Let Academic Freedom Ring

Let Academic Freedom Ring
by Philipp Tsipman

You don’t have to be at Tufts for too long before you notice one thing: there is not a whole lot of diversity here. Diversity of thought, that is. Sure, Tufts can boast of an ethnically diverse faculty and student body. If you look more than skin-deep, however, you’ll notice that this place resembles more closely a political party or an exclusive social club than a hotbed of free and independent inquiry and thought.

Of the hundreds of lecturers at this university every year, David Horowitz, speaking on Thursday, April 1 will be one of just a handful who is a conservative. The commencement address has been delivered by a liberal from time immemorial, and if we look at the faculty, only two are registered Republicans, or less than 2% of those surveyed in the spring 2002, and only one faculty member gave to a Republican campaign between 1998 and 2001 out of over one hundred contributions.

Now, one may say that Massachusetts is naturally heavily Democratic, that the faculty may be non-partisan, and that in any case the university hires the best people possible without any partisan or ideological discrimination.

Massachusetts voted 32.5% for Bush in 2000 vs. 47.87% nationally. That’s hardly 2%. If you are ever in doubt, however, about the ideological inclinations of the faculty and the non-partisan atmosphere at Tufts, just take a look at the professors’ doors in East Hall, the home of the English and History departments. There are signs, cartoons, and decals for every liberal cause imaginable, sending a clear message to both students and potential faculty applicants about who is “in” and who isn’t. Try to find something similar on the conservative side.

Then, take a look at the events sponsored by these two departments and at their curricula, along with those of the Spanish, Urban and Environmental Policy, Child Development, Sociology and Anthropology Departments, and of the various academic programs at Tufts: Peace and Justice, American Studies, Women’s Studies, and the Group of Six culture centers. Whenever politics is touched upon, it is considered from a Democratic or Green partisan perspective. Even when the political process is not mentioned directly, the discussions reflect the concerns of the well-heeled, liberal Northeastern intellectual elites: environment, racial, gender, and sexual orientation “justice,” animal rights, secularism, Third World humanitarianism, multilateralism, multiculturalism, anti-militarism, and an opposition to guns, smoking, and business. Until recently the Tufts Chaplaincy used to feature a disclaimer on its website associating itself with "liberal religion." The disclaimer is no longer there, but the attitude persists.

While President Bacow talks about valuing diversity "in every dimension-—as a critical element in adequately preparing students for a rapidly changing world," the radicalized sixties generation of today’s faculty and administrators brought their politics and their prejudices along with them to their tenure. They combined them with Boston’s Brahmin exclusivity and created a perfect social club, where minorities and foreigners are more than welcome, as long as they are “our people” that is, and don’t disagree.

Yet, learning from only one perspective in an environment where challenging the underlying assumptions to any extent makes you an outcast in class and hurts your grades is not learning but indoctrination. The result is herd mentality where ideas go largely unchallenged and one comes out with the same cookie cutter mentality as everyone else.

For too long this has been true at Tufts. It’s now time to open things up.

This Sunday, Students for Intellectual Diversity, an affiliate of the Tufts Republicans, will introduce a resolution on the Academic Bill of Rights with the TCU Senate. The bill outlines several key principles—-freedom of speech, non-discrimination, due process, intellectual diversity-—that the university should commit itself to in order to create a climate free of academic bias. We urge the TCU Senate and the faculty Educational Policy Committee to support this proposal, and for President Bacow to call together a taskforce that will address this issue on a university-wide level.

Kerry in Bed with Benedict Arnold?

Some fun facts on John Kerry and outsourcing from FreeSpeech.com, via JihadWatch.

14-year-old suicide bomber arrested

I first heard this on the Israeli Russian radio. It's scary how almost matter-of-factly it's covered in Haaretz.

[Update: The 14-year-old might not be such a 14-year-old afterall.]

Fast Pass at Airport Security

The Transportation Security Administration plans to start testing a registered-traveler identification program in June, which will let those who volunteer for a background check avoid tight screening at the airport.

That's smart. Although they'll have to make sure that the system itself is secure and won't lead to identity fraud.

Via daleynews.

Fun with Campaign Contributions

The Fundrace Money Map. Check out their Neighbor Search, too.

