We have lots of political correctness threads, perhaps we can centralize the issue in one thread so we're not cluttering up the board: http://www.thecollegefix.com/post/30609/ UW-Madisons Young Americans for Freedom labeled hate group KATE HARDIMAN - UNIVERSITY OF NOTRE DAME JANUARY 6, 2017 535 276 Share101 13 The Student Coalition for Progress at the University of Wisconsin-Madison recently pushed a petition that alleged University of Wisconsin Madisons Young Americans for Freedom chapter is a hate group and its members and efforts create a hostile environment on campus. Young Americans for Freedom is a conservative student organization that aims to promote free market economics and Reaganesque principles. The 3-week-old petition, titled Denounce Young Americans for Freedom and the alt-right, also recommended Young Americans for Freedom members be subjected to intensive diversity training. The petition was launched about a month after YAF hosted conservative columnist Ben Shapiro on campus to speak about microaggressions, safe spaces and free speech. The petition decried Shapiros visit, claiming it made minority students feel unsafe, and accused Shapiro of denying systematic and institutional violences against so-called marginalized communities. The petition also claimed members of YAF have further contributed to making campus a hostile environment by attempting to out and misgender LGBTQIA+ students as well as have individually confronted and made unsafe prominent members of student government. The Student Coalition for Progress states on its Facebook page that it delivered its petition on Dec. 23. A petition update also blamed YAF social media posts for alerting the news media about the universitys new Problem of Whiteness class, and encouraged supporters to file a hate and bias report if they have been traumatized by YAF members or the national outrage news of the class prompted. (The College Fix, which broke the story about the Problem of Whiteness class, actually learned of its existence from a Multicultural Student Center email, not from YAF social media, as the petition asserts). UW YAF Chair Kara Bell called the petition complete defamation in a phone interview with The College Fix. They [Student Coalition for Progress] released the petition and tried to make it a huge deal, but all of their accusations are completely false, Bell said. The administration didnt even seem to know what this petition was talking about. We dont know who started the petition but the last thing we would ever want to do is target a student. Bell noted the petition was released during finals week, a move she believes was deliberate. Her YAF chapter had had its final meeting Dec. 4. Other conservative campus groups rushed to support YAF after the petitions dissemination. UW College Republicans Chair Jake Lubenow called the petition inflammatory in a statement and asked the administration to condemn it. The petition does not make a single claim substantiated with evidence of any kind, Lubenow wrote. The petition gained more than 200 supporters after its Dec. 15 release, however has since been shut down after failing to meet a required number of signatures, according to YAF spokesperson Emily Jashinsky. I checked the petition on change.org this week and found it shut down after falling way short of its signature goal, Jashinsky stated. People generally appreciate having a group of informed and vocal conservatives on campus to bring ideological diversity to the community and they dont support the radical Lefts hilariously ill-fated attempts to censor YAF. Wisconsin YAF is an awesome group of energetic student activists who are not in any way threatened by this silly petition, she added. In fact, the panic the chapter has induced in campus leftists is an indication of their success. The Left is desperate to shut down YAFs impactful advocacy for traditional conservative ideas because they know it is really making a difference on campus. Assistant Vice Chancellor of University Communications John Lucas told The Fix via email that YAF remains a registered organization in good standing at UW Madison. I do want to clarify that the petition itself does not represent the university position on the group or constitute a formal complaint against YAF, Lucas said. Student Coalition for Progress did not respond to The Fixs request for comment. Bell said that YAF will continue to plan events in the New Year, including a speaker debate co-sponsored with UWs Black Lives Matter chapter. The university said that they have no evidence whatsoever of us as a hate group, Bell said. Were not worried at all. ABOUT THE AUTHOR Kate Hardiman Kate Hardiman is a student at the University of Notre Dame majoring in the Program of Liberal Studies and minoring in the Philosophy, Political Science, and Economics (PPE) Program. She serves as campus editor of the Irish Rover and is a fellow of both the Constitutional Studies Department and Center for Ethics and Culture. She is interning at The Hill in Washington D.C. for the summer of 2015 and has had articles published there, as well as on Minding the Campus.
Sounds like a very good idea. But tell me, does that include you calling the president-elect names? How about cutting that out?
Liberals like to push free speech and PC at the same time. That will make your head explode. Interesting that liberals will burn our flag but condemn me for calling someone a name.
