Even though I am employed by the Université libre de Bruxelles, sometimes, I am deeply deceived by some of the decisions made within certain parts of the institution. These decisions do not reflect the values of the institution I am proud to be associated with, as a place of learning, research, and social progress.
Especially, recently, when the ULB decides to host an event organized by the Centre Jean Gol, the so-called "research" center of the Mouvement Réformateur, in the largest auditorium on the main campus.
This Mouvement Réformateur, responsible for harmful higher education reforms, under the leadership of Valérie Glatigny. These reforms seek to transform universities into factories of diploma production, measuring educational quality by the length of student trajectories, while disproportionately harming economically disadvantaged students.
This same Mouvement Réformateur, which has recently proposed further budget cuts targeting ARES, FNRS, and financial support for underprivileged and international students.
This event also welcomes the president of the Mouvement Réformateur, Georges-Louis Bouchez, who has publicly supported reinstating anti-begging laws and praised acts of violence in Israel as "genius" and "smart".
The Centre Jean Gol itself labels social progress as "wokisme", a so-called "unspeakable totalitarianism".
I don't understand why the ULB welcomes a debate composed of those people when the description explicitly proposes that Europe has to "equip themselves with a military power structurally independent of the United States", and "to once again become an economic, industrial and political power that weighs in the world?", like if the current debate in politic that ULB should focus on was the economic power of Europe (rather than, I don't know, climatic, social, and cultural questions).
I feel ashamed that the ULB, which claims to be a university anchored in the present, and, more importantly, an engaged university, considers that welcoming a more and more right-wing party to debate on more and more conservative questions is a good and sane idea. I feel ashamed that the name and the infrastructure of the ULB are used as tools for promoting such questions and such answers. I feel ashamed that this is the political direction that the ULB has decided to take.