Columbia's De Genova responds -and it's worse than we thought!

Columbia Spectator ^ | Nicholas De Genova

[Ignatz]

To the Editor:
Spectator, now for the second time in less than a year, has succeeded to quote me in a remarkably decontextualized and inflammatory manner. In Margaret Hunt Gram's report on the faculty teach-in against the war in Iraq (March 27, 2003), I am quoted as wishing for a million Mogadishus but with no indication whatsoever of the perspective that framed that remark. It is hardly surprising, therefore, that your Staff Editorial in the same issue, denouncing the teach-in for "dogmatism," situates me in particular as the premier example of an academic "launching tirades against anything and everything American."

In my brief presentation, I outlined a long history of U.S. invasions, wars of conquest, military occupations, and colonization in order to establish that imperialism and white supremacy have been constitutive of U.S. nation-state formation and U.S. nationalism. In that context, I stressed the necessity of repudiating all forms of U.S. patriotism. I also emphasized that the disproportionate majority of U.S. troops come from racially subordinated and working-class backgrounds and are in the military largely as a consequence of a treacherous lack of prospects for a decent life. Nonetheless, I emphasized that U.S. troops are indeed confronted with a choice--to perpetrate this war against the Iraqi people or to refuse to fight and contribute toward the defeat of the U.S. war machine.

I also affirmed that Iraqi liberation can only be effected by the Iraqi people themselves, both by resisting and defeating the U.S. invasion as well as overthrowing a regime whose brutality was long sustained by none other than the U.S. Such an anti-colonial struggle for self-determination might involve a million Mogadishus now but would ultimately have to become something more like another Vietnam. Vietnam was a stunning defeat for U.S. imperialism; as such, it was also a victory for the cause of human self-determination.

Is this a tirade against "anything and everything American"? Far from it. First, I hasten to remind you that "American" refers to all of the Americas, not merely to the United States, as U.S. imperial chauvinism would have it. More importantly, my rejection of U.S. nationalism is an appeal to liberate our own political imaginations such that we might usher in a radically different world in which we will not remain the prisoners of U.S. global domination.

Nicholas De Genova
March 21, 2003
The author is an assistant professor of anthropology and latina/o studies.

[f.Christian]

Religion and politics are not a test for office ...

but character // loyalty is ---

time to try and fire these these traitors !

[jriemer]

Added "pinhead" to keywords...

[EdReform]

"The author is was an assistant professor of anthropology and latina/o studies."

[Cincinatus]

If I were a Columbia alum, I would be outraged

Apparently, they are. But to get a college administration's attention, you need to let Mr. Wallet speak: Terminate alumni donations.

[wideawake]

He is a professor of "Latino Studies." This likely means that he is seething with resentment over the US invasion of Mexico in 1846 and of Puerto Rico in the 1899 War with Spain.

He probably considers the American West occupied Mexican territory.

[wordsofearnest]

I'd say the columbia spectator caught pretty good. In or out of context he needs to go live wherever in the hell he thinks people are victims of American imperialism.

[scubadave]

"This man needs to be run out of Columbia on a rail. "

Maybe we should fly him INTO Columbia (BOGATA)!! The pointy-headed prof should take off his Birkenstocks and join the marxist thugs in the jungles (without a salary from Columbia U). Benefits include unlimited access to various herbal remedies and free literature :)

[nicmarlo]

FYI better....you won't believe it. (OTOH, you probably will.)

[BillyBonebrake]

His name and address were on switchboard.com on Friday but not today. He must be under some sort of protection. Can I protect him? Please!!???

[mbynack]

Thanks for the update on this.

I also emphasized that the disproportionate majority of U.S. troops come from racially subordinated and working-class backgrounds and are in the military largely as a consequence of a treacherous lack of prospects for a decent life.

I don't believe this is true. The last demographics I saw on the US military showed that it was fairly representative of the US population as a whole, with a slightly larger ratio of whites to black. .

