Believe me, nobody here in Colombia or from any country in Latin America prefer the artificial term "Latinx". If you use that word here you will get reactions that go from derision to plain mockery. That ridiculous word it's the creation of some woke Americans of Latino ancestry, who want to claim their identity based on stereotypes and false assumptions about "Latino" cultures, as if all Spanish-speaking countries were a monolith.
In conclusion, many feel here this is just a thing that woke "gringos" with a Hispanic surname (and uppity white ones, of course) care about, and who want to know more than the supposed cultures they're supposedly proud of. I cannot think of anything more condescending.
On the other hand, I always read these stories of college humiliations with a bad feeling. These people are so blinded and brainwashed that it's almost parodical. How could you be so eager to destroy other person's life?
It is easy to make fun of university professors- but imagine the pressure of having to discover or talk about brand new things every year - whether through research or pure thought. One of the problem with affirmative action / diversity hires is that the people so hired can’t really perform at that level. So they compensate by making activism more important than being a good scholar. Whole programs (usually ‘something something studies’) are invented to create jobs for professors who aren’t really scholars to teach students who aren’t really academic enough to be at university.
Pretty undeniable this is what has happened at Elite universities. Not enough qualified candidates in the pipeline just put them in silly new sub branches no one takes seriously. Well that worked for awhile but now the numbers are against the serious academics and there's no moves left on the board except keep your head down and don't draw any attention to yourself.
"One of the problem with affirmative action / diversity hires is that the people so hired can’t really perform at that level. "
ironically, this is doing in the left in unexpected places. for example, selecting Supreme Court Justices based on race and sex characteristics, not merit, means the selections from the left are out of their league on judicial reasoning.
Increasingly, we have academic merit on the right, and tokenism on the left. no wonder the left throws tantrums, it truly is unfair.
It's worth mentioning why Latinx is so offensive as a term. It isn't just that it's made up, it diminishes a core part of our Spanish language: gender.
Americans are not accustomed to a gendered language; English isn't. Oh, sure, we call ships "she" but these are colloquialisms not core linguistic components. In Spanish though, essentially every word is male or female at its core. This is why Latinx is so demeaning, it eliminates one of the beauties of our native language, and it does so in the very name we use to refer to ourselves. To Latinos (that means both men and women together), it feels like colonialism all over again. Wealthy and powerful white people suppressed our beliefs in the 1500's and they're still trying to alter our language today.
Fundamentally, a group of people deserve to be referred to by the name they choose themselves. I write this only so that those here have better tools at their disposal to push back on this terminology. And I encourage you to do so.
I thought Latinx was a Marxist propagandist attempt to capture the diverse cultures and countries represented by Latin/ Spanish ancestry and bring them under one political roof. It actually sounds like a word created by a marketing firm to sell a toothpaste campaign to a boardroom. I live in the American S.W. where many consider themselves Spanish because they were here before there was a Mexico or a United States. Interestingly, many of their ancestors were Jews who fled to the New World to escape the Inquisition. At a recent High School Graduation I noticed that a lot of blond haired blue eyed "Garcia's" were graduating with a lot of brown skinned, brown eyed "Smith's". Anyone with eyes to see it can pick out the Native American ancestry in many Mexicano's and Anglo's and vice versa. Likewise, African American. Is there sometimes tension between Spanish, Anglo and Native American cultures here, yep. But, the diversity creates mutual respect and most of us feel sad when encountering haters of any stripe. The thing most of "woke" doesn't understand and tries to mimic is that many of us are free men beyond race and culture.
Yeah famous writer and former Vox co-founder Matthew Yglesias has his spicy sounding Spanish last name from one paternal Cuban born grandfather. That Grandfather was an Ashkenazi (white European) Jew who's ancestors had fled to Spain centuries ago but didn't really intermarry with native Spanish population.
So he freely admits (to his credit) he got an affirmative action bonus on his Yale application for being Hispanic despite ethnically being just as white as any otherr Jewish American and only 1/4 grandparents even having the Cuban/Spain nationality as opposed to ethnicity connection.
It's a farce, which he freely admits, that this got him a preference on his college application.
Brian, what an excellent point. That never occurred to me. English is one of the few languages that doesn't assign gender to all nouns. How will the Woke morons address this?
Unfortunately, some movements are trying to normalize a non-gendered version of Spanish language. Spanish uses masculine nouns to refer to a group of individuals of both sexes (todos, amigos, expertos, etc), and it has been like this all the time. But some enlightened minds (feminists) decided that Spanish was a sexist language. So, what did they do? They started to duplicate nouns to cover both genders (todos y todas, amigos y amigas). As this was not enough, they then decided to change the masculine suffix "o", present in many nouns and change it for an "e". As a result, many news outlets are starting to use an "inclusive language" which is non-binary. Now they don't say "todos", but "todes". No "amigos", but "amigues", and all the variations you can imagine.
As you can expect, almost everybody finds this irritating and the Real Academia Española does not recognize inclusive language. Many people use it in an ironic way, but I fear this usage only contributes to its spread. Thanks goodness, it's still rare to find somebody in real life who talks like this. However, Argentina and Spain, the wokest countries in the Spanish-speaking sphere, have been invaded by this nonsense since a long time and government publications use inclusive language.
They are trying in Brazil too, but it has failed, they tried with "x", then "u" now "e". But typically only the media, academia (left) the everyday people on the street could care less.
Alejandro, how do these vicious, insane, jerks degender a word like lapiz? They want to destroy a beautiful language and its grammar rules that have lasted centuries.
There is an old saying "French to my diplomats, Spanish to my lovers, English to my servants and German to my dogs."
Though I don't agree with the "suppression" part of your comment. We are a product of Spanish colonization, we speak Spanish (a European language) and our beliefs are not the same of the peoples who inhabited these lands. There was no Latin America when the Spanish came, that was a result of the independence processes in Hispanic America in the 19th century. And finally, we have Indigenous, European and African blood. That's undeniable and to repudiate our past is simply foolish.
Is it white progressives pushing "Latinx" or super-woke young Hispanic/Latino activists and students that invented the moniker in the ever consuming drive for "intersectionality" (no doubt, a number of those activists are LGBTQ identified and that's how it was introduced) and have enforced its usage within the circles of progressive activism and academia, which flows downstream to the whites in those circles?
I'm asking because it seems like of the criticism of this term assumes this was invented by white "woke" academics and activists, but my understanding of the genesis of the term is that it did originate from actual Hispanic/Latino progressive advocacy groups. The fact that this term appears to be widely out of touch with "mainstream" Hispanics/Latinos is probably more to do with the same gap that exists between hyper liberal white academics and activists and the white working and middle class that also exists between hyper liberal Hispanic academics and activists and the Hispanic working and middle class (and I think you'll observe the same gap between Black, Asian and even LGBTQ academics and acivists and their working and middle class counterparts).
A large part of the "problem" with "woke" white progressives is that their likely only exposure to minorities happens to be with minorities in the same academic, political and activist circles. Therefore, if a self-identified "Latinx" person insists that this is the correct term that should be used (and if not used, is a "micoragression" that can result in total social and professional ex-communication for the offender) white progressives assume they are speaking on behalf of their "community" and adopt the term and enforce it within their own circles. Similarly, white progressives whose main encounters with Black Americans tends to be with "Black Student Union" associations, BLM "activists", and other self-appointed "community representatives" tend to believe that ideas like "defund the police" are backed by the broader Black community without question, and take on similar stances.
Obviously not all, or even most, minorities hold the same views and support of the positions their "representatives" in academia hold, but the ones that white progressives are most likely to encounter in academia and activism hold these views to the extreme, vociferously, and with the power to extract extreme sanctions from "late followers" - the "woke" movement is largely becoming a pogrom of its own "believers" - but make no mistake a lot of the power and direction in this movement comes from those very academic and activist minorities with white progressives constantly scrambling to be the best "ally" of, cause the least offense to survive socially and professionally, and push the line even further in those efforts. Not to make "white progressives" victims either, but I think it's important to understand that a lot of these ideas *are* being generated by actual living and breathing "authentic" minorities, but ones entirely unrepresentative of their broader communities, but if you travel in those circles that is a fact you will be largely unaware of if your only contact with "minorities" is of this sort.
TLDR: "Latinx" is not really an invention of white progressives pushing this term on an uninterested minority, it's the invention of a subset of that minority group itself. IOW, this is almost a better argument to be had "in that community".
Very reasonable and possibly much closer to the mark.
Strategically, the "true" source does not necessarily matter when one considers how to oppose these dogmas. Consider labeling Whites as engaged in cultural arrogance (I first typed "genocide" since all of this is histrionics) as a canard. Draw out the "woke Latinx" creators of this moniker and then have them defend with their ethnic brothers and sisters their insistence on its usage.
The central issue is how important is such gamesmanship to the goal of human happiness and a just society? Most people want to make their way in life and have security and opportunity. Many are willing to work hard toward that goal. "Wokesterism" can be employed as an act of misdirection from the root causes of the inequality we face today. The most cynical members of the power elite must be very happy that the peasants are fighting among themselves instead of gathering torches and pitchforks. If you are the CEO of a major corporation whose compensation and bonus depends upon suppressing wages, siphoning off as much of the profit to shareholders (the rentier class) as possible, which would you prefer: the establishment of a union in your company or allowing some energy expenditure on "wokesterism". In an economy where everything and everyone has been commodified, the short term "smart move" is to allow (and indeed AFFIRM) the DEI faction to have their voice and deflect away from meaningful and substantive change of the status quo.
Late reply - sorry :) but I agree, the corporate push towards DEI/"wokeism" is entirely a devised concession to the perceived energy of the Democratic base that will be much more consumed with these issues than those of economic class and labor issues, and it's a still relatively cheap investment to herd your workforce through some obligatory DEI trainings as a liability shield from any lawsuits over "inequitable" workplace policies. It's also a branding and marketing tactic to the up and coming consumer markets comprised of Millennials and Gen Z who do indicate at least some of their consumer preferences can be swayed by such branding.
I just brought this up because I think a lot of the opprobium about "LatinX" is a bit misplaced and really misses the social dynamics of the "woke" left (and I really dislike reusing the term "woke" in this way given its origins, but it has really become the collloquial to describe the phenomenon), which if you don't understand it, it's hard to really resist or change it.
I've always considered Latinx as an example of cultural appropriation by a group of privileged closet aristocrats. I consider its use by "wokesters" as an example of arrogance.
Golfer, I'm referring to the European conquistadors who displaced the natives of ancient Mexico. I don't at all mean to say that native Mayan derivative belief systems were somehow better; based on results if nothing else, they were clearly not. But even people who recognize this and have no desire reclaim their native heritage (Mayan art and practices are undergoing a bizarre renaissance today, paralleling that of US American Indian culture) are aware of this history, and the linguistic colonization going on today feels like an echo of it.
I am a poor exemplar of this, since, while I have the Latino name, I'm as white (European) as anyone else. However travel to Chiapas and you will find many people who take this ancestry far more seriously. A guarantee Latinx wouldn't go down well there.
I really didn't post it to get into a history debate. It was 500 years ago, who cares? But if there's one thing the woke are sensitive to, it's charges of colonialism (even as they engage in it relentlessly) so claiming that "Latinx" is colonialist may make a few of them listen.
I don't think it's any more demeaning than black. If you're in Africa, "black" has no meaning because it refers to nearly everyone. I have not been to Africa, but based on my experience with Latin America, I suspect there are many more recognized categories in country than outside. The Irish and the Italians are both "white", but don't tell them that in 1940's NYC.
My personal preference would be that we stop being so focused on categorizing people by race at all (I think the French are right about this), but if we're going to to so, Latino is a useful category, despite its imprecision.
I’m for addressing people in whatever manner they prefer. If you want to be described as Latino or Latino or Latinx, good on you. I have always described my race as “Human”
I call these arrogant wokesters as "cultural fascists", "fascist colonizers", or "cultural appropriators". How arrogant to think that one can insert their desire for virtue signaling into a culture which dates back to the Romans.
Thanks for the explaining your point, Brian. I am of the same view: it's pointless to argue about something happened 500 years ago and it's seamed into our identities.
Yeah, Alejandro is right. Get 5 Latinos in the room and you'll get 6 different definitions of Latino. That said, I think the most common definition in the US would be someone from the historically Spanish or Portuguese colonies. Mostly that's central & south America, but not entirely. My wife is Latino because her father was a Filipino emigrant. Although most would also consider her Asian/Pacific Islander. (She looks as white as me though. She got the Missouri instead of the Manilla.)
Originally, Latino referred only to the people who inhabited the Lazio region, near to Rome, or in the broader sense, someone who spoke a language derived from Latin. It is a very disputed topic nowadays, this article (you can use Google translate) tries to elucidate the issue, though I can say the word has different meanings in the US and in Spain: https://verne.elpais.com/verne/2019/09/05/mexico/1567637745_213328.html
That's just the same false narrative we have been taught for generations: Spanish were perverse monsters and natives were peaceful and pacific beings. I am just tired of such simplistic view of history.
1. The natives weren't peace loving, farmers, potters and weavers. The Aztecs and the Mayans were blood thirsty murderers. They performed human sacrifice on such a grand scale. It even sickened the conquistadors and that was hard to do. The purpose of warfare was not to kill and conquer your enemy, it was to capture as many as possible for human sacrifice. The Aztecs would line up hundreds of victims at the bottom of the Pyramid of the Sun and from sunrise to sunset slaughter their victims. The prisoner at the top of the stairs was put on a stone platform, held down and a priest would cut his still beating heart out, hold it up to the sun and his minions would throw the body over the backside of the pyramid and the next victim was put on the platform. That would go on until the sun went down and the next day it would start all over again.
The Mayans weren't much better.
2.The snowflakes lament how badly the Europeans treated the native Americans. Show me one country in the world that wasn't settle by invaders. Just one. Normandy, France is called Normandy because the Northmen settled it. And by settled, I mean the invaders came in, slaughter or enslaved the original occupants. This happened all over the world, including the Americas. The Romans committed genocide against the Gauls.
Now we look back in horror but back then it was common practice.
I've said this before and I will say it again, most people have never read a history book and it seems this ignorance is more prevalent on the left and they flaunt it and take pride in their ignorance.
Exactly, and that was the reason several peoples enslaved by the Aztecs allied with the Spaniards and defeated the Aztecs.
And I agree, it's not correct to view those events with our modern eyes. And regarding the European treatment of natives, we can say the Spanish were more benign than the British. At least the Spanish mixed with the natives, preserved their languages, granted privileges to those who supported them, built universities, etc.
Same here. I always say, thank God for the Spanish! I am freaking grateful for their so called evil colonialism! It’s thanks to them that I’m Catholic and that human sacrifice was outlawed in the colonies!
Well, if I follow the metaphor to its logical conclusion, the limit to this is the death of the addict. That can take a long time - maybe another 15 years?
Problem is those barns while easy to mock are still the one big advantage we have over East Asia. The US simply has more top rated universities that people from all over the world fight to get into. The rich in China go to great lengths to get their kids admitted
How many more decades can that last now that objective entry measures are being banned for students and faculty? Pretty sure in twenty years schools in East Asia will be the standard bearers for hard skills disciplines because those majors simply can't thrive when objective acceptance measures are banned.
It would probably happen even sooner if China wasn't going backwards in terms of opening up to the world, but even without China Singapore, India, Japan, and Taiwan can move way up in university rankings especially as English becomes the norm at more and more international colleges around the world.
Rich white women that are bored out of their damn minds, spoiled rotten, and sheltered are the problem in this society. Note: I am a white woman, just none of the other items.
Liberals aren't the same as Woke. Woke can be said to be the opposite of classical liberalism. Actual liberals can work with and compromise with moderate Republicans to get stuff done, but the Woke will never compromise because their beliefs are inherently religious in nature. Full disclosure--I'm a white female liberal and I won't be lumped in with those insane Progressives.
I've had to switch from calling myself liberal to calling myself centrist, because most woke people will self-ID as liberal, and trying to distinguish between the two can sound like No-True-Scotsmanning.
