All the Lovely People

Welcome Instapundit Readers!

A woman's name came up in polite conversation recently. She runs one of the school boards of which I have been critical of late. That board has been doing a horrible job, a complete disservice to the kids at that school.

"She's perfectly lovely," I was told by someone who knew her. "Yes, lovely," someone else agreed.

Here's the thing: I'm sure she is. I know many of these people. They're all lovely. Boards everywhere are populated with delightful, successful people who would be wonderful table partners at a dinner party. Politically, they are largely centrists.

And yet, woke perversities and the insanity of Critical Race Theory are being institutionalized on their watch. 

And it's not just school boards. It's institutions of all kinds - corporations, foundations, NGOs...all of them, really. And, arguably, they are overseeing the dismantling of Western culture, of the Great Experiment. 

This is not an exaggeration.

How can this be?

This is a source of some interest to me, so I decided to talk to a number of people about it. There are several factors at play.

First, about a decade ago, boards made a laudable effort to diversify themselves. In the process, they got what they asked for, which was not merely skin color diversity but opinion diversity. At least, they thought they wanted that. Or perhaps they thought their new members would smile and keep to themselves, just happy to be there.

Some of the new faces were considerably more radicalized than anyone may have realized. It's also possible they became more radicalized, as was the fashion, post Ferguson, and in particular, post George Floyd. Either way, most boards now found themselves with one or two very different voices in their midst, voices pushing for radical change.

Normally, this wouldn't matter. Boards are usually twenty or more people, and an extremist or two would easily be voted down.

But this time was different.

You see, if the extremist voices are "of color," it changes the social dynamic entirely. Remember, we are dealing with Lovely People here. Lovely People are virtuous. Lovely People don't make a fuss. Lovely People embrace diversity, and they want to be sure you know that.

So much easier to go along. 

Plus, these new advocates for social justice were just so damn passionate. They pushed their agendas with vigor.

This has long been a crucial aspect of the American polity. The left cares about what it cares for more strongly than the right. They write letters to the editor, they go to town meetings. They hashtag ad infinitum. If it's Tuesday, it must be a women's march. Or a climate march. Or a food justice march. (Not kidding, it's a thing.)

Conservatives don't do these things. Or rarely, anyway. They get outworked, out hustled, and outshouted.

Many of the radical changes that have happened in our institutions also happened during the Trump administration. This is no coincidence. You see, Lovely People couldn't be seen to be Trump supporters. In places like Manhattan it was social suicide. 

Lovely People didn't approve. 

So, if you stood in the way of these new voices, the others would be on to your scent. They would sniff a Trumpist inside their boardroom walls.

Like I said, suicide.

There's also the matter of board...comity? No board likes dissension, and they especially don't like it when word of dissension leaks out. Group dynamics create groupthink.

But lastly, with private school boards, there has been an entirely unique factor at play. Most school board members have enrolled children. Put yourself in their place. Assuming you even had qualms about having your kids labeled "supremacists" and "oppressors," you were all too aware there could be real consequences if you resisted the New Order.

You see, the administrators and teachers were all enthusiastically on board. Stand in the way of this train and that letter of recommendation to Yale might not have the necessary adjectives.

Don't think they're above it, because they're not.

You might even have to find another school, and that's certainly a hassle, and it might not be a brand, like Dalton or Brearley, and that will be an issue next time you compare familial notes at the club. So where's Taylor now?

So, you see, if you're a Lovely Person, there's just no incentive to raise your hand, no incentive to say, "but wait."

The Lovely People don't get ahead by throwing bombs.

The problem is, as the Naked Dollar has repeatedly pointed out, progressive movements are never sated. The goal posts are always moved. The Lovely People will go along and go along until one day the revolution comes for them.

Next Up: The Trinity School

I previously wrote about Trinity College. This is about the Trinity School in Manhattan, another elite private school like Dalton, Brearley, etc. 

A year ago, they decided to get in on the "antiracism" bandwagon, like the others. We now know the fruits of their labors.

If you haven't been following this space for the last few months, antiracism specifically means judging people entirely by their skin color and setting up a system of reverse racism to make up for America's past sins. It is the practical application of Critical Race Theory, and has nothing to do with simply "not being racist." It is, itself, highly racist.

I have been supplied with the documents involved, and Trinity wins the award for the most heavy-handed problem-solving approach. Apparently, systemic racism is a really big problem at Trinity because they set up a task force with - get this - 188 members and 11 working groups. I think fewer people negotiated the Paris Climate Accords.

