DOCSLIB.ORG

Ideological Diversity Course UNDERGRAD

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Ideological Diversity Course UNDERGRAD Free Speech, Viewpoint Diversity, and Higher Education or Bigots and Snowflakes: Living in a World Where Everyone Else Is Wrong COURSE DESCRIPTION In this course, we will address questions surrounding viewpoint diversity. There are two foundational premises for the course. The first is that there is a lack of diversity along this dimension, particularly within the domain of higher education; recent survey data confirm this trend (goo.gl/ddnGEG). The second assertion is that this lack of diversity damages the mission of higher education (we will talk more about this in the first class). Inherent in the definition of viewpoint diversity is the principle that there is a spectrum of perspectives ranging, politically speaking, from staunchly conservative on one end to radically progressive on the other – and that the voicing of perspectives falling along that spectrum should be without social penalty. *Because the tilt in our current context on campus leans left and the material in the course will often refer to the absence and dismissal of opinions that deviate from an orthodoxy, omitted viewpoints often — though not without exception — coincide with non-left views or leftist views that simply ask uncomfortable questions. Using our two assertions as a starting point, we examine issues that students may consider relevant for their academic studies in the social sciences and on campus more broadly. The overarching goal of the course is to introduce students to concepts that will teach them the importance of examining multiple perspectives dispassionately and to think critically in all aspects of their education. Invariably, it is the case that, to cover this material, we will delve into topics and listen to speakers that some will find distasteful or even abhorrent, particularly — although not exclusively — in the fourth section (described below). This course will force students to push past any initial distaste (if they are so inclined) to consider ideas that some view as not fit for public (or private) discourse and decide for themselves whether that is a valid or effective strategy. Our course material will consist of readings in the form of books and articles but will also include several video recordings and a few podcasts. The first step in this course is for each student to go through the OpenMind program that is available through Heterodox Academy. It is a “free, interactive, psychology-based platform designed to foster intellectual humility, empathy, and mutual understanding across a variety of differences. OpenMind equips people with the essential cognitive skills and shared language to overcome their differences and work together to solve their collective problems.” It is available at https://openmindplatform.org and all students (and the instructor) are required to complete it. COURSE REQUIREMENTS I expect students to attend every class and to actively participate in class conversations. I expect all readings to be completed prior to the corresponding class meeting and all work to be completed on time. I also insist upon acceptance of the following: Commitment to Viewpoint Diversity, Mutual Understanding, and Constructive Disagreement. In order to create a classroom environment that supports respectful, critical inquiry through the free exchange of ideas, the following principles will guide our work: • Treat every member of the class with respect, even if you disagree with their opinion; • Bring light, not heat; • Reasonable minds can differ on any number of perspectives, opinions, and conclusions; • Because constructive disagreement sharpens thinking, deepens understanding, and reveals novel insights, it is not just encouraged, it is expected; • All viewpoints are welcome; • No ideas are immune from scrutiny and debate; • You will not be graded on your opinions. COURSE OBJECTIVES Upon successful completion of the course requirements, you will: • Have a clear understanding of viewpoint diversity and its importance • Be able to compare and contrast viewpoint diversity and free speech • Think critically about the role of viewpoint diversity (or its absence) in sociology and in the campus setting more broadly BROAD THEMES Substantively, the course is divided into four sections, titled “Foundations”, “Lay of the Land”, “Sociology”, and “Implications and Case Studies”. In the first section, we lay the foundations for an understanding of this topic – to do this, we will read widely on topics that introduce students to central concepts surrounding the following: (a) The link between politics and academia (b) The psychology behind people’s political convictions (c) A specific look at a criticism levied against post-modernism (particularly relevant given its prevalence in sociology) In the second section, we will take a closer look at the current state of the world with respect to the topic at hand. We will focus our reading on topics relating to viewpoint diversity in academia in particular, examining various perspectives on the ways in which free speech is being challenged