Columbia Professor calls for "A Million Mogadishus"

[Drake]

Some more interesting perspective on Mr. de Genova.

From Slate:

http://www.fpp.co.uk/docs/ADL/Slate110702.html

In some instances, the ADL's methodology may be drastically underestimating the extent of anti-Semitism. For example, the survey states a gratifyingly low (three percent) rate of anti-Semitism on campus. From this it concludes that anti-Semitism is more common among less-educated people. But is that really so? After all, college students are well-schooled in the "correct" answers to the ADL quiz. If, as many Jewish groups assert, anti-Semitism is piggybacking anti-Israel sentiment on campuses, it's not on statements like "Jews are shrewd in business." It's on statements like this one attributed to Nicholas DeGenova, a professor of Latino studies at Columbia University, in the April 18 edition of the Columbia Spectator: "The heritage of the victims of the Holocaust belongs to the Palestinian people. The state of Israel has no claim to the heritage of the Holocaust." The ADL poll has no way of gauging agreement with that idea. But since it was volunteered publicly by a person who influences thought and opinion, it seems much likelier than any of the anti-Semitism index's statements to reflect genuine hostility toward Jews.

It appears that even other academics tend to find Mr. de Genova's general political orientation a bit extremist and suspect.

[Drake]

Originally posted by superbama
Who cares if this guy is fired? I don't. I'm sure he could get gainful employment at a terrorist camp helping bombers become critical thinkers.

I for one would rather see this one guy take a bullet to the head than see 18 million fellow Americans die.

It's comments like that which really make me sad. You could dismiss political zealots like Mr. de Genova rationally by citing some of his extremist views (and believe me, there's nothing an academic hates more than being marginalized), or you could advocate that we just kill him.

That approach worked wonders with Alexander Solzenitzen.

[superbama]

I didn't advovate killing him, just saying I would rather see him dead than 18 million. Or is one Professor worth 18 million "others" ?

[NoMyths]

Hell, I'd rather see anyone dead than 18 million. Dead! DEAD!

And then kill them some more, just for being presumptuous.

[Drake]

Would you strangle one baby to death in order to save the lives of a million other babies? That's not a moral decision I'm qualified to make.

My entire argument is that Mr. de Genova is young and foolish and we should treat his comments with the same consideration and gravity that we would give to any other young fool.

[KWhit]

Guys, you're missing a point here. It is not Cam's decision whether the guy is fired or not. It's the University President's decision.

Some of you have made very good points about why differing viewpoints should be cherished at a university - not punished. I'm sure the Univ Pres will keep that in mind as he decides this professor's fate.

However, when someone doesn't approve of someone else's statements they have every right to respond (which is what Cam did). He is just exercising his right to free speech by writing his letter.

If he is fired, it will NOT be because Cam wrote the letter. It will be because the Pres decided it was in the best interests of the school. Cam just gave him some more information to help him make that decision. You did the right thing Cam.

[superbama]

Originally posted by Drake
Would you strangle one baby to death in order to save the lives of a million other babies? That's not a moral decision I'm qualified to make.

My entire argument is that Mr. de Genova is young and foolish and we should treat his comments with the same consideration and gravity that we would give to any other young fool.

Cool, fire him like any other young fool. Let him get a doctorate in "Life is kicking my ass working at a laundrymat". As long as you understand I was not advocating his death mearly stating my preference.

As for the babies, I would have to wait and see their political viewpoints before deciding

[Drake]

I don't actually want him fired, sb. I think most people -- even your average 18-21 year old -- will be able to tell in a very brief period of time that he's an extremist long on ideology and very short on true wisdom. I imagine his egregious intellectual shortcomings will allow him to ascend in the academic ranks as high as he deserves to go.

One thing I've learned about academics: they don't tolerate fools in their midst for long.

[superbama]

Well truth be told I would not know much about that world. I dropped out of high school as a freshman and have fought and clawed to get what I have today. The academic threshhold for foolishness is considerably higher than the world I live in. I just hope he can follow directions, I cannot stand when they overstarch my collars.

[Drake]

Hehe. Well said.

[AgPete]

Originally posted by Bee
It really bugs me to see professors who teach their opinions instead of the facts. I was lucky in school that the majority of the teachers I had presented the facts and wanted to students to form their own opinions, I guess that's no longer the norm.

