Counterculture Con HQ

March 17, 2010

Post-gender: Mixed dorm rooms gaining acceptance

Academia still at the cutting edge of cultural evolution, welcome to post-gender America.

In the 1970s, many U.S. colleges moved from having only single-sex dormitories to providing coed residence halls, with male and female students typically housed on alternating floors or wings. Then came coed hallways and bathrooms, further shocking traditionalists. Now, some colleges allow undergraduates of opposite sexes to share a room.

College officials say the movement began mainly as a way to accommodate gay, bisexual and transgender students who may feel more comfortable living with a member of the opposite sex. Most schools say they discourage couples from participating, citing emotional and logistical problems of breakups. Officials say most heterosexuals in the programs are platonic friends.

“College students are adults,” said Chang, who is gay and is now a law student at Rutgers University in New Jersey. “They have every single right to choose the person they feel most comfortable living with.”  He estimates that at schools where the option exists, only 1% to 3% of students living on campus choose a roommate of the opposite sex.

“If we are going into a post-gender world, then the regulation of private behavior is just not practical,” he said.

But at colleges, he said, “I think those old-fashioned ways of thinking are kind of dissipating. . . . Over the years, this division between men and women, which was so big, is slowly closing.” Eland’s and Pronto’s living arrangement won’t last long.  Both will be studying overseas next fall, she in Spain, he in Costa Rica, and they are not sure where — or with whom — they will live when they return to school.

[…]

March 10, 2010

Intifada Goes to School

The Global Jihad has brought their intifada against Israel and America to the university campus.  Administrators are powerless and befuddled.  Conflict in the multi-culti model that is their campus does not compute.  Diversity…. Is…Strength.  bzzzzt…. fizzle….

(IsraelNN.com) Israel Liberation Week, which was organized last week by the Zionist Freedom Alliance (ZFA) at the University of California at Berkeley, ended violently Thursday night in an altercation between ZFA activists and anti-Israel students. The incident took place during a concert featuring Black, Jewish and Mexican hip hop artists promoting, according to the organizers, “freedom for the nation of Israel from Western pressure and influence.”

As Zionist rapper Kosha Dillz was performing before a crowd of Berkeley students, members of the SJP (Students for Justice in Palestine) draped PLO flags from a balcony directly over the stage. When ZFA activist Gabe Weiner attempted to remove the flags, he was punched in the head, he says, by SJP member Husam Zakharia who was then beaten to the ground by Weiner and Yehuda De Sa.

Local ZFA member Yehuda told Israel National News: “Several other members of SJP, including female students, attempted to attack Weiner and De Sa but when three more ZFA activists entered the scene, the male members of SJP – who regularly use physical intimidation to silence Zionist students – hid behind female members of their group and refused to step forward and fight.”

“In many ways it felt very similar to how things go down in Israel. Arabs attack Jews and then hide behind women. When Jews take defensive action, a biased media paints us as aggressors. The fact that our students at Berkeley had to experience this gives them a better appreciation for some of the challenges confronting us in our own country. Even though I wanted to avoid the altercation, I recognize the value in anti-Israel activists getting put in their place by the very students they so often try to bully into silence.”

HaKohen said that he generally tries to reach out to Muslim and Arab students when running programs on campuses but that the Muslim Student Association and SJP at Berkeley were completely unwilling to dialogue on any level.

Full article, here.

There is a difference between opposing a country’s policies vs delegitimizing it’s very right to exist.  Below, the university campus as the incubator of modern anti-Semitism in the West:

“It’s about bringing the Middle East war to the university campus in an intellectual framework that doesn’t allow for freedom of speech.”

“We palestinians have nothing to dialogue about with Zionists.”

February 24, 2010

SecProgs: Ten Commandments Irrelevant

Every day the Secular Progressives of academia provide us with grist for the mill.  Here a survey reveals a little bit of the mindset of the Academy and the impact having a college education makes on people’s beliefs about God and country.

(CNSNews.com) College professors are more likely than the average person to believe that the Ten Commandments are irrelevant today — and to think that America is a corrupting influence on good people, according to a new study released Monday.

Those who teach on American college campuses are more likely to agree with the statements “America corrupts otherwise good people” and  “The Ten Commandments are irrelevant today,” according to the report, which was unveiled at a news conference at The Heritage Foundation in Washington, D.C., conducted  by the Intercollegiate Studies Institute, an educational organization based in Wilmington, Del.

