Daily New says that there was some sort of competition over being assigned to some new post (no doubt heavily endowed)

When I heard about this, all I could think of was, "At Columbia? Really??" I know, shame on me for thinking NYC was above the fray.

This case grows murkier by the day, but no matter the outcome, it’s dismaying to realize we’re so far from ever becoming a race-blind society.

Agreed. :(

Just to clarify... both are professors at Teachers College, an education-focused grad school at which I doubt there are as many desis as at Columbia undergrad. I do wonder what the defamation lawsuit is about though.

I'm glad that Columbia students and faculty have shown that this of type hatred is not welcome on their campus.

Ah...wonderful Teachers College! I did an astonishingly mind-numbing MA program there a couple of years ago. I somehow managed to escape with my intellect intact. I'll be watching this story with bated breath.

I'm glad that Columbia students and faculty have shown that this of type hatred is not welcome on their campus.

which is all well and good. i expected nothing less. we have yet, however, to establish that it was done by a malicious 'other' as they haven't released the tape yet. Gawker seemed to think that this was, as the least likeliest rationale, possibly Colombia's assertion of 4th amendment rights.

since i'm your representative from the vast right wing conspiracy, i can report back that a certain giddiness is just beginning to take hold. a rule of thumb in conservative circles is when the liberal press does not report the race of a suspect, the suspect cannot be white...a rule that played out true in amardeep's recent hate crime post.

and just as the left is concerned about the noose epidemic, the VRWC likes to talk about a fake hate crime epidemic, like duke lax, anti-muslim posters at GWU, and one sad sack who burned a cross on his own lawn.

so now that columbia is balking at releasing the tapes, the conspiracy theorists are going wild, specuialting that the tapes will show up in sandy burgers socks or william jeffersons freezer.

This type of thing is completely unacceptable in any civilized society. My only problem is with the "hate crime" investigation. The utilitarian in me does not like to criminalize symbolic acts, however despicable they may be and however much I may detest and abhor the person indulging in such acts.

1) i had the same thought as manju running the conditionals through my bayesian filter

2) it’s dismaying to realize we’re so far from ever becoming a race-blind society. i don't want to be snarky, but come on, many of the people on SM don't want a race-blind society, they like hanging out with other desis in preference to other races. hatred, violence, etc. = bad. but there's no point being blind, and the emergence of websites like SM for people generally from one particular race shows that we see color vividly and critically (that being said, though SM obviously isn't race blind, it generally isn't exclusive either, which is a major issue).

by the way, the so-called "anti muslim" poster was a satire (at least an attempt)targeting the "islamo-fascism" awareness week held by a 'conservative' (the word has lost its meaning) student group.

This is not like Jena 6. I have talked to Alan Bean who assisted the Jena 6 crowd. If you want to be shocked, you got to read all the details of that story. This is nothing. There will always be an isolated racist or even a non racist weirdo who wants to commit trouble by hanging a noose for kicks. We can not condemn an entire institution based on a random incident. The problem is when it is accepted by the authorities as not a big deal. In this case, the Professor is getting a lot of support from whites and other races. In the Jena 6 case, there was little discipline or action initiated by the white people in the school. Columbia should just hand over the part of the tapes from that time frame. It should not affect the privacy of others if they isolate the timeframe.

A few weeks back, the same thing happened at UMD campus in College Park... Is this spreading all across universities too?

in case that cross buring link didn't work, here's another report:

“I think we are all pretty much mystified as to why it happened,” said George A. Bonanno, a professor of psychology. “This is an institution that prides itself on having open dialogue about race and fairly progressive ideas.”

Please. The way they treated Ahmedinejad says it all. Here's Sunsara Taylor on the same event cicatrix discusses here.

I woudn't be surprised if Constantine did this herself. Why? For a host of reasons: (1) publicity and (2) buttress her lawsuit against Luthar. Personally, I find the whole affair fishy.

maybe, just maybe prof.constantine did the deed herself or outsourced it.

Suniya S. Luthar

Kinda ironic that somebody whose name is a homonym of Luther is suspected of this event. Did you know Luthar's secretary is named Malkum? Personally, I live by the philosophy that no noose is good news.

We can not condemn an entire institution based on a random incident.

