Amherst Students Have Learned The Progressive-Approved Method to Win Political Debates: Intimidate And Censor The Opposition

Progressive student propose a new logo for Amherst College.

Progressive student propose a new logo for Amherst College.

Say hello to yesterday’s demands from the new totalitarians in the Amherst student body.

Amherst was once known as an elite place for the expansion of the intellect and critical thinking abilities. The student have just devalued that degree. (My high school friend Peter, who often comments here, lately to assail me for not supporting Donald Trump, is a proud graduate of the institution. He has my deep sympathies.) No critical thinking could produce this. I’ve bolded my favorite parts:

Amherst Uprising – What We Stand For

Submitted by Amherst Uprising – a collective of students on campus who came together as a result of the sit-In organized in Frost Library on 11/12/15.

Preamble:

We, Students of Amherst College, refuse to accept the negative social climate created towards our peers of color and other marginalized groups. We have begun this movement, Amherst Uprising, in an effort to change the status quo for a more just and inclusive environment within our campus. We demand that Amherst become a leader in the fight to promote a better social climate towards individuals who have been systematically oppressed. Student leaders acknowledge and support the demands previously stated and currently being presented. Furthermore, we demand the College acknowledge its ethical and moral responsibilities as an institution and community of our world. Amherst College should not be complicit in oppressive organizations and systems, no less.

We as a compassionate student body have gathered to address the legacy of oppression on campus. If these goals are not initiated within the next 24 to 48 hours, and completed by November 18th, we will organize and respond in a radical manner, through civil disobedience. If there is a continued failure to meet our demands, it will result in an escalation of our response.

1. President Martin must issue a statement of apology to students, alumni and former students, faculty, administration and staff who have been victims of several injustices including but not limited to our institutional legacy of white supremacy, colonialism, anti-black racism, anti-Latinx racism, anti-Native American racism, anti-Native/ indigenous racism, anti-Asian racism, anti-Middle Eastern racism, heterosexism, cis-sexism, xenophobia, anti-Semitism, ableism, mental health stigma, and classism. Also include that marginalized communities and their allies should feel safe at Amherst College.

2. We demand Cullen Murphy ‘74, Chairman of the Board of Trustees, to issue a statement of apology to students, alumni and former students, faculty, administration, and staff who have been victims of several injustices including but not limited to our institutional legacy of white supremacy, colonialism, anti-black racism, anti-Latinx racism, anti-Native American racism, anti-Native/ indigenous racism, anti-Asian racism, anti-Middle Eastern racism, heterosexism, cis-sexism, xenophobia, anti-Semitism, ableism, mental health stigma, and classism

3. Amherst College Police Department must issue a statement of protection and defense from any form of violence, threats, or retaliation of any kind resulting from this movement.

4. President Martin must issue a statement of apology to faculty, staff and administrators of color as well as their allies, neither of whom were provided a safe space for them to thrive while at Amherst College.

5. President Martin must issue a statement to the Amherst College community at large that states we do not tolerate the actions of student(s) who posted the “All Lives Matter” posters, and the “Free Speech” posters that stated that “in memoriam of the true victim of the Missouri Protests: Free Speech.” Also let the student body know that it was racially insensitive to the students of color on our college campus and beyond who are victim to racial harassment and death threats; alert them that Student Affairs may require them to go through the Disciplinary Process if a formal complaint is filed, and that they will be required to attend extensive training for racial and cultural competency.

6. President Martin must issue a statement of support for the revision of the Honor Code to reflect a zero-tolerance policy for racial insensitivity and hate speech.

7. President Martin must release a statement by Friday, November 13th, 2015 by 5:00pm that condemns the inherent racist nature of the unofficial mascot, the Lord Jeff, and circulate it to the student body, faculty, alumni, and Board of Trustees. This will be followed up by the encouraged removal of all imagery including but not limited to apparel, memorabilia, facilities, etc. for Amherst College and all of its affiliates via a phasing out process within the next year.

