I am a British citizen, and a reasonably representative member of the class of people among whom Prof. Walt would generally care to have a reputation. In respect of this blog post, I'd like to make it clear that so long as the inconvenience is not too great, I am prepared to testify in a British court to the effect that:
1) I have read the specific attacks on him published by
and
2) that on reading those articles, I was disposed to think worse of Professor Walt, less likely to recommend his work to others, and in general his reputation with me had been harmed. My considered view is that Walt and his colleague Mearsheimer are not anti-Semites (I happen to disagree with their thesis but this is by the by), but every time I read one of these articles, even by an acknowledged
Between those two, Walt would have, AFAICS, decent grounds to bring a suit for libel in England; if he could convince a court that he had been called an anti-Semite, then the person accusing it would have to prove he was one in order to establish a defence of justification (or argue that it was fair comment). The American libel laws basically allow people like Goldberg and Douthat to throw around these very serious accusations at zero risk, but the British courts don't, and I think the British courts have it right in this case. This is not a general endorsement of UK libel law.
Alas, I think Douthat would only get even more self-righteously smug if he were put into a libel case, which might lead to a smugness singularity and the destruction of reality.
ReplyDeleteAs George Galloway will tell you, there's nothing quite like losing a £200,000 plus fees libel case to wipe the fucking smile off someone's face.
ReplyDeleteHow is it a "very serious accusation", anyway? Every intelligent and decent person who has ever publicly expressed an opinion on any subject concerning Israel has been accused of being an antisemite; that's a given, a law of nature. If you haven't been accused, something's probably wrong with you. Personally, I take it as a compliment.
ReplyDeleteDsquared, I think you've mistyped Jonah Goldberg (of the NRO) meaning to type Jeffrey Goldberg (of The Atlantic).
ReplyDeleteIt is Jeffrey to whom Professor Walt refers rather than to Jonah. (It is possible that Jonah Goldberg has written something libelous regarding Stephen Walt, but Walt has not complained of it it the piece to which you link)
I think libel threats are unnecessary, as this sort of thing is self-debunking: I used to have a high regard for Ross Douthat, but between this smear and his recent consequentialist piece on torture, this is no longer the case. I imagine my feelings will be shared by plenty of people.
Have you reviewed W&M? I'd be interested to read your take on it.
best wishes,
Edmund@Political Scientist
It is possible that Jonah Goldberg has written something libelous regarding Stephen Walt
ReplyDeleteI'd say it was a racing certainty.
Hilarious to think that I was given one of John Mearsheimer's articles as a seminar assignment and I thought it was a gaggle of neoconservative shite. (The Future of the US Pacifier - post-coldwar drawdown will inevitably mean Franco-German war!)
Il faut choisir son camp...
PS: god, thanks, good spot - I thought that the piece was unusually literate for Jonah Goldberg, and have had to change the epithet accordingly.
ReplyDeleteI haven't read the M&W book, but read the original article, and the nearest to a review I've done is this on the Guardian blog.
How is it a "very serious accusation", anyway?
Well, it can get you speaking engagements cancelled, and anything which might hit a man's pocketbook is by that token serious in the eyes of libel law.
I'd certainly advise against taking "anti-Semitic" as a badge of pride; it's actually an accusation that you're a racist and thus a very serious insult. If you let that sort of thing go by, it will tend to stick, and it will both cost you friends and gain you new ones who aren't very nice. (this, by the way, abb1 mate, is the sound of me gently asking you to cool it a bit on the Israel stuff please).
"I'd certainly advise against taking "anti-Semitic" as a badge of pride; it's actually an accusation that you're a racist and thus a very serious insult."
ReplyDeleteIrritatingly, D^2's html filter doesn't allow me to do the 'using antisemitic as a random insult in place of the adolescent use of "gay" but with strikethroughs in appropriate places' thing, so the gag I was going to make doesn't work. But true dat.
"it will both cost you friends and gain you new ones who aren't very nice"
See: Liberal Conspiracy and Devil's Kitchen threads on the subject. There are very, very few things that make me feel on the same side as Decent Left-ists, but there are a few (non-Pali) people who appear on Israel/Pali threads who actually manage to achieve that.
Incidentally, "an accusation that you're a racist" is hardly an insult either. Tribalism is a big part of human nature, and I suspect most (if not all) people have racist impulses; it's nothing terrible, civilized individual just has to understand it and deal with it, that's all. Just like you deal with your impulses of greed or lust.
ReplyDeleteDislike of the Jews has become excessively demonized (for obvious reasons) and that is why Jeffrey Goldberg (and other self-hating Semites like him) have the opportunity to demagogue.
The very liberal use of "antisemite" as a slur, and it's subsequent loss of purchase is indeed a shame. Unfortunately I don't think Jews have anyone to blame but themselves, or at least their fellow Jews (and I can't believe I just wrote that sentence.) But in following the issue on the internet recently, it would appear to me that for every person branding as an anti-semite, anyone who questions Israels desires or war conduct, there is another who complains about the injustice of being labeled an anti-semite for expressing what appears to be textbook anti-semitism.
ReplyDelete" This is not a general endorsement of UK libel law."
ReplyDeleteI like the coda
...there is another who complains about the injustice of being labeled an anti-semite for expressing what appears to be textbook anti-semitism
ReplyDeleteWho are they? Name two in the anglophone (preferably American) mainstream.
Bruschettaboy: This week's Economist is running an article on how English courtrooms are being used to stifle free speech outside England. The piece is online.
ReplyDeleteI'm referring to discussions on the Israeli/Palestinian conflict on relevant websites & blogs devoted to it by individuals, not to published commenters in the mainstream press.
ReplyDelete"Unfortunately I don't think Jews have anyone to blame but themselves,"
ReplyDeleteOf course, I blame the Germans,
I certainly agree that there are quite a few people who appear to be using the general cloud of smoke surrounding the issue as cover for simple anti-Semitism. I even think that it's possible that Professor Walt is one of them. Which is part of the evidence that, if these accusations against him are false, they're definitely libellous. And while the UK's libel laws are used to stifle free speech, they're also often used for honest people to defend their reputation against disgusting slurs. The practice of making unsubstantiated accusations of anti-Semitism is also something that could have a chilling effect on free speech, which is why I would like to see this one end up in court, where we could get it all sorted out once and for all.
ReplyDeleteJesus Christ British libel laws are ridiculous. Are you sure you can back up in court that Jeffrey Goldberg is, in fact, a twat?
ReplyDeleteI don't have to; it's "mere vulgar abuse"
ReplyDelete