I have written columns and blogs through the years about the disturbing trend on U.S. campuses toward free regulation and controls. In the name of diversities and tolerance, college administrators and professors are enforcing greater and greater controls on speech –declaring certain views or terms to be forms of racism or more commonly “microaggressions.” The latter term is gaining support to expand the range of controls over speech and conduct to include things that are indirect or minor forms of perceived intolerance. The crackdown seems most prevalent in California where lists of “micro aggressions” seems to be mounting as a macroaggression on free speech. The new list of verboten terms out of University of California (Berkeley), headed by Janet Napolitano, captures the insatiable appetite for speech regulation. The school has asked faculty to stop using terms like “melting pot” or statements like “I believe the most qualified person should get the job.” They are now all microaggressions. Not only are school buying into the concept of microaggressions and speech regulation, but they are shaping a generation of students who seem to look for any possible interpretation of terms to take offensive at.
Ironically, while using the term “melting pot” is now viewed as an unacceptable microaggression, actual aggression in the form of assault by a faculty member on people for using free speech is not considered an offense worthy of termination — indeed it was an act deemed understandable if not heroic by some students and faculty in the case of California Professor Miller-Young.
Napolitano asked UC deans and department chairs to attend seminars “to foster informed conversation about the best way to build and nurture a productive academic climate.” The seminars includes handouts with these terms as part of the program called “Recognizing Microaggressions and the Messages They Send.” The manuals were reportedly adapted from a book by Columbia University Psychology Professor Derald Wing Sue. For civil libertarians, the handouts should be entitled “Recognizing Speech Codes and The Speech They Curtail.”
Some points have been previously discussed on this blog. For example, now discouraged is the statement “There is only one race, the human race.” We saw recently how the President of Smith College was forced into a mea culpa for saying “all lives matter.” Such collective valuations of live and humanity is now considered offensive because it denies “the significance of a person of color’s racial/ethnic experience and history.” A microaggression.
Likewise, “America is the land of opportunity” somehow suggests that “People of color are lazy and/or incompetent and need to work harder” while asking an Asian, Latino, or Native American “why are you so quiet?” is trying to force him to “assimilate to dominant culture.” Finding such microaggressions has become a virtual cottage industry (if I can say that without degrading any cultures that do not use — or use — cottages). Even some of the most important social and political debates are now considered racist if one side is spoken directly. For example, the Supreme Court and the nation has continued to debate affirmative action and whether it is a form of racism. However, saying “Affirmative action is racist,” is now deemed a microaggression by default. Thus, you can have the debate — just do not state your position on the ultimate question. Academics supporting such views seem wholly unconcerned that the barring of the expression depends on your first accepting the opposing premise on the issue of affirmative action. Consider the defense of OiYan Poon, an assistant professor of higher education at Loyola University in Chicago: “The statement that ‘affirmative action is racist’ completely ignores the history and purpose of affirmative action, which is to address inequalities resulting from the many ways our government and society have prevented people of color from accessing economic, educational and political opportunities and rights.” That is of course the opposing position in favor of affirmative action. It is worth noting that the Supreme Court has declared affirmative action to be unconstitutional for universities admissions. Recent opinions explore the limited range in which race may be considered for purposes of diversity, not affirmative action. However, the main problem is that the barring of this expression as a microaggression assumes that affirmative action is not racist — the very point under debate. In this sense, one side controls the debate by declaring the opposing view as simply racist to express.
The expanding efforts to curtail speech on college campuses shows how the taste for speech controls can become insatiable for many. Ironically, liberal faculty once rallied whole campuses to fight for free speech. Now, many are leading the fight against the speech of opposing groups as essential to a “tolerant” society. It is a dangerous trend that we are seeing throughout the West. However, the campaign of faculty to deny speech on campuses presents an existential threat to the entire academic mission. We are education a new generation that free speech is a danger to rather than the definition of a free society.
Source: Daily Beast
Karen S.,
“Tupac’s tattoo was prophetic, if you recall the East/West coast war that cost us Tupac and Biggie Small.”
What the is this?
Who are these, presumably, protagonists and what is an “East/West coast war?” Isn’t “war” typically between nations, such as, during Lincoln’s “Reign of Terror” when the Union invaded the sovereign nation of the Confederate States (seceded)
(seceded – seceded like Scotland voted on secession last year and West Virginia, Bangladesh, Pakistan, the entire USSR seceded – that secession – like when a husband violent abuses a wife and he won’t allow her to leave – that secession)?
Are we seeking the “best” in life; its highest form?
Were these the “crème de la crème?” Was this benign or a metastasizing malignancy?
Were these figures colleagues of Einstein or otherwise socially redemptive?