Needless to say, that many hammers were going to find a lot of nails. They produced a 17-page document, which, if you're a masochist or just really, really bored, you can read in its entirety here.

It's the usual nonsense, but let's highlight a few items:

-Expand the number and type of affinity spaces.

If you're not familiar, an "affinity" space is racially segregated. You know, like the fifties. And by "expanding the number and type," Trinity means dividing us into smaller and smaller subgroups based on our skin color or gender (remember there are pushing 100 of those now). Intersectionality comes into play here, presumably. So if you are both, say, genderqueer and muslim, perhaps you get your own space. (I'm thinking that's a pretty small space, but these days who knows.)

-Collect identity data from from student applicants, allowing applicants to self-identify.

So, if gender isn't totally up to the individual, why not race, a la Rachel Dolezal? Trinity is clearly doing this climb the ladder of intersectionality, but it strikes me as rife for abuse.

-Create opportunities for students to practice the act of respectful disagreement and of nuanced exploration of orthodoxies.

Excellent words on a piece of paper. Except I am just blown away by the lack of understanding for the very things they advocate. Ibram Kendi, the Grand Poobah of the CRT/antiracism movement, has specifically said that if you aren't "antiracist," you are by definition a racist. Translation: if you don't sign up for CRT's full instruction manual, including dividing our kids by race and by "oppressor" and "oppressed," you are a racist.

So, if you're some kid at Trinity who doesn't want to be labelled as an oppressor for things his great-great-great-grandfather may or may not have done, you are a racist. Are you going to raise your hand in class and engage in an act of "respectful disagreement?" 

And as for the "nuance" part, CRT has as much nuance as Joseph Stalin. It is a blunt hammer that allows no deviance from the party line.

-Undertake an earnest, community-wide exploration of the principles of restorative justice to see if its main principles - of meeting and listening circles, of teaching and learning together about ethical behavior, of deliberate embracing of active empathy and the awareness of the power of mutual care - could make improvements to our current disciplinary model.

Presumably well-educated people produced these words. Interestingly, the closer you get to the academic world, and in particular the progressive world, the worse and more opaque the writing gets. Andrew Sullivan wrote an excellent piece about this recently.

I could go on, there's pages and pages, but if you're a Naked Dollar reader, you know the drill. In fairness, the Trinity document is not as militant as, say, the teacher demands at Dalton. Also, Trinity does not appear to be a client of the odious DEI consultants Pollyanna, so perhaps they won't go down as self-destructive a path as the others. But a breathtaking amount of time went into the document's creation, all so they could come up with ideas like "listening circles."

Here are the Perfectly Lovely People on the Trinity Board:

Philip Berney, President Chair, Executive Committee 

Adrienne Barr, Secretary 

Andrea C. Roberts ’73, Treasurer Chair, Finance Committee 

Joseph Frank, Vice President Chair, Audit Committee 

Lisa Kohl, Vice President Chair, Committee on Trustees 

David Perez, Vice President Chair, Development Committee 

Jeffrey Scruggs, Vice President Chair, Diversity, Equity, Inclusion Committee 

Maria Garzon, M.D., Vice President Chair, Education Committee 

Jeff Blau, Vice President Chair, Facilities Committee 

Serena Moon, Vice President Chair, Investment Committee 

Igor Kirman, Esq., Vice President Chair, Law Committee 

James Deutsch ‘96, Vice President Chair, Personnel Policy Committee 

Shiva Farouki, Vice President Chair, Trustee Awards Committee 

John P. Arnhold ’71 (emeritus) 

Joseph Baratta 

Andrew R. Brownstein, Esq. (emeritus) 

Lisa Caputo 

Margaret Hess Chi ‘97 

Rex Chung 

Geoffrey Colvin ’70 (emeritus) 

Mahmood Khimji 

Victor “Tory” K. Kiam, III ’78 (emeritus) 

Jo Ann O. Kruger (ex officio) President, Parents Association 

William P. Lauder ’78 (emeritus) 

Hugh Lawson 

Emily F. Mandelstam 

Matthew McLennan 

Nicole S. George-Middleton '93 

Iva Mills 

Janna Levine Raskopf '03 (ex officio) President, Trinity Alumni & Alumnae Association 

Samuel W. Rosenblatt '78 

John Sexton Benjamin R. Shute, Jr. ’54 (emeritus) 

Alyssa Tablada ’89 

Douglas T. Tansill ’56 (emeritus) 

Camille Hackney Thornton 

Robert Wolk 

Yadwa Yawand-Wossen

Dalton Just Can't Get Out of Its Own Way

Dalton and Jim Best

I really thought I was done writing about Dalton, but they just can't seem to get out of their own way.

