Democracy's Fading Beacon

This week the American Civil Liberties Union amended a lawsuit in a Boston federal court on behalf of the American Sociological Association (ASA). Its intent is to wrest an explanation from the Departments of State and Homeland Security as to why the U.S. government refuses to admit internationally known South African scholar Adam Habib into the United States for purposes of scholarly exchange. Professor Habib was denied a visa on the charge that he "engaged in terrorist activities," but the government has not produced and refuses to produce supporting evidence or to even specify his alleged offense.

The real explanation for Habib's visa denial seems to be "ideological exclusion," an unwritten policy by which the government refuses to allow people who have expressed critical political views from entering the country.

As a scientific association whose goal is to advance sociology and promote its contributions to society, the ASA had invited Habib to speak at the Association's 2007 Annual Meeting. Habib, Deputy Vice-Chancellor of the University of Johannesburg, has a Ph.D. in political science from the City University of New York and is a world-renowned scholar of democracy, governance, and social movements. He is also a Muslim of Indian descent who, as a prominent human rights advocate, promotes democracy and equality. As such, Habib has questioned the efficacy of the war in Iraq and certain U.S. anti-terrorism policies.

In October 2006, the U.S. government suddenly and without explanation confiscated Habib's visa and turned him away at JFK airport -- following years of unquestioned and unhindered travel to and from this country to study, teach, lecture, and participate in scientific conferences. His visit to the United States was for a series of meetings with private research and academic organizations and government agencies including the National Institutes of Health, National Science Foundation, and Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.

Habib's subsequent reapplication for a visa to speak at the ASA 2007 Annual Meeting met with suspicious quietness. Only after polite prodding was there any government acknowledgement that the scientific gathering was fast approaching and assurance that a decision would be forthcoming.

The prolonged unfolding of Habib's visa review and the U.S. government's latest baseless denial challenges our country's commitment to global democratic goals. Freedom to present scientific research and debate its implications for society are hallmarks of American democratic culture and the foundation of our enviable record of scientific achievement. Academic freedom has allowed scientists, intellectuals, and their scholarly societies to flourish and create one of the world's most dynamic educational systems and robust knowledge-based economies. The ASA is opposed to the use of visa denials or de facto denials on ideological grounds, because such action suppresses free intellectual exchange. The robustness of our scholarship depends upon hearing informed views and upon vigorous debate. No less than academic freedom is at stake.

Cloaked in a year's worth of State and Homeland Security secrecy, the U.S. government's lack of explanation and inaction on Habib's visa says much about emerging norms for government behavior that lack transparency and accountability. What does it mean to tout democracy as an aspiration for the world if our own government increasingly undermines our democratic credibility? How long will it take to encourage the world's scientists and scholars to take their knowledge elsewhere?

Habib's case is not unique. Many decisions on scholars' visas have not flowed easily, or at all, from the State Department in recent years, suggesting a disturbing pattern. In the face of government non-accountability, can the United States retain our nation's well-earned "bright beacon" metaphor that advertises hope, freedom, optimism, opportunity, and openness? Or, is our projected image becoming government-behind-closed-doors, a "warning beacon" of obfuscation, opaqueness and non-accountability?

Participants in the ASA's August 2008 Annual Meeting in Boston still hope to hear Dr. Habib along with other scholars from the United States, the Americas, and elsewhere. Every field of science, including sociology, is international in scope because science, by its very nature, transcends national and cultural boundaries.

History is replete with failed nations that became afraid of critical thought and debate. Our nation was built instead and deliberately upon the belief that the vigorous defense of our First Amendment rights to speak and be heard make us strong.

Comments

[DueTruthiness]

I find it interesting to note that during WWII when the Axis powers were trying so desperately to unlock the secrets of atomic energy it was their own priciples of idealogical exclusion that prevented them from allowing the various viewpoints needed to break through to signifigant scientific discovery. America by contrast offered a safe haven for the various schools of thought and thus it was no great surprise that many of the world's greatest minds of the time all gravitated to our country. We owe our many scientific achievmants to a philosophy that at one time promoted free exchange of thought. A philosophy that is sadly being eroded by a party that instead puts effort into discouraging thought so that it may achieve it's on covert aims. Bush wants history to remember him as the decider, it is clear though that he will never be remembered as the great thinker.

[ljsfolly]

The Democracy that bush has wanted to shove down the throats of Iraq is not the democracy he has "given" us. I expect that bushes words and actions were all just to manipulate everyone regarding what he wanted to spread in the world. We have seen the reality and it isn't a pretty package wrapped up with a bow. While I feel for those caught in the idealogy of democracy I also suspect that when a country is ready for their version of democracy they will have it. The problem with bushes version is that there was never an ounce of true desire for the advancement of democracy.

