Reason Magazine
- reason.com
- reason.tv
- reason.org
- Donate
- Site Search:
Reason on Facebook
Reason on Twitter
Reason on YouTube
Reason RSSGet Reason E-mail Updates!
Manage your Reason e-mail list subscriptionsadvertisements
Reason Writers Around Town: Katherine Mangu-Ward on Ward Churchill and Diminutive Nazis in The Wall Street Journal
Remember Ward Churchill?
He was the University of Colorado Native American studies professor who won national notoriety for calling some of the 9/11 dead "little Eichmanns." In Denver this week, he's suing to get his job back. Get the scoop, plus learn what Churchill ate for breakfast, in an article by Associate Editor Katherine Mangu-Ward in The Wall Street Journal today.
Read the whole thing here.
|3.27.09 @ 11:16AM|#
Ward Churchill -
Hey everybody look at me! I'm screaming at the top of my
lungs to get attention.
Oh shit, somebody really looked at me, my credentials and my work.
That's a violation of my free speech rights.
________________________________________________
Kiss my ass Ward. You and your wife's discipline (ethnic studies)
is largely unacademic crap. In a just world you'd both be teaching
remedial English at a lower tier community college.
|3.27.09 @ 11:19AM|#
he's a phony indian trading off the heritage of real indians in a racial game of divide and conquer. as an authentic, certifiable white man, i hate phonies.
spambot|3.27.09 @ 11:43AM|#
"When you bring your skills to bear for profit, you are the
moral equivalent of Adolf Eichmann."
So I guess that means if he gets his job back he is working for
free?
Federal Dog|3.27.09 @ 11:56AM|#
"In a just world you'd both be teaching remedial English at a
lower tier community college."
Like hell they would. In any reasonable world, they would be taking
that class.
Tim Barrus|3.27.09 @ 11:57AM|#
Katherine Mangu-Ward is a lady-in-waiting for the American Taliban. This article is objective? Please. "Chickens coming home to roost? What a tired cliche. Mangu-Ward has an agenda. It is to punish. When did it become compelling for journalists to punish anyone. When did the American Taliban give her this authority. Churchill may have been politically incorrect, but he was right. This patently absurd article is simply another cog in the wheel of the witch-hunt. But America just looooooove its witch-hunts. This so-called article (it is badly-written rhetoric) should be burned in hell. Jornalists have to give us their opinion. Why should I CARE what this irrelevant woman thinks. In fact, I could care less. Churchill spoke the truth. The American Taliban does not tolerate the truth. At this point, freedom of speech in America isn't even an idea. It's a sad joke which is what this article is. More finger-waving yadayadayada on the part of yet another intellectual midget whose thinking is done by, who else, the American Taliban. There is always a price for truth. http://le-too.blogspot.com -- Tim Barrus, Amsterdam
|3.27.09 @ 12:00PM|#
Churchill may or may not be a fraud, but he was terminated for
expressing an inflammatory and unpopular opinion about 9/11.
The conventional wisdom is not to be questioned. 9/11 was
perpetrated by evil people who had no motive other than hating our
freedom. America never does wrong. Even when we do, our hearts are
in the right place.
I recommend the infamous essay if you haven't read it. Kind of
improvisational and not necessarily entirely factual, but an
interesting polemic from one if this country's few actual radical
leftists.
Kolohe|3.27.09 @ 12:04PM|#
I saw the pic before I read the headline, and thought at first this was going to be about Gloria Steinem.
|3.27.09 @ 12:17PM|#
This article is objective?
No, you moron, it's her opinion.
I know that this must come as a h-u-g-e surprise, as she posted
this on the website of a opinion magazine.
TofuSushi|3.27.09 @ 12:24PM|#
Ward Churchill is yet another visionary being tarred and
feathered by the Right Wing Noise Machine.
Free Ward Churchill!
|3.27.09 @ 12:36PM|#
Churchill may or may not be a fraud, but he was terminated
for expressing an inflammatory and unpopular opinion about
9/11.
I would disagree with that. His inflammatory statements about 9/11
brought him into the public eye. The subsequent scrutiny revealed
academic and employment fraud that made it impossible for him to
keep his job.
So I would say that the proximate cause of his firing wasn't his
public idiocy, although it was a contributing or "but-for"
cause.
