Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

W. Churchill. A sad look at a sick academic bubble.
NRO ^ | 9 February 2005 | Mark Goldblatt

Posted on 02/09/2005 11:02:17 AM PST by 45Auto

The recent controversy over the writings of Ward Churchill, radical activist, faux Indian, and tenured professor of ethnic studies at the University of Colorado, raises a number of serious academic issues — which, let me underscore, does not mean that Churchill himself is in any way serious. On the contrary, Churchill is as unserious as anyone ever paid to stand in front of a classroom, an intellectual featherweight whose ideas are less politically scandalous than buffoonishly wrongheaded. Case in point is his assertion that the victims of the World Trade Center attack got what was coming to them: "If there was a better, more effective, or in fact any other way of visiting some penalty befitting their participation upon the little Eichmanns inhabiting the sterile sanctuary of the twin towers, I'd really be interested in hearing about it."

Churchill's own attempt to clarify what he meant by this is telling: "I have never characterized all the September 11 victims as 'Nazis.' What I said was that the 'technocrats of empire' working in the World Trade Center were the equivalent of 'little Eichmanns.' Adolf Eichmann was not charged with direct killing but with ensuring the smooth running of the infrastructure that enabled the Nazi genocide. Similarly, German industrialists were legitimately targeted by the Allies."

To make sense of Churchill's clarification, a reader has to accept the following premises: 1) the United States government is actively and intentionally engaged in genocide; 2) the hijackers, contrary to their own claims, were attempting to defend individual freedom rather than advance a totalitarian spiritual regime; 3) the ideological agenda of the hijackers represents the true aspirations of the people on whose behalf they claim to act.

Each of these premises is false based on a preponderance of evidence. But that understates the point; all three are so utterly false that failure to recognize their falsehood, in effect, betrays a cognitive disability. Yet I'd estimate ten percent of American college professors — and I'm low-balling that figure — would accept them as probably or at least partially true. (If you substitute "corporate capitalists" for "the United States government" in the first premise — i.e. "Corporate capitalists are actively and intentionally engaged in genocide" — assent among college faculty probably rises to 25 percent.) These are credentialed adults who are initially hired to instruct, and who are eventually tenured to profess...yet they're professionally, stupendously, tenaciously, defiantly, demonstrably wrong.

That is the gist of the problem.

If we take as axiomatic the principle that colleges exist in order to pursue and disseminate the truth, it follows that no accredited mathematics department would employ a teacher who denied, say, that base angles of an isosceles triangle are equal; that no physics department would employ a teacher who denied the force of gravity; that no chemistry department would employ a teacher who denied that protons and neutrons are found in the nuclei of atoms; that no biology department would employ a teacher who denied that green plants convert light energy into chemical energy by photosynthesis. The hard sciences, in other words, are bound in their fidelity to truth not only by traditional logic and empirical evidence but by a demand for coherence within a framework of what is already known. Faculty in hard sciences seek to push the envelope of knowledge, not to "deconstruct" it. (Deconstruct v.t. To affect intellectual depth by teasing out secondary and tertiary senses of a term until it belies its original meaning.) It is exceedingly rare, therefore, to find a professor in a hard science espousing irrational, unsupportable theories.

Not so in the social sciences. To be sure, no history department would, in the current academic climate, employ a teacher who openly argued that the Holocaust never happened. But this is a matter of political expediency, not material certainty. On the contrary, many history departments employ teachers steeped in postmodern thinking, who hold, for example, that the perception of a reality existing independently of thought and language is illusory, that "reality" is in fact a linguistic construct of the phenomena of subjective experience which is continually adjusted in response to a fluid social consensus. But if there's no such thing as an independent reality, then there can be no reality check. There's no test for truth. And that, my friends, is Holocaust denial — one step removed. Postmodern thought has taken root across the social sciences, spawning all manner of loopy theoretical posturing in history, psychology, sociology, anthropology, linguistics, political science, and even philosophy itself.

