The University of Missouri football team has decided to not participate in anymore games until the schools President is fired. The tension has been mounting for quite sometime, and no matter which side of the fence you are on, these have all been peaceful protests and I applaud the students at this University for taking a stand.
Here is an excellent breakdown of all the events leading up to this point: http://www.themaneater.com/special-sections/mu-fall-2015/
UPDATE: The President has officially stepped down.
Institutions of Higher Victimization Are Getting Exactly What They Deserve
November 09, 2015
RUSH: What's happening on the American college campus, the vaunted academy, to me, takes the top spot in the Stack of Stuff today. For those of you who are just now getting attuned to what's happening during the day, the University of Missouri's embattled president has resigned. His name is Tim Wolfe. He just quit, just resigned because of committing the crime of being a white male.
If you dig deep into this, I first heard about this, I think it was Friday after I got home from work. I got a note from a friend of mine about this whole story and the subject line: "Wow, your home state's a weird place." And I said, "Well, I already knew that. What's this about?" And that's when I started becoming familiar with the story on campus at the University of Missouri. I did not attend. The family did, but I am not a member of the alma mater there.
Now, if you haven't been following this story, this is a Social Justice Warriors story. Some of the students as Mizzou have been calling for the president of the University to resign. It's all an extenuation, a continuation of what started boiling over in Ferguson, Missouri, which is 120 miles down the road, down I-70. And of course Ferguson had nothing to do with any of this that's happening on campus. What's happening on campus had nothing to do with anything in Ferguson, and I wouldn't be surprised if what's happening at the University of Missouri has been imported from Ferguson in terms of leaders of the community organizers and agitators are concerned.
The pressure on the university president, I guess it really began, a student began a hunger strike with a list of demands. None of them specific. I mean, if you go through the list of demands here and the complaints, you don't find anything specific. You find the major problem is that there are too many white people at this place, and they apparently are not nice enough or considerate enough to the 10% of the people there who are black, and so there has to be some changes. But don't forget, folks, this is the place, it was just a couple of short years ago the University of Missouri got a gold star. The University of Missouri was the leading, most sensitive university in America because that's where Michael Sam went to school.
Michael Sam, the first gay player to come out in advance of going to the NFL draft, picked up by the St. Louis Rams, didn't make the team, went to the practice squad of the Cowboys, didn't make the team, left to Canada, wasn't gonna make the team, so quit. He's out of football for now. But at the time the University of Missouri was heralded as a citadel of tolerance, a citadel of progressivism, a citadel of acceptance. What happened? What happened? How could the place that led the nation in tolerance and love and acceptance for gay athletes on the football team, what could have made it fall so far so fast?
Okay. Back to the details. Student goes on a hunger strike after a list of demands, including that the university president quit and ride out of town. Thirty black members of the Mizzou football team said that they would begin to boycott practices and games until the university president was forced out or until he resigned. The faculty then joined, and then the head football coach Gary Pinkel then joined, and the die was cast. Because, you see, the football program runs most major universities. And if you take the football program out and the money that it generates out, you've got huge financial problems. It's incalculable, the damage. The coach, I mean, he's gotta go out and recruit at the end of this season. The last thing he can do is oppose his players. Of course he's gotta join the players in the boycott.
The faculty did not like the president to begin with, before any of this started. You know why? The president, Tim Wolfe, only had a bachelor's degree. He wasn't properly educated. He didn't have a postgraduate degree. He didn't have one, period. He just had a bachelor degree. Now, they've got no problem with student athletes not learning anything. The faculty at these places have no problem with student athletes barely attending class and few of them even graduating. But when it comes to the university president, he was white, and he only had a bachelor's degree. No specific complaints were actually ever cited. It was basically a list of complaints about the atmosphere on campus.
The closest thing to a specific complaint that I've been able to find -- and correct me if I'm wrong on this -- the closest thing that I have been able to find to a specific complaint is that Wolf's car, the university president's car allegedly bumped a protester last month while he was surrounded by a crowd of screaming protesters. And never mind that he apologized for that, quote, unquote, crime. He apologized profusely. But his car bumping one of the protesters apparently was an unacceptable, unforgivable crime against humanity. He even said he should have gotten out of the car and apologized in person, which might have just ratcheted things up even more. I have a list here of the University of Missouri student demands, and there's nothing specific in it.
Let's, instead, look at this in a different way. Just to remind you, SB Nation, a sports website, back on February 10, 2014 -- this is just a year and a half ago -- "Michael Sam's Announcement Shines an Incredibly Positive Light on Mizzou." Yeah, just a year and a half ago. A year and a half ago, they loved Mizzou. Well, they had a star linebacker, an African-American who was gay, and everybody knew he was gay but they kept the secret! He confided to the team; the team kept it a secret for whatever reasons, 'cause he didn't want to come out.
But the Missouri University system, the campus at Columbia -- the football team -- was apparently so enlightened a year and a half ago, that someone like Michael Sam was not only allowed to go and attend, but to prosper, succeed, excel, and be given an award. And now... (interruption) Well, yeah, okay. There is one other thing. That's right. It was reported in the Drive-Bys that some idiot made a swastika out of feces on a building and that the president didn't do enough about that when he was told about it.
So swastika, feces. I don't know why that... Well, I don't know. What is racist about that? (interruption) Swastika? I can see a lot of people being offended by it, but is it a racially motivated thing? I mean, it's no different... You know, the quarterback of the Carolina Panthers, Cam Newton? Did you hear what he did yesterday? Well, they played the Packers. They played the Packers in Charlotte and some Packers fans showed up wearing their cheeseheads and Packers jerseys, and they had a banner.
They had a banner that they had slung over the railing at field level. I forget exactly what it said, but it was something promoting the Packers, like: We're in Packer country here. But they weren't. They were in Charlotte. So Cam Newton says he saw it and he went over there and he grabbed it and tore it down, and the Packer fans thought he was coming over to talk to 'em and say, "Hey, man, good game," or whatever. He took it away, and they thought it was a joke, and he was gonna be bringing their banner back, but he didn't.
He said, "Look, last time we were in Green Bay, I didn't see anybody with a Panther sign. So I'm not gonna have to look at any Packer signs here in my home stadium. This is about protecting the building," or whatever he said. He ripped it down. But the University of Missouri president did not get mad enough at the feces-laden swastika sign. Those are the two specific events that have taken place. No, it makes total sense. If you put this in the right context, it makes total sense. This is not about any specific grievance.
This is just the ongoing attempt by the left to capture what they're losing at the ballot box. The Democrat Party's losing elections. Ferguson didn't turn out the way the protestors wanted it to. People have moved down the road. You know what's really interesting about this to me (and there are many aspects of it that are interesting) is that if you look at this incident by itself, outside of the context, you would believe that we still live in the 1800s, that we are still pre-Civil War, that we still have slavery; we still have blatant racism and discrimination.
This country has done more to progress from those days, this country has done more to address the legitimate grievances... We have altered policy. We have had policies implemented to basically punish achievers because of their race in order to balance things out. We have lowered entry standards. We've done everything we can. Affirmative action. We've done quotas. And as you see, it's never enough. Because it's never really all about that. And I, frankly, think part of me was all weekend and this morning watching this...
I know people are upset about it and wringing their hands together. But it's also happening at Yale. You know what happened at Yale? Some students are very upset by Halloween costumes. It really... The students at Yale are demanding a safe area where they can be free from having to hear anything that upsets them, including opposing political points of view. These 19 to 20, 22-year-old children simply need to feel safe and they don't feel safe on the campus, and the tipping point was when they saw some really scary Halloween costumes.
So a faculty member, a female faculty member says, "Well, just turn away if you don't want to look at the costumes." And they said, "Just turn away? We're surrounded by it! We can't turn away," and they surrounded the teacher and threatened the teacher, the professor, or what have you. And so Yale is caving. We, last week, talked about the various universities where they are setting up essentially hall monitor-type people to approve or disapprove of each and every Halloween costume on some college campuses.
We're not talking about kindergarten or grade school here. We're talking about college campuses where the students are so upset by some Halloween costumes, that adult supervisors were set up to approve or disapprove various Halloween costumes so that some students wouldn't be scared and upset and offended, maybe. I think these universities -- these institutions of higher propaganda -- are getting just what they deserve, folks. I think they are reaping what they've sown. They turned over the asylum to the inmates years ago, and the inmates have finally figured out how to blackmail 'em.
You do it with the football program. It's gonna win each and every time 'cause these colleges cannot do without the football program. Mizzou has a game against BYU this Sunday or this weekend, probably Saturday over at Kansas City at Airhead Stadium. Now, I'm not... I haven't had the radio on today, but I would wager that all of you listening to sports talk radio this morning in and around Columbia or Kansas City or St. Louis... I would wager that virtually every host has been on the side of the players -- every host -- because they want the game to be played.
They want to cover the game; therefore they're gonna side with the players. They're not... Nobody is gonna stand up. There was one player who stood up and said, "Hey, there's not unanimity on this team. There are a bunch of players here that don't think this boycott ought to happen." But it was too late. The coach, he's gotta go out and recruit. He can't possibly do anything but join his players in this boycott if he wants to remain coach, if he wants them to listen to him, if he wants to have control of the team, if he wants to be able to recruit players.
He's got to stand with the players that are causing the trouble here. He can't side against them. And this is what everybody knows. It's what the protesters know. It's what the striking or what the threatened striking players know. But really, these institutions of higher learning are anything but that. They are institutions of higher propaganda, and I really do think they're getting exactly what they deserve. All of these tirades from the students rooted in anger and fear, the threats, the demands.
You know, we don't have students anymore.
We have institutions of higher victimization.
We are allowing students to adopt victim status as a means of getting what they want, including grades. In the list of student demands, there is this demand that university be more accepting of "marginalized" students. That means two things. Of course "marginalized" is a racial reference, but it also has to with students who might be flunking out. We're supposed to overlook it. We're not supposed to punish students who are not getting good grades 'cause it's not their fault. They're victims of a racist hierarchy and patriarchy on campus, and they're doing the best they can.
And you've got to respect and understand that with all the stress and all the pressure and all the racism, they're doing the best they can. And you can't flunk them. This is what the university experience has become: Threats, tirades, demands, endless parade of victims, now agitators. See, I think the universities have had their hands in creating these little monsters. As far as I'm concerned, they can live with 'em now. This is exactly it. When they stopped teaching -- when they stopped teaching critical thought, when liberalism overcame every campus, when liberalism overwhelmed everything -- it was the end of independent, critical thought. And it was the beginning of, "You better toe the line or you're out."
And this is what they are reaping.
BREAK TRANSCRIPT
RUSH: No, no. No, no. My point is this: When you teach how rotten America is... When you teach students at the university level and at the high school level how racist the country is, how unfair, how unjust, how immoral -- when you have black studies courses and professors who are so extremely radical that you don't even recognize them -- what do you expect to happen after a few years? You expect to just teach these students that America's horrible, that it's racist, that they don't have a chance, that the white man so dominates it and it's so unfair -- there's such white privilege -- that they don't have a prayer?
You think they're just gonna sit there and listen to it and then leave campus and cause trouble? No. At some point, they're gonna realize, "Hey, wait a minute. This campus is the same place as what they're telling me is outside," and they're gonna get mobilized and they're gonna find their agitators who are adults like in Ferguson and so forth and they're gonna try to take over the universities, too. After all, this is what they've been taught. The thing is, the rabble-rousers are supposed to wait until they get out of school or maybe graduate and then take all of this misbehavior outside the campus to other parts of American society and culture. But they're not supposed to be doing this on campus.
"No, no, no! We're not the kind of people we've been teaching you about!"
But I guess it's not working. That's why part of me is kind of smiling over this.
BREAK TRANSCRIPT
RUSH: Hey, folks, this is academe. This is the academy. This is education. This is what every parent thinks is the most important thing about their young kids' future: Sending them to places like this, sending them these institutions of higher learning. And they're not institutions of higher learning. They're institutions of higher propaganda. And they are places where the malcontents are beginning to run, and it's my contention that the universities have sown their own fate here.
This is the kind of stuff they've been teaching. This is what they have been putting in these students, these young skulls full of mush. In their heads. You can't expect year after year to teach people what a rotten country they were born to, what a rotten country they live in. You can't teach young minority students how unfair their lives are. You can't make the biggest victims in the world, and you can't expect to teach them and create all this anger and rage and have it not explode. When your curriculum is based on the multicultural curriculum, which is that everything about this country's illegitimate from the first days of Western European settlers, what do you expect to happen?
We're not raising an era of college-educated people. We're creating victims. We're creating rage-filled maniacs with a totally distorted view of reality and of history. We have a president who has such weird economic policies that even if they do manage to graduate from these supposed higher institutions, they don't have any jobs or careers to latch onto.
END TRANSCRIPT http://www.rushlimbaugh.com/daily/2015/11/09/institutions_of_higher_victimization_are_getting_exactly_what_they_deserve
To this point alone:
Quote from: The_Choose_1 on November 09, 2015, 02:24:30 PM
Because, you see, the football program runs most major universities.
(https://i.kinja-img.com/gawker-media/image/upload/s--Y65jH33K--/c_fill,fl_progressive,g_north,h_358,q_80,w_636/ykdkqhstdm1ptubyuct2.jpg)
Quote from: Non-RedNeck Westsider on November 09, 2015, 02:55:50 PM
To this point alone:
Quote from: The_Choose_1 on November 09, 2015, 02:24:30 PM
Because, you see, the football program runs most major universities.
(https://i.kinja-img.com/gawker-media/image/upload/s--Y65jH33K--/c_fill,fl_progressive,g_north,h_358,q_80,w_636/ykdkqhstdm1ptubyuct2.jpg)
Yeah, that looks bad, but who wants to live in a world where the heads of med schools and universities out-earn guys who can make 20-year-old boys move balls better than other 20-year-old boys?
The whole situation is a fiasco. PC taken too far and a glimpse into the priorities of America/Americans. Even as a "liberal", this has me on edge. Apparently it's not too apparent what was done, or not done, and what exactly the events were that led to a football program ousting a university president. What little I know (and frankly, there seems to be so little to the story, which is what makes this all the more disturbing) is that nothing really out of the ordinary happened and MO is once again back in the spotlight for nothing positive at all.
This has me concerned for overreach on the BLS movement. I like the basic premise of the movement, but if it's going to result in events such as this, there will certainly be overreach and everyone will very quickly begin to see through the movement.