Nonetheless, I don't see how anyone could argue that his firing
wasn't justified. You wouldn't want to be in a position where
anyone who expresses an inflammatory and unpopular opinion can't be
fired for any reason.
Stagman|3.27.09 @ 12:41PM|#
he was terminated for expressing an inflammatory and
unpopular opinion about 9/11.
While all of us were paying him to do so. While inflammatory, it's
also really stupid opinion.
Free speech is not the freedom to say what ever you want with out
any sort of repercussions. He has a right to say what he wants, we
have a right to exercise our free speech and fire his ass.
Art-P.O.G.|3.27.09 @ 12:45PM|#
Why should I CARE what this irrelevant woman thinks.
Um, yeah...why should anyone care what you think?
TofuSushi|3.27.09 @ 12:52PM|#
They were not inflammatory statements, they were the truth and you know it.
|3.27.09 @ 12:53PM|#
I don't think the man should have been fired from Colorado State
University....
....alone.
The whole staff should be fired.
It's Colorado State University, for Mises' sake.
Arguing about how governement "educational" institutions ought to
be governed is a sideshow. Divorcing education from the state is
the ball we should keep our eyes on.
Kevin
|3.27.09 @ 12:58PM|#
Ward Churchill is proof that being an asshole and correct is worse than being nice but wrong. The Sept. 11 attacks weren't just predictable. They had precedent. Even Ron Paul acknowledged blow back.
|3.27.09 @ 12:59PM|#
Correction:
I don't think the man should have been fired from the University of Colorado....
....alone.
The whole staff should be fired.
It's a State University, for Mises' sake.
Arguing about how governement "educational" institutions ought to be governed is a sideshow. Divorcing education from the state is the ball we should keep our eyes on.,
Sorry, Buffs. Even sorrier, Rams
Kevin
|3.27.09 @ 1:00PM|#
"Free speech is not the freedom to say what ever you want
with out any sort of repercussions. He has a right to say what he
wants, we have a right to exercise our free speech and fire his
ass."
That's right. And then he has the right to exercise his free speech
and kick your ass. Oh wait, at some point things went from speech
to actions.....
TofuSushi|3.27.09 @ 1:01PM|#
Lamar,
Ron Paul is the one who thought buying slaves would have prevented
the Civil War, right?
What was his big WWII solution? Buying Jews?
Stagman|3.27.09 @ 1:04PM|#
Oh wait, at some point things went from speech to
actions.....
Speech is an action, and an action can be speech. Think flag
burning.
Jesse Walker|3.27.09 @ 1:09PM|#
Chickens coming home to roost? What a tired
cliche.
Take it up with Churchill.
Michael P.|3.27.09 @ 1:10PM|#
I recommend the infamous essay if you haven't read it.
Kind of improvisational and not necessarily entirely
factual, but an interesting polemic from one if this
country's few actual radical leftists.
So what you're basically saying is that he half-assed it and
peppered it with phony supporting evidence, yet I should totally
read it because he's a rare bird and interesting and shit,
right?
jtuf|3.27.09 @ 1:14PM|#
From the WJS article:
Mr. Churchill, for his part, remains unrepentant. On the stand this week, he repeated his position that the attack on the World Trade Center was "perfectly predictable," saying: "When you bring your skills to bear for profit, you are the moral equivalent of Adolf Eichmann." And he refused to acknowledge that the objections to his scholarship had merit, explaining that history written by white men is full of lies and that he is simply trying to correct for that historical imbalance. The "technocratic corps at the very heart of America's global financial empire," dead in the World Trade Center, were legitimate targets, Mr. Churchill insisted, while he is an innocent victim. Perhaps, instead, it was simply that Mr. Churchill's own chickens finally came home to roost.
Fine. Now that he's fired, he can write and post video logs on the
web for free like the rest of us. The only change in his condition
is the loss of salary (aka profit).
|3.27.09 @ 1:21PM|#
"Ron Paul is the one who thought buying slaves would have
prevented the Civil War, right? What was his big WWII solution?
Buying Jews?"
