
Ted Kaczynski on political correctness…


The Department of Education has opened two investigations into the University of Louisville and Howard University for possible discrimination against white men.
The federal investigation by the Office for Civil Rights stems from a program that Yum! Brands offers to help increase the representation of women and racial minorities in the franchise restaurant industry. The company operates Taco Bell, KFC and Pizza Hut.
Professor Mark Perry, who frequently files Title IX and Title VI complaints, shared the OCR letters with The College Fix. Title IX of the Civil Rights Act prohibits higher education institutions from discriminating on the basis of sex, while Title VI prohibits racial discrimination.
The Fix contacted OCR attorneys Bradley Moore and Arati Jani on March 23 to ask for an update on the investigations but did not receive a response.
The two universities joined with the fast food corporation to create the Yum! Franchise Accelerator MBA program at the University of Louisville.
The Kentucky university teamed up with the corporation in 2021 to “unlock opportunity in the franchising industry and create a level playing field for the underrepresented people of color and women.” The program is part of a broader investment in helping everyone, except white men, learn about business.
When you were growing up, the term “abolition” likely referred to slavery.
But much history has since been made, and we’re in the midst of a racial revolution.
These days, a world of wokeness wants to “abolish whiteness.”
How might that be done?
According to University of California, Berkeley Professor Zeus Leonardo, we must eradicate white people.
A bit of background via his faculty page:
Some of his essays include: “Critical Social Theory and Transformative Knowledge,” “The Souls of White Folk,” “The Color of Supremacy,” “Contracting Race,” and “Dis-orienting Western Knowledge.”
The author’s most recent books:
Per The Post Millennial, in a video of the instructor’s lecture “Teaching Whiteness in a Multicultural Context and Colorblind Era,” Zeus asks, “Is it worth it to be white anymore?”
A host of current headlines beg the same.
White folks, he waxes, “depend” upon whiteness:
“[I’m] trying to distinguish between whiteness and ideology, white people and identities and white bodies, which is some kind of literal understanding there that then we graft the meaning of white people onto, right? But if you undercut whiteness as an ideology, one that a lot of abolitionists suggest is parasitic, right? And it’s an ideology that white people really depend on.”
Should they be let off the hook?
“If we give white people an option out of that, and it’s not just sort of words, right? It’s sort of structural transformations, then what I’m suggesting is that it also signals the withering away of white people.”
The professor gets downright biblical. To quote John Lennon, “imagine”:
“If you can, imagine we didn’t have white people…let’s say, 600 years ago. So the suggestion by abolitionists is, we made white people, so one is not born white. By virtue of having a white Bible, one has to be taught to be white. … [W]hites are taught as young children to be white.”
Usually, he asserts, “That means in opposition to the non-white, usually black.”
The instructor can’t fathom that colorblindness is real. “Colorblindness isn’t necessarily such a literal process of being blind to color,” he insists. “It’s about feigning being blind to color, because in a completely racialized globe, how do you not see race?”
White people know what they are:
“[W]e…know just from personal experience, that if a white person took a non-white person home as a date, everything changes. Right? … To bring home a friend who’s not white, everything changes.”
Why in the world wouldn’t whites want whites to be abolished? He theorizes it may be their awareness of whiteness:
“So in some, at least, lived way, whites already know that they’re white. And that may explain why there’s sort of this defensive reaction towards abolishing whiteness and abolishing white people, because there is an investment here, okay?”
And abolition, as he understands it, is exactly what must occur. White bodies, however, will get a pass:
“[M]y recent understanding is that to abolish whiteness is to abolish white people. Okay, now that’s…different from white bodies, right? White bodies will still exist, but we will no longer consider them white people.”
The “moderators” at Cornell University‘s arXiv server, an open-access archive and free distribution service for scientific material, have been censoring scientific studies that they claim contain “inflammatory content and unprofessional language.”
A “preprint server” for preliminary versions of scientific studies that are moderated but not yet peer-reviewed or published, arXiv is supposed to be neutral when it comes to what gets published. The reality, however, is that arXiv is selectively censoring studies and even banning scientists for publishing work with “controversial” viewpoints.
In one instance, researchers tried to publish a study presenting an opposing viewpoint to another study about room temperature superconductivity. Those researchers aligned with the opposing point of view study are reportedly now “in hot water” on arXiv for daring to buck the “consensus.”
The server also proceeded to ban University of California San Diego (UCSD) theoretical physicist Jorge Hirsch from posting anything on the platform for six months as punishment for his conflicting viewpoints.
Daines was referring to multiple physicians’ claims that Pitt’s statements “point to the possibility” that organs were “extracted from live fetuses.” That was based on statements the university made about minimizing ischemia time, which refers to “the time after the tissue collection procedure and before cooling for storage and transport.”
The university’s application to NIH also prompted lawmakers to question whether the university had violated fetal tissue trafficking laws as part of its federally funded “GUDMAP” research program. In applying for NIH funds, Pitt said it sought to “develop a pipeline to the acquisition, quality control and distribution of human genitourinary [urinary and genital organs and functions] samples obtained throughout development (6-42 weeks gestation).”
So far, the university has denied any wrongdoing and claimed it played no role in medical procedures. It’s unclear, however, why the university made comments about ischemia time and obtaining quality tissue.