First, they screwed up in-person classes. Then, there was the meltdown over faculty demands and Critical Race Theory ("antiracism"). Then their head of DEI was made a sacrificial lamb. Then Jim Best, their headmaster, announced he was "leaving" at the end of the year.

This whole beat, the Naked Dollar's covering the private school woke wars, started with the story of Dalton's misadventures back in December. I didn't do it because I care, particularly, about Dalton. I didn't go there, and I don't live in Manhattan. But I do care about education, and Dalton was illustrative of a broader, deeply illiberal, trend towards the politicization of the classroom. 

Dalton was not unique, in other words.

Having said that, it does seem like they go out of their way to be capital of Wokeistan. 

A couple of days ago, an anonymous group called Prep School Accountability paid to have mobile billboards park in front of several Manhattan schools, including Dalton (and Brearley, which I have also chronicled). 

One truck said this:

Another said...

For the record, I have no idea who did this. It's interesting, though, because the battle against K-12 indoctrination doesn't seem as lonely as it did a few months ago. People are stepping up. Mostly anonymously, for reasons that are perfectly understandable, but more and more people are willing to come forward and put their names on the line. Soon, we will have what sociologists call a "preference cascade."

In any case, I knew I could count on the Naked Dollar's old friend Jim Best to give us a response so risible that he make his peers look like mere pretenders. Perhaps Jim's newly acquired occupational freedom has lent him the rhetorical license he craved all along. It's a short note, but there's just so much to unpack.

Here's what Jim wrote just yesterday about the trucks, along with my comments (in bold)...

To the Dalton Community:

This action is antithetical to what Dalton stands for and negatively impacts the welfare of our children and our community members.

Jeez, really? How is that? Apparently because

It attempts to create a climate of intimidation and harassment and evokes some of the worst moments in our nation's history.

We literally just marked the 100th anniversary of the Tulsa Race Massacre, where as many as 300 people were killed and 2,000 homes torched. So, moments like that, Jim? Perhaps words like, "Teach our kids how to think, not what to think" evoke My Lai or 9-11 for you? I'm sorry, you are not a serious person.

We took, and will take, necessary steps to ensure the well being of our students, faculty, and staff.

Did any staffers or kids see the signs? Please tell me everyone's alright!

At Dalton, we encourage constructive discourse consistent with our values of creating "a climate of respect in which creativity, curiosity, individual risk-taking, and personal excellence are achieved and can flourish." 

It's true. Dalton loves discourse, just loves it...as long as it's "consistent with their values," which also include telling you you're a racist if you disagree with those values, and if you're white, you'd better "check your privilege," otherwise known as "shut the f*** up."

We continue to listen closely to community members who engage in respectful dialogue and work together to help build an educations environment grounded in empathy and compassion.

This is what all these administrators say. Jane Fried of Brearley, and George Davison of Grace Church said exactly the same thing. And it's such crap. Why do so many "community" members fear going on the record? Because they know there will be repercussions. And as for compassion, does that include telling minority students they are permanently oppressed? That they should live in a state of perpetual grievance? How is that compassionate?

The tactics we saw this morning are neither dignified nor persuasive.

No doubt you said the same about the last year of BLM and Antifa street violence...just kidding. Let's face it Jim, it isn't the method that bothers you, it's the message.

They only redouble our commitment to stand by our mission, our values, and every single member of our community.

Except for those of you who are racists for opposing my agenda, and as soon as I figure out who you are, I will inform Yale.

Jim Best, Head of School

Yom Fox, Interim Director of Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion

Et Tu, Andover?

Welcome Instapundit Readers!

Our nation's most storied and elite schools are increasingly becoming a parody of themselves. What was once a completely proper effort to broaden horizons and become more inclusive has turned into a self-parodying fetish. Our schools are now full fledged participants in the drive to dismantle Western culture. 

Lots of people say to me, surely the pendulum will swing back. People are waking up, right?

Think again.

Sometimes, when pendulums swing too far and they become wrecking balls. There's nothing left to salvage. 

Someone reached out to me about the board chair of one of the schools I've been writing about recently, telling me she's a "perfectly lovely person." I'm sure she is, most of them are, but "perfectly lovely people" are presiding over the collapse of our culture.

