I can’t emphasize strongly enough how our campuses are being mismanaged. Yes, many administrators have (bogus) Ph.D.’s in Leadership and Vision, but those degrees really don’t represent any actual knowledge of how to run a campus.
One of the weird thing about the many hate crimes on campus is how often they are hoaxes. Nearly every day in this country there are such fake hate crimes, so many that I quickly gave up keeping track of them.
Our incompetent admin always seems to respond to hate crimes, even fake crimes, in the worst possible way: by hiring more Vice Presidents of Diversity. Even when everyone agrees the hate crime didn’t happen, it’s still quite possible for the campus to spend another million dollars a year for all eternity, to “keep it from happening again.”
Now, when there’s a fake hate crime, a good leader would track down the people (students, usually, but sometimes faculty) perpetrating the hoax and punish them, hopefully punting them off campus. That’s good management: make sure students know they will not benefit, and will be punished, for making fake hate crimes.
It seems a pretty simple idea, one shouldn’t need a Ph.D. to understand how this works. If students are rewarded for crimes, they’ll continue to commit crimes.
Kansas State had a couple of fake hate crimes recently. The first was simple confusion:
In October, a Jewish ceremonial tent was destroyed. Initially, it was investigated as anti-Semitic vandalism. Authorities later concluded the tent was damaged during inclement weather. …
It really is amazing how a storm can push over a tent and the first possibility is “this was a hate crime.” Sheesh. At least Kansas State didn’t decide to blow $1,000,000 a year to keep storms from knocking over tents.
Could the “leaders” of Kansas State be so competent as to make two good decisions in a row? No way:
In the past week, a 21-year-old black student at Kansas State confessed to law enforcement officers to having defaced his own car with racist graffiti and slurs, including “whites only” and “go home,” in what was described as an out-of-control Halloween prank. No charges were filed against the student.
This student actively tried to pull off a hate crime hoax, could possibly have started a race riot. But no charges were filed?
What a horrible, horrible decision. How can our leaders not understand that, if there are no penalties for creating fake hate crimes, that this might well lead to more fake hate crimes?
So, one good decision, one bad decision. Could the leaders at Kansas State make a worse decision? Sure, absolutely:
Classes at Kansas State University will be suspended for two hours Tuesday to allow students, faculty and staff and members of the Manhattan community to participate in a unity walk and assembly in response to a series of racially charged incidents on campus.
That’s right, the “series of racially charged incidents,” which is to say two non-hate crimes, leads to a reward for the students: classes are suspended.
Hmm, students know they won’t be penalized for faking hate crimes, and also know that if they fake a few such crimes, classes get cancelled. How can anyone not understand that these decisions will lead to more fake hate crimes?
I have my “end of the semester” flu today, so I ask forgiveness of the gentle reader for the short post. But I do wish to point out that the guys running these places, even the low level deans, commonly make $100,000 or more a year, while the many vice presidents score $250,000 a year, and the Poo Bah can easily make $1,000,000 a year.
Almost all of them have Ph.D.s in university leadership, management, or vision, and all of them put together can’t see how managing these types of decisions might lead higher education into a death spiral of more fake hate crimes.