Agreed. If Columbia should be mocked, I think Bollinger's pathetically defensive attempt at grandstanding with Ahmedinejad ranks far higher among the reasons.

i can't believe these publications named names. even when the investigating officials, and all others involved, were reluctant to. if luthar isn't found guilty, it wouldn't matter. her reputation (teaching at an ivy league school) is already ruined.

if luthar is guitly, she should be appropriately punished. but her involvement is one of many leads, officers say. constantine wrote a book on racism. that's enough to bring out any bigot in nyc to perform such atrocity.

terrible as heck, regardless.

oh no dravidian lurker... you went there. the HMF-Manju NOI back-and-forth begins soon.

which is all well and good. i expected nothing less. we have yet, however, to establish that it was done by a malicious 'other' as they haven't released the tape yet. Gawker seemed to think that this was, as the least likeliest rationale, possibly Colombia's assertion of 4th amendment rights.

true. many people seem to think there's something fishy about this case.

aside, I will say that I find it disappointing that something has to be so overt, so hateful in higher education in order to get attention or to 'get people (campus officials) talking.' I've been a tutor, student teacher, etc., and it's disappointing that people never discuss the many ways in which different groups of students feel maligned in the classroom.

forgot to add- it's particularly ironic that this took place at teachers college too.

i can't believe these publications named names. even when the investigating officials, and all others involved, were reluctant to. if luthar isn't found guilty, it wouldn't matter. her reputation (teaching at an ivy league school) is already ruined.

if luthar is guitly, she should be appropriately punished. but her involvement is one of many leads, officers say.

Talk about slander and a rush to judgement. I'm not sure why Professor Luthar is named openly, but it saddens me to see a old New Delhi high school classmate's name bandied about so readily. I simply cannot believe she did anything of the sort. In fact, I can't think of anyone of a gentler and kinder disposition.

So enough already about Suniya Luthar before the case is investigated fully.

2) it’s dismaying to realize we’re so far from ever becoming a race-blind society. i don't want to be snarky, but come on, many of the people on SM don't want a race-blind society, they like hanging out with other desis in preference to other races. hatred, violence, etc. = bad. but there's no point being blind, and the emergence of websites like SM for people generally from one particular race shows that we see color vividly and critically (that being said, though SM obviously isn't race blind, it generally isn't exclusive either, which is a major issue).

razib,
Of course. Identity-politics is terrible if left to fester on it's own and create tumor-like political schisms as it thrives but we all do practice a certain unconscious style of identity-politics as we shop for music, look for books and join online communities.

so now that columbia is balking at releasing the tapes, the conspiracy theorists are going wild, specuialting that the tapes will show up in sandy burgers socks or william jeffersons freezer.

Manju,

you must be behind on your Limbaugh. That's "Sandy Burglar" I'm not sure what the particular fundie-con appellation for William Jefferson is, however.

I'm not sure what the particular fundie-con appellation for William Jefferson is, however.

black. the other six letter appellation starting with n is reserved only for smoke filled rooms in country clubs.

While we are on the subject of obvious racial slurs.
http://www.theage.com.au/news/cricket/monkey-chants-for-symonds/2007/10/12/1191696091293.html

While we are on the subject of obvious racial slurs. http://www.theage.com.au/news/cricket/monkey-chants-for-symonds/2007/10/12/1191696091293.html

Ahem..."while we are on the subject of stories that have been on the news tab for a freaking day and are just barely tangential to the subject of the post..."

As an outsider I find the noose thing funny although politically incorrect.

her reputation (teaching at an ivy league school) is already ruined.

Is suniya luthar a desi ?

I highly doubt the Suniya woman is responsible for it. I actually find it odd one professor sues another for defamation. Constantine sounds a little oversensitive with the lawsuit. She has a right to freak out if she feels isolated by the community. But if she is getting all the support she needs, she needs to isolate the jerk who did it as the guy who is outnumbered. Otherwise your life is going to be hell if you let every prank, no matter how offensive, get to you.

These incidents will continue to happen even if he have a color blind society simply because there will always be one freak somewhere who will want to rile things up for his pleasure. I don't think anyone should be embarassed by this incident unless the university keeps covering this up. The controversy blew up to such a huge degree in Jena not because there were nooses. It was the way the white community reacted in the days subsequent to that incident.

Is suniya luthar a desi ?

I highly doubt the Suniya woman is responsible for it.

Is it really necessary to refer to her as "the Suniya woman" for pete's sake?

As an outsider I find the noose thing funny although politically incorrect.

I don't ever want to sound disparaging about a comment, about anything, because someone lives outside the US, but in this case the "noose thing" is rather a lot more of an issue that just political correctness. Maybe you haven't been to the US (or been here long enough) but the history of US white/black relations makes a noose a quite frightening object, loaded with the historical connotations of being arbitrarily strung up on the nearest tree for whatever reason the nearest white people found objectionable. This continued well into the 1950s, so it's not something that occurred centuries ago either. Whoever did it, there's nothing funny about it.

Not in Oz mate.
Ahem! was that a raw nerve there?

i had the same thought as manju running the conditionals through my bayesian filter

Ah razib... how I've missed your smugness. As I'm sure you've missed my priggish tone (great choice of words, by the way).

I got somethin' you can run through ya bayesian filter right here, pal.

I think that the goal of being "race blind" is really misleading. Unless we actually deconstruct the idea of race itself, on all levels, being blind to it doesn't make any sense. In fact, I believe there's some evidence that "colorblind" ideology runs counter to progress on our struggle with race and racism, insofar as it denies something that is real on a social level whether we acknowledge it or not.

