Whatever else Stanford Professor David Palumbo-Liu may be, he certainly is a champion whiner. Here he takes to the Guardian to whine yet again about his critics claiming that he espouses violence. In doing so, he once again leaves the lingering impression that he does actually espouse violence. And he accuses those critics of McCarthyism, offering a helpful definition of that term which demonstrates that if anyone is engaging in McCarthyism, it is not David Palumbo-Liu’s critics, but David Palumbo-Liu himself.
McCarthyism, he says, involves “the use of tactics involving personal attacks on individuals by means of widely publicized indiscriminate allegations especially on the basis of unsubstantiated charges.”
“Indiscriminate allegations” and “unsubstantiated charges,” eh? Well, let’s look at the record. David Palumbo-Liu has accused me of purveying “right-wing propaganda,” and claimed that I published “lies and distortions” about him that “open[ed] the door to the hate mail, phone calls, threats and harassment that not only I, but also my family, am now subjected to.” Has he offered any evidence of these “threats and harassment,” and demonstrated that they’re connected to my writing about him at Jihad Watch? No, it’s an “unsubstantiated charge.” Has he demonstrated that what I publish is “right-wing propaganda”? No, it’s an “indiscriminate allegation.”
Meanwhile, he says that there is “no evidence” that he has “advocated violence.” Yet in this very article, he says: “The organization I belong to is called the Campus Antifascist Network. We advocate for organized resistance to fascist violence on campus.”
What fascist violence on campus, Professor? You mean like when Leftists rioted over Milo’s appearance at Berkeley? You mean the calls from Leftists that I be physically assaulted at Truman State University? You mean the Leftist mob that injured a professor at a Charles Murray event at Middlebury College in Vermont? Leftist students such as those David Palumbo-Liu counts as his friends and supporters are the real fascists today, emulating the fascists of old in physically menacing and forcibly silencing those they hate, but those aren’t the fascists Palumbo-Liu has in mind. He means conservative students, who haven’t assaulted anyone, or threatened to do so.
In any case, note that he says that his group advocates for “organized resistance to fascist violence on campus.” What kind of organized resistance to violence? Sit-ins? Flowers in gun barrels? Locking arms and marching together toward those who are being violent? What? Palumbo-Liu reveals what he means by “organized resistance to violence” when he writes rather incoherently: “We do not – and never would – advocate – for initiating violence.” The key word in that sentence is “initiating.” He doesn’t condemn responding to perceived “fascist” violence with violence. So does he advocate violence? No. But is he ruling it out? Not in any clear or direct way.
David Palumbo-Liu has previously called for the suppression of views that deviate from the hard-Left line. That’s fascism, and he’s a fascist. And what’s worse is that he is a revered professor at Stanford, and that there are hundreds of professors just like him on campuses all over the country. Universities today, it bears repeating, are no longer institutions of higher learning in which views are freely debated and accepted or rejected on their merits, but centers of hard-Left indoctrination and recruitment.
“I’m a Stanford professor accused of being a terrorist. McCarthyism is back,” by David Palumbo-Liu, Guardian, February 8, 2018:
Today anyone can be accused of anything, without basis in fact or evidence, and that accusation can be instantly trumpeted over the airwaves unchecked by any journalistic standard. That is the painful lesson I have had to learn this year.
As a scholar-activist working on issues such as sexual assault, Palestine, and anti-fascism, I am used to receiving abusive messages and being publicly maligned. Now, however, attacks on me have reached troubling new heights.
Last month, the Stanford Review, a rightwing publication co-founded by Peter Thiel and based on my university campus, wrote that I have helped set up an “organization [that is] undeniably a chapter of a terrorist group” and demanded my resignation. Their article was picked up by groups like JihadWatch, Campus Fix, Campus Reform, Fox & Friends, and other rightwing media outlets.
The organization I belong to is called the Campus Antifascist Network. We advocate for organized resistance to fascist violence on campus, and for educating our communities and others as to the nature of fascism today. We claim solidarity with a proud tradition of anti-fascism dating back to the early 20th century.
The group was founded shortly after the election of Donald Trump, and responded to the steady rise of a well-funded rightwing campaign on college campuses. We do not – and never would – advocate – for initiating violence.
The attack on me is part of a broader phenomenon noted by the American Association of University Professors, which claims that college campuses are the new battleground for conservative groups, far-right organizations and white supremacists. These groups are all trying to intimidate faculty and students, to recruit members, and to attract publicity. Not just careers and reputations are on the line – often personal safety is as well.
Today, we are seeing the resurgence of a wretched phenomenon we thought we had put behind us – McCarthyism, which involves “the use of tactics involving personal attacks on individuals by means of widely publicized indiscriminate allegations especially on the basis of unsubstantiated charges”….
CNN ran a story on the increasing numbers of professors like myself who have faced death threats for their political statements and activism.…
Despite this new and alarming phenomenon on campus, university administrators seem loth [sic, Professor] to aggressively protect their faculty. My own university has left it to me to press charges, and has chosen not to make any public comment on the Stanford Review’s defamation of my character, despite an open letter supporting me signed by nearly 700 members of the Stanford community.
Besides those who signed letters of support, six constitutional law scholars from the Stanford School of Law wrote a letter to the editor of the Stanford Daily declaring that there was no evidence that I had advocated violence, nor that I am a member of a terrorist group. These then were my sources of support, not the university. Yet this has not stopped the attacks on me….