The American Association of University Professors (AAUP) “Faculty Issues and Concerns” listserv at the University of Washington (UW) presents an interesting case for examining the question of academic norms and free speech. As an open online forum with over seventeen hundred subscribers, it allows faculty to communicate across departments and campuses on a variety of topics. With the stated purpose of “advancing the principles of the AAUP and encouraging active discussion of higher education issues and faculty rights,” the listserv provides a unique site for faculty exchange and debate. Indeed, as a user-driven platform, the listserv enables its members to present a host of issues through moderated discussions that are often contentious and controversial.1 In this brief discussion, I want to highlight several exchanges that occurred between 2013 and 2015. All of the conversations concerned the topic of Palestine-Israel and shared common features that relate directly to concerns over the meaning and purpose of academic norms and freedom. Speci†cally, the exchanges demonstrate what we might call a discursive pattern in which certain faculty members seek to constrain the meaning of free speech so as to eˆectively prevent critical discussions and actions on the topic of Israel. As I will show, whether on the question of divestment or the academic critique of Israel, these faculty members invoke civility, politics, and freedom to end the conversation. The key word here is invoke. What makes these discussions important is the way principles like “free speech” and norms like “civility” are used, not de†ned. Thus the pattern I would like to underscore involves the careful avoidance of any de†nitions that might open critical examination into what does and does not count as norms of

中文翻译：

---

反对批评的“言论自由”

美国大学教授协会 (AAUP) 华盛顿大学 (UW) 的“教师问题和关注”列表提供了一个有趣的案例，用于检查学术规范和言论自由的问题。作为一个拥有 1700 多个订阅者的开放式在线论坛，它允许教师跨部门和校园就各种主题进行交流。以“推进 AAUP 的原则并鼓励对高等教育问题和教师权利的积极讨论”为既定目的，列表服务为教师交流和辩论提供了一个独特的网站。事实上，作为一个用户驱动的平台，listserv 使其成员能够通过经常有争议和有争议的适度讨论来提出一系列问题。 1 在这个简短的讨论中，我想强调一下 2013 年至 2015 年之间发生的几次交流。所有对话都涉及巴勒斯坦-以色列的话题，并具有共同的特征，这些特征直接涉及对学术规范和自由的意义和目的的担忧。具体而言，这些交流展示了一种我们可以称之为话语模式的东西，在这种模式中，某些教职员工试图限制言论自由的含义，从而有效地阻止关于以色列话题的批判性讨论和行动。正如我将要展示的，无论是关于撤资问题还是对以色列的学术批评，这些教职员工都以文明、政治和自由来结束对话。这里的关键词是调用。使这些讨论变得重要的是“言论自由”等原则和“文明”等规范的使用方式，而不是定义的方式。