NEWS
Alleged remarks raise concern
Looking for a print version?
Simply choose ‘Print’ on your computer and a printer-friendly document will be generated.
Also by Nick Penzenstadler:
- Cartoon attacks David Horowitz (May 6, 2008)
- Organization confident 'Sex Toys 101' will go on (May 1, 2008)
- Law School shuts down 'Sex Toys 101' talk (April 30, 2008)
- McCain drives economic line (April 17, 2008)
- McCain stopping in state today (April 16, 2008)
Related Stories:
- Professor under fire for remarks (February 23, 2007)
- Professor to share story of alleged racist remarks (December 3, 2007)
- Kaplan refutes student claims (March 6, 2007)
- Students lambaste professor (March 2, 2007)
- Wiley, law professors react to controversy (March 12, 2007)
Share This:
by Nick Penzenstadler
Monday, February 26, 2007
University of Wisconsin Law Professor Leonard Kaplan has faced accusations of making derogatory remarks about the Hmong community in his class, and now he could face questions about his position as a tenured professor.
UW Political Science Professor Donald Downs said since Kaplan is tenured, he is able to take more risks with his lectures than when he served as an assistant professor.
Downs said professors spend five or six years as assistant professors, then another five or six more as assistant professors with tenure before moving into a full professor position after being judged on scholarship, publication and research.
Professors who continue through their profession successfully, Downs added, get more protection by using their intellectual honesty. But he also said it is valuable to have professors who are not afraid to say what they think.
"You can't be fired if you're untenured unless there is just cause, but you can be denied tenure," Downs said. "We want people to take intellectual risk — we don't all want to be on the same page all the time."
Law student Nam Dao — who is Vietnamese and was present the class when the incident occurred — said the professor's words, though "insensitive" or "in bad taste," were not meant to be offensive.
"Those are all hearsay and secondary sources — of course they're going to seem inflammatory on paper," Dao said. "His goal was not to be racist; he definitely should not be fired — this is definitely within the realm of academic freedom."
The lecture in question also discussed cultural values in the Jewish and Muslim community, and Dam said Kaplan did not single out Hmong people. Dam added Kaplan's teaching style is unique because of its edginess.
"I was definitely a bit uncomfortable, but that's the type of professor he is," Dam said. "He keeps you on your toes — that's his teaching style."
Downs added professors are allowed to push the envelope and avoid "watering down education" so long as they aim not to offend students.
"Leonard's claim was that he certainly wasn't doing it directly," Downs said.
When contacted by The Badger Herald, Kaplan issued a statement that he will be providing further information sometime this week.
"Until then, I have nothing further to say," Kaplan said in the statement.
Anonymous (February 26, 2007 @ 7:26am):
Instability, discord and division are the inherent byproducts in "diverse" societies, and so America will need increasingly severe punishments for those who demonstrate racial aggression, as she increases with diversity.
Ultimately, no laws will prevent America from continuing to Balkanize, and increasing in alienation and tension, as she continues to grow with diversity.
What will begin to dramatically heighten this growing alienation and tension will be the coming Third World poverty here, as whites are displaced largely by people from the Third World. As more and more of our schools become low performing, this will effect our ability to create First World wealth.
I know all this challenges the cult beliefs of pretend-egalitarians, but at some point thinking people will have to lose their fear in confronting the system.
Anonymous (February 26, 2007 @ 8:49am):
That's pretty heavy commentary... which blog did you copy that from? What's the alternative to diversity? One pure race? And when we have that, then what? There's still international diversity. I think the real problem is people like you who feel threatened that Japanese and Mexican immigrants are harder-working and more productive than you. Now your job is no longer taken for granted, and even now your wife can leave you for an ethnic minority after you lose your job for being a fat, lazy POS who can no longer provide for your family. But why give her that right. After all, not too long ago, people like you claimed that female suffrage would destabilize society... and now look at them.
Anonymous (February 26, 2007 @ 11:07am):
"What's the alternative to diversity? One pure race?"
I think you miss the point. It is the muliple "One pure race" advocates that fuel the diversity machine. It's all the non-whites which seem to have exclusive organizations that exclude all but the chosen race. Imagine the rancor if someone proposed a whites-only organization.
I would prefer a melting pot approach where all become Americans, not a plethora of ???-Americans of every possible ethnicity/culture/nationality.
Anonymous (February 26, 2007 @ 11:27am):
I feel that Dao has a point in that he didn't feel that the comments were offensive to him, and the reason is that he is not HMONG. He is Vietnamese and that is the difference. Those comments made by Professor Kaplan should never had put into his classroom or in any conversation due to the fact that this is Wisconsin and we have no room for individuals that speak about other minority groups like that even if it is in a educational setting. It makes me feel like Kaplan should do some more studying on the Hmong instead of looking to spread his views on the Hmong and to label the Hmong culture as a way to misunderstand the justice system. Overall, from the info that is posted online for everyone to see and read, I feel that Kaplan should take responsibility for his actions and received some help in understanding the Hmong people with facts and not fiction.