Was that ever the norm? I guess history classes were borderline and I did have an excellent comparative politics class in which the professor kept to the facts and never allowed personal politics in the class but I think most of my social science classes were a heavy mix of the professor's ideology. I found a lot of it in the science classes too.

As far as the professor, I really don't have any comment. I learned a long time ago that you don't have to be a genius to get a college degree. There are idiots everywhere. With people like this that obviously have some other issues, I treat them like a bad television show, change the channel and ignore.

[Subby]

I would advocate killing Tarkus if it saved me a couple cents on my next donut.

What?

[Drake]

I would not harm anyone who looks as good as Tarkus does in a Speedo.

[EagleFan]

The problem isn't just who he was talking about, it was that he was talking about anyone. If he said he wanted to see millions or Iraqis killed and drug through the streets I would still have a low opinion of him and also write a letter as well.

It's about humanity. I see the need for the war at this time but am not a war monger. If the war could be won without the loss of a single life, that would be the best solution. Unfortunately that's not the case with war but I don't want to see anyone slaughtered, that's just called having decency and being humane.

The most ironic thing about his statement is what would happen to him if he were an Iraqi and said the same thing about Iraqi troops. The least of his worries would be getting fired.

[Anthony]

i think it's lame that Cam sent the letter to the president of the school. so the only free speech one is allowed to is the speech we all agree with?

i don't agree with his comments, but college is a world in and of itself. it is a place to foster free thought. whoever among us who went to college will agree that we live a very sheltered life in the 4 years we attend institutions of higher learning. old enough to have a voice and opinion, but not old enough to have real responsibilities. i think the same "leeway" extends to the professors.

colleges are mini-countries, with their own dictators and restrictions and freedoms. it's the kind of environment that tries in vain mostly to encourage one to fight the powers that be and that an individual can make a difference, while there's still time before the individual graduates and becomes "one of them". in the context of radical thought that is rampant in the university level, i think we should just shake our head in disgust at the professor's words, but let him say his piece nonetheless. he's afforded the same leisure to speek his mind (wrong or right) that MIchael Moore took when he bashed our president and our war, all the while cashing in his big Hollywood check from the country that makes it possible for him to be fat and famous.

[stkelly52]

Should he be fired? Without a doubt. Colleges are businesses. They depend on the money that is being brought into them from tuition and from alumni. Because of this man's comments, both could likly decline. In addition it is a wonderful lesson to teach the students of his school that while you do have freedom of speech, that does not mean you are immune to the consequences of what you say.

[superbama]

I am really impressed on how many people are willing to defend this man. Man I would have had a blast with this protection had I known and studied hard enough to become a professor. Sweet!

[astralhaze]

Jesus Christ. This is the most pointless discussion I have seen in a while. Some Ivy League professor says something stupid at a rally and it's an issue? Who gives a shit? How many people read this board? A few hundred at least. I have seen more than my share of stupid comments on this board and I haven't seen anyone calling for daleearnhardtjr's head. How does this effect any of your lives? Do you think that because some moron professor calls for a million Mogidishu's that will make it more likely to happen? I have no problem with Cam writing a letter to the administration, although I wouldn't have bothered, I agree that the guy is an assjockey; but, really, this is much adieu about nothing. I feel stupid even replying.

[JonInMiddleGA]

Originally posted by KWhit
You did the right thing Cam.

Okay, that's enough, you're scaring me. We've now agreed twice in the span of less than a week.

If that ain't a sign of the apocalypse, I don't know what is.

[heybrad]

Nevermind

[QuikSand]

(smart move, brad)

I wonder whether the construct of:

I for one would rather see this one guy take a bullet to the head than see 18 million fellow Americans die.

is really a valid one?

Do we really think that one particular tenured professor at one American university will, by means of saying that he wishes for high US casualties in war, will actually make that so? Are we really talking about this man's bringing these things about? Or rather, just expressing his opinion (presumably) that high war casualties might bring about fewer wars in the future?

I'm not thrilled about the guy and his opinions, either - I find it hard to see who could be. But I'm not so sure that advocating his execution for his opinions is a particularly rational conclusion, at least in the kind of society that we all claim to want to defend.


