the politics of knowledge: middle east studies edition
I haven't said anything about the horrific events in Iraq (and Palestine, and Lebanon) these recent few weeks, because I have no idea what is worth saying.
But there are a lot of people in this country who do have something valuable to say-and once again, some of them are coming under politically-motivated attack for teaching, writing, and rabble-rousing about it. For the past several years, right-wing pundits and organizations have levelled sustained and grevious criticisms against the academic community of Middle Eastern Studies scholars, accusing them (us) of academic illegitimacy, anti-Americanism, and worse. I've only touched upon the issue obliquely on this blog--partly because most of the worst recent rounds of it (the MEALAC/David Project affair, the creation of Campus Watch, the attempt to legislate political oversight committees for Title VI funding) happened before I'd started Verbal Privilege, so I was raising hell via mailing-lists and letters-to-the-editor instead.
But a new wave of this bullshit has arisen, and once again, it's manifesting as an attempt to destroy people's careers. The two newest targets are Wadie Said (Edward Said's son) who is being considered for a position at Wayne State University's Law School; and Nadia Abu El Haj, a Barnard/Columbia anthropologist whose tenure candidacy is under siege. Inside Higher Ed has an overview; here's another piece on the Said case--which is particularly disturbing because the instigators all but admit their ire against Said is largely based on the fact that he's his father's son, and nothing else. The MES-haters lost their favorite target with Said's death; they seem to have transfered their invective not only to his intellectual heirs but to his flesh-and-blood ones as well. In Abu El-Haj's case, criticism of her book Facts on the Ground has erupted into a Campus Watch-led attempt to influence her tenure prospects; Barnard President Judith Sharpiro has had to step in with a letter reminding alumnae that tenure decisions should be made on the basis of academic merit, not politics.
These attacks have a debilitiating effect on the ability and willingness of scholars knowledgeable about the Middle East to reach out to the public and share their knowledge and perspectives at a time when such outreach is utterly crucial. It's clear to me from conversations with colleagues that this has had a chilling effect, especially on grad students and young, untenured academics--the difference between the UK (where I did my grad work in the field) and the US feels striking. People are less likely to give a public seminar, talk to a newspaper, write a non-pseudnymous blog, appear on local television, etc. when they're afraid of being branded disloyal or anti-Semitic if they object to US or Israeli policy. This is, of course, precisely what the likes of Campus Watch desire--the self-policing silence of a group of people who have the resources to make an informed effort to counter the foolish "conventional wisdom" and general poverty of knowledge about Islam and the Middle East that warp public discourse in America and prevent policy change. It's no accident that a wave of such attacks coincided with the outspoken opposition of most MENA scholars to the Iraq war in 2002-3.
(on a related note, Abu Aardvark's recent comments on why so few younger MENA scholars blog are relevant; this is clearly part of the reason, in addition to general academic-career paranoia. For all my worries about blogging-whilst-employed, perhaps I should fear more for the fate of this blog when I return to the ivory tower?)
Anyway, for quite some time I've believed we--the broadly-construed academic community concerned with MENA/the Islamic world--should go on the offensive and make the case for what we do, for the validity of our perspectives, and challenge the likes of David Horowitz and Campus Watch more openly. Last year at MESA there was quite a bit of talk about routes forward; this year (alas, I couldn't attend) it seems to have borne fruit.
Juan Cole (whose offer of a position at Yale was most likely derailed by such a campaign) has a post-MESA post about a new way to do so. MESA's Committee on Academic Freedom in the Middle East and North Africa (CAFMENA, which has taken up the cause of Turkish intellectuals prosecuted under Article 301, Iraqi professors murdered in Baghdad; liberal faculty members purged from Iranian campuses, and many others) is expanding its brief to include academic freedom issues in the United States. He suggests you give them some money; I concur. But more importantly, seek out good sources of alternative perspectives on the Middle East yourself, encourage others to read them, and support the academics, writers, policywallahs, activists, journalists and filmmakers trying to break down the walls of ignorance.
[nota bene: although none of my close friends or mentors have been subjected to these attacks--yet--I have had professional interestions as an editor with several of the targets of recent years, and am friends with students/advisees of some of the others. while many of these people certainly have strong political views, sometimes undiplomatically expressed, I have always found their academic work to be sound and enriching.]
