Date: Mon, 14 Feb 2005 12:39:25 -0600 Subject: On a related topic: Ward Churchill at Whitewater From: Kate Hale <halecl@uwec.edu> Message-ID: <BE364C7D.2419%halecl@uwec.edu>
I pulled this from the Leader-Telegram online. Note particularly paragraph
s
8 & followingthese are our state legislators (well, ok, not Eau Claireıs)
(but imagine Dave Zienıs likely response if it were us and not UW
Whitewater). Iıve been wondering whether there oughtnıt to be some
responses from the other campuses on this . . .
Vis a vis the teach-in: I know Rick Richmond has been tracking academic
freedom issues on the SFPJ website. Perhaps Robert Jensen would be a good
keynoter for the teach-in (or John Nichols again). And I (itıs probably
obvious by now) DO think Karenıs suggestion is an excellent one.
Kate Hale
English
http://www.leadertelegram.com/story.asp?id=52240
Speaker cleared for university talk
Embattled Colorado professor to lecture at UW-Whitewater
The Associated Press
MADISON (AP) A Colorado professor who likened Sept. 11 victims to Nazis
will be allowed to speak at UW-Whitewater next month, a decision the
chancellor said was repugnant but necessary under First Amendment principle
s
of free speech.
The decision Thursday sparked outrage among state lawmakers, who said they
would appeal to the UW System president to intervene and would also make
other formal protests to block the speech by Ward Churchill.
UW-Whitewater Chancellor Jack Miller said in a statement he decided to
honor an invitation for Churchill to speak at the campus 40 miles southeast
of Madison despite the controversy over comments the University of Colorado
professor made about the Sept. 11 attacks.
Miller laid out six stipulation he said must be met to ensure the March 1
would go off as planned, including assurances the university can guarantee
the safety of the campus, visitors and Churchill.
While calling Churchillıs comments ³grossly inappropriate,² Miller said it
would be up to students, staff and others to judge the professorıs comments
.
³I have worked to make an informed decision, not the popular or politicall
y
expedient one,² Miller said.
He also said in a statement no taxpayer money will be used to pay
Churchillıs honorarium or travel expenses. Miller pledged to help raise
private money to cover the costs of the speech and to make a personal
contribution.
State Rep. Steve Nass, R-Whitewater, began circulating a formal resolution
Thursday to condemn Millerıs decision that he hoped the full Legislature
would vote on next week. Nass said the decision defied common sense and
questioned why the university would allow someone to speak on campus that
had spewed what he called anti-American hate speech.
³The bottom line is common sense has to prevail here,² said Nass, who
graduated from Whitewater in 1978 and received his masterıs degree in 1990.
³This is hate speech. The chancellor is saying itıs OK to bring hate speech
to the university so long as it does not cost the university money. That is
ridiculous.²
Churchill came under fire after it became widely reported that an essay he
wrote likened workers in the World Trade Center to ³little Eichmanns,² a
reference to Adolf Eichmann, who ensured the smooth running of the Nazi
system.
Churchill made the comparison in an essay written hours after the 2001
attacks and later revised for a book.
The ethnic studies professor said in Boulder, Colo., Tuesday that his essa
y
referred to ³technocrats² who participate in what he calls repressive
American policies around the world.
The essay and follow-up book attracted little attention until Churchill wa
s
invited to speak last month at Hamilton College in Clinton, N.Y., which
later canceled his talk out of security concerns. Other schools have
canceled speeches by the professor out of similar worries.
Churchill, a longtime Indian Movement activist, was invited to speak at th
e
campus six months ago on the topic of racism and Indians. He did not return
a call left at the university Thursday or respond to an e-mail.
Miller laid out several concerns about the speech in a letter he sent to
Churchill before making his decision. Churchill wrote back that he was
³entirely unprepared to undergo a personal interrogation² regarding his
³worthiness² to deliver a public lecture on an entirely different topic tha
n
he wrote about in the controversial essay.
He warned he would still expect his full honorarium if the university
canceled his speech and would use at least part of the money to visit
Whitewater on his own to speak.
The controversy and Churchillıs subsequent comments prompted the Universit
y
of Coloradoıs Board of Regents to investigate whether it can remove
Churchill.
On 2/14/05 12:21 PM, "Christian, Donald P." <CHRISTDP@uwec.edu> wrote:
> Karen - funny you should mention it. I emailed David Jones about this la
st
> week, after the panel discussion, and he thought it would be a good thing
to
> pursue a campus discussion. We might frame this as how facuty are aware o
f and
> "manage" their political biases in the classroom. Susan Turell does a
> masterful job of this. Kent Syverson also might be a good participant.
I'd
> be happy working with a group of faculty to structure such a dialogue.
>
> Don
>
> From: Pope, Karen O.
> Sent: Mon 2/14/2005 11:44 AM
> To: Hale, C. Kate; SFPJ; Christian, Donald P.
