We recently discussed how Wake Forest Psychology Professor S. Mason Garrison described conservatives as “guilty, anxious, and unable to handle stress well as children.” It was indicative of the overt hostility often encountered by Republicans and conservatives on our campuses today. Now, another psychology professor is under fire for a quiz that matter-of-factly explained that white men are characterized as a group for their abuse of others and lack of remorse for their violence and deceit. Like Professor Garrison, the resulting outcry reportedly led Professor Kirsten Bradbury to rescind the quiz. However, the incident reflects both the orthodoxy and hostility that now characterizes higher education. It also follows a familiar pattern when academics are called to account for such biased attacks.“However, if we must go there, which sociodemographic group is most likely to repeatedly violate the rights of others in a pattern of behavior that includes violence, deceit, irresponsibility, and a lack of remorse?”
Bradbury then added an addendum stating “Hint: They also happen to hold the most social power and because of that they can get away with the most wrongdoing.”
She gave four choices with three obviously absurd choices of middle class Latino families, female dentists and Asian men of all economic groups. The correct answer was, of course, wealthy white men.
Like many, Bradbury felt that she had license to engage in such racial stereotyping and disparagement. It reflects a culture today at universities that not only tolerates but fosters such proselytizing and intolerance.
We have seen attacks based both on race and ideology from professors over the years without any repercussions or even criticism from universities in many cases. We have previously discussed faculty who called for “detonating white people,” abolishing white people, denouncing police, calling for Republicans to suffer, strangling police officers, celebrating the death of conservatives, calling for the killing of Trump supporters, supporting the murder of conservative protesters and other outrageous statements. I also defended the free speech rights of University of Rhode Island professor Erik Loomis, who defended the murder of a conservative protester and said that he saw “nothing wrong” with such acts of violence. (Loomis was later made Director of Graduate Studies of History at Rhode Island).
At the University of California campus, professors actually rallied around a professor who physically assaulted pro-life advocates and tore down their display.
On every level of our educational systems, it has become acceptable to demonize conservatives and oppose their teaching students. One school board member recently called for conservatives to be “culled” from faculties by “taking them to the slaughterhouse.” Many faculties have indeed “culled” their ranks of conservatives. A new survey of 65 departments in various states found that 33 do not have a single registered Republican.
The survey conducted by The Harvard Crimson revealed that 82.46% of faculty surveyed identify as “liberal” or “very liberal.” Only 16.08% self-identified as “moderate” and a mere 1.46% identified as “conservative.” Not a single faculty member identified as “very conservative,” but the number of faculty identified as “very liberal” increased by another 8% in just one year. Yet editors at the newspaper assured students that eliminating Republicans or conservatives from the faculty was nothing to fear or regret.
Likewise, in an editorial column, the editors of the legal site Above the Law mocked those of us who objected to the virtual absence of conservative or libertarian faculty members at law schools. Senior editor Joe Patrice defended “predominantly liberal faculties” based on the fact that liberal views reflect real law as opposed to junk law. (Patrice regularly calls those with opposing views “racists,” including Chief Justice John Roberts because of his objection to race-based criteria in admissions as racial discrimination). He explained that hiring a conservative academic was akin to allowing a believer in geocentrism (or that the sun orbits the earth) to teach at a university.
It is that easy. You simply declare that conservative views shared by a majority of the Supreme Court and by roughly half of the population are invalid to be taught.
It is not limited to faculty. Polls now show that 60 percent of students fear sharing their views in class, including some polls showing an even higher level of fear. There is a growing orthodoxy taking hold on our campuses with rising intolerance for dissenting faculty and students alike.
When this controversy arose, Bradbury simply offered a mild “my bad” and pulled the quiz. It was not because she issued an insulting and unsupported racial attack. She simply told students that “given the current rate of sociocultural and scientific change,” the quiz had “grown too stale to use.” No real apology and no action from the university. Just a shrug.
Imagine if a professor described black men in such disparaging terms. Would the University of Texas at Austin or its faculty remain silent?
When conservatives have uttered controversial statements, the response is quite different. The recent suspension of Ilya Shapiro is a good example. Other faculty have had to go to court to defend their free speech rights. One professor was suspended for being seen at a controversial protest. Conservatives and libertarians understand that they have no cushion or protection in any controversy, even if it involves a single, later deleted tweet. At the University of North Carolina (Wilmington) one such campaign led to a professor killing himself a few days before his final day as a professor.
