[Photo by David Gamble, for The Independent on Sunday]
![]() |
|
|
|
Within ten minutes however they have livened up, as I warm to the theme, and after half an hour they are lively, reactive, and listening with closest attention. Almost nobody leaves during the two hours the evening lasts; most stay on during the ten-minute break that I announce.
![]()
The questions are the best part, as usual. A German girl student, a quiet, well spoken twenty-year old, the Federal Republic’s equivalent, no doubt, of a Rhodes Scholar: she finds it highly desirable that I should be imprisoned, fined, excluded, and prevented from speaking; and even more praiseworthy that her country’s government is suppressing Free Speech where it is used for ideas which she and they agree are unacceptable. I listen patiently, praise her command of the English language, and suggest with the utmost respect that in Germany this century so far Nothing Has Changed. There is little that the rest of the world can or should learn from Germany about Free Speech. |
One questioner addresses the issue that I had raised in discussing the Daniel Goldhagen thesis — that if I were a Jew I would want to see an answer to the vital question: why the Jews are so hated within only a few years of their arrival in each host country; he points out that the Jews have now been in the United States in strength for fifty years, yet “they are not hated”. I reply that on the contrary, my own perception is that they are moving into the same positions of predominance and influence (media, banking, business, entertainment, and the more lucrative professions like law, medical and dentistry) that they held in Weimar Germany, which gave rise to the hatreds and the resulting pogroms; and that this being so, twenty or thirty more years might see in the USA the same dire consequences as happened in Nazi Germany. I sense that this is not a popular prediction. For this evening only I have marked the books down to half-price for the impoverished student population, since I know they are even poorer than I. A. is cool, efficient, and very popular with the students. She works very hard unpacking, arranging, pricing, and then repacking the books. The book table is thronged, and I give several books away. She tells me however that we did not cover the $420 which the university administrator extracted from her in cash before the function began, as rent for the hall! Oi. Minus the petrol for the seven-hundred mile drive here and back yesterday and today. Minus her wages, minus the car-hire, minus, minus, minus. We have not expected to make any cash surplus on the day, however, and I told her as we drove over here that what matters is a far larger principle: establishing, or reestablishing channels of communication to the thinking student population, despite every effort of the Traditional Enemies of Free Speech to abrogate them. What a wonderful audience university students make. Still eager to learn, and curious about alternative opinions and interpretations (particularly those they are being “protected” from). Which in turn makes me very conscious of the need to lecture to them with the utmost restraint. |
Afterwards M. and J. take us to a restaurant, just closing down for the night, where we have a snack (it is already ten p.m.) I am exhausted. We set off toward Oregon, and stop at Colfax to look for a hotel but the only one is darkened, dead, and lifeless, so we turn back to Pullman and check into rooms at –. A wasted forty-mile round trip. The hotel gives me a special rate, as I have spoken at WSU. I then work on the Website until 2 a.m., and send off several e-mails.
April 14, 1998 (Tuesday)Pullman, Washington (USA) Up at 7:30 a.m. This morning’s Spokesman-Review, the Spokane newspaper, has the improbable (and less than accurate) headline: WSU SHOUTS DOWN HOLOCAUST REVISIONIST. Yes, the Journaille: they have a lot to answer foR. I guess that some journalist wrote that headline yesterday afternoon, before the actual lecture. |
In his newswire, Michael A Hoffmann comments: There are actually three versions of the Spokesman-Review’s coverage of David Irving’s lecture , two slightly variant ones posted on their website and the version printed in hard copy on p. B-3 of the April 14 edition, with the more sensible headline, “Holocaust revisionist faces critics.” All three versions are attributed to reporter Andrea Vogt, who, it seems, cannot bring herself to call the author of more than 25 histories, many of them classics from major publishing houses, a historian. For several critiques of Spokesman-Review reporting cf. http://www.hoffman-info.com/whore.html I am told the WSU student newspaper, The Daily Evergreen carR. a reasonably objective article. I have e-mailed them for a copy. MR. Irving’s behavior at WSU is a model of restraint and intelligence. He walked into a tinderbox and came out of it having doused the fire of media hysteria only to ignite that more primal fire, which the Librarian of Congress, James H. Billington calls, “the fire in the mind.” Congratulations to MR. Irving, the students who hosted him and the dead white males who brought us the U.S. Constitution which guaranteed his freedom of speech. The fact that Irving spoke for hours before hundreds of students — future leaders who will influence thousands of others — is proof positive that there is hope for our future, if we will come out of our figurative and literal bunkers and go public on behalf of our convictions and do so with intelligence. |