[lbo-talk] Inconvenient facts

Thomas Brown browntf at HAL.LAMAR.EDU
Sun Apr 3 13:30:31 PDT 2005


Luke wrote:
>Doug wrote:
>> Let me be clear about this. I think what you're doing stinks. I think
>> you're the very definition of an opportunist.
>
>I can't disagree. Brown's opporunistic timing was lamentable.

Please get the facts right. The accusations of research misconduct against Churchill predate the media firestorm. CU has ignored them for years. Just because you only recently heard about this doesn't mean that it wasn't cooking before.

Second, who isn't an opportunist? Is it really such a pejorative label? Aren't people who fail to take opportunities generally rather foolish?

Finally, think about what it means to be an "opportunist." Doesn't it imply that you get some reward for taking an opportunity? The notion that I'm going to get any career traction from this is absurd. Given the far-left bias in my field, it's going to hurt me if anything. And the right-wing media tycoons have yet to cut me a check.

I think what's happening here is that folks are beginning to realize that there is something depraved and bogus about a prominent figure on the left. Feeling betrayed, we seek to lash out. After all, criticism from the right could never be accurate, could it? No, there must be someone else to blame. So we kill the messenger.


>> I'm very focused on what I think is the major issue - the defense of
>>academic and intellectual freedom.
>
>Including the freedom to be a shoddy scholar so long as you line up on the
>right side? As Brown noted, scholarly freedom properly understood has
>already won out in this particular case.


>> Secondarily, they'd like to discredit the case for US genocide against
>>Indians, which is certainly, along with slavery, a
> >great foundational crime of this country. You're making that easier for
>>them too. So I don't give a fuck about whether the story > of a particular
>blanket is true or not.

Doug also doesn't care about getting the facts right in his own journalism, as evidenced by his "freedom index" manipulations.


>Other people do care. We call them "scholars."

Thank you. Some posters here don't seem to get that not everyone views the world in black and white, and that not everybody is motivated solely by politics.

Thomas

PS: I'm out of this thread for at least a few days. Later on y'all.



More information about the lbo-talk mailing list