Misplaced Pages

Norman Finkelstein

Article snapshot taken from Wikipedia with creative commons attribution-sharealike license. Give it a read and then ask your questions in the chat. We can research this topic together.

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Dronkle (talk | contribs) at 23:35, 25 June 2007 (Removing "offending" phrase which generated BLP issue but leaving rest.). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Revision as of 23:35, 25 June 2007 by Dronkle (talk | contribs) (Removing "offending" phrase which generated BLP issue but leaving rest.)(diff) ← Previous revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff)
Page extended-protectedThis article is currently under extended confirmed protection.
Extended confirmed protection prevents edits from all unregistered editors and registered users with fewer than 30 days tenure and 500 edits. The policy on community use specifies that extended confirmed protection can be applied to combat disruption, if semi-protection has proven to be ineffective. Extended confirmed protection may also be applied to enforce arbitration sanctions. Please discuss any changes on the talk page; you may submit an edit request to ask for uncontroversial changes supported by consensus.
For other uses, see Norman Finkelstein (disambiguation).
This article may require cleanup to meet Misplaced Pages's quality standards. No cleanup reason has been specified. Please help improve this article if you can. (February 2007) (Learn how and when to remove this message)
File:Norman finkelstein democracynow.jpg
Norman Finkelstein on Democracy Now!

Norman G. Finkelstein (born December 8 1953) is an American professor of political science and author. A graduate of Binghamton University, he received his Ph.D in Political Science from Princeton University. He has held faculty positions at Brooklyn College, Hunter College, New York University, and most recently, DePaul University, where he was an assistant professor from 2001 until he was denied tenure in 2007.

Political Views

The son of Jewish Holocaust survivors, Finkelstein is known for his writings critical of Israel's role in the Israeli-Palestinian conflict and for his contention that the Holocaust is being exploited both for pro-Israel political ends, and for the personal financial gain of institutional actors at the expense of actual survivors. A self-described "forensic scholar," Finkelstein's books each take as their foil a work of mainstream scholarship which he purports to expose as deeply flawed and even fraudulent. The authors he has thus targeted, including Daniel Jonah Goldhagen and Alan Dershowitz, along with others such as Benny Morris whose work Finkelstein cites approvingly, have in turn accused Finkelstein of grossly misrepresenting their work, and selectively quoting from their books.

Parental background, education and career

Finkelstein has written of his parents' experiences during World War II. His mother, Maryla Husyt Finkelstein, grew up in Warsaw, Poland, and survived the Warsaw Ghetto and the Majdanek concentration camp, as well as two slave labor camps. His father, Zacharias Finkelstein, was a survivor of both the Warsaw Ghetto and the Auschwitz concentration camp.

Finkelstein grew up in New York City. He completed his undergraduate studies at Binghamton University in New York in 1974, after which he studied at the École Pratique des Hautes Études in Paris. He went on to earn his Master's degree in political science from Princeton University in 1980, and later his PhD in political studies, also from Princeton. Finkelstein wrote his doctoral thesis on Zionism, and it was through this work that he first attracted controversy. Finkelstein has taught at Rutgers University, New York University, Brooklyn College, and Hunter College and currently teaches at DePaul University in Chicago.

Finkelstein on From Time Immemorial

Norman Finkelstein examined the book From Time Immemorial, by Joan Peters, in detail in his doctoral thesis and alleged that the book was a "monumental hoax". A "history and defense" of the state of Israel, Peters' book had been effusively praised in mainstream United States media sources. According to Finkelstein, his charges initially roused little attention in the U.S.: "By the end of 1984, From Time Immemorial had...received some two hundred notices...in the United States. The only 'false' notes in this crescendoing chorus of praise were the Journal of Palestine Studies, which ran a highly critical review by Bill Farrell; the small Chicago-based newsweekly In These Times, which published a condensed version of this writer's findings; and Alexander Cockburn, who devoted a series of columns in The Nation exposing the hoax....The periodicals in which From Time Immemorial had already been favorably reviewed refused to run any critical correspondence (e.g. The New Republic, The Atlantic Monthly, Commentary). Periodicals that had yet to review the book rejected a manuscript on the subject as of little or no consequence (e.g. The Village Voice, Dissent, The New York Review of Books). Not a single national newspaper or columnist contacted found newsworthy that a best-selling, effusively praised 'study' of the Middle East conflict was a threadbare hoax" (Finkelstein, Image and Reality of the Israel-Palestine Conflict 45-46).

However, after a number of reviewers in the British and Israeli media supported Finkelstein's criticisms, a few U.S. journals began publishing more critical reviews of the book. In the magazine Foreign Affairs, William B. Quandt described Finkelstein's criticism of From Time Immemorial presented in chapter 2 of Image and Reality of the Israel-Palestine Conflict as a "landmark essay" and a "victory to his credit."

The controversy that surrounded Finkelstein's research caused a delay in his earning his Ph.D. at Princeton University. Noam Chomsky, a friend of Finkelstein's, wrote in Understanding Power that Finkelstein "literally could not get the faculty to read ." According to Chomsky, Princeton eventually granted Finkelstein his doctorate only "out of embarrassment ," but refused to give him any further professional backing.

