Harvard Prof, Involved in Political Flap, Labeled 'Intellectual Lightweight'

CNSNews.com) - Cornel West, the Harvard professor and author at the center of a racial controversy at the prestigious school, is being criticized for his contributions to academia by both the political left and right. Author David Horowitz said West is "an incredible intellectual lightweight" who has only achieved success by playing racial politics.

The flap began when Harvard president and former Clinton Treasury Secretary, Larry Summers admonished West, a professor with Harvard's Afro-American studies department, for a variety of perceived offenses. West was called to task for allegedly inflating student grades, his stint as a singer in a self described "hip hop" CD, his role as a leader in Al Sharpton's nascent presidential campaign and his penchant for writing what Summers deemed pop culture books instead of academic books. An outraged West announced that he felt "attacked and insulted" and would not tolerate "disrespect."

Sharpton and Jesse Jackson then waded into the academic dispute. Jackson said the "tension at Harvard is having an impact across the country." Sharpton threatened a lawsuit against Harvard as "an aggrieved party" because West was rebuked for his involvement in Sharpton's campaign.

West is the author of a best selling book, "Race Matters", reviewed by the New York Times as a "compelling blend of philosophy, sociology and political commentary." According to the Times, "One can only applaud the ferocious moral vision and astute intellect on display in these pages."

West is still mulling over whether to leave Harvard for Princeton University. He told National Public Radio that, "In a deep sense, I weep for Harvard."

Race Card?

Author and former 60's radical David Horowitz told CNSNews.com that West "got where he got by politics and by playing the race card which he has played liberally in this conflict."

"I don't believe that Cornel West has ever written a work of serious scholarship," Horowitz added.

Horowitz, the author of Hating Whitey, a critique of the civil rights establishment, called West a "Marxist" who is cozying up to "anti-Semitic blacks" like Louis Farrakhan. Horowitz criticized West for alleging that America had been "niggerized by the terrorist attacks." According to Horowitz, West "means that blacks in America are subject to daily World Trade Center attacks. He's a racial demagogue."

The Economist Magazine editorialized that West's recent foray as a rap musician proved "that the medium is best left to the likes of Snoop Doggy Dogg rather than Harvard professors." The venerable magazine also mocks West's Web site because it "is shot through with embarrassing boasts and grammatical errors."

On his Web site, West, while promoting his hip hop CD titled Sketches of My Culture, states that "In all modesty, this project constitutes a watershed moment in musical history." This prompted the Economist Magazine to ask, "What on earth would the immodest version be?"

The Economist also ridiculed the typographical errors on West's Web site and sided with Summers' original critique. "[The Web site] describes Mr. West as "one of the most preeminent minds of our time" and refers to somebody called "Nietzche." So Mr. Summers clearly has a point." (Editors note: Correct spelling is Nietzsche)

The Washington Post's liberal columnist Mary McGrory sarcastically noted that West and Henry Louis Gates, Jr., the chairman of the Afro-American Studies Department at Harvard, are "academic rock stars" who are threatening "to pull up stakes and make tracks for Princeton, where they indicate they will be ever so much more appreciated."

McGrory, in an article titled Hullabaloo at Harvard, referred to West and his colleagues as "academic divas" from a "spoiled college department." She criticized the involvement of Jackson and Sharpton in the dispute, calling them "two premier demagogues" and "two of the world's most preposterous personalities."

The New Republic Magazine has also taken West to task for his academic achievements. Writing in an essay called "The Unreal World of Cornel West" in 1995, literary editor Leon Wieseltier called West's collection of books "almost completely worthless." He chided West for his view that "Marxist thought becomes even more relevant after the collapse of communism in the Soviet Union and Eastern Europe than it was before."

West also wrote: "The relative unity and strength of our capitalist foes requires that we must come together if our struggle is to win!" Wieseltier said the comment reveals West's philosophy as "monuments to the devastation of a mind by the squalls of theory."

Grumbling at Harvard?

Harvard only has 14 designated "university professors", one of whom is West. According to Horowitz, for West to be chosen "one of only 14 out of 2,000 professors, there must be a hell of a lot of grumbling." Horowitz believes Summers was pressured by the faculty to rein in West.

"Cornel West is extravagantly public in his buffoonery, so it is hard to ignore him," Horowitz stated.

He said the elevation of West to the level of "university professorship" was "a racist joke because he's black. [They] put an idiot into one of Harvard's most distinguished professorships and no one will say anything."

