October 31, 2007

Free-Speech Group Accuses U. of Delaware of 'Thought Reform'

The University of Delaware is engaging in “systematic thought reform,” according to a prominent free-speech group. Said free-speech group is basing its conclusions on “a selective citation of documents,” according to the university.

In a letter this week to the university’s president, the Foundation for Individual Rights in Education said Delaware’s residence-life education program promotes specific views on race, sexuality, and morality among students. The group, known as FIRE, also likened the program to a description of thought control in the novel 1984, by George Orwell. The accusations set the conservative blogosphere aflame.

FIRE cited several documents describing Delaware’s program, a curriculum-based attempt to promote self-examination and discussion among the 7,000 students who live in campus dorms. According to one document, resident assistants recently attended a “diversity facilitation training” session, where they received a list of definitions of racism from a visiting speaker. The term “racist,” the list said, “applied to all white people (i.e., people of European descent) living in the United States.”

In a letter to FIRE released late Wednesday, Michael A. Gilbert, Delaware’s vice president for student life, rebuffed many of the group’s claims, including its assertion that the university requires students to participate in the program — or to adopt specific views. “This type of goal,” Mr. Gilbert wrote, “is both highly undesired and wholly unattainable.” —Eric Hoover

Comments

1. I am so happy that FIRE blew open this case. I work in the student affairs office and the place went crazy when the letter from FIRE arrived. THe truth is that they created a well intended program, but crossed the line in many ways. Yes until this week the program was mandatory and they have temporarily suspended the mandatory nature of it, but once the attention goes away especially with Parents Weekend arriving they want to look good. Boy can they lie.

   — Marie    Oct 31, 10:09 PM    #

2. I have been an RA for the past two years and have not been comfortable with this program. It has gotten out of hand and demanding of students. Yesterday I was approached to be an advocate of the program. Several of my RA friends have been asked to be available for talking with the press. When I declined I was taken aside and told that my future as an RA was in jeopardy as was future a student. I decided to stand-up for myself. I read the university response to FIRE and they seem to want to divert the attention away from the programs flaws and talk about how FIRE make U Del. students look. Well it was U Del. students that had the backbone and insight to bring this issue up to FIRE. Go Hens! FIRE believes in us.

   — Bill    Nov 1, 05:59 AM    #

3. As an alum and Delaware resident I am in shock. Wow I guess as white person I am a racist. The university’s response
   never mentioned the issues that FIRE brings up. I want real answers until then no $ for my alma mater.

   — Kathleen    Nov 1, 06:25 AM    #

4. Reading through the material prepared for this program, it can only be described as “orwellian”. The Univeristy of Delaware should be deeply embarrassed.

   — Jon    Nov 1, 06:33 AM    #

5. I’m not familiar with the University of Delaware’s program but I absolutely believe it is the responsibility of colleges to foster safe environments for minority students and that doing so often requires pointing to white privilege, heterosexual privilege, and invisible racism, among other things. It is not the job of the university to brainwash students; however, it is the job of students to open their minds and consider alternate views. And, it is the job of universities to set standards of behavior that prevent discrimination. I hope this protest is meaningful, that there is something real to protest beyond having to face the hard truths about race relations in this country, or about homophobia. I hope this isn’t about white students who don’t want to change their views, or learn. Why go to college if they know all there is to know? Finally, I am always suspect of any protest that fails to offer solutions. Did the students suggest alternate ways of accomplishing the program’s goals? Or, are the goals themselves in question? This article should have provided more details.

   — SociologistWithACape    Nov 1, 07:33 AM    #

6. Sociologistwithacape demonstrates why these programs go bad very quickly. First he talks of invisible racism and calls it an alternative view to be considered. But it doesn’t take more than a couple of lines before the alternative view morphs into a hard truth and those asked to consider are suspected of refusing to change their views or learn to the point where it makes going to college worthless.

   Views such as invisible racism and heterosexual privilege are fringe at best – I’d call them ludicrous liberal bilge. If provided in an array of possible viewpoints, it’s education. When it’s portrayed as the “hard truth,” then it’s not education, it’s political indoctrination. That’s not what higher education is supposed to be about and Delaware would do well to wake up to that fact.

   — Bill    Nov 1, 08:11 AM    #

7. Sociologist— You are suspicious of any protest that doesn’t offer a solution? That only covers about 95% of the protests that we see on campuses today? Here’s an alternative: inform students that racial discrimination in the public sphere will not be tolerated, and then leave the students alone. Personally, I’d just boycott the whole thing. I don’t recall my Resident Assistant having much to do with my graduation from university…

   — Gdub    Nov 1, 08:46 AM    #

8. As an African American, I am disgusted with the “new racism” such as that embodied in the U. Delaware mind control program. The persistence of racial incidents on campuses is largely attributable to such idiocy, which itself is obviously racist.

   I’ve long wished that the evils of academic political correctness would stop making things worse than they have to be.

   To fools who charge that all whites of European descent are racists, I simply say that it doesn’t take a genius to see how your hateful and biased views perpetuate, if not perpetrate problems. Slavery would never have ended if your thesis had the least bit of merit to it.

   Why colleges and universities keep allowing hatre speech to pass as “diversity training” is beyond me. Speakers such as that in the story doubtless want everyone to be as miserable as they are.

   — Ken    Nov 1, 09:21 AM    #

9. Uncharacteristically of the general way in which I often see things, I think that Bill has a real point here. There is a big and fundamental difference between exposing students during undergrad years to many different, maybe new ideas, positions, view-points, arguments, and the like, vs. expecting that they will change in some particular way, adopt some particular view, and if not be socially branded as [fill in the blank: some horribly negative thing, the terms are many, e.g., “racist”]. The first activity above is education, and it is what college exists to enable and promote. The latter is something genuinely horrible, to be feared and avoided in a democracy, lying at the far opposite end of the scale from education, and colleges ought not to engage in it. It is equally reasonable, and important, that colleges themselves be asked and expected to do some serious self-examination here. I would say it is absolutely reasonable to ask everyone, majority and minority, to examine themselves for prejudicial views. Almost everyone does have at least some. Majority and minority alike. And done in an honest educational way, this lies within the realm of education and reasonable activity of an undergraduate college. I can’t judge the U. Del. program because I really don’t know much of anything about it, and there is very little to go on here in such a short piece. But I would say that the U. of Del., and those who created this program, cannot be hypocritical here. They too must be willing to do just what they want others to do: engage in honest self-examination on the issues raised here.

   — David    Nov 1, 09:43 AM    #

10. Thank God for groups like FIRE who expose such abuses. In Red China, brainwashing occurs, but there is no FIRE. I wonder if UD got their idea for the program from China or Cuba or someplace.

    — michael    Nov 1, 10:13 AM    #

11. U of Delaware the new Gitmo. Freshman orientation the new waterboarding. U of Delware administration the gestapo. Imagine the poor white kid, already suffering from low self-esteem due to an alcoholic parent and poverty, somehow making it through high school to the University of Delaware, and the first thing he finds out is he is a racist.

    — Karen    Nov 1, 10:26 AM    #

12. Regrettably, this is merely the latest in a two-decades-long attempt by the University of Delaware to turn itself into a burlesque of the college described in Malcolm Bradbury’s “The History Man.” For some unfathomable reason, recent administrations have persuaded themselves that the U.S. Constitution magically becomes null and void within the precincts of the campus (at least until the Federal courts periodically, and expensively, remind them otherwise). Don’t they employ legal counsel at that place? If so, what the heck does he or she do all day?

    — Gustave    Nov 1, 10:27 AM    #

13. It is interesting that someone mentions “Red China,” for during the Cultural Revolution there, people were subjected to “struggle” sessions in which they would be openly accused by others of such “crimes” as being “capitalist roaders” and “anti-revolutionary,” and the like.

    My Chinese friends who experienced these sessions remember them with horror. One would think that universities are places that advocate “free inquiry,” but I guess that being re-education camps is more the rage these days.

