Please note that you can leave a comment on any of our posts at our Facebook page.  Subscribers can also comment at length at our Angel's Corner Forum.

JANUARY 31,  2022

SHORT TAKES ON THE DRIFTING WRECKAGE – OVERNIGHT: 

EVERYONE MUST KNOW THIS – OVERNIGHT:  We alert you to the latest trendy class available, for those who require the very best in cocktail-party conversation.  From College Fix:   Princeton University is offering a course this spring semester called “Nuclear Princeton: An Indigenous Approach to Science and the Environment,” which seeks to connect nuclear science to settler colonialism.  “How do we grapple with the lasting, unintended impacts of conducting science, engineering, and medicine in ‘the nation’s service and service of humanity?’” the course description says, with reference to Princeton’s motto. “What lessons can we learn from the University’s past to conduct morally sound research and generate culturally inclusive knowledge?”  Students will learn about the Ivy League university’s history with nuclear science and how it relates to the perspective of Native Americans.  “Course readings touch on interdisciplinary topics: the university’s past and present engagements with nuclear science, engineering, the nuclear arms race, and anti-nuclear movements, along with Indigenous perspectives on land, sovereignty, and indigeneity,” the syllabus states.  I gotta be there.  I mean, you get a class like this once in a lifetime.  So I'm not a Princeton student.  So what?  I can try to audit the class as an oppressed person.  I'll get on a list.

January 31, 2022       Permalink

FIRST-CLASS PIECE – OVERNIGHT:  Well written and well researched and well thought out, this article by Eric Kaufmann in City Journal is one of the best I've read on the generational threat to freedom of speech.  A must read:

The clash between socialist and liberal economics defined the late twentieth century, and this century brings a cultural version of that struggle. Today’s culture wars pit advocates of equal outcomes and special protection for identity groups against defenders of due process, equal treatment, scientific reason, and free speech. Our political map is taking shape around this new divide between what I will call cultural socialism and cultural liberalism.

Cultural socialism, which values equal results and harm prevention for identity groups over individual rights, has inspired race-based pedagogies and harsh punishments for controversial speech. Rooted in the idea that historically marginalized groups are sacred, this view is no passing fad. Letters, associations, universities, and media defending free speech notwithstanding, the young adherents of cultural socialism are steadily overturning the liberal ethos of the adult world.

Survey data from my new Manhattan Institute report, “The Politics of the Culture Wars in Contemporary America,” show the scale of the challenge. While the American public leans two-to-one in favor of cultural liberalism, a majority of Americans under 30 incline toward cultural socialism. For instance, while 65 percent of Americans over 55 oppose Google’s decision to fire James Damore for having questioned the firm’s training on gender equity, those under 30 support the firing by a 59–41 margin. Similar gaps separate young and old people on similar instances of cancel culture, such as the oustings of Gina Carano (an actor fired from Star Wars for social media posts) and Brendan Eich (the former CEO of Mozilla forced out in 2014 for opposing gay marriage in 2008). Only part of this disparity stems from the fact that young people lean left: centrist young people, for instance, support Google over Damore by a 61–39 margin, while centrists over 55 support Damore over Google 58–42.

On the use of critical race theory in school, a similar divide emerges. Eight in ten people over age 55 oppose teaching schoolchildren that the United States was founded on racism and remains systemically racist, or that the country and their homes were built on stolen land. A slight majority of young people support teaching these notions. While opposition to critical race theory in schools can take an illiberal form, compulsory CRT violates two key liberal principles: first, that pupils in a classroom or employees in a diversity training session should not be forced to agree with ideas they don’t believe in; and second, that people should not be treated differently because of their race. Recent attempts by state governments to limit whites’ access to Covid-19 medication are another manifestation of this tendency.

Another front in the culture war is censorship of speech, usually justified on grounds that such speech would inflict psychological harm on minorities and that power should be redistributed to “marginalized groups.” Activists pushing for such censorship organize online flash mobs and pressure campaigns, wielding accusations of racism, homophobia, or transphobia to ruin a person’s reputation and have them fired from their position. The problem is especially acute in higher education: the number of academics targeted for cancellation has exploded in recent years.