Lincoln’s first idea of compassionate repatriation for the benefit of obtaining nationhood and self-esteem for freed slaves, as Moses led his people out of Egypt after slavery there, definitively and correctly addressed the problem of freed slaves that America refused to and should have paid for.
What props this “tattooed” rubbish up in a society that would normally reject it “out of hand?” Affirmative Action. Welfare and Food Stamps. Social Services, HAMP. HARP; artifices that de-incentivize, demoralize and infect, at the expense of the American thesis of freedom without bias and neutrality?
Was “White Supremacy” proven axiomatic, in the absence of these artifices, as “White Contrition,” “White Repentance” and “White Penance” are demanded and effected through the generous application and incomprehensible acceptance of false, arbitrary and contrived guilt?
It would seem that people would be fully concentrating on their subsistence if not for these artifices. And they would, to be sure. Hunger has a way of motivating people and generating the proper etiquette and deference.
The “War on Poverty,” $22 Trillion since 1965, has produced this bizarre elevation of things base and repulsive.
America fought the “War on Poverty” and Poverty won.
America has funded its own demise.
WWOD? What Would Orwell Do?
He’d collapse in a heap thinking, “Holy Geez, these milquetoast cowards bought my fantastical,
bizarre fiction hook, line and sinker; what a bunch of idiots.”
Orwell would ponder P.T. Barnum’s basic law of the universe: “There’s a sucker born every minute.”
TJustice
1, June 24, 2015 at 1:02 pm
“Ken Rogers
“To you maybe. My point was that JT posts mocking [sic] this school on free speech issues, yet an individual that graduates from UC Berkley [sic] with a degree in humanities would get instant credibility from him due to the institution he attended. I don’t think it should…”
In the first place, you have produced zero evidence to substantiate your accusation regarding JT’s willingness to confer “instant credibility” on anyone graduating from UC-Berkeley, and in the second place, political correctness of the kind under discussion would hardly, in and of itself, preclude someone’s getting a first-rate education there.
Even UC-B’s law school’s offering a professorship to the political and legal hack, John Yoo, doesn’t completely vitiate the value of a law degree from UC-B, although it could certainly raise questions during employment interviews of those graduates. I know it would if I were doing the interviewing.
We used to raid gardens @ night. We would have salt and pepper shakers in our pocket, sit in the garden, and nosh on tomatoes and cucumbers.
Bigfatmike asked…
Does it still count if you get them from in front of a grocery store instead of a farmer’s field?
Nope, only if you swiped your stuff under the cover of darkness at the source. That included the great cantaloupes of early August. Watermelons were too much trouble to carry away 🙂 To this day I wait for early August in Michigan just to be able to buy really fantastic cantaloupes from farmers’ roadside stands…I no longer try to swipe them. Some big lug stooping in the fields seems inappropriate now.
@Aridog: “Nope, only if you swiped your stuff under the cover of darkness at the source. ”
Under that anarchist front you are such a stickler for rules.
But I had no idea that Michigan was such a haven for cantaloupes. If I ever get up that way again I will make a point of tying some – from a farmers market, of course.
More on topic, I think the term “melting pot” is correct. In my lifetime where ever I’ve lived, the idea was acceptable, even in otherwise xenophobic areas. Salad components are what you start with and over time it becomes a whole new thing…called being an “American.” Often living among migrants, or outright as a foreigner in eastern countries, the phenomena worked. The very white 6 foot tall Yankee me managed to be accepted in a very xenophobic place…and was never more complimented than where a older father asked me, with considerable contrition, if I would please teach his young daughter how to dance the Foxtrot…the FOXTROT in the 1960’s! Fortunately I knew the dance steps of most ballroom varieties. In that place the music of America’s 30’s and 40’s was very popular and the civilians who interacted with us all acted as if we were Gen MacArthur, the statue usually in some town square. When “Americans” are positive the idea rubs off, even in some very xenophobic places. So, yes, call us a melting pot for that is what we really are…only those who like overt segregation would want it any other way.
” One of my happiest pursuits in the old days, with the help of a few buddies, was to raid farmers sweet corn fields, always protected by high fences, etc., just to prove we could get it before everyone else. ”
What about the watermelons?
Does it still count if you get them from in front of a grocery store instead of a farmer’s field?
Back on Remulak we refer to America as a “melting pot”. This is a nation state where people from all over the world came and integrated some what. The result is a “stew”. Now some aspects of the stew are stewing in their own juice. Ivy League schools on the East Coast and Berkeley out there on the West Coast have this problem with people who abide there who think that their itShay does not stink. But it does.
If I were an employer looking for a new hire I would be cautious about hiring anyone from that rank of so called schools of higher education. Does Berkeley still have Frats and Sororities? Harvard and Yale too?