I think in the eyes of the law, there's a basic difference between words that have the logical potential to bring about harm or violence, and those that are simply unpalatable. Screaming to a group of protestors "everyone grab a brick and throw it at the first white person you see" is speech that is not protected - it is intended to incite illegal and harmful behavior. Neither is yelling "fire!" in a crowded theater, to borrow from Schenck, since that is intended to alarm and potentially injure others.

Does this nutjob's speech deserve protection? I think so. He's not calling upon his audience to do anything, he's just making a political statement. It's a particularly unsavory statement, but it's not one that the government ought to seek to squelch. Rather like burning the flag, I suppose. It's difficult to embrace it, but the fact that we willingly harbor people with such contrary opinions is a good thing, it's what the flag and the country properly stand for.

That, however, is not to say that there should be no consequences for holding those opinions. In my judgment, this man deserves to be hated and chastised by listeners, and people with economic influence like Cam. That's fundamentally different than calling for the government to take action. We the people have our own ways of making our opinions felt - through purchase decisions, protests, and the like.

(It's interesting to me how so many people on this very board will simultaneously applaud Cam Edwards for his letter exerting influence on Columbiua University for what he sees as an inappropriate practice, but in the next thread will use disturbingly ugly language to talk about Martha Burk and her efforts to exert the same kind of pressure against Augusta National, for what she sees as an inappropriate practice. I guess to them it's a matter of judging the content of the argument, and then deciding who has the right to object, protest, or otherwise try to bring about change.)

There's a subsidiary issue in all this - that of academic tenure. While most of this thread's discussion has focused on matters of "free speech" (in various contexts), I think it's also reasonable to wonder whether such a wide blanket protection such as those offered under typical academic tenure rules is good for academia and society in general. There might be a worthwhile debate to be had, there. Indeed, if the guy making these arguments were in almost any other employment related to the activism (head of an organization or union, for instance) there would be much more serious employment repercussions, I'd have to think.

An interesting discussion here.

[illinifan999]

I wrote a letter too.

Dear Mr.De Genova,

This was a quote from the article, "By turns, the speakers Wednesday night said the Bush administration's actions in Iraq were bullying, illegal, deceitful, corrupt and murderous"
That doesn't sound much like the Bush administration, it sounds more like the Iraqi regime. Iraq gassed Kurds, has violated numerous UN resolutions, murdered anyone who opposed the regime. I also know an African-American who happens to be a pretty good friend. He is one of the most patriotic people I know. Yet you said that people who called themselves patriots where white supremacists. Yep, he must definatly hate his own race.

So since only true heros are the ones that defeat America, you shoud move to Iraq and help the regime. From what you said you seem to have a big mouth, but no guts. Go to a parent that just lost her son or daughter during the way, and tell them that you are glad they are dead, and that they have "treacherous lack of prospects for a decent life," taken from the article.

I also read that you hope that your comments would not lead to death threats. While I would never wish for someone to be harmed, you have made a choice. The American Constitution allows freedom of speech. You may recieve angry e-mails, and what not, but you are protected by law to be able to say what you want. This law also protects you from being killed or injured for your comments. Iraq does not allow this freedom of speech. In fact in Iraq if you were to say one thing that goes against the government, you might as well draw up you will because Sadaam's men will come to kill you.

Daniel Ertmann

Probably not as good as Cam's but I like it.

[Subby]

Originally posted by illinifan999
Probably not as good as Cam's but I like it.

That's probably the understatement of the year...

[Drake]

Originally posted by Subby
I have a smallish penis and a taste for goat porn

Actually, that was the understatement of the year.

[Subby]

Originally posted by Drake
Actually, that was the understatement of the year.

Smallish porn and goat penis. Get it straight...

[ice4277]

What scares me more than this turd's comments was the fact that the crowd "loudly applauded" him after he was done speaking.

[NoMyths]

Hey, illinifan's letter got to the "move to Iraq" part in the second paragraph! That sets a record compared to the Warmonger and Peacenik conversation.

[Bee]

Originally posted by Subby
I would advocate killing Tarkus if it saved me a couple cents on my next donut.

Krispy Kreme?

[CamEdwards]

Good job Daniel-san.

[superbama]

Sorry oh great quicksand. I take it back. I would rather see 18 million soldiers dead than this man harmed, You happy?

[QuikSand]

Yeah, I'm pretty sure that's what I said.