of cards at the least sign of criticism? I don’t get it.
This situation is reminiscent of the deplatforming of Richard Dawkins in California several years back. Hopefully some other local group will step up and offer you a platform, as happened in Dr. Dawkins’s circumstance.
I’m supposed to give a full lecture at another university on Thursday, so I have another chance. And we may well film a discussion between Maarten and I on Friday.
Indeed. You could put it on YouTube.
The last-minute deplatforming of Richard Dawkins in 2017 was eye-opening for me, as I was looking forward to his talk. I’m sorry to see that the intellectual disease of deplatforming is continuing to metastasize, now affecting Jerry, another person I admire.
https://x.com/Jon_Alexandr/status/1385277329442623493
Very sorry to hear this Jerry. But glad that you have another talk scheduled and that you won’t be out any money!
I’m doing this for free, as I do all academic talks (sometimes there’s a modest honorarium of $100 or so). But I do this for both educating, discussing, and also, in this case, being in a nice place. The organizers paid for my trip, so I’m not out any money, but I’m sad that they didn’t get their money’s worth!
I hope these other events are not also cancelled. These things have a way of snowballing. In the days of social media, there are many people actively looking for reasons to be offended.
It’s a deplorable action and worrisome sign of the times. How very un-scholarly.
I am not at all surprised that this would happen at some point, at some place. The loss is theirs, and you will have more opportunities to make the case for science at venues that are more congenial to its honest and vigorous pursuit.
Even when they see the irony themselves of deplatforming speakers they still don’t get what a bad policy it is at a place for education. Sad.
Amsterdam…the place of tolerance no more.
So some members of the committee “didn’t feel comfortable” allowing a couple of Zionists to speak on the topic of science and cancel culture, and presumably all the members of the committee didn’t feel comfortable about potentially being blackballed. How nice then that they do feel comfortable illustrating the principle they originally wanted to see criticized.
I’m outraged at the insult to you, Boudry, and the integrity of science itself. The article was excellent and the talk would have been killer. My hope is that the Streisand Effect gives you a larger platform to emphasize the importance of your topic. Bet it does.
Thanks for the kind comment, and to all the other people on this thread as well!
You know, it strikes me as pretty weird that your article grabbed hold of a lot of hot wires — the sex binary, innate male/female psychological differences, race as real, spurious indigenous “ways of knowing,” etc — and yet none of those hot controversies got you deplatformed. Instead, a war in the Mideast ended up being the catalyst for cancellation outrage from the critical justice warriors.
Bet you didn’t see that one coming when you wrote it.
Yes—in fact, when I read the first few words of the post’s title, “I’ve been deplatformed…,” my mind went immediately to the sex binary topic, and I assumed someone outside of the inviting organization was responsible. The thinking involved with this cancellation seems so convoluted.
I thought exactly the same thing when I first came across this post. None of those other raging wildfire issues did the job, they actually got him invited in the first place. What got him canceled was being more sympathetic to Israelis / Jews than to HAMAS. Go figure. I think the end is nigh, or something.
I thought the opposite— that it surely would be due to Palestine protestors.
The sex-binary thing is still an issue, but there aren’t organized massive protests against… biology. And the outrage there is getting a bit stale and outdated. All things Palestinian is more trendy.
As odious as it is, Prof Coyne can also take this as a compliment. Protestors only really go after those who whose voices are making a difference and being listened to.
+1
Another astounding example of ideology infiltrating free academic discourse. So off-the-mark and sadly ironic. Very disturbing.
This is so sad. I am a super liberal but agree with you on the Hamas/Israel war. I believe in free speech. If you don’t think you will like a presentation, don’t go to it. This was just wrong, especially given your speech had nothing whatsoever to do with any war. I envy you being in Amsterdam. Don’t let the cancellation get you down. There are so many wonderful things to see and do in Amsterdam so go and do them.
Shouldn’t that be “I’m a super liberal and so of course I agree with you on the Hamas/Israel war”? It would be difficult to find any group anywhere in the world more in conflict with traditional liberal views than Hamas.
I thought the exact same thing when I read that conjunction.
Exactly.
Betabreak’s action is an ideological subversion of democracy.
