Around Town: KSU's new colors ... black, gold - and red?
by Otis Brumby, Bill Kinney and Joe Kirby
Around Town Columnists
March 05, 2011 12:00 AM | 6851 views | 29 29 comments | 24 24 recommendations | email to a friend | print
MARXISM? GOOD.

Capitalism? Bad. Very, very bad.

And the United States? Why, it is "the most violent nation-state in history."

No, we're not quoting Nikita Khrushchev or Hugo Chavez. Not Moammar Gadhafi or Mahmoud Ahmadinejad.

Those sentiments and that quote can be found in a lengthy research paper by Kennesaw State University's new $228,000-a-year provost, Dr. Timothy Chandler of Kent State University, who will be the second-highest administrator and right-hand man to President Dr. Dan Papp.

Papp, meanwhile, told Around Town on Friday that he was "blindsided" to learn what Chandler had written. Papp was reached by phone at the investiture ceremony for popular former KSU Provost Dr. Lendley Black, who is the new Chancellor of the University of Minnesota-Duluth.

Chandler's paper was published in the Jan.-Feb. 1998 issue of The Journal of Higher Education and titled "Beyond Boyer's 'Scholarship Reconsidered': Fundamental Change in the University and the Socioeconomic Systems." (The "Boyer" referred to is Ernest Boyer, author of "Scholarship Reconsidered: Priorities of the Professoriate.")

Chandler co-authored the piece with fellow Kent State professor Walter E. Davis, Ph.D. - who has gone on to greater fame (or notoriety) as one of the foremost 9/11 conspiracy theorists, charging that President Bush was complicit in the attacks. When Davis's name is "Googled," the very first item that appears is his 7,000-word screed arguing that it is "not logical" and "impossible" that bin Laden was responsible; that the U.S. was planning to invade Afghanistan before the attacks; that the Bush family "got their start as key Hitler supporters," and much more. But one can't hold it against Chandler that he co-wrote a paper with such a kook when the 9/11 attacks were still years in the future.

Chandler on Friday said he disagrees with Davis, and Papp told AT that Davis' anti-Bush rant was "a piece of trash."

Far more serious is Chandler and Davis' obvious fondness for Marx and vehement dislike of capitalism, which underpins much of their paper. Though Marx is mentioned by name only a few times in their magnum opus, they seem to have swallowed Marxist theory hook, line and sinker. Some excerpts:

* "Although the close connection of capitalism to violence is easily shown, it is seldom acknowledged. The allocative resources, which are increasingly disproportionably possessed, were obtained by individuals and groups, at one time or another, by physical force, coercion."

* "Increased competition results in increased ethnicity and racism."

* "Militarism, the development and use of weapons of mass destruction, occurs for the primary purpose of accumulating and protecting ownership of material wealth and obtaining or maintaining domination and is thus an effective goal of capitalism."

* "The goal of accumulating material wealth in the context of a hierarchical social structure influences an individual's desire for power, privilege and self-determination toward characteristics of greed and selfishness, which in turn produce inequality and conflict with others."

* "Capitalism requires an ever increasing consumption (growth) and can easily lead to the destruction of the physical environment. Because of its hegemonic nature, capitalism penetrates into every aspect of life ... and often with devastating effects. Capitalism is hierarchically structured and characterized by a high degree of inequity and an extreme disproportioned distribution of wealth and power. ... As a result, masses of people are forced to succumb to the economic system in order to survive. An asymmetric distribution of resources guarantees high levels of competition, greed, and violence. These three outcomes are important explicit goals of capitalism."

* "While the United States has the most sophisticated propaganda apparatus ever assembled, it is also the most violent nation-state in history."

* "Ownership is taken for granted in capitalistic societies and is central to the accumulation of wealth and domination. All ownership of land or material means of production was at one time or another obtained by force. One prominent means of maintaining ownership and control is through generational inheritance, a concept that is accepted without question, whereas reparations for certain groups, which can be argued for with the same logic, is not."

* "The record of Western science is mixed. Along with all the advances in technology and industry comes five hundred years of oppression and destruction. Universities must take a major responsibility for this destruction, as they must take a major role in halting the slide down the slippery slope of self-elimination. The university in the context of capitalism clearly must be evaluated."

The 25,000-word paper mixes leaden prose and an onslaught of academic jargon. It's almost as long as "War and Peace" but without the latter's thrills. It clearly wasn't written for the general reader. We hope for the sake of Chandler's students that his lectures are more interesting than his writings.

Chandler, 59, is a native of the United Kingdom who became a U.S. citizen just three years ago. He holds a Ph.D. in education/physical education from Stanford University in California and has spent the bulk of his academic career teaching and/or studying in this country and Canada.

Chandler and Davis argue that students and faculty should have "real academic freedom, and real socioeconomic security."

