9/11 for Dummies (also known as liberals)
- From: shogun@xxxxxxxxx (shogun)
- Date: Wed, 24 Aug 2005 02:51:05 GMT
9/11 for Dummies
By Professor Anonymous
FrontPageMagazine.com | August 12, 2005
?Why is it,? wondered my faculty friend, ?that after 9/11, and after the start
of the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq, all of a sudden professors without
professional experience or expertise in the subject became ?experts? on the
Middle East, Radical Islam, terrorism, U.S. foreign policy and the like??
These instant experts were eager to teach students, colleagues -- and anyone
they could get to listen -- about these subjects. They were especially anxious
to ensure that everyone would adopt their politically correct viewpoints and
have an arsenal of facts to support their views.
?We both know,? I said, ?that this is propagandizing, not educating, and it is
an abuse of the true mission of universities, which is the pursuit of
knowledge, not political ideology. We see how this undermines academic
discipline and standards essential for the pursuit of knowledge. You know what
I mean: thorough knowledge of the primary sources and the main scholarship for
one?s field; critical and rational analysis of many different approaches and
complex explanations for the key questions and problems in one?s field; a
total commitment to accuracy and honesty, even if this means sacrificing one?s
pet theories; and above all, making sure that our students learn the
importance of these standards. They have to embrace them fully. Without these,
the pursuit of knowledge leads to the dead end of propaganda and distorted
theories, not truth. We see how vulnerable students are to the seductive
attractions that instant ?experts? offer with their simplistic instant
explanations and ideology. This makes insisting on upholding our professional
academic standards all the m ore important, don?t you think??
?Sure,? said the professor, ?but there?s been a problem here ever since 9/11
and even before that. Instant ?experts? and their low standards are spreading
everywhere nowadays.?
I know that this is true, and this is my subject here. The information I am
about to present comes from my own experience at the university where I teach,
from my teaching assistants and students, from colleagues at other
universities, from professional journals such as The Chronicle of Higher
Education and Academe, the Journal of the American Association of University
Professors, and from newspapers such as The New York Times and The Washington
Post.
The 9/11 Emergency and Instant Experts
Thus radical professors sought to use their newly asserted expertise to
indoctrinate and radicalize as many students and faculty as they could;
especially students. [1] Students were ?too conservative,? said some; the
tragic demise of the ideals of 60?s radicalism was at hand, thought others.
This crisis called for action.
In one department at a large public university a professor of American
business history took it upon himself to organize a "teach-in" with some other
professors--most of whom had no particular knowledge or expertise that made
them logical choices for this. Meanwhile, faculty members who did have such
knowledge, including specialists on foreign affairs, Islamic history,
political theory, and military and diplomatic history, were not asked to
participate; they were expected to attend and be indoctrinated like everyone
else. This event was well- advertised throughout the university, thus
insulting genuine experts who should have been in charge of the whole thing,
given their qualifications and knowledge. The qualification for leadership
here was leftist ideology, not substantive knowledge of the issues and
relevant fields.
Another example: a professor of 17th c. British history organized a panel on
American foreign policy and Afghanistan. He was no expert on the subject, but
considered himself qualified to organize and choose a panel of speakers who
all belonged to the "No Blood for Oil" antiwar school of thought. Their
analysis of the crisis of radical Islamists, terrorism, Osama bin Laden,
Afghanistan and the Middle East etc. revolved around one idea: that our
involvement in these problems was entirely and exclusively aimed at gaining
control of oil pipeline territories and oil. Not only was the political and
cultural analysis beyond poor, even the economics were wrong! (there was and
is now no oil pipeline in Afghanistan). Most of the audience, faculty and some
graduate students from the history and government and politics department, sat
quietly nodding in agreement. Only a few courageous souls dared to question
this analysis and its purported factual basis, and in so doing risked getting
the disapproval and contempt of the rest of the audience. Social pressure to
accept the teachings of the pseudo-experts as much as real experts was
evident. Challenging them was ?not cool.?
more @ http://www.frontpagemag.com/Articles/ReadArticle.asp?ID=19096
.
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: 9/11 for Dummies (also known as liberals)
- From: Questions .
- Re: 9/11 for Dummies (also known as liberals)
- Prev by Date: Re: Combating Radical Islam
- Next by Date: Cindy Sheehan: Commander in Grief
- Previous by thread: CNN
- Next by thread: Re: 9/11 for Dummies (also known as liberals)
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|