As far as this incident... Dr. Constantine, from what I know and from people who know her, is a gentle and good soul, and this noose incident is heinous and shameful. I am curious to see what develops from it. I have serious doubts that some angry grad student of a desi professor would hang a noose over a black professor's door.

I think this is just part of a larger campaign by some individual at TC... this is not the only incident. There have been at least two reported incidents of racist and/or Nazi graffiti scrawled in bathroom stalls there. I'm sure they targeted Constantine because she is a prominent voice on issues of race and social justice.

Some poor Desi Prof. gonna get all the hate because of the NY POST ARTICLE.

Nazi graffiti scrawled in bathroom stalls there.

did Ahmadinejad use this bathroom?

I got somethin' you can run through ya bayesian filter right here, pal.

wow, i'm astounded by the 'come back.' we'll see what's on the video tape soon enough.

I think that the goal of being "race blind" is really misleading. Unless we actually deconstruct the idea of race itself, on all levels, being blind to it doesn't make any sense. In fact, I believe there's some evidence that "colorblind" ideology runs counter to progress on our struggle with race and racism, insofar as it denies something that is real on a social level whether we acknowledge it or not.

english please?

Identity-politics is terrible if left to fester on it's own and create tumor-like political schisms as it thrives but we all do practice a certain unconscious style of identity-politics as we shop for music, look for books and join online communities.

not all identity politics are created the same. people riot, kill and discriminate on the basis of race, religion and ethnicity far more often than they do on whether they like white wine or beer, bach or butt rock. that's why consumer driven globalization won't bring us all together.

I have serious doubts that some angry grad student of a desi professor would hang a noose over a black professor's door.

I've always felt like desis aren't proactively racist... they may snub their noses at those they deem to be inferior, but they can't be bothered to actively hate (gotta hit the books!). That's something left up to white people...

not all identity politics are created the same. people riot, kill and discriminate on the basis of race, religion and ethnicity far more often than they do on whether they like white wine or beer, bach or butt rock. that's why consumer driven globalization won't bring us all together.

nor did I suggest as much (i.e. all identity politics are created the same). I was not making the 'consumer-driven globalization will bring us together' point either. I was proceeding on the very reasonable assumption that we routinely make decisions as simple as sitting at table A or table B, based on the apparent essential characteristics of the people sitting there. That's the basic assumption of someone who ascribes to a particular kind of identity politics--that something/someone/some experience will be better simply because it is made or populated by the group to which you assign the most positive values.

fyi, from my own experience and that of my family, I can describe in sickening detail the violence and mayhem sown by ethnic identity-politics, so it amuses me just a tad that you would see fit to remind me of the likely outcomes of widespread adoption of identity-politics, when the wounds it leaves behind are still so raw.

Razib - "english please?"

doth i hear the smarty pot calling the kettle black....?

i think that the axioms of multiplication imply that identity politics = politics. think about it.

Re 13 & 16:

Columbia under Bollinger seems to have been succumbing to external pressure quite a bit. Besides Bollinger's charming introduction to Ahmedinjad, I recall the attempts to get rid of Joseph Massad and George Saliba in the MEALAC Department, and the current attempt by external groups to deny tenure to Nadia Abu El-Haj at Barnard.

Shaad- I'd heard of Joseph Massad, but I looked up the other two profs that you mentioned, and all I have to say is, academia sure is a tough world.

also, kind of off-topic, but I really love the photograph accompanying this post. It's gorgeous.

academia sure is a tough world.

especially true in the social sciences. this is not columbia, but another ugly incident was the dershowitz-finkelstein dustup, which led to norm finkelstein and mehrene larudee both being denied tenure at depaul despite otherwise glowing academic recommendations.

i think sen craig should get massad to defend him

especially true in the social sciences. this is not columbia, but another ugly incident was the dershowitz-finkelstein dustup, which led to norm finkelstein and mehrene larudee both being denied tenure at depaul despite otherwise glowing academic recommendations.

Finklestein really did know and on several occasions said/wrote about the likely outcome to his tenure review process. The fact that he never actually published an article in a peer-reviewed academic journal really hurt as well as the fact that most of the arguments from "The Holocaust Industry" were picked out of Novak's book on the holocaust in american life. That being said, with the Dersh dead-set against him, even if his tone in writing was a bit more civil, he'd probably still be out searching for another job. Most of my awesome professors in middle-east area-studies had no love for the man or his work, but certainly didn't think he was a bad teacher or deserved the Dersh-bomb by which he was forced out of DePaul.

I doubt the desi professor in this story will face the same kind of rail-roading, unless she is inextricably linked to the hanging of the noose.

Re 40:

nala, it isn't really that bad in academia, unless your area of interest is the near/middle east. That said, Daniel Pipes' Campuswatch and David Horowitz's Academic Bill of Rights do have the effect of muzzling tenure-track faculty even in other fields.

