Ward Churchill is a fraud and traitor and I am a fellow fraud and traitor. Don't take my word for it--ask the Jakester.
1 comment:
Anonymous
said...
Ah, I see that that Horowitz's patriotically-correct police have caught up with you. We have ways of dealing with you tenured terrorists!
Seriously, though, Horowitz seems to be acting rather erratically these days. I'll begin by saying that Horowitz is, one-on-one, a pleasant and quite normal guy; his political beliefs, however, have always been radical and conspiratorial, whether he was hanging with the Black Panthers or with the Red Staters. They've gotten worse over the last few years, possibly triggered by Horowitz's belief that he was slighted by the Academy and by the publishing industry. (Perhaps ironically, the book that he had trouble getting published, "Uncivil Wars," is one of his better pieces, though its subject matter -- basically a long discursion on how his anti-reparations tour was reacted to by lefty campus activists -- was doomed to make it a 'pass' in the publishing world.)
Horowitz's politics are, I think, driven by the personal, whether it's responding to imagined or actual slights, or the result of talking to too many people with fringe identities. He's prone to taking extreme positions, and encouraging others to do the same. Yet he's not someone who can't be reasoned with, if someone's willing to take the time and effort.
Those who follow him, however, are often a different kettle of fish. I can hardly make grammatical, let alone rhetoric or logical, sense of Jakester's post. Hopefully you won't hear from too many of them.
1 comment:
Ah, I see that that Horowitz's patriotically-correct police have caught up with you. We have ways of dealing with you tenured terrorists!
Seriously, though, Horowitz seems to be acting rather erratically these days. I'll begin by saying that Horowitz is, one-on-one, a pleasant and quite normal guy; his political beliefs, however, have always been radical and conspiratorial, whether he was hanging with the Black Panthers or with the Red Staters. They've gotten worse over the last few years, possibly triggered by Horowitz's belief that he was slighted by the Academy and by the publishing industry. (Perhaps ironically, the book that he had trouble getting published, "Uncivil Wars," is one of his better pieces, though its subject matter -- basically a long discursion on how his anti-reparations tour was reacted to by lefty campus activists -- was doomed to make it a 'pass' in the publishing world.)
Horowitz's politics are, I think, driven by the personal, whether it's responding to imagined or actual slights, or the result of talking to too many people with fringe identities. He's prone to taking extreme positions, and encouraging others to do the same. Yet he's not someone who can't be reasoned with, if someone's willing to take the time and effort.
Those who follow him, however, are often a different kettle of fish. I can hardly make grammatical, let alone rhetoric or logical, sense of Jakester's post. Hopefully you won't hear from too many of them.
Post a Comment