Dr. Richard Brake, director of ISI’s Culture of Enterprise Initiative, cautioned that the survey results DO NOT say that all–or even most–college teachers think that America corrupts otherwise good people — or that the Ten Commandments are irrelevant.  “But they are more likely to think that having taught college, and they are more likely to think that compared to the rest of the population,” Brake said.

Brake explained that ISI randomly sampled 2,508 Americans from all walks of life, asking them 39 questions designed to elicit their beliefs, including the question: “(Do you agree or disagree): America corrupts otherwise good people.”

“When we filtered all those other impacts that might influence the way you might answer that question and just looked at the impact of being a teacher in college, we found that there were six propositions that (teaching at a college) had a significant statistical influence on. Number one was, ‘America corrupts otherwise good people.’

“Being a college teacher made them more likely to agree with that proposition,” Brake added.

Likewise, professors were also more likely than other Americans to agree with the statement: “The Ten Commandments are irrelevant for today.”  “Now, again, even college professors don’t (all) think the Ten Commandments are totally irrelevant, but they believe that much more so than the regular population.” Brake told CNSNews.com.

College professors, according to the report, were also more likely to agree with the statement: “Educators should instill more doubt in students and reject certainty.”  That’s not surprising, Brake said, given that today’s professoriate was trained from the 60’s and 70’s onward to be skeptical, adhering to the mantra of “Question Authority.”  “These are the people that are now our professors–the ones that said ‘Hey, Hey, Ho, Ho, Western Civ has got to go,” Brake told CNSNews.com.

In 2006 and 2007, ISI administered a 60-question multiple-choice exam testing 14,000 college freshmen and seniors on their knowledge of  American history, government, foreign affairs and market economics. The students failed on average in both years.In 2008, the focus shifted toward comparing the civic literacy of college graduates to non-college graduates. Seventy-one percent of Americans taking the test flunked and college students were not much more knowledgeable about American history and institutions than other citizens.

In 2010,  the study’s principal findings, Brake said, are that those who possess college degrees are more likely than those who don’t to favor same-sex marriage and abortion on demand, and less likely to agree that “anyone can succeed in America with hard work and perseverance” or that teachers should be allowed to lead prayers in public schools.

The rest, here.

Well there you have it.  The more edumacated you are the less you give a rat’s ass about the very foundation of Western culture–The Ten Commandments.   It seems to me the Academy goes out of its way to prove the tenuous link between a person’s wisdom and his intelligence or education.  If there is any correlation at all you might be forgiven for thinking it’s an inverse one.

Notice also their hatred for America is right up there with their disdain for the Bible.  The reasons are manyfold.  Their contempt for regular Americans and their backward “desert religion” (that’s how they see christianity), even though they will deny till they’re blue in the face America is a christian nation; our foreign policy which doesn’t tilt Left enough for them; our capitalist system which will never be quite socialist enough for their tastes (compare the welfare state of present-day America to how it was before the New Deal).  In short, we aren’t the SecProg utopia of their fantasies yet.  But although they believe America “corrupts” you, don’t you dare question their patriotism!  Hoo boy!  lol.  Try to make sense of that one if you can.

It boils down to this, gentle readers.  Secular Progressivism has become a replacement religion to these folks.   Everybody has got to believe in something higher.   The result is that Christianity has been placed in direct competition with these Utopians and their Earthly religion.  I don’t think it had to be that way, at least not in the U.S. which never had a state Church propping up the status quo.  But that’s how it ended up.  They believe Christianity stands in the way.  Thus they have made it a contest between the two– their religion vs ours.  And because you cannot serve two masters, you have to choose one.  These intellectuals have chosen their’s, and so have we.  We are at odds, and there is no avoiding it.

These are the people educating your children and future generations of the West.  Your little Johnny goes off to college, and he never comes back.  So parents, choose wisely where you decide to send your money.  Because everything you taught little Johnny to believe is up for grabs once he falls into their clutches.   The Left’s fertility rate is far lower than the Right’s.  This is how they keep up with us.  You have the child and raise him, then send him off to replenish the Left’s diminishing ranks after you did all the hard work.  Works out pretty good for them!

February 10, 2010

Islamic-Leftist Convergence Alive and Well on Campus

Is this what they mean by “diversity is strength?”

How’s that multiculturalism working out for you now?  Feel enriched yet?  This is nothing.  It’s only going to get better.  After all, they learned it from the best– Saul Alinsky and his culture destroying pals on the Left created a monster they can no longer control.

