Strengthening Constitutional Self-Government

No Left Turns

The Anarchist’s Bookfair Stars Ward Churchill

San Francisco recently hosted the Anarachist Bookfair. Ward Churchill was the star attraction, though freeing the Unabomber seems a priority among the Anarchists in attendance. Ward Churchill blasted the country in which he lives, comparing it to Nazi Germany and those who support Bush to big and little Eichmanns. Tip of the hat to ’Little Green Footballs.’

As Congressman Traficant used to say: ’Beam me up, Scotty.’

Discussions - 14 Comments

Please, God, no more Ward Curchill. When is he planning to drink the Koolaid?

Churchill is not a freak.

G.M.

No, not a freak. Just a misunderstood man, who, when given the opportunity to clarify his statements in a non-inflamatory manner, didn’t get it. Just as anyone’s opinion is valid and needs validation, one must understand that your statements may be offensive and those who are offended deserve their time to be heard as well.

The guy is a freak and moron. An ad hominem attack is very appropriate in this case.

I’m also enjoying how the anarchists organize events, invite speakers, have organized booths, and generally acting like technocratic cogs in the machine and are little Eichmanns who bought into the consumerist bourgeois society. Not to mention, most of them look alike and are the world’s biggest conformists to each other.

Do these morons REALLY want the triumph of anarchism? Do they really want a state of nature in which life is "poor, nasty, brutish, and short"? Or, are they foolish enough to think if they brought down the corporations and government, thereby undermining all protections of rights and prosperity, that all people are going to love each other like some kind of John Lennon fantasy?

If Churchill like anarchy so much, he won’t mind if Univ of Colorado pays him in jelly beans instead of money. The contraditions and absurdities are too much . . .

Anarchist’s bookfair. What a quaint idea. Is it all orderly, people waiting in line to purchase books binded in orderly factories, protected by laws and peace? Or can the strong go in there and take what they want?


Where were the Free Republic people or other conservative demonstrators?

Churchill, this vile excrescence, should be unable to appear in public anywhere in America without hostile demonstrators to witness against him.

No, Churchill shouldn’t be able to appear anywhere in public without a laugh track to accompany him.


I disagree. Churchill’s insane rantings are no laughing matter. Laughter is usually the wrong response to these people. They should be ignored only in the sense that no one should listen to them or attempt a futile "dialogue" with them (a la Sean Hannity). The productive response is not a "laugh track," but a vehement, public, ongoing denunciation of their views and words.

There is a fight here, whether we like it or not. If one side chooses not to fight, the other side wins, no matter how crazy it may be.

Argument honors Churchill’s positions, and implicitly elevates them to the status of discourse worthy of a response. Ridicule denigrates, and is a far more effective weapon against fanatics. Do you argue with some ding- dong standing on the corner of a busy street holding a sign saying "THE END IS NEAR?" Of course not, it just draws attention to the wing nut.


Churchill is a man who plaigarizes not only academic work, but even art projects, who claims to be an indian when he is not, and who dresses and comports himself like the worst of the early seventies warmed over for 3 long decades. He is howlingly funny. If he was not real, Tom Wolfe would have to create him! I respectfully submit that you are confusing taking seriously those principles which you hold dear and which Churchill affronts (and I understand and respect that), with taking Churchill himself seriously.


That Churchill has been given aid and comfort by taxpayer funded institutions is NOT a laughing matter - your deliberate effort and concerted argument would be best reserved for the otherwise sane people who hired and promoted this bozo. As to Churchill himself - make him a punchline. No one quite recovers from that. Heard much out of the Hollywood crowd after their brutal lampooning in Team America, World Police?

Churchill is not a freak. There are too many like him, so he is not unusual enough to be freak. And his tendency to plagiarize makes me wonder who is really responsible for the "little Eichmann" comments.

I never said we should argue with Churchill in any way. He is utterly unworthy of this, and an attempt to argue with him would only lend credibility to his position among unthinking people.

I said we should denounce him. The purpose of denunciation is to build and sharpen public contempt for the target. It is utterly different from any form of dialogue, in which at a minimum some respect must be shown.

We must denounce Churchill in terms so clear and uncompromising that it’s clear to everyone that we give him not the slightest shred of credence or respect.

This is a far cry, though, from simply laughing him off -- a lazy, ineffective response, and a copout. Churchill is not a buffoon but a vicious extremist, and laughter is never an appropriate response to such people.

Mr Frisk,

I suggest you re-read "Radical Chic." There is nothing lazy about well crafted ridicule.

wm


That is different from trying to laugh someone off. If the message of contempt is clear enough and contains something of substance, I’d agree that it can be made funny without defeating its political purpose, and perhaps even helping that purpose. But the contempt has to be clear.

I doubt that humor, as such, reaches in these situations very far beyond clued-in elites.

I am part of a clued in elite. Hurrah! You have made my day! :)

Leave a Comment

* denotes a required field
 

No TrackBacks
TrackBack URL: http://nlt.ashbrook.org/movabletype/mt-tb.cgi/6316