RUTHFULLY YOURS

https://www.wsj.com/articles/harvards-invidious-racial-boxes-supreme-court-unc-affirmative-action-discrimination-oconnor-hispanic-asian-label-admissions-11661196819?mod=opinion_featst_pos2

Remember the liberal outrage over Sen. Jesse Helms’s “Hands” ad in his 1990 Senate campaign against Harvey Gantt? Some credit the ad for Helms’s come-from-behind victory.

The 30-second spot featured the white hands of a frustrated job applicant crumpling a rejection letter. “You needed that job,” the narrator says, “and you were the best qualified. But they had to give it to a minority because of a racial quota. Is that really fair?”

The ad said Mr. Gantt, who is African-American, favored racial quotas. It was politics at its rawest, and Mr. Gantt accused Helms of trying “to divide people along the lines of race.” He denied he favored quotas.

Cut to 2022. The Minneapolis Public Schools have negotiated a contract with the teachers union that includes this language: “If excessing a teacher who is a member of a population underrepresented among licensed teachers in the site, the District shall excess the next least senior teacher, who is not a member of an underrepresented population.” In plain English, Deroy Murdock writes in the Daily Mail, it means “fire Whitey first.”

The Minneapolis contract is ugly stuff, but highly apposite as the Supreme Court prepares to hear lawsuits in October by Students for Fair Admissions accusing Harvard and the University of North Carolina of racial discrimination in admissions. In 1990, Helms’s ad was denounced as false and incendiary. These days the discrimination it highlighted is fast becoming standard practice, and not only in Minneapolis and at UNC or Harvard.

https://www.nationalreview.com/corner/anti-racism-and-common-sense/?utm_source=recirc-desktop&utm_medium=blog-post&utm_campaign=river&utm_content=top-bar-latest&utm_term=fourth

A  short time ago, the National Museum of African American History sported a poster that most normal adults would describe as moronic if not blatantly racist. The poster purported to list indicies of “Whiteness,” such as hard work, individualism, objectivity, nuclear family, respect for authority, and delayed gratification. These weren’t presented as universal qualities to strive for regardless of race. Rather, these were  tools of oppression,  contributors to unfairness, and characteristics of white supremacy.

CRT/anti-racism training tells little white kids that they’re privileged and/or oppressors by virtue of their race. Common sense counsels that such training will almost necessarily yield negative outcomes, some of them severe.

There was a time in the recent past when the vast majority of adults — regardless of race, educational attainment, or economic background — intuitively grasped that such instruction is galactically stupid, immoral, toxic, false, and destructive. A majority might still think so, even if they’re too cowed to say it.

But that doesn’t appear to include a majority of today’s so-called “elites,” many of whom support and promote such instruction. This portends ill for our society, which seems to be sprouting ruptures in social cohesion by the minute. Indeed, less than 20 years ago, before the germination of anti-racism  training, Gallup reported that 74 percent of white Americans and 68 percent of black Americans thought race relations were good. By July 2021, those numbers had cratered to 43 percent and 33 percent, respectively. Some of that decline may be attributable to discrete events such as the Michael Brown and George Floyd incidents and the media narratives surrounding them.  But the steady harangue of idiotic — and sometimes evil — CRT/anti-racism/DEI training surely contributes.

https://www.nationalreview.com/corner/arizonas-campus-disaster-can-be-stopped/

The woke rebellion against America’s founding principles continues to advance on all fronts. Nowhere is this truer than at America’s universities, the source and stronghold of the cultural revolution. The pushback against the illiberalism of our universities — their betrayal of their own first principles — has so far been a paltry thing. Supposedly, this is because higher education is shielded by academic freedom in a way that K–12 education is not. But that is not the reason we have failed. The truth is, opponents of the woke revolution have barely begun to do what they can to restore liberal education to America’s academy.

The greatest abdication of all is our failure to reform universities by way of trustees (also called regents or governors). University boards of regents can do almost anything. Yet most often they do nothing but rubber-stamp the decisions of administrators. That has to change right now, and it needs to change first in Arizona.

Boards of regents at public universities are responsible to the people of their state. Regents are appointed by governors, and sometimes by legislatures, too. In a few states, regents are selected by popular vote. Yet almost never do we see the appointment of university trustees become an election issue. Well, trustee selection needs to be an election issue right now in Arizona. Here’s why.

Arizona’s public universities have turned themselves into leaders in the national movement to indoctrinate students in the tenets of “diversity, equity, and inclusion” (DEI). The showpiece of this campaign is Northern Arizona University’s (NAU) move to require four — count ’em, four — diversity courses for graduation, all of which must be grounded in “critical theory,” the neo-Marxist system that produced critical race theory, critical legal theory, and still more entries in the grand campaign to neo-Marxitize pretty much everything.