NUS Practices Intellectual Fascism


London:  November 6, 2015 – By cancelling lectures by individuals such as Germaine Greer, whose views it deems unacceptable, the National Union of Students is practicing a form of intellectual fascism, according to Social Commentator Mal Fletcher.

In a paper and video published by the London-based international think tank 2020Plus, Fletcher argues that while the NUS has a duty to guard its public podium on issues such as religio-political extremism, there are other issues which should remain on the table for debate.

“Society as a whole has few qualms about denying a public forum to speakers who recruit or act as apologists for terrorist groups,” says Mal Fletcher.

“However, there are other important ethical and moral questions for which the jury of informed public opinion is still deliberating.  This is arguably true in the case of transgenderism.”

“In cases like this, discussion is not only desirable but essential. Shutting down a debate before it has properly begun is not only an insult to the intelligence of students, it is a form of censorship – which most liberal student groups are supposedly against.”

Recent media and press coverage on transgenderism has featured stories about children who request gender realignment, or whose parents do so on their behalf.

However, this perceived gender confusion is often a part of the normal development of a child's sexual identity, Fletcher believes.

Children and young teenagers experience a wide range of emotions and questions about their gender roles at different stages of their growth.

“For certain children, psychological experimentation might express itself in forms of behaviour which don't seem appropriate to their gender.”

“Does that mean that they would benefit from gender reassignment? It may simply mean that they need empathy, patience and support from parents who understand that gender identity is, to an extent, fluid in all children - at least for a while.”

On issues like transgenderism, representative organisations like the NUS should recognise that no prevailing societal consensus has been reached and allow honest, though not intemperate, discussion.

“To disallow open debate on an issue like this,” Fletcher concludes, “is to deny others a right that one demands for oneself – the right of freedom of expression and belief.”

For interviews with Mal Fletcher or further information, please contact 2020Plus 


© Copyright 2020plus.net with Mal Fletcher

Recent Social Comments

››  Facebook's Libra Requires Too Much Trust

Posted on: Wednesday 19 June 2019

››  Privacy is the Future? Not on Trains

Posted on: Thursday 23 May 2019

››  Julian Assange: Anarchist or Activist?

Posted on: Thursday 11 April 2019

››  Christchurch and Social Media Censorship

Posted on: Monday 18 March 2019

››  Should An ISIS Bride Become Stateless?

Posted on: Wednesday 20 February 2019