Do they discriminate? How about on the basis of sex? Race? Orientals? White South Africans? Jews?
We need to examine the roles of the current frats at Berkeley and see how much of a meltdown has occurred. The new lingo currency will support the anti meltdown movement and support the all white, all male, all caucasion, all upper class frats. The hierarchy at Berkeley can begin reform by eliminating frats and sororieties.
These are just the views of an outsider.
The thoughts of an old coot: I grew up in a time period where all rural areas smelled of cow or horse manure, properly aged to reduced the acidity. When we had horses we also had the curing pile of dung that we spread with manure spreaders on our hay fields. Back then veggies and fruits had a season, in the rural areas and in the cities, and that’s when you got them, not from a far off place we’d likely never heard of back them modified by Lord knows what. To my knowledge there were no GMO’s and “organic” meant what it said…grown in horse or cow poop, and in some places I lived, in human waste…aka “night soil.” Everything had its season and you lived with that, it made each season worth looking forward to…not to mention inducing individuals, even in cities,to grow some of their own in garden patches. Most folks, urban and rural, “pickled” in some form to preserve what wasn’t in a season down the road…like Koreans and “Winter Kimchi” buried in the ground in large jars that carried them through the winter literally.
I do miss the old days, really. You didn’t have to wonder if some label was true or not, and many are not…only slightly accurate at best. One of my happiest pursuits in the old days, with the help of a few buddies, was to raid farmers sweet corn fields, always protected by high fences, etc., just to prove we could get it before everyone else. Little criminals we were…but we knew feed corn from sweet corn for sure. We never took much sweet corn, that wasn’t the point…it was in the tiny victory of the adventure…we all ardently believed the farmer would shoot us if caught (which never happened of course). Today, shopping in small and large markets is no where near as much fun. 🙁
Ken Rogers
To you maybe. My point was that JT posts mocking this school on free speech issues, yet an individual that graduates from UC Berkley with a degree in humanities would get instant credibility from him due to the institution he attended. I don’t think it should…
‘ Only in a liberal utopia like UC Berkeley would the statement, “I believe the most qualified person should get the job” be considered a “microaggression.” ‘
I work at UC Berkeley. Being “qualified” for a job depends on your meaning of the word. Qualifications are all relative. LOL.
Okay…just stop everyone. I have dodged all your micro-aggression, but all the nano-aggression has me in a fetal position, weeping, on the floor.
@ Darren Smith
1, June 24, 2015 at 5:35 am
Vewy, vewy sadly, Monsanto has had its wittle corporate-person feelwings hurted by that cruwel old meanie, Neil Young:
http://ecowatch.com/2015/06/20/monsanto-fires-back-neil-young/
Pol Pot was engaged in Macro Aggressions. We can call Berkeley the University of Pol Pot. The Tinkers need to go to that so called school and teach some con law ethics to the dumb faculty and administration. The students need to rebel. Google: Tinker v. Board of Educaton of Des Moine.
Tupac himself was contradictory about his own definition of “thug”. On the one hand, he proclaimed it was a positive connotation of the underdog. But on the other hand, in the exact same interview, he said this:
“There was concerted thought and positive intention to affect change behind Shakur’s words and actions. But Shakur was (and still is) a complex, enigmatic icon(oclast), and the acronym, the movement, and the explanation were controversial and contradictory. Shakur himself realized that his message could be misconstrued and misused. In the same interview with Kearse, expounding on his lyrics, Shakur said, “I live the thug life, baby I’m hopeless … I’m doing it for the kid that really lives a thug life and feels like it’s hopeless. So when I say hopeless, and I say it like that, I reach him, and even if when I reach him it makes it look glorious to the guy that doesn’t live that life. I mean I can’t help it. It’s a fad. He’ll drop the thug life soon enough.””
He remarked on the thug fad, and that the young guy he’s trying to reach will drop that fad soon enough.
“Artists no longer provide commentary on the word like Shakur. The images in most of the aforementioned allusions actually show thugs as something to aspire to, even as they are largely vilified in society. Trick Daddy’s “I’m A Thug,” off of 2001’s Thugs Are Us, is particularly egregious as there are children singing “this is the life for me” on the hook (specifically black children in the video). But the vast majority of the mentions put thugs on a pedestal in their own way, mostly with the trite mainstream rap images of conspicuous consumption galore and fictional violence.”
And there was this interesting commentary on the usage of thug to refer to black males:
“At the very least, the presence of thug in rap keeps the word in the public’s consciousness and self-assigned to black males. Rappers are not the sole group to represent black people in America, but rap is unequivocally the most popular representation of black people and black culture worldwide. It is easy to find examples where it is acceptable, even complimentary, to call black men thugs because there are black men broadcasting themselves as such to anyone and everyone who will listen.