I was proceeding on the very reasonable assumption that we routinely make decisions as simple as sitting at table A or table B, based on the apparent essential characteristics of the people sitting there. That's the basic assumption of someone who ascribes to a particular kind of identity politics--that something/someone/some experience will be better simply because it is made or populated by the group to which you assign the most positive values.

ok, let's back up here. part of this is semantical. what is 'identity politics'? for example, some people have an identity as working class or not middle class. these people organize for their interests. in the context of elite campuses that really isn't a major factor because elite campuses are already strongly biased toward those of means (no matter the race). on elite campuses 'identity' often means race, sexual orientation, gender, etc. and yes, everyone essentializes and stereotypes. that's a psychological fact, you take the information you have and make the best inferences possible. this is not always racial, the fact i am a registered republican leads many acquaintances to assume i'm religious and pro-death penalty and what not when i'm neither of these things. they generalize because that's the best model of being a republican there is out there until further information can add more accuracy to the picture. that's life and i don't have much of a problem with that actually.

back to what cicatrix said about being 'race blind,' i honestly just had to laugh because SM attests to the daily fact that race matters. and, it also confirms that it doesn't always matter in a negative way, being around people who look like you can be liberating when you are no longer the 'indian guy/girl' etc. (this isn't really a fact for me, but i know it is important for many people) in any case, i was probably being a bit harsh as it isn't like she was running over her words with a fine tooth comb. but, i think the terminology used in 'discourse' can flesh out assumptions and that need to explored some. in the USA today most progressives favor diversity and tolerance, but sometimes we need to ask what we mean in the first place...speaking of which:

doth i hear the smarty pot calling the kettle black....?

yeah, yeah. but you know, i usually talk about facts that can be retrieved via google in 5 seconds, or scientific concepts, when i'm being inscrutable. the former just needs to be confirmed (i usually provide links) and the latter is real (science that is), jargon is necessary because you can't just use good ole boy language to describe it (or even good ole boy classical common sense, see QM). that is, science isn't made up word games. it's word games which map onto to reality in a systematic and coherent way. some of the deconstructionist stuff is also real and worthy, but a lot of it is just crap to mask people's attempt to force their ideas down your throat. e.g., many people are highly selective in their attempts to interject nuance, highlight subjectivity and deconstruct the concepts used in discourse. for example, there's no point in deconstructing and understanding the nuance of manju's politics for many here, he's a 'right wing apologist' or something pretty simple like that ;-) there's going to be no reflection on manju's Way of Knowing, which might be embedded in his own Truth. deconstruction is an open-ended process, and generally the process is ended at a point where the people are at the conclusion they wanted to reach in the first place. in that way, it's often just like theology or op-end journalism, you know the conclusion before you assemble the data.

New York magazine also thinks Prof. Luthar's name got dragged through the mud by the Daily News...

http://nymag.com/daily/intel/tags/madonna%20constantine

Also whats up with Bollinger calling D-Jad a dictator. He came from behind and won a victory against a powerful incumbent. Thats not really that dictatorial. He might very well lose the next election.

deconstruction is an open-ended process, and generally the process is ended at a point where the people are at the conclusion they wanted to reach in the first place. in that way, it's often just like theology or op-end journalism, you know the conclusion before you assemble the data.

razib,

you cheeky bugger. did you just remove the foundation of cultural studies, historiography and most post-colonial area-studies?

Shaad #45

nala, it isn't really that bad in academia,

You're right, it's not bad, it's ugly. Tenure-track faculty can do just about anything they feel like. A good many of them have skeletons in their closets. I know because I am one of the dead bodies. Except no one is asking any questions·

That is why foreign students, Chinese in particular, are so appreciated on US campuses. They don't say anything.

Ahem! was that a raw nerve there?

Personally, I fear the day when we DON'T have raw nerves about the historical lynchings of black people.

Also whats up with Bollinger calling D-Jad a dictator. He came from behind and won a victory against a powerful incumbent. Thats not really that dictatorial. He might very well lose the next election.

I agree, Bollinger showed a real ignorance of the Iranian political system. Actually, it might have been really interesting if he had pressed Ahmadinejad about his boss Khamenei's actions.

Re 49:

razib, you cheeky bugger. did you just remove the foundation of cultural studies, historiography and most post-colonial area-studies?

muralimannered, it's been done before. The initial salvos might have been lobbed by C. P. Snow in his 1959 lecture The Two Cultures, but matters came to a head during the Science Wars of the '90s: see, in particular, Gross and Levitt's Higher Superstition: The Academic Left and Its Quarrels With Science, the Sokal hoax in Social Text, and Sokal and Bricmont's Impostures Intellectuelles (US edition: Fashionable Nonsense: Postmodern Intellectuals' Abuse of Science).

And while Razib might be a registered Republican, even liberal/left-leaning scientists like me have had issues with certain aspects of cultural studies and postmodernist analysis.