The road to hell is paved with good intentions, as they say.

Andover, possibly the most prominent secondary school in the country, is fully onboard the woke/CRT/anti-racism train. Their board backs the move entirely, as does the administration and presumably the teachers. Many of the kids do, too, but they're kids and they are only behaving the way Andover says they should.

It's child abuse.

Not all the alumni and parents are happy, though. I know this because some have reached out to me.

For starters, the board wrote the following to the Andover community (my comments in bold):

To the Andover Community:

On behalf of the Phillips Academy Board of Trustees, we acknowledge that this is a profoundly painful time in our country, marked by a series of tragic acts of violence against George Floyd, Breonna Taylor, Ahmaud Arbery, Tony McDade, and countless other Black people in the United States. For those who are hurting, please accept our heartfelt compassion and support. In the face of widespread anger and chaos, we stand together in solidarity for what is right and just.

Breonna Taylor? The police were being shot at by her drug-dealing boyfriend. Tony McDade? Body cams show he was pointing a gun at the police, and he was a murder suspect. A grand jury fully cleared the officers. Ahmaud Arbery? Racism, although the police had nothing to do with it. George Floyd? Horrible, but very swift justice has been served - and zero evidence was ever presented that this had anything to do with racism. 

The fact is that the data do not support the narrative of the police out hunting unarmed young black people. Most think that thousands are shot every year, when the actual number last year was nineteen. More unarmed whites were shot than that. This is in the context of 10 million arrests.

We reaffirm Andover’s commitment to educate youth from every quarter, and in doing so, preparing students to combat systemic racism in our institutions and our country.

Racism exists in this country, absolutely, although it is far less prevalent than it used to be. But "systemic" racism? Absolutely not. Read this to understand why. We are a better country than that. But Andover is eager to join the parade of self-loathing.

Across generations of students, faculty, staff, alumni, and parents—of myriad races, cultures, and identities—we have gathered over these recent days to grieve, to express outrage and frustration, and to support one another. We have heard and read painful personal experiences shared in virtual gatherings and social media.

To the Black members of our community and beyond: We see you; we hear you; we are suffering with you. We acknowledge that Black Lives Matter and support the movement.

When you capitalize "Black Lives Matter," you are not making a generic statement supporting blacks. You are citing a specific movement run by a specific organization, one that is avowedly Marxist and wants to tear down the entire fabric and history of our country, right down to the nuclear family. This is not hyperbole, this is from their own statements and actions.

Our 2014 Strategic Plan, Connecting Our Strengths, placed Equity and Inclusion as a central pillar upon which we remain accountable. We must re-examine that pillar, with new context, and ask how Andover can have the greatest impact in the ongoing battle to dismantle systems of racism and oppression.

Andover is the most liberal, diverse place imaginable. It is run by progressives for progressives. If they are racist, it's progressives that are responsible. But consider that whites comprise a mere 29.6% of the students, despite being 76% of the U.S. population. Andover's "2021 State of the Academy" offers such demographic options such as "genderqueer," and 49% of the female students identify as one of the following: bisexual, demisexual, homosexual, pansexual, queer, or questioning. 72% are feminists. For good measure, 2.6% identify as communists. 

The headmaster is a black, married gay man and a school parent. The Dean of Students is a married gay woman with four kids who have attended. If a boy wanted to go to class every day in drag, I am assured there would be no objection. There are plenty of fully-out gay kids at Andover and I'm also assured by students that no one makes anything of it. And yet, Andover still feels the need to imagine itself as being part of the systemically racist/misogynist/homophobic American fabric. 

Andover is proud of its intentional diversity, and while we have made efforts to create an equitable and inclusive community, we know there is more we can and must do. Guided by the Equity and Inclusion Committee of the Board of Trustees and working closely with school leadership, including incoming Head of School Dr. Raynard Kington, Andover will take the following actions:

The concept of "equity," which very specifically means equal results, is completely at odds with the ideas of meritocracy and excellence, which are things I imagine Andover also claims to care about. (To understand fully what equity means, read this.)

1. 1.  Reaffirm the Board of Trustees’ commitment to diversity, equity, and inclusion (DE&I). This will include re-examining the board’s efforts to enhance its own diversity and make changes where necessary, increasing efforts to embrace equity and inclusion in all board endeavors, requiring anti-racism education for all trustees, and extending the charter of the Committee on Equity and Inclusion.
2.      Will the white board members resign to protest their own presence? 
   
