Ward Churchill is hopping mad that he's being fired from his tenured faculty position at the University of Colorado. He says he is not leaving. He has announced his decision to sue. The whole procedure, he insists, was a "farce" and a "fraud." Only in America, he believes, could he be treated in this way. I'm not sure why Churchill is so indignant. According to the logic of his original argument, he deserves his penalty--and worse. By his own account, he had it coming.
Let's review the main thesis of Churchill's notorious essay On the Justice of Roosting Chickens. He called the civilians working on September 11, 2001 in the Twin Towers of the World Trade Center "little Eichmanns." In short, they were "a cadre of faceless bureaucrats and technical experts who had willingly and profitably harnessed themselves to the task of making America's genocidal world order hum with maximal efficiency." So they deserved it. Indeed we all deserve it. Churchill wrote that for U.S. crimes stretching back two centuries, compensatory justice "would require a lethal reduction in the U.S. population...of between 96 and 99 percent." Basically no one in America deserves to live.
In a footnote to the essay, however, Churchill acknowledged that this indictment of America's citizens applies also to him. For one, he enjoys privileges that are a fruit of conquest. "I am a citizen only by virtue of the U.S. impostion of itself upon my people," he wrote. (Churchill fancies himself to be part native American, a claim that has been questioned by his critics.) Despite his criticism of U.S. foreign policy, Churchill says he didn't do enough to block the U.S. war machine. "I am nonetheless here, in the belly of the beast, still alive and at liberty, and have thus done less than I could have. Hence I share in the political guilt of all Americans. It follows that had I been aboard one of the fatal aircraft on 9/11 or should I be similarly extinguished in the future, as is entirely possible under present circumstances, I will have no more basis for complaint than any other American."
Now the chickens are coming home to roost for Ward Churchill. Should he be surprised? Yes, but only at how leniently he is being treated. If America were really the ruthless war machine that he alleges, America would turn him over to Al Qaeda. The radical Muslims would then do their worst, which Churchill himself admits would be perfectly understandable and just. But America has attempted nothing of the sort. Instead, the U.S. war machine's Colorado representatives have decided merely to relieve Ward Churchill of his job. So what is the guy snivelling about? Could it be that he knows he's been playing the victim card for years and getting away with it, and now he expects to put on his American Indian outfit and cry some more, and hope that some politically correct jury falls for it and awards him a big sum of money? Churchill is right about one thing: only in America!
Reader Comments ( Page 4 of 4)
46. Andie Pauly When you say freedom of speech to the UTMOST are you saying that we can say anything without impunity. We surely can't yell fire in a crowded theatre and we can't threaten the lives of public officials without retribution. How did you stand on the Imus situation? Did you allow him the right of free speech? I will support and defend even Nazi's the right to assemble and to speak their mind, but that doesn't mean that I will have that same group in the public schools talking to my children. I also don't want any one teaching their version of religion to my kids at school. I oppose institutional sponsored prayer in school also. Freedom of speech like all of our rights do come with defined boundaries. We may not like those boundaries but I can't think of any place in the world that is better, can you?
nativenurse at 10:07AM on Jul 27th 2007
47. Instead of paying attention to the likes of Ward Churchill, too bad we do not have these sort of guys around nowadays:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xyUX6wV1lBQ
Ken Berg at 10:29AM on Jul 27th 2007
48. Mr. D'Souza once again wishes to impress us with his knowledge and wisdom. Unfortunately, and as always, he looks only to that little part which suits him. Had he more integrity, he would note that while we can condemn Mr. Churchill for his failings in academia, as I recall those of Mr. D'Souza's persuasion had Mr. Churchill tried, convicted and "hung" even prior to his academic failings came to light. So, there is certainly no glory to be claimed on the neo-con side. Perhaps Mr. D'Souza, Rush Limbaugh, Sean Hannity, Bill O'Reilly and none other than David Horowitz should be investigated for "intellectual integrity." As I read books on each side, I know how shallow this neo-con literature really is, including some by college professors who blindly follow it. They remind me of a statement I ran across. If NAZI'ism had come to power in this country, at least 60% percent of professors at Harvard and Yale would have gladly yelled out "Sieg Heil" at the beginning and end of their classes. (Judging from what is now coming out of Stanford, I might raise that level to 80 to 90% at that institution.