    The results are destructive. Instead of bringing people together, it is like throwing a bomb into the social and intellectual atmosphere. People become afraid of being accused of being “racist” or whatever, and so relationships tend to be much more guarded and less open.

    Actually I believe that is what the administrators want, versus their “stated” goals.

    — William    Nov 1, 10:41 AM    #

14. Although I too do not know the details of UD’s program, I am amused at the outcry about a program that “promotes self-examination and discussion.”

    Heaven help us if we have to examine our views and discuss ideas with which we may not agree.

    Our social world is a construction, with agendas built in. Why is it that any attempt to look at these agendas brings out the brainwashing chorus, almost always from the right-wing?

    At the same time, why is it that universities think they need to practice behavior modification instead of challenging students to indeed examine their beliefs?

    The issue at UD, perhaps, is what self examination means and what passes for civil discourse.

    — theron    Nov 1, 10:43 AM    #

15. I am a faculty member at UD and I am embarrassed. I had no idea there was such a program and I hope the University does the right thing. I have a lot of respect for UD’s students. They are a great bunch of people and if they see a problem, the University should listen.

    — Diane    Nov 1, 10:46 AM    #

16. This type of activity is not limited to U Del. It goes on in the corporate world when employees of corporations are forced into “sensitivity training.” It happens in the government sphere government employees are forced to do things that contravene their personal beliefs, or lose their jobs; as in the case of the San Fransisco fighters fire forced to participate in a gay rights parade or lose their posts. They endured horrific verbal and sexual harrassment in the process of protecting their jobs.

    This is another example of the militancy of the left, the racist “anti-racist” and homosexual lobbies.

    — R2    Nov 1, 10:46 AM    #

17. I have no connection with Delaware, but as a faculty member I had a close connection to the residence life department at another state university for several years, a closer connection than any other faculty member I’ve ever known. This department would have been glad to implement something like the Delaware program, but it was so overwhelmingly incompetent in basic operations that it never would have been able to bring it off. (It was unable to keep track of room keys, maintain accurate room charts, schedule meetings, prevent furniture from disappearing, and bill students for documented damage.) The training program, which I underwent, was limited to the RAs and other staff, and it was astounding (and incompetently run). I learned many things I had never known, such as: black people don’t tell time the same way white people do; when a white person says “3:00pm” it means “3:00pm,” but when a black person says “3:00pm” it means “some time in the afternoon,” so if a black person doesn’t show up for a 3:00pm meeting that’s ok, because it’s a cultural difference. (This was actually taught as part of staff training.)

    The residence life culture I observed up close was profoundly anti-intellectual. It was based on group-think, psychological bullying, repetitive slogans, and deep educational ignorance.

    It’s long past time to bring an end to “Residence Life” as we know it.

    — Bob    Nov 1, 10:48 AM    #

18. “I wonder if UD got their idea for the program from China or Cuba or someplace.”

    Both…indirectly.

    — gene    Nov 1, 10:50 AM    #

19. I’ve read the script. It’s like the Black Panthers merged with the Khmer Rouge. It’s almost too unbelievable to be true.

    — marci    Nov 1, 11:25 AM    #

20. It’s sad to see people use a case of misguided name-calling as an excuse for misguided name-calling of their own. Stupidity can come from any point on the political spectrum-as can clear thought and intelligent discourse.

    It would be interesting to know whether the university’s behavior measures up. How many professors are black? Gay? Simply eccentric?

    — jpr    Nov 1, 11:36 AM    #

21. To “theron” who says, “Although I too do not know the details of UD’s program, I am amused at the outcry about a program that “promotes self-examination and discussion”, I suggest you go to the UD Residence Life website and see for yourself (before they remove it). Read the linked documents. Here you go:
    http://www.udel.edu/reslife/students/wholenewworld.htm

    — MikeH    Nov 1, 11:55 AM    #

22. For some reason, thereon seems to accept that UD’s program actually “promotes self-examination and discussion” just because its promoters say so. Anybody who’s been through so called “diversity training” knows that exactly the opposite is true. The programs take place in a highly charged atmosphere where expressions of opinions contrary to the desired mindset are risky, so most people just clam up. Encouraging reexamination of our beliefs is what education should be about, but what UD is up to is giving student a roadmap to correct thinking that has only left turns. That’s what has the right up in arms, not an unwillingness to undertake self -examination.

    — binkless    Nov 1, 11:55 AM    #

23. When I first read the details of this program, I thought surely it is being misreported or missrepresented: no major university in its right mind would do these things.

    But then I read the selection of documents that FIRE collected and posted on its site. They strike me as just as bad as everyone is saying.

    Perhaps it is the case that FIRE’s charges come from “a selective citation of documents,” as the VP claims — in which case, perhaps the VP for student life might like to provide us with all of the complete documents pertaining to his program so we can see if they’re being distorted or taken out of context.

    What the VP doesn’t address though, are the comments of some of the students and employees of UD who have corroborated the worst about the program. Perhaps there are only a few at the moment, but their testimony seems to spell trouble for UD.

    — jm    Nov 1, 12:05 PM    #

24. Nothing is going to be achieved by merely commenting on the absurdities propounded by the University of Delaware. Has anyone read the response by the University to the FIRE letter?

    The lunatic left at Delaware will never give up its asinine political correctness, unless someone (FIRE?) makes a legal issue out of it. Does its policy not infringe on the First Amendment to the US Constitution. Sue the Morons!

    — DANinZA    Nov 1, 12:23 PM    #

25. Any program that is intended to “promote self-examination and discussion” should allow its participants to come to their own conclusions, including that the whole notion of “white privilege” is lefty BS. This program doesn’t allow for that. All these students are forced to accept these fringe theories as “hard facts” and any denial will be met with swift retribution. It’s called brainwashing. it’s called indoctrination.

    So what about gay or black students? Surely, most of them already believe that crap about white or heterosexual privilege. Are they forced to change their views and become indoctrinated in Christianity and traditional values and the dangers of “black racism”? No. Of course not.

    This is a left wing/anti-America/anti-religious brainwashing/indoctrination program and resistance is futile.

    — Real American    Nov 1, 12:45 PM    #

26. I visited the FIRE page, downloaded and read the only document from U. Delaware that FIRE provides (go here: http://www.thefire.org/pdfs/3d0208922083e5d59664be8371ab5f0f.pdf )

    This is a presentation by a Dr. Shakhti Butler. In my view the contents are reactionary and wrong.

    But there is no indication whatsoever on this page that U. Delaware is doing anything more than exposing its RAs to this viewpoint.

    It’s no more improper to expose them to this viewpoint than to expose them to any other viewpoint, except overly racist and Nazi viewpoints.

    (I’d make an exception for this viewpoint too, as it too is racist, though not Nazi. But — unfortunately — this is what passes for “antiracism” among many otherwise well-meaning people.

    It’s like the “White Skin Privilege” position, which is also utterly wrong and reactionary, but accepted by many people who want to fight racism and are seeking a theoretical understanding for it.

    So simply to expose RAs, or students generally, or anybody to this viewpoint is not objectionable.)

    And here’s the problem: FIRE is not saying: “Look! U. Del. is exposing students to only one, or a small number, of viewpoints about racism!”

    If FIRE, or anybody, did this, they might have a point. Students should be exposed to a number of perspectives on racism.

    But no: FIRE is saying: “Look at THIS viewpoint on racism! We don’t like it!”

    FIRE isn’t saying this? But they are — by quoting this particular viewpoint extensively, at

    http://www.thefire.org/index.php/article/8552.html

    FIRE claims it is “against indoctrination” — though they don’t define what “indoctrination” is.

    But, if they were REALLY “against indoctrination”, as they claim, they would complain about programs that exposed students to one, or a limited number, of viewpoints on racism, REGARDLESS OF WHAT THOSE VIEWPOINTS WERE.

    That is: it would not be the content of the viewpoints themselves, but the LACK OF DIVERSITY of viewpoints, that those who “oppose indoctrination” should be concerned about.

