It’s fascinating watching the progression into the dark days ahead. In Nazi Germany, it didn’t start out with mass arrests and deportments for concentration camps…first tiny minorities were targeted, then larger and larger groups until all that remained outside of the camps was the terrified majority, individuals of whom could not speak out lest there was a sudden discovery that the “troublemaker” was even distantly related to one of the groups in the camps and with so many sub-groups targeted, the entire population legitimately was vulnerable (I’m using broad strokes here, which I trust the gentle reader will forgive).
I remember, many years ago, when we first abandoned academic equity when it came to Asian students. They were too smart, you see, it was only fair that the entrance requirements for Asians were (somewhat) secretly made just a little bit harder than for the other students. Once this tiny crack was opened, it became ever more tolerable to grant certain other minorities backdoor benefits, at the expense of other groups.
Then came the penalties for males. “We don’t have enough females in…” became a perpetual battle cry (at least in STEM), and now males often find themselves penalized for being in the wrong gender…even today, when around 60% of college students are female, we nevertheless see ever more programs to bring more females into the system. With this “minority” conquered, it was time to move on to even bigger segment of the population:
Every week we now hear of more cries against white people, not just to give them some penalty, but outright calls for violence, even genocide against whites. A recent article highlights some of the latest outrages, and while I grant comparing this stuff to the later days of Nazi Germany is hyperbolic, the fact still remains, if any other ethnic group was targeted like this, it would be considered a terrible evil.
At the University of Oregon this month, students are exploring race-related issues in various symposia — albeit in segregated “tracks” based on self-identified race and gender.
Described as a full-day “retreat,” the Women of Color Symposium has one track for those who are “womxn of color” — and no, that “x” is not a typo — while the second track is for students who are not of color.
I’ve written before of the out-of-control white shaming in Oregon, but that was nearly two years ago, not that much has changed. Have we all forgotten the futility of “separate but equal” accommodations? This whole concept was abandoned as a vicious lie half a century ago. If we know that giving a special place just for black students is morally wrong, how is it that we cannot know that giving a special place just for white students is also wrong?
A brain suffering this level of cognitive disconnect is obviously malfunctioning to the point of madness, so it’s hardly surprising that the morally depraved lunatics running this system would pile on the madness by spelling “women” with an “x,” as though any aspect of the English language would allow that letter to possibly be between an “m” and an “n” in a pronounceable word.
To avoid any misunderstandings, the university notes the following on its registration form for the presumably separate-but-equal events: “Any self-identified Womxn of Color, including Trans Women, Non-Binary and Gender Non-Conforming People of Color, are welcome in the Womxn of Color Symposium Track. We respectfully ask that anyone who does not identify as Womxn of Color attend the Allyship Symposium Track in order to provide and maintain a sacred space.”
They are obligated to put the qualifier “self-identified” here, as the word “womxn” is not a word, not in the dictionary, and the meaning of it cannot be common knowledge. Thus you’ll need your own personal definition. There’s another odd word in the above:
Not to shed any scorn on religion but the madmxn and madwomxn doing this honestly think the seminars where they’ll spew anti-white hatred are sacred.
Apparently they’re self-identifying the meaning of that word, because in terms of the Enlightenment, in terms of our most successful philosophical considerations, holding seminars to enhance hate and destroy a particular ethnic group simply because of their ethnicity is the exact opposite of sacred, and it in fact a defilement of everything higher education (supposedly) stands for.
As direct slap in the face to the “separate but equal” lie, these racially segregated seminars are explicitly different. Here is what the white people get:
However — the second track, “What’s Up With Whiteness,” is…intended to be a space where people at all stages of their social justice journey can engage with one another in entry-level conversations about white identity.”
I’ve heard the lunatics running our higher education asylums as Bolsheviks, Leftists, and Progressives, among other words—many of which used to be words of pride, instead of the quite justified slurs they are today. Because one phrase invariably pops up in their ideological literature (at risk of demeaning that word) is “social justice,” I feel the best phrase describing them is Social Justice Warrior, or SJW.
It’s very telling that among all the groups targeted, SJWs have never been in the crosshairs, despite their tendency to act in crazy ways (also known as “virtue signaling”) and known propensity towards violence.
Now, Oregon is close to California, and so it’s reasonable to conjecture that what we’re seeing in Oregon is just spillover from the constant insanity pouring out of that state. It’s a reasonable premise, but consider what’s happening on the other side of the continent:
Florida Gulf Coast University assistant professor of sociology Ted Thornhall, for example, offers a course about “white racism.”
“Much evidence, both historical and sociological, shows the U.S. has been and remains a white supremacist society,” noted Thornhall in the school’s newspaper. He emphasized that his course was not anti-white, but anti-white racism.
Semantic arguments about the difference between “anti-white” and “anti-white racism” wear a little thin here. In times past, it took a group of scholars to create a course, determining by consensus what material was academically relevant. Now you can just slap any ol’ thing together and call it “higher education”; it used to be the main restriction on creating courses by even this laughable method was the course needed to sell, but with the SJW takeover now the courses need only support the ideology.
Did nobody question this course?
In a seeming pre-emptive strike at any who might question the need for the course, or its legitimacy…betrays gross ignorance and/or malevolent intent as well as a self-evident need to enroll in the course.”
Another key to identifying the SJW is the cry of “RACIST” against any who challenge anything about their ideology. I concede he’s not exactly crying racism at anyone who thinks maybe this course might be dubious in terms of academic necessity, but, gee whiz, that’s quite the flurry of attacks against me, or anyone else with questions, here. In times past, scholars were expected to question, but now we get pre-emptive attacks against what used to be honorable behavior.
Allow me to address the attacks.
I don’t consider myself grossly ignorant, I’m quite aware white people have done many extremely racist things…but to focus a course like this just on the “sins” of white people is going to mislead far more than enlighten. Just as our obsessive focus on slavery in this country’s past has caused much of the population to believe only whites had slaves, or that it was a strictly American institution (instead of the simple truth that essentially every civilization on the planet had slavery in some form, regardless of skin color), courses like the above need considerable balance to be considered actual education instead of indoctrination.
He also pre-emptively says I must have malevolent intent, although he gives little reason or evidence why that must be the case. Accusations made without evidence can be dismissed without evidence, and this dismissal is considered ever more reasonable the more outrageous the accusation. As malevolence is fairly extreme to me, I could simply dismiss the accusation here…but I nevertheless submit much of the work in my blog, wherein I often reveal an interest in making higher education about education again. I don’t wish him harm at all, and am a little curious who he thinks I’m being malevolent toward, even theoretically.
Perhaps I need to enroll in his course, to see with my own eyes that there’s more than the obvious indoctrination here, but enough defense.
This sort of anti-white hysteria is becoming ever more common on our campuses. First some Asians were taken away, and nothing was done. Then many males left campus, and nothing was done. At some point, whites are going to see our campuses aren’t for them, either.
This may not be the same as the events in 1933-1939, but, yes, it does seem to rhyme.