WMD: Made in the USA

ChangeforAmerica on loose "chems":

"One of the ultimate ironies is that for all of the U.S. government's finger-pointing at Iraq and other countries -- nations we're challenging to account for every one of their weapons of mass destruction -- our country is riddled with similar weapons that our government itself can't even find," says Elizabeth Crowe, an organizer for the Chemical Weapons Working Group, a coalition of citizens living near chemical-weapons sites....

By the government's own estimate, there are 15,000 chemical plants that contain large quantities of potentially deadly compounds. Many of the facilities have been shown to employ little security, offering terrorists easy access to chemicals that could be used as weapons of mass destruction.

Yickes! Scary. How about we just outsource the industry and get rid of the problem? ;)

I'm glad ChangeforAmerica is worried about this. Many "progressive Democrats" still don't seem to see a strong economy and defense as part of their core values. Well, then, don't complain about a lack of democracy when you lose, folks!

The Fickle Richard Clarke

InstaPundit notes a Clarke statement that isn't getting much attention:

Richard Clarke, the country's first counter-terrorism czar, told me in an interview at his home in Arlington, Virginia, that he wasn't particularly surprised that the Bush Administration's efforts to find bin Laden had been stymied by political problems. He had seen such efforts fail before. Clarke, who retired from public service in February and is now a private consultant on security matters, has served every President since Ronald Reagan. He has won a reputation as a tireless advocate for action against Al Qaeda. Clarke emphasized that the C.I.A. director, George Tenet, President Bush, and, before him, President Clinton were all deeply committed to stopping bin Laden; nonetheless, Clarke said, their best efforts had been doomed by bureaucratic clashes, caution, and incessant problems with Pakistan.

(August 4th 2003 issue of the New Yorker)

Quick Hits

Far right and left batter French govt in regional elections. Bad on both counts.

Congress taking on Marbury and judicial activism. Interesting.

Dubya:

Bad news in Afghanistan.

Army drops charges against Guantanamo chaplain James Yee. Embarrassing?

Richard Clarke accuses Bush for ignoring pre-9/11 warnings about al Qaida. Smells partisan to me.

Bush is also being hit on fraudulent Medicare estimates. Worrisome.

These are not open lies by the President, of course, but they are not about his sexual relations either. Bush has to clean up the show if he means to "restore dignity and honor to the White House."

Kerry:

How many John Kerrys does it take to change a lightbulb?

Kerry--America's second black President? No, how about Teresa Heinz Kerry as the first African-American First Lady?

"Had the decision belonged to Senator Kerry, Saddam Hussein would still be power today in Iraq. In fact, Saddam would almost certainly still be in control of Kuwait." -- Dick Cheney, March 17, 2004

So far, Kerry's "proposed $1.7 trillion in new spending, more than the annual economic output for the country of France, three-fourths of the size of the entire U.S. government, and an average of $15,500 per American household."

The Crazy Right:

Bush Advances the "Gay" Agenda. Disgusting.

CWA: FMA is not enough. Just sad.

College News:

The tax man is coming after U.


University of North Texas: "Free Speech Area. To Schedule, Contact Dean of Students Office."

Quick Hits

Vindicated Blix returns to U.S.
Not sure what to think about this yet.

Troops arrest 12-year-old Palestinian bomb smuggler
Militants' Use of Child Fighters Debated

Al Qaeda's Spain Strategy

There were many good reasons for PP's defeat on 14-M but no one can ignore the fact that al Qaeda's plan 'to split Spain from allies' apparently worked like charm.

As David Horowitz writes in How to Beat the Democrats and Other Subversive Ideas, "Every testimony by North Vietnamese generals in the postwar years has affirmed that they knew they could not defeat the United States on the battlefield, and that they counted on the division of our people at home to win the war for them."

The Other Spanish Left

"The fascists shall not pass! No Pasaran".
-- Dolores Ibarruri (Pasionaria), July 18, 1936

"the Spanish people would rather die on its feet than live on its knees."
-- Dolores Ibarruri (Pasionaria), September 1936

Via The Politburo Diktat.

Why? Madness.