> Subject: RE: Bills in several states aim to counter perceived liberalism
of
> college professors
>
> All:
> This has come up in quite a few discussion we've had lately, and is now i
n the
> "press" so often, I wonder if we shouldn't have a panel or a discussion d
uring
> the teach-in on academic discourse relative to the 1st amendment, but als
o
> relative to creating a campus climate for dialog and scholarly inquiry?
It
> seems Marty Wood and Rick Richmond have both sent previous posts on this,
too.
>
> Just a thought,
> Karen
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: sfpj-request@listserve.uwec.edu [mailto: [mailto:sfpj-request@listserve.uwec
.edu]
> On Behalf Of Hale, C. Kate
> Sent: Saturday, February 12, 2005 11:20 AM
> To: SFPJ; Christian, Donald P.
> Subject: FW: Bills in several states aim to counter perceived liberalism
of
> college professors
>
>
> Heads up!
>
> Kate
>
>
> C. Kate Hale, Ph.D.
> UWEC Dept. of English
> Office: 617 Hibbard Hall
> 715-836-2761
> halecl@uwec.edu
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Will Fantle [mailto:wfantle@sbcglobal.net]
> Sent: Sat 12-Feb-05 10:49 AM
> To: Hale, C. Kate; btg@mydnet.com; jdrsks@sbcglobal.net;
> jdernbach@state.pa.us; langw@uwstout.edu; mthree@charter.net;
> guitar8@sbcglobal.net; zoltan@igc.org
>
> Subject: Bills in several states aim to counter perceived liberalism of
> college professors
>
> Last update: February 12, 2005 at 6:37 AM Bills in several states aim to
> counter perceived liberalism of college professors Associated Press Publi
shed
> February 12, 2005
>
> WESTERVILLE, Ohio - College sophomore Charis Bridgman tends to keep quiet
in
> class if she thinks her professor might disagree with her Christian-influ
enced
> ideas.
>
> The 19-year-old says schools such as her Otterbein College in suburban
> Columbus should be a place for open discussion, but she feels some profes
sors
> make students afraid to speak up.
>
> ``They might chastise me, or not even listen to my opinion or give me a c
hance
> to explain,'' she said.
>
> Professors would have to include diverse opinions in classrooms under
> legislation being pushed in Ohio and several other states by conservative
s who
> fear too many professors indoctrinate young minds with liberal propaganda
.
> Such measures have had little success getting approval in the other state
s.
>
> ``I see students coming out having gone in without any ideological leanin
gs
> one way or another, coming out with an indoctrination of a lot of left-wi
ng
> issues,'' said bill sponsor Sen. Larry Mumper, a former high school teach
er
> whose Republican party controls the Legislature.
>
> The proposal in Ohio to create an academic ``bill of rights'' would prohi
bit
> public and private college professors from presenting opinions as fact or
> penalizing students for expressing their views. Professors would
>
> not be allowed to introduce controversial material unrelated to the cours
e.
>
> Professors dismissed the bill as unnecessary and questioned whether its
> supporters had ulterior motives, such as wanting more conservative profes
sors.
>
> Similar legislation failed in California and Colorado last year, while th
e
> Georgia Senate passed a resolution, which is less binding than a bill, th
at
> suggests adoption. The California bill, which would affect only public
> schools, has been reintroduced and faces opposition from professors and
> student groups. An Indiana bill is nearly identical to Ohio's.
>
> The Ohio legislation is based on principles advocated by Students for Aca
demic
> Freedom, a Washington, D.C.-based student network founded by conservative
> activist David Horowitz.
>
> ``It doesn't matter a professor's viewpoint,'' Horowitz said in an interv
iew.
> ``They can be a good professor, liberal or conservative, provided they pu
rsue
> an educational mission and not a political agenda.''
>
> Mumper said he is concerned universities are not teaching the values held
by
> taxpaying parents and students.
>
> He questioned why lawmakers should approve funding for universities with
>
> ``professors who would send some students out in the world to vote agains
t the
> very public policy that their parents have elected us for.''
>
> A faculty group or school committee could oversee complaints from student
s who
> believe their grades were affected by a professor's bias, Mumper said.
>
> Joe White, a political science professor at Case Western Reserve Universi
ty in
> Cleveland, said students could use perceived discrimination as an excuse
to
> refuse to learn.
>
> ``We're not supposed to teach for their comfort,'' he said.
>
> Other opponents, including the American Association of University Profess
ors,
> say such bills could stifle debate.
>
> ``We see nothing but mischief if we invite people from outside of the
> university to somehow start monitoring what goes on inside the classroom,
''
>
> said David Patton, an AAUP member and professor emeritus of Ohio State
> University.
>
> Sen. Teresa Fedor, a Democrat from Toledo, agrees: ``Can we say 21st cent
ury
> witch hunt and book burning?''
>
> ---
>
> On The Net:
>
> http://www.studentsforacademicfreedom.org
>
> http://www.aaup.org
>
> <http://www.startribune.com/copyright>
> (c) Copyright 2005 Star Tribune. All
> rights reserved.
> 5355be7.jpg
>
>
>
> Will Fantle
> wfantle@sbcglobal.net
>
>