What are we to make of higher education when students and institutions respond to the recent presidential election with cry-ins, canceled exams, therapy dogs, Play-Doh, coloring books, group screams, Legos, bubble-blowing, and trauma counseling? Well, college “ain’t what it used to be.”
For some time, higher learning has been a political matter, one where the primary aim is to usher students into the club of elite (supposedly enlightened) progressive opinion. Gone is the formation of keen, analytical habits of mind and rational argument.
The result is not just a poorly educated student body, but an infantilized one. Mature discourse is out, and fragility, dependence, and bad temper is in.
Rather than cultivate habits of sustained and sober thought, we encourage manufactured outrage and self-indulgent victimhood. Anyone who has spent time with 2-year-olds recognizes the behavior. In our case, however, we appear to cultivate it on our campuses.
An infantilized campus is bad enough, but it becomes intolerable when these are the places where leaders of a self-governing republic are usually formed.
Regardless of party or position, a citizenry incapable of facing adversity or unwilling to reason about and discuss difficult, public things will not likely produce leaders who can do so. If college campuses steep our future leaders in habits of entitled fragility, the only politics they will be able to imagine is that of the tantrum.
Tellingly, this is exactly the kind of politics we have seen on campus, and, increasingly, off campus as well.
A darker view would regard our infantilized campuses as something more sinister than the accidental byproduct of politicized higher education. When the noise of a tantrum becomes a primary political instrument in place of reason, persuasion, and evidence, then volume, not thought, wins the day.
And volume is coercive. When 2-year-olds throw tantrums, they attempt to force matters and get their own way. A set of people taught not to reason but to huddle in safe spaces and throw the occasional tantrum is a people taught to impose their will. They have not been denied a voice; rather, they are intent upon being the only voice.
This is not to say that all post-election anxiety is necessarily irrational. But it is a lack of the aforementioned habits that makes aggression and extremism so common.
Genuine higher learning requires (among other things) time, intense application of thought, patient reflection, and maturity. Rather than an education in elite and coddled groupthink, real learning is an education in honed and sound thinking—thinking that is not victim to every fleeting passion.
This is precisely the kind of learning poet Robert Frost had in mind when he wrote, “So when at times the mob is swayed/ To carry praise or blame too far,/ We may choose something like a star/ To stay our minds on and be said.”
If we cannot restore the “higher” to higher education, if we cannot put down our Play-Doh and take up our Plato, it’s unlikely we’ll see a return of either to our politics or our learning. (For more from the author of “How Infantilized Campuses Threaten Our Nation’s Future” please click HERE)
The University of Chicago’s president, Robert J. Zimmer, wrote a Wall Street Journal article, titled “Free Speech Is the Basis of a True Education.” In it, he wrote:
Free speech is at risk at the very institution where it should be assured: the university. Invited speakers are disinvited because a segment of a university community deems them offensive, while other orators are shouted down for similar reasons. Demands are made to eliminate readings that might make some students uncomfortable. Individuals are forced to apologize for expressing views that conflict with prevailing perceptions. In many cases, these efforts have been supported by university administrators.
Sharing the president’s vision, the University of Chicago’s dean of students, John Ellison, sent a letter to freshmen students that read, in part:
Our commitment to academic freedom means that we do not support so-called ‘trigger warnings,’ we do not cancel invited speakers because their topics might prove controversial, and we do not condone the creation of intellectual ‘safe spaces’ where individuals can retreat from ideas and perspectives at odds with their own.
Those are hardly the sentiments of dishonest and spineless administrators at other colleges. At DePaul University, a visit by conservative journalist Milo Yiannopoulos was disrupted by student activists. School security refused to restore order and later banned Yiannopoulos from returning.
Conservative Ben Shapiro was invited by Young America’s Foundation to California State University-Los Angeles to deliver a speech titled “When Diversity Becomes a Problem.”
University President William Covino wrote an email that read, “After careful consideration, I have decided that it will be best for our campus community if we reschedule Ben Shapiro’s appearance for a later date, so that we can arrange for him to appear as part of a group of speakers with differing viewpoints on diversity. Such an event will better represent our university’s dedication to the free exchange of ideas.”
