July 7, 2008

Closed Out? Norman Finkelstein, Controversial Scholar Denied Tenure, Can't Find a Job.

It’s been just over a year since DePaul University denied the tenure bid of Norman G. Finkelstein, the political scientist who has attracted both venom and praise for his writings on the Holocaust and the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. Now no one in academe will give him another job — not even as an adjunct, he told The Jewish Week this month.

In an article, Mr. Finkelstein said he had lectured at 40 campuses in the last year. “I would ask faculty there about a position and was told it was out of the question,” he said. “I can’t even get an adjunct appointment for one semester.”

Mr. Finkelstein is living in Brooklyn, N.Y., where he grew up, in the apartment of his deceased father. He told The Jewish Week, a local newspaper, that he doubted he could get even a job teaching high school.

“The way they do background checks is to Google your name,” he said. “With me, they would get 30,000 Web sites, one-third of them saying I am a Holocaust denier, a supporter of terrorism, a crackpot, and a lunatic.”

Mr. Finkelstein said he was working on a new book, A Farewell to Israel: The Coming Break-Up of American Zionism, although he does not yet have a publisher. —Robin Wilson

Comments

1. Are we supposed to feel sorry for him? If he can’t get a job in academe, he will just have to get a job somewhere else. We can’t all work were we would like.

   — Steve    Jul 7, 02:43 PM    #

2. Tell him to join the club. He’s not the only one who can’t find a job. Not sure why he gets an entire article dedicated to his unemployment.

   — Chris    Jul 7, 03:34 PM    #

3. But the point is this is the goal of some people, whereas it is not in general. Mission accomplished according to people who don’t like what they are hearing. No one seeks to create a context where a mechanic or a PhD working on some esoteric dimension of Mexican history is denied a job…

   — alfd    Jul 7, 03:36 PM    #

4. There may be freedom of speech, but there is NOT freedom from consequences. Shoot your mouth off enough espousing nutty viewpoints that run counter to common sense, and you can make yourself unemployable.

   Hey Mr. Finkelstein, check out United Truck Driver’s Training Schools – I hear they need more drivers on the interstates. It’s good honest work and you can say anything you like while driving that big rig.

   — Al    Jul 7, 03:48 PM    #

5. Chris, the point is that he is being kept unemployed not by a lack of credentials but over his scholarly opinions. It is a clear case of his being denied academic freedom.

   — John    Jul 7, 03:49 PM    #

6. And so academic freedom is very effectively denied. American academics should pay close attention to Mr. Finkelstein’s case. Between the onset of temporary labor and the weakening of academic freedom in cases like Mr. Finkelstein’s, we all have much to worry about at US colleges and universities. LS

   — Leone Smith    Jul 7, 03:51 PM    #

7. Dr Finkelstein has made some fairly outrageous statements in his time—e.g. supporting the death threats made against Irshad Manji for her book The Trouble With Islam and describing her as a “Spiked Hair Semi-Muslim Lesbian” [ sic ]. In the circumstances, it’s hard to blame universities for hesitating before hiring such an individual. The radio commentator Michael Savage—who also gives the impression of being somewhat unhinged—likewise complains frequently of being unable to find a job in the academy due to his unorthodox political opinions, which in his case are the polar opposite of Dr Finkelstein’s. I don’t believe that any injustice was done thereby to him either.

   — Gustave    Jul 7, 03:53 PM    #

8. I would suggest to Mr. Finklestein that he quit thinking for himself. He needs to be more politically correct if he wants to find work in higher education. Universities and colleges are into “branding” and “prestige” now. They don’t want different; they want same. Or else how will they sell their brand?

   Mr. Finklestein, I’m with All. There is more free and open exchange of ideas going on at the United Truck Driver’s Training Schools than at our private and public universities.

   — HL Morgan    Jul 7, 04:01 PM    #

9. Why is the Chronicle even doing a story on Finkelstein? Like many others, he didn’t get tenure. The reasons for denying his tenure were clear. So unless you expect to do a story on every faculty member who can’t find a job — which number tens, if not hundreds, of thousands, please stop wasting the ink. I though the Chronicle was a respectable publication, not a tabloid.

   — Jay    Jul 7, 04:01 PM    #

10. Jay (9),

    Perhaps you could summarize the details of the deliberations of Finkelstein’s tenure case if it is so “clear”. On what exact grounds was he denied tenure?

    — alfd    Jul 7, 04:09 PM    #

11. Dr. Finkelstein has been blacklisted for going where few aware academics dare: criticizing the apartheid practices of Israel and pitbull Allan Dershowitz, and footnoting his “nutty” assertions. What has happened and is happening to him (like what happened to journalist Gary Webb) will serve as an effective warning to others not to approach, let alone grasp as he did, the third rail of American academia — the ethnic cleansing of Palestine and the extreme danger it poses to the U.S. and the world.

    — Gary    Jul 7, 04:10 PM    #

12. alfd (1)

    So what part about unsubstantiated scholarship is unclear to you? His writings were political, not substantive scholarship. Last I checked, Op-Ed pieces do not quality a faculty member for tenure. Well-researched and documented academic articles do. Assuming he spent more time doing research and publishing in legitimate journals, rather than writing polemics, he might have well received tenure. The University of California hired Angela Davis, who is still in their employ with tenure, even though she was viewed as a radical at the time. So all Finkelstein had to do was credible research and writing — which DePaul determined he did not. Clear enough for you?

    — Jay    Jul 7, 04:25 PM    #

13. Wow! Does this ever show that you better not mess with Alan Deshowitz or the Israeli lobby.

    — bsl    Jul 7, 04:34 PM    #

14. No, John (post #5), I think YOU are missing the point. Academic freedom means that you are free to research and draw conclusions from that research as you best see fit. It does not mean that every wacky theory deserves a job. That is called tenure.

    — JM    Jul 7, 04:57 PM    #

15. Well, I am all for academic freedom. Academic freedom is granted to people who have proven themselves sufficiently capable and contributory that society through its mechanisms grants them the the promise of continued employment regardless of their opinions or the positions they take. This is as it should be.
    One earns academic freedom by first demonstrating, though solid, workmanlike scholarship assessable within the bounds of convention, that one is sufficiently capable, productive and credible to warrant the grant of academic freedom, which in America comes with tenure and usually with advancement to associate professor. Its not a terribly unreasonable to limit the guarantee of protection of the production of highly inflammatory work to those who have first established some measure of credibility.
    Dr. Finkelstein’s problem is that he tried to exercise academic freedom he had not yet earned.
    Freedom of speech should be universal.
    Freedom of speech does not, however, entitle one to indefinitely continue a particular job with a employer, who is required to pay for work they find objectionable. Academic freedom does, but must be earned.
    The difference between a crackpot and a visionary is that the visionary has first proven themselves worth listening to.
    Personally, I feel for the guy. He is paying a huge personal price for having misjudged the system.

    — inarchetype    Jul 7, 04:59 PM    #

16. Interesting comments. I would think tenure, if it is to exist at all, should be earned by demonstration of scholarly productivity that demonstrates careful and critical thinking, and perhaps even good judgement. It does not seem to me that tenure should be “denied” over some sort of negative assessment, other than a failure to substantively demonstrate the positive aspects of scholarship and teaching/mentoring. But, I have never had a decent academic position, despite what many would consider a tenurable record. I’m not quite sure why I was not able to land a tenure track job—maybe I just talk too slowly. Ah well, I have had an entirely acceptable life without running the tenure track. Dr. Finklestein is certainly not alone in being unable to find the job he wants. It is difficult to generate much sympathy for him, though. How free is freedom? Well, not entirely. Welcome to the real world.