    They would NOT be concerned with the actual content of the viewpoints — much less with whether FIRE agreed with them or not.

    I find FIRE to be an ideologically right-wing (“conservative”) organization. Therefore FIRE’s implication — that this is the ONLY permissible viewpoint at U. Delaware’s training for RA’s — is suspect. FIRE can’t be trusted to be objective.

    What is the evidence that this is the ONLY permissible position at U.Del? Is there any?

    If there is, FIRE is remiss for not providing it.

    If there isn’t, FIRE is not supporting “free speech” at all. It is simply opposing viewpoints “conservatives” don’t like.

    I oppose this viewpoint too — it is, in fact, “conservative.”

    But it is not wrong to expose students to it.

    — Grover Furr    Nov 1, 01:00 PM    #

27. I keep wondering how University Admissions Committees keep letting so many supposedly racist, sexist, homophobic students into their midst in the first place. Are they really so incompetent that they don’t notice such character defects when poring over applicants’ extra-curricular activities and recommendations?

    Ah but I get it now: those committees are laden with whites blind to their own racism, sexism etc., giving rise to the RAs’ remedial re-education programs, which MUST not be taught by whites, otherwise how can a white RA preach that ALL whites are racist?

    This crap is nothing more than Soviet-style indoctrination. DU alums ought to organize against such fascism and deny their alma mater $$ until it deep-sixes these pernicious attempts to turn students against their parents and their country.

    — Anna Keppa    Nov 1, 01:05 PM    #

28. Since when did it become a college’s mission to actively and/or coercively shape the social and political attitudes of its students? I thought colleges exist to grant degrees to its students. Is there such a thing as a Bachelor of Diversity or Master of Political Correctness degree? Get back to teaching the “3Rs” (so to speak) and forget about social engineering.

    — bpbatista    Nov 1, 01:21 PM    #

29. Grover Furr needs some internet training. FIRE links to many documents at UD other than the one he specifies.

    Consider http://www.thefire.org/pdfs/f3dd33e562a3289f10d86888911b7a8d.pdf where you’ll find this gem:

    Assistant Director for Residential Education – Works in conjunction with individual
    Complex Coordinators to engage in action research on all major lesson plans. Design and
    implement strategies to communicate information from competency assessments to
    students. Develops, designs, interprets, and reports baseline studies on the diversity
    education elements of the competency chart, currently expressed as:
    1. Understand how your social identities affect how you view others.
    a. Each student will understand their social identities which are salient in
    their day-to-day life.
    b. Each student will be able to express an understanding of how their social
    identities influence their views of others.
    2. Understand how differences in equity impact our society.
    a. Each student will learn about the forms of oppression that are linked with
    social identity groups.
    b. Each student will recognize that systemic oppression exists in our society
    c. Each student will recognize the benefits of dismantling systems of
    oppression
    3. Understand your congruence with citizenship values:

    Face it: the UD administration is completely on board with extreme left doctrine about racism and has developed a system of roles and training to impress the doctrine on its students.

    — binkless    Nov 1, 01:56 PM    #

30. Faculty and friends of higher education who may have had their eyes opened by this affair, and who would like to work to return humane educational values to campus life, are invited to visit The Collegiate Way: Residential Colleges and the Renewal of University Life.

    The Collegiate Way advocates the creation of small, cross-sectional, faculty-led, residential colleges within large institutions as a way to improve the quality of campus life for all. It presents a picture opposite to the current residence life establishment, coming neither from the left nor right but rather from the perspective of broad, liberal education.

    — R.J. O'Hara    Nov 1, 02:01 PM    #

31. Grover –

    Read the first three comments in this thread and then get back to me. I find it interesting that one of the involved RA’s was being strong armed into putting a happy face on this for the media. I applaud him for having the moral courage to refuse.

    But, he is probably one of those right-wing conservatives, so nothing he says can be believed anyway. I’ll be so happy when Hillary is elected, then she will make it illegal to question the moral authority of anything the left chooses to do.

    Otherwise, best regards.

    Ken

    — kenp    Nov 1, 02:02 PM    #

32. This kind of crap is enabled by government support for liberal arts majors. I’d rather see a huge cutback on college aid to liberal arts majors and the money diverted instead into supporting those students who are pursuing the hard sciences. Civilizations are built by engineers, architects, scientists, physicists, chemists etc. The last thing we need in this country is more diversity coordinators, ethnic studies professors, lawyers of all kinds or sociologists. These people are a dead weight on society. End government subsidies for all liberal arts majors — if you want to pursue a crap career in “Whiteness Stuides” or “Womyn’s Studies” be my guest, but not on my dime. China is currently graduatng 600,000 engineers a year. They are already cleaning our clock and will do so even more in the future unless we get rid of crap like this and concentrate on BUILDING our society rather than tearing it and everyone in it apart.

    — MaryJ    Nov 1, 02:08 PM    #

33. Yes MaryJ. Let’s be more like China. That’ll take of the probelms of ideological brainwashing and totalitarian governance. Really.

    — richard    Nov 1, 02:38 PM    #

34. Grover Furr,
    If you’re not part of the U of D faculty, you should be. Here is a link to Dr. Shakti Butler’s Diversity Facilitation Training.

    http://www.thefire.org/pdfs/3d0208922083e5d59664be8371ab5f0f.pdf

    I especially like her definition of ‘racist’.
    A racist is one who is both privileged and socialized on the basis of race by a white supremacist (racist) system. The term applies to all white people (i.e., people of European descent) living in the United States, regardless of class, gender, religion, culture or sexuality. By this definition, people of color cannot be racists, they do not have the power to back up their predjuduces, hostilities or act’s of discrimination.

    She has many other definitions for other terms. According to her, if you are a white American, you are a racist. She states from European descent, but I guess if you’re a white European now you’re not a racist, but then she does not make this clear. And if you’re not white then you can’t be a racist.

    If this is the norm of what’s being taught in universities today, then I’m glad I’m in my mid-fifties, for I don’t wish to be around when these ‘indoctrinated’ people are responsible for the world in which we live.

    — JRS    Nov 1, 02:53 PM    #

35. Look. it’s real simple. What Delaware is doing is what the large majority of other American colleges/universities are engaged in, to different degrees of boldness.

    It’s called Cultural Marxism indoctrination. The precepts of “Critical Theory” as developed by the thinkers of the Frankfurt School are being used on the captive students as part of a long term strategy to undermine the backbone of the West.
    Go research the the things I mentioned in this post yourself if you don’t believe me.

    — Sam I am    Nov 1, 02:57 PM    #

36. Regarding Grover’s contention that FIRE only opposes viewpoints that conservatives don’t like, he should be aware that the group has acted on behalf of a PETA protester who was not being allowed to distribute pamphlets at FSU describing slaughterhouse brutality.

    In another more recent case, FIRE acted on behalf of a liberal professor at Bellvue Community College who was suspended because he presented his students with a math word problem involving a woman named “Condoleeza” throwing a watermelon off of a building.

    Yes, it is sometimes objectionable speech, even borderline racist speech, but FIRE is consistent in their commitment to freedom of speech, regardless of the political positions involved.

    This post from FIRE helps explain their non-partisan approach.

    — Dan Wismar    Nov 1, 03:00 PM    #

37. As a Caucasian freshman living on campus at the University of Delaware, I can speak for many of us here that this accusation has major flaws associated with it. First of all, we were sent through “diversity training” at the beginning of the semester. It was a very good experience and at no time did the instructors favor white supremacy in any way and if anything made all of us freshman think twice at any previous thoughts or misconceptions we might have had about racism. I’m not positive if this training program was mandatory or not but in any way it was a good experience to have entering a new step in your life. Other accusations have spread around the media in previous days saying that we are forced to have door decorations or other paraphernalia on a certain topic (ours is sustainability). We are not forced to have any material on our door and can take it down at any time. Anyway, what University doesn’t have material on their door stating their name and other material? However, I did hear of another complex on campus where students were asked when they discovered their sexual orientation and I personally feel that it is not anyone’s business to know when you knew your sexual orientation and that question was out of line. But again, I’m not part of that complex and don’t know if that question was voluntary or not. In conclusion I am disappointed to be framed and generalized as a white supremacist just because I enroll at the University of Delaware. I never in anyway felt pressured to conform to certain ideas and if at any point in the future do; I will call the instructors out on it immediately. I hope this clears any misunderstandings and please make sure not to jump to conclusions if you have no outside knowledge of this situation other than this article.

