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.

For instance:

and

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.
http://www.thefire.org/index.php/article/8555.html?PHPSESSID=ef9d0db44f2593676f9d9a32116590ce
http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=58426
The good news is, after just a couple days of this travesty becoming public, the university caved and has discontinued the program.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

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.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

How terrible to be forced to consider that people are all the same.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

Except for whites, who are all racists.

 

" 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.

 

I think all the whites who seem to be racist should go to a different university out of respect for the minorities there.

 

Good idea. We should also stop sending our racist public funds to support the university. We don't want the university tainted by money from an inherently racist system.

 

Did you think before you said that, or did you just pound away on the keyboard? Yes, it's ALWAYS terrible to be "forced" to think anyway. People should be free to be liberal, racist, religious, Nazis, whatever. It's the job of the university to provide the information which, hopefully, will open minds; it's NOT the job of the university to start administering litmus tests or worse, to start attempting to indoctrinate people to a specific ideology.

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.

~String

 

http://michellemalkin.com/2007/10/3...rsity-of-delaware-update-the-school-responds/

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.

S.A.M:

Yes, how terrible it is when organisations with an agenda attempt to actively force a person to adopt certain subjective beliefs and opinions! Good golly, that sounds similar to something I read in Orwell. What was it again?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thoughtcrime
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crimestop

 

Oh man, get a load of this:

http://michellemalkin.com/2007/10/3...rsity-of-delaware-update-the-school-responds/

So let me get this straight:

- 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!

I guess Poland doesn't count?

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

 

Notes around

No, not really. The problem, though, is that such specific definitions, in order to foster such septic conservative outrage and infect otherwise rational people with grotesquely misbegotten fears, must be recklessly applied.

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.

• • •​

Who's forcing them to go to college? Who is forcing them to spend money they don't have for a degree? A public university, obviously, cannot make everyone happy. What everyone is panicking about is an idea that is, once you grasp it, shockingly familiar. In fact, it's obvious. It is not presently the job of high schools to make people look at reasons why. That's something for the fancier education. So why, when getting that higher education, should one object to its purpose?

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.

Reminding students specifically that civilized society, like life, is unfair doesn't seem very Orwellian. I understand why, politically, at least, it makes certain folks uncomfortable. Nobody wants the burden of openly arguing that engineered injustice is a natural necessity.

Sincerely, where does this one come from? Because the only time I ever run into this version of equality, it is someone arguing against a liberal argument that I've never actually heard.

Er ... from a liberal.

 

I wasn't aware that India had abolished the caste system?

 

Again, I wish conservatives would also be uproared over the patriotic tripe that is handed out as american history to CHILDREN. Children being much more vulnerable and manipulatible.

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.

 

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

 

They have, and in fact, they have a rigorous affirmative action mechanism in place that is more far-reaching than anything in the USA.

~String

 

String,

I don't know you well enough to tell whether your being sarcastic or not.

I guess you are.

 

A good point and I would agree with you wholeheartedly if this were a private institution. But its a university that's funded by all those tax dollars from nasty white racists.

The university should offer this concept as part of a class that can be taken. Just because this ridiculous brainwashing meshes with liberalism doesn't make it right to force it upon every student who walks on campus. Yes, I do indeed benefit from a system that has been built to better white men for ages. It's perfectly acceptable to expose me to this notion in a civics, history, philosophy, or economics class, it is not acceptable to foist the notion on me that, simply by existing within that system, I'm somehow a racist. Moreover, if I'm to be exposed to this left-wing indoctrination, I should be given some counterbalance to this idea as well as educated as to the strides this nation has made in creating equality. And while the college is at it, it might want to start exploring other racial issues like, why even in racially mixed and wealthy communities with racially balance educational staffs (like certain universities, and school districts like... say... Shaker Heights, Ohio) why black students still account for the most drop-outs, score the lowest on tests and end up in detention at rates far exceeding white or Asian students-- even despite economic parity within the community. (I know by even knowing and acknowledging this, I'm a horrible racist)

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).

~String

 

excellent post above.

re:

the caste system was abolished decades ago. yet even with government programs like the one you mentioned, the culture of the caste system exists.

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.

 

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:

http://www.udel.edu/PR/response/

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.

 

I agree that sounds really stupid.