Norman Finkelstein has resigned from DePaul University, but DePaul has formally issued his statement about the case as well as a university statement affirming that he is a "prolific scholar" and "outstanding teacher." This was no doubt part of a formal settlement, which presumably included a considerable cash sum for the injury the university inflicted on Professor Finkelstein. (The NY Times reports that Professor Finkelstein "would not discuss financial terms of the resignation
agreement, which he said was confidential, but noted that it does not
bar him from speaking out about issues that concern him, including
''the unfairness of the tenure process.'") Hopefully Professor Finkelstein will find academic employment in a country less subject to private censorship of controversial opinions.
Meanwhile, the shameless Alan Dershowitz, asked by The New York Times about this latest turn of events, is quoted as objecting that, "The idea of describing him as a scholar trades truth for convenience. He's a man who is a propagandist and is not a scholar.'' The irony in this bit of psychological projection is rich. Dershowitz has been described, quite correctly, by Judge Richard Posner as "not a scholar". A leading authority on academic freedom in the legal academy tells me that Harvard Law School could almost certainly establish a case for firing Dershowitz given the dearth of scholarly productivity (and quite independent of his unprofessional conduct in this matter). Perhaps the NY Times might have picked someone else better situated to evaluate the distinction between scholarship and propaganda?
Recent Comments