Breaking the Social Contract

Thursday, May 18, 2006

Ward Churchill Speaks, People Cheer

After every single sentence, in fact. Got annoying. But it was enjoyable to see him speak in person, finally, after having blown two chances to see him in San Francisco last spring. His speech pretty much covered the material that he is known for emphasizing, in the style he's known for using (very gruff and passionate).
The focus of the talk was on state repression (such as the green scare, a topic particularly pertinent in Eugene) and its links to academic repression. No surprise here. He went through some examples of such repression, talked about the denigration of nations and the predominance of states, gave a critique of civilization as an unnatural imposition that is naturally resisted on all levels, and talked about indigenous struggles. He believes we should look to indigenous struggles in our resistance because indigenous peoples know how to most "naturally" resist tyranny. I've come to realize that Churchill's brand of indigenism is almost identical to anarcho-primitivism, which explains the abundance of his books on Green Anarchy's reading list.
Overall, the talk was very rousing and entertaining. I enjoyed myself. Now I'm waiting to see tomorrow how the local newspapers twist the meaning of it and slander Churchill...

9 Comments:

  • That's cool that you finally got to see him speak. I've heard so many speeches of his on the radio/on cd as well as seen them on TV that seeing him speak wouldn't interest me much, though I'd probably go. I feel like I know exactly how his talks are, even though I've never been to one. Of course speeches usually are bad, unless there is ample time for Qs and As (and Churchill talks typically have that).
    Coincidentally, there was that academic misconduct thing recently against him, which seems like a complete sham. I overheard some academic folk discussing it tonight while eating at China Delight (I was eavesdropping).
    Churchill's whole indigenism/nationalism thing doesn't sit well with me at all. I do like Churchill, and he says plenty of good things, but I don't think his framework is very close to the one I'd employ, its not what is best. But he is an interesting read, and talker.

    By Blogger Jake R., at 1:48 AM  

  • Did anybody ask questions about his native-americanism? That was such a pain at his talk at Evergreen.

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at 10:03 AM  

  • I didn't stay for the Q+A because I had nothing to ask and my experience with Q+As has generally been one of frustration and boredom (unless I have something to ask, like with Heinberg). It is definitely true that all Ward Churchill talks are the same, basically; he starts out with an Indian greeting, talks about Leonard Peltier, and moves into the issue he is addressing, always with a focus on state repression and indigenism. I didn't learn much (except for one story he told about the Pinkerton detection agency after the civil war pretending to be a morally outraged mob in order to drag a train robberer from jail, extract information from him, and lynch him) but it was still enjoyable to listen to his delivery. He is very articulate.

    By Blogger Sam, at 1:38 PM  

  • Hey guys, first time I've done anything on these blogs for a while. Anyway, I agree w/Jake on the indigenism/nationalism thing, that's the main reason why he bothers me, even though I never articulated it as such. Also, I think Sam's right about Q & A

    By Blogger Unknown, at 4:14 PM  

  • Yeah, Qs and As are more often than not boring and/or frustrating, since most of the questions are typically painfully stupid. But it is still the only time when the speaker is not really going off of a script and only saying things you probably already know if you've read any of their books, which is usually the case, since why else would you be interested in attending a talk by them? If you have a question to ask though, they might be alright. But overall, yeah, talks by people normally=meh.

    By Blogger Jake R., at 5:30 PM  

  • It's been my experience with speakers (writers...etc.) that I'm very familiar with, like Churchill or Derrick Jensen, that Q & A is my favorite part.

    Its great to see them just speak to the audience and respond outside of their routine. It just seems more personal, more relaxed. But that's just me.

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at 12:12 AM  

  • u a ho sam. post something.

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at 3:39 PM  

  • Ward Churchill is a tosser. Anybody that calls the people who died on 9/11 "little Eichmanns" is my enemy. Also, he's a whingey college professor. Plus, he's a Third Worldist and a nationalist. He supports national liberation and, I believe, Islamic terrorism. I wouldn't want any kids of mine studying under him in university.

    - Ned Swing

    By Blogger Ned Swing, at 12:32 PM  

  • I have yet to here anything from Churchill, I probably only read that article that usually gets posted on every blog on Thanks Giving Day.

    By Blogger blackstone, at 1:04 PM  

Post a Comment

<< Home