February 4, 2005

Ward Churchill among the Blogs

I've been too busy to blog this afternoon, but the Ward Churchill controversy continues to rage. Bloggers long ago joined the fray, and among those who find Churchill repugnant (and other than the likes of Chalmers Johnson, that's most everyone) but believe he should be allowed to stay on at CU are: Instapundit (too many to list); American Digest; Evan Coyne Maloney; Belmont Club; Steve Bainbridge; SayAnything; and Eugene Volokh (several posts gathered on one page).

Also see, for a contrarian view: Ace of Spades; Prestopundit; Arma virumque; Joe's Dartblog (says Joe, "in the end I really don't care what happens to Churchill"); Ranting Profs, which begins by arguing for keeping Churchill, but notes that his (apparently) fraudulent claim of being a Cherokee might influence the decision; Blogs for Bush, which quotes Samuel Johnson: "I have got no further than this: Every man has a right to utter what he thinks truth, and every other man has a right to knock him down for it. Martyrdom is the test." See also the Pink Flamingo Bar and Grill.

Roger Simon sees a theater of the absurd in the whole affair:

The spectacle of some desperate nitwit pretending to be an Indian in order to get a job in an Ethnic Studies Department is right out of an Italian comedy of the seventies (Pietro Germi or maybe Lina Wertmuller). The "gulled" gentlemen and ladies in the various academic departments (not to mention the bozos over at "prestigious" Hamilton College) would be marvelous foils for, say, Giancarlo Giannini at his height. Not even the great Gogol himself could make such delicious mockery of boneheaded "political correctness."

QD at Southern Appeal:

Like I said, Bainbridge is probably right here - if academic freedom means anything, it probably means being free to be an ass.

Probably. Suppose, though, that a professor of mechanical engineering decided mischievously to mislead his students on how to calculate stress loads (or something like that), so that when they went out to design bridges, they would collapse after a few years. Or suppose an accounting professor taught his students how best to embezzle money. Or suppose a history professor taught his students that the Holocaust had never happened. Or suppose a political science professor taught his students that HIV was created by the CIA? Would the principle of academic freedom protect them? Should it?

Rand Holman links to a piece by Thomas Ryan, which details the radical background of Nancy Rabinowitz, who invited Churchill to Hamilton College.

I'll periodically update the list.

— Winfield Myers

| Feb. 4, 2005 | 6:31 PM