“Create a crisis.” That call is made in a new campaign sponsored by the American Association of University Professors to force “colleges to drop their contracts with ICE’s key corporate enablers.” Despite years of criticism over the purging of faculty ranks of conservatives and libertarians, university professors continue to double down on far-left ideology that is now an orthodoxy in higher education.
I previously wrote about the AAUP’s ideological shift in my book, The Indispensable Right: Free Speech in an Age of Rage. After that book, the AAUP then selected Todd Wolfson, a far-left activist, as its new president.
Wolfson ran on the pledge to make AAUP a “fighting organization” for social change. After his selection, Wolfson has called Trump supporters “fascists” and demanded boycotts of Israel.
Given that history, it was little surprise to see the AAUP’s sponsorship of this campaign, as reported by the College Fix.
The campaign is also funded by Coefficient Giving, associated with liberal billionaire Dustin Moskovitz and his wife Cari Tuna. They have been criticized for reportedly funding groups pushing defund police and other radical agendas.
AAUP joined this campaign with Young Democratic Socialists of America, Sunrise Movement, and the Workplace Justice Lab at Rutgers University. It includes a toolkit instructing students to “create a crisis for university admin through an escalating campaign.”
The campaign seeks to organize to combat the “Trump regime” and its “terrorism”: “When students and workers join together in action, we can force our schools to stop funding and normalizing ICE collaborators and take down the whole regime.”
They are targeting companies such as Enterprise, Flock, ICE Air Carriers, Hilton, and Target.
The campaign states further that “ICE, and the Trump regime generally, cannot function without the consent and collaboration of the business world. Breaking companies from ICE is the central axis for generating enough leverage to stop the regime’s terrorization campaign.”
So university professors are funding a campaign that actively seeks to create a crisis on campuses. It takes a position as an organization that immigration enforcement is a form of terrorism. The silence among faculty is deafening. Rather than objecting that the AAUP should focus on issues related to academic freedom and protections for its members, there have been virtually no objections to the organization’s ideological agenda.
It is evidence of the new orthodoxy in higher education and the refusal of administrators and faculty to make any meaningful change in their intolerance for opposing views.
Many departments no longer have a single Republican faculty member in this academic echo chamber.
A Georgetown study found that only 9% of law school professors at the top 50 law schools identify as conservative — almost identical to the percentage of Trump voters in the new poll.
There is little evidence that faculty members are interested in changing this culture or creating greater diversity at schools. In places like North Carolina State University, a study found that Democrats outnumbered Republicans 20 to 1.
Yale University has finally achieved the academic version of Nirvana, a state of perfect peace and enlightenment. A recent study found that the faculty had finally purged every Republican donor from its ranks.
According to a recent report from the Buckley Institute, there is now not a single Republican found across 27 of 43 departments at Yale University. In a nation roughly evenly divided between Republicans and Democrats (with a slight advantage to the GOP), only 3 percent are Republicans across all Yale departments.
The hostility to opposing views is impacting our students. A new study offers additional data on this problem, showing that almost 90% of students misrepresent their views in class and on assignments to satisfy faculty by adopting more liberal views.
In the meantime, the small number of dissenting faculty have no real voice, particularly among legal academics. I have previously written about the similar liberal agenda of the American Bar Association despite plunging membership among lawyers. The ABA now represents just 17 percent of the bar.
The AAUP currently has only 44,000 to 45,00 members. There are an estimated 1.5 million university and college professors in the United States. Both the ABA and AAUP have become captive to the most ideological elements of their membership. That agenda has overwhelmed the original apolitical mission of these groups.
This orthodoxy will continue until donors refuse to support universities that do not take meaningful action to restore diversity in the faculty ranks. The AAUP’s radical agenda is only the latest example of how higher education remains a hardened ideological silo. These faculty members have shown again and again that they are unwilling to change this culture. Only donors can force reform by cutting off their contributions or directing them to schools with a proven commitment to intellectual diversity.
Bleeding heart liberals living a life of patting themselves on the back for making life better on campus for the non white students. The exception being the oriental students whose parents have taught them diligence and responsibility. The same group that justifies the rape and murder of Jews now ignores the killing of tens of thousands of the slaughtered Iranian citizens by the Iranian regime.