COMMENT:  Please read the rest.  You can see the quality of the research by the above extract.  We are poisoning the minds of our children, and, although people tend to drift right as they live their lives, there is no guarantee that this tendency will continue.  What do you do when almost all major institutions are taken over by the woke left?

There are some who believe that it's already too late and that America is cooked.  I'm a bit more optimistic, primarily because wokeness tends to be regionalized.  The poison isn't uniformly spread across America.  People so inclined can start moving to more rational regions, even if they may find some of the customs a bit odd.  It's a good odd.  As the numbers in more rational regions grow, the politics may well change.

January 31,  2022     Permalink 

JANUARY 30,  2022

SHORT TAKES ON THE DRIFTING WRECKAGE – OVERNIGHT:

THIS IS INSANITY – OVERNIGHT:  It will destroy the very students it presumably is designed to help.  From Campus Reform:   At Boston University, students are no longer graded on their writing, as Marisa Milanese and Gwen Kordonowy explain in a recent article on the school's writing program's “‘ungrading’ movement.”   According to Milanese and Kordonowy in a recent column, out of 100 instructors in the Boston University program, “nearly half employed contract grading in some form this semester.”  Milanese and Kordonowy, a master lecturer and senior lecturer, respectively, say they still comment on students’ writing, although, they “…no longer place a letter or number on anything they write. No As and Bs. No 82s or 94s.”  The pair refer to their technique as “contract grading,” which “typically involves minimum expectations for students to earn a final course grade.”  The explanation goes on to suggest, “These expectations are unrelated to performance: Attend class and participate, meet due dates, fulfill the criteria of every assignment, make substantive revisions and so on.”  I'd love to know where these students will be in ten years.  Probably functionally illiterate.  The ability to communicate in written and spoken English is a much-demanded skill both nationally and internationally.  The world is not buying what these two "teachers" are selling.  And that's economic death.

January 30, 2022       Permalink

THE HUGE BACKFIRE – OVERNIGHT:  President Biden's promise to restrict his choices for a Supreme Court justice to African-American women may be going down well with his base, but is exceedingly unpopular with the general public.  Anyone surprised?  From Fox: 

More than three-quarters (76%) of Americans want President Joe Biden to consider all potential nominees to replace outgoing Supreme Court Justice Stephen Breyer, according to a recent ABC News-Ipsos poll.

The poll comes after Biden said Thursday that he will announce his nominee before the end of February, and that the candidate will be a Black woman. Among Democrats, 54% supported considering all nominees regardless of race and gender. Just 23% of those polled wanted Biden to restrict his list of nominees to Black women.

The poll, which was conducted Jan. 28-29 with Ipsos Public Affairs' KnowledgePanel among a random national sample of 510 adults, also found that 43% believe that the Supreme Court is partisan, and that justices rule "on the basis of their partisan political views."

Other finding from the poll were unflattering toward the president, who earned low approval numbers on issues ranging from inflation — with 69% disapproving — to surging crime and gun violence. Just 1% of those polled said the state of the economy is "excellent."

Biden's Supreme Court announcement follows through on a pledge he made during the 2020 campaign. When his campaign was faltering during the 2020 Democratic primary in South Carolina, Biden reportedly told Rep. Jim Clyburn, D-S.C., he would publicly promise to appoint a Black woman to the high court in exchange for the House majority whip's endorsement.

Biden's decision has been criticized by those who claim he is allowing identity politics to seep into the Supreme Court. Last week, Former Housing and Urban Development Secretary Dr. Ben Carson told WMAL that "to create that kind of situation in the highest court in the land is really abominable, and very detrimental to our freedoms."

COMMENT:  Biden rules with the intellect and sensitivity of a big-city political machine.  Every move is a political deal, every appointment pays off a debt.  But restricting a Supreme Court appointment on the basis of race or gender is a bridge too far.  Despite its image being battered by controversy, the Supreme Court is still seen by most Americans as a revered if imperfect institution.  Americans would like to think that appointments to the Court are noble acts.  They see, though, that nobility is nowhere in sight.

January 30,  2022     Permalink