Re: [Marxism] Interesting comment on the Joel Kovel termination

[Louis Proyect <lnp3@xxxxxxxxx>]

Gary MacLennan wrote:
> My protest email to Botstein is bouncing around.  I wonder if the great
> "liberal" is feeling uder seige.  I certainly hope so.
> 

Gary (and anybody else), if it is worth sharing, please post it here. 
This is what one comrade wrote Botstein, btw:

Dear Mr Botstein,

I am writing you from Edinburgh, Scotland, to register my disgust and 
outrage at the political witchhunt against Joel Kovel responsible for 
his dismissal from Bard College. Joel is an internationally renowned 
champion of universal human rights, evidenced in his principled 
rejection of and opposition to Zionism, an ideology responsible for the 
ongoing crime against humanity that is Israel’s brutal oppression of the 
Palestinian people and the expropriation of their land and resources.

As both an academic and a human being you are a disgrace, deserving of 
every scintilla of the opprobrium that is sure to come your way from 
every corner of the globe over this egregious act. You can rest assured 
that whatever trace of a legacy you leave behind, it will be dwarfed by 
that left behind by Joel Kovel.

In the words of the Tibetan proverb: ‘Better to live one day as a tiger 
than a thousand years as a sheep’.

John Wight
Edinburgh
Scotland

---

Plus, this is a letter written by Noel Bush, a Bard graduate in 1996:

Subject: Where are your principles?
Date: Thu, 19 Feb 2009 14:19:04 +0100
From: Noel Bush <noel@xxxxxxxxxxx>
To: Leon Botstein <president@xxxxxxxx>

Leon,

I have been dismayed to learn about the forced retirement / termination
of Joel Kovel from Bard's faculty.  I will admit immediately that I was
not familiar with Kovel's work -- either on Zionism, eco-socialism, or
any other topic -- prior to learning about this incident.  But the root
of my outrage has nothing to do with Kovel's political views.

I think that anyone with respect for principles of intellectual freedom
and academic integrity would be troubled by what Kovel has written about
the circumstances of his termination from Bard.  As a believer in the
sanctity of open enquiry and the role of the academy in protecting the
same from political repression, I feel that you, as the representative
of Bard College, owe the world an explanation for the decision to
terminate Joel Kovel, given what he has claimed were its motivations.

I dearly hope that you will not hide behind claims of "employee
confidentiality".  I am not a legal professional, but I feel certain
that, to whatever extent Kovel's privacy might be implicated in the
proceedings, he has opened up the matter for a fair exposition by any
participant in the events outlined in his chronology.  If you intend to
claim that the evaluation involved students or other individuals whose
identities or circumstances should be protected by concerns of privacy,
I trust you are skillful enough to omit such details without suppressing
the remaining relevant facts of the matter.

Nor do I think your assertions that Kovel was dismissed due to financial
pressures are credible.  I read the article in Inside Higher Ed in which
you employed a rather hackneyed tactic by dismissing the possibility
that Kovel was terminated for his beliefs, writing to him, "You are not
as controversial as you would like to believe."  This is disingenuous on
your part, every bit as insulting to the intelligence as you claim
Kovel's charges are.  It would seem much more to the point to observe
that, to the extent that Kovel is a critical participant in a critical
public discourse, the College has an ethical obligation to redouble its
efforts to defend him publicly, let alone keep him on staff.  By your
patronizing dismissal of the controversial nature of Kovel's views, do
you wish to suggest that he is unworthy of the academy, some sort of
dilettante who fancies himself "controversial"?

No, waving off Kovel's claims with patronizing language is not an
adequate response.  You stand accused on the public stage of violating
the principles that you claim to hold dear.  Without responding fully to
the charge that you have terminated Joel Kovel because of the conflicts
between his political views and your own, you passively permit the
inference that there may be truth to Kovel's claims.  Permitting that
inference is not admission, but as a public figure I believe you must
hold yourself to a higher standard of accountability, and explicitly
address accusations that impinge on the very foundation of your role in
public life.

If, indeed, there *is* any truth to the charges, then I beg you to hear
the voice of protest against this course of events, and consider the
consequences of your action.  You were recently quoted in the New York
Times as saying that "it is also clear that being a Zionist and favoring
the security and healthy future for the State of Israel is absolutely
compatible with creating a Palestinian state".  To the extent that I
understand Kovel's views, his position is quite the opposite.  But, even
if the question is settled in your mind -- even if you are unshakeably
certain that Kovel is utterly wrong -- do you feel that his views must
be banished from the academy?  Do you feel that his positions are so
beyond the pale that they cannot be seriously, intellectually
considered?  Do you agree with the claims that his most recent book
constitutes "hate speech"?  Is the academic intellectual space really so
poorly defended and maintained that it cannot mediate the engagement
among disparate and contentious views without risking some civil
rupture?  Are Kovel's arguments to be classed with "evil" in the George
W. Bush view of the universe -- unworthy of any serious consideration,
functionally impervious to any critique?  You claim to have been
"delighted" that Kovel holds the views he does, but your actions
contradict that claim.

Whatever your views are on this, you must state them publicly, and you
must defend -- on academic, professional, intellectual and political
bases -- your decision to terminate Jovel Kovel.  You must not try to
duck the question by pointing at your own "good principles" as evidence
that you care "more correctly" about the matter of Zionism and Israel.
You must not evade an accounting by passing the matter off as a question
of employee performance -- unless that is precisely what you find to
have been the matter, in which case you *still* owe a more detailed
public response to these very serious allegations.  I say words like
"must" and "owe" because, in my view, the several distinguished
positions you hold, and your role in public discourse, confer upon you
these obligations.

In light of these serious accusations, it is also inadequate to cite
student claims that Kovel had problems with "organization".  Or are you
trying to build a college of "organized" technocrats who "deliver
education" effectively?  If you're going to dismiss all the faculty
members who are "disorganized", you're going to be opening up a lot of
vacancies.

Lastly, and hopefully tangentially, I could not help but be struck by
the coincidence of the Times article about your project with Al Quds,
and the termination of Kovel.  It is dangerous to suspect connections
where none are explicit, and yet it is also sometimes the way we can
proceed to the truth.  So I conclude by asking you to also address,
comprehensively and clearly, whether there was any connection whatsoever
between the termination of Joel Kovel and your ability to garner support
for the project in the West Bank.  The nastiness in this potential link
is too glaring to ignore, and I believe this question deserves as much
of an answer as the primary issue of Kovel's termination.  Hopefully
there is no trace of a possibility that this connection is anything
other than an imaginative association.

I thank you for your time, and I hope that you will prove me wrong in
both my outrage at Kovel's accusations, and my fears about the
association with the Al Quds project.

I await your reply, as do a growing number of people who are organizing
on- and off-line in reaction to these events.

Cordially,
Noel Bush, Bard 1996
Berlin

________________________________________________
YOU MUST clip all extraneous text when replying to a message.
Send list submissions to: Marxism@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Set your options at: 
http://lists.econ.utah.edu/mailman/options/marxism/archive%40archives.econ.utah.edu