    — S    Nov 1, 03:10 PM    #

38. I am a UD graduate who has a BA in psychology. I have had a successful career and currently consult on leadership development and find this RA program abhorrent. But, I find a statement that only engineers, scientists, etc. build societies also absurd. Universities are not the conscience of society. They are institutions of learning. To create a program of social engineering in an attempt to impose a new “ism” on young minds is arrogance that defies description.

    While FIRE may be a conservative organization, it is to be commended to bringing this perversion of academia to light. If the University had been imposing the viewpoint that homosexuality is a sin, you can bet the liberal left would be in an uproar over this.

    — John    Nov 1, 03:16 PM    #

39. Part of the U of D Residence Life Diversity Training website has just been altered. A section called WHOLE NEW WORLD Training is now linking to a blank page. If they feel they are being misrepresented, why remove what was there. It would prove their point…unless it doesn’t.

    — bio mom    Nov 1, 03:23 PM    #

40. As someone who has worked in Residence Life and Student Affairs in general, I do believe that we are (and should be) concerned with the moral development of our students. Before anyone starts to label me, I will save them the trouble: as defined by George Will, I would be considered a “Tory Conservative.”

    I believe that institutions of higher education are called to educate the total student in preparation of service for their society. That should not require indoctrination or any other coercive form of education, but it will likely require discussion of different view points and respect for those who posit those viewpoints. But above all, it requires honest examination of what they have learned to ascertain if it serves them as a mature, intelligent and engaged member of our society.

    — Don    Nov 1, 03:24 PM    #

41. What the U of Del is doing here is blatant indoctrination of the type that would make Stalin proud. It is exactly what happens in communist dictatorships where the incorrect thought is the one that will get you thrown in jail, sent off for “re-education” or killed. Imagine what our schools will be like in 50 years… But sadly, if this doesn’t stop, I fear there won’t be an America in 50 years. Looks like Orwell was more prophetic than not.

    — jdawg    Nov 1, 03:31 PM    #

42. To “bio mom”

    Not surprised. Never fear, the Internet is forever. I believe that page has been cached somewhere, and screenshots of it are saved for all to view. It wouldn’t be the first time the left has tried to cover something up like this.

    — jdawg    Nov 1, 03:36 PM    #

43. S,
    You are missing the point. No one is framing you of this: “In conclusion, I am disappointed to be framed and generalized as a white supremacist just because I enroll at the University of Delaware.” It’s Dr. Shakti Butler who does that. Go to post #34 and read her Diversity Facilitation Training. Then you will understand the uproar.

    — JRS    Nov 1, 03:40 PM    #

44. I am a UDel parent, an editor at American University, AND I went through anti-racism training similar to this as part of an anti-racism mandate in 1996 at the Unitarian Universalist Association, Boston, when I was employed there. Then and there it was mandatory and there was a tremendous uproar both about the manadatory nature and the “all whites are racists” tenet. The UUA eventually changed it’s training in response to protests (even from their trustees). BUT this training was then the fad and “benchmark” belief in antiracism thinking. It was an awful experience and people were publicly belittled. I’d hoped the whole fad had gone away, but apparently the training is still being sold to organizations, including UDel. On the other hand, I am glad to see some non-social programming going on in the dorms. It’s needed. UDel is a terrific school, but in my opinion, doesn’t bring in enough speakers and evening program. You’re only 90 minutes from DC, and 40 from Philly. You could do it.

    — Linda McHugh    Nov 1, 04:00 PM    #

45. Earlier I posted this, “I suggest you go to the UD Residence Life website and see for yourself (BEFORE THEY REMOVE IT). Read the linked documents. Here you go:
    http://www.udel.edu/reslife/students/wholenewworld.htm

    Well, la-de-dah, they have, of course, removed the documents (there were 5 here originally, just this morning). Nothing to see here folks, move along. (Just like air-brushing someone out of a photograph). “Whole New World Training” indeed!

    — MikeH    Nov 1, 04:09 PM    #

46. I would suspect that many in Adacemia, including those at Deleware, would be self-described evolutionists (many of my professors are (MS. Ed.)).
    Assuming that adaptations among members of the same species allows a subset to prosper and “advance”, then wouldn’t the accumulation of “white priviledge” be among the adaptations? And if the academics are true to evolution dogma, then they should admit that there is no question of “right & wrong” just pragmatic concern on the effectiveness of said adaptation in the advance of the sub-species. Hence, they should agree that some invisible racism works to improve the entire species by weeding out the less-fit subsets who are not capable of accumulating other forms of “priviledge”.
    This used to be known as Social Darwinism, the logical extension of Evolution, but scorned among academic evolutionists (especially sociologists!) as unpalatable, which, in fact, it is (along with evolution in general).
    A solution? Allow students to rub elbows with lots of other kinds of people and let them learn for themselves how to navigate this complex society without the State intervening.

    — G. L. Tirebiter    Nov 1, 04:18 PM    #

47. Linda,

    Although the “all white people are racists” part of this “treatment” is certainly horrific, the idea of Stalinist or Orwellian indoctrination being conducted in any setting in the US should cause us all concern. If the school has nothing to hide, then why are they redacting or eliminating the web pages that reference this program?

    — jdawg    Nov 1, 04:22 PM    #

48. Dear Dan,

    So you would like to educate ‘the whole student’—therefore, you see moral education as part of the University’s job.

    However, morality is not an academic subject. Math teachers should know math and Shakespearian scholars should know Shakespeare, but who defines morality? How does one become an expert in the subject? Can only Ph.D.‘s be entrusted with moral education?

    The notion that morality is an academic subject that can be taught on college campuses leads inevitably to some form of mind control and indoctrination. You can see this on campuses throughout the nation. That the indoctrination is both from the right and the left is to be expected. To the man with a moral hammer, every moral problem looks like a nail that must be bashed. True academic subjects are tough enough to teach without any added burden. Let the poor students alone—they have enough to do studying for the next Calculus exam.

    — arnold asrelsky    Nov 1, 05:05 PM    #

49. Dear Mr. Tirebiter,

    You assume that if one ‘believes’ in evolution one does (or should) derive moral principles from that belief. Why?

    There is no doubt that nature ‘condones’ brutality, murder, rapine, cruelty, etc. but I put the word condone in quotation marks because neither I nor other ‘believers’ in evolution believe that whatever is is right.

    The fact that wasp babies survive on the living flesh of scorpians provides no clue for proper moral behavior among humans. To believe that it does (or should) merely reveals one’s prejudice about evolution—which you have done.

    — arnold asrelsky    Nov 1, 05:22 PM    #

50. Arnold Asrelsky,
    As I’m leaving for the day, this shall be my last post (it’s OK I own the company).

    I’m in complete agreement with your assessment of the morality issue, but my only question is; do they still teach Calculus?

    — JRS    Nov 1, 05:28 PM    #

51. Arnold,

    You raise a really good question and I am sorry if I inferred that it is solely the Universities’ job to nuruture and develop morality. It is society’s job. The question is: through what means and what mechanisms? Please understand that I am not defending UDel’s specific program (which I have admittedly not reviewed).

