OI Ward Churchill Thread

[Richard Nixon]

Discuss Ward Churchill here.


Does it matter if Ward Churchill "really is" an American indian or not?

American academic Ward Churchill stirred up quite a bit of controversy in the US by comparing some 9/11 victims to Eichmann of holocaust fame.

He's been in the news a lot lately b/c he was fired from his job in an investigation that resulted from his 9/11 claims. Although he wasn't technically fired for his comparisons about 9/11, one issue that came up during the investigation was whether Ward Churchill "really is" native American (i.e., has indigenous ancestors).

In America, the one-drop theory predominates among the governing white elite. These people historically considered anyone "contaminated" with Indian blood, however minor, to be Indian. To rectify this error, many government instutitions, including the state run university of colorado where Churchill worked, allegedly preferentially hired people with even " a drop" of aboriginal ancestry.

Churchill claims to be 1/16 aboriginal (i.e., he had a great-great(!)-grand parent that was pure aboriginal) but the geneological record doesn't support this, and it's not entirely clear whether his family upbringing considered this a major part of their identity.

Even some in the pretty bona fide American Indian Movement have trouble with his claims to being native American:

http://aimgrandgovcouncil.blogspot.c...erary-and.html (http://www.anonym.to/?http://aimgrandgovcouncil.blogspot.com/2007/07/ward-churchill-academic-literary-and.html)

and references therein.

However, suppose CHurchill had, say, no native extraction. I'm torn about how concerned we should be about Churcill's stance claiming to be "indigenous". On one hand, I think a spokesperson for minority rights is valuable. On the other hand, I understand that if he is a "white imposter" then one wonders if he's not usurping a place at the table from somebody that really suffered discrimination of aboriginals growing up.

But this reasoning is problematic. It would suggest that being 15/16 white also basically means one is treated as white their whole lives and therefore doesn't know what it means to be 100% or even 1/2 indigenous.

Hence, on some levels, even if taken at face value CHurchill's "indigenous-ness" was questionable because the 1 drop theory itself is questionable and no longer really the social norm. Moreover, Churchill's family's self understanding as indigenous, if true, probably did impact their economic prospects and, to some extent, the values he holds.

Nevertheless, one comes away with the uncomfortable feeling that Churchill is milking the 1 drop theory for his own benefit rather than denouncing it.
__________________

[Robert]

Plagiarist. Liar. Polemicist. Fraud. Prima donna. Hypocrite. Crybaby.


Additional critics came forward, including sociologist Thomas Brown, who had been preparing an article on Churchill's work, and historians R.G. Robertson and Russell Thornton, who claimed that Churchill had misrepresented their work.In 2005, University of Colorado at Boulder (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/University_of_Colorado_at_Boulder) administrators ordered an investigation into seven allegations of research misconduct (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Research_misconduct).... [The university] then fired Churchill by a vote of eight to one.On the following day, Churchill filed a lawsuit in state court claiming that the firing was retribution for expressing politically unpopular views.On April 1, 2009, a Colorado jury found that Churchill had been wrongly fired, but awarded only $1 in damages. As one of the jurors said later in a press interview, "it wasn't a slap in his face or anything like that when we didn't give him any money. It's just that [Churchill's attorney] kept saying this wasn't about the money, and in the end, we took his word for that."
:laugh:

I hope he sues his lawyer for that little tactical error. I also hope he wins and gets awarded one more dollar.

[Kwisatz Haderach]

While many of the people who died in the attack on the World Trade Center and (especially) the Pentagon were indeed helping to commit grave injustices and perhaps even crimes against humanity, comparing them to Eichmann is like comparing Bush to Hitler, or a pickpocket to a serial killer. Yes, they're both bad, but they're nowhere near being in the same league of evil.

[Trystan]

Ward Churchill is an idiot. I think (or I hope) that most RevLefters realise this.

[RGacky3]

He's a Nutjob, whyd you bring him up btw?

[khad]

While many of the people who died in the attack on the World Trade Center and (especially) the Pentagon were indeed helping to commit grave injustices and perhaps even crimes against humanity, comparing them to Eichmann is like comparing Bush to Hitler, or a pickpocket to a serial killer. Yes, they're both bad, but they're nowhere near being in the same league of evil.
Oh quiet. You guys act like he made up that Eichmann shit. Lewis Mumford (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lewis_Mumford) said it first during Vietnam, in much more explicit detail, and today he's still regarded one of the most respected theorists of urbanism and technological development. His work is practically required reading for architecture and urban planning students.

http://web.telia.com/~u27015815/varld.html (http://web.telia.com/%7Eu27015815/varld.html)


The characteristic virtues of Organization Man correspond as nearly as possible to the machine that he serves: thus the part of his personality that was projected in mechanical instruments in turn reenforces that projection by eliminating any nonconforming organic or human functions. (---) Organizational Man flourishes as a virtual automaton within a collective system of automation. The model for the Organizational Man is the machine itself. As the mechanism grows more perfect, the residue of life needed to carry on the process becomes more minute and meaningless. (---)

On those terms Adolph Eichmann, the obedient exterminator, who carried out Hitler’s policy and Himmler’s orders with unswerving fidelity, should be hailed the hero of our time. But unfortunately our time has produced many such heroes who has been willing to do at safe distance...what the exterminators at Belsen and Auschwitz did by oldfashioned handicraft methods. (---) And what makes this ’ideal type’ even more menacing is his successful use of the human disguise. His robot mechanism simulates flesh and bood; and exept for a few troglodyte specimens there is nothing to distinguish him outwardly from a reasonable human being, smoothmannered, lowkeyed, presumably amiable. Like Himmler, he may even be a ’good family man.’ (---)

Already these faithful servants of the megamachine have taken for granted that there is only one acceptable view of the world, that which they stand for: only one kind of knowledge, only one type of human enterprise has value - their own, or that which derives directly from their own. Ultimately they mean that only one kind of personality can be considered desirable - that established as such by the military- industrial- scientific elite which will operate the megamachine. (---)

The fact that you people are making a big deal out of Ward Churchill's words just shows the extent to which you've been exposed to right wing media and just how little you've actually read.