By the way, the only decent coverage I've read on the issue. Even if you read NYT, you'll likely come out with the same opinion you would if you caught this from Fox News (that there's not a big deal here and blacks in this state are way overreaching).
http://www.latimes.com/nation/nationnow/la-na-missouri-campus-racism-20151109-story.html
Read the article above.
Still stands that it's a pathetic sign that athletics, particularly football, rule our publicly funded systems of higher education. But hey, use what you got to take a stand, right?
I still think there is a risk that as a society we are going down the path of being far too coddled. There will always be racism or things that hold us all back. Fight for change, but recognize that being human is tough, humanity is far from perfect, and we are at least at a point where any improvements going forward will be small at best (because we have come so far), just be wary of the price we might need to pay for such marginal improvements to our society (on these fronts).
Without speaking to the reasonableness of the protesters' demands, from an administrative perspective this doesn't seem to have been handled well. The university needed to act much more quickly and to get out in front of the message or it was inevitable they'd get bulldozed by it.
The Mizzou president surely spoke in support of swastikas being drawn on campus to get fired, amirite??"Not enough was done" WTF specifically does that mean?? Did he not have any concerns?? College is liberal hell. White liberals are responsible for all of this faux high racial tension black victimization bullshit, and now they have to lie in the bed that they made. They wanna bring back the 60s (when blacks really really had racial concerns) so bad.
This video made my blood absolutely boil. This kid was simply trying to DO HIS JOB. In a public space mind you.
http://www.barstoolsports.com/barstoolu/missouri-protestors-bully-a-student-photographer-and-refuse-to-let-him-take-their-pictures-during-their-public-protest/?utm_source=desktop&utm_medium=related&utm_campaign=push
It's genuinely embarrassing; the President at the university punked out and so did the Governor of Missouri. It is completely crazy, as is the craziness that happened at Yale over an eMail about (of all things) what to wear at Halloween.
https://youtu.be/9IEFD_JVYd0
This is a damn good read on the Yale situation --
http://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2015/11/the-new-intolerance-of-student-activism-at-yale/414810/
I keep waiting for a significant enough number of enlightened people on the Left to put a halt to this bullying and totalitarian craziness (glad to see simms3' response in this thread). The coddling is out-of-control; it's just so infantilizing.
College kids seem bored
The girl in the Yale video needs help
The Mizzou president said he had made attempts to open dialog with anyone willing to discuss the issues, right up into his resignation speech.
But for other reasons, he had little or no support from the University System Board. There were some other issues going on here besides a football team making threat strikes.
Quote from: spuwho on November 09, 2015, 11:16:24 PM
But for other reasons, he had little or no support from the University System Board. There were some other issues going on here besides a football team making threat strikes.
I think this is my big take away here.
I'm as liberal/left as they come...fuck it, call me a Marxist...but SOMETHING is off here. There were definitely 'other issues going on here' besides the football team, the strike, etc... Either the reporting sucks or Mizzou/Missouri has the worst PR team in the world (governmental workers + college board + coach being "for" the strike leads me to believe there's somewhere the public is missing).
Quote from: I-10east on November 09, 2015, 05:46:06 PM
College is liberal hell. White liberals are responsible for all of this faux high racial tension black victimization bullshit, and now they have to lie in the bed that they made. They wanna bring back the 60s (when blacks really really had racial concerns) so bad.
That doesn't sound like either university I attended. Was this your experience when you were in college? Where was it?
Quote from: Adam White on November 10, 2015, 02:21:30 AM
Quote from: I-10east on November 09, 2015, 05:46:06 PM
College is liberal hell. White liberals are responsible for all of this faux high racial tension black victimization bullshit, and now they have to lie in the bed that they made. They wanna bring back the 60s (when blacks really really had racial concerns) so bad.
That doesn't sound like either university I attended. Was this your experience when you were in college? Where was it?
This is why I listen to Rush Limcheese. All he talks about is Liberal Colleges and their Professors? Rush is an Entertainer at best and his lemmings would all jump over the cliff if he told them to. (http://www.binaryoptions.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/12/lemmings-off-a-cliff.gif)
football be powerful in this country.
Quote from: fsquid on November 10, 2015, 08:35:20 AM
football be powerful in this country.
The Dollar even more powerful.
More powerful than football or dollars (those matter more to the alumni) on campus is the crazy desire by faculty and staff to *not* be caricatured as something other than liberal. To step off the plantation in this way is to risk ridicule, and worse. Did you not listen to that young chick at Yale scream at this obviously liberal man gallantly standing there and listening to her foolishness but doing so with complete respect and restraint? I mean, the absolute comfort she felt to be so incredibly intolerant -- of someone placed there, as a member of the tribe essentially -- for her benefit. That was jarring.
Does the woman know how to feel any sense of shame? Do any of the folks so casually tossing around the Scarlet Letter "R" at the mere utterance of a contrary thought?
Liberals lose their freaking mind when accused of being racist (and Black people know this; anyone see those Bernie Sanders rallies when the ridiculous BlackLivesMatter people jumped the stage in Seattle ???). The shiznit is completely out-of-control.
And, you don't have to be a Rush Limbaugh fan (I rarely listen but I don't have a problem with the man or his program) to know the generic truth of what I-10east posted. Never in American history has the path forward been so wide open and relatively unhindered for African Americans -- and that crazy azz chick is out there screaming at a sympathetic man about a triviality.
At Yale !!!
Many, many white people have figured out that a good number of African Americans have a damn near complete inability to distinguish rudeness from racism, or indifference from racism, or bad luck from racism, or all manner of things experienced by all people . . . from racism. It has truly grown to bizarre proportions, this conflating damn near anything negative that happens in your life to racism. And, there is less and less of an ability to look squarely in the mirror -- and accept personal responsibility or at least accept the possibility that you made a healthy contribution to whatever negativity surrounds you. White people, black people -- everyone is quick these days to lapse into bitch-and-moan mode. I personally detest it.
Adam, if you didn't run into any of the longing for the activism of the 1960s (and the inherent mythologizing of what actually happened, or how many people were actually involved) at the two universities you attended . . . where, pray tell, was that !?!
Like I've stated before. No problem with these students exercising their rights to peaceful protest. But to bully a fellow student who works for the media who was simply documenting the whole scene, and a COMMUNICATIONS professor bullying the student for exercising his first amendment right really makes me second guess the majority of those students intentions for protesting all together. disgraceful. If the President had to step down, she should as well for that ridiculous behavior.
Unfortunately, this kind of foolishness isn't limited to college campuses and "liberals". The whole "War on Christmas" bullshit and the conservative meme that Christians are persecuted in the United States is the right's version of the left's obsession with racism.
http://www.nydailynews.com/news/national/christian-evangelists-upset-starbucks-red-cups-article-1.2427180
Quote from: RattlerGator on November 10, 2015, 09:02:37 AM
Adam, if you didn't run into any of the longing for the activism of the 1960s (and the inherent mythologizing of what actually happened, or how many people were actually involved) at the two universities you attended . . . where, pray tell, was that !?!
I attended the University of Florida and the University of North Florida. UNF was certainly much more right wing as a general rule - I remember having a Poly Sci professor getting irate with me when I contended that Bush wouldn't win re-election (turns out I was right about that). And I had a very anti-communist Russian history professor.
UF was much more balanced across the spectrum. Yes, you had your liberal groups (and left wing groups), but as I recall, there was a very active "Libertarian" party (my sister was dating a member at that time - Brian Doherty, who went on to be an editor at "Reason" magazine) and other various right wing groups (campus crusade for christ, N/ROTC, the whole Greek system, etc). No one group seemed to have any louder a voice than the others (with exception to the Greeks, who basically ran student government).
I think there is a general lack of tolerance from many on the right - dissenting voices must be shut down. It's funny that conservatives get so worked up about how "liberal" university campuses are, but don't bother to complain about how conservative the US military is - an organization that disallows critical thinking, tells its members what to think and is full of people who think they know everything about how the world works based on their own limited experiences.
Quote from: Downtown Osprey on November 10, 2015, 09:08:33 AM
Like I've stated before. No problem with these students exercising their rights to peaceful protest. But to bully a fellow student who works for the media who was simply documenting the whole scene, and a COMMUNICATIONS professor bullying the student for exercising his first amendment right really makes me second guess the majority of those students intentions for protesting all together. disgraceful. If the President had to step down, she should as well for that ridiculous behavior.
professor of mass media at what some think is the #1 journalism school in the country. Had to shake my head when I saw that this morning.
Quote from: finehoe on November 10, 2015, 09:34:10 AM
Unfortunately, this kind of foolishness isn't limited to college campuses and "liberals". The whole "War on Christmas" bullshit and the conservative meme that Christians are persecuted in the United States is the right's version of the left's obsession with racism.
http://www.nydailynews.com/news/national/christian-evangelists-upset-starbucks-red-cups-article-1.2427180
That is a manufactured story taking some facebook post and trying to make it some national effort. You don't see Fox News or National Review or a host of other center-right or right organizations bitching about Starbucks and those cups. To equate that non-event with what happened at Mizzou is ludicrous. No one is making the point that differences of opinion are real and deeply held.
This is about free speech being attacked, institutionally!
Did you watch the craziness at Mizzou captured on that video ? ? ?
http://nymag.com/daily/intelligencer/2015/11/can-we-take-political-correctness-seriously-now.html#
QuoteThe reason every Marxist government in the history of the world turned massively repressive is not because they all had the misfortune of being hijacked by murderous thugs. It's that the ideology itself prioritizes class justice over individual rights and makes no allowance for legitimate disagreement.
Who, honestly, can't genuinely see the truth in that statement? Who? You have not only a professor exhibiting outrageous conduct, but she happens to be a professor of mass media! But, what the hell, she's working with the protest movement, so she calls out for everyone to see and hear, "Help me get this reporter out of here. I need some muscle over here." At a public university, in an open space.
Damn.
It's a sad day for academia and the left-wing when this isn't roundly, and seriously, rebuked.
Quote from: stephendare on November 10, 2015, 09:54:43 AM
Quote from: Adam White on November 10, 2015, 09:35:08 AM
Quote from: RattlerGator on November 10, 2015, 09:02:37 AM
Adam, if you didn't run into any of the longing for the activism of the 1960s (and the inherent mythologizing of what actually happened, or how many people were actually involved) at the two universities you attended . . . where, pray tell, was that !?!
I attended the University of Florida and the University of North Florida. UNF was certainly much more right wing as a general rule - I remember having a Poly Sci professor getting irate with me when I contended that Bush wouldn't win re-election (turns out I was right about that). And I had a very anti-communist Russian history professor.
UF was much more balanced across the spectrum. Yes, you had your liberal groups (and left wing groups), but as I recall, there was a very active "Libertarian" party (my sister was dating a member at that time - Brian Doherty, who went on to be an editor at "Reason" magazine) and other various right wing groups (campus crusade for christ, N/ROTC, the whole Greek system, etc). No one group seemed to have any louder a voice than the others (with exception to the Greeks, who basically ran student government).
I think there is a general lack of tolerance from many on the right - dissenting voices must be shut down. It's funny that conservatives get so worked up about how "liberal" university campuses are, but don't bother to complain about how conservative the US military is - an organization that disallows critical thinking, tells its members what to think and is full of people who think they know everything about how the world works based on their own limited experiences.
exactly. all you have to do is look to some of the posters on this board who get pretty shouty whenever a dissenting viewpoint is discussed. Spuwho and a few other people with more conservative viewpoints being exempt from this comment.
Remember the chaos when Diane and I first posted that torturing prisoners was wrong and going to be an ethical problem?
Or the shouting that happened over our reporting of the police shooting of the unarmed Kiko Battles? I believe I was accused multiple times of being a 'cop hating liberal' who was for crime overrunning springfield (which is the neighborhood I live in---I guess I was just suppose to love the prospect of being crimed)
Or Bobby Elrods 4 year long crusade to shout down any discussion of global warming on this site.
And the two year crusade over writing about the impending financial crash of 2008 (starting in 2006) as 'liberal nonsense' and fear mongering.
It's kind of like the whole worn-out "war on christmas" trope that is trotted out each year. According to those types, any acknowledgement of other belief systems amounts to an attack on christianity. There is only one version of the 'truth' and any deviation from that amounts to PC or liberal bias, etc. So a retailer trying to maximize profits through being as inclusive as possible isn't being good at 'free market' capitalism - it's actively promoting an anti-christian agenda.
There is so little in the way of self-reflection for these right wing types. They hold so steadfastly to their version of events, of history - their worldview. There's only one allowable narrative and any deviation from that is scorned. How is that any different than what they're accusing 'liberals' of?
Quote from: RattlerGator on November 10, 2015, 10:19:43 AM
QuoteThe reason every Marxist government in the history of the world turned massively repressive is not because they all had the misfortune of being hijacked by murderous thugs. It's that the ideology itself prioritizes class justice over individual rights and makes no allowance for legitimate disagreement.
Who, honestly, can't genuinely see the truth in that statement? Who? You have not only a professor exhibiting outrageous conduct, but she happens to be a professor of mass media! But, what the hell, she's working with the protest movement, so she calls out for everyone to see and hear, "Help me get this reporter out of here. I need some muscle over here." At a public university, in an open space.
Damn.
It's a sad day for academia and the left-wing when this isn't roundly, and seriously, rebuked.
There has never been a Marxist government in power in any country, anywhere, in the history of mankind.
Quote from: Adam White on November 10, 2015, 09:35:08 AM
I attended the University of Florida and the University of North Florida. UNF was certainly much more right wing as a general rule - I remember having a Poly Sci professor getting irate with me when I contended that Bush wouldn't win re-election (turns out I was right about that). And I had a very anti-communist Russian history professor.
UF was much more balanced across the spectrum. Yes, you had your liberal groups (and left wing groups), but as I recall, there was a very active "Libertarian" party (my sister was dating a member at that time - Brian Doherty, who went on to be an editor at "Reason" magazine) and other various right wing groups (campus crusade for christ, N/ROTC, the whole Greek system, etc). No one group seemed to have any louder a voice than the others (with exception to the Greeks, who basically ran student government).
I think there is a general lack of tolerance from many on the right - dissenting voices must be shut down. It's funny that conservatives get so worked up about how "liberal" university campuses are, but don't bother to complain about how conservative the US military is - an organization that disallows critical thinking, tells its members what to think and is full of people who think they know everything about how the world works based on their own limited experiences.
My goodness -- you went there, Adam? Really? No marxist government? Ever? So, everything has failed before because the poor fools on the left just didn't understand how to perfect their efforts? Or didn't try hard enough? Nothing is the fault of marxists? It's everyone else's fault? Hmmmmm, where have I heard that foolishness before? Utopia awaits, comrades, utopia awaits !!!