But note that the university invited leftists such as Cornel West, Angela Davis, and Tim Wise without feeling a need for differing viewpoints.
Sociologist Barry Glassner is the president of Lewis & Clark College. Morton Schapiro is the president of and a professor of economics at Northwestern University.
Schapiro wrote in The Washington Post: “I’m an economist, not a sociologist or psychologist, but those experts tell me that students don’t fully embrace uncomfortable learning unless they are themselves comfortable. Safe spaces provide that comfort.”
Both presidents, in a Los Angeles Times op-ed, said campus protests are a “sign of progress” toward diversity and inclusion and are “noble” methods of change, as opposed to the opining of “pundits and politicians … from gated communities and segregated offices.” They added, “Students are coming of age in a time of political, social and economic turbulence unseen in a generation.”
Many college administrators have generalized contempt for American values. Here’s just a bit of the evidence. A reporter from Project Veritas covertly recorded an administrator at Vassar College following through on her request to shred the Constitution.
Carol Lasser, professor of history and director of gender, sexuality, and feminist studies at Oberlin College, said that “the Constitution is an oppressive document” because it intentionally makes change a slow process. Wendy Kozol, chair of comparative American studies at Oberlin, agreed, saying, “the Constitution in everyday life causes people pain,” and added that she rarely discusses the Constitution in class and that when she does, she tends to focus on specific amendments.
The University of Michigan and Case Western Reserve University have announced safe spaces to protect students from unwelcome opinions. University of California-Santa Barbara students want trigger warnings for all classes and the right to be excused from any lessons that might “trigger” them.
The courage shown by University of Chicago administrators is relatively rare. The academic tyranny seen on many college campuses reflects a dereliction of duty by those who are charged with the ultimate control—the boards of trustees.
Trustees have the power to fire a president and his key administrators for yielding to campus tyrants. College administrators buy into today’s nonsense because they lack backbone and are cowards. Worse yet, they may see merit in safe spaces, trigger warnings, and student disruption of speakers with uncomfortable ideas. (For more from the author of “Colleges’ War on Free Speech Continues” please click HERE)
https://joemiller.us/wp-content/uploads/dublin-429990_960_720.jpg720960Joe Millerhttps://joemiller.us/wp-content/uploads/logotext.pngJoe Miller2016-09-16 00:12:232016-09-16 00:12:23Colleges’ War on Free Speech Continues
Brown University, located in Providence Rhode Island, was founded by Baptist leaders in 1764 with the Latin motto In Deo Speramus, in God we hope. I imagine these godly founders would be quite surprised with the recent announcement that “Brown University’s student body president will be hand-delivering menstrual products to all nonresidential bathrooms on campus, including men’s rooms, with the help of 20 other students.”
As reported by Sydney Hutchison on CampusReform.org, “The initiative is intended to communicate the message that ‘pads and tampons are a necessity, not a luxury,’ and that not all people who menstruate are women.”
So there are menstruating men who need tampons?
And note that this is being done by Viet Nguyen, President of the Undergraduate Council of Students, who hopes that by “putting menstrual products in women’s, men’s and gender-inclusive bathrooms” the school can “‘set a tone of trans-inclusivity, and not forget that they’re an important part of the population.’”
In nearby Worcester, Massachusetts, Clark University’s new chief diversity officer has put forth guidelines for incoming students, including: don’t say “you guys,” since that could be interpreted as excluding women; don’t ask an Asian student for help in math or ask a black student if he plays basketball, since to do so would be to stereotype and thereby commit a “microaggression.” These must be avoided at all costs.
Ironically, an article announcing this stated that these guidelines were for “freshmen” — but doesn’t that very term exclude women? Isn’t this a microaggression in and of itself? Perhaps, just as Princeton University is trying to ban the “m” word from campus (meaning, the infamous “man” word), Clark U needs to follow suit, referring to the “freshmen” class as the “freshpeople” class or the “freshindividuals” class? Now we’re talking.