Well, since the European powers ended slavery by buying up slaves,
there is historical precedent for such a conclusion. As for WWII
and Jews, I don't have a clue what you're talking about, but if you
see a parallel, then by all means, savor your sweet, if cryptic,
victory!!!
|3.27.09 @ 1:24PM|#
Gee - it's not like Tim Barrus has any special reason to be
standing up for fake Indians, is it.... oh, wait.
Never mind.
|3.27.09 @ 1:25PM|#
"Speech is an action, and an action can be speech. Think
flag burning."
LOL! You missed my point. Firing somebody is certainly a right
enjoyed by a private employer. I'm just not sure its a free speech
issue. If it were, why couldn't you (not you personally) fire all
the blacks working for you as a statement that you don't think
blacks are capable of responsibility? Free speech?
TofuSushi|3.27.09 @ 1:26PM|#
Lamar,
He was saying that we could have avoided WWII during the campaign.
I do not remember what sort of magic market toy he would have used
for that, but he said it could have been avoided.
Maybe he just wanted us to stay out so the Germans could slaughter
Soviets and is sad at the outcome.
Stagman|3.27.09 @ 1:33PM|#
Gee - it's not like Tim Barrus has any special reason to be
standing up for fake Indians, is it.... oh, wait.
That has got to be one of the greatest Wikipedia articles I've ever
read. Barrus, if nothing else, you've got some real stones.
Michael P.|3.27.09 @ 1:44PM|#
Holy crap. I don't know what possessed me to click on that Tim Barrus blog link, but it is astounding. So very idiotically astounding.
Stagman|3.27.09 @ 1:54PM|#
LOL! You missed my point. Firing somebody is certainly a
right enjoyed by a private employer. I'm just not sure its a free
speech issue. If it were, why couldn't you (not you personally)
fire all the blacks working for you as a statement that you don't
think blacks are capable of responsibility? Free speech?
I missed no point. I was pointing out that it's a gray area and
always has been. I happen to think this is a free speech issue. The
university responded to an action by Ward Churchill by saying "we
don't want you educating our students since you believe nonsense
like this".If Churchill has the free speech right to say whatever
he thinks, but the university has no right to express their opinion
on what he said, then free speech loses some meaning.
That aside, I think that a private employer should be able to fire
all his black employees and that the appropriate response is to run
the asshole out of town and/or tar and feather them in the
media.
|3.27.09 @ 1:58PM|#
"He was saying that we could have avoided WWII during the
campaign."
IIRC, Ron Paul said that our intervention in WWI lead to WWII.
Please correct me.
|3.27.09 @ 1:59PM|#
"I missed no point."
Well, except the point that the university didn't rely on free
speech grounds, nor did it need to. Other than that, you nailed
it!
Stagman|3.27.09 @ 2:06PM|#
Well, except the point that the university didn't rely on
free speech grounds, nor did it need to. Other than that, you
nailed it!
Would he have been fired without saying what he did? No. What he
said brought a lot of negative attention to the school right around
the same time it came to light that their football team had several
rapists with the coach sweeping it under the rug. UC didn't want
him around to say more crap that might further dissuade potential
students from going elsewhere for an education.
It's unimportant what grounds the university technically relied in
rendering their administrative decision to fire him. They went for
the path of least resistance that offered the least chance of a
successful appeal.
|3.27.09 @ 2:14PM|#
"It's unimportant what grounds the university technically
relied in rendering their administrative decision to fire
him."
I tend to think it is relevant that the university had multiple
grounds.
|3.27.09 @ 2:20PM|#
Free speech is not the freedom to say what ever you want
with out any sort of repercussions. He has a right to say what he
wants, we have a right to exercise our free speech and fire his
ass.
Ever heard of tenure?
Stagman|3.27.09 @ 2:23PM|#
Did I say it wasn't relevant? A murder trial can last a year. All the evidence heard is relevant, but only a small minority of it is important.
|3.27.09 @ 2:25PM|#
Why is it that you guys are starkly ideologically rigid when it
comes to economic policy, but you get all wishy-washy when it comes
to free speech?
No professor should ever be fired for expressing an opinion, no
matter how inflammatory.
His ideas are simply that America isn't the great force for good
we've all been propagandized into believing in. The only entity
threatened by his writing is the U.S. government, which you guys
are perfectly willing to trash when they interfere with anything
else.
|3.27.09 @ 2:27PM|#
Tenure is a union for well-educated idiots.