Madness:

Double Palestinian bombing kills 11 Israelis, wounds more
Afghanistan: Suspected Taliban attack kills five
Iraq: Roadside bombs kill six US soldiers
Man accused of killing nine in Fresno committed polygamy, incest, police allege

Slightly lesser madness:

Spain's ruling party ousted from power after terror attack

Why madness? Because Spaniards (and liberals everywhere) seem to believe that you can make peace with the terrorists if only you give them enough. As it seems to have worked once, I don't see why the terrorists won't try it again.

Why slightly lesser? Because the PP really isn't a very well-run party, and has not been able to make a good case for its leadership on anything other than the improving economic situation.

Elsewhere:

"Kerry [said] that he's heard from some world leaders who quietly back his candidacy and hope he defeats President Bush in November."

Now, that's a really good reason to elect the guy!

"North Korea Waits for Kerry," comments The Christian Science Monitor. The Financial Times reports, "North Korea warms to Kerry presidency bid":

Dear Leader is not the only one getting deferential treatment from the communist state's propaganda machine: John Kerry, the presumptive Democratic candidate, is also getting good play in Pyongyang.

"Victory to the Iraqi Resistance!" Calls Campus "Anti-War" Activist

Wow. This is pretty hard to take, especially since Aimee is someone I've exchanged posts with last year over the MIT Pugwash list. Back then I thought she was just another campus leftie.

I got the post below through the Tufts Coalition for Social Justice and NON-VIOLENCE. Its affiliate, the Tufts Coalition to Oppose the War in Iraq (TCOWI), is sponsoring an "anti-war" rally on March 16th and a speaker this Friday, Khury Peterson-Smith. Peterson-Smith is quoted as responding to a question about the morality of suicide bombings: "I am sure the Iraqi resistance would use helicopters and tanks if they had them. I mean if Texas was under occupation, I am sure the people would use their guns or whatever means to defend themselves. What it comes down to is that there is no right way to occupy another country."

I wonder how many people there on Friday will agree.

________________________________________________________________________
From: tucoalition@yahoogroups.com

Message: 5
Date: Tue, 9 Mar 2004 05:31:07 -0500
From: Joshua H Koritz
Subject: Fwd: [bostoncampusantiwar] a wake up call from Mumbai...

From: Aimee L Smith
Reply-To: Aimee L Smith

[please read! my thoughts are at the end. -aimee]

Challenging the "Non-Violence" Trend in the global Anti-War Movement
Lets Make March 20 a Day to Support the Resistance in Iraq
Dr. Hisham Bustani

In the Fourth World Social Forum (WSF) held in Mumbai-India late January of this year, there was an agreement on holding an International Action Day against the occupation in Iraq on March 20, 2004. World-wide demonstrations will take the streets under that banner.

On the opposite side of the WSF's venue, another meeting of Anti-Imperialist anti-Globalization organizations took place under the name: Mumbai Resistance '04 (MR04). This forum was more principled regarding the struggle against Imperialism and the analytical view of its mechanisms and the means of confrontation. In MR04, the participants did not settle only for raising the "End the Occupation" banner. There was a unanimous consensus on the necessity of raising the "Support the Resistance" banner in the demonstrations of March 20.

Why "Support the Resistance" Not Just "End the Occupation"

The battle that goes on now in Iraq between the American invaders and their allies on one side, and the popular resistance on the other, has many dimensions that make the "Support the Resistance" slogan basic and necessary.

1st: After what happened in Palestine and Afghanistan by the process of liquidation of the main contradictions and transforming political struggles into dismantled agendas with the help of the NGOs (workers' rights, women's rights, children's rights..etc), and the relative success in producing caricature forms of authority in the violated nations (Karazi regime in Afghanistan, the Ruling Council in Iraq) or producing regional capitalist/Imperialist arms/axes (the Zionist entity in the Arab region), and the relative success in transforming acute situations into long standing chronic ones; the time has come for us as people to comprehend and learn from these lessons, and realize that a negative slogan such as "Stop the War" will not do any good in the face of US Imperialist aspirations.

"Stop the War": To whom is this slogan directed? Who does it target?

