The Professors: The 101 Most Dangerous Academics in America

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

The Professors: The 101 Most Dangerous Academics in America is a 2006 book by conservative American author and columnist David Horowitz.

1 Argument
2 Response
- 2.1 From targeted professors
3 The list
4 References
5 External links

[edit] Argument

Horowitz argues that U.S. universities are permeated by anti-Americanism and a left-wing bias. The academics described in The Professors are allegedly the worst offenders, but also only the tip of the iceberg. The bookflap says, "We all know that left-wing radicals from the 1960s have hung around academia and hired people like themselves. But if you thought they were all harmless, antiquated hippies, you'd be wrong. Today's radical academics aren't the exception—they're legion. And far from being harmless, they spew violent anti-Americanism, preach anti-Semitism, and cheer on the killing of American soldiers and civilians—all the while collecting tax dollars and tuition fees to indoctrinate our children." Horowitz extensively quotes from the professors concerned, and argues that two controversies involving Lawrence Summers of Harvard show that the administrators dare not challenge the radicals.

[edit] Response

The book was seen as a McCarthy-like blacklist by some, and was denounced by Free Exchange on Campus, a coalition of organizations that includes the American Association of University Professors, the American Civil Liberties Union, the American Federation of Teachers, Campus Progress, the Center for American Progress, the Center for Campus Free Speech, the National Association of State PIRGs, the National Education Association, People for the American Way Foundation, and the United States Student Association. Many of the professors included on the list also issued responses ranging from pride of being included, to criticism of Horowitz, to warnings of possible future repercussions.

[edit] From targeted professors

Stanley Aronowitz: "I wish I was all that dangerous. Dangerous to what? To conservatism and right-wing lunaticism? I think, yes, most of us who he's named are dangerous to the lunatics. […] He's raised the issue: What is dangerous to democracy in this country and in this world? Who are the dangerous people? I think that will be a very interesting conversation. To run away from it would be a terrible mistake." ^[1]
Marc Becker: "Stunned. I'm not worthy! I'm not worthy! (Think Wayne's World)... Academic freedom is like muscles in that if we don't use it, it begins to decay... Horowitz wants to intimidate people like me who oppose imperialism and neoliberal economic policies into being quiet. If we are quiet, than we have lost our academic freedom." ^[2]
Michael Bérubé: "A complete sham... First of all, Horowitz didn't even bother to rank us... Horowitz catalogues some of the reprobates and miscreants I'm in with: Ron Karenga is a Professor and Chairman of the Black Studies Department. He's also a convicted torturer and inventor of Kwanzaa. Hold the phone! He's a what? ... Well, yes, it does sound a little odd. But remember, dear friends, that most of David's readership thinks torture is just fine. Kwanzaa, however—that's downright un-American." ^[3]
Dana Cloud: "We should definitely respond politically to Horowitz's stepped-up efforts in a national and visible way. I disagree with those on the left who say that Horowitz should be ignored. Horowitz may be regarded by many as a right-wing nut or crackpot, but he is doing the groundwork for more serious forces. His book is part and parcel of the assault on civil liberties in the U.S. since 9/11, and we should respond to him in that context." ^[1]
Matthew Evangelista: "My main concern is that the targets of Horowitz's campaign and their sympathizers are creating a lot of free publicity for his book, whereas the more sensible response might be simply to ignore him... a reviewer... remarked that there was no need to buy his book because much of the same material was available for free on Horowitz's Web site... Within days... the entries for me and many of the other 101 had been removed... suggesting that Horowitz's motives are, after all, more pecuniary than political. What a surprise." ^[1]
Grover Furr: "Horowitz says that his change from being a leftist to being a right-winger had nothing to do with the fact that it pays big bucks to be a right-winger, while being a leftist pays nothing. Of course! it is just a coincidence that the side he has picked pays so well!" ^[4]
Robert Jensen: "It's easier to defame opponents using emotionally charged language than engage on real issues... there's a lot of bad teaching in universities. But, I'm constantly attacked by people who have no knowledge of -- and as far as I can tell, no interest in learning about -- how I teach. Because they hear me express strong opinions at political rallies or read my newspaper opinion pieces, they assume I treat my classroom like a pulpit and students as targets for conversion." ^[5]
Peter Kirstein: "David Horowitz's book The Professors is an example of war's impact on our democratic freedoms. War may be rhetorically intended to spread democracy abroad, but it usually eviscerates it at home during the conflict... Dissent is good for America, and without it, the nation would have even fewer restraints on its imperial overstretch that it does now."^[1]
Robert McChesney: "The criticism of me (presented in Horowitz's book) consisted of two out-of-context quotes from articles where I criticize the news media and the Bush Administration. This is presented as prima facie evidence that I am a dreadful teacher who uses the classroom to harass students to adopt my political views, my campus-wide, student-elected teaching award notwithstanding. By the same “logic,” quotations could be taken from many professors in America, and nearly all conservatives, to establish that they propagandize in the classroom. By Horowitz’s evidentiary standards, Harvard’s Stephan Thernstrom, who endorses The Professors on its cover, should be ridden out of academia as a narrow-minded bigot who abuses students who disagree with his pointed views. ^[6]