 |
| |
|
|
chegitz guevara
|
 |
Ft. Lauderdale, FL Communist Party of Apolyton
Jun 2000
time: 00:27
|
|
It's not as interesting as all that.
He spoke at my university, DePaul University, circa '93 - '94. He was supposedly speaking about multi-culturalism, but it was basically an all out attack on all things European decended (which, as I looked at him, I thought included him also--especially since most Indians these days are mixed). He was talking about how "advanced" Indian societies were Aztec surgery and all that, and basically saying how there was nothing of value in European culture. Rather than a multi-centric view of history, the only centers of value were the non-European ones.
So I said, what about the fact that despite the dominent theme in European history, there has always been resistence to that theme within European culture itself. I wasn't merely refering to Marxism, but the whole culture of resistence, from Diggers to Anabaptists, from Sparticus to Bartolomeo de las Casas, on down. After all, it's not like like were "Europeans" marched in lock step throughout history. I also mentioned the fact that many of the victims of Europe were other Europeans.
He just got red in the face and laid into me verbally, basially calling me (in a very round about way) scum and an enemy of the people. I was like, "what the f*ck," but I decided not to say anything about the fact that he was wearing obviously very expensive glasses (a product of that worthless European technology), making a living off of a European institution (the university), etc.
After that, I sorta wrote him off, except for his very fine research on government repression in the U.S.
Last edited by chegitz guevara on 05-02-2005 at 04:10
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Ogie Oglethorpe
|
 |
Marietta, GA
Dec 1999
time: 05:27
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by chegitz guevara
You did? |
Yep 
quote:
It would seem that others have something to say about his legitamacy as a member of the American Indian culture.
American Indian Movement
quote:
The American Indian Movement Grand Governing Council representing the National and International leadership of the American Indian Movement once again is vehemently and emphatically repudiating and condemning the outrageous statements made by academic literary and Indian fraud, Ward Churchill in relationship to the 9-11 tragedy in New York City that claimed thousands of innocent people’s lives.
Churchill’s statement that these people deserved what happened to them, and calling them little Eichmanns, comparing them to Nazi war criminal Adolf Eichmann, who implemented Adolf Hitler’s plan to exterminate European Jews and others, should be condemned by all.
The sorry part of this is Ward Churchill has fraudulently represented himself as an Indian, and a member of the American Indian Movement, a situation that has lifted him into the position of a lecturer on Indian activism. He has used the American Indian Movement’s chapter in Denver to attack the leadership of the official American Indian Movement with his misinformation and propaganda campaigns.
Ward Churchill has been masquerading as an Indian for years behind his dark glasses and beaded headband. He waves around an honorary membership card that at one time was issued to anyone by the Keetoowah Tribe of Oklahoma. Former President Bill Clinton and many others received these cards, but these cards do not qualify the holder a member of any tribe. He has deceitfully and treacherously fooled innocent and naïve Indian community members in Denver, Colorado, as well as many other people worldwide. Churchill does not represent, nor does he speak on behalf of the American Indian Movement.
New York’s Hamilton College Kirklands Project should be aware that in their search for truth and justice, the idea that they have hired a fraud to speak on Indian activism is in itself a betrayal of their goals.
|
Che, your penchant for being taken in by hucksters like Churchill and Marx is amusing. |
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Berzerker
|
 |
topeka, kansas,USA
May 1999
time: 23:27
|
|
quote:
Not all Americans are 'guilty' because they are Americans- some, for instance, opposed American governmental interference in Nicaragua and El Salvador, exposed the lies behind America's foreign policy, and some gave their lives helping the citizens of those countries. |
Would (or are) these opponents of that policy be guilty if the Sandinistas et al started slaughtering non-combatants as I believe they did with some indian tribe?
