RUTHFULLY YOURS

https://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/

Harvard University’s maladroit defenestration of Ronald Sullivan and his wife, Stephanie Robinson, struck a blow against liberal education. Many of Harvard’s own left-liberal luminaries are up in arms. But the university’s disgraceful act can come as no surprise to anyone who has been paying attention for the last few decades to higher education in general and to Harvard in particular.

On May 11, the Harvard Crimson reported that Dean of the College Rakesh Khurana informed Winthrop House residents by email that morning that he would not renew Sullivan and Robinson — both of whom teach at Harvard Law School and will keep their positions there — as Winthrop faculty deans. The first African Americans to head one of Harvard’s 12 residential houses, Sullivan and Robinson had served in that position for 10 years.

The trouble began in January when Professor Sullivan — faculty director of the Harvard Criminal Justice Institute and the Harvard Trial Advocacy Workshop — announced that he would serve on the legal team representing film producer Harvey Weinstein, who faces criminal charges of rape and other sexual misconduct (Sullivan left Weinstein’s defense team on Friday, May 10, the day before Dean Khurana made public his decision). Students protested angrily. They claimed that Sullivan caused them to feel unsafe by taking Weinstein as a client. They alleged that Sullivan’s decision was “trauma-inducing.” They demanded his ouster on the grounds that he had rendered himself unfit to lead Winthrop House.

https://thefederalist.com/2019/05/24/college-professors-reason-students-crazy-people/

Bring together immature adolescents with leftist professors and the inevitable outcome is the current crisis in higher education. The conditions on most American campuses should not surprise any people who are aware of the nature of adolescence. The educators running them, however, seem particularly ignorant. They condone incivility, tolerate infantile behavior, and encourage such silliness as “redefining gender.” They cave under threats and apologetically submit to the most outrageous student demands.

Contemporary educators are curiously insensitive to one aspect of adolescent development in particular. When immature youths with fragile impulse control get no help (e.g., firm limit-setting) from adults in authority, their control over their sexuality and aggression worsens, and they act on their impulses more often.

This behavior reflects not only diminished self-control, but also an attempt to locate desired boundaries. However, neither meeting the developmental needs of students nor providing them a liberal education are primary concerns of many American academics. More important to them is inculcating students with the leftist political and cultural ideology they champion.

https://www.americanthinker.com/articles/2019/05/what_are_the_children_learning.html

Because of the manipulative leftist ideology rampant in schools, black children are not permitted any pride in their own achievements. Instead they are pumped full of an inordinate opinion of themselves merely because of the color of their skin.  It is an abuse of the potential that they actually possess, and it is leading to frustration, failure, and anger at many levels.

Examples abound.  In Saratoga Springs, New York students are asked to tabulate their “privilege” and as a result their race, gender, religion, appearance, and disability status are used as a means “to enlighten students on their relative status in society.”  Achievement is cast aside.  Instead, a false self-aggrandizement for certain groups is established.

Jason D. Hill, a black immigrant who has chosen to embrace the American dream takes issue with author Ta-Nehisi Coates.  Hill writes that Coates’ beliefs “[t]hreaten to alienate [his] son from his country and afflict him with a sense of moral inefficacy and impotence.”

Hill maintains that by “imparting this credo, [Coates has] potentially paralyzed [his son and other black children because he has] “alienated them from their own agency and emancipatory capabilities.”  Hill asserts that Coates presumes that “black people are mostly treated as mindless automatons who can’t seem to help themselves.”

https://gellerreport.com/2019/05/nyu.html/

I had the misfortune to witness the undergrad NYU ceremony yesterday at Radio City Music HalL.. This was not my first time at the rodeo so I knew what to expect. But this was a whole other level. There was no ‘education’ component to it. It was all propaganda for the most subversive, radical movements in American society. It was, from the first, an orgy of hard left poison. Colonialism! LGBT! Welfare! Socialism! Climate!  Refugees! Climate! Islamic! Native American!  Manhattan is actually Native American land – don’t ya know? The valedictorian from the graduation and post-grad ceremonies both were students at the  NYU Dept.of Social and Cultural Analysis the notorious school that recently ended its official relation with the Tel Aviv campus.