8. Dean Epstein must ask faculty to excuse all students from all 5 College classes, work shifts, and assignments from November 12th, 2015 to November 13th, 2015 given their organization of and attendance at the Sit-In.

9. Do not threaten the jobs of the faculty, staff, or administrators that support our list of demands. Such threats will result in an escalation of our response.

10. The Office of Alumni and Parent Programs must send former students an email of current events on campus including a statement that Amherst College does not condone any racist or culturally insensitive reactions to this information.

11. Dean Epstein must encourage faculty to provide a space for students to discuss this week’s events during class time.

Please acknowledge that all of these statements of apology are not the end all – that they are only a part of short-term healing and by no means achieve all of the goals we will set forth. We are in the process of finalizing long-term goals which we hope to collaborate on regularly with all members of the community.

By no means does this start/stop with the administration.

[Signed] Students from over 40 organizations.

Observations:

I. If Amherst capitulates to this masterpiece of un-American, arrogant student activist grandstanding, Amherst might as well shut down for good. It will no longer be a respectable institution or one any parent could entrust with the mind of a young adult.

2. Apologies elicited by threats are not apologies, but coerced statements.If President Martin capitulates to this demand, he ought to be fired immediately. It will demonstrate cowardice, fecklessness, and his lack of responsibility.

3. The “legacy of oppression” jargon is boilerplate cant, stated in generic terms to avoid rebuttal and to maintain the illusion of grandeur. It deserves neither respect nor response.

4. The demand for a statement promising that there will be no negative consequences for an effort to install a repressive totalitarian regime in what was supposed to be a bastion of liberal education must not only be condemned and defied, but specifically contradicted.  The effort to constrain speech and free thought at Amherst is an existential attack. A competent administration must give the “movement” a deadline to withdraw its demands, or to see the charter of every single signatory group revoked.

5. “President Martin must issue a statement to the Amherst College community at large that states we do not tolerate the actions of student(s) who posted the “All Lives Matter” posters, and the “Free Speech” posters that stated that “in memoriam of the true victim of the Missouri Protests: Free Speech” is a direct assault on academic freedom, free speech, core American values and the right to dissent. While dissent does not create a hostile educational environment, such a demand, combined with an effort to use the power of the mob to demonize the mere expression of opinions not supportive of the “movement’s” totalitarian beliefs, should be unequivocally condemned and rejected by university authorities.

6. The demands should also be aggressively defied by the Amherst students who have managed to retain their ethical compasses and an understanding of civic responsibilities at an institution that has obviously failed miserably to teach them. There should be ten times the number of “All Lives Matter” and  “Free Speech” posters on walls around campus tomorrow. Any student who does not actively defend free speech and open discourse against these bullies is aiding and abetting an attempted assassination of democracy.

7. “President Martin must issue a statement of support for the revision of the Honor Code to reflect a zero-tolerance policy for racial insensitivity and hate speech” constitutes an endorsement of indoctrination and the suppression for free speech.

8. Any faculty member who supports Amherst Uprising is by definition unfit to teach at an institution of higher learning, and cannot be trusted to do so. Far from being inoculated from the consequences of joining forces with enemies of free thought and debate, such a faculty member should be, must be, punished.

9. Along with the non-totalitarian students, alumni must rally to preserve democratic values at Amherst by immediately announcing a cessation of financial assistance unless the school’s leadership reassures them that Amherst has the will and the determination to stand for traditional educational values, and not embrace the suppression of speech and the punishment of dissent.

10. If and how Amherst’s administrators will be able to respond effectively to this power play is much in doubt. Obviously, the Amherst culture, like so many other campuses, nurtured the distorted view of rights, politics and history that is producing this disgraceful protest and others. The lack of ideological diversity in U.S. universities has finally sparked a full-blown crisis of values, as many critics predicted it would. Amherst, Yale, the University of Missouri and the rest deserve to inherit the wind here, but our culture does not.

It is tempting to vent our anger like conservative blogger Jonah Goldberg, who wrote in part,

…[T]he line I have in mind is pretty short: “You stupid f**k, look at you now.”