Campus Trigger Warnings Gone Batty
Across the country, at California State University, San Marcos, a “trigger warning” was sent out notifying all students and faculty that there would be a pro-life display on campus next week. An email from the university’s Office of Communications, obtained by CampusReform.org, pointed out that the “presentation is not a university sponsored presentation,” that it could be “disturbing and offensive,” but that presentations like this on campus were “protected under the First Amendment.” Oh, the evils of free speech.
The email also explained that resources would be available for students “who may need assistance” after being exposed to the pro-life display. They must not be traumatized by the reality of abortion. God forbid.
As for the meaning of “trigger warnings,” the Urban Dictionary offers a definition replete with what I would call sarcastic sanity. A trigger warning is
A phrase posted at the beginning of various posts, articles or blogs. Its purpose is to warn weak-minded people who are easily offended that they might find what is being posted offensive in some way due to its content, causing them to overreact or otherwise start acting like a dip***t. Popular on reddit SRS or other places that social justice warriors like to hang out.
Trigger warnings are unnecessary 100% of the time due to the fact that people who are easily offended have no business randomly browsing the internet anyways. As a result of the phrase’s irrelevance, most opinions that start out with this phrase tend to be simplistic and dull since they were made by people ridiculous enough to think that the internet is supposed to cater to people who can’t take a joke.
How dare the Urban Dictionary post such insulting stuff without a trigger warning!
Gender Pins and Privilege
Over at Champlain College in Vermont, “In an effort to become more inclusive for gender nonconforming students,” the school “handed out hundreds of pronoun pins during first-year orientation advertising the wearer’s preferred gender pronouns.”
What exactly did this look like? “Options included ‘she/her,’ ‘he/him,’ ‘xe/xer,’ and even ‘Hello, my pronouns are fluid. Please ask me!’”
And at Pomona College in California, new students “were welcomed to campus with posters in their dorms giving instructions on ‘How to be a (Better) White Ally’ and stating that all white people are racist.” (Note carefully: If you are white and you differ with this assessment, then you are definitely racist.)
“The signs state white people should ‘acknowledge your privilege’ and ‘apologize if you’ve offended someone,’ adding that offensive language includes words like ‘sassy’ and ‘riot,’ which are ‘racially coded.’”
Yes, “‘Understand that you are white, so it is inevitable that you have unconsciously learned racism.’” And don’t you dare deny it! So say the so-called social justice warriors.
Segregation Good Again?!
Also in California, reports earlier this week claimed, “Segregated housing will now be available to black students at California State University Los Angeles as a means of combating ‘microaggressions’ and ‘racially insensitive remarks’,” with these alleged infractions coming from both students and faculty.
Wouldn’t the only solution, then, be fully segregated schools, where no such offenses could take place (at least theoretically)? Could it be that segregation is the new way forward, the path of progressivism, the wave of the future? Asian schools, black schools, Hispanic schools, white schools … what utopias they will be!
Of course, this probably won’t be enough, because microaggressions can still occur, which would necessitate perhaps breaking these down into all male and female schools as well, and perhaps requiring LGBT schools vs. straight schools as well, thus you could go to an all-Asian, female, lesbian school or an all-black, male, straight school. Progress is wonderful, isn’t it?
The New York Times is denying these reports, citing Cal State campus spokesman Robert Lopez to the effect that the school had simply created dorm space for 24 students “oriented around the black community,” although the dorm space is “open to all students.”
Am I the only one who doesn’t follow exactly what this means? Either way, whether or not this is segregation, it’s not the first time this has been done in recent years.
Anti-Semitism Gets a Pass
Finally, at Cal Berkeley, a course is being offered entitled, “Palestine: A Settler Colonial Analysis,” sponsored by faculty member Dr. Hatem Bazian, who is so adamantly anti-Israel that he has called for an “American intifada.”
As Abraham H. Miller notes on Observer.com, Dr. Bazian “is co-founder of the militant Students for Justice in Palestine, an organization so virulently anti-Israel that it can shut down any speaker it disagrees with on almost any campus even before you could enunciate the monosyllabic word ‘Jew.’”