From the Orange County Register:

Free speech’s survival is at stake at UC Irvine. Its fate is in the hands of UCI Chancellor Michael Drake. 

On Monday night there was an assault on this most treasured principle of Americans. Michael Oren, a respected academic and Israel’s ambassador to the United States, attempted to make a presentation to about 500 students, faculty and community members about U.S.-Israeli relations. A raucous group of protesters time and again interrupted his effort to create a bridge of understanding over the contentious issue of the Middle East.  The protesters screamed and shouted attempting to drown out the ambassador. One of one, they were removed by security officials who stood on the perimeter of the UCI Student Center.

After repeated interruptions, Oren stepped out. In a side room, officials from the university, the Jewish community and the Israeli Consulate were questioning if the ambassador should continue. The real question was would the university be a place for an exchange of ideas or one where totalitarianism and verbal violence would hold sway.

This is not the first time that UCI has been the focus of violent acts by radical Arabs. The university administration last fall sent information to the FBI, alleging that members of the university’s Muslim Student Union collected money at a campus event, which then was given to an organization that provided funds to Hamas, which could be a violation of federal law, according to JewishJournal.com. Many Jewish students fear attending UCI since they know they will be victims of hostility and hate.

The real question is: What will the university administration do? Will it continue to sit on the sidelines, immobilized, fearing to act? Will administrators allow UCI to become a place of mob rule? Or will they take decisive action against those who attempt to impose their will.

It’s time that UCI consider suspension, and even expulsion, of those students who do not respect the basic tenets of free speech and academic freedom. The protesters attempted to terrorize the ambassador into silence. They almost succeeded. Such people are a threat to all in a civil society. If the university administration refuses to act, it becomes an accomplice to their acts of verbal violence and intimidation.

Thanks: Jawa

February 1, 2010

Professor Sends Shout Out to modern Academia

“What is to be done is active and unremitting hostility towards our universities.”

Academia Leads the Way in Stifling Free Speech

Today, the threat to free speech is coming primarily from the Left.  This is just the latest example.  Stay tuned for CCHQ’s take at the bottom.

The University of Northern Colorado (UNCO) has decided it’s time to prohibit “Bias Motivated Incidents.” When you hear about a “bias motivated incident,” maybe you’re thinking about a cross burning, or something of that nature.  But at UNCO the “bias motivated incident” could simply be an “inappropriate joke” that is motivated by some form of bias.

The UNCO policy also says that “Any discriminatory act is a violation of the Housing & Residence Life Student Code of Conduct.” Well, what do they mean by “any discriminatory act”? According to the UNCO handbook this includes, but is not limited to, “racism, ageism, sexism, and/or homophobia.” And (get ready for this!) included in the definition is “intentionally, recklessly or negligently causing physical, emotional, or mental harm to any person.”

First, and perhaps most obviously, it empowers people to trump the speech of others by simply becoming offended. So it really protects and defends the speech of those least able to protect and defend their own speech through reasoned discourse. It is not often that the speech of the emotionally frail has much merit. People who fall apart emotionally in response to protected speech are unlikely to have the intellectual firepower needed to articulate ideas from which the rest of us can benefit. They are simply being empowered to trump the speech of their emotional and intellectual superiors.

Second, it empowers people to trump the speech of others by pretending to be offended. When this occurs, the speech code is rewarding more than just the intellectually inferior – it is rewarding the morally inferior. It is using faux outrage to cancel honest opinion.

Finally, as the Foundation for Individual Rights in Education (FIRE) points out, laws must “give a person of ordinary intelligence a reasonable opportunity to know what is prohibited, so that he may act accordingly.” Grayned v. City of Rockford, 408 U.S. 104, 108-09 (1972). If people do not know what is prohibited there will be a dramatic chilling effect on free speech.

Those who must live under UNCO’s policy cannot know what could cause another person “emotional” or “mental” harm. That is because the policy does not require that the speaker intends to cause the alleged harm. The fact that someone subjectively feels “emotionally harmed” by the speech is enough for UNCO. So the speaker who correctly imagines that just about any idea is bound to offend someone, somewhere, is deterred from speaking on any potentially controversial topic.

College administrators often fail to distinguish between speech that is severe and persistent enough to constitute harassment and simple isolated expressions of protected speech. It appears as if they are utterly unable to write a code that could pass constitutional muster. More likely, they are fully aware that they can sustain the code through the twin threat of internal formal sanction and social stigmatization. Many would like to defeat such a patently illegal policy. Few wish to be dubbed racist, sexist, or homophobic in the process.

