Drexel Professor Who Called For “White Genocide” Hired By New York University

drexel27n-1-web200px-ColumbiaNYUCoat.svgWe have previously discussed the controversial writings of George Ciccariello-Maher, a former Drexel University professor who was pushed to resign after a national outcry.  Ciccariello-Maher has blamed the Las Vegas massacre on “Trumpism” and declared that “All I want for Christmas is white genocide.” He has insisted that some of his prior tweets have been”satirical,” though he appears to court controversy on social media.  He has now announced to have been hired as a visiting scholar by New York University’s Hemispheric Institute of Performance and Politics.

Last year, he tweeted, “Some guy gave up his first class seat for a uniformed soldier. People are thanking him. I’m trying not to vomit or yell about Mosul.”  Likewise, after the mass shooting in Las Vegas, he posted, “It’s the white supremacist patriarchy, stupid,” arguing the tragedy was caused by an overarching “narrative of white victimization.”

Despite a long history of writing highly offensive and prejudicial statements, I continued to question the effort to fire Ciccariello-Maher in exercising his free speech rights on social media.  My concern was heightened by the demand of wealthy donors that the Ciccariello-Maher be fired.  Thousands of university professors (including this one) engage in blogs and social media to express political, social, and academic viewpoints.  Inevitably, there will be those who view many statements to be offensive or insulting. However, these academics retain not simply their rights of free speech but have historically been protected by the principles of academic freedom. If schools like Drexel destroy that tradition, any professor could be dismissed after some wealthy donor complains to a university president.  University administrators are notorious for putting the bottomline ahead of principle in such controversies.  The answer to Ciccariello-Maher is readily apparent: response with your own postings and arguments.  That is the beauty of free speech. Bad speech can be countered by good speech.

There is however a countervailing concern.  As we have previously discussed (including the recent story involving an Oregon professor), there remains an uncertain line in what language is protected for teachers in their private lives. The incident also raises what some faculty have complained is a double or at least uncertain standard. We have previously discussed controversies at the University of California and Boston University, where there have been criticism of a double standard, even in the face of criminal conduct. There were also such incident at the University of London involving Bahar Mustafa as well as one involving a University of Pennsylvania professor.

As is well known on this blog, I tend to favor free speech rights in all of these cases. In my view, this view does seem to be satire — bad satire but satire all the same. However, the standard remains entirely uncertain for academics as to whether their conduct or comments outside of school will be the basis for discipline.

New York University is one of many universities with an ambiguous line for free speech.  The question is whether NYU would hire a professor who called for “black genocide.”  Ambiguous speech standards lend themselves to biased applications.  If this hiring is setting a new standard for tolerance of the exercise of free speech, it would be a long needed bright line rule.  However, if this is another content-based determination, it will only further undermine free speech on our campuses.  That is why this hiring should be accompanied by some clear statement on the standard for the protection of free speech for faculty that is content-neutral.

Like many liberal protesters today, Ciccariello-Maher  is not necessarily an advocate for free speech.  In a recent Facebook post , Ciccariello-Maher blamed his loss of his Drexel job on conservatives who “[target] campuses with thinly veiled provocations disguised as free speech.”  Neither his speech or that of his critics is “disguised as free speech,” it is free speech and deserving of protections.

40 thoughts on “Drexel Professor Who Called For “White Genocide” Hired By New York University”

  1. This guy is a coward. He doesn’t want to commit white genocide. He wants to indoctrinate the children to do it for him.
    “He alone, who owns the youth, gains the future.” – Adolf Hitler

  2. The Golden Rule is as applicable today as it was in antiquity. Do unto other as you would have them do unto you.

    If it would be wrong to wish for a black (or fill in any other ethnicity) genocide, then it’s wrong to wish for a white one. If it’s wrong to be biased against women, it’s wrong to be biased against men.

    George Ciccariello-Maher’s statements were racist and bigoted, pure and simple.

    I understand Professor Turley’s purist point on free speech. We need lawyers with his views defending our Constitution. For me, private speech should impact employment when it affects their job performance, safety, or negatively impacts the employer’s reputation or profits. Bottom line – keep your personal life out of work. No one has the right to plow his employer into the ground. For instance, if a professor posted pics of his Klan outings and boasted that there should be a black genocide, if he remained employed the university would not. He has the right to say whatever he wants. He won’t go to jail. But his employer also has the right to stay in business and keep its students safe. That said, I realize there is a very fine line to tread to avoid employers using political bias in hiring practices, or insisting that all their employees keep idealogical lockstep. Again, personal and business should not mix, and should not be any of the other’s beeswax.

    Wishing for violence against the target of your racism goes beyond simple bias and brings up the specter of a threat. If he ended up harming students, the university might be held liable for retaining him after making such statements. I wouldn’t bet mine, or anyone else’s life that he was joking.

    Another salient point is whether his clear racism affected his ability to teach. Did he treat all students the same? Did he demand his students write from a certain political perspective in order to earn a grade? This needs to be investigated in his employment history, including interviewing past students.

    Bias and political pressure was already common on campus when I went to college. If you weren’t a Democrat, you had to pretend lest you anger the one grading you. Most cannot afford throwing away their education to make a political statement.