3. 2.  Dedicate a task force to establish Andover’s strategic focus on anti-racism. The task force will review recently collected data and feedback from students and campus adults; critically examine current practices, systems, and structures; and analyze results to determine what actions Andover must take to build upon its broad and deep work in equity and inclusion. The task force’s formal charge and membership will be considered by Dr. Kington after his arrival this summer. We seek a report, with recommendations, in the fall.
4.      Words matter. "Anti-racism" does not mean "not being racist." Anti-racism is the practical application of Critical Race Theory, which very specifically says that the only solution for "systemic" racism is to institute a wide-ranging system of reverse racism (against whites, if you haven't been following along).
5.      Assess and deepen the intellectual pursuits of the 2014 Strategic Plan pillar of Equity and Inclusion. Andover will take measure of academic and co-curricular programs, including Empathy, Balance, and Inclusion courses to expand its commitment to anti-racist education. We will build on efforts of the Department of Interdisciplinary Studies to embed inquiry of race and ethnicity within the core curriculum.
6.      This is the part where the entire curriculum gets politicized by DEI consultants like Pollyanna.
7.      Expand Community and Multicultural Development (CAMD) initiatives, including support for affinity groups that underpin identity development and affirm students of color. Continue CAMD’s justice series, which examines anti-black and white supremacist ideologies in the criminal justice system, economic and educational institutions, and voter disenfranchisement.
8.       So, if your kid is spending half the day studying "white supremacy" and "voter disenfranchisement," what is getting crowded out? Shakespeare? Calculus?
9.      (The points go on. Trust me, more of the same. I'm truncating this part in the name of brevity.)

We will continue to hear one another and expand upon what we’ve learned from the scholars and educators who have engaged with our campus community. We are especially inspired today by the ideas and work of Patrisse Cullors and Ibram Kendi and the perspective of author Robin DiAngelo.

Cullors is an avowed Marxist who has somehow enriched herself since starting BLM, buying millions in real estate. She is resigning over the controversy. Kendi says that anytime blacks aren't 13% of an outcome, there is by definition systemic racism. No allowance for other factors like culture, personal choices, random chance, or anything else. Your company doesn't have 13% blacks? Racist. Your town comes up a bit short? Racist. He believes the only solution is reverse racism. Martin Luther King be damned. DeAngelo is a big CRT advocate who wrote White Fragility, pioneering the convenient intellectual mousetrap that white people who object to CRT are themselves, ipso facto, racist.

Charting a way forward is the responsibility of every one of us—and needs the strong minds and generous hearts of our campus community and our extended family of alumni and parents. This work is especially crucial for our students, who will apply what they’ve learned on and off campus across a spectrum of urgent societal needs.

Andover has made deep and meaningful progress to date. In these challenging times, Andover must stretch itself in the pursuit of excellence and its mission of achieving knowledge for a greater good.

Again, you cannot pursue excellence and achieve equity at the same time. They are mutually exclusive.

Sincerely,

Amy Falls ’82, P’19, ’21
President-elect, Board of Trustees

Gary Lee ’74
Chair, Trustee Committee on Equity and Inclusion

Jim Ventre ’79
Interim Head of School

Brainwashing Works

The students also seem on board with all this, other than the closeted conservatives (95.2% of whom say they self-censor). Just recently, four members of the girls lacrosse team resigned as a "direct response to the racism, homophobia, and classism upheld by both the lacrosse program and Andover athletics."

They called for students to dress in all black to express their solidarity with all those athletes who have felt "othered."

As day follows night, the Andover administration put out a statement of solidarity.

I don't blame these girls, which is why I'm not naming them. They are perfectly distilled products of their environment, utterly convinced of the presence of racism in the very air we breathe. If they didn't arrive at Andover that way, Andover made sure they got that way.

As a generation of these students graduates from Andover and other institutions, it will be interesting to see how many choose to give back to schools that told them they were hopelessly racist.

Of note: it was only before the last game of the year that these girls decided to make their statement, having otherwise enjoyed a full season. Presumably the racial makeup of the team was the same for the first dozen games.

Alums and parents: STOP FUNDING THIS!

As always, I will finish with the names of the Perfectly Lovely People, otherwise known as the Andover board. These are the people who could stop this blatant divisiveness, but instead choose to promote it.

