All-seeing reader Fred Ray sends word of a down and dirty food fight at Rutgers over what Fred has termed “homophobic hoagies.” (Fred’s links: here and here.) As it happens, another loyal and perceptive reader who is quite familiar with Rutgers sent the same word (with links to here, here, and here) at about the same time, with the following on the scene comments:
Rutgers is famed far and wide for an assortment of so-called
Peretz and free speech:
Richard Marius took a leave of absence as director of Harvard University’s expository writing program to accept a $70,000 salary as a full-time speech writer to Vice President Al Gore beginning July 24. Marius, who previously had written speeches for Gore, was all set to depart when another sometime Gore speech writer, multimillionaire New Republic (and former Ramparts magazine) publisher Martin Peretz, got wind of the appointment and reportedly told Gore Marius was “an anti-Semite.” Peretz cited Marius’ comparison of the Israeli domestic security service, Shin Bet, with its Nazi equivalent, the Gestapo, in a book review Marius had written for the Harvard alumni magazine. Without further explanation, Marius was told by Gore communications director Lorraine Voles on July 9 that he had been “unhired.” The turnaround time was so quick that Marius had time to be reinstated in the fall teaching schedule at Harvard. Peretz, noted for extreme pro-Israel views, was Gore’s tutor at Harvard and, when Gore spoke at 1994 Harvard commencement exercises, Peretz gave a reception in his Cambridge, MA home in the vice president’s honor. (See “Other Voices,” p. 117.)
Washington Report on Middle East Affairs: http://www.washington-report.org/backissues/0995/9509086.htm
John – It is time for you to find another hero. This guy is the personification of identity politics and thin skinedness. It will be interesting to see him weigh in, hypocritically of course, on the Summers controversy. I am sure he will eloquently demonize Summers detractors.
James, I am glad that you could find a favorable opinion of Jimmy Carter as a diplomat. However, there are more than a few folks who would disagree with you. See http://www.nationalreview.com/20may02/nordlinger052002.asp “> here and here and here and the list goes on and on.
Also since you go out of your way to criticize Israel, I find it more than a little strange that your
What bothers me most about this story is that no mention is made of what the food truck operators said when they were asked by offended students to alter the signs. Nor is there mention of the subsequent letters-to-the-editor, campus posters, petitions, rallies, protests, boycotts, and so forth, all intended to influence other students and the truck owners rather than the university administration. Perhaps the proprietors are homophobes, racists, and sexists, but more likely is that they are capitalists who would have voluntarily changed the signs if they’d found themselves losing business.
Sorry, the comment above was posted in the wrong thread. I have reposted it in the correct thread.
Richard
I do not, as you say, “go out of my way” to criticize Israel. I just think that it is somewhat bizarre for the Jewish-American editor of an influential magazine that consistently demonstrates a rabid, pro-Israeli bias to criticize the “identity politics” of black leaders like Jesse Jackson. It is even more bizarre when you consider that in the wake of the 9/11 attacks on NY/DC he made this astonishing statement of ethnic identification,
James:
I support Israel over those who want to kill most of her citizens. To you, that makes me rabid. Furthermore, if I am Jewish as well, then to you that means I am engaging in “identity politics”.
This is nonsense. If I wanted Jews to live in special dorms and receive special privileges, and if I insisted that every task at which Jews did poorly was rigged — THAT would be identity politics.
LTEC
Excuse my ignorance but I am somewhat at a loss. When did I accuse YOU, or anyone else who opposes terrorism against Israeli citizens, of engaging in identity politics.
You did not realize it, but your post is particularly revealing.
Peretz’s support of Israeli extends far beyond basic statements against terrorism, and you know it. Consider this statement by Marty, our friend who is beyond race:
The Palestinians will have their state, the first polity of their own in history, the second state to have been birthed by Zionism. There will be separate states, not interlaced states, making their own economic ways in the world. I suspect the Palestinians will make a mess of it, like their cousins in the rest of the Arab world. Perhaps the Saudis will help them. Or the Europeans, who have such strong views on what Israel should risk. It won’t be Israel’s responsibility. And it won’t be America’s. Bill Clinton won’t get the Nobel Peace Prize. So what?