Does it target the ruling classes in the North and the circles of Trans-National Corporations who benefit from such an aggression and are in fact practicing it on the ground? Or does it target the masses who are already opposed to the aggression, and who do not have the political decision in their countries, and even do not have the power of radical change from within the system? (W. Bush for example is not an elected president. He is an appointed president by the US High Court after it refused the re-count results which clearly showed Al Gore as the winner in the elections. For more details see the chapter "A Very American Coup" in: Michael Moore, Stupid White Men, London: Penguin Books, 2002, pp. 1-28).

The same applies to other negative slogans like: "Bring the Troops Home" or "End the Occupation Now"!

What is required now from the masses angered by the policies of their governments is to comprehend that "policy changes" will not change the structure of the system which is based on hegemony and exploitation. Simply asking these governments to "change" will not work (as with what happened during the overwhelming anti-war demonstrations that took place before the aggression which did not change a single thing on the pre-planned US invasion of Iraq along with its allies). This means that the masses should stand shoulder-to-shoulder with the resistance and place themselves in the contra-Imperialist camp and support it.

2nd: There's a historic moment looking the people of the world in the face now: it is the time of defeating the Imperialist aggression on Iraq. This defeat (if accomplished) will create an important turn towards establishing the triumph of people over hegemony and exploitation, and will serve as a strong lever for the continuous struggle in Palestine and Afghanistan, and all the liberation struggles around the world.

The triumph of people and defeating the US Imperialist aggression in Iraq and the resultant effects will not occur without support secured to the Iraqi resistance by the global AntiWar/AntiGlobalization/AntiImperialist movement. The first step towards that is to loose the embarrassment that ties the movement and prevents it from raising the "Support the Iraqi Resistance" slogan because of its military nature, and because of the trend being "marketed" excessively in the movement nowadays as the "attitude of choice", and by that I mean: Non-Violence and Civil Resistance, and looking with contempt at armed resistance.

The forms and objective expressions of the resistance differ from one location to another according to standing circumstances and the form of the aggression, its propellers and objectives. The forms of resistance are not subject to "wrapping" and "framing" and "commoditization", or else the antiImperialists will be practicing exactly the very Imperialist "sin". What do the "non-Violent preachers" want from the Arab Iraqis? To leave themselves, their homeland, their resources subject to violation, rape, theft and occupation while they hold sit-ins and coordinate vigils to satisfy the "non-violence" and "civil resistance" pre-requirements??

In the case of Iraq, or any case where a war of aggression and occupation is launched by an Imperialist power, the right slogan will be (and sorry to be shocking here): YES TO WAR....A war of resistance and liberation.

3rd: We've illustrated above that supporting the resistance is an essential and important issue to defeat the US Imperialist aggression on the world, and that it's the only means capable of forming an objective "contradiction" to this aggression. Therefore, the third important issue related to "supporting the resistance" arises from the fact that the Iraqi resistance is completely isolated especially on the political level.

This isolation is due to two facts:

1-The lack of International communication with the Iraqi resistance, the lack of any form of political support, and the lack of any real effort to break this "taboo" which was imposed by the USA and to which most of the "anti-war" organizations are abiding.

2-The absence of a political "face" for the Iraqi resistance until now, which makes the Iraqi resistance absent from the global popular arena and absolutely ineffective in it.

Breaking the isolation off the Iraqi resistance globally will assure a true back-up to its efforts to eliminate the occupation and pushes it a step forward on this road, it also will encourage the resistance to form a political representation that can speak for it and positively react with the global movement for the aim of defeating the Imperialist project in the world.

4th: Ever since September 11, the US has intensified its portrayal of resistance and national liberation movements as "terrorists", and at the same time, it has issued oppressive laws encroaching on internal freedoms under the name "Anti-Terrorist laws", and practiced some of the most terrorizing breaches of human rights: from war and aggression, to arresting people under inhumane conditions (Camp X-ray in Guantanamo Bay) because they are "terrorists".

This "game of terms" comes from the lessons Imperialism has learned in Vietnam and the global popular support of the resistance forces there, and from the lessons it comprehended from the liberation and independence movements in the post WWII era which were an inspiration to many generations and its leaders became idols until now (Che Guevara, General Jiab, Nasser as examples). The US does not want to repeat this "mistake", so it bombards resistance fighters not only with bombs, but with the most obscene of names and traits in an massive propaganda attack (seemingly successful!) to prevent any serious solidarity, and to cut the road in front of any possible communication, transforming this issue into some sort of "political sin" or "political scandal".