Article.

We have also learned that it’s not only someone’s speech which is under scrutiny, but also the individual uttering it.  The most recent and glaring example of this came from Harry Reid, who was given a big pass for his  “negro” comment where a conservative would have been made to pay big time.  Speech codes by the Left are inevitably applied in a highly selective way.  They are meant to stifle you, gentle readers, not themselves.   But it’s not only your speech that is the being controlled, it’s what you think.  If you’re not allowed to say something, then you shouldn’t be thinking it.  They use these speech codes to shape the culture, i.e., how you think.  And if the culture shapers can begin their work early in the universities when their victims are still young and impressionable, then the future belongs to them.  And that’s why at CCHQ we say what we think, and you should too.

January 23, 2010

Thomas Sowell: Populist Intellectual

There are some ideas so wrong that only a very intelligent person could believe in them.

~George Orwell

I think nobody living today embodies George Orwell’s cynicism for the intellectual class as does the great Thomas Sowell.  That is not to say that he is anti-intellect, or that he himself is not an intellectual.  But rather, like Orwell, he has what I consider a healthy mistrust for the social class that calls itself the “intelligentsia.”

January 13, 2010

Academia a Willing Host for Radical Islam Parasite

On college campuses and universities across the West, secular progressives will often try to deny conservatives a voice on the grounds that “hate should not be given a platform.”  Modern wacademia, which today is party central of the secular progressive far Left, is virtually a judeo-christian, conservative no-go zone.  It’s gotten so bad that conservative speakers actually need body guards when speaking on campus.  If only they extended such courtesy to our real enemies.

UK ACADEMIA OFFERS RADICAL ISLAM MOST CONDUCIVE ENVIRONMENT OUTSIDE OF WAZIRISTAN

Shortly after he tried to bring down flight 253 to Detroit on Christmas Day, Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab became the fourth former head of a British university Islamic Society (ISOC) to have been charged with a serious terrorism offense. This is only the tip of the problem. Shaming as it is, during his time studying at University College London (UCL), Abdulmutallab was in the most conducive environment an Islamic extremist could inhabit outside Waziristan.

Just before Christmas, the al Qaeda preacher Anwar al-Awlaki was the subject of an airstrike on his Yemen home that killed many al Qaeda operatives. Only last April my organization was trying to explain to London’s City University why he was not a suitable person to address, by video-link, their Islamic Society. Despite already having been known to be spiritual mentor to two of the 9/11 hijackers, he has been advertised as the “distinguished guest” speaker at the U.K.’s Federation of Student Islamic Societies‘ (FOSIS) annual dinner in 2003, and at Westminster University in 2006. Awlaki is now thought to be the connection between Abdumutallab and the people who gave him the bomb with which he intended to bring down the Detroit flight.

It was a graduate of the London School of Economics who kidnapped and beheaded Wall Street Journal reporter Daniel Pearl in 2002. It was two undergraduates from Kings College London who carried out a suicide bombing in a bar in Tel Aviv the following year.  But as the list of British students turning to terrorism grew, so did the denial that there was anything wrong.

Our report, published in the summer of 2008, uncovered routine extremist preaching on U.K. campuses as well as the propagation of extremist texts. In conjunction with the polling company YouGov, we also carried out and published what remains the only major survey to date of Muslim student opinions in the U.K. The results were deeply disturbing.

The poll showed that one in three Muslim students believed that killing in the name of their religion could be justified. That figure almost doubled to 60% among respondents who were active members of their universities’ ISOCs. Other results included the discovery that 40% of Muslim students polled supported the introduction of sharia law into British law, and that 58% of students active in their ISOC supported the idea of the introduction of a worldwide Caliphate.

These horrifying opinions rightly shocked the newspaper-reading public. But the response from government and the university authorities was not to tackle the problem, but rather to attack the messengers.

Then Higher Education minister, Bill Rammell, entered the debate—and studiously stepped onto the wrong side. Mr. Rammell congratulated FOSIS and the National Union of Students, expressing himself “pleased at the speed with which [they] have dismissed the findings.” I hope those words don’t come back to haunt him.