This is not to condone the mayor, the president, the media, or any other person who uses thug to identify black males.”
As I said earlier, rap artists do not use “thug” to refer to the underdog who is fighting against the influence of gangs and drugs and peer pressure in order to stay in school, get a scholarship, and become a doctor. Deny it all they want, but the term is used to portray a tough guy who’s rich by illegal means. Many of the songs talk about drug dealing, violence, and other crimes, the literal definition of a thug. The label which produced Shakur was Death Row Records, not Stay In School Records. He complained about being called a gangsta rapper, but he’s in many photos flashing gang signs.
It is undeniable that rap artists who elevate thug to a compliment are admiring the lifestyle of the tough guy criminal.
I absolutely refuse to allow songwriters to speak in glowing terms of thugs, and then have the mainstream media and academia decide that the term is now suddenly racist and must be excised as further controlling Free Speech and the English language. Thug is a very concise description of a violent criminal of any color.
Po – disagree with the points of the article that I cited, if you wish, but insulting my intelligence yet again without addressing the position just proclaims you biased.
RWL – I remember that study. The reproductive organs were especially prone to tumors on GMOs in rat studies. Genes can have unanticipated effects far downstream of where they were inserted. Plus the latest GMOs actually incorporate pesticide into the plant’s tissues. A blast of water is not going to wash it off. If they were so certain of the superiority of their product, they would proudly label it engineered. But considering the millions of dollars they spend fighting labeling, they clearly believe that customers would not buy their product if they knew what was in it.
Darren – I agree so completely that I would take that statement, put it on a T-shirt, and wear it to DC.
There should be micropenalties for these microaggressions.
bigfatmike
1, June 24, 2015 at 2:15 am
@Po
This is a great article.
I wonder if you think this has any lessons for TPP with, from what we know, seems less about trade that protection of intellectual property?
———————————————————
Exactly, Mike. Monsanto is a great example of what is happening. It is a corporation that establishes itself politically through major donations to politicians across the globe which enables them to actually write laws that not only make their products required, but hold them non-liable for the negative consequences that derive from the use of their products.
Now imagine a dozen similar corporations across all industries ( Nestle, Mobil, Shell…) doing the same thing individually….worse yet, imagine those corporations coming together to push for new laws, pacts and treaties that benefit them communally, and you have TPP.
Nafta was passed at the behest of the corporations, and it is costing us still, and the TPP will cost us more because it would actually come with a legally enforcing arm that would make countries subject to lawsuits before a court staffed by judges who are corporate lawyers who go representing the same corporations suing to rendering justice in cases that these corporations themselves are bringing forth. (http://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/kill-the-dispute-settlement-language-in-the-trans-pacific-partnership/2015/02/25/ec7705a2-bd1e-11e4-b274-e5209a3bc9a9_story.html)
John Oliver did a great piece showing what happens to countries like Ecuador and Togo when they run afoul of those corporations (one in fighting pollution caused by oil exploration and production (Mobil), the other by limiting the sale of phillip Morris products…both countries now unable to defend themselves in court due tot he high costs.
TPP would create scorched earth economic and legal policies across the globe.
Greg Pallast does a great summary of the issues with Monsanto. Another great piece was done by Vice News recently, you may be able to find it on youtube.
Deriving this from a previous comment. It is my view that there are corporations, there are evil corporations, and there is Monsanto who answers only to Satan.
“Paul C. Schulte
1, June 23, 2015 at 7:02 pm
Skeptic – Noah Webster has been dead for quite a long time. All dictionaries are called Webster dictionaries to indicate that they are using American English for their spelling.”
—–
P. Schulte: Sorry to have hit a nerve, I do not know what you are implying with the above information other than that I believed Mr. Webster to still be alive. (*1758-1843) . . . REALLY? The man known as the “US dictionary maker”…”US lexicographer” was Noah Webster. Apparently you did not have professors that would tell their students to, “Get out Mr. Webster and check your work”. Our English profs were good at that as we had a few students who were terrible at spelling. I have referred to the dictionary as Mr. Webster ever since, so do my children and my grandchildren. Also, I guess you believed that I would not have known they were using American English for the spelling Had it not said, Websters New World Dictionary of the American Language, enlarged from the concise edition.” on the front of the dictionary. Sorry, I wasn’t around when he lived but I do know who he was and that he has been dead for quite a while. thanks for the refresher course “Prof. Schulte.”
The definition of Race was to clarify that there are more than one race, not just mankind, there are 3 divisions of the human race, Jewish, Negroid and Mongolian and YES, some plants and animals could be called a race listed as the 6th definition under “Race”. (a particular lineage, family descent, stock or breed, that will reproduce true to type.. Look it up in “MR. WEBSTER”. The “human race” is a species.