Comments on: Horowitz vs Australia

By: Helen

Helen — Tue, 09 Dec 2008 00:33:03 +0000

True – I hadn’t thought of that!

By: sharon

sharon — Mon, 08 Dec 2008 12:37:36 +0000

So you have to look for the capitalisation sometimes to understand articles on Australian politics. Confusing, I know.

And the difference between republican and Republican isn’t confusing?

By: Hugh

Hugh — Mon, 08 Dec 2008 12:30:35 +0000

John Vandermeer, estimable biologist from the University of Michigan, was so upset by not being included on the list he wrote a letter to Horowitz demanding an explanation. You could try that, but I don’t think it worked for John.

http://www.frontpagemag.com/Articles/Read.aspx?GUID=5FA6588A-EB6A-4294-BE2C-D3FD54CDFE11

Dear Mr. Horowitz:

A friend forwarded to me your list of the 100 most dangerous professors. I must take issue with your decision on the people at the University of Michigan, where I am a professor of biology. You list Juan Cole and Gayle Rubin as the only two professors here who merit inclusion in your list. While I do agree that Juan and Gayle are certainly dangerous from your point of view, I must argue that I should be included at least on par with them, perhaps even more dangerous. Sometimes there is a tendency for people like you to ignore professors in the Natural Sciences as potentially subversive. This is a mistake in general, and especially a mistake in my case. Let me summarize my subversive activities.

By: Helen

Helen — Mon, 08 Dec 2008 02:51:41 +0000

tgb1000 12.06.08 at 1:31 pm

So liberal = conservative down under, huh? Onaccounta the winter = summer thing?

It’s called “Big L Liberalism / small l liberalism over here. “Big L Liberalism” is the neo/conservatism of the “Liberal” party, and we say “small l liberalism” to refer to liberalism as you understand it in the US. So you have to look for the capitalisation sometimes to understand articles on Australian politics. Confusing, I know.

By: Baraholka

Baraholka — Sun, 07 Dec 2008 23:08:26 +0000

Dave @ 4; Colin @10

“undergraduate tone”, “he’s using it to settle scores from his youth”

Howard and Costello tried to destroy the Australian Student University Guilds precisely to settle scores from their youth and to minimize the exposure of University students to any critique of capitalism or to radical politics of any sort.

Since Howard and Costello behaved in such a petty, undergraduate and insidious manner it is unsurprising that their acolytes in the Young Libs have followed their lead.

By: David Irving (no relation)

David Irving (no relation) — Sun, 07 Dec 2008 01:30:02 +0000

tgb1000 – the Liberal name (note the capitalisation) is more a historical accident than anything else. The party’s founder, Robert Menzies, had heard of (and misinterpreted) Adam Smith and J.S. Mill.

They’ve always been anything but liberal, btw – they’re socially conservative, and, at least at the beginning, enthusiastically supported all kinds of protectionist tariffs (although they’ve more recently fallen under the spell of what passes for thought in neo-liberal economists).

By: Dave

Dave — Sat, 06 Dec 2008 16:20:39 +0000

@14: it’s no more arse-about-face than the UK conservative party embracing neoliberal economics in the 1980s; or the US wingnuts conflating liberalism and fascism, and using ‘neoconservatism’ as a label for a doctrine of overthrow. By their deeds shall you know them.

By: tgb1000

tgb1000 — Sat, 06 Dec 2008 13:31:33 +0000

So liberal = conservative down under, huh? Onaccounta the winter = summer thing?

By: Robert

Robert — Sat, 06 Dec 2008 12:01:49 +0000

I'm afraid David Wright is ignorant of economics.

By: Alex Kuz

Alex Kuz — Fri, 05 Dec 2008 22:36:26 +0000

So, someone already pointed out that Michael Berube is on that list. I should have read the other comments more closely I guess.

By: Alex Kuz

Alex Kuz — Fri, 05 Dec 2008 22:03:28 +0000

Wasn’t Crooked Timber’s own Michael Berube included in Horowitz’s book, The 100 Most Dangerous Professors in America? I was a student at Penn State shortly after the book was published and attended a Horowitz speech on campus that was quite riveting. Students were livid about the inclusion of Michael and another professor, Sam Richards (I was taking one of Sam’s classes at the time), in the book. Lot’s of screaming back and forth between Horowitz and students with the gall to ask him to explain their presence on the list. If my memory serves me correctly, there was very nearly a fight between a College Republican (the group that sponsored the event) and a young black woman. You could feel Horowitz’s blood pressure rising throughout the entire Q&A—a few times he even shouted something like “Stupid, stupid!! Next Question!” or called questioners idiots. It was a great time! And Michael, if you read this, congrats on being included in that book—I’d consider it an honor.

By: Colin Danby

Colin Danby — Fri, 05 Dec 2008 19:39:32 +0000

This is a matter of some resentment. Horowitz’s list is heavy on decrepit hippies who haven’t been dangerous for thirty years (I suppose he’s using it to settle scores from his youth). So there are far fewer spots left for those of us who have tried to achieve dangerality more recently.

By: ehj2

ehj2 — Fri, 05 Dec 2008 19:36:32 +0000

If you want to go even further and be placed on the “no-fly list,” change your name to Kennedy.

By: ehj2

ehj2 — Fri, 05 Dec 2008 19:33:45 +0000

Just change your name to Clinton.

By: David Wright

David Wright — Fri, 05 Dec 2008 19:00:28 +0000

What does a leftist have to do to get noticed in this country?

It would probably help to be in a department, like minority studies or ecology, where leftism counts as the axiomatic foundation of the discipline. Maybe an economist who taught that the demand curve for labor is not downward-sloping, or that there are no dead-weight losses and no Laffer curve, could get on the list.