"Refined white supremacy in a UCI Lecturer's blog comments"

UPDATE #4 HERE.

UPDATE #2 HERE.

UPDATE #1 HERE.

That is the title of the letter "The Ghost of Adolph Rupp" sent to members of the UCI community.  Seems I am now a white supremacist. That said, as someone who writes and comments under his own name, I'm not particularly worried.  I comported myself on that thread as I always do.  For the record:

I am not a white supremacist, nor am I an enabler of white supremacy.  I am interested in the historical and rhetorical context of race in American culture.  (I've taught two courses on the subject.)  And I am interested in the context of online rhetoric.  This particular thread fascinated me because it intersects with many of my scholarly interests. 

But it will probably be the last time I attempt a discussion of these interests online, because you never know when the person across from you will decide it's time to notify your superiors that they have a white supremacist among them.  (Even though they don't.) 

Although it will cause me personal inconvenience, I do hope the people who received this email take it seriously.  Accusations of hate-speech and race-based discrimination should be investigated, so that when the complaints are legitimate they can be dealt with accordingly.  Just because someone took the time to craft an inaccurate, slanderous letter painting me as white supremacist does not mean that all such letters will be inaccurate and slanderous.

Here is the text of his letter:

"Refined white supremacy in a UCI Lecturer's blog comments"

The UCI lecturer's name is Scott Eric Kaufman.

http://www.ags.uci.edu/~skaufman/contact.html 

I informed Mr. Kaufman yesterday that I would be contacting UCI and I invited him to suggest names of people who he wanted included. Mr. Kaufman declined to respond, but he is copied on this email.

Over the course of several days, Mr. Kaufman was vigorous in his defense that it was appropriate that ABC affiliate post an excerpt of this with a link:

"Death of A House Negro
First Hogzilla II, now this?

Not to convert this place into the Dead Meat Buffet but an enormous amount of meat died this weekend and we’re all the better for it. It goes without saying that the term “house negro” gets bandied about with great frequency against anyone of seemingly African descent when they are on the Right. Be you Clarence Thomas, Condoleeza Rice, Michael Steele, or J.C. Watts, you can expect a Harry Belafonte, a Danny Glover, or yes - even a Steve Gilliard to call you out for being the race traitor that you are. The sell-out, Oreo cookies who do Whitey’s bidding and put a black face on racist policies that would otherwise be rightly called out for what they are. Uncle Thomas and Aunt Thomasinas alike.

But really, who is doing whose bidding in those situations? Can Howard Dean call Condoleeza his “do right answer mammy who be smart”? Can James Carville call out Clarence for collard greens?

Which brings us to today’s marquee morbidity. The tragic, untimely death of Donk House Negro and all around bigot Steve Gilliard. Who knew that boiling bacon grease in a spoon and mainlining it into the neck vein was bad for your health?

Most people will remember him as the happy-go-lucky poster of this photo of Michael Steele:

 

How to win a seat at the Democrat’s table.

The rest won’t remember him at all. The way it should be.

Naturally, The Left is deeply saddened that they need to find someone else who is not afraid to breakout the MS Paint and draw big lips and watermelons on black Republicans because they believe in individual responsibility or *gasp* lowering taxes.

It won’t be hard to find a replacement for Gilliard. Just scrape the bottom of the barrel like you usually do."

 

The New York Times had a different opinion of Mr. Gilliard http://www.nytimes.com/2007/06/06/us/06gilliard.html?_r=1&oref=slogin

Mr. Kaufman reserved most of his attacks for a blogger, patiotboy, who had succinctly summarized the serious problems with an ABC affiliate hosting white supremacist language that was explicity intended to inflict injury and humiliation:

patriotboy said,

on June 5th, 2007 at 10:09 pm

Brittney: The thing about blogging is that it levels the playing field. Everyone has a voice. Just because I disagree with that voice, doesn’t mean it gets ignored. Not here, anyway.

Some of those voices belong to freaking idiots. You aren’t required to repost every bleating that comes out of the Nashville area, and you don’t. Why did you decide to post this one? How did it make the cut? [...]

patriotboy said,

on June 6th, 2007 at 2:20 am

And Lynnster, Smantix isn’t working for an affiliate of a national television network. I have no hope of changing his behavior."