If Contra supporters share responsibility for their crimes, and they do, then do Contra opponents share responsibility for Sandinista crimes? How does one avoid this? Not take sides? That ain't good enough for Churchill...
quote:
Knowledge, associated as it is with power, demands action. To Posess knowledge and ignore its demands is to nullify claims of innocence. Ignorance, in effect, equates to complicity, a variety of guilt |
He's got us all covered with that definition of guilt, even himself because he's paid by the state. So some tribe offs another tribe in SE Asia and I don't know about it so I'm complicit? I'm sure this guy knows of many atrocities being committed so why isn't he off fighting the good fight instead of condemning the country in which he is free to speak out. I mean, there's irony in that fact.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
PeteH
|
|
quote:
Even if one thought that destroying the system could only make matters worse? There's quite a few things that I think are wrong with the good ol' Capitalist World Order, but I'm not seeing any reason to believe that destroying it would allow something better to take its place. |
For me it really comes down to what base values a system is built on. I don't believe our current culture or anything resembling it as far as lifestyle and technology can exist without the exploitation and destruction of the natural world, including many humans. I don't believe there is an egalitarian, sustainable form of modern civilization. I would be happy to be proven wrong, but nothing in my own observations or a study of a couple million years of human history and evolution have given me cause to doubt that belief yet.
quote:
He's got us all covered with that definition of guilt, even himself because he's paid by the state. So some tribe offs another tribe in SE Asia and I don't know about it so I'm complicit? I'm sure this guy knows of many atrocities being committed so why isn't he off fighting the good fight instead of condemning the country in which he is free to speak out. |
The quote is about willfully ignoring the evil being done. If someone truly is unaware of the destruction their lifestyle brings, they can be informed. If you are aware and just decide the suffering or destruction or whatever other consequences it may bring to the rest of the world are worth it for you to have the commodities and lifestyle you currently enjoy, then I think it is fair to say you have lost the ability to claim innocence because 'you just didnt know'
|
|
| |
|
|
|
PeteH
|
|
quote:
He said ignorance = complicity. Willfully ignoring an atrocity assumes you knew the atrocity was occuring and you decided to ignore it. |
While really not wanting to get bogged down in a large discussion of definitions, based on the overall context of the original quote, he is using a more 'theological' definition of ignorance, one of not following a duty. Or more literally 'ignore-ance'
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Lincoln
|
|
All he needs now is a feather in his cap.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Mordoch
|
|
Denver, Colorado
Jan 2002
time: 05:27
|
|
Churchill is now coming under some additional scrutany for some other comments he made.
quote:
Top state and University of Colorado officials say more radical comments by professor Ward Churchill calling for the United States to be put "out of existence" and saying that more "9/11's are necessary" should be included in a review of whether to fire the controversial professor.
Churchill, who is under fire for comparing World Trade Center victims to a top Nazi, made the comments in April in Satya magazine, a Brooklyn-based monthly publication that promotes animal rights and social justice...
In the question-and-answer interview, Churchill is asked what should happen to America. "I want the state gone: Transform the situation to U.S. out of North America. U.S. off the planet. Out of existence altogether."
Another question: What are the solutions to U.S. misdeeds? Churchill answers in the interview: "One of the things I've suggested is that it may be that more 9/11's are necessary." |
http://www.denverpost.com/Stories/0...2693730,00.html
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Kidicious
|
 |
Diety of Kidiverse
Mar 2003
time: 21:27
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by molly bloom
I'm guilty for whatever I do- not for only being white, or born in Great Britain.
|
I should have said I'm guilty for the my actions, just as they are guilty for their actions. SuperCitizen was not at the World Trade Center on that day.
Last edited by Kidicious on 05-02-2005 at 19:57
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Ogie Oglethorpe
|
|
Marietta, GA
Dec 1999
time: 05:27
|
|
Is Ward Churchill going to be fired?
Some Random Blog
quote:
Breaking News: Ward Churchill Probably Going Down
4 February 2005
I think the University of Colorado is about to sell Ward Churchill down the river. Some of my vast throng of reader may recall that I used to work for the UC system; I'm still on the staff e-mail distribution list, and this letter from UC President Betsy Hoffman just came in:
Dear Colleagues:
In the wake of what has been a difficult time in the life of this university, I wanted to clearly state my position and the position of my administration on issues surrounding academic freedom. First, I want to thank the Regents for upholding the Laws of the Regents and the traditions of the academy. I have the utmost confidence in Interim Chancellor DiStefano’s leadership to handle this matter.