Iran has no open internet and these socialist indoctrination troopers were just fine with limiting free speech on the internet in America. The similarities are staggering. When alone in their enclaves they tell each other look see how compassionate I am for the downtrodden while they sip a cocktail glass filled with the finest champagne that money can buy at the parties where they give them selves gold medals. All the while the grade level reading requirement is in a tail spin. But but but they have all the answers and are therefore justified in telling you what you can and cannot say in the hallowed halls of higher learning. Self congratulation snobs sending all the gummy bears out to save the world.
TiT,
” . . . look see how compassionate I am for the downtrodden while they sip a cocktail glass filled with the finest champagne that money can buy at the parties where they give them selves gold medals.”
You just described the Oscars/Hollywood.
All the more reason why they have become more and more irrelevant.
“Henny Penny” (a.k.: “Chicken Little” “Chicken Licken”) is a European folk tale about a chicken who thinks the sky is falling after an acorn hits her head, leading her to hysterically warn others. She and her friends (Cocky Locky, Ducky Lucky) are tricked by Foxy Loxy into entering his den, where they are eaten, often serving as a moral warning against panic and gullibility.
The Incident: An acorn or nut hits Henny Penny on the head, causing her to panic and believe the world is ending.
The Chain Reaction: She gathers other characters—Cocky Locky, Ducky Lucky, Goosey Lucy, and Turkey Lurky—to go to the King.
The Fox: Foxy Loxy tricks them into going into his cave/den.
The Ending: In most traditional versions, the characters are eaten by the fox.
Idiom: “The sky is falling!” is a common idiom for unwarranted hysteria or panic (i.e.: AAUP’s “Create a Crisis”).
Popular Variations:
Chicken Little: Commonly used in the US.
Chicken Licken: Known in other regions.
The Sky is Falling Down: A popular version emphasizing caution in believing rumors.
No group is more Fascist and less tolerant than today’s left. They demand ideological purity at a level that would make Mao and Stalin blush.
Irregardless, I did your mom.
Based on what I have observed (I did not go to college) from being around UCSC, it is not the professors that are doing the actual teaching, it is the student aides. Thus you are more likely to get the modern radical teachings and accept since one of your peers are presenting them. This does not excuse the professors.
As to a post earlier, I was wondering about the RICO act (again not a lawyer). Does it may apply, since this seems to be coordination between several individuals (donors) and groups to create havoc and possibly damage?
Idk rcs, but they say they’re for democracy but anti capitalist, anti climate change, equity in wealth and health, “gender”, some other stuff. They’re global. If you can’t fix it, tear it up, as a motto. It’s an all out push to impoverish the US. Americans shall live as Bangladesh. Sewage and clean food and water will become ill managed.
Sorry rcs…
Let’s keep it simple. It’s called a communist revolution; commies doing murderous commie stuff.
They want your precious bodily fluids.
De-funding police and ICE makes perfect sense, Laken Riley
Ah the slimy educational Illuminati raise their pointy heads again on ‘social justice’ for causes they ‘like.’ So the Corporate Robber Baron’s are the full circle enemy of the people once again! At least until the dirtball educational Illuminati need corporate ‘donations’ and contributions to the “endowment for higher educational purposes” so the faux academic communists are tenured, pay-raised, and insulated from real-life. Spark the low IQ revolution at our Universities and get the gallows ready for the capitalist swine, right? The path to righteousness and prosperity Soviet Style Baby!!!
This generation of Americans needs to spend a year in Iran. They will kiss the ground here if they return.
They have no idea. None. Spoiled rotten.
Try getting a visa.
I am glad that during my years in college and law school I cannot recall one professor indicatingh his or her political or sociologicl preferences. I am also glad that my children were able to finish college and grad school without coming into contact with the current idiocy present in higher education in our country. What I am fearful of is that my grandkids are or will be will be subjected to idiocy as presented by members of the AAUP and other Marxist groups.
Same here. I was graduated from a small state college in PA. ALL my history profs were neutral toward their students philosophy. They were liberal but allowed us to go our own way without pressure. That is education. Today its all about indoctrination.
Here we go with ‘anonymous’ again.
Here we go with m_ass_ imo
I would suspect that Corporate America will instead walk away from the activist colleges and professors. The Pentagon just recently cancelled most of their contracts with the Ivy Leagues and similar minded institutions for advanced studies by the military. One also wonders if parents will continue to pay exorbitant fees to these universities. Some universities are starting to cut courses especially in some esoteric specialties where there is minimal hiring in the workplace and salaries don’t match the expenses of the education. Simple economics may handle this problem.
California (as an Example) has dropped out of the 4th spot in GDP to Japan. It’s going to be hard to pay for all those top flight colleges as people beat a path to elsewhere.