Still further down the epistemological food chain come literature and art, pseudo-disciplines hoist on the ouija-board wonkery of aesthetic judgment. The truth value of a work is gauged neither by correspondence with an independent reality nor even, for the last quarter century, by it coherence within a canonical framework; rather, truth value is a function of whether the work pleases the teacher. Subjectivity, therefore, rules. Literature and art departments often employ faculty members whose theories are not just at variance with one another but are mutually exclusive. It is not unusual, nowadays, for two students at the same college to sign up for the same survey course the same semester with two different professors and discover they're learning nothing in common.

But the epistemological nadir of any university is found in the wacky world of ethnic and gender studies: black studies, Africana studies, Chicano studies, Latino studies, Puerto Rican studies, Middle Eastern studies, Native American studies, women's studies, gay and lesbian studies, et al. The suggestion that "studying" is involved in any of these subjects is laughable; they are quasi-religious advocacy groups whose curricula run the gamut from historical wish fulfillment (the ancient Egyptians were black; the U.S. Constitution was derived from the Iroquois Nation) to political axe grinding (the Israelis are committing genocide against the Palestinians; the U.S. is committing genocide against the people of Cuba) to gynocentric self-help (reasoning from verifiable data is a tool of male domination, to which the experiential impressions of women are a necessary antidote) to circumstantial special pleading (Lincoln was gay because, well, he was a nice guy; Hitler, not so nice, therefore not gay). Contesting the status quo is the raison d'etre of these departments. No idea is beyond the pale — except, of course, the suggestion that the status quo might somehow be valid.

Which returns us to Ward Churchill, professor of ethnic studies, University of Colorado. In one sense, he's like a thousand other burnt-out refugees from the 1960s who avoided a full-time job long enough to acquire multiple university degrees. Along the way, however, he convinced lots of people that he was a Cherokee Indian — apparently on the basis of an honorary tribal membership — and thus tapped into the vast reservoir of white liberal guilt flowing through the halls of academia. Most critically, he found outlets to publish crypto-Marxist rants and thereby distinguished himself from the vast majority of his invincibly ignorant peers. That publishing record, in turn, allowed him to command not only his tenured professorship, but activist committee posts and lucrative speaking engagements at campuses nationwide.

So who published Ward Churchill?

Well, there's AK Press. Publisher's mission statement:

AK Press is a worker run book publisher and distributor organized around anarchist principles. . . . Our goal is to make available radical books and other materials, titles that are published by independent presses, not the corporate giants, titles with which you can make a positive change in the world.

Then there's South End Press. Publisher's mission statement:

Since our founding in 1977, we have tried to meet the needs of readers who are exploring, or are already committed to, the politics of radical social change. . . . In this way, we hope to give expression to a wide diversity of democratic social movements and to provide an alternative to the products of corporate publishing.

Finally, there's City Lights Books. Manuscript submission guidelines:

City Lights Books is a publisher of fiction, essays, memoirs, translations, poetry, and books on social and political issues. We publish a dozen new books a year and are committed to providing the finest works of vanguard literature and oppositional politics.

In other words, Churchill hooked up with like-minded lefties, networked himself into book contracts, parlayed these into academic prestige and political name recognition — and thus a wholly unserious man who says wholly unserious things wound up being taken very seriously. In a more rational world, Churchill would be an amateur conspiracy theorist with a chip on his shoulder, the type who spends an hour on hold with CSPAN to spew 15 seconds of venom before Brian Lamb cuts him off.

In our world, Churchill is a cause célébre.

So what's to be done with him?

The fact that he has tenure must, I'm afraid, be taken into account. Firing him, or forcing him to resign, might be morally satisfying but would be a tactical error. It would confer martyr status on him, and it would be interpreted by his students, and by Churchill himself, as punishment for speaking the truth to power. Besides, the fault here does not lie with Churchill; he's a symptom, not a disease. The fault lies, generally, with the sick academic culture in which he has thrived, and, specifically, with the administrative weasels at the University of Colorado who have repeatedly rewarded his dubious critical achievements. What should be done with Churchill, therefore, is...nothing. His notoriety should stand as an ongoing monument to the decay of intellectual standards in higher education, and his professorship as an ongoing monument to the intellectual cowardice of the school which hired and tenured him.

Thus, inadvertently, Ward Churchill might teach us all a lesson.