 

Mr. Kaufman launched his support of white supremacist language on an ABC affiliate in his comments in a Thursday 7 June 2007 thread at patriotboy's blog. Patriotboy titled this thread: "Getting Serious for a Moment." http://www.patriotboy.blogspot.com/

Mr. Kaufman commented under the pseudonym "SEK."  Mr. Kaufman buttressed his enabling of white supremacist language by identifying himself as an "academic."  Mr. Kaufman frequently invited readers to his web site. His site unambiguoulsy identifies him as a UCI lecturer.  Mr. Kaufman repeatedly criticized all who disagreed with him, because "we" did not properly understand the "context" of white supremacist language posted on an ABC affiliate's blog. Mr. Kaufman ignored numerous reminders that ABC and its affiliates transmit over publicly owned airwaves. Mr. Kaufman ignored reminders of Janet Jackson's "wardrobe malfunction," and Don Imus' characterizations of the Rutgers' Women's Basketball team. If Mr. Kaufman had not been so completely dismissive of so many who tried to point out that it was he, who was missing the wider "context," I never would have felt compelled to contact so many at UCI. Mr. Kaufman refuses to acknowledge that he has inserted himself in the "context" of other acamedicians who have enabled white supremacy, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Martin_Heidegger

. 

Mr. Kaufman assumes a middle ground with respect to the transmission of white supremacist language that does not exist. He is either actively educating against the massive ignorance that undergirds all "white supremacy," or he is enabling tolerance of it.  It's a zero-sum game and I think I am being kind to Mr. Kaufman, a Ph.D. graduate student, by referring to him only as an enabler.

Dr. Quanbeck, among other things, I am requesting that you (and others copied on this) consider that Mr. Kaufman has already initiated a process which will pull UCI in his "context." That's why I copied UCI's Development Office. I doubt that they are anxious to hear Mr. Kaufman's name on a fundraising call. I doubt Mr. Kaufman considered their "context" when he lobbied so aggressively in favor of posting white supremacist language on an ABC affiliates's website. 

I have also copied Congresswoman Maxine Waters' Chief of Staff, Mikael Moore. I am sorry to admit that I was largely ignorant of what a rare gift Congresswoman Waters is to our great nation, until I began reading Jane Hamsher's blog, FireDogLake. I have also faxed a copy of this email to Alice A. Huffman, the President of the California Office of the NAACP. I have also copied the California Universities Consortium, because they are committed to advancing diversity in California education. I am inviting everyone copied on this to share their assessment of Mr. Kaufman's understanding of "context" with Mr. Kaufman. It is my sincere hope that this "sharing" takes place  individually and institutionally.

I have also copied UCI's student newspaper. I hope they see fit to report on Mr. Kaufman's advocacy for white supremacist language displayed on an ABC affiliate. Another issue is that Mr. Kaufman appears to have a lot of time available for blogging. I suspect that a large portion of Mr. Kaufman's funding comes directly from the taxpayers.  I think a very wide spectrum of UCI students will be very interested in his understanding of "context."  I raised issues very similar to these with Mr. Kaufman on the thread and he repeatedly and explicity welcomed them.   

I also copied "Ethics at UCI."

Below, I have quoted some of Mr. Kaufman's routinely banal comments, but I would urge everyone to read his comments in their entirety. Bold is mine:

"I'm interested in this affair for other, call them "academic" reasons." [...]

"Yes, random people can read it; however, random people should do their due diligence, as it is incumbent upon them to understand a statement before responding to it. (And yes, context is a vital part of understanding.)"

I wrote this to Mr. Kaufman: "You're enabling an incredibly vile example of refined white supremacy."

He responded: "...Just because the context is invisible to you does not mean that white supremacy has been enabled." [...]

Mr. Kaufman is also sickeningly quick to cast himself as the victim of "bigotry:"

"And is you bringing up that I'm from the South an attempt to score points with the members of this crowd who believe the citizens of Louisiana are sub-human dreck? What's with the odd bigotry against Southerners here?" [...]

Here Mr. Kaufman criticizes me for not being more tolerant of an ABC affiliate posting and linking white supremacist language.  

"I think I've made my position clear here from the beginning. In fact, before I was drawn into this idiotic pissing context with Ghost, I stated precisely what horses I had in the race. I have no position here to nuance, or to shift from, other than the simple fact that there was a miscommunication in context. The General admits as much. Why you can't let it go, Ghost, is beyond me." [...]

This was Mr. Kaufman's first response after I informed him that I would be sharing his comments with UCI.

"And why, exactly, are you going to do this? Have I engaged in any sort of harassment? Have I in any way, shape, or form endorsed Smantix's vile obituary? As I stated from the beginning, I have an interest how online interactions are framed. People in my department know that. People at the university know that. You can re-inform them of it if you'd like."

