These law-school faculty prove the Left has become so Puritanical and rigid that any positive reflection on the post-war period is immediately ‘racist.’ This isn’t history—it’s religion.
Thirty-three professors at the University of Pennsylvania’s Law School have lost their minds in response to their colleague Amy Wax, who published a piece stating something apparently atrocious: Culture matters for human flourishing.
In response to this simple claim, the university erupted in petitions, condemnation, and a spluttering of essays that accomplish very little apart from signaling leftward piety (here, here, here, and here). These precious articles represent the academy’s bad-faith efforts to traduce one of few un-silent conservatives on campus, symptomatic of the intellectual dilapidation in the modern academy.
Australian universities appear to have completely capitulated to the virulently anti-male propaganda of radical feminists. Feminists increasingly control what is taught in our faculty departments, even influencing faculty recruitment, where preference is given to women and minority groups. Faculties are presently lowering academic standards in hiring in order to be politically correct. This necessarily lowers the quality of education offered to students and the standards of scholarly publication. The point is not merely that white males have been subject to systematic discrimination in higher education, though that is clearly unacceptable. Free speech is also under serious threat at Australian universities. ‘Speech codes’ and ‘sensitivity training’ severely limit what can be said on campus. And fines are imposed on many campuses for causing ‘offence’.
Earlier this week in the Washington Post, Skidmore College professor Jennifer Delton wrote an opinion piece in which she challenged university administrators to confront the notion of free speech on campuses because the alt-right engages in “weaponizing the concept of free speech.” She argues that conservatives on campus have led to the anger-tinged tactics of the alt-right, while ignoring the fact that the left has its share of violent actors who take free speech to its extreme just as often.
Oddly enough, Delton spends much of her piece patting the left on the back for weeding out communists from its ranks in the mid-2oth century by denying them the right to speak out and assemble.
In the late 1960s in Pakistan, during the uprising against Field Marshal Ayub Khan’s military dictatorship, the Left that led us infused the concept of ‘internationalism’ and ‘universal human rights’.
The concept of ‘cultural appropriation’ or segregation based on colour was alien to my teenaged comrades.
The concept of tribal identity or communities based on skin colour was a ‘reactionary’ concept – a primitive idea that we thought had been given a death knell by the 1948 UN Declaration of Universal Human Rights.
All Ryerson social work grad Rebecca Katzman wanted was to do her third-year placement at one of two respected Toronto Jewish organizations with a track record of addressing social justice issues.
The 22-year-old, who will graduate with her Bachelor of Social Work degree on June 8, said her desire to be placed at either the Prosserman Jewish Community Centre (JCC) or the United Jewish Appeal (UJA) was “sparked” by a combination of actions at Ryerson — among them the anti-Semitism she experienced on campus.
However, she wasn’t prepared in the slightest for what happened with her third-year placement coordinator in the faculty of social work, Heather Bain.
Though Hollander does not claim that there is a single explanation for intellectuals’ attraction to dictatorships such as those of Stalin, Mao, and Castro (or Khomeini, in the case of Foucault), let alone to have found it, he nevertheless believes, in my view plausibly, that the longing for quasi-religious belief in an age when actual religion has largely been rejected is a significant part of the explanation. The totalitarian dictators were not the typical politicians of democratic systems who, whatever their rhetoric, seem mainly to tinker at the edges of human existence, are ready or forced to make grubby compromises with their opponents, reveal themselves to be morally and financially corrupt, are more impressive in opposition than in office, have no overarching ideas for the redemption of humanity, and make no claims to be panjandrums of all human knowledge and wisdom. Rather, those dictators were religious leaders who claimed the power to answer all human questions at once and to lead humanity into a land of perpetual milk, honey, and peace. They were omniscient, omnicompetent, loving, and kind, infinitely concerned for the welfare of their people; yet at the same time they were modest, humble, and supposedly embarrassed by the adulation they received. The intellectuals, then, sought in them not men but messiahs. More.
Reality check: They become illogical at the prospect of power.