Re 50:

You're right, it's not bad, it's ugly. Tenure-track faculty can do just about anything they feel like. A good many of them have skeletons in their closets. I know because I am one of the dead bodies. Except no one is asking any questions

Er, generally it's the tenured faculty who "can do just about anything they feel like." Tenure-track faculty, with the possibility of future tenure suspended above them like the Sword of Damocles, tend to be quite circumspect about their words and actions. That said, I don't know what fate befell you, and I am quite aware that abuse does occasionally occur, so you have my sympathies.

That is why foreign students, Chinese in particular, are so appreciated on US campuses. They don't say anything.

At the risk of overgeneralizing, in my field, the impression is that students of either East Asian or South Asian origin tend to have a better work ethic, and are actually interested in postgraduate academic work. I am inclined to think that that might have more to do with their being appreciated.

There was another noose found downtown infront of NY Post office.

muralimannered, it's been done before. The initial salvos might have been lobbed by C. P. Snow in his 1959 lecture The Two Cultures, but matters came to a head during the Science Wars of the '90s: see, in particular, Gross and Levitt's Higher Superstition: The Academic Left and Its Quarrels With Science, the Sokal hoax in Social Text, and Sokal and Bricmont's Impostures Intellectuelles (US edition: Fashionable Nonsense: Postmodern Intellectuals' Abuse of Science).

shaad,

i'm familiar with the sokal hoax, gross and levitt's book as well as c.p. snow's book. I used to entertain grand fantasies of living in the post-modern academic world as well, till I decided that it wasn't worth the years of living at the subsistence level while doing research for a dissertation. I believe there was also a marxist scholar at a very small college in Virginia who wrote a good article asking, after a fashion, when 'the post-colonial' actually began. It seemed to be far more fashionable abroad, even when I was in college, than at home (although that may have had more to do with the conservative nature of my college). Dipesh Chakrabarty's old stomping ground, Melbourne University, was flush with a lively crop of post-colonial scholars and aspirants to the same line of work.

hate to say this, but i think she did it herself because (1) to get publicity for her work on racism --she would otherwise be just another obscure researcher; (2)to cast doubt on her rival. also, this sort of thing would be very unlikely to occur at a place like Columbia.

Nazi graffiti scrawled in bathroom stalls there.

did Ahmadinejad use this bathroom?

manju, you're awesome. for a conservative :) may you get all the tax breaks that you want. but only those that you can get with the help of a conniving CPA and offshore accounts, not ones that crazy presidents decree without good reason.

deconstruction is an open-ended process, and generally the process is ended at a point where the people are at the conclusion they wanted to reach in the first place. in that way, it's often just like theology or op-end journalism, you know the conclusion before you assemble the data.

razib, fair enough. however, the conclusion is persuasive only when the narrative is bolstered with convincing evidence. i'm sure you're well-aware of the subjectivity in methodology that many scientists simply ignore in characterizing their disciplines. no one paradigm of knowing is inherently complete and appropriate to illuminate a problem. ultimately, i think it just comes down to this - good scholarship and bad scholarship. reasonable people, i hope, will appreciate both rawls and nozick because of the beauty of the framework they choose to employ in their reasoning. refusing to engage with people on the basis of their political leanings (i'm not accusing you of this, btw) or judging the weight of an argument primarily on the basis of its disciplinary affiliation, seems to be problematic. i hear you, though, on some of the terrible writing that is associated with some PoMo and PoCo people.

Shaad #53:

Er, generally it's the tenured faculty who "can do just about anything they feel like."

At the risk of overgeneralizing, in my field, the impression is that students of either East Asian or South Asian origin tend to have a better work ethic, and are actually interested in postgraduate academic work.

Sorry I meant tenure. But now that you bring it up, I like to think of the tenure-track as bullies-in-training. I remember how one young professor would wag her finger at the students--students older, more experienced and definitely more knowledgeable than her. Another young arrogant jerk threatened to shoot the students. Not all tenure-track faculty are on probation and to figure out who is and who isn't you'd have to have a fine meter on the internal politics.

As for impressions--one professor told me he grades by impression (none of the assigned work had ever been graded). So I wouldn't put too much weight on impression. In any case, my impression is that the East-South Asian graduate student work ethic is a hoax perpetuated mostly by (white) American and British professors (or oftentimes employers). I'm thinking now of one particular professor who told me he would only work with Chinese students--he seriously thought that he could get away with this sort of thing and yes he did. Courtesy Google, I uncovered the fact that he comes from a Scottish colonial family with assets in Australia (gold mines), South Africa, Jamaica, and yes good old Virginia (plantations you know). Perhaps master-serf relationships come naturally to them.

I'll probably have rotten tomatoes hurled my way, but I have been dealing with rotten, stinky tomatoes like the aforementioned for a good long time now and I stand by my hard-won impressions.

for all the rah rah about the noose, police investigation, etc. - was there any crime committed? It wasn't even vandalism as in drawing something on a wall. It wasn't an assault as in "get ready-- we're going to hang you" because the woman wasn't there and wasn't even the one that found the noose. Nothing suggests that there was an actual intent or threat to injure the woman or anyone else. I say it's a non-issue, not even as serious as bathroom scrawl, which actually necessitates someone cleaning it up.