https://www.yahoo.com/news/uc-davis-cancels-milo-yiannopoulos-093957985.html UC Davis Cancels Milo Yiannopoulos, Martin Shkreli Event Vishakha Sonawane,International Business Times 2017-01-14T09:39:57Z Comments Sign in to like Reblog on Tumblr Share Tweet Email An event featuring conservative blogger and far-right speaker Milo Yiannopoulos and former pharmaceutical executive Martin Shkreli was canceled Friday night by the University of California, Davis, after protesters blocked access to the venue. Campus police barricaded the doors to the event in a bid to control protesters, who demanded that the program be shut down. It was canceled half an hour prior to its scheduled start after the university authorities determined the event could not continue safely. Some protesters held placards that read: “Your facism [sic] is showing,” “Deport the racists” and “Shut it down.” “I am deeply disappointed with the events of this evening,” UC Davis Interim Chancellor Ralph J. Hexter, said in a statement. “Our community is founded on principles of respect for all views, even those that we personally find repellent. As I have stated repeatedly, a university is at its best when it listens to and critically engages opposing views, especially ones that many of us find upsetting or even offensive.” The university dismissed that reports of broken windows or property damage. One person was arrested inside the venue but no other people were taken into custody, it added. Yiannopoulos and Shkreli were to give a speech at the event arranged by the UC Davis College Republicans. The Breitbart columnist issued a statement on Facebook and said the program was canceled after “violence from left-wing” protesters. “My event at UC Davis tonight has been cancelled after violence from left-wing protestors [sic]. There are reports of hammers, smashed windows and barricades being torn away. The campus police can’t guarantee anyone’s safety so I’m not being allowed anywhere near the building. Stay safe, everyone,” Yiannopoulos said in the statement. Last July, Twitter permanently banned Yiannopoulos after he called on his followers to attack “Ghostbusters” actress Leslie Jones with racist tweets. Shkreli, the former chief executive of Turing Pharmaceuticals, told the Sacramento Bee that the demonstration showed an “underbelly of violence and intolerance that just doesn't speak well for the student body.” He was reportedly at the event to debate Yiannopoulos. “I’m pro-feminism; I don’t think these people know that,” Shkreli said as he was surrounded by the protesters. “I was going to tear Milo to shreds ... he doesn’t understand feminism.” In December 2015, Shkreli resigned as chief executive of Turing Pharmaceuticals after he was arrested on securities fraud charges. He faced widespread criticism earlier that year for increasing the price of a lifesaving malaria medication by 5,000 percent and was suspended from Twitter earlier this month for harassing a journalist.
Here's more: http://www.thecollegefix.com/post/30801/ University of Kansas maintains women’s-only lunchroom for Muslims JUSTIN CARUSO - GEORGE WASHINGTON UNIVERSITY •JANUARY 19, 2017 148 188 Share22 0 The University of Kansas maintains a women’s-only lunchroom that’s largely utilized by Muslim students, a venue billed as a “safe place” for them. “It is mainly used by Muslim women because it allows them a space to remove [their] hijabs and eat,” said Abdoulie Njai, KU Student Senate director of diversity and inclusion, in an email last week to The College Fix. The room, open on weekdays from noon to 1 p.m. in the public university’s Office of Multicultural Affairs, is open to all female students — but in particular it allows female Muslim students to eat in a segregated, private area. The lunchroom debuted a year ago. A campus spokesperson confirmed to The College Fix that it’s still in use today but declined to comment further. According to Njai, “it has become very popular and many students utilize the space.” Njai added it’s something of a “safe place” for them. “Prior to me becoming Director of Diversity and Inclusion, Omar Rana, our last Director of Diversity and Inclusion worked very closely with international students. He was informed that international students who wore hijabs were being forced to leave campus because there was no place on campus where they could eat,” he told The Fix. “Omar collaborated with Precious Porras the Director of the Office of Multicultural Affairs and they decided to transform one of their rooms into the women’s lunch room to create a safe place for these students to eat.” When the lunchroom debuted in February 2016, an article in the campus newspaper The University Daily Kansan also quoted Rana as calling it a place “mainly for women on campus who require a safe space to eat lunch due to religious attire that cannot be removed in public.” “One thing that they mentioned is that they didn’t really have a place to go for lunch hours,” Rana said at the time. “They can’t really eat in the union because they would have to take off their burqa or niqab, which they can’t do, or they would have to eat under it, which isn’t always the most comfortable.” A member of the KU Muslim Student Association, Zoya Khan, also told the campus newspaper that “it’s about creating a safe space for Muslim women on campus, and I think that’s really allowing for that.” “I think it’s creating an environment of inclusivity and acceptance. We are part of the KU community and KU is allowing for us to feel comfortable.”
