As Lew from Kiwipolitico wisely said earlier today, “the best remedy for bad speech is more speech.” He said this in response to some bizarre claims Dr. Paul Buchanan (who prefers not to be known by his academic title, so I shan’t mention it again), one of the authors at said blog and the man behind “Buchanan Strategic Advisors,” has made about me. I am talking about this particular comment thread and specifically this particular comment (Update: Buchanan has deleted the offensive comments now, so these links are merely historical):
Good bye Matthew:
Your sense of importance is inversely proportional to your intellectual worth (oh, and BTW, I know your supervisors and lets just say that…the examiners shall decide).
Although the version he originally wrote (which, unluckily for him, was sent out by e-mail as soon as he entered it) was slightly different:
Good bye Matthew:
Your sense of importance is inversely proportional to your intellectual worth (oh, and BTW, I know your supervisors, who agree with me).
Now, what Buchanan has claimed here (in both versions) is simply not true.
Let me emphasise that: Buchanan is spreading false information about me.
Neither of my supervisors know him and they have definitely never discussed my PhD with him (as one of them said, the fact that she has never met him or had contact with him effectively precludes her discussing my work with him). Paul Buchanan has either confused me with someone else or he is lying. Normally I’d extend the principle of charity and assume that he’s been foolish, but given the invective of his earlier comments in that thread, I’m inclined to believe that he thought he could lie about having spoken with my supervisors and get away with it. Luckily for me (and not so luckily for him) I have a very good relationship with both of my supervisors and speak with them regularly.
It was very easy to verify that Paul Buchanan was not telling the truth.
I’m making a point about this here on my blog (sorry, foreign readers, who don’t know who Paul Buchanan is) for the sheer fact that Buchanan has blocked me from commenting in the thread and thus my only recourse is to signal here that Buchanan is passing himself off as someone who knows about my project (and its academic merit) when, in fact, he does not.
As to why he has taken against me… Well, I don’t rightly know. I have some theories but I’m not going to make matters worse by speculating openly as to why he thinks heaping abuse upon me is in anyway justified. Indeed, if he wasn’t against robust debate I’d be discussing this with him over at his blog.