U Colorado Prof. Ward Churchill has been denied academic freedom but so

[jody]

has Professor Hans-Hermann Hoppe at U Nevada.

The Chronicle of Higher Education reports http://chronicle.com/free/2005/02/2005021406n.htm">Professor Who Was Accused of Making Derogatory Remarks in Class Wants UNLV to Clear His Record.

QUOTE
In his lectures, Mr. Hoppe said that certain groups of people -- including small children, very old people, and homosexuals -- tend to prefer present-day consumption to long-term investment. Because homosexuals generally do not have children, Mr. Hoppe said, they feel less need to look toward the future. (In a recent talk at the Ludwig von Mises Institute, which Mr. Hoppe says was similar to his classroom lecture, he declared, "Homosexuals have higher time preferences, because life ends with them.")

Mr. Knight found that argument unwarranted and obnoxious, and he promptly filed a complaint with the university. In a telephone interview on Saturday, Mr. Knight said: "I was just shocked and appalled. I said to myself, Where the hell is he getting this information from? I was completely surprised, and that's why I went to the university about this."

According to both Mr. Hoppe and Mr. Knight, the university's formal grievance procedure hinged on the question of whether Mr. Hoppe could cite peer-reviewed academic literature to support the claim that homosexuals have high time preferences. The "letter of instruction," which was written on Wednesday by Raymond W. Alden III, the university's executive vice president and provost, tells Mr. Hoppe that his comments created "a hostile learning environment because they were not qualified as opinions, theories without experimental/statistical support, topics open to debate, or otherwise limited."
UNQUOTE


The interesting thing is Hoppe says he would deny a professor academic freedom if he were president but complains because UNLV denied him academic freedom.
:shrug:

[imenja]

1. this whole situation is awful

Churchill is an idiot. The idea that all the janitors, maids, dishwashers, waiters, secretaries, and data entry operators were "little Eichmanns" is horrifying and displays a level of ignorance that is starling. Academic freedom should be sacred. I support no efforts to censure faculty. But I likewise resent fools who make purposefully inflammatory statements that serve no thoughtful political purpose and throw all of our rights into question.

Hoppe's censure is not unique. Professors who make racist comments can find themselves out of a job, regardless of tenure. What is unusual about the Churchill case is that is has received such national attention and inflamed the Right, always eager to find reasons to persecute academics.

[Montresor]

2. Little Eichmanns

But if you are a professional and worked in the WTC (as I did), that means I am a "little Eichmann". As a matter of fact, why not all individuals with a higher level of education be labeled "little Eichmanns" since most "janitors, maids, dishwashers, waiters, secretaries, and data entry operators" probably did not receive a college degree.

[imenja]

4. I agree

but Churchill's political sensibilities would suggest he might have greater sympathy for the working class. No murder is justified. Not of a CEO or a janitor.

[ConsAreLiars]

8. You obviously haven't read his words.

Why are you so willing to mis-characterize what he said? Despite hate-radio and such, his writings and interviews are easily found and read, and if you do so you will find that his words are in direct contradiction to your, uh, "paraphrase."

[imenja]

14. Here are his own words

"Finally, 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."

http://www.commondreams.org/headlines05/0201-05.htm

How would you feel if your husband had been one of the "technocrats of empire" working in his cubicle at Morgan Stanley?

[FredScuttle]

3. Uh, not quite

Churchill's reference to "little Eichmanns" was meant for the technical workers (investment bankers, etc) not the janitors and waiters and other minimum wage workers.

I still don't agree with him that white-collar workers deserved to be incinerated by a flying missile, but just thought I'd correct that point.

[imenja]

5. did he distinguish?

or did he simply ignore the fact workers of a wide variety of occupations were in the building?

[curlyred]

6. he distinguished, IMO

From what I have read, and from listening to him speak, he made a clear distinction.

I still think his hyperbole was WAY over the top.

[imenja]

7. I'll take you at your word on that

but the guy is still an idiot, and I resent him.
Did you happen to see Pat Buchanan on Meet the Press? He had a far more cogent analysis of 9/11. He said what we wish Democrats had the courage to say.

[Disturbed]

10. Damn, people just don't read or listen.

"white-collar workers deserved to be incinerated?

He did not say that either.

Taking the word of RW pundits on TV, radio or elsewhere regarding anything is really being stupid.

[imenja]

12. did he or did he not say those in the WTC were "little Eichmanns"?

[imenja]

15. His defense of his words

http://www.commondreams.org/headlines05/0201-05.htm

"Finally, 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. "

Who were these "technocrats of empire" if not white collar workers? Were they they Hispanic cleaning staff or dishwashers? The firefighters and police who lost their lives that day?

[imenja]

16. Original Text

"Well, really. Let's get a grip here, shall we? True enough, they were civilians of a sort. But innocent? Gimme a break. They formed a technocratic corps at the very heart of America's global financial empire – the "mighty engine of profit" to which the military dimension of U.S. policy has always been enslaved – and they did so both willingly and knowingly. Recourse to "ignorance" – a derivative, after all, of the word "ignore" – counts as less than an excuse among this relatively well-educated elite. To the extent that any of them were unaware of the costs and consequences to others of what they were involved in – and in many cases excelling at – it was because of their absolute refusal to see. More likely, it was because they were too busy braying, incessantly and self-importantly, into their cell phones, arranging power lunches and stock transactions, each of which translated, conveniently out of sight, mind and smelling distance, into the starved and rotting flesh of infants. 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."

http://www.kersplebedeb.com/mystuff/s11/churchill.html

[rodeodance]

9. Churchhill DID distingish between the lower workers and the upper

echalons. Read his stories and his follow up stories!

[Metrix]

11. I think the real question to ask yourself

is if you are able to get so worked up about the civilian casualties in Iraq and Afghanistan.

[imenja]

13. why is that the real question?

How does that relate to the question of academic freedom? The issue of civilian deaths is of great importance, but it is not at issue in this particular case. Why do you even raise it in this case? Are you incapable of considering more than one issue in your lifetime? Or perhaps you see American lives as inherently less valuable than Iraqis? We are speaking of academic freedom here, not the value of human life. Further, this professor's comments were about 9/11. Perhaps you haven't been clued in, but Iraq has nothing to do with 9/11.

[agitpropagent9]

17. has he?

how exactly has churchill been "denied academic freedom"?
i mean i've seen the furor play out, but exactly where has he been muzzled (or punished, except by the court of public opinion)?

[jody]

18. There are other DU threads that discuss Churchill's problem. Suggest

you scan those for answers to your question.

[imenja]

19. The Colorado legislature is considering a law

that may have the effecting of limiting college professor's freedom of speech and challenge tenure itself. http://www.denverpost.com/Stories/0,1413,36%257E61%257E2706079,00.html
The law itself may not seem so bad, but the more legislators meddle in academic affairs, the worse universities become. Politicians despise intellectuals and use every opportunity to try to restrict them. In Florida, we have faced a few challenges over controversies, such as a play that depicted a Christ-like figure as gay.


Churchill resigned as head of his program. I have no sympathy for him. But the fact that it has launched yet another backlash against academics concerns me. A professor at Hamilton College has lost her job because she supported Churchill. http://www.denverpost.com/Stories/0,1413,36%257E11676%257E2706340,00.html

The Denver Post has a large number of articles on the subject.