Comments on: 100 most dangerous….

By: Harald Korneliussen

Harald Korneliussen — Wed, 15 Feb 2006 08:19:27 +0000

It’s a bit odd that a conservative wouldn’t include Peter Singer of Princeton in such a list. A man who seriously proposes that parents should be allowed to euthanasise their babies the first month after birth is much more scary than Noam Chomsky IMHO.

By: snuh

snuh — Wed, 15 Feb 2006 00:23:42 +0000

does holocaust denier arthur butz get a nod? how about that noted torture apologist, alan dershowitz? john "the president can crush your child's testicles, should he think it's a good idea" yoo? why do i get the feeling the list was not made in good faith?

By: nick s

nick s — Tue, 14 Feb 2006 21:56:03 +0000

I’d be interested in the major themes that tie them together.

Duh, there’s one theme: “Noting that David Horowitz is more than somewhat unhinged.”

By: Elf Sternberg

Elf Sternberg — Tue, 14 Feb 2006 21:47:21 +0000

I’m disappointed. No PZ Meyers or Michael Behe. One or other must be taken to task for dragging down the discourse of American science!

I vote for Behe, myself.

By: Oskar Shapley

Oskar Shapley — Tue, 14 Feb 2006 21:31:13 +0000

Berube, Cole, Chomsky, I understand, but where’s my PAUL KRUGMAN? Isn’t he, like, the Mother Of All Dangerous Professors (M.O.A.D.P.)?

By: jet

jet — Tue, 14 Feb 2006 20:26:16 +0000

John Quiggin,
Wouldn’t that just be a list of the 100 most prominent middle-eastern scientists?

By: John Quiggin

John Quiggin — Tue, 14 Feb 2006 20:17:46 +0000

Doesn’t this guy know anything about list-making? The top 100 has to be in order. For all we know, Chomsky might be the 73rd most dangerous professor in the US, which would make the buckets of bile tipped over him look rather misdirected.

And while US professors can bitch about not being included, there would be much more fun for the rest of us in complaining about the relative rankings of our favourite subversive scientists.

By: albert

albert — Tue, 14 Feb 2006 20:13:14 +0000

J.B. Foster @ U. of Oregon is a sociologist. (Former?) Editor of Monthly Review…

By: jet

jet — Tue, 14 Feb 2006 19:59:28 +0000

Does anyone have access to some context analysis tools that you could point to google harvests of those names? I’d be interested in the major themes that tie them together.

By: me2i81

me2i81 — Tue, 14 Feb 2006 19:50:46 +0000

So just who are they supposed to pose a threat to?

Young, impressionable minds? When I learned about the Chomksy Hierarchy of formal grammars, I joined my local Spartacus Youth League.

By: John

John — Tue, 14 Feb 2006 19:41:00 +0000

Well I would imagine that even a well read and well educated citizen might have heard of three or four of these folks. Their influence on public opinion and policy must be approximately 5/8 of diddly squat. So just who are they supposed to pose a threat to?

By: harry b

harry b — Tue, 14 Feb 2006 19:04:18 +0000

abb1—yes, its that McChesney.

steve—ideas do have power. Professors don’t, except in so far as they are powerful as citizens. One of the numerous reasons to make fun of Horowitz is to remind lefty professors that their teaching and research are much less threatening to the social order than they would like to think and he, apparently and bizarrely does think. Corporations, police chiefs, high-level government officials and politicians, the FBI etc, they do have power, and they are, indeed, dangerous. Thus McChesney, though not powerful or dangerous, is probably on the high end of the list because he has good idea and is a reasonably effective communicator with the kind of people who can, ultimately, challenge the power of Horowitz’s friends who actually have it. But his being a professor has nothing to do with that—he was like that when he was a journalist, and would be as effective as he is if he’d remained a journalist.

By: Robin

Robin — Tue, 14 Feb 2006 18:48:41 +0000

That’s a weird list. Lisa Anderson, who is a great person, is chosen over Rashid Khalidi . . . hmmmmm. I can’t discern any pattern in whom Horowitz dislikes besides the fact that they’re lefties and/or work on Middle East stuff.

By: eweininger

eweininger — Tue, 14 Feb 2006 18:41:51 +0000

My brief perusal of the list only turned up two sociologists….

At least we have new grounds for self-flagellation.

By: Barry Freed

Barry Freed — Tue, 14 Feb 2006 18:26:52 +0000

Of course. Only my shotgun, my pickup, and my malt liquor are either powerful or relevant.

And your dog! How could you forget your dog? You are a sorry excuse…Sheesh!