Anonymous (February 26, 2007 @ 1:07pm):
They spelled Dao's name wrong twice. "Dam", is that supposed to be a blending of "Nam" and "Dao"?
Anonymous (February 26, 2007 @ 1:09pm):
Once again now many of those who defend Barrent's rights are quiet, save Professor Downs. When will we have a society that at least allows all sides to be heard regardless of how hurtful or misinformed? One day I hope we will have the freedom to speak, but I doubt it will be at the University of Wisconsin anytime soon.
- Germain E. Stemme.
Anonymous (February 26, 2007 @ 2:20pm):
Maybe students should confront faculty members for clarification of their lectures before throwing bombs in the form of emails to media outlets? This thing is starting to look more like a hatchet job than a misunderstanding.
No report I have read has given much context for the remarks that set this off, but I find it unthinkable that the racist rant some assume to have taken place actually did.
And this was not a well-written news piece by the way. Thanks for the very incomplete description of the tenure process. What exactly were you trying to suggest?
Anonymous (February 26, 2007 @ 4:42pm):
I was in the class so let me provide a bit of context.
The subject matter in our Legal Process class was about the role of cultural values in formulating law. Kaplan used Hmong stereotypes, particularly the dowry system and the gang problem, to illustrate two points. With regards to the dowry system, if a women does not consent to sex, the man will be charged with rape in America. However, in criminal cases involving ethnic minorities, there exists the cultural defense argument--essentially, "in my culture this is not a crime." Kaplan noted that the cultural defense argument is used by people from other cultures as well, such as Muslims. Regarding the gang problem among the Hmong population, Kaplan used it to illustrate the point that the state of Wisconsin is not doing a good job of providing educational opportunities and job training to the Hmong. Thus, the state of Wisconsin is not doing a good job of embracing cultural differences and helping a section of the Hmong to assimilate into mainstream culture. Kaplan noted that the second generation of immigrant groups usually contain a criminal element, using Meyer Lansky, who was Jewish, to illustrate that point. Further, what I can't capture is Kaplan's style, he's provoking and makes you uncomfortable-not a bad thing for an hour and half lecture.
Regards,
Nam Dao
3L University of Wisconsin Law School
Regards,
Nam Dao
3L University of Wisconsin
Anonymous (February 26, 2007 @ 6:19pm):
Nam Dao,
You should send your remarks to the Cap. Times if you haven't already.
Anonymous (February 26, 2007 @ 8:50pm):
This is a clear hatchet job. Kashia Moua should apologize to Kaplan, and Kaplan should not apologize for attempting to discuss a serious subject such as the relationship between formal legal rules and cultural norms. Caving to the demands of these students will jeopardize academic freedom.
Anonymous (February 26, 2007 @ 10:00pm):
Context, that's understandable. Freedom of speech, especially on a college campus, that' understandable. Ignorant, disparaging generalizations about specific ethnic groups is not understandable, should not have a place on campus especially from a faculty member (tenured or not) and context makes really no difference. There are many around us who don't have very thick skin, but situations like this have very little to do with that and this type of ignorance should not be portrayed as some sort of display of "academic freedom" because that will set a precedent. Are we to believe that for such an intelligent guy this professor supposedly is, that of all the possible examples he could have conjured up, that these were the best examples he could have made? If that's the case, it's a shame and an embarrassment and obviously does not reflect very well on him. There's no place in the classroom for these kinds of remarks, and it really doesn't matter what context it was meant in. There are plenty of equally great examples, I'm sure, that are just as effective that don't insult, ridicule, or prejudice people, and that's the difference. His statements were not, in fact, necessary and should not be justifiable.
Anonymous (February 26, 2007 @ 10:24pm):
maybe this guy should do some studies on hmong people before he opens his mouth. This is offensive and shows his ignorance. He brought out the fact that hmong people only know how to kill people. No one really knows what happend in those two incidents and except those who died and the suspects. How can you say something like that because those two hmong men could have only been doing it in self defense. These white people could have been just as ignorant as this professor...
Anonymous (February 26, 2007 @ 11:32pm):
According to some students in his class, Kaplan does not believe nor did he teach that all Hmong men are killers! Others apparently weren't listening as well, or (apparently) saw the chance to try and leverage publicity and a critical race and law program (??) out of the situation. The lecture was hypothetical! How hard is that to understand? Or do the facts ruin an otherwise pleasurable feeling of misplaced outrage and self-righteousness?
Of course, maybe the UW just doesn't put enough money into the thought police.