Sorry, Adam, but that position requires no thinking on your part and is something of a supremacist take that removes your requirement to acknowledge what actually
has occurred and your responsibility to deal with it.
As for campus -- it was very evident at UF when I was there in the 80s and I know it has been evident there since. I have no doubt it was evident before, either. There is a reason why Alachua County and Leon County very much defy the norm for North Florida. I served on the Board of Directors of the corporation that publishes The Alligator when I was at UF and saw it in practically every issue we published. Of course, I was firmly within the left-wing at that time.
Finally, if you think the US military disallows critical thinking, you know nothing of the US military. Which, unfortunately, is the case for so many on the left who only know how to think of the armed services via ridiculous resort to condescending caricature. The United States military certainly has a center-right orientation,
but so does the country it protects. However, no one on the center-right or even the right wing in America is shouting down speakers on university campuses. That's all shamefully happening on the left. And it's outrageous, no matter how much the left tries to engage in some relativist pablum as if both sides are doing it.
Both sides very clearly aren't.
Quote from: RattlerGator on November 10, 2015, 10:41:15 AM
Quote from: Adam White on November 10, 2015, 09:35:08 AM
I attended the University of Florida and the University of North Florida. UNF was certainly much more right wing as a general rule - I remember having a Poly Sci professor getting irate with me when I contended that Bush wouldn't win re-election (turns out I was right about that). And I had a very anti-communist Russian history professor.
UF was much more balanced across the spectrum. Yes, you had your liberal groups (and left wing groups), but as I recall, there was a very active "Libertarian" party (my sister was dating a member at that time - Brian Doherty, who went on to be an editor at "Reason" magazine) and other various right wing groups (campus crusade for christ, N/ROTC, the whole Greek system, etc). No one group seemed to have any louder a voice than the others (with exception to the Greeks, who basically ran student government).
I think there is a general lack of tolerance from many on the right - dissenting voices must be shut down. It's funny that conservatives get so worked up about how "liberal" university campuses are, but don't bother to complain about how conservative the US military is - an organization that disallows critical thinking, tells its members what to think and is full of people who think they know everything about how the world works based on their own limited experiences.
My goodness -- you went there, Adam? Really? No marxist government? Ever? So, everything has failed before because the poor fools on the left just didn't understand how to perfect their efforts? Or didn't try hard enough? Nothing is the fault of marxists? It's everyone else's fault? Hmmmmm, where have I heard that foolishness before? Utopia awaits, comrades, utopia awaits !!!
Yeah, I "went there" - because it's true. Do you know what Marxism-Leninism is?
Quote from: RattlerGator on November 10, 2015, 10:41:15 AM
The United States military certainly has a center-right orientation, but so does the country it protects. However, no one on the center-right or even the right wing in America is shouting down speakers on university campuses. That's all shamefully happening on the left. And it's outrageous, no matter how much the left tries to engage in some relativist pablum as if both sides are doing it.
Center-right? You're having a laugh.
Quote from: RattlerGator on November 10, 2015, 10:19:43 AM
That is a manufactured story taking some facebook post and trying to make it some national effort. You don't see Fox News or National Review or a host of other center-right or right organizations bitching about Starbucks and those cups. To equate that non-event with what happened at Mizzou is ludicrous. No one is making the point that differences of opinion are real and deeply held.
This is about free speech being attacked, institutionally!
The whole "War on Christmas" nonsense and the "Persecution of Christians" idiocy has been going on much longer than this latest Starbucks cup thing (and yes Fox News is on the cup 'controversy': http://mediamatters.org/video/2015/11/09/fox-host-the-war-on-christmas-is-off-to-an-earl/206704).
But don't let that affect your narrative that manufactured outrage is strictly a liberal phenomenon.
Quote from: finehoe on November 10, 2015, 11:02:54 AM
Quote from: RattlerGator on November 10, 2015, 10:19:43 AM
That is a manufactured story taking some facebook post and trying to make it some national effort. You don't see Fox News or National Review or a host of other center-right or right organizations bitching about Starbucks and those cups. To equate that non-event with what happened at Mizzou is ludicrous. No one is making the point that differences of opinion are real and deeply held.
This is about free speech being attacked, institutionally!
The whole "War on Christmas" nonsense and the "Persecution of Christians" idiocy has been going on much longer than this latest Starbucks cup thing (and yes Fox News is on the cup 'controversy': http://mediamatters.org/video/2015/11/09/fox-host-the-war-on-christmas-is-off-to-an-earl/206704).
But don't let that affect your narrative that manufactured outrage is strictly a liberal phenomenon.
Or how about the idiotic contention that if a college student (or anyone else) is liberal, he or she is "indoctrinated," whereas anyone with conservative views is just thinking for himself?
Quote from: fsquid on November 10, 2015, 10:17:57 AM
professor of mass media at what some think is the #1 journalism school in the country. Had to shake my head when I saw that this morning.
It appears she is
*not* a J-school professor but is instead in the Department of Communication, which has an "area focus" on Mass Media and is heavy into theory:
https://communication.missouri.edu/undergrad/massmedia
The department is part of Mizzou's College of Arts and Sciences.
Quote from: Adam White on November 10, 2015, 11:10:56 AM
Or how about the idiotic contention that if a college student (or anyone else) is liberal, he or she is "indoctrinated," whereas anyone with conservative views is just thinking for himself?
Adam, show me where I've said or intimated that.
And I'm waiting on someone to show me a college campus where people on the right are shouting down speakers and not allowing them to speak.
The mere fact that a Fox News host had a throw-away line about the supposed War on Christmas in no way, shape or form indicates some crazy focus on Starbucks and their cups. Few people on the right are talking about this but folks on the left sure as heck are. Gotta keep that non-thinking caricature going.
Quote from: RattlerGator on November 10, 2015, 12:29:16 PM
Quote from: fsquid on November 10, 2015, 10:17:57 AM
professor of mass media at what some think is the #1 journalism school in the country. Had to shake my head when I saw that this morning.
It appears she is *not* a J-school professor but is instead in the Department of Communication, which has an "area focus" on Mass Media and is heavy into theory:
https://communication.missouri.edu/undergrad/massmedia
The department is part of Mizzou's College of Arts and Sciences.
that's a relief
fsquid, I agree. But still telling. The photographer appeared quite sympathetic to them, but that didn't matter to the future marxist-leninists. No, sir buddy! And Stephen, the important thing wasn't the college the professor (not a student, by the way) is associated with. It was the fact that she's a professor at a respected university and -- acting as an agent of the university (which is an arm of the government) was blatantly violating that J-school student's first amendment rights.
Surely you can't be missing that essential point.
But maybe you can, given a few of your most recent responses. Stephen, can you objectively read my comments without some blinkered interpretation infecting what you've read? I'm beginning to doubt that you can.
And then there's this:
Quote from: stephendare on November 10, 2015, 12:08:54 PM
No. actually Rattler Gator, there has never been a marxist government outside of Christianity.
There has been mixed socialism, but never a stateless society of the proletateriat.
Sorry, but you know there are books on this subject, right?
Okay, Stephen -- that was good for a great, great laugh. Thank you !!! Thank you very much. What was I saying to Adam about a supremacist take? So, you've revealed yourself to be a nativist with Shad Khan and now as a supremacist on issues of religion it seems. Outside of Christianity, huh? So . . . y'all
*are* worshiping the God of marxism -- dayyyuuuummmm.
And . . . books? Did you say
Books on the subject ! ? ! Keep the laughs coming, man. I think you maybe meant indoctrination pamphlets -- right, Adam?
Honestly. A stateless society of the proletariat? Good grief, Stephen. Incredulity is all that shiznit deserves and that's damn well all you're going to get out of me.
But, back to the question of this thread (which you seem to be hijacking).
Stephen, are you not disturbed by what occurred there?
Quote from: RattlerGator on November 10, 2015, 09:02:37 AM
More powerful than football or dollars (those matter more to the alumni) on campus is the crazy desire by faculty and staff to *not* be caricatured as something other than liberal. To step off the plantation in this way is to risk ridicule, and worse. Did you not listen to that young chick at Yale scream at this obviously liberal man gallantly standing there and listening to her foolishness but doing so with complete respect and restraint? I mean, the absolute comfort she felt to be so incredibly intolerant -- of someone placed there, as a member of the tribe essentially -- for her benefit. That was jarring.
Does the woman know how to feel any sense of shame? Do any of the folks so casually tossing around the Scarlet Letter "R" at the mere utterance of a contrary thought?
Liberals lose their freaking mind when accused of being racist (and Black people know this; anyone see those Bernie Sanders rallies when the ridiculous BlackLivesMatter people jumped the stage in Seattle ???). The shiznit is completely out-of-control.
And, you don't have to be a Rush Limbaugh fan (I rarely listen but I don't have a problem with the man or his program) to know the generic truth of what I-10east posted. Never in American history has the path forward been so wide open and relatively unhindered for African Americans -- and that crazy azz chick is out there screaming at a sympathetic man about a triviality.
At Yale !!!
Many, many white people have figured out that a good number of African Americans have a damn near complete inability to distinguish rudeness from racism, or indifference from racism, or bad luck from racism, or all manner of things experienced by all people . . . from racism. It has truly grown to bizarre proportions, this conflating damn near anything negative that happens in your life to racism. And, there is less and less of an ability to look squarely in the mirror -- and accept personal responsibility or at least accept the possibility that you made a healthy contribution to whatever negativity surrounds you. White people, black people -- everyone is quick these days to lapse into bitch-and-moan mode. I personally detest it.
Adam, if you didn't run into any of the longing for the activism of the 1960s (and the inherent mythologizing of what actually happened, or how many people were actually involved) at the two universities you attended . . . where, pray tell, was that !?!
Tell me more about how black americans can't tell when someone is rude or racist.
I love the outrage of "political correctness gone too far". The result of PC going too far is a university president resining?
Yet, we have debates as to whether minorities are repeatedly and inter-generationally marginalized.
As a society we believe that racism is moderate enough for our liking but PC has gone too far.
The outrage seems to be that it is possible that a white man was unfairly treated and this country will not stand for that. Yet, when there is discrimination towards entire generations of minority americans...well, they're unable to discern the realities of life?
Is my assessment correct?
Quote from: stephendare on November 10, 2015, 12:45:14 PM
Quote from: fsquid on November 10, 2015, 12:40:51 PM
Quote from: RattlerGator on November 10, 2015, 12:29:16 PM
Quote from: fsquid on November 10, 2015, 10:17:57 AM
professor of mass media at what some think is the #1 journalism school in the country. Had to shake my head when I saw that this morning.
It appears she is *not* a J-school professor but is instead in the Department of Communication, which has an "area focus" on Mass Media and is heavy into theory:
https://communication.missouri.edu/undergrad/massmedia
The department is part of Mizzou's College of Arts and Sciences.
that's a relief
yes. so not actually a journalism student. Which would make the behavior more scandalous, because you know......Journalism. (liberal bias, what not.)
Wonder why the right wing has framed this as such, when its really a kid from the arts college?
professor is the person acting like an asshat. I have an interest as I have three cousins who graduated from Mizzou journalism.
Quote from: RattlerGator on November 10, 2015, 01:04:56 PM
fsquid, I agree. But still telling. The photographer appeared quite sympathetic to them, but that didn't matter to the future marxist-leninists. No, sir buddy! And Stephen, the important thing wasn't the college the professor (not a student, by the way) is associated with. It was the fact that she's a professor at a respected university and -- acting as an agent of the university (which is an arm of the government) was blatantly violating that J-school student's first amendment rights.
Surely you can't be missing that essential point.
But maybe you can, given a few of your most recent responses. Stephen, can you objectively read my comments without some blinkered interpretation infecting what you've read? I'm beginning to doubt that you can.
And then there's this:
Quote from: stephendare on November 10, 2015, 12:08:54 PM
No. actually Rattler Gator, there has never been a marxist government outside of Christianity.
There has been mixed socialism, but never a stateless society of the proletateriat.
Sorry, but you know there are books on this subject, right?
Okay, Stephen -- that was good for a great, great laugh. Thank you !!! Thank you very much. What was I saying to Adam about a supremacist take? So, you've revealed yourself to be a nativist with Shad Khan and now as a supremacist on issues of religion it seems. Outside of Christianity, huh? So . . . y'all *are* worshiping the God of marxism -- dayyyuuuummmm.
And . . . books? Did you say Books on the subject ! ? ! Keep the laughs coming, man. I think you maybe meant indoctrination pamphlets -- right, Adam?
Honestly. A stateless society of the proletariat? Good grief, Stephen. Incredulity is all that shiznit deserves and that's damn well all you're going to get out of me.
But, back to the question of this thread (which you seem to be hijacking). Stephen, are you not disturbed by what occurred there?
RG, we try to speak English during our discussions. Please keep it as American as possible. A lot of people aren't comfortable with speaking bull shit. Maybe, you can start a thread explaining how to properly conjugate and interpret the BS form of American English.
Quote from: stephendare on November 10, 2015, 11:59:13 AM
Well they are taught to say that daily by their mind control masters at Fox. I always find it so depressing how few right wing people actually seem to think for themselves or actually study an issue before they repeat the latest nonsense on the right wing closed circuit.
And of course, here is an account from an actual student at Yale about what is going on at the campus.
As expected, there are huge parts missing from the official uppity blacks narrative.
https://medium.com/@aaronzlewis/what-s-really-going-on-at-yale-6bdbbeeb57a6
he may be there, but that is just a long string of letters on a screen. What drivel.
Quote from: RattlerGator on November 10, 2015, 12:35:05 PM
Quote from: Adam White on November 10, 2015, 11:10:56 AM
Or how about the idiotic contention that if a college student (or anyone else) is liberal, he or she is "indoctrinated," whereas anyone with conservative views is just thinking for himself?
Adam, show me where I've said or intimated that.
And I'm waiting on someone to show me a college campus where people on the right are shouting down speakers and not allowing them to speak.
The mere fact that a Fox News host had a throw-away line about the supposed War on Christmas in no way, shape or form indicates some crazy focus on Starbucks and their cups. Few people on the right are talking about this but folks on the left sure as heck are. Gotta keep that non-thinking caricature going.
Sorry RattlerGator - I wasn't referring to anything you have posted. I should have been more clear.
Quote from: RattlerGator on November 10, 2015, 12:35:05 PM
And I'm waiting on someone to show me a college campus where people on the right are shouting down speakers and not allowing them to speak.
