Matching Grant Challenge
alexPureWhen I met Alexander Cockburn, one of his first questions to me was: “Is your hate pure?” It was the question he asked most of the young writers he mentored. These were Cockburn’s rules for how to write political polemics: write about what you care about, write with passion, go for the throat of your enemies and never back down. His admonitions remain the guiding stylesheet for our writers at CounterPunch. Please help keep the spirit of this kind of fierce journalism alive by taking advantage of  our matching grant challenge which will DOUBLE every donation of $100 or more. Any of you out there thinking of donating $50 should know that if you donate a further $50, CounterPunch will receive an additional $100. And if you plan to send us $200 or $500 or more, CounterPunch will get a matching $200 or $500 or more. Don’t miss the chance. Double your clout right now. Please donate. –JSC (This photo of Alexander Cockburn and Jasper, on the couch that launched 1000 columns, was taken in Petrolia by Tao Ruspoli)
 Day 19

Yes, these are dire political times. Many who optimistically hoped for real change have spent nearly five years under the cold downpour of political reality. Here at CounterPunch we’ve always aimed to tell it like it is, without illusions or despair. That’s why so many of you have found a refuge at CounterPunch and made us your homepage. You tell us that you love CounterPunch because the quality of the writing you find here in the original articles we offer every day and because we never flinch under fire. We appreciate the support and are prepared for the fierce battles to come.

Unlike other outfits, we don’t hit you up for money every month … or even every quarter. We ask only once a year. But when we ask, we mean it.

CounterPunch’s website is supported almost entirely by subscribers to the print edition of our magazine. We aren’t on the receiving end of six-figure grants from big foundations. George Soros doesn’t have us on retainer. We don’t sell tickets on cruise liners. We don’t clog our site with deceptive corporate ads.

The continued existence of CounterPunch depends solely on the support and dedication of our readers. We know there are a lot of you. We get thousands of emails from you every day. Our website receives millions of hits and nearly 100,000 readers each day. And we don’t charge you a dime.

Please, use our brand new secure shopping cart to make a tax-deductible donation to CounterPunch today or purchase a subscription our monthly magazine and a gift sub for someone or one of our explosive  books, including the ground-breaking Killing Trayvons. Show a little affection for subversion: consider an automated monthly donation. (We accept checks, credit cards, PayPal and cold-hard cash….)

pp1

or
cp-store

To contribute by phone you can call Becky or Deva toll free at: 1-800-840-3683

Thank you for your support,

Jeffrey, Joshua, Becky, Deva, and Nathaniel

CounterPunch
 PO Box 228, Petrolia, CA 95558

Challenging Academic Freedom in the US

The Case of Steven Salaita

by BARBARA NIMRI AZIZ

The morals and principles of all authorities need to be periodically examined. So it is that we find the University of Illinois is yet another institute of higher learning that falls short.

The U. of Illinois fails on the principle of academic freedom, having withdrawn its appointment to my colleague, Professor Steven Salaita. Salaita, a brilliant and daring young scholar in comparative literature was set to join U. Illinois’ department of American Indian Studies. Besides his work in comparative studies, Salaita is an expert in Arab American fiction and author of The Uncultured Wars  and Israel’s Dead Soul among many fine analytical treatises. U. Illinois’ decision to cancel Salaita’s appointment is said to be based on tweeted comments critical of Israel during the current Gaza crisis. But Salaita could well have already been targeted for his radical insights, his criticism of American liberalism, and analyses of Israeli policies. A campaign launched on behalf of Salaita is generating considerable attention.

Off the radar is the removal last week of another modest champion of free speech:– “The Commentators”. The program aired over WHCR- 90.3fm “Voice of Harlem” at City College, a university celebrated for its progressivism. This too is a free-speech issue, since according to “The Commentators”’ host, Leroy Baylor, the administration attacked the show for inviting controversial guests such as American Muslim leader Louis Farrakhan. Baylor says that the university has consistently charged that the program was “anti-Semitic”.

American universities have a shameful tradition of purging courageous scholars from their ranks for saying unpopular things. I’m reminded of South African professor and former Robben Island prisoner, Fred Dube. Dube was expelled from his post at Stony Brook University of New York in the mid-80s. The campaign against Dube was launched after he raised some poignant questions about Zionism in his classes.

Then we had the notorious case of Sami Al-Arian, a Palestinian American professor who not only was removed from U. Florida in 2002 stemming from statements he made in a TV interview; he was indicted, jailed, subject to years of legal harassment. (Only recently he was cleared of all charges.)  Native American, Ward Churchill, distinguished professor of Ethnic Studies at U. Colorado was also fired because of statements made after the 911 attacks; Churchill was well known for his support of Palestinian rights (which de facto involves criticism of US-Israeli policies.) To these is added the case of Israel critic and author Normal Finkelstein. DePaul University denied him tenure in 2007.

University administrators often conduct such purges over opposition from faculty committees.

These examples, where scholars fought back only to lose in the end, are the best known. In countless cases elsewhere, professors—it they are not fired—find themselves marginalized, denied promotion or otherwise ostracized for their stand in defense of Islam and support of Muslim and Palestine rights. Others who speak out on certain taboo subjects early in their careers find themselves shut out completely.

In many institutions, most especially our exalted universities, there is an unspoken rule about criticizing Israel. Even a faculty member who hosts a ‘controversial’ guest lecturer can come under fire.

Some years ago I arrived at a New York university hosting a theatrical performance by an Arab American author. The scholar who invited to lead the discussion afterwards was a doctoral candidate at this well-known graduate center. Welcoming me, she whispered “Every head of department here is Jewish”. I was shocked and asked: “What has this to do with the performance, or with me?” She could only reply, “Just keep it in mind.” In retrospect, I wonder if her warning was less about anything I might utter, and more a reflection of the chilling atmosphere in which she and fellow scholars function.

Today, activists and other concerned citizens feel the tide is turning– that Israel can no longer control information and thwart free speech on our campuses. The campaign for U. Illinois to reverse its decision on Salaita rapidly garnered 13,000 signatures. We credit social media with spreading democracy across the globe. Can it be successfully mobilized in defense of freedom here?

Barbara Nimri Aziz is a veteran anthropologist and journalist, radio producer (www.RadioTahrir.org) on WBAI- New York, and founder of the Radius of Arab American Writers (www.rawi.org )