This "Wokesters" are not progressives. Many of them are simply making "fashion statements" and the really hardcore are what I consider closet aristocrats. A Royalist mindset has little to do with the economic "ism" it operates under. It is a condition of dogmatic and narcissistic behavior. Trump can be generalized as a Royalist. These so-called progressives give true Progressives a bad name.
That's pretty convenient and lets a lot of people off the hook. Did you watch the video where Yale professor Nicholas Christakis was mobbed by the woke because his wife supported students deciding for themselves what Halloween costumes were acceptable? That wasn't white women. Same with the ASU "multicultural center" incident. Not to mention Ibram X. Kendi...
Agree. There seems to be some sort of glee with a lot of conservatives in portraying "woke language" as being perpetrated on unwilling minorities by a bunch of arrogant white progressives who are, in this view, the "real racists and colonizers" for doing so, so lolz "libs" are the real racists so there ;P.
It really ignores that the genesis for a lot of this ideology, language and style of activism is coming from "BIPOC" academics and activists who are pushing downstream in their circles of white progressives whose likely sole contact with minorities is from these circles, and who are therefore totally in the belief that they are reflecting the views of the broader "minorities" that these self-appointed "represenatives" claim to be. It's not "racism" so much as a bubble. If the only Hispanics you encounter are in academia and activist circles and insist on "Latinx" as their identification, you will mirror and enforce that usage, and congratulate yourself for being "culturally responsive" and an "ally". They simply don't have much, if any, contact with Hispanics outside of those bubbles who don't use the term and find it offensive, and even if they did encounter any, those are not the people that have the power to "call them out" and ostracize them socially and professionally over it.
To answer your question, it's because of moral absolutism.
The article link from 1995 by D'Andrade was a good canary in the academic coalmine for this idea. Basically they (meaning folks who think career defenestration is a completely appropriate outcome for anyone who says or even thinks things different from their SJ narrative) think it is their solemn duty to ferret out 'immoral' people in society because it is a serious good vs. evil battle.
To them, agreeing with the woke ideology (gender identity, race essentialism, white supremacy everywhere, etc.) is inherently good. And disagreeing with it is inherently bad. Therefore people who say or think or believe 'bad' things should be cast out of any positions of power (or even no power at all). To them, this is doing the right thing and being a warrior for all that is good and wholesome in the world.
Moral absolutism leads to a modern day inquisition and I don't care what your ideas are, that is never good. Think Nazi or Socialist governments. Prison camps were and are filled with those who disagreed with these tyrannies. I honestly believe that is the direction the PC and Woke movements are headed.
Rick, a month ago I wrote an essay on why the left is not liberal. Liberalism, as based on its founders in the 19th century, was based on free speech not as now, stifling free speech. So, I refuse to call these tyrants liberals. I call them leftists.
I honestly don't believe, for one minute, that they focus on good. I believe it is all about power and they use the good vs evil red herring as a cover for their malicious intent.
If it weren't about power they would focus on redemption and not punishment.
I think THEY think they are focusing on good, because without that they wouldn't be able to point to anything that was the reason for their cause except for power. And overtly basing it on power would be openly admitting it. I think it's the B.S. 'righteousness' of it all that they think legitimizes everything. The power they get from it is, I think, what they would consider the logical outcome of 'speaking truth to power'...or whatever other idea they will grotesquely mangle for their cause.
I admit that redemption makes so much more sense than punishment here, after all that would be the 'right' and merciful thing to do. But you have to remember that it's usually not the older academic CRT adherents that are pushing for the more drastic things (at least not initially, they will gladly jump on that train if it has momentum), but rather the younger academics and students themselves. And this younger cohort have all grown up in an era where social media call-outs and mob mentality are not only considered normal by them, but almost like it's someone's duty to do so. A lot of these people are simply children, regardless of age. And we all know how children love revenge.
I don't think all this would nearly be the issue it is without the advent of social media 20 years ago. And it's effect on the social psychology of the human brain.
Alejandro, I know exactly what you mean. I was raised and worked in Central America and believe that most of these claims are made by snowflakes who have never lived outside the United States and have no idea about the cultural differences of other societies.
The extremes the PC and Woke morons go to would be laughable if they weren't taken so seriously by the left/Democrats. In one of Bari's earlier postings by a guest writer, the author of the post mentioned in one of the north central states university, some idiot had written a PC dictionary. In this new dictionary, you couldn't use the word "Jerry" because that was a derogatory word used by US GIs during the Second World War to describe Germans soldiers.
Heaven forbid we insult a NAZI! Why in the world is anyone listening to the idiots. They should be laughing at them. But the Democrats see an opening for more votes and not only pretend to believe these clowns but act on what these losers say.
By acting on this craziness, people not only lose their jobs but are destroyed by this malignant movement.
You are absolutely correct. When you live in a different culture, you have to make allowances for these differences. most of these differences are subtle but would drive a gringo crazy. If you grew up in this culture, like I did, these differences become a way of life.
It seems to me, that those "woke gringos" are behaving here just like their colonialist forefathers did when trying to push their value system and their vocabulary on some "savages who are obviously to stupid" to even create their own words to name their identity, with some help of some local collaborators, of course. Maybe the "deconstruction of colonialism" should start right here, maybe with leaving it exclusively to the people themselves how they wanna be called and not have some elitist wokists make up names for them.
Bravo, they complain about how "perverse" the Spanish conquest was, but they don't seem to realize they are having colonialist attitudes. I would say it's even worse, at least Spaniards preserved a lot of indigenous languages. In any case, they are treating us, as you say, as savages who don't know better.
I believe those who invented and use “Latinx” are focused on gender not culture or ethnicity.
Gender is a fundamental component of the Spanish language (as an extension of the culture), and this bothers the gender/sex radical lunatics - which is pretty much all the elite, white, powerful liberals and Democrats. Hence, their refusal to use the masculine “Latinos” when talking about men AND women, required them to invent their own gender neutral word.
I am one of the 99% who doesn't speak up publicly or professionally. I talk about it with friends and family, specifically the "woke" ones, but I won't, for example, share an article like this on Facebook or speak up when a colleague casually mentions the prevalence of white supremacy in America. I work in an entirely different field but one only marginally less woke than higher education. I'm 34 and my career is just starting to have something resembling momentum. I think the ongoing revolution at American universities is the single most important threat to our country, including China, but I'm not going to be another white male easily dismissed for wrong think. I just can't do it.
No offense to you. It is perfectly understandable why - but intellectual cowardice is how we ended up here. We need intellectually brave people to stand tall. The cultural peer pressure is a real force and causes people to lie to themselves and stay quiet when they know it is wrong. I was prepared to lose everything - my house, my job, and my life to stand for the code which I gave myself. I wasn’t always like this but maybe knowing that others are with you will help give more people courage to not tamper their voices.
Or, if subversive measures are more appealing here is another route we can take:
I agree. It seems daily that I read another non-woke intellectual taking the easy way out. Retiring, resigning, staying on but not fighting for what they believe. I know the battle isn't easy, but there appears to be a pattern of cowardice amongst the non-woke intellectuals that should concern everyone.
But nobody wants to die on a hill alone. OK, everyone should be willing to sacrifice their lives/careers to principal, must most won't -- probably you wouldn't. *But* give people a flag to rally round, and it's different. You have comrades at your side, you have a fighting chance, you have a plan, NOW it is possible to be brave.
Exactly Ray! We need a movement. And trickier, what if the movement had something all sides should believe in? For example, we should ALL (all sides) want to end the corruption in our systems, right? That is the #1 problem we face. It isn't the deep state (or whatever you want to call the colluding forces working against humanity), rather it is that our system isn't good enough to prevent their corruption. If we made a few easy tweaks that we all agreed on, we could prevent that corruption and once again gain control of the government and institutions that have been subverted.
Good thoughts Rationalist, but the war between sanity and fanaticism must come to a head too. I see it as the sane of both left and right vs. the maniacs of *both* the woke left and the trumpist right.
A year ago I would have seconded your opinion without hesitation. Today I sense there is more to it. As the professor said it is carefully orchestrated. I too am in a position to speak my mind but I understand that is very rare these days. So I advocate for the subversive route.
I think the US alt right / Christian movement are doing the right thing by creating their own institutions. IT platforms, schools, political movements. You can’t reform woke institutions. I also the cultural balkanization of the US is a good thing as it allows people to vote with their feet.
SO true. It's a fundamental lack of leadership in American institutions. I for one have refrained from donating to my alma mater for years now for precisely this reason and I am sure I am not alone.
Where we are all getting screwed is that we are donating, by gun point, through our taxes. Post secondary education is funded both by direct payment and via financial aid. Government welfare for these institutions has to stop now. It is corrupting them to their core.
You are not alone. After giving tens of thousands over 30 years to my alma mater based on my experience there, I took the time to follow what today's students were pursuing as majors and careers. I also noted that compared to my time in college, there were now two times more administrators than educators. When it came time for my annual donation, I contacted the school to request a discussion over this turn of events. To my dismay, I learned much of the shift was due to title nine issues and the increasing comfort required by students. I also realized the school had a list price for education, but only 4 paid the full bill out of 550; the rest got a discount through merit or other scholarships. I asked why not just drop the price, improve the quality of applicants, and get more to pay full price. The answer was astonishing, "people perceive value through the retail price." I suggested they should try to appeal to students who fundamentally understand quality and price.
It was the clincher, keep my money and spend little time talking about or to my alma mater. Instead, I spend lots of time with young people talking about the importance of having real experiences in the workplace and life that require leadership and focus on a goal and achieving it. When I hire people I look for the actual quality applicant who has a PSD degree....poor, smart, and determined. I have met very few from the most elite schools; most come from state schools.
It's actually time to make these institutions pay taxes or more taxes as the case my be. The Ivy League schools especially are raking in obscene amounts of money and yet they continue to charge burdensome fees just because they can. The core is rotten.
I struggle with this. I’m 51 and don’t know how much longer I can take the bullshit. You might think you can handle it, compartmentalize it, but eventually, in my experience, it all gets to be too much to bear. Too much hiding, too much swallowing down your objections and opinions. The worst is the feeling that I’m part of something deeply wrong, maybe even evil. I try to be subversive, try to find and talk to like minded colleagues but all this living in the shadows is getting to me. It’s no way to live in the long term. I want to be free, intellectually, spiritually and emotionally.
It’s much harder to make a change at 51. You should really consider what the next twenty years will feel like for you. Hope this doesn’t sound harsh, because I do identify with your struggles. I don’t know what the fuck to do myself, but I’m looking for ways out.
I’m a 54 year old professor and agree… it is a struggle. The academy has changed so much from when I first started. If I thought I could get a job outside of academia, I’d do it in a flash. But because of my age and what I do, it’s not realistic. All I can really do is count the days to retirement.
Frankly, I’m not sure what I’d do if I was your age. If you can, I would try to get out, as I think it’s going to get worse.
Excellent question! The reason I think the academy will deteriorate further is that (a) the ideology is firmly entrenched, with the vast majority of faculty being progressives who are loathe to admit that they are wrong (this is, after all, where the ideology originated and careers are built on it); (b) the students who adopt the ideology do so with a religious zeal and it is these students who will one day make up the academy, presumably pushing it further leftward (conservatives, for sure, and probably middle of the road liberals know better than to pursue a career in academics these days; they will not be welcome); (c) many universities, including my Midwest one, are working to include misgendering and bias complaints under Title IV (which is horrifying, in my view); and (c) DEI is big business on campuses (see https://www.heritage.org/education/report/diversity-university-dei-bloat-the-academy).
The winds may very well be shifting in the larger society, but I've seen no evidence that this is occurring at universities--at least not at my major university in the Midwest. I sincerely hope that I'm wrong about this and that it gets better. But they (the progressives, Marxists) have been on a long, steady march to get to this point and so I don't see them abandoning their cause anytime soon, especially now that they have gained societal acceptance. The only thing that can stop them would be if parents stopped sending their children to college.
Julia, because there are absolutely no incentives, nor any Internal or external pressures, in place to change the trajectory. Absolutely none. It’s very dire indeed.
BP, I share your pessimism. I have thought about leaving what feels like an infinite number of times. My issue is similar to yours: I am quite stuck because of what I do (essentially, a highly specialized humanities subdiscipline that involves plenty of analytic rigor, but no data crunching or quantitative analysis, which are the only academic skills that are seen as valuable in the market these days). In 2021, I talked to a friend who is recruiter in my pre-doctorate line of work and she told me that it would be very difficult for me to get back in because it’s so incredibly competitive. In fact, her only advice was for me was to try to get my foot in the door by applying to be a administrative assistant, so basically a secretary. I was so depressed after that conversation and frankly a bit offended - an admin with a PhD, really? So basically, my writing, communication, and analytic skills are basically worth nothing in the market? On top of that, being an observant Catholic, I have a bunch of kids, the oldest of which is starting high school. So starting over completely would be a big ask, because my current employer, bad as they may be, pays me a lot more than a secretary would make. Plus, in four years I can access tuition benefits for other Catholic schools for my oldest. Sadly, never did I think I would have such an appreciation for the phrase “golden handcuffs.”
Hi Antigone! I can't imagine being in the humanities, as it contains among the most woke people on campus (at least at my university). And given that you are an observant Catholic (assuming that your colleagues know that about you), it must be even worse for you. In my experience, the two things that academics abhor and actively discriminate against are Republicans/conservatives and people who are religious--unless you ascribe to the Islam religion (the latter is at least quasi acceptable, whereas Christianity most assuredly is not). So much for "diversity and inclusion."
Honestly, I can't imagine that you would ever get hired as an administrative assistant because you would be way too overqualified for the position. Further, it doesn't sound realistic for you to do that given your responsibility to your family. That said, it doesn't hurt to look to see what's out there. While I haven't looked myself, I've heard that there are websites and consultants that can help academics who are considering alternative careers, as you do have skills (as you say, writing, communication, and analytic skills) that ought to be of worth to some potential employers. These websites/consultants might be able to help you think outside the box for job opportunities you might never have considered otherwise.
As for me, I think it's too late largely because of my age, but also what I do (I do research and so I have some quantitative skills, but I am by no means a statistical wizard). I am also super worried about the economy and, therefore, I would be reluctant to make any big career changes (I've heard that layoffs are expected among the professional class this fall). So, I'm pretty much stuck, I think.
Have you been able to engage with colleagues who feel the same way that you do about the academy? I do have a couple likeminded colleagues that I can commiserate with and if it wasn't for them, I think I'd be even more miserable than I already am! I would love it if there was a support group of sorts for academic folks who don't subscribe to wokeness. I'm not sure that's realistic, though. I think people might be too scared to put themselves out there.
Again, with any luck (and lots of prayer!), maybe the academy will straighten itself out with time. Who knows.
It keeps me up at night too. I'm not in academia, BTW, but in a very woke industry. I want to leave, but building a new career at this stage would be difficult. I feel really lucky that I don't have kids to support, though. These are tough decisions, but ultimately our peace of mind, our quality of life and our health are more important than anything.
I own a small restaurant in a very liberal midwest university town. I can't post on social media, as I'll end up being boycotted (it's happened before) and forced out of business. It's simple to state that you should 'go down swinging' when it's someone else's livelihood, it's a bit different when you're sacrificing yourself.
Will you enjoy living in a Stalinist world? Because that's the end-game. Most people are cowards and followers. I learned that very early on in life when I stood up. But the alternative is unthinkable.
I would have agreed a year ago. I am starting to realize that it is a trap designed to weed out traditional or independent thinkers. They should stay. They should document (not on an office computer) what they observe. We need moles.
Courage, yes, is the essential pre-requisite to fight evil. But intelligence is also high on the list.
Concurrent with speaking out (or perhaps even leading it), we need to develop methods to become more robust on an individual and communal level. Tyrants of all stripes ALWAYS target basic life needs (mostly food and income, but increasingly access to energy) and so serious consideration is required to minimize single points of failure. Save, live below your means, and have multiple lines of income -- these are some of the obvious ones. (And of course, easier said than done.) Beyond that: community. There is a massive groundswell happening in the "alternative economy" space (or whatever you choose to call it) with millions of people who are very well aware that this is a critical inflection point in the story of human freedom. For me, that means I now go FAR out of my way to patronize businesses aligned with my values - a previously unimaginable thing based on my (rapidly shifting) secular, capitalist worldview.