Here's a nice article on how anti-Israel speech is being supressed on university campuses (I realise this is not literal "shouting down" but you get the idea):
http://www.salon.com/2015/09/30/free_speech_for_all_on_campus_unless_youre_criticizing_israel_that_is/ (http://www.salon.com/2015/09/30/free_speech_for_all_on_campus_unless_youre_criticizing_israel_that_is/)
Quote
Yeah, I "went there" - because it's true. Do you know what Marxism-Leninism is?
I'm still waiting for a response on this.
Seems a solid 5% of the people I'm surrounded with went to Yale, including several minorities. Add another 5% for each of other prestigious schools Harvard, Princeton, Columbia, Stanford (probably more like 20% here), and Penn (also probably like 10-15%). In fact, in San Francisco, most of my friends and acquaintances attended one of these schools, or Berkeley or UCLA. Occasional others of premium prestige. I'll be interested in hearing how horrible the racism is at these schools from people a little older than the little minions screaming and cursing at their professors today. Birds still chirping.
The Atlantic piece was absolutely brilliant. And today I notice a new tune at NYT and LA Times. Don't mess with the media. Don't bite the hands that feed you. If there was any group sympathetic to the cause, it was the majority of the media. After the events unfolded at Mizzou where the media was so publicly shut out, all bets are off now.
I waver on my own thoughts on my own generation. On one hand, I think we're pretty awesome and that prior generations mucked it up for us. I still believe this. But on the other, I think many of us are absolutely spineless wimps who deserve less than half of what we do have. Life is tough and our own feelings are nothing. How selfish are we? Humans are mostly good. All of us have bad streaks. Put us all together in one confined place before we have even half so much as matured and we are bound to cut each other down. But we are also bound to be awesome to each other. It's a mixed bag. Teen years are tough. But in reality, for many if not most, college years are still just as tough! I'm glad my parents always told me my time to enjoy life wouldn't even arrive until I got closer to 30 because if I had expected more up until now I would be miserable. Ups and downs start to smooth out later and later in life. Our life expectancy is 70-80 years now. We aren't even total adults until at least 30. Please, these kids just need to simmer down. Life in America isn't so bad.
There will always be endemic racism, homophobia, xenophobia, misogyny, etc etc etc (and honestly do we dare mention that there is an absolute hate by some people towards white males?...it's not PC to say so but fuck it, it's true) Do we honestly expect to be completely void of these fairly natural human notions to be biased or even afraid of the unfamiliar on our college campuses?!? Compared to even just 10-20 years ago, we're basically rid of these notions but it will never be 100%. If I were the parent or grandparent of a black teen at one of these schools, I think I'd be pissed. I would have actually been through it. I would have witnessed the real crusaders fighting for meaningful change. But I don't think I would ever expect that 100% of humanity would be 100% non-racist. My black daughter is in Yale. My mother sat at the back of the bus and drank out of different water fountains and went into different schools, restaurants, bathrooms, etc. My black daughter heard the n word mumbled once or encountered racism from some douchey white guys at a notoriously white/racist frat (why would black girls want to go there anyway?!? this is known at every college that SAE is this way...), but overall her life is fine with diverse friends free from racism. Like WTF is she complaining about? And if that were her screaming at that professor, whether I'm shelling out $65K/year to send her there (maybe I worked multiple jobs to be able to do so) or whether generous donors to the school (likely mostly white) allowed her a free ride, I would slap the shit out of her and yank her out of there so fast she wouldn't even know what's coming. She is the epitome of everything that is wrong with my generation.
Quote from: Adam White on November 10, 2015, 02:21:30 AM
That doesn't sound like either university I attended. Was this your experience when you were in college? Where was it?
Sounds like you're trying to get all high and mighty with me. I did a couple of classes at Jones College, and everything was okay. There was no racial incident during the time I was there (to my knowledge) so that 'experience' argument isn't applicable. For the most part college IS ran by the extreme liberal left, make no mistake about it.
Quote from: The_Choose_1 on November 10, 2015, 08:34:03 AM
This is why I listen to Rush Limcheese. All he talks about is Liberal Colleges and their Professors? Rush is an Entertainer at best and his lemmings would all jump over the cliff if he told them to. (http://www.binaryoptions.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/12/lemmings-off-a-cliff.gif)
Haha, it's the exact opposite, the 'lemmings' or 'sheep' are the followers of the liberal philosophy that kowtows to this black victimization narrative which is very pernicious. I'm an independent thinker that believes in personal responsibility; You may call that conservative, but I call it being responsible for one's self. I don't need no handouts, I don't need 40 acres and a mule, I don't need affirmative action (which is basically legalized discrimination against whites) my standards don't need to be lowered, and on and on... These buzz words, haha.."Rush Limbaugh" and "Fox News". That has no substance with me.
http://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2015/09/the-coddling-of-the-american-mind/399356/
QuoteSomething strange is happening at America's colleges and universities. A movement is arising, undirected and driven largely by students, to scrub campuses clean of words, ideas, and subjects that might cause discomfort or give offense.........
Here is your coddling Simms3... You are not alone...
This article is full of terms like... Microaggressions and... Trigger warnings and... vindictive protectiveness... and emotional reasoning
Enjoy... 8)
Quote from: RattlerGator on November 10, 2015, 09:02:37 AM
And, you don't have to be a Rush Limbaugh fan (I rarely listen but I don't have a problem with the man or his program) to know the generic truth of what I-10east posted.
Thank you RG.
Quote from: I-10east on November 10, 2015, 03:05:58 PM
Quote from: Adam White on November 10, 2015, 02:21:30 AM
That doesn't sound like either university I attended. Was this your experience when you were in college? Where was it?
Sounds like you're trying to get all high and mighty with me. I did a couple of classes at Jones College, and everything was okay. There was no racial incident during the time I was there (to my knowledge) so that 'experience' argument isn't applicable. For the most part college IS ran by the extreme liberal left, make no mistake about it.
I'm not trying to "get all high and mighty" on you. I just wanted to know where you encountered this - because your comment was very strongly-worded and it almost seemed personal.
This Mizzouri folly will be fuel for more copycat college rallies; Racial rebels without a cause using unfounded and misguided blame on campuses all over the country. Coming to a college near you SMH...
^^^It's been a while. What does that have to do with anything??
Don't hurt the snowflakes feelings
http://www.mediaite.com/online/university-of-missouri-police-ask-students-to-report-hurtful-speech/
Quote from: Adam White on November 10, 2015, 03:26:51 PM
I'm not trying to "get all high and mighty" on you. I just wanted to know where you encountered this - because your comment was very strongly-worded and it almost seemed personal.
My bad then. While it's true for some experiences, IMO every experience don't have to be personal for validation like many think. This is the digital age. Speakers that don't tow the liberal narrative aren't popular on college campuses; Speakers like Ayaan Hirsi Ali who is very qualified to speak on Islam, and her speech was cancelled at Brandeis University because she doesn't tow the left's narrative. People who are Islamic, wanna talk about America's faults, it being racist and that sorta thing are popular, because it's multicultural. It always seems like (nowadays) the extremely rude ones (usually students) that are shouting are liberals while the opposing side is calm. These are my analyses throughout the years, just from my observations on TV, online, publications etc.
Quote from: stephendare on November 10, 2015, 03:45:24 PM
so you really have no clue as to what is happening on today's campuses or why. Isn't that true?
Just your middle aged opinion based on something that happened to you twenty years ago?
??? Very bizarre...
Quote from: stephendare on November 10, 2015, 03:45:24 PM
Quote from: I-10east on November 10, 2015, 03:40:48 PM
^^^It's been a while. What does that have to do with anything??
so you really have no clue as to what is happening on today's campuses or why. Isn't that true?
Just your middle aged opinion based on something that happened to you twenty years ago?
But let's be real, is racism on college campuses today now WORSE than it was when a middle-aged person today attended decades ago? Is that what you're implying when you say "you have no idea what's going on on campuses today". Also, Stephen, can I point out that you yourself are middle-aged? Please don't even try to pass yourself off as someone deeply in tune with what's going on on college campuses today. I believe you're about as far removed from it as anybody else here, and there are actually quite a few posters, myself included, who are a little more fresh out of these campuses than you are.
Yes Stephen, and I agree with your premise. But at the same time, the way people are acting, one would think we had transgressed back into the 60s. I think you and I can both come at this from the perspective of a minority and as people in a minority group that have likely experienced bias/prejudice/hate, perhaps sometimes fairly extreme, from people just based on who we are, at some point in our own lives. But honestly, in this day and age it's so uncommon and universally frowned upon that I just shrug it off and move on. I see it in the gay community. We take everything for granted. But the generations before us of Harvey Milk's time, or even before, or even as recently as in the 80s and 90s when large percentages of the gay population literally died off as the only place in the country that would fund research into what was happening were hospitals and clinics in SF, they really went through a whole lot. By comparison, if we wander off into a conservative part of town and hear the word faggot mumbled under someone's breath (which honestly, how often does that happen anywhere, these days...if it happens, it happens in a place you'd expect it, and the whole country hears about it as a front page story), it's like the end of the world happened. Yes, there are isolated incidents which are atrocious, like the recent beating in Palm Springs of all places, but these incidents that used to happen every day all over the country for years are now a few times a year in total, countrywide, and receive major press, and all the troops rally to find justice. I mean, it's a different world, for blacks, gays, women, now even trans, basically there is fairly universal acceptance and tolerance. And these kids in college today grew up in by far the most tolerant world the world has ever seen and look how spoiled they're acting! I can't stand them. Little bitches who have actually never experienced real strife who claim their mere existence demands respect and admiration and for all of their demands and ill-formed thoughts based out of no actual experience to be listened to on a one way street.
We are basically at 95-99% tolerance. A few decades ago, closer to 0% tolerance. 100 years ago people of the same race were even intolerant of each other (Italians vs Irish etc). We're in a world today where if a mixed-race, super fat, Muslim-Wicca mixed religion MTF woman former drag queen who kept her name of Sue Casa ran for president, she has a fighting chance!
And we're to believe these little snobs at Yale have it so bad and there's intense racism there? 'Da fuck? Like what more do these people want? There will always be racism and classism and elitism and misogyny and anti-semitism and general hate. I will say, the more this becomes a single-group thing (like only black people are experiencing this awful racism from everyone else, and Asians don't even count as a minority group because they're basically "white"), the more this stuff happens, the more it will piss more people off and frankly, it might exacerbate racism. It's becoming too much in my opinion. Too many asks for sheer perfection on the part of everyone, which will never happen.
I think teenagers and 20-somethings can be ridiculous. I also think that when they leave the nest and get a chance to experience freedom and a wider variety of opinions/cultures/whatever they can sometimes go overboard. It's all part of "finding yourself" and coming to grips with who you are. I think back to lots of stuff I did when I was that age - and I'm not necessarily talking political stuff - and I shudder. (Hell, I think back to stuff I did last week sometimes and wonder what I was thinking).
But even so, that doesn't mean that sometimes (or oftentimes) the protestors don't have a point. It's just that they go about it the wrong way. Racism still exists. Sexism does too. As do lots of other problems.
I don't know what happened in Missouri - and because of that, I won't offer an opinion on the matter. But whatever was happening on that campus was apparently bad enough (whether really bad or just perceived to be bad) to get the whole football team to down tools and refuse to play. Think about that for a second - we're talking football players, not your usual Marxists or liberals or whatever. It's not the Black Panthers or the Weathermen. It's football players. That's the one thing that actually made me wonder if my gut reaction might've been wrong.
Quote from: stephendare on November 10, 2015, 05:14:43 PM
Quote from: simms3 on November 10, 2015, 05:02:31 PM
Yes Stephen, and I agree with your premise. But at the same time, the way people are acting, one would think we had transgressed back into the 60s. I think you and I can both come at this from the perspective of a minority and as people in a minority group that have likely experienced bias/prejudice/hate, perhaps sometimes fairly extreme, from people just based on who we are, at some point in our own lives. But honestly, in this day and age it's so uncommon and universally frowned upon that I just shrug it off and move on. I see it in the gay community. We take everything for granted. But the generations before us of Harvey Milk's time, or even before, or even as recently as in the 80s and 90s when large percentages of the gay population literally died off as the only place in the country that would fund research into what was happening were hospitals and clinics in SF, they really went through a whole lot. By comparison, if we wander off into a conservative part of town and hear the word faggot mumbled under someone's breath (which honestly, how often does that happen anywhere, these days...if it happens, it happens in a place you'd expect it, and the whole country hears about it as a front page story), it's like the end of the world happened. Yes, there are isolated incidents which are atrocious, like the recent beating in Palm Springs of all places, but these incidents that used to happen every day all over the country for years are now a few times a year in total, countrywide, and receive major press, and all the troops rally to find justice. I mean, it's a different world, for blacks, gays, women, now even trans, basically there is fairly universal acceptance and tolerance. And these kids in college today grew up in by far the most tolerant world the world has ever seen and look how spoiled they're acting! I can't stand them. Little bitches who have actually never experienced real strife who claim their mere existence demands respect and admiration and for all of their demands and ill-formed thoughts based out of no actual experience to be listened to on a one way street.
We are basically at 95-99% tolerance. A few decades ago, closer to 0% tolerance. 100 years ago people of the same race were even intolerant of each other (Italians vs Irish etc). We're in a world today where if a mixed-race, super fat, Muslim-Wicca mixed religion MTF woman former drag queen who kept her name of Sue Casa ran for president, she has a fighting chance!
And we're to believe these little snobs at Yale have it so bad and there's intense racism there? 'Da fuck? Like what more do these people want? There will always be racism and classism and elitism and misogyny and anti-semitism and general hate. I will say, the more this becomes a single-group thing (like only black people are experiencing this awful racism from everyone else, and Asians don't even count as a minority group because they're basically "white"), the more this stuff happens, the more it will piss more people off and frankly, it might exacerbate racism. It's becoming too much in my opinion. Too many asks for sheer perfection on the part of everyone, which will never happen.
you'd be surprised how much of this i agree with, but I always try to remind myself that the adversity I've seen or experienced isn't the end story. Like here in Jax, while gays were still being killed in fag bashing incidents or dying without their parents in AIDS hospices, there was a real struggle for women trying to get equal pay or break the glass ceiling, and there was still a short period where wealthy Jewish investors (like Alexander Brest) still had to have a gentile business partner if they wanted to succeed.
Definitely not as bad as being traded as sexual property, or being the victims of genocide, but both struggles (equal pay, acceptance into the business community) were worth fighting for nonetheless, I think.
I think at Yale, the basic problem is that Yale is being marketed as a jumping point into the Meritocracy, when in fact there is no such thing at that level of wealth and exclusion. Kids go there and find themselves faced with the same insurmountable barriers that have defined the college for 9 generations. The only way into the circle is marriage or financial miracle.