This is very sad, and especially that it is happening in the Netherlands. There have been ongoing protests at the University of Amsterdam, and it decided to close today and tomorrow. Last week, education minister Robbert Dijkgraaff (former director of the Institute for Advanced Study in Princeton) reiterated that “universities should be a safe space for everyone” and that “the great strength of a university is that you can discuss and debate where you ‘fight’ each other with arguments.”. Too bad that the organizers do not seem to adhere to this.
I might be taking “safe space for everyone” out of context but it has come to mean that certain views can’t be expressed for fear of causing “harm” to the most fragile and easily upset closed minds, who are usually progressive women and/or effeminate sexual-gender minorities. (“Women’s tears win all arguments”, as Richard Hanania says.). Regardless of Mr. Dijkgraaff’s actual intent, “safe spaces” is an unfortunate choice of words because it endorses the very worst inclinations on university campuses, which professors actually get fired for challenging.
To his credit, he said it in Dutch where it doesn’t have that connotation, to the best of my knowledge.
I’m surprised and saddened that the University of Amsterdam cancelled your discussion. As one of the better universities in Europe, I had thought that fear of allowing invited guests to speak, because they had unpopular opinions, would not be as bad as in the USA. I was wrong, they seem to have the same problems we have here with cowardly suppression of rational discussion for petty reasons.
Unbelievable and shameful. Like others have said, I wouldn’t have expected this from the Netherlands. And yes, give the talk at a nearby bistro!
“The era of hypocrisy, mediocrity, dishonesty, and outright lunacy.” – Adrian Rabbani
Courage appears to be the least common trait among humans. The least.
Each of us is responsible; we must -each of us- re-ignite western values, the western way and civil debate. I have committed to rejecting tribalism, to rejecting fundamentalism (on *any* issue), to listening, hearing, sharing and to conversation – however difficult.
So sorry this happened. If you have enough time (interest) maybe organize the talk someplace else – nearby?
What’s next, cancelling someone because they don’t like the colour taupe?
Do Amsterdam University or Betabreak have financing from Muslim interests? Fanatic ideologues are a cancer but, also, one should almost always follow the money.
I don’t know the answer but I doubt it. They are just following the Zeitgeist of the young in Amsterdam, who appear to be strongly pro-Palestinian.
“Palestinian-Chilean sensation Elyanna” had her tv debut on The Late Show with Stephen Colbert this past May 8th. (Jen Psaki was also on this episode.) Elyanna’s second performance on this episode was “the first song to be performed entirely in Arabic on The Late Show.” (Posted to YouTube on May 9.)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xK1dSeAwQMo
Were Elyanna’s two performances an indirect “statement” about the war by Stephen Colbert or CBS? Or was it just pandering to the current Zeitgeist of college protestors?
Shameful.
The people who invited you are open about simply being afraid of what might happen to them if they didn’t cancel your talk, and they wished to make it publicly known that they are taking a knee to their intimidators. This means to me that the civil authorities who have the power to override the heckler’s veto (by knocking hecklers’ heads together) have decided the universities are a hill they are not prepared to die on. Even if they are unsympathetic to deplatformers they have to save their efforts for more dire threats to the kingdom itself.
At least they acknowledge the irony! “Politics is preventing us from allowing your talk about politics distorting scientific facts.”
In the tale of the Pied Piper-ish BètaBreak, the danger of blindly following the lead of those who wield power, influence, or invitations comes into focus. When we allow ourselves to be swayed by censorious political agendas or biases, we risk losing sight of the values of free expression and open inquiry that are essential to the pursuit of truth.
A distinguished professor traverses 4K miles and is the unwitting recipient of an ideological ‘ice bucket challenge’ sorting event. Shameful and shocking.
So sorry to see that the contagion of deplatforming has spread so far and wide. I am particularly concerned that educational institutions are involved. How are we to understand the issues of the day if we are unable to discuss and to analyze? Deplatforming strikes at the heart of academia. I second the comment about Spinoza.
What seems to be lacking in this, as in all such instances, is some simple courage to stand up to bullies. It’s the lack of conviction in their principles that I find so contemptible.