As it pertains to a small business in a leftist enclave, I wish I had any answer at all. I’ve been a business owner and I know how vulnerable that position can be. You might have hard questions to ask yourself. Will those Leftist areas even be sustainable in a few years? Is your investment built atop a rotting carcass and, if so, is it better to bail sooner or later.
Beyond that, nothing is ever a monolith and a big part of a small niche can easily eclipse of a small part of a large one. Can you lean into the cancellation to bring out a new customer base? The Alt Economy is replete with examples of people who parlayed their cancellation to greater success.
This is not to say this avenue is available to everyone or that there isn’t a massive struggle involved. It isn’t, and there is. But it does point a way forward which I think essentially boils down to: 1 – get robust and 2 – help those aligned with your values.
Courage is special because it’s rare. Rare and, yes, necessary. But it’s also incumbent on all of us to support the courageous in any way we can.
This is the fight of our lives. The fight that will determine not just the course of the rest of our individual lives, but the very path of human civilization itself. The longer we wait to fight, the harder it becomes.
I wonder. If a small business in a woke town stood for the unwoke truth, would it encourage others who are keeping silent out of fear to come out of the woodwork? Could it perhaps result in increased business? (I know I specifically patronize businesses who refuse the woke message.) Such an experiment could end in ruin...otoh, it might not. And I would say that if it does end in ruin (perhaps likely?), the woke have already prevailed.
They've definitely prevailed in my town. I was attacked once, and withstood it, but it's not worth it to fight it again, when our city and county government are all progressives.
But then again there's the famous recent case of Gibson's Bakery v. Oberlin College where Gibson's sued Oberlin and took them to the cleaners. Maybe not exactly on point but if nobody stands up the the leftist bullies - and make no mistake but they are a minority - we will all go down with the ship.
Never forget what Ronald Reagan said:
“Freedom is never more than one generation away from extinction. We didn't pass it to our children in the bloodstream. It must be fought for, protected, and handed on for them to do the same, or one day we will spend our sunset years telling our children and our children's children what it was once like in the United States where men were free.”
Our America is worth fighting - and dying - for. Who disagrees? I'd like to hear why.
It's happened many times where I live as well. Disgruntled employees with poor work ethics love to make false allegations and rally the wokesters to destroy a person's livelihood around here.
very true seen it happen to a good friend he had to step down from a business he built from nothing , all because some slacker accused him of racism for not advancing said slacker . Very sad all I can say is good thing I retired , don't think I would last long at any job these days
they will find a way to take you down , I feel for you having to watch what you say or post , must be terrifying not knowing when or why the hammer will drop . All I can say is good luck .
You definitely should keep your business and personal opinions separate (unless your opinions are part of your brand). If you can’t do it, then you are being wise.
I would say to you and the the Rationalist that, without taking any offense to your comments, I don't consider it intellectual cowardice when the rules of the game as established by the majority woke negate any chance at rational discussion. When I'm one on one with a friend, I can rationalize with them, get them to stick to a point and try and actually back it up with anything tangible, etc. Online and in the workplace, challenges are immediately shot down with claims of trauma and a reminder of their official victim status. From there, any further arguing only proves the point in the woke minds.
But I don't know, you're probably both right. Better to go down swinging than end up as the woman at the end of Invasion of the Body Snatchers.
I like the metaphor of the leopard eating the face of your neighbor, with the sudden realization that it has future designs yours. It seems what many in academia failed to acknowledge is that what starts out as a cute little cub grows up with an ever-increasing appetite. There was a time when the little leopards could have been caged or in this case engaged directly by their colleagues and forced to justify their “petty spite” and/or “spiritual purification” pogroms. There was a time in academia when open discussion or formal debate was a cherished means of doing so. Alas, it seems neither Mr. Manson nor his colleagues chose to do so, not even when the leopard was one cubicle away. Perhaps he felt he needed permission, as in the case of his colleague Jeff. Of course, some would argue that you never need permission to do the right thing.
A leopard can’t change its spots and nor can the Marxist "woke" crowd. To use another metaphor, it’s become clear that the animals are running the zoo. The only defense against being eaten is to stop feeding them, force them back into the wild, or in this case the non-academic world where one needs to produce something someone else is willing to pay for. Not to diminish Mr. Manson’s field, but I doubt there is much of a market for “nonhuman primate behavior” or “human personality variation”. Given the interaction with his colleagues, I think he makes my point on the last one. “Higher” education has become one big scam with decreasing market value. Just ask those who graduated with a degree in “gender equity” now working at Starbucks to pay $60,000 in student loan debt. Just like the housing bubble of the early 2000s, it about to pop like an infected abscess. I suppose the good news for Mr. Mason is he won’t be around to get covered in puss.
Every government agency , every university and almost all large corporations now have divisions of diversity, equity and inclusion. There are plenty of jobs for ethnic and gender studies majors. They don't do anything useful, but they draw paychecks, sometimes quite large ones.
DEI is a veritable industry. It was a clever way to employ otherwise unemployable BIPOC graduates who graduated with Blacks / Gay / Queer / Feminist / Studies majors. Do note that after Michelle Obama failed to become partner at her law firm she went to a local Chicago hospital and became its 'diversity counselor' @ $125K per year. After her husband, Barak, became a Senator and he landed a $2 million grant for the hospital - they bumped Michelle's pay to $300K. This was all published in a 2009 New Yorker article.
During recessionary times, anyone with DEI on their resume or anything resembling wokeism in the body copy, will end up in the "pass" pile. I'm sure there will be an algorithm created so they don't even make it to the hiring managers inbox.
I certainly hope so, but in the meantime, DEI officers and their minions are doing plenty of damage within universities and corporations. While I could see DEI newbies being passed over in the next recession, I don’t see the current DEI budgets shrinking much. There is too much political pressure for organizations to put their money where their mouth is on these matters. So those DEI offices will continue to do much damage one way or another.
As soon as companies are stung by the recession, DEI depts. will be the first on the chopping block. All DEI depts. bring to the table are expensive lawsuits and under productive whiny employees.
That would be logical- but don’t you think they’d be thrashing & wailing should that happen? The societal pressure to goose-step to this movement/ religion is powerful…
DEI employees aren't producers. They have no skills, and contribute nothing to an organizations bottom line. They are a trend, a red line on the ledger, and will be trimmed as soon as the timing is right. They will get cut before the marketing budget.
A company's loyalty is to their shareholders. The top producers who add quantifiable value will remain at a company during a recession. These jobs have nothing to do with monitoring pronouns or creating safe spaces.
Ah, memories. I graduated from the University of Arizona back in 1980. If memory serves the out of state tuition (I was from New Jersey) back then was about $5,000 for two semesters. I had a 67 Plymouth Barracuda that I bought for $600 when I was in high school. It had a slant six and a three gear, column mounted shifter. It took three days to make the trip from my house to Tucson. The first night I would sleep in the car, the second in a cheap motel and the third where I would be living during the school year. On the last trip home my brakes were failing, and I had to pump them before they would engage. Luckily it was all highway driving and I made sure to stay a good distance behind cars and trucks.
In between classes and working various jobs so I could eat, I had some truly remarkable experiences. We would take trips down to Guaymas, Mexico in my friend’s van and camp on the beach. I remember pulling over one moonless night to pee (we always packed plenty of beer) and looked up to the most amazing array of stars I’ve ever seen. They looked like clouds. Another night we camped on Mt. Lemmon, outside of Tucson when a thunderstorm rolled in across the valley below. It was like being on Mt. Olympus, watching thunderbolts hurtle earthward below us. And then there were the girls. Back then you didn’t have to ask permission before you kissed them. All you had to do was look in her eyes and she would let you know how she felt….
Those days of sacrificing a lot of immediate comfort to reach a larger goal later never felt like a sacrifice, did it? I did the same as you folks here . . . affordable state college, worked year-round to pay the bills, graduated with zero bank but zero debt, then went to work and never looked back.
Even working on the mall landscaping crew summers was fun, albeit sweaty and back-breaking.
Abscess: A localized collection of purulent material in any body part, resulting from invasion of a pyogenic bacterium or other pathogen. Sterile abscess: An abscess from which microorganisms cannot be cultivated as a tuberculous or mycotic culture at one week. How prevalent are true sterile abscesses? I admit they do exist.
Math is hard. Science is boring. These fields unfairly assume that there are correct answers and that you have to know what they are. I feel safer in a field where my feelings and opinions are important.
I’m in the same situation. The last two companies I worked for are super-woke. I think critical theory is ridiculous and corrosive to society and culture. I was angry at mandatory “Privilege” training that said meritocracy and individualism are problematic concepts. But, I would never publicly say some of the opinions I hold at my current company because overall I like the job, I like my team, and I need the paycheck. I also have significant financial and family obligations, and I cannot afford to be railroaded out of the company with a stain on my record. So, for me it is separation of church and state. My opinions about politics stay among my friends—at least the ones who aren’t brainwashed yet.
The ideology is truly sick, but the people who push it are quite smart, at least tactically. They understand that the way to push the ideology is to tie it to your paycheck. They knew that infiltrating elite universities would lead to infiltrating corporate America because upper management of corporate america pulls directly from elite educational institutions. And why wouldn’t they pull from those institutions? To get into those institutions you have to be intelligent, highly motivated and highly competitive. I don’t fault companies for that, and I don’t fault a lot of the young folks who graduate from those institutions. Again, these people are highly competitive, and wokeness has become another competitive avenue for them. They can’t just be woke, they have to be the most dedicated wokesters.
So here we are. What can you do? You and I don’t make the rules, we are expected to live by them.
I am just going to vote Republican. That’s a very hard thing to do for me, but I just don’t see what choice I have.
This is an understandable reaction. I'm further along in my career - a tenured faculty member at a public university in the South - but I'm not yet in a position to retire nor to sustain dismissal or an unpaid leave.
And yet, someone has to show some courage sometime. My advice would be to find allies, advocate for freedom of thought wherever and whenever you can, and prepare yourself mentally, physically, and - as much as possible - financially to face down the leopard if and when it shows itself.
I’m a tenured professor too. The only thing that has kept me sane is that I have cultivated a very small group of likeminded colleagues with whom I can talk to about the madness going on in my department and university.
The Uvalde police couldn’t either. You will have to live with yourself. Perhaps a direct attack is futile but think strategically and look for opportunities
I mostly agreed with the other responses to my comment, and I'm not one to get worked up by any online comment, but I'll say that you comparing my stance that I shouldn't comment on this topic publicly to the Uvalde police is inflammatory and dimwitted.
It comes down to courage. I sympathize with the Uvalde police and you. I hope I have the courage to say and do the right thing in the challenging moment.
life must be tough holding all that in , scared to mention your views . Dump facebook there is nothing there for you . So you have a career , as long s you goosestep in line with the others , how long to you go along with this ? Or do you stop before you goosestep off the cliff with the other lemmings ? Sorry still asleep
Is it not? Are people not allowed to be themselves or speak freely about their thoughts because of the tenets of the ideology of the mass of their contemporaries. Seems to be similar to me. I would argue that this is exactly what the woke folks want. They feel that great injustice was done to various groups by others and the answer is to commit injustice to their perceived enemies? Funny because the Kendis of the world promote that very tactic. Current discrimination is the answer to past discrimination, no?
Let me be more clear: I am not addressing whether or not discrimination is taking place--clearly it is. Why, I'm a white male myself, I should know ;-)
But: Academics, media workers, Google employees, etc. have CHOSEN to work in industries that embrace this toxic nihilism. The historical examples (Jews in 1930s Germany, black people in the Jim Crow South, etc) did not. It is typical of today's intellectually featherweight discourse to equate the problems some privileged, upper-middle-class, Americans experience to the worst excesses of human savagery--and I don't buy it. God forbid these privileged softies ever have to stare down anything more scary than a slow supermarket checkout line...
You don’t think that there were gay people who were otherwise privileged, upper-middle-class softies who still weren’t allowed to be openly gay because the other upper-middle-class privileged softies were predominantly Christian and anti-homosexuality?
In the Army, where I learned most valuable life lessons in the simplest and crudest way, I learned that shit rolls downhill. That was simply the explanation for what occurs when those in the hierarchy above you do something wrong, and how it ultimately will become your problem because those higher up don’t often accept consequences because they don’t have to. I believe the overall point was that those with less power are subject to the whims of those who have more.
So I empathize with the more powerful, not because they deserve it implicitly, but because shit rolls downhill and if we can end this with the privileged class, we should. Otherwise they will screw everything up and the people who they think they are trying to help will ultimately be the ones who suffer the most.
Coming out in the seventies was better, I think. Back then, being gay meant having to be verbally circumspect but also being allowed to focus on one issue—finding love—instead of dozens!
I cannot like this but I do feel your pain. Best of luck to you. Document what you see and hear. Don't join the mob and that is what it is. Use fear of confrontation as an excuse. Perhaps in the future you can be a voice of reason. A mole of sorts.
It seems to me you’re making a Faustian bargain. Sooner or later the woke mob will come for you or the rational among us will render your employer irrelevant. I was once faced with a dilemma similar yours. It had nothing to do with woke fanatics but to my mind a more relevant issue- competence. I was hired to shepherd through several development projects that had been stalled because of existing staff incompetence . The design budgets had been depleted ands the clients were refusing to ante up any more money until previously agreed to milestones were met. It fell upon me to spend literally hundreds of uncompensated hours to meet them. When the absentee partner showed up to finalize billing I went off on the office manager and laid out the sheer incompetence of him and his staff. Within days I was laid off. At the same time I had a newborn baby, a wife on maternity leave and lots of bills to pay. The good news is that I landed a better paying job with support employees who were willing to develop skills necessary to make the company successful.
I appreciate your dilemma. The moral of my story is to have faith in yourself. If you lead well, others will follow and you’ll prove yourself to be indispensable.
By the way that company no longer exists and after it was bought out the partner retired and the manager I exposed was fired. I’m now at a point in my life where I can tell any problematic snowflakes to go fuck themselves, in more subtle phraseology of course. Even better, there’s nothing they can do about it.
I disagree with the others below and am on your side for staying and advancing quietly. I believe the universities will need reasonable people at all levels to reveal their true colors when the time comes. The fight had best be led by those who can go all out, those whose choice is retire or fight. Not that I am saying the retire choice is wrong; but certainly legal battles will have some impact.
Well, at least you're honest, but it begs the question: why in the world did you go down that path in the first place? ALL of this was going on when you made the decision.
I get my blood boiling when reading articles like this. Our higher education has been hijacked by woke inquisition that does nothing but purity tests and prosecuting people for any hint of disagreement or free thought.
We are now slowly reaching the point, where normal people are force either to censored themselves or resign or in case of speaking up having their livelihoods taken away and for ever be branded racists, fascists, nazis or what ever.
Hopefully we are also reaching the point, where this woke left is slowly staring to eat its own (as any revolution does). Evermore liberal, progressive elites on the costs are being attacked for not being radical enough or daring to question any tenets of woke religion.
What ever the outcome in the future, sadly woke ideology will follow us for couple next years. Lets hope that with increasing religious zeal of woke mob, evermore people start to wake up from this woke nightmare we are currently in.
This will probably end like Lysenkoism (pseudoscience) in Soviet union, which affected biology departments of USSR. Basic ideology of Lysenkoism is very similar to todays woke ideology in USA, that both had support of politics, both denied basics biology and both we not based on facts but on made up examples. I recomend everyone reading up on Lysenkoism and be shocked by similarities to current issues on our Universities. Well its not surprising, because both ideologies come from same left leaning "kitchen".
"As you won’t be surprised to hear, Jeff is not a racist, but a standard-issue liberal Democrat."