Later, he wrote this:

"You're going to inform my institution that I'm interested in the context of online interactions? They already know that. I presented on this very topic at the largest academic conference for English professors a mere six months ago. Last month, I participated in a roundtable on the same at UC Davis. People already know I'm interested in the context of online interactions. I'm confused as to what you think you'd accomplish here. [...]

So what you intend, then, is to re-inform people in my department of what they already know? You can see why I'm confused." [...]

That said, I find the threat childish, but if you really want to follow through with it, I can't stop you. I'm sure people in my department will take the word of a dead basketball coach very, very seriously. (Or wait, will you drop the veil of pseudonymity and complain under your own name? If you do, I'll take the high ground and not reveal your identity. I'm no tattler.)

Bold is mine.

If anyone finds my concerns about Mr. Walker's position "childish," please email me.

Dr. Quanbech, aside from your Office, I simply plucked email addresses very randomly off of UCI departments that I thought might be most sensitive to the grave injury that white supremacist language represents to the United States and the world. I would hope that those copied on this would feel very free to copy others on this email. .

A sub-topic of my discussions with Mr. Kaufman included comments about "refined" white supremacy versus other forms of it.  Again Mr. Kaufman was unwilling or unable to admit how much more lethal white supremacist language is when wielded by people who are highly proficient with respect to the use of language, or those that are credentialed by society, as teachers are.

I would invite all copied on this to consider that the only lesson Mr. Kaufman may learn out of this is to not reveal his identity or place of work. I certainly hope that this can bring about some kind of "conversion," for Mr. Kaufman. In my opinion, he owes an apology to the family of Steve Gilliard. I would hope that Mr. Kaufman would find some way to make substantial restitution to people who have been injured by the kind of of refined white supremacist language that he wants posted on an ABC affiliate. There's no shortage of victims and I have found that apologies untethered by restitution tend to be ephemeral.

Comments

[Rudy V]

#9

"Are these people from PatriotBoy blog the embodiment of the BORG?"

No, they are not.

I also disagree with SEK's position in the patriotboy comments (although I can understand why he tries to defend someone he apparently knows better than most of the General's readers). There is however no excuse for what Ghost did. None whatsoever.

And FWIW, I also disagreed with most of your comments there.

[Scott Lemieux]

Thix is unspeakably idiotic. Did anybody at JG step in to tell this nitwit to knock it off after the threat of slanderous tattling was made?

[Scott Lemieux]

Ah, I see now that JG has a post making this very point...good.

[Anonymous]

Just realized that the irony of the situation is that, if we discount context (as the Ghost of Adolph Rupp asks us to do), it would be very easy to mistake the use of the name Adolph Rupp for a tacit endorsement of the original Rupp's white supremacism rather than a criticism. Sure, in most of his posts he's condemning white supremacism, but if I, unfamiliar with the Ghost of Adolph Rupp's other comments, stumbled onto a comment under his name about another subject, I might easily miss the criticism. I'm sure I could find at least one comment in which the mockery implied by that name is never directly stated.

I wish someone would explain to me the difference between this and what Brittney Gilbert did by posting a link to Smantix's offensive rhetoric without indicating her disapproval in a sufficiently explicit manner. In both cases, there's a real potential that an outsider might misunderstand a word or several words as an endorsement of white supremacism. In both cases, context reveals that the words in question are actually intended as a mockery of white supremacism.

Now, you might say there's a difference between using the name of a racist and linking to an offensive post without clearly marking one's being offended, but I can pretty much guarantee that if someone went around posting under the name Adolf Hitler or even the Ghost of Adolf Hitler, not many people would look the other way.

Gilbert, of course, failed to respond to criticism and declined to edit her original post to make the rhetoric in question less ambiguous. I suppose it's only fair to offer the Ghost of Adolph Rupp an opportunity to change his pseuodnym to something like The Idiotic Ghost of Adolph Rupp...

[jholbo]

Oh man, what a mess. Sorry, Scott. Best of luck in inducing this to blow over.

[Scott Eric Kaufman]

'Gads, I wake up to learn that he has forwarded this (from the above) to all the same people:

Although it will cause me personal inconvenience, I do hope the people who received this email take it seriously. Accusations of hate-speech and race-based discrimination should be investigated, so that when the complaints are legitimate they can be dealt with accordingly. Just because someone took the time to craft an inaccurate, slanderous letter painting me as white supremacist does not mean that all such letters will be inaccurate and slanderous.

I think I'm dealing with someone who has come unhinged.