    I am saying, however, that education is, and must be, more than just education about a particular topic area. For education to be effective and serve the good of society, it must be exercised on a moral basis. Education devoid of ethics is not a neutral outcome — it is a dangerous outcome. Enron… Keating…there are plenty of scandals that involve well-educated people making harmful and immoral choices. This does beg the question of who gets to define morality. Good question. I would MUCH rather have a reasoned discussion over what defines morality and who gets to teach it, than a discussion of if it is really appropriate to be taught as part of the curriculum. I think there is ample evidence that it is needed. I do not believe that teaching about ethics and morality automatically lead to mind control and indoctrination. I would submit, however, not having these discussions is a disservice to professions, the greater society, and utimately students themselves. It is also a betrayal of most Universitys’ mssions. As you note, true academic subjects are difficult enough to teach, but since many professions are applied, please don’t ever give me a lawyer to advocate for me who does not believe in right and wrong, please don’t ever turn my 401K over to an investor who doesn’t play by the rules, or a physician who is willing to lie to me about the need for surgery. Yes the student will have more to learn, and it will be challenging to teach, but I think it is well worth the effort!

    — Don    Nov 1, 05:49 PM    #

52. The comments by S in post 37 reflect part of the problem with today’s students. One would hope that before posting, S read the article and the comments posted here. If so, then S should have understood that what is being objected to is the exact opposite of what he/she posted. The accusation isn’t that the program advocated white supremacy but rather referred to all whites as racist.

    In making the statement “at no time did the instructors favor white supremacy in any way and if anything made all of us freshman think twice at any previous thoughts or misconceptions we might have had about racism”, S demonstrates a level of misunderstanding that is scary in a college freshman. Clearly no one was accusing the program of “favoring white supremacy”!!

    I am also a bit concerned that the student participated in a program and had no idea as to whether it was mandatory or not. It appears to me that critical reflection, seeking out information and being well informed are the casualties of all the “feel good” sessions on college campuses now.

    — bil    Nov 1, 06:05 PM    #

53. RE: — MaryJ Nov 1, 02:08 PM #

    Ethnic studies, sociology and the like are not “liberal arts”. They are social sciences.

    — Penny    Nov 1, 06:30 PM    #

54. I graduated in May from UD. I was there for just over four years on a full time or part time basis. I never felt that any professor or teaching staff attempted any kind of indoctrination or viewpoint discrimination, even in potentially highly-charged classes such as classes on the Vietnam War or race/cultural issues in the United States. UD’s commitment to academic fairness and freedom of speech is better judged by its defense, in 2006, of allowing a prominent neo-Nazi to maintain an adjunct teaching position at the University, since the administration judged his political ideology to be entirely distinct from his subject expertise. FIRE’s analysis of the UD program is inflammatory, one-sided, and shallow. Oddly enough, just the things that it accuses the UD program of.

    — richard    Nov 1, 06:43 PM    #

55. After suggesting to President Harker Dekaware was doing a good imitation of the Takiban, I received an email in which he appears to lie. Wow!

    — John    Nov 1, 07:44 PM    #

56. OH great – what we need are racists to tell us we are racists, so the racists can re-educate us. That way we, whom the racists think are racist, won’t be racist any longer, but the racists who don’t realize they are racist will continue to be racist as they are.

    Goes back to the main problem – their idea is NOT that racism is bad – oh heck no- it’s just to make sure that the RIGHT people can continue to be racist…

    Nearly always, it’s the most racist of folks who complain about how racist others are.

    We are all racists of one kind or another, it’s more a matter of recognizing that we are all in this world together, that we all feel and want the same things, and are entitled to pursue those things as long as it doesn’t infringe on others.

    — gl clib    Nov 1, 08:05 PM    #

57. Well, it looks like the pc fascists at UD folded like cheap suits, their thought control program is being dismantled under pressure from FIRE.

    Just what about the transparency of the internet do these poor dinosaurs in academia not get? I guess it’s a new learning curve for them.

    College campuses for these moronic lefties aren’t their playground anymore. Thank God.

    — penny    Nov 1, 08:35 PM    #

58. According to FIRE’s website, the UD program has now been suspended pending investigation and evaluation. A letter from the UD president to the UD community is also posted there:

    http://www.thefire.org/index.php/article/8585.html

    — jm    Nov 1, 08:54 PM    #

59. I am impressed by all the intelligent arguments and comments exhibited in these postings, especially by S, Grover Furr, & SociologistWithaCape. Of course, the African American who posted comment #8 wouldn’t know anything he’s talking about, and so should be totally ignored by any intelligent person, nor would Marie (comment 1) or Bill (comment 2) know anything. It’s time we all admitted that UD and similar universities, and their professors, know what’s best for all Americans. After all, they have PhDs and are therefore smarter than the rest of us. It is our duty to tell them when we discovered our sexual identity—this is wholly within the purview of the State. And its time we all admitted we’re white racists— there’s nothing we can do about it— we were born white, so it must be true. And if we think homos are queer, its proof positive that we are the ones that aren’t normal, and therefore, by definition, totally homophobic. (After all, if all whites are racist, it only stands to reason that all straight people are homophobic, right? Readers must agree that’s only logical.) So, instead of decrying UD, UD is to be congratulated for setting us straight. It’s about time the State and its institutions of “higher learning” got involved in fixing us poor slobs. Why can’t the rest of those making comments here recognize the idiocy of their arguments? And that’s why I’m voting for Hillary!!! I think UD is doing just what they need to do, and I hope all those that contribute to their alma mater, whether it is UD or similar institutions of “higher learning” are proud of where their dollars go!!!! And since I’m sure most all readers totally agree with what I’ve written, I’ll even sign my name. Go Hillary!!!

    — Hank Brock    Nov 1, 08:59 PM    #

60. Bill,
    I think you are unclear with the statement about white supremacy, in Dr. Shakti Butler’s Diversity Facilitation Training she states that racism is a synonym for white supremacy. If you read the Diversity Facilitation Training manual you would see the point she made.

    Also, I was not concerned at the time if the program was mandatory or not, if I had not been interested in attending the program I would have looked into it to see if it was mandatory or not. One should look at the bigger picture I am trying to paint rather than belittle and critique things that are beside the point. I have homework to get to and will resume this discussion tomorrow.

    — S    Nov 1, 09:06 PM    #

61. What? I just posted my comments, and I get a message that it is being “moderated,” and that they’ll decide whether or not it deserves posting? I used no swearing or obscene language, and my comments were no more disparaging than anyone else’s. BUT, I’ll bet my posting will not be posted, simply because it is not politically correct. We will see how much they butcher my posting. And this is about “Free Speech”? Not here.

    — Hank Brock    Nov 1, 09:06 PM    #

62. I am a parent of a recent graduate of U Del and am disgusted by this New World Order kind of thinking. By the way, people of other races than Caucasian can be racist. I am white and have been prejudiced against by other whites for being Jewish. A very good friend of ours, who is white, works as a professor at a black university. He says he experiences race hatred every day on the part of the administration and some of the students. He has to go the extra mile plus more helping students lest he be accused of being racist if someone gets a bad grade from him. He works very hard to help the students, and guess what, it is the administration which, on the whole cares much more about their positions and money than the well being of their students. So, anyone can be racist, and it is extremely narrow minded to accuse an entire race of prejudice. How foolish.

    — Irene    Nov 1, 09:58 PM    #

63. Dear JRS,

    I must apologize for not being clear. Of course I did not mean the Calculus invented by those two Dead White Males, Newton and Leibniz—their product is obviously supportive of hegemonic, europhallocentric patriarchal oppression and has no place in a modern, forward-looking University.

    No, I should have made clear that I was referring to the New Age Science of predicting the future and achieving inner harmony through the use of renal calculi—kidney stones to you, bub. Thanks for the chance to improve my comment.

    PS Congrats on owning your own firm—what’s the good of being a CEO if you can’t provide yourself with perks?

    — Arnold Asrelsky    Nov 1, 10:51 PM    #

64. Does anyone get the sense that people are being directed here to comment? The similarity of the talking points is astonishing. Almost every person commenting in the thread is expressing a visceral hatred for liberals—almost as if they’re just here because they have an axe to grind.

    — Justin    Nov 1, 10:58 PM    #

65. Dear Don,

    Do you believe that if southern Christian ministers had had a course in Christian charity they would have come out against slavery?