But I don't blame the tenured for their actions: It is perfectly
rational to not do a single goddamn useful thing all fucking day
long if you can't be fired for it.
|3.27.09 @ 2:27PM|#
Barrus, you're an idiot on many levels. You really expect to
make a difference by showing up on a libertarian website and
slamming a article written by one of the editors of that website?
If, so, you're deluded. Nothing has changed except you've gotten
the ration of abuse which you were obviously seeking.
FWIW, most of us here have better sense and manners than to show up
on Huffington Post or Feministing and bait the liberals.
Although I've been one of KM-W's harshest critics, and with good
reason, the WSJ article was the best piece I've ever read by her
and a quite respectable little piece of actual journalism.
Why should I CARE what this irrelevant woman thinks. In fact, I
could care less.
Bullshit, dutch-boy. The opposite of caring is total indifference,
ie ignoring. You obviously cared enough to send a frothy little
rant. Hope this makes you feel better. Loser.
T|3.27.09 @ 2:31PM|#
Tenure has outlived it's usefulness.
Well, to you, maybe. I know one or two tenured professors that
might disagree. Me, I'm libertarian enough not to want to get into
other people's employment terms.
Stagman|3.27.09 @ 2:31PM|#
No professor should ever be fired for expressing an opinion,
no matter how inflammatory.
That is the important word. "Should" is very different than
"cannot".
Also, free speech is a right guaranteed against the government, not
private citizens or organizations. And to answer your next
question, I think public Universities should be treated as private
entities.
T|3.27.09 @ 2:35PM|#
No professor should ever be fired for expressing an opinion,
no matter how inflammatory.
What about expressing his opinion that, say, his department head is
an incompetent moron who isn't fit to teach pre-schoolers to tie
their shoes? If I expressed that opinion to my boss, I'd sure as
hell get fired. Why is he special? Because he's a professor?
Stagman|3.27.09 @ 2:37PM|#
Well, to you, maybe. I know one or two tenured professors
that might disagree. Me, I'm libertarian enough not to want to get
into other people's employment terms.
Fair enough. But I was only expressing an opinion about what I
think about tenure. I did not propose that the government do
something about it.
If we're going to use anecdotal evidence, by the way, I know one or
two professors that wish they could get the hack out of their
department that hasn't done anything important in 20 years and
replace him with someone who'll actually contribute something.
|3.27.09 @ 2:37PM|#
Stagman,
Of course you do. Anyway the "cannot" comes with tenure, in theory.
I happen to think it's a very good idea to insulate professors from
punishment for their opinions.
Does freedom only exist for employers and other monied interests to
you guys? I suppose everyone else has the theoretical freedom to go
get rich and oppress their own underlings. Although not with your
policies!
IMO, freedom of speech isn't just an arbitrary restriction on
government. It is guaranteed because it serves a higher purpose,
namely pragmatic advancement of ideas. That means it's a good idea,
and should be expanded into as many areas of life as
possible.
You're supposed to be freedom lovers, yet you go straight to the
lowest form of totalitarianism when Churchill is brought up (and I
suspect other radical liberals). "I don't like his ideas, so fuck
'im!"
|3.27.09 @ 2:38PM|#
Why is he special? Because he's a professor?
Yup. There is a whole other world out there beyond the paper
pushing, profit-centric economic world, you know.
T|3.27.09 @ 2:41PM|#
Yup. There is a whole other world out there beyond the paper
pushing, profit-centric economic world, you know.
Then I suggest you and the good professor go find it without taking
a salary for doing so, since taking that filthy, filthy lucre would
be participating in the profit-centric world.
|3.27.09 @ 2:42PM|#
Oops, take back the "dutch-boy" taunt, with sincere apologies to
any Nederlanders - that jerkoff Barrus is one of ours.
And thanks, AMD, for the link to the blistering expose and
takedown. Brilliant.
</|3.27.09 @ 2:44PM|#
Katherine Mangu-Ward is a lady-in-waiting for the American
Taliban.
And she looks so hot w/o her Burqa on !
|3.27.09 @ 2:46PM|#
Churchill was ultimately fired because his work turned out to be fraudulent. It's quite possible that this would have gone unnoticed or unchallenged had he not been publicly controversial, but he was clearly and finally fired on the merits.
