RUTHFULLY YOURS

A college player on the women’s volleyball team has been kicked off because she didn’t agree with the leftist ideology being force-fed to the team.

The absurdity of American higher education is on display at the University of Oklahoma. As we read in this Campus Reform story, a player on the women’s volleyball team has been kicked off because she didn’t agree with the leftist ideology being force-fed to the team.

So even athletics are now controlled by people who demand conformity to the foolish tenets of diversity and social justice. No matter if you’re a good player — if you think wrong thoughts, you are not wanted.

The player, Kylee McLaughlin, is suing the university for a minimum of $75,000, plus legal fees. Let’s hope this gets to the jury and the jurors decide to let the defendants know what they think about this astounding intolerance. Perhaps some administrator at OU will remember the Oberlin case and settle fast.

https://www.foxnews.com/politics/republicans-education-china-us-universities-miguel-cardona-banks-foxx

Reps. Jim Banks, R-Ind., and Virginia Foxx, R-N.C., pressed Education Secretary Miguel Cardona for answers about his department’s plans to investigate China’s financial foothold in the U.S. university system.

“The American public deserves to know that their money is not being compromised by Communist China and other adversarial nations,” the Republicans wrote in the letter sent on Wednesday. “The FBI warned colleges a decade ago about how hostile actors use campuses for spying, propaganda hubs, and faculty recruitment. Unfortunately, too many institutions failed to take this warning seriously.”

“The previous administration modernized the reporting process and found over $6.5 billion in unreported gifts and contracts and opened 19 university investigations. However, the Department has closed only four of those investigations to date. Moreover, you have not started or provided status updates on any other investigations into foreign gifts or contracts,” the letter continued.

The lawmakers demanded information including the number of staff analyzing the Higher Education Act’s foreign gift and contract disclosure requirements, the total amount of reported foreign gifts and contracts in the Jan. 31 reporting period, and whether the Department has opened any related university investigations. Banks and Foxx asked Cardona and his staff to respond to them within two weeks.

In this Jan. 28, 2020 file photo, Connecticut State Commissioner of Education Miguel Cardona speaks with Berlin High School students while on a tour of the school. (Devin Leith-Yessian/Berlin Citizen/Record-Journal via AP) (AP)

“The lack of progress we have seen on this issue since your confirmation as Secretary is alarming, and we are concerned the Department is not treating threats from China and other adversarial nations seriously,” Banks and Foxx wrote to Cardona.

The investigations hinge on Section 117 of the Higher Education Act, which requires schools to report foreign gifts and contracts over $250,000. During the Trump administration, the Education Department opened investigations into schools including Harvard and Yale over unreported foreign funds from countries including China.

https://www.americanthinker.com/articles/2021/06/academias_obsession_with_racism_.html

For the 2020-2021 admissions cycle, the English department at the University of Chicago only admitted graduate students committed to working in Black Studies. At the other end of the city, at Evanston’s Northwestern University, white students took  to social media not only to confess their racism but also to pledge to do better.

Throughout America, faculty at colleges and universities are being required to enroll in modules (courses) on race relations, written with an eye toward critical race theory and the epistemology of Black Lives Matter.

These modules have various names, but among the most common is an oxymoron titled “inclusive excellence,” as if everyone can be excellent by being included. The object, of course, is for colleges and universities to enroll greater numbers of those who already receive preferential treatment based on ascribed characteristics.

Meanwhile, sacrosanct suppositions that represent critical race theory are increasingly becoming the norm on the college campus. Among these are: All whites are racists; systemic racism is the cause of a vast black underclass, and the legacy of slavery and Jim Crow explains every pathology to be seen in the black community.

Seldom, if ever, has a single factor explained such a complicated set of social forces.

To raise the question of free will and individual responsibility is a manifestation of racism or white privilege. Nothing shuts down a conversation faster than “check your privilege” or “your white fragility is showing.”

Millionaire black celebrities are pointing out the privilege gap to many white Americans who live from paycheck to paycheck. The absurdity is only lost on those white people who are mired in their own guilt.

When challenged, the inanity is justified in that privilege is not what you’ve accomplished, experienced, or how many homes you own, but what you won’t experience, like being abused by the police or not being able to find a band-aid the color of your skin.

Of course, white people also get killed by rogue cops, and no one has the skin color of a band-aid.