A George Washington University professor recently stepped down from teaching “Anti-Racist STEM Education” after reading the N-word aloud during the class when discussing the 1964 Norman Rockwell painting The Problem We All Live With.
The incident occurred Jan. 18 at GWTeach University, the institution’s teacher training college geared towards STEM majors. The incident was brought to the attention of the university after students filed numerous complaints, as reported by The Hatchet.
Professor Alicia Bitler reportedly said the N-word during a discussion of the painting that depicts Ruby Bridges, the first African-American child to attend a white school in Louisiana. In the painting, the N-word can be clearly seen in the background in the form of graffiti on a wall.
Alicia Bitler reportedly described the incident as an “oops-moment” soon after it happened. Bitler then continued to teach the class. Three days later, university officials acknowledged the students’ complaints.
Incidents like these have been around the country for years. In 2020, Campus Reform reported that a law professor at Emory University was suspended for using the N-word in an “academic context to illustrate the effect language has on the severity of a civil wrong” during a lecture.
As reported by Inside Higher Ed, University of Southern California Professor Greg Patton was suspended for “saying a Chinese word that sounds like a racial slur in English” during a lecture on Chinese “filler words.”
Professor Zeus Leonardo, an associate dean at Berkeley’s Graduate School of Education, thinks racial justice might mean abolishing white people.
“To abolish whiteness is to abolish white people. That’s very uncomfortable perhaps, but it asks about our definitions of what race is and what racial justice might mean.”
He claims that white people are committed to being villains.
Can you imagine if we said this about black people? He’s inciting people to violence and is promoting hatred.
This is what teachers are learning.
During a virtual discussion, a video of which surfaced in October, Leonardo suggested reading for students arguing white people are not actually born white, but rather “abused” and “bullied” into becoming white by their white caretakers and guardians.
FOXNews reported on Swalwell’s interview on CNN:
Rep. Eric Swalwell, D-Calif., said on CNN Thursday that kicking Russian students out of U.S. universities should be “on the table” in response to Russian President Vladimir Putin launching an invasion into Ukraine.
“Frankly, I think closing their embassy in the United States, kicking every Russian student out of the United States … should … be on the table. … Vladimir Putin needs to know every day that he is in Ukraine, there are more severe options that could come,” Swalwell said on “CNN Newsroom.”
Documents obtained by NATIONAL FILE show that the University of Pennsylvania, which hosts and funds Joe Biden’s think tank called the Penn Biden Center, directly profits from the sale of Pfizer-BioNTech and Moderna Coronavirus vaccines. The University gets more money if more vaccines are sold. The University of Pennsylvania also gets “milestone payments” when the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) approves a Pfizer-BioNTech vaccine. BioNTech pays the University of Pennsylvania Board of Trustees directly, and the university is protected from civil liability if people try to sue for “bodily injury” or “death” caused by BioNTech vaccines.
BioNTech signed a licensing agreement in 2018 with the University of Pennsylvania, which directly funds the Penn Biden Center for Diplomacy and Global Engagement. Even though Coronavirus had not yet broken out when the deal was made, the 2018 agreement ensured massive payments for the University of Pennsylvania if its technology ended up getting used in new mRNA-based vaccines. Well, UPenn’s technology did end up getting used in the mRNA-based Coronavirus vaccine produced by Pfizer and BioNTech, and the deal has led to massive revenue for the university. Joe Biden, who was working for the University of Pennsylvania when the deal was made, received more than $900,000 from the University of Pennsylvania in the two years before he ran for president in this past election.
The University of Pennsylvania also houses the pro-vaccine website FactCheck.org. University of Pennsylvania president Amy Gutmann is now Biden’s nominee for Ambassador to Germany. The Biden administration’s FDA has speedily approved or authorized Pfizer-BioNTech vaccines including for children — all while the Penn Biden Center’s parent university enjoys massive profits from vaccine sales and FDA approval. And the Pfizer-connected FDA even knew about numerous adverse events for children related to the Pfizer-BioNTech vaccine, but allowed children to be injected with it anyway. Now, as the FDA considers emergency use authorization for a Pfizer-BioNTech vaccine for children as young as six months old, the direct financial relationship between these vaccines and Joe Biden’s think tank must be exposed.
An SUNY Fredonia professor, Stephen Kershnar, was exposed on social media for making the argument that pedophilia may not be as wrong as society deems it, questioning the deeply held societal understanding that it’s wrong for adults to have sex with children.
Kershnar, who teaches libertarian philosophy and applied ethics at the university, made an argument for pedophilia, the professor, who teaches philosophy at the state-funded university, argued: “Imagine that an adult male wants to have sex with a 12-year-old girl. Imagine that she’s a willing participant. A very standard, very widely held view is that there’s something deeply wrong about this. It’s wrong independent of it being criminalized.”
“It’s not obvious to me that it’s in fact wrong,” he continued. “I think this is a mistake. And I think exploring that why it’s a mistake will tell us not only things about adult/sex and statutory rape and also fundamental principles of morality.”
“There’s a couple of things to say here,” he continued. “One is even if you are looking for a threshold. Let’s say there’s a threshold. I’m making this number up, but let’s say it’s at age 8. Still, that tells you that some adult/sex is permissible. Second, the notion that it’s wrong even with a one-year-old is not quite obvious to me.”
You must be logged in to post a comment.