The Pen and the Sword
A Statement Regarding MIT’s Censorship of Written Revolution
Note from the Editor-in-chief: Ellie Montemayor ’26, a publisher of The Tech, is one of the editors of Written Revolution. She was not involved in any public statements made about the status of the student group nor in the publication of this article.
I am writing to contextualize the recent sanctions imposed on the student publication Written Revolution and its editors; these sanctions carry troubling implications for the state of free thought and expression on MIT’s campus.
Written Revolution is an ASA-recognized student organization that, during the past year, has released five publications containing essays, poems, and artwork created by MIT students; these publications include essays on solidarity in the Global South, poems commemorating loved ones massacred in Gaza, and reflections on MIT’s own campus protests.
According to its constitution, Written Revolution is “an anti-imperialist club dedicated to fostering a deeper understanding and critical analysis of imperialism's impact on societies, cultures, and economies worldwide”, which aims to “engage and educate a broad audience through the power of conversations, written work, and advocacy”.
“At the heart of Written Revolution is the belief that knowledge and awareness are foundational to fostering empathy, promoting social justice, and driving meaningful change. We aim to create a safe, inclusive space where individuals from diverse backgrounds can come together to learn, share, and discuss the complex histories and ongoing effects of imperialism in an expressive manner,” the constitution reads.
Division of Student Life administrators have taken issue with an essay entitled “On Pacifism” that was published in the fifth edition of Written Revolution. “On Pacifism” grounds itself in the principle that occupied peoples have the right to resist their occupation; this “right to resist” is enshrined in international law, as United Nations General Assembly Resolution 2625 (1970) explicitly endorses the right to resist “subjection of peoples to alien subjugation, domination and exploitation”.
The essay delineates the diversity of tactics used by the pro-Palestine movements and analyzes the efficacy of these tactics as they were used in the American Civil Rights movement, the Buddhist resistance against the South Vietnamese government, and other historical contexts. The piece calls for MIT students to build stronger connections with the greater Boston community; after all, we cannot advocate for liberation whilst ignoring MIT’s gentrification of Cambridge that has displaced thousands of the city’s low-income residents. Fighting for food security on our own campus while ignoring the food deserts in Roxbury turns our activism into an elitist charade.
“On Pacifism” concludes with the following call to action: “One year into the accelerated phase of genocide, many years into MIT’s activism failing to connect deeply with the community, we need to rethink our model for action. We need to start viewing pacifism as a tactical choice made in a contextual sphere. We need to connect with the community and build root-mycelial networks of mutual aid. And we must act now.”
The Division of Student Life cites the publication of “On Pacifism” when justifying the ban of the fifth edition of Written Revolution at MIT. Administrators accuse its author of “highlighting self-immolation” for including a photo and discussion of the self-immolation of Vietnamese Buddhist monk Thích Quảng Đức -- Quảng Đức undertook this act as a protest against the South Vietnamese government’s persecution of Buddhists, and the aforementioned photo received the World Press Photo of the Year award in 1963.
On November 1st, Written Revolution editors received an email from Dean of Student Life David Randall informing them that their publication had been banned and censored:
“At this time, you are directed to no longer distribute this issue of Written Revolution on MIT’s campus. You are also prohibited from distributing it elsewhere using the MIT name or that of any MIT-recognized organization.”
The Committee on Discipline banned On Pacifism’s author — a currently-enrolled MIT student and graduate worker — from stepping foot on MIT’s campus. Both of these sanctions were enforced immediately without due process.
This act of censorship echoes a troubling precedent for the future of free expression on our campus. It is largely indicative of the “Palestine Exception” to free speech; although the First Amendment theoretically protects those who advocate for Palestinian liberation, university administrators and government officials crush those who do in practice.
This exception has been illustrated at the University of Maryland, where the Students for Justice in Palestine (SJP) applied to hold a vigil on October 7th; the university conducted a “threat assessment” where “no immediate or active threat” was found before unlawfully banning all expressive, non-university-sponsored events regardless. It is likewise illustrated at Columbia University, where administrators stipulated that student groups “should not issue statements unrelated to their missions”, and at the University of Wisconsin at Madison, where any speech activity short of “individuals speaking directly to one another” within twenty-five feet of a building is prohibited.
Articles published in The Tech have compared members of the Coalition Against Apartheid to neo-Nazis and claimed that the deliberate targeting of civilian infrastructure “can be attributed to human error and the fog of war”. These are examples of abhorrent, erroneous speech; they are also examples of protected speech. MIT’s sanctioning of Written Revolution exposes political prejudice against its authors — On Pacifism’s discussion of tactics is largely similar to the discussions seen in 21H.001 (MIT history class “How to Stage a Revolution”) as well as other pieces published in the Tech. These topics constitute a legitimate debate, regardless of your views on them, that we all have the right to contribute to.
The genocide in Gaza has only grown more harrowing as the Western world becomes increasingly apathetic. Israel launched an assault on Jabalia, a refugee camp in North Gaza, in October; the four hundred thousand civilians trapped there have been pounded with ceaseless air strikes. Israel firebombed the last flour store in North Gaza; no food has entered the camp in over a month. Those lucky enough to evade the bombings will starve.
Quelling dissent against Israel’s war crimes only enables these atrocities to continue.
I call on MIT’s students of principle to rebuke this act of censorship. Email David Randall (drandall@mit.edu) to express your discontent with this unilateral decision. Print copies of Written Revolution or read it online.
If you carry the privilege of being an MIT student, you are in a unique position to seek the truth distorted underneath layers of propaganda and class interests; after all, in the words of Chomsky, it is the responsibility of intellectuals to speak the truth and expose lies. We must connect with our communities to “build a better world”, and we must challenge censorship to challenge imperialism. And we must act now.
Kate Pearce ’27 is a member of the MIT Coalition for Palestine. The views expressed in this piece do not necessarily reflect those of any MIT-affiliated organization.