The bully picks on someone he already knows won’t be able to stand up to him. Simple courage won’t deter him. Bullies are stopped only when an adult intervenes. What we are seeing is that the adults have decided to sit this one out, perhaps because the bully’s uncle is the local untouchable gang chieftain with a track record of luridly creative but dangerously unpredictable violence.
Yes this is so often the root problem. It’s fine/whatever that students at UvA are intolerant antisemites. Free speech etc. The students should be free to denounce Jerry if they want to. The real problem is university administrators and org leaders at Betabreak bending to the will of the intolerant.
I can’t add anything of note that hasn’t already been expressed here, so will say only that I’m sorry this happened to you and hope it doesn’t completely taint your stay in that beautiful city.
Appalling. A combination of censorship with a big helping of cowardice.
This does speak positively about Drs Coyne and Boudry for having the guts to publicly state a position which is unpopular in the academy.
Have a fantastic stay in Amsterdam-
Another stab in the heart of rational thought allowing only the thoughless thugs a voice.
I can only say to ‘rational educators’, please, never give up your quest to bring us out of the dark ages.
Given the violent protests, they could have said that it was due to safety concerns.
BTW I presented this blog post to ChatGPT 4o and asked it to write a reaction. Here it is:
=====
Your blog post highlights a significant issue in academia today: the increasing prevalence of deplatforming due to political views, even when those views are unrelated to the topic of discussion. Here’s my reaction:
The recent deplatforming of Dr. Coyne and Dr. Boudry by the Betabreak science discussion group at the University of Amsterdam is a troubling example of how academic freedom is being compromised by political considerations. The decision to cancel a discussion on evolutionary biology because of the speakers’ views on the Israel-Palestine conflict, which were expressed independently of the planned event, underscores a worrying trend in which the mere association with certain political stances can lead to exclusion from academic discourse.
This incident is reminiscent of the case of Dorian Abbot at MIT, where similar reasoning was used to prevent a speaker from addressing a scientific topic due to their unrelated political opinions. Such actions not only undermine the principles of free speech and open inquiry but also set a dangerous precedent where academic forums are no longer safe spaces for diverse viewpoints.
It is particularly ironic that the cancelled discussion was intended to address how ideological biases can distort scientific understanding. By cancelling the event, Betabreak has inadvertently demonstrated the very issue Dr. Coyne and Dr. Boudry were set to discuss. The fear of being “blackballed” at the university reflects an environment where conformity to certain political views is prioritized over the pursuit of knowledge and intellectual diversity.
The academic community must resist this trend and reaffirm its commitment to free speech and open debate. Deplatforming individuals based on their political views, especially when those views are unrelated to the academic content, is antithetical to the core values of higher education. Universities should be bastions of free thought, where ideas can be challenged and debated on their merits, rather than suppressed out of fear of controversy.
In conclusion, the deplatforming of Dr. Coyne and Dr. Boudry is a clear violation of academic freedom. It highlights the urgent need for universities to protect the rights of scholars to express diverse opinions without facing professional repercussions. Only by doing so can we ensure that academia remains a space for robust and open intellectual engagement.
Crikey. Even a dumb machine knows better! Thanks for doing this Herman.
I’m appalled by this cowardly and shameful deplatforming.
Heckler’s veto wins again.
Whoever is responsible for the cancellation of the scientific Coyne / Maroja- event : shame on you! You are using Nazi- Methods !!!
I, for one, disagree with your views on Israel, but would with great pleasure have attended the talk that was cancelled. I also disagree with some of your food preferences, by the way.
I would have deplatformed Dr. Coyne for his opinion on oatmeal raisin cookies.
I’m kidding, I’m kidding! I believe in freedom of expression when it comes to cookies!
Well, food preferences are subjective, as I always say. I am curious why you mention my food preferences in this discussion.
Because I’m trying to tease you, you doofus. I guess I’m not as funny as I thought I was.
Or alternately, I was trying to highlight the absurdity of associating an opinion on one subject with another entirely unrelated one.
As Frau Katze pointed out above, BetaBreak appears to be a student organization, with a governing committee of seven young women and one young man. Do they not have faculty mentors? Who was ultimately responsible for the decision? While I scorn such behavior in general, I am hesitant to cast opprobrium on these young people without first knowing the degree to which it was fear or antipathy that motivated them. This could be a teaching moment. One hopes.