Amy Falls ’82, P’19, P’21
Charter Trustee
President, Board of Trustees
New York, NY

Chris Auguste ’76, P’09, ’12
Charter Trustee
New York, NY

Joseph Bae ’90, P’21, ’23
Charter Trustee
Hong Kong

Gil Caffray ’71, P’20
Charter Trustee
Greenwich, CT

Robert J. Campbell ’66
Charter Trustee
Rockport, ME

David Corkins ’84
Charter Trustee
Denver, CO

Patricia Doykos ’82, P’15
Alumni Trustee
Titusville, NJ

Louis G. Elson ’80, P’12, ’15, ’17
Charter Trustee
London, England

Dr. Keith Flaherty ’89, P’23
Charter Trustee
Cambridge, MA

Stefan Kaluzny ’84
Charter Trustee
New York, NY

Dr. Raynard Kington P’24
Head of School
Andover, MA

Dan Lasman ’73, P’06
Alumni Trustee
Boston, MA

Chien Lee ’71
Charter Trustee
Hong Kong

Gary Lee ’74
Charter Trustee
Tulsa, OK

Chris Leggett ’78
Alumni Trustee
Duluth, GA

Tristin Batchelder Mannion ’82, P’19
Charter Trustee
Boston, MA

Stephen Matloff ’91
Alumni Trustee
Alumni Council President
Los Angeles, CA

Tammy Snyder Murphy ’83, P’15, ’17, ’19
Charter Trustee
New Jersey

Tamara Elliott Rogers AA ’70
Charter Trustee
Cambridge, MA

Karen Humphries Sallick ’83, P’14, ’17
Alumni Trustee
Westport, CT

William Tong ’91, P’24
Alumni Trustee
Stamford, CT

Yichen Zhang ’82, P’18, ’20
Charter Trustee
Hong Kong

Eric Zinterhofer ’89, P’18, ’19
Charter Trustee
New York, NY

Campus Life, Imitating Art

If you haven't read it, there is much in my novel, Campusland, that was borrowed from real life. Our nation's fatuous universities provide so much raw material.

But, in other cases, things I just made up came to pass. 

One plot line in Campusland revolves around a professor who teaches 19th Century American Lit. During a discussion of Mark Twain, a student, in a set up, reads aloud a passage from Huck Finn that uses the n-word. Other planted students feign outrage and march out of the lecture hall, all the while an accomplice films the incident. They post it on social media, blaming the professor.

Will he keep his job? You'll have to read it to find out.

Hannah Fischthal

Preposterous, right?

Just a few days ago, as reported by Dana Kennedy in the New York Post, a longtime adjunct professor at St. John's University named Hannah Fischthal was fired for essentially the same thing. She read a passage verbatim from Twain. 

It had that word. 

She actually warned students first and explained the context and why that mattered. The book, Pudd'nhead Wilson, is actually a statement against racism and slavery.

It didn't matter. Several of her Red Guard wannabe students reported her, saying that just hearing the word caused them harm.

Fischthal, the daughter of Holocaust survivors, was summarily executed. Er, sorry, fired. (Getting ahead of myself again.)

Some critics of Campusland thought the satire was too over the top. What they didn't know is that I frequently dialed back reality because I didn't think anyone would buy it, even when presented as satire.

That's how screwed up things are.

Post Script: Twain is now getting banned in many schools and libraries, but this isn't Twain's first go-around with cancel culture. In the 19th Century, he was also banished from many libraries, and also for matters of speech. But what offended people then was his use of a rural patois; Twain wrote how real people spoke in the real world, something groundbreaking at the time. Before Twain, authors were expected to use the Queen's English only. 

Woke Insanity: Trinity College Edition

We'll take a brief respite from the K-12 woke wars to look at a recent incident at Trinity College in Connecticut. I haven't focused as much on colleges lately because everyone pretty much understands they are nuts, and college kids are older, so they are not as "at-risk," psychologically, as younger kids. (Although that's debatable at times.)

Trinity used to be a nice little liberal arts college. A family member went there. It was where kids who weren't getting into Ivies could go and have an Ivy-ish experience. Its vibe was never as crazy as many of the other similar schools in New England, such as Bowdoin or Middlebury. (Or Wesleyan - nobody out-crazies Wesleyan).

It was also a safe space for conservative kids, at least as safe as one could to find in the Northeast.

But that all changed when they made the enormous mistake of hiring this woman:

Joanne Berger-Sweeney

How often do the destroyers come in the form of hyphenated names? (Answer: a lot. Coincidentally, the villainess in Campusland also had a hyphenated name.)