The submission of the global movement to these terms dictated by Imperialism is a huge catastrophe. Moreover, it represents a non-direct participation in securing a "safe back" for Imperialism's injustices and aggressions. And the withdrawal of the global movement from the task of supporting the resistance will definitely be in the favor of Imperialist propaganda's efforts to de-legitimize the armed resistance in Iraq and elsewhere.

Conclusion: Resistance in the face of Imperialist Embezzlement

The global movement should not give in to Imperialist embezzlement: Resistance is legitimate. It is not "terrorism", and it is not an "embarrassment" when compared to non-violence and civil resistance. It is necessary to stop aggression and injustice.

The atmosphere that surrounds the global anti-war movement which required this article to be written to stress the right of resistance to exist and operate via all means, including armed struggle, is a negative sign that portrays the level of success of counter-efforts aimed at dismantling and fragmenting the movement and transforming it into a place for questioning basic rights with no real action on the ground. This also illustrates the need for all principled organizations to join their efforts to break through this foggy and negative attitude that is starting to engulf the movement and is trying to push it towards the margins: right where Imperialism wants it.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

Dear anti-war advocats,

"Victory to the Iraqi Resistance!"

The more I look around at the US anti-war movement, the more I
feel convinced that we are a racist, elitist society that
visits genocide and suffering on others, shifts any blame
from our own participating in and benefiting from these policies,
and then condemn those forced to face the armed invaders we
allow our society to subject them to. I find this state or our
society deeply racist and collectively criminal. I think the
very least we can do (i.e. it offers minimal risk to our own safety
and comfort) is to call for "Victory to the Iraqi Resistance."
I hope my fellow dwellers of the hub-of-the-empire on these lists
will consider taking that very minimal step towards acknowledging
the basic and equal humanity of our brothers and sisters in Iraq
who even the US declaration of Human Rights agknowledges has
a fundamental human right to violently resist armed invasion
and occupation. I see no way to say that the Iraqis do not deserve
this basic human right without being racist. And the fact that
the architects of war exploit racism within our society to
reduce the risk to white people in these heinous projects by
recruiting heavily in communities of color no more ties our hands
in condemning the deep fundamental racism of armed invasion than
does including Colin Powell and Condaleezza Rice in the administration.
If we who claim to promote social justice in this society can't
have this very basic and minimal moral clarity, who will?

If you do agree on a moral basis that "Victory to the Iraqi
Resistance" is the correct slogan, we can then move on to the
tactical trade-offs between being a movement that appeals to
the weakest and worst common denomenator or one that actually
compells people to think and search and question. Every
movement has both ends, but if even people within the movement
get used to the pandering mode and never wrestle with the assumptions
in that mode, we will become perpetuaters and even adherents
to the racism in these slogans. We need to be transforming ourselves
as well as the society around us. If we stick with the mode
that continually puts our interests over those of people elsewhere
that are facing the much more brutal face of our empire, then we may
never learn to have compassion for people we invade - meanwhile,
the ever more consolidated media is working full tilt 24/7 to
demonize and dehumanize "the enemy." What is the moral minimum
to this strategic choice? And strategically, how much harder
will it be for people to enlist when people all around them are
talking about the humanity and moral high ground of Iraqis,
including the resistance?

In any case, I hope you carefully read the appeal from Dr. Bustani above.

In hope,
Aimee


----- End forwarded message -----

On Blogging

John has a most hilarious post to which I can relate so much: Starbucks and Bloggin are Ruining My Life. What was the world like before the Blogosphere Ecosystem and Technorati?

Although like any writer without an editor, he might not know it, he's been very entertaining to read ever since the summer. He also happens to be a pretty darn amazing guy. :)

What Money Cant' Buy in the U.S.

Halliburton, the company that for decades has gone to war with the US Army, is under sharp attack at home. In particular, the US Treasury has reopened an investigation into whether Halliburton violated US sanctions against Iran and Libya by doing business with the countries through a Cayman Islands subsidiary.
...
Harried Halliburton executives are having to defend the company against charges on everything including price gouging in Iraq, sanctions busting in Libya and Iran and bribe-paying in Nigeria.