I chuckle at the notion that cancelling this talk will help them avoid unwanted attention. Given that antipathy toward Jerry’s strong stance for Israel (and his opposition to Hamas) appears to have played at least some role in the decision, these students might have deflected the potential ire of their peers while inviting that of others, perhaps from a man who believes that “Israel is the West’s first line of defense.”
https://www.jpost.com/Opinion/Columnists/Geert-Wilders-and-European-democracy
Lest any misread my intent, that is not a smear by association. Our old political categories of “left” and “right” no longer make much sense; our allies on one issue could be adversaries on another. Glad to see so many commenters rallying in support of our host.
That’s an interesting op-ed. One of the great bonuses of reading WEIT is all the ancillary knowledge I gain from fellow readers. I’ve bookmarked more than I’ll ever have the time to read. Akways worthwhile.
I was told that it was the student vote that resulted in our deplatforming. But of course I can have no idea about what motivated them: “fear or antipathy” as you say. And there can be no teaching moment since I don’t get to talk to them. They can, however, read these comments, which were designed to be that very teaching moment. (My post is neutral above, as you see.
The commenters here are the teachers.
It’s hard to look at Betabreak’s decision here and see anything but ugly motives and flimsy spines.
On the one hand, you have the vindictive and sanctimonious lot who called for the cancellation–a pack of miscreants who believe that they operate within an unambiguous, unassailable position of moral superiority. From these lofty heights, they eagerly dispense punishment to those who disagree with their point of view.
On the other, you have people who apparently don’t have the ingredients to take a principled stand against this kind of mean-spirited, myopic authoritarianism and instead become its reactionary instruments.
Sadly, this combination of punitive moral clarity and self-preserving cowardice is pretty commonplace these days. If a loud enough person says they are offended or appalled, a lot folks with a responsibility to uphold liberal values will apparently turn to dust and blow away on the wind.
I am sorry this happened to you, Jerry. The cancellation is unfair and shameful.
+1
Politics pervades not just the academy, but also the arts, the church, and business. This is the very definition of totalitarianism.
This kind of thing has occurred previously in various places and times in the West, and the societies have always recovered. This time, it has assumed an international scale hitherto unknown. Will society recover? We’ll see.
It might be helpful if other speakers decided to cancel themselves in support of the 3 who were axed. Just to make a point.
In this case it seems the whole event is cancelled.
Yes, that would be nice.
It’s hard to believe something like this can happen in a 2024 democracy…
It’s appalling that this organization caved to such a close-minded mentality. If members of free societies cannot discuss political differences in a civil manner, the free societies begin to crumble. What are we left with then? Certainly not an environment conducive to the unfettered exploration of the natural world.
One point worth mentioning: When that notice of cancellation stated “We understand the irony of this considering this is the very issue that Dr. Coyne wrote his article about, however the group decided we can’t host this event given the current political climate,” I believe the group meant to reference the irony of what it was doing in light of the nature of your article and pending discussion. Your presentation would have reflected the paper’s focus on the problem of infusing science with politics, if I understand you correctly. I don’t believe the group intended to imply that your discussion would be about the Israel/Hamas war. My take is that it alluded to the fact that it was succumbing to the very challenge to scientific inquiry that your paper pointed out. Just my 2 cents worth.
What a shame! I really hope it does create a Streisand Effect bounce!
During the pandemic, I was happy that scientists stoically looked for the only good way out, despite all the criticism from people who were lost and didn’t understand science. Now I’m afraid that science is the one that’s losing its way. It is harmful and ammunition for the people who already shouted during the pandemic that science is unreliable. It takes any smart and scientific solution to future major problems further away than ever. The “scientists” who cancel you are putting more at stake than they realize. They have no sense of responsibility.
Where I come from, there is only one word to describe:
Horseshit.
Also chicken and bull (which is close to the name of the pub in Jesus & Mo).
What a bummer! I’m stupefied by the stupidity.
