Random Notes from CO
So - my family is wonderful. Really, they are. Two brothers and one sis have decided to post blogs! Here they are:
Jesse is at www.jessedog.blogspot.com
Del (Darrell) is at www.monsieurl.blogspot.com
Lesli is at http://leslilarocque.blogspot.com
Check them out; they are really cool. I, however, have not figured out the best way to post pictures yet, as you can see. But the day will come soon, I promise.
Work is going exceedingly well. I have no complaints. I went to downtown Denver Saturday and had too much fun. The architecture is amazingly different from anything I have ever seen. Of course, living on the east coast my whole life did not prepare me for seeing a town full of buldings built after 1900. We get so used to certain types of buildings back east that new architecture seems surreal.
One local news item I've been meaning to write about is a professor in the Ethnic Studies department who has come under fire for several weeks now over a sentence he wrote. Ward Churchill currently teaches at CU Boulder, (the University of Colorado at Boulder for those not in with the Boulder slang,) and was the head of the Ethnic Studies Department at CU until recently. He holds lectures around the US often, as his primary focus is Native American Studies, and was commissioned to speak at a college in New Hampshire several weeks ago. Before he was scheuled to appear, however, a professor (or was it the dean?) at the school read an essay of Churchill's published in 2001 after September 11. He cancelled Churchill's lecture on the grounds of one line in a very long essay that compared (as this NH prof/dean put it) 9/11 victims to "little Eichmanns" who deserved to die.
As you can see, this caused quite a stir. How can an Ethnic Studies professor, a man who has championed the rights of Native Americans year after year say something so terrible? Some of the community and some students went crazy. One reporter from the Denver Post glommed on to the story and never let up. In fact, here's a quote from the Denver Post that sums up their position, dated Feb. 26, 2005:
"Since it was first reported that Churchill, a CU ethnic studies professor, had demonized some of the victims of the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks, the university has faced relentless scrutiny of its hiring practices and faculty qualifications. Churchill has undergone an extensive media review of his scholarship, artwork and genealogy, while everyone from radio talk-show hosts to syndicated newspaper columnists have questioned his integrity, his ancestry and his military career."
Wow. Political backlash at its best. What concerns me about this whole thing is the actual whiplash from one essay WRITTEN OVER THREE YEARS AGO. Three actions of the backlash: 1) Ward Churchill resigned as Head of the Ethnic Studies Department. 2) The insane reporters from the Denver Post have questioned Ward Churchill's Native American Heritage, saying he is not Cherokee. 3) The reporters have questioned his military background. See how #'s 1 thru 3 have nothing to do with that darn essay he wrote three years ago? In fact, I guess I haven't mentioned it yet, but Ward Churchill's "Eichmann" sentence has been taken out of context. For the real, actual essay - if you're interested - please see: http://www.kersplebedeb.com/mystuff/s11/churchill.html
For a summary of the essay and the "demonizing" sentence: Churchill was saying that the powers of the US, or the "Christian West," have constantly been attacking the Middle East, or the "Islamic East," for years, through several presidents, and the terrorists saw the buildings of the Pentagon and the Twin Towers as military targets-- not all who were inside were innocent civilians in the terrorists' eyes.
I find it fascinating that the First Ammendment has been ignored. I find it fascinating that a Native American Studies professor has had his Native blood challenged over a single sentence in an essay that had nothing to do with Native Americans. My favorite comment from Ward Churchill's mouth after this entire wreck of a situation: "Native Americans are the only race who have to prove their blood like dogs." How apropos.
This is my diatribe for now. I suggest you read some other Ward Churchill essays, especially an essay about cultural anthropologist Robert Thomas on the CU website: http://www.colorado.edu/EthnicStudies/faculty/w_churchill.html
My opinion, (as we know everyone has one) is that Ward Churchill has gotten a very raw deal.
Jesse is at www.jessedog.blogspot.com
Del (Darrell) is at www.monsieurl.blogspot.com
Lesli is at http://leslilarocque.blogspot.com
Check them out; they are really cool. I, however, have not figured out the best way to post pictures yet, as you can see. But the day will come soon, I promise.
Work is going exceedingly well. I have no complaints. I went to downtown Denver Saturday and had too much fun. The architecture is amazingly different from anything I have ever seen. Of course, living on the east coast my whole life did not prepare me for seeing a town full of buldings built after 1900. We get so used to certain types of buildings back east that new architecture seems surreal.
One local news item I've been meaning to write about is a professor in the Ethnic Studies department who has come under fire for several weeks now over a sentence he wrote. Ward Churchill currently teaches at CU Boulder, (the University of Colorado at Boulder for those not in with the Boulder slang,) and was the head of the Ethnic Studies Department at CU until recently. He holds lectures around the US often, as his primary focus is Native American Studies, and was commissioned to speak at a college in New Hampshire several weeks ago. Before he was scheuled to appear, however, a professor (or was it the dean?) at the school read an essay of Churchill's published in 2001 after September 11. He cancelled Churchill's lecture on the grounds of one line in a very long essay that compared (as this NH prof/dean put it) 9/11 victims to "little Eichmanns" who deserved to die.
As you can see, this caused quite a stir. How can an Ethnic Studies professor, a man who has championed the rights of Native Americans year after year say something so terrible? Some of the community and some students went crazy. One reporter from the Denver Post glommed on to the story and never let up. In fact, here's a quote from the Denver Post that sums up their position, dated Feb. 26, 2005:
"Since it was first reported that Churchill, a CU ethnic studies professor, had demonized some of the victims of the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks, the university has faced relentless scrutiny of its hiring practices and faculty qualifications. Churchill has undergone an extensive media review of his scholarship, artwork and genealogy, while everyone from radio talk-show hosts to syndicated newspaper columnists have questioned his integrity, his ancestry and his military career."
Wow. Political backlash at its best. What concerns me about this whole thing is the actual whiplash from one essay WRITTEN OVER THREE YEARS AGO. Three actions of the backlash: 1) Ward Churchill resigned as Head of the Ethnic Studies Department. 2) The insane reporters from the Denver Post have questioned Ward Churchill's Native American Heritage, saying he is not Cherokee. 3) The reporters have questioned his military background. See how #'s 1 thru 3 have nothing to do with that darn essay he wrote three years ago? In fact, I guess I haven't mentioned it yet, but Ward Churchill's "Eichmann" sentence has been taken out of context. For the real, actual essay - if you're interested - please see: http://www.kersplebedeb.com/mystuff/s11/churchill.html
For a summary of the essay and the "demonizing" sentence: Churchill was saying that the powers of the US, or the "Christian West," have constantly been attacking the Middle East, or the "Islamic East," for years, through several presidents, and the terrorists saw the buildings of the Pentagon and the Twin Towers as military targets-- not all who were inside were innocent civilians in the terrorists' eyes.
I find it fascinating that the First Ammendment has been ignored. I find it fascinating that a Native American Studies professor has had his Native blood challenged over a single sentence in an essay that had nothing to do with Native Americans. My favorite comment from Ward Churchill's mouth after this entire wreck of a situation: "Native Americans are the only race who have to prove their blood like dogs." How apropos.
This is my diatribe for now. I suggest you read some other Ward Churchill essays, especially an essay about cultural anthropologist Robert Thomas on the CU website: http://www.colorado.edu/EthnicStudies/faculty/w_churchill.html
My opinion, (as we know everyone has one) is that Ward Churchill has gotten a very raw deal.
posted by Lorraine at 5:05 PM
5 Comments:
I read the article, and I must say:
I TOTALLY DISAGREE with you on this one, sis. This guy may have written an article three years ago, BUT if you remember, Hitler wrote Mein Kampf in 1924, 9 YEARS before 1933, and in 1938, MANY non-Fascists around the world were STILL supporting him and giving him the benefit of the doubt. His POSITION was still DOCUMENTED well before Munich, and yet most ignored his direct, hideous language until it was too late.
This Churchill to me represents something wholly evil- an academic who can simplify everything to make a very dangerous and criminal point on horrid conclusions.
By him criminalizing everyone in the WTC, he has crossed over the line... WELL over the line. How can you take that paragraph with 'little Eichmanns' in it OUT OF CONTEXT?? He basically said that everyone in the WTC was a murderer because they were a part of capitalistic big business, and deserved their fate! What kind of lunatic fringe nonsense is that?
BTW, here is the offending sentence by Churchill: "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."
LITTLE EICHMANNS inhabiting the sterile Twin Towers... sounds VERY clear to me he was talking about those who worked in there.
The first past of that essay disgusted me, personally. I tire of hearing about how the West is abusing the East- no one in the West started cutting off heads of innocents and kidnap them on a regular basis, and torture them.
To me it is a VERY easy explanation- people need to come together and work out peace. This old 'blame game' tactic by extremists on both sides is OLD. Men like Churchill are extremists that represent those who have a very narrow interpretation of the world, and prepetuate hate.
It is not an Islam-Christian-Jew issue; it is an extremist vs. normal people issue.
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
Did you read the entire essay? Did you see that sentence in context?
Just wondering.
And I totally disagree with you. The First Ammendment still stands in this situation. I do agree that the West HAS abused the East, but I do not, however, agree with the actions of the extremists. I still firmly believe, after reading the entire essay, that Churchill is writing in regards to the actions taking place in a military context. Were there actions right? No. Are the actions of OUR military always right? No. He is an academic, like most others, who write to prove inconsistencies in our current government.
That's why he wrote that essay, and that's why his comments are still being taken out of context. And more to the point - it doesn't matter WHAT he said in the essay - he shouldn't have his entire identity as a Native questioned; the two do not logically come from one another. The factthat he is Native American has nothing to do with what he wrote. It's disgusting.
Lorraine, IT DOES matter what he said in the essay!
You can't take what he said out of context... not in the LEAST.
The terrorists weren't military members!! These same men torture, cut people's heads off, drive suicide bombers into the middle of civilians ON PURPOSE, HIDE in hospitals, schools, and mosques, AND kidnap people on a regular basis until their demands are met.
Churchill can't compare terrorists who commit such atrocities to OUR government, for it would take MUCH, MUCH, MUCH more evil for US to commit than they have.
I am sticking to my guns on this one- this type of intellectual ignorance is typical of those who have nothing better to do than to bash the United States by placing OUR actions at the same level as terrorists, AND blame innocent people by saying they deserved it!!
The only inconsistency is, for example, like comparing a serial killer to the schoolyard bully. Both commit wrongs, but to put them on the same footing is LUDICROUS... and yet this is what Churchill is telling us! Terrorists (the serial killers) are justified because America (the schoolyard bully) is just as bad? Pure garbage. I don't buy it for a second.
Post a Comment
<< Home