Footnote-checker extraordinaire of the culture wars, Keith Windschuttle, whose column in The Australian apparently led to the cancellation of the Sydney Uni conference featuring Antonio Negri, has got it all wrong about Italian politics and Negri’s background in “terror”, according to Guido at Rank and Vile.
As I’ve argued before, the fact that a University could apparently be intimidated into cancelling the right to speak on campus of a philosopher because of his politics is an absolute disgrace. And it’s disgraceful too that this occurs because of confected outrage on the part of right-wing newspaper columnists. And it’s appalling that these same columnists can continue to get away with claiming that “left-wing PC warriors” are the enemies of freedom of speech.
Elsewhere: Catallaxy reports on Windschuttle’s defamation action against The Bulletin.
Reference Material: Those interested in previous blogosphere discussion of Windschuttle’s History Wars should consult the relevant archives at Back Pages and Troppo.
Mark - I am looking forward to your comments on the Trot protest this coming Thursday at the U of M, when they will try to ’silence’ Brendan Nelson, who is due to speak at a conference. Will this be an ‘absolute disgrace’ too:)?
Andrew N: How is it possible to silence Brenan Nelson when he can call a press conference every other day? I think you are conflating heckling with silencing in a political context, as against an academic context.
As Peter says, it’s not strictly analogous, Andrew, but yes - I think protests that try to “silence” people (and I’m well aware ISO/Resistance inspired ones usually do) are generally both wrong in principle and politically counter-productive and particularly so in the Nelson case.
Peter K - It’s true, of course, that they can only step Brendan Nelson delivering this particular speech, and not silence him more generally. And that if people want to know Negri’s views they need go no further than the campus bookstore, whether or not he gets to speak at the conference. It makes you wonder why either intervention is worthwhile. As Mark notes, these attempts often backfire. Nelson will turn this protest into part of his VSU campaign.
It’s true, Andrew, that people can easily access Negri’s books but those (like me) who have objections to his position could also benefit from the opportunity to put them to him, and potentially his thought could benefit from the interchange - that’s the point of scholarly discourse surely?
The left has a pretty good track record at silencing people it doesn’t agree with - Geoffrey Blainey, Hans Eysenck in Oz, plenty of examples in the US according to Ddavid Horowitz and the Students for Academic Freedom. Thing is, the left all-too often resorts to physical intimidation and sometimes outright violence rather than to the OpEd pages of a national newspaper to achieve its objectives.
Also, I thought KW’s point was not Negri’s politics but his terrorist past. If that’s a furphy, as Guido argues, why cancel his appearance?
Rob, I don’t know what you’re referring to with regard to Blainey. If you mean that academics tried to “silence” him, that’s untrue, and as Stuart Macintyre demonstrates in his book The History Wars, its status as a furphy has been accepted by no less a figure than John Howard.
Thing is, the left all-too often resorts to physical intimidation and sometimes outright violence rather than to the OpEd pages of a national newspaper to achieve its objectives.
This is where I have my usual problem with your habit of politically generalising, Rob
Who does this and do they represent “The Left”? I referred above to people like the International Socialists and Resistance - who do sometimes act in this fashion (though often it’s harder to pinpoint who starts violence than one assumes) - and who are also tied in with the escalation of the protests at Baxter. When I was active in campus politics, I was a vigorous opponent of socialist sects and their tactics. I make distinctions among the Right - for instance I’d distinguish between Windy and Andrew Norton (who I imagine would accept a “Right” label if only because he’s a member of the Liberal Party) - Andrew’s a thoughtful and intelligent person who argues with reasoning and evidence. It might be well for you to do the same with “The Left”!
Are you referring to The History Wars or The Fuss that Never Ended, Mark?
Well, the history wars are Windy’s stock in trade, Rob!
I believe Macintyre coined the phrase ‘the history wars’ in his book of that name. It’s a tendentious and largely ineffective riposte to KW’s attacks on mainstream Australian historiography and includes an unconvincing defence of the National Musuem of Australia. It’s characterised by a general tendency to talk around issues rather than address them directly. In his new forward to the revised edition, Macintyre unwittingly concedes the field to Windschuttle by arguing that the debate about Australia’s past be re-confined to the academy. to limit the damage done to historians by the public canvassing of the issues (not that he would put it quite like that, of course).
The Fuss that Never Ended is a book he co-edited specifically about the Blainey affair. Rafe Champion wrote an excellent piece on it for Quadrant last July.
Personally, I can’t see why what Windschuttle did on this occasion is so ‘appalling’. He wrote an article for the Oz on a subject he felt strongly about. - a terrorist being invited to participate in an academic conference. If he’s right about that I would share his concerns. If he’s wrong, that should be easy enough to demonstrate.
