When I read the Ward Churchill piece, I had to agree, especially about
the question period, that the man came across as a bit of a rhetorical
tyrant himself. And he didn't offer any apology for the Eichmann
comparison, nor a real explanation. Off-putting, indeed. But also in
comparison with the Bush gang, why is he so awful? They lie & lie & the
American people, on the whole, go along with it all. I note that
Condoleesa Rice has just sent a letter to the UN rejecting the UN
protocol on appeal rights, the latest in a long list of refusals there.
So I agree with Alison & Ann that there's trouble right here in....
And the real danger is not a silly hothead like him but the ever more
massed power of a right wing media launched against not only him but
anyone who dares to think outside the very small box they have erected
of 'patriotism' etc. Just look at who's been nominated to run Homeland
Security, the Patriot Act, etc. Sitting just a little North, weith an
administration pissed off at our refusal to get in line & do what they
want, is not very comfortable (you can imagine how many 'thinkers' are
telling us & our government that we should kiss ass if we want the
'good relationship' of trade etc to continue, & that, sadly, is a
powerful argument...
Ward Churchills don't help.
But of course, under the ideals on which the US was founded (do any of
these people remember those?) he should be allowed to speak.
Doug
Doug
Douglas Barbour
Department of English
University of Alberta
Edmonton Alberta T6G 2E5 Canada
(780) 436 3320
http://www.ualberta.ca/~dbarbour/dbhome.htm
Speech
is a mouth.
Robert Creeley
|