And while Dr. Bazian denies that he is anti-Semite, “he blocked the appointment of a Jewish student to San Francisco State University’s Student Judicial Council on the grounds that the individual supported the State of Israel and was thus a racist by definition.”
With good reason Miller’s article claims that the course is intended “to Erase Jewish History from Israel.”
Yet there are no trigger warnings or concerns about microaggressions here. After all, it’s only Jews who will be offended!
But with that, I’m out of space and will have to stop here, with one last word of wisdom: Parents, think twice before sending your kids off to a particular college. Some campuses are better than others, and your kids are anything but guinea pigs to be thrown into the latest social experiment. (For more from the author of “Tampons in the Men’s Room and Other Campus Insanity” please click HERE)
https://joemiller.us/wp-content/uploads/bathroom-453420_960_720.png451960Joe Millerhttps://joemiller.us/wp-content/uploads/logotext.pngJoe Miller2016-09-10 00:38:382016-09-10 00:38:38Tampons in the Men’s Room and Other Campus Insanity
Let’s concede at the outset that many students find their college years enlightening and enriching. But something is rotten in the state of academia, and it is increasingly hard not to notice.
There once was a time when employers could be reasonably certain that college graduates had a basic sense of the world and, as a minimum, could write a coherent business letter. That is simply no longer the case, as some academic leaders appear ready to admit.
Harvard’s former president, Derek Bok, mildly broke ranks with the academic cheerleaders when he noted that, for all their many benefits, colleges and universities “accomplish far less for their students than they should.” Too many graduates, he admitted, leave school with the coveted and expensive credential “without being able to write well enough to satisfy employers … [or] reason clearly or perform competently in analyzing complex, nontechnical problems.”
Bok noted that few undergraduates can understand or speak a foreign language; most never take courses in quantitative reasoning or acquire “the knowledge needed to be a reasonably informed citizen in a democracy.” Despite the massive spending on the infrastructure of higher education, he conceded, it was not at all clear that students actually learned any more than they did 50 years ago.
Indeed, a recent survey of the nation’s top-ranked public universities by the American Council of Trustees and Alumni found that only nine of them required an economics course for graduation; just five required a survey course in American history; and only 10 required that students take a literature course. Despite the lip service given to “multiculturalism” on campus, the study found that: “Fewer than half required even intermediate study of a foreign language.”
This knowledge deficit has been a long time coming.
By 1990, the cost of four years at an elite private college had passed the median price of a house in the United States. But a survey sponsored by the National Endowment for the Humanities in 1989 found that a majority of college seniors would flunk even a basic test on Western cultural and historical literacy: 25 percent could not distinguish between the thoughts of Karl Marx and the United States Constitution (or between the words of Winston Churchill and those of Joseph Stalin), 58 percent did not know Shakespeare wrote “The Tempest,” and 42 percent could not place the Civil War in the correct half-century.
Most seniors were unable to identify the Magna Carta, Reconstruction, or the Missouri Compromise; they were “clearly unfamiliar” with Jane Austen’s “Pride and Prejudice,” Fyodor Dostoevsky’s “Crime and Punishment,” and Martin Luther King Jr.’s “Letter From a Birmingham Jail.”
These concerns now seem almost—quaint. The fact that college students had huge gaps in their knowledge was old news by the early 1990s. But today the question is no longer whether students have learned specific bodies of knowledge; it is whether they are learning anything at all.
In their widely cited book “Academically Adrift,” Richard Arum and Josipa Roksa concluded that 45 percent of students “did not demonstrate any significant improvement in learning” during their first two years of college. More than a third (36 percent) “did not demonstrate any significant improvement in learning over four years of college.”
Traditionally, the authors wrote, “teaching students to think critically and communicate effectively” have been claimed as the “principal goals” of higher education. But “commitment to these skills appears more a matter of principle than practice,” Arum and Roksa found.