It was the lack of a crime that prompted all that jena rah rah too. Protesters wanted a "hate crime" charge leveled at whoever put up the noose, but hate crime designation can only accompany an actual crime, and no crime was committed in putting a noose on a tree at night.

some people have an identity as working class or not middle class. these people organize for their interests. in the context of elite campuses that really isn't a major factor because elite campuses are already strongly biased toward those of means (no matter the race). on elite campuses 'identity' often means race, sexual orientation, gender, etc.

just as an aside. many elite colleges have tried to socioeconomically 'diversify' and 'combat' this in recent years, which means more outreach and courting during the admissions process, fewer loans-more grants financial aid policies, etc. personally i feel like they're only trying this in a very tokenizing way, much like racial diversity is on most campuses, and without acknowledging the reality that they are only able to have more low-income students if the other students and alumni continue to be filthy rich. as for campus identity politics, there are no 'poor student alliances' that i know of, and based on what i've seen, i feel like race is still a divisive factor among those who come from working class/not-rich backgrounds. poor/not-rich white kids feel that class 'trumps' race and feel awkward because the white kids they hang out with are unknowingly incredibly pretentious, and poor/not-rich black kids would rather hang out with other black kids regardless of class. i *do* think that it is a noble effort for elite campuses to take socioeconomic background into account when looking at applications, but i do wish they would be more upfront about why they do any of this, or how they are able to do it.

It was the lack of a crime that prompted all that jena rah rah too. Protesters wanted a "hate crime" charge leveled at whoever put up the noose, but hate crime designation can only accompany an actual crime, and no crime was committed in putting a noose on a tree at night.

that is completely not what any of the hullabaloo is about. it's because when the white kids beat up the black kids they got charged with assault and got probation, but when the black kids beat up the white kids, they got charged with attempted murder and got jail sentences. biased criminal justice system, anyone?

It was the lack of a crime that prompted all that jena rah rah too. Protesters wanted a "hate crime" charge leveled at whoever put up the noose, but hate crime designation can only accompany an actual crime, and no crime was committed in putting a noose on a tree at night.

They lived in a town where the idea of blacks gathering under a white tree was seen as outrageous. Everybody knows what the symbolism of it was. What made the incident blow out of proportion wasnt merely becasue the whites didnt get arrested. What made the situation get to a boiling point was a series of incidents starting with the white board members trying to dismiss it as a harmless prank. And then the DA threatening to ruin the black kids lives if anyone had the temerity to make noise about this. It also led to a few other incidents down the line and a pattern of the DA undercharging white participants and overcharging black participants was too easy to notice. It took a whole year for the Jena 6 marches to get that organized.

This case seems like an isolated instance. Some moron could be getting his kicks this way or has a misplaced sense of revenge on mind.

Somewhere right now HMF is praying to his picture of Malcolm x and wishing that a white person is behind this at Columbia University, so he can then go off on one of his all white people are racists rants.

cookiebrown @ 21,

just a little bit confused by the tone (and i realize you can't really relate that exactly in words on a blog). you quoted me because we both made the same point right? or did i say something different?

Clueless, it is unlikely that the person who did it is not white, considering how things go. With the rash of blackface/Latino/a mocking parties across the country, the vast majority of the participants were white, though occasionally there was a person of color or two in the crowd. If it did happen to be another person of color, they would be flaunting a symbol of white supremacist terrorization. Your sarcasm is really pathetic.

* in the party photos, I mean

It is also sickening that anyone would find "funny" a symbol of mob violence.

It is also sickening that anyone would find "funny" a symbol of mob violence.

Not everyone who reads this blog / comments is an American and the whole noose episode has me in splits.

Maybe you haven't been to the US (or been here long enough)

The comment was an outsider and I stand by it. Melbourne in my handle refers to the city in Oz not the one in Florida.

Personally, I fear the day when we DON'T have raw nerves about the historical lynchings of black people.

I've always felt like desis aren't proactively racist... they may snub their noses at those they deem to be inferior, but they can't be bothered to actively hate (gotta hit the books!). That's something left up to white people...

Ok people from the land of "Oz" -- it is FINE that you do not have a social-historical understanding of what a noose means in the U.S. For your clarification, it is similar to burning a cross in someone's front yard. Given its obvious role as a symbol of race-based terrorism, it is NOT funny or hilarious regardless of what your social context is. Further, it is OFFENSIVE (and reprehensible, and disgusting) to continue to argue that it is funny even after someone has clarified its intent to you. If you find bombing people's homes, terrorizing them, killing their children, beating them to the point of death or severe disability, hanging and burning them alive, etc., funny, then I would recommend that good manners dictate that you refrain from telling everyone else that you find this entertaining.