Please stop insinuating all racists are, you know, Republicans. I'm sure the woman who wore a gorilla mask to throw an egg at Larry Elder considered herself a standard-issue liberal Democrat. There is racism (and anti-Semitism) within both parties, but the Democratic party actively and publicly weaponizes racism and anti-Semitism to achieve its goals against any target (white, black, Jewish, Asian) who isn't 100 percent committed to their poisonous program.
I am a UCLA graduate and majored in Anthropology (1979) so this article grabbed my attention right away. UCLA will no longer have my financial support. I am grateful my own children are grown and graduated from college already before all the woke stuff started full throttle.
Perhaps when the Republicans take over the house they can hold hearings on the state of free speech on college campuses. My dream would be that they tie federal support of colleges to campus free speech. There are metrics published by FIRE ( https://www.thefire.org/largest-ever-free-speech-survey-of-college-students-ranks-top-campuses-for-expression/ ) that have been tracking this for years, that could be used to incentivize colleges to change their policies to promote free speech.
In hospitals, Medicare requires certain clinical performance metrics be met in order to get Medicare reimbursement, and since Medicare is 40-60% of a hospitals income, it's taken very seriously, and drives change. If you look at the FIRE metrics, the best colleges still have very low free speech metrics. Requiring them to meet certain levels in order to realize their federal funding could drive significant changes on the campus.
I’m always annoyed by leftist friends who screech about taxing churches — but turn a blind eye to universities, which are ALSO non-profits and, unlike churches, receive massive federal funding and land grants on top of paying no corporate tax.
At least churches do charity work and are generally a net good to society. Universities do nothing but indoctrination into a philosophy that is a cancer to our culture.
Universities are big business with an agenda . They have to much money . Thet lost their way 40 50 years ago . A good many perfessors are not worth 1/4 the salary the get . it is insane when a few radical students can ruin careers of the best . Money ruins everything
Maddi...from what i heard, NPR is on track to receive $500 Million in the year 2024, all tax money for a one sided pitch, not the only gift they receive.
The reverence for « free speech » is too often selective. Many who decry the tyranny of wokeness on college campuses are often quick to support « don’t say gay » laws in public schools.
wadr, I don't see where personal free speech has any connection to what public school curriculums teach to children. Are you saying that free speech should allow teachers to teach anything they wany to children, without regard to the wishes of the parents?
And, anyone using the term 'Don't Say Gay' is pretty much admitting they don't know what the actual legislation says, or are willing to mischaracterize it for political purposes.
Think about it: the only honest reason why people gravitate to the academy is that it's a sinecure (like the public sector, without the stigma). You don't have to do anything even approaching real work and you have most of your time free to do pretty much anything you want. The only price used to be that you won't make much money, but that is no longer true, and if you're on the administrative side, you can do very well indeed. So it's worth asking: what types of personalities like this? I'm afraid the answer is not flattering to those involved.
As to this Prof, I'd say his essay carries very little weight, as he put up with this dumpster fire until he could safely retire, and then wrote this piece cloaking himself in moral righteousness to justify a pedestrian financial decision. Like I said, look at the people involved in these entreprises, and you'll begin to understand the problem. 'Twas ever thus.
Much of academics is anything but sinecure these days. Maybe this is the 1950-1980's academic fantasy most people still associate with the profession, but today it's a never ending battle to justify your position and 'tenure' is largely a thing of the past (or if it exists, it only covers a trivial amount of your salary). Today, professors at top ranked research institutions are seen through the lens of the the dollar amount they bring in to the university. Now, it isn't exactly put like that, but essentially you are graded on proxies of that measure: the status of your publications, your recent grants and other activities that are essentially profitable for the institution (ie patents). If you aren't productive in ways that pay your salary, the university essentially has a system to "fix the glitch" as done with Milton in Office Space, and you simply stop receiving your paycheck. Everything just works itself out naturally.
Now, if you want to talk administrators, that's a whole different ballgame. We keep seeing an expansion of administration roles in academia, and I think that largely stems from very high leadership that need to be seen as proactively doing something new or at least reactive to the latest political trends. So, they wield their institutional funds to create a FTEs for various roles at both faculty and staff levels. The interesting thing here is that these types of roles are generally lacking externally derived funding, so they are supported on the backs of professors that bring in money to fund their own salary and research program.
And the interesting part there is applying this to the situation in the article. If licensing of Predpol's algorithms brings in much money to the university (and if developed at UCLA, certainly UCLA has some financial stake here), all the activism in the world is going to have a very hard to time unseating it and its creator. Like I said, you are largely as good as your revenue in academia. And, ironically, the money brought in via Predpol is likely contributing to the pool of money that fund the salaries of the people that want it axed. These facts aren't lost on the highest level leadership either.
But I'm just a disillusioned and cynical academic scientist, so take all this for what it's worth.
I have a graduate degree from UCLA and lost much faith in the place when the campus Ministry of Truth cast out Keith Fink, whose case is mentioned here. Guy was right-wing, yes, but his First Amendment course was very popular on campus, not least because he didn't tell students what to think (rare at UCLA now, sadly) and was respectful of all views. Contemporaneous discussions of the matter have been scrubbed from Daily Bruin archives and even stupid Wikipedia.
In a country where two-thirds of young adults can't name the country from which the founders declared their independence and where high schools no longer have civics classes, a First Amendment course is a fine way to begin to understand the Bill of Rights. That such cannot be tolerated at a major public university should concern us all.
Good luck to you Professor Manson. I wish nothing but the best for you and your future. This postmodern/woke ideology snuck up on most everyone else, including me, seemingly overnight. I was fired from my position for a series of comments I posted on my personal FB page.
My comments were impolite, passionate, and were widely tolerated, except one woman, who just so happened to be a colleague of mine. She decided to take a screen shot of my comments to present to our employer's HR team director.
The snowflake claimed she felt threatened by my comments, which weren't directed at her, nor any one else in particular - the outcome: I was fired immediately.
My sense is this extreme and intolerant overreaction came directly from the director of the HR team, who previously worked for ultra-woke Ellen DeGeneres in hyper-woke LA. before becoming the so-called "Chief People Person" at my former company.
Yep. And I'm female. I'd much rather work with/for/lead a group of males than a group of females; previous eras, a combination was always best. Unfortunately the crazed, and I think basically unhappy, female social media shouting is ruling the day because there is no consequence other than agreeing with such in hopes they will go away. The tweets go up, any conflicting responses barred, and thus they believe they're righteous. Why quit? One thing still stuns me per quote from one of the other commenters said - paraphrasing - why should the loner at the end of the hallway get to decide what a leader does? And why should a leader promote illogical policy to keep the loner quiet? Very easy to clean up...leaders shouldn't let that poof of smoke at the end of the hallway rule their direction. Heavy handedness is needed.
"Chief People Person", now there's a good example of a woke euphemism. They've gone from " Personnel Officer" to "Human Resources Director" to "Chief People Person". The words become more comfortable as the policies become more rigid and intolerant.
Lesson: unless you know and trust them as friends, you shouldn't have colleagues connected to you on social media (and your social media account should be private to friends only). LinkedIn is for anodyne colleague connections.
Exactly. Look at the public comments made by the Democrat leaders about any black conservatives and tell me that they aren't more racist than anything ever muttered by conservatives.
Peter - the abject and open racism displayed towards black people who don't align with leftist orthodoxy is nuts. Our SC Senator Tim Scott regularly gets called a "coon" and "Uncle Tim."
I have no idea of what you're situation in life is, but would you give up everything to fight for a cause? Have you ever been faced with that?
I've lost jobs (CEO level) twice because I fought my superiors, I can tell you, it's a bitch, and not many people will do it, but plenty of people say they would. In both of my cases, the culture didn't change, I was just out of a job.
Life situation: entrepreneur, very successful. Giving it all up, changing the game. Don't have superiors, which is a key and i suppose rare difference. No board, no bank. Will be sure to maintain that independence.
The author in question could not be fired so had a unique position to hold out.
Your situation sounds like you were a lone voice. Hope you find yourself among better company next time
A lot of people left Germany in the thirties and they were derided by many of their countrymen as foolish and over-sensitive. One of those people was an eccentric professor named Albert Einstein. I have never heard or read anywhere that anyone called him foolish or stupid.
At some point, we need to abandon the anodyne term "woke" and replace it with the far more accurate term - Marxism. What is occurring today is no different than Russia in 1917, China in 1949, Cuba in 1959, and Venezuela in 1997 - condemn/rewrite history, set the population against itself, attack/censor free speech, condemn meritocracy and replace it with allegiance to "equality of outcome." The end state of this process is the always the same (see the 4 once-prosperous countries listed above). Words matter and until we collectively start describing what's happening in America accurately, we should not expect different results.
Except it isn't Marxism. The countries you name do not practice Marxism or communism or socialism. They are all run by totalitarian governments that do not allow dissent, and that punish free thought and personal initiative. Life may be good if you're a friend of Vlad or a CCP apparatchik or Maduro's nephew, but you still must obey all the rules. Even Karl Marx, bigot that he was, would be appalled by the misnamed application of his flawed theory.
You are absolutely correct. However, they all started out with the same slogans and actions that we are living through. My point is that all of these countries started with the same slogans and actions. The question to be asked is whether what you describe is America's future.
Yes, but it's been a long time. Thank you for reminding me. Marx and Engels may have thought their ideas would improve the lot of the working classes, but results to date have been mixed at best.
Tenured, leaving and retiring? Why dont you stay on and make them try to fire you. It will cover your monthly nut while you more publicly expose the racist scumbags who run that s..hole department.
You have a good point here: it's the profs with tenure who are in a position to retire who are in the best position to fight back, because they have less to lose. I mean, if you can afford to retire, you can afford to be fired, so why not take the risk? I'm a tenured faculty member at a public university in the South; I'm not yet eligible to retire, and being fired or placed on unpaid leave would be a financial catastrophe for me. I'd like to think I could respond with courage should the leopard show itself, but the risks for me are much, much greater.
Same here. I am an Independent contractor in the medical field, ie.,no rights. Even though there is a shortage of clinicians in my field, a misinterpreted word to the wokesters who run Admin. means look for a new job,.
Believe me, nobody here in Colombia or from any country in Latin America prefer the artificial term "Latinx". If you use that word here you will get reactions that go from derision to plain mockery. That ridiculous word it's the creation of some woke Americans of Latino ancestry, who want to claim their identity based on stereotypes and false assumptions about "Latino" cultures, as if all Spanish-speaking countries were a monolith.
In conclusion, many feel here this is just a thing that woke "gringos" with a Hispanic surname (and uppity white ones, of course) care about, and who want to know more than the supposed cultures they're supposedly proud of. I cannot think of anything more condescending.
On the other hand, I always read these stories of college humiliations with a bad feeling. These people are so blinded and brainwashed that it's almost parodical. How could you be so eager to destroy other person's life?
But for destroying the competent and successful, how will they warrant merit?
They’re not the best and brightest; they’re simply the Party Faithful.
It is easy to make fun of university professors- but imagine the pressure of having to discover or talk about brand new things every year - whether through research or pure thought. One of the problem with affirmative action / diversity hires is that the people so hired can’t really perform at that level. So they compensate by making activism more important than being a good scholar. Whole programs (usually ‘something something studies’) are invented to create jobs for professors who aren’t really scholars to teach students who aren’t really academic enough to be at university.
nice cover , Pops.
Pretty undeniable this is what has happened at Elite universities. Not enough qualified candidates in the pipeline just put them in silly new sub branches no one takes seriously. Well that worked for awhile but now the numbers are against the serious academics and there's no moves left on the board except keep your head down and don't draw any attention to yourself.
"One of the problem with affirmative action / diversity hires is that the people so hired can’t really perform at that level. "
ironically, this is doing in the left in unexpected places. for example, selecting Supreme Court Justices based on race and sex characteristics, not merit, means the selections from the left are out of their league on judicial reasoning.
Increasingly, we have academic merit on the right, and tokenism on the left. no wonder the left throws tantrums, it truly is unfair.
Really?
They are the worst and darkest.
It's worth mentioning why Latinx is so offensive as a term. It isn't just that it's made up, it diminishes a core part of our Spanish language: gender.
Americans are not accustomed to a gendered language; English isn't. Oh, sure, we call ships "she" but these are colloquialisms not core linguistic components. In Spanish though, essentially every word is male or female at its core. This is why Latinx is so demeaning, it eliminates one of the beauties of our native language, and it does so in the very name we use to refer to ourselves. To Latinos (that means both men and women together), it feels like colonialism all over again. Wealthy and powerful white people suppressed our beliefs in the 1500's and they're still trying to alter our language today.
Fundamentally, a group of people deserve to be referred to by the name they choose themselves. I write this only so that those here have better tools at their disposal to push back on this terminology. And I encourage you to do so.
My wife (Latina) calls folks that use “Latinx” “pendejx”
Might not be common in Central or South America, pero “Pendejo” is a fairly common, nonflattering descriptor in Mexico
In my head that turned into a very anglicized "penday-hex."
So funny! Your wife is awesome!
love it!
Brilliant!
In Colombia it's very common, though it has a less insulting meaning than in Mexico.
I thought Latinx was a Marxist propagandist attempt to capture the diverse cultures and countries represented by Latin/ Spanish ancestry and bring them under one political roof. It actually sounds like a word created by a marketing firm to sell a toothpaste campaign to a boardroom. I live in the American S.W. where many consider themselves Spanish because they were here before there was a Mexico or a United States. Interestingly, many of their ancestors were Jews who fled to the New World to escape the Inquisition. At a recent High School Graduation I noticed that a lot of blond haired blue eyed "Garcia's" were graduating with a lot of brown skinned, brown eyed "Smith's". Anyone with eyes to see it can pick out the Native American ancestry in many Mexicano's and Anglo's and vice versa. Likewise, African American. Is there sometimes tension between Spanish, Anglo and Native American cultures here, yep. But, the diversity creates mutual respect and most of us feel sad when encountering haters of any stripe. The thing most of "woke" doesn't understand and tries to mimic is that many of us are free men beyond race and culture.
I’m a gringo, my wife is Latina
I sometimes call our sons “rednexican”, which some of the more woker folks clutch their pearls over…
And that’s ok with me
love it, everyone has to stop taking themselves so seriously.
too funny.
Yeah famous writer and former Vox co-founder Matthew Yglesias has his spicy sounding Spanish last name from one paternal Cuban born grandfather. That Grandfather was an Ashkenazi (white European) Jew who's ancestors had fled to Spain centuries ago but didn't really intermarry with native Spanish population.
So he freely admits (to his credit) he got an affirmative action bonus on his Yale application for being Hispanic despite ethnically being just as white as any otherr Jewish American and only 1/4 grandparents even having the Cuban/Spain nationality as opposed to ethnicity connection.
It's a farce, which he freely admits, that this got him a preference on his college application.
Brian, what an excellent point. That never occurred to me. English is one of the few languages that doesn't assign gender to all nouns. How will the Woke morons address this?
Unfortunately, some movements are trying to normalize a non-gendered version of Spanish language. Spanish uses masculine nouns to refer to a group of individuals of both sexes (todos, amigos, expertos, etc), and it has been like this all the time. But some enlightened minds (feminists) decided that Spanish was a sexist language. So, what did they do? They started to duplicate nouns to cover both genders (todos y todas, amigos y amigas). As this was not enough, they then decided to change the masculine suffix "o", present in many nouns and change it for an "e". As a result, many news outlets are starting to use an "inclusive language" which is non-binary. Now they don't say "todos", but "todes". No "amigos", but "amigues", and all the variations you can imagine.
As you can expect, almost everybody finds this irritating and the Real Academia Española does not recognize inclusive language. Many people use it in an ironic way, but I fear this usage only contributes to its spread. Thanks goodness, it's still rare to find somebody in real life who talks like this. However, Argentina and Spain, the wokest countries in the Spanish-speaking sphere, have been invaded by this nonsense since a long time and government publications use inclusive language.
One thing I've noticed is that whenever woke people say "inclusive" what they are doing excludes people.