Shame on Betabreak for its cowardice and bigotry. To cancel a talk that had nothing to with Israel/Palestine because of the speakers’ stance on the irrelevant topic is textbook cancel culture. I hope this organization gets plenty of bad publicity for its craven actions.
Disgusting and cowardly. Sorry about your situtation – you deserve better
My commiserations Gerry. An utterly shameful decision. And in Amsterdam of all places: once Spinoza’s refuge, don’t they know their own history? Unbelievable!
Nothing polite to say about the deplatforming. My obscure voice added to those above in dismay & outrage & in your support. (Sure, sometimes I don’t agree with your food taste or the way you express some things. I do like cats!)
Absolutely atrocious behaviour. It brings the academie into disrepute when it will not even tolerate discussion,
Did this pop your de-platforming cherry, or has this happened to you before?
I can’t say I’m surprised given the current cancel-culture climate, but it’s still very disappointing.
This is the first time I’ve been deplatformed or cancelled in any way.
Tempted to move to the Netherlands just so I can vote for Geert Wilders, one of the few Dutch people still holding back the flood.
I hope everyone is beginning to understand how fragile democracy can be – it’s dependent on the basic decency of people, which is never assured. This is being imposed from above/outside, and too many people think the problem is actually Democracy itself.
Remember this: “There is no doubt that a small group of committed, thoughtful people can change the world; indeed, it is the only thing that ever has.” – Margaret Meade. This is NOT a mass-movement. It’s a coup being orchestrated by the world’s über-wealthy via de facto unlimited funding.
This is alarming, but frankly it’s nothing in comparison to Warren Smith (@WTSmith17 on X) being fired from his teaching job a week ago, which we only learned about yesterday. For his viral video (on YT) he was getting nothing but accolades from his own bosses, then after a month or so, suddenly in 5 minutes (as he says) it was all over. It seems he was given no reason, and was offered cash to sign a Non-Disclosure document which he declined.
Awful, and all too common in university settings. Don’t trust universities to honour their commitments. One resentful student can cancel a public meeting.
Total disgrace!
My opinion would not be so close to yours on Israel/Gaza (I’m not pro either side). But you’re perfect when it comes to the meta issues of free speech and cancellation, which is something I usually care more about than the non-meta issues.
Betabreak should be ashamed. They had an opportunity to stand up for freedom of thought and speech, and they blew it.
How can anyone think there’s a reasonable stance to take on this issue. However it’s framed, you either support made-murdering terrorists or a mass-murdering state. It’s not like anyone’s opinion on the war, one way or the other, is going to make a bit of difference to the outcomes. Smarter people in higher positions of power are utterly powerless to change things, so why should we care what ordinary people think of it?
Well, with all respects, you did take a side as did many others at US universities, at least you have the moral high ground of not being in a protest that ended with toxic elements.
I stopped respecting either side years ago and just feel compassion for those at the bottom of the totem pole who suffer for it.
Perhaps the point is that those taking a side should not prevent the other side from speaking up. I don’t think Jerry supported the suppression of opposing views. In our effort to resolve differences without resorting to violence, it is important to keep the channels of debate and discussion open.
I know. I said he had that moral high ground in one certain aspect.
Most of those protestors were probably harmless, the usual case I’ve seen in them is that a sizeable element become toxic bastards.
I see. Thanks!
I lost respect for both sides some time ago. Just gangs and chess players (people who play the long game with manipulation).
Well… it was bound to happen eventually.
Theocracies and theocratic demands of orthodoxy are not only reserved for religions.
Just don’t go silently.
Dear Jerry,
I am outraged! but unfortunately it doesn’t surprise me. all the best!
Sadly no one in Amsterdam will get the opportunity to engage and be informed.
They will be BetaOff!
In their deep past this was a city that was know as a safe haven for liberal discourse, now BetaBreak reject that notion for an irony.
It is twisted that a talk about science and polictics has now drawn out a queston of free speech to a totally unrelated subject matter.
Not suprised but disappointed for our host and the people who wished to learn, expand and inquire.
Betabreak should pay the ultimate penalty of being shunned by all scientists because of their recent last-minute cancellation of Coyne and Boudry’s scientific discussion, a cancellation made for solely sociopolitical reasons.