    1. The Constitution guarantees free speech.
      The Constitution does not guarantee that free speech will be free of consequences.
      You can issue a death threat or call for the death of a man’s family, but you cannot be sure the man will not neutralize that threat.
      Free speech is much more complicated in the real world in which we live.
      If this guy believes in white genocide so much let him start with himself. Let him commit suicide on Pay-per-view to prove his devotion to the cause.

  3. BTW, white genocide is pretty obviously a real thing whether you’re for it or not:

    The ongoing Third World invasion of Germany will create a nonwhite majority in the 20- to 30-year-old age group within just four years, and a nonwhite majority within one generation, a new statistical analysis based on official German census figures has shown.

    The analysis, carried out by Professor Adorján F. Kovács from the Goethe-Universität at Frankfurt am Main, was published in The European magazine in Germany under the title “Truths about the Refugee Crisis” (Wahrheiten zur Flüchtlingskrise).

    Professor Kovács said that proponents of the current “unprecedented immigration” such as Chancellor Angela Merkel argue that “one, two, or three million are only a few compared to the 79–80 million people who currently live in Germany.”

    This claim, Professor Kovács, says, is simply wrong because it does not take into account the age demographic which the influx is affecting.

    1. If you are an idiot, it is real. I bet in the U.S. more white people die than minorities on any given day must be a plot.

  4. My concern was heightened by the demand of wealthy donors that the Ciccariello-Maher be fired.

    JT, you seem to be offended by private citizens expressing their free speech rights by withdrawing financial support for the school. These schools are in the education business, and that means their customers are those that will financially support whatever they are producing. Your beef should be with the administrators of these schools and not those that pay to keep their doors open.

      1. Very Well said Olly! The free market determines what behavior is acceptable in society and worth their support. If one disagrees with someone’s actions the best thing to do is NOT support them or the organization supporting them. If enough supporters do not like what action took place then it is resolved.

        One can say ones belief, be a drunk, a drug addict, a sex offender, a robber, a social Marxist, etc… but their is a social price that must be paid for FREEDOM & LIBERITIES. Do as you believe but be prepared to face the reply to your actions. Sometimes positive sometimes no so!

    1. Good point. Free speech and individual rights go both ways.

      George Ciccariello-Maher has the right to say whatever he wants. Parents have the right to send their kids elsewhere out of concern and protest. Donors have the right to financially support, or not, any institution they wish, and to vote with their dollars. The employer has the right to fire him for creating an intolerant, hostile learning environment and negatively impacting the reputation of the school, and perhaps affecting enrollment.

      Tenure was supposed to protect avant-garde scholarship and different points of view. It’s not supposed to protect and encourage rising racism and bias on college campuses, making the environment suppressive and even unsafe for conservative students.

      We have seen instances of college professors actually threatening violence against students who disagree with them. This trend has got to be stopped. This racist bigoted professor was in a position of authority over students. There is no balance or even variety of viewpoints among academia politically, and this professor is pushing the edge towards violence.

    Turley is 100% correct that the possibility. if not likelihood, that NYU’s support for free speech (i.e., academic freedom) is shallow. Would NYU hire, as he stipulates, someone who proclaims a wish for black genocide? Also, NYU has a terrible free-speech record (see thefire.ogr). Ideologues, be they college administrators or staff members of the National Coalition against Censorship, make shallow free-speech advocates.

    G. Tod Slone, PhD (Université de Nantes, FR), aka P. Maudit,
    Founding Editor (1998)
    The American Dissident, a 501c3 Nonprofit Journal of Literature, Democracy, and Dissidence
    217 Commerce Rd.
    Barnstable, MA 02630

  6. I think that his hiring is hemospheric. But the school that hired him is gastrointestinal.

  7. I follow this creep’s career with zero attention. Why don’t we wait until we see him dressed in rags under a bridge muttering something about the Revolution and Che’ before we look in on him again.

  8. Someone please correct me, but I thought hate speech is protected except for speech inciting violence. A reasonable person can infer this Marxist academic was inciting violence in his racist tweets. He doesn’t fit the diversity-hiring mandates of NYU, so this must be a pity hire. I have acquaintances whose kids went to NYU, but then their attendance was just to network anyway. It was never about the quality of the education. (And ditto to what Darren Smith said.)

  9. He is clearly too disturbed to teach anyone except med students doing rounds in a psyc ward.
    Eventually this nonsense will end up in deadly violence

  10. The professor represents the archetypical Beta-Male. His arrogance alone should be sufficient reason to reject his application for employment. Trouble makers seldom become valued employees. With plenty of suitable candidates abound, why take a chance on one with questionable behavior?

    1. Wait till he meets some of the fellas that don’t understand,
      “He is down with the cause”.
      He will be just another soft beta white target to practice their racist hostilities on.

  11. Professor George isn’t punking for pesos in the ally ways of Mexico. George is looking for an uptown girl.

  12. I also support free speech, how else are we to know who the idiots are? And once a “professor” demonstrates such for all to see, are we to do nothing?

  13. Joseph Jones – I am sure several of his neighbors would be happy to loan him a weapon.

  14. If he’s white, I suggest he start with himself. This hypocrite reminds me of those who want the earth to carry a lower population load. Start with yourself. If you need an appropriate weapon, just ask.

Comments are closed.