Ethnic Studies

[Anonymous]

I can’t believe people want to learn about non-white people. What a waste of a brain.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:They can go work for AOC. Not being snarky. This world is bigger than OP imagines.

Yup.

Ethnic/ gender studies is a great pipeline for crazy politicians and associated nonprofits.

And little else.

You say that like it's a terrible thing. The nonprofit job sector is huge. There are tons of jobs out there for people who want to make the world a better place, rather than make a profit for a corporation.

https://philanthropynewsdigest.org/news/nonprofit-job-growth-from-2007-to-2016-outpaced-for-profit-job-growth

...and the way to make the world a better place is to develop some actual, productive skills. Nonprofits need and demand scientists/ lawyers/ leaders/ engineers/ thinkers...not brainwashed ideologues.

These majors teach excellent critical thinking skills, just like any other humanities major. These students are well prepared for law school and management positions and organizing positions.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I can’t believe people want to learn about non-white people. What a waste of a brain.

Most stuff written by non-Whites is vastly inferior. Compare Plato/Aristotle to Du Boies. No contest.

Also, I find that when Leftists ask for “diversity” they just mean studying stuff that blacks and Hispanics have written. No Hindu, Chinese, or Islamic literature/philosophy. For example, look at this new “diverse” reading list for the Spring Humanities 110 class at Reed College( which they changed last year because of student protests)

“Sor Juana Inés de la Cruz, Poems, Protest, and a Dream: Selected Writings, trans. Margaret Sayers Peden (New York: Penguin Books, 1997).
W.E.B. Du Bois, Souls of Black Folk (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2007).
Ralph Ellison, Invisible Man (New York: Vintage International, 1980).
Zora Neale Hurston, Their Eyes Were Watching God (New York: Harper Perennial, 2006).
David Levering Lewis, ed., The Portable Harlem Renaissance Reader (New York: Penguin, 1994).
Alain Locke, ed., Survey Graphic; Harlem: Mecca of the New Negro (Baltimore: Black Classic Books, 1980).
Jean Toomer, Cane (New York: Liveright, 2011).”

Where’s all the Chinese, Hindu, and Islamic literature/philosophy?( you know, serious stuff that isn’t just people whining about how they can’t get ahead) You throw out St. Augustine’s Confessions so you can read Harlem Renaissance garbage? Give me a break!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I can’t believe people want to learn about non-white people. What a waste of a brain.

sarcasm detected ... but you can learn about non-white people without wasting your major on ethnic studies.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:They can go work for AOC. Not being snarky. This world is bigger than OP imagines.

Yup.

Ethnic/ gender studies is a great pipeline for crazy politicians and associated nonprofits.

And little else.

You say that like it's a terrible thing. The nonprofit job sector is huge. There are tons of jobs out there for people who want to make the world a better place, rather than make a profit for a corporation.

https://philanthropynewsdigest.org/news/nonprofit-job-growth-from-2007-to-2016-outpaced-for-profit-job-growth

...and the way to make the world a better place is to develop some actual, productive skills. Nonprofits need and demand scientists/ lawyers/ leaders/ engineers/ thinkers...not brainwashed ideologues.

These majors teach excellent critical thinking skills, just like any other humanities major. These students are well prepared for law school and management positions and organizing positions.

Sorry, but you are in fantasy land. There is no comparison between a difficult degree like engineering and something dumb like gender studies. I do have to admit that AA studies was the easiest class that I ever took in undergrad.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I can’t believe people want to learn about non-white people. What a waste of a brain.

Most stuff written by non-Whites is vastly inferior. Compare Plato/Aristotle to Du Boies. No contest.

Also, I find that when Leftists ask for “diversity” they just mean studying stuff that blacks and Hispanics have written. No Hindu, Chinese, or Islamic literature/philosophy. For example, look at this new “diverse” reading list for the Spring Humanities 110 class at Reed College( which they changed last year because of student protests)

“Sor Juana Inés de la Cruz, Poems, Protest, and a Dream: Selected Writings, trans. Margaret Sayers Peden (New York: Penguin Books, 1997).
W.E.B. Du Bois, Souls of Black Folk (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2007).
Ralph Ellison, Invisible Man (New York: Vintage International, 1980).
Zora Neale Hurston, Their Eyes Were Watching God (New York: Harper Perennial, 2006).
David Levering Lewis, ed., The Portable Harlem Renaissance Reader (New York: Penguin, 1994).
Alain Locke, ed., Survey Graphic; Harlem: Mecca of the New Negro (Baltimore: Black Classic Books, 1980).
Jean Toomer, Cane (New York: Liveright, 2011).”