Here's more: http://www.wsj.com/articles/censorship-is-free-speech-it-must-be-the-class-of-1984-1485478244 Censorship Is Free Speech? It Must Be the Class of 1984 Political correctness on campus has reached the stage of a perfect Orwellian inversion. By JILLIAN KAY MELCHIOR Jan. 26, 2017 7:50 p.m. ET 8 COMMENTS Higher education’s suppression of speech is well-publicized. But in an odder and less well-known twist, campuses are increasingly co-opting the language of free speech and using it to justify censorship. One example: The designated “free speech zones” that exist on roughly 1 in 10 U.S. college campuses, according to a report released last month by the Foundation for Individual Rights in Education. The very existence of a “free speech zone” suggests that students’ expression is limited elsewhere on campus. And even in the “free” zones, administrators often restrict who can speak, when and for how long. PHOTO: ISTOCK/GETTY IMAGES Dozens of universities have also used the language of free speech to justify trendy “Language Matters” or “Inclusive Language” campaigns. The point of these programs is to condition students to wince away from words and phrases deemed offensive, instead using politically correct substitutes. –– ADVERTISEMENT –– Among the campaigns’ common targets are “hey guys” and “man up” (too gendered), as well as “crazy” (inconsiderate of people with mental illness) and “lame” (disrespectful to the disabled). Ironically—and insidiously—these “inclusive” language campaigns seek to exclude opposing political or cultural viewpoints. It’s an attempt to ban not only words but also thoughts. The University of Northern Colorado’s “Language Matters” campaign last year warned students not to say “All lives matter.” The dean of students, Katrina Rodriguez, defended the program in an email last June to Heat Street, where I am political editor, saying it was “about being mindful about how words can affect others and the conversations provide an opportunity for individuals to understand why particular language may be hurtful to someone else in our community of learners.” She continued: “We believe that fostering dialogue on a college campus so that multiple perspectives are explored and debated is the essence of free speech.” The inclusive-language campaigns at the University of Wisconsin’s campuses in Milwaukee and River Falls have also discouraged students from saying “illegal immigrant” or “illegal alien,” because either term “fixates on legal status instead of people as individuals” and “asserts that only certain groups belong in the U.S.” UW-Milwaukee even included “politically correct” on its list of disfavored terms, arguing that it “has become a way to deflect, say that people are being too ‘sensitive’ and police language.” Which brings us to the warped idea that by suppressing “dominant” voices, universities actually further free speech. Katherine Kvellestad, a University of Pennsylvania student, recently used a version of this argument to defend students who wanted a portrait of Shakespeare removed from the English department. The students also pushed for an English curriculum with fewer white, male writers. “I think, in a way, the whole PC culture idea can almost promote free speech because there are a lot of people who have been marginalized in the past,” Ms. Kvellestad told Heat Street during a phone interview in December. “So it’s kind of free speech in a different sense, that we’re giving credence and voices to voices that we were not hearing.” One of Ms. Kvellestad’s fellow Penn students made a related argument in a Jan. 11 op-ed in the student newspaper, claiming that his white professors’ refusal to censor class content had hindered his ability to learn. Sophomore James Fisher described how one Penn professor showed depictions of slavery and let students make comments Mr. Fisher considered “ignorant.” He told the professor that “what he was doing was traumatic to me . . . [so] I would not allow him to continue.” The professor, Mr. Fisher wrote, “then used the argument that, in order to make the class a ‘safe space,’ he had to protect the voice of all students in class. . . . So, because my professor wanted to protect the voices of the white students who benefit from black oppression, the oppression unfortunately continued.” In “Politics and the English Language,” George Orwell describes how the misuse of language can lead to messy thinking—and how, even worse, intentionally imprecise language can soften or obscure abhorrent ideas. He anticipated a world in which administrators, professors and students demand the right to act as censors even as they claim to venerate the right to unrestricted expression. —Ms. Melchior is political editor of Heat Street.
Here's more: https://www.pastemagazine.com/artic...s-have-declared-war-against-social-justi.html Republicans Have Declared War Against Social Justice on College Campuses By Eric Shapiro | January 27, 2017 | 2:30pm Photo by Mark Wallheiser/Getty POLITICS FEATURES SOCIAL CAMPUSES Share Tweet Submit Pin Republicans Have Declared War Against Social Justice on College Campuses The age of Trump is upon us, and it is clear that university campuses will be battlegrounds in the fights to come. Two weeks ago, the Arizona state legislature introduced HB 2120, a piece of legislation that would ban courses and events on college campuses relating to “social justice.” The bill, by state representative Bob Thorpe, did not hide its intentions. In fact, it was extremely explicit in its censorious intent. According to The Guardian, HB 2120 would: “Prohibit ‘courses, classes, events and activities’ in public schools that promote ‘social justice toward a race, gender, religion, political affiliation, social class or other class of people’ Courses and events that are ‘designed primarily for pupils of a particular ethnic group’ or advocate ‘solidarity’ based on ethnicity, race, religion or gender would also be banned.” This particular bill failed, but like an unexploded shell falling from a quiet sky, you can bet it heralds total warfare somewhere in the near distance. And it is deeply ironic and remarkably hypocritical that the conservatives, who often condemn political correctness on college campuses for unduly suppressing views liberals deem out-of-bounds would, in their domain of influence, promote legislation with the express purpose of limiting the First Amendment rights of those with whom they disagree. By threatening to cut funding by 10% from academic institutions that offer classes or permit events in the extremely wide range of subjects and activities that comprise “social justice,” Arizona Republicans were engaging in the very stifling of free speech they decry (sometimes justifiably so) on liberal arts campuses. Their attempts at censoring “social justice” activities constitute nothing less than a right-wing version of political correctness, untethered from the kind of First Amendment justification conservatives routinely invoke selectively when it suits their argument. Furthermore, it’s hard to fathom how any true proponents of small government would endorse using the tools of the state—in this case, the power of the purse—to violate, in spirit if not in law, the First Amendment rights of citizens. It is especially discouraging, at the dawn of the age of Trump, to see Arizona Republicans—and, indeed, Republicans nationwide—crack down on marginalized groups and their allies. It is fitting that Arizona’s latest abomination came in the same week that President-elect Donald Trump, a self-proclaimed foe of “political correctness,” insulted civil rights hero John Lewis, who risked his life and incurred bodily injury as a civil rights activist in the 1960s, as “all talk and no action.” Clearly, many Republicans find the kind of “action” undertaken by men like John Lewis a great threat and will go to great lengths to discourage it, even if it means violating their own alleged respect for the Constitution. While Trump is not directly to blame for conservatives’ longstanding attempts to de-legitimize the study of social justice, attempts to crack down on marginalized groups and their allies are in line with the President-elect’s authoritarian and racist tendencies. Will Constitutional conservatives, who so often wrap themselves in the First Amendment to defend controversial speech on liberal arts campuses, stand up and defend the students and faculty of universities who find their rights to free speech and assembly endangered? Given the utter failure of “principled” conservatives to stand up to Donald Trump and his following on so many other, higher-profile occasions, it is far more likely that they will stand idly by as their beloved Constitution is continually trashed by opportunistic bigots. The institutions targeted by bills like HB 2120 should not back down. On the contrary, students and faculty alike should rally against the HB 2120s of the future. Should similar legislation pass, they should endure funding cuts and double down on social justice; backing down would set an awful precedent. Broader principles are at stake in this fight. Following Martin Luther King Day, it is vital that social justice liberals and economic progressives alike remember that the civil rights movement is not just history, but an ongoing struggle for justice, equality and human dignity. Laws like HB 2120 should serve as a reminder of the fact that the left cannot ever take its capacity to engage in activism and organize protests for granted. On the contrary, Republicans, who currently dominate government on the state, local and federal levels, will attempt to maintain their minority rule by any means necessary.
