Monday, February 07, 2005
Roosting Chickens
Recently some people have been wanting to remove Prof. Ward Churchill from the faculty of the University of Colorado-Boulder because he wrote the essay "Some People Push Back: On the Justice of Roosting Chickens", in which he describes those who died at the World Trade Center "little Eichmanns" and Madeleine Albright a "malignant toad" and compared her to Jabba the Hutt. I have looked over parts of the essay and also of the criticism of it.
The first thing that comes out was that both Prof. Churchill and his critics use the verb "be" a lot: they label their enemy with some abominable word that has little to do with the essay. Prof. Churchill calls the World Trade Center people "little Eichmanns" without giving justification or even saying what a "little Eichmann" was. His equating Madeleine Albright with Jabba the Hutt fits in the same category - it seems to me that the Jabba label could fit any obese person. What has obesity got to do with America's relationships with other countries? His critics do no better. I read them from Prof. Churchill's web site. They use trite gross-out worlds such as f*k, ahole, sh*t, and cock. Prof. Churchill calls these people idiots and cretins. All of these appellations are meaningless. They don't say anything about the issues Churchill raises.
The point that he is raising is that America has taken actions against other countries that have offended them greatly and that they retaliate against us because of this. As examples, Churchill cites the constant bombing of Iraq by Clinton and both Bushes which have killed many people. He says that sooner or later people are going to be fed up with this and they are going to respond in kind.
Further, he raises the point that most Americans don't seem to care about this and don't realize the role they play in the oppression of third world countries. For example, World Trade Center employees traded stocks in corporations that made the bombs and the planes and carried them to their targets. For this he calls them "Eichmanns". I think that is overreaching the point. These people are just simply caught in a world not of their making. But his essential point still is valid: we need to consider the consequences of our actions overseas. Are we doing the best we can to improve life in this world?
The first thing that comes out was that both Prof. Churchill and his critics use the verb "be" a lot: they label their enemy with some abominable word that has little to do with the essay. Prof. Churchill calls the World Trade Center people "little Eichmanns" without giving justification or even saying what a "little Eichmann" was. His equating Madeleine Albright with Jabba the Hutt fits in the same category - it seems to me that the Jabba label could fit any obese person. What has obesity got to do with America's relationships with other countries? His critics do no better. I read them from Prof. Churchill's web site. They use trite gross-out worlds such as f*k, ahole, sh*t, and cock. Prof. Churchill calls these people idiots and cretins. All of these appellations are meaningless. They don't say anything about the issues Churchill raises.
The point that he is raising is that America has taken actions against other countries that have offended them greatly and that they retaliate against us because of this. As examples, Churchill cites the constant bombing of Iraq by Clinton and both Bushes which have killed many people. He says that sooner or later people are going to be fed up with this and they are going to respond in kind.
Further, he raises the point that most Americans don't seem to care about this and don't realize the role they play in the oppression of third world countries. For example, World Trade Center employees traded stocks in corporations that made the bombs and the planes and carried them to their targets. For this he calls them "Eichmanns". I think that is overreaching the point. These people are just simply caught in a world not of their making. But his essential point still is valid: we need to consider the consequences of our actions overseas. Are we doing the best we can to improve life in this world?