    Do you believe that if Catholic Bishops had studied Catholic Theology they would not have excused and hidden pederastic priests?

    Do you believe that if high school students had been taught the dangers of speeding and drinking, that age group would not have exceeded all others in deaths on the highway?

    I ask these rhetorical questions to underscore the idea that your notion of ‘teaching’ morality is far too naive and simplistic. The execs at Enron did not fail because they had no notion of fiduciary responsibility. Doctors who lie do not do so because they lack Medical Ethics 101, and lawyers who subvert justice do not do so because they have never had a course in ethics, legal or otherwise.

    No, sinners sin for the usual reason—their selfishness and greed override their moral scruples. No course, academic or otherwise, will change this. I can help you write a good essay—I do not know how to make you or me a better person. Such is our dilemma.

    — arnnold asrelsky    Nov 1, 11:26 PM    #

66. Aw shucks, fellows, Justin sussed us out. What perspicacity. I, for one, will own up—yes, yes, we were all directed here and promised a free subscription to the Weekly Standard if we trashed the UD thought-control program.

    But it occurs to me that the person who really reveals a visceral hatred for liberals must be yourself if you believe that the statement, all whites are racists, indicates liberal thought. I have rarely come across a better example of Orwellian Newspeak. And here I was thinking that I was a life-long liberal. Go know.

    — arnold asrelsky    Nov 1, 11:36 PM    #

67. As a second-year University of Delaware student who completed the diversity-focused residence hall program last year, I have to make some objections to the accusations put forth by FIRE and its surrounding commentators.

    1. The term “Orwellian”, used by FIRE to describe UD’s education program, is a gross exaggeration of the materials presented to residents through one-on-ones and monthly floor meetings with our RA. There was absolutely no effort to “control” our minds, so to speak. I recall activities where we were given the opportunity to examine our thoughts and beliefs about the state of society, social institutions, and where we stand within them. All opinions were respected, even if they proved discordant with the “official” stances of Residence Life.

    2. I am personally insulted that the students of University of Delaware have been portrayed in the past few days as victims of “systematic thought reform”. Perhaps it is an indicator of the failure of Residence Life to achieve its goals of diversity acceptance, but nobody I’ve spoken to has had his or her values fundamentally changed by monthly activities or programs. The only result I’ve noted is that my classmates might have an increased awareness of the lives of people dissimilar to themselves. ResLife programming ranges from guest speakers coming in to describe what life is in a wheelchair to programs about world hunger. These programs are NOT mandatory; last year, we had an incentive program where attending diversity-focused programs earned you points that could be redeemed at the end of the year for gift-certificates or DVDs. An incentive program is hardly mandatory.

    3. To show the other side: When we were given program evaluation forms for the residence hall curriculum last year, I took the chance to strongly criticize the curriculum. No, I did not appreciate having diversity “shoved down my throat”, nor did I believe myself to be fundamentally changed after the program. I was not entirely comfortable being asked about when I first discovered my sexual identity during my one-on-one with my RA, but I was not uncomfortable either. I did not enjoy being told to list those ethnic groups that I felt uncomfortable around. Despite the shortcomings of the program, however, all the attention that it has been given in the past few days is completely unmerited. Over the course of last year, I never felt as if I was forced to accept the specific views promoted by the University of Delaware. All of this attention has affected my campus very negatively, and I don’t appreciate the FIRE’s embellished overstatement of what goes on in the halls that I live in.

    — Liz    Nov 1, 11:42 PM    #

68. Arnold, my point was not that Delaware was some bastion of liberalism, or that liberals would support the policy as described by the article (as I take it you object). Rather, I was making the point that the comment thread seems less about Delaware in a lot of instances and more about trying to tar liberals. Try comments 25, 27, 35 or 41, for instance. (32 is also cute in its own way).

    Anyway, other than the fact that I didn’t express myself perfectly, I don’t think we really have too much to disagree about.

    — Justin    Nov 2, 12:04 AM    #

69. I just saw a film called, “The Lives of Others.” It’s about East German dissidents during the Stasi era. Chillingly similar to UD program, especially as regards the evaluation and “treatment (UD’s term)” of the non-compliant.

    — alan    Nov 2, 02:38 AM    #

70. “the school defines learning specifically as ‘attitudinal or behavioral changes,’ not acquiring any sort of knowledge and ability”?

    http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=58426

    lol.

    — taba    Nov 2, 06:41 AM    #

71. Wow — if all us white folk are racists then I guess UDel should REFUSE ALL DONATIONS from white alums!

    — Laura    Nov 2, 09:13 AM    #

72. Here is the univeristy definition of what it won’t tolerate “Racism, sexism, heterosexism, ageism, ableism and other behaviors and systems that empower some while oppressing others will not be tolerated.”

    What the heck is ageism and ableism? Are that able bodied people supposed to be ashamed of the fact that they can move and it gives them an advantage in life? Give me a break!

    Why not include homosexism, psychotosism, depressionism, bi-polarism, sociopathism, and any other difference there may be among us on the list. Mark my words… the next thing on the list will be obesitism. It is laughable at this point and I am! ROFLOL!!

    — Lisa    Nov 2, 09:36 AM    #

73. Dear Justin,

    I have reread the posts you indicate. Number 32 strikes me as biased against the liberal arts not liberals. All the others compare the UD program to procedures in Russia or China or are critical of the program for similar reasons. I see nothing in them ‘off-topic’ or directed against liberals.

    However, you are correct in seeing a similar thread in many of the comments—they, like mine, are comments by liberals attacking a push for conformity disguised as a search for truth, justice and the American way.

    I have no idea what you mean when you say now that you had not intended to characterize the bulk of the comments here as anti-liberal. You are right, you have not expressed yourself clearly.

    BTW, the removal of documents from the UD web site and the ultimate abandonment of the program surely indicate the truth: these bullies have no
    stomach for fighting folk they are powerless to punish. They are only comfortable pushing powerless students around.

    — arnold asrelsky    Nov 2, 11:12 AM    #

74. Just finished reading all of these comments and web-references. Great job guys. Just so refreshing to see the independent American Don’t Tread on Me Spirit and PC-Disobediance still alive and kicking. I am 65 and spend a lot of my time on the banks of the Concord river and have been through most of the social battle of the broad diversity of zealots that are and have been out there. Sum results: I discriminate ...I discriminate based on the content of people’s character (and behaviors) ....and so many of the know-it-all’s and zealots just hate it as it is the very last thing they want to be judged on and their reactions usually give me a good estimate of when i am dealing with a “racist” of one kind or another (and what does that word ‘racist’ really mean??) . Glad to see there are more young people doing the same. Gives me hope and brightens my day. Think for yourself and you’ll be Ok and usually do the right things more than half of the time which puts you ahead of the game in the long run. And pick your battles carefully so that you are there in the long run to be ahead of the game:)

    — jc    Nov 2, 12:02 PM    #

75. Responding to Bill’s chilling comment:“Yesterday I was approached to be an advocate of the program. Several of my RA friends have been asked to be available for talking with the press. When I declined I was taken aside and told that my future as an RA was in jeopardy as was future a student..”

    Bill,this is blatant blackmail. If I were you I’d name names and contact a lawyer. An attorney would put the school on notice that any act of retribution would be met with a law suit.

    — Paul Izzo    Nov 2, 12:32 PM    #

76. Is it time to shut down this Orwellian crap across the nation!!! ENOUGH!

    — truthy    Nov 2, 01:06 PM    #

77. I disagree that opposition to “all whites are racist” ideology is necessarily right wing. I am way to the left of the antiracism training crowd and, having gone through one of their trainings myself, find their ideas divisive and reactionary, not to say bizarre. They don’t really mind the current power structure—they’d just like to see different color people on top. To those who’d like to learn more about the training industry, I strongly recommend “The Shadow University” by Alan Kors and Harvey Silverglate (Free Press, 1998). Silverglate is a lawyer active with the Massachusetts ACLU—so much for the charges of right wing bias—and Kors a historian at Penn.

