College alumni groups spread nationally to counter ‘cancel culture’ (WaPo)

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Summary: Old, white guys with money forms groups to get colleges to go back to giving their “born on third” kids a place to mess around for four years before their use their connections to get executive jobs.

If you believe the name they give their group, you’re not paying attention. You think their work might help your middle class white kid, but they are as much against your kid getting a leg up as they are against minority groups. They want power and opportunity for their wealthy, white kids and no others.

Oh, BS. Many of those most involved in these organizations are immigrants and college graduates who grew up decidedly middle class.

It's about the divide between those who believe that free speech should be paramount, even if that allows people with a bigger soapbox to argue against equity, and those who believe that equity should be paramount, even if that entails the censorship or de-platforming of opposing views.

The W&L example says the people want to preserve General Lee’s legacy.

They’re hoping people assume they’re coming from a good place with the whole free speech thing, but they basically seem upset that people like Lee and Jefferson are seen with more real glasses today than with the rose-colored ones we had when we were kids.

Don’t be fooled. They aren’t about free speech. That’s their cover.

Fair point about W&L but U of C professor Dorian Abbot being disinvited from giving a scientific lecture at MIT because he publicly opposes DEI initiatives is appalling.

It’s not, actually. Research and science in general suffer enormously from the bias in science. Universities and labs are increasingly realize that science is stunted by the old boys club.

Please explain how Mr. Abbot's research in planetary science been affected by bias.

Does his research require him to publicly oppose DEI initiatives?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:These groups are not actually in favor of free speech. They just don’t want anyone learning anything accurate about the history of slavery. It’s Orwellian for them to describe themselves as in favor of free speech when their only goal is to subvert free speech.

Straight up gaslighting 101.

It’s true. These cancel culture groups are trying to get courses that teach about the history of racism and slavery actually cancelled. That’s straight up Orwellian. You cannot advocate that you support free speech and try to get courses cancelled at the same time without people noticing you are basically just a fascist group trying to shut dissent.

Hint: people who truly support free speech on campus don’t spend all their time trying to suppress it.

Happens on both sides, but you know that already.

So disingenuous. It's not even close.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:These groups are not actually in favor of free speech. They just don’t want anyone learning anything accurate about the history of slavery. It’s Orwellian for them to describe themselves as in favor of free speech when their only goal is to subvert free speech.

Straight up gaslighting 101.

It’s true. These cancel culture groups are trying to get courses that teach about the history of racism and slavery actually cancelled. That’s straight up Orwellian. You cannot advocate that you support free speech and try to get courses cancelled at the same time without people noticing you are basically just a fascist group trying to shut dissent.

Hint: people who truly support free speech on campus don’t spend all their time trying to suppress it.

Exactly.

[Anonymous]

Call me when these cancel culture groups actually stand up for free speech rather than trying to suppress it.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Summary: Old, white guys with money forms groups to get colleges to go back to giving their “born on third” kids a place to mess around for four years before their use their connections to get executive jobs.

If you believe the name they give their group, you’re not paying attention. You think their work might help your middle class white kid, but they are as much against your kid getting a leg up as they are against minority groups. They want power and opportunity for their wealthy, white kids and no others.

Oh, BS. Many of those most involved in these organizations are immigrants and college graduates who grew up decidedly middle class.

It's about the divide between those who believe that free speech should be paramount, even if that allows people with a bigger soapbox to argue against equity, and those who believe that equity should be paramount, even if that entails the censorship or de-platforming of opposing views.

The W&L example says the people want to preserve General Lee’s legacy.

They’re hoping people assume they’re coming from a good place with the whole free speech thing, but they basically seem upset that people like Lee and Jefferson are seen with more real glasses today than with the rose-colored ones we had when we were kids.

Don’t be fooled. They aren’t about free speech. That’s their cover.

Fair point about W&L but U of C professor Dorian Abbot being disinvited from giving a scientific lecture at MIT because he publicly opposes DEI initiatives is appalling.

It’s not, actually. Research and science in general suffer enormously from the bias in science. Universities and labs are increasingly realize that science is stunted by the old boys club.

Please explain how Mr. Abbot's research in planetary science been affected by bias.

