| We
were greatly baffled by the attitude of a certain
cabinet member who expressed surprise when
the University authorities permitted Socialist
Abad Santos to speak before a convocation of
University professors and students. Contending
that the Socialist Supremo’s speech was
a ‘virtual insult to the government and
that the speech would have been more properly
delivered at a private institution rather than
at the State University, that department secretary,
whose identity has not been revealed, showed
extreme narrow-mindedness and excessive conservatism.
Such an attitude manifests social cowardice,
moreso when he refused to be publicly quoted.
To the broad-minded and understanding constituents
of this institution, it is clear that the
University in allowing Attorney Abad Santos
to address that convocation, was merely encouraging
reflective thinking among our students on
current problems.
Doubtless, without guidance, some students
and professors are apt to form hasty conclusions
based on rumors concerning serious topics
of the day. In providing the students’ opportunities
to hear views representing both sides of
any question, our University leaders make
possible intelligent, careful deliberations
based on actual contacts with the representative
conflicting factions of any question. Thus,
University students are being prepared to
view with impartiality and reflect on problems
they are to meet in real life before they
are swayed to any side of a big problem.
To interpret this gesture as a ‘virtual
insult to the government’ is to misunderstand
the real motives of University authorities
in allowing Don Pedro to speak before that
University audience. This narrow-minded assertion
constitutes an underestimation of the foresight
of our University constituents.
That the speech could have been more properly
delivered at a private institution rather
than at the State University is another distorted
thought from our critical secretary for we
believe that to guide the students properly
without necessarily cramping their ideas,
the proper procedure is not to deprive them
of opportunities to hear the question discussed.
On the contrary, the more they hear both
sides - the more impartial their conclusions
will be. More than any other group, a university
audience can better ponder such delicate
questions.
If bigoted ideas are to be avoided; if hasty
judgments are to be forestalled; if blind
following is to be discouraged - then students
should be exposed to varied ideas and personalities,
radical or otherwise. Only thus, can they
be in better position to make comparison,
and to choose which are worthwhile. In only
such a broad-minded manner can we expect
an intelligent reception and discussion of
questions of natural import within the academic
shades of the University campus.
be striking at the very root of our democratic
institutions." This statement we attribute
to Regent Guillermo Villanueva whose firm
stand on academic freedom and free discussion
merits commendation.
To oldsters who, like our unknown cabinet
member, invariably lament the impulsiveness
of youth, we recommend more careful appraisal
and greater moral courage. |