Elsewhere (283)
John Staddon on Ethnic Studies standards:
The anonymous sociologist’s claim that empirical facts are irrelevant… raises an important question: if theories in the social sciences are not constrained by empirical facts, what are they constrained by? The answer seems to be that theories in Race and Ethnic Studies sociology are mainly constrained by the political opinions prevailing in that branch of the field… [‘Race theorist’] Eduardo Bonilla-Silva scorns the very idea [of truth], speaking of the “devil of ‘objectivity’” (note the scare quotes). Without the possibility of objectivity, there is no science. Has sociology become, then, just political activism? To some extent, yes. According to Tukufu Zuberi and Bonilla-Silva: “The aim is to attain epistemic liberation from White logic.”
Professor Bonilla-Silva and his nasty, paranoid contortions have been mentioned here before. When not denouncing objectivity and “white logic” – or complaining that his employer, Duke University, “oozes whiteness,” which is, it goes without saying, a terrible thing to ooze – the professor equates critics of affirmative action with 19th century supporters of slavery. He also claims that non-racial ‘colour-blind’ attitudes and policies are merely a “way of calling minorities niggers, Spics or Chinks.”
One of the more bizarre indicators of Bonilla-Silva’s mental state is his written insistence – published in a course syllabus – that students must control their “body language” and avoid any “irresponsible contestation” of his arguments. Black students who disagreed with the professor’s lurid racialist theories have been denounced by him as “Uncle Toms.” Oh, and Professor Bonilla-Silva, a grown man, a tenured academic with a six-figure salary, refers to the United States, in class, as “Gringoland” and “AmeriKKKa.”
Further to this recent hoaxing drama, James Lindsay on laundering hokum:
‘Critical race theory’ is a mess, for example. It’s an explicitly political situation, in which ‘whiteness’ has to be bad and therefore can’t do anything right, and they take these ideas and launder them through the academic process. And these departments exist specifically to launder these ideas, to put them through the academic process and give them the appearance of being rigorous studies, so then activists can go and say, “Oh, a study has shown…”
For more on so-called “critical race theory,” see also this.
At Colorado State University, where “inclusive excellence” is a goal stated many, many times, matters of great import are being decided:
The school’s guidelines urge those who are posting about the university: “Avoid gendered emojis when possible. Instead use one of the variations of the yellow smiley faces or object emojis.” The guide also suggests that individuals “use inclusive pronouns” such as “they/them/theirs.”
For further illustrations of “inclusive excellence,” and the delightful, not-at-all-unhinged people it attracts, see also this.
And while I find the term “intellectual dark web” faintly silly, David Fuller’s interview with Douglas Murray is not without its moments:
It is preposterous that almost everything that is true is so hard to say in public, and so controversial to say in public. And so disputed, and so howled against. I think everybody who’s been described as a member of the ‘intellectual dark web’ probably has one thing in common, which is that they’re all used to being howled at for saying things that are self-evident – howled at in public – only to then discover that the public come up to them in private and say, “Thank you so much for saying what we think.” […]
Somebody came up to me after the event in London [with Sam Harris and Jordan Peterson] and they had a copy of that day’s New York Times, and page one, two and three, I think, were about something to do with trans [issues]. And this person said, “This is why people are here.” I said, I’m not sure they’re here because of the New York Times running so much about trans, and we didn’t address anything to do with that, but I got what he meant. We’re being given really weird, quite fringe stuff, all the time, as our diet, and we’re starting to rebel.
As usual, feel free to share your own links and snippets, on any subject, in the comments.
Sigh…I guess have to do everything myself…101…Again I blame my OCD…and my anxiety…but to make this legitimate,..
They don’t feel pity, or remorse, or fear. And they absolutely will not stop, ever, until you are destroyed, personally and professionally. More importantly, there’s no real down side to punching back twice as hard, as the silent majority of centrist and conservative people have had just about enough of this. Hammering these louts with implacable, well-funded and very public lawfare might convince these miscreants that they do not have the impunity they think they do.
This. I’m not a fan of punching for the sake of punching but to see so many on the right, especially those who are adamant that they are Trump supporters, get all bedwetting about Trump’s “horseface” tweet, shows me that they still don’t get it. Don’t get me wrong. I’m not a fan of such an approach in general myself. But in the current climate, after decades of GOPe/Cuck surrender, and after Trump’s success after success after success in fighting these leftists at their own game and seeing positive results in the real world with record low unemployment, 4%+ GDP growth, record low unemployment for minorities, etc. etc. etc., to make such an issue of this and get all weak kneed, I’m far more embarrassed for them than for Trump’s little (supposedly) pointless nose tweak.
Amen, Brother WTP. I’ve had more than enough. For the first time in our lives, my wife and I have joined the local political organization. We’re using our professional expertise to help them organize, to navigate local laws, to develop and deploy software that runs political organizations and organize donors. We’ve never been overtly political but for the first time since Reagan, we both sense that we have a President who not only knows how to win, but one who knows that winning is normal and good and desirable. And it is a very attractive quality.
L, I’m beginning to feel the same way. I’ve dabbled a little in doing research for a local organization but I got a bit of a creepy feeling about it. On the one hand, and since I will be having time for it shortly, I would like to make a similar contribution but on the other hand politicalized people, even people with whom I mostly agree, bug me. I do vaguely know a city councilman, mostly because I worked with his wife, with whom I’ve talked about local issues whenever I bump into him every couple years or so and he seems fairly normal. More so than his wife, not that she was all that bad and I did get along with her, I just disagreed with the degree of corporate kool-aid she consumed. I may reach out to him at some point.
DrD @ October 13, 2018 at 15:023: Ethnic “studies” have simply become faiths, newly invented pseudo-religions…
Very often true, but there are lots of genuine programs too. For instance, Armenian studies – defined as multi-discipline scholarship covering the Armenian language, Armenian literature, Armenian history, Armenian art, music, and dance, Armenian social patterns… all of which are related.
There are graduate-level programs in Armenian studies at major universities, but as far as I know, no grievance-mongering to speak of.