Shun Betabreak!
Shameful indeed. I’ve had many good interactions with Dutch colleagues over the years and am shocked that they’ve slipped into this.
I recall walking through Dam Sq. on my first visit to Amsterdam and somehow noticing a distinctive stone-faced building housing a department store. Not so long afterwards, I found it was once Nazi SS headquarters. Gave me a chill.
See link below and scroll down a bit.
https://historythenandnow.com/2016/11/20/amsterdam-wwii-era-and-before/
As someone said once, “history may not repeat, but it does rhyme”.
As several commenters have pointed out (e.g., #20, #45), the last minute cancellation by Betabreak of an invited panel discussion is a perfect example of precisely what the panel was set to discuss. At the risk of being contrarian, I suggest that this example is even better than an abstract panel discussion of the subject would be. And the next stage—we can no doubt look forward to cancellation of lectures on speciation in Drosophila for the same reasons—-will be even more instructive.
I wish our host a pleasant, well-deserved visit to Amsterdam, at Betabreak’s expense. A few more examples of this sort, and we will no longer have to explain to sleepy-heads what “cancellation culture” actually means.
Laingholm (comment #70) said “Sadly no one in Amsterdam will get the opportunity to engage and be informed.”
I think this is really the key point: The losers here are the potential attendees who wanted to hear what Professors Coyne and Boudry had to say on the announced topic (“The Ideological Subversion of Biology”), and were willing to attend without reference to the professors’ views on other topics.
It’s certainly not going to have any material impact on Prof. Coyne’s overall ability to have his views heard.
In a way, it might even be a compliment to Prof. Coyne that his views are considered dangerous. I’m reminded of a poem by Bertolt Brecht:
>>The Burning Of The Books
>>When the Regime
>>commanded the unlawful books to be burned,
>>teams of dull oxen hauled huge cartloads to the bonfires.
>>Then a banished writer, one of the best,
>>scanning the list of excommunicated texts,
>>became enraged: he’d been excluded!
>>He rushed to his desk, full of contemptuous wrath,
>>to write fierce letters to the morons in power —
>>Burn me! he wrote with his blazing pen —
>>Haven’t I always reported the truth?
>>Now here you are, treating me like a liar!
[….]
Shameful; BetaBreak should be written as “Invertebrates”
Of course I find this cancellation appalling and beyond irony. The official cancellation is so peculiar in that 1) it recognizes “the irony of this [politically based de-platforming] considering this is the very issue that Dr. Coyne wrote his article about”; and 2) openly states the organizers’ “fear [that having the event] would reflect on us as a committee and that we might be blackballed at UvA/AUC.” But they won’t be because they have publicly announced their cowardice. Curious? Also curious is the complete lack of agency that this statement evinces. They “have to” cancel because they openly fear being open about their lack of spine and principle.
I want to add that I have read the article by Drs Coyne and Maroja and recommended it to many many friends, family and students. This is an amazing piece of scholarship that tackles in an intelligent manner myths that are borne and maintained by sloppy, anti-science thinking.
If you do one thing now, do yourself the favor of reading the Coyne and Maroja article:
https://skepticalinquirer.org/2023/06/the-ideological-subversion-of-biology/
Then gather and discuss. There is a great deal of meat here.
Thanks for the encomiums about our paper!
Appalling, obviously. Even more so that the people who cancelled you know they are being craven. At least you got a free trip to Amsterdam, Jerry. Hope you’re enjoying the fries.
Sometime during the day the betabreak website went private and now requires a login.
Irrespective of the deplatforming, why did they take so long to do it? Why don’t they have a checklist of unacceptable opinions to vet potential speakers or a form for them to fill out?
Just FYI
Dawkins, Shermer, and Pinker eXtweeted about this in support.
…
I suppose they might have read some of the comments, too.
[ proceeds to lose sleep in embarrassment over my comment’s structure, clarity, exposition, and my bizarre pseudonym ]
Quite ironic and a sad commentary on where we are. Which is warping science and truth with political ideology. Especially sad given the subject of the talk.