A 11 state block in the”old Confederacy” has a GDP of $ 9 trillion which is now twice that of California which is $4.3 trillion. This same block has absorbed 70 % of population growth in the last 5 years. The only larger economies are USA, and China.
Now per capita California would still probably lead but even that gap is closing. I only use California as an example. There are other states like New York, Illinois, Massachusetts that are seeing the same trends.
When the money leaves, institutions falter and leave or close. The Activist Profs may starve.
Sort of brings back an old cry of “The South Will Rise Again”. Henry W. Grady would be proud.
How did you make the connection from leftist degree mills to GDP in Japan?
And no, the pentagon did not cancel “most” of their contracts, just 93 across 22 universities, ca. $5 billion on a budget of $1 Trillion (2026), considered wasteful. Per military.com. At least source what you’re writing. Anyone can make up such nonsense.
Anonymous8:52AM-Thats ok ATS. I knew it would be beyond you because your linear mind has to work through each minuscule step before it goes to the next step and has already lost it’s focus and gone of the rails. Too bad you were born without the capability for global thinking and multitasking and has no ability to cast your net wider in the information pool.
Of course an alternate explanation for your obtuseness might simply be concrete thinking, a harbinger of early senescence. Tsk, Tsk.
GEB, grow-up.
Ole GEB is on a role, swearing, cussing, threats … that’s what ole white boys do when their fragile egos are hurt.
Please point out to us where GEB is swearing, cussing, making threats.
And it is spelled “roll.”
GEB,
Well said.
Those of us with a degree of logic, reason, common sense can see exactly the point you were making.
The annonys, not having those traits, not so much.
Harvard’s endowment is 59.6 billion
The cancelled contracts for Harvard were ca. $180 million. So based on an OP BOD of $7 billion, its nothing. BTW those cancelled fellowships had little impact on Harvard. Those fellowships are spread over 3 to 7 years., ca. $30 m per yr. All considering, the cancelled contracts is spit on a hot rock.
Put the Somalis at Harvard. There’ll be 16 dollars left. 😂
GEB,
Well, have to question who needs the other more? Corporate America or colleges?
Yes, GEB, to leave it ruin is the goal. Don’t forget how to make wheel on a wagon. Wheels are game changers. 😏. Oh, and fire goes UNDER the crockery.
There’s an old husband’s tale that says, Those who can, do, and those who can’t, teach. University professors live in a cloistered environment, and most enjoy a professional reputation earned by others. When you have “almost 90% of students misrepresenting their views in class and on assignments to satisfy faculty by adopting more liberal views,” it proves that propaganda is a mile wide but a millimeter thick. In other words, the professors are not challenged by the students who, in turn, are telling their temporary captors just what they want to hear and no more. It’s a win-win for both.
This might actually be healthy, a source of wizened empowerment by young people as they prepare to leave the nest for the “real world.” Some, unfortunately, will succumb to this liberal grooming. They will go on to support the ten-side of the 90/10 issues and use their learning to rationalize it. But most will emerge with a street-smart understanding of what one must do to find the truth. They will realize just how easy it was for those in charge to manipulate the data for their own purposes.
Our world is no longer a Walter Conkrite or The Nutty Professor world, but one in which each of us can and must find the truth. In my undergraduate, graduate, and post-graduate days at some of the finest universities in the nation, I can honestly say that only two or three of the hundreds of professors I had ever lest me with lasting knowledge. The rest were foils against whom I mastered the sport. I’m not alone.
The model is that students will be challenged by their professors, and need to think and work harder to justify their positions. To the extent that such a process is needed to fully develop skills of reasoning and presenting coherent arguments that result, this is not a “win” for students.
Don: Thank you for your comment. By college, students have mastered to a degree the art and science of being a student. By then, they know that it’s not smart to disagree with the professor. Remember, this is not an equal relationship. Most, if not all, students quickly realize exactly what they must do to survive and thrive. The learning experience from this is just as valuable, if not more so, than whatever the underlying lesson was meant to teach. Granted, this takes someone with sharp skills to begin with, but those who are able to master it will go on to bigger and greater things. Consider the relatively large number of Harvard and Yale grads in the Trump administration: Vance (Yale), Stefanik (Harvard), RFK, jr. (Harvard), Ramaswamy (Harvard), Hegseth (Harvard), Bessant (Yale), Makary (Harvard), Oz (Harvard), Sauer (Harvard), etc. Myu point, Don, is that like so many other things in life, those who learn to make natural selections in their own interest will not just survive but excel. The others may not do as well because they succumbed to the liberal hogwash and used their education to rationalize it. It’s called confirmation bias and we all have it to one degree or another.