I’ve been saying words to that effect all week, watching higher ed go into full meltdown. Because this “crisis” is 100 percent liberalism’s fault. Sure, sure, you can divvy up the slices of blame in different ways, but those guys tailgating in the parking lot drinking beers and eating bratwurst? Those are the conservatives and libertarians enjoying a day off, because they don’t have to wait in line for even a morsel of blame.

I almost feel sorry for those decent, sincere career liberals standing there in the quad as the little Maoists scream in their faces and strip off the suede elbow patches on their tweedy jackets like a lieutenant being busted down to a private…With the Left given total control of these oases of tolerance and citadels of progressivism, what do we get? We get pampered and coddled students screaming that these institutions are hotbeds of racism, homophobia, sexism, and the rest of the 31 Flavors of Oppression. 

…And it is fitting. It is just. It’s almost frick’n Biblical in its justness. You see, there is precious little bigotry and prejudice on college campuses. But the bulk of what does exist is aimed almost entirely at the guys and gals chilling at the tailgate party. Pro-life Christians, Israel-supporting Jews, libertarian professors, conservative scholars, climate-change skeptics, traditionalists of every stripe including classical liberals, and, of course, people who can take a joke: These make up the bulk of the victims of campus bigotry and prejudice. I can’t tell you how many professors I’ve met who have to keep their conservatism secret, at least until tenure, if not forever. I’ve never met or heard of a faculty member who had to keep her Marxism on the down-low….

Funny stuff, but conservatives should not be gloating. They were at least equally responsible for losing influence in academia and proving impotent at recovering it. Now a potent strain of totalitarianism is emerging from the next generation, which has been taught to extol the methods and the values of Marxists and fascists.Conservatives have an ethical obligation to help liberals try to fix the problem doctrinaire progressive indoctrination created, because if they can’t, we are all in trouble.

__________________________

Sources: National Review, Washington Post, Amherst Soul

 

 

56 thoughts on “Amherst Students Have Learned The Progressive-Approved Method to Win Political Debates: Intimidate And Censor The Opposition

  1. Unbelievable! Time to reinstate the draft. These pipsqueaks need to quit parroting what their progressive professors have been indoctrinating them with and do something useful with their lives.

  2. … Conservatives have an ethical obligation to help liberals try to fix the problem doctrinaire progressive indoctrination created, because if they can’t, we are all in trouble.

    You do not distinguish between an ethical obligation and a prudential obligation, which you should, both ethically and prudentially. That there was the latter. Only those responsible for it or otherwise with a duty of care in relation to it – here, those who created the problem – have an ethical obligation to help solve it.

  3. I question the culpability of conservatives in this. For decades, conservatives who warned of the rising tide of marxism, progressivism, and insanity in public education were mocked and ridiculed. Just as they were with the “conspiracy theories” that the media was sprinting in the same direction. School boards and textbook writers who attempt to wind back the ratcheting effect are vilified and pulled from their positions. I agree that everyone needs to work together to fix this, and even that it is lamentable that they haven’t had more success at preventing it from happening. Gloating isn’t going to help anything. But the solution lies with the liberals, both to stop encouraging this nonsense, and to actively join conservatives in opposing it.

    • As I explore ultra-conservative positions and those that look at ultra-conservatism from a position even farther to the right (!), I came across the John Birch Society (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Birch_Society). To define a conservative position, nowadays, seems to me to be a very difficult thing and one requiring a strength of mind that is hard to come by. If one is not going to come under the influence of the Marxist view of things, that underlies all radical liberal positions, one will have to actively and decisively oppose each element in that platform.

      And that will mean (or so it seems to me) revising the view of 150+ years of American history and very much that ‘we’ consider to be our legacy, and our ‘greatness as a nation’. To respect hierarchy means to recognise power-relations, to respect and value differences in status, which also means to value differences of elevation, and differences of every sort, including cultural, racial, gender: every single sacred cow of radical liberalism which, now, no one can really say anything about because they will be shut down by a ‘mob’ of activist radical liberals and too the censoring impulse arises out of their own selves and shuts themselves down. Therefor, to discover and articulate a conservative platform is a reverse-radical act and requires a very different relationship to the questions of freedom, equality, and all else.