They are trying in Brazil too, but it has failed, they tried with "x", then "u" now "e". But typically only the media, academia (left) the everyday people on the street could care less.
Alejandro, how do these vicious, insane, jerks degender a word like lapiz? They want to destroy a beautiful language and its grammar rules that have lasted centuries.
There is an old saying "French to my diplomats, Spanish to my lovers, English to my servants and German to my dogs."
If you have time, check the following article, it's completely deranged: https://www.crehana.com/blog/negocios/que-es-el-lenguaje-inclusivo/
I glanced at the article and it seemed to me to be written by a woke advocate.
One of the woke goals is to get rid of gender altogether.
Great explanation!
Though I don't agree with the "suppression" part of your comment. We are a product of Spanish colonization, we speak Spanish (a European language) and our beliefs are not the same of the peoples who inhabited these lands. There was no Latin America when the Spanish came, that was a result of the independence processes in Hispanic America in the 19th century. And finally, we have Indigenous, European and African blood. That's undeniable and to repudiate our past is simply foolish.
Is it white progressives pushing "Latinx" or super-woke young Hispanic/Latino activists and students that invented the moniker in the ever consuming drive for "intersectionality" (no doubt, a number of those activists are LGBTQ identified and that's how it was introduced) and have enforced its usage within the circles of progressive activism and academia, which flows downstream to the whites in those circles?
I'm asking because it seems like of the criticism of this term assumes this was invented by white "woke" academics and activists, but my understanding of the genesis of the term is that it did originate from actual Hispanic/Latino progressive advocacy groups. The fact that this term appears to be widely out of touch with "mainstream" Hispanics/Latinos is probably more to do with the same gap that exists between hyper liberal white academics and activists and the white working and middle class that also exists between hyper liberal Hispanic academics and activists and the Hispanic working and middle class (and I think you'll observe the same gap between Black, Asian and even LGBTQ academics and acivists and their working and middle class counterparts).
A large part of the "problem" with "woke" white progressives is that their likely only exposure to minorities happens to be with minorities in the same academic, political and activist circles. Therefore, if a self-identified "Latinx" person insists that this is the correct term that should be used (and if not used, is a "micoragression" that can result in total social and professional ex-communication for the offender) white progressives assume they are speaking on behalf of their "community" and adopt the term and enforce it within their own circles. Similarly, white progressives whose main encounters with Black Americans tends to be with "Black Student Union" associations, BLM "activists", and other self-appointed "community representatives" tend to believe that ideas like "defund the police" are backed by the broader Black community without question, and take on similar stances.
Obviously not all, or even most, minorities hold the same views and support of the positions their "representatives" in academia hold, but the ones that white progressives are most likely to encounter in academia and activism hold these views to the extreme, vociferously, and with the power to extract extreme sanctions from "late followers" - the "woke" movement is largely becoming a pogrom of its own "believers" - but make no mistake a lot of the power and direction in this movement comes from those very academic and activist minorities with white progressives constantly scrambling to be the best "ally" of, cause the least offense to survive socially and professionally, and push the line even further in those efforts. Not to make "white progressives" victims either, but I think it's important to understand that a lot of these ideas *are* being generated by actual living and breathing "authentic" minorities, but ones entirely unrepresentative of their broader communities, but if you travel in those circles that is a fact you will be largely unaware of if your only contact with "minorities" is of this sort.
TLDR: "Latinx" is not really an invention of white progressives pushing this term on an uninterested minority, it's the invention of a subset of that minority group itself. IOW, this is almost a better argument to be had "in that community".
Very reasonable and possibly much closer to the mark.
Strategically, the "true" source does not necessarily matter when one considers how to oppose these dogmas. Consider labeling Whites as engaged in cultural arrogance (I first typed "genocide" since all of this is histrionics) as a canard. Draw out the "woke Latinx" creators of this moniker and then have them defend with their ethnic brothers and sisters their insistence on its usage.
The central issue is how important is such gamesmanship to the goal of human happiness and a just society? Most people want to make their way in life and have security and opportunity. Many are willing to work hard toward that goal. "Wokesterism" can be employed as an act of misdirection from the root causes of the inequality we face today. The most cynical members of the power elite must be very happy that the peasants are fighting among themselves instead of gathering torches and pitchforks. If you are the CEO of a major corporation whose compensation and bonus depends upon suppressing wages, siphoning off as much of the profit to shareholders (the rentier class) as possible, which would you prefer: the establishment of a union in your company or allowing some energy expenditure on "wokesterism". In an economy where everything and everyone has been commodified, the short term "smart move" is to allow (and indeed AFFIRM) the DEI faction to have their voice and deflect away from meaningful and substantive change of the status quo.
In the end, it is always all about the Money...
Late reply - sorry :) but I agree, the corporate push towards DEI/"wokeism" is entirely a devised concession to the perceived energy of the Democratic base that will be much more consumed with these issues than those of economic class and labor issues, and it's a still relatively cheap investment to herd your workforce through some obligatory DEI trainings as a liability shield from any lawsuits over "inequitable" workplace policies. It's also a branding and marketing tactic to the up and coming consumer markets comprised of Millennials and Gen Z who do indicate at least some of their consumer preferences can be swayed by such branding.
I just brought this up because I think a lot of the opprobium about "LatinX" is a bit misplaced and really misses the social dynamics of the "woke" left (and I really dislike reusing the term "woke" in this way given its origins, but it has really become the collloquial to describe the phenomenon), which if you don't understand it, it's hard to really resist or change it.
Leave it to privileged, woke leftists to try and remove gender from a Romance language lol
I've always considered Latinx as an example of cultural appropriation by a group of privileged closet aristocrats. I consider its use by "wokesters" as an example of arrogance.
The woke crowd is trying to get rid of gender as a concept, so not surprising they decided to "correct" Spanish to fit their own aims.
Brian...thanks for the explanation...needed.
Golfer, I'm referring to the European conquistadors who displaced the natives of ancient Mexico. I don't at all mean to say that native Mayan derivative belief systems were somehow better; based on results if nothing else, they were clearly not. But even people who recognize this and have no desire reclaim their native heritage (Mayan art and practices are undergoing a bizarre renaissance today, paralleling that of US American Indian culture) are aware of this history, and the linguistic colonization going on today feels like an echo of it.
I am a poor exemplar of this, since, while I have the Latino name, I'm as white (European) as anyone else. However travel to Chiapas and you will find many people who take this ancestry far more seriously. A guarantee Latinx wouldn't go down well there.
I really didn't post it to get into a history debate. It was 500 years ago, who cares? But if there's one thing the woke are sensitive to, it's charges of colonialism (even as they engage in it relentlessly) so claiming that "Latinx" is colonialist may make a few of them listen.
This is an example of describing people in archetypal terms is demeaning.
Except for language, are Guatemalans the same as Ecuadorians? Are Catalonians the same as Danes? Are Sri Lankans the same as the Japanese?
Affinity banners are raised but each member is probably more distinct from the next person as they are to someone outside of their affinity group.
Value people, not descriptions.
I don't think it's any more demeaning than black. If you're in Africa, "black" has no meaning because it refers to nearly everyone. I have not been to Africa, but based on my experience with Latin America, I suspect there are many more recognized categories in country than outside. The Irish and the Italians are both "white", but don't tell them that in 1940's NYC.
My personal preference would be that we stop being so focused on categorizing people by race at all (I think the French are right about this), but if we're going to to so, Latino is a useful category, despite its imprecision.
I’m for addressing people in whatever manner they prefer. If you want to be described as Latino or Latino or Latinx, good on you. I have always described my race as “Human”
I call these arrogant wokesters as "cultural fascists", "fascist colonizers", or "cultural appropriators". How arrogant to think that one can insert their desire for virtue signaling into a culture which dates back to the Romans.
Thanks for the explaining your point, Brian. I am of the same view: it's pointless to argue about something happened 500 years ago and it's seamed into our identities.
Yeah, Alejandro is right. Get 5 Latinos in the room and you'll get 6 different definitions of Latino. That said, I think the most common definition in the US would be someone from the historically Spanish or Portuguese colonies. Mostly that's central & south America, but not entirely. My wife is Latino because her father was a Filipino emigrant. Although most would also consider her Asian/Pacific Islander. (She looks as white as me though. She got the Missouri instead of the Manilla.)
Originally, Latino referred only to the people who inhabited the Lazio region, near to Rome, or in the broader sense, someone who spoke a language derived from Latin. It is a very disputed topic nowadays, this article (you can use Google translate) tries to elucidate the issue, though I can say the word has different meanings in the US and in Spain: https://verne.elpais.com/verne/2019/09/05/mexico/1567637745_213328.html
That's just the same false narrative we have been taught for generations: Spanish were perverse monsters and natives were peaceful and pacific beings. I am just tired of such simplistic view of history.
There are two things at play here.
1. The natives weren't peace loving, farmers, potters and weavers. The Aztecs and the Mayans were blood thirsty murderers. They performed human sacrifice on such a grand scale. It even sickened the conquistadors and that was hard to do. The purpose of warfare was not to kill and conquer your enemy, it was to capture as many as possible for human sacrifice. The Aztecs would line up hundreds of victims at the bottom of the Pyramid of the Sun and from sunrise to sunset slaughter their victims. The prisoner at the top of the stairs was put on a stone platform, held down and a priest would cut his still beating heart out, hold it up to the sun and his minions would throw the body over the backside of the pyramid and the next victim was put on the platform. That would go on until the sun went down and the next day it would start all over again.
The Mayans weren't much better.
2.The snowflakes lament how badly the Europeans treated the native Americans. Show me one country in the world that wasn't settle by invaders. Just one. Normandy, France is called Normandy because the Northmen settled it. And by settled, I mean the invaders came in, slaughter or enslaved the original occupants. This happened all over the world, including the Americas. The Romans committed genocide against the Gauls.
Now we look back in horror but back then it was common practice.
I've said this before and I will say it again, most people have never read a history book and it seems this ignorance is more prevalent on the left and they flaunt it and take pride in their ignorance.
Exactly, and that was the reason several peoples enslaved by the Aztecs allied with the Spaniards and defeated the Aztecs.
And I agree, it's not correct to view those events with our modern eyes. And regarding the European treatment of natives, we can say the Spanish were more benign than the British. At least the Spanish mixed with the natives, preserved their languages, granted privileges to those who supported them, built universities, etc.
You are right. We can't judge the past using our modern set of morals. What was right for them is wrong by our standards and vise versa.
Same here. I always say, thank God for the Spanish! I am freaking grateful for their so called evil colonialism! It’s thanks to them that I’m Catholic and that human sacrifice was outlawed in the colonies!
Any jack-ass can kick down a barn...as the saying goes...
And the rush of righteousness is an exhilarating high, an addiction that requires ever increasing amounts of barn to kick down.
Will there be any limit to this?
Well, if I follow the metaphor to its logical conclusion, the limit to this is the death of the addict. That can take a long time - maybe another 15 years?
I only pray this never comes to my country. Most likely, it won't, since we have a lot of serious issues to take care of.
Hopefully, this paranoid stage in the US history will pass. It must pass.
Ojalá. Estamos viviendo acá una locura inconcebible.
Al parecer estuve en un error: https://gaceta.es/iberosfera/intentan-cancelar-a-un-egresado-de-la-universidad-de-baja-california-por-defender-la-vida-y-la-familia-en-su-discurso-de-graduacion-20220704-2317/
https://cadenanoticias.com/regional/2022/07/tras-polemico-discurso-exigen-al-rector-de-uabc-respetar-todas-las-ideas
Ya empezaron.
That's offensive! What does an addict dying have to do with anything? I think you owe us an apology, and perhaps, a resignation. 😉
Exactly! Calling people "addicts" is White Supremacy in action. We owe respect to the "drug accustomed."
Good job! I was trying to come up with another way to say addict, but you beat me to it.
or can I apologize for my refusal to resign?
HAHAHA!
HAAAAAAAS
So Jean, by requesting an apology are you one of the us addicted to the rush of cancelling those who don't agree with your point of view?
...it was humor...
Problem is those barns while easy to mock are still the one big advantage we have over East Asia. The US simply has more top rated universities that people from all over the world fight to get into. The rich in China go to great lengths to get their kids admitted
How many more decades can that last now that objective entry measures are being banned for students and faculty? Pretty sure in twenty years schools in East Asia will be the standard bearers for hard skills disciplines because those majors simply can't thrive when objective acceptance measures are banned.
It would probably happen even sooner if China wasn't going backwards in terms of opening up to the world, but even without China Singapore, India, Japan, and Taiwan can move way up in university rankings especially as English becomes the norm at more and more international colleges around the world.
Rich white women that are bored out of their damn minds, spoiled rotten, and sheltered are the problem in this society. Note: I am a white woman, just none of the other items.
D3's = Deranged. white. woke. women.
I like AWFL better (Affluent White Female Liberal)
Liberals aren't the same as Woke. Woke can be said to be the opposite of classical liberalism. Actual liberals can work with and compromise with moderate Republicans to get stuff done, but the Woke will never compromise because their beliefs are inherently religious in nature. Full disclosure--I'm a white female liberal and I won't be lumped in with those insane Progressives.
I've had to switch from calling myself liberal to calling myself centrist, because most woke people will self-ID as liberal, and trying to distinguish between the two can sound like No-True-Scotsmanning.
You're right! I wish there was a better term for what we are.
This "Wokesters" are not progressives. Many of them are simply making "fashion statements" and the really hardcore are what I consider closet aristocrats. A Royalist mindset has little to do with the economic "ism" it operates under. It is a condition of dogmatic and narcissistic behavior. Trump can be generalized as a Royalist. These so-called progressives give true Progressives a bad name.
How about:
WASP = White Affluent Socialist Pontificators
That's pretty convenient and lets a lot of people off the hook. Did you watch the video where Yale professor Nicholas Christakis was mobbed by the woke because his wife supported students deciding for themselves what Halloween costumes were acceptable? That wasn't white women. Same with the ASU "multicultural center" incident. Not to mention Ibram X. Kendi...
Agree. There seems to be some sort of glee with a lot of conservatives in portraying "woke language" as being perpetrated on unwilling minorities by a bunch of arrogant white progressives who are, in this view, the "real racists and colonizers" for doing so, so lolz "libs" are the real racists so there ;P.
It really ignores that the genesis for a lot of this ideology, language and style of activism is coming from "BIPOC" academics and activists who are pushing downstream in their circles of white progressives whose likely sole contact with minorities is from these circles, and who are therefore totally in the belief that they are reflecting the views of the broader "minorities" that these self-appointed "represenatives" claim to be. It's not "racism" so much as a bubble. If the only Hispanics you encounter are in academia and activist circles and insist on "Latinx" as their identification, you will mirror and enforce that usage, and congratulate yourself for being "culturally responsive" and an "ally". They simply don't have much, if any, contact with Hispanics outside of those bubbles who don't use the term and find it offensive, and even if they did encounter any, those are not the people that have the power to "call them out" and ostracize them socially and professionally over it.
Correct - it’s not just white privileged women but they comprise a large portion of wokesters
Unfortunately there are plenty of "BiPOC" women involved, as well as men.
You mean the "cat" people.
And...for some reason - they hate men1
But are you AWFL is the question?
Haha! Nah, I love my man, both my sons, and myself. Independent leaning Conservative.
Yeah, I know, but...
Pablo here, can confirm.
To answer your question, it's because of moral absolutism.
The article link from 1995 by D'Andrade was a good canary in the academic coalmine for this idea. Basically they (meaning folks who think career defenestration is a completely appropriate outcome for anyone who says or even thinks things different from their SJ narrative) think it is their solemn duty to ferret out 'immoral' people in society because it is a serious good vs. evil battle.
To them, agreeing with the woke ideology (gender identity, race essentialism, white supremacy everywhere, etc.) is inherently good. And disagreeing with it is inherently bad. Therefore people who say or think or believe 'bad' things should be cast out of any positions of power (or even no power at all). To them, this is doing the right thing and being a warrior for all that is good and wholesome in the world.
It's religious zealotry in another form.
