KAIST's recent decision to disallow I Am a Ggomsu (a political talk show satirizing supposed transgressions of politicians) from being held at the school auditorium has proven controversial. With the school's alleged "political neutrailty" coming under fire from various people, should events with particular political leanings be allowed on campus?

Pro: University Should be an Open Intellectual Space
By Sou-yeon Lee

Recently, KAIST made the headlines with its rejection of I Am a Ggomsu, a popular talk show, to be held in the auditorium on campus. I Am a Ggomsu is a podcast in which four men talk about current social issues, often making sarcastic comments about the current administration. Thus, numerous suspicions arose as to why KAIST declined the show to be held on campus, notably regarding whether government pressure was involved or not. Despite all these speculations, KAIST made it clear that holding political, religious and for-profit events on campus is against school regulations. Considering that I Am a Ggomsu is closer to a talk show with political satire than a promotional campaign for particular political parties or a demonstration-instigating program against the government, KAIST’s decision can be interpreted as a regulation against the holding of events even with the least bit of political agenda.

However, why do universities have to offer a politically neutral environment for its students? Although some may argue that at least KAIST should be politically neutral as it was established by the government as an educational institution, KAIST has the foremost responsibility of providing an optimal learning environment to its students regardless of its ties to the government. A university is a place where a diverse student body gathers to exchange ideas and explore different viewpoints. Embracing this school of thought, the university should be able to provide an open space for many different views to clash, be debated on and be understood, instead of restricting such events from being held in the first place.

One of the main reasons for the existence of regulations, which forbid political or religious events to be held on campus, could be due to concerns that these somewhat provocative events could have a direct influence on students. But what is wrong with students being influenced? It is not only natural that students go through changes in their beliefs and values in their 20s, but they also should have the right to explore and learn different aspects of existing ideologies. Moreover, students usually attend various events on campus voluntarily, without any pressure or force. As intellectuals, college students are mature enough not to be easily swayed by a few words heard at an event they voluntarily attended. It would be problematic if the university were to force students into attending certain events. Yet, it would be more problematic if the university takes away such opportunities for students to hear the various voices that exist in our society. What the university should do is to provide an environment for open debates and discussions, and only after is it really up to the students to decide whether to accept the different ideologies introduced or stick to their own.

In the case of many universities in the United States and Europe, political activities on campus are frequently seen. Most universities are generous in terms of allowing political activities to be held, and some even encourage having political or religious events on campus with their belief in the freedom of expression. Yet, surprisingly, KAIST is not the only university in Korea that has regulations forbidding political events to be held on campus. Many other universities also stipulate similar regulations and maintain conservative attitudes regarding free expression of distinct political views. It is somewhat disappointing that Korean universities claiming to provide world-class learning environments are not as open and liberal as those in other countries.

One important notion in the foundation of a university is academic freedom. Although the meaning of academic freedom can be interpreted in various ways, it seems illogical to argue that academic freedom can be achieved in an environment in which the topics of events held on campus are restricted to non-political or non-religious ones. In other words, such regulations that forbid political and religious events to be held are clearly against the nature and the essence of a university. Thus, we need to go back to basics and think about the foremost reason for the existence of universities. Do universities exist to restrict students’ academic freedom, or to provide an open intellectual space?
 

School’s Stance as an Influential, National Institution
By Jae Sung Kim

The recent controversy surrounding the widely popular political talk show, I Am a Ggomsu, and KAIST’s official response against allowing its auditorium to be used for the talk show caused quite a stir in the media. In particular, the personnel responsible for finding venues expressed deep discontent and complained of the Facilities Management Office which, at first, approved of the talk show but later reversed the decision. Despite admitting that there was miscommunication, some definite fault lies with the Facilities Management Office for failing to recognize the talk show as a non-school related political talk show in the first place. However, the truth is that the venue finder resorted to deception in renting the auditorium, disguising the talk show as a typical, in-school academic event. The whole affair thankfully came to a conclusion after KAIST released its official response to disallow the talk show in its auditorium on grounds of its school regulations. The regulation in discussion states that no political, religious or commercial events may be held in the auditorium, and other non-school related events must be approved by the president of KAIST.

Then why have there been no cases of public political events held in the auditorium, and why should we continue to disallow such occasions of political intention on campus? The foremost reason is that our school has to maintain political neutrality and independence. While in-school events hosted by the students can be seen as expressions of their interests that diversify the lives of students on campus, allowing public events of particular political beliefs on campus can be highly misleading from the perspective of the media and people outside school. Even if the institution had no connection whatsoever to the political event other than lending its facilities, the mere fact that such an event was held on campus is more than enough to arouse suspicion and lead the masses to connect the institution and the event together, making a fallacy of assumption on the correlation between those two. It would be especially true if the occasion were a highly controversial and debated one such as I Am a Ggomsu, because even when KAIST evidently recognizes what consequences it may bring, allowing it on campus will be interpreted as toleration and indirect support.

An institution with such social prestige and influence as ours must be considerate and prudent in its actions, because a careless, indiscreet decision related to controversial matters, in particular politics and religion, can be greeted by one group that is interested in the matter, but ill-received by all other groups regardless of whether the consequence was intended or not. Constituents of KAIST should also keep in mind that our school, as a national institution, depends heavily on government budget support, which comes from people of all kinds of political beliefs. The public is aware that KAIST runs on their national tax, and watching such an institution display its support to a particular political belief that runs against theirs or hints of actions that mislead them to believe so is bound to create wide, public contempt. To prevent these predictable consequences, public political events should be kept out of campus as it always has been, and our school should be consistent in its set of regulations.

Not only the public but also the students are easily susceptible to taking offence at public political events on campus depending on their political beliefs. This does not mean that there should not be any political discussions and criticism on campus, but rather that they should be led by KAIST students, the main constituents and interest group in school, and not by some outside political event; this should be encouraged for a healthy development of interest in politics and the nation as a whole. Diversity in political opinions on campus can be seen and discussed without having to allow public political events into the school, and if the students so desperately wish to attend those occasions, then they should do so individually outside the campus. In other words, KAIST students are free to manifest and discuss their political beliefs as individuals, but in perspective of the institution in whole, we cannot afford risks that may depict the school to have a certain political stance and consequently put KAIST in peril.