As far as college and university students, those who attend those institutions to "be" educated, you are there to learn, not "be educated." They should, by this time have learned to think for themselves, and not take everything "dished out" by any college professor. So, let us drop the "Oh, poor little children. They are being taught the wrong thing." Grow up people!
Robert I. Laitres at 5:42PM on Jul 28th 2007
49. I have never read Ward Churchill's writings, but I have heard that one of his books on the CIA's undercover work at home is a classic.
In any case, people who have, seem to have a different opinion from the one promoted on talk radio. The plagiarism charge was quite minor as I read it and almost to be expected from a writer with 20 or so books to his credit.
And here is what
James P. Sterba, Professor of Philosophy, University of Notre Dame (excerpt from letter to University of Colorado Acting Chancellor DiStefano)writes:
"I have been familiar with Professor Churchill’s work for a number of years now. I have cited his work approvingly in an essay I wrote for the journal Ethics in 1995 published by the University of Chicago. This journal is probably the oldest and most prestigious journal in the field of ethics and political philosophy published in the the United States. Later, I revised and published a portion of this essay which included the parts that referred to Professor Churchill’s work in my book, Three Challenges to Ethics, published with Oxford University Press in 2001. At the time, I asked Professor Churchill to write a blurb for the back of this book which he graciously did. Both Oxford and myself were pleased to have his endorsement of my book. All of this is evidence of my belief, and the beliefs of the editors of Ethics and Oxford University Press in the excellence of Professor Churchill’s work. There is not even the hint of incompetence here. It is excellence all the way down."
Not quite as much the fringe lunatic that talk radio would have you believe he is.......or even some of the left-liberal mainstream.
Lila Rajiva at 7:35PM on Jul 28th 2007
50. The outspoken, longhaired, University Prof, Ward Churchill is an invention of the Media.
The court case will be very entertaining and I'm sure he will win his job back but after the book deal and the movie, he may just retire to a hippy commune high in Colorado.
Commoncents at 7:07PM on Jul 30th 2007
51. All you liberal trolls should hang yourselves. It would do the world a big favor, you self-righteous dicksucking asswipes.
Eddie at 4:26AM on Aug 1st 2007
52. The Duke lacrosse team fiasco shows that liberal educators have created a phony cultural paradigm that distorts reality. And, nobody exploits phony paradigms, obfuscates truth, or games the system like the Clintons.
Shades of Ward Churchill: I Got Your University; Right Here
Set the Wayback Machine for 23 August 1995: a hot day in the nation’s capitol. But 3000 miles due west on California’s Central Coast, a constellation of events was unfolding that would have a profound effect on Western civilization; plunge it into decades of war. Yet, this cataclysmic upheaval was only part of the plan. Bill Clinton picked up the telephone. It was his Chief of Staff Leon Panetta, calling from a payphone in Monterey. Bill held the receiver at arms length and gazed at the tasteful floral arrangement that adorned the Oval Office. Leon’s disembodied voice filled the room. What now, asked Hillary. It’s that damn college, mouthed Bill. There was, no getting out. Hillary nodded, just tell Leon he’ll get whatever he needs: http://theseedsof9-11.com
Ann Olin at 2:19PM on Aug 6th 2007
53. I agree with much of what WC espouses -- regardless of his genetic lineage. He illuminates the dark and sinister behavior historically displayed by Americans -- behavior that most Americans would like to forget about or deny, but behavior that the rest of the world is familiar with.
I am a Native American, and my people have suffered immensely for centuries from mistreatment -- including attempts at genocide -- by European American “illegal aliens”: European immigrants who never sought, nor received, official permission from my people to settle in our land. WC enlightens us of European atrocities committed against Native Americans, and he gets vilified for it.
Americans have notoriously bullied other peoples around the world for generations. We exhibited few scruples when exploiting them unmercifully, as long as the end result benefited greedy capitalists, filling their pockets with ill-gotten wealth. We have exhibited bias with our unwavering support of Israel, to the detriment of Islamic Arabic countries. The result of such arrogant, selfish discriminatory behavior is world-wide hatred for America. It doesn’t take a rocket scientist to see why.