      This will mean, it seems to me, turning against tenets of American religiosity: America’s civil religious tenets which inform people culturally but yet remain unconscious. These students and their ‘arrogance’ so-called did not arise out of nowhere. They are of-a-kind with the radical liberals whose radical religiosity infected America at an early date. While I do not fully understand this legacy and people like the Grimke sisters (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Grimké_sisters), I suspect that these prudish, insolent faces are similar faces to what we see in these radical liberal freaks here described. And what can you do about them? You will be able to do NOTHING (to take a polemic position) because so many, generally, subscribe to similar perspectives simply because to define an oppositional position is morally and ethically difficult. Myself, I decide to come out with my own position: anti-egalitarian, anti-homosexual, pro-white also exploring segregationist perspectives. Yep, that’s what I think.

      • The idea that censorship and bigotry exists only on the Left is misguided. Also, the idea that people are not subject to real discrimination based upon their ethnicity and religious beliefs is also a myth. The California Supreme Court has gone so far as to rule that a judge may use his personal ethnic and religious bias to exclude Jews and others who refuse Jesus Christ from participating in court hearings and that judges may view evidence provided by Jews less favorably than evidence provided by Christians.

        http://bit.ly/1DTh6XG September 18, 2015 California Supreme Court Protects Christians from Jews and Other Infidels

        Bigotry and the willingness to use the power of the government to discriminate against other groups is not unique to the Far Left, but as we see, the California Supreme Court officially supports judicial discrimination against Jews and others who refuse Jesus Christ.

    • “But the solution lies with the liberals, both to stop encouraging this nonsense, and to actively join conservatives in opposing it.”

      Sadly, Tragically, that just isn’t going to happen. Having lived through this once before (I’m 68),and having seen the progressive and incremental results as those involved came to maturity and became our country’s leaders……………………I just can’t trust that we can get though this again. I fear our country is doomed.

  4. I’m a bit heartened that posters saying all lived matter and recognizing that free speech is in danger. What I worry is that too many snowflakes have influence and can’t handle stress and the hard knocks of real life that screaming for a mommy figure shouldn’t cure.

    • That’s an interesting take.

      Assuming it’s genuine, I fear Hamilton College will be next on the list. Ironically, Hamilton has always wanted to be Williams or Amherst when it grows up.

      By the way, Hamilton provides a good example of how conservatives have made an effort to stop the ivory tower train from racing down hill and been effectively shut out. Some faculty members reached an agreement with the administration to establish the Alexander Hamilton Institute on the campus. The AHI would focus on traditional western topics. When the faculty heard about the deal, they threw a fit and the administration reneged on the deal. The Alexander Hamilton Institute now exists off-campus. The college missed an opportunity to avail itself of some balance.

  5. “…And it is fitting. It is just. It’s almost frick’n Biblical in its justness.”
    To paraphrase Wilde, a man must be without a heart and soul who can read of the plight of liberal academics, and not burst out laughing.
    As aaronpaschall rightly points out, gloating isn’t helpful, so I will stop, eventually. I intend to help by wearing an idiotic FreeSpeechAwareness wristband, and tweeting the hashtag #Bringbackourfreespeech, I will also take a selfie of myself holding a hand-lettered sign, and post it to Facebook. Surely, no one can do more than that.
    I want every leftist totalitarian to have their own, personal Robespierre moment, when they realize that the Fascists who decide it’s time for them to get a turn on the guillotine, are the ones that they themselves built. Not evangelicals, or the NRA, or the pro-lifers, or strict Constitutionalists, or other right-wing bogeymen. Nope. It’s the little social justice warriors, imbued with a deep sense of purpose, shallow understanding and extra-thin skin, who seek the destruction of the kindly old Stalinist apologists poking about the Sociology Department, reflecting on the ’60’s and the wonders of tenure. Their crime? They simply haven’t kept up with the latest in leftism!
    It’s all too delicious.