Horowitz believes racial politics trump competence, noting that conservative author Thomas Sowell and economist Walter Williams, whom he considers intellectuals "could not get a job at Harvard."

Summers, who has now backed away from his criticisms of West and apologized, has agreed to meet with Jesse Jackson over Harvard's commitment to affirmative action.

Horowitz said Summers thought he could confront West because he, Summers, was a liberal from the Clinton administration. But, Horowitz now believes Summers is now "groveling" to the Afro-American studies department at Harvard and to Jackson.

"This kind of appeasement of bad behavior only encourages bad behavior," stated Horowitz.

Horowitz says Summers should not fear West's threat to leave for Princeton University. "The Harvard [Afro-American studies] department is undoubtedly the best department, but if it lost Cornel West, it would be even better," he said.

West did not respond to a request for an interview. He told National Public Radio last week that he will not talk to the media because there are "a lot of things going on that it's hard for the newspapers to really tell the truth about."

Hello, thought I would join the conversation about here.

in reference to the tenents of Libertarians:

**1. Man will usually act in what he perceives to be his own interest, albeit far too often in his short-term interest.

2. No other person or group should be given the authority to determine what is in an individual's interest, nor to use force, fraud or coersion to get him to behave accordingly.

3. No person or group of persons may justly initiate force, fraud or coercion against another for any reason.**

Why do I have the impression a Christian Mother can never be a Libertarian?

Would seem to me that the virtues leave out selfishness.

Only with Selflessness does one develop Trustworthiness, Responsiblility, Dependability and Integrity.

Would you want a man to seek his own interest as President, or Military Leader, or Chieftain?

Seems to me that Good Leaders are noted quickly because they will 'serve' others interests not their own.

The list of the Greatest Leaders on this Earth is of people who sacrificed themselves for others. For instance, the Heroes of the WTC.

A Leader who wants to call himself great is Clinton. Would you want to follow him into combat. I would not even want to follow his orders because he would leave me high and dry.

I really do not agree with Ayn Rand et al on selfishness. It seems counterproductive to the comity needed for building a community or nation.

Rand was not a libertarian though many of the principles she advocates are consistent with libertarian thought.

Would seem to me that the virtues leave out selfishness.

Selfishness is about perceived short-term gain. Informed or "enlightened" self-interest is about doing what will serve one best in the long run. [l]ibertarian philosophy is a philosophy of the appropriate role of government. It is not intended to be a comprehensive moral code, but the basic "non-initiation of force, fraud or coercion" principle is fundamental to morality, IMO. IOW libertarianism IS moral, but doesn't address, nor attempt to address, all moral issues.

Only with Selflessness does one develop Trustworthiness, Responsiblility, Dependability and Integrity.

A wise person would be trustworthy, responsible, dependable and honorable because he/she recognizes that being so leads to better friends, better relationships, better self-image, better life. It's just good "business" to be so, but that's not the only reason to be so. Those who deceive are perpetrating fraud and are in violation of libertrianism's first principle, and are in violation of God's law and the spirit of God's law.

Seems to me that Good Leaders are noted quickly because they will 'serve' others interests not their own.

The best leaders are those who aspire to be great leaders, not merely to be perceived as great leaders. Achieving that goal can be a person's raison d'etre; making apparent sacrifices to become "great" in any field is consistent with self interest. Nothing is more important to happiness than what one thinks of him/herself, IMO.

The list of the Greatest Leaders on this Earth is of people who sacrificed themselves for others. For instance, the Heroes of the WTC.

Self-interest, as I noted above, doesn't rule out sacrifice. One of Man's great driving forces is to achieve significance, not necessarily in the eyes of others, but in reality. People want to "make a difference."

Also, what one thinks of him/her self often determines how difficult decisions will be made. Most of those who lost their lives saving and trying to save others at the WTC didn't consciously give their lives, but they consciously risked their lives, something many of them had done many times before. It is our failing that we didn't notice and appreciate those times when they risked death or serious injury and didn't die. Firefighters and police have mini-cultures within our culture. Those mini-cultures think about, talk about and admire bravery more than most of the rest of us. By taking risks that are inherent to the professions they chose they are living up to their own creeds. They couldn't think of themselves as they do otherwise. People are brave, among other reasons, because they have an great desire to be so. Taking risk in service to others is their way of making a difference, of being significant, of making the time they spent on this earth worthwhile and leaving the world better than it would have been without them. All of this fulfils their self-interest, but is in no way selfish.

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.