Looking the other way on racial bigotry
The case of George Ciccariello-Maher is an interesting and instructive one. Ciccariello-Maher, a former professor at Drexel University, generated headlines a while ago when he tweeted favorably about the ethnic extermination of white people; later he blamed the brutal Las Vegas massacre, without evidence, on a “narrative of white victimization,” claiming that the sadistic mass murder “is what happens when [white people and men] don’t get what they want.” To say that Ciccariello-Maher has a chip on his shoulder about white people would probably be an understatement; it is uncomfortable, in any case, to witness such naked racism so proudly and publicly flaunted. Most people keep that stuff under wraps, out of shame if nothing else.
The public revelation of Ciccariello-Maher’s racist inclinations unfortunately led to a wave of idiot harassment, including death threats; there does not seem to be a controversy in the Internet era that is not accompanied by such stupidity. Then as now, The College Fix and every other respectable institution and person wholly condemns such behavior. The most appropriate thing to do is ignore it, but Drexel University decided to place Ciccariello-Maher on administrative leave. The university claimed it was a matter of safety, not politics. Then, several weeks ago, Ciccariello-Maher announced that he was leaving Drexel, claiming that, due to the harassment, his “situation” there had become “unsustainable.” He has since taken a position at New York University.
The coverage surrounding Ciccariello-Maher’s tribulations at Drexel have been largely, if implicitly, sympathetic, inasmuch as it has focused primarily on the dumb Internet harassment that has been directed at him rather than the explicitly racist rhetoric in which he has trucked. And therein lies the queer sort of weirdness of the whole situation. If an instructor at a major American university had tweeted, “All I want for Christmas is black genocide,” surely the media response and the public reaction would both be universally, overwhelmingly negative (and rightly so). You cannot say the same about Ciccariello-Maher’s tweets calling for the mass slaughter of whites. Indeed, the instructor himself exhibits an almost-comically unselfaware cognitive dissonance on the matter: when resigning from Drexel, Ciccariello-Maher condemned the alleged “assault from the racist Right,” which is a funny thing you say when you yourself have openly pined for white genocide. It’s a perfect instance of the pot calling the kettle black (or white, as the case may be).
If there is anything to take away from this mess of a controversy, perhaps it is that, for some reason, many people are willing to tolerate blatant racism in the ranks of academia, at least if it’s racism of the right kind and the practitioner of it is of the right political persuasion. Indeed, that has been clear for some time now. And that is a shame. Higher education should be just that—high, as in above the rank and petty and idiot impulses of bigotry. In an ideal world, if a professor wrote favorably about “white genocide,” we would recognize it for the ghastly and indefensible opinion that it is. In this world, however, such a professor can land an instructor position at one of the most prestigious universities on the planet. What does that say about higher ed’s priorities? Nothing good, I’m afraid.
MORE: Ohio State tells students only white people can be racist
IMAGE: Flickr
Please join the conversation about our stories on Facebook, Twitter, Instagram, Reddit, MeWe, Rumble, Gab, Minds and Gettr.