But what really undermines this nonsense preached from the gospel of political correctness is that the fundamental divisions in post-industrial society is not based on race, but on distinctions that come from the division of labor or class.

https://www.frontpagemag.com/point/2021/06/critical-race-theory-stanford-leads-antisemitism-daniel-greenfield/

This is an old problem with a critical new urgency in the age of critical race theory.

Jews may be the target of a disproportionate amount of hate crimes, but they’re not an official minority. As critical race theory rolls out in organizations, people are pressured into joining segregated groupings. Official minorities go to minority Oppressed Victim caucuses, while designated white people go to the White People are Evil Oppressors and Must Apologize Every Day for Their Existence caucuses.

And that means the descendants of Holocaust survivors being told they’re guilty of white supremacy.

That’s how things went over at Stanford.

Dr. Ronald Albucher, a psychiatrist and associate professor in the medical school, and Sheila Levin, a therapist specializing in eating disorders, describe being pressed into joining a “whiteness” affinity group by staffers with the Diversity, Equity and Inclusion program, being told they were “privileged,” and seeing antisemitic incidents downplayed.

The university responded inadequately to their concerns, made over the course of a year, Albucher and Levin say, thereby fostering a “hostile and unwelcoming environment” for Jewish employees working for Stanford’s Counseling and Psychological Services office (CAPS).

The justice of their case is pretty clear whether it will lead to any meaningful response in the era of critical race theory and under the Biden regime is another matter altogether.

https://townhall.com/columnists/betsymccaughey/2021/06/16/the-leftists-writing-your-childs-social-studies-lessons-n2591054

It’s hard to know what’s worse — brainwashing kids or lying about it.

Parents worried their kids are being indoctrinated with critical race theory can’t get straight answers. Local school boards and principals lie to them, claiming children are merely being taught to be “critical thinkers.”

On Saturday, the truth came out. Teachers unions and activists held rallies in 22 cities to support critical race theory. What they said was eye-popping. They unabashedly declared that their goal is indoctrinating students in far-left causes.

The Zinn Education Project, which organized Saturday’s events, produces race-centric material for junior high and high schools across the country. Lesson plans are offered free for teachers to download. Parents wondering where the critical race theory their children are getting comes from can go to the website. They’ll be shocked.

Zinn was founded by the late Howard Zinn, a Marxist historian who said that teaching social studies wasn’t about dates and events. It was to make students want to change the world, overthrowing the status quo.

A Zinn lesson called “Students Design a Reparations Bill” explains that students will be asked to improve on the “flimsy” reparations bills currently in Congress. Critical thinking isn’t encouraged. This isn’t a debate about whether there should be reparations. This is one-sided indoctrination. “As racial justice activists, student are all on the ‘same side,’ in this role play,” says the Zinn website.

Other extreme left groups supplying social studies materials for schools include the Southern Poverty Law Center and Black Lives Matter at School. SPLC tells educators to stand their ground against parents “and vigorously resist efforts to maintain the status quo.” No wonder parents are getting the run around.

https://www.frontpagemag.com/fpm/2021/06/jason-hill-video-cultural-nihilism-and-end-frontpagemagcom/

This video is brought to you by a Freedom Center-Glazov Gang collaboration on a new exclusive webinar series, Teach-Ins for the Twenty-First Century. Join us as some of the leading thinkers and pundits on the scene today discuss key issues related to the coronavirus pandemic and its ongoing implications, confronting the Left, the jihad terror threat, and much, much more. And make sure to ask your own questions of our experts.

This new webinar features Jason D. Hill, a professor of philosophy at DePaul University in Chicago and a Shillman Journalism Fellow at the Freedom Center.

Dr. Hill discusses Cultural Nihilism and the End of Education in America, revealing How our institutions of learning became national security threats.

Don’t miss it!

https://thefederalist.com/2021/06/14/america-has-an-existential-civics-education-crisis-that-more-civics-education-will-only-make-worse/

This entire fight is over whether Americans will live under the original Constitution or its bastardized enemy. The civics curriculum battle is key to who will win that war, and the left has the upper hand.

As leftists push for greater control of what children learn about American history and how Americans define their civic responsibilities, a majority of Americans support more “civics education,” an interesting new Heritage Foundation survey finds.