Where’s all the Chinese, Hindu, and Islamic literature/philosophy?( you know, serious stuff that isn’t just people whining about how they can’t get ahead) You throw out St. Augustine’s Confessions so you can read Harlem Renaissance garbage? Give me a break!

Ugh, St.Augustine is from Africa.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I can’t believe people want to learn about non-white people. What a waste of a brain.

sarcasm detected ... but you can learn about non-white people without wasting your major on ethnic studies.

And you can also major in ethnic studies and become a lawyer, activist, marketer and a whole host of other careers.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I can’t believe people want to learn about non-white people. What a waste of a brain.

Most stuff written by non-Whites is vastly inferior. Compare Plato/Aristotle to Du Boies. No contest.

Also, I find that when Leftists ask for “diversity” they just mean studying stuff that blacks and Hispanics have written. No Hindu, Chinese, or Islamic literature/philosophy. For example, look at this new “diverse” reading list for the Spring Humanities 110 class at Reed College( which they changed last year because of student protests)

“Sor Juana Inés de la Cruz, Poems, Protest, and a Dream: Selected Writings, trans. Margaret Sayers Peden (New York: Penguin Books, 1997).
W.E.B. Du Bois, Souls of Black Folk (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2007).
Ralph Ellison, Invisible Man (New York: Vintage International, 1980).
Zora Neale Hurston, Their Eyes Were Watching God (New York: Harper Perennial, 2006).
David Levering Lewis, ed., The Portable Harlem Renaissance Reader (New York: Penguin, 1994).
Alain Locke, ed., Survey Graphic; Harlem: Mecca of the New Negro (Baltimore: Black Classic Books, 1980).
Jean Toomer, Cane (New York: Liveright, 2011).”

Where’s all the Chinese, Hindu, and Islamic literature/philosophy?( you know, serious stuff that isn’t just people whining about how they can’t get ahead) You throw out St. Augustine’s Confessions so you can read Harlem Renaissance garbage? Give me a break!

The best part of DCUM is that you type without taking off your hood.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I can’t believe people want to learn about non-white people. What a waste of a brain.

Most stuff written by non-Whites is vastly inferior. Compare Plato/Aristotle to Du Boies. No contest.

Also, I find that when Leftists ask for “diversity” they just mean studying stuff that blacks and Hispanics have written. No Hindu, Chinese, or Islamic literature/philosophy. For example, look at this new “diverse” reading list for the Spring Humanities 110 class at Reed College( which they changed last year because of student protests)

“Sor Juana Inés de la Cruz, Poems, Protest, and a Dream: Selected Writings, trans. Margaret Sayers Peden (New York: Penguin Books, 1997).
W.E.B. Du Bois, Souls of Black Folk (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2007).
Ralph Ellison, Invisible Man (New York: Vintage International, 1980).
Zora Neale Hurston, Their Eyes Were Watching God (New York: Harper Perennial, 2006).
David Levering Lewis, ed., The Portable Harlem Renaissance Reader (New York: Penguin, 1994).
Alain Locke, ed., Survey Graphic; Harlem: Mecca of the New Negro (Baltimore: Black Classic Books, 1980).
Jean Toomer, Cane (New York: Liveright, 2011).”

Where’s all the Chinese, Hindu, and Islamic literature/philosophy?( you know, serious stuff that isn’t just people whining about how they can’t get ahead) You throw out St. Augustine’s Confessions so you can read Harlem Renaissance garbage? Give me a break!

The best part of DCUM is that you type without taking off your hood.

The best part of DCUM is when people resort to name-calling instead of refuting their arguments.

[Anonymous]

DP. Why bother with a reasoned refute? Anyone who says with a straight face "Most stuff written by non-Whites is vastly inferior. Compare Plato/Aristotle to Du Boies. No contest."

She starts with a hasty generalization then moves onto a false analogy.

Seriously. There is no gray matter or intellectual curiosity there to work with.

[Anonymous]

And, a poster above did refer to the contributions of non-Western civilizations.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I can’t believe people want to learn about non-white people. What a waste of a brain.

Most stuff written by non-Whites is vastly inferior. Compare Plato/Aristotle to Du Boies. No contest.