Here's more: http://www.theedinburghreporter.co.uk/2017/01/vote-for-a-city-free-of-islamophobia/ Vote for a city free of Islamophobia Police in Edinburgh and the City of Edinburgh Council are inviting people to vote for projects designed to create a city free from Islamophobia. The total fund available is £40,000 and has been contributed to by Police Scotland, City of Edinburgh Council and Scottish Government. Its purpose is to help local people deliver innovative projects which reduce prejudice and foster positive relationships between diverse communities. Between 10 November and 12 December, applications were submitted for projects to receive up to £5,000 from the total fund. Residents are now being asked to decide which of 34 projects, who collectively applied for over £120,000, will be given funding. The communities of Edinburgh are invited to attend an event at Methodist Church Hall in Nicholson Square on Saturday 28 January, from 1.30pm – 3.30pm, where these projects will be showcased and voting will open. Sergeant Scott Kennedy of Edinburgh’s Prevention’s Interventions & Partnerships (PIP) Team said: “It’s been really encouraging to see so many organisations and groups eager to be involved and who want to help create a city free from prejudice, so we’re really looking forward to heading into the next phase. “These projects are for the benefit of the people and communities of Edinburgh, so I’d urge residents to get involved and have their say in where this public funding goes.” Councillor Maureen Child, Convener of the Communities and Neighbourhood Committee, said: “This is a great opportunity for local people to vote for projects that can really make a difference. There are fantastic organisations and groups throughout the city who, with a grant from a fund like this, make real strides towards an end to Islamophobia. “Participatory budget exercises like this continue to be exceedingly popular, allowing local people to make real decisions about priority activities in their community.” Voting is open to all people who live in Edinburgh and are aged 8 and above. Voting will open at the event and run until Monday 13 February. Details on how you can have your say can be found at www.scotland.police.uk/shared-vision-your-decision
I remember 2003 when the right tried to silence opposition to Bush' war in Iraq. Now they want silence any critique of TrumpCo with the threats. You get your free speech, I get mine but only one tries to use the government to stop the other.
Here's more: http://thehill.com/blogs/pundits-bl...utm_medium=impactweekly&utm_campaign=02162016 UCLA banned my book on Islam from a free speech event BY ELAN JOURNO, OPINION CONTRIBUTOR - 02/11/17 07:40 PM EST 258 2,266 2.3K UCLA banned my book on Islam from a free speech event © Getty Images At UCLA Law School last week, a squad of student "thought police" tried to ban my book, Failing to Confront Islamic Totalitarianism: From George W. Bush to Barack Obama and Beyond. They don't want you to know the book even exists, let alone what's inside it. And the UCLA administration enabled them. This ominous episode underlines how students are learning to be contemptuous of intellectual freedom. The story of what happened at UCLA is laced with ironies. On Feb. 1, the UCLA chapter of the Federalist Society and the Ayn Rand Institute co-sponsored a panel discussion at UCLA Law School on the vital importance of freedom of speech and the threats to it. My book shows how certain philosophic ideas undercut America's response to the jihadist movement, including notably its attacks on freedom of speech. Naturally, the book was displayed and offered for sale at a reception prior to the event, which featured Dave Rubin, the contrarian YouTube host; Flemming Rose, the Danish editor who published the now-infamous Mohammad cartoons in 2005 and author of The Tyranny of Silence; and Steve Simpson, editor of Defending Free Speech (these two books were also displayed). During the reception, however, a group of UCLA students assembled in front of the book table and objected to mine. Why? Had they read the book, weighed the evidence, and found it lacking? Had they formed a considered evaluation of the book's argument? No: They felt the book was "offensive" and "insulting." They had "issues" with the views that I and my co-author, Onkar Ghate, put forward. Our views, it seems, were "Islamophobic." Based on what? Apparently, for some of them, it was the book's title. Yet another irony here is that in the book we disentangle the notion of "Islamophobia." We show that it's an illegitimate term, one that clouds thinking, because it mashes together at least two fundamentally different things. The term blends, on the one hand, serious analysis and critique of the ideas of Islamic totalitarianism, the cause animating the jihadists, which is vitally important (and the purpose of my book); and, on the other hand, racist and tribalist bigotry against people who espouse the religion of Islam. Obviously, racism and bigotry have no place in a civilized society. Moreover, the book makes clear that while all jihadists are self-identified Muslims, it is blatantly false that all Muslims are jihadists. (It should go without saying, though sadly it must be said, that countless Muslims are law abiding, peaceful, productive Americans.) Ignorant of the book's full scope and substance, the students felt it had no place on campus. The students demanded that my book be removed from display. My colleagues who manned the display table declined to remove the book. So the students enforced their own brand of thought control. They turned their backs to the table, forming a blockade around it, so no one could see or buy the books. Then they started aggressively leaning back on the table, pushing against the book displays. By blocking access to the book, they were essentially trying to ban it. At this point, you might hope the UCLA administration would step in to re-assert the principle of intellectual freedom that is so crucial to education, a