The letter below appears in the April 13 edition of the Student Printz.  It is one of the most eloquent and inspiring responses I have yet read to the crisis at USM.  I hope it is read as widely as possible, which is why I am reposting it here.

===================================

Climate of fear pervades USM

By John Meyer
Professor of Speech Communication

March 5, 2004 was a sad day for higher education in Mississippi.

I have been a faculty member who supported working with the president and his administration, feeling that he brought some strengths to help Southern Miss move forward. I have worked with the administration on a project when asked. I have not been happy with many poorly reasoned or communicated decisions on the part of the administration, but I was still willing to support seeking improved communication between the president and faculty members. That changed on March 5, when a series of poor decisions indicating disrespect for faculty and staff was topped off by a highly public act of petty revenge.

The events of that day proved that those I had thought of as being rather paranoid in feeling that administrators were “out to get” Southern Miss faculty and staff who might disagree with them were right all along. Some are saying that judgments should wait until “the facts are out.” Even the president says this, but I view it as rhetoric to divert attention away from what is really happening here: simple authoritarian retribution against two professors who dared to question a president and one of his appointees. I am convinced that enough facts are out to make a judgment in this case!

I could keep quiet, hoping to keep my nice job, say “yes, sir,” and retreat to my office. But I choose to defend freedom of speech and inquiry instead so that I can sleep at night and live with myself when I go home to my family, what is truly most important, after all. Yet it speaks volumes about our situation when I must fear for my job at our high profile research university if this is published. If Southern Miss were his own private business, President Thames would be free to run it using these kinds of scare tactics. I believe he would not be running it long, however; he could not retain good people and they would quickly leave and out-compete him in the marketplace. Sheltered by the bureaucracy and power structure of a state university, he has been given some leeway to become authoritarian, perhaps for the sake of efficiency, or bringing in dollars. Indeed, Dr. Thames showed past and potential success in those areas. However, in my opinion, he has damaged Southern Miss by letting power-hunger and revenge overshadow what strengths he brought to the presidency. For USM to continue as a university of good reputation, the state IHL board must end this reign as soon as possible. The two professors should also be reinstated.One poster, plastered on campus during that chaotic week, said it all: “Without followers, there is no leadership.”   
  

Indeed, Southern Miss has hit the “big time.” Scholars inside and outside of Mississippi now legitimately wonder what freedom faculty here have to pursue ideas and research wherever they may lead. Why come to Southern Miss and bring in major grant dollars only to potentially be fired on the whim of a disagreeable president? Are quality faculty expected to say “yes, sir” without question and without the freedom to investigate and explore knowledge that an administration may not approve? How will we conduct research as well as debate, argue and otherwise interact with one another freely in an atmosphere of distrust, fear and threat? How can we teach our students when now we know that if we say or do anything the administration disagrees with we might be locked out of our offices and unable to teach our courses the next day? This kind of workplace climate is why words like “tyranny,” “dictatorship” and “oppression” are being thrown around.