Does his research require him to publicly oppose DEI initiatives?

Of course not. But that's the point. His opinions on DEI have *nothing* to do with his expertise in his field. So canceling his presentation on his scientific research because of his political beliefs is about punishing him for his thoughtcrimes. Let me be clear, I support DEI initiatives. But I also value academic freedom.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Summary: Old, white guys with money forms groups to get colleges to go back to giving their “born on third” kids a place to mess around for four years before their use their connections to get executive jobs.

If you believe the name they give their group, you’re not paying attention. You think their work might help your middle class white kid, but they are as much against your kid getting a leg up as they are against minority groups. They want power and opportunity for their wealthy, white kids and no others.

Oh, BS. Many of those most involved in these organizations are immigrants and college graduates who grew up decidedly middle class.

It's about the divide between those who believe that free speech should be paramount, even if that allows people with a bigger soapbox to argue against equity, and those who believe that equity should be paramount, even if that entails the censorship or de-platforming of opposing views.

The W&L example says the people want to preserve General Lee’s legacy.

They’re hoping people assume they’re coming from a good place with the whole free speech thing, but they basically seem upset that people like Lee and Jefferson are seen with more real glasses today than with the rose-colored ones we had when we were kids.

Don’t be fooled. They aren’t about free speech. That’s their cover.

Fair point about W&L but U of C professor Dorian Abbot being disinvited from giving a scientific lecture at MIT because he publicly opposes DEI initiatives is appalling.

It’s not, actually. Research and science in general suffer enormously from the bias in science. Universities and labs are increasingly realize that science is stunted by the old boys club.

Please explain how Mr. Abbot's research in planetary science been affected by bias.

Does his research require him to publicly oppose DEI initiatives?

Of course not. But that's the point. His opinions on DEI have *nothing* to do with his expertise in his field. So canceling his presentation on his scientific research because of his political beliefs is about punishing him for his thoughtcrimes. Let me be clear, I support DEI initiatives. But I also value academic freedom.

That's not really "academic freedom" though. Maybe he should leave his politics out of the workplace.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Wow. These MAGAs are planning to trash UVA.

https://thejeffersoncouncil.com/year-end-uva-update-from-bert-ellis/

I’m so glad you posted this - if this is what you think of as “trashing,” there is really nothing to discuss. Everything he says is common sense, especially this:

“I just found copies of the 2021-2022 Peer Evaluation Forms and Process for University of Virginia professors. I have attached copies here and here. Please note the prominence of DEI issues within the evaluations. There is even a special appendix on DEI examples to use in the evaluation. It is readily apparent that no professor can possibly get a good evaluation and obtain tenure or even a raise in salary if he/she does not pledge total allegiance to DEI and can itemize a large number of DEI initiatives on his/her part. This should not have anything to do with teaching math, science, business or other social science courses. Every Dean or Department Head now has a DEI officer who has co-oversight on the peer review process.”

He is absolutely correct. I hope this DEI nonsense which has infected all aspects of college (and corporate) life is reined in. That you seem to want to see everything through the DEI lens only identifies exactly who you are.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Summary: Old, white guys with money forms groups to get colleges to go back to giving their “born on third” kids a place to mess around for four years before their use their connections to get executive jobs.

If you believe the name they give their group, you’re not paying attention. You think their work might help your middle class white kid, but they are as much against your kid getting a leg up as they are against minority groups. They want power and opportunity for their wealthy, white kids and no others.

Oh, BS. Many of those most involved in these organizations are immigrants and college graduates who grew up decidedly middle class.

It's about the divide between those who believe that free speech should be paramount, even if that allows people with a bigger soapbox to argue against equity, and those who believe that equity should be paramount, even if that entails the censorship or de-platforming of opposing views.

The W&L example says the people want to preserve General Lee’s legacy.

They’re hoping people assume they’re coming from a good place with the whole free speech thing, but they basically seem upset that people like Lee and Jefferson are seen with more real glasses today than with the rose-colored ones we had when we were kids.

Don’t be fooled. They aren’t about free speech. That’s their cover.

Fair point about W&L but U of C professor Dorian Abbot being disinvited from giving a scientific lecture at MIT because he publicly opposes DEI initiatives is appalling.