    — Joe Erwin    Jul 7, 05:14 PM    #

17. Jay (12),

    I take it you were on the tenure review committee? If not, please advise where the DePaul deliberations (which I presume were confidential) were unveiled in public – I’d like to check them out myself.

    — alfd    Jul 7, 05:20 PM    #

18. Gustave, I’m just curious. Is there a citation for that “spiked hair” comment? It gets exactly one Google hit as you quoted it. Googling just “semi-Muslim lesbian” gets the same one hit.
    Given the amount of virtual and other ink spilled on Prof. Finkelstein, is this particular comment something apocryphal?

    — Just curious    Jul 7, 05:34 PM    #

19. All of the academic analysts who have posted on this story have done so from their own perspective. God forbid, move away from yourself for a moment and think, only fleetingly if you will, of the consumer. Occasionally college administrators do so as does faculty, albeit less occasionally. What about the student who pays the bill for his/her education or the parent/s/ who pay/s/ for their son or daughter? Who in the world wants to pay hard earned and scarce american dollars to expose themselves or their children to a crackpot who is literally bouncing off classroom walls for 45 hours a semester? Think about it. Would you enroll and pay for that?

    — Bill    Jul 7, 07:08 PM    #

20. Curious:-

    It was sent to me as one of those e-mail round robins, part of an (increasingly polemical and nasty) exchange of messages between Dr Finkelstein and an individual who pulled him up over the Manji death threat. Given the habitually ad hominem nature of his public discourse (he has described Elie Wiesel as a “clown”; the Simon Wiesenthal Centre as “immoral crooks,” and refers to Deborah Lipstadt on his website as the “Elsie the Cow Chair in Judeo-Yenta Studies”), the reported comment about Manji didn’t seem out of character. If he denies saying it, though, that would be another matter.

    — Gustave    Jul 7, 07:22 PM    #

21. Gustave, no doubt. But still the single Google hit is odd.
    The “Elsie” comment is on his site indeed and noted by others.

    — Just curious    Jul 7, 07:38 PM    #

22. In my world, tenure decisions are based more on external funding than the convention of viewpoints. My guess is that Finkelstein didn’t generate much for DePaul and doesn’t bring much to the table with him now.

    — Another Jay    Jul 7, 08:51 PM    #

23. SUE ‘EM!!! That’s what I did, and my counsel and I are very confident that a jury will agree with us. The fact is that academic freedom is a charade. The higher education industry, which hired the likes of Todd Gitlin, Bill Ayers, Angela Davis and Eldridge Cleaver has the gall to discriminate based on political beliefs??? I was fired for supporting the Iraq War and opposing affirmative action.

    Remember, academe was supposed to be the last bastion of freedom where Socratic thinkers would NOT be punished. That’s no longer true. They may not make us drink hemlock any more, but when they destroy our careers we must make them pay for it. I hauled them into court, and they WILL pay for what they did. We, the faculty, must not take this like a craven bunch of sheep any more.

    — Prof. X    Jul 7, 09:34 PM    #

24. Do you think that a creationist biology professor, a republican political scientist, or an anti-Marxist philosopher would get tenure? Get real. The University is the last bastion of political correctness and liberal conformity. You stray and you don’t stay!

    — Carlos    Jul 7, 10:14 PM    #

25. Oh, you are Black Listed….well, WELCOME. It happens to white people still, interesting. They’ve learned to do it so much better than in the 1950’s no one would dare call it Black Listed today but it is and Black Listed is a nice club of survivors. It is multicultural, multiethnic, none mono-linguistic and represent every nationality on either side of the political divide right or left. But you went against what was politically acceptable and you have to be proud to suffer the consequences.

    — ouramericas    Jul 7, 10:19 PM    #

26. I did not expect that Dr. Finkelstein would not be able to find job ANYWHERE. I thought that Jewish lobby would not allow this to become a proven case of blacklisting. But, something (and we know exactly what) is changing really fast. If you tried to tell such story yesterday, you would be called a paranoic inventing a conspiracy theory. Today, this story is broadcast as wide as possible to intimidate everyone who might think of deviating from the Party line. That’s right, the Party with capital P, because it’s not a reference to Soviets, it’s the reference to the American Communist reality.

    — Michael Pyshnov    Jul 7, 10:53 PM    #

27. Interesting. There are a few reasoned commentaries posted on this blog, but most demonstrate a remarkable lack of understanding of tenure and the tenure process. Tenure provides protection for academic freedom, and until granted can be denied for almost any reason short of blatant discrimination. The process seeks to determine if the candidate is likely to continue a productive pattern of teaching and scholarship of credit to the institution and for the greater good of society at large. Mr. Finkelstein indulged in controversy and paid the price for his indiscretions. I don’t know enough about Mr. Finkelstein’s actual accomplishments to weigh in one way or the other on DePaul’s decision, but that is now over and done. If Mr. Finkelstein was in fact a scholar of some repute, which I doubt, he would be far more likely to find a favorable reception when looking for employment in academia. From everything I’ve read, he appears to take controversial positions to make sure he gets noticed, rather than gain notice through reasoned academic scholarship. He has my sympathy, as does anyone who is denied tenure, but it is evident that he needs to move on. Perhaps he should run for office.

    — CW    Jul 7, 11:22 PM    #

28. CV, don’t be so naive. Running for office when having the Jewish lobby opposing you have been described in full detail in 1985 by (of course, former, after serving 25 years) Congressman Paul Findley in the book “They Dare to Speak Out.” Start learning things from this book.

    Now, it’s the next stage. The Jewish lobby OPENLY says: “Just try something funny, in the next case your children would never find job.”

    — Michael Pyshnov    Jul 7, 11:46 PM    #

29. Dr. Finkelstein is a scholar of highest quality. Why he is denied the right to get a teaching job? There are so many professors of mediocre abilities. They got their jobs during the 70 and 80 and many of them are from Zionist circles. So why? The answer is simple; it is because of the intimidation of these Zionist goons who are retiring from almost every college and university. The trend is clear: their numbers are going down, retirement and death. Fortunately, there is no substitute for them. The new generation of the honorable Jewish men and women are fair and practical.
    Dr. Finkelstein will have the last laugh.

    — AN    Jul 8, 12:41 AM    #

30. As for Norman Finkelstein, I don’t feel sorry for him in the least — he is the same man who called Ward Churchill a “plagiarist” when Churchill was being expelled from the University of Colorado. Well, Norm, how does it feel to walk in Ward Churchill’s “moccasins” for a day???

    — MA1    Jul 8, 01:40 AM    #

31. Dr Finkelstein’s denial of tenure had nothing to do with academic freedom, as the actual letter from the President of DePaul University made very clear.

    — Dr Geoffrey Alderman    Jul 8, 02:05 AM    #

32. So we are to take Alan Dershowitz — who applied muscle to the University of California Press to kill Norman Finkelstein’s peer-reviewed book BEYOND CHUTZPAH: ON THE MISUSE OF ANTI-SEMITISM AND THE ABUSE OF HISTORY — as the paradigm of reasoned academic debate and scholarship that Finkelstein ostensibly is not?