"that is completely not what any of the hullabaloo is about. it's because when the white kids beat up the black kids they got charged with assault and got probation, but when the black kids beat up the white kids, they got charged with attempted murder and got jail sentences. biased criminal justice system, anyone?"

attention to the facts of the case, anyone? The black kids never got beat up, especially not on school grounds or to any point requiring hospitalization. The feeling was that their knocking the white kid out and stomping him should not have been "attempted murder" because the white kid's injuries weren't as severe as what they felt attempted murder should have been. Fine, perhaps the charges should have been some sort of assault and battery, whatever you like. Keep in mind the perpetrator was already on probation for punching a teenage girl in the face, which does often merit a DA going for a stronger charge.

There are plenty of places where one can find horrid racial injustice. "Jena Six" is showtime.

noblekinsman - I gave a very general synposis of the situation, which is obviously more complicated, to point out what it is that so many people find reprehensible about the situation. And witness testimonies are conflicting about some party at which a group of black students might have gotten attacked.

Camille - I see what you mean, but I did mean overt signs of racism like nooses, etc. People like Dinesh D'Souza are definitely harmful though.

Just to clarify, noblekinsman you're right in that I mischaracterized the situation in Jena in my initial 'synposis.' But if you look news about racially charged events happening in the town for over the past year, it's clear that white defendants (if they're even charged with anything) are getting lighter sentences than black defendants, and the Mychal Bell case is the best example of that.

And FWIW, I'm not entirely sure that I think hanging a noose should be a crime punishable with jail time (assuming there is no physical harm done). Community service or some sort of racism therapy, but jail time? I find that hard to justify.

"I'm not entirely sure that I think hanging a noose should be a crime punishable with jail time (assuming there is no physical harm done)."

It is NOT a crime and should not be a crime. It is protected speech. I can hate you all day long and show you nooses, mock your dead ancestors, and hate your race and your soul. I just can't use the noose on you or credibly threaten to. Which comes back to the Columbia case. No crime was committed. I don't even think it can be construed as a defacement of property.

There are huge sentencing discrepancies, and all sorts of racial problems in judicial system. Jena garbage isn't symbolic of them. Charging someone with attempted murder for stomping out an unconscious person is fair. Much of the jena protesters' argument when it comes to specifics of the case ends up being "the kid didn't look that hurt," which is possibly because people pulled the attackers off, and further is irrelevant to attempted murder (if you shoot and miss, you didn't hurt anyone but you attempted murder). It's iffy at best. Perhaps the kid got charged a bit too harshly. That's it. Then the question becomes, well does a racist perhaps deserve to get stomped? Maybe. But I think drunk hipsters deserve to get stomped. Nevertheless, it's illegal to do so, and that's a good law.

it is similar to burning a cross in someone's front yard.

If you find bombing people's homes, terrorizing them, killing their children, beating them to the point of death or severe disability, hanging and burning them alive, etc., funny,

I equate the noose to Americans poking fun at the Indian accent. Unlike the Don Imus comment - that was criminal behaviour.

good manners dictate that you refrain from telling everyone else that you find this entertaining

I equate the noose to Americans poking fun at the Indian accent.

No, a better analogy is painting a swastika on a Jewish professor's door. It is a pointed reminder of a time when your people could be murdered with impunity.

And yes, I realize I'm going to the Godwin's Law place, but I think the comparison is justified in this instance.

I'm not American either, but I understand the context of the "noose" just as I do understand swastikas (in the nazi sense) and burning crosses.

Yep, there's definitely a huge difference between poking fun at someone and putting a symbol of death purposely up within their view. Words and items have no intrinsic meaning or value aside the value assigned to them, however such an item as a noose has a pretty wide interpretation in American culture, and that assigned interpretation is commonly "death by hanging". It's not the same as putting black roses outside her door or even writing a derogatory name on her door. It was meant to convey something very specific.

And yes, I realize I'm going to the Godwin's Law place, but I think the comparison is justified in this instance.

It's very justified. if not moreso, given that the incident happened in the United States, and not Germany.

Somewhere right now HMF is praying to his picture of Malcolm x and wishing that a white person is behind this at Columbia University,

Shouldn't I be praying to David Duke for that? Or Clueless?

Irony is.. Malcolm was actually shot at the Audobon Ballroom, not too far from Columbia.

i apologize for responding on this thread to hmf's remarks (this and this among others) on the facebook post, but apparently he has been engaging in his usual charming behavior and the post has since been closed, which leaves me without a forum to respond on. i would appreciate it if you could let my response stand, or add it to the other post.

hmf, this is my last response to you on this discussion.

if a guy actually makes some statements against your usual misogynist frothing, it is because he wants to get in women's pants, and women of course are incapable of contributing effectively to the discussion since you and you alone have had the unique vantage to explore both male and female behaviors and are specially qualified to posit laughable theories that sound like they have been extracted from reading the equivalents of self-help books written by pick-up artists like mystery and the game. and if none of these work, adopt the age-old strategy of ad hominem against the commenter. it seems an easy way to just dismiss arguments that don't agree with your contorted world views without actually engaging with the points in them.