It’s not, actually. Research and science in general suffer enormously from the bias in science. Universities and labs are increasingly realize that science is stunted by the old boys club.

Please explain how Mr. Abbot's research in planetary science been affected by bias.

Does his research require him to publicly oppose DEI initiatives?

Of course not. But that's the point. His opinions on DEI have *nothing* to do with his expertise in his field. So canceling his presentation on his scientific research because of his political beliefs is about punishing him for his thoughtcrimes. Let me be clear, I support DEI initiatives. But I also value academic freedom.

That's not really "academic freedom" though. Maybe he should leave his politics out of the workplace.

Of course it is about academic freedom & the spirit of free inquiry if he is being prevented from presenting his scientific research because he wrote an op ed arguing that DEI is antithetical to the principles of equality and undermines the public trust in universities (his contentions, not mine). This is the equivalent of punishing professors in the 1950s for alleged communist leanings.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Summary: Old, white guys with money forms groups to get colleges to go back to giving their “born on third” kids a place to mess around for four years before their use their connections to get executive jobs.

If you believe the name they give their group, you’re not paying attention. You think their work might help your middle class white kid, but they are as much against your kid getting a leg up as they are against minority groups. They want power and opportunity for their wealthy, white kids and no others.

Oh, BS. Many of those most involved in these organizations are immigrants and college graduates who grew up decidedly middle class.

It's about the divide between those who believe that free speech should be paramount, even if that allows people with a bigger soapbox to argue against equity, and those who believe that equity should be paramount, even if that entails the censorship or de-platforming of opposing views.

The W&L example says the people want to preserve General Lee’s legacy.

They’re hoping people assume they’re coming from a good place with the whole free speech thing, but they basically seem upset that people like Lee and Jefferson are seen with more real glasses today than with the rose-colored ones we had when we were kids.

Don’t be fooled. They aren’t about free speech. That’s their cover.

Fair point about W&L but U of C professor Dorian Abbot being disinvited from giving a scientific lecture at MIT because he publicly opposes DEI initiatives is appalling.

It’s not, actually. Research and science in general suffer enormously from the bias in science. Universities and labs are increasingly realize that science is stunted by the old boys club.

Please explain how Mr. Abbot's research in planetary science been affected by bias.

Does his research require him to publicly oppose DEI initiatives?

Of course not. But that's the point. His opinions on DEI have *nothing* to do with his expertise in his field. So canceling his presentation on his scientific research because of his political beliefs is about punishing him for his thoughtcrimes. Let me be clear, I support DEI initiatives. But I also value academic freedom.

That's not really "academic freedom" though. Maybe he should leave his politics out of the workplace.

Of course it is about academic freedom & the spirit of free inquiry if he is being prevented from presenting his scientific research because he wrote an op ed arguing that DEI is antithetical to the principles of equality and undermines the public trust in universities (his contentions, not mine). This is the equivalent of punishing professors in the 1950s for alleged communist leanings.

Exactly. It’s so amusing that these liberals are insisting it’s the right who wants to stifle free speech. Every word and action on the left makes it crystal clear that the only acceptable opinions are those that agree with them. Enough, already.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Summary: Old, white guys with money forms groups to get colleges to go back to giving their “born on third” kids a place to mess around for four years before their use their connections to get executive jobs.

If you believe the name they give their group, you’re not paying attention. You think their work might help your middle class white kid, but they are as much against your kid getting a leg up as they are against minority groups. They want power and opportunity for their wealthy, white kids and no others.

Oh, BS. Many of those most involved in these organizations are immigrants and college graduates who grew up decidedly middle class.

It's about the divide between those who believe that free speech should be paramount, even if that allows people with a bigger soapbox to argue against equity, and those who believe that equity should be paramount, even if that entails the censorship or de-platforming of opposing views.

The W&L example says the people want to preserve General Lee’s legacy.

They’re hoping people assume they’re coming from a good place with the whole free speech thing, but they basically seem upset that people like Lee and Jefferson are seen with more real glasses today than with the rose-colored ones we had when we were kids.

Don’t be fooled. They aren’t about free speech. That’s their cover.

