Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
skip to main |
skip to sidebar
Hail Red Army!
Join Now!
Which Side Are You On?
Hail Red Army!
Election Information
The News
Periodicals, Institutes, Organizations
- ACLU
- Al-Ahram Weekly
- American Prospect
- Central America Report
- City Pages MN
- Common Dreams
- Counterpunch
- FAIR
- Freedom From Religion Foundation
- Historical Question?
- Institute for Public Accuracy
- Labor Notes
- Left Business Observer
- Meso-American Culture
- Monthly Review
- Mother Jones
- NACLA
- Nation, The
- National Security Archive
- New Left Review
- Noam Chomsky Archive
- Politics 101
- PR Watch
- Progressive, The
- Prospect
- Slate
- Tom Tommorow
Blogs
Ha Ha or Hmmmm?
How Things Work
Favorite Books
Favorite Records
- Amigos Invisibles, Los
- Beck-Sea Change
- Black, Frank-Teenager of the Year
- Buckley, Jeff-Grace
- Clash, The-London Calling
- Costello, Elvis-This Year's Model
- Dylan, Bob-Desire
- Frogs, The
- Led Zeppelin-Houses of the Holy
- Modern Lovers, The
- Pixies, The-Come on Pilgrim/Surfer Rosa
- Pretenders, The
- Radiohead-Kid A
- Smith, Patti-Horses
- Talking Heads-77'
- The Name of this Band is Talking Heads
- XTC-English Settlement
Favorite Directors
Favorite Films
Films Worth Watching
Gangters and Noir
Laugh Out Loud Movies
Boo F***ing Hoo
1939: The Best Year in Film?
Archive
-
▼
2005
(387)
-
▼
February
(38)
- Period of Calm
- US Power
- And the Settlements Continue
- Hunter S. Going Out With a Bang
- Megalomaniac Pope Identifies Where We Went Wrong: ...
- Ward Churchill
- Hunter S. on Nixon
- What's Behind the Rise in Malpractice Insurance?
- Privatization and its Discontents
- It's the Teachers Fault
- Roses Are Red
- Great graphic on Huygens-Space Probe
- John Negroponte In a word: Thug!
- Teach For America
- Peacenick Democrat Kerry Calls for 40,000 More Tro...
- Counterpunch Quoting the NY Times Quoting Counterp...
- New Feature
- Cannibalism and Censorship
- Persecution
- Continued
- Stats
- Ward Churchill Revisited
- Cricket Yes, Chess No, says Bearded One Sistani
- Intolerable Cruelty
- Why Arthur Miller Was Sooo Good
- Hemp Chewing Banned for Cows in Liechtenstein
- Bush Conservative?
- Trade Deficit Hits New Record
- NATO United says Rice. This is a good thing?
- The Ahistorical Pundits
- Defend Ward Churchill Against the Enemies of Liberty
- Democracy From Above
- Those Wacky College Kids
- Rice: US Won't Attack Iran, Today
- Max Schmelling Dead at 99
- A Glitch in the Matrix and other laughs
- Scorcese, another name for sellout?
- PDA or Socialism?
-
▼
February
(38)
6 comments:
I saw Ward Churchill speak at UWM a couple of months ago (and hung out with him and some others at a potluck afterward). I think he's an arrogant asshole. He treated legitimate questions from audience members with ridiculous pomposity and he made all sorts of nebulous comments implying that we're all supposed to go out and commit violent acts until the world has changed. What kind of violence? Doesn't matter. And we're supposed to dismantle the entity that is the United States of America. Snap our fingers and it's done. His ideas sound like those of a revolutionary with a 3rd grade education.
forgot i need to let the blog know who i am. that comment is from me, mtf.
The assholishness factor is not really the point. The point is whether he should be able to speak at any venue. He should, it's his right. Fox and O'Reilly and other reactionaries have a theory that most US University's are indoctrination centers for radical left ideas, it just ain't so. They use an inflammatory statement by a loose canon to "prove" their propoganda.
They dominate the terms of the debate because they define the parameters of thinkable thought. It has gotten so bad that people like Kerry are defined as radical left. Ward Churchill says things like, 9/11 happened because the US has pursued policies around the world that piss people off, the Pentagon was a legitamite target. Instead of debating these issues they ban him. This is a censorship fight not a fight over the way WC say's things.
On the violence issue: It always amazes me how if someone opposed to imperialism advocates violence they are a dangerous terrorist but when Kerry advocates more troops in Iraq, or Clinton bombs civilian targets in Sudan, or Colin Powell calls for the invasion of a country that is of no threat to the US, they are called statesman.
Cockburn is right, you can talk about physically silenceing someone if you are on the "right" side of the issue of the day, Oceana is now our enemy, but if not shut up and we will fire you. They define the debate this way.
I didn't mean to imply that I think Churchill should be silenced. I of course think exactly the opposite. With him being in the news, I was merely reminded of the time I had seen him speak, and his "assholishness" was definitely a factor there.
It's true that I don't necessarily support the type of violence that Churchill is advocating. But that doesn't make it safe to assume that I do support the violent actions taken by the US abroad. On most levels, I don't support either. I suppose the problem is, as frustrating as it may be to some, one happens consistently right now (US action abroad) and one is barely a blip on the radar (revolutionary action in the US).
If Churchill wants us to take (violent?) action... if revolting against a system that we see as unjust is our moral imperative, then he's gonna have to do better than "whatever it takes" as far as I'm concerned. "Whatever it takes" results in nobody doing anything of substance. People my age who are interested in debating and thinking about these kinds of ideas have no idea what it mean to "dismantle the entity that is the United States of America". Nobody knows what the hell that means. This is some David and Goliath shit, and a couple of pissed off college students aren't going to be able to accomplish a fucking thing running around doing "whatever it takes".
me again: mtf.
I was not assuming the endorsement of US violence just trying to make the point of inconsistency in the US, US violence good, any other, terror.
I actually think individual acts of terrorism are almost always counterproductive and kill the innocent. Like the Algerian resistance fighter, yes we have all watched Battle of Algiers lately, said after he was captured in response to the journalist that asked him why they were using small bombs and picking soft targets, I paraphrase, if you give us tanks and bombers we will use them against the French.
Ward Churchill should be able to say what ever he wants. If the university and schools don't uphold freedom of people to say whatever they want, who will?
Post a Comment