Nonetheless, I emphasized that U.S. troops are indeed confronted with a choice--to perpetrate this war against the Iraqi people or to refuse to fight and contribute toward the defeat of the U.S. war machine.

Military members have a choice - do as they're ordered or suffer the consequences. The consequences range from a Bad Conduct discharge that follows you for the rest of your life, up to and including the death penalty for desertion in time of war.

Vietnam was a stunning defeat for U.S. imperialism; as such, it was also a victory for the cause of human self-determination.

Our involvement in Vietnam had nothing to do with US Colonialism. Once we left the region, leaders like Pol Pot killed millions.

For a guy who is supposed to be an academic, he sure doesn't mind bending facts to fit his pre-conceived notions of reality.

[pgyanke]

Oh well... Thank you, Professor, for clearing up the misunderstanding. Many of us here at Freerepublic.com were dismayed at the decontextualizationismbergenhogen of your remarks and we can now see that our ire was grossly inadequate to the reality. We will now commence with true vitriole for the unAmerican, piece of marxist filth that you represent.

[AmericanInTokyo]

What....an....absolute.....weenie (not you, Ignatz, de Generate).

My, this is blood in the water for the sharks. He should have kept his trap shut and not overexplained.

Now he has really dug his own career grave.

You don't pee in the face of millions of Americans and get away with it, and then pee some more.

Professor Nick is about to learn a bitter, academic and public relations lesson.

[TIGHTEN]

Response from Columbia, received 3-31-03, 11:47am est:

Thank you for your letter.

I would like to make clear in the strongest possible terms that the
recent (March 26th, 2003) remarks by Assistant Professor Nicholas
DeGenova concerning the war in Iraq were made on his own behalf and
should not be taken to reflect the views of the department of
Anthropology. As chair and as an individual member of Columbia's
faculty I cherish the principles of freedom of speech and academic
freedom. Now more than ever, we need to protect these freedoms.
However, I am deeply concerned when the academic obligations of debate
and critique are sullied by sentiments that seem profoundly out of line
with the values and commitments that are fundamental to academic life.
I am personally appalled by some of Professor DeGenova's remarks, and
repudiate any statement wishing violence against soldiers or civilians
alike. I deeply regret the offence that has been occasioned by this
incident, but must note as well that I am also saddened by the violence
of the language that has been directed, in turn, not just at Professor
DeGenova alone, but at the department of Anthropology as a whole and our
colleagues in the faculty and administration at Columbia University.

Professor Nicholas Dirks,
Chair, Department of Anthropology

[wideawake]

I'll put it this way - my little brother is over there in Iraq.

If he had said, in my presence, that he was hoping to see my brother subjected to the same fate as those brave marines in Mogadishu I would have pummelled him then and there.

There is such a thing, in the legal traditions surrounding free speech, as "fighting words."

He has uttered them.

[martianagent]

In my brief presentation, I outlined a long history of U.S. invasions, wars of conquest, military occupations, and colonization

The answer to this kind of statement should be as follows, any time any of us hear it: If that is true, i.e. if the United States has indeed been involved in a career of empire building and of oppression of third-world people for the last hundred years, then somewhere on this planet there must be some gigantic territory with a sign saying "Property of the United States of America" on it.

Where is this territory? I would like to visit it and check it out with an eye towards investing in real estate, and possibly some hunting, fishing, and good times with the native women.

[wordsofearnest]

Amen to Neil's response. I caught live last week and all but high fived the TV.

[Ignatz]

P.S. Ignatz, excellent response !

Thanks, M.
Now we'll see if this "bastion of free expression" will post my reply in the forum.

[CaptainJustice]

I dunno... I don't abide by seditious traitors easily. I don't think I'd beat him within an inch of his life, but I cant promise I wont spit on him if I ever meet him.

[Noumenon]

No kidding. Brings a whole new meaning to the expression - 'hoisted by your own petard', doesn't it? The arrogance is breathtaking.