Strange that Windschuttle has become such a figure of fear for at least some on the left. His The Killing of History is well-argued when it attacks boutique theorizing, but quite unpersuasive as a general statement about the disicpline and practice of history. And The Fabrication of Aboriginal History, whilst bold in its construction, is easily susceptible to methodological attack and there are evident problems in his treatment of at least some of the evidence. I wish those on the left who wish to take issue with him would do so on those grounds rather than the tedious repetition of ad hominen attacks. Robert Manne’s Whitewash was utterly ineffective for that reason, and KW had no difficulty shrugging off the attacks.
Perhaps he’s a figure of fear because of his habit of issuing writs for defamation? I don’t know - the fact that his columns seemingly have an effect of shutting down debate and discourse might also have something to do with that, if it’s indeed the case. I suspect it’s related to the general climate of self-censorship and fear of political attack that right-wing PC warriors have created.
It’s very easy to demonstrate that his characterisation of Negri as a terrorist is inaccurate and misleading, and Guido has done so in the post to which I’ve linked.
I don’t know who’s making ad hominem attacks against Windschuttle - I don’t recall any in my reading of Whitewash. As you say, Rob, his work is open to methodological and conceptual attack (primarily that he defends “objectivity” while smuggling in a lot of his own ideological assumptions) and that’s what I thought Manne’s contributors did rather well.
I think Chris Sheil did a good job in critiquing some of Windschuttle’s questionable assumptions and methodological failings in his Back Pages posts.
John Dawson has written a volume called Washout (published by Windschuttle’s Macleay Press!) debunking Whitewash. I’ve not read it but have seen some of his esssays and he seems to have done a fairly effective hatchet job on Reynolds and Lehman.
I don’t want to bang on too boringly about this but what do you mean by this:
“…the general climate of self-censorship and fear of political attack that right-wing PC warriors have created.”
Articulating a forceful countervailing view is not shutting down debate, it’s opening it up, surely?
After all, there’s only one Windschuttle. As Whitewash demonstrates, he seemingly has no academic supporters (Dawson is not an academic - although Blainey wrote a cautiously favourable review of TFOAH). He has both supporters and detractors in the mainstream media, but that’s what you’d expect: his are very polarising arguments.
There’s nothing to be afraid of here. It’s all healthy debate.
Anyway….
Articulating a forceful countervailing view is not shutting down debate, it’s opening it up, surely?
But the point of his column was to prevent Negri from speaking.
And it would seem that he succeeded. Whether or not Sydney Uni decided that they didn’t want the controversy (at a time when Nelson is intervening in what can be taught and vetoing research grants), or whether Negri encountered visa problems, we don’t know because they’re not commenting. I find this disappointing as well - the fact that a defence of academic freedom can’t be mounted in the current climate.
There may only be one Windschuttle but he’s clearly influential in political and media circles.
Last comment - I promise!
What Windschuttle said was:
“…the Howard Government should reconsider whether someone convicted of crime on this scale deserves an entry visa.” - plus some tendentious concluding remarks about standards.
That doesn’t seem to be all that unreasonable. Conviction for a serious criminal offence is a valid reason for denying a visa, I believe. The letter cited by Guido doesn’t deny that he was convicted, just disagrees with the law under which he was.
I agree though that the univesity should provide a public explanation of the matter, because it certainly could look like caving in to intimidation or criticism. If a visa was refused, that should be made clear, and for what reasons.
Well, nothing wrong with this thread turning into the Mark and Rob show, I guess
The implications of Windschuttle’s statement were that he shouldn’t be given an entry visa, and I wonder whether he wasn’t. We’re in agreement that the University should explain what’s going on. And perhaps if it is the case that he was denied a visa, then the Minister should also explain why.
As to his conviction, it’s reasonable for people to disagree about the Italian laws, but surely the fact that Negri voluntarily returned from exile in Paris to serve his sentence and that as the letter Guido cites demonstrates, spent his time in Paris writing and teaching should count in his favour. Presumably visas aren’t refused to everyone who’s ever had a conviction. If that has happened in this case, it must be his political beliefs and Windschuttle’s (mis)characterisation of them that’s a factor.
Turn it up Rob. How can you ’silence’ someone who has their own dedicated printing and distribution outfit—the Macleay Press? I know packs of PhD students who’d love to present and publish their research, but for the domination of the history book publishing market by baby boomers.
As to Negri, I put my thoughts on the issue down here, my argument being that ex-Red Brigadists are far better off in cultural studies departments than still walking around plotting. There’s nothing so socially unthreatening than paradigm deconstruction.