  6. I almost want to give them credit for demand #5; without it, some people might have been fooled into thinking that their definition of “racially insensitive and hate speech” extended primarily to the assholes who shout “nigger” at random passersby.

    • Hah. I think the current hip response is “Good luck with that,” which replaced “not so much.”

      It should be interesting watching the administrators twisting themselves into verbal knots trying to appease these little monsters.

    • Better reply:

      Dear Kids:
      I address you this way because your list of demands reveals you as exactly that. In that the study of human development is a discipline offered here at Amherst (and something of a necessary focus for a college administrator) I’d peg the tenor of your “demands” as consistent with those of most three-year-olds.

      As to the demands themselves: the answer is no, and here’s why.

      1) Amherst College doesn’t hold you responsible for anything you did before you got here, It’s ludicrous to expect the College to accept responsibility for anything that happened before the rest of us did.

      2) Threats are the tool of a thug. We pride ourselves on tolerance at Amherst, but one thing we do NOT tolerate is thugs. Do ANYTHING that even gives the appearance of acting on your threats, and you’ll be expelled. By the way, if you’re expelled, we’ll keep your parent’s money. I’m cc’ing them on this, just so they know about that last part.

      3) For the love of God, learn how to write. We have some excellent writing courses here at Amherst. Pull any of this shit, and you’ll be unable to find that out for yourselves.

      4) There are about 1800 of you. The world’s population is now estimated at approximate seven billion. Ask yourselves how many of those people would far rather be at Amherst than where they are right now.

      5) Tangential to that last point, your presence at Amherst means that collectively, you represent roughly 0.0000026 percent of the world’s population. Just a suggestion, but you might consider not whining about privilege, being grateful for what you have, and starting to figure out how to use what you learn here for the betterment of all.

      Do I make myself clear? Now get back to your studies and stop making fools of yourselves.

  7. Somehow I have a gut feeling that this is all just a symptom deriving from the big education bubble. In which case, appropriate shadenfreude added, I’m quite content to watch higher education imploding. It can only mean that my kids will get an affordable education when the time comes.

      • Though I seek to give 18-25 year olds more benefit of the doubt on maturity than I ought to (based wholly on historic ability for people to mature faster or be compelled to mature faster). Lately it would seem we subsidize immaturity. That being the case, I would be amenable to arguments raising the voting age from 18 to 25 or 30 even.

  8. I’ve been told the Vietnam War Era at Notre Dame lasted three minutes. Students filled the main quadrangle for a protest. Father Edmund Joyce, administrative right hand of Father Theodore “Hess” Hesburgh, the Kennedy family’s personal priest, took the microphone and announced that “Anyone still on this quad in three minutes will be expelled.” The quad cleared and no one needed to be expelled. Kind of funny.

    By the way, I’m pretty sure the Vietnam War was originally more about a Catholic U.S. President trying to save a very Catholic country from Communism than people think.

  9. The recent events at Amherst, and at other “institutions of higher learning” seem ominously reminiscent of the Chinese Cultural Revolution (1966 -1976) where Mao and a few of his supporters intentionally put into motion a process of radicalizing hundreds of thousands of children and students to become vicious and mindless monsters (the Red Guards) who turned on almost every symbol of authority. The process was easy to start but not so easy to stop and was not stopped until horrific damage was done to the Chinese nation and its people.

  10. The idea is to put any opposition on the defensive either through intimidations or exclusion via administrative policies. Conservatives have done little but ramble on about spoiled children. What would John Silber have done?

    • As a student during Silber’s tenure, I can tell you exactly what he would have done, because I saw him do it.

      After he’d been goaded enough, he called an open campus meeting. He called it for one of the larger, though not the largest, lecture halls at B.U., correctly predicting that the vast majority of students didn’t give a damn about the kerfuffle (whatever it was). There were plenty of seats left over.

