Not listening, not listening!

Is there some built-in reflex in humans that keeps us paying attention to things we should be ignoring? I think there is.

Case in point: For my undergraduate degree, I went to Northwestern University, getting a degree in engineering. Along the way, I ended up taking an ECE class by the infamous Arthur Butz, an electrical engineering professor who is famous for his outspoken Holocaust denial (Northwestern has not fired him as he has tenure, and his views on history have nothing to do with his position in a EE faculty). I obviously hate the man's guts, but he was teaching the lab of a very introductory ECE class that a large number of engineering students need to take (I needed the class as a prerequisite for nearly any further ECE coursework, including my circuit analysis class), so I had no choice. Fortunately, Butz didn't bring up his views in class, and I do not know of any ideology-guided grading (I received an A, certainly, though the lab grade was a tiny portion of the overall course).

Before the course, I figured I should know a bit about this man, so I looked up some information, reading his website, and biographies from both the crazy neo-Nazi right and the rest of the world. I was disgusted, infuriated, and contemptuous of Butz's arguments and those of the people and organizations he supports (it's a thin veneer for blatant anti-Semitism; if you don't believe me, read his work), but I figured that he can believe what he wishes, neh? (His views and the views of others like him have been thoroughly addressed by a number of eminent historical scholars, and pretty much every history PhD in five countries think that he's wrong.) I pretty much ignored the guy, and got through the class just fine.

In later years at NU, I ended up taking two excellent courses from an eminent Holocaust historian, Peter Francis Hayes. He taught 'Modern German History: 1918-1945' and 'History of the Holocaust', the two best non-engineering classes I took in college, period. He's an amazing lecturer, giving students bucketloads of reading (with a heavy emphasis on primary sources) and posing extremely thought-provoking discussion and essay questions. I was curious, though, to hear of his thoughts on Dr. Butz, another professor at his own institution spewing such nonsense. Dr. Hayes' views (permit me to paraphrase with a great amount of license) are that Dr. Butz makes a big splash in the news every few years with a new anti-Holocaust comment to draw attention to his 'historical work', but that he's just a crackpot that the entirety of the historical academic community rejects. The overwhelming evidence for the Holocaust - from German records to thousands of firsthand accounts - should be incontrovertible to someone without a prior agenda.

So, why do I bring this all up? In recent weeks, the Northwestern campus has been in an uproar over comments made by Butz to the Chicago Sun-Times along the lines of 'the Iranian president is right' about the Holocaust. (For those of you who haven't followed things lately, the new radical Iranian president has made any number of statements in recent months calling the Holocaust a 'myth' and further calling for the destruction of Israel.) Calls for Butz's firing were renewed, letters and ads went to the campus newspaper decrying him, etc. *yawn*

Events have recently heated up as university president Henry Bienen sent an email to the entire university explaining why they won't fire him, but calling his views essentially racist bullshit that the school does not support (he said it a bit nicer, but not much). His email was met alternatively with praise or a storm of criticism from both sides (some saying he should go further and fire the guy as he is a representative of NU, others saying that Bienen went too far in his harsh assessments of Butz's views). This eventually culminated in the Daily soliciting Butz to write one column in the Op/Ed section detailing his views. By then, even the ADL decided to complain (surprised?).

What I don't get is why people make such a big deal of this every few years. Butz's famous book was published in 1976, and every few years something identical happens. What is the purpose of this uproar except to draw attention to his views? Everyone knows that the guy is simply wrong - entire departments (including Butz's own) have signed letters and advertisements saying they think the guy is a bigoted nut. So making a big deal over one more comment is just playing into his hands, no? And yet people continue to make a big deal about it... *shakes head* It seems so silly.

The online version of the Daily has a space for online comments on Op/Ed articles. Unsurprisingly, Butz's column garnered an appreciable 30-some responses (and dozens or hundreds of letters directly to the Daily; I don't know how many, but it's a lot). What's kind of scary/funny is that the majority of the comments are from compatriot Holocaust deniers who were drawn to the article by the controversy - they're given a free forum and a captive audience to promulgate their views (always under the guises of 'intellectual honesty' or some similar nonsense). Isn't this precisely the opposite of how we should treat this situation? If no one had bothered to notice when Butz made his Iran comment, he and his cronies would have stayed in obscurity where they belong.

The only possible plus I can see is that Butz and his ilk show their true idiocy when their views are openly published. Butz's arguments, though on the surface plausible, fall apart under any sort of scrutiny. The comments on the online article are even more revealing - many are clearly from reflexive anti-Semites, and even the 'well meaning' and 'reasoned' ones leave a reader rather unimpressed... but is this worth it? We didn't believe these people to start with, so it's not like we need to be convinced they're nuts.

So... yeah. Moral of the story? Ignore idiots; they will go away in time.