    Following that disgraceful interference, the Middle Eastern Studies Association issued the following commendation to UC Press for not buckling to the kind of pressure that DePaul University did:

    “The Committee wants to use this occasion to cite and congratulate the University of California Press, and its director, Lynne Withey, for seeing to completion the publication of Dr. Norman Finkelstein’s book . . . despite considerable and concerted efforts to prevent that from happening. For this MESA’s Committee on Academic Freedom salutes the Press and all those who made this happen.”

    Speaking of glass houses, most of the remarks in this thread do not evince the kind of temperate discourse that the authors insist Finkelstein so lacks.

    — Gary    Jul 8, 02:27 AM    #

33. Folks, I’ve met him in person. I found him loud, boorish, and obnoxious. His employment problems may not be entirely due to his political views.

    — Losemygrip    Jul 8, 03:58 AM    #

34. Folks, I’ve met him in person. I found him honorable, rational, straight talking and fired with indignation at human rights abuses Israel commits daily against Palestinians in the Palestinian Occupied Territories. His employment problems are absolutely linked to the fact that he will not be intimidated.

    — EvaSK    Jul 8, 05:33 AM    #

35. academic freedom is a privilege, not a right. People should wait until they have tenure to go crazy. You can produce mildly controversial work before tenure, but Finkelstein went overboard. He should have known the consequences of such a risk. Academic freedom applies to tenured faculty. You’re naive if you didn’t realize that.

    — Kat    Jul 8, 06:35 AM    #

36. It wasn’t just that he was denied tenure. It was that his department and an outside committee voted in favor of granting him tenure and then the Dean of the college overturned the decision due to outside pressure!

    — Matt    Jul 8, 06:51 AM    #

37. Can someone point me to guidelines or an FAQ on what one can and cannot say about Israel? Does the Israel Lobby publish such guidelines? Is there a bureau that will review my commentary for error before I publish it? I regret that I may have published unknowingly some views that are forbidden. Here is another question: A Lebanese friend showed me some photos taken by an acquaintance while in Israel. A text description of what the photos plainly show could be construed as critical of Israel. Is it permitted to publish the description if I provide the actual photos as well, or is the whole matter best avoided? Can I submit the photos and proposed commentary for review by the Israel Lobby censors, or would the action of seeking approval by the censors cause problems?

    — PJT    Jul 8, 07:37 AM    #

38. Wow! This is pretty frightening. It seems crystal clear to me that Finkelstein is scholar who publishes a great deal (far beyond the tenure requirements at most research universities), and whose work is well-documented. He clearly was denied tenure because he is controversial, perhaps difficult personally, and maybe intemperate in his opinions and self-expression. Many people commenting on this story seem to think that is just fine, which is troubling, to say the least. Is this the Chronicle’s readership?! Only a conservative, who has suffered similar persecution, seems to recognize what’s happening here (#24). And yes, sometimes accomplished scholars get denied tenure (though usually at places far above Depaul on the food chain)—but then they get another job. This is blacklisting, plain and simple.

    — flprof    Jul 8, 07:44 AM    #

39. Folks, what nobody’s mentioned is that the Depaul position is not the first job from which Finkelstein has been fired (as he himself notes). So, the problem may not be lack of “academic freedom.”

    — ch    Jul 8, 08:11 AM    #

40. “[A]cademic freedom is a privilege, not a right. . . . Academic freedom applies to tenured faculty.” (#36)

    Academic freedom derives from the more general idea of freedom of expression, and it most definitely is a right, if the concept of “right” has any meaning whatsoever. It is not conferred by tenure nor by any other procedural or legal ritual. It belongs to students and professors alike, regardless of rank, and regardless of whether or not it is respected or protected by law or other procedural safeguards.

    What is most disturbing about this thread is not the controversy over Finkelstein, but the indifference of many here to the importance of fundamental freedoms that transcend the academy— but that surely should be revered most highly within the academy.

    The judgments on Finkelstein’s work I will leave to those who are more familiar with it, but the implications of this decision are troubling. When a scholar gets overwhelming support for tenure from his or her peers but then is derailed by administrators, then something has gone terribly wrong.

    Unfortunately, this is hardly rare. It happened to the marxist schoar Ken McGill at Florida in the seventies when he had he unanimous support of the faculty of the Department of Philosophy, only to be blocked by then president Stephen C. O’Connell, who subsequently had a coliseum named after him—but let me not get started on the absolute indifference of the great U. of F. to fundamental academic freedoms, most notably the freedom of expression.

    Landrum Kelly, Ph.D., Florida

    — Landrum Kelly    Jul 8, 08:20 AM    #

41. Tenure. Academic freedom. Discrimination. Conspiracy. Has anyone heard of employment at will? What a pampered group we are. I have no opinion of Dr. Finkelstein’s views, but do have an opinion of the real world…it’s the place where I live, a place where absolute rights are virtually non-existent, and where sometimes we have to play by other’s rules. We decide, and then accept the consequences of our own choices.

    — Jaime    Jul 8, 08:23 AM    #

42. “I have no opinion of Dr. Finkelstein’s views, but do have an opinion of the real world…it’s the place where I live, a place where absolute rights are virtually non-existent, and where sometimes we have to play by other’s rules.” #42

    Uh, Jaime, the problem is that university administrators increasingly do not play by the rules, any rules.

    Landrum Kelly

    — Landrum Kelly    Jul 8, 08:37 AM    #

43. Mr. Finkelstein seems to be trying to get tenure by blackmailing his employer: I am controversial, so I am in the news a lot, so if you don’t give me tenure, you will be accused of being unfair, biased, etc. etc. I saw way too many faculty with this mindset in my time in higher education. Fact is, some of them probably were really good scholars and maybe they should have gotten tenure. But somewhere along the line they bought into the idea that noise and rancor equal dialogue and debate.

    — gs    Jul 8, 09:05 AM    #

44. It may well be true that in the “real world” there are things one should not say. Perhaps things that one should know better than to say.

    However, this does not mean that we should give up! Sigh and say, “Oh, well. He should have known better. The academy isn’t about speaking the truth, it’s about paying the bills.”

    How do academics dare to speak out in support of the “real world,” despite the fact that it is wrong? Injustice should not be greeted with calm recognition—it should be battled. To those who wrote (and thought) that they sympathize, but this is the real world: simply stand up and say clearly, “This is wrong.”
    Evil is perpetrated best by those who say nothing. Or, apparently, those who speak out in favor of mediocrity of freedom.

    To address a couple of comments:
    Finkelstein’s work is meticulous and well-documented and legitimate scholarship and anyone who says otherwise has blinders on, or hasn’t read it.

    #19—Yes, I am a student and have paid to take two courses with him. His was the first course I signed up for at DePaul. I wish I could afford to leave the school in protest of losing him.

    And Landrum Kelly is absolutely right, academic freedom is NOT a PRIVILEGE. It is a right. It does not have to be earned. It does, as we have learned, need defense.