Stagman|3.27.09 @ 2:51PM|#
I happen to think it's a very good idea to insulate
professors from punishment for their opinions.
But see that's not the problem with tenure. Tenure always insulates
professors from getting fired for doing shitty work. Churchill is a
great example. His comments were inflammatory and stupid at the
same time. I don't care how inflammatory he was. I do care that
he's putting out and teaching a bunch of crap.
|3.27.09 @ 2:51PM|#
T,
Surely you understand the difference between getting paid for work
and making a profit?
Universities are meant to be oases of free thought and intellectual
and scientific advancement. Sure a lot of crap comes from them, but
you owe more than you think to universities. They manage to advance
civilization without the magic of the unfettered marketplace!
Imagine.
</|3.27.09 @ 2:52PM|#
Although I've been one of KM-W's harshest critics, and with
good reason, the WSJ article was the best piece I've ever read by
her and a quite respectable little piece of actual
journalism.
Gillespie/Welch:
KM-W is both an incendiary controversalist to, yet well respected
by the second tier of liberal trolls.
What more do you want? The time for promotion is NOW!
SENIOR EDITOR!
SENIOR EDITOR!
SENIOR EDITOR!
SENIOR EDITOR!
SENIOR EDITOR!
SENIOR EDITOR!
Michael P.|3.27.09 @ 2:53PM|#
I happen to think it's a very good idea to insulate
professors from punishment for their opinions.
Where did you get the idea that Churchill was somehow punished for
his ideas? His "ideas" only brought attention to him and he was
subsequently exposed as a fraud and plagiarist - hardly a matter
that falls into the parameter of protected free speech.
Stagman|3.27.09 @ 2:54PM|#
Universities are meant to be oases of free thought and
intellectual and scientific advancement. Sure a lot of crap comes
from them, but you owe more than you think to universities. They
manage to advance civilization without the magic of the unfettered
marketplace!
Universities are marketplaces of ideas. The problem with our
university system now is that it overvalues bad ideas.
|3.27.09 @ 3:04PM|#
Michael P.,
They wouldn't have gone line by line through all of his scholarship
looking for reasons to fire him if not for his opinions.
Whatever academic malfeasance he is guilty of (and shoddy
scholarship isn't malfeasance--neither is "disrespecting Indian
oral traditions"), the investigation took place in a poisoned
atmosphere and was drenched in political considerations. To
conclude that it was all just a big coincidence is naive.
|3.27.09 @ 3:09PM|#
Churchill was ultimately fired because his work turned out
to be fraudulent. It's quite possible that this would have gone
unnoticed or unchallenged had he not been publicly controversial,
but he was clearly and finally fired on the merits.
Exactly. The idiot went screaming at the top of his lungs. People
unsurprisingly looked. He's an idiot if he hadn't figured that's
gonna happen.
Lady Libertarian|3.27.09 @ 3:30PM|#
Why is it that you guys are starkly ideologically rigid when it comes to economic policy... which you guys are perfectly willing to trash when they interfere with anything else.
Why are you liberals such sexist pigs?
My Ass Can Singh|3.27.09 @ 3:39PM|#
"Tim Barrus, Amsterdam"
I took a shit in Amsterdam once. Apparently they trained it to
write gibberish. Damn them Duch is smart!
|3.27.09 @ 3:43PM|#
In other words it's okay to single him out for investigation because he was outspoken. And I'm the stalinist?
Actual Native American |3.27.09 @ 3:51PM|#
"Would he have been fired without saying what he did? No. What
he said brought a lot of negative attention to the school right
around the same time it came to light that their football team had
several rapists with the coach sweeping it under the rug."
Let's say I'm running around naked in my neighborhood. Not even
harassing anyone, just running around naked. Well some of the
neighbors are offended so they call the police.
So the police start chasing me. I run into my house. They follow me
in because they have probable cause. Once inside, they find I have
23 teenage girls chained to the wall, all of them naked. So they
arrest me for kidnapping. And then they convict me and sentence me
to life without parole.
And I'm thinking WTF??? All I was doing was running around the
neighborhood naked.
I stand by my original post:
He's a goddam self-important lying piece of horse shit.
