Wayward was kind enough to furnish a link for Professor Francis Boyle's famous "Chief" emails to the President of the University of Illinois. It turns out that the good professor has a flair for comedy. For instance, he consistently spells it "Illiniwak." I think this is like "Amerika," which I hope he doesn't find out about. In the same hilarious vein, he compares the Ch**f to Little Black S**bo, which may turn out to be our only area of agreement ever. They are alike; they are both excellent examples of fake racism.
Professor Boil (see how funny that is?) may appeal to a leftist's idea of racism, but after you read the epic tale of Little Black Sambo, complete with racist illustrations, I suspect you will be scratching your head.
Full disclosure is all the rage today, so let me admit that S**bo is also what I called my younger son Samuel. I was like the Don Imus of fatherhood.
John
yeah, great story to teach our children. now i truly understnad India!
Hmm, not sure how one could use the story of little black sambo to dismiss the history surrounding the term and its various applications, but hey, there you go.
John:
I hear you can reach the East by sailing west.
You should try it.
Well, I guess this is what tenure produces.
According to Professor Boyle, the University of Illinois is an institution where, "bigotry and racism against People of Color have always been started , promoted, and aided and abetted from the very top on down--from the Board of Trustees and the President down to everyone else on campus." If this is truly what Professor Boyle believes, is he not morally obligated to resign from his position within that institution?
Prof. "Boil" hates the polices of the U of I but is too greedy and over paid to tell them to shove it, He should go to the University of Colorado at Boulder and buddy up with Ward Churchill they are two of a kind and take Kaufman with him!!!
Wait ... Boyle's emails seemed over the top, but I'm not sure that there's any evidence of academic misconduct. I'm not sure that comparing him to Churchill is fair. Also, his tenure and employment at the law school should be related to his work there, not his personal opinions.
Yea, Im sure all that was done on his own time, at home on his personal computer. He is just like Churchill biting the hand that feeds him, Hiding behind tenure, Joseph White wrote a book about leadership, He should read his book and show some leadership and stop Boyle and his kind, If they don't like it at the U of I they should find someplace that they do. Boyle should stick to teaching the law! If he wants to make the law, get elected to the legislature, if not shut up!!!
No, I mean UIUC can't dump a tenured professor just for having strange opinions and expresssing himself online. They'd have to show that he was also failing to do his job, or violating laws or university policies. Revilo Oliver was also a tenured professor, and I think most people would consider him more embarrassing than Boyle. But UIUC didn't remove Oliver for his beliefs either. en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Revilo_P._Oliver
College jobs are strange indeed. I'm not sure if there are any non-government jobs where you could call your bosses racist bigots and expect to have a job the next day. Hell even if your bosses *were* racist bigots, they'd probably still fire you on principle.
--
Glock21 Op/Ed
Well, the functions of college jobs are pretty unique, and so it is natural and logical that such differences exist...
P.S. is Joseph White the biggest idiot ever? Did you hear his infamous Eastern Illinois Panther speech at lobby day.
If this is truly what Professor Boyle believes, is he not morally obligated to resign from his position within that institution?
No.
If I found out I was working for some front company of the Ku Klux Klan, which appears to be the same league this professor puts the U of I... you'd be damn sure I'd be quit and working on my resume and encouraging all other professors to boycott working at the same job. To do otherwise is not just morally repugnant, but pure hypocrisy.
No better than the "under orders" excuse. If your job is helping a company managed and operated by racists and bigots, there is no other choice unless you condone racism and bigotry.
The reality is that he is lying his butt off in order to make waves and stir up controversy in order to gain attention to his cause and is doing so from the security of tenure. If he believed his BS, he's a hypocrite and repugnant human being. if he doesn't believe it then he's exploiting his position in order to mislead people and BS them into supporting his cause which is also repugnant.
Either way, this man is repugnant. He should quit or admit he's lying. Period.
--
Glock21 Op/Ed
I'm sorry, I don't say this to be rude, but both of your arguments seem to miss the point of a university. I'm not arguing Boyle's competence as a faculty member. But the whole point of universities is to develop multiple lines of thought and encourage individual and share academic scholarship. The whole point of an education system is to provide students with opportunities that they would not otherwise have.
A university is not a company. It's a little scary that people would want them to run in similiar ways. If you disagree with the values or operations of the society or the university itself, a university is exactly where you ought to be. Under your reasoning, there would be no room for a W.E.B. Dubois, Dr. King, or many of the great leaders who led resistences.
What's your motto supposed to be? "In the face of injustice, go some place else!" "Not on my watch! (So I'll look someplace else!)"
It's strange to me that the same arguments don't surface when people complain about universities as bastions of liberalism or whatever. Why do you think that is?
So no, Boyle doesn't look good, nor like he has much in common with those heroes. Just resisting in itself is not particularly noble. But to extend your judgment to anyone who works within a system to change it, is rather insidious.
xian... I see your point on how I'm coming across. Part of the reason I still live in Illinois in spite many other States, even some very nearby having laws that fit my political philosophy better, is that I still have hope for fighting for change right here. There is always the option of "voting with my feet" but I feel that such things don't help matters significantly, at least beyond individually.
The comment quoted earlier just seemed to convey the belief that he was somehow working with and for repugnant human beings. Something that I'd imagine if he really believed he wouldn't want to be associated with and seems to be admitting he has little power to change as it goes to the very top. But this quote is an excerpt that probably doesn't display his full motivation which very well may be intended to instigate change... though he has obviously picked a lousy way to win people over to his side by demonizing them. Just seems unlikely that someone would phrase it in a way that vilifies the whole thing if what they really meant was that they truly cared about it and wanted to fix some problems it has. Similarly someone who cares about America and wants to reform it shouldn't be pressed to "love it or leave it," but someone who vilifies every part of American society, every part of its government, etc would probably be happier elsewhere (as a personal choice, not by force).
It's not so much what I think he should do as much as what his statements seem to convey about what he would want if he really believed what he was saying. Honestly I think he's trying to fix a problem he sees with the University but using absurd and shocking statements to draw attention to it as opposed to what he really believes and he should be called on it. If he really does believe what he's saying I find it hard to believe that he thinks it is something he has any power to fix or anything that he'd want to be professionally associated with.
I'm not arguing against tenure so much as noting his stated views seem contradictory to his personal actions. Tenure for academic work and exploration is critical to higher education. Though I think some people abuse it for activity that would be unacceptable under any other working environment. It's one thing to suggest certain policies are having discriminatory effects, it's quite another to make your own co-workers and bosses out to be white collar Klan members. The problem with fighting abuse with tenure is that it opens up the doors for administrators to abuse the power of fighting abuse. As much as it drives us up the wall when radicals and nutjobs abuse tenure, it's hard to oppose it for the thousands upon thousands of others who aren't making the headlines, but using it for its purpose, to freely explore and expand higher education.
That said, my last post seems a bit overly harsh on the idea that he should quit if he believes this. Probably because I was mentally more focused on the idea that he was actually lying about his beliefs, which I still think is the case here.
--
Glock21 Op/Ed
Mr. Boyle, while on the faculty at the U of I law school, managed to defend ... wait for it.....Libya and old Momar (sp) when they were sued in the World Court by the victims of the state sponsered terrorist attack on PAN AM Flight 93.
Mr. Boyle, who has dual citizenship with Ireland, used his Irish passport to circumvent US laws on travel to Libya. He should be tried for treason. Momar paid him the money owed Im sure... with the blood of innocent people who died for no other reason than Momar wanted Americans dead.
Nice going Mr. Boyle