Fair point, liam. On a related theme, I believe it’s the case that most of the surviving members of the Japanese Red Army are now fully reconciled to the capitalist system as enthusiastic corporate executives.
Although, from what little I’ve read of his work, I suspect Negri, if given his head, could kill many more people through terminal boredom and comprehension fatigue than he ever had in his sights as a terrorist.
Not to trivialise the issue.
Nic, that was a terrible abuse of the trackback system. You can’t just trackback to somewhere if you don’t specifically cite the originating post (this one). The SAF doesn’t even have very much to do with this issue.
It’s a fine line between self-promotion and (ominous drumroll) trackback spamming…
I guess Rob mentioned SAF. Btw, in my view, they’re a crackpot outfit.
Ouch, this was my fault, was it? I don’t understand how trackbacks work.
SAF do seem a bit extreme but then so are the forces against which they pitch themselves. Horowitz is an interesting character although he’s gone too far to the right for my (believe it or not, Mark) taste.
On another subject, does anyone have any idea how to stop your cat from angrily scratching the furniture while you sit for hours at your laptop composing comments for these blogs? (SERIOUS question!)
Liam: It was relevant from the start, even before Rob mentioned the SAF and Horowitz, the two situations are alarminly similar and it can be argued that one has led to the other as Im sure this has happened in the USA. Hey… thats actually a good topic.
What Id have said in a comment would have been quite similar to what i said in that post, so I thought why bother repeating myself. And Mark did link to old troppo and BP articles.
Francesca doesn’t seem to be placated by more food or extra cuddles ……..
Cats are the secret rulers of the world, Rob, and we but their humble servants…
Absolutely true, Mark. Why do actual or aspiring world dictators hate cats (vide Napoleon complex)? Because they don’t like competition and cats have plans of their own.
Ever seen the 40s noir classic “Cat People”, Rob? Highly recommended!
Off to bed now!
Oh, I know it well, Mark! Classic Val Lewton stuff! What a great film maker! (Have to admit a sneaking liking for the 1980’s remake by Paul Shrader as well).
Did either of you guys see the sequel ‘Curse of the Cat People’? Is it worth renting?
The 80s remake had a great soundtrack and also Natassja Kinski prowling in the woods naked which can’t be a bad thing
Wasnt the world made for mice and we just happen to inhabit it?
Definitely worth it, Kim. Along with the ‘horror’ aspects it’s a quite compelling picture of a lonely and isolated childhood. Quite moving. I know it’s OT but since we’ve gravitated to the subject, try Lewton’s I Walked With a Zombie. I know it sounds like the B-grader to end all B-graders but it really is the most fantastic film - sort of Jane Eyre set in the 1930’s Caribbbean.
(My sneaking liking for the remade Cat People had something to do with a naked Natassja Kinski as well. Fine signature song by Bowie.)
Cool, sounds good, Rob. I might pay a visit to Trash Video at West End and pick up “I Walked With a Zombie” as well.
Was the Bowie song on any of his albums or just the soundtrack to the film?
Kim, I think it’s on Let’s Dance as ‘Putting out Fire’.
Are you a Bowie fan too? Fab!
How could I forget, Rob? I must hunt down the cd - I’ve noticed a lot of Bowie’s back catalogue being remastered recently and available in some shops for ten bucks which is a good thing too!
Remastered is definitely the way to go. Bowie’s stuff has come up quite indifferently on straight transcription. ‘Heroes’, ‘Scary Monsters’ - terrific stuff, the more so with some digital assistance. (Isn’t it wonderful how these posts can wander…?)
Agreed, ’tis a very sad day when the ability of free thinking people to make up their own minds on any issue is taken away by narrow-minded and bigoted ‘elites’ like Windshuttle
Rob, fill up a clean water spray bottle, like the ones hairdressers use, and whenever your cat scratches the furniture, give it a very short blast on the nose. They hate that, though it does no harm, and it’ll learn not to bother you when you’ve got your spray bottle with you.
Liam’s right. That’s what Bec advised me to do when I was catsitting for her. But I couldn’t always bear to do it to poor Calliecat…
There I was, trying to find a recent Age article which I didn’t tag at the time, with the dog behind me on the floor.
I realised the only solution was to find the print edition, which was outside in the recycle bin under a load of tins our upstairs neighbours had put out.
Segue to me in the workroom with a smelly paper and an empty document. Thinks: need a cup of tea.
Acts: goes to kitchen
returns to find: dog with shredded remains of paper.
She has an opinion about this business of me spending hours in front of a glowing screen.