Finkelstein denied tenure
Posted on June 11 2007 by Cecilie Surasky under Alan Dershowitz , Educational Institutions , Norman Finkelstein.The Chicago Tribune reports:
Norman Finkelstein, the DePaul University faculty member whose case attracted attention beyond the academic world, has been denied tenure.
At DePaul, as elsewhere, tenure decisions are not announced publicly, but as news of Finkelstein’s fate spread across the academic gossip network late Friday, DePaul’s president issued a statement confirming denial of tenure and explaining the university’s position on the combative political scientist.
“Over the past several months, there has been considerable outside interest and public debate concerning this decision,” Rev. Dennis Holtschneider said. “This attention was unwelcome and inappropriate and had no impact on either the process or the outcome of this case.”Hailed by some for his outspoken views on Israel and Jewish issues, he has been decried by others as fomenting anti-Semitism. Supporters and opponents of Finkelstein, 53, have circulated petitions about the assistant professor, a frequent and fiery speaker on campuses across the nation.
Among his supporters are Raul Hilberg, the dean of Holocaust historians formerly at the University of Vermont, and celebrated linguist Noam Chomsky. Among those challenging the legitimacy of Finkelstein’s scholarship is Harvard professor of law Alan Dershowitz.
Finkelstein is noted — some would say, notorious — for the heated rhetoric of his books and public appearances. He has called leaders of American-Jewish organizations “Holocaust mongers.” In his book “The Holocaust Industry,” he portrayed legal efforts to get compensation for World War II slave laborers as an extortion.
His students, though, have given him high marks, saying he has encouraged debate on touchy issues such as the continuing struggles between Israel and the Palestinians.
Before coming to DePaul, Finkelstein taught at several New York universities but was not granted tenure. At DePaul, his application for tenure was supported by the political science department but opposed by Dean Chuck Suchar of the College of Liberal Arts and Sciences, who said he found Finkelstein’s attack-style scholarship inconsistent with the university’s commitment to respect for the views of all.
Finkelstein could not be reached for comment; Hilberg saw DePaul’s decision as disquieting.
“I have a sinking feeling about the damage this will do to academic freedom,” Hilberg said.
Dershowitz applauded the outcome of the long and bitter case. “I think it was the right decision,” he said. “DePaul is a better university for making it.”
Holtschneider recognized that the school would be criticized — as it would have, had the decision gone the other way.
“Some will consider this decision in the context of academic freedom,” he said. “In fact, academic freedom is alive and well at DePaul.”
For the full range of articles and other materials about the decision, go to Finkelstein’s site.
Get Muzzlewatch delivered fresh daily
Print This Post
June 11th, 2007 at 1:21 pm
Well, this story has been carried by three gazillion publications by now. When was the last time you had heard of a third-tier scholar at a third-tier university (his words) receive this kind of attention for getting or not getting tenure?
It seems to me that the anti-Israel camp has no difficulty getting all the attention it needs.
June 11th, 2007 at 2:54 pm
I am impressed by dean suchar’s commitment to respect the views of all. too bad his vision of respect is not sufficiently elastic to cover the well documented and reasoned views of finkelstein. i look forward to de paul hosting a spate of holocaust deniers, slack-jawed creationists, david duke and ilk, barry camish, ron paul, avraham burg, etc.
June 11th, 2007 at 5:07 pm
TM, those words you attribute as Finkelstein’s own were taken way out of context by Dersh and slapped onto Finkelstein as in a most dishonest manner. And you repeat the dishonesty here.
What Finkenstein said was something like, “….and Dershowitz will then say I am at a third tier University…”
Do you think for yourself?
June 12th, 2007 at 7:42 am
It is very much worth reading the letter by the President of the University to Finkelstein. It is, IMHO, brilliant.
My fears were that the university would fail the see the problems with Finkelsteins behavior - quite beyond the issue of what solutions or who you blame in the Middle East. The President does see quite clearly the problems with Finkelstein and he stated them with precision.
http://www.normanfinkelstein.com/pdf/tenuredenial/Finkelstein,Norman06.08.2007.pdf
June 12th, 2007 at 8:52 am
zionist zealots seek destruction, not only of professional careers but the lives of palestinians as well..professor finkelsteins tenure battle is an example of the arrogant attitude of zionist zealots who will do anything to destroy lives…….israel is the only thing that matters to them…to hell with the rest of the world…and judaism…..what is that to them?
http://www.antiwar.com/avnery/?articleid=11120
It is enough to see what the occupation has done to the Jewish religion.
In my childhood I was taught at home that Judaism was a humane religion, a “light unto the Gentiles.” Judaism means to loathe violence, to value the spiritual above the powerful, to turn an enemy into a friend. A Jew is allowed to defend himself – “If somebody comes to kill you, kill him first,” as the Talmudic injunction goes – but not as a lover of violence and the intoxication of power.
What has remained of that?
Concerned friends recently e-mailed me some hair-raising quotes from a statement by Rabbi Mordechai Eliyahu, former Sephardic chief rabbi of Israel and the spiritual leader of the settlers and the entire religious Zionist camp. In a letter to the prime minister, the rabbi decreed that it is impermissible to have compassion with the civilian population of Gaza if that imperils Israeli soldiers. His son, Shmuel, interpreted this decree on behalf of his father: if the killing of 100 Arabs is not sufficient to stop the launching of Qassam rockets at Israel, then 1,000 must be killed. And if that is not sufficient, then 10,000, and 100,000, and even a million. All this to stop the Qassams, which in all the years have not succeeded in killing a dozen Jews.
What is the connection between this “religious” view and the God who (in Genesis 18) promised not to destroy Sodom if 10 righteous people could be found there?
What is the difference between this moral perception and that of the Nazis who executed 10 hostages for every German soldier killed by the resistance?