Moral absolutism leads to a modern day inquisition and I don't care what your ideas are, that is never good. Think Nazi or Socialist governments. Prison camps were and are filled with those who disagreed with these tyrannies. I honestly believe that is the direction the PC and Woke movements are headed.
Completely agree.
Same thoughts here
Time to start banding together and poking the eyes of so-called Progressives.
They are nothing more than a distraction at best and very corrosive of a liberal culture at worst.
Rick, a month ago I wrote an essay on why the left is not liberal. Liberalism, as based on its founders in the 19th century, was based on free speech not as now, stifling free speech. So, I refuse to call these tyrants liberals. I call them leftists.
I honestly don't believe, for one minute, that they focus on good. I believe it is all about power and they use the good vs evil red herring as a cover for their malicious intent.
If it weren't about power they would focus on redemption and not punishment.
I think THEY think they are focusing on good, because without that they wouldn't be able to point to anything that was the reason for their cause except for power. And overtly basing it on power would be openly admitting it. I think it's the B.S. 'righteousness' of it all that they think legitimizes everything. The power they get from it is, I think, what they would consider the logical outcome of 'speaking truth to power'...or whatever other idea they will grotesquely mangle for their cause.
I admit that redemption makes so much more sense than punishment here, after all that would be the 'right' and merciful thing to do. But you have to remember that it's usually not the older academic CRT adherents that are pushing for the more drastic things (at least not initially, they will gladly jump on that train if it has momentum), but rather the younger academics and students themselves. And this younger cohort have all grown up in an era where social media call-outs and mob mentality are not only considered normal by them, but almost like it's someone's duty to do so. A lot of these people are simply children, regardless of age. And we all know how children love revenge.
I don't think all this would nearly be the issue it is without the advent of social media 20 years ago. And it's effect on the social psychology of the human brain.
John McWhorter wrote a fantastic article on exactly this, and he turned it into a book "Woke Racism: How a New Religion Has Betrayed Black America"
Andrew Sullivan had a great conversation with McWhorter here: https://andrewsullivan.substack.com/p/john-mcwhorter-on-woke-racism
McWhorter is a national treasure.
They’re just the lefty flip side of the 1980’s Moral Majority righty coin.
Nail on head
Alejandro, I know exactly what you mean. I was raised and worked in Central America and believe that most of these claims are made by snowflakes who have never lived outside the United States and have no idea about the cultural differences of other societies.
The extremes the PC and Woke morons go to would be laughable if they weren't taken so seriously by the left/Democrats. In one of Bari's earlier postings by a guest writer, the author of the post mentioned in one of the north central states university, some idiot had written a PC dictionary. In this new dictionary, you couldn't use the word "Jerry" because that was a derogatory word used by US GIs during the Second World War to describe Germans soldiers.
Heaven forbid we insult a NAZI! Why in the world is anyone listening to the idiots. They should be laughing at them. But the Democrats see an opening for more votes and not only pretend to believe these clowns but act on what these losers say.
By acting on this craziness, people not only lose their jobs but are destroyed by this malignant movement.
None of them would last a single day in any Latin-American country living as a person earning the minimum wage.
You are absolutely correct. When you live in a different culture, you have to make allowances for these differences. most of these differences are subtle but would drive a gringo crazy. If you grew up in this culture, like I did, these differences become a way of life.
When my Dad talks about WWII, he calls them "krauts." Imagine the horror!
The Bosch is another one
It seems to me, that those "woke gringos" are behaving here just like their colonialist forefathers did when trying to push their value system and their vocabulary on some "savages who are obviously to stupid" to even create their own words to name their identity, with some help of some local collaborators, of course. Maybe the "deconstruction of colonialism" should start right here, maybe with leaving it exclusively to the people themselves how they wanna be called and not have some elitist wokists make up names for them.
Bravo, they complain about how "perverse" the Spanish conquest was, but they don't seem to realize they are having colonialist attitudes. I would say it's even worse, at least Spaniards preserved a lot of indigenous languages. In any case, they are treating us, as you say, as savages who don't know better.
I believe those who invented and use “Latinx” are focused on gender not culture or ethnicity.
Gender is a fundamental component of the Spanish language (as an extension of the culture), and this bothers the gender/sex radical lunatics - which is pretty much all the elite, white, powerful liberals and Democrats. Hence, their refusal to use the masculine “Latinos” when talking about men AND women, required them to invent their own gender neutral word.
"How could you be so eager to destroy other person's life?"
That's easy. It makes them feel better about their pitiful little selves.
Maybe because they have nothing else in their lives that makes them feel like they are accomplishing anything, or that they matter in the least?
I would like people to stop talking about Marxism and Communism until you really understand it/.
I’ve studied it a fair bit.
It’s an evil ideology that killed at least 100 million people in the 20th century.
I don’t think Golfer’s simplified description is inaccurate.
There are oppressors and oppressed. The oppressed have every right by any means to overthrow the oppressors.
I am one of the 99% who doesn't speak up publicly or professionally. I talk about it with friends and family, specifically the "woke" ones, but I won't, for example, share an article like this on Facebook or speak up when a colleague casually mentions the prevalence of white supremacy in America. I work in an entirely different field but one only marginally less woke than higher education. I'm 34 and my career is just starting to have something resembling momentum. I think the ongoing revolution at American universities is the single most important threat to our country, including China, but I'm not going to be another white male easily dismissed for wrong think. I just can't do it.
Thank you for writing this, Prof. Manson.
No offense to you. It is perfectly understandable why - but intellectual cowardice is how we ended up here. We need intellectually brave people to stand tall. The cultural peer pressure is a real force and causes people to lie to themselves and stay quiet when they know it is wrong. I was prepared to lose everything - my house, my job, and my life to stand for the code which I gave myself. I wasn’t always like this but maybe knowing that others are with you will help give more people courage to not tamper their voices.
Or, if subversive measures are more appealing here is another route we can take:
https://joshketry.substack.com/p/do-we-need-to-re-infiltrate-our-own
I agree. It seems daily that I read another non-woke intellectual taking the easy way out. Retiring, resigning, staying on but not fighting for what they believe. I know the battle isn't easy, but there appears to be a pattern of cowardice amongst the non-woke intellectuals that should concern everyone.
I support my family on my salary. I cannot afford to lose my job or become so controversial that I become unhirable.
I am vocal about this stuff in my social circle and with family, and even that is an uphill battle sometimes.
I totally understand. This comment was not meant to be an attack. But to inspire courage from those who can.
Academic intellectuals are certainly not known for personal or emotional bravery.
Yep . The Deans would have to expell these students and set-up example, but they have caved in.
Gordan we need to change the culture and sensationalize and lift up those who do. We could use technology to up us.
But nobody wants to die on a hill alone. OK, everyone should be willing to sacrifice their lives/careers to principal, must most won't -- probably you wouldn't. *But* give people a flag to rally round, and it's different. You have comrades at your side, you have a fighting chance, you have a plan, NOW it is possible to be brave.
Exactly Ray! We need a movement. And trickier, what if the movement had something all sides should believe in? For example, we should ALL (all sides) want to end the corruption in our systems, right? That is the #1 problem we face. It isn't the deep state (or whatever you want to call the colluding forces working against humanity), rather it is that our system isn't good enough to prevent their corruption. If we made a few easy tweaks that we all agreed on, we could prevent that corruption and once again gain control of the government and institutions that have been subverted.
But we need a movement.
#TransparencyMovement
Like this:
https://joshketry.substack.com/p/what-we-need-is-a-transparency-movement
Good thoughts Rationalist, but the war between sanity and fanaticism must come to a head too. I see it as the sane of both left and right vs. the maniacs of *both* the woke left and the trumpist right.
Tell me more about what you term "the trumpist right".
A year ago I would have seconded your opinion without hesitation. Today I sense there is more to it. As the professor said it is carefully orchestrated. I too am in a position to speak my mind but I understand that is very rare these days. So I advocate for the subversive route.
I think the US alt right / Christian movement are doing the right thing by creating their own institutions. IT platforms, schools, political movements. You can’t reform woke institutions. I also the cultural balkanization of the US is a good thing as it allows people to vote with their feet.
SO true. It's a fundamental lack of leadership in American institutions. I for one have refrained from donating to my alma mater for years now for precisely this reason and I am sure I am not alone.
Where we are all getting screwed is that we are donating, by gun point, through our taxes. Post secondary education is funded both by direct payment and via financial aid. Government welfare for these institutions has to stop now. It is corrupting them to their core.
You are not alone. After giving tens of thousands over 30 years to my alma mater based on my experience there, I took the time to follow what today's students were pursuing as majors and careers. I also noted that compared to my time in college, there were now two times more administrators than educators. When it came time for my annual donation, I contacted the school to request a discussion over this turn of events. To my dismay, I learned much of the shift was due to title nine issues and the increasing comfort required by students. I also realized the school had a list price for education, but only 4 paid the full bill out of 550; the rest got a discount through merit or other scholarships. I asked why not just drop the price, improve the quality of applicants, and get more to pay full price. The answer was astonishing, "people perceive value through the retail price." I suggested they should try to appeal to students who fundamentally understand quality and price.
It was the clincher, keep my money and spend little time talking about or to my alma mater. Instead, I spend lots of time with young people talking about the importance of having real experiences in the workplace and life that require leadership and focus on a goal and achieving it. When I hire people I look for the actual quality applicant who has a PSD degree....poor, smart, and determined. I have met very few from the most elite schools; most come from state schools.
It's actually time to make these institutions pay taxes or more taxes as the case my be. The Ivy League schools especially are raking in obscene amounts of money and yet they continue to charge burdensome fees just because they can. The core is rotten.
@the rationalist Thanks for link! Spot on!
"do-we-need-to-re-infiltrate-our-own"
How is this not "Woke on Steroids"?
I struggle with this. I’m 51 and don’t know how much longer I can take the bullshit. You might think you can handle it, compartmentalize it, but eventually, in my experience, it all gets to be too much to bear. Too much hiding, too much swallowing down your objections and opinions. The worst is the feeling that I’m part of something deeply wrong, maybe even evil. I try to be subversive, try to find and talk to like minded colleagues but all this living in the shadows is getting to me. It’s no way to live in the long term. I want to be free, intellectually, spiritually and emotionally.
It’s much harder to make a change at 51. You should really consider what the next twenty years will feel like for you. Hope this doesn’t sound harsh, because I do identify with your struggles. I don’t know what the fuck to do myself, but I’m looking for ways out.
This resonates so much. I’m a 41 year old college professor and the stress around this issue keeps me up at night and has even led to health issues.
I’m a 54 year old professor and agree… it is a struggle. The academy has changed so much from when I first started. If I thought I could get a job outside of academia, I’d do it in a flash. But because of my age and what I do, it’s not realistic. All I can really do is count the days to retirement.
Frankly, I’m not sure what I’d do if I was your age. If you can, I would try to get out, as I think it’s going to get worse.
Serious question: why do you think things will deteriorate further? It seems to me the winds may be shifting.
Excellent question! The reason I think the academy will deteriorate further is that (a) the ideology is firmly entrenched, with the vast majority of faculty being progressives who are loathe to admit that they are wrong (this is, after all, where the ideology originated and careers are built on it); (b) the students who adopt the ideology do so with a religious zeal and it is these students who will one day make up the academy, presumably pushing it further leftward (conservatives, for sure, and probably middle of the road liberals know better than to pursue a career in academics these days; they will not be welcome); (c) many universities, including my Midwest one, are working to include misgendering and bias complaints under Title IV (which is horrifying, in my view); and (c) DEI is big business on campuses (see https://www.heritage.org/education/report/diversity-university-dei-bloat-the-academy).
The winds may very well be shifting in the larger society, but I've seen no evidence that this is occurring at universities--at least not at my major university in the Midwest. I sincerely hope that I'm wrong about this and that it gets better. But they (the progressives, Marxists) have been on a long, steady march to get to this point and so I don't see them abandoning their cause anytime soon, especially now that they have gained societal acceptance. The only thing that can stop them would be if parents stopped sending their children to college.
Julia, because there are absolutely no incentives, nor any Internal or external pressures, in place to change the trajectory. Absolutely none. It’s very dire indeed.
BP, I share your pessimism. I have thought about leaving what feels like an infinite number of times. My issue is similar to yours: I am quite stuck because of what I do (essentially, a highly specialized humanities subdiscipline that involves plenty of analytic rigor, but no data crunching or quantitative analysis, which are the only academic skills that are seen as valuable in the market these days). In 2021, I talked to a friend who is recruiter in my pre-doctorate line of work and she told me that it would be very difficult for me to get back in because it’s so incredibly competitive. In fact, her only advice was for me was to try to get my foot in the door by applying to be a administrative assistant, so basically a secretary. I was so depressed after that conversation and frankly a bit offended - an admin with a PhD, really? So basically, my writing, communication, and analytic skills are basically worth nothing in the market? On top of that, being an observant Catholic, I have a bunch of kids, the oldest of which is starting high school. So starting over completely would be a big ask, because my current employer, bad as they may be, pays me a lot more than a secretary would make. Plus, in four years I can access tuition benefits for other Catholic schools for my oldest. Sadly, never did I think I would have such an appreciation for the phrase “golden handcuffs.”
Hi Antigone! I can't imagine being in the humanities, as it contains among the most woke people on campus (at least at my university). And given that you are an observant Catholic (assuming that your colleagues know that about you), it must be even worse for you. In my experience, the two things that academics abhor and actively discriminate against are Republicans/conservatives and people who are religious--unless you ascribe to the Islam religion (the latter is at least quasi acceptable, whereas Christianity most assuredly is not). So much for "diversity and inclusion."
Honestly, I can't imagine that you would ever get hired as an administrative assistant because you would be way too overqualified for the position. Further, it doesn't sound realistic for you to do that given your responsibility to your family. That said, it doesn't hurt to look to see what's out there. While I haven't looked myself, I've heard that there are websites and consultants that can help academics who are considering alternative careers, as you do have skills (as you say, writing, communication, and analytic skills) that ought to be of worth to some potential employers. These websites/consultants might be able to help you think outside the box for job opportunities you might never have considered otherwise.
As for me, I think it's too late largely because of my age, but also what I do (I do research and so I have some quantitative skills, but I am by no means a statistical wizard). I am also super worried about the economy and, therefore, I would be reluctant to make any big career changes (I've heard that layoffs are expected among the professional class this fall). So, I'm pretty much stuck, I think.
Have you been able to engage with colleagues who feel the same way that you do about the academy? I do have a couple likeminded colleagues that I can commiserate with and if it wasn't for them, I think I'd be even more miserable than I already am! I would love it if there was a support group of sorts for academic folks who don't subscribe to wokeness. I'm not sure that's realistic, though. I think people might be too scared to put themselves out there.
Again, with any luck (and lots of prayer!), maybe the academy will straighten itself out with time. Who knows.
It keeps me up at night too. I'm not in academia, BTW, but in a very woke industry. I want to leave, but building a new career at this stage would be difficult. I feel really lucky that I don't have kids to support, though. These are tough decisions, but ultimately our peace of mind, our quality of life and our health are more important than anything.
College is supposed to be an institution where the free exchange of ideas is welcomed. Not anymore! The insane are running the asylum.
What subject do you teach?
"Beware the man with one sandal." That was a paraphrase. I have forgotten the real quote but the result was the same.
So you think this is a huge threat but don't say anything. You know a lot of people who see it too but don't speak up.
Cause and effect....you being a white male will be taken out anyway, if this keeps up, because that's the goal.
So keep quiet and wait.
I own a small restaurant in a very liberal midwest university town. I can't post on social media, as I'll end up being boycotted (it's happened before) and forced out of business. It's simple to state that you should 'go down swinging' when it's someone else's livelihood, it's a bit different when you're sacrificing yourself.
Will you enjoy living in a Stalinist world? Because that's the end-game. Most people are cowards and followers. I learned that very early on in life when I stood up. But the alternative is unthinkable.
I would have agreed a year ago. I am starting to realize that it is a trap designed to weed out traditional or independent thinkers. They should stay. They should document (not on an office computer) what they observe. We need moles.