“An astounding proportion of students are progressing through higher education today without measurable gains in general skills,” they wrote. “While they may be acquiring subject-specific knowledge, or greater self-awareness on their journeys through college, many students are not improving their skills in critical thinking, complex reasoning, and writing.”
But those are precisely the skills that employers increasingly expect from college graduates. A 2013 survey of employers on behalf of the Association of American Colleges and Universities found that 93 percent of employers say that a demonstrated capacity to think critically, communicate clearly, and solve complex problems is more important than a candidate’s undergraduate major.
More than three-quarters of the prospective employers of new college graduates said they wanted colleges to put more emphasis on such basic skills as “critical thinking, complex problem solving, written and oral communication, and applied knowledge.”
Trashing the Curriculum
So how could we spend so much for so little? The most obvious answer is that colleges and universities frankly don’t care whether students learn much of anything.
Once again, Harvard’s Bok is willing to admit that administrators have few incentives to worry about something as irrelevant as student achievement because student learning can’t be monetized and doesn’t do anything to advance academic careers. “After all,” he writes, “success in increasing student learning is seldom rewarded, and its benefits are usually hard to demonstrate, far more so than success in lifting the SAT scores of the entering class or in raising the money to build new laboratories or libraries.”
There are, of course, other factors at work. The dumbing down of elementary and secondary education has made its way to the collegiate level; too many unprepared students are admitted despite their inability to do college-level work. Nearly four out of 10 college faculty now agree with the statement “Most of the students I teach lack the basic skills for college-level work.” This inevitably contributes to the flight from teaching (few professors want to teach remedial courses) and the overall lowering of standards.
This general indifference to what, if anything, students learn is embodied in the modern curriculum that enables students to study just about anything, without necessarily learning much at all. (For more from the author of “The Dumbing Down of College Curriculums” please click HERE)
https://joemiller.us/wp-content/uploads/books-1082942_960_720.jpg643960Joe Millerhttps://joemiller.us/wp-content/uploads/logotext.pngJoe Miller2016-08-29 23:17:242016-08-29 23:17:24The Dumbing Down of College Curriculums
It all goes back to two well-intentioned federal goals: first, that a college education should be within the reach of every American, and second, that if students borrow money from the federal government, they should repay it. Most of us would agree that both are noble goals. But the consequences of both have been stunning.
As a result of the first, the money began to flow; over the last 30 years, inflation-adjusted federal financial aid has quadrupled. Total student debt has now reached the $1 trillion mark, more than the credit card debt of every American combined. The federal deficit in the recently ended fiscal year totaled $1.3 trillion; the debt load carried by college grads now stands at more than two thirds of our nation’s massive budget shortfall.
The above paragraph was actually written five years ago. The actual numbers are far worse today.
Look at the bright side: it’s only 1,272 percent inflation in the last 38 years.
Well done, Democrats! (For more from the author of “CHART of the DAY: College Inflation Since 1978” please click HERE)
https://joemiller.us/wp-content/uploads/61056391_31343afdc6_b.jpg7681024Joe Millerhttps://joemiller.us/wp-content/uploads/logotext.pngJoe Miller2016-08-09 00:08:302016-08-09 00:15:08CHART OF THE DAY: College Inflation Since 1978
The war on poultry rages on yet another public university campus – this time at the University of Nebraska – Kearney.
The hullabaloo started last January when students were asked to select a new dining option for the student union. Their choices included Chick-fil-A, Panda Express, IHOP, A&W and Sbarro.
The youngsters chose Chick-fil-A – in a landslide. I mean, who doesn’t love a plump juicy chicken breast tucked between hot, buttered buns?
However, it turns out majority does not rule at the University of Nebraska – Kearney. A vocal minority pitched a fit and demanded that Chick-fil-A be banished from campus . . .