When Berger-Sweeney got to Trinity, she decided to go all-in on the social justice train. The character of the school changed almost overnight, as did the nature of the student body. The few fraternities left are under constant bureaucratic assault. 

You know the drill.

The first big warning sign was when Republican Congressman Steve Scalise and staffers were shot during a baseball practice in 2017. A Trinity sociology professor named Johnny Williams weighed in about what he thought you should do if you saw a Republican bleeding in the street. He used a hashtag.

#letthemfuckingdie

Berger-Sweeney had his back. First Amendment, and all. (Bear that in mind as you read below.) Williams is still on the faculty.

What kills me is that Trinity had a niche. If they'd doubled down on that niche, they'd be unique in New England right now. Applications and money would have ballooned. It would have been a nearby alternative for all the kids now heading south to find some semblance of a normal college experience. Instead, Trinity decided to be like every other school in pursuing an anti-intellectual, anti-American agenda. Social justice warriors welcome here.

The results were dismally predictable.

The endowment is hurting. Of course it is when they are giving all the big donors a ready-made excuse to send their money elsewhere. They certainly don't call me anymore. (Not that I fall into the big donor category.)

Message to Trinity parents and alums if you are currently giving: stop.

Which brings us to a recent incident. Read this letter from a passel of deans (my comments in bold):

Dear Students, Staff, and Faculty,

We write you to inform you about an incident that recently took place on campus. A student studying in the library reported that he heard a group of Trinity students being insensitive to the violence and suffering that Palestinians and Israelis are currently experiencing. 

Someone was being insensitive? Smithers, release the hounds! And my money says they were being insensitive about Palestinians, not Israelis, which is what has the left's panties in a bunch.

When confronted, the students were reported to be dismissive and lacking in empathy for the humanity of all affected. We recognize the courage of the student who spoke up and sought assistance to address this situation.

So some other student rats out his/her classmates for saying words she doesn't like in a private conversation, and she has courage?

We have been in contact with several students present and are collecting relevant information in order to identify who was involved and what their role was in the incident. This information will inform our process going forward.

Process for what?

We ask that each of us extend compassion and support to one another.

All except the kids who were being insensitive about Hamas terrorists. Those kids are gonna hang.

To all who may be looking for support, please don't hesitate to reach out, especially to those offices that stand ready to assist you.

Sincerely,

Joe DiChristina - VP Student Success and Enrollment Management

Jody Goodman - Dean of Student Life

Rob Lukaskiewicz - Dean of Community Life and Standards

Ann Reuman - Senior Assoc. Dean and Special Asst. to the VP for Student Success

John Selders - Asst. Dean and Coordinator of Student Standards

Yes, these are real people and those are actual job titles. If you ever wonder why your kid's tuition is so high, look no further than the creation of all these ridiculous, meddling admin positions.

This is where we are now. Kids being praised as "courageous" for ratting out the private conversations of other kids. And what were they talking about? Committing a crime? Blowing up a dorm? No, they were being "insensitive" and "lacking in empathy." This is what merits a full investigation along with a university communication these days.

And what sort of kangaroo court will decide what constitutes the proper level of "empathy?"

Berger-Sweeney and her ilk hide behind the First Amendment when it protects her own faculty member when he suggested, very publicly, we let Republicans die in the streets. But some kids who "lacked empathy" in a private conversation?

Somewhere, Torquemada is smiling with approval.

The New Ethno-Marxism (and How We Got Here)

It's difficult to keep up with the forces that have taken over America's institutions. 

In reality, these forces have been at work for decades now, and it's vitally important to understand where they came from.

Here at the Naked Dollar, we like to make it easy to understand these things, because the left makes it intentionally difficult. They love jargon and they love abstruse, campus-born concepts. 

Welcome to the Cliff Notes Guide to understanding All This Crap.

Let's start with Marx, because really, that's the right place. Most rational people might think we were done with Marxism after it got 100 million people killed in the 20th century, but no. To borrow from from Zoolander, "he's so hot right now."

Madman in a Library

Every bit the madman he appeared to be, holed up in the British Library, Marx based his radical new ideology almost entirely on economics. The oppressed, according to Marx's doctrine, were the working class, and they would inevitably rise up with violence against their bourgeois capitalist oppressors, seizing the means of production as well the profits otherwise earned at their expense.

They didn't, exactly, but that's another story.

Then came this guy, Antonio Gramsci.