Finkelstein published portions of his thesis in the following publications:

Praise and Criticism of Finkelstein's scholarship

Finkelstein's work has attracted a number of supporters and detractors across the political spectrum. Notable supporters include Noam Chomsky, prominent intellectual and political critic; Raul Hilberg, Holocaust historian; Avi Shlaim, Israeli New Historian; and Mouin Rabbani, Palestinian jurist and analyst. According to Hilberg, Finkelstein displays "academic courage to speak the truth when no one else is out there to support him... I would say that his place in the whole history of writing history is assured, and that those who in the end are proven right triumph, and he will be among those who will have triumphed, albeit, it so seems, at great cost."

Criticism has been leveled against Finkelstein from several angles. The first sources are responses from those whose work Finkelstein has discussed. Daniel Goldhagen, whose book Hitler's Willing Executioners Finkelstein criticized, claimed his scholarship has "everything to do with his burning political agenda." Similarly, Alan Dershowitz, whose book The Case for Israel and Finkelstein's response Beyond Chutzpah sparked an ongoing feud between the two, has claimed Finkelstein's complicity in a conspiracy against pro-Israel scholars: "The mode of attack is consistent. Chomsky selects the target and directs Finkelstein to probe the writings in minute detail and conclude that the writer didn’t actually write the work, that it is plagiarized, that it is a hoax and a fraud," arguing that Finkelstein has leveled charges against many academics, calling at least 10 "distinguished Jews 'hucksters,' 'hoaxters,'(sic) 'thieves,' 'extortionists, and worse."

Other criticisms come from historians and academics including Benny Morris, the unofficial leader of the Israeli New Historians, Peter Novick, and Marc Saperstein, who find fault in his method and findings. For example, historian Omer Bartov called his work "shrill hyperbole...brimming with the indifference to historical facts, inner contradictions, strident politics and dubious contextualizations."

Finkelstein and Alan Dershowitz

Graphic of a globe with a red analog clockThis article documents a current event. Information may change rapidly as the event progresses, and initial news reports may be unreliable. The latest updates to this article may not reflect the most current information. Feel free to improve this article or discuss changes on the talk page, but please note that updates without valid and reliable references will be removed. (June 2007) (Learn how and when to remove this message)
Main article: Dershowitz-Finkelstein Affair

Shortly after the publication of the book The Case for Israel, Norman Finkelstein complained that it is "a collection of fraud, falsification, plagiarism, and nonsense". Saying that Dershowitz lacked knowledge about specific contents of his own book during their joint interview by Goodman, Finkelstein also speculated that Dershowitz did not write the book, and may not have even read it..

In addition, Finkelstein noted that in twenty instances that all occur within about as many pages, Dershowitz's book cites from the same passages that Joan Peters used in her book From Time Immemorial (a book which Finkelstein says is widely regarded by serious scholars as fraudulent), in largely the same order often quoting exactly the same words with ellipses in the same places. In at least two instances, Dershowitz reproduces Peters' errors (see below), from which Finkelstein draws the conclusion that he could not have checked the original sources as he claims. Finkelstein suggests that this copying of quotations amounts to copying ideas. Dershowitz stated that if "somebody borrowed the quote without going to check back on whether Mark Twain had said that, obviously that would be a serious charge"; however, he insisted emphatically that he himself did not do that, that he had indeed checked the original source by Twain.

On behalf of Dershowitz, Harvard Law School dean Elena Kagan asked former Harvard president Derek Bok to investigate the charges; Bok exonerated Dershowitz of the charge of plagiarism.

Dershowitz threatened libel action over the charges in Finkelstein's book, and, consequently, Finkelstein deleted the word "plagiarism" from the text before publication. Finkelstein also removed the charge that Dershowitz was not the true author of The Case for Israel, the publisher said, because "he couldn’t document that."

Asserting that he did consult the original sources, Dershowitz says that Finkelstein is simply accusing him of good scholarly practice: citing references he learned of initially from Peters' book. Dershowitz denies that he used any of Peters' ideas without citation. In a footnote in The case for Israel which cites Peters' book, Dershowitz explicitly denies that he "relies" on Peters for "conclusions or data".

In their joint interview on Democracy Now, however, Finkelstein cited specific passages in Dershowitz's book where a phrase that he says Peters coined was incorrectly attributed to George Orwell: " coins the phrase, 'turnspeak', she says she's using it as a play off of George Orwell which as all listeners know used the phrase 'newspeak'. She coined her own phrase, 'turnspeak'. You go to Mr. Dershowitz's book, he got so confused in his massive borrowings from Joan Peters that on two occasions, I'll cite them for those who have a copy of the book, on page 57 and on page 153 he uses the phrase, quote, George Orwell's turnspeak. Turnspeak is not Orwell, Mr. Dershowitz, you're the Felix Frankfurter chair at Harvard, you must know that Orwell would never use such a clunky phrase as 'turnspeak'."