It creates cognitive dissonance. But then, Yale always has.
Yea, which makes it all the more pathetic that kids go to Yale thinking they'll automatically be a state senator within 15-20 years or a CEO. A black graduate of Yale has a better chance at being hired at a prestigious law firm, bank, or into a political role than a white kid who went to Chico State. Ok?!?!? Like, a MUCH MUCH MUCH better chance. That's because student A went to Yale and student B went to Chico State, it's all about the school. A black graduate of Yale with no particular background probably has about the same chance as a white graduate of Yale with no particular background, all else being the same...Yale on a resume speaks volumes no matter who you are. But neither has the same chance as a graduate of Yale coming from some NE dynasty (someone who by history/chance is likely to be white). The point is, this is the way it is and has been. This is actually often the appeal of going to Stanford versus Yale or Harvard. Stanford is admission purely on smarts, not on background. Less of a competition with dynasty grads. If one were smart enough to get into Yale, that same person should be smart enough to get into Stanford. And anyone who does any bit of research into what these schools are like and how they're different should be fully prepared to have to deal with and compete with the old-school elite at NE Ivy League schools. This is no secret. And it's not a race thing. It's just that there's a club that still happens to be more white and while that's changing fairly rapidly, too, it's still about who you are and your background and that's just the way it is! If you can't deal with that, there are hundreds of other schooling options, some just as "good" as the Ivies in the NE.
But let's make everything about race and play victim all the time. In this day and age, it would not surprise me if there were new grads, perhaps black grads that were choosing between southern HCBUs and taking a full ride at say Yale, and choosing the latter, and expecting the culture at Yale to reflect what they saw at one of the southern HCBUs. Never gonna' happen! If the "cultural" aspect of it is more important to you and what you want is what you saw at Morehouse or even a Clemson, etc, then go there! Not Yale!
I just don't get how awful it can be for these people. I think they're just overly entitled.
Quote from: Adam White on November 10, 2015, 05:16:22 PM
I think teenagers and 20-somethings can be ridiculous. I also think that when they leave the nest and get a chance to experience freedom and a wider variety of opinions/cultures/whatever they can sometimes go overboard. It's all part of "finding yourself" and coming to grips with who you are. I think back to lots of stuff I did when I was that age - and I'm not necessarily talking political stuff - and I shudder. (Hell, I think back to stuff I did last week sometimes and wonder what I was thinking).
But even so, that doesn't mean that sometimes (or oftentimes) the protestors don't have a point. It's just that they go about it the wrong way. Racism still exists. Sexism does too. As do lots of other problems.
I don't know what happened in Missouri - and because of that, I won't offer an opinion on the matter. But whatever was happening on that campus was apparently bad enough (whether really bad or just perceived to be bad) to get the whole football team to down tools and refuse to play. Think about that for a second - we're talking football players, not your usual Marxists or liberals or whatever. It's not the Black Panthers or the Weathermen. It's football players. That's the one thing that actually made me wonder if my gut reaction might've been wrong.
I place no added importance or significance on their losing football team's decision not to play. College athletes. Are we really supposed to sympathize?!? They often go to college on full rides, are able to take easy classes and receive A's for doing nothing, and are loved and worshiped by the entire school, pick of the litter with girls/guys, and talk about a naturally built in "safe space" as parodied on South Park and actually hearkened by these idiot protesters. The one NFL guy who played for Missou who called these players ungrateful was right.
School had a contract with BYU and some advertising apparently and was going to have to pay $1M if the team didn't play. I'm sure the team knew that (or perhaps the activists that paid them a visit for their support). I'm sure the team was contacted vigorously by activist groups. There's a whole lot else in the background too like the fundraising they did for a new stadium expansion under this former president's tenure, some healthcare plan stuff, etc. Not to mention this is the team that produced the first openly gay NFL player (how bad could it have been?!?). Oh boo hoo, even the poor football team felt the need to join in. Puh leaze, this whole thing is so politicized it's ridiculous that we're weighting things now based on a college athlete's decision to join in. Were these decisions to join in the protest even made at the student level in all cases, or was there some decision-making further up? I'm sure there's a huge money trail and a huge trail of evidence pointing to a laundry list of items needing to be protested by faculty, administrators, and staff. The whole thing is a mess. The fact that the football team is in on it just makes it even more cloudy for me. But I hate our emphasis on certain college sports. I'm already biased.
I attended three public universities and have worked for one for the last 7 years. People who believe that universities in general aren't centers of liberalism is kidding themselves. The fact that professors lean left is borne out in study after study and survey after survey. While there are exceptions (a number of private schools tend to lean right) the academy is probably the most liberal institution in the U.S., up there with the media and the entertainment industry. In Professors and their Politics (https://jhupbooks.press.jhu.edu/content/professors-and-their-politics), sociologists Solon Simmons and Neil Gross report that 62% of professors self-identify as liberal, compared to only 18% saying they're middle-of-the-road and 19% saying they're conservative.
This does not mean that all or even most professors trying to "indoctrinate" their students or stymie those with opposing beliefs. It doesn't mean that all professors are liberal, let alone extremely liberal; in fact it varies from program to program; business and the hard sciences are less liberal than the humanities, for instance. It also doesn't mean that the student body necessarily reflects the beliefs of the professors. In fact, Gross has argued elsewhere that students rarely experience radical changes in their political beliefs in college.
What it does mean, however, is that academia tends to be self-selective, with students who are already liberal being the ones who pursue that career. It means that very liberal intellectual movements and endeavors are able to gain ground in academia, even though there's limited interest outside it. And it means that liberal professors tend to groom like-minded students for advancement while deterring conservatives and moderates.
What's interesting about some of the current debates is that they're not between liberals and conservatives, but rather different factions of liberals. Safe space liberals versus free speech liberals. Pro-Palestinian liberals versus pro-Israel liberals. White progressives versus minority activists. It ain't easy to fit into a convenient narrative, but that doesn't stop some people from trying.
Quote from: Tacachale on November 10, 2015, 05:45:37 PM
I attended three public universities and have worked for one for the last 7 years. People who believe that universities in general aren't centers of liberalism is kidding themselves. The fact that professors lean left is borne out in study after study and survey after survey. While there are exceptions (a number of private schools tend to lean right) the academy is probably the most liberal institution in the U.S., up there with the media and the entertainment industry. In Professors and their Politics (https://jhupbooks.press.jhu.edu/content/professors-and-their-politics), sociologists Solon Simmons and Neil Gross report that 62% of professors self-identify as liberal, compared to only 18% saying they're middle-of-the-road and 19% saying they're conservative.
This does not mean that all or even most professors trying to "indoctrinate" their students or stymie those with opposing beliefs. It doesn't mean that all professors are liberal, let alone extremely liberal; in fact it varies from program to program; business and the hard sciences are less liberal than the humanities, for instance. It also doesn't mean that the student body necessarily reflects the beliefs of the professors. In fact, Gross has argued elsewhere that students rarely experience radical changes in their political beliefs in college.
What it does mean, however, is that academia tends to be self-selective, with students who are already liberal being the ones who pursue that career. It means that very liberal intellectual movements and endeavors are able to gain ground in academia, even though there's limited interest outside it. And it means that liberal professors tend to groom like-minded students for advancement while deterring conservatives and moderates.
What's interesting about some of the current debates is that they're not between liberals and conservatives, but rather different factions of liberals. Safe space liberals versus free speech liberals. Pro-Palestinian liberals versus pro-Israel liberals. White progressives versus minority activists. It ain't easy to fit into a convenient narrative, but that doesn't stop some people from trying.
This is a very good analysis. In fact, if you are fairly conservative and want that environment, SMU is a private university in Dallas that is pretty unabashedly conservative! It's as conservative as Yale is elitist. Pick your poisons, pick your environments, but don't pick A and expect it to be B. A big enough university will have a little bit of A and B, and perhaps some C too.
Yes, Liberals Rule the Ivory Tower—But Why?
Why Are Professors Liberal and Why Do Conservatives Care? is full of statistics on the liberal voting preferences and political and cultural self-identification of academics. Some facts from the book:
50 percent of professors describe themselves as being "left or liberal." That puts the professoriate considerably to the left of the country as a whole; Gross estimates that professors are "about three times more liberal on average" than American adults.
However, just 8 to 9 percent of college faculty can be accurately described as "far left" or "radical"—and the percentage is even smaller among younger faculty. "The professorate is obviously not bursting at the seams with revolutionaries," writes Gross.
19 percent of professors could be called "moderates."
On the right, Gross estimates that economic conservatives comprise just 4 percent of academia, and that 23 percent of academics are social and pro-military conservatives. In general, conservatives "tend to cluster in fields like accounting, management information, marketing, and electrical engineering" and economics.
Professors are also less religious than average Americans—but this, too, shouldn't be overblown. Research by Gross has shown that just over half believe in God.
So, academia is indeed more liberal than America, just as other professions, such as the clergy and the military, are dens of conservatism. But where conservatives get it wrong, Gross says, is in their simplistic assertions that academia's leftward lean is a result of bias or discrimination. Rather, he argues, academia is liberal because... it has been attacked for being liberal. Gross's analysis concludes that the ivory tower's well-known political reputation has encouraged a kind of self-selection effect, where conservatives gravitate away from it, and liberals towards it.
That would mean it's precisely backwards to claim that universities discriminate against conservatives in favor of the godless and liberal. Rather, people who are godless and liberal tend to flock to universities—and stay there.
Gross's findings suggest that there isn't much indoctrination taking place on campus: in detailed follow-up interviews with 57 professors who participated in his study, just two "fit the stereotype held by conservative critics of a radical professor bent on converting students to his political point of view."
I had a long conversation with Gross on the Point of Inquiry podcast about his research and what it means to the culture wars. Among other things, we observed that academia's liberalism would be very hard to change; after all, it's not likely that professors are suddenly going to change their beliefs or parties. We also discussed how conservative complaints about academia's liberalism don't have an obvious analog on the left: you don't usually find liberals calling for, say, the military to be less right wing—they just tend to accept it. So why doesn't the right accept the liberalism of academia as just part of the nature of things?
http://www.motherjones.com/politics/2013/04/higher-education-liberal-research-indoctrination
Quote from: Tacachale on November 10, 2015, 05:45:37 PM
I attended three public universities and have worked for one for the last 7 years. People who believe that universities in general aren't centers of liberalism is kidding themselves. The fact that professors lean left is borne out in study after study and survey after survey. While there are exceptions (a number of private schools tend to lean right) the academy is probably the most liberal institution in the U.S., up there with the media and the entertainment industry. In Professors and their Politics (https://jhupbooks.press.jhu.edu/content/professors-and-their-politics), sociologists Solon Simmons and Neil Gross report that 62% of professors self-identify as liberal, compared to only 18% saying they're middle-of-the-road and 19% saying they're conservative.
This does not mean that all or even most professors trying to "indoctrinate" their students or stymie those with opposing beliefs. It doesn't mean that all professors are liberal, let alone extremely liberal; in fact it varies from program to program; business and the hard sciences are less liberal than the humanities, for instance. It also doesn't mean that the student body necessarily reflects the beliefs of the professors. In fact, Gross has argued elsewhere that students rarely experience radical changes in their political beliefs in college.
What it does mean, however, is that academia tends to be self-selective, with students who are already liberal being the ones who pursue that career. It means that very liberal intellectual movements and endeavors are able to gain ground in academia, even though there's limited interest outside it. And it means that liberal professors tend to groom like-minded students for advancement while deterring conservatives and moderates.
What's interesting about some of the current debates is that they're not between liberals and conservatives, but rather different factions of liberals. Safe space liberals versus free speech liberals. Pro-Palestinian liberals versus pro-Israel liberals. White progressives versus minority activists. It ain't easy to fit into a convenient narrative, but that doesn't stop some people from trying.
For the record, I never said colleges weren't liberal. I took exception to this:
"College is liberal hell. White liberals are responsible for all of this faux high racial tension black victimization bullshit, and now they have to lie in the bed that they made. They wanna bring back the 60s (when blacks really really had racial concerns) so bad."
I think that's the cartoonish view of universities that completely ignores the diversity and heterogeneity of most campuses. Yes, there are lots of liberals and leftists and whatever. But it's not all "PCU" - and the crazies seem to get a lot of press because they're good for it. I reckon an average person could attend a major public university and not really have to deal with "liberal hell" unless he chose to engage with it.
Yale is known as an elitist institution that makes it hard for many outside types to thrive there. I'm pretty sure that I, a white male from a middle class family who's daddy wasn't a senator or high profile lawmaker, would have felt left out or not respected enough amongst some of those who were seen as "entitled through legacy." Are we on a path to making every institution the same?
^^^Short answer, yes. Same same, but diiifferenttt. I wish I could insert James Franco meme here right now.
Quote from: simms3 on November 10, 2015, 05:28:44 PM
Quote from: stephendare on November 10, 2015, 05:14:43 PM
Quote from: simms3 on November 10, 2015, 05:02:31 PM
Yes Stephen, and I agree with your premise. But at the same time, the way people are acting, one would think we had transgressed back into the 60s. I think you and I can both come at this from the perspective of a minority and as people in a minority group that have likely experienced bias/prejudice/hate, perhaps sometimes fairly extreme, from people just based on who we are, at some point in our own lives. But honestly, in this day and age it's so uncommon and universally frowned upon that I just shrug it off and move on. I see it in the gay community. We take everything for granted. But the generations before us of Harvey Milk's time, or even before, or even as recently as in the 80s and 90s when large percentages of the gay population literally died off as the only place in the country that would fund research into what was happening were hospitals and clinics in SF, they really went through a whole lot. By comparison, if we wander off into a conservative part of town and hear the word faggot mumbled under someone's breath (which honestly, how often does that happen anywhere, these days...if it happens, it happens in a place you'd expect it, and the whole country hears about it as a front page story), it's like the end of the world happened. Yes, there are isolated incidents which are atrocious, like the recent beating in Palm Springs of all places, but these incidents that used to happen every day all over the country for years are now a few times a year in total, countrywide, and receive major press, and all the troops rally to find justice. I mean, it's a different world, for blacks, gays, women, now even trans, basically there is fairly universal acceptance and tolerance. And these kids in college today grew up in by far the most tolerant world the world has ever seen and look how spoiled they're acting! I can't stand them. Little bitches who have actually never experienced real strife who claim their mere existence demands respect and admiration and for all of their demands and ill-formed thoughts based out of no actual experience to be listened to on a one way street.
We are basically at 95-99% tolerance. A few decades ago, closer to 0% tolerance. 100 years ago people of the same race were even intolerant of each other (Italians vs Irish etc). We're in a world today where if a mixed-race, super fat, Muslim-Wicca mixed religion MTF woman former drag queen who kept her name of Sue Casa ran for president, she has a fighting chance!
And we're to believe these little snobs at Yale have it so bad and there's intense racism there? 'Da fuck? Like what more do these people want? There will always be racism and classism and elitism and misogyny and anti-semitism and general hate. I will say, the more this becomes a single-group thing (like only black people are experiencing this awful racism from everyone else, and Asians don't even count as a minority group because they're basically "white"), the more this stuff happens, the more it will piss more people off and frankly, it might exacerbate racism. It's becoming too much in my opinion. Too many asks for sheer perfection on the part of everyone, which will never happen.
you'd be surprised how much of this i agree with, but I always try to remind myself that the adversity I've seen or experienced isn't the end story. Like here in Jax, while gays were still being killed in fag bashing incidents or dying without their parents in AIDS hospices, there was a real struggle for women trying to get equal pay or break the glass ceiling, and there was still a short period where wealthy Jewish investors (like Alexander Brest) still had to have a gentile business partner if they wanted to succeed.
Definitely not as bad as being traded as sexual property, or being the victims of genocide, but both struggles (equal pay, acceptance into the business community) were worth fighting for nonetheless, I think.
I think at Yale, the basic problem is that Yale is being marketed as a jumping point into the Meritocracy, when in fact there is no such thing at that level of wealth and exclusion. Kids go there and find themselves faced with the same insurmountable barriers that have defined the college for 9 generations. The only way into the circle is marriage or financial miracle.
It creates cognitive dissonance. But then, Yale always has.
Yea, which makes it all the more pathetic that kids go to Yale thinking they'll automatically be a state senator within 15-20 years or a CEO. A black graduate of Yale has a better chance at being hired at a prestigious law firm, bank, or into a political role than a white kid who went to Chico State. Ok?!?!? Like, a MUCH MUCH MUCH better chance. That's because student A went to Yale and student B went to Chico State, it's all about the school. A black graduate of Yale with no particular background probably has about the same chance as a white graduate of Yale with no particular background, all else being the same...Yale on a resume speaks volumes no matter who you are. But neither has the same chance as a graduate of Yale coming from some NE dynasty (someone who by history/chance is likely to be white). The point is, this is the way it is and has been. This is actually often the appeal of going to Stanford versus Yale or Harvard. Stanford is admission purely on smarts, not on background. Less of a competition with dynasty grads. If one were smart enough to get into Yale, that same person should be smart enough to get into Stanford. And anyone who does any bit of research into what these schools are like and how they're different should be fully prepared to have to deal with and compete with the old-school elite at NE Ivy League schools. This is no secret. And it's not a race thing. It's just that there's a club that still happens to be more white and while that's changing fairly rapidly, too, it's still about who you are and your background and that's just the way it is! If you can't deal with that, there are hundreds of other schooling options, some just as "good" as the Ivies in the NE.
But let's make everything about race and play victim all the time. In this day and age, it would not surprise me if there were new grads, perhaps black grads that were choosing between southern HCBUs and taking a full ride at say Yale, and choosing the latter, and expecting the culture at Yale to reflect what they saw at one of the southern HCBUs. Never gonna' happen! If the "cultural" aspect of it is more important to you and what you want is what you saw at Morehouse or even a Clemson, etc, then go there! Not Yale!
I just don't get how awful it can be for these people. I think they're just overly entitled.
You seem to know an awful lot about how it is to grow up as a poor black kid. And how it is to be a poor black kid at an Ivy League university.
I wish I had the strength of your convictions.
Also:
http://online.wsj.com/public/resources/documents/Polk_Rich_Applicants.htm (http://online.wsj.com/public/resources/documents/Polk_Rich_Applicants.htm)
http://www.forbes.com/sites/joshfreedman/2013/11/14/the-farce-of-meritocracy-in-elite-higher-education-why-legacy-admissions-might-be-a-good-thing/ (http://www.forbes.com/sites/joshfreedman/2013/11/14/the-farce-of-meritocracy-in-elite-higher-education-why-legacy-admissions-might-be-a-good-thing/)
http://www.salon.com/2013/09/09/the_1_percents_ivy_league_loophole/ (http://www.salon.com/2013/09/09/the_1_percents_ivy_league_loophole/)
http://www.stanforddaily.com/2014/06/04/its-time-to-eliminate-legacy-preference-in-stanford-admissions/ (http://www.stanforddaily.com/2014/06/04/its-time-to-eliminate-legacy-preference-in-stanford-admissions/)
http://reason.org/news/show/legacy-admissions-hurt-middle (http://reason.org/news/show/legacy-admissions-hurt-middle)
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Development_case (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Development_case)
Stanford is no different than Yale or Harvard when it comes to admissions, even if it
is in the Bay Area.
So you spent time to try to find a bunch of articles that attempt to disprove something I never said. Oh, and your articles mention that the acceptance rate of legacies at schools including Stanford are 2-3x that of other applicants. Doesn't actually go into legacy attendance at all, and says nothing that is a secret. The fact of the matter is, duh, colleges and literally every other organization give some preferential treatment both to legacies and to people who might be able to donate more, and often they go hand in hand. This has never been different in our lifetimes. Ironically, the big donors are the ones that fund the world class programs, facilities, and faculty, and allow such huge percentages of middle to lower income students to attend for free. So I personally could give two shits if John Smith gets into a top notch school slightly less qualified (these kids are NOT getting in if they are dufuses, no matter how rich their parents are) than me if it means I can tap into their endowment to attend for free.
Also, Stanford is very non-traditional compared to the Ivies. There is a bigger emphasis on sports and the curriculum and teaching methods are a little more MIT than Harvard. And it goes on from there.
When you attend an Ivy, you have exposure to and must deal with finals clubs and borderline oppressive tradition. These clubs are what you try to get into, and rest assured it's exclusively about who you are (and that will never change...must we all always feel "left out"?). These don't even exist at Stanford. There are no secret societies at Stanford. Hardly any tradition. Football is big (even I go see Cardinals games every now and then) It's a very different environment. But sure, go ahead, pretend all schools, or all elite schools are the same.
I think the point is there are differences amongst elite schools or small, specialized schools, and then the big state universities are generally big enough where it's impossible not to find like-minded people or friends with similar backgrounds, or your niche.
My take and outlook is clearly extremely different from yours. My coworker who sits next to me went to Harvard. Her father owns one of the top 3 entertainment companies and is a billionaire back in NYC. Her boyfriend's brother was in the Yale finals club that got in trouble recently, but believe me when I say there is a huge back story there. I think she makes more than I do as a green analyst who knows nothing probably because her father is an investor in one of the funds (I am guessing), whereas I have toiled 60-90++ hour weeks on average for the last 5 years and worked my ass off to be one of the only non-Ivies in my firm, but I'm not green with envy should this actually be the case. It's perhaps unfair that she's 4 years younger and illiterate compared to me and might make a bit more. She lives with a fellow Harvard girl in a new condo buillding next door to my old apartment building (coincidentally). She pays $2200 for her beautiful bedroom in a doorman building that sold out at $2K/square foot whereas I pay closer to $3K for my bedroom in a building with stairs and some old coin laundry machines in the basement. Life just isn't fucking fair. Who cares. She's still about my favorite person in the office.
The professor that got screamed at by that girl at Yale is a nice man, apparently, and came from Harvard where is deeply missed. These kids are more privileged than 99.9% of the world just by the mere fact they are attending these schools. But apparently it's never enough. I think they are selfish, greedy bitches who complain about everything and take a concept like "safe space" from a recent South Park episode parodying this whole thing before it even got started, they take that seriously. You can't make this stuff up. People older than 25 need to start growing some backbone and sticking up to these bully kids.
Quote from: simms3 on November 11, 2015, 04:00:27 AM
So you spent time to try to find a bunch of articles that attempt to disprove something I never said. Oh, and your articles mention that the acceptance rate of legacies at schools including Stanford are 2-3x that of other applicants. Doesn't actually go into legacy attendance at all, and says nothing that is a secret. The fact of the matter is, duh, colleges and literally every other organization give some preferential treatment both to legacies and to people who might be able to donate more, and often they go hand in hand. This has never been different in our lifetimes. Ironically, the big donors are the ones that fund the world class programs, facilities, and faculty, and allow such huge percentages of middle to lower income students to attend for free. So I personally could give two shits if John Smith gets into a top notch school slightly less qualified (these kids are NOT getting in if they are dufuses, no matter how rich their parents are) than me if it means I can tap into their endowment to attend for free.
Also, Stanford is very non-traditional compared to the Ivies. There is a bigger emphasis on sports and the curriculum and teaching methods are a little more MIT than Harvard. And it goes on from there.
When you attend an Ivy, you have exposure to and must deal with finals clubs and borderline oppressive tradition. These clubs are what you try to get into, and rest assured it's exclusively about who you are (and that will never change...must we all always feel "left out"?). These don't even exist at Stanford. There are no secret societies at Stanford. Hardly any tradition. Football is big (even I go see Cardinals games every now and then) It's a very different environment. But sure, go ahead, pretend all schools, or all elite schools are the same.
I think the point is there are differences amongst elite schools or small, specialized schools, and then the big state universities are generally big enough where it's impossible not to find like-minded people or friends with similar backgrounds, or your niche.
My take and outlook is clearly extremely different from yours. My coworker who sits next to me went to Harvard. Her father owns one of the top 3 entertainment companies and is a billionaire back in NYC. Her boyfriend's brother was in the Yale finals club that got in trouble recently, but believe me when I say there is a huge back story there. I think she makes more than I do as a green analyst who knows nothing probably because her father is an investor in one of the funds (I am guessing), whereas I have toiled 60-90++ hour weeks on average for the last 5 years and worked my ass off to be one of the only non-Ivies in my firm, but I'm not green with envy should this actually be the case. It's perhaps unfair that she's 4 years younger and illiterate compared to me and might make a bit more. She lives with a fellow Harvard girl in a new condo buillding next door to my old apartment building (coincidentally). She pays $2200 for her beautiful bedroom in a doorman building that sold out at $2K/square foot whereas I pay closer to $3K for my bedroom in a building with stairs and some old coin laundry machines in the basement. Life just isn't fucking fair. Who cares. She's still about my favorite person in the office.
The professor that got screamed at by that girl at Yale is a nice man, apparently, and came from Harvard where is deeply missed. These kids are more privileged than 99.9% of the world just by the mere fact they are attending these schools. But apparently it's never enough. I think they are selfish, greedy bitches who complain about everything and take a concept like "safe space" from a recent South Park episode parodying this whole thing before it even got started, they take that seriously. You can't make this stuff up. People older than 25 need to start growing some backbone and sticking up to these bully kids.
Simms, you seem like a nice enough guy. I don't know
that much about you other than you are from Jax, grew up in Ortega (I think), live in San Francisco and work in real estate or something related. I also know your sexual orientation. I don't know if you're white (I assume you are) and I don't know if you attended an Ivy League university or college (though I have to assume you did based on your comments).
I have been to San Francisco twice in my lifetime, each time for about 3 or 4 days. I think. The last time I was there was in the late 80s. My best friend moved to San Francisco a number of years back and currently lives in Oakland. A former work colleague/friend of mine just moved to SF with his job (Sony Playstation). I have slightly more than a passing interest in SF due to the fact that I have considered I might want to live there someday.
Objectively speaking, when it comes to San Francisco, my CV is pretty thin. If I tried to tell you what it was like to live and work in SF, you'd be well within your rights to tell me that I don't know what I'm talking about as I haven't the experience to know that. Even if I have visited a couple of times and know some people.
Most people would agree with that logic.
I take the same approach to things like race relations. And being a black kid attending Yale. Now, maybe you know what it's like to attend Yale (or Stanford) and so I am in no position to argue with you on that point. I don't have an Ivy League eduation and wouldn't dream of claiming to know what it's like to go to one of those schools (even if some of my friends have done). Fair enough. But even if you do have that experience, are we really the right people to be arguing about the experiences of black students at Ivy League universities?
If you are a black male who attended an Ivy League university, then I apologize. As I said, I only know so much about you.
Edit: I just re-read your comment and see that you referred to yourself as a "non-Ivy". If that's the case, then I don't think you have enough experience to really say what it's like to attend an Ivy League university (in general) or Yale (in particular), even if your work colleague is a Harvard grad.
I don't know if you attended Stanford. But I live in London and wouldn't claim to know what it's like to attend LSE just because it's close to my office. And I wouldn't claim to know what it's like to be an Oxbridge grad just because I know a few.
Quote from: simms3 on November 11, 2015, 04:00:27 AM
So you spent time to try to find a bunch of articles that attempt to disprove something I never said. Oh, and your articles mention that the acceptance rate of legacies at schools including Stanford are 2-3x that of other applicants. Doesn't actually go into legacy attendance at all, and says nothing that is a secret. The fact of the matter is, duh, colleges and literally every other organization give some preferential treatment both to legacies and to people who might be able to donate more, and often they go hand in hand.
VS
"Stanford is admission purely on smarts, not on background."
Here's Vox's take on this debacle. Take it for what it's worth (It's very succinct, particularly the lack of info concerning that meeting).
https://www.youtube.com/v/mRQpd2iQLf8
Quote from: I-10east on November 11, 2015, 08:29:17 AM
Here's Vox's take on this debacle. Take it for what it's worth (It's very succinct, particularly the lack of info concerning that meeting).
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mRQpd2iQLf8
Thanks for that.
I feel like a lot of you don't really understand everything that went on at Mizzou that eventually led to the President of the University System resigning. Here's a great timeline that delves into all the issues students had with the administration and why they felt the need to protest.
http://www.themaneater.com/special-sections/mu-fall-2015/
^ agreed...and thank you!
A lot of that is not much different than the goings ons at other college campuses. Some things were poorly handled by MU or the police, but not necessarily anything to do with racism, just stuff handled poorly. And some of the racist/prejudice stuff has nothing to do with black people specifically, and some of it clearly doesn't stem just from "white privilege". After reading Maneater, I'm actually more amazed that the events that happened did and more convinced than ever that as a society we have become egg shells. Just pathetic.
Quote from: Adam White on November 11, 2015, 04:23:02 AM
Quote from: simms3 on November 11, 2015, 04:00:27 AM
So you spent time to try to find a bunch of articles that attempt to disprove something I never said. Oh, and your articles mention that the acceptance rate of legacies at schools including Stanford are 2-3x that of other applicants. Doesn't actually go into legacy attendance at all, and says nothing that is a secret. The fact of the matter is, duh, colleges and literally every other organization give some preferential treatment both to legacies and to people who might be able to donate more, and often they go hand in hand.
VS
"Stanford is admission purely on smarts, not on background."
Maybe "pure" was a strong word but your articles only mentioned acceptance rate, not actual statistics on legacy acceptance. So point still stands.
Hour long discussion on Diane Rehm's show
http://thedianerehmshow.org/shows/2015-11-10/university-of-missouri (http://thedianerehmshow.org/shows/2015-11-10/university-of-missouri)
Quote from: simms3 on November 11, 2015, 11:47:44 AM
A lot of that is not much different than the goings ons at other college campuses. Some things were poorly handled by MU or the police, but not necessarily anything to do with racism, just stuff handled poorly. And some of the racist/prejudice stuff has nothing to do with black people specifically, and some of it clearly doesn't stem just from "white privilege". After reading Maneater, I'm actually more amazed that the events that happened did and more convinced than ever that as a society we have become egg shells. Just pathetic.
The way the swastika incident (anti-semitism) was handled was pretty much the last straw for people. I wonder though simms if you would feel the same way had the administration basically ignored LGBT issues and allowed homophobia to run rampant on campus?
I can see why students would want the President gone. They're paying to be there and they have a right to challenge the administration and ask for resignations if the administration is not fostering an environment that is beneficial to all students. I understand that not everyone will be satisfied by all things, but the President of any university has to communicate with students regularly and be willing to address any issues that come up on their campus.
Maybe my own college was just as bad. I just remember incidents happening fairly frequently to all people, of all backgrounds. I was also in a fraternity. I subjected my own self to fairly high levels of homophobia, and it was psychologically damaging, but I survived and frankly a lot of my fraternity brothers who were outwardly anti-homo at the time, in the house, are now some of my best friends and couldn't be more supportive. 18-22 year olds are still kids who are just awful, to each other, to themselves, and to strangers, regardless.
I agree the university president clearly mishandled things and wasn't striking a good chord with students. But I still think these students have largely done themselves a disservice in the way they themselves also handled events.
If we can't handle hearing a bad name on a college campus every now and then (and clearly as on most campuses, these are now and then events), then we have become egg shells. Things can always be better, but they are naturally progressing every year to be better. Things will never be 100%.
And as shown in the events log, many things these students are complaining about are entitlement related, not race related.
Quote from: simms3 on November 11, 2015, 11:48:48 AM
Quote from: Adam White on November 11, 2015, 04:23:02 AM
Quote from: simms3 on November 11, 2015, 04:00:27 AM
So you spent time to try to find a bunch of articles that attempt to disprove something I never said. Oh, and your articles mention that the acceptance rate of legacies at schools including Stanford are 2-3x that of other applicants. Doesn't actually go into legacy attendance at all, and says nothing that is a secret. The fact of the matter is, duh, colleges and literally every other organization give some preferential treatment both to legacies and to people who might be able to donate more, and often they go hand in hand.
VS
"Stanford is admission purely on smarts, not on background."
Maybe "pure" was a strong word but your articles only mentioned acceptance rate, not actual statistics on legacy acceptance. So point still stands.
No, those articles made it clear that Stanford does accept legacies and has a history of doing it. Which runs counter to your claim that it doesn't happen at Stanford. Don't try moving the goalposts.
Avoid absolute statements and you won't paint yourself into a rhetorical corner.
Quote from: tufsu1 on November 11, 2015, 01:08:56 PM
Quote from: simms3 on November 11, 2015, 11:47:44 AM
A lot of that is not much different than the goings ons at other college campuses. Some things were poorly handled by MU or the police, but not necessarily anything to do with racism, just stuff handled poorly. And some of the racist/prejudice stuff has nothing to do with black people specifically, and some of it clearly doesn't stem just from "white privilege". After reading Maneater, I'm actually more amazed that the events that happened did and more convinced than ever that as a society we have become egg shells. Just pathetic.
The way the swastika incident (anti-semitism) was handled was pretty much the last straw for people. I wonder though simms if you would feel the same way had the administration basically ignored LGBT issues and allowed homophobia to run rampant on campus?
I'm more amazed that in this day of everything being documented on social media and cell phones that no one took a picture of said swastika.
Quote from: Adam White on November 11, 2015, 02:47:24 PM
Quote from: simms3 on November 11, 2015, 11:48:48 AM
Quote from: Adam White on November 11, 2015, 04:23:02 AM
Quote from: simms3 on November 11, 2015, 04:00:27 AM
So you spent time to try to find a bunch of articles that attempt to disprove something I never said. Oh, and your articles mention that the acceptance rate of legacies at schools including Stanford are 2-3x that of other applicants. Doesn't actually go into legacy attendance at all, and says nothing that is a secret. The fact of the matter is, duh, colleges and literally every other organization give some preferential treatment both to legacies and to people who might be able to donate more, and often they go hand in hand.
VS
"Stanford is admission purely on smarts, not on background."
Maybe "pure" was a strong word but your articles only mentioned acceptance rate, not actual statistics on legacy acceptance. So point still stands.
No, those articles made it clear that Stanford does accept legacies and has a history of doing it. Which runs counter to your claim that it doesn't happen at Stanford. Don't try moving the goalposts.
Avoid absolute statements and you won't paint yourself into a rhetorical corner.
uh, ok. And the point still stands that if you want an elite university that isn't bogged down (perceptively to some, or many) in old-school tradition, finals clubs, and well known high percentages of legacies from established NE families, Stanford is a well known option. But continue down this witch hunt of yours to try to discredit my point, a point that is fairly accepted that different colleges exist to offer up a plethora of varied student bodies, varied cultures, varied specialties, etc. I think coming from an inner city, a poor (of any color), or minority background to Yale and expecting a whole bunch of things that may seem more familiar to you is like a wealthy elite white kid from Connecticut choosing to attend Florida A&M and expecting the familiar. The opportunity for either student to attend either school is there. Nobody should have to be forced to endure racism or discrimination and incidents should be reported and handled, but nobody should expect their lives to go on without such incidents happening, ever.
In the case of the Yale students, there is a whole background story with the finals club incident (with the girl) that you won't hear, and the well publicized halloween costume letter is just absurd. The immature way in which these kids acted at that school is merely indicative of the broader storyline happening with Millennials in general and across college campuses, all of a sudden.
None of this behavior is excusable, and in fact, much of it in my opinion is laughable (and invoking a South Park parody such as a "safe space" is beyond words). The young immature idiots who claim they want open dialogue are forcing a one way street of demands with closed dialogue. Yes there are incidents of university presidents or faculty not addressing things in the best possible manner. But the witch hunting, PC crap, and insane demands and actions by "bright young" minds barely different from those of teenage minds (in fact many still are teenagers) is pretty unfathomable. The fact that grown adults are listening to the extent they are, or even aiding and abetting (that's how I'd call it) is even worse.
With that, I'm just done...Adam White, continue down the path of honing in on one statement and distracting the entire conversation away by using one statement said in gest to attempt to discredit an entire side of the argument. That's always surprisingly effective, and I can tell you realize that. It's also an immature way to hold a conversation or have a debate.
Quote from: simms3 on November 11, 2015, 03:34:07 PM
Quote from: Adam White on November 11, 2015, 02:47:24 PM
Quote from: simms3 on November 11, 2015, 11:48:48 AM
Quote from: Adam White on November 11, 2015, 04:23:02 AM
Quote from: simms3 on November 11, 2015, 04:00:27 AM
So you spent time to try to find a bunch of articles that attempt to disprove something I never said. Oh, and your articles mention that the acceptance rate of legacies at schools including Stanford are 2-3x that of other applicants. Doesn't actually go into legacy attendance at all, and says nothing that is a secret. The fact of the matter is, duh, colleges and literally every other organization give some preferential treatment both to legacies and to people who might be able to donate more, and often they go hand in hand.
VS
"Stanford is admission purely on smarts, not on background."
Maybe "pure" was a strong word but your articles only mentioned acceptance rate, not actual statistics on legacy acceptance. So point still stands.
No, those articles made it clear that Stanford does accept legacies and has a history of doing it. Which runs counter to your claim that it doesn't happen at Stanford. Don't try moving the goalposts.
Avoid absolute statements and you won't paint yourself into a rhetorical corner.
uh, ok. And the point still stands that if you want an elite university that isn't bogged down (perceptively to some, or many) in old-school tradition, finals clubs, and well known high percentages of legacies from established NE families, Stanford is a well known option. But continue down this witch hunt of yours to try to discredit my point, a point that is fairly accepted that different colleges exist to offer up a plethora of varied student bodies, varied cultures, varied specialties, etc. I think coming from an inner city, a poor (of any color), or minority background to Yale and expecting a whole bunch of things that may seem more familiar to you is like a wealthy elite white kid from Connecticut choosing to attend Florida A&M and expecting the familiar. The opportunity for either student to attend either school is there. Nobody should have to be forced to endure racism or discrimination and incidents should be reported and handled, but nobody should expect their lives to go on without such incidents happening, ever.
In the case of the Yale students, there is a whole background story with the finals club incident (with the girl) that you won't hear, and the well publicized halloween costume letter is just absurd. The immature way in which these kids acted at that school is merely indicative of the broader storyline happening with Millennials in general and across college campuses, all of a sudden.
None of this behavior is excusable, and in fact, much of it in my opinion is laughable (and invoking a South Park parody such as a "safe space" is beyond words). The young immature idiots who claim they want open dialogue are forcing a one way street of demands with closed dialogue. Yes there are incidents of university presidents or faculty not addressing things in the best possible manner. But the witch hunting, PC crap, and insane demands and actions by "bright young" minds barely different from those of teenage minds (in fact many still are teenagers) is pretty unfathomable. The fact that grown adults are listening to the extent they are, or even aiding and abetting (that's how I'd call it) is even worse.
With that, I'm just done...Adam White, continue down the path of honing in on one statement and distracting the entire conversation away by using one statement said in gest to attempt to discredit an entire side of the argument. That's always surprisingly effective, and I can tell you realize that. It's also an immature way to hold a conversation or have a debate.
Okay, fine Simms. Whatever. I didn't use that to try to discredit your entire argument - I was pointing out that you were dead wrong on something that you offered as 'evidence' of a particular point (though I suspect it was more an attempt - once again - to play the whole "San Francisco card" more than anything else). I also spent a decent amount of time pointing out that you weren't really a credible source for opinions on Ivy League university life and black experience.
I'll go cry myself to sleep and you enjoy your $90 haircuts and lunches with only the most educated, connected people in the world - things a dumb hayseed like me will never understand or get to experience.
Having gone to the most liberal type of college programs and then later to the most conservative (and alternatively the most liberal sort of job to arguibly the most conservative career), I would agree that universities tend to be more liberal, since their nature lends itself towards a belief that society can move towards a utopia (a staple belief of the left side). It is interesting in seeing how the larger liberal population divide themselves into smaller, intense groups...
With that said, I think we are seeing the effect of social media on activism. A person can find a society of people who believe exactly as he/she does via Facebook, etc. When always surrounded by people of same mind, that horrible group dynamic takes over and the group moves toward its more extreme edge.
Regardless of beliefs, people get worse when their numbers rise.
Quote from: fsquid on November 11, 2015, 02:55:28 PM
Quote from: tufsu1 on November 11, 2015, 01:08:56 PM
Quote from: simms3 on November 11, 2015, 11:47:44 AM
A lot of that is not much different than the goings ons at other college campuses. Some things were poorly handled by MU or the police, but not necessarily anything to do with racism, just stuff handled poorly. And some of the racist/prejudice stuff has nothing to do with black people specifically, and some of it clearly doesn't stem just from "white privilege". After reading Maneater, I'm actually more amazed that the events that happened did and more convinced than ever that as a society we have become egg shells. Just pathetic.
The way the swastika incident (anti-semitism) was handled was pretty much the last straw for people. I wonder though simms if you would feel the same way had the administration basically ignored LGBT issues and allowed homophobia to run rampant on campus?
I'm more amazed that in this day of everything being documented on social media and cell phones that no one took a picture of said swastika.
That struck me as very odd also, my favorite was the Student body president tweeting the KLAN was on campus, then other tweets about the KLAN attacking a building throwing bricks through the window THEN!!!!! wait for it wait for it. "Never Mind" none of it happened. Make you wonder what else didn't happen.
I'm sure the student's goal is to solve all of the social ills, and inequality. MLK got the ball rolling many years ago. I'm sure their tirade is all that is needed to make everything equal and safe all across America, in every school, neighborhood, job, town, etc. :P
Quote from: spuwho on November 09, 2015, 11:16:24 PM
The Mizzou president said he had made attempts to open dialog with anyone willing to discuss the issues, right up into his resignation speech.
But for other reasons, he had little or no support from the University System Board. There were some other issues going on here besides a football team making threat strikes.
Interesting editorial from the
St. Louis Post-Dispatch after Wolfe was first hired:
Wanted: College president. No experience requiredMonday, December 19, 2011 | 3:37 p.m. CST
BY ST. LOUIS POST-DISPATCH
The obvious problem facing the UM System Board of Curators and Timothy M. Wolfe, its out-of-the-blue choice as the university system's new president, was this:
How do you explain the selection of a former software executive with no significant academic credentials as the leader of a four-campus university system?
Answer: You take a sow's ear and turn it into a silk purse.
On Wednesday, Wolfe visited the university's St. Louis campus and said he plans a two-month "journey of enlightenment" to bring himself up to speed on the needs of the various campuses.
This is great. Next time we're lost, we're going to tell our spouses that we're on journeys of enlightenment.
On Wednesday, curators praised Wolfe's Columbia roots (he grew up there and got a bachelor's degree from Mizzou) and said he understood academia because his parents were professors.
And then there was curator Pam Henrickson's explanation that Wolfe would bring "fresh eyes. Somebody to come in and say, 'Why do you do this?'"
This would not be a good way to hire someone to, say, fix your car. Whatever happened to straight talk?
http://digmo-01.missouri.edu/a/143910/what-others-say-wanted-college-president-no-experience-required/
Quote from: civil42806 on November 12, 2015, 06:55:08 AM
That struck me as very odd also, my favorite was the Student body president tweeting the KLAN was on campus, then other tweets about the KLAN attacking a building throwing bricks through the window THEN!!!!! wait for it wait for it. "Never Mind" none of it happened. Make you wonder what else didn't happen.