But there are a lot of people in this country who do have something valuable to say-and once again, some of them are coming under politically-motivated attack for teaching, writing, and rabble-rousing about it. For the past several years, right-wing pundits and organizations have levelled sustained and grevious criticisms against the academic community of Middle Eastern Studies scholars, accusing them (us) of academic illegitimacy, anti-Americanism, and worse. I've only touched upon the issue obliquely on this blog--partly because most of the worst recent rounds of it (the MEALAC/David Project affair, the creation of Campus Watch, the attempt to legislate political oversight committees for Title VI funding) happened before I'd started Verbal Privilege, so I was raising hell via mailing-lists and letters-to-the-editor instead.
But a new wave of this bullshit has arisen, and once again, it's manifesting as an attempt to destroy people's careers. The two newest targets are Wadie Said (Edward Said's son) who is being considered for a position at Wayne State University's Law School; and Nadia Abu El Haj, a Barnard/Columbia anthropologist whose tenure candidacy is under siege. Inside Higher Ed has an overview; here's another piece on the Said case--which is particularly disturbing because the instigators all but admit their ire against Said is largely based on the fact that he's his father's son, and nothing else. The MES-haters lost their favorite target with Said's death; they seem to have transfered their invective not only to his intellectual heirs but to his flesh-and-blood ones as well. In Abu El-Haj's case, criticism of her book Facts on the Ground has erupted into a Campus Watch-led attempt to influence her tenure prospects; Barnard President Judith Sharpiro has had to step in with a letter reminding alumnae that tenure decisions should be made on the basis of academic merit, not politics.
These attacks have a debilitiating effect on the ability and willingness of scholars knowledgeable about the Middle East to reach out to the public and share their knowledge and perspectives at a time when such outreach is utterly crucial. It's clear to me from conversations with colleagues that this has had a chilling effect, especially on grad students and young, untenured academics--the difference between the UK (where I did my grad work in the field) and the US feels striking. People are less likely to give a public seminar, talk to a newspaper, write a non-pseudnymous blog, appear on local television, etc. when they're afraid of being branded disloyal or anti-Semitic if they object to US or Israeli policy. This is, of course, precisely what the likes of Campus Watch desire--the self-policing silence of a group of people who have the resources to make an informed effort to counter the foolish "conventional wisdom" and general poverty of knowledge about Islam and the Middle East that warp public discourse in America and prevent policy change. It's no accident that a wave of such attacks coincided with the outspoken opposition of most MENA scholars to the Iraq war in 2002-3.
(on a related note, Abu Aardvark's recent comments on why so few younger MENA scholars blog are relevant; this is clearly part of the reason, in addition to general academic-career paranoia. For all my worries about blogging-whilst-employed, perhaps I should fear more for the fate of this blog when I return to the ivory tower?)
Anyway, for quite some time I've believed we--the broadly-construed academic community concerned with MENA/the Islamic world--should go on the offensive and make the case for what we do, for the validity of our perspectives, and challenge the likes of David Horowitz and Campus Watch more openly. Last year at MESA there was quite a bit of talk about routes forward; this year (alas, I couldn't attend) it seems to have borne fruit.
Juan Cole (whose offer of a position at Yale was most likely derailed by such a campaign) has a post-MESA post about a new way to do so. MESA's Committee on Academic Freedom in the Middle East and North Africa (CAFMENA, which has taken up the cause of Turkish intellectuals prosecuted under Article 301, Iraqi professors murdered in Baghdad; liberal faculty members purged from Iranian campuses, and many others) is expanding its brief to include academic freedom issues in the United States. He suggests you give them some money; I concur. But more importantly, seek out good sources of alternative perspectives on the Middle East yourself, encourage others to read them, and support the academics, writers, policywallahs, activists, journalists and filmmakers trying to break down the walls of ignorance.
[nota bene: although none of my close friends or mentors have been subjected to these attacks--yet--I have had professional interestions as an editor with several of the targets of recent years, and am friends with students/advisees of some of the others. while many of these people certainly have strong political views, sometimes undiplomatically expressed, I have always found their academic work to be sound and enriching.]
posted by kitabet at 6:51 PM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home