free society, and the advancement of human knowledge. Finally a rep from UCLA did step in–to abet the student protestors. My book was "inflammatory." It had to go. Thus: at a panel about freedom of speech and growing threats to it – not least from Islamists – UCLA students and school administrators tried to ban a book that highlights the importance of free speech, the persistent failure to confront Islamic totalitarianism, and that movement's global assaults on free speech. This shameful incident reflects a wider phenomenon on American campuses. At university, students should learn to think, to engage with different views, and thus to grow intellectually. But increasingly, students learn to put their feelings above facts. Some students demand to be protected from what they merely believe, without evidence, are uncongenial views. They demand that non-orthodox views be silenced. And such universities as UCLA willingly coddle and appease them. The universities, observes Steve Simpson in Defending Free Speech, are a bellwether of the future of freedom of speech. If today's students are increasingly hostile to intellectual freedom, can we really expect tomorrow's voters, lawyers, judges, politicians to uphold free speech? To champion that principle, you have to value dialogue, knowledge, and, ultimately, the reasoning mind. Yet reason is precisely what those student agitators subordinated to their emotions. Elan Journo (@elanjourno) is the director of policy research at the Ayn Rand Institute, co-author of Failing to Confront Islamic Totalitarianism: From George W. Bush to Barack Obama and Beyond, and author of Winning the Unwinnable War: America's Self-Crippled Response to Islamic Totalitarianism. The views expressed by contributors are their own and are not the views of The Hill.
Take your own advice first of all. But the problem with political correctness is when it stops conversation from taking place that needs to. Or makes people completely (*)(*)(*)(*) thier mind off when confronted with an ugly truth. No we should not just call each other names or hurt feelings for the sake of it. But when you have people unwilling to acknowledge problems with the black community and crime, or liberals and radicalism. We have a problem. - - - Updated - - - Yea liberals just Riot and attack people. Soooooooooo much better lolol.
Here's more: https://www.wsj.com/articles/its-ra...y-at-an-upscale-chicagoland-school-1487375679 It’s Racial Indoctrination Day at an Upscale Chicagoland School As administrators foist ‘social justice’ on 4,000 suburban students, parents plead for balance. PHOTO: ISTOCK By PETER BERKOWITZ Feb. 17, 2017 6:54 p.m. ET 320 COMMENTS What passes for education at many American public schools is too often closer to indoctrination. Consider the seminar day that New Trier High School, in Winnetka, Ill., on Chicago’s affluent North Shore, is planning for Feb. 28. The title for the all-school seminar is “Understanding Today’s Struggle for Racial Civil Rights.” That very term, “racial civil rights,” is misleading, since civil rights protect Americans’ freedoms regardless of their race. Judging from the roster of scheduled events, the seminar might be more accurately titled “Inculcating a Progressive View of Social Justice.” Here are a few of the offerings scheduled for presentation to New Trier’s roughly 4,000 students: “SPENT: A Simulation to See How Long You Can Survive on Minimum Wage”—which touches on race at best tangentially. “Developing a Positive, Accountable White Activism for Racial Civil Rights”—which promotes a divisive view of race as a primordial fact, the essence of identity, a bright line between oppressed and oppressor. “One Person One Vote: Can the Voting Rights Act Be Saved?”—which absurdly suggests that the Voting Rights Act is at risk of being repealed. There are plenty of sessions on the connections that music, art and culture have with civil rights. Very little programming, however, is devoted to actually explaining to students what civil rights are and what their place is in this country’s political tradition. Yet the continuing quest to fulfill America’s founding promise is unintelligible without a grasp of how civil rights are grounded in the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution. Or without an understanding of the often-heroic struggle for civil rights over the course of American history—the abolition movement, the Civil War, the great Reconstruction constitutional amendments, the grievous setback of Jim Crow, the modern civil-rights movement, the landmark Supreme Court cases like Brown v. Board of Education. Instead of teaching, the school’s aim seems to be hammering home to students that racism plagues America and will persist until white people admit their unjust privilege, renounce their unearned power, and make amends for the entrenched oppression from which they continue to profit handsomely. This despite the school board’s written policy to provide a “balanced view” on “controversial issues,” and the seminar’s stated purpose “not to promote the philosophy of one political party or another.” On Monday a group of concerned New Trier parents will make a final attempt to persuade the school board to alter the seminar’s programming to include a diversity of views about race and rights in America. The parents have proposed, for example, inviting black conservative intellectuals—such as my Hoover Institution colleague Shelby Steele and this newspaper’s Jason Riley—or people like Pastor Corey Brooks, the director of Project Hood, which seeks to end violence and build communities on Chicago’s South Side. So far, these efforts have been met with stonewalling and vitriol. On Feb. 6, a group of recent New Trier graduates—some of whom helped plan the seminar day—published an open letter to explain why the parents’ proposals are unreasonable and immoral. The letter opens with a long quotation from Martin Luther King Jr.’s 1963 masterpiece, “Letter From a Birmingham Jail.” The implicit message is that the New