This is the best, the most brilliant of NYU? It is a stunning indictment of the left-wing take-ever of the education system in this country. And our taxpayer dollars is funding this civilizational suicide.

https://www.frontpagemag.com/fpm/273835/harvards-insatiable-identity-politics-cannibals-michelle-malkin

I have no love for left-wing, Hillary-promoting Hollywood producer and accused #MeToo villain Harvey Weinstein. Nor am I a fan of those who perpetrated the cop-bashing “Hands Up, Don’t Shoot” fiction involving social justice martyr Michael Brown. But I do strongly believe that a grave injustice has been committed by Harvard’s witch-hunt mobsters against a law professor who joined Weinstein’s legal team and had represented Brown’s family in a civil suit against Ferguson, Missouri.

Too bad Ivy League elitist bubbles have purged themselves of people with the backbone, integrity, and courage to end the madness.

Ronald Sullivan, faculty dean of the undergraduate dorm Winthrop House, was terminated from the honored position after hysterical student protesters condemned his decision to take on Weinstein’s case as “trauma-inducing.” Protests, sit-ins, temper tantrums, an online Change.org petition and even litigation by offended female students created pressure on the university for months. The administration sought to appease the mob with a “climate review,” no doubt hoping to quell the rebellion against Sullivan as the school year came to a close. No dice. Harvard College Dean Rakesh Khurana announced over the weekend that both Sullivan and his wife, Stephanie Robinson, co-faculty dean at Winthrop House, will be removed on June 30.

https://pjmedia.com/news-and-politics/a-typical-high-school-tells-a-larger-story-schools-are-now-dominated-by-the-feminist-agenda/

Recently, my wife Janice posted a video in her Fiamengo File series about an Ottawa school, Brookfield High, that had launched a ManUp campaign, complete with posters targeting males as prone to evil and females as innocent victims. “Judging from the displays,” she states, “Brookfield High goes out of its way to make girls feel welcome through positive messaging; boys, in contrast, are set apart to be lectured and shamed about male evil.”

The poster reads When you stand back and watch evil, you’re standing by it, “strongly reinforces the grim mood…The clear implication is that this boy…WILL encounter ‘evil’ at his school—not amidst the slutty girls who tempt him…but amidst the other boys who will supposedly do bad things to girls and condone violence.” The only way to be good, she summarizes, is for boys and men “to deny their own needs and to accept that their sex is uniquely responsible for evil. What a warped message for this school—and many others like it.”

https://www.city-journal.org/college-boards-sat-adversity-score

For decades, the College Board defended the SAT, which it writes and administers, against charges that the test gives an unfair advantage to middle-class white students. No longer. Under relentless pressure from the racial-preferences lobby, the Board has now caved to the anti-meritocratic ideology of “diversity.” The Board will calculate for each SAT-taker an “adversity score” that purports to measure a student’s socioeconomic position, according to the Wall Street Journal. Colleges can use this adversity index to boost the admissions ranking of allegedly disadvantaged students who otherwise would score too poorly to be considered for admission.

Advocates of this change claim that it is not about race. That is a fiction. In fact, the SAT adversity score is simply the latest response on the part of mainstream institutions to the seeming intractability of the racial academic-achievement gap. If that gap did not exist, the entire discourse about “diversity” would evaporate overnight. The average white score on the SAT (1,123 out of a possible 1,600) is 177 points higher than the average black score (946), approximately a standard deviation of difference. This gap has persisted for decades. It is not explained by socioeconomic disparities. The Journal of Blacks in Higher Education reported in 1998 that white students from households with incomes of $10,000 or less score better on the SAT than black students from households with incomes of $80,000 to $100,000. In 2015, students with family incomes of $20,000 or less (a category that includes all racial groups) scored higher on average on the math SAT than the average math score of black students from all income levels. The University of California has calculated that race predicts SAT scores better than class.