What are you saying? I'm a coward?
You are not a coward. Prudence is not cowardice.
Those who trade liberty for security end up with neither. As true now as when Franklin observed it.
No you're not. You're trying to take care of your family.
But if nobody stands up what happens?
you are not a coward , but living in fear will take a toll on your health and life . Hope you can ride out this insanity , good luck
What else can you call it? Yeah, looks like that's what that is.
Courage, yes, is the essential pre-requisite to fight evil. But intelligence is also high on the list.
Concurrent with speaking out (or perhaps even leading it), we need to develop methods to become more robust on an individual and communal level. Tyrants of all stripes ALWAYS target basic life needs (mostly food and income, but increasingly access to energy) and so serious consideration is required to minimize single points of failure. Save, live below your means, and have multiple lines of income -- these are some of the obvious ones. (And of course, easier said than done.) Beyond that: community. There is a massive groundswell happening in the "alternative economy" space (or whatever you choose to call it) with millions of people who are very well aware that this is a critical inflection point in the story of human freedom. For me, that means I now go FAR out of my way to patronize businesses aligned with my values - a previously unimaginable thing based on my (rapidly shifting) secular, capitalist worldview.
As it pertains to a small business in a leftist enclave, I wish I had any answer at all. I’ve been a business owner and I know how vulnerable that position can be. You might have hard questions to ask yourself. Will those Leftist areas even be sustainable in a few years? Is your investment built atop a rotting carcass and, if so, is it better to bail sooner or later.
Beyond that, nothing is ever a monolith and a big part of a small niche can easily eclipse of a small part of a large one. Can you lean into the cancellation to bring out a new customer base? The Alt Economy is replete with examples of people who parlayed their cancellation to greater success.
This is not to say this avenue is available to everyone or that there isn’t a massive struggle involved. It isn’t, and there is. But it does point a way forward which I think essentially boils down to: 1 – get robust and 2 – help those aligned with your values.
Courage is special because it’s rare. Rare and, yes, necessary. But it’s also incumbent on all of us to support the courageous in any way we can.
This is the fight of our lives. The fight that will determine not just the course of the rest of our individual lives, but the very path of human civilization itself. The longer we wait to fight, the harder it becomes.
I wonder. If a small business in a woke town stood for the unwoke truth, would it encourage others who are keeping silent out of fear to come out of the woodwork? Could it perhaps result in increased business? (I know I specifically patronize businesses who refuse the woke message.) Such an experiment could end in ruin...otoh, it might not. And I would say that if it does end in ruin (perhaps likely?), the woke have already prevailed.
They've definitely prevailed in my town. I was attacked once, and withstood it, but it's not worth it to fight it again, when our city and county government are all progressives.
But then again there's the famous recent case of Gibson's Bakery v. Oberlin College where Gibson's sued Oberlin and took them to the cleaners. Maybe not exactly on point but if nobody stands up the the leftist bullies - and make no mistake but they are a minority - we will all go down with the ship.
Never forget what Ronald Reagan said:
“Freedom is never more than one generation away from extinction. We didn't pass it to our children in the bloodstream. It must be fought for, protected, and handed on for them to do the same, or one day we will spend our sunset years telling our children and our children's children what it was once like in the United States where men were free.”
Our America is worth fighting - and dying - for. Who disagrees? I'd like to hear why.
It's happened many times where I live as well. Disgruntled employees with poor work ethics love to make false allegations and rally the wokesters to destroy a person's livelihood around here.
very true seen it happen to a good friend he had to step down from a business he built from nothing , all because some slacker accused him of racism for not advancing said slacker . Very sad all I can say is good thing I retired , don't think I would last long at any job these days
they will find a way to take you down , I feel for you having to watch what you say or post , must be terrifying not knowing when or why the hammer will drop . All I can say is good luck .
Completely understand.
You definitely should keep your business and personal opinions separate (unless your opinions are part of your brand). If you can’t do it, then you are being wise.
I would say to you and the the Rationalist that, without taking any offense to your comments, I don't consider it intellectual cowardice when the rules of the game as established by the majority woke negate any chance at rational discussion. When I'm one on one with a friend, I can rationalize with them, get them to stick to a point and try and actually back it up with anything tangible, etc. Online and in the workplace, challenges are immediately shot down with claims of trauma and a reminder of their official victim status. From there, any further arguing only proves the point in the woke minds.
But I don't know, you're probably both right. Better to go down swinging than end up as the woman at the end of Invasion of the Body Snatchers.
Live to fight another day. Nothing wrong with that while you also live your life.
if ya don't stand up... every single time... it won't be the country we had.
being told what to think and asking permission to speak is submissive; the perfect antithesis of an American.
We just watched Invasion of the Body Snatchers the other day, and I was calling it the Invasion of the Wokesters. The parallels are eerie.
You won't make it to 40 in your career - they will come for you.
I like the metaphor of the leopard eating the face of your neighbor, with the sudden realization that it has future designs yours. It seems what many in academia failed to acknowledge is that what starts out as a cute little cub grows up with an ever-increasing appetite. There was a time when the little leopards could have been caged or in this case engaged directly by their colleagues and forced to justify their “petty spite” and/or “spiritual purification” pogroms. There was a time in academia when open discussion or formal debate was a cherished means of doing so. Alas, it seems neither Mr. Manson nor his colleagues chose to do so, not even when the leopard was one cubicle away. Perhaps he felt he needed permission, as in the case of his colleague Jeff. Of course, some would argue that you never need permission to do the right thing.
A leopard can’t change its spots and nor can the Marxist "woke" crowd. To use another metaphor, it’s become clear that the animals are running the zoo. The only defense against being eaten is to stop feeding them, force them back into the wild, or in this case the non-academic world where one needs to produce something someone else is willing to pay for. Not to diminish Mr. Manson’s field, but I doubt there is much of a market for “nonhuman primate behavior” or “human personality variation”. Given the interaction with his colleagues, I think he makes my point on the last one. “Higher” education has become one big scam with decreasing market value. Just ask those who graduated with a degree in “gender equity” now working at Starbucks to pay $60,000 in student loan debt. Just like the housing bubble of the early 2000s, it about to pop like an infected abscess. I suppose the good news for Mr. Mason is he won’t be around to get covered in puss.
Every government agency , every university and almost all large corporations now have divisions of diversity, equity and inclusion. There are plenty of jobs for ethnic and gender studies majors. They don't do anything useful, but they draw paychecks, sometimes quite large ones.
DEI is a veritable industry. It was a clever way to employ otherwise unemployable BIPOC graduates who graduated with Blacks / Gay / Queer / Feminist / Studies majors. Do note that after Michelle Obama failed to become partner at her law firm she went to a local Chicago hospital and became its 'diversity counselor' @ $125K per year. After her husband, Barak, became a Senator and he landed a $2 million grant for the hospital - they bumped Michelle's pay to $300K. This was all published in a 2009 New Yorker article.
Spot on. This point (about DEI being a jobs program for otherwise unemployable humanities majors) cannot be overemphasized enough.
During recessionary times, anyone with DEI on their resume or anything resembling wokeism in the body copy, will end up in the "pass" pile. I'm sure there will be an algorithm created so they don't even make it to the hiring managers inbox.
I certainly hope so, but in the meantime, DEI officers and their minions are doing plenty of damage within universities and corporations. While I could see DEI newbies being passed over in the next recession, I don’t see the current DEI budgets shrinking much. There is too much political pressure for organizations to put their money where their mouth is on these matters. So those DEI offices will continue to do much damage one way or another.
DEI is a cancer on the body politic.
As soon as companies are stung by the recession, DEI depts. will be the first on the chopping block. All DEI depts. bring to the table are expensive lawsuits and under productive whiny employees.
That would be logical- but don’t you think they’d be thrashing & wailing should that happen? The societal pressure to goose-step to this movement/ religion is powerful…
DEI employees aren't producers. They have no skills, and contribute nothing to an organizations bottom line. They are a trend, a red line on the ledger, and will be trimmed as soon as the timing is right. They will get cut before the marketing budget.
A company's loyalty is to their shareholders. The top producers who add quantifiable value will remain at a company during a recession. These jobs have nothing to do with monitoring pronouns or creating safe spaces.
$60,000 in student loan debt assuming they dropped out after their second year. :-)
Ah, memories. I graduated from the University of Arizona back in 1980. If memory serves the out of state tuition (I was from New Jersey) back then was about $5,000 for two semesters. I had a 67 Plymouth Barracuda that I bought for $600 when I was in high school. It had a slant six and a three gear, column mounted shifter. It took three days to make the trip from my house to Tucson. The first night I would sleep in the car, the second in a cheap motel and the third where I would be living during the school year. On the last trip home my brakes were failing, and I had to pump them before they would engage. Luckily it was all highway driving and I made sure to stay a good distance behind cars and trucks.
In between classes and working various jobs so I could eat, I had some truly remarkable experiences. We would take trips down to Guaymas, Mexico in my friend’s van and camp on the beach. I remember pulling over one moonless night to pee (we always packed plenty of beer) and looked up to the most amazing array of stars I’ve ever seen. They looked like clouds. Another night we camped on Mt. Lemmon, outside of Tucson when a thunderstorm rolled in across the valley below. It was like being on Mt. Olympus, watching thunderbolts hurtle earthward below us. And then there were the girls. Back then you didn’t have to ask permission before you kissed them. All you had to do was look in her eyes and she would let you know how she felt….
damn if that don't sound REAL familiar!
and I find myself smiling as I recall those days...
Those days of sacrificing a lot of immediate comfort to reach a larger goal later never felt like a sacrifice, did it? I did the same as you folks here . . . affordable state college, worked year-round to pay the bills, graduated with zero bank but zero debt, then went to work and never looked back.
Even working on the mall landscaping crew summers was fun, albeit sweaty and back-breaking.
and back then, wasn't it SWTSU?
And if I recall correctly, the student body make up, at that time, was something like 70% women, 30% men.
Could that have had any impact on your decision?!?! Not sayin' I thought about that before enrolling up the road...a friend told me...
“An infected abscess” is redundant. Just saying!
Not necessarily. There are sterile abscesses as well.
Abscess: A localized collection of purulent material in any body part, resulting from invasion of a pyogenic bacterium or other pathogen. Sterile abscess: An abscess from which microorganisms cannot be cultivated as a tuberculous or mycotic culture at one week. How prevalent are true sterile abscesses? I admit they do exist.
Ok, so I took some literary license. You have to admit though, the redundancy does aid in visualizing exploding puss.
Are not the Gender Studies people becoming DEI political officers?
Don't forget nursing!
My daughter is set to graduate from Drexel's nursing program this September
That's great! Congrats to her!
I've been a nurse for around 30 years and I love it. Two of my kids are in nursing at University of Pittsburgh- they love it.
Just say medical field. Covers a wide range. I don’t know about law though!
Math is hard. Science is boring. These fields unfairly assume that there are correct answers and that you have to know what they are. I feel safer in a field where my feelings and opinions are important.
lol
I’m in the same situation. The last two companies I worked for are super-woke. I think critical theory is ridiculous and corrosive to society and culture. I was angry at mandatory “Privilege” training that said meritocracy and individualism are problematic concepts. But, I would never publicly say some of the opinions I hold at my current company because overall I like the job, I like my team, and I need the paycheck. I also have significant financial and family obligations, and I cannot afford to be railroaded out of the company with a stain on my record. So, for me it is separation of church and state. My opinions about politics stay among my friends—at least the ones who aren’t brainwashed yet.
The ideology is truly sick, but the people who push it are quite smart, at least tactically. They understand that the way to push the ideology is to tie it to your paycheck. They knew that infiltrating elite universities would lead to infiltrating corporate America because upper management of corporate america pulls directly from elite educational institutions. And why wouldn’t they pull from those institutions? To get into those institutions you have to be intelligent, highly motivated and highly competitive. I don’t fault companies for that, and I don’t fault a lot of the young folks who graduate from those institutions. Again, these people are highly competitive, and wokeness has become another competitive avenue for them. They can’t just be woke, they have to be the most dedicated wokesters.
So here we are. What can you do? You and I don’t make the rules, we are expected to live by them.
I am just going to vote Republican. That’s a very hard thing to do for me, but I just don’t see what choice I have.
You have my sympathy.
This is an understandable reaction. I'm further along in my career - a tenured faculty member at a public university in the South - but I'm not yet in a position to retire nor to sustain dismissal or an unpaid leave.
And yet, someone has to show some courage sometime. My advice would be to find allies, advocate for freedom of thought wherever and whenever you can, and prepare yourself mentally, physically, and - as much as possible - financially to face down the leopard if and when it shows itself.
I’m a tenured professor too. The only thing that has kept me sane is that I have cultivated a very small group of likeminded colleagues with whom I can talk to about the madness going on in my department and university.
The Uvalde police couldn’t either. You will have to live with yourself. Perhaps a direct attack is futile but think strategically and look for opportunities
I mostly agreed with the other responses to my comment, and I'm not one to get worked up by any online comment, but I'll say that you comparing my stance that I shouldn't comment on this topic publicly to the Uvalde police is inflammatory and dimwitted.
It comes down to courage. I sympathize with the Uvalde police and you. I hope I have the courage to say and do the right thing in the challenging moment.
But until you can say that you were faced with it and did the right thing, you might want to refrain on judging others.
I'm speaking as one who has paid a significant price for fighting the establishment, and lost both times.
Jon...if the fight was just, then You did not lose.
life must be tough holding all that in , scared to mention your views . Dump facebook there is nothing there for you . So you have a career , as long s you goosestep in line with the others , how long to you go along with this ? Or do you stop before you goosestep off the cliff with the other lemmings ? Sorry still asleep
did writing this make you feel tough and cool?
sorry i'm not tough and for sure not cool , don't care what others think of me . And you ? what are you ?
Just a guy sharing my thoughts, responding to a guy named jerry who was needlessly aggressive in his response
I’m sure there was a time when gay folks pretended to be straight Christians to keep a job or get along with coworkers. We do what we must to survive.
Sorry, but this is in no way similar
Is it not? Are people not allowed to be themselves or speak freely about their thoughts because of the tenets of the ideology of the mass of their contemporaries. Seems to be similar to me. I would argue that this is exactly what the woke folks want. They feel that great injustice was done to various groups by others and the answer is to commit injustice to their perceived enemies? Funny because the Kendis of the world promote that very tactic. Current discrimination is the answer to past discrimination, no?
Let me be more clear: I am not addressing whether or not discrimination is taking place--clearly it is. Why, I'm a white male myself, I should know ;-)
But: Academics, media workers, Google employees, etc. have CHOSEN to work in industries that embrace this toxic nihilism. The historical examples (Jews in 1930s Germany, black people in the Jim Crow South, etc) did not. It is typical of today's intellectually featherweight discourse to equate the problems some privileged, upper-middle-class, Americans experience to the worst excesses of human savagery--and I don't buy it. God forbid these privileged softies ever have to stare down anything more scary than a slow supermarket checkout line...
You don’t think that there were gay people who were otherwise privileged, upper-middle-class softies who still weren’t allowed to be openly gay because the other upper-middle-class privileged softies were predominantly Christian and anti-homosexuality?
In the Army, where I learned most valuable life lessons in the simplest and crudest way, I learned that shit rolls downhill. That was simply the explanation for what occurs when those in the hierarchy above you do something wrong, and how it ultimately will become your problem because those higher up don’t often accept consequences because they don’t have to. I believe the overall point was that those with less power are subject to the whims of those who have more.
So I empathize with the more powerful, not because they deserve it implicitly, but because shit rolls downhill and if we can end this with the privileged class, we should. Otherwise they will screw everything up and the people who they think they are trying to help will ultimately be the ones who suffer the most.
As an older gay man I have to disagree with you. It’s very similar. I feel pretty much the same way I did in the 90s.
Coming out in the seventies was better, I think. Back then, being gay meant having to be verbally circumspect but also being allowed to focus on one issue—finding love—instead of dozens!
As many a Jew back in the day changed their names from "Goldstein" to "Garrison" to avoid the wrath of Christian warriors.