i am sure your analysis of human interactions that constantly focuses on the follies of whites and women has absolutely nothing to do with the fact that you are a male person of color (and for all that, i even agree with a lot of your opinions about racism in the us). but seeing this would require more self awareness than you seem capable of. surely, even you must have wondered why every discussion you get into on any matter of substance ends up in abuse and vituperation, while this doesn't happen for other commenters. you seem to confuse being wrong, obnoxious and unpopular with actually being correct and courageous. or maybe this is just your coping mechanism. as with every other problem in the world, you always blame the other person rather than seeing it as a consequence of your bushian defensive and insecure attitude of "you are either with me or against me", but seem to be left without a response when actually shown an instance where you spewed your hate filled spitballs with absolutely no reason. as usual, you adopted your usual "debating" strategy of cherry picking sentences so you didn't have to address anything uncomfortable.

sm intern, you might want to consider why hmf's quoting misogynist lyrics with a sham apology was considered acceptable, but a response with similar lyrics was not. even by the limited definition of civility being "low" profanity, you must have noticed his nastiness to commenter after commenter in multiple posts. hey, you decided to get into the messy business of censorship after all!

melbourne desi, I don't care what you equate the noose to. I am explaining to you what it means to Americans to provide context so that it's easier to understand why people would react strongly to your assessment. My goal is to engage in dialogue so that there are concrete images for you to connect to. It is not a stretch to equate a noose (hello?! lynching?) with the entire widespread era of systematic and public violence towards African Americans in the U.S. I don't say this for you to hit back with, "Oh, well if it's not an Australian example I will continue to laugh because it is soooo funny." I know you are smarter than that.

I also understand that you're joking about my comment at the end re: good manners, and this is not directed solely to you, but comparing me to a slave owner because I value an e-space that promotes continuous dialogue as opposed to one that devolves into HMF vs. Manju nonsense is really inappropriate. I am not a fascist, nor am I the PC-police, nor am I a slave owner, so please come up with a more creative (and accurate) description for what you're trying to say or just do one better and refrain from calling me names.

Mary, the analogy was warranted.

given that in all likelihood it was Ahmadinejad who scrawled the swastika and yarmukle wearing jew cartoon on the CU bathroom wall, perhaps we consider the theory that he mistook the good professor for a homosexual (which of course is just a western social construction as prof massad instructs us).

there are some intersting 1st ammendment questions at stake here, though at the end of the day threats of physical violence are not protected speech, as one's rights naturally end where another's begin. this can be reasonably interpreted as a threat, not unlike jena, and one cannot send a note to another person saying "i'm going to kill you" even if one has no intention of doing it.

the problem is that such incidents are highly contextualized, and there is often a high degree of subjectivity since in other contexts, this would be protected speech. more problematic, for example, is the pace university koran flushing incident, which straddles the line between jena and serrano's piss christ.

and as much as i'd like to witness the spectacle of cuban american suing hollywood movie stars for wearing che guevara t-shirts, hate speech in the abstract must be protected. hate crime legislation has many sympathisers on the right, as even sean hannity and bill o reilly want severe punishment for the noose hangers, in part because they want to also ban americn flag burning and restrict govt grants for anti-christian art.

already there is a nys assemblyman who wants to introduce a law that criminalizes noose-hanging. this leaves the libertarian right and the old fashioned aclu types alone to fight for a classic liberal interpretation of the free speech doctrine. ban cross burning and noose hanging in the abstract, and you can rest assured next comes flying a hammer and sickle or burning an American flag.

I value an e-space that promotes continuous dialogue as opposed to one that devolves into HMF vs. Manju nonsense

hey, hmf vs. manju is nothing if not continuous.

I'm not sure what the legal definition of a threat is in New York, but hanging a noose, is definitely threatening within American history and I'm sure in other parts of the world too. I'm sure my parents, who haven't really paid attention to American history even though they live in the US, would be worried sick if someone hung that on my door (no American context is needed; i'm sure they wouldn't think that someone was just trying to decorate my door) - What is merely free speech and what transgresses into unprotected speech that has potential for violence, I'm not sure in NY what that is. Maybe a New York lawyer can explain?

I know you are smarter than that.

I am not a fascist, nor am I the PC-police, nor am I a slave owner, so please come up with a more creative (and accurate) description for what you're trying to say or just do one better and refrain from calling me names

No name calling intended although it is an interesting thought - to be your slave that is :)

Any updates on this story?

hey, hmf vs. manju is nothing if not continuous.

As Orwell said, the war is not meant to be won, it's meant to be continuous.

, but seem to be left without a response when actually shown an instance where you spewed your hate filled spitballs with absolutely no reason

DL, if you must know, it was this statement of yours that I considered first blood. Not to mention this. Instead of whine about it, I bit back.

I'd respond to the rest of your tome, but I do indeed try and respect the mods attempt to keep threads on track and topic.