Trier parents are comparable to the “white moderate” King reproaches for preferring order to justice. King’s admonition to the comfortable—to imagine themselves in the place of the persecuted and downtrodden—is a timeless message, but inapt for the situation. New Trier failed to teach the letter writers the distinction between political activism and education. The seminar day presupposes that the pervasiveness and potency of racism in America are facts beyond dispute, rather than hypotheses to be critically examined. That’s why the letter writers dismiss the parents’ desire for a multiplicity of views as an effort “to distract the conversation.” Let’s hope that the concerned New Trier parents succeed Monday in teaching the New Trier school board about education’s proper purpose. If not, maybe the best thing might be for more families to follow the parent group’s advice: “Excuse your child for the day, and encourage him or her to volunteer”—perhaps with Corey Brooks and Project Hood. Mr. Berkowitz is a senior fellow at the Hoover Institution, Stanford University.
Political correctness is a movable line that is set by one to fit their predetermined narrative. There is no supreme authority that adjudicates PC thus the subjectivity of what is or is not PC.
Here's more: http://fox43.com/2017/02/16/student...zzle-pins-by-elizabethtown-college-democrats/ Student groups unite after white privilege puzzle pins by Elizabethtown College Democrats POSTED 10:39 PM, FEBRUARY 16, 2017, BY FELIX RODRIGUES LIMA 20170216_210801 ELIZABETHTOWN, Pa. Student political groups at Elizabethtown College are uniting to protect one groups right to start a conversation about a topic they think is important. Last week, the Elizabethtown College Democrats started distributing white puzzle piece pins to create awareness of the topic of so-called white privilege, and while some other groups may not agree with the topic, they are standing with them on speaking out. On Thursday night, leaders of the College Democrats, College Republicans and the Young Americans for Liberty, held a closed-door meeting to discuss ways forward after the Democrats initiative gained international attention and prompted negative comments on social media. The groups had a positive discussion and are drafting a joint statement that will be released through the colleges office of marketing and communications on Friday, according to Dr. Kyle Kopko, an assistant dean at the college and an advisor to the College Republicans. What is also expected is that leaders of the groups will take information back to their respective groups and potentially unite to hold some sort of discussion event or events on race relations, Kopko said. http://thefederalist.com/2017/02/17...ologize-white-skin-anti-science-anti-history/ Wearing Puzzle Pieces To Apologize For Your White Skin Is Anti-Science And Anti-History At Elizabethtown College, students are donning white puzzle piece pins as a means of (virtue) signaling penitence for our times original sin: whiteness. Alex Grass By Alex Grass FEBRUARY 17, 2017 It used to be that youd walk down the street, see someone wearing a pin in the shape of a puzzle piece, and assume that person was expressing solidarity for those with autism. But these days, at Elizabethtown College in Lancaster County, Penn., students are donning white puzzle piece pins as a means of (virtue) signaling penitence for our times en vogue original sin: whiteness. This movement is twofold: it is ahistorical, and it is anti-science. It evinces a stark ignorance of historyand of the differences among white people. It also espouses anti-scientific tropes that recall the era of eugenics, anti-Semitism, and race theorists. What We Talk About When We Talk About Privilege The Elizabethtown College Democrats hatched this campaign to encourage self-loathing among inheritors of white ancestral sin. Their spokeswoman, Aileen Ida, explained that [inherent white privilege] can be seen in the day-to-day life of people of color versus the day-to-day life of white people. The day-to-day life of which white people? Elizabethtown College is in Lancaster County, prime landscape for the AnabaptistAmish and Mennoniteresettlement after they fled Europe. Idas generalized gripe about white privilege is crippled when set against the Anabaptists history of persecution. In the 16th Century, European states declared Anabaptists punishable by death. Supplying them with food or shelter compelled the same punishment. Austrian King Ferdinand commissioned a company of executioners to root out the Anabaptist faith in his lands. There was a literal plan to blot out the Anabaptist faith via thought-out and state-sponsored genocide. Idas concern for those lost centuries of inequality are risible once set against the Anabaptists own history of persecution. Using Race As A Privilege Measure Doesnt Always Work But how do white people fare today? The 2016 Misery Indexa metric created by economist Arthur Okun to calculate economic wellbeingranks Ukraine, Greece, and Russia in the top 20 most miserable countries. How, precisely, should a Ukrainian foreign exchange student ponder the inborn malevolence of his or her skin color while Avdiivka and other cities in his home country char and crumble under the rain of Russian shells? The somewhat relevant snag of group histories and national origins seems to throw a wrench in the engine of Idas self-loathing philosophy. Walter Benn Michaels, author of The Trouble With Diversity, might point out to Ida that many groups of blacks are more genetically similar to whites than to their presupposed co-race-members. Additionally, Charles Murrays Coming Apart depicts not a racially stratified society, but a world in which high-price education and upper-class income streams mean that the lucky fewlikely including black attendees of Elizabethtownwill always do better than their lower class fellows. Whatever shall we do with all those white-privileged Anabaptists, Ukrainians, and the perpetually poor white underclass? Surely, Ida