A Return to the Academy
by Daniel Pipes
Washington Times
April 5, 2017
[WT title: "Left-wingery at the Academy"]
I just attended a two-day academic conference at the University of
Pennsylvania, in part out of interest in the topic ("_American & Muslim Worlds
ca.
1500-1900_
(http://meforum.us12.list-manage1.com/track/click?u=b7aa7eddb0f2bb74bfa4f6cb5&id=b41f0e4ce1&e=d0674a6693)
"), in part to get a first-hand
sense of discourse in the humanities at the contemporary university. As the
founder of Campus Watch, I wondered if it is as bad as our reports suggest,
or whether we focus on outliers.
My first impression was one of intellectual coziness. A broad consensus on
a common base of liberal assumptions crowds out dissenting opinions. A
series of hierarchies exists:
* Modern bests old
* Non-American bests American
* Female bests male
* Dark skin bests white skin
* Muslim bests non-Muslim
The word "Islamophobia" is used as though a normal English-language word
rather than a propagandistic tool to shut down criticism. A prominent
nineteenth century missionary, Henry Jessup, was anachronistically called a
"preeminent Muslim-basher."
A Canadian professor living in Costa Rica resented that the people of the
United States "commandeered" the word American to apply to themselves only.
One speaker praised the conference for having "problematized the
centrality of the United States." A moderator worried so much about
"America-centrism" that he asked, "Should we not be doing this topic at all?
Is there an
inherent arrogance" in Americans studying Muslims? A frisson rippled through
the audience at mention of "Trump"; in contrast, invoking Edward Said won
the predictable approval.
My second impression concerns jargon. No person outside academe uses words
like "problematize," "racialize," and "relativize," much less would he
"historicize the notion of imagination." (What's with all this turning nouns
into verbs with –ize?) Use of the word "and" in the conference title spawned
considerable debate (does it imply America and the Muslim world are
completely different or does it allow for overlap?) to the point that this
came
to be known as "the and problem."
The third and strongest impression concerns triviality, the historians'
tendency to avoid big, meaningful analyses in favor of trifling micro-topics.
They answer questions no one asks. This propensity blazed brightly at the
UPenn conference. Papers titled "Byron's Houris in America: Visual
Depictions of Muslim Heroines in the Gallery of Byron Beauties" or "'Strangers
in
the Stranger Lands': The 'Rebs and Yanks' in the Khedival Citadel" turned
the worthy topic of early U.S.-Muslim connections into a series of
obscurities. The prize for oddity, however, goes to "Bombo's America: An
Energy-Humanities View of the Early American Oriental Tale."
In contrast, compelling and useful issues barely surfaced: The role of
literate Muslims among African slaves. The impact of the Moro rebellion in the
Philippines on U.S. opinion. The legacy of Protestant missionaries to the
Middle East. The percentage of Muslims in early Middle Eastern immigration.
The way _peddlers became dry-goods store owners_
(http://meforum.us12.list-manage1.com/track/click?u=b7aa7eddb0f2bb74bfa4f6cb5&id=39e50e26e7&e=d0674a66
93) and then, disproportionately, _liquor store owners_
(http://meforum.us12.list-manage1.com/track/click?u=b7aa7eddb0f2bb74bfa4f6cb5&id=154b606af8&e=
d0674a6693) . The _legacy of the Shriners_
(http://meforum.us12.list-manage.com/track/click?u=b7aa7eddb0f2bb74bfa4f6cb5&id=88069ab9ec&e=d0674a6693)
,
officially known as the Ancient Arabic Order of the Nobles of the Mystic
Shrine, with its mock Mecca Temples and other Islamic motifs.
The conference was advertised as "free and open to the public but
registration is required," so I signed up, thereby signaling the organizers and
speakers of my presence. I can't be sure, but I suspect that Kambiz
GhaneaBassiri's gratuitous mention of my 1990 article title, "_The Muslims are
Coming! The Muslims are Coming_
(http://meforum.us12.list-manage.com/track/click?u=b7aa7eddb0f2bb74bfa4f6cb5&id=1601dabbe0&e=d0674a6693)
!" was intended for
my benefit. Likewise, the repeated order that the conference not be recorded
on audio or video seemed directed squarely at me. It's an odd demand from
an academic institution, which by its nature wants to reach a wider public,
but understandable given how often Campus Watch has exposed Middle East
studies excesses by _recording events_ (http://meforum.us
12.list-manage2.com/track/click?u=b7aa7eddb0f2bb74bfa4f6cb5&id=bb300e9a1e&e=d0674a6693)
. I
doubt that prohibition is _legally enforceable_
(http://meforum.us12.list-manage.com/track/click?u=b7aa7eddb0f2bb74bfa4f6cb5&id=e61aec51ed&e=d0674a6693)
.
I grew up around a university (my father Richard is a professor emeritus)
and went on to earn a Ph.D. in medieval history, so I initially expected
the campus ever to be central in my life. Then, because it radicalized and I
did not, my connection to the academy withered. Now, on occasional returns
visits to it, I invariably feel alienated by the left-wingery, the jargon,
and the arrogant irrelevance. While glad I escaped its clutches, I worry
about the future of American (that word again) higher education. So, yes,
Campus Watch has it right.
The Fox News Channel revealed that half of Americans are ready for an
alternative media. When will educators figure out the same logic applies to
universities?
--
--
Centroids: The Center of the Radical Centrist Community
<[email protected]>
Google Group: http://groups.google.com/group/RadicalCentrism
Radical Centrism website and blog: http://RadicalCentrism.org
---
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"Centroids: The Center of the Radical Centrist Community" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email
to [email protected].
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