    — DR    Nov 2, 01:53 PM    #

78. Talk about religious indoctronation. If this was done to ecourage students to believe in Christanity. The ACLU (American Communist Legue United) Would be in court in the morning.

    — Derk Palfreyman    Nov 2, 02:37 PM    #

79. Dear DR

    During my time in academia such commenets as “all whites are racists- non-whites can’t be racists because they are not part of the power structure” seemed to emanate from groups I’d identify as ‘radical leftists,’ which would include radical feminists, queer-theorists, cultural studies mavens, radical deconstructivists, etc.

    The danger inherent in such views were clearly demonstrated at Duke U., where a group of radical faculty led by a Black radical feminist concluded that since the accused were privileged whites further privileged by wealth and reputation stemming from athletic prowess, they perfectly fit the profile of those likely to rape members of marginalized groups. Hence it was a sure thing they were guilty. The book, Guilty Untill Proven Innocent clearly reveals the danger of such thinking.

    My Hat is off to TheFire, whether they’re liberal, conserative, radical or pumpkins. Attempts to confite such groups to some political stereotype in order to nullify their value represent partisan politics at its most malicious. .

    — arnold asrelsky    Nov 2, 06:02 PM    #

80. I’d be interested in responses to #5 sociologist with a cape (which conjures up quite an image) who argued, why go to college if you know everything, in an apparent defense of the UD program. I’m interested because I’ve heard that statement used before, and it was quite effective in shutting down opposition. Any thoughts?

    — bob    Nov 2, 08:44 PM    #

81. Bob,

    Why go to college if you already know everything?

    Try The Education of Henry Adams:

    “The only part of education that the professor thought a success was the students…Their faith in education was so full of pathos that one dared not ask them what they thought they would do with education when they got it. Adams did put the question to one of them, and was surprised at the answer. ‘The degree of Harvard College is worth money to me in Chicago.’ ...So far as it went, the answer was good, and settled one’s doubts.”

    — John Blenkiron    Nov 2, 11:57 PM    #

82. Dear Bob

    Sociologistwithacape talks of ‘knowledge’ but means ‘reeducation’ Chinese style. The ‘knowledge’ to be inculcated is that all whites are racists, sexists, homophobes, etc. and must accept and admit this and strive to eliminate such defects from their souls.

    Naturally, all others are innocent victims of whites. This is a hell of a way to create a spirit of friendship and concern between college freshman, don’t you think?

    Why should the minority person like or trust the ‘clansman’ in the next room or even the same room? The best this Ku Kluxer can do is to be accepted as a ‘recovering racist, sexist, homophobe, etc.’ who will be closely watched for backsliding. This can be avoided perhaps by frequent self-criticisms and self-confessions. That’s the way it went down in China and that’s the way it works here.

    Example: at my school an ‘imparter of knowledge’ told a blonde blue-eyed student that she could never understand or appreciate what minority students suffered. The girl broke into tears and rushed out of the clasroom, full of the new insight she had been granted. Is this your idea of increasing the sum of knowledge in the student body? It’s not mine.

    — arnold asrelsky    Nov 3, 08:08 AM    #

83. FIRE now needs to demonstrate it’s willingness to go after Antioch U for the same offensive programs.

    — facultywife    Nov 3, 12:09 PM    #

84. My wife and I are both graduates of UofD… and have been proud of that until now. We would have been happy to have sent our kids there… until now. Until a program like this is done away, we wouldn’t even consider a donation to the school.

    — Craig & Joyce Simonian    Nov 3, 01:39 PM    #

85. Dear Arnold,

    If “leftists” such as the ones you describe represented any kind of challenge to current power arrangements, do you really think universities would welcome their political proselytizing, or that corporations would sponsor their sensitivity trainings?

    DR

    — DR    Nov 4, 12:26 PM    #

86. Dear DR

    Certainly, our power-brokers would not allow such goings-on if it threatened them. Actually, they know that such indoctrination sows hatred and mistrust in the student body, making it less likely that students would ever discover their true enemies. Of course I know this, what do you take me for, a fool?

    — arnold asrelsky    Nov 5, 10:26 AM    #

87. I feel bad for all of my white friends. As a proud African American I guess Ill have to stop hainging out with them in fear of them attacking me.

    — Jaquin    Nov 5, 05:30 PM    #

88. Several of the posts here have oversimplified the range of political beliefs as one-dimensional, ranging from liberal to conservative (the dimension that has been most discussed in recent years, e.g. the red/blue state polarization). Insofar as people’s belief systems can be reduced to points in space, that space has at least one additional dimension, stretching from libertarian to authoritarian. (To more accurately represent political beliefs, the liberal/conservative dimension should probably be split into moral liberal/conservative and fiscal liberal/conservative dimensions, but that is beside the point I’m trying to make right now.)

    My beliefs would fall in the libertarian/liberal quadrant; someone can, for example. share my belief that homosexuals should have the same rights as and be on an equal footing with heterosexuals, but unlike me, believe that this belief should have the force of law and anyone who speaks in a manner that degrades gay people should not only be shunned but also punished and/or re-educated. FIRE’s stance is decidedly libertarian, but as the cases mentioned in post #36 show, they are not necessarily conservative. It seems to me that they have been labeled conservative because they focus on opposing authoritarian policies and actions at universities, which are currently more liberal than conservative.

    — MadEngineer    Nov 5, 07:03 PM    #

89. To “bio mom”, “jdawg”, MikeH
    It’s in cache but the linked documents are gone!

    http://64.233.167.104/search?q=cache:81H7yKpXaiUJ:www.udel.edu/reslife/students/wholenewworld.htm+%22 University+of+Delaware%22+%22WHOLE+NEW+WORLD+Training&hl=fr&ct=clnk&cd=1&gl=ca&client=firefox-a

    Crazy stuff! Check out this article:
    http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=58426

    — Wen    Nov 6, 01:25 AM    #

90. I am a white queer/same-gender-loving guy from a middle-class background. I’m a late-20s self-identified educator/activists working in student affairs in higher education. I am deeply disturbed by what has happened at UD and by many of the comments posted here. I believe, particularly after reading through most of these comments, that the suspension of the ResLife program was just as much an attack on the content of the “thought reform” as it was an attack on supposed “coercive liberal though reform” or “brainwashing”.

    I’ve been taking time to reflect on my own practices as a social justice educator working in higher education. Are my practices and methods coercive? Do I present a broad range of material representing various ideologies on the topic of identity politics? Or do I try to steer participants/students down a set agenda, hoping they arrive at an acceptance of the ideologies that I hold dear? I honestly have to admit that, many times, I hope to have folks understand and adopt my way of thinking about identity politics. I admit that this is extremely problematic and I need to find other ways of truly engaging students in conversations about identity, power, and inequality/oppression.

    However, after working as ResLife administrator for six years and after living in residence halls inside of this (white queer cis-gendered temporarily ablebodied male) body for over ten years, I have experienced the often violent realities that students from marginalized and oppressed groups face daily. I have been personally targeted with violence, harassment, threats on my life, vandalism, demonized, dehumanized in every residence hall community that I’ve lived in. I have seen my student staff and residents who are folks of color, queer, people with disabilities, folks from working-class or poor families, international students, women, trans folks all face these things as well. The simple “let’s all get along and respect each other” and “celebrate diversity” and cultural food festivals and harsh penalties for those who perpetrate hate acts/crimes (if they can ever be caught) all do little or nothing to change the every-day reality of folks from oppressed/subordinated identity groups. Why? Because they do nothing to encourage folks to analyze the interplay of social/cultural/institutional power and identity in our every day thought-forms and behaviors. No act of hate or prejudice is ever an isolated event – it has context, background, it is a function of ideologies and beliefs that come from the environment and ideas of “self”. So to only respond to individual actions and not engage a community in a discussion about the factors that may contribute to hateful acts, and to not support people in identifying ways that they can personal help transform their community into a more accepting, non-violent place is to almost do nothing at all.

