Historian resigns from free speech group over ‘opposition research’
NIALL FERGUSON, the British historian, has left his role with a Stanford University free speech initiative after leaked emails showed him suggesting “opposition research” be carried out on a Left-wing student.
Ferguson resigned from a leadership position on the Cardinal Conversations programme, which invites guest speakers from across the political spectrum to give talks.
The academic said he had made an “error of judgment” but had been “deeply concerned” by the reaction on campus against a talk by Charles Murray, the controversial social scientist, who spoke on Feb 22.
Ferguson said he acted because he believed the Cardinal Conversations programme was being taken over by “elements fundamentally hostile to free speech”.
His resignation from the programme’s committee came against a background of controversy over free speech at universities in the US and UK.
Ferguson’s leaked emails, published by The Stanford Daily, showed him in communication with conservative students.
A subject of discussion was Michael Ocon, a Left-wing activist student referred to as “Mr O”.
In one email, Ferguson wrote that “some opposition research on Mr O might also be worthwhile”.
And in another wrote: “Now we turn to the more subtle game of grinding them down on the committee. The price of liberty is eternal vigilance.”
Ferguson suggested that the original steering committee “should all be allies against O. Whatever your past differences, bury them. Unite against the SJWS (social justice warriors).”
The Cardinal Conversations initiative was launched in January as a “thought-provoking community discussion of key issues across the political spectrum”.
Ferguson said his emails had been prompted by the opposition to Murray’s visit. In a statement to The Daily Telegraph he said: “I very much regret the publication of these emails. I also regret having written them.
“I was deeply concerned by the events that took place on Feb 22. It seemed to me that the student steering committee was in danger of being taken over by elements that were fundamentally hostile to free speech.
“It was, however, reckless to use such inflammatory language. Realising subsequently that I had made a serious error of judgment, I resigned from Cardinal Conversations.”