Mr. Rammell’s reaction epitomizes the problem. University authorities and the government would rather ignore the embarrassment than tackle it. And when they do address it, it is almost always to attack those shouting “fire” rather than those working to start one. Last year during Israel’s operation in Gaza, I was due to chair a debate at the London School of Economics on Islam and democracy. Radical students already holding an “occupation” on campus apparently threatened violence if I—known to be a critic of radical Islam and a friend of Israel—was to appear. The result was that the university authorities asked me to stay away from campus, saying they could not ensure my security or that of the audience.

As I enjoyed a quiet evening in, the irony of the situation was not lost. Every month in Britain extremist Islamic speakers preach a message of intolerance and hatred at the invitation of Islamic societies. It is one of the reasons people like Abdulmutallab are so often created and nurtured here in Britain.

Such poison has spread throughout our universities. It means students at a vulnerable stage of their development are routinely subjected to views that most people, including many British Muslims, would find hair-raising. On campus, such views are normalized and excused.

Just weeks before the attempted massacre on Christmas Day, FOSIS spokesman Qasim Rafiq, who succeeded the Detroit bomber as president of the UCL’s ISOC, said “There is no substantial evidence to suggest extremism is prevalent on any U.K. campus.” It is a line that many people would like to hear. But it is also a lie.

That lie has once again been exposed. But it must also be dealt with. That means both dealing with the extremists, and dealing with all those who, through ignorance, malice, or fear, have become the assistant idiots of Islamist terrorism, enabling the radicalization and recruitment of a generation. Even now the president of UCL is trying to divert attention by accusing his critics of “Islamophobia.” It strikes me that our ivory towers, like our Parliament, are more than overdue for a clear-out.

In more detail, here. The secular progressives who themselves infest Western academia are complicit in the radicalization of our campuses.  Why they turn a blind eye, one can only speculate.  Their blind hatred of all things “rightwing” to whom they feel they are giving aid and comfort to by opposing radical islam, their slavish devotion to “multiculturalism” and PC, their fear of being attacked as “racist”, their white guilt and utter fear of “discriminating.”  Who knows.  We can only speculate, and even my own superior powers to look inside the mind of the Left has reached a limit here.

January 6, 2010

A Response to David Brooks’s “Educated Class”

In a prior post we fisked, columnist David Brooks’s laments that brilliant people like him don’t have more power, and how unfair it is that gap-toothed illiterates like you, gentle readers, don’t just give him all the power.  After all, he’s smarter than you, better educated, and you, well you’re a moron.  Below we have Thomas Sowell, a pretty smart guy who didn’t drop out of high school like the rest of you did address some of David Brooks’s concerns.

January 5, 2010

They Think You Are Stupid

Everybody is entitled to the occassional rant.  This is what it looks like when the self-styled “educated class” do it.  Fisk this one with me.  Let’s take a quick peak inside his head

TEA PARTY TEENS – David Brooks

In almost every sphere of public opinion, Americans are moving away from the administration, not toward it. The Ipsos/McClatchy organizations have been asking voters which party can do the best job of handling a range of 13 different issues. During the first year of the Obama administration, the Republicans gained ground on all 13.

The public is not only shifting from left to right. Every single idea associated with the educated class has grown more unpopular over the past year.

His column, we now know, isn’t going to be about the merits (or lack thereof) of your beliefs and values, it’s about your lack of edumacation.   One thing you need to realize, gentle readers, Liberals think you are stupid.  No, they really do.  I know this because I used to be a Liberal, and self-styled member of that “educated class,” and I remember how self-superior we used to be as we sneered down our noses at you, “the public.”  The fact that most of the American public often disagreed with our positions did not give us pause, as you’d think it should have.  No, it only reinforced our sense of intellectual superiority.  Because you are morons.

The educated class believes in global warming, so public skepticism about global warming is on the rise. The educated class supports abortion rights, so public opinion is shifting against them. The educated class supports gun control, so opposition to gun control is mounting.

The story is the same in foreign affairs. The educated class is internationalist, so isolationist sentiment is now at an all-time high, according to a Pew Research Center survey. The educated class believes in multilateral action, so the number of Americans who believe we should “go our own way” has risen sharply.

Notice he offers no substantive argument here.  But more importantly, notice his use of the word “so”.  You disagree with him on every single one of the issues he just mentioned, not because he may be full of crap on most or all of them, but merely to spite the educated class.  He believes one thing, “so” you spitefully believe another.  This is what an intellectual elitist looks like in the throes of a full tilt temper tantrum.  He’s not even trying anymore.

A year ago, the Obama supporters were the passionate ones. Now the tea party brigades have all the intensity.