Fair point about W&L but U of C professor Dorian Abbot being disinvited from giving a scientific lecture at MIT because he publicly opposes DEI initiatives is appalling.

It’s not, actually. Research and science in general suffer enormously from the bias in science. Universities and labs are increasingly realize that science is stunted by the old boys club.

Please explain how Mr. Abbot's research in planetary science been affected by bias.

Does his research require him to publicly oppose DEI initiatives?

Of course not. But that's the point. His opinions on DEI have *nothing* to do with his expertise in his field. So canceling his presentation on his scientific research because of his political beliefs is about punishing him for his thoughtcrimes. Let me be clear, I support DEI initiatives. But I also value academic freedom.

That's not really "academic freedom" though. Maybe he should leave his politics out of the workplace.

Oh, the irony.
DP

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:These groups are not actually in favor of free speech. They just don’t want anyone learning anything accurate about the history of slavery. It’s Orwellian for them to describe themselves as in favor of free speech when their only goal is to subvert free speech.

Straight up gaslighting 101.

It’s true. These cancel culture groups are trying to get courses that teach about the history of racism and slavery actually cancelled. That’s straight up Orwellian. You cannot advocate that you support free speech and try to get courses cancelled at the same time without people noticing you are basically just a fascist group trying to shut dissent.

Hint: people who truly support free speech on campus don’t spend all their time trying to suppress it.

Happens on both sides, but you know that already.

Only one side is starting cancel culture groups while simultaneously trying to cancel courses so no, it’s not both sides.

DP. Talk about disingenuous. Liberal groups refuse to even allow conservative speakers to speak, and you’re calling yourselves the “party of free speech”? What a joke. A really terrible joke.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Summary: Old, white guys with money forms groups to get colleges to go back to giving their “born on third” kids a place to mess around for four years before their use their connections to get executive jobs.

If you believe the name they give their group, you’re not paying attention. You think their work might help your middle class white kid, but they are as much against your kid getting a leg up as they are against minority groups. They want power and opportunity for their wealthy, white kids and no others.

Oh, BS. Many of those most involved in these organizations are immigrants and college graduates who grew up decidedly middle class.

It's about the divide between those who believe that free speech should be paramount, even if that allows people with a bigger soapbox to argue against equity, and those who believe that equity should be paramount, even if that entails the censorship or de-platforming of opposing views.

The W&L example says the people want to preserve General Lee’s legacy.

They’re hoping people assume they’re coming from a good place with the whole free speech thing, but they basically seem upset that people like Lee and Jefferson are seen with more real glasses today than with the rose-colored ones we had when we were kids.

Don’t be fooled. They aren’t about free speech. That’s their cover.

Fair point about W&L but U of C professor Dorian Abbot being disinvited from giving a scientific lecture at MIT because he publicly opposes DEI initiatives is appalling.

It’s not, actually. Research and science in general suffer enormously from the bias in science. Universities and labs are increasingly realize that science is stunted by the old boys club.

Please explain how Mr. Abbot's research in planetary science been affected by bias.

Does his research require him to publicly oppose DEI initiatives?

Of course not. But that's the point. His opinions on DEI have *nothing* to do with his expertise in his field. So canceling his presentation on his scientific research because of his political beliefs is about punishing him for his thoughtcrimes. Let me be clear, I support DEI initiatives. But I also value academic freedom.

That's not really "academic freedom" though. Maybe he should leave his politics out of the workplace.

Oh, the irony.
DP

You consider DEI efforts to be...political?

That is fcked up.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Summary: Old, white guys with money forms groups to get colleges to go back to giving their “born on third” kids a place to mess around for four years before their use their connections to get executive jobs.

If you believe the name they give their group, you’re not paying attention. You think their work might help your middle class white kid, but they are as much against your kid getting a leg up as they are against minority groups. They want power and opportunity for their wealthy, white kids and no others.

Oh, BS. Many of those most involved in these organizations are immigrants and college graduates who grew up decidedly middle class.

It's about the divide between those who believe that free speech should be paramount, even if that allows people with a bigger soapbox to argue against equity, and those who believe that equity should be paramount, even if that entails the censorship or de-platforming of opposing views.

The W&L example says the people want to preserve General Lee’s legacy.

They’re hoping people assume they’re coming from a good place with the whole free speech thing, but they basically seem upset that people like Lee and Jefferson are seen with more real glasses today than with the rose-colored ones we had when we were kids.

Don’t be fooled. They aren’t about free speech. That’s their cover.

Fair point about W&L but U of C professor Dorian Abbot being disinvited from giving a scientific lecture at MIT because he publicly opposes DEI initiatives is appalling.

It’s not, actually. Research and science in general suffer enormously from the bias in science. Universities and labs are increasingly realize that science is stunted by the old boys club.

Please explain how Mr. Abbot's research in planetary science been affected by bias.

Does his research require him to publicly oppose DEI initiatives?

Of course not. But that's the point. His opinions on DEI have *nothing* to do with his expertise in his field. So canceling his presentation on his scientific research because of his political beliefs is about punishing him for his thoughtcrimes. Let me be clear, I support DEI initiatives. But I also value academic freedom.

That's not really "academic freedom" though. Maybe he should leave his politics out of the workplace.

Of course it is about academic freedom & the spirit of free inquiry if he is being prevented from presenting his scientific research because he wrote an op ed arguing that DEI is antithetical to the principles of equality and undermines the public trust in universities (his contentions, not mine). This is the equivalent of punishing professors in the 1950s for alleged communist leanings.

He wasn't hired for his personal, uninformed opinion on DEI. He should stay in his lane.

Maybe if he focused on his actual work, he'd be presenting right now.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Wow. These MAGAs are planning to trash UVA.

https://thejeffersoncouncil.com/year-end-uva-update-from-bert-ellis/

I’m so glad you posted this - if this is what you think of as “trashing,” there is really nothing to discuss. Everything he says is common sense, especially this:

“I just found copies of the 2021-2022 Peer Evaluation Forms and Process for University of Virginia professors. I have attached copies here and here. Please note the prominence of DEI issues within the evaluations. There is even a special appendix on DEI examples to use in the evaluation. It is readily apparent that no professor can possibly get a good evaluation and obtain tenure or even a raise in salary if he/she does not pledge total allegiance to DEI and can itemize a large number of DEI initiatives on his/her part. This should not have anything to do with teaching math, science, business or other social science courses. Every Dean or Department Head now has a DEI officer who has co-oversight on the peer review process.”

He is absolutely correct. I hope this DEI nonsense which has infected all aspects of college (and corporate) life is reined in. That you seem to want to see everything through the DEI lens only identifies exactly who you are.

Lies. DEI is one bullet point under a whole list of criteria for each section.

Sounds like the old, white professors are worried that they might need to enter the 21st century.

And there are tons of TRASH ideas:
>Spouting idiotic campaign propaganda about Youngkin "not brainwashing them with the Woke/CRT/DEI mantras".
>Pushing to replace the Board with MAGA losers to "reverse the path to Wokeness".
>Denigrating courses in race/gender as "courses that exist for no other purpose but to make a big deal about race and gender and other issues that can only create more oppressed parties trying to tear down anything and everything and everyone that helped create our University" - WTAF?

I'm appalled that this MAGA loser is on the board of UVA.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:These groups are not actually in favor of free speech. They just don’t want anyone learning anything accurate about the history of slavery. It’s Orwellian for them to describe themselves as in favor of free speech when their only goal is to subvert free speech.

Straight up gaslighting 101.

It’s true. These cancel culture groups are trying to get courses that teach about the history of racism and slavery actually cancelled. That’s straight up Orwellian. You cannot advocate that you support free speech and try to get courses cancelled at the same time without people noticing you are basically just a fascist group trying to shut dissent.

Hint: people who truly support free speech on campus don’t spend all their time trying to suppress it.

Happens on both sides, but you know that already.

Only one side is starting cancel culture groups while simultaneously trying to cancel courses so no, it’s not both sides.

DP. Talk about disingenuous. Liberal groups refuse to even allow conservative speakers to speak, and you’re calling yourselves the “party of free speech”? What a joke. A really terrible joke.

Just keep making stuff up as conservatives burn books.