[ÑóẊîöʼn]

Instead of making inflammatory (and quite possibly inaccurate, considering the different historical circumstances) comparisons with "evil" historical figures, why didn't this Ward Churchill mucker actually spell out what the 9/11 victims did/were doing that was so terrible?

[khad]

Instead of making inflammatory (and quite possibly inaccurate, considering the different historical circumstances) comparisons with "evil" historical figures, why didn't this Ward Churchill mucker actually spell out what the 9/11 victims did/were doing that was so terrible?

It's the Mumford argument about the Organization Man. Agree or disagree, take it as you will.

http://www.commondreams.org/cgi-bin/print.cgi?file=/headlines05/0201-05.htm


Finally, I have never characterized all the September 11 victims as "Nazis." What I said was that the "technocrats of empire" working in the World Trade Center were the equivalent of "little Eichmanns." Adolf Eichmann was not charged with direct killing but with ensuring the smooth running of the infrastructure that enabled the Nazi genocide. Similarly, German industrialists were legitimately targeted by the Allies.

It is not disputed that the Pentagon was a military target, or that a CIA office was situated in the World Trade Center . Following the logic by which U.S. Defense Department spokespersons have consistently sought to justify target selection in places like Baghdad , this placement of an element of the American "command and control infrastructure" in an ostensibly civilian facility converted the Trade Center itself into a "legitimate" target. Again following U.S. military doctrine, as announced in briefing after briefing, those who did not work for the CIA but were nonetheless killed in the attack amounted to "collateral damage." If the U.S. public is prepared to accept these "standards" when the are routinely applied to other people, they should be not be surprised when the same standards are applied to them.

[Conquer or Die]

If the U.S. public is prepared to accept these "standards" when the are routinely applied to other people, they should be not be surprised when the same standards are applied to them.

Otherwise it's racism.

[Agrippa]

Instead of making inflammatory (and quite possibly inaccurate, considering the different historical circumstances) comparisons with "evil" historical figures, why didn't this Ward Churchill mucker actually spell out what the 9/11 victims did/were doing that was so terrible?

Maybe you should actually read his essay.

[ÑóẊîöʼn]

It's the Mumford argument about the Organization Man. Agree or disagree, take it as you will.

I'm against attacking civilian targets no matter who does it. I'd say the centre of a major city would count.

[khad]

I'm against attacking civilian targets no matter who does it. I'd say the centre of a major city would count.
Hey, don't shoot the messenger. You asked:

"why didn't this Ward Churchill mucker actually spell out what the 9/11 victims did/were doing that was so terrible?"

I clarified what Churchill actually said:


Finally, I have never characterized all the September 11 victims as "Nazis." What I said was that the "technocrats of empire" working in the World Trade Center were the equivalent of "little Eichmanns." Adolf Eichmann was not charged with direct killing but with ensuring the smooth running of the infrastructure that enabled the Nazi genocide. Similarly, German industrialists were legitimately targeted by the Allies.
Churchill was talking specifically about the "technocrats of empire," not every random worker who was in the building. He was talking about specific people in charge, not 9/11 victims categorically. Thus, your original question seems to have been rather misguided.

[#FF0000]

Plagiarist. Liar. Polemicist. Fraud. Prima donna. Hypocrite. Crybaby.

That's pretty much my impression of him from what little I know. I don't know why he caught so much flak for the whole "chickens coming home to roost" thing though. I figured it was just sort of common sense that the U.S. was targeted by foreign terrorists for a reason beyond "lol h8 ur fredums"

[Richard Nixon]

That's pretty much my impression of him from what little I know. I don't know why he caught so much flak for the whole "chickens coming home to roost" thing though. I figured it was just sort of common sense that the U.S. was targeted by foreign terrorists for a reason beyond "lol h8 ur fredums"

That's true and I realize it. But for instance on our Israel policy all our recent administrations (Clinton, GW Bush, Obama) has been commited to a two state policy, however various problems such as security reasons especially now with the Hamas in charge have blocked that.

[synthesis]

Someone's suggesting that American civilians can be considered collateral damage in war? I thought it was only okay if they were brown! God save us all!

:rolleyes:

It's funny how a significant part of American society considers all Muslims to be a part of some broader conspiracy to donkey-punch their freedoms, but if anyone suggests that all Americans play a part in depriving Muslims of their freedom, all you hear is "traitor!"

It's also funny how it's "war" when their civilians die, but when they're ours, it's "terrorism." Truth is, whatever it is they call "al-Qaeda" has always considered American civilians to be "collateral damage" and not the inherent target - namely, our economy and government, or as they see it, Israel's unfair advantage.

[The Situationist]

Ward Churchills full book "On the Justice of Roosting Chickens" is actually a very eye-opening read.

Most people get hung up on the sensationalism of one quote taken out of context, and miss his validity as a researcher and theorist, which in my view is quite strong.