An interview with Professor Steven Greer: "They're not interested in truth and justice—they have a personal vendetta"
In January last year, Free Speech Champion Marcus Lumi sat down with Prof. Steven Greer to talk about the campaign of vilification waged against him by Bristol University's Islamic Society.
The following interview appeared in The New Taboo in the Spring of 2022, almost a year after the baseless accusations and smear campaign undertaken by the Bristol University Islamic Society (BRISOC), condemning Professor Steven Greer for supposed ‘Islamophobia’. In light of the publication of his new memoir documenting his experience, Falsely Accused of Islamophobia: My Struggle Against Academic Cancellation, we thought it would be a good idea to revisit this conversation to explore, in detail, what actually happened to Prof. Greer. As ever, we condemn the baseless attacks on him personally, and the broader attack on academic freedom this came to represent. MM
In February 2021, Bristol University academic Professor Steven Greer came under fire from a social media campaign launched against him by the university’s Islamic Society, a campaign which led to an investigation by the university. According to the group, Greer had been making Islamophobic statements and remarks in his lectures.
In relation to the trend of de-platforming and censorship in higher education, it has been observed that, even if the person targeted is ultimately acquitted, the process itself will have done plenty of damage. Such is the case with Greer.
If a campaign of vilification based on outright falsehoods against an individual was not bad enough, following Greer’s exoneration the university did not even allow him to go back to teaching the course around which the complaints were centred.
Claiming that he “felt physically very vulnerable,” Greer describes to me the absence of backing from fellow academics as a “deafening silence from colleagues,” with “even very little private support.” The law professor says he witnessed a “poisonous and toxic” atmosphere at Bristol: “I know that there is a small cabal of people who are actively hostile to me,” he says. Eventually, he stopped working at the institution altogether: “I was signed off by my doctor on account of the stress produced by BRISOC’s campaign, coupled with the lack of support from the university and Law School.”
The overall support for the campaign was quite significant. Greer told me that, “in February 2021 there were 7,043 ‘likes’ on Instagram, consisting of 6,243 ‘likes’ for BRISOC’s campaign and a further 893 ‘liking’ denunciations of what I said about the standard human rights critique of the traditional Islamic view of women.” There were “another 50 or so on Facebook,” says Greer.
The complaints concerned a module Greer used to teach called ‘Islam, China, and the Far East’. The most noteworthy accusation was that Greer did not recognise the treatment of Uyghur Muslims in China as discriminatory. This has since been proven a complete lie. It ignores the fact that Greer has, in his lectures, clearly stated that the Uyghur plight is a human rights abuse. This can all be seen in the Islamic Society’s own evidence report. According to Greer, this part of the Human Rights Law, Politics and Society course has been taught for years with minor modifications and has often been attended by a good number of Muslim students—all without any controversy. Greer says the Uyghur accusation has been withdrawn but no official apology has been given for the error.
The students separately took issue with Greer supporting PREVENT (a part of the UK government’s overall counter-terrorism strategy), but the academic insists this stance is not discriminatory: “If the focus is jihadist or Islamic terrorism, the focus will be on Muslims. If the focus is on the far right, it will be non-muslims, mostly white working-class men.”
Greer further says that anyone can be referred to PREVENT, but whether a person who has been referred actually goes through the process is entirely voluntary. If a young Muslim man does happen to take part in it then he will be counselled by an expert who is also a practising Muslim. All of this suggests the non-bigoted nature of the programme, according to Greer.
Whatever one’s views on the Uyghur situation or PREVENT, the idea that Greer’s views are rooted in bigotry against Muslims is, frankly, silly—or, more likely, given that the Islamic Society’s own report disproves their accusations, mendacious. For Greer, there were several other problems with the accusations the students put forth against him.
For one, they violated the formal guidelines which structure how these complaints are made. The formal complaint was made on October 30, 2020, when the time limit to lodge such a complaint for the 2019-2020 academic year had long since passed. This was also before the material for the following academic year had been introduced. So, the time frame within which they issued the complaint turned out to be disadvantageous for the complainants. Secondly, it was initially launched by a medical student who personally had no familiarity with the course and relied upon hearsay.
