  | 
      | 
  
    The Firing of Finkelstein 
By Peter Kirstein 
 
While the tenure-denial case  of Norman G. Finkelstein has seemingly ended with the September 5, 2007 settlement between  the professor and DePaul   University, this  distressing episode will continue to reverberate throughout the academy for the  foreseeable future. From the day I first published on April 1, 2007 the  revelation that Dr. Finkelstein was experiencing opposition to his application  for tenure and promotion, I have been consumed with the egregious violation of  his academic freedom and the failure of a university to resist the unwarranted  intrusion of external partisans such as Alan Dershowitz, Frankfurter Professor  of Law at Harvard University. 
Mr. Dershowitz was enraged  that Dr. Finkelstein, in his latest book, Beyond Chutzpah had written a  scathing attack of his The Case for Israel.Mr. Dershowitz was  determined to use the power of his position at Harvard and his connections with  powerful supporters of Israel to launch an international media campaign of  vilification and character assassination that had a single purpose: to silence  and destroy Dr. Finkelstein through the denial of tenure. I felt at times that  the efforts of Mr. Dershowitz, an internationally known attorney and legal  scholar, reflected a campaign of such anger and relentless fury that it  revealed a personal animus bordering on hatred. Normally a heated exchange  between academicians is confined to content and interpretation of a given  topic. It rarely evolves into an orchestrated effort on the part of a powerful,  affluent, tenured professor to deny continued employment of a junior faculty  member seeking promotion to associate professor and the granting of tenure. 
 
DePaul University has  consistently stated that although it resented external pressures on the institution’s  internal review processes, it was not unduly influenced by external forces  prior to President (Rev.) Dennis H. Holtschneider’s denial of tenure letter on  June 8, 2007. Yet Professor Dershowitz sent a dossier of ad hominem attacks to  both the DePaul University College of Law and Department of Political Science.  One member of the Department of Political Science, Professor Patrick Callahan,  pressured the department’s Personnel Committee to accept fifty pages of  material that he had solicited from Alan Dershowitz. The Personnel Committee,  which “found no evidence… of academic misconduct or dishonesty,” in the  scholarship of Dr. Finkelstein, reluctantly acceded to the former department  chair’s demand as revealed in its November 1, 2006 report: “[I]ndeed, it  represented a departure from our initial desire to keep unsolicited material  from entering our deliberations, trusting instead the processes of external and  departmental review that have served us well over the years.” This exhaustive  thorough vetting of Dr. Finkelstein’s scholarship resulted in a unanimous 4-0  vote of affirmation of the quality and integrity of his scholarship. I am  unaware of any other faculty body at DePaul   University that engaged  in such a thorough, comprehensive review of his oeuvre. Indeed as the  Dershowitz allegations were unraveling before the detached review of  “specialists” in the field of political science, the Department of Political  Science affirmed with a 9-3 majority the integrity of Dr. Finklestein’s  research, and concluded he should be granted tenure and promotion. 
 
Dr. Finkelstein taught in the College of Liberal Arts and Sciences and its  Personnel Committee voted unanimously (5-0) to recommend the granting of tenure  and promotion to associate professor. Even though Dr. Finkelstein’s research  had been assessed as satisfying DePaul’s tenure standards for scholarship by  three units of review—the Political Science Department Personnel Committee, a  majority of the department (9-3) and the college’s personnel committee—one witnesses  a dramatic and shocking departure from the accepted norms of the assessment of  scholarship in Dean Chuck Suchar’s infamous memorandum of March 22, 2007 that  appeared initially on my blog. The dean of the College of Liberal Arts    Sciences does not charge that Professor  Finkelstein is guilty of research misconduct, fabricated evidence, plagiarism  or unsubstantiated conclusions, but instead concludes that tenure should not be  granted due to a rhetorical tonality that is “hurtful,” “inflammatory” and lacking  “civility.” Dean Suchar then concludes that the passionate, no-holds-barred  scholarship, that is characteristic of Dr. Finkelstein, is a breach of the  Vincentian character of the university. The dean also avers that Dr.  Finkelstein should not be granted tenure because “he was considering a lawsuit  against DePaul…,” which confirmed the lack of “values of collegiality.”  
 
Let me be clear. A powerful  dean of the nation’s largest Roman Catholic university is using a rumor that an  academician under his charge might pursue legal redress as grounds for  recommending the denial of tenure. The die was cast and the word was out. Dr.  Finkelstein, who all conceded was an “outstanding” and brilliant teacher, would  be denied tenure due to the tone but not the substance of his pioneering and  transformational research on the Palestinian occupation and the utilization of  the German Holocaust during World War II for personal financial reward. 
In a 4-3 vote the University  Board on Promotion and Tenure (U.T.B.T.) recommended the denial of tenure, and  chose to reject the carefully constructed and elaborately presented peer  assessment at the departmental and college level. The U.T.B.T. essentially  adopted the Suchar Memorandum’s emphasis on tonality by condemning the lack of  niceness in Dr. Finkelstein’s monographs. These non-specialists lacked any  evidentiary material that could be used to deny tenure legitimately. According  to Fr. Holtschneider, when he proclaimed the DePaul decision to deny Dr.  Finkelstein tenure, the U.T.B.T. was upset that books such as Beyond  Chutzpah and The Holocaust Industry were “deliberately hurtful,” and  possessed an “inflammatory style.” [Emphasis added.] 
Without attempting to be  reductionist, were the personal feelings of Alan Dershowitz, who ironically  claimed to be a victim, the predominant reason for the denial of tenure? Is  passion in scholarly discourse when investigating the absence of  self-determination and the presence of apartheid in Palestine a violation of Vincentian values?  Is scholarship that triggers international debate and awareness of topics that  are central to international peace and security worthy of condemnation and  dismissal by a university community? Is a professor, upon intensive review, who  is exonerated from baseless allegations of academic misconduct, to be crucified  on the grounds of pitch and demeanor?  
 
The Norman G. Finkelstein case  represents more than one individual’s tragedy and expulsion from the academy.  It represents a closing of the American mind. It affirms that revisionist or  dissenting scholarship on Israel,  the Palestinians, the Holocaust and the influence of the Israel Lobby is  fraught with peril that only the tenured few can survive. Graduate students and  non-tenured faculty, I am afraid, will avoid legitimate inquiry into these  seminal topics for fear that a Dershowitz or other organized entity might  engage in a campaign of personal destruction and succeed in intimidating and  eviscerating a university’s capacity to exercise impartial judgment and  evaluate fairly non-tenured faculty during their probationary period. The DePaul University’s  abdication of its responsibility to honor A.A.U.P. guidelines on academic  freedom and due process, and to construe itself as a responsible custodian of  the broader academic community, suggests the battles ahead for academic  freedom, critical thinking and basic justice will require even greater resolve  and dedication. “We are all Professor Finkelstein” emblazoned the shirts of the  intrepid professor’s supporters at the DePaul University  fall convocation and during the first day of classes. Indeed we are: now and  forever. 
	  Peter N. Kirstein is  professor of history at Saint Xavier University  and Vice President of the American Association of University  Professors-Illinois Conference  | 
     |