Columbia anthropology professor Nicholas "Million Mogadishus" De Genova is not the only member of that illustrious faculty who has been abusing his professorial authority by making outlandish, incendiary, and irresponsible commentary about the Middle East. Dissident Middle East scholar Martin Kramer takes the head of Columbia's Middle Eastern and Asian Languages and Cultures (MEALAC) to task today on his blog Sandstorm. Kramer has much to say about Hamid Dabashi, and is particularly eloquent on Dabashi's own contribution to the teach-in that his colleague De Genova made so famous.

Dabashi's comment at the teach-in:

Because there are no answers to our questions about this war, we just get angrier and angrier. But this is where the blessed thing called "teach-in" comes in handy. Tonight, we think for ourselves. Revenge of the nerdy "A" students against the stupid "C" students with their stupid fingers on the trigger.

...one is left wondering just what Dabashi is talking about. And just what are Columbia students to conclude from such a quote in their campus newspaper? That a pro-war position might drop them to a "C"? That's why professors (especially departmental chairs) have no business suggesting even the most tenuous correlation between grades and politics. It's just one more example of Dabashi's egregiously flawed judgment.

Students deserve real self-discipline from their professors. I miss evidence of this quality in the illiberalism, sloppy research, and near-hysterical tone of these statements Dabashi has written for publication. It's deeply disturbing to me thatóat this time, of all timesósuch a person chairs the department of Middle Eastern and Asian Languages and Cultures at Columbia.

I do hope the administration has the courageófor it will take a lot of courageóto stand up to demagoguery of this nature. Columbia has done so in the past, and, if it is still the institution I remember, I expect it will do so in the future.

I guess this could be interpreted as a threat to cut the grades of those who disagree, but I'd read it differently...just as more elitist snobbery ("we're brilliant and the people in Washington and the military are stupid.")

"stupid 'C' students with their stupid fingers on the trigger" 'A' students ARE pulling the triggers. Due to PC in the Army, Infantry is now the most sought after MOS. A young man graduating from ROTC or West Point needs at least a 3.5 GPA to be considered for training as an Infantry officer!

Tipsy...plus, the 3.5 GPA for the Infantry officers probably actually means something...ie, most of them probably took courses with some substance and real degree of difficulty, rather than the typical mish-mash..

It is heartening to see John Corigliano, a distinguished professor at the City University of New York, repsond to to such remarks. Would that more of our colleagues spoke out against "illiberalism" and "demagoguery" on the campuses of our university.

Dear Tipsy,

I'm not a military person, but does the infantry comprise only officers?

Thanks.

Not a Military Person ... No, in fact infantry is overwhelmingly enlisted men. I just get angry when people like Dabashi say that military men are dumb and felt like the GPA requirement thing was a good way to show how wrong he is.

I definitely interpret his remarks as condescending towards the supposed intellectual abilities of others, not as a threat over grades. Of course, the nerdy "A" students are probably not showing up to transparently stupid propaganda-fests either. The A students in feel-good identity studies depts. don't qualify as nerds. How many math or physics majors get involved in this nonesense?