@jjc
‘By college, students have mastered to a degree the art and science of being a student.’
Those days, sadly, are long gone. Too many freshmen are lucky if they’ve managed to learn to tie their shoes or sit still. Undergrads often leave their programs at levels lower than we were upon completing junior high school. Similar applies to many new professors, too, advanced programs are often not particularly rigorous (but man, are they expensive). This is not hyperbole.
James,
To help prove your point, 77% of Gen Z job seekers have brought a parent to an interview—they’re even getting them to negotiate pay rises and take their hiring tests
“Over three-quarters of recent job seekers are pulling up an extra chair for their Gen X and boomer parents—not just for job interviews, but also to help write resumes, negotiate salaries, and solve workplace conflicts. Experts suggest using ChatGPT to prepare instead.”
Can you imagine a prospective employee walking into a job interview with their parents at the table?
Bosses are firing Gen Z workers in record time: ‘Yeah, checks out’
“However, HR consultant Bryan Driscoll argues that it is not just young employees presenting a problem, but the education system itself which is not preparing its graduates for the working world.”
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/yourmoney/consumer/article-13886905/bosses-firing-gen-z-workers-record-time.html
@Upstate
Yes. I do not disparage jjc as they seem to be someone that simply hasn’t paid attention or is not in the thick of it. It’s not a joke; what passes for young adults these days sure is, though. Sorry, jjc, I repsect your opinion, but you need to forget about the past, it simply isn’t the state of things today, and it gets worse every year, not better, and quite demonstrably. And again: we are all going to have to live in this world we are creating.
James: I accept your point but in the old days, whenever they were, colleges were more selective than today. Each school had a range of SAT scores that barred anyone who didn’t meet those scores. More than 80 percent of colleges today do not require submission of SAT scores and, regrettably, many of the students they enroll are as you describe. While this expands the “pool,” it does not diminish the prospects for the good students who understand all too well that the value of education is solely up to the student and how much she or he puts into learning. Because of what you stated, some schools, including Harvard University, are reconsidering their entrance procedures and may reintroduce some form of testing. Many of the “basket-weaver” grads flunk out of jobs in the business world and wind up working for state or federal government agencies where they do not have to compete or perform to hold their jobs.
@jjc
I hear you, I do. This is simply not the reality in 2026. it just isn’t. Even in the most conservative and small state schools, kids are coming out of their programs with some level of this toxicity.
If we want to reform this, it will be as painful and accompanied by just as much screeching as enforcing our already existing immigration laws. Higher education is a joke. Students show up unprepared to properly brush their teeth as matriculating freshmen. So called ‘advanced’ programs in many cases might as well be further babysitting. This, again, is not hyperbole.
You need to let the past go, it’s deader than a door nail in 2026, and we are all going to have to deal with the ramifications of this, whether we like it or not. A modern degree, particularly an advanced one, is largely pretty much just a transaction receipt to show you paid the money. Yes, there are exceptions, but they are exceedingly few, and it goes for the ‘higher’ professions such as law and medicine just as much.
This is me, I do not know why my AV changed. Possibly a typo on my part. would sure love a real registration system, even if it doesn’t eliminate the trolls.
I did your mom.
Typical lib. Can’t argue the point, so throw out an insult.
Argue what point?
Don’t see you arguing any point.
More diatribe from the resident moron. . .go back to your computer in the basement.
One moron said to another moron, you’re a moron.
About your speed
It is strictly unwise for public-good organizations to go political, whatever the brand. Now it is the AAUP, an organization purportedly favoring and working for faculty. Surprisingly, the AAUP should be working steadfast on the biggest of all educational questions: “What to do about AI?” I contribute to a faculty group at a huge university (70K+ students) and none of them seem to know, but all are concerned. But no, the AAUP is now concerned about ICE, over which they have little impact.
Political meandering has happened to the teachers unions, the ABA, USAID, WHO, and more. All have currently diminished influence and hence credibility. Activism seems to be irresistible to crazed leaders, who somehow believe they are now players on the big leagues. The AAUP did have some influence when it restricted itself to tenure and academic matters. But now? They have lost their way. As well, they have no money, unlike for example Randi Weingarten, president of the American Federation of Teachers, who has millions in union dues to dole out to personal favorites.