All of us are aware that the discussion surrounding recent events strike at our core values and the bedrock on which all higher education institutions in America are built.
Like all of you, I have relied on the principles and tenets of academic freedom as I pursued my scholarly work. But this ideal is not merely a set of rules and rituals; it is the heart that gives life to the body of any university. My administration is, and always has been, firmly committed to the protection of this lifeblood of scholarly debate and discovery.
According to the faculty handbook, a faculty member’s “efforts should not be subjected to direct or indirect pressures or interference from within the university, and the university will resist to the utmost such pressures or interference when exerted from without.” I pledge to you to do all within my power to uphold this important statement.
But the rights afforded those of us in the academic community to pursue our scholarly work come with a heavy responsibility to behave with integrity and professionalism and to meet the highest ethical standards our disciplines demand. These standards create the boundaries within which academic freedom rests. Our work does not happen in a vacuum, but rather is regularly put to the test of scholarly debate and dissection creating another set of boundaries within which our freedom to discover, research and write lies.
When faculty members meet the measure and the moral and ethical boundaries of their disciplines they do and should expect the full support of their university. This relationship between the faculty member and his or her university creates the environment necessary for the nurture of groundbreaking research, essential scholarship and educational advancement that modern society relies upon.
True higher education – the process of debate, discovery and learning – only functions when both sides of this equation uphold their responsibilities. It is my pledge to you today that this administration will do its part.
While this debate has been and will continue to be difficult as we work through issues involved with the situation before us, I believe it will ultimately prove beneficial to all of us in the university community and to those who view it only from outside. Rarely does the issue of academic freedom garner so much attention and reflection. Ultimately, it will be these painful conversations and buttressing of arguments that will ensure the long-term health of academic freedom for generations to come.
Betsy
This reads to me like "we believe in academic freedom but we think the Wardster crossed the line." I think they're going to fire him. I don't think they ought to fire him for what he said. He is a person with vile and contemptible views, and they never should have hired him; his brand of scholarship is an anti-intellectual, politicized, garbage scow of worthless identity politics and eighth-grade Marxist doubletalk. But they did hire him, and now they have to extend the same protection of academic freedom that the non-feces-for-brains faculty have. They might fire him for lying about his Indian ancestry, but that's another matter.
(As far as I can recall, this is the first time my blog has ever actually broken news. Woohoo! I'm a CITIZEN JOURNALIST! I demand a fried egg sandwich.)
Update: Welcome Instapundit readers! Take your shoes off and set a while. |
|
|
| |
|
|
|
PeteH
|
|
quote:
You could agree with all of that - I agree with some of it - and yet see no reason to believe that a better society could be created by destroying the present one. Does the recognition of the present world order as evil compel one to try for its destruction even if one believes that what rises out of the ashes will be more evil? |
This is entering a level of hypothetical-ness that will render almost any point meaningless.
I cannot control what comes after in a general sense; however, if the few million years of human histry prior to civilization is any indication, I have no reason to believe that it is 'worse' or that a post-civilization world would be 'worse'.
If I had a crystal ball that would let me see the consequences of every action, I could possibly make a different decision. Since I do not, I must base my decision on the nest information I can gather, and take actions which will serve what I see as the primary moral principals I support. For me, this means that the landbase is primary, and any decision which has the benefit of civilization on one side and the preservation or restoration of the landbase on the other has a clear 'good' decision.
|
|
| |
|
| |
All times are GMT. The time now is 05:27.
Apolyton Time is 00:27. |
top of page
|
|
|
Forum Rules:
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
|
HTML code is ON
vB code is ON
Smilies are ON
[IMG] code is ON
|
|
|
|
|
|
05-02-2005 03:59
Attachment: 
There shouldn't be a line for academic freedom.
|