[OckhamsElectricRazor]

The ASA is just another example of the addage, "All that is necessary for the triumph of evil is that good men do nothing'. Academia and the professional associations in the US has been disgusting silent about the Neocon scurge in the this country. The basic fabric of society is being changed and the professional community responds with timid silence--fearful of losing grant money or finding disfavor in peer reviewed projects. The ASA's only public outcry is when ONE of their own is hurt. With the shining exception of the American Cancer Society this year, where are the voices of the Establishment healthcare associations about healthcare reform? The ABA is marching in support for Pakistania lawyers. What about the full frontal assault on the law in the US?! Historically, academia and the professions in the US have never taken leadership in the great political issues, e.g. the rise of Fascism in Europe, the civil right movement, etc. This sad tradition has sadly NOT changed in the present times of trouble.

[vbond]

Barring revelations to the contrary, I hope that Dr. Habib gets his visa.

But if he doesn't, his appearance at the 2008 meeting via Web Conference, in main sessions and smaller discussions, would be powerful on so many levels.

Think about it.

[realitytrumpsbull]

Well, Arne, that's because if you sit down and
research it, a lot of the democracy(R) stuff
sure seems to kind of boil down to window
dressing.

Roll the tape back to WWII, and commence
your studies with the subject of IG Farben,
kind of trace around the lineage and partnerships and all that kind of good stuff,
and then review what's happened in OUR
country from Y2K on forward. Interesting
times we live in, yes indeedy...

I support a guy named Kucinich in his effort
to take the cause of the People to Congresser,
well, at least that part of Congresser which
can still be said to belong TO the People,
and not to whomever up there...we're almost at
the centennial of the Standard Oil antitrust,
funny, how history repeats itself...
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Standard_Oil

Know what's the funniest part of all of this?
Gasoline is the LEFTOVERS...everybody's fighting
over LEFTOVERS...what a bunch of bushbags...

[SamThornton]

It's becoming increasingly difficult to discern the differences between the United States government and the excesses of Stalinism.

President Bush famously said that he looked into the soul of Vladimir Putin and was reassured by what he saw. As is becoming clear, Putin wishes nothing less than reinstitution of the Stalinist regime in Russia. Taking President Bush at his word, he would be comfortable with the same for America. Indeed, President Bush has largely succeeded in exactly that.

This is no small accomplishment. President Bush must be credited with the creation of an extremely effective autocracy just one Presidential signature away from a regime even more repressive than Stalin ever dreamed of.

Is there any possibility of reversing this fait accompli? Not likely. President Bush has successfully eviscerated his political opposition. No politician of national standing today has the courage to mount a counter-revolution.

Like it or not, we now live in a brave new world in which the Great Decider has absolute power and our lives and existence are at his whim.

[Lemeritus]

"What does it mean to tout democracy as an aspiration for the world if our own government increasingly undermines our democratic credibility?"

I do not know Dr. Habib, so I cannot speak in his defense. However, I do find it heartbreakingly ironic that United States of America stands to lose all that it ever stood for out of fear of criticism; worse, that my fellow countrymen -- here in these comments -- see nothing wrong with that.

"A country isn't a rock. And it isn't an extension of one's self. It's what it stands for, when standing for something is the most difficult."

[peterg76]

The US "commitment to global democratic goals"? The United States? Of America? The US is hated all over the world, not for bringing people democracy, but for taking it away. Al Qaeda wouldn't even exist if a) Palestinians and b) Saudis had actual democracy.

People won't fight to take back their democracy if they refuse to believe it's been lost.
Questioning whether the US still has the so-called "well-earned 'bright beacon' metaphor" is not helpful - the US has fallen far, far beyond that level. It's nice the US had a history of (sometimes) selfless enlightened foreign relations, but it's not the 19th century anymore.

[DueTruthiness]

Try to remember, Dubya is a "decider", he doesn't have time for debate or back and forth exchange of ideas. As for academic freedom, those two words aren't really his thing but here's two words he does like, "Mission Accomplished"! Then it's off to make another decision...

[Larenzo]

What else could you expect from this paranoid dubya regime? The reason they are so secretive and paranoid because they're afraid all the bad crap that they've done will be discovered. Like darth cheney's secret energy talks early on....like the real reason for the iraq invasion...secret prisons....torture...selling America out to corporate interests....this is an almost endless list. So anyone who can be kept from speaking out will be put down.....simple, folks.

[Atticus]

"Idealogical Exclusion" is a perfectly valid (and sensible) reason to deny a visa to any foreigner who has criticized the values and customs of our country.

A tired grassroots citizenry is very tired things will NOT get better in our country until we finally outlaw the ACLU.