Coalition of the Confused

Hosted by Jenifer (Zarknorph)

Confused malcontents swilling Chardonnay while awaiting the Zombie Apocalypse.

  • 971
    MEMBERS
  • 55454
    MESSAGES
  • 35
    POSTS TODAY

Discussions

Occupy the Syllabus   General Confusion

Started Aug-17 by Apollonius (Theocritos); 7031 views.
In reply toRe: msg 45

An outstanding analysis highlighting several recent events which the 'woke' have used to signal their virtue and increase their social (and financial) capital:

Workers vs. wokeness: recognizing campus social justice as a luxury good - Jonathan Kay, Quillette, 16 November 2020
https://quillette.com/2020/11/17/workers-vs-wokeness-recognizing-campus-social-justice-as-a-luxury-good/
Turns out, these people aren't virtuous.  As these stories demonstrate, they are actually quite despicable.
BerrySteph

From: BerrySteph

Nov-23

Apollonius (Theocritos) said:

https://quillette.com/2020/11/17/workers-vs-wokeness-recognizing-campus-social-justice-as-a-luxury-good/

Difficult to tell how much of this article/claim is genuine since Quillette is completely dominated by the Zionists. Many of them obviously quite nasty.

In reply toRe: msg 43

Farewell to affirmative action? - John S. Rosenberg, Minding the Campus, 2 December 2020
https://www.mindingthecampus.org/2020/12/02/farewell-to-affirmative-action/


These conflicting results—one by voters rejecting racial preference; one by courts affirming it—bring into sharp relief what is arguably the largest divide between popular and elite opinion on any current controversial issue. The California vote on Proposition 16 was but the latest in a series of referenda in liberal states rejecting “affirmative action”:

California (1996) approved Proposition 209 55%-45%.
Washington (1998) approved Initiative 200 58%-42%.
Michigan (2006) approved Proposal 2 58%-42%.
Washington (2019) defeated Initiative 1000, which would have repealed I-200’s ban on affirmative action, 50.5%-49.5%.


Each of these results was regarded as surprising, even shocking, because elites in each state—Democratic (and, in Washington, Republican) governors and senators, newspapers, universities, churches, Silicon Valley, and even professional sports teams (California, 2020)—strongly supported affirmative action and vastly outspent its opponents.

No one should have been surprised, since these votes reflected public opinion in surveys going back decades. For example, Frank Newport, then Gallup’s editor in chief, writing about the Harvard case in 2018, quoted a question Gallup asked four times between 2003 and 2016:

Which comes closer to your view about evaluating students for admission into a college or university: applicants should be admitted solely on the basis of merit, even if that results in few minority students being admitted (or) an applicant’s racial and ethnic background should be considered to help promote diversity on college campuses, even if that means admitting some minority students who otherwise would not be admitted?

“Each of the four times Gallup has asked this question over a 13-year time period,” Newport emphasized, “between 67% and 70% of Americans chose the ‘solely on merit’ option.” WGBH in Boston (2018), Marquette University law school (2019), and the Pew Research Center found virtually identical results: 74%, 77%, and 74% respectively in favor of disregarding race and relying on qualifications only, even when the consequences were explained as they had been with Gallup.

In reply toRe: msg 20

Why our universities have failed - Victor Davis Hanson, American Greatness, 29 November 2020
https://amgreatness.com/2020/11/29/why-our-universities-have-failed/

Something went wrong with the rapidly expanding university in the 1960s, and the new 21st century, high-tech, globalized campus has made the mess it inherited dangerous.

In reply toRe: msg 46

Race and social panic at Haverford: a case study in educational dysfunction - Jonathan Kay, Quillette, 1 December 2020
https://quillette.com/2020/12/01/race-and-social-panic-at-haverford-a-case-study-in-educational-dysfunction/

... Of all the Haverford community members I spoke with, the only one who asked to be quoted by name was recently graduated philosophy major Alex Gutierrez, who once summarized the mindset of campus activists in an essay about Jacques Lacan. “Modern activists have psyches that are built for the joy of transgression,” he observed. “They engage in activism so they can repeatedly experience that joy, a joy that is denied them in everyday life because everyday life is dominated by the ethics of pleasure… And so they need to invent fictional dominant orders so that they can defy them. This is why protesters would actually be extremely unhappy if oppression went away. They want white patriarchy to be as powerful as possible, so they can defy it.”

