Posted on 04/13/2016 6:29:52 AM PDT by Academiadotorg
In the latest issue of The Chronicle Review, UCLA historian Russell Jacoby offers some insights into the campus diversity craze that are actually refreshing.
Jacoby asks, "Should all quarters of society demographically reflect all other quarters?"
"Why? Should there be more pacifists in the military? Fewer Indian motel owners?"
As well, Jacoby notes: "Inasmuch as academic leftists champion diversity, a certain irony must be signaled. For decades they have poured scorn on 'essentialism' and posited that all identity is 'constructed.' After years of postmodern guff, the arguers reverse themselves: You are your group identity, essentialism, pure and simple."
Of course, he does not let conservatives off the hook, although even here, he does make an interesting point. "Conservatives say they are underrepresented among college professors," he writes. "Oddly they, or the researchers who support their argument, do not target student populations for disparities, where the issue first arose."
Of course, he dismisses attempts to track the imbalance on the faculty of those to the right of center: "What's next? A study showing English professors prefer shopping at Whole Foods to Walmart?"
Nevertheless, he notes an interesting trend documented in a study last year: The "ratio of Democrats to Republicans or Liberals to Conservatives" went from 1:1 in the 1920s to 2:1 in the 1950s to 14:1 in 2010.
However, that was never the purpose of diversity. Diversity is just a political ploy to water down the political power of white Americans.
Because it’s not the diverse actions or thoughts, it’s about look.
What my father warned me about in the 80’s has come to fruition and then some.
NASA should be chock full of Mohammedans and the head of NASA should be an Islamic sand Moslem
Bingo
A white liberal, a black liberal, an American Indian liberal, an Asian liberal, a Hispanic liberal, a homosexual liberal, and a conservative would be considered a diverse group by a liberal.
Yep. To them a library full of nothing but Das Kapital is diverse as long as the covers are all different colors.
This is neither natural nor accidental. What it argues is a movement from political agnosticism to deliberate skewing on the part of hiring committees. The author dismisses the feasibility of any Affirmative Action-like program and I'm inclined to agree, but for another reason: the people who skewed this absolutely knew what they were doing and may not be trusted to remediate. This, however:
Oddly they, or the researchers who support their argument, do not target student populations for disparities, where the issue first arose.
This is completely disingenuous. Student populations are composed of young people who are there to learn principles and practices, and we all are reminded frequently how foolish they look when they attempt to espouse them before they have understood how incomplete their understanding really is. One does not select such a population, one teaches it. I should not like to undergo an appendectomy at the hands of a pre-med student, and I don't take my epistemology from a brat who can barely spell it.
It is a problem whose solution may be particularly brutal, very possibly stemming from a forcible "forgiveness" of student loans, meaning a shifting of their repayment from student to taxpayer, and what is likely to happen to the next generation of students immediately thereafter. That may be a trigger event that will force a redesign, or at least a reconsideration, of the entire system, and quite a few staffs and majors are not going to make the cut. That's very rough medicine, and the patient is notably uncooperative.
There’s the kind that comes from a place where all manner of peoples want to go to, and then there’s the kind that comes from ginning it up for, as you say, the appearance.
On the other hand, it's quite easy to quantify how racial/ethnic diversity make America and Europe worse. Just look at poverty and crime stats.
See my reply #8. The cult of “Diversity” is all about undermining traditional societies, communities; all about undermining the distinct heritages of the earth. It is a vicious war on all that elevates and enhances a people’s culture.
“Diversity” and “Multiculturalism” and “Feminism” and “Progressivism” and “homosexual/trans/BS” are ALL pure Marxist techniques used to embed ‘hate” for others (easily done in very small children). It is all about embedding the right emotions into very young children-—who are immature/irrational NATURALLY and can only embed irrational (warped) emotions divorced from Reality.
That is why it is essential for moral, loving Natural parents to raise their OWN children so they can grasp Reality (Truth/God). They are the real (natural) “teachers” and when they give up their very young children to strangers to form/shape their emotions and desires can never be “natural” (as God designed).
Natural Law Theory undergirds EVERYTHING-—destroy the Natural Family and you WARP everything (Reality for the Marxist “utopia”). Common Core is created to create emotional cripples, incoherent morons-—compartmentalized to be little worker bees for the State/Corporations, totally incapable of bonding/trusting/loving. They can not EMBED truth (Reality/Natural Laws which created the Age of Reason/US Constitution)—and correct human (real-life) emotions. The TV/Movies create artificial emotions-—destroys the ability to control OWN emotions-—Outside forces are controlling “how to “think”” (feel only) and it destroys REAL LIFE emotions-—warps how they see others/real world.
Think about taking kittens too early from the mother; they will be WARPED (unnatural instincts/emotions) for LIFE. The Socialist John Dewey knew this—they could literally control emotions in children by embedding irrational emotions/ideas in early childhood (all emotions at that age are irrational) so they will NEVER be capable of Rational maturity when ideas are removed from Truth/Natural Law. “Maturity” is only Rational and ONLY comes from Real Life experiences and Wisdom of the Ages (Classical Ed) and the ability to control emotions from WITHIN (virtue)-—not with threats from the outside— the State. Our children are being programmed to have no inner control—no virtue formation which only comes from self-reliance (thinking for oneself—not being controlled every minute) and Individualism (uniqueness/special which ONLY parents/family give to children in real-life interactions (practicing virtue) where they can experience “normal” (God’s Design).
Dewey made mandatory “socializing” “skools” for really young children (with the plastic minds) who should NEVER be in a “socialized” system for “learning” (group think is only to train emotions/feeling for the warped). Classical Education (Socratic Method/Aristotelian Logic gives the child the TOOLS to think for themselves (true education). That ability was STRIPPED with Dewey’s takeover and with Jimmy Carter—spread to the entire country to literally destroy Western Civilization (Christianity) in our children -—to create chaos/division/disunity-—for the collapse into the Orwellian NWO.
Children should have tutors/family until age 8 at least—like for hundreds of years in America which creates Indivdiualism/Thinking for Self/self-reliance (virtue)-—no programmed “bots” (non-thinkers).
The establishments of both parties are committed to "diversity" and a transnational order, they just disagree on the details of how to make it happen. This is why support for liberal immigration policy and amnesty is a litmus test for being a respectable, mainstream member of either party.
I think that the main difference between "liberal" and "conservative" diversity advocates is that liberals are willing to use the ethno-nationalism of Third World immigrants and their descendants as a means of opposing nationalistic and patriotic movements in the US and Europe, while "conservative" diversity advocates claim to oppose all nationalisms. This isn't set in stone, though, witness how the Bushes and other GOP establishment luminaries pander to La Raza.
no, they would tell the conservative to go away for lacking “collegiality.” that has actually happened.
bump
Wait, what happened after they went into the bar?
They all stuck the conservative with the bill.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.