    Seeing this violence targeted at folks from oppressed/subordinated groups so often and having the ability to listen to people’s day-to-day experiences with empathy and a rational mind leave me with a feeling of urgency and often with desperation. This sense of desperation and urgency, I imagine, may have been what lead UD to utilize some of its controversial methods.

    However, I think it is dangerously hypocritical to challenge the incorporation of anti-oppression/social justice ideologies in ResLife programs as “coercive thought reform” when folks who are marginalized or oppressed face hateful, violent coercive though reform every day. If folks want to talk about coercive thought reform in higher education, let’s talk about how the ideology of white supremacy is still so pervasive that a Black woman continually has her intelligence and academic ability questioned by her white peers and professors in class. And let’s talk about how the ideologies of classism contribute to an incredibly high college drop-out rate for students from working class and working poor families.

    Social justice education programs are created to present folks with systematically silenced narratives and ideas and to help students unlearn the destructive thought forms and ideologies of dominant/dominator culture. These ideologies of domination are inherently coercive and we are educated in them from birth. I believe that we cannot create a world of equality and justice with these ideologies unquestioned and unchallenged because these ideologies justify groups’ exploitation and oppression or power and privilege. Programs in higher education that fail to bring a critique of power into discussions of equality and diversity are simply supporting the oppressive cultural/individual/institutional systems that perpetuate inequality.

    But, clearly, it would make no sense for people to go about engaging folks in explorations of identity and power through coercive methods — that is also a replication of dominator culture and violence. So what suggestions do folks have, then? How do I work to alleviate the daily indignities that people from oppressed/subordinated groups face in their residence halls? How do I address the interpersonal dynamics of power and oppression that lead to acts of violence and prejudice? What methods or pedagogies around identity politics and oppression might critics of the UD ResLife program suggest instead?

    — Brandon    Nov 7, 10:18 AM    #

91. Maybe this is just a distillation of part of the previous post by Brandon, but I find it highly ironic that UD’s program pushes the trope that “prejudice plus power equals racism”, yet uses its own power-differential position to push these very controversial ideas on young people.

    — Artemus    Nov 7, 12:15 PM    #

92. Brandon,

    You want a suggestion? Why not look at how the US military manages diversity training — the military was on the forefront of integration starting in the 1950s. Today I would say that the military is far more successful in promoting and integrating minorities in the officer corps than universities have been in integrating minorities in their faculties. Look at the statistics and see if I am correct. If I am, then perhaps you could learn something by studying the military. To be clear, I’m not saying all is well, only that the military appears to have made more progress than the academy.

    — John    Nov 7, 12:44 PM    #

93. I sure hope Brandon at 10:18 was a magnificently executed satire of we have come to expect from university employees.

    If that was a serious post, well, things are too far gone for mere reform.

    — Spartee    Nov 7, 02:40 PM    #

94. I cannot let MaryJ’s comment in #32 go unanswered. She stated that there should be “huge cutbacks on college aid to liberal arts majors” because people with those degrees, such as lawyers, are all dead weights on society. I have a liberal arts degree from UD, and I am currently a lawyer. After Hurricane Katrina, I moved to New Orleans, and I have been working to resolve insurance disputes between homeowners and insurers, and I am currently taking pro bono cases to help low-income homeowners battle contractor fraud. Saying that someone with my degree and of my profession is a dead weight on society and is not building our society is the same kind of ridiculous generalization and brainwashing that everyone here is discussing (ie, the generalization that all white people are racist). Instead of being part of the problem of societal generalizations, how about you become part of the solution and have respect for all hard-working members of society, no matter how they contribute. Hopefully UD will get itself in check and do the same.

    — SED    Nov 7, 04:38 PM    #

95. I wonder what right-wing foundation organized all the comments to this article?

    — Andrew Austin    Nov 7, 10:28 PM    #

96. Brandon, on the offchance that yours was a serious post:

    College freshmen come in with eighteen years of experience living on planet Earth. Eighteen years. Why do you assume that they come in as blank slates, or worse, indelibly imprinted with “isms” like some form of original sin? A student comes into a college and you have NO IDEA what he or she may have gone through, but you know all about how he or she needs to be straightened out.

    I’ve seen some good-hearted and well-meaning folks get so disgusted by the assumption that they will always be oppressors no matter what they do, that they stop caring about doing the right thing – why bother when they’re always in the wrong. And that’s a real shame. If a kid starts college already having had diversity “shoved down her throat” as one student said, the best thing you can probably do is just shut up about it.

    — Laura    Nov 7, 11:22 PM    #

97. I wonder what right-wing foundation organized all the comments to this article?

    — Andrew Austin Nov 7, 10:28 PM #

    I doubt any right-wing foundation conspired to organize these comments. This is clear from the posts by left of center folks who are deeply concerned about individual rights. More than one of us are posters on the Liestoppers Forum dedicated to the Duke Lacrosse Fiasco. Some of the leading figures in the fight against PC insanity like KC Johnson, Stuart Taylor, and defense attorney Brad Bannon are decidely liberal or extremely liberal Democrats. This is an issue that transcends political divisions. Indeed it is a concern for all citizens of the country whose taxes support UDel.

    — Michael Barger    Nov 8, 12:58 PM    #

98. The underlying problem here: these programs DEFINE people. That is always wrong. In my experience, professors and administrators sometimes fall into the trap of seeing only as far as their microcosm extends. They have been in higher education so long that they themselves have become brainwashed. They continually seek to challenge others with the concrete ultimatums that prevent the teacher from being taught. Though of course there are exceptions, when was the last time your teacher spend a week in the ghetto? I am a white RA at the University of Northern Colorado. I also spent the first 12 years of my life as the racial minority in one of the roughest neighborhoods in Kansas City, Missouri.

    A couple weeks ago, I was in an RA class where an administrator told me that as a white heterosexual male, it is impossible for me to be oppressed. She was unable to see beyond her world, the world of white priviledge and power. The world that I grew up in was much different and I’m tired of being guilted for my skin color. I am truly sorry for the mistakes of my brothers (of any color) and my ancestors, but I am not a racist. I also know just as well as any of my African American brothers and sisters how the sting of racism can drastically affect someone’s life. I was marginalized, stereotyped, belittled, denied, oppressed, and attacked for my race. I don’t want sympathy; I want change. The kind of change we need is not brainwashing, attacking stereotypes intended to shock the racism or intollerance out of you; it’s love and openness. You can’t ignore it, you can’t label it, and you can’t do your part by reading a book or going to a class. It’s a lifestyle.

    I don’t like the world tolerance because there are many things that should not be tolerated. As simple and cheesy as it sounds, we need love. If we truly love people with a pure, real love, we will learn.

    — Lee    Nov 9, 01:13 PM    #

99. Michael Barger writes that no foul play is afoot because of all “the posts by left of center folks who are deeply concerned about individual rights.”

    A common tactic used by astroturf workers is to profess to be on the opposite ideological side that they really are on and use that deception as cover for flakmaking.

    I’ve studied and written about the way astroturf is made, and the character of this thread strongly suggests that’s what’s going on.

    Frankly, I would find it incredible that very many self-identified progressives would be so ignorant about such matters. I have closely examined the curriculum, and progressives would be much more likely to support it as oppose it.

    Sorry, but the reactionary rhetoric is giving the game away.

    — Andrew    Nov 9, 08:52 PM    #

100. What I find most disturbing about this entire thread is the lack of respect for differing point-of-view and our absolute in ability for have a civilized discussion. Every comment that supports the program is immediately dismissed as “liberal garbage” and those against the program are “right-wing-nut-jobs.”

     Why is is that we cannot have a discussion about beliefs around power/privilege without it being entirely polarizing?

     By this, I am not so much criticizing FIRE or UDEL, but the respondents on this thread who seem to be unable to carry forth an educated discussion without disparaging the other side.

     — Seth    Nov 14, 04:35 PM    #

Previous: Tiny Items Create Big Questions on Health Risks
Next: Touro College Sells Online Division for $190-Million