[Queer Dewd]

Scott Eric Kaufman wrote:

Still, there's a stain attached to someone who acquires multiple mentally unsound stalkers. People wonder whether they're really the issue, or whether it's you.

Yup. Been there, done that, got the t-shirt. I was hoping things had changed since 1998, but who was I kidding? There was a way then, and still today, that while your superiors know they shouldn't, they will still find it suspect that stalkers like that exist. You must have said or done something, they will still think to themselves.

It's not an unusual phenom. When I had to go to the cops b/c of my own experiences with online stalking, the police psychologist already understood, from the literature, that this dynamic goes on and warned me about it.

[Pseudonymous]

I suppose that when it comes to making false and defamatory statements that you know of what you speak.

For example, what exactly is the white supremacist language in the SMB excerpt you quoted at length? It seems to be insulting and highly offensive but it does not seem to be advocating white supremacy.

Judging by the inflammatory post titling you've exhibited, since removed, that you are as guilty as who you are accusing of white supremacy.

These pogroms have a way of burning everyone associated with them and that by trying to throw gas on the fire with your own inflammatory language that you inadvertently got a little on yourself.

[Karl Steel]

These pogroms have a way of burning everyone associated with them and that by trying to throw gas on the fire with your own inflammatory language that you inadvertently got a little on yourself.

Wow. I think we need a little Altheimlich exegesis on this metaphor.

[John Protevi]

Scott, I'm sorry to see you've got this two-bit Savonarola on your case. Hang in there. JP

[Gordon]

Wow, I have every confidence that this stupidity will eventually pass away.

But I'm very sorry for the massive anxiety and inconvenience that it put you through. JG's following isn't the most stable group.

I truly hope that your school's administration has the sense to not to get jittery on account of this deeply disturbed person.

Gordon

[Kennie Rose]

Scott:

I agree with Luther's post. While it is, perhaps, tempting to get involved, I would probably just ignore the fellow. Don't get yourself emotionally involved in his obviously ridiculous charges, and I certainly feel you should stop talking about him, so you don't provide more messages and e-mails for him to forward to people in your department. Events like this are discouraging; as a future PhD candidate at the University of Louisville, I have been considering starting an intellectual blog, but who wants to get involved in these kinds of exchanges? Good luck!

[Sisyphus]

Scott --- I, too, wish you the best, and hope that this doesn't get in the way of your real work, i.e. Getting the Damn Dissertation Done (TM). I agree with the people who say not to engage any further ---- these issues draw out people who have problems and are trying to work through them in a messed-up way ---- you can see in Tenured Radical's discussion of some people who self-select for her courses. Get some new posts up there and move these down the page ---- at least you could distract us from _this_ controversy by starting a new one, eh? :)

[J J Cohen]

Scott, when someone willfully misconstrues what you say, what can you do? Every further statement you make becomes in their mind further evidence to buttress their crazy argument.

You are clearly not guilty of the crimes with which you've been charged.

Sorry that this is sapping your energy and wasting your time.

[Jonathan Dresner]

I hope your colleagues know the difference between a pseudonym and an acronym, Scott. And that a few of them follow the links in the emails and learn to love blogging.

Yikes. I will say this, though: your vigorous responses to these kinds of attacks are a model. I'm sorry you have to be on the front lines, though. Let us know if there's anything we can do to help.

[Kevin]

Scott, it really saddens me to see you having to deal with this nonsense, but I trust that everyone that received the email will see right through it. I agree that it is now time to ignore the dude.

[eM]

To think my own brother is a white supremacist. Does this mean that everytime I was threatened to have "the jew burned out of me" you were secretly cheering on the inside? For shame! And...end sarcasm. Zealots. psshh.

I must say that I'm a bit disappointed in you. Have you never heard the phrase "don't play with fire"? So disappointed <*shakes head*>. C'est la vie. Let me know if you require any assistance, references, etc. I could use the distraction.

[Xanthippas]

Honestly, if the people who received that email cannot immediately see that there is no substance to it, and the idiot's numerous citations do not support the claim he is trying to make, then they are quite frankly idiots.

[TM]

Smells like crazy to me...

Have your legal weapons ready, should you need them.

[BH]

Wow. Good luck ignoring this guy from this point forward, Scott, as that's your plan of action. Your comments and the scenario as a whole pretty clearly speak for themselves, and while there may be some blowback from your apparent status as a lightning rod, just remember the lighning rod stands taller than everything else on the landscape - and protects others who perhaps can't handle themselves as well as you. So stand strong and know you are in the right here.