Also, I find that when Leftists ask for “diversity” they just mean studying stuff that blacks and Hispanics have written. No Hindu, Chinese, or Islamic literature/philosophy. For example, look at this new “diverse” reading list for the Spring Humanities 110 class at Reed College( which they changed last year because of student protests)

“Sor Juana Inés de la Cruz, Poems, Protest, and a Dream: Selected Writings, trans. Margaret Sayers Peden (New York: Penguin Books, 1997).
W.E.B. Du Bois, Souls of Black Folk (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2007).
Ralph Ellison, Invisible Man (New York: Vintage International, 1980).
Zora Neale Hurston, Their Eyes Were Watching God (New York: Harper Perennial, 2006).
David Levering Lewis, ed., The Portable Harlem Renaissance Reader (New York: Penguin, 1994).
Alain Locke, ed., Survey Graphic; Harlem: Mecca of the New Negro (Baltimore: Black Classic Books, 1980).
Jean Toomer, Cane (New York: Liveright, 2011).”

Where’s all the Chinese, Hindu, and Islamic literature/philosophy?( you know, serious stuff that isn’t just people whining about how they can’t get ahead) You throw out St. Augustine’s Confessions so you can read Harlem Renaissance garbage? Give me a break!

That’s a very fair point that Leftists avoid

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:DP. Why bother with a reasoned refute? Anyone who says with a straight face "Most stuff written by non-Whites is vastly inferior. Compare Plato/Aristotle to Du Boies. No contest."

She starts with a hasty generalization then moves onto a false analogy.

Seriously. There is no gray matter or intellectual curiosity there to work with.

Is it really? I don't know who Du Boies is, and I read only a little Plato since I studied engineering. Are they wrong about these writers? Why?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I can’t believe people want to learn about non-white people. What a waste of a brain.

Most stuff written by non-Whites is vastly inferior. Compare Plato/Aristotle to Du Boies. No contest.

Also, I find that when Leftists ask for “diversity” they just mean studying stuff that blacks and Hispanics have written. No Hindu, Chinese, or Islamic literature/philosophy. For example, look at this new “diverse” reading list for the Spring Humanities 110 class at Reed College( which they changed last year because of student protests)

“Sor Juana Inés de la Cruz, Poems, Protest, and a Dream: Selected Writings, trans. Margaret Sayers Peden (New York: Penguin Books, 1997).
W.E.B. Du Bois, Souls of Black Folk (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2007).
Ralph Ellison, Invisible Man (New York: Vintage International, 1980).
Zora Neale Hurston, Their Eyes Were Watching God (New York: Harper Perennial, 2006).
David Levering Lewis, ed., The Portable Harlem Renaissance Reader (New York: Penguin, 1994).
Alain Locke, ed., Survey Graphic; Harlem: Mecca of the New Negro (Baltimore: Black Classic Books, 1980).
Jean Toomer, Cane (New York: Liveright, 2011).”

Where’s all the Chinese, Hindu, and Islamic literature/philosophy?( you know, serious stuff that isn’t just people whining about how they can’t get ahead) You throw out St. Augustine’s Confessions so you can read Harlem Renaissance garbage? Give me a break!

That’s a very fair point that Leftists avoid

It's not a point "leftists" avoid. A lot of Eastern lit and philosophy is offered, taught, and taken. It is an outright lie to say it isn't. That said, if you are going to college in the western world, there will be a fair amount of material from the western world. The fact that world is not all classic Roman and Greeks may have eluded you, however.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:DP. Why bother with a reasoned refute? Anyone who says with a straight face "Most stuff written by non-Whites is vastly inferior. Compare Plato/Aristotle to Du Boies. No contest."

She starts with a hasty generalization then moves onto a false analogy.

Seriously. There is no gray matter or intellectual curiosity there to work with.

Is it really? I don't know who Du Boies is, and I read only a little Plato since I studied engineering. Are they wrong about these writers? Why?

WEB Du Bois (note the spelling) was a 19th and 20th century writer and historian. Aristotle and a Plato are 4th and 5th century BC philosophers. Comparing them and their scope of work is unhelpful. They were all brilliant for what they did.

The Harlem Renaissance writers produced some of the best poetry and music of the last two centuries. Everyone on that syllabus is recognized as creme de la creme.

That poster's grievance seems to be that 2500 year old Greek polemics are being replaced by more current and relevant polemics in mainstream syllabi.

And she/he is being reductive by labeling it grievance lit. The odds are that poster actually read any of it are exceedingly small