Gorilla in the Room <email@example.com> wrote:
From: "Gorilla in the Room" <firstname.lastname@example.org>
Subject: Debate Stifled on Walt-Mearsheimer Paper - Rmail
Date: Tue, 6 Jun 2006 08:02:36 -0700
Looks like the thuggish tactics of Dershowitz et al. had the intended effect of silencing real debate at the highest levels on The Lobby.
When professors Walt and Mearsheimer (of Harvard and the University of Chicago, respectively) went public with their paper in the London Review of Books on March 23, it seemed the whole world started screaming. From columnists Richard Cohen and Max Boot to historian Tony Judt and Democratic Rep. Eliot Engel of New York, public figures battled in the pages of the major papers. Accusations of anti-Semitism and divided loyalties flew. The magazine I work for published three articles on the paper in a single week.
But something else happened at Harvard, something strange. Instead of a roiling debate, most professors not only agreed to disagree but agreed to pretend publicly that there was no disagreement at all. At Harvard and other schools, the Mearsheimer-Walt paper proved simply too hot to handle â and it revealed an academia deeply split yet lamentably afraid to engage itself on one of the hottest political issues of our time. Call it the academic Cold War: distrustful factions rendered timid by the prospect of mutually assured career destruction.
Sent using R|mail.
Subscribe to the RSS feed for political-research at http://rss.groups.yahoo.com/group/political-research/rss