Would enjoy knowing the committee’s age distribution, the votes cast, (to cancel or not) and the correlation between the two. All of them (the silencers) proudly thrashing about in the self-certainty sun, an entire generation of adult moral minnows unaware of the ocean of democratically dangerous wetness behind their enlightenment rejecting ears.
As I understand it, the decision was made by majority vote OF THE STUDENTS. Given that, and that they’re all college students, the age distribution is pretty uniform.
I’ve been wondering whether or not the vote was a secret ballot? Had it been so, I wonder what Betabreak’s decision would have been had the vote gone 54%/46% against deplatforming? Hypothetical, I know but…
On a lighter note, I can’t stop thinking that Betabreak sounds like some sort of breakfast dish, and that they have gone similarly limp when the milk (of human kindness, and better communication) has been poured over them.
But truly sorry to read of this nonsense affecting you and Maarten, Jerry. All best wishes.
Pardon for assuming faculty had decided this. I’m very sorry it happened.
It’s not just science talks:
https://slippedisc.com/2024/05/just-in-dutch-run-scared-of-jerusalem-quartet/
[The headline is badly phrased.]
The comment on that page from “Jonathan” is informative. Apparently the violence there is getting worse.
Sorry you’ve been affected (again!) by all the nonsense going around.
I’m sorry indeed that you’ve been de-platformed, Jerry, no matter what the stated reasons from the student association. Here’s hoping that the attempt to suppress scientific inquiry backfires spectacularly, and becomes instructive to those who’ve comforted themselves with expediency.
“It is not because men’s desires are strong that they act ill; it is because their consciences are weak.” — John Stuart Mill, On Liberty.
#GreatQuotes
Very sorry to hear Jerry. Quite ridiculous, especially given the subject of the now cancelled talk. Annoyed for you.
Am I the only one who cannot enter Betabreaks website without a password? I would really like to have a look…
It appears to be closed to all but members (or those with a password) right now.
Jerry i am so sad to hear this and fully support you in all your efforts to carry on with your work. thank you for sharing this
i am mortified !
Another sign of corruption within Western institutions. Instead of Free Enquiry we have a new Inquisition.
“Another fear is how it would reflect on us as a committee and that we might be blackballed at UvA/AUC.”
Imagine being this gutless and this spineless.
The organizers have proved themselves worthy of the great insult that BoJo slung at the London Assembly: “Great Supine Protoplasmic Invertebrate Jellies”
Congratulations, Jerry. Being deplatformed is the greatest accolade that can be bestowed on a public intellectual. It means you are doing something right. As H. G. Wells said over a hundred years ago, “Human history becomes more and more a race between education and catastrophe.” There is no question as to who is winning that race today.
The world has gone mad.
There is the issue of politicization of Academia and science. It is a betrayal of the very essence what University is all about. Since the woke upheaval, they went to bed with Islamic extremism and antisemitism. Brown shirts are again back. This is the road to cognitive folly and cognitive vice. See my substack :
https://hxstem.substack.com/p/the-open-society-and-its-enemies
Late to the party, so most everything I could say has already been said, and likely better than I would say it, but I join the many commenters here in decrying this unjustified censorship.
I am left nearly speechless anyway by yet another example of this bizarre malady afflicting the young people of today. Self-proclaimed as the most enlightened generation in human history, they continue to prove themselves stunningly ignorant, judgmental, close-minded and incapable of tolerating opposing views.
Their apparently unquestioning love for one of the most illiberal movements on the planet (Hamas, but the same goes for most Islamic regimes) is utterly confounding. It makes about as much sense as if following 9/11 we would have seen signs for “NYC Firefighters for Al-Qaeda”.
Sad for you. Sad for science. But then again not surprising in light of the long run of human history during which many scientists have been ostracized or even killed for their research, ideas, ethnicities or lack of “correct beliefs”. I enjoy reading your blog, that you stand your ground no matter the idiocy pounding on your door.
Shouldn’t a “science discussion platform” get the handedness of a DNA molecule literally right or at least don’t use a figure in which the handedness stays the same over the whole length of the moelcule?
The pursuit of truth gave way to mobbing, silencing and terrorizing others in words and deeds. Shameful and disgusting. Spinoza 2.0 and this is just the beginning, so we need to stop it immediately