I was one who believed that Bollinger could have chosen his words a little better. A little.

But Dabashi here does his best to make Bollinger seem a little closer to target, albeit unwittingly.

One gets the feeling that A-jad picked up the phone upon landing in Iran, called Dabashi, and asked him:

"Why don't you pass the time with a game of solitaire?"
 

Clever, SE2.

Extraordinary that he accuses Bollinger of wrapping his message in "the missionary position." That's like a zero entendre or something.

I was a little concerned to see that Bollinger passed on the very specious accusations about Iran's military involvement in Iraq (supplying weapons and so on). These have been debunked time and again.

Missionary-Positioned Eagle
 

The rhetoric is overboard, and the words not artful, but I don't think adding the charge of racism to the criticism of Bollinger's gratuitous personalized attack is completely off the mark.
 

11:49,

Why not say why not?
 

Because the racial tinge to the situation is obvious and open, and Bollinger's failure to be diplomatic in his tone and choice of words thus reflects more than just a failure to be appropriately polite. This is where RB's post re physical appearances perhaps become quite astute. Bollinger is literally the picture of WASP plentitude -- tall, blonde, good-looking. A-jad -- a short, swarthy, Arab -- is, rather obviously, his racial opposite. When one thinks of their interchange, Bollinger almost comes off like a bully, not a little because of these atmospherics. Does that mean Bollinger should have pulled his punches? No. But it means he might have thought twice about mounting a gratuitously personal attack (as opposed to a neutral statement of opposition to A-jad's ideas). The racial backdrop here means that there was a power imbalance Bollinger should have recognized and "spoken to". That he did not do so laid him open to the kind of charge this professor is making.
 

"the racial tinge to the situation is obvious and open"

Where?

(and btw, as the litigant in Grutter and Gratz, Bollinger has a fair claim on being the least racist person in higher ed, in effect if not in intent)

"Bollinger is literally the picture of WASP plenitude."

I think that in this sentence by 'plenitude' you mean 'affluence,' by WASP you mean 'Jewish,'* and by 'literally' you mean 'figuratively.'

If you've got any paper around that needs weighting down maybe you should consider consider an alternate purpose to which your keyboard could be put. Alternatively, if you've got a chalkboard nearby you could drag your nails across it, upload the resulting sound, and more economically achieve the same effect as your substance-free allegation of racism in the quintessential tableau of open discourse, two people on a dais with a lectern.

Catty Eagle


*according to Ed Koch
 

True enough, SE. Also, I think, by "Arab" this poor fellow means "Persian."
 

Is Bollinger *literally* caucasian? Is he *literally* taller than A-jad? Is he *literally* possessed of all the quintessential attributes of a First World eminence? Then I would say the racial tinge is "oepn and obvious", because A-jad is not caucasion, is short and is most clearly not a man of the world. Note too that I didn't actually claim Bollinger's a racist, rather that he ignored the racial overtones of the situation. The fact that you think his stated positions automatically make him non-racist is thus irrelevant. I think you may be focusing too much on what people say and too little on how things can be perceived. A sensitivity to the atmospherics might have led Bollinger to tune his remarks differently. Had he been speaking to some Dutch or German rightist politican, I for one would have been more comfortable with the aggressively patronizing tone.
 

On further consideration, you're right. Tall people should be more thoughtful.

Stooping to conquer,

Sarcastic Eagle


(nice pun on 'stooping' there, for those who know the original meaning of the word)
 

Or perhaps you mean "swooping," Eagle?
 

Or perhaps you're a great raging boor.

(Nice pun there, eh?)
 

STOOP

4 a archaic : to move down from a height : alight b: to fly or dive down swiftly usually to attack prey
 

Mr. Dabashi's comments are simply the view of an offended Iranian citizen or former citizen I do not know this professor's emigration status. I do believe however that inviting a declared denier of the death of millions of Jews during world war II, to speak on the grounds of Columbia University was crossing that line that not even the first ammendment giv es anyone. Reading the world news, the lack of respect for authority begining with the respect that many media organizations give President Bush I don't find it unusal. If anyone studied civilizations they have a trajectory of lasting just about 500 years. We are engaging into a path of self- destruction based on our own love for freedom according to our establised mores. Our civilization will also go down into history. What will start killing all of us slowly is an overdose of "Democracy". Democracy with no boundaries is not democracy.
 

Perhaps President Bollinger should take a serious interest in the activities of their Center for Middle Eastern Studies.
 

Yeah, and it's lack of respect for nit-witted authority that always causes the decline in civilizations, -- right?
 

SE, 3:57 may be your best egg yet - hard boiled and well salted.

3:40/4:57, there is no vacuum here wherein to apply your silly code. A-jad's denials of the Holocaust, homosexuality, the subjugation of women in Iran, etc. would come across just as ugly in the absence of visual media, disembodied on the radio. Your precious "racial backdrop" falls away in the presence of such loud ignorance. It should anyway.

Sometimes an idiot is just an idiot. As Richard likes to say, such comments may give us more insight into you than your accused (Bollinger).
 

Let's not get too ugly while the cat's away. Richard's principle of only posting what you would be happy enough to have your name put to is also a good one.
One of the good things about this blog is its relative civility.

This though mainly to lament the recent loss. Suddenly the pitching looks less deep.
 

Perhaps, RT, and I share your sorrow tonight - though just to be clear, A-jad was my idiot, not the poster.
 

OK, SE2, I maybe jumped from 'silly' to 'idiot' too readily. I actually noticed a semiotic oddness about that event myself, partly the blacked-out stage to keep out any photographic record of the event with "Columbia University" logo in the background, as I think someone has noted. "Racism" doesn't do it, but it was an odd event. Otherwise I think your opener gets it: "I was one who believed that Bollinger could have chosen his words a little better. A little." And yes, Dabashi's writing is horrendously bad.
 

Two weeks after the event it is still unclear what the hell Bollinger and his colleagues were trying to accomplish with the event. Not sure they think too deeply over there.
 

I've heard a rumour that Columbia is planning a debate on Thug Rap. They're going to invite Fitty and a few of his homeys onstage. I believe Bollinger plans to make opening remarks addressing Fitty's demonstrated misogyny, non-NPRness, etc etc. If he calls him a "little bitch" -- the rough Street equivalent of his welcome to A-jad -- I hope he's wearing better armour than our GIs.
 

This is what smart University Presidents do. Anyone listening in at Columbia or Harvard?

http://www.thecrimson.com/article.aspx?ref=520069
 

I'll tell you what smart university presidents do: they avoid getting caught doing a Larry Craig in the little boys room.