Friday, Jul 25, 2008
Paglia and others sound off on Horowitz; Kant can't cure clinical depression; since when is Yale egalitarian?
Aug 27, 1999 | My response to Time magazine's slander
BY DAVID HOROWITZ
(08/26/99)
(The following is a copy of a letter Camille Paglia sent to the editors of Time magazine.)
That the ever-platitudinous Jack E. White has called David Horowitz a "bigot" is, of course, stupid and unprofessional but hardly surprising to the weary Time readers who, like hikers confronted with a bog, must rapidly skirt White's flatulent prose whenever it appears.
But that Time's editors allowed the sophomoric libel to pass raises questions about the magazine's process of internal review: Was this simply a late-summer slip-up (in which case Time will promptly admit it), or is there a double standard for PC propagandists like White?
I respect the astute and rigorously unsentimental David Horowitz as one of America's most original and courageous political analysts. He has the true 1960s spirit -- audacious and irreverent, yet passionately engaged and committed to social change.
Although we are both columnists for Salon, I do not know Horowitz -- aside from when I was interviewed on his radio show in California eight years ago. But I regard him as an important contemporary thinker who is determined to shatter partisan stereotypes and to defy censorship wherever it occurs -- notably, in this case, in the area of discourse on race, which is befogged with sanctimony and hypocrisy.
As a scholar who regularly surveys archival material, I think that, a century from now, cultural historians will find David Horowitz's spiritual and political odyssey paradigmatic for our time.
David Horowitz is a bigot, and the worst kind: He tries to defend his racist attacks by trotting out his "black family."
As a black woman married to a white man, I say: Good luck! If Horowitz cared what his family thought of his opinions on race, he would have rethought his column. Horowitz says he earned the right to talk to blacks "honestly" because of the '60s. Personally, I don't care how many marches he went to, how much money he dropped in a civil rights bucket, how many times he sang "We Shall Overcome" with guest celebrities; Horowitz is not black, and he has no right to tell me or any other person of color how to pursue issues pertaining to our communities. I would not dare tell the residents of Love Canal that they had no right or recourse against those industries they felt had poisoned their communities.
I do not care what Horowitz -- or any other white person outside my husband, in-laws and friends -- thinks about the African-American reality in America. Get some character before you accuse White of character assassination.
-- Alice Huber
Chicago
David Horowitz's column is harsh and blunt, but certainly not racist or bigoted. I know statistics can be found to support whatever position one wants, and I think Mr. Horowitz and the NAACP did a splendid job ferreting out supporting data. However, his comments are fairly stated and depict his view of the situation.
I'm not inclined to agree with this column. However, I am horrified by the obviously vicious attack by Time magazine. It is possible to offer opposing views without using such inflammatory language. That type of commentary simply fuels the anger and hatred that all too often typifies racial relations today.
Race is such an easy "card" to play. How difficult is it to claim a person is espousing racist views if you disagree with him? How can the accused disprove it when every subsequent comment is merely considered another example of bigoted thought? Until we can disagree about racial subjects without being accused of racism, this social wound will continue to fester.
-- Susan Koopmans
What's appalling about Horowitz's whine to Time is the shameless extent to which he expects to be treated with the interpretive generosity he so vehemently denies those not of his kith. To say that it is impossible to argue that he is a racist is for him to assume that his article was anything other than an irresponsible, baiting diatribe. Although I'm sure it's wholly apparent to him that racism doesn't exist, white people have done all they could in a handful of years to institutionally modify hundreds of years of oppression.
-- Terry Sawyer
I hope that Salon magazine will support Horowitz in his suit. It is about time someone took a stand against the accusers who try to blame everything on someone else. If they will look in the mirror they will see who is responsible for their problems. If this mad trend of letting the real bigots dominate the press and court system continues, we are all in real trouble. May God help our children.
-- Gerald Shepardson
Stillwater, Minn.
Everyone's entitled to his own opinion, including Horowitz and White. Salon is wasting space on Horowitz's justification and rationalization of his column. Horowitz is a columnist. I thought at some point, a columnist would develop a thick skin. If Horowitz has a dispute with Time, have him do what everyone else does: Write a letter to the editor. If these two people want to squabble about their own points of view, let them take it to the parking lot and let them duke it out. Leave us out of their bickering.
-- Kris Elwood
Green Bay, Wis.
Get Salon in your mailbox!