“We only hope to create dialogue on the importance of being aware to issues facing diverse and minority students,” QSA president Tiff Weekley told the Kearney Hub. “Though majority voices are most often heard, it is important to listen to what issues are facing all students and to start conversations around those.” (Read more from “Chick-Fil-A Flap Rocks Another American University” HERE)
https://joemiller.us/wp-content/uploads/8333728559_263dd8b267_o.jpg20003000kathleenhttps://joemiller.us/wp-content/uploads/logotext.pngkathleen2016-02-22 23:21:042016-04-11 10:52:24Chick-Fil-A Flap Rocks Another American University
White college students are undergoing a weekly “deconstructing whiteness” program at Northwestern University.
The “6-part workshop series for undergraduate students who self-identify as white” launched in January and runs through March, according to the university’s website. Students enrolled chose to do so – it is voluntary.
A spokesman for the prestigious private university located outside Chicago declined to give The College Fix details on the program, such as how many students enrolled and how it’s been received so far.
“It’s part of Northwestern’s Social Justice Education effort to create learning opportunities for our students,” Bob Rowley, a spokesman for the campus, told The College Fix in an email, providing a link to the social justice webpage and adding: “Beyond that, we don’t have anything more for you on it.”
According to a report in the campus newspaper, the workshops focus on “terminology used in conversations of race, the history and meaning of whiteness, white guilt and the difference between intellectualizing and feeling racism.” (Read more from “White Students Undergo Weekly ‘Deconstructing Whiteness’ Program at College” HERE)
https://joemiller.us/wp-content/uploads/female-702961_960_720.jpg642960kathleenhttps://joemiller.us/wp-content/uploads/logotext.pngkathleen2016-02-17 22:44:362016-04-11 10:52:34White Students Undergo Weekly ‘Deconstructing Whiteness’ Program at College
I’m a sophomore at the University of Alaska Anchorage and every time I step foot on my campus, I’m not as safe as I should be. Doorways are adorned with signs reaffirming this fact to a would-be mass shooter. Students, staff and faculty complying with UA policy are all sitting ducks. While a mass-shooter style event is unlikely, statistics show that the possibility of a young woman like myself being subjected to a physical or sexual assault while on my way to or from class is not unlikely and has in fact been the terrible reality for some.
The Alaska State Legislature shouldn’t need to waste their time reining in the University of Alaska’s Board of Regents who’ve acted beyond their authority. UA Regents have no business denying me my God-given right to defend myself. The outright ban on concealed carry by the BOR’s policy is entirely unconstitutional and that is why the Alaska State Legislature must act by passing SB174. Article I, sec. 19 of the Alaska State Constitution affirms that neither the State, nor any political subdivision of the State (aka the UA BOR), shall deny or infringe the individual right to keep and bear arms. The Board of Regents has acted in direct violation of Alaska’s State Constitution which makes their present policy unacceptable.
SB174 does nothing but change where a concealed firearm can be carried, it does not change the requirements for obtaining or owning said firearm. The argument that college students are incapable of safely handling a weapon on a college campus belies the fact that these same adults carry a weapon in equally crowded public spaces, without incident. This bill simply allows law-abiding and then policy abiding folks like myself the ability to defend ourselves at school just as we may in other public areas.
I often hear that the “allowance” of concealed carry would distract from the learning environment. I vehemently disagree. I couldn’t tell you the last time I noticed someone carrying a concealed weapon. That’s the whole point; it is concealed. It’s equally bogus to say that professors will be too afraid to give out an earned poor grade to a student due to the possibility that they are carrying a weapon. If anything, instructors should feel safer knowing that they are allowed the means to defend themselves.
I hate to repeat a cliché, but it’s true that “when seconds count, police are only minutes away”. The average shootout lasts approximately 3 to 10 seconds. How anyone could think that a shootout between an armed citizen and an armed assailant (who are only shooting at each other) is scarier or more threatening than a mass shooter executing defenseless victims at point-blank range by shooting them sometimes several times in the head (as occurred in the Virginia Tech Massacre), for minutes while waiting for police to arrive is beyond me.
Truly, my favorite argument against campus carry is that “the answer to bullets flying isn’t more bullets flying.” Yes, I am sure that’s why when police arrive on the scene of an active shooter event they don’t bring any guns whatsoever. They just “hug it out”, or employ some other equally ridiculous fantasy based solution.