Do you remember Archie Bunker's line about that, to which Meathead retorted "Abe Lincoln?"
Classic.
Oh, god, yes. That was hilarious. And then Edith said . . .
"I didn't know Lincoln was Jewish."
I cannot like this but I do feel your pain. Best of luck to you. Document what you see and hear. Don't join the mob and that is what it is. Use fear of confrontation as an excuse. Perhaps in the future you can be a voice of reason. A mole of sorts.
It seems to me you’re making a Faustian bargain. Sooner or later the woke mob will come for you or the rational among us will render your employer irrelevant. I was once faced with a dilemma similar yours. It had nothing to do with woke fanatics but to my mind a more relevant issue- competence. I was hired to shepherd through several development projects that had been stalled because of existing staff incompetence . The design budgets had been depleted ands the clients were refusing to ante up any more money until previously agreed to milestones were met. It fell upon me to spend literally hundreds of uncompensated hours to meet them. When the absentee partner showed up to finalize billing I went off on the office manager and laid out the sheer incompetence of him and his staff. Within days I was laid off. At the same time I had a newborn baby, a wife on maternity leave and lots of bills to pay. The good news is that I landed a better paying job with support employees who were willing to develop skills necessary to make the company successful.
I appreciate your dilemma. The moral of my story is to have faith in yourself. If you lead well, others will follow and you’ll prove yourself to be indispensable.
By the way that company no longer exists and after it was bought out the partner retired and the manager I exposed was fired. I’m now at a point in my life where I can tell any problematic snowflakes to go fuck themselves, in more subtle phraseology of course. Even better, there’s nothing they can do about it.
Did you read the part about the leopard eating other people's faces, then finally coming for yours?
I disagree with the others below and am on your side for staying and advancing quietly. I believe the universities will need reasonable people at all levels to reveal their true colors when the time comes. The fight had best be led by those who can go all out, those whose choice is retire or fight. Not that I am saying the retire choice is wrong; but certainly legal battles will have some impact.
Well, at least you're honest, but it begs the question: why in the world did you go down that path in the first place? ALL of this was going on when you made the decision.
We're no longer the home of the brave, so don't let your timidity worry you
In the kingdom of the blind, a one-eyed man can get pretty lonely.
A very apt metaphor.
I get my blood boiling when reading articles like this. Our higher education has been hijacked by woke inquisition that does nothing but purity tests and prosecuting people for any hint of disagreement or free thought.
We are now slowly reaching the point, where normal people are force either to censored themselves or resign or in case of speaking up having their livelihoods taken away and for ever be branded racists, fascists, nazis or what ever.
Hopefully we are also reaching the point, where this woke left is slowly staring to eat its own (as any revolution does). Evermore liberal, progressive elites on the costs are being attacked for not being radical enough or daring to question any tenets of woke religion.
What ever the outcome in the future, sadly woke ideology will follow us for couple next years. Lets hope that with increasing religious zeal of woke mob, evermore people start to wake up from this woke nightmare we are currently in.
This will probably end like Lysenkoism (pseudoscience) in Soviet union, which affected biology departments of USSR. Basic ideology of Lysenkoism is very similar to todays woke ideology in USA, that both had support of politics, both denied basics biology and both we not based on facts but on made up examples. I recomend everyone reading up on Lysenkoism and be shocked by similarities to current issues on our Universities. Well its not surprising, because both ideologies come from same left leaning "kitchen".
Read "Son of the Revolution" by Liang Heng and Judith Shapiro, and you will know what is in store, and you can prepare.
"As you won’t be surprised to hear, Jeff is not a racist, but a standard-issue liberal Democrat."
Please stop insinuating all racists are, you know, Republicans. I'm sure the woman who wore a gorilla mask to throw an egg at Larry Elder considered herself a standard-issue liberal Democrat. There is racism (and anti-Semitism) within both parties, but the Democratic party actively and publicly weaponizes racism and anti-Semitism to achieve its goals against any target (white, black, Jewish, Asian) who isn't 100 percent committed to their poisonous program.
Good catch! This kind of casual bigotry should always be called out. The idea that Republicans are all racist is not morally different from racism.
Anthony...there you go with the helpful thought.
Right. Because democrats have never had racists in their ranks. It’s so ridiculous it’s laughable.
So true.
I am a UCLA graduate and majored in Anthropology (1979) so this article grabbed my attention right away. UCLA will no longer have my financial support. I am grateful my own children are grown and graduated from college already before all the woke stuff started full throttle.
Perhaps when the Republicans take over the house they can hold hearings on the state of free speech on college campuses. My dream would be that they tie federal support of colleges to campus free speech. There are metrics published by FIRE ( https://www.thefire.org/largest-ever-free-speech-survey-of-college-students-ranks-top-campuses-for-expression/ ) that have been tracking this for years, that could be used to incentivize colleges to change their policies to promote free speech.
In hospitals, Medicare requires certain clinical performance metrics be met in order to get Medicare reimbursement, and since Medicare is 40-60% of a hospitals income, it's taken very seriously, and drives change. If you look at the FIRE metrics, the best colleges still have very low free speech metrics. Requiring them to meet certain levels in order to realize their federal funding could drive significant changes on the campus.
This is a good idea.
I’m always annoyed by leftist friends who screech about taxing churches — but turn a blind eye to universities, which are ALSO non-profits and, unlike churches, receive massive federal funding and land grants on top of paying no corporate tax.
At least churches do charity work and are generally a net good to society. Universities do nothing but indoctrination into a philosophy that is a cancer to our culture.
(Source: I used to be a university professor.)
Always ask what altar people pray on. If they look puzzled remind them how similar “woke” is to any religion.
Universities are just one of their churches.
Unfortunately so are bureaucracies, and some corporations, alongside at least one entire circuit court.
Luckily this Supreme Court is chipping away at the fiat law apparatus....
Universities are big business with an agenda . They have to much money . Thet lost their way 40 50 years ago . A good many perfessors are not worth 1/4 the salary the get . it is insane when a few radical students can ruin careers of the best . Money ruins everything
Maddi...from what i heard, NPR is on track to receive $500 Million in the year 2024, all tax money for a one sided pitch, not the only gift they receive.
Jon - good idea!
The reverence for « free speech » is too often selective. Many who decry the tyranny of wokeness on college campuses are often quick to support « don’t say gay » laws in public schools.
wadr, I don't see where personal free speech has any connection to what public school curriculums teach to children. Are you saying that free speech should allow teachers to teach anything they wany to children, without regard to the wishes of the parents?
And, anyone using the term 'Don't Say Gay' is pretty much admitting they don't know what the actual legislation says, or are willing to mischaracterize it for political purposes.
“The principal driver of the doublethink in my department and so many others at UCLA is fear of the woke faction. “
This only happens because the university leaders are cowards.
Think about it: the only honest reason why people gravitate to the academy is that it's a sinecure (like the public sector, without the stigma). You don't have to do anything even approaching real work and you have most of your time free to do pretty much anything you want. The only price used to be that you won't make much money, but that is no longer true, and if you're on the administrative side, you can do very well indeed. So it's worth asking: what types of personalities like this? I'm afraid the answer is not flattering to those involved.
As to this Prof, I'd say his essay carries very little weight, as he put up with this dumpster fire until he could safely retire, and then wrote this piece cloaking himself in moral righteousness to justify a pedestrian financial decision. Like I said, look at the people involved in these entreprises, and you'll begin to understand the problem. 'Twas ever thus.
Much of academics is anything but sinecure these days. Maybe this is the 1950-1980's academic fantasy most people still associate with the profession, but today it's a never ending battle to justify your position and 'tenure' is largely a thing of the past (or if it exists, it only covers a trivial amount of your salary). Today, professors at top ranked research institutions are seen through the lens of the the dollar amount they bring in to the university. Now, it isn't exactly put like that, but essentially you are graded on proxies of that measure: the status of your publications, your recent grants and other activities that are essentially profitable for the institution (ie patents). If you aren't productive in ways that pay your salary, the university essentially has a system to "fix the glitch" as done with Milton in Office Space, and you simply stop receiving your paycheck. Everything just works itself out naturally.
Now, if you want to talk administrators, that's a whole different ballgame. We keep seeing an expansion of administration roles in academia, and I think that largely stems from very high leadership that need to be seen as proactively doing something new or at least reactive to the latest political trends. So, they wield their institutional funds to create a FTEs for various roles at both faculty and staff levels. The interesting thing here is that these types of roles are generally lacking externally derived funding, so they are supported on the backs of professors that bring in money to fund their own salary and research program.
And the interesting part there is applying this to the situation in the article. If licensing of Predpol's algorithms brings in much money to the university (and if developed at UCLA, certainly UCLA has some financial stake here), all the activism in the world is going to have a very hard to time unseating it and its creator. Like I said, you are largely as good as your revenue in academia. And, ironically, the money brought in via Predpol is likely contributing to the pool of money that fund the salaries of the people that want it axed. These facts aren't lost on the highest level leadership either.
But I'm just a disillusioned and cynical academic scientist, so take all this for what it's worth.
I have a graduate degree from UCLA and lost much faith in the place when the campus Ministry of Truth cast out Keith Fink, whose case is mentioned here. Guy was right-wing, yes, but his First Amendment course was very popular on campus, not least because he didn't tell students what to think (rare at UCLA now, sadly) and was respectful of all views. Contemporaneous discussions of the matter have been scrubbed from Daily Bruin archives and even stupid Wikipedia.
In a country where two-thirds of young adults can't name the country from which the founders declared their independence and where high schools no longer have civics classes, a First Amendment course is a fine way to begin to understand the Bill of Rights. That such cannot be tolerated at a major public university should concern us all.
Good luck to you Professor Manson. I wish nothing but the best for you and your future. This postmodern/woke ideology snuck up on most everyone else, including me, seemingly overnight. I was fired from my position for a series of comments I posted on my personal FB page.
My comments were impolite, passionate, and were widely tolerated, except one woman, who just so happened to be a colleague of mine. She decided to take a screen shot of my comments to present to our employer's HR team director.
The snowflake claimed she felt threatened by my comments, which weren't directed at her, nor any one else in particular - the outcome: I was fired immediately.
My sense is this extreme and intolerant overreaction came directly from the director of the HR team, who previously worked for ultra-woke Ellen DeGeneres in hyper-woke LA. before becoming the so-called "Chief People Person" at my former company.
Welcome to the MATRIARCHY! It's one huge high school girls' restroom out there, complete with bullies at the door.
THAT is a topic well worth pursuing! How right you are!
Yep. And I'm female. I'd much rather work with/for/lead a group of males than a group of females; previous eras, a combination was always best. Unfortunately the crazed, and I think basically unhappy, female social media shouting is ruling the day because there is no consequence other than agreeing with such in hopes they will go away. The tweets go up, any conflicting responses barred, and thus they believe they're righteous. Why quit? One thing still stuns me per quote from one of the other commenters said - paraphrasing - why should the loner at the end of the hallway get to decide what a leader does? And why should a leader promote illogical policy to keep the loner quiet? Very easy to clean up...leaders shouldn't let that poof of smoke at the end of the hallway rule their direction. Heavy handedness is needed.
And didn’t Ellen implode because of her nasty and bulling workplace? This HR BS is always offset by its hypocrisy.
Maybe the only alternative to all of this is stand your ground at work, document everything, then sue.
If Shakespeare were writing today, he might substitute HR directors for lawyers.
"Chief People Person", now there's a good example of a woke euphemism. They've gone from " Personnel Officer" to "Human Resources Director" to "Chief People Person". The words become more comfortable as the policies become more rigid and intolerant.
Lesson: unless you know and trust them as friends, you shouldn't have colleagues connected to you on social media (and your social media account should be private to friends only). LinkedIn is for anodyne colleague connections.
Agreed!
Good advice.
Sam - what goes around comes around. Remember they eat their own (Didn´t Ellen have troubles of her own with these people?)
“Jeff wasn’t racist… he was a democrat.” Those things are not mutually exclusive.
Exactly. Look at the public comments made by the Democrat leaders about any black conservatives and tell me that they aren't more racist than anything ever muttered by conservatives.
When I read these stories I first get angry, then try to visualize how I’d respond if this were happening to me.
The color of my skin, though, would be an important dynamic, but I suspect with me these folks would try the “sellout” and “coon” route.
What I’d pray for is the courage to fight back, go on the principled, honorable offensive, yet take and name names.
Peter - the abject and open racism displayed towards black people who don't align with leftist orthodoxy is nuts. Our SC Senator Tim Scott regularly gets called a "coon" and "Uncle Tim."
Larry Elder was “The blackface of White Supremacy”. Why Joy Reid was not fired on the spot for such a racist comment is beyond me.
So brave. Not.
When the leopard comes, and is eating your colleagues face, you shoot the damned leopard. You don't flee.
A tenured professor chose the easy way out.
The only way this turns is if enough people choose the hard way.
I have no idea of what you're situation in life is, but would you give up everything to fight for a cause? Have you ever been faced with that?
I've lost jobs (CEO level) twice because I fought my superiors, I can tell you, it's a bitch, and not many people will do it, but plenty of people say they would. In both of my cases, the culture didn't change, I was just out of a job.
Life situation: entrepreneur, very successful. Giving it all up, changing the game. Don't have superiors, which is a key and i suppose rare difference. No board, no bank. Will be sure to maintain that independence.
The author in question could not be fired so had a unique position to hold out.
Your situation sounds like you were a lone voice. Hope you find yourself among better company next time
I'm now an entrepreneur who's started a few businesses. I learned that I couldn't work for others who's values I didn't respect.
I gotta admit though, it was nice getting a paycheck.
Buy he is giving up his career! He’s leaving rather than fighting and possibly getting fired.
The OP had tenure, cant be fired for that
I am changing what I'm doing specifically to engage more head-on.
A lot of people left Germany in the thirties and they were derided by many of their countrymen as foolish and over-sensitive. One of those people was an eccentric professor named Albert Einstein. I have never heard or read anywhere that anyone called him foolish or stupid.
At some point, we need to abandon the anodyne term "woke" and replace it with the far more accurate term - Marxism. What is occurring today is no different than Russia in 1917, China in 1949, Cuba in 1959, and Venezuela in 1997 - condemn/rewrite history, set the population against itself, attack/censor free speech, condemn meritocracy and replace it with allegiance to "equality of outcome." The end state of this process is the always the same (see the 4 once-prosperous countries listed above). Words matter and until we collectively start describing what's happening in America accurately, we should not expect different results.
Except it isn't Marxism. The countries you name do not practice Marxism or communism or socialism. They are all run by totalitarian governments that do not allow dissent, and that punish free thought and personal initiative. Life may be good if you're a friend of Vlad or a CCP apparatchik or Maduro's nephew, but you still must obey all the rules. Even Karl Marx, bigot that he was, would be appalled by the misnamed application of his flawed theory.
You are absolutely correct. However, they all started out with the same slogans and actions that we are living through. My point is that all of these countries started with the same slogans and actions. The question to be asked is whether what you describe is America's future.
Have you read the communist manifesto? Its utopian vision is totalitarian.
Yes, but it's been a long time. Thank you for reminding me. Marx and Engels may have thought their ideas would improve the lot of the working classes, but results to date have been mixed at best.
It's totalitarianism.
Tenured, leaving and retiring? Why dont you stay on and make them try to fire you. It will cover your monthly nut while you more publicly expose the racist scumbags who run that s..hole department.
You have a good point here: it's the profs with tenure who are in a position to retire who are in the best position to fight back, because they have less to lose. I mean, if you can afford to retire, you can afford to be fired, so why not take the risk? I'm a tenured faculty member at a public university in the South; I'm not yet eligible to retire, and being fired or placed on unpaid leave would be a financial catastrophe for me. I'd like to think I could respond with courage should the leopard show itself, but the risks for me are much, much greater.
Same here. I am an Independent contractor in the medical field, ie.,no rights. Even though there is a shortage of clinicians in my field, a misinterpreted word to the wokesters who run Admin. means look for a new job,.