The truth is, a lot of the people in these soft science academic positions are third-rate minds. In my professional life, I encounter many of them--glib, but ultimately stupid. Many are focused on details and cannot grasp the "big picture."

These are the kind of dullards who count sentences, paragraphs, and pages in textbooks devoted to "minorities" ("pet" minorities, actually) without considering the function of the book. These are the people who hate capitalism and oil companies but have no idea how their tofu gets to market. Etc. etc.

I'm glad the public is finally calling their bluff. It should have happened a long time ago. The Dark Ages before the rise of the blogs is now ending.
Promethea | Email | Homepage | 04.12.05 - 11:33 pm | #

"Thirty plus years ago those who are the current professors were just students acting out during the Vietnam war. Their legacy continues to infect our college campuses."

You said it right there. A righteously fatuous generation of students has grown up to be a self-righteously fatuous generation of intellectuals. There are closely reasoned intellectually coherent leftists arguing for new directions in our politics out there, but their reason rhetoric is far too nitpicky and well, rational, to be admired by this generation of rebel-without-a-causists professors.

Just an outstanding post!
MaxedOutMama | Email | Homepage | 04.13.05 - 1:21 am | #

I absolutely agree with you that Vietnam was the turning point, the origin for the sort of thinking that culminates in this nonsense at Columbia.

But, strange though it may seem, there are a few people who call themselves Marxists who have their heads on straight, and they are professors, at that! The main one that comes to mind is Norm Geras.
neo-neocon | Email | Homepage | 04.13.05 - 1:24 am | #

Name names. Who are the anti-capitalists? Who are the anti-Americans? Please provide links to their anti-capitalist, anti-American works.

You sure talk about Ward Churchill a lot, two months after you promised to stop talking about him.

Consideration of the lower class defines capitalism! Sorry, I consider Adam Smith to be the founder of capitalism, not Ronald Reagan.

The freedom to buck the establishment defines America! And it's why, regardless of what you people think, I love America. If you all had your "conservative" way, I am sure we'd all be denying women the right to vote, and making the black people sit in the back of the bus. Isn't that how our founding fathers wanted it? Tell me again how the "activist judges" hate America.

"Intellectual elite"...ohh, what a horrible thing to be called! I'd rather be a red-state dumbass that votes for Bush because he said Saddam Hussein had WMDs and was responsible for 9/11.
Mitzell | Email | Homepage | 04.13.05 - 1:37 am | #

Don't woryy Mitzell, no one with more than two synapses firing will ever accuse you of being part of the intellectual elite.
Rick Ballard | Email | Homepage | 04.13.05 - 2:30 am | #

Well shoot, Mitzell.

I guess I'm just going to have to give up. You must be right about everything after all. Saddam wasn't really such a bad guy and I'm sure if we had elected a AlGore in 2000 we'd probably be best buds with him now.

Maybe AQ would have still attacked us, but like your buddy Ward said, those 3,000 civilians probably had it coming anyway. At least our eyes have been opened to all of the injustice the US has spread around the world, right?

But then again, maybe I don't agree with you. Maybe I think the US has done more to promote freedom and prosperity around the world in the last four years than the UN has done since it was established.

And please please please... listen this time:

1) Saddam did have WMDs (we've gone over this ad nauseum)
2) Bush never said Saddam was responsible for 9/11. He said there was a connection between AQ and Saddam (which there was)

Finally, "activist judges" don't hate America. They are just trying to remake America into something it wasn't inteded to be.
Bryan | Email | Homepage | 04.13.05 - 5:02 pm | #

Mitzel, stop playing stupid.

You want the names of anti-American, anti-capitalist academics? Let's start with Noam Chomksky, Bernadine Dohrn, Bettina Aptheker, Herbert Aptheker, Hatem Bazien, Robert Berdahl, Cornell West, Howard Zinn, Eric Foner, John Esposito.... and about a million more.
The Redhunter | Email | Homepage | 04.13.05 - 7:45 pm | #

Bryan:

1) the "intelligence" that the Iraq War was based on was completely wrong. Even the Bush administration admits this. What they don't admit is that they completely twisted the "intelligence" to do what they wanted. Iraq did not pose a threat. Period.

2) Saying Bush did not claim Saddam was responsible for 9/11 is like saying Clinton didn't lie about Monica. Every speech Bush made was "Saddam Hussein...9/11...Saddam Hussein...9/11." And 70% of people believed Saddam was responsible. The public was deceived.

And as for my "buddy" Ward Churchill, I don't agree that the civilians in the WTC deserved what happened. I don't believe the USA deserved what happened. I *do* believe the USA should have expected what happened. We are very much involved in the affairs of the Middle East, and I'm not saying we shouldn't be, but we should at least be prepared for the consequences.

Redhunter: I've honestly never heard of any of the people you mention aside from Chomsky. I take issue with you calling Chomsky anti-American and anti-capitalist. I'll drop two Chomsky quotes:

"The U.S. explicitly reserves to itself the right to act as it chooses, and is carefully avoiding any meaningful recourse to international institutions, as required by law."

"The 'corporatization of America' during the past century [has been] an attack on democracy."

I completely agree with the man. Criticizing America's foreign policy and its corporatization does not make one a freaking traitor. Cut the McCarthyism.
Mitzell | Email | Homepage | 04.14.05 - 11:54 am | #

Well Mitzell you need to get out more. If you're going to ask someone to "name names" then you need to become more familiar with the academic world. And if Chomksky doesn't hate American then nobody does. Pleaseeee...

BTW, it's only McCarthyism if it's not true. And I speak the truth, whether you like it or not.

As far as your contention that Bush insinuated that Saddam was responsible for 9/11, you need to develop better listening and reading skills. He never said it from everyting I've read. You need to stop hearing what you want to hear and listen to what people are actually saying. We on the right can't be responsible for your lack of comprehension abilities.
The Redhunter | Email | Homepage | 04.14.05 - 8:25 pm | #

Dude.

I KNOW he never specifically said it. He read speeches that smart people wrote for him. They took great care not to actually say it. Know why? Because it's a lie.

But the intended message got through loud and clear.

As for Chomsky, you're just being ridiculous. Terrorists bring down the World Trade Center and kill our soldiers, and you think a guy who criticizes the Republicans is the most anti-American guy around. You're not very bright.
Mitzell | Email | Homepage | 04.14.05 - 9:05 pm | #

Mitzell, good to see you back defending traitors!!!! BTW, I took a seminar with Chomsky one summer, and boy, ole' Chomsky was one jackass, who could not deal with any student who dared to question anything he said.
wolverine | Email | Homepage | 04.14.05 - 9:59 pm | #

Sounds like you can't deal with anyone who questions the government.
Mitzell | Email | Homepage | 04.15.05 - 10:51 am | #