      He gave about ten minutes of opening remarks that basically outlined why the students’ position was bunk. took about three questions (skewering the questioners in his responses), looked at his watch and said “Thanks for coming. I have another engagement.” Then he left a hall full of outrage.

      And not a damned thing changed..

  11. My Dad was President at one of the SUNY campuses during the Vietnam era. During one particularly stressful time–in the aftermath of Kent State, perhaps–one of the college’s VPs showed up on our doorstep, very agitated, with a list of student demands he’d been presented.

    Dad thanked him, folded the list, and put it in his pocket.
    “Aren’t you going to read them?”
    “No. I don’t deal with demands. They’re welcome to come talk.”

    • Nice to hear about adults in higher ed administration. Seems like a long time ago now. I’m thinking of printing up and selling bumper stickers that have a pipe on them that say “What would Ward Cleaver recommend we do?”

      At Hamilton during the Kent State thing, a bunch of students wanted finals cancelled. The administration refused. Life went on.

  12. Has anyone else noticed the prevalence of language like this?

    “3. Amherst College Police Department must issue a statement of protection and defense from any form of violence, threats, or retaliation of any kind resulting from this movement.”

    “9. Do not threaten the jobs of the faculty, staff, or administrators that support our list of demands. Such threats will result in an escalation of our response.”

    These are issues all on their own. Not only do the students want to be disruptive, they want to be so free from consequence. And this entitlement mentality is absolutely a product of the current mindset of liberals:

    A: “Well, so long as it doesn’t hurt anyone, there shouldn’t be consequences for doing it.”

    B: “What about those people who are hurt.”

    A: “They don’t count, you white racist cis-shitlord.”

    And they get away with it. Time and time again…. IF the answer to violence is to agree not to have consequences for the violence, how long until the institution of protest violence kills someone, and these snowflakes DEMAND not to be prosecuted for murder?

  13. The Amherst Miniskule student geniuses have a few bones of a business model. But right now, they are too busy re-making history to be bothered with paying any attention to such. (Besides, being vision-privileged is so right-wing.)

    For their evangelism to be effective in the long term, they must close the athletics department and open instead a politico-tourism department. So far, they have neglected to charge admission to their chief patrons, the Minitrue propagandist class. That clientele must be broadened and subsidized as needed. The Union of Sanctuary Cities could mandate that all city employees attend one of Amherst’s tours. annually or semi-annually (since the march of progressivism requires frequent refresher training). Resources, such as (for example) Heterosexual Male White Christian (HMWC) rickshaw drivers, must be commissioned to cart around fertile, open minds with the concomitant minimization of CO2 emissions. (The rickshaw drivers must, of course, perform their community service while holding their breath.)

    I remain hopeful that after all the students’ hunger strikes and boycotts and sit-ins (now called occupying) and lists-of-demands-presenting and justice enforcement, at least a few of the children will grow up a bit and create at least $15-an-hour jobs for themselves, educating (or, re-educating) hapless prisoners of privilege on the irresistible liberty and equality exemplified in the progressively safer spaces of Amherst.

  14. Sixties parents would have taken their expelled children to the woodshed.
    I doubt many parents would do that today. Those who would probably don’t have children involved in the protests.

    I would love to have statistics on the majors of the students participating in these protests. I’m guessing the hard sciences are not well represented.

  15. I’m still giggling about demand #7, about the mascot. Here we have a vainglorious manifesto about how these ignorant and muddled children are going to eradicate racism, and in the middle they include offing the football team’s big headed mascot. It’s such a great self-inflicted deflation. I remember similar demands from the SDS when my college was shut down by a protest..the laundry list screams, “OK, now that we have the upper hand, what else do we want? Come on, everyone, THINK.”