They also state that their paper's major contention is "that all dominate-subordinate relationships are to be challenged." We'll see how Chandler likes being challenged by students - and how well Papp likes being challenged by Chandler.

WHEN CONTACTED Friday by AT, Chandler suggested the flap over his writings was much ado about nothing and described himself as a political "moderate."

"I am certainly not a Marxist," he said. "I see it as one way of looking at the world. It's not the way I personally choose to look at the world. But as an academic I have to be open to a variety of points of view. It's not my own personal point of view. I would consider myself anything but a Marxist, but I think there's still good reasons to think about it from a variety of perspectives."

Chandler conceded, however, that he and Davis wrote the paper "partly through a Marxist lens."

"Certainly there are aspects of that paper where we looked through a Marxist lens, and I think that's perfectly acceptable in academic circles to do that," he said. No doubt.

But why not look at it through a "capitalist lens"? If Chandler and Davis had wanted to choose an utterly discredited political theory to look at things through, why didn't they choose a "Nazi lens," or a "segregationist lens" or a "colonialist lens"? What's so special about Marxism?

***
LAST SPRING was not a great one for Dr. Papp. His handling of the Jessica Colotl case (involving an illegal alien enrolled as a student at KSU) showed him politically tone deaf to public opinion, according to his critics. Now this spring may not look much better. His injudicious remarks in the Colotl case came back to haunt him, and now his choice of Chandler doesn't look likely to easily resolve itself.

Papp implied that his provost search committee (which was headed by Dr. Arlinda Eaton, dean of the KSU Bagwell College of Education) had failed him by not raising any red flags (pardon the pun) about Chandler's views.

"I would point out that there was a faculty team on the search committee that reviewed his publications including that one," he told MDJ reporter Jon Gillooly, who contributed to and helped research this report. "I have not read the paper per se, but as I said, the faculty review team went through his research materials and was aware of this."

Of course, many will argue the fact that a team of academics could read such a paper and see its Marxist worldview as no big deal is indicative of how prevalent such thinking is in the faculty lounges at some campuses.

"I believe if you look at his entire body of work that you cannot reach the conclusion that he is a Marxist by any stretch of the imagination," Papp told AT.

We'll let readers be the judge of that.

He added that he now has read some of the excerpts of Chandler's paper "and some of them are anti-capitalism, but I would point out that some capitalists criticize capitalism as well."

True, but they are rarely as scathing as Chandler, unless perhaps writing for The Daily Worker.

Papp told AT that had he been fully briefed ahead of time about Chandler's writing, "I would have asked a whole lot more questions."

We don't doubt that. Papp noted that his focus throughout his career has been "supporting and helping American national security policy and strategy. I strongly oppose the concepts of Marxism and Leninism and anti-capitalism."

But as to the hiring of Chandler, he added, "It's a done deal."

That may depend on how the Chandler hiring plays with KSU's alumni and business supporters - nearly of them "capitalists," we would suppose. They might not cotton to the idea of having someone with an outlook so inimical to theirs helping run the show there. They might decide to "vote with their pocketbooks" and withhold their contributions. That might get the attention of Papp, who is committed to raising the millions of dollars necessary to field a football team for KSU.

It all brings to mind the old joke about how there aren't any Marxists left in the old Soviet Union - because they've all found professorships in American universities.
Comments
(29)
Comments-icon Post a Comment
Daffney
|
March 18, 2011
McCarthyism is back!!!
anonymous
|
March 18, 2011
This is ridiculous. So now people can't make a mistake? He may regret writing that paper and all anyone can say is "He wrote a marxist paper 13 years ago, so he shouldn't be hired." That's the most ignorant statement i've ever heard. And even if he didn't think it was a mistake, are his viewpoints not allowed to change in 13 years? Maybe it takes 20 years before he can change his mind...Everyone who is saying KSU would be better off without him is as ignorant as they come. Just wait until the next person they hire is in favor of Corporal Punishment(which is still legal in GA) and then tell me you wouldn't rather have the marxist
Rick F
|
March 17, 2011
Seems like Chandler's political views are--if you'll pardon the expression--a red herring. Shouldn't the question be whether he would do a good job as provost?
P.R.
|
March 11, 2011
"why didn't they choose a "Nazi lens," or a "segregationist lens" or a "colonialist lens"? What's so special about Marxism?"

This comment by itself was enough to convince me that the authors don't have the first idea what Marxism is. For one thing, Marxism is not Communism: it is a descriptive lens for viewing class relations, and cannot by definition advocate a particular political system.

What's ironic about the column's question - "Why not choose a capitalist lens?" - is that in a very important way, Marxism IS a capitalist lens. One political analyst observed that the only people who take Marxist terminology such as "modes of production" or "labor efficiency" seriously these days are bankers.
Steambadger
|
March 10, 2011
Kudos to Dr. Papp for standing by his provost in the face of this ignorant assault. Shame on the MDJ for engaging in such mudslinging.
Oh No Pirates
|
March 10, 2011
This is a joke, correct?