From Wikipedia|3.27.09 @ 3:57PM|#
"On May 16, 2006 the University released its investigative committee findings. The Investigative Committee, a five-member subcommittee of the Standing Committee on Research Misconduct, agreed unanimously that Churchill had engaged in "serious research misconduct," including four counts of falsifying information, two counts of fabricating information, two counts of plagiarizing the works of others, improperly reporting the results of studies, and failing to "comply with established standards regarding author names on publications." In addition, the committee found him "disrespectful of Indian oral traditions." Two members found that Churchill's actions did not warrant dismissal and that the most appropriate sanction was suspension. While the remaining three found that his conduct was grounds for dismissal, they were split as to what the most appropriate sanction was-two believed suspension was appropriate and one stated dismissal was appropriate"
T|3.27.09 @ 3:59PM|#
Surely you understand the difference between getting paid
for work and making a profit?
Yes. There isn't one. Unless, of course, you pay more in expenses
than the value of your check. In which case, you're doing it
wrong.
*|3.27.09 @ 3:59PM|#
"Yup. There is a whole other world out there beyond the paper
pushing, profit-centric economic world, you know."
You show me a university that isn't profit-centric and I'll show
you a unicorn.
|3.27.09 @ 4:00PM|#
"When you bring your skills to bear for profit, you are the
moral equivalent of Adolf Eichmann."
Awesome.
Tell me again; why did this paragon of selfless virtue and
knowledge-for-knowledge's-sake hire attorneys and sue the school in
order to get his job back?
Should we assume there is no attempt to recover back pay? Surely,
he is above dirtying his hands, in that regard.
*|3.27.09 @ 4:06PM|#
Ward Churchill, the academic poseur who would never have been
hired to teach anywhere if it weren't for the nation's mania over
"diversity," has been having his day in court and a Wall Street
Journal piece covers the action.
Churchill's argument that, despite the findings of academic fraud
and plagiarism against him, he was only investigated because of his
repellant "little Eichmanns" essay on 9/11 and therefore is being
punished for his exercise of free speech, is silly. On that theory,
any professor who has a record of fraud and plagiarism can immunize
himself from any adverse consequences by saying something
outrageous. Repugnant words should not be allowed to serve as a
shield for illegitimate conduct.
Churchill is sticking with his moronic analogy, by the way. He
offers the view that anyone who offers his skills for profit is the
moral equivalent of the Nazi killer. That's so stupid it's hardly
even offensive. Why would Colorado allow such a buffoon anywhere
near its students?
|3.27.09 @ 4:13PM|#
"It's not about the money. It's about the sweet, innocent, impressionable, suburban sorority girls. Unlike anybody who has ever spent any tinme in the real world, or actually worked for a living, they think I know what I'm talking about. Nobody who knows me will even say 'hello' to me."
|3.27.09 @ 4:20PM|#
KM-W is both an incendiary controversalist to, yet well
respected by the second tier of liberal trolls.
Grudgingly respected when her writing merits it.
"Second tier liberal troll." Heh.
|3.27.09 @ 4:28PM|#
Plus, Churchill has falsified details of his military service in
published works, though not it works published in academic journals
AFAIK. However, if he also used those same falsifications in his
employment app, that would be grounds for dismissal.
Apologize for this guy all you want, Tony, but he's still a liar
and a fraud.
Perhaps the chickens did come home to roost, just not in the way he
expected them to.
Federal Dog|3.27.09 @ 6:01PM|#
"Tenure is a union for well-educated idiots."
No: It's a union for idiots who minimally completed a tuition for
diploma transaction and, for whatever reason, convinced a bare
voting majority of a hiring committee to give them jobs.
|3.27.09 @ 6:30PM|#
I'm curious how this guy managed to not make a single enemy in Colorado strong enough to uncover all the monkey business before the Sept.11 essay.
|3.27.09 @ 7:09PM|#
His ideas are simply that America isn't the great force for
good we've all been propagandized into believing in
No, his ideas are that Americans are all the moral equivalent of
war criminals and deserve to be killed.
Site comments/questions:
Media Inquiries and Reprint Permissions:
(310) 367-6109
Editorial & Production Offices:
3415 S. Sepulveda Blvd.
Suite 400
Los Angeles, CA 90034
(310) 391-2245