The whole damn thing is an obvious hoax. Only the most gullible aren't coming to that realization. The poop swastika was quite likely placed there by the dorm guy who reported it and who, by the way, is now probably heavily involved with the so-called protest movement (which is bogus!). The damn hunger striker, who probably wasn't even on an actual hunger strike, is the son of a guy who earned multiple millions last year and has been on campus damn near 8 freaking years.
Mizzou has a black gay student body president -- okay? They clearly embraced Michael Sam last year when he came out as gay.
This "protest" has nothing to do with Mizzou. Nothing at all. This entire event has been ginned up because of Ferguson, Missouri and the failed "Hands up, Don't shoot" lie. They
picked the University of Missouri because a national narrative on that state as racist had already been set.
It's an election year coming up, and some crazed-folks on the left desperately need some agitation to stir up the base to get them in the mood to vote. They've tried the War on Women, and that collapsed after the obviously bogus Rolling Stone article. They're gonna keep trying, apparently, until something sticks.
But this is obviously 100% bogus.
And Stephen, that was an incredibly feeble response to the crazy campus speech codes schools are implementing . . . and the crazy student groups shouting down speakers on campus and disallowing any debate on campus . . . and the unthinking acceptance of any complaint by coddled students. Jason Whitlock is no one's right winger or Republican. He is disgusted by the spectacle these folks have put on and so am I. It's a damn good read:
http://j.school/post/133025099640/crying-wolfe-exposes-real-problem
Enough, already. We have the same groups in Florida trying desperately to find something to agitate for -- keep your eyes on a group calling itself "Dream Defenders" -- they've been trying to cook up foolishness for a few years now. One day soon they'll likely succeed. And it may, may, be a legitimate cause. But it should first be greeted with HEALTHY skepticism. That hasn't happened at Missouri yet.
I'm so over this fiasco. I'm definitely not one of these "Southeastern Conference snobs" but is it too late for the SEC to kick Mizzou out, and back to the Big 12?
Never in the Big Ten thank god...
Quote from: finehoe on November 12, 2015, 11:02:06 AM
Quote from: spuwho on November 09, 2015, 11:16:24 PM
The Mizzou president said he had made attempts to open dialog with anyone willing to discuss the issues, right up into his resignation speech.
But for other reasons, he had little or no support from the University System Board. There were some other issues going on here besides a football team making threat strikes.
Interesting editorial from the St. Louis Post-Dispatch after Wolfe was first hired:
Wanted: College president. No experience required
Monday, December 19, 2011 | 3:37 p.m. CST
BY ST. LOUIS POST-DISPATCH
The obvious problem facing the UM System Board of Curators and Timothy M. Wolfe, its out-of-the-blue choice as the university system's new president, was this:
How do you explain the selection of a former software executive with no significant academic credentials as the leader of a four-campus university system?
Answer: You take a sow's ear and turn it into a silk purse.
On Wednesday, Wolfe visited the university's St. Louis campus and said he plans a two-month "journey of enlightenment" to bring himself up to speed on the needs of the various campuses.
This is great. Next time we're lost, we're going to tell our spouses that we're on journeys of enlightenment.
On Wednesday, curators praised Wolfe's Columbia roots (he grew up there and got a bachelor's degree from Mizzou) and said he understood academia because his parents were professors.
And then there was curator Pam Henrickson's explanation that Wolfe would bring "fresh eyes. Somebody to come in and say, 'Why do you do this?'"
This would not be a good way to hire someone to, say, fix your car. Whatever happened to straight talk?
http://digmo-01.missouri.edu/a/143910/what-others-say-wanted-college-president-no-experience-required/
big state universities are big business.
(http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-IrQYrHwvVRM/VkQa7cMDrgI/AAAAAAAAKgc/rPA9JeA7wno/s1600/CTlGsETWcAARcmD.png)
Quote from: stephendare on November 12, 2015, 08:55:57 AM
Quote from: AKIRA on November 12, 2015, 03:24:01 AM
Having gone to the most liberal type of college programs and then later to the most conservative (and alternatively the most liberal sort of job to arguibly the most conservative career), I would agree that universities tend to be more liberal, since their nature lends itself towards a belief that society can move towards a utopia (a staple belief of the left side). It is interesting in seeing how the larger liberal population divide themselves into smaller, intense groups...
With that said, I think we are seeing the effect of social media on activism. A person can find a society of people who believe exactly as he/she does via Facebook, etc. When always surrounded by people of same mind, that horrible group dynamic takes over and the group moves toward its more extreme edge.
Regardless of beliefs, people get worse when their numbers rise.
True. And when fecal swastikas get put out and people are being screamed 'ni--er at, and the like (with no appropriate response from the administration) then its time to do something about it. The students being intimidated are paying the same money as the ones doing the intimidating.
I agree with you 100% on that. It appears that when leadership was required, it was sorely lacking.
We do black students no favors by infantilizing them and making them think it is somehow the President of the university's job to respond when someone happens to call another person nigger or cracker or whatever. Good grief, people. Get a grip.
That president acquiesced to them in all manner of ways. It wasn't enough. Did you not read that laughable list of demands they presented to him? Harkening back to an earlier question tossed my way: Adam and Stephen, do
you not know what Marxism-Leninism is ? ? ?
Quote
Here's the list in its entirety:
1. We demand that University of Missouri System President, Tim Wolfe, writes a hand-written apology to Concerned Student 1-9-5-0 demonstrators and holds a press conference in the Mizzou Student Center reading the letter. In the letter and at the press conference, Tim Wolfe must acknowledge his white privilege, recognize that systems of oppression exits, and provide a verbal commitment to fulfilling Concerned Student 1-9-5-0 demands. We want Tim Wolfe to admits his gross negligence, allowing his driver to hit one of the demonstrators, consenting to the physical violence of bystanders, and lastly refusing to intervene when Columbia Police Department used excessive force with demonstrators.
2. We demand the immediate removal of Tim Wolfe as UM system president. After his removal, a new amendment to thd UM system policies must be established to have all future UM system president and Chancellor positions be selected by a collective of students, staff, and faculty of diverse backgrounds.
3. We demand that the University of Missouri meets the Legion of Black Collegians' demands that were presented in the 1969 for the betterment of the black community.
4. We demand that the University of Missouri creates and enforces comprehensive racial awareness and inclusion curriculum throughout all campus departments and units, mandatory for all students, faculty, staff and administration. This curriculum must be vetted, maintained, and overseen by a board comprised of students, staff and faculty of color.
5. We demand that by the academic year 2017-18, the University of Missouri increases the percentage of black faculty and staff members campus-wide by 10 percent.
6. We demand that the University of Missouri composes a strategic 10-year plan on May, 1 2016 that will increase retention rates for marginalized students, sustain diversity curriculum and training, and promote a more safe and inclusive campus.
7. We demand that the University of Missouri increases funding and resources for the University of Missouri Counseling Center for the purpose of hiring additional mental health professionals, particularly those of color, boosting mental health outreach and programming across campus, increasing campus-wide awareness and visibility of the counseling center, and reducing lengthy wait times for prospective clients.
8. We demand that the University of Missouri increases funding, resources and personnel for the social justice centers on campus for the purpose of hiring additional professionals, particularly those of color, boosting outreach and programming across campus and increasing campus-wide awareness and visibility.
And last night, they asked they asked their "white allies" to segregate themselves out so there could be a blacks only safe space.
Are y'all white people on the left paying attention to this shiznit?
Quote from: RattlerGator on November 12, 2015, 05:24:44 PM
Adam and Stephen, do you not know what Marxism-Leninism is ? ? ?
Do I? Yes, I do. When I lived in the USA, I was a member of the Socialist Party USA and was registered as a Socialist voter in the State of Florida. In the UK, I am not a member of any political party, but am a member of the Fabian Society. I have to be honest, though, and admit I did vote for the Communist Party candidate for Mayor of Hackney, even though I don't agree with the views of Marxist-Leninists.
I have read Marx (some Marx, nowhere near all of his writings) and have read bits and pieces of stuff by Lukacs, Parenti, Ollman, Bookchin and others. I could go into great detail about where I fit on the political spectrum and what my beliefs are, but I'll spare you and everyone else (unless you want me to).
So yeah- I know what Marxism-Leninism is and what the difference is between Marxism and Marxism-Leninism.
Wow, you keep peeling back the layers Adam and I keep being surprised! And disappointed. You seem like a fine guy, cuz, but . . . my goodness. Both approaches are soul-crushing efforts that inevitably lead to totalitarianism. And with each inevitable failure, acolytes do what y'all have done.
Do you know what Marxism is?
Do you know what Marxism-Leninism is?
Yeah, yeah, yeah . . . it has never been truly tried; blah, blah, blah.
I know this with 100% certainty: they are both scourges of the earth and willfully blind.
I spent one solid week in Cuba in February. Mostly in Havana. It was a great trip, a fun trip. But abject failure all around, wherever you cared to look. And although Cubans clearly love their country, and even with a Committee in Defense of the Revolution rep on every block in Havana, the people with talent or drive very clearly want no more of that Marxism or Marxism-Leninism foolishness.
They've been tried all over this planet. They don't work, thank God.
Quote from: RattlerGator on November 12, 2015, 10:35:53 PM
Wow, you keep peeling back the layers Adam and I keep being surprised! And disappointed. You seem like a fine guy, cuz, but . . . my goodness. Both approaches are soul-crushing efforts that inevitably lead to totalitarianism. And with each inevitable failure, acolytes do what y'all have done.
Do you know what Marxism is?
Do you know what Marxism-Leninism is?
Yeah, yeah, yeah . . . it has never been truly tried; blah, blah, blah.
I know this with 100% certainty: they are both scourges of the earth and willfully blind.
I spent one solid week in Cuba in February. Mostly in Havana. It was a great trip, a fun trip. But abject failure all around, wherever you cared to look. And although Cubans clearly love their country, and even with a Committee in Defense of the Revolution rep on every block in Havana, the people with talent or drive very clearly want no more of that Marxism or Marxism-Leninism foolishness.
They've been tried all over this planet. They don't work, thank God.
Very interesting that you have been to Cuba. I'd like to go someday - if only because I've heard a lot of good things.
Anyway - I am not going to defend Cuba, but I think one cannot view Cuba without fully considering the impact of US actions (whether it be active attempts to destabilize the country or the embargo).
But Cuba is an example of a Marxist-Leninist government. As was the USSR. In fact, all such regimes were based on philosophies derived from Marxism-Leninism. And Marxism-Leninism (in my opinion) is inherently undemocratic.
Quote from: Adam White on November 13, 2015, 01:02:48 AM
I am not going to defend Cuba, but I think one cannot view Cuba without fully considering the impact of US actions (whether it be active attempts to destabilize the country or the embargo).
Yeah, and that's what more than a few folks in the group (this was an Ivy League -- Penn -- travel group) tried to assert. But, Adam, the USSR crashes and China rises in the last couple of decades. European nations trade with them regularly and European tourists visit regularly. Are US actions really relevant? Cuba (who first implemented the embargo against
us, not vice-versa) could trade with the entire world. We as a nation couldn't stop that.
Sorry. No excuses. They were and are an abject failure while much less accomplished nations (like the Dominican Republic) have zoomed past them since 1959.
Back to the topic of this thread: Mizzou has now named a black man as interim president. So predictable. And there was rich boy Jonathan Butler, the hunger striker, privileged as all get-out, leading the assembled protesters in chants of
"I am a revolutionary!" Yeah, right.
It has become a clown show in Missouri and I doubt if the majority of taxpayers in that state are either amused or entertained.
Quote from: RattlerGator on November 13, 2015, 10:55:01 AM
Quote from: Adam White on November 13, 2015, 01:02:48 AM
I am not going to defend Cuba, but I think one cannot view Cuba without fully considering the impact of US actions (whether it be active attempts to destabilize the country or the embargo).
Yeah, and that's what more than a few folks in the group (this was an Ivy League -- Penn -- travel group) tried to assert. But, Adam, the USSR crashes and China rises in the last couple of decades. European nations trade with them regularly and European tourists visit regularly. Are US actions really relevant? Cuba (who first implemented the embargo against us, not vice-versa) could trade with the entire world. We as a nation couldn't stop that.
Sorry. No excuses. They were and are an abject failure while much less accomplished nations (like the Dominican Republic) have zoomed past them since 1959.
Back to the topic of this thread: Mizzou has now named a black man as interim president. So predictable. And there was rich boy Jonathan Butler, the hunger striker, privileged as all get-out, leading the assembled protesters in chants of "I am a revolutionary!" Yeah, right.
It has become a clown show in Missouri and I doubt if the majority of taxpayers in that state are either amused or entertained.
George Washington and most of your so-called "founding fathers" were privileged - yet it's common American belief that they were "revolutionaries" as well. I don't think social standing is relevant.
Quote from: RattlerGator on November 13, 2015, 10:55:01 AM
Sorry. No excuses. They were and are an abject failure while much less accomplished nations (like the Dominican Republic) have zoomed past them since 1959.
An "abject failure" tied with the USA for life expectancy (34th in 2013). The UK is 19. Cuba's healthcare system only ranks two places below the USA's.
Maybe it's time for a bit of self-reflection!
Perhaps we could move the communism discussion to a separate thread and get this one back on topic.
Quote from: Tacachale on November 13, 2015, 03:36:31 PM
Perhaps we could move the communism discussion to a separate thread and get this one back on topic.
In Soviet Union, communism discussion moves YOU to a separate thread!
Quote from: stephendare on November 13, 2015, 03:03:44 PM
wow. a whole week eh?
Jealousy & envy are your middle names!
But I don't blame you, Stephen J&E. It was a great trip. Great cigars, great drinks, beautiful wimminz. Cuba's a wreck, though; cite all the propped up stats you want. It's a freaking wreck. Like multiple writers told us while there -- to hell with your damn state-controlled health care, let me choose and I'll figure that out for myself.
But they have no freedom of the press, they have no liberty, the Stasi-like Committee in Defense of the Revolution is on every block, and they are still locking people up for political reasons.
Meanwhile, Mizzou has a bogus "revolutionary" ginning up bogus racial complaints, aided by the Ferguson Grievance Mongers. Fidel, I'm sure, is so proud.
If a state, even one with such a health care system, needs a CDR to threaten and commit violence over political belief, then yes, that state is a failure.
But on the true topic at hand, I think the swasitika was probably a lie, and I do not believe the cottonball story as reported.
Pinkel resigns today. Lymphoma.
America's favorite assistant professor is back at it again... Just fire her already...
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7EBWtXxnZYE