Via CaribPundit.

This is fascinating, especially when compared to the corruption scandals that have rocked France, Italy, and Israel (here and here).

"Higher" Education

David Post of the Volokh Conspiracy on the final exam "given by Jim Harrick, Jr., the former assistant basketball coach at the University of Georgia (and son of Head Coach Jim Harrick, Sr.) in his class on Principles and Strategies of Basketball in 2001." Questions included the following:

'How many goals does a basketball court have?' [Ans: 2]
'How many halves are there in a basketball game?' [Ans: 2]
'How many points is a 3-point goal worth?' [Ans: 3]

What an embarrassment. Much more so if we then compare it to the French grading system.

"Memogate"

If, like me, you thought that Joby Fortson's memo on Texas redistricting was a low point of partisan hanky panky, brace yourself for the newly released Democratic memos on judicial appointments, care of OpinionJournal:

Nov. 7, 2001/To: Senator Durbin
'The groups [...] also identified Miguel Estrada (D.C. Circuit) as especially dangerous, because he has a minimal paper trail, he is Latino, and the White House seems to be grooming him for a Supreme Court appointment. They want to hold Estrada off as long as possible.'

April 17, 2002/To: Senator [Ted Kennedy]
'Elaine Jones of the NAACP Legal Defense Fund tried to call you today. . . . Elaine would like the committee to hold off on any 6th Circuit nominees until the University of Michigan case regarding the constitutionality of affirmative action is decided by the 6th Circuit. . . . The thinking is that the current 6th Circuit will sustain the affirmative action program, but if a new judge with conservative views is confirmed before the case is decided, that new judge will be able, under 6th Circuit rules, to review the case and vote on it.'"

German man wants state-paid sex

BBC News reports:

The unnamed man argued that, as his wife lived in Thailand, the local authority had to compensate him for his "considerable sexual needs"....

"I require the brothel visits for my physical and psychological wellbeing," the man said in his application.

Honey, will you "civil union" me?

This settles it. I am for DOMA and against the Federal Marriage Amendment. Federal law should recognize marriage as it currently does until the debate changes nationally and DOMA's second clause is rewritten.

Massachusetts should pass a constitutional amendment next week that restricts "marriage" to a union of two unrelated people (finally prohibiting first cousin marriage). "Civil unions" bring down everything that is special and wonderful about marriage to the level of a legal contract, degrading it.

We must also really crack down on the Mickey Mouse drive-through weddings they do in Vegas.

Schools, Facing NCLB, Abandon Gifted Programs

Also, in today's New York Times:

The formula for cutting back in hard times was straightforward, if painful, [Gary Tyrrell, assistant superintendent of the Mountain Grove School District, Mo.] said: Satisfy federal and state requirements first. Then, "Do as much as we can for the majority and work on down."

Under that kind of a formula, programs for gifted and talented children have become especially vulnerable. Unlike services for disabled children, programs for gifted children have no single federal agency to track them.

Evil! But, hopefully resolvable with private funds.

California SC: Catholic Group Must Pay for Birth Control

From today's New York Times:

The California Supreme Court ruled Monday that Catholic Charities must provide its employees in California with medical coverage for birth control, in spite of its religious objections to contraception.

Ouch. Are we on our way to France's scarf, cross, and yarmulke ban? On the other hand, with an increasing number of social and welfare services being provided by religious institutions, how do we keep them from not excluding other denominations?

Follow-up on Harold Bloom vs. Naomi Wolf

I agree with The Agitator:

And before you give me the 'no woman ever asks for rape' line, let's be clear -- this wasn't even sexual harassment, much less assault. Suggestive behavior by women never invites rape. But it can certainly invite a come-on. Bloom put his hand on her thigh. Wolf said no. Bloom removed his hand, stopped the advance, and went home. Ban the hand on the thigh, and you might as well ban seduction.

Kerry vs. Bush vs. Clinton

Some quick hits:

Bush's economic record vs. Clinton's

CNN's reporting on Bush's economic record vs. Clinton's

Kerry goes unilateral (a year late)

U.S.' ambitious pro-democracy effort in the Middle East (finally!)