September 26, 2007
Self-hating Academics
Jeff Strabone in his eponymous blog:
A lot of obvious arguments have been rolled out against Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad's speech at Columbia University yesterday: that he's a hatemonger, a Holocaust denier, a homophobe, and so on. These are all valid criticisms of the man, for he is all those things. He certainly did his credibility no help yesterday with these remarks, reported by the BBC:
'Asked about executions of homosexuals in Iran, Mr Ahmadinejad replied: "In Iran we don't have homosexuals like in your country."
Reacting to laughter and jeers from the audience he added: "In Iran we don't have this phenomenon, I don't know who you told this."'Universities have a special place in public life. They are the one place where intellectual freedom is taken most seriously. That is not to say that universities ought to invite rude individuals with bad ideas to speak, but it is understandable that they sometimes do.
Despite all of that, Columbia was wrong to allow Ahmadinejad on its campus, and it's not because he hates Jews, gays, and men with stylish haircuts. There are surely members of the Columbia community—faculty and students alike—who hold these and other prejudices. And it's not because he has blood on his hands. If that were the rule, it would be hard to find an important figure in world politics who qualified. Besides that, we might not agree on which international bloodletters were terrorists and which were freedom fighters. No, there is an even more fundamental reason than that: Ahmadinejad is the enemy of universities.
More here. [Thanks to Asad Raza.]
Posted by Abbas Raza at 02:59 PM | Permalink






Comments
Well, I think that it was rather pointless to have the guy talk at Columbia from one point of view: obviously this guy is not going to engage in any sort of intellectual dialogue, for which universities allegedly exist.
But on the other hand, I think it is a bad policy for universities to refuse to hear anyone talk, even if they do close schools in their own countries. It seems to be that this whole attitude started during the Vietnam War, when students and faculties got into uproars when government officials or other war supporters were chosen to give commencement speaches. (But it probably started even before that; at any rate, that is when I remember that it started.)
I think it is just a dangerous road to start to go down when a university says there are certain categories of people it just won't listen to, no matter how idiotic what they have to say is. Of course, most of the time universities (at least those in the rank of a Columbia) don't waste their time inviting idiotic speakers.
As for the remarks of Columbia's president, I think he did go quite a bit over the top, but I think he was probably doing so because he had come under so much vitriolic criticism from the right, and therefore felt he had to show the world that he could be" tough," too.
Posted by: JonJ | Sep 26, 2007 10:17:00 PM
I wonder why Bollinger didn't insult the dictator of Pakistan when he came to Columbia...
http://worldleaders.columbia.edu/events_pakistan.html
Posted by: Nat | Sep 27, 2007 2:48:25 PM
Post a comment