    — Kathryn    Jul 8, 09:18 AM    #

45. As an administrator, I’ve found the comments very interesting reading – one would hardly believe they are all speaking of the same person. However, I found Landrum (#41) comment most disturbing: “When a scholar gets overwhelming support for tenure from his or her peers but then is derailed by administrators, then something has gone terribly wrong.” However, per the published letter (on Finkelstein’s own web site) “overwhelming support” may have been too strong a description – there were clearly some reservations (admittedly unstated) “In Professor Finkelstein’s case, a faculty committee of the Department of Political Science voted in favor of tenure, submitting statements for the majority and minority, with a response from the majority. The Personnel Committee for the College of Liberal Arts and Sciences then voted to support tenure and promotion, with reservations that it asked the college dean to note in his report. Subsequently, the college’s dean issued a written opinion against tenure and the UBPT voted against tenure. The UBPT report and materials from the lower committees were forwarded to the president for review. As in all cases of tenure, the final decision was made by the president.”

    — Allison    Jul 8, 09:20 AM    #

46. Let’s not forget: there’s a little thing called common sense. If you’re not tenured, don’t act as if you are. Stick your principles – if you want to get tenure, keep your mouth shut, do real research rather than spouting political opinions and generating headlines, and most of all, do what your employer wants you to do. Not rocket science, just common sense.

    No different from idiots that think they should work to push creationism rather than the job they are hired to do.

    If you’re an assistant professor and think that you have “academic freedom” to do whatever you want and spread whatever political views you want, I have some advice for you: get a clue.

    The university had every right to deny him tenure, and he did his best to make life tough for any university that does hire him. Boo hoo.

    — me    Jul 8, 09:34 AM    #

47. Well, the world needs ditch diggers, too.

    — Judge Smales    Jul 8, 09:43 AM    #

48. Let’s remember that Dr. Finkelstein’s field is political science. He is a world-famous author in this field. Universities must be fighting each other to offer him job.
    The arguments against him are as ridiculous as was the Soviet responses to accusations of persecuting Solzenitzin.

    — Michael Pyshnov    Jul 8, 10:05 AM    #

49. I think the tenure issue is making this murky. Everyone expects high standards for tenure and tenure-track positions, and we can debate Finkelstein’s qualifications (however, DePaul’s own documents show that he was well qualified, and was dismissed for rudeness in his research writings).

    But when hiring adjunct faculty, most colleges simply demand a graduate degree and a pulse. It’s not hard at all to get a non-tenure-track faculty position. So if Finkelstein truly is not able to get one, that indicates a massive blacklist. This issue needs to be investigated further.

    Also, Prof. X in comment 24, please contact me about your case (collegefreedom.org).

    — John K Wilson    Jul 8, 10:06 AM    #

50. Poor little moonbat. Sooner or later, some marxist faculty will prevail on a feckless administration to underwrite his bile.

    — Rueben Scroat    Jul 8, 10:14 AM    #

51. To #46: This is from Wikipedia, for what it’s worth:

    “In early 2007 the DePaul University Political Science department voted 9 to 3, and the College of Liberal Arts and Sciences Personnel Committee 5 to 0, in favor of giving Finkelstein tenure. The three opposing faculty members subsequently filed a minority report opposing tenure, supported by the Dean of the College, Chuck Suchar.”

    The point of tenure should be the protection of persons who offer controversial ideas. Conventional views need no such protection.

    I have not read one word by Finkelstein and therefore am very reluctant either to endorse or to condemn the views he has espoused. It seems clear, however, that, if the above Wikipedia entry is correct, administrators in this case ignored the strong recommendation of the faculty (and, yes, Allison X, administrator, I would consider a 9-3 vote to be indicative of “overwhelming support”).

    Controversial points of view are at least intellectually interesting and should be protected if for no other reason than that they provoke thought and discussion. It appears that heavy-handed administrative action based on institutional expediency in the face of political pressure might have carried the day at DePaul.

    This one certainly invites some serious further inquiry—and possibly some rethinking by the DePaul administration, if the school expects to be taken seriously as a defender of academic freedom.

    One is reminded once again of the old maxim, “I may disagree with what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it.”

    Freedom of expression is or ought to be the guiding principle in cases such as this. A prima facie reading of this thread would seem to indicate that it was the last concern of the DePaul administration, but I will suspend final judgment until I have read more.

    Landrum Kelly
    www.philosophicalquestions.org

    — Landrum Kelly    Jul 8, 10:53 AM    #

52. He is aiming too high. He could be an academic superstar at a tier II or tier III, compass point or community college. He should get a job there. He will be offered a position if he applies. They just don’t want him at a university like the ones that he feels he is entitled to teach at.

    — Community College Tech Trainer    Jul 8, 11:02 AM    #

53. Can somebody knowledgable update me on scientific accomplishments of Dr. Finkelstein during his tenure-track years? I understand that he is “a world-known scientist” and that he probably “worked on” this and that and so on, but what are his specific results? I mean in the sense of “discovered”, “proved”, etc.

    — Mark de Goz    Jul 8, 11:02 AM    #

54. Landrum Kelly is the definitive word on everything. Just ask him.

    Try his web site, www.my-exagerated-self-importance.com

    — Judge Smales    Jul 8, 11:13 AM    #

55. The Zionist/Jewish lobby? So, believing the outrageous lies of the Protocols of the Elders of Zion has not past, even in academia. Norman Finkelstein is a Jew-hating Jew, unfortunately not the first in history. He is entitled to his opinions (odious as they are to me personally). However, his academic position should rest squarely on his scholarship and that aspect of his work is what has been called into question. #49 – I don’t know about his being “world-famous” in his field as much as “infamous.”

    — A proud Jew and Zionist    Jul 8, 11:31 AM    #

56. I can’t speak with authority about DePaul. But I can speak to another VIncentian school, St. John’s in New York.

    At St. John’s, tenure is routinely granted in the theology department to people who make “no waves.” They also write nothing (so there’s no paper trail). One female theology professor got tenure based on a book contract that was a sham. She’s still there.

    The C.M.s need to rethink their approach to post-secondary education.

    — Columbia Administrator    Jul 8, 11:49 AM    #

57. This is a fascinating thread and I love these wonderfully colorful opinions. As an administrator in a school of physical sciences, I rarely get to see the raw opinions of my colleagues in the humanities. In the physical sciences, these decisions rarely turn on polemics.

    One interesting point that seems to have been overlooked is that granting tenure really means that there is a good probability that the recipient will be around for the next thirty-five years. Since there is ample evidence that Finklestein is “ … loud, boorish, and obnoxious …”, that’s enough for me to deny him tenure. Who wants this guy next door for the next thirty-five years. What about the notion of collegiality? One can disagree without being disagreeable.

    — Sgt. Rock    Jul 8, 11:57 AM    #

58. hello from israel!!
    you american zionists are more zionists than us.
    it seems that the man gets at least a film made about him i am not sure we will see a film soon about the other folks who made sure he was being denied.

    www.americanradicalthefilm.com

    — nathan barak    Jul 8, 12:02 PM    #

59. Provocative things invariably happen to provocateurs. While many assume that academic freedom ensures that one cannot get ostracized for one’s opinions, most do not realize that most colleges and universities—and especially the venerable ones—are very conservative in decorum. Research can be controversial, ad hoc polemics not so much.

    — R. Gazlin Woolcraft    Jul 8, 12:52 PM    #

60. To Landrum (#41):

    Freedom of expression is indeed a right under our form of government. But this means only that speech may not be restricted or punished by the government (apart from that business about yelling “fire” in a crowded theatre).

    “Freedom of expression” does not mean that others are obligated to to publish myviews, regard me as a friend, accept me into their church or political party, or offer (or continue) employment. If I use my freedom to libel you, the government won’t come after me, but you can (at least in court).

    In this particular case, if I am judged to speak irresponsibly, no school is under obligation to offer me tenure or to hire me. Freedom of expression is not the issue here.

    — drj50    Jul 8, 01:01 PM    #

61. Academic freedom is not designed to protect idiots. It might be difficult to draw the line, so we should err on the side of protection of academic freedom, but I have no desire to fight for this guy. A few more like him and society will rethink the idea of academic freedom, as it should. We’ve been given academic freedom. Let’s be respectful and not abuse it. This is just not what academic freedom was designed to protect.

    — me    Jul 8, 01:08 PM    #

62. In 1953, murals painted by New York artist Anton Regregier in San Francisco’s Rincon Annex Post Office were put on trial for communist subversion by a Congressional subcommittee. The testimony revealed that most and possibly all of the Congressmen arguing for the artwork’s destruction (as the opening salvo of an intended pogrom against New Deal art) had never seen the murals, so they made numerous false claims about the paintings’ content. His critics were not successful, and the murals today remain in situ and are recognized as some of the best public art of their time.

    I see little indication by those claiming that Professor Finkelstein is prone to “nutty” polemics that they have actually read his extensive publications — a record remarkable for any pre-tenure academic I might add.

    — Gary    Jul 8, 01:34 PM    #

63. At least Chomsky and Finkelstein sign their names, unlike most of the persons who have attacked Finkelstein here.

    What do I know of Finkelstein? I know almost nothing, but there are two issues that coalesce around his writings that make him worthy of being read: (1) criticisms of Israeli policy and (2) the question of whether he really has suffered unjustly because of those criticisms. Since “academic freedom” and “freedom of expression” are probably the real issues here, I have just ordered three of Finkelstein’s books new from Amazon for just under forty dollars, with shipping. I want to find out for myself what the man thinks, how he presents his arguments, and whether or not he was indeed denied tenure simply because he went against the grain.

    I therefore make two recommendations:

    (1) find out more before judging and offering a public condemnation;

    (2) write a book about Finkelstein or one of his theses, if you are an enterprising young scholar looking about for a worthwhile thing to do.

    Until I have read more, I will suspend judgment myself. I strongly suspect that Finkelstein tends to overstate his case, but there is always the chance that he simply is suffering from a fairly predictable reaction. In any case, he is hardly absent from the academic scene. On this particular day he is perhaps getting more serious attention than any other scholar in or out of academe. I think that we shall hear more from him, and more about him.

    Regardless of what I might come to conclude about the worth of his scholarship, I expect to come to know a bit more about why he has provoked such strong feelings. Right now, I can only say this: I know Chomsky’s work, and Chomsky’s recommendation carries a lot more weight with me than do all of the anonymous posters on the entire internet. That to me is an inducement to do some serious work myself on the life and thought of Norman Finkelstein. It will not make me rich and famous, but it will make me more informed.

    I can say that I disagree strongly with DRJ50 (poster #62) that this entire brouhaha is not about freedom of expression. It is quite obvious that that is precisely what it is about.

    Landrum Kelly
    Chair, Department of History and Political Science
    Livingstone College
    Salisbury, NC

    — Landrum Kelly    Jul 8, 02:25 PM    #

64. It seems to me that there is an awful lot of speculation here on the circumstances surrounding Finkelstein’s denial of tenure. It also appears that much of the commentary here is of the “sour grapes” variety, so of which may be motivated by the biographies of the commenters. For me, the troubling fact is that the recommendation for tenure was overruled by the Dean of Finkelstein’s college.

    — TAP    Jul 8, 03:29 PM    #

65. Allison (#46),

    yes, “the final decision was made by the president”—-but only after this:

    Alan Dershowitz
    “sent a blast of e-mail messages to faculty and administrators there accusing Mr. Finkelstein of shoddy scholarship, lying and anti-Semitism.”(NYT, 4/12/07)…from the same article, “Mr. Dershowitz had been in touch with DePaul’s president, the Rev. Dennis H. Holtschneider, and the previous chairman of DePaul’s political science department, Patrick Callahan, as far back as 2005. When Mr. Finkelstein came up for tenure, Mr. Callahan sent an e-mail message to Mr. Dershowitz asking for documentation of his charges. Mr. Dershowitz took it upon himself to send the materials to most of DePaul’s faculty and others.”

    True, there is bad blood between Finkelstein and Dershowitz; but should this allow him to weigh in on a tenure case, especially one where the candidate has 9-3 and then 5-0 support from departmental colleagues and college committee? As an academic, if you think the answer is yes, then I sure hope you haven’t made any enemies with your work, or disagreed with anyone powerful in public (by the way, Dershowitz is not even a political scientist).

    — flprof    Jul 8, 03:45 PM    #

66. Wow! This blog is something. A wikipedia article as source material; are you kidding me? And how about all of racist finger pointing here? Higher ed in America is doomed and the maturity and paranoia displayed in many of the opinions above prove it. I should look for a ditch-digging job with Finkelstein. I may not like the s.o.b., or his opinions, but at least digging a ditch is work you can feel good about. Go back and read through the 60-some-odd posts. It reads like a middle school debaters club arguing over what the theme of the next dance should be. I have to go now… I think Jerry Springer is on and he is going to let us know if Morry Povich gets tenure; I hear Oprah is out to get him. You all try to behave while I’m gone, OK?

    — Derek    Jul 8, 03:48 PM    #

67. Yes, many of these posts are sophomoric, though I deliberately quoted the NYT (and not FrontPage or Counterpunch). Can we all agree, however, that the Finkelstein case raises an important issue: if a scholar’s tenure bid has the support of his colleagues and his college committee, but is then overturned by an administrator after a concerted campaign by an enemy from outside the university and the ranks of his discipline, are we OK with that? I really think this is a pretty straightforward question, and i would like to see some of the people above take a stand on this. Yes or no?

    — flprof    Jul 8, 03:59 PM    #

68. I know not enough about issues, personalities or like to comment on same.

    However, my contention for all to consider —- Is why have committees vote, on any matter —- where there is an inevitably singular decision maker?

    The decision-maker can easily seek inputs and decide, —- since the voting process and votes are for intents and purpose meaningless —- then why even participate in such a sham process?

    This voting process is certainly not analogous to a “meaningful democratic voting process,” where a veto power is being exercised over the decision —- for in such cases, the veto’s can be overridden by an overwhelming majority of votes.

    So the question in general (and not to this case in particular) —- Is why participate in a voting process and give credence to same if the process is an “ipso fact sham.”

    — zahid    Jul 8, 04:55 PM    #

69. Mark de Goz: “Can somebody knowledgable update me on scientific accomplishments of Dr. Finkelstein during his tenure-track years? I understand that he is “a world-known scientist” and that he probably “worked on” this and that and so on, but what are his specific results? I mean in the sense of “discovered”, “proved”, etc.”

    I’ll tell you what he did in political science. He was the first man in academia who set the things right – told the truth about the issues nobody wanted to talk about; he published simple facts that were mostly known to everybody who reads news and gave them their proper names. In that he was right.

    He was wrong, however, when he supposed that a professor doesn’t have to fear the Jewish lobby.

    — Michael Pyshnov    Jul 8, 04:55 PM    #

70. Directed toward Mark de Goz:

    I think we should keep in mind that nothing “scientific” can be proven in the social sciences. Dr. Finkelstein does not study any type of natural or quantitative science.

    — Matt    Jul 8, 05:29 PM    #

71. To Michael Pyshnov and others:

    The most disturbing recurring theme in this thread is the willingness to espouse such blatant anti-semitic vitriol time and again. Give it a rest. Would others be so willing to blame Blacks, Hispanics, Catholics, Muslims, etc if members of these religious or ethnic groups were involved? I think not. You should be ashamed.

    — a concerned academic    Jul 8, 05:30 PM    #

72. I am still waiting for some discussion of the problematic procedure by which Finkelstein was denied tenure. Zahid (#70) seems to get it: why should scholars in his department, his field, and on the college committee waste all their precious time evaluating his scholarship objectively, soliciting outside referees, etc., only to have Dershowitz intervene and the President overrule their decision. This is indeed a sham, and anyone who has served on a tenure committee or written a tenure letter should be deeply offended by this, as it denigrates the tenure process. Furthermore, since Dershowitz charged Finkelstein with “shoddy scholarship”, and he was subsequently denied tenure,despite the positive votes of the folks who actually evaluated his scholarship, is it any wonder that he can’t a job?

    Let’s put aside antisemitism (real and imagined), snide remarks about ditch-digging, and hair-splitting about academic freedom. If this is the way the tenure process works, then why should any of us participate in it? Would any one care to discuss this?

    — flprof    Jul 8, 05:45 PM    #

73. Why should Dr. Finkelstein get tenure somewhere? Because he is an outstanding educator. I have seen him address a minority of hostile students who did their best to discredit his arguments. When they failed, they resorted to claiming he was disgrace to all the victims of the Holocaust, ignoring its impact on his own family history.

    I know the man as decent and principled and unwilling to suffer fools gladly (he was quite gracious with those heckling students though). I remember seeing his comment about Elie Wiesel being the “resident clown of the Holocaust circuit” and wondered what he meant by that. I understood once I looked into it.

    I don’t have to agree with every position he’s taken to know that he challenges the official narrative in an effective manner. If he did not; the other side would not fear him so (as with the denial of his entry to Israel). As far as dubious scholarship goes (as well as the issue of temperment), read the Frank Menetrez piece on Dershowitz vs Finkelstein at Counterpunch ( http://www.counterpunch.org/menetrez02122008.html )

    — LanceThruster    Jul 8, 06:45 PM    #

74. I admire the literally exceptional openness of Professor Landrum Kelly both in posting his name and offering to actually read what Finkelstein has written (#65), just as I deplore the snottiness of #55 in response to Kelly.

    I do not post my own name because I know from experience what a hail of abuse and vituperation (including personal and professional threats) will fall on anyone who publicly criticizes Israel or defends the Palestinians’ claim to the land and water taken from them. Alan Dershowitz wrote an eponymous best-seller that celebrates Chutzpah, but when Finkelstein met and bested him on that ground, Dershowitz set out to destroy him for his effrontery. I admire Finkelstein for his courage, just as I understand the silence or anonymity of the many of you who have been targeted and who know the high price to be paid for the wrong kind of chutzpah regarding discussion of the long-festering wound that imperils us all. Finkelstein now stands as Exhibit A.

    — Gary    Jul 8, 07:41 PM    #

75. What some of you don’t seem to understand is that the faculty do not have the final say on tenure decisions. The president has the final say.

    Some faculty appear to believe he did good scholarship. The president considered all factors he thought were relevant. He made the decision he felt was best for Depaul.

    It’s not a matter of academic freedom, what you think is acceptable, or any of that. It is a question of what the president found acceptable. Finkelstein knew that going into his tenure track job (or at least should have). You can complain all you want about the faculty vote, but those are not the rules at Depaul, and for good reason.

    If he had been so offensive after getting tenure, he would not have been fired.

    And as for getting outside information, who cares? If he had been arrested on pedophelia charges, the president should have looked at the police reports. Accusations of plagiarism should be considered. If he called students names in class, the president should consider that. How is this any different?

    — me    Jul 8, 07:51 PM    #

76. Yes, “me”, but Finkelstein was not accused of paedophilia; nor was he accused of calling students names in class; and, in fact, if you read closely, it was Dershowitz, NOT Finkelstein, who was accused of plagiarism! Indeed, it was Finkelstein’s attack in print on Dershowitz that led to accusations—by Dershowitz—of “shoddy scholarship” and “lying”. No doubt Dershowitz thinks this, but he hardly is a good source for the president to base his decision on!! Meanwhile, it was not “some” faculty who believe he did good scholarship: it was three-quarters of his colleagues in his department, and a 5-0 vote by the tenure committee above that. “Me”, unless you are the President of DePaul himself, I have a very hard time taking your position seriously—the faculty do and should have a pre-eminent say in these matters. It seems clear that the President based his decision on information provided by someone on a vendetta. How can any faculty at DePaul now have faith in the tenure process?

    — flprof    Jul 8, 08:52 PM    #

77. “How can any faculty at DePaul now have faith in the tenure process?”

    They might lose faith in the president, but they haven’t learned anything about the tenure process. In my pre-tenure days I did what anyone with half a brain should do: I kept my mouth shut and tried to avoid upsetting the wrong people. Being on the tenure track means doing what it takes to get tenure.

    You should not have faith that anything you say will fall under the protection of “academic freedom”. It doesn’t. Anyone on the tenure track should be aware of that.

    The faculty do play a dominating role in the tenure process. However, they do not have complete control of the process. Or do you wish to deprive the president of his rights? I know little about him, but I do know that he is given this power in order to protect Depaul. In extreme circumstances, he has to override the faculty. That is what he has chosen to do. I doubt he overrides the faculty more than 40% of the time.

    “I have a very hard time taking your position seriously”

    I’m not sure what my position is that you can’t take seriously. That the president of Depaul’s duties include making the final decision on tenure cases? That is a fact, not a position.

    — me    Jul 8, 09:25 PM    #

78. “Errors like straw upon the surface flow
    Those who search for pearls must dive deep below” Shakespeare.

    Hope I am right —- It was Shakespeare? Wasn’t it —- has been 4+ decades since HS; that I did any English Lit.

    Anyway, the debate rages on but the broader fundamental question remains —- What is the purpose of having committees or committee votes on any issue per se. —- the issue herein in my opine is not what’s on the surface, i.e., tenure or denial of it per se, but what do committees, reviews processes and votes really mean?

    What should people noted for their perspicuity and perspicacity to discern gather from this incident? —- The surface? Or what lies below?

    The issue in my opine is not the person —- It is far greater, and goes way beyond an individual (or even a group for that matter) —- The issue is not even tenure per se, or what the Prof. deserved, it isn’t even the issue of blacklisting, and nor has it to do with power, legal rights or like.

    It is why should the intellectual participate in a process that for all intents and purposes is meaningless? Or simply put a sham.

    Why do those who value principles most —- give credence to the same, participate in something which creates the illusion of a democratically “deliberative and fair” process?

    For an amplification of the above see my earlier comment (#70), —- and I do believe that Flporf [#74 — (“Discussion Of Problematic Procedure)] is in a somewhat different manner is trying to probe the same “.

    A final note —- I care not two hoots one way or the other about the Prof., his views or whether or not he did or did not deserve tenure, —- but I do care about the process, —- And, above all question the very fundamentals per se. —- Why participate in a process that is apparently a sham and has no meaning? —- It may be employment “At Will,” and “At the Desire Of,” —- but does that mean one should … (Kindly refer to my earlier comment #70)

    — zahid    Jul 8, 09:40 PM    #

79. There is a comical note in calling Dr. Finkelstein’s writings “shoddy scholarship”: Jews in Israel and abroad knew all the main points made by Finkelstein for quite some time!
    It was not a secret that Israel is using fascist methods. It was not a secret that Israel is using the label “anti-Semite” against Jewish dissidents. It was not a secret that the Holocaust was exaggerated and exploited for money. (Only the Jews in Russia had no knowledge of it before they came to Israel.)

    — Michael Pyshnov    Jul 8, 10:21 PM    #

80. “In my pre-tenure days I did what anyone with half a brain should do: I kept my mouth shut and tried to avoid upsetting the wrong people. Being on the tenure track means doing what it takes to get tenure.” #79

    The problem with that strategy is two-fold: first, you are absolutely worthless during your tenure-seeking phase; second, you remain absolutely worthless as you then look toward the next promotion after getting tenure.

    I say, say it loud, say it clear, and do it from the first day you get into grad school until the last day you teach on a college campus. You will get some flak, but you will be able to live with yourself, and you will not wind up pimping for the administration during your entire academic career.

    If freedom of the press belongs to the man who owns one, as has been said, then freedom of speech belongs to the person who exercises it, not when it is safe to do so, but when it is perilously unsafe to do so.

    College teaching is not a sinecure. It is far better to be fired than to turn into a white-washed wall that is built to protect administrators and the status quo.

    Landrum Kelly

    — Landrum Kelly    Jul 8, 10:42 PM    #

81. “I think we should keep in mind that nothing “scientific” can be proven in the social sciences. Dr. Finkelstein does not study any type of natural or quantitative science.”

    So the difference between “science” and “political science” is like a difference between ice hockey and ice skating. In hockey when you score everybody knows it and accepts it. In skating you have to make a good impression on the referees instead. Did Dr. Finkelstein know it beforehand or was he thinking he played hockey?

    — Mark de Goz    Jul 8, 11:24 PM    #

82. Yeah, I think Finkelstein forgot that AFTER you get tenure is when you can go crazy. I had a poly. sci. professor who was a kind of Marxism expert, even a Marxism supporter, but you would’ve never guessed it. Pre-tenure he was all business and all about trumpeting liberal swill. As soon as he got tenure he introduced Marx into his political theory seminars… First, EARN tenure, than if you get denied you can fight it. One case was a woman who sued the UC system because Berkeley’s math department denied her tenure. However, it had nothing to do with her being a woman, or outspoken or anything like that. The committee just didn’t think her contributions to mathematics were original enough. That was all. I’ve tried reading Finkelstein’s stuff and haven’t been too impressed, but I hope he gets a job again someday…

    — Legend    Jul 9, 12:22 AM    #

83. My understanding of academia was that unless you’re the next Mikhail Gromov or Robert Trivers, or have a nice trustfund to fall back on, you should at least pretend to play nice till you have your tenure in the bag…

    — Legend    Jul 9, 12:26 AM    #

84. I realize that wealthy donors seldom demand a quid pro quo for their philanthropy, but considering Dershowitz’s determined interference in a university not his own, might the president of DePaul have overruled his faculty when informed just how much money his institution would not receive if it gave Finkelstein tenure?

    — Gary    Jul 9, 03:03 AM    #

85. So what does he actually say in class? What are his positions? If he really believes that the Holocaust did not happen, despite the evidence to the contrary, then the univerisity has to wonder about his judgement, political and historical.

    Can he support his positions? This is like the astronomer who says that the earth is the center of the solar system. You’ld wonder about his judgement, even if he wrote papers explaining his position. That would be shoddy scholarship.

    If he is supposed to be teaching students about historical accuracy and looking at the evidence and the record, his students would not be served well.

    — George    Jul 9, 08:43 AM    #

86. Since both of his parents survived the Warsaw Ghetto and concentration camps, Finkelstein does not teach that the Holocaust is a fiction.

    #87 (and others) should take the trouble to read what Finkelstein has actually written.

    — Gary    Jul 9, 09:09 AM    #

87. I hate to weigh in on this again, but WTF! Finkelstein is NOT a Holocaust denier (#87); indeed, his parents were eyewitnesses. He argues that the Holocaust has been milked by interested parties, financially and politically, and that this in fact denigrates the memories of the victims and survivors both. I am not sure I agree, but it is a plausible and perfectly respectable argument.

    Meanwhile, back to “me”, post #79. You are joking right? Four times out of ten the President disrehards faculty tenure recommendations? What kind of process is this? Moreover, if he wants to “protect Depaul” he would do far better to respect the intellectual and professional opinions of his faculty than to bend to outside pressure from someone with a personal grievance against a tenure candidate. This undermines the intellectual credibility of the university, and turns its tenure process into a sham, as Zahid and I seem to agree. How does this “protect” Depaul? From what? Alan Dershowitz?

    Finally, I am utterly appalled at the number of folks who think it is just fine to trim your sails, keep your opinions to yourself, and by implication, avoid controversial research before getting tenure. This is the absolute negation of academic freedom. My understanding of the tenure process is that you are free to say and publish anything, wherever your research takes you; then, if your peers in your field and your colleagues in your department find your scholarship to be sound—no matter how controversial or unpopular, no matter if it pisses off Alan Dershowitz or anyone else—you get voted tenure. Yes, the higher-ups can make the final decision, but they have a certain obligation to follow faculty recommendations about the soundness of scholarship. You all seem to prefer a system in which junior faculty simply regurgitate the conventional wisdom, keep their mouths shut, and dare not push the edge of the envelope. What kind of university will this create? What kind of new research will this stimulate? Unbelievable!

    — flprof    Jul 9, 09:25 AM    #

88. Those of you who think college presidents have too much power and abuse it, why don’t you start with first making them electable by the faculty?

    — Mark de Goz    Jul 9, 09:29 AM    #

89. Actually, I think most college Presidents respect the tenure process, and when a tenure candidate has the clear support of his colleagues they ratify that. The Finkelstein case stands out precisely because in this case outside pressure was brought to bear on the process, and the President appears to have bent to it. I suspect that even at DePaul this is unusual, and I do not believe that the President there or anywhere else overrules positive faculty tenure decisions 40% of the time.

    — flprof    Jul 9, 09:41 AM    #

90. This is a much, much bigger story. It’s about America no longer being a country belonging to the private and free individuals, but becoming a system.
    Being an employee in this system, submitting to its political requirements, increasingly becomes the only way one can earn living.
    Still, I belive that this scandal is revealing the power of the system too early, I think we will see Dershowitz, conscious of ramifications and repercussions, issuing a permit.
    As Lenin said, “Two steps forward, on step back”.