The tea party movement is a large, fractious confederation of Americans who are defined by what they are against. They are against the concentrated power of the educated class. They believe big government, big business, big media and the affluent professionals are merging to form self-serving oligarchy — with bloated government, unsustainable deficits, high taxes and intrusive regulation.

He’s not entirely unfair here; and he actually calls them “tea party” instead of the usual epithet they use.  Kudos.  But yes, people out of power–unable to set the agenda–are generally relegated to “what they are against.”

The tea party movement is mostly famous for its flamboyant fringe. But it is now more popular than either major party. According to the NBC News/Wall Street Journal poll, 41 percent of Americans have a positive view of the tea party movement. Only 35 percent of Americans have a positive view of the Democrats and only 28 percent have a positive view of the Republican Party.

If the Tea Party is mostly famous for its flamboyant  fringe, that’s because the likes of you have made every effort possible to define them that way.  As you can see from those polls, Mr. Brooks, they aren’t that fringe you’ve made every effort to define them as.  They are what a right-of-center country looks like.

The movement is especially popular among independents. The Rasmussen organization asked independent voters whom they would support in a generic election between a Democrat, a Republican and a tea party candidate. The tea party candidate won, with 33 percent of independents. Undecided came in second with 30 percent. The Democrats came in third with 25 percent and the Republicans fourth with 12 percent.

Yes, they are independents, but not necessarily “moderates.”  Ever wondered where all the Republicans went?  That’s where.  They are conservatives who have walked away from a Republican party which they feel no longer represents them.  That’s what sunk the GOP in the last two congressional elections.  The same GOP you made every effort to depict as “far Right” and “extremist,” but which wasn’t.  Well, you had lots of people fooled, but not these people.  That’s why they left.  Now they are independents, and the GOP is going to try and win them back.  The GOP was extremist?  You haven’t seen nothing yet.  They are against statism regardless of party, against globalism, open borders, Free Trade, and big spending.   So when you play your usual gotcha game of–“but you weren’t against spending when the Republicans did it!”– you are entirely mistaken.  They were.

The rest here.

January 3, 2010

Indoctrinate U

We all know how Liberal the media and entertainment industry tends to be.  You see it every day and you’ve essentially resigned yourself to it.  You switched to Fox or watch the Food Channel to avoid it.  But that brand of Liberalism is milk and cookies, mere fashion, just flavor of the month compared to the cutting edge culture destruction of the Academy.  As you will get a taste of below, the real meat is coming from our modern colleges and universities.

Once the marketplace of ideas, now a social engineering project, modern academia has become the incubator of the stealth revolution of cultural marxism.  It is the cutting edge that drags the entire movement along.  And they are getting them young, right out of high school; kids yet without an original thought of their own.  They are essentially raising your kids, and their inculcation can take decades to undo.  And yes, there’s a certain stealthiness about it.  Just watch how afraid they are of the cameras.  If you’ve ever seen Michael Moore’s Roger & Me, it’s like that, but with pointy heads instead of tycoons, with a dash of that coffee-drinking supervisor from Office Space.  Highly entertaining, as well as informative!

Shelby Steele’s Faustian bargain on full display here as white Liberals groom young minorities in the culture of the aggrieved so that they can take moral responsibility, and then the credit, for rescuing them.  And to protect these aggrieved minority students from all the other racist whites on campus, they engage in racial segregation– segregated orientation, segregated housing, and ethnic and cultural “centers” where everybody self-segregates.  Where even the term “boyfriend” and “girlfriend” are too “gender-specific” and therefore offensive.  All in the name of “diversity” and “multiculturalism”, of course, which they use as a weapon in their long walk through our institutions and judeochristian culture.

Here you will see black professors and authors chafing under the sacred cows and politically correct groupthink of the Academy’s far Left plantation.   Groupthink that uses “hate speech”, “racism”, selective application of speech codes, lawsuits, righteous anger, and even violence to suppress alternative views without having to refute on the merits a single solitary argument being offered. Behold the hallowed grounds of the academy, that erstwhile “marketplace of free ideas” where the 1st Amendment doesn’t exist.

It starts out rather unremarkably with testimonials at the student level.  But hang in there.  Once the actual university intelligentsia start self-revealing is when the real freakshow begins.  That’s when it gets good, gentle readers.  So without any further ado–where diversity means skin color, not ideas; where porn is in, and Passion of the Christ is out–I give you Indoctrinate U:

Thanks: KitmanTV

« Newer Posts