TOPICS: Culture/Society; US: Colorado
KEYWORDS: academia; antiamerican; commie; moron; wardchurchill
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-30 next last

1 posted on 02/09/2005 11:02:17 AM PST by 45Auto
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: 45Auto

"....the epistemological nadir of any university is found in the wacky world of ethnic and gender studies: black studies, Africana studies, Chicano studies, Latino studies, Puerto Rican studies, Middle Eastern studies, Native American studies, women's studies, gay and lesbian studies, et al. The suggestion that "studying" is involved in any of these subjects is laughable; they are quasi-religious advocacy groups..."


2 posted on 02/09/2005 11:03:40 AM PST by 45Auto (Big holes are (almost) always better.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: 45Auto
ENEMY PROFESSOR
3 posted on 02/09/2005 11:05:47 AM PST by doug from upland (I would trust Stevie Wonder to give me a ride before I'd trust Ted Kennedy)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: 45Auto

"In a more rational world, Churchill would be an amateur conspiracy theorist with a chip on his shoulder, the type who spends an hour on hold with CSPAN to spew 15 seconds of venom before Brian Lamb cuts him off.

In our world, Churchill is a cause célébre."

Well said...


4 posted on 02/09/2005 11:09:53 AM PST by Taylor814
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

Comment #5 Removed by Moderator

To: 45Auto

Tremendous article. Yeah, the postmodernists think they
rule the roost. Time to get the U's back to hard information
gathering. Leave the internal solipsistic to the
philosphy department or maybe the local coffee shop at
"free-mike" time.
My suggestion. Support private schools who actually have
a philosophy which believes that there are things outside
of ones experience and senses which are universal, true,
and everlasting, and are worthy of being discovered. Give the ones who think they are the final arbiters of wisdom, drugs,(particularly hallucinogens) so they can "explore" and "learn" on their own time, and in their own mind(whatever that is)....


6 posted on 02/09/2005 11:14:41 AM PST by Getready ((...Fear not ...))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Floyd R Turbo

> The only error larger than firing him would be NOT firing him.


What, are you *nuts*? Let this guy rant and rave! What better posterboy for the Looney Left?


7 posted on 02/09/2005 11:18:03 AM PST by orionblamblam
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: Floyd R Turbo

I think Big Chief "Mental Ward" Churchill made the issue of his firing moot last night when he said he does "not work for the taxpayers. Now that he's clarified that, he obviously wouldn't expect a paycheck, would he?

Beyond that, he presents an ethical dilemna: What do you do with someone who ain't worth killin'?


8 posted on 02/09/2005 11:21:40 AM PST by Emmett McCarthy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

Comment #9 Removed by Moderator

Comment #10 Removed by Moderator

To: orionblamblam

Heck, make him Howard Dean's speechwriter!


11 posted on 02/09/2005 11:24:17 AM PST by Tijeras_Slim
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

Comment #12 Removed by Moderator

To: Floyd R Turbo

Has the governor announced his plan to seek his removal? There are certainly grounds - just in having misrepresented his "Indian" heritage to get the job in the first place.


13 posted on 02/09/2005 11:26:25 AM PST by Emmett McCarthy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: 45Auto

I think they should just let the guy babble on and on. Parents may then take notice and realize some of America's institutes of higher learning are broken beyond repair.


14 posted on 02/09/2005 11:26:36 AM PST by CyberAnt (Where are the dem supporters? - try the trash cans in back of the abortion clinics.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: 45Auto

Is this really the best Colorado University could find as a department head? Msutbe some awfully unqualified people teching in University's.


15 posted on 02/09/2005 11:29:23 AM PST by sgtbono2002
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: 45Auto

best analysis on the subject i've seen. thanks.


16 posted on 02/09/2005 11:29:56 AM PST by kallisti (i never repeat gossip--so listen closely the first time)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

Comment #17 Removed by Moderator

To: sgtbono2002
I can't believe CU is taking this long to fire this SCUM's butt!! I guess there isn't enough outrage there by the taxpayers to can his *SS!!
18 posted on 02/09/2005 11:31:14 AM PST by RoseofTexas
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

Comment #19 Removed by Moderator

Comment #20 Removed by Moderator


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-30 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson