Ward Churchill: Canary in the mine of academic freedom

Ward Churchill isn't just some controversy that flashed over the newswires last year. He's a real human being, a teacher, a soldier against holocaust denial in America and one of the few writers who took the time to explain "why they hate us." He's also a tenured professor of Ethnic Studies at the University of Colorado. Backed by powerful right-wing forces nationally, the campus administration is seeking to revoke his post for the tumerity to document empire.

Churchill is a showman as anyone who's ever seen him speak can testify. Sometimes he lets his own arguments get the best of him. But on this one, there's no mistake. Churchill isn't being purged for ettiquette. It's about a little matter of what America is. Churchill is ferocious in his exposure of America's hidden holocaust and imperial genesis. He has little patience for collegiality in the face of white supremacy.

Do academics have the right to question empire? To document its abuses? To challenge the youth on the ethics of Eichmann? Are professors bound to tow the party line in supposed "times of national crisis"?

For his courage to not shut up, we should all support Ward Churchill's right to teach, share his analysis and refuse a right-wing witchhunt through college campuses. If Churchill is fired, the chill will set in on campus. Turmoil would not be inappropriate, public solidarity is in order.

On the link, there's an Open Letter from Concerned Academics. If you're on campus, get involved or at least lend your name.

Open Letter From Concerned Academics
OPPOSITION MOUNTS AS SHOWDOWN APPROACHES OVER THE FIRING OF WARD CHURCHILL
by Concerned Academics -  CA; Concerned Academics; January 16, 2007

Dismissal hearings for University of Colorado professor Ward Churchill were held  this past week. Ward Churchill appeared before the Privilege and Tenure Committee with many witnesses speaking in his behalf. The committee will have 30 days to issue its findings to CU president Hank Brown.  Brown will weigh the findings and make a recommendation to the Board of Regents.

Opposition to his dismissal is growing on campuses across the country. The firing of Churchill, a tenured professor and former head of the Ethnic Studies Department at UC Boulder, is increasingly being seen by those in academia as an attack on academic freedom, dissent and critical thinking that must be stopped.  In a recent statement the Colorado branch of the American Association of University Professors notes “we believe that the investigation [into alleged research misconduct] now is widely perceived to be a pretext for firing Churchill when the real reason for dismissal is his politics.” The AAUP statement raises serious questions and concerns over the handling of the Ward Churchill case, and calls for the reversal of the decision to fire him.    

This growing movement of opposition to the firing of Professor Churchill includes some of this country’s most prominent scholars and public intellectuals, including Noam Chomsky, Derrick Bell and Richard Falk, Professor Emeritus of International Law and Practice at Princeton University.  In an essay recently solicited by the journal of the International Studies Association entitled "On Behalf of Robust Academic Freedom",  Professor Falk writes, “The relentless pursuit and persecution of Ward Churchill is a revealing instance of the witch-hunting McCarthyist ethos that is currently threatening academic freedom.”  And he concludes, “When academic freedom is threatened, the most sustaining response, is vigorous defense on principle”.  In August, Anthropology Today published an editorial entitled “Education and the Dangerous Professor: The Challenge for Anthropology” written by University of Denver Anthropology Professor Dean Saitta.  Richard Delgado's recent review of Ward Churchill’s latest work On the Justice of Roosting Chickens, published in the American Indian Law Review, makes it quite clear that the attacks are a result of Ward's political speech.

On September 29 –30th  The Emergency Summit Of Scholars And Activists Defending Critical Thinking And Indigenous Studies was convened in  Lawrence, Kansas.  It produced a resolution written to the P&T Committee calling on the University of Colorado Boulder to reinstate Professor Churchill because of a deeply flawed investigation

Thousands of academics have signed petitions and visited websites spawned by this movement to defend dissent and critical thinking in academia, now focused on the case of Ward Churchill, including Ward Churchill Solidarity Network, defendcriticalthinking.org, teachersfordemocracy.org  and more. 

There is also increasing student activity in support of Ward Churchill. In December of 2006 a student group was formed at the University of Colorado called Students for Academic Freedom (SAF).  On December 16, they held a press conference  to protest the "politically motivated" investigation of Churchill, and to call for him to receive the UCB Alumni Association Teaching Recognition Award that he won in 2005 which was withheld pending the outcome of the investigation.  An SAF spokesperson said "We are prepared to take organized action against the administration between now and the month of February to ensure that our demands are met,"  "If this process goes forward, it would set a precedent that, despite the traditional peer review process, and despite tenure, professors must always censor the conclusions of their research to popular acceptance, or face harsh repercussions. This threatens the nature of academia. This precedent should send a shock wave of fear to all professors nationwide."

Natsu Saito, Law professor at Georgia State College of Law and wife of Professor Churchill, wrote in a recent letter, “We are at a critical stage with respect to CU’s attempt to fire Ward Churchill.”  Academics across the country are increasingly speaking out to say that Ward Churchill must not be fired.  The Open Letter From Concerned Academics issued at the beginning of this case and signed  by over 600 faculty stated: “This attack is intolerable and must stop now.  The precedents already set in this case – that a professor can be publicly pilloried and threatened with dismissal for what he writes – must not be allowed to stand.  The University of Colorado Board of Regents must drop any effort to fire Churchill… and repudiate its actions up to now; and all colleges and universities must reaffirm, in word and deed, their commitment to defend critical thinking.” 

For endorsement list and media contacts, check Znet. 

Comments

[repeater]

I wish Ward hadn't resigned his post in the ethnic studies dept. Anyway, this is an extremely important struggle and no time for nitpicking or turfing.

Where do I sign? Or is it primarily for professors and such?

[other brother]

This whole mess is a cautionary tale. Don't let your mouth overload your ass and don't say shit you have to backtrack on later.

Whatever Churchill says, he blames every common person for the crimes of imperialism.

Average Iowa farmboys and little Eichmans. Rhetorical molotovs, lazy logic, dubious politics.

I've read several of his books and recommend them. Pacifism as Pathology is a classic. A Little Matter of Genocide a necessary read.

[repeater]

Oh, come on now...

The people attacking Churchill aren't doing it because they think he should be more focused on who's responsible for imperialism and its crimes. In fact, just the opposite. And the whole issue here is exactly that Churchill isn't the issue. The issue, very clearly, for those attacking him, is the limiting or the complete silencing of radical voices in all of society, not just the universities. It is part of their culture war, and they're attacking our roots, as imperfect as they are. So where do we stand on that?

[leftclick]

repeater: I agree that we have to be clear on why Churchill is being attacked. At the same time, support can be critical without being 'nitpicking.'

Let's face it, he was careless and gave them some ammunition to work with. I read his controversial essay and no matter what he says now, he did seem to be labeling everyone who worked in the WTC as "little Eichmann's", not just the technocrats.

A long-time activist such as himself should know that enemies are always going to look for ways to attack. Just as any serious activist knows to be mindful of their surroundings when they speak, he should have been more cautious about publishing something he wrote in the heat of the moment. Reactionaries have enough power without us giving them more ammunition.

We must support him as part of repelling the attacks on academic freedom, and defending dissent. We must also support the qualitative content of his work, which does correctly expose the horrors of imperialism.

What we must not do is confuse moral high ground for strategy, as Churchill has done in the past.

[repeater]

"A long-time activist such as himself should know that enemies are always going to look for ways to attack. Just as any serious activist knows to be mindful of their surroundings when they speak, he should have been more cautious about publishing something he wrote in the heat of the moment. Reactionaries have enough power without us giving them more ammunition."

Well, with all do respect, don't you think Churchill exactly expected such an attack? At least when he put it out there it was in the midst of alot of people (including the president's press secretary) saying that "you have to watch what you say". What if Churchill's point was always about how "we shouldn't have to be watching what we say, and fuck you very much for suggesting it Ari Fleischer." I mean there's more here than just critical support.

The issue is not that Churchill is beyond reproach, but that the principle aspect of this contradiction in some ways required that Churchill "say something stupid". And if we concentrate on what he said that was incorrect, rather than on the fact that there was a need for someone to say something, and how goddamn courageous it was in the situation to have said what he said, I think we play into "supporting" Churchill (in a very liberal way), instead of fighting against this agenda.

[the sixth borough]

Churchill was right about those technocrats in the towers. Not talking about culinary, custodial, clerical. I live in NYC – I know exactly the TimeOut soft fascists just making money that he's talking about.

I saw a youtube of Churchill talking to the student body at Boulder, probably last year. He gave a challenging speech, a little puffed up in style, and it was enthusiastically received by that Colorado crowd. His combination of sharp essential analysis and macho pride is refreshing sometimes. It was one of those rare occassions.

He said, and I'm paraphrasing, you all are being trained to be technocrats, officials, thinkers – social engineers. What do you serve? Who do you serve? This is what your antcestors have done. This is what is happening. Who do you serve?

Right on. The students said right on too. He took some tough questions. It wasn't a scripted show.

My roomate took classes with him at UC. It changed his outlook on the world.

That's what they want to stop.

We're with you, Ward Churchill.

Tell the truth. Aim high.