Incendiary in Academia May Now Find Himself Burned
By KIRK JOHNSON
<http://www.nytimes.com/2005/02/11/national/11professor.html>
http://www.nytimes.com/2005/02/11/na...professor.html
BOULDER, Colo., Feb. 10 - Prof. Ward L. Churchill has made a career at the
University of Colorado out of pushing people's buttons, colleagues and
students say, clearly relishing his stance as radical provocateur and
in-your-face critic.
Whether it is getting arrested by the Denver police for trying to disrupt
Columbus Day, which Professor Churchill has described as a "celebration of
genocide" because of the deaths of Indians that resulted from European
colonization, or ruffling feathers in the faculty lounge, hyperbole and
bombast have always been ready tools in the Churchill kit bag, people here
say.
Now many of the offended are pushing back. The storm of controversy that has
blown up around Professor Churchill over his essay about the Sept. 11
attacks, with its reference to the Nazi Adolf Eichmann - the "technocrats"
at the World Trade Center were "little Eichmanns," Professor Churchill said
- has turned the professor into a talking point and a political punch line.
On conservative talk radio, on campuses across the country, and especially
here in Boulder, debate about Professor Churchill means debate about freedom
of speech, the solemnity of Sept. 11 and the supposed liberal bias of
academia.
Many people here say that the professor - with his scholarly record under
investigation by the university l and with Gov. Bill Owens, a Republican,
calling for his dismissal - has become a symbol of academic expression under
fire. Others worry that subjects like Sept. 11 have become "sacred," and
cordoned off from unpopular analysis. Some say that the vitriolic debate
itself is the message and that people have been transformed into mirror
images of the man they love or loathe - little Churchills, as it were, who
are just as entrenched, over-the-top and, apparently, eager to offend as he
himself.
"Two sides are being presented without a lot of people listening," said Joe
Flasher, 24, a graduate student in astrophysics. "You already have your
opinion, right. So it's one person saying what they think and then the other
person saying the complete opposite. It seems very polarized. But I guess it
is the ultimate exercise in free speech."
Student organizations like College Democrats and College Republicans have
skirmished over Professor Churchill, a member of the ethnic studies
department. The Democratic group began a petition this week saying, "The
attacks on Professor Ward Churchill are attacks on the academic freedom of
the university." The Republicans, in calling for his dismissal, said that
alumni should freeze donations and that parents should send their children
elsewhere until political balance is brought to the professorial ranks.
"It's probably in their best interest to get rid of guys like that, but why
hide what this place really is: a bunch of lunatic leftists," said Matthew
Schuldt, senior vice chairman of College Republicans.
The undercurrent of the debate, faculty members and students say, is anxiety
about how the outside world regards the university. A football recruiting
scandal and several alcohol-related deaths among students over the last year
created waves of bad publicity for the institution. Now some people fear
that everyone will think the university is full of people like Professor
Churchill, whose essay, which drew little attention at its publication after
the attacks, gained notoriety when he was scheduled to speak at Hamilton
College in upstate New York last week. It suggests little emotion about the
deaths of thousands of people on Sept. 11 and a cold logic of foreign policy
analysis salted with terms that seemed calculated to enrage rather than
enlighten.
"If he had just been a little more thoughtful, nothing would have happened,"
Uriel Nauenberg, a professor of physics and the former chairman of the
Boulder Faculty Assembly, said. "He did not have to say these things in the
manner that he did."
Nonetheless, Professor Nauenberg said he did not believe that Professor
Churchill should be forced out because of the essay, though he added that he
personally found the expressions in the essay obnoxious.
Professor Churchill, 57, a Vietnam War veteran who became a lecturer at the
university in 1978 and was granted tenure in 1991, has claimed affiliations
over the years with many vociferous left-wing groups, including the Black
Panthers, Students for a Democratic Society and the American Indian
Movement. He said in an interview that winning peoples' attention often
meant not being nice. The United States' foreign and domestic policies, he
said, are brutal, and the words to describe that can be painful.
"I don't believe in the theory that we get to treat people like dogs, but
you have to talk to us in a polite way," he said.
Faculty members say that an objection to his writing style or opinions,
however outrageous or unpopular, is not enough to justify firing him. The
30-day review of his "writings, speeches, tape recordings and other works,"
that was announced last week by the university's governing body, the Board
of Regents, must find evidence of outright academic dishonesty, said R L
Widmann, a professor of English and the chairwoman of the Academic Affairs
Committee of the Boulder Faculty Assembly.
" 'I published a falsehood and I knew it to be untrue' - that's what they'd
have to find," Professor Widmann said.
But the passions have led to some dishonesty. University officials said on
Monday, for instance, that they were canceling a speech by Professor
Churchill because of security concerns. The student organizers of the speech
had received death threats because of their support for the professor,
university officials said, and safety could not be guaranteed.
The students, whose names were not released, admitted on Tuesday that the
death threats were embellished.
"They said, 'We were just being political,' " Ron Stump, the vice chancellor
for student affairs, said. "We expressed our disappointment."
The speech came off without incident - and without any apologies from
Professor Churchill.
Many students interviewed on campus in recent days said they feared that the
lines being drawn around Professor Churchill were also creating boundaries
about what could be freely and safely talked about in the United States.
"I think it's no longer about free speech - it's turned into this kind of
thing that we can't talk about Sept 11, that it's kind of become a sacred
issue," said Erin Langer, 22, a senior humanities major from Naperville,
Ill. "People forget we're in a university setting, and the way ideas are
challenged is by looking at an extreme view. The fact that he is so extreme
challenges people to think more."
Michelle York contributed reporting from New York for this article.
a decent article, though I don't agree with everything that was said. this guy just seems like a major douche, but I'm sure nobody is questioning that.
Linear Mode