The AAUP has probably begun its long decent into oblivion.
So you think politics in higher ed is only a recent development, USAID, WHO etc. ?
If I wrote the response to include everything I know and don’t know, it would be so long that no one would read it. So, I try to keep it on point and short.
Really appreciate your articles but this one needs a little proof reading.
I’ll be honest, that kind of drive‑by proofreading comment misses the point. If you understood the argument well enough to correct the typos, then you understood the argument well enough to engage it.
Turley isn’t submitting a term paper here, he’s warning about what’s happening in real time. I care a lot more about the substance of that than whether every comma is in the right place.
“If you understood the argument well enough to correct the typos, then you understood the argument well enough to engage it.”
You get an A+ on this post!
OLLY,
I think most understand the good professor is making his articles before or in between classes or other things. It is a blog, not a formal essay. Just like some people here post comments using mobile devices (IIRC, James, DustOff), so there might be typos. Generally it is easy enough to figure out if GEB hit the 1 key instead of the 3 key by using a little common sense.
It is an opinion piece.
I don’t know if this is what Marie DePaula was referring to or not, but Prof. Turley wrote:
“A Georgetown study found that only 9% of law school professors at the top 50 law schools identify as conservative — almost identical to the percentage of Trump voters in the new poll.”
without any apparent reference to what that “new poll” was. There are several opinion differences subsequently quantified in the column, but none seem to clarify that particular reference. That is a lapse somewhat more important than your facetious reference to a misplaced comma.
My point was about proofreading in the ordinary sense: grammar, spelling, stray commas. Missing a citation is a different category. That’s not “proofreading,” that’s asking for clarification and a source so readers can check the data. Those are both fair things to flag, but they’re not the same job, and my comment was aimed at the folks who jump on surface grammar instead of engaging the substance.
If we’re going to turn this into a proofreading seminar, I should probably note that her use of proof reading itself could use a little… proofreading.
Colleges are not “educating” most of these kids, they are processing them. They pull in students who would not have sniffed admission a generation ago, stick them in high priced remedial classes that repeat failed high school work, and run the whole thing through the student loan machine.
The kid is in deep debt before he has earned a single true college credit. While he is treading water, he is dropped into a campus environment that is politically one way, top to bottom, and he learns very fast which way he is supposed to talk if he wants grades, friends, and peace. Parents send off a kid who may be conservative or at least open minded and they get back a stranger who has the party line down pat and a loan balance he may never escape.
This is not an accident and it is not compassion. It is a business model that monetizes academic failure and then uses those same underprepared kids as raw material for a political project. For the student and for the country that is not higher education, that is capture.
Are there any legal consequences for sponsoring crises on campuses leading to riots?
Based on how you worded that, I honestly can’t answer it. You’ve got to be more specific. What exactly do you mean by ‘sponsoring a crisis,’ and what exactly do you mean by ‘leads to a riot’? Be clear.
Can’t? Nor should you try. You are not a lawyer and have no experience in higher Ed.
Feeling mean spirited today?
“Colleges are not “educating” most of these kids, they are processing them” What a misinformed and uneducated comment. So they issue no degrees, just mind tinkering. Tell that to the millions who graduate. You are absolutely wrong on so many levels. You’re just repeating rightist media’s BS, hook, line and sinker. Do some real research for once.
Your last paragraph about the business model is true and is an example of what liberals are doing to higher education. They live in ivory towers and love to wear their “colors” at graduation ceremonies as if to say they are part of the ruling class. There is an old adage that says, “those who can “do”, and those who can’t “teach”. That’s so prevalent these days. . .pushing them through their 4 years of college so as not to get their parents in an uproar.
I agree phantom. I come at this with a systems‑thinking lens, and our education pipeline is a textbook case. If you start by looking at the output, the “product” we are turning out is pretty clear: indebted graduates with thin real‑world experience, light on marketable skills, and heavy on grievance and entitlement. That is not a batch of random defects slipping through an otherwise sound process. That is what the process is set up to produce. The kids who come out grounded, skilled, and sane are the one‑offs who somehow slipped the net. The system takes in raw human material and, between input and output, it does its real work: sorting, conditioning, and branding people with a set of approved attitudes. Once you see it that way, you stop treating these outcomes as accidents and start seeing them as the designed end state of the model.
Do you have any education industry credentials or experience?