Students often face such choices of losing points on exams or just mouthing the political bias of their professors. We previously discussed how historian Jon Meachum asked students in a quiz at Vanderbilt University “Was the Constitution designed to perpetuate white supremacy and protect the institution of slavery?” When a student answered “false,” the answer was marked wrong.
Bradbury’s question and later shrugging off of the controversy reflects the intolerance and sense of impunity in higher education. She clearly has little fear that attacking white males would have any repercussions and felt little need to apologize for the attack. The response of the University of Texas reinforces the sense of license.
Feminism created a monster, and identity politics gave it 100 heads.
The general bias against white people is not amusing; it is monstrously unfair and it is sustained by ludicrous falsehoods. I am tempted to think that the integration of women into our political lives is partly to blame. The desperate urge to expiate sins of “racism” that they haven’t even committed is a quasi-religious and womanish response to current events. The horrible bias of the news media, which make every white-on-black offense a cause célèbre and obscure most black-on-white crime, feeds the guilty-mindedness of well-meaning whites.
OT (somewhat)
Former Police Commissioner Ray Kelly had some choice words for Alvin Bragg, and other Democrat office holders, on Fox last night. Regarding Jim Jordan’s field hearings in NYC, he said:
“I liked the hearing. I liked the fact that victims of crime can speak directly to politicians. They avoid that as much as they possibly can. But yes, Chairman Jordan (R-OH) was right on target as far as police officers being treated with such disrespect throughout the country.”
. . . [Y]ou walk along the streets of New York, you can see how much the quality of life has deteriorated. And that’s why people are leaving. It’s right there. You can see it plain as day.”
. . . So, I think it really has to do with — certainly, Alvin Bragg is a major contributor to this, because the other district attorneys in New York City follow the lead of the Manhattan district attorney.”
https://www.breitbart.com/politics/2023/04/18/fmr-nyc-police-commissioner-kelly-alvin-bragg-is-a-major-contributor-to-nyc-crime/
No other major network but Fox would air such blunt criticism of Bragg.
This situation has created a epistemological bubble in the legal profession. Young lawyers cannot comprehend the arguments of conservative jurisprudence, because they have never been exposed to it except from biased sources. It simply does not compute with them. You cannot have a civil debate with them, because in their eyes you are LITERALLY A FASCIST. Your speech is violence and must be suppressed with violence if necessary (and they see no irony in that…).
— tommylotto, UT Law, 1990
Way too many people in colleges. Quality and quantity are in eternal conflict. The more people you admit to college, and put on your faculty, the lower down the bell curve you proceed. Government at all levels need to reduce money sent to “higher education” or any other level.
And Elizabeth Warren wants the tax payers to pay for these wack jobs college education!
Obviously this psychology professor managed to skip (during her education) all classes on world history and human conflict. If there is a constant in human history it is violence, deceit, irresponsibility, and lack of remorse. She obviously overlooked the greatest killer in Human History was Mao Zedong, then Joseph Stalin, Then Adolf Hitler. After that you get into all whole litany of petty and not so petty dictators and rulers and they were all equal opportunity offenders and represented all races and religions As they rose to the temporary top over the corpses of their victims.
She obviously forgot that the 4 great Early civilizations were Egypt, Mesopotamia, Indus River Valley, China. None of which were powerful white men. And of course those 1st four civilizations were pristine and perfect in their search for expansion and power (sarcasm). Slavery started in all of them while Europe was still living in huts and animal skins for another 2000 years. She also obviously missed all the empires that arose and fell in the Mesopotamia region even as Egypt went through its Old, Middle and New Kingdoms. These were powerful civilizations but not particularly enlightened or white. Virtually all lusted for power and conquest.
People can only make such illogical and insane statements because they never studied history or simply decided to just ignore it. In fact you could make a stronger argument that Europe and it’s descendants in the rest of the world, despite having also used slavery, was the moving force to end slavery.
If there is anything that history teaches us, it is none of us are perfect or even close to perfect.
This professor needs a long period of self reassessment and maybe a yearlong retreat for a remedial course in history maybe studying the warring kingdoms phase in China and the Chinese Civil war or the Sino-Japanese conflicts, or the centuries of conflict in the Indian Subcontinent and on and on and on. Or the treatment by JAPAN of fellow Asians during world war 2. Humanity is frequently not an admirable species.