Gramsci had a different take. He believed that the ruling elite used culture more than economics as their principle tool of oppression. He called it "cultural hegemony." Institutions - corporations, the media, churches, the entertainment industry - were purveyors of this culture and used its institutional organs to propagate a "capitalist zeitgeist." The common man was kept in his place with all the legal and societal structures that these institutions deliberately put in place.

Here are Gramsci's own words:

“Socialism is precisely the religion that must overwhelm Christianity. … In the new order, Socialism will triumph by first capturing the culture via infiltration of schools, universities, churches, and the media by transforming the consciousness of society.”

Here's what it was called: the Long March through the institutions.

Could Gramsci have imagined how successful he might be? Arguably, his vision has been achieved. Our schools, churches, sports leagues, major corporations, media industry...all have embraced far-left nostrums. 

But Gramsci himself couldn't have understood how his vision would be realized, because it happened with a uniquely American twist - through the crucible of race. 

Enter Critical Theory

Critical Theory was born in Germany in the 1930s and championed along the way mostly by bloviating Marxist philosophers in Europe. This included Gramsci, Michel Foucault, and Jacques Derrida, the latter two being darlings on today's campuses. (And yes, they are technically "deconstructionists," not critical theorists, but it's a distinction without a difference for 99% of the world's population.)

Ask ten people what Critical Theory is and you'll get ten answers. Seriously, Google it. Many of the explanations are ridiculously strangled, no doubt intentionally, progressive word salads designed to keep you out of the club. But the consistent theme is that truth is not an absolute, it stems from power - i.e. those with the power, the ones controlling society's institutions, can create whatever truths they want.

All truth stems from power.

(Keeping up? If this all sounds ridiculous, trust me, a lot of people take it very seriously.)

In a previous post, I detailed how some are now arguing that there shouldn't be correct answers in math, because correct answers are a "social construct." If you don't like who was doing the "constructing" (read: white mathematicians from a racist era), then does 2 + 2 really equal 4?

So, if you believe in critical theory, you not only have a shorthand way to dismiss everything you don't like from the past (i.e. anything to do with Western Civilization), but you also have an incentive to take over society's institutions. That way, you have the power, and the truth is what you say it is.

Which brings us to Critical Race theory.

Derrick Bell 

In the 1970s, Derrick Bell was a professor at Harvard Law School. His bright idea was to inject race into Critical Theory. In this take, race itself became the social construct, with whites (who had the power) constructing it in such a way as to permanently oppress blacks. Since whites had possessed the power since our country's founding, everything was therefore permeated with racism. All of it, most notable our institutions. Racism was systemic.

Well, if every institution was racist, the only solution was to burn it all down and start all over again.

That, or take them over, make them your institutions. Then you get to create the truth.

Critical Race Theory* was about to have its moment.

George Floyd

Gramsci's Long March had been making steady progress for decades, but the opportunity for its final victory arrived in the unlikely form of a felonious drug addict named George Floyd (with an assist for COVID). 

Floyd may prove as important to history as Gavrilo Princip, the 19-year old who assassinated Archduke Ferdinand. Both men, wittingly or not, unleashed forces they couldn't begin to fathom. Modern "thinkers" on all things race like Ibram Kendi stepped on the gas.

The visible side of this was the summer of riots, but beneath the surface, far more consequential things were happening. Curricula were being rewritten, charters altered, mandates revised. DEI exploded as an industry.

And so here we are.

If old Marxism defined the "oppressed" by economic status, the new Marxism defines the oppressed by skin pigmentation. Some call this "woke." Others call it "cultural" Marxism. 

But why not call it what it really is?

Ethno-Marxism.

This new variant is actually far more pernicious. In "old" Marxism, at least everyone was supposed to be treated equally (in theory).

This new Ethno-Marxism seeks to right historical wrongs by flipping the tables. The once oppressor class must now, itself, feel the pain. This is a vengeful ideology bent on conforming America to its will, and if all of our traditions and institutions are hollowed out or even burned to the ground in the process, so much the better.

Think I'm being alarmist, maybe exaggerating for effect? Then take the damn time to read what they say, because they are quite up front about it.  

Or perhaps you think you're safe? Maybe you hired a DEI consultant, or you scrubbed your socials. Maybe you are careful to only espouse the "right" opinions.

Think again. 

The rules of this game are constantly changing, and if you find yourself suddenly in the way, the rules will be changed enough to get you cancelled. 

They will not care who you are.

*If you hear the term "anti-racism," that is nothing more than the practical application of Critical Race Theory.