Choosing to carry a gun in any situation is a personal choice that everyone must make for themselves. It includes accepting responsibility for the consequences of drawing your weapon. When faced with a threat to one’s life, students, just like every other person in most any context, absolutely have the right to defend themselves. The University of Alaska’s Board of Regents has over-stepped its bounds and needs to follow the law. Senator Pete Kelly is attempting to require them to do just that with SB174 and he has my continued support. There is no legitimate reason for a law abiding citizen to be prohibited from carrying a concealed firearm for self defense.
https://joemiller.us/wp-content/uploads/White-stag-holsters.jpg498750Joe Millerhttps://joemiller.us/wp-content/uploads/logotext.pngJoe Miller2016-02-15 23:55:442016-04-11 10:52:37SB174 Could Save My Life: Supporting Campus Carry
The Muslim Student Association at San Diego State University is demanding that administrators combat Islamophobia by developing a “zero tolerance policy explicitly for Islamophobic speech and actions.”
The demands, modeled after similar ones issued by black student associations at campuses across the nation, were lodged after a female Muslim student was allegedly attacked by a white man in a campus parking lot on the afternoon of Nov. 19, about a week after the Paris terrorist attacks, which killed 130 people.
At SDSU, despite reports that several witnesses stood by and did nothing as the attacker grabbed the woman’s hijab, as well as a police sketch of the alleged attacker, a police investigation could not identify a suspect, according to the San Diego Union Tribune.
Meanwhile, the female student who said she was attacked has not been identified. But she told Hanif Mohebi, executive director of the Council on American-Islamic Relations-San Diego, that her attacker grabbed her from “behind,” called her a terrorist, “choked her with the hajib” and told her to “get out of this country,” the Union Tribune reports . . .
Yet less than a week after the alleged hate crime, SDSU’s Muslim Student Association held a protest against Islamophobia on campus that attracted hundreds of students. (Read more from “The Muslim Student Association Just Made a Ridiculous Demand: ‘These Actions Should Be Punished'” HERE)
https://joemiller.us/wp-content/uploads/logotext.png00kathleenhttps://joemiller.us/wp-content/uploads/logotext.pngkathleen2015-12-31 00:30:532016-04-11 10:54:25The Muslim Student Association Just Made a Ridiculous Demand: ‘These Actions Should Be Punished’
Retired Harvard University Law Professor Alan Dershowitz strongly criticized the recent protests at the University of Missouri and Yale University, stating that “these students are book burners,” and “the fog of fascism is descending quickly over many American universities.”
Dershowitz made his comments during an interview on The Kelly File on Thursday. When asked for his reaction about the student unrest at Yale and the University of Missouri, Dershowitz said, “These are the same people who claim they are seeking diversity. The last thing many of these students want is real diversity, diversity of ideas. They may want superficial diversity, diversity of gender, diversity of color, but they don’t want diversity of ideas.”
“We are seeing a curtain of McCarthyism descend over many college campuses,” said Dershowitz. “I don’t want to make analogies to the 1930s, but we have to remember it was the college students who first started burning books during the Nazi regime. And these students are book burners. They don’t want to hear diverse views on college campuses.”
“When I went to speak at Johns Hopkins University there were protests,” he said. “It was said that because I won’t acknowledge that Israel commits crimes against the Palestinians, I am quote ‘harassing students’ and violating the ethical standards of Johns Hopkins University.”
“By expressing my opinion,” he continued, “I am ‘harassing students.’ This has become a very serious problem not only in American universities, but in universities around the world as well. And it is influencing and having a terrible impact on the education of students.” (Read more from “Retired Harvard Professor: The Fog of Fascism Is Descending Quickly Over Many American Universities” HERE)
https://joemiller.us/wp-content/uploads/logotext.png00Joe Millerhttps://joemiller.us/wp-content/uploads/logotext.pngJoe Miller2015-11-14 01:04:472016-04-11 10:56:10Retired Harvard Professor: The Fog of Fascism Is Descending Quickly Over Many American Universities