GEB,
Well said.
And why so often are these academic racists white women?
Because liberal and radical feminisms created a monster.
Education Secretary Cardona repeatedly declines to define ‘woman’
https://justthenews.com/politics-policy/education-secretary-cardona-repeatedly-declines-define-woman
Can you imagine people looking back in history, reading a headline like that, and then saying,
“What was wrong with those people?”
What’s happening is pure open persecution of anyone or anything that dares to oppose the left’s hive-minded cult. This is the kind of tactics that the Nazi’s used to gain power in 1930’s & 1940’s Germany and the political left is willfully ideologically blind to this truth. The 21st century political left is ethically and morally bankrupt.
Witherspoon wrote,
“ What’s happening is pure open persecution of anyone or anything that dares to oppose the left’s hive-minded cult.”
No, this is proof that conservatives are a bunch of snowflakes and unable to handle stress. Any criticism is labeled an “attack” or any mockery is labeled “prosecution”. It’s the whiny mentality of victimhood that pervades conservatives when they get the same treatment they give others. Turley using Above the Law’s Joe Patrice as an excuse to further whine about mockery and ridicule of conservatives on campus omits an important fact. It’s free speech. Mockery and ridicule of conservatives because of their idiotic ideas or outdated views is not an “attack” on their free speech rights. It’s a consequence of expressing those ideas and not being able to accept the reality that those ideas may be mocked or ridiculed or dismissed all together. It’s precisely what is involved as part of exercising free speech. Conservatives do this to liberals all the time. But when it’s they who are the targets of such criticism and ridicule they become mewling whiny snowflakes and cry foul.
Turley should konw better than to enable such whining and mewling in victimhood narratives of conservatives.
“…victimhood narratives of conservatives? Once again, your projection amuses me, but it is quite sad that you are so blind and so angry.
Mary,
A great observation.
Mary, are you sure it’s projection? Conservatives have been whining a lot lately about being “prosecuted” and “attacked their free speech” when none of that has happened. What about all the whining about wokeness and all that it entails. Books? Ooohh those scary books that may offend their moral values must be banned or forbidden because, they are scary leftist….stuff. Sure Mary. Whatever makes you feel less of a victim and free from ahem…persecution.
Svelaz,
I’ve let this go for too many comments; you keep talking about (and I quote) “prosecution” or “prosecuted” and I’m talking about “persecution”.
Prosecution: The institution and conducting of legal proceedings against someone in respect of a criminal charge.
Again for those that are being intentionally obtuse…
Persecution: Hostility and ill-treatment, especially on the basis of ethnicity, religion, sexual orientation or political & social beliefs.
This is literally happening and your own words “mockery and ridicule of conservatives” support the claim. Denying that literal persecution is happening is signature significant and shows moral bankruptcy, actually believing that literal persecution is not happening is pure delusional.
Delusion: An idiosyncratic belief or impression that is firmly maintained despite being contradicted by what is generally accepted as reality or rational argument.
Svelaz wrote, “Ooohh those scary books that may offend their moral values must be banned or forbidden because, they are scary leftist….stuff.”
About that “scary books” false smear.
What Happened To Common Decency When It Comes To Exposing Minors To Sexually Explicit Materials?
I think you’re too ignorant to actually understand this fact, but you just supported my claim of pure open persecution of anyone or anything that dares to oppose the left’s hive-minded cult.
Good job.
Persecution: hostility and ill-treatment, especially on the basis of ethnicity, religion, sexual orientation or political & social beliefs.
Steve,
Good one!
Witherspoon, you don’t know what prosecution means. In fact YOU proved my point. All I did was mock and ridicule your comment and true to my point YOU claim…persecution.
When you can’t handle criticism or mockery you turn into a whiny child throwing a tantrum. It’s as predicable as a Swiss clock.
When I make fun of you it’s not persecution. It’s you being mocked and ridiculed. Claiming persecution fits squarely into the victimhood mentality that I pointed out. You just made my point beautifully. Thanks!
“All I did was mock and ridicule your comment.” You say, “all I did”, as if the incivility to mock and ridicule should be acceptable and go without saying. I’m sure you do not understand it, but when you then attack one as “whiney” who objects to your rudeness you are indeed engaging in full blown, unmitigated persecution. You may self-righteously think you are debating, but in actuality you are demeaning and inappropriate and outside all the bounds of civil discourse. I have come to accept that you may really have no other way to express yourself but to embarrass yourself.