Gutierrez wrote these words before his alma mater fell into upheaval in late October. But his analysis seems apt. When students complained that Raymond had caused them “harm” with her October 28th email, they weren’t really speaking up as activists denouncing racism on campus (since there doesn’t seem to be much of it), but as consumers whose parents paid good money for them to experience the sensation of transgressive social-justice heroism. “Normally, the administrators are the perfect target for student transgression,” Gutierrez told me. “They take the abuse and they’re not supposed to push back. That’s part of their role. That’s what students expect.”

Many outstanding comments on Quillette's forum, including quite a few from parents of the kids who spend $54,000 per year (for tuition alone; these parents indicate that the total cost is closer to $75,000 p.a.) to pay for the kind of education Haverford provides.

In reply toRe: msg 50

Seattle:

Teaching hate - Christopher F. Rufo, City Journal, 18 December 2020
https://www.city-journal.org/racial-equity-programs-seattle-schools

The Seattle school district claims that the U.S. education system is guilty of “spirit murder” against black children.

San Diego:

Radicals in the classroom - Christopher F. Rufo, City Journal, 5 January 2021
https://www.city-journal.org/radicalism-in-san-diego-schools

San Diego’s school district tells white teachers that they are guilty of “spirit murdering” black children and should undergo “antiracist therapy.”

Jenifer (Zarknorph)
Host

they claim that “the United States was built off the stolen labor of kidnapped and enslaved Black people’s work, which created the profits that created our nation.”

Yup

katiek2

From: katiek2

Jan-7

Just like Australia was built off the stolen labor of enslaved aboriginals who lands were stolen and given to the convicts, murderers and thieves shipped to no-mans land as penalty for crime.  Your country was built on the backs of criminals and thieves, who treated and still treat the original inhabitants of the land as less than human.  I don't see any room for you to point your nose in the air and rant about injustice in my country.  

Jenifer (Zarknorph) said:

they claim that “the United States was built off the stolen labor of kidnapped and enslaved Black people’s work, which created the profits that created our nation.”

Yup

Nope.

Slavery was an inefficient system which had already been abandoned in advanced countries (Europe, China) by the middle ages.

America's Founders figured that slavery would die out in America before long.  It got a reprieve during the cotton boom 1830s-1850s, but that depended on acquiring new lands because growing cotton soon exhausts the soil.  Only a small elite class of Southerners benefited from it.  The North's economy was already well into the industrial age.

After slavery was abolished the North became even more prosperous.  Since the 1960s blacks in the U.S. have undoubtedly been a net drain on the economy.

katiek2 said...

Just like Australia was built off the stolen labor of enslaved aboriginals who lands were stolen and given to the convicts, murderers and thieves shipped to no-mans land as penalty for crime.  Your country was built on the backs of criminals and thieves, who treated and still treat the original inhabitants of the land as less than human.  I don't see any room for you to point your nose in the air and rant about injustice in my country.  

Wow.

Look, I'm not trying to say that Jennifer's ancestors were perfect, any more than I'd try to say that my own ancestors were perfect.

Hell, I wouldn't even claim that my wife's ancestors were perfect. (I can give you some details and examples, if you think you can handle it.)

But's what's behind your attack on Jennifer?

Is it intended to excuse something that is happening today?

Or are you saying that kidnapping is acceptable?

You do realize that in some cultures (my wife's culture, for example), kidnapping is simply unacceptable, for any reason, don't you?

My wife doesn't understand why so many in our own culture here in the USA consider kidnapping as acceptable today. 

TOP