would think twice before asking them to wear her white puzzle piece. But then again, maybe not. Race Theory Oversimplifies Our World Idas focus on whiteness has nothing to do with history or any other logical assessment of privilege. Instead, it has everything to do with race theory. This explains the easy comfort with which Black Lives Matter activists like Yusra K. Ali can make claims like white ppl are a genetic defect of blackness. This focus on the evils of whiteness is an obverse echo of race-theories propagated by Wilhelm Marr and Houston Stewart Chamberlain. Wilhelm Marr, patriarch and inventor of the term anti-Semitism, codified baseless conspiracy theories about worldwide Jewish power. Chamberlain, an intellectual forefather of Hitler, blamed German ills on the Jews as well. Much like the Elizabethtown Democrats, Marrs theories relied on caricatures and exaggerations of Jewish power, and generalizations about who is a Jew. Today, genetic studies tell us that characteriz[ing] Jewish people as mere coreligionists or as genetic isolates that may be closely or loosely related remains unresolved. We already know about the vast genetic and economic disparities between different types of white people. Lumping them together is a literal exercise in anti-intellectualism. Thus, independent-minded groups on campus would do well to invite speakers like Michaels and Murray to speak truthfully on matters of race and economics. If the race-theory narrative of Ms. Ida and her cohorts goes unchallenged, it will leave a stain of ignorance on generations of students. Alex Grass is a Young Voices Advocate and a student fellow at the Floersheimer Center for Constitutional Democracy at Cardozo School of Law. He lives in Brooklyn with his wife and two kids.
Here's more: http://dailycaller.com/2017/02/18/l...chool-cancel-ice-skating-party-at-trump-rink/ EDUCATION Trump skating rink Getty Images/Mario Tama Trump skating rink Getty Images/Mario Tama ‘Liberal Moms’ Make Fancypants Manhattan Prep School Cancel Ice Skating Party At Trump Rink Photo of Eric Owens ERIC OWENS Education Editor 10:58 AM 02/18/2017 1436129 A fancypants private school on Manhattan’s Upper East Side has called off this year’s ice-skating party because a large group of parents refused to send their children to the Trump Wollman Rink in Central Park. The school at the center of the boycott is The Dalton School, reports the New York Post. The parents made their stand against kids having a fun ice-skating party because they want to protest President Donald Trump, whose name is associated with the ice rink because he played a major role in refurbishing it back in 1986. On Thursday, Dalton’s Parents Association sent a letter announcing that the annual “Dalton on Ice” event would not happen this year. “Dalton on Ice” “would not be financially prudent” due to “significantly lower attendance,” the missive explained, according to the Post. Some Dalton parents are miffed as a result. “Liberal moms” are responsible for the cancellation, one peeved parents told the tabloid. “I think it is completely insane,” said another parent. “Like him or not, it feels like a strange place for New Yorkers to protest. And sad that kids now have no skating party.” The Trump Wollman Rink bills itself as “New York’s outdoor ice skating facility” — combining “a fond New York tradition with modern amenities for the casual ice skater and avid ice hockey player.” The cost of a single year of tuition for students in kindergarten through 12th grade at The Dalton School is $44,640. This amount, which represents slightly more than the average household income in the state of Alabama, is “among the lowest of our peer schools,” Dalton trumpets. The $44,640-per-year cost at Dalton includes the cost of lunch. On Friday, lunch at Dalton scrumptiously featured sustainable green tea salmon, anasazi bean salad, fresh organic papaya yogurt and a pasta bar with both marinara sauce and puttanesca sauce. Notable Dalton alumni include Anderson Cooper, blogger Matthew Yglesias and, of course, Christian Slater. Priscilla Hiss, Alger Hiss’s wife, taught English at Dalton. Follow Eric on Twitter. Like Eric on Facebook. Send education-related story tips to erico@dailycaller.com. Read more: http://dailycaller.com/2017/02/18/l...ce-skating-party-at-trump-rink/#ixzz4Z5my49pU
Here's more: http://insider.foxnews.com/2017/02/...igan-state-whiteboard-ban-student-free-speech 'Why Not Ban Pens & Keyboards?': Tucker Battles Student Over Whiteboard Ban Feb 23, 2017 // 10:12pm As seen on Tucker Carlson Tonight Tucker Carlson debated a Michigan State University student over the college's pending ban on whiteboards, after an offensive term was scrawled on one inside a dormitory. The Lansing, Mich. branch of the NAACP hailed the administration's decision as a victory for the school's black community. "Why not ban pens, keyboards, and other instruments of divergent opinions and just kind of suppress speech, and everyone will be happy?" Carlson asked Aaron Stephens, a student at MSU who supports the decision. 'We're Not Standing in the Way': CT Gov, Tucker Spar Over Illegal Immigration Civil Rights Activist: Illegal Immigration Hurts Job Prospects for Black Men Former CIA Agent: Some Spies Playing 'Very Dangerous Game' to Hurt Trump On "Tucker Carlson Tonight," Stephens said the larger issue is that a student felt compelled to "intimidate somebody... based on a different identity." He said the ban itself is imperfect because it puts the blame on the "messaging" rather than the "message." Carlson responded that the promise of the First Amendment is not only to be allowed free thought but also free speech. Stephens said discourse should be respectful and that a person's viewpoint should be about "attacking issues" rather than people. "Maybe we live in such an Orwellian world that the only outlet is on a whiteboard," Carlson said. Watch the full clip above and watch Tucker debate Connecticut's governor on President Trump's immigration law enforcement order HERE.