    I’m surprised there isn’t a demand in there that reads, “And that tuna casserole the cafeteria serves is terrible! We demand that the Board apologize, and that it be replaced by the following delicious vegan recipe. Oh! What’s the deal with that big modern art thing hanging in the lobby of the student union. Who picked that out? We demand an apology and that it be replaced with a big photo of Barack Obama, Che Guevara, or Elmo.”

    • Honestly, I thought the mascot might have been the only legitimate point on this list.

      General Jeffery Amherst was instrumental in the smallpox infested blanket genocide of North American Indians. Having a mascot commemorating him in North America is like having a Hitler mascot in Jerusalem.

      But then again… if you’re going to take offense at the mascot for that reason, you might have first thought to the name of your college.

      • Oh, it is a legitimate objection—to make 70 years ago. If the Amherst connection troubles you, then you better go to school elsewhere. I applied there and knew nothing about the name. But the town and the school is named after the guy—-and they are picking on THE MASCOT? With that big head? Make up your mind: is a mascot an insult to the subject (Native American mascots), or an honor? Or is it just whatever you choose to bitch about?

        • Well, I doubt that many of the people making the argument now were around 70 years ago. I don’t like that argument, it suggests that once something perniciously awful sticks around long enough, we can’t do anything about it, even if we just learn about it. That’s… kind of sick.

          But as to the mascot over everything else: Absolutely. There isn’t a reason to attack the mascot without attacking the school’s name and a whole laundry list of other things first.

          • I mean.. by that logic, we should give Cosby a pass. I mean, if his rapes bothered us, we should have done something 40 years ago, and we can not watch his stuff now, right?

      • Tuna? Wasn’t it swordfish? In the 1970s? And didn’t the mercury amount go back down to safe level two or three decades ago? Tuna?

        Or is this a tease? A chuckle?

    • Add to that the “9th Amendment,” No. 11, of their stupid screed: “Please acknowledge that all of these statements of apology are not the end all – that they are only a part of short-term healing and by no means achieve all of the goals we will set forth. We are in the process of finalizing long-term goals which we hope to collaborate on regularly with all members of the community.” We reserve the right to demand more bizarre crap when we think of it.

      I’ve been noticing statements like this from a lot of different Left groups. The arrogance of it. “Even if hell freezes over, or pigs fly, or mutant flying pigs use their super-powers to go to hell and freeze it over with ice rays, and you meet our demands, we’re still going to keep extorting you.”

  16. I am curious…these (Amherst, Yale, Missouri, etc.) are all institutions of purportedly higher learning. Their goal, supposedly, is to prepare the students to go out into the world equipped to make a living in their chosen field(s). Unfortunately, they seem really dedicated to (Insert Name Here) Studies which are the equivalent of Underwater Basket-weaving and have no career ladder attached. Along with these courses of study, individual courses rewriting history, indoctrination disguised as education and the Philosophy and Implementation of Tyranny are being offered. They still retain, however, some status and their graduates are apparently still in demand in some circles. My question…how much in demand? With the cost of the major Universities sky-rocketing and scholarships (other than football) becoming increasingly more difficult to get, how are they competing with on-line schools like Phoenix, DeVry’s and others whose sole aim is to provide graduates with a viable career alternative? I wonder if any such studies have been done, and has anybody actually looked at the bottom line…who’s working and who isn’t?

    • These are children. We know that the brains of adolescents are not fully formed. By their very nature, adolescents test the limits and if they did not test the limits, we would have a pretty tame upcoming generation.

      Does this mean that they are correct in their demands? To an extent Yes and to an extent No. Those who have become intoxicated by power have been allowed to go too far. That, however, is the fault of the older generation.

      Is there guilt on the part of the older generation? There should be. It was the older generation who simultaneously gave society the victimization philosophy of Affirmative Action and rise of the religiosity of the Silent Majority.

      Which institution actively and persistently has defended the American ideal that we judge people by the content of their character and not by the color of their skin (or their ethnicity)? There is none.

  17. I can not believe that just a decade and a half after I finished college, that there are so many whiny manginas attending college, and even bigger manginas administering them.

    Manginas lost their entitlement to respect.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.