    — Michael Pyshnov    Jul 9, 09:44 AM    #

91. Time Travel —- Let us go back 500 Years or so.

    The King has made a decision:

    Medieval Subject (“MS”) No. 1 is appalled: “How could he?”

    MS No. 2 supports the King; MS 3 is not sure —- And so the debate rages on amongst the subjects.

    MS 10 explains it in simplified terms: “Like it or not agree or disagree —- he is the King; and so that’s the way it is, that’s that let’s move on.”

    But wait —- Before moving on evaluate says MS 12

    The Victim is “Important,”

    The King is “Very Important,”

    But it is the “System” i.e.; The “Monarchy” which is critical.

    So what are the possible outcomes?

    Focus on the “Important,” —- Try and save the victim (Help escape, pardon, etc.); and, wait till the King does the same again, —- and have repetitive process per se.

    Focus on the “Very Important,” —- Get rid of the King, the King is deposed —- But Lo! Behold a generation or so later there is another King —- and something similar happens, —- and here we go again …

    Focus on the “Critical” —- Change the “System” i.e.; The “Monarchy” —- No “Monarch” or “Monarch” with limited powers, and at least …

    Now if the rebuttal to MS 12 was MS 10 i.e. “He is the King; and so that’s the way it is,” —- Guess what we would have no “Magna Charta” no “Bill of Rights,” No … We would all still be ruled by the Monarchs period.

    Change of course in many forms i.e., evolutionary; revolutionary (mass revolt: like a herd of elephants charging); coup d’état (strike of a tiger or cobra), … and “Change” may be positive or negative.

    But prior to “Change” are the fundamentals —- Is the current system/process —- “Monarchy” or “University Presidential Powers” per se “Right?” Is the “System Fair?” —- Are “Changes Desirable?“ Should the Committees have the “Power” to override the Presidential Decision by say a 2/3 or 3/4 Vote, Or…

    The “Focal Perspective” of a debate, in my opine at this juncture should not even be “How Change Occurs,” —- But “What Are The Changes Needed?”

    Summarily, the issue is “Far Greater” than the “Victim (Prof.)”, the “King (Pres.)”, —- It is the “System/Power of Monarchy (Tenure Process/Decision)”.

    The above is what I have been trying to express (See Comment #70; #80 ) —- And, what some others like Flporf [#74 — (“Discussion Of Problematic Procedure)] —- And, I believe to some extent Landrum Kelly are trying to express.

    — zahid    Jul 9, 10:06 AM    #

92. Landrum Kelly
    Chair, Department of Narcissism and Self-Importance

    List your web site again, goofball.

    — Judge Smales    Jul 9, 10:18 AM    #

93. AAUP—where are you? Are you hiding? Come out where ever you are.

    — Gary Brooks    Jul 9, 10:24 AM    #

94. Anytime that one speaks out, in class or online or anywhere else, one runs the risk of being targeted by control freaks, cranks, reactionaries, and nut cases of all sorts. That is not sufficient reason to shut up, of course, but it is a reminder that, if one is going to be outspoken, then one must “travel light and be prepared to bail.”

    Landrum Kelly
    www.philosophicalquestions.org

    — Landrum Kelly    Jul 9, 10:30 AM    #

95. If you must disagree with ones position, do it as you would in practice—focus on the scholarship, not on the individual. Judge Smales and others degrade the process when all they do is attack individuals (see #94). Grow up, this isn’t elementary school when the best we could do was resort to name calling.

    — Christian Hobbes    Jul 9, 10:31 AM    #

96. I don’t understand why people are discussing the tenure issue at all; this is just a distraction tactics. DePaul administration wanted Finkelstein out, that’s all. Otherwise, it would be quite possible to give him another position (in case the faculty voted against giving him tenure, but even this was exactly the opposite case). And now it’s even clearer, well, unless you suppose that the faculty in 40 universities voted to keep Finkelstein unemployable.

    This is the scandal that must travel internationally as a human rights scandal. I hope it will. The Helsinki agreement, publication and the human rights campaign in Russia, all of it as it used to be when the political systems were the opposite to what they are now.

    — Michael Pyshnov    Jul 9, 11:23 AM    #

97. What is with “Judge Smales’” sophomoric name calling of Landrum Kelly? If he truly is a judge, I would not want to be assigned to his court with any expectation of judiciousness, let alone maturity.

    — Gary    Jul 9, 12:49 PM    #

98. To #80, Zahid, that’s Dryden, from “All for Love”:

    “Errors, like straws, upon the surface flow;
    He who would search for pearls must dive below.”

    Sorry that this sheds no light on Finkelstein, Dershowitz, DePaul, or tenure.

    — dan    Jul 9, 02:34 PM    #

99. correction for #75 –

    Should read:

    …resident clown of the Holocaust “circus.”

    ——-

    The information I came across regarding Mr. Wiesel was written up at the following link:

    http://www.jewishjournal.com/forums/viewthread/895/P15/#4918

    — LanceThruster    Jul 9, 02:46 PM    #

100. #95 AAUP: useless and toothless.

     — Jon    Jul 9, 10:50 PM    #

101. I have suspended judgment, and I am glad that I have.

     I have been defending Finkelstein’s right of free expression, but I was just sent a link to his own website, where he does indeed say just above an article on water-boarding (if the link is authentic), “It’s not been conclusively shown that a bullet to the skull causes brain damage. Would Vanity Fair be so kind as to perform this experiment on Hitchens as well?”

     http://www.normanfinkelstein.com/article.php?pg=11

     If this is indeed the kind of rhetoric that Finkelstein wants to advance as worthy of being protected by tenure, he would not have my vote at this point.

     I will suspect final judgment until I have read some of his books. He might be making some valid points, and he might not, but the above type of speech has no place in academic discourse.

     Landrum Kelly
     www.philosophicalquestions.org

     — Landrum Kelly    Jul 10, 12:20 PM    #

102. Norman Finkelstein and his supporters are trying to convey the impression that DePaul’s decision to deny him tenure was a violation of academic freedom. See http://normanfinkelstein.com/article.php?pg=11&ar=1851. There is one easy way to determine whether this is true. Norman Finkelstein has the power to release to the public, the minority report filed by three political science professors, including the former chairman of the department, which documented the case against his tenure. Finkelstein has refused to release this report, thus suppressing an important part of the truth. Instead, he has leaked the reports that he regards as favorable to him. His supporters have also published critiques of the suppressed minority report, while withholding the report itself. I understand that the suppressed report is well-documented and devastating to his case. It proves that he was not denied academic freedom but rather that he was denied tenure for all the right reasons, including sloppy scholarship, making up false quotes, regularly employing ad hominem arguments, and abusing colleagues—in one case, calling a female subordinate the “b” word. If Finkelstein disputes any of this, let him simply release the report. He cannot credibly claim suppression of his ideas while he actively suppresses the ideas of those who disagree with him. Let the truth come out and then everyone can judge for themselves whether there was a violation of academic freedom, or a proper application of academic standards.

     — Alan Dershowitz    Jul 14, 11:23 AM    #

Previous: U. of Nevada at Reno, Facing Dozens of Lawsuits, Spends Big on Outside Legal Help
Next: Names of Diploma-Mill Customers Won't Be Released