Here's more: https://www.wsj.com/articles/college-facultys-new-focus-dont-offend-1488200404 College Facultys New Focus: Dont Offend Professors across the country are adapting to an environment in which a word or turn of phrase has the power to derail a career Frank Tomasulo says he was encouraged to resign from City College of New York after he made comments about a black student. PHOTO: STEVE REMICH FOR THE WALL STREET JOURNAL By DOUGLAS BELKIN Feb. 27, 2017 8:00 a.m. ET 357 COMMENTS Frank Tomasulo has taught film studies at universities since 1977. Last year, he eliminated several classic movies from his syllabus for fear of offending his mostly liberal students. He no longer shows Birth of a Nation (because it deals with racism), the W.C. Fields film The Bank Dick (because it makes fun of blind people), or Tootsie. It brings up too many gender stereotypes, said Dr. Tomasulo. Such caution is part of the new normal for many faculty across the country as they adapt to an environment in which a word or turn of phraseif perceived to be biased or insensitivehas the power to derail a career. In recent years, hundreds of schools have created bias-response teams that field thousands of complaints from students from across political spectrum who believe they have been slighted or slurred over race, gender, sexual orientation or political views. At some campuses, conservative students have posted clips of lectures to expose what they see as professors radical leftist views. Faculty groups are fighting back by calling for bans on video in classrooms and lawmakers in a few states have introduced legislation to protect free speech on campus. But day to day, many faculty say they are caught in a conflict between the free-speech ideals of academic debate and a creeping self-censorship in the classroom. Dale Carpenter, a law professor at Southern Methodist University and an expert on the First Amendment, attributes the shift in part to a 2011 letter by U.S. Department of Educations Office for Civil Rights telling schools they must protect students from sexual harassment or risk being sued. The letter, he said, prompted an overcorrection that ended up infringing on free speech. Universities have developed entire bureaucracies to combat the problem of discrimination and a hostile environment, Mr. Carpenter said. Those bureaucracies are needed, but they also tend to feed on their own momentum. Its like the inquisition or McCarthyism, said Benjamin Ginsberg, a political-science professor at Johns Hopkins University. Administrators have created new classes of victims and new classes of crimes. It diminishes the confidence of the faculty. The term politically correct was first used in the U.S. in the 1960s by the left to poke fun at their own dogmatism. It was co-opted in the 1980s after a new crop of ethnically diverse students began to demand that minority voices be added to the curriculum and that language in the classroom reflect a broader worldview more respectful of minorities and people not in positions of power. So now you couldnt say cripple, you had to say handicapped, said Jonathan Zimmerman, who teaches the history of education at the University of Pennsylvania. Conservatives seized on this shift and used the term politically correct to connote what they saw as a creeping relativism and an attack on truth. The meaning took on additional nuance in the past decade as college prices skyrocketed and parents began to expect more protection for their children on campus. Those expectations prompted schools to hire more university administrators to look after students well-being, not to teach them, said Dr. Zimmerman. That shifted the conversation about what is politically correct from the realm of the intellectual and cultural to the psychological and emotional. Now the battles arent about what were reading, but what were saying or feeling, he said. Administrators say their goal is to create a sense of community and tolerance in which every student feels safe and has the opportunity to learn and flourish. Critics of bias response teams say schools have created a nanny-state in which students believe they have the right to not be offended. Advocates say they have further to go. Theres a tremendous amount of research in higher education showing different experiences for people by race, gender or sexual orientation or religion, said Ryan Miller, professor of educational leadership at the University of North Carolina at Charlotte. These students need a place to go to get support and report issues they are having. The unintended consequences come in the classroom where some faculty say they are now pulling their punches, particularly those without the job protections of tenure. Renee Fraser, an adjunct who teaches western civilization at Moorpark Community College in California, said she is deeply concerned about receiving a bias complaint when she delivers a lecture this semester about nationalism. If you describe nationalism, youre describing Donald Trump, she said, noting that students in her school are mostly conservative. Im embarrassed that I dont let the students have more freedom because Im afraid for my job.