“[T]wo-thirds of parents and nearly three-quarters of teachers share a strong desire to see greater emphasis on civics education. Indeed, interest in civics education among parents has increased substantially over the past five years. However, only around one-third of each group are satisfied with the type of content included in their schools’ civics education,” says the report, which Gabe Kaminsky exclusively reported here.

This datapoint might be taken by some Republicans and right-branded institutions to support an effort underway branded as a “bipartisan” push to “increase civics education.” Look, something about which most Americans can agree amid a time of bitter cultural divides!

The problem with this takeaway is that it is neither supported by the rest of the report, the context into which it is released, the history of American public education, nor the increasingly clarifying realities of America’s current cold civil war.

Stanley Kurtz and the National Association of Scholars have done yeoman’s work exposing the national “civics education” agitation as a leftist play for increased political power. In short, here’s the problem this report underscores about that political background: Most Americans may want more “civics.” But they do not at all agree what “civics” means.

https://www.nationalreview.com/corner/supreme-court-shows-interest-in-harvard-anti-asian-affirmative-action-case/

This was another uneventful morning at the Supreme Court, with two uncontroversial decisions (one unanimous, one split between 9–0 and 8–1 decisions in two related cases) involving the First Step Act and the felon-in-possession statute. But the big news came in case number 20-1199, Students for Fair Admissions v. President and Fellows of Harvard College. The Court has yet to decide whether it wants to hear the case, but this morning, it asked the Biden administration to file an amicus brief setting forth its views of the case. Cases in which the Court asks the Solicitor General for such a brief are not always taken by the Court, but they are much more likely to end up on its docket.

While there is little doubt that the administration will side with Harvard, its position could be politically sticky, and the case could be explosive. The petition asks the Court to overrule its pro-“diversity” rationale for allowing universities to consider race in admissions:

 (1) Whether the Supreme Court should overrule Grutter v. Bollinger and hold that institutions of higher education cannot use race as a factor in admissions; and (2) whether Harvard College is violating Title VI of the Civil Rights Act by penalizing Asian-American applicants, engaging in racial balancing, overemphasizing race and rejecting workable race-neutral alternatives.

Roger Clegg has set forth the argument for why the Court should hear this case, and it now has the Court’s attention. The case involves blatant discrimination against a group of non-white, historically discriminated-against group (Asian Americans) who have been the subject of much recent attention over anti-Asian hate crimes. Democrats have been very touchy about being forced to admit that they support Harvard’s discrimination. The Biden administration dropped an investigation into anti-Asian discrimination at Yale. Democrats rejected, by a 49–48 vote in the Senate, a Ted Cruz amendment saying that no college “may receive any Federal funding if the institution has a policy in place or engages in a practice that discriminates against Asian Americans in recruitment, applicant review, or admissions.” Congressman Ted Lieu erupted in anger at a hearing in March when Peter Kirsanow raised the issue. Hardly anything is nearer and dearer to Asian-American parents than educational opportunity. Democrats are understandably hesitant to openly admit that they support discrimination against Asian Americans in that very area. But they do.

https://www.nationalreview.com/corner/crt-invades-the-law-schools/?utm_source=recirc-desktop&utm_medium=homepage&utm_campaign=river&utm_content=featured-content-trending&utm_term=first

For many years, law schools have been moving away from teaching the nuts and bolts of our legal system and toward what Professor Charles Rounds of Suffolk Law School calls “bad sociology, not law.”  I have spoken with veteran lawyers who wring their hands over the fact that so many graduates have had their heads stuffed with dodgy theories but have difficulty with legal fundamentals.

Things are getting worse, as critical race theory invades the law schools. On her Dissident Prof blog, Mary Grabar has posted an excellent piece by Professor Matthew Andersson on the harm of CRT.

Andersson writes, “CRT, along with BLM, is a pleading tool: a position taken up by an organized — or more accurately by an incited — coalition of individuals and institutions opportunistically advancing a synthetic complaint in the public forum, especially through media, universities, and government organizations. These are needed to create the impression that their argument has an historical basis and  possesses moral weight. The sufficiently articulated demands can be seen as a path to both social and legal relief through remedies of financial damages and restitution, and through policy that codifies its demands and interests — despite any constitutional violations.”

This “pleading tool” is one that will do a great deal more damage to our concepts of equality under the law.