D’Souza seems to think that WC was fired because of his opinions regarding 9-11. He was fired because of allegations of fraudulent writing and plagiarism. How ironic that D’Souza thinks that WC should have been fired because WC expressed his beliefs -- albeit unpopular -- regarding 9-11; D’Souza then expressed his own absurd belief that the cause of 9-11 was far-left liberal behavior. If WC was actually fired because he expressed his opinions about 9-11, then America has fallen to a new low. May the great Spirit save us all.
Mark at 1:19PM on Aug 23rd 2007
54. Contrast the defense of Churchill to the case of DeJohn vs. Temple University, in Philadelphia. Called to active duty after September 11, 2001, when Christian DeJohn interrupted his graduate studies to serve in Bosnia, he was sent invites to protests sponsored by Temple’s History Dept. When he objected, Temple retaliated. Talk show Radio Free Penn State: “While serving our country abroad, DeJohn-- who had established himself as a student in good academic standing before he was deployed-- was marginalized and maligned as a serviceman for disagreeing with some of his professors’ anti-war views.”
Temple’s ongoing retaliation, ignored by the media: welcoming him home with a form letter expelling him, destroying his credit by falsely reporting his graduation, delaying his graduation by refusing to evaluate his MA thesis, contacting “about a dozen” potential employers to sabotage his job search, threatening to expel him for bringing a civil rights suit.
Defendant Professor Gregory Urwin’s response to DeJohn’s free speech concerns? That veterans are “mentally imbalanced” from being “trained to kill.” Urwin has stooped so low as to compare DeJohn (a decorated, disabled Army veteran) to the Virginia Tech mass murderer.
Defendant Professor Richard Immerman, History Dept. chair, says he didn’t help because his only duty is to see that profs return library books. He’s written of his hope that DeJohn will “self-destruct,” while a Temple witness wrote that DeJohn “should be dealt with in the Sicilian manner;” i.e., murdered.
When DeJohn testified before the PA Academic Freedom hearings in 2006, Temple Pres. David Adamany- though DeJohn asked for his help- denied any knowledge: “If students were going to complain about this I would know it but I just do not know of any retaliation. I would be upset if intimidation was going on.” Adamany has never been held accountable for his untruth, but when the controversy led to Temple Trustees adopting a new policy, the Washington Times wrote that for the academic freedom movement, this was “the biggest victory in its three-year history.”
DeJohn brought suit in Federal court for Temple’s violations of his and other students’ rights. While claiming Temple’s speech code is not unconstitutional, Temple attorney Joe Tucker (who insists “This case has nothing to do with DeJohn’s First Amendment rights”) scrapped and rewrote it on the eve of a crucial deadline. At one point Temple’s “defense” was that they had no idea how their own policy appeared on Temple’s official websites.
In March 2007 a Federal judge ruled in DeJohn’s favor, issuing a permanent injunction against Temple for violating the First Amendment. Center For Academic Freedom senior counsel David French wrote, “Every Temple student enjoys greater free speech rights as a result of Christian DeJohn’s stand.” This historic free speech victory has been ignored by the media.
Though DeJohn has a 3.2 (B plus) GPA, Temple attorney Tucker, trying to deflect attention from the bedrock 1st First Amendment issues involved, refers to him in The Chronicle of Higher Education as “a marginal learner, barely passing.” A decorated, disabled Army veteran who has risked his life overseas to defend the civil rights of foreigners through service on five continents is now being denied the most basic Constitutional rights in Philadelphia- the "cradle of democracy."
The Foundation for Individual Rights in Education writes, “While taking a stand for free speech is vital for the health of our democracy, doing so often entails untold costs, as Christian’s story demonstrates all too clearly. That’s why it’s crucial to remember that when courts consider the constitutionality of speech codes on campus, every discussion of principle and precedent has a tremendous impact on the daily lives of real students.”
DeJohn has faith that if his story can get out to average Americans, justice will be served through the court of public opinion.
Christian DeJohn may be contacted at: TankerCMD@aol.com
Christian DeJohn at 2:45PM on Sep 29th 2007