24 September 2016

PC Deniers Are Flat-Earthers: Part 6

A college in New Jersey has deemed a student-sponsored "American BBQ" event "offensive" because the students used an "I Want You" image of Uncle Sam to promote their event. (You'll probably feel compelled to read that again, but don't waste your time. You read it correctly the first time.)

The college administrative snowflakes said this imagery was "too militaristic and not inclusive of the entire student population."
. . . they had been using the famous ‘I want you’ image of Uncle Sam in several posters around campus to get the word out about the event, and the administration thought that these posters were too militaristic and not inclusive of the entire student population.” . . . the Uncle Sam flyers in question said simply, “We want you...to come to our BBQ.”
I suppose they could have used a smiley face image instead but then, I suppose, that would have offended sad people. While many folks in academia continue to have, in the words of Professor Gordon S. Wood, their "incestuous conversations", a growing number of people  are simply laughing at them. You just can't make this stuff up.

23 September 2016

Emerging Civil War & Essential Civil War Curriculum

I've written for both of these sites and it's nice to see ECW give a plug for Virginia Tech's Essential Civil War Curriculum in their latest newsletter:

22 September 2016

PC Deniers Are Flat-Earthers: Part 5

Professor Daniel Jacobson, who teaches philosophy at the University of Michigan, has written an excellent essay at the Cato Institute's website about the attack on free speech on American college campuses. While Jacobson does not specifically mention the term "political correctness" it is, of course, part of the tactic limiting free speech. 

A few of the money quotes from Jacobson's piece:
Many academics now consider freedom of speech just another American eccentricity, like guns and religion. What they call free speech fundamentalism is misguided at best, in their view, and an embarrassment before our more sophisticated European counterparts.
And . . .
In considering this phenomenon, note that academia is now overwhelmingly dominated by progressives and other leftists, many of whom are not only skeptical of freedom of speech but intolerant of dissenting opinion.
And . . .
Academic freedom, too, is now championed primarily as a matter of guild privilege, in defense of an activist pedagogy that promotes political orthodoxy and does not shrink from stifling dissent.
And . . .
The great irony at the heart of the current attack on freedom of speech in academia is that the antagonists of free speech claim to be defending the victimized when, in fact, they are the oppressors.  
And . . .
What is more, such intolerance creates an incentive for hypersensitivity, since it empowers campus activists—again exclusively leftist activists—to suppress dissent. . . . This movement encourages the cultivation of intellectual vices that are antithetical to an intellectually diverse society by granting power to the thin-skinned and the hotheaded—or at any rate to those most ready to claim injury or to threaten violence. And it does so subversively, by pretending to enforce norms of civility and tolerance, while doing violence to the classically liberal ideals of a freethinking and intellectually diverse university.
[All emphasis mine.]

A devastating knockout punch to the flat-earthers.

Read the rest here.

21 September 2016

Should Public School Teachers Do This? - Part 2

Story here.

As an aside, have you noticed that all the CW bloggers who are so critical about any display of the Confederate flag, never make even the weakest criticism of the desecration of the flag that was carried into battle by Union soldiers? Isn't that amazing? And isn't it rather telling? I've told you over and over again that Confederate iconography was simply the low hanging fruit. The SJW's aren't anywhere near finished.

15 September 2016

Trump & Old White Men

Off topic a bit, but not too much. If you read Civil War & History blogs, you've invariably noticed that many of the comments in the posts quickly devolve into Trump bashing and "old white men" being the source of all evil on the planet. The hate directed at this demo is palpable on these blogs. With that in mind, I came across a piece today which discusses how an LA Times reporter was "stunned by the diversity of volunteers who are committed to seeing him win the Golden State and the presidency."
“It was as if the whole thing had been staged, in Cambodia Town, no less, to belie the notion that Trump’s appeal is largely limited to older white males,” the Times‘s Steve Lopez wrote.
And this:
Gary Fultheim, the Jewish man who is also part-owner of the building that Trump’s HQ is located in, reportedly said one of the main reasons he is voting Trump for president is because he believes Trump will do a better job of protecting Israel from Iran than the Democrats will.

The "protecting Israel" comment is interesting to note; particularly when you understand the growing anti-semitism in academia and the intellectual support it's getting in a growing number of American universities and colleges. I find that trend deplorable, don't you?

08 September 2016

PC Deniers Are Flat-Earthers: Part 4

The University of Iowa could become the first school in the state to add a bachelor’s program in social justice to its list of degrees, provided its Board of Regents approves the motion.

Of course SJW and PC are related. But I would disagree with the author. I don't believe PC has peaked. 

06 September 2016

PC Deniers Are Flat-Earthers: Part 3

Lead off to the latest on political correctness and free speech suppression in academia:
In the midst of national debates concerning free speech on college campuses, the University of Colorado at Colorado Springs has opted to clamp down on students who challenge the reigning orthodoxy regarding manmade global warming. . .  . “We will not, at any time, debate the science of climate change, nor will the ‘other side’ of the climate change debate be taught or discussed in this course,” the professors said in their letter obtained by The College Fix.
Yes, challenging the "reigning orthodoxy" has always been suppressed by the intolerant and powerful. Can't have too much free thought goin' 'round these days, don't ya know. And suppressing the "other side" is, more often than not, due to the fact that the "orthodoxy" is unable to stand up to scrutiny. In other words, they can't defend their position.

And how about this:
The professors, backed by University Communications Director Tom Hutton, said that the ban on debate even extends to discussion among students in the online forums.
Wow. And yet we still have deniers.

Story source

And how about this little gem from Clark College in Worcester, Mass:
And don’t say “you guys.” It could be interpreted as leaving out women, said Ms. Marlowe, who realized it was offensive only when someone confronted her for saying it during a presentation.
Full disclosure: I don't like "you guys" either, though it usually comes out like, "you gieez." Reminds me too much of New Jersey. Anyway, I scold my grandchildren for saying "you guys." We prefer "y'all." It's a rule in my household. Besides sounding more melodious, it also saves time. It's also more inclusive. I suggest colleges and universities make the term "y'all" mandatory so as not to offend anyone.

And PC can be rather costly:
In August, the University of Wisconsin system, which includes the Madison flagship and 25 other campuses, said it would ask the State Legislature for $6 million in funding to improve what it called the “university experience” for students. The request includes money for Fluent, a program described as a system wide cultural training for faculty and staff members and students. But that budget request has provoked controversy. “If only the taxpayers and tuition-paying families had a safe space that might protect them from wasteful UW System spending on political correctness,” 
Wouldn't you love to see a breakdown of how that $6 million would actually be spent? LOL.


03 September 2016

Indoctrination is Expensive

And how 'bout the prices on those used textbooks? $183 for a used psychology textbook?
I think maybe George Mason made the wiser choice. LOL.