11-01-07, 10:40 PM #1
University: All Whites Racist
The University of Delaware had a mandatory program for all residence hall students that evaluated their positions on a variety of issues and attempted to ensure that all students have views in line with those of the extreme left wing.
The "shocking program of ideological reeducation," which the school itself defines as a "treatment" for students' incorrect attitudes and beliefs, is nothing less than "Orwellian," FIRE said.
The school requires its approximately 7,000 residence hall students "to adopt highly specific university-approved views on issues ranging from politics to race, sexuality, sociology, moral philosophy and environmentalism."
A racist is one who is both privileged and socialized on the basis of race by a white supremacist (racist) system. 'The term applies to all white people
Requirements for students include: "Students will recognize that systemic oppression exists in our society," "Students will recognize the benefits of dismantling systems of oppression," and "Students will be able to utilize their knowledge of sustainability to change their daily habits and consumer mentality," FIRE said.
The foundation said students even are "pressured or even required" to make social statements that meet with the school's approval.
after an investigation showed that males demonstrated 'a higher degree of resistance to educational efforts,' the Rodney complex chose to hire 'strong male RAs.' Each such RA 'combats male residents' concepts of traditional male identity,' in order to 'ensure the delivery of the curriculum at the same level as in the female floors.'
Anyone found to have thoughts not in synch with the leftist university party line was sentenced to "treatment" to cure them of their thought crimes.
The good news is, after just a couple days of this travesty becoming public, the university caved and has discontinued the program.
Late Thursday, University of Delaware President Patrick Harker released on the school’s website a Message to the University of Delaware Community terminating the university’s ideological reeducation program, which FIRE condemned as an exercise in thought reform. He stated, “I have directed that the program be stopped immediately. No further activities under the current framework will be conducted.” Harker also called for a “full and broad-based review” of the program’s practices and purposes.
11-01-07, 10:45 PM #2
Higher education in America has become a cesspool of ideological indoctrination. Why this surprises people anymore is beyond me. Visit a college campus. They exist on plains of reality not generally connected to the rest of the nation (or the world). The good news is, the "conservative media," for all its ills now exists to point this junk out to people, whereas 20 years ago, the sane among us would have had to suffer in silence.
11-01-07, 10:49 PM #3
11-01-07, 10:51 PM #4
11-01-07, 10:53 PM #5
" A racist is one who is both privileged and socialized on the basis of race by a white supremacist (racist) system. 'The term applies to all white people"
I hope that's a misquote.
11-01-07, 11:00 PM #6
I think all the whites who seem to be racist should go to a different university out of respect for the minorities there.
11-02-07, 12:14 AM #7
11-02-07, 02:00 AM #8
Also, only a fool would subscribe to the notion that "all people are the same." All people are not. All people SHOULD have the same rights, but people are born very, VERY much different. Some are quite inferior, and others are obviously superior in many ways. Only in our insipidly liberal society is it a faux pas to actually point out the blatantly obvious.
11-02-07, 02:30 AM #9
Typically, Delaware denied that the program is compulsory. But visit the above site, and read the material in their 'voluntary' re-education program. What a load of bullshit. I'm stunned that the University thinks it can get away with such nonsense.
Originally Posted by S.A.M.
How terrible to be forced to consider that people are all the same.
Last edited by mountainhare; 11-02-07 at 02:45 AM.
11-02-07, 02:51 AM #10
Oh man, get a load of this:
“Have you ever heard a well-meaning white person say, ‘I’m not a member of any race except the human race?’ What she usually means by this statement is that she doesn’t want to perpetuate racial categories by acknowledging that she is white. This is an evasion of responsibility for her participation in a system based on supremacy for white people.” - Page 8
- If a 'white' person claims that race exists, they are racist. Because race is an artifical construct invented by colonial powers to justify oppression of non-whites.
- If a 'white' person claims that race does not exist, they are racist. This is because they are trying to 'evade their responsibility' for being a big bad whitey.
I mean, WTF? It's a lose/lose situation.
What's funny is how they use the term 'white', although 'white' in itself is often regarded as a race. So on one hand, they claim that race does not exist. Except when we need to group all of the white race together to bitch about them.
* Note how they use the pronoun 'She'. LOL!
“Under Moorish rule, Spain had been the center of European culture. The Moors built 11 universities, thousands of book stores, hot and cold running water perfumed with roses, and a system of public baths for poor as well as rich. Moorish cities were centers of trade with Africa and Asia. Jewish people flourished during the Moorish empire; they had major roles in education and commerce, and were treated more justly than at any other time in European history.”
11-02-07, 03:56 AM #11
Notes aroundOriginally Posted by Exhumed
Consider, please, on the one hand, Kurt Vonnegut Jr.'s joke in Hocus Pocus that, once they'd divvied up the prisons by race, they realized they had left a few groups out. Thus, Asians were sent to white prisons, and considered "honorary white people".
It's a subtle joke, I admit, but strikes me as hilarious. After all, I'm Asian enough to be considered an Asian-American, but I've been raised entirely in the white culture. I might look at this strange definition and try to except myself on the obscure point that I grew up no more at home among hostile white children than a half-white black friend of mine. And yes, I chose those words deliberately. Because even though I've been beaten for looking too Asian, that was as a child, and even though I don't hear of many hate crimes against adults with freckles, much of that took place at a time when kids were beating one another for freckles, having curly hair. ("Havin' nigger hair!" I once heard, and a fight quickly ensued. The funny thing, in retrospect, is that, while the curls were tight, indeed, these days I'd probably expect some sort of faggot joke about that haircut. Anyway, I digress.)
When a cop pulls me over for a suspected DUI, I heard, "Good evening, sir. License, registration please? Proof of insurance? Do you know why I stopped you this evening, sir?" When my half-white black friend gets pulled over for running a yellow light, it's, "Driver, step out of the vehicle!"
The truth of the matter is that I do benefit from the white supremacist system. And, like most of my racist neighbors, I haven't really done much about that system except benefit from it. The only real problem I have with such a definition is that, if it is taken out of its proper context--and the basis of our discussion, this topic, reflects one of those improper contextual shifts--it can legitimize severe behavior. I do think there is a difference between those of us who haven't thrown away every principle, virtue, or value we ever learned or were taught, and those who seek to regularly exploit and sharpen the imbalance.
I'm not prepared to destroy everything for this. I'm not prepared to throw away every scrap of progress over this. If the revolution comes, I'll pick a side, but for f@ck's sake, there are better ways. In the abstract, they're worth it. One of them, my favorite, is to simply not worry about any of it. I wish I could convince the dedicated, proactive, and even militant racists, homophobes, sexists, &c. how much more enjoyable the realities of their lives will be when they decide to stop worrying about such useless crap. But that's a little bit harder to pull off than it sounds in the query letter. In treatment form, it seems script development will be constant insofar as, whether direct or functional or otherwise, progress occurs, qualitatively and quantitatively, according to predictable vector dynamics.
It always seems that way. And rarely, if ever, is it actually that way. This is what the teenage years were for, people. Seriously. I learned it then. I learned what it meant sometime later. The magnitude is what caught me. The permeating effect. But the point is that I can figure it out. One would think those with degrees and careers, whose intelligence and wisdom is, comparatively, affirmed, should understand it. Or, to be less selective about it, those who think they know better than I. What? It's not a crime to think you know better than I. All I'm after is that more people should recognize some form of what I'm talking about.
Because it really is simple enough to realize that I ought not feel guilty for failing to figure out the solution. Any solution in this case necessarily involves implementation, and if the human species is thus far incapable of repeating simple technology consistently enough to deliver clean, potable water to every human being on the planet, something so considerably more intricate and subtle, with no immediate manifestations to signal success, presents tremendous challenges in identifying, naming, and describing.
I'm sorry I'm not up to it. In the meantime, the least I can do is try to pay attention. It really is a low-maintenance regard for the issues. And it helps to bear in mind that the fact that one acquires certain information should not inherently suggest one knows what to do with it.
We should also remember that history, while not a precise body of information, does obey certain principles. For instance, one could easily suggest that, had the whole economic settling that took place through the era of white supremacy and internationalization--a period that, technically, continues today--taken place without the ethnic-racial identity politics of justification, history could have seen exploitation along ethnic lines but made no specific judgments. To the other, though, the process would necessarily have run differently. The ethnic condemnations exist as justifications. If our social character had evolved so differently as to not require justification, the character and very nature of our species would also be different. It's hard to figure what other lines might have been drawn; by the time of the American slavery crisis, the age of the barbarians had passed. Language was not sufficient to dehumanize. Religion was, but in those wars you could, technically, convert. Sort of. But skin color ... that's pretty obvious to the superstitious mind seeking stronger justification for what it otherwise would consider greater evil.
So we are, essentially, stuck with what is, including those parts we cannot easily see or recognize.
In the meantime, 'tis best to not distress ourselves with such broad definitions of racism. The idea is obscure for its (oxymoronic) specific generality, and not intended for casual use.
• • •
Originally Posted by Superstring99
I once wrote something about the fact that many students are shocked when, in college, they are exposed to the truth of the historical record. I can't believe the Myth of Southern Reconstruction still kicks. It's still a bit strange to think of the fight on behalf of the Columbus myth. The public discussion about Thomas Jefferson's illegitimate offspring has never, that I've witnessed, tread in useful territory. Of course, I haven't really looked. It's just that whenever I come across it, it's about the scandal aspect. Who cares? I think that makes for a great essay question: Describe Thomas Jefferson's state of mind as he was banging a Negro slave.
The whole point is that you are supposed to look at history in a certain way. And every nationalist trend exploits that way for political traction, but there is a fundamental truth about any story. And history is a story.
Nothing ever begins.
There is no first moment; no single word or place from which this or any other story springs.
The threads can always be traced back to some earlier tale, and to the tales that preceded that; though as the narrator's voice recedes the connections will seem to grow more tenuous, for each age will want the tale told as if it were of its own making.
Thus the pagan will be sanctified, the tragic become laughable; great lovers will stoop to sentiment, and demons dwindle to clockwork toys.
Nothing is fixed. In and out the shuttle goes, fact and fiction, mind and matter woven into patterns that may have only this in common: that hidden among them is a filigree that will with time become a world.
but people are born very, VERY much different. Some are quite inferior, and others are obviously superior in many ways. Only in our insipidly liberal society is it a faux pas to actually point out the blatantly obvious.
Er ... from a liberal.
11-02-07, 05:12 AM #12
11-02-07, 05:18 AM #13
It sounds from your post like UD is doing something just plain wrong.
But it never bothered conservatives when children were brainwashed and given very slanted views of history. That is considered natural.
I can remember one kid asking the teacher why GW was such a great general since it seemed like he mostly retreated and had this one big victory where he attacked on Christmas. Something that didn't seem fair to the kid. He got blasted. I mean yelled at. And this was not some wise ass. He was good student and he was disturbed by what he had read OUTSIDE THE TEXTBOOOK. Anyone raising questions about Manifest Destiny, the righteousness of annexation of Texas, interventions in S>A, and so on was blasted. But the real problem was not what happened when anyone questioned, it was the fact that we as small children mostly did not know to question or had been long since trained not to question what teachers said.
And not one Goddam conservative ever gave a shit about any of this.
But you have your nuts in a pretzel over how adults are being brainwashed.
11-02-07, 06:02 AM #14
University students aren't vulnerable to manipulation? Especially the green ones straight out of high school? Give me a break.
But I do understand what you are saying, Granty. Children should not be indoctrinated into a conservative belief system. Political and religious protelyzing should remain outside the classroom
11-02-07, 08:14 AM #15
11-02-07, 08:19 AM #16
11-02-07, 08:32 AM #17
One cannot attempt to hold white bad people accountable for their misdeeds (which, apparently, all whites must pay for /answer for as a community) without calling out the current misdeeds of minorities (which, if whites have to suffer for all the crimes of all white people, it should only be fair to call this out to the entire "black" or "Hispanic" community).
11-02-07, 08:52 AM #18
excellent post above.
i know a guy whose father forbade to marry a girl from a lower caste. that was as recent as 2002. and he's from Mumbai, which is a large city, and large cities tend to be more progressive.
the caste system is alive and well, even if the State says it isn't.
11-02-07, 09:17 AM #19
Seems that after the University's review was conducted they determined that FIRE was wrong about a bunch of its claims. From the University's letter to FIRE:
Your letter asserts a number of conclusions that can be supported by a selective citation of documents, but are not actualized. The idea that students are “required to adopt university approved views” on the issues listed is not a goal of this institution or of the residence life department. This type of goal is both highly undesired and wholly unattainable. Students are challenged to express themselves as free-thinking citizens. The indoctrination you speak of serves no educational purpose and does not exist as part of a systematic effort on this campus. I assume that you have noted the absence of any policy, rule, or regulation pertaining to your concerns about disciplinary action being taken against students for unwillingness to be changed in the manner that you describe.
There is in fact a program within the residence halls that engages students in self –examination of the roles they hope to take in society. This effort is consistent with the mission of the University which states, “Our graduates should know how to reason critically and independently…communicate clearly in writing and speech, and develop into informed citizens and leaders.” The program is designed to encourage students to think about and to consider a number of issues, but all make their own decisions about the outcome of this reflection. FIRE’s assertion that students are told what to think is inaccurate. In common with FIRE, our institution values free speech, active voice, and open dialogue. We believe that students learn and grow in part by engaging in significant discussions on both sides of the classroom door.
Looking at the competencies materials from the program provided on the FIRE web site it seems pretty clear that students were asked to consider their feelings on these subjects and discuss them not to accept any given belief system.
Now most educational materials derived by professional educators are poorly written and pretty worthless so I wouldn't doubt that students might be implenting them in all kinds of ways that are contrary to the intent of the program, but I don't see how this program is an attempt at thought-control. Just another crappy residential life program similar to what goes on in schools all around the country. If I remember correctly my school had one, which I never bothered to attend.
11-02-07, 10:41 AM #20
By Ganymede in forum Free ThoughtsLast Post: 07-05-11, 10:38 PMReplies: 121
By Fraggle Rocker in forum Human ScienceLast Post: 06-26-07, 02:47 PMReplies: 178
By spuriousmonkey in forum The CesspoolLast Post: 06-09-07, 06:25 AMReplies: 556
By KennyJC in forum Religion ArchivesLast Post: 08-29-05, 09:34 AMReplies: 51