James O. Freedman, the former president of Dartmouth College, the University of Iowa, and the American Academy of Arts and Sciences, has defended Dershowitz:

I do not understand charge of plagiarism against Alan Dershowitz. There is no claim that Dershowitz used the words of others without attribution. When he uses the words of others, he quotes them properly and generally cites them to the original sources (Mark Twain, Palestine Royal Commission, etc.) complaint is that instead he should have cited them to the secondary source, in which Dershowitz may have come upon them. But as the Chicago Manual of Style emphasizes: 'Importance of attribution. With all reuse of others’ materials, it is important to identify the original as the source. This not only bolsters the claims of fair use, it also helps avoid any accusation of plagiarism.' This is precisely what Dershowitz did.

Alexander Cockburn in The Nation writes however:

Quoting The Chicago Manual of Style, Dershowitz artfully implies that

he followed the rules by citing "the original" as opposed to the secondary source, Peters. He misrepresents Chicago here, where "the original" means merely the origin of the borrowed material, which is, in this instance, Peters.

Now look at the second bit of the quote from Chicago, chastely separated from the preceding sentence by a demure three-point ellipsis. As my associate Kate Levin has discovered, this passage ("To cite a source from a secondary sourceS") occurs on page 727, which is no less than 590 pages later than the material before the ellipsis, in a section titled "Citations Taken from Secondary Sources." Here's the full quote, with what Dershowitz left out set in bold: "'Quoted in.' To cite a source from a secondary source ("quoted inS") is generally to be discouraged, since authors are expected to have examined the works they cite. If an original source is unavailable, however, both the original and the secondary source must be listed."

So Chicago is clearly insisting that unless Dershowitz went to the originals, he was obliged to cite Peters. Finkelstein has conclusively demonstrated that he didn't go to the originals. Plagiarism, QED, plus added time for willful distortion of the language of Chicago's guidelines, cobbling together two separate discussions.,

Professor Noam Chomsky defended Norman Finkelstein on the April 17 2007 broadcast of Democracy Now!

Dershowitz has described Finkelstein as a "failed academic", and has claimed that Finklestein intentionally picked a fight so that he could claim that he was the victim of "outside interference" if DePaul University does not award him tenure. In an April 3, 2007 interview with the Harvard Crimson, "Dershowitz confirmed that he had sent a letter last September to DePaul faculty members lobbying against Finkelstein's tenure."

Tenure denial

In June 2007, following a 4-3 vote by DePaul University's Board on Promotion and Tenure (a faculty board), a decision affirmed by the university's president, the University denied Finkelstein tenure. The political science department of the university had praised Finkelstein and recommended tenure by a 9-3 vote (a recommendation endorsed by a 5-0 vote by the College Personnel Committee), but according to university president Dennis Holtschneider, Finkelstein's "unprofessional personal attacks divert the conversation away from consideration of ideas, and polarize and simplify conversations that deserve layered and subtle consideration.". The university denied that Alan Dershowitz, who had been criticized for actively campaigning against Finkelstein's tenure, played any part in this decision. At the same time, the university denied tenure to international studies lecturer Mehrene Larudee, a strong supporter of Finkelstein, despite unanimous support from her department, the Personnel Committee and the Dean.

In April 2007 Dr Frank Menetrez, a former Editor-in-Chief of the UCLA Law Review, published a detailed and painstaking analysis of the charges made against Finkelstein by Alan Dershowitz, finding no merit in any single charge. He reports that he sought Dershowitz's observations and assistance but was rebuffed.

The Faculty Council later affirmed the right of the professors Finkelstein and Larudee to appeal, which a university lawyer said was not possible. Council President Anne Bartlett said she was "terribly concerned" due process was not given. DePaul’s faculty association considered taking no confidence votes in administrators, including the president, because of the tenure denials.

Notes

  1. http://www.normanfinkelstein.com
  2. William B. Quandt, Book review of Image and Reality of the Israel-Palestine Conflict, Foreign Affairs, May/June 1996.
  3. Noam Chomsky, Understanding Power (New York, 2002) 245.
  4. Interview on Democracy Now, 9 May 2007
  7. "A Tale of Two Holocausts," rev. of The Holocaust Industry, by Norman G. Finkelstein, The New York Times Book Review 6 August 6, 2000, accessed 13 February, 2007.
  8. ^ Amy Goodman, "Scholar Norman Finkelstein Calls Professor Alan Dershowitz's New Book On Israel a 'Hoax'," Democracy Now! 24 September, 2003; incl. links to full "Rush Transcript," audio clip, and MP3 podcast.
  9. .
  10. .
  11. .
  12. .
  13. .
  14. .
  15. .
  18. .
  19. Zhou, Kevin. "Feud Weakens Prof's Tenure Bid" Harvard Crimson April 4, 2007
  20. "DePaul Rejects Tenure Bid by Finkelstein and Says Dershowitz Pressure Played No Role", The Chronicle of Higher Education, June 2007
  22. |DePaul Rejects Finkelstein
  23. Finkelstein Supporter also Denied Tenure at DePaul
  24. Who's Right and Who's Wrong?

Bibliography

Books

Books, articles, and translations by Norman G. Finkelstein

Interviews with Finkelstein

Profiles about Finkelstein

Reviews of books by Finkelstein

Critical controversies engaging Finkelstein

External links

See also

Categories: