“The Dirty Dozen”: University of British Columbia Professor Fired After Doxxing Students Who Dropped Her Class

We often follow controversies at universities over free speech and academic freedom issues, but few are quite so bizarre as the case of Dr. Amie Wolf. Wolf was fired after a period of paid administrative leave due to her attacks on 12 students who transferred out of her Indigenous Education in Canada course. Wolf has since lashed out at the university and other professors, including a vulgar diatribe.  She is vowing to challenge the action of the university which she insists is due to her refusal to “assimilate to the institution’s norms” as “an academic who identifies as female Indigenous.”  While I am certainly no expert on Canadian law, that would seem highly difficult on these facts if pursued as a legal action. (Perhaps some of our Canadian academics or lawyers could contribute on such claims).
The University of British Columbia hired Wolf in 2015 to be an Aboriginal education consultant at the UBC Sauder School of Business. She also served as a lecturer on Indigenous education. She was recently terminated after she doxxed a dozen students who transferred out of her Indigenous Education in Canada course.  However, the termination without cause reportedly allowed her to receive a lump sum payment under her contract.Wolf published their names and, according to a conservative site, stated in a later interview that she wanted to be sure that they would be unable to get a job as clearly “unfit.” 

We have often discussed professors under fire for controversial or extremist statements on social media or blog posts. I often oppose discipline for such statements even when professors espouse hatred or support violence against those with opposing views. As we have previously discussed, one professor called for more Trump supporters to be killed. Rhode Island Professor Erik Loomis, who writes for the site Lawyers, Guns, and Money, said he saw “nothing wrong” with the killing of a conservative protester — a view defended by other academics.  While sites like Lawyers, Guns, and Money feature writers like law professor Paul Campus who call for the firing of those with opposing views (including myself), it is not their commitment to free speech but our own that must guide our actions.

This is different. This is actively seeking to harm students through doxxing. This type of conduct has come up before. CNN legal analyst and Stanford lecturer Asha Rangappa doxxed a student journalist for criticizing her.  However, that did not appear to involve a student at Stanford.

Wolf responded to her termination in a heated blog post that stated that “UBC is a colonial institution. It exists on stolen land and the fact is: that’s illegal.” She then added that “My dismissal letter reads that I no longer have any teaching duties at UBC, for no reason. Well, there is a reason. The fact that it isn’t stated is the statement itself. The reason for my dismissal is that I will not assimilate to the institution’s norms.” However, she pledged to fight:

I figure, if I can’t fight this – a resourced, educated, mature woman -how is an Indigenous child who is a descendant of survivors every going to defend themselves from being treated like a second class citizen in our colonial public education system?

The Wolf is my totem animal. I follow the Wolf’s ways, which resonate with me. A pack animal, the Wolf who is the hunter eats last, making sure every animal has had their feed before partaking.

The problem is that Dr. Wolf was clearly wrong and abusive in her treatment of the students.  She was not defending but attacking others. This was a mandatory course and students complained about her conduct and teaching.  She wrote interim reports tagging each student as showing “unconscious and unacceptable biases, the reinforcement of white supremacy and/or Indigenous specific racism” as well as an “intolerance for ‘otherness.'” After the university deleted the reports, she doxxed the students.

 

Reddit also linked an alleged tweet from Dr. Wolf but (like others) it is no longer available.  The Reddit posting stated that Wolf later added that “Anonymity is the home base of white supremacist actions. My former students are slandering me behind my back and to the media. This is what Indigenous specific misogyny looks like. They must be named and held accountable for their violence. Above all, they should not be teachers.” I have not been able to find that tweet.

The students are not alone in such attacks. Dr. Wolf has also attacked a faculty member at St. Mary’s University in Nova Scotia who noted questions about Wolf’s Indigenous background. She is Polish and Native American descent, according to media reportsDr. Darryl R. J. Leroux, Associate Professor in the Department of Social Justice at St. Mary’s University made reference to her background.  In one tweet, he stated “It appears likely now that infamous UBC prof in Teacher Education is a white woman masquerading as ‘Indigenous.’ Through her alleged grift, she has inflicted harm on racialized students & unleashed torrent of white supremacist hate aimed at BIPOC.”

Recently, he tweeted  “Lots of media have contacted me re: Dr. Wolf. I’m not doing interviews. Pls contact @nomoreredface whose research I retweeted. For clarity, Dr. Wolf’s g-grandma’s brother married a Cree-Métis woman. I write about *lateral* descent in Ch 3 of my book.”

For her part, Wolf attacked Leroux for what she described as his “genocidal view of how culture is transmitted” and wrote that she has been abused by critics “[s]ince his marvelous work to discredit an Indigenous female professor engaged in powerful post-secondary decolonization education work.” She ended that later posting with simply: “I have no words except two for people like you, and these are overdue: F**k you.”

Ok, now you see how bizarre this has all become.

I do not see how Dr. Wolf could take legal action in her termination, but she may be referring to an intention to fight back publicly rather than legally. The attack on the “dirty dozen” named students crosses the line for academics and proves ample basis for discipline. If these students took public positions denouncing Dr. Wolf, the situation might be different. In fairness, anonymous students making public attacks on academics can be unfair and deny a professor an opportunity to refute the basis or history behind such stories. However, first reprimanding these students for dropping her course and then posting their names was entirely unjustified and unacceptable.

The key is that this did not appear accidental but intentional. Sometimes academics and others send out ill-considered tweets or inadvertently reveal information that they would have ordinarily protected from disclosure. In such cases where there is an acknowledgement of the mistake, I believe a university should confine any action to a reprimand or similar action. This appears to be a premeditated and petty effort to punish these students from dropping her class.

Thus, I expect that this is not the last we will hear from Dr. Wolf but it is likely the last the UBC will hear from her as a faculty member.

94 thoughts on ““The Dirty Dozen”: University of British Columbia Professor Fired After Doxxing Students Who Dropped Her Class”

    1. John Metzger son of Tom Metzger tried and did establish various “white student unions” in California schools in 1987 and they were quickly denounced by ADL, etc.

      It was quickly plowed under after intense law enforcement and administrative harassment. Here we are so many years later, mutatis mutandis. Sal.

      1. Sal– ” It was quickly plowed under after intense law enforcement and administrative harassment”

        As expected. That’s the approach being taken in Edmonton.

        But I think people are growing weary of it.

  1. “This is different. This is actively seeking to harm students through doxxing.” Professor Turley, do you read yourself? Do you hear yourself? You’re saying it’s ok to encourage killing Trump supporters but it’s not ok to doxx students (who may be leftists and therefore worthy of human rights according to you). There is no difference. None of this is ok.

  2. American Indians are descended from Mongolians, who “stole” the land in North America long before the Cherokee, or Sioux, or Apache stole the land from the Mongolians. THAT theft seems like more violence against Asians to me…

  3. Let’s address the “stolen land” basis of the Left’s view of Western civilization.

    It might shock people to learn that Native American tribes captured land from each other. They didn’t have deeds of trust passed down through generations. They battled their enemies and took, or lost, territory.

    The Sioux claim the Black Hills are sacred land that European descended settlers “stole” from them. However, the Arikawa, Cheyenne, Crow, Kiowa, and Pawnee lived there before. Each chased the previous tribe out, until the Lakota Sioux chased them out and claimed it.

    So, did the Sioux “steal” the Black Hills from the previous tribes?

    Native American tribes did not believe in ownership of land in perpetuity. They clearly did not believe the first person to set foot on a piece of land owned it, throughout all their descendants, forever and ever. That would make the Iroquois Nation rather embarrassed. They didn’t “own” land. They held territory until and unless their enemies took it.

    Just stop with the “stolen land” claim. It’s ridiculous. I’ve half a mind to give the Black Hills to the Sioux, and then force them to give it to previous tribes they took it from. And that should include the land upon which Indian Gaming takes place. Research back 10,000 years and give it to whomever seems most closely related to the earliest tribes based upon archeological evidence. Pray your tribe’s progenitors excelled in pottery and left a lot of identifiable arrowheads lying around.

    Here’s an idea. Set aside special Native American sites as national parks, monuments, and museums. Deed the rest of the land in parcels on reservations to individual tribe members. Allow them to sell that land to anyone they want, just like any other homeowner. Stop treating Native Americans like dependent children who require reservations agencies and land managers and special sovereignty. In all fairness, treat them as fellow Americans. And that means that all laws apply equally, including gambling laws.

    If a gambling business is an evil vice for a Caucasian, and against the law, then it should be the same for Native Americans. Gambling is either legal, or illegal, in a state, for everyone.

    I often say that there is no institutionalized racism in the US, because there are not laws against any particular race. That’s not entirely true, as Indian Gaming is an example of a particular race based privilege. It’s easy to forget that there are laws that only apply to particular races when it comes to running a gambling establishment.

    Democrats are also working hard to reinstitute institutional racism, in university admissions practices that discriminate against Asians and Caucasians, as well as hiring practices and school curriculum. Requiring Critical Race Theory in government workers, contractors, and/or schools is another example of Institutional Racism. There are also racially discriminatory school resources that only help blacks, as opposed to Latinos, Asians, Pacific Islanders, and Caucasians.

    We should abandon racially based identity.

    1. They lost the wars. They should have advanced beyond the stone age. They didn’t. They lost. Deal with it.

  4. If you think there is an easy answer to this, I suspect you are a bit over the top on your particular state’s law.

    So, most people don’t believe in natural rights, I don’t know if you do, but a natural right to privacy hardly seems defensible, I can’t think of why, if I know something is true, I can’t say it, that truth should not be a defense. That’s what privacy statute law says, that truth is not a defense. That already, as scholars, should cause us a feeling of revulsion. Our whole practice, as scholars, is to protect knowledge, and to teach people how to tell true knowledge from false knowledge—how to assay silver from iron, etc.

    If privacy rights are merely statutory, we have here a conflict of laws: a settler-colonial privacy law that makes truth-telling illegal: even if Dr. Wolf was correct that her students were white supremacists who posed a clear danger to indigenous children, privacy law should prevent her from saying so. I suppose she could argue “necessity,” but that is a high bar.

    But that is to defeat a validly applied statute. As an indigenous scholar, we need to inquire as to Dr. Wolf’s indigenous law. Perhaps her indigenous law gives her much greater freedom of speech. If your answer to that is ‘this is a University, you have to follow the rules, your employment contract, etc.’ that simply avoids the question of conflict of laws. Why should the colonial privacy statute beat Dr. Wolf’s indigenous freedom?

    If Dr. Wolf had run after her students with a baseball bat, OK, that’s wrong everywhere for all time. Privacy law is statutory. Why should indigenous people have to obey statutes that introduce new laws? “We live in a democracy/constitutional republic/X” is still avoiding the issue.

    As for land claims, people often think of European style ownership, but claiming the right to hunt in another’s land is also a land claim, it is the claim of servitude over the land, e.g. the right to walk over it to hunt. So, perhaps Dr. World has a servitude over the land of Canada that grants her unrestricted freedom of speech per her aboriginal law.

    If you dismiss outright the validity of aboriginal oral tradition, that is just the problem Dr. Wolf highlights—whether you agree it is a problem or not is of course up to you.

    So, does freedom of speech mean freedom to say whatever the state does not prohibit? That’s obviously a ridiculous notion, that’s not freedom, the freedom to do whatever you are told by somebody.

  5. Why are so many Democrats in deep denial that the norm on the Left is to try to ruin those who disagree with their politics? No one should be surprised that someone with Left leaning politics in Canada tried to prevent students who dropped her class from being employed.

    The Left is totalitarian, whether it’s the modern American Democrat Party, or the Socialists of Venezuela. The entire movement requires a strong government. Ironically, our country was founded to escape tyranny, and created a limited government.

    I cannot for the life of me understand how the Left was able to label conservatives as Fascist, etc. Conservatives seek individual freedom. Republicans aren’t out there attacking Democrats on college campuses all across the nation, preventing their speakers from being heard, or trying to destroy or ruin everyone who disagrees.

    It is impossible for Fascism or any other totalitarian state to rise with a limited government and strong individual rights. It just boggles my mind how the intolerants managed to brand those who value freedom as the bad guys.

    1. it’s all because Roosevelt hijacked the word Liberal for his objectively fascist New Deal
      this one linguistic perversion is a root cause for how Democrats can impose totalitarianism while spewing the big lie that Republicanism (Classically Liberal) equals Nazism

      also the Kosher folks are making bank over this confusion

  6. EVERY leftist has the mind of a criminal — intent on depriving the rights of others to try to take dictatorial control. Leftists commit nearly all crime, vote for fellow criminals to be their proxy armed robbers, turn government into organized crime, encourage foreign criminals to invade, encourage crime, attack police, attack Americans for exercising their individual rights, . . . Leftists are unfit for any free country.

  7. Silly me, I thought Higher Education was supposed to teach Critical Thinking. This type of thinking (not the critical kind) seems to have become pervasive in the halls of higher ed. Did it start when colleges began offering majors in what I call “Victim Studies”? Unfortunately the unintended consequence is to hurt the very group(s) they purport to want to help.

    https://bariweiss.substack.com/p/whistleblower-at-smith-college-resigns

  8. The real victim in today’s society is the conservative white man and white woman, and all republicans, black or white.

  9. It must be understood that it was the white mans fault when Africans slaughtered other Africans, it was the white mans fault when the Indians slaughtered other Indians on the American plains and it’s the white mans fault when black men slaughter other black men on the streets of Chicago. Do we abhor men killing other men to gain territory? Of course we do. To see only the sins of one versus the other only perpetuates the continuation of the cycle. To give into an us versus them mentality only assures a roadblock on our path to a more civilized world.

    1. You done with the psychobabble tinkertoo ?. What you typed is just bunkus…symbolism word salad or credible substance. Nothing new with you there.

      1. Phergus, so which is it, symbolism or credible substance. Speak the speech I pray the tripingly on the tongue. Do not mouth the words as so many of your players do.

        1. blah blah , symbolism over credible substance. The left side of the aisle is pure symbolism over credible substance. Ergo they have near zero substance. The prog mindset to jam all evils into a pot and boil down to race is absurd and demeaning. But it is their spice… their bait for the weak minded.

    2. It was the white man’s fault when African tribal leaders began slavery by selling members captured from other African tribes.

      Oh, hells yes! Only idiots would mouth those words, much less, lend them even a scintilla of credence.
      _________________________________________________________________________________

      Funfacts:

      – If it weren’t for the savagery and dearth of civility in Africans, there would NEVER have been slaves or slavery.

      – Incidentally, true, actual reparations can only come from African tribal leaders and African tribes.

      1. Truth. For millennia man of varying tribes , regardless of color has made slaves of whom they conquer. In some facets like rome slaves could earn then purchase their right to become citizens…to encourage them to be part of society. Does not make it right , but it had it’s time in the sun. Slavery has been gone for 150 years plus in America. Civil rights were set in stone 50 years ago…mind you the demoratz fought that tooth and nail and voted against same. But here we are one helluva diverse country…yet we have disgusting and divisive ‘critical race theory” cancer spread around. And we have BLM violence and screed tossed in citizens faces. Cities full of “minorities” … loaded with crime , violence and drugs … why are these citizens still called minorities when they are the vast majority in these dilapidated urban decay centers ?. Why does democratic runs states , cities and when they have the potus continually degrade education therein and just offer handouts like drugs to continue the cycle ?. It’s not racism people , it’s control.

  10. “I began by telling the president that there was a cancer growing on the presidency and that if the cancer was not removed the president himself would be killed by it.”

    – John Dean
    __________

    Americans must excise the cancer on American education.

    Teacher and professors unions must be irrevocably decertified and annihilated with extreme prejudice.

    Educators must be deprogrammed, reeducated and compelled to follow orders.

    Elected officials must officiate, managers must manage and teachers must teach; only.

    Reading, ‘Riting and ‘Rithmetic will do nicely.
    __________________________________

    “Ours is not to wonder why. Ours is just to do or die.”

    – Lord Tennyson Alfred

    1. There are many fine teachers in this country, but these little sayings seem to please some people.

      smh

      1. There are many more mediocre , and more yet useless teachers in our midst. Unionization has seen to this. But you are probably all for half wits teaching someone else’s children. Teaching critical race bunk , teaching bad whitey bunk , BLM vomit. You are probably down with that cancer.

        1. “Unionization has seen to this.”

          It happens beforehand. Nasty little comments reinforcing attitudes about teachers may be steering more highly qualified people out of teaching. Who else do people want teaching their children? The best, right? A person with great breadth of knowledge, an ability to help kids link ideas, an ability to explain things clearly, and a love for working with young people.

          For some, it may be the low pay or that they have other, more lucrative opportunities at all that steers them away from teaching. The universities aren’t helping with their low standards (less than a 3.00 is okay).

          In general, it seems that a great many teachers a unfairly maligned.

      2. The subject is the illicit assumption of control by power-hungry communists in the antithetical, anti-American and treasonous teacher/professor unions who consider the wallets of Americans their personal property; the provision, nay, gifting of power to communists in unions by communists in government.

        Discipline must be imposed on the power-hungry, dictatorial communists in American education; the discipline commensurate with extinction.

        There is a cancer growing on American education.

      3. Many of the “fine teachers” to which you refer know and see the insane behavior of their fellow teachers like Wolf and do nothing because of a too high social and financial risk. That makes those fine teachers cowards.

  11. I bet there’s more to this. 12 students don’t suddenly “drop” out of a course. They were sending a message for sure, and Dr. Wolf doesn’t have to stand there to be attacked in public. I used to think doxxing was wrong, but the culture laps it up. Dr. Wolf has few weapons when that happens, and universities are losing all credibility in defending their own professionals. I’m not saying where I’ll come out on this when I know more. Wolf may be a loony after all. But, for now, I distrust all who hide behind their “anonymity”. Doxxing can lead to violence and injury, sure, but a culture can’t let public figures be destroyed like this. She had to hit back, make it hurt.

    1. “She had to hit back, make it hurt.”

      Hire a lawyer, for Pete’s sake, and her lawyer would have told her don’t dox anybody unless YOU want to get sued and lose. If she was dumb enough to dox students, I wouldn’t hold my breath for a compelling vindication of her conduct.

    2. Think of it this way, there are allies and there are liabilities. She’s already a liability to your cause. It’s her problem.

      1. “China’s Cyberposse”

        https://www.nytimes.com/2010/03/07/magazine/07Human-t.html

        ‘Feng decided to get revenge on the human-flesh searchers. He and a few other users started a human-flesh search of their own, patiently matching back the anonymous ID’s of the people who organized against Diebao to similar-sounding names on school bulletin boards, auction sites and help-wanted ads. Eventually he assembled a list of the real identities of Diebao’s persecutors. “When we got the information, we had to think about what we should do with it,” Feng says. “Should we use it to attack the group?”

        ‘Feng stopped and thought about what he was about to do. “When we tried to fight evil, we found ourselves becoming evil,” he says. He abandoned the human-flesh search and destroyed all the information he had uncovered.”

      2. Netflix has two good documentaries about this: DON’T F**K WITH CATS and CRIME SCENE. They both illustrate the moral complexities of cyber posses. In both instances, innocent (in the narrowest sense of the word) people were sometimes targeted.

    3. Anonymous tells us that others have no right to be Anonymous. The students would have to tell the school who they are to withdraw from her class. Anonymous will be publishing his name address and telephone number in his next post. Anonymity can be misused when reporting a false story. There are differences in motivations. Remember, she is immersed in the Way of the Wolf.

    4. Anon , Hmmm , you come across as a disgruntled biased teacher waiting for a cause to stand on that hill for. This woman is a psycho…. she had no more business “teaching” than she would in a teepee on a reservation. She is a fake , phoney and has some serious anger and control issues. She should be banned from ANY public sector job !!!. When tools like you are down for doxxing because you put pooblik officials on such a pillar…you have issues and or a hidden agenda.

Leave a Reply