“Blame this guy for Islamophobia, throw everything at him and eventually, the university will capitulate.”
Moreover, in their evidence report, the Islamic Society states that Greer does not recognise Islamophobia and racism as real. Anyone who reads Greer’s article which prompted this objection can quickly see this is not the case. In the article, he argues that Islamophobia and racism may overlap but should be regarded as distinct forms of social prejudice. This is a far cry from what was otherwise said in the evidence report.
What does Greer think was going through the heads of his accusers? “Blame this guy for Islamophobia, throw everything at him and eventually the university will capitulate,” he muses.
None of the accusations was upheld by the university. The Islamic Society was, unsurprisingly, not best pleased with this outcome and has since doubled down. The original petition, boasting over 4,000 signatures, remains live. The students have not admitted any wrongdoing and keep insisting that they are the real victims. Greer states: “They’re not interested in truth and justice: they have a personal vendetta.”
Although he was ultimately declared innocent, Bristol has not shown the explicit support that Greer so clearly needs and deserves. Indeed, they demanded that he be silent about his victory until the Islamic Scoiety’s appeal against the initial decision of the university had been settled. The topic which prompted these complaints has been sidelined and his colleagues have largely been reluctant to wade into such a sensitive matter.
“Because the University of Bristol prohibited me from announcing my exoneration, it was very important to me that I was allowed to teach ‘Islam, China and the Far East’ to demonstrate that I had been exonerated,” states Greer. It was thus a big disappointment when he learnt that the module was to be effectively scrapped. In his words, “It has been marginalised and attenuated.”
Towards the end of our discussion, Greer made another pertinent observation: Considering the dilemma faced by his employers, he says, “The university preferred the reputational damage of not defending academic freedom to the reputational damage of being accused of Islamophobia.”
On December 1, 2021, Greer was to attend an online event on Islamophobia and academic freedom organised by the University of Bristol’s Free Speech Society, but the event was cancelled. “It was yet another attempt to silence me, successful this time but only temporarily.” When I asked what brought about the cancellation, the Free Speech Society told me that according to the University of Bristol Law School, the event could not take place due to Greer being “unable to attend.” While in correspondence with the Free Speech Society, Greer had informed them that the justification the university had given was that Greer’s attendance would invalidate his reason for being on leave, which prohibits him from participating in anything related to work. That is despite the fact that Greer had done something similar just a few weeks earlier by taking part in the online launch of his book.
The Free Speech Society’s interpretation of the actual reason was that the university was again attempting to avoid having its reputation tarnished by allowing the ‘Islamophobia’ scandal to be discussed publicly, in whatever form.
The Islamic Society was invited to the event but according to the Free Speech Society, there were several reasons why they effectively said no. One of the main reasons was their busy schedule during the first term, a schedule which includes working with different Muslim charities as well as on campaigns such as ‘Islamophobia Awareness Month’. However, the Free Speech Society maintains that they would not agree to a collaboration under any circumstances: “They’ll say, ‘We don’t want to because it’s bad timing,’ but ultimately what they’re saying is that they don’t want to at any time.” None of the other societies across the U.K. that also signed the petition against Greer responded to the invitation—nor did any Islamic organisations around the Bristol area.
It is an unfortunate situation, not least because those accusing Greer of bigotry are unwilling to actually defend their accusations in an open conversation. On top of that, they have continued to double down by declaring themselves to be the real victims. But the saddest part of the whole affair is that a reputable academic institution such as the University of Bristol has cowered away from, rather than defended academic freedom at a time when it was desperately needed.
Steven Greer, was a Professor of Human Rights at the University of Bristol until his retirement last year. He is a fellow of the Academy of Social Sciences and of the Royal Society of Arts, and research director at the Oxford Institute for British Islam.
Marcus Lumi is a philosophy undergraduate at Royal Holloway, University of London.