If we’re trading résumés now, fine. I’ve actually spent years inside the system. I hold an education degree, taught for 17 years, am a federally certified strategic planning facilitator; I’ve done business process modeling and management consulting for the US DoEd and other entities, and now I’m a published author. That last point is gratuitous, but I no longer care. You don’t need credentials to see what’s in front of your face, but since you asked, I’m not just throwing rocks from the cheap seats.
All well and good, now prove it. Just one one problem, there is no such certification as a “federally certified strategic planning facilitator”. Such a role or position is not recognized or regulated by the US federal gov. Rocks? You’re just throwing lies the size of boulders from the front seats.
Let’s pretend none of my résumé is true. Let’s say I never finished high school and have an IQ of 90. Good. Now we’re on equal footing. None of that touches a single point I made about the education system’s inputs, incentives, and outputs. If you think I’m wrong, refute the argument, not the imaginary version of my LinkedIn page you’ve built in your head.
OLLY,
We all know you have more credibility than the annonys. You comments prove it, while the annonys prove their lack of credibility. Just read their child like comments.
And I am certain that many of your excellent points will be echoed in Elise Stefanik’s book titled Poisoned Ivies which comes out on April 14.
Thanks, Catherine. I just preordered it. As you probably know, my focus here has been citizen formation for a long time, and I’m hoping her work will feed into a larger project I’m putting together on exactly that problem.
OLLY,
Higher education is a business. And one that is no longer paying off in the long run for the grads while being subjugated to leftist indoctrination and having to pay for it. Professor Turley posted a article about how colleges had “Captured audiences,” as more colleges mandate woke DEI classes for graduation.
The good news is, seeing no value added only costs, companies are or already have fired their DEI divisions. Those with DEI degrees have now found out a hard lesson in life as they resume their careers as baristas, living at home, and still paying for that college loan for a degree that is not worth the paper it was written on.
You’re right on it, Upstate. Higher ed is a business, and it stopped being a good deal for a lot of kids a long time ago. You pay top dollar to sit through four years of soft propaganda and come out with a piece of paper that often does not pull its weight in the real world. That is not an accident, that is the model. If states are labs of democracy, these schools are petri dishes for ideological capture, not formation.
The DEI cycle is Exhibit A. Schools pushed DEI as the next big thing, built programs around it, and sold kids on the idea there would be a whole new industry waiting for them. Now companies are quietly cutting those offices and those jobs, and the grads are back home pouring coffee and staring at loan statements. That is not on the kid. That is a system that happily sells whatever fad is paying this decade and lets someone else deal with the wreckage later.
Another worthy comment, Olly!
I stopped supporting my alma mater, one of the worst, years ago. They don’t miss me.
I did years ago also. Sad.
I read this and I wonder about the conservative commentators and podcasters who persist is “looking at colleges” for their kids. Why do they see this (and know this) and still want to send our kids to indoctrination? Hillsdale College in Michigan seems to be the only option for higher education.
I agree that Hillsdale is probably the best option, but not the only one. Another, which seems to have worked for one young person I know, is to spend a few years in the military, or at a good community college, or working, before attending a college. We all know that human brains do not become fully functional until age 25 or so (a bit less for females) so this avoids exposing them to the Marxist indoctrination machine while their minds are still full of mush.
For sure, we have had family members in the military and made better people of them.
Marxist indoctrination? You buy into that propaganda? Listen, its 2026, not 1950. Its obvious you have no idea what’s going on in modern education, emphasis on modern, education, just read rightist headlines and think you are informed. When did you graduate, 1930? Again, its 2026.
LOL
Wow. Pure slop from anonymous. As if modern now means intolerant. The intellectual lightweights are everywhere.
Hillsdale? Seriously? A degree from them does not prepare anyone for a future employment. Its just a conservative degree mill.
Nor does a degree from Harvard or Yale, leftwing indoctrination centers.
And you know that as a fact?
Anonymous, you are wrong. I would hire a Hillside grad but I would never hire a Harvard or Columbia grad. I don’t need Jew haters working for me.
I am retired now so the point is moot, but the point stands.
Right? lol it’s bizarre.
Sounds like gerrymandering eh?
Not really
Stop grants. Not possible.
It’s possible
American Association of University Propagandists eschews diversity in favor of radical Marxist tropes cooked up in Moscow, Sorosville and the DNC. Given the virulence of their attacks on the US government and private enterprise, it is time for them to sever all ties of financial dependence upon both. Zero out all government grants to their universities and to the students who attend their universities. Stop soliciting contributions from the corporations they deem anathema.