Anonymous (February 27, 2007 @ 12:40am):
Want to know about Hmong bride price practices? Read the following link hosted by the Hmong Cultural Center:
http://www.hmongcenter.org/hmonmarcus.html
Paragraphs 5-7 discussing bride price and bride "captures" are particularly interesting in light of the comments that Kaplan made in his law and culture lecture. I don't see why we can't discuss these cultural difference when they are well documented. It's a shame that self-loathing youth can't embrace their cultural differences and discuss them in class, especially if a professor is supposedly mischaracterizing these differences. If we can't do this in law school, then Grutter (aff action case) got it wrong. This is obviously not the proper forum for cross-racial understanding and breaking down stereotypes.
I guess I'm just an optimist, but i think that law school is the proper forum. This is just a knee-jerk reaction by some students, and I hope they someday see that their actions are censoring the type of speech that is necessary at this level of education.
Anonymous (February 27, 2007 @ 12:55am):
"There are many around us who don't have very thick skin, but situations like this have very little to do with that and this type of ignorance should not be portrayed as some sort of display of "academic freedom" because that will set a precedent."
The situation has everything to do with that. The precedent has already been set. It's known as the first amendment and though Bush has tried to kill it, it still lives. There used to be a speech code here, which was laughable and overturned in a short time. There is a place in the classroom for Kaplan's language and it is not indefensible -- get over it.
Anonymous (February 27, 2007 @ 12:57am):
Here's an email that was originally sent out regarding the issue at-hand. I post the contents here to highlight that some of the "quotes" used by media sources should be verified for accuracy and for the context.... why can't we all just get along.
---[Excerpt from a student email]------
As some of you may know, there is a current controversy at the University of Wisconsin Law School regarding remarks made by a Professor during his class on February 15, 2007. The following are remarks reported by students in the class; these remarks are not all exact quotes but reflective of the students' recollection. His remarks included comments such as, "Hmong men have no skills other than killing" and that first generation Hmong women were better off with Hmong men dead. He stated, "What do you think happened after ten years? The Hmong men started to die and women started to do better. Women did handicrafts and other things..." Hmong men were labeled as "warriors" and "killers". Furthermore, comments were made suggesting that all second generation Hmong end up in gangs. We find these comments to be highly disturbing and in violation of our rights as students to learn in a safe and non-hostile environment.
We believe these comments have generated a hostile and racially divided learning environment. These comments promote existing misinformation about the Hmong community, their cultural practices and their history. Such ethnic stereotyping and inaccurate portrayals of the Hmong community has the harmful effect of alienating students from their peers and faculty. Furthermore, we believe the comments are harmful to the larger law school community and suffocate the academic exchange of ideas and perspectives.
Anonymous (February 27, 2007 @ 4:27pm):
The above email is absolutely fascinating. What is perhaps most remarkable about the email is that it is clearly crafted in a way to achieve the very opposite of its stated goals.
What could be more divisive to the law school community than sending this kind of crap to media outlets before taking it to the professor and seeing if things could be sorted out? Nice job. Really, just a nice job.
It also strikes me that more misinformed opinions about the Hmong have been formed as a result of the reaction to Kaplan's lecture, not the lecture itself.
Anonymous (February 28, 2007 @ 2:21am):
Actually...according to a segment I just saw on the news tonight, one of the students stated that they did go meet with Kaplan after class. He apparently did not apologize for his comments but did apologize if his comments had hurt the students.
It seems like the students did make an attempt to resolve this issue with Kaplan directly and personally. He was the one who held out by refusing to acknowledge that his comments could, indeed, be seen as deragotory and also dangerous considering that they do feed into certain stereotypes about the Hmong community.
Anonymous (February 28, 2007 @ 12:34pm):
one love to all my homies.
Anonymous (March 1, 2007 @ 4:56am):
"What could be more divisive to the law school community than sending this kind of crap to media outlets before taking it to the professor and seeing if things could be sorted out? "
I heard the students did approach Kaplan after class, and he said the facts he stated were "true". He stood by the ignorance. Why are you so afraid of students speaking out? It makes the whole product better, not a biased education.
Anonymous (March 2, 2007 @ 12:47am):
"There is a place in the classroom for Kaplan's language and it is not indefensible -- get over it."
There's also something called decency and respect which is something I'm hoping this public institution protects and promotes as well. If not, then when's the KKK demonstration scheduled to begin?
Anonymous (March 2, 2007 @ 7:46am):
Why would Kaplan concede to the statements attributed to him if the statements were a misinterpretation of his words? Students speak out in this case based on misinterpretation and based on an effort to dictate speech in the classroom. Academic freedom is about Kaplan presenting his views and others contesting them, as opposed to requesting the Dean discipline Kaplan, requesting that all faculty receive diversity training, etc. Those other requests are a protest designed to limit speech and hence they are inconsistent with academic freedom (but obviously themselves constitutional forms of expression).
Add a comment
We welcome your thoughts, but please keep your feedback thoughtful, on-topic and respectful. Offensive language, personal attacks, or irrelevant comments may be deleted.
Login...
Not registered? Sign up now.
It's quick, free, and the email address you provide will not be sold or solicited.