No one could have written this in seriousness.

I particularly like the passage wherein 25,000 words is equated with the length of War and Peace and then the article is criticized for not being written for the general public.

Yes, an academic paper in an academic journal was written for the specialist? Oh my! What is the world coming to!
expat texan
|
March 10, 2011
The "freest country in the world" can't even tolerate someone *citing* Marx? Freedom, my foot.
Covert Socialist
|
March 10, 2011
What's the bigger embarrassment here: the outrage over mere citations, or that people who have never read Marx are so outraged? Tough call.

Sorry to interrupt the insanity - carry on!

Cheers!
KennesawMOM
|
March 09, 2011
As KSU faculty member, resident and taxpayer of Cobb County, -- and mom of two children, I resent the article's representation of KSU, Dr. Papp's leadership, the hiring process of Dr. Chandler, and the "public opinion." However, I hope sincerely that the MDJ quoted Dr. Papp accurately as stating that the hiring of Dr. Chandler is "a done deal."

The title of "fearless leader" is easily assigned. Evidently, Dr. Papp is being tested again. Please join me in offering support.

Sincerely,

KennesawMom
Kyle Jordan
|
March 08, 2011
Get a life people! Tim Chandler is not a marxist. I am sure half the community idiots who are writing on this blog could not even define the term. Perhaps some education will help...
Fred Engels
|
March 08, 2011
Kent State prof proposes a solution that will make everyone happy - their KSU takes him back, our KSU moves on. The only one who could be unhappy with this outcome is Comrade Chandler, who would not get to enjoy his decidedly bourgeois salary bump.
Kent State prof
|
March 07, 2011
This seems sort of crazy.

Tim Chandler is viewed here as an excellent, moderate administrator. He's been non-political; I've never seen him speak or write about Marxism and capitalism at all in the 20 years I've been here.

Tim clearly admits to writing the article, but your quoted material is incredibly out of character. It's hard to understand why or how he wrote such a thing.

We'll miss him. And before anyone says, "you can have him," we were disappointed he's leaving and would gladly take him back.
KSU Alumnus
|
March 07, 2011
I recently graduated from KSU. I am very familiar with Papp's academic career. He is certainly NOT a Marxist. He's as conservative as these types come. He even taught at the Army War College. There are plenty of other conservative or libertarian leaning professors at KSU.
Scart
|
March 07, 2011
Allow me to point out that many of us, including students and faculty at KSU, don't feel that the choice of Provost need be made on the basis of a) free-market, b) god fearing, or c) even American, for that matter.

How many of you who are so up-in-arms have read Dr. Chandler's paper? Or, for that matter, Marx?

Asserting that capitalism isn't perfect or that America isn't the shining beacon of pure awesome to the rest of the world that we seem to think we are are not crimes. If you don't agree, that is your prerogative. Of course, if you could back up your vitriol with an argument other than "USA! USA!", it would go a long way towards actually taking it seriously.

This article, as well as the comments to this point... no. I should leave it at that. But if you insist that "god help us", I have rather a lot more reasons to ask than these.
sam goldman
|
March 07, 2011
I think he will fit in very well with the other like minded folks at KSU.
NtheNo
|
March 06, 2011
How many free market, God fearing, USA loving Americans that would have been a PERFECT fit for this growing southern university and community were overlooked? Very sad. God help us.
OMIPS
|
March 06, 2011
@KSU PROF - you've presented your position and thoughts very well but the issue here is that the country is in a 'cultural war' where left is against right, progressivism is against conservatism, and central government is against individual rights i.e., the Constitution and Bill of Rights. And, in this heated environment, KSU has brought on board an admitted (by his writings) Marxist. In this passionate "cultural war" KSU has brought to our community, and put into a leadership position, a man who has professed disdain for our country and our way of life. Ironically, you've brought this man from Kent State the place where in 1970 the cultural revolution drew first blood. Frankly, to many of us in this community you look like fools to others of us you look like the enemy.
rjsnh
|
March 06, 2011
With so many salient issues that could be addressed within Cobb County this editorial represents much ado about nothing. Mount your high horse and move on.
Dr. Tim Langley
|
March 05, 2011
Maybe it's time for the taxpayer to quit funding colleges. Let THEM compete in the marketplace for both students and staff.
Samuel Adams
|
March 05, 2011
Thank you, KSU Prof, for that thoughtful post.

Although, when there were more than 100 applicants for the position, I think KSU might have done MUCH better.

*We welcome your comments on the stories and issues of the day and seek to provide a forum for the community to voice opinions. All comments are subject to moderator approval before being made visible on the website but are not edited. The use of profanity, obscene and vulgar language, hate speech, and racial slurs is strictly prohibited. Advertisements, promotions, and spam will also be rejected. Please read our terms of service for full guides