“Civility” as a Threat to Academic Freedom

Critical intellectuals are unfortunately accustomed to intentional, institutional censorship and precarious academic labor as threats to the freedom to research, teach, and speak their minds. However, alongside these material forces of exclusion and silencing, we must consider ideological conditions as threats to academic freedom. As a case in point, “civility” is what rhetorical scholar Michael McGee describes as an “ideograph”: a shorthand word or phrase that captures and organizes community around prevailing ideological commitments. “Civility”—the basis of universal, rule-governed cooperation—is a widely takenfor-granted good in capitalist society. However, the call for civility masks the presence of contending interests and inequality. Those who call attention to antagonism definitionally violate the rules of civility and are subject to legitimated sanction. The ideology of civility is thus a significant threat to academic freedom. In what follows, I support this argument first with a historical and etymological discussion of the term “civility.” Then I will discuss the increasing deployment of this term to discipline critical intellectuals, particularly Steven Salaita. I conclude with a discussion of resistance to this ideological frame and the oppressive actions that it justifies.