Here’s a link to just one site that might help you to be received and accepted more favorably as you labor to present your arguments.
https://www.uscourts.gov/educational-resources/educational-activities/setting-ground-rules-civil-discourse-and-difficult
Ron A. Hoffman,
Well said.
No, this is proof that conservatives are a bunch of snowflakes and unable to handle stress.
So which is it? Whites have all the power, operate with immunity from repercussions? Or Whites are scared of their own shadow, and can't handle simple things?
You also have the problem that the United States, lead primarily by ancestors of white Europeans, built the most powerful and prosperous Nation on earth
“Throughout history, poverty is the normal condition of man. Advances which permit this norm to be exceeded — here and there, now and then — are the work of an extremely small minority, frequently despised, often condemned, and almost always opposed by all right-thinking people. Whenever this tiny minority is kept from creating, or (as sometimes happens) is driven out of a society, the people then slip back into abject poverty.
This is known as “bad luck.”
Robert Heinlein
Today. Democrats are putting in place, a secretary of Education that lacks the intellect to define women. He would be in charge of implementing Title IV). Judges that cant explain Brady material, or explain the 5th amendment. Ignorance these nominees wear like a badge of honor.
History is repeating itself. The word “Nazi” is used all too often–usually by the left–as an epithet in total disregard for what horrors those people perpetuated. It’s an insult to the victims and survivors of the Holocaust. President Herzog referred to just that in his speech at Yad Vashem on Monday night.
Yes, we have been living in the 1930s and it is spring 1939 now with Taiwan taking Poland’s place. Question is will Taiwan’s allies dither the way Chamberlain and France did in those first days of September 1939. I believe they will.
Wasn’t the overuse of the words “Marxist, fascist, socialist, etc. etc.” by the right as epithets not count? They sure loved to use them, often interchangeably because most had no idea what they really meant.
“[W]hite men are characterized as a group for their abuse of others and lack of remorse for their violence and deceit.”
That is the determinism (and racism) of blood “guilt.” It never ends well.
True that, Sam. True. But we’re so good at repeating history. I keep wondering why the most vehement, outspoken racists against whites, particularly white men, are white women. This is not going to end well.
Aren’t white men the ones freaking out about being marginalized by adopting the whole “great replacement theory”? It sure gives them an excuse to be more aggressive with minorities and project some sort of majority over the rest. Isn’t that the whole idea behind that theory? That they are being replaced by the minority because they are no longer the majority would seem to be a reason why they might be seen as more “stressed out” or portray themselves with a victimhood mentality. Tucker Carlson is a big believer in the theory I hear.
the whole “great replacement theory”?
You forgot to include qanon in your post.
The only people talking about replacement theory and qanon is leftists.
What world do these people live in?
It is like watching a badly produced reality tv show.
A more correct answer would have been “University Psychology Professors.” But that was not given as a choice.
reminds me of a joke about two Jewish rabbis, one reading a neo-nazi paper that says Jews control everything.
As a white man, I just wish the rest world knew I was in charge.
Truly, this has gotten out of hand. This type of attitude is the talk of a bully – willing to destroy anyone or anything to achieve one’s intended purpose. When will this stop?!
Communism does not allow differing points of view, let alone active dissent. Communism requires censorship. It’s already here. Welcome to many of America’s colleges and universities. Thank you, Jonathan, for an excellent article.
17 deaths by violence over the weekend in Chicag- ine weekend! And guess what race the victims AND perps are….these race baiters are ALMOST laughable.
Adults who still send off-spring to these colleges should be ashamed. Support Hillsdale College!
Grove City too.
Racists and race batters.
Feels like a game that ordinary people are destined to lose.
But the pendulum always swings back.
This professor would do well to read “Atlas Shrugged.” I can only hope she recognizes herself. Dagny Taggart she ain’t.
“Dagny Taggart she ain’t.”
But Ivy Starnes she is.
Has anyone one here seen the video from last weekend in Chicago of the mob of youths hugging and kissing the lone woman trying to get into her apartment building. So much love from the kids. Anyone notice skin color? No. Of course not.
What’s worse were the statements by the outgoing and incoming mayors.