John,
Sorry, but this thread was already hijacked. I apologize for contributing to the heist.
James,
I just think that it is somewhat bizarre for the Jewish-American editor of an influential magazine that consistently demonstrates a rabid, pro-Israeli bias to criticize the “identity politics” of black leaders like Jesse Jackson. It is even more bizarre when you consider that in the wake of the 9/11 attacks on NY/DC he made this astonishing statement of ethnic identification,
Michelle –
It is not I who introduced the issue of Peretz’s ethnicity. As many long time readers of TNR know, he regularly invokes his religious background in explaining his political positions. Consider the first two sentences of a recent Peretz column:
Like many American Jews, I was brought up to believe that if I pulled the Republican lever on the election machine my right hand would wither and, as the Psalmist says, my tongue would cleave to the roof of my mouth.According to the Bible, of course, these are the feared consequences of forgetting Jerusalem. Now although there are many reasons one might want to vote for John F. Kerry, remembering Jerusalem
James, I take your point, but it doesn’t really explain the “rabid,” does it? Would you call the Rainbow Coalition “rabidly pro-minority”? I hope not.
Also,
the Jewish-American editor of an influential magazine that consistently demonstrates a rabid, pro-Israeli bias
means that it’s not just Peretz, but TNR that froths at the mouth in support of Israel. If you have no objection to, say,
the Latino editor of an influential magazine that consistently demonstrates a rabid, pro-Mexican bias,”
by all means continue to talk like this.
Michelle
Point taken. Rabid was not an appropriate choice of words. I apologize to anyone who was offended. However, I will point out that Peretz, and others at TNR, are not shy about using intemperate language to describe black politicians:
Exhibit A – jesse jackson = “hustler”
Exhibit B – Leon W on Cornel West’s scholarship = “almost completely worthless
I thought the Rutgers food story was amusing. I thought that this bout of free enterpise exemplified by these grease trucks had always been a godsend to students repulsed by the food served by the sinecured concessionaires in the universities. I wish I experienced something like this when I was in college. i understand that Temple University over there at Philly has something like this. Now one might ask if someone might have the nerve to call a sandwich a “honky ” or a “nigger ” sandwich . Maybe that is a name that is far more risky for people to use than calling a sandwich with the adjective of ” fat ” before it. We can probably guess that the names originated from the student themselves. I mean it is much faster for a student to call a sandwich a Fat Italian rather than describing it as ” I want a sandwich with 3 slices of salami ( presumably thick ), and a slice of pepperoni on it plus 3 tomato wedges, onions, pepper and salt, plus 3 Parmesano Reggiano cheese slices on it, plus a drizzle of olive oil etc. “. In terms of ease and efficiency you can guess how this terms came into common usage when ordering sandwiches from the Rutgers grease trucks. i am more of the opinion that this has more to do with educating the Rutgers students than using the sledgehammer threat of shutting down the grease trucks. How about giving these sandwiches a new name on a paper tape covering the blocked out names ?
I am sorry I caused the thread to be hijacked. However, I am more sorry that I was not reading the thread to respond to James. James is out of the Pat Buchanan School of politics. He was deliberately provoking the people on this site to get a particular response from us. He used every code word at his disposal to challenge and insult us. It appears that for someone of his ilk he get perverse pleasure from antagonizing people enough so that they will finally call him an anti-Semite. At that point he will let them have it with both barrels accusing them of dual loyalty/disloyalty to the US. To his immense astonishment nobody rose to the bait. I guess he will have to find another website to show his special “love” for Jews.
By the way, Michelle, your comments were magnificent. I am sure that you really upset him with your calm factual responses.
Now, this story is funny. These kids don’t know what they are getting themselves into. If they were old enough to think of what is in store for them when they enter the workforce, they’d be less enthusiastic about getting rid of the Fat Filipino. (By the way, having spent 20 years within a Filipino family, I can tell you that Filipinos love ethnic humor… in particularly humor that sticks a fork in Filipinos.)
The kids are busy creating what Henry Miller called “The Air Conditioned Nightmare.” Once they enter the workforce, they will be suffocated by the very hyper-sensivity they sought to create at school.
