One of the topics discussed at the Princeton Town Council this past Monday was roundabouts. The Council wants to install one at the corner of Terhune and Harrison, I believe it was. I don’t like roundabouts, and hope they don’t build this one, but I have to admit that the issue is more complicated and more interesting than my personal preferences, so I thought I’d lay out the structure of the problem involved.
Continue readingMasters of the Universe
The Times “Covers” the Iran War
Here’s The New York Times describing recent developments in the US-Israeli war against Iran and Lebanon:
The June memorandum of understanding was widely seen as a boon for Iran, granting the regime badly needed sanctions relief even as talks over tough concessions like nuclear enrichment were postponed for later. But Iranian leaders opted to escalate again rather than consolidate their gains from the deal, according to Nate Swanson, an Iran expert at the Atlantic Council, a Washington-based research group.
Ships could move through the Strait of Hormuz freely before the war. Iran’s insistence that the deal’s vague language on the issue gave it control over the waterway led to the deal falling apart. Iran began firing on ships that transited in channels outside Iranian waters, and American forces retaliated by bombing southern Iran, prompting a cycle of attacks and counterattacks across the Middle East.
In other words, according to the Times, “expert” opinion tells us that the failure of the ceasefire is to be chalked up to Iranian belligerence and irrationality. In fact, what it actually tells us is that the “experts” are full of shit. Every claim made in this passage is factually challenged nonsense.
Continue readingWho Kidnapped Najam Sethi? And Who Didn’t?
Originally published at the History News Network, March 15, 2004.
The letters section of The New York Review of Books for February 12, 2004 contains a heated exchange between Bernard-Henry Levy, author of Who Killed Daniel Pearl? (2003) and William Dalrymple, who reviewed Levy’s book in the December 4 issue of the NYRB (“Murder in Karachi”). As it happens, I have a document that settles a contentious issue between them. I reproduce it below.
Continue readingICE-Free Zone for Princeton
Statement to Mayor & Municipal Council of Princeton
400 Witherspoon St., Princeton, New Jersey
August 10, 2026
Almost exactly a year ago today, the Mayor and Council unanimously passed resolution R-25-275, a resolution supporting passage of what was then called the Immigrant Trust Act. Among other things, the resolution called on other municipalities to join with Princeton in urging the state legislature to pass the Act. In the end, 30 municipalities and seven counties passed resolutions, and an amended version of the ITA passed the legislature in January 2026.
“Whataboutism”
Further Reflections on the Jason Arday Case
My post on the Jason Arday controversy, “Black Plagiarism Matters,” has gotten more-than-usual traffic for posts at this blog, much of it via Roderick Long’s Facebook page (thanks, Roderick), where there’s an extensive discussion of the post, much of it admittedly point-missing and pointless. One common criticism I’ve gotten there is that my bringing up the Martin Stone case (as a contrast to the Jason Arday case) is an instance of “whataboutism.” Like so much Internet slang, “whataboutism” is a package deal concept. One part of the package captures something real and significant; the other embodies a confusion. A criticism involving an uninspected package deal ends up committing a fallacy of equivocation, which is my response to all of these criticisms. All of them commit a fallacy of equivocation.
Continue readingAristotle vs. Institutional Neutrality
A bunch of us had a contentious discussion the other day about institutional neutrality, apropos of my then-upcoming talk about it at the Heterodox Academy conference. One topic that came up was how institutional neutrality relates to curricular decisions. Is there an institutionally neutral way of deciding, say, whether a given topic or discipline merits inclusion within the curriculum of a given institution of higher education? Or a neutral way of deciding whether a program, department, division, school, or university itself ought to set aside the resources to make something a formal subject of study? Since not everything can be studied, decisions have to be made about what gets included and what doesn’t. Can those decisions be made “neutrally”? Continue reading
Getting in the Way
“…Jesus did get in the way of empire…”
–Mary Anne Grady Flores, Ithaca Catholic Workers Movement
As I’ve mentioned here a few times (May 26, May 28, July 1), I support the direct-action activist effort to block weapons shipments from the United States to Israel. These shipments conscript our complicity in Israeli aggression, occupation, and war crimes, and also conscript (and are embedded in) civilian commercial networks that are exploited for military purposes. They turn all of us into accomplices of and human shields for wars of aggression and brutality, a status that I think we’re obligated to resist and refuse.
Continue readingBlack Plagiarism Matters
One of the biggest higher ed stories out there right now is the Jason Arday plagiarism case. The New York Times has run two articles on it in the last two days, the Guardian is running with it, the Times of London is pushing it, and then there’s Tech Times, Times Higher Education, The Telegraph and the BBC. From a more ideologically astringent angle, there’s Bari Weiss’s ever-impartial Free Press, some sermonizing at The Wall Street Journal, and some tooth-gnashing at Daily Caller. Obviously, you can count on the white nationalists to have weighed in. This is their chance to shine.
Continue readingLike a Surgeon
Back in February 2025, I wrote a post here in which I took issue with the trend among physicians of objecting to the use of the word “provider” for physician. Physicians object to that term because they find the “provider” terminology disrespectful and status-diminishing, but my claim was that the objection is itself just an expression of physicians’ narcissism, elitism, and political naivete. Like it or not, physicians are providers and have to get used to being described as team players in a joint enterprise rather than as solo practitioners engaged in some quasi-Romantic quest.
Continue reading“Iran’s Fractured Leadership”
I wrote the post below the line back in April, but got pulled into other things, and never posted it. But I feel pretty vindicated: since late March, the Times’s narrative has turned 180 degrees. In March, they were quoting officials quite sure that Iran’s leadership was too “fractured” to act in a unified way. By July 29, the narrative became: “Trump Encounters a More Determined Iran as War Widens.” By August 1, it was: “In Iran, the U.S. Appears Headed for Strategic Defeat, Allies Fear.”
Good call, NYT, but how the fuck did that happen? How did Iran go from being all fractured and confused to achieving victory over the supposedly unified and all-powerful United States in four months? One possibility is that though “fractured,” Iran had the capacity to heal its “fractures” pretty fast. The other is that Iran was never all that fractured in the first place. In the first case, we’ve gotten no account from the Times of the transition from the one thing to the other; in the other, we’ve gotten no acknowledgement of its false assessment of Iranian dysfunction. Either way, the question arises: how much do these journalistic “experts” really know, anyway? To the extent that they know anything, how much of their knowledge is ultimately neutralized by the desire to generate nationalist propaganda? Continue reading
Policy of Truth 