It is not ideological to say that academia should be held responsible for its output, especially in fields that can drive policy (for instance, in economics it

It is not ideological to say that academia should be held responsible for its output, especially in fields that can drive policy (for instance, in economics it is well known that one of the key studies that tipped the scale in favor of austerity was erroneous, but it was not checked because it was in the academic zeitgeist [1]). I do not think it is ideological either to say that the purpose of research is to help develop people and nations. Whether it comes from hard science or soft science (a contentious categorization). All in all, I think my point is fairly clear. Neutrality in academia, especially political science, economics, etc. is non-existent and that the developments and recommendations coming out of those departments should never escape a wide scrutiny and criticism. The way the article frames it is that criticism, when it leads to retractation in Cotton's case or that of polsci/humanities, is bad. I profoundly disagree. Calling for freedom of speech in academia, like the article does, does not mean that every one is heard, only that the already entrenched and tenured remains unchallenged. [1] https://theconversation.com/economists-an-excel-error-and-the-misguided-push-for-austerity-13584 https://theconversation.com/economists-an-excel-error-and-th...