One group takes offense, and it’s enough to take away everybody’s fun. Yup, that’s the way it works in the contemporary office. And, the political discussions and controversy are also banned. Yes, LGB&Ts (is this some sort of sandwich?), you are building your own prison. This group of people must be roundly hated by every fun loving kid on campus. Sooner or later, some pissed off kid will get tired of all the moral posturing and sock an LGB&T in the chin, and then we’ll have an instance of hate crime, won’t we?
leo brings up some great points. Also, I had thought that gays had “hijacked” terms like the “d” word and the “q” word, etc. to prevent denigration. And blacks too frequently refer to themselves as the “N” word.
Just don’t dare name a late-night bad-health sandwich after those terms, however! You might be referred to mandatory sensitivity training!
Jeez John — if you’re gonna post about supposed “insensitive” terminology, you gotta have a less restrictive comment policy on the usage of said terms! I had to edit my previous comment three times in order to have it pass your “language filter.” :-)
Dave – I don’t think I have a sensitive language filter, per se. I think what causes these problems is that I have added so much stuff to my Movable Type Blacklist using wildcards. Thus, “.+cialis.+” blocks just about ever spam mention of cialis, but it also, unintentionally, blocks terms like “racialist,” which I tried to use, socialist, etc. I fixed that one, but there are no doubt others. When you get blocked send me the comment by email and I’ll try to figure out what’s doing it.
Richard-
Your ad hominem attack on me leaves me perpelxed. I merely pointed out that it was strange for John to cite a quote from Peretz criticizing ethnic identity politics when Peretz himself regularly engages in such politics. As evidence for my assertion, I cited several Peretz quotes where he invokes the responsibilites of his Jewish identity to support various policy positions. I guess my question for you is: Are provocative speech and ethnic identity politics only appropriate when they are advanced in the name of certain chosen groups and not others?
Oh, dear, I’ve fallen behind again.
James,
Point taken. Rabid was not an appropriate choice of words. I apologize to anyone who was offended.
I doubt anyone was “offended,” James; “amused” is more like it. Had you made your case calmly and without the fangs and the, er, excess saliva, there was some chance people would’ve read it with interest. And even now I’ll try.
However, I will point out that Peretz, and others at TNR, are not shy about using intemperate language to describe black politicians:
Exhibit A – jesse jackson = “hustler”
Exhibit B – Leon W on Cornel West’s scholarship = “almost completely worthless
OK, a few points here:
(1) Cornel West is not a “black politician.”
(2) Jesse Jackson is not exactly a “black politician” either (at least, he’s never held an elective office, so far as I know), but I suppose failed Presidential candidates do count.
(3) Is Jackson a “hustler”? I suppose that’s a term of art, so I can’t really say. But my impression is that he’s spent the last couple decades threatening discrimination lawsuits against large corporations and getting them to settle rather than fight the cases. And because corporations very often do prefer to settle cases rather than fight them when it looks like the fight is going to be expensive in money and costly in bad publicity (whether they win or lose), there’s no way to know whether Jackson’s plaintiffs had a valid cause of action or not.
(4) Cornel West hasn’t, so far as I know, produced very much in the way of useful scholarship. If you know otherwise, please tell me where I can find it, because I would be genuinely interested.
Oh, and is “Leon W” Leon Wieseltier, and were we all just supposed to know that?
Michelle
From Merriam Webster Online Dictionary:
http://www.m-w. com
rabid – 1 a : extremely violent : FURIOUS b : going to extreme lengths in expressing or pursuing a feeling, interest, or opinion
Again, I apologize for the use of the word if anyone was offended. However, based upon the definition given by M-W, I belive my use of rabid was well within the bounds of civil discourse.
As to Mr. West’scholarship:
see: http://www.manningmarable.net/works/jul02b.html
“In the Spring 2002 issue of The Journal of Blacks in Higher Education published a detailed analysis of Cornel West
James,
Then you would have no problem with
the Latino editor of an influential magazine that consistently demonstrates a rabid, pro-Mexican bias,”
would you? I mean, if “rabid” means nothing more than extreme passion in expressing an opinion?
