"An unforgivable insult to the Afghan people"

Monday, March 27, 2006
John Fund reports today that Malalai Joya, a 27 year old female member of the Afghan Parliament, spoke at Yale University last Thursday about Sayed Rahmatullah Hashemi, the Yale Taliban:

"It is an unforgivable insult to the Afghan people that he is here. He should face a court of law rather than be at one of your finest universities."

Yale continues in its refusal to respond, even going so far as having the campus police order removal of questioners from the campus.

Meanwhile, Penraker points out that studying in America has little effect on hard-line Islamists.

And James Kirchick of the Yale Daily News says:

"Outrage over religious fascism ought to be the province of American liberals. But in Hashemi's case it has been almost entirely trumpeted by Fox News, the Wall Street Journal editorial page and right-wing bloggers. A friend of mine recently remarked that part of his and his peers' nonchalance (and in some cases, support for) Hashemi has to do with the fact that the right has seized upon the issue. Our politics have become so polarized that many are willing to take positions based on the inverse of their opponents'. This abandonment of classical liberal values at the expense of political gamesmanship has consequences that reach far beyond Yale; it hurts our national discourse."

9 comments:

CF said...

I'm glad Yale has admitted him and refuses to respond. It rather exposes academia for what it is, I think--
Just as the Summers kerfuffle exposed Harvard.

Now, to persuade their big buck contributors that's it's time to spend that money elsewhere.

MeaninglessHotAir said...

cf,

Maybe they are being exposed for what they are.

I mean, what is it that these places are, really? Why is it reasonable to give money to them and call that "charitable giving" at all? Why are they tax-exempt? Why are they able to rake in millions of the taxpayers' money without being held accountable to the taxpayers' laws?

Essentially these institutions are businesses in the business of education. They have brand names to preserve which allow them to charge premium values for their products. After all, the area of a circle is the same at Harvard as at North Dakota State. Why pay more?

But in fact they are treated as some sort of exclusive club that one's family was powerful enough to buy into. That's why we see those little stickers in the rear windows of all those cars. If they are exclusive clubs, fine, but end the charitable giving tax exclusion.

Skookumchuk said...

Changing demographics are not on their side anyway. There was a time when you went to one of about five universities in the Northeast, or you didn't go at all.

Technological change isn't on their side either. Any person with a browser has greater access to the written word than at any one university library.

To top it off, the American people no longer respect them. This ain't a country to put its énarques on a pedestal. There may have been some prospect of it becoming so in the 1970's and 80's, but no more.

I think that at least some of the outrageous behavior is just hysteria following their belated recognition of the above. That is the real reason; a hatred of their own culture, the culture that increasingly sees them as meaningless. And the hatred brings with it an attraction to that culture's enemies. Some Talib could plant Semtex on one Volvo gas tank per month out in the faculty parking lots - and they would still let them in.

Skookumchuk said...

Oh, yeah - and this one is priceless:

"Outrage over religious fascism ought to be the province of American liberals".

Barry Dauphin said...

Once upon a time many folks in middle America had ambivalent feelings about the folks at Yale, Harvard, etc. because they felt intimidated by all the pointy headed intellectuals that were absent minded professors--intimidated by their intellect but laughing at their lack of practical intelligence. Now much of middle America is looking upon the Yales, Harvards, etc. with much deserved contempt. The elite universities have ceased to be forums for serious and respectful debate. Instead they are fast replacing Ringling Bros and Barnum & Bailey with some Soviet Politburo thrown in for good measure.

Rick Ballard said...

Barry,

They are no longer universities in any meaningful sense with regard to what were once the liberal arts. They retain some semblance of a university regarding the physical sciences but boundaries are blurring even there.

The victory achieved by the affinity groups responsible for the intellectual sclerosis exhibited by the Ivies can only be described as hollow in the extreme.

Hollywood, the MSM and the universities going down together is pleasing but one might wish that it was happening more quickly.

chuck said...

There was a time when you went to one of about five universities in the Northeast, or you didn't go at all.

It may have looked that way, but IIRC there are some 500 colleges of various sorts in the Boston area and people actually go to them. There are many specialties, such as teaching, that don't require a Harvard degree.

A friend of mine recently remarked that part of his and his peers' nonchalance (and in some cases, support for) Hashemi has to do with the fact that the right has seized upon the issue.

I think his friend is like myself: when it comes right down to it, I am really not that concerned about liberty and justice in other countries. When the lack thereof poses a threat then I can be moved to action, but otherwise I am content to leave things be. This is generally a healthy attitude, I think. There are many important things nearer to home and we can't all spend our time being good little internationalists. The difference in the liberal case is that the liberal pieties require one to express an interest in such things and instead of admitting a profound disinterest one has to invent silly excuses.

I think more generally that the reason progressives, such as gay activists and feminists, don't concern themselves with the Muslim world, or China, Cuba, and North Korea, is that they really just don't care what happens over there. They just can't admit it. Real internationalists are scarce.

CF said...

My son went to Harvard and loved it--but it was not for the classes. They have so much money you can start up any activity you might be interested in and he learned more managing a business for HSA and as President of one of the organizations than he did in classes.Most of his friends were foreign students or poor children of recent immigrants. His real education took place before he went there.(I do think the kids at Harvard and less flakey than the kids at Yale)

But he majored in science.

The Liberal arts and social sciences are rather a p.c., easy riding joke. And it's almost impossible to flunk out--ergoclowns like Gore and Kerry.

Knucklehead said...

"It is an unforgivable insult to the Afghan people that he is here. He should face a court of law rather than be at one of your finest universities."

As far as Yale (and the others of our "finest universities") are concerned, that's just an added bonus. The intent was to insult the people of the United States.

The people who make the decisions at such institutions admire totalitarianism. The unwashed masses are far too stupid to be listened to much less allowed any input into decision making. They admire totalitarianism, and those who engage in it, in all forms regardless of brutality.

It is an affront to them that the US "interfered" with what they view as the authentic instantiation of a superior system of human organization. Admitting a participant in, and apologist for, that superior system provides the would be totalitarians of Yale with near rapture.

He is a hero to them. Embracing him makes them feel warm and fuzzy. It also insults America. And it insults the people of Afghanistand who, to the thinking of the Yale Totalitarian League, deserve nothing but vilification for not fighting off the Evil Hyper-Hegemon and maintaining a system of such sublime beauty as the Taliban represented.