April 12, 2007
Professors Gone Wild Posted by Alexander Burns at 02:55 PM EST Some weeks ago there was a discussion on this blog about the political inclinations of the American academy. Sparked by an article by Michael Barone, the discussion got pretty contentious. Reflecting on that debate, and on some new developments since then, I’m struck by a point that I wish I’d made at the time. One of the problems with Michael Barone’s portrait of the American academy, which might have been useful to consider back in March, is the academy’s supposed homogeneity. As Barone depicts American universities, one might think that they are relatively unanimous in their political leanings, and that left-wing professors form a more or less united front against traditional Anglo-American values. This is obviously not the case. I am sure Barone would gladly acknowledge this, though, and my point in raising this observation is not to celebrate the intellectual heterogeneity of the American university system. The news that inspired this observation is certainly not worth celebrating. Indeed, the larger observation that I’m motivated to make is that American academics cannot possibly be directing their full energies into radicalizing our nation’s youth, since much of that potential energy is occupied in personal, internecine academic feuds. One such feud is covered in today’s New York Times. “If the longstanding fight between two professors, Alan Dershowitz and Norman Finkelstein, was under the jurisdiction of family court a judge could issue restraining orders and forbid inflammatory statements,” Patricia Cohen’s article begins. “But, alas, this nasty and zealously pursued feud is taking place in scholarly precincts, so each protagonist is continuing his campaign, unhampered, to destroy the other’s professional reputation and career.” As previously reported by the Harvard Crimson, Professor Finkelstein’s bid for tenure at DePaul University has run into trouble, as DePaul College’s dean defied a faculty recommendation and decided to oppose Finkelstein’s appointment. According to Finkelstein, Harvard Law School Professor Alan Dershowitz has waged a campaign to oppose his promotion. Dershowitz has essentially admitted to doing so. The Times article contains more detailed information about the history of the feud between these two men, and about the specific controversy surrounding Finkelstein’s tenure review. At the heart of the matter is a long series of exchanges over Israel policy and anti-Semitism, in which Dershowitz has tended to take a staunchly pro-Israel position, and Finkelstein has accused Dershowitz of dissembling in order to advance his political agenda. The striking thing about this feud is just how little it has to do with real scholarship, and the extent to which it must distract these professors from more serious academic work. Each of these men has apparently poured hours of energy into producing personal attacks on the other (“The 10 Stupidest Things Finkelstein Has Said,” for example, or “Should Alan Dershowitz Target Himself for Assassination?”), and posting them on their respective Internet sites. Regardless of which man’s perspective one prefers, it’s hard not to see such sniping as childish. Criticizing Finkelstein’s work, Dershowitz told The New York Times: “There’s no scholarship there.” Actually, this criticism could characterize the entire Dershowitz-Finkelstein controversy. In cases like this, academics seem to act less like “tenured radicals” than like tenured children. It would be tremendously unfair to take the Dershowitz-Finkelstein controversy as a typical one, or as one that effectively depicts the state of academia. Most academics that I’ve encountered have been serious, conscientious, private people. From the facts of this case, though, it doesn’t seem unjust to conclude that some of America’s most politically outspoken professors are more concerned with lambasting each other than with brainwashing college students. If Alan Dershowitz and Norman Finkelstein spent a little less time attacking their personal adversaries, and a little more time teaching and writing, it might not allay Mr. Barone’s distrust. But it would surely be better for their students, their colleagues, and the country.
|