Sorry, but stuff Merriam-Webster. If I told you that hundreds of thousands of Shia rabidly celebrated their long-banned highest feast yesterday, would you take it as merely my value-neutral compliment to their intensity of faith?
Re Cornel West, “number of citations” is a familiar way of gauging scholarly importance, true. But when I look at what West has actually published in the last fifteen years or so, I don’t see a lot of scholarly activity in there. (That, as I recall, was one of Wieseltier’s complaints.) At
http://www.pragmatism.org/library/west/west_bibliography.htm
there is what appears to be a fairly up-to-date bibliography (it’s headed by a book from 2004). Note that almost all the recent books are works geared towards a general readership, anthologies that West edited or co-edited, or both.
I don’t trust frequency of citation as a measure of scholarly activity when the person in question is one who set out deliberately to be a “public intellectual.” I’d hazard a guess that Susan Sontag and Norman Mailer are footnoted something like as often, and for the same reasons — that is, as “public intellectuals” rather than as scholars.
There is nothing wrong with being a “public intellectual” (well, OK, there is, but I don’t want to get into that right now); but a top professor at a top university is more or less expected to put out an actual scholarly work now and then. I don’t wonder Summers was irritated with him.
Michelle-
Leon’s criticism of West was not based on his lack of recent scholarly activity. Keep in mind that Leon’s scathing critique was published 10 years ago. Rather, Leon called the man scholarly’s work “almost worthless” because he disagreed with it. Leon W is not a scholar (he failed to complete his PHD at Harvard), and has never published a SINGLE paper in a scholarly, peer reviewed journal. The arrogance!!!
And you criticize me for my use of the word rabid.
Unfortunately, he is the literary editor of one of the most influential magazines in the world. Let’s examine the effect of his biased hack job on West:
see: http://slate.msn.com/id/1003998/
“I must admit to being poorly disposed toward West, mainly on the basis of a devastating critique in the New Republic by Leon Wieseltier that appeared in year 1995. In a long review-essay, Wieseltier demolished West’s stature as a “public intellectual,” portraying him as a pretentious egomaniac, a mass of contradictions, and a superficial thinker who dresses up diluted Marxism in incomprehensible phraseology. An obvious column idea suggested itself: Bradley’s guru is much wackier than Gore’s.
Then I read some of West’s writings. While he certainly can be eccentric, solipsistic, and turgid, at his best moments West is shrewd, courageous, and inspirational. I remain ambivalent about his work, but it is certainly not, as Wieseltier asserts “almost completely worthless.” It doesn’t trouble me at all that West is advising Bradley. In fact, it makes me respect Bradley, for openly engaging a self-described socialist who may prove a big political liability to his campaign, mainly because he finds him insightful and stimulating.”
James,
Re “rabid,” all I’m saying is that pretending you didn’t mean it pejoratively is silly. If I were to say that you are a rabid defender of Cornel West, how would you take it?
Re West, you ought not to encourage others to go read Weisberg’s piece in Slate. The ending about sums it up:
I’d be alarmed if West were drafting Bradley’s policy positions. But for the role of spiritual guru to a candidate with a charisma deficit, he seems like just the guy.
Does that sound like a defense of West’s scholarly work to you? Or indeed like an endorsement for one of the top jobs at one of the top universities in the country?
And while I’m sure TNR will be grateful for your calling it “one of the most influential magazines in the world,” that’s just, um, ridiculous. (And I say that as one whose general politics coincide with TNR’s better than they do with any other political zine’s I know.)
Michelle –
This will be my last post on this thread and I’ll let you have the last word. But before we leave, I just wanted to return to my original point:
1. Why on earth would M. Peretz cap a critique of liberalism and identity politics by praising George Bush “as the first president who apparently does not see individual people in racial categories or sex categories” when much of the man’s own political beliefs and activism (as evidenced in the quotes I cited)are built around his religious identity.
That is hypocrisy at its worst. It is amazing to me that John, and many others who post on this blog, can not see this obvious contradiction.
No, James, you have the last word. I couldn’t possibly comment.
Actual, I will have the last word.
Your ad hominem attack on me leaves me perpelxed.
Well you are in luck James. Moses Maimonides has written a book called a Guide to the Perplexed. But somehow I don