particularly on college campuses. In the third section, we will specifically look at claims surrounding the lack of viewpoint diversity in sociology. Last, in the fourth section, we will spend considerable time hearing from speakers themselves who have tackled these issues. *Our first class (or two) will address the questions of what is ideological diversity and why should anyone care? COURSE LAYOUT I. Foundations (Weeks 1-4) Readings • All In One, an illustrated version of Chapter 2 of John Stuart Mill’s 1859 book On Liberty • The Righteous Mind, Jonathan Haidt (Random House) • Explaining Postmodernism: Skepticism and Socialism from Rousseau to Foucault, Stephen Hicks (Scholargy) o Conversation with Jordan Peterson on this book (http://www.stephenhicks.org/2017/08/19/jordan-peterson-and- stephen-hicks-discuss-postmodernism/) • The Still Divided Academy, April Kelly-Woessner, Matthew Woessner, and Stanley Rothman (Rowman and Littlefield) II. Lay of the Land (Weeks 5-8) Readings • What’s Happened to the University, Frank Furedi (Routledge) • Becoming Right: How Campuses Shape Young Conservatives, Amy Binder and Kate Wood (Princeton University Press) • Free Speech on Campus, Sigal Ben-Porath (University of Pennsylvania Press) • We Are All on Campus Now, Andrew Sullivan (*article in New York Magazine) • “Republican is Not a Synonym for Racist”, Peter Beinart (*article in the Atlantic) • “The Racism Treadmill”, Coleman Hughes (*article in Quilette) • “Systemic Racism or Isolated Abuses? Americans Disagree”, David Graham (*article in the Atlantic) III. Sociology (Weeks 9-11) Readings • The Sacred Project of American Sociology, Christian Smith (Oxford University Press) • “How Ideology Has Hindered Sociology”, CC Martin (*journal article in the American Sociologist) • Heterodox Academy interview with Arthur Sakamoto (Department of Sociology at Texas A&M, https://heterodoxacademy.org/arthur-sakamoto-on-paradigms- in-sociology-half-hour-of-heterodoxy-14/) IV. Implications and Case Studies (Weeks 12-15) Readings • Uncensored: My Life and Uncomfortable Conversations, Zachary Wood (Penguin Books) o Zachary Wood Ted Talk • The Coddling of the American Mind: How Good Intentions and Bad Ideas are Setting Up a Generation for Failure, Greg Lukianoff and Jonathan Haidt (Penguin Press) Audio and Video presentations Ezra Klein vs. Sam Harris • Sam Harris conversation with Charles Murray (https://samharris.org/podcasts/forbidden-knowledge/) • Vox Article responding to podcast (https://www.vox.com/policy-and- politics/2018/3/27/15695060/sam-harris-charles-murray-race-iq-forbidden- knowledge-podcast-bell-curve) • Sam Harris conversation with Ezra Klein (https://samharris.org/podcasts/123- identity-honesty/) Amy Wax • Glenn Loury with Amy Wax on 9/11/17 (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cb9Ey-SsNsg) • Glenn Loury with Amy Wax on 3/21/18 (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BWNzYuOuef0) Erica and Nicholas Christakis • Sam Harris with Nicholas Christakis (https://samharris.org/podcasts/facing-the- crowd/) • The Perils of Writing a Provocative Email at Yale (https://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2016/05/the-peril-of-writing-a- provocative-email-at-yale/484418/) • My Halloween Email Led to a Campus Firestorm – and a Troubling Lesson about Self-Censorship Bret Weinstein • Sam Harris with Bret Weinstein (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=20ku1H4VzfQ) • Glenn Loury with Bret Weinstein https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y_jWby5apSU GRADING Grading Requirements (out of a possible 350 points). I will grade on a +/- system. Students with 315 points or higher at the end of the semester can be assured of at least an A- (obviously more for those closer to 350). • Weekly response posts (15x10 points = 150 points) • Class participation (100 points) o I will grade students’ participation across the whole semester. The grade represents my overall assessment of their participation in the class. If you are actively participating every day, can get a perfect score. — the full 100 points While active participation is easiest to measure by those students who speak in class and contribute to discussions, I will also consider those who are clearly following the conversation and being thoughtful about it. If you don’t regularly participate in class, your score drops. Those who never participate in class but have perfect attendance will end up with a score around 60 or 70 points. • Two well-developed response papers addressing questions (a) surrounding controversial issues (b) expanding the discussion on ideological diversity (c) a comparison of the readings (50 points each) o Response papers should be 4-5 pages in length, be double-spaced in 12 pt. font with 1-inch margins. o Papers will be graded on writing style, spelling, grammar, clarity, and on evidence that you’ve done the readings (or watched/listened to relevant material), thought about what you’ve learned, and distilled it (as opposed to simply regurgitating what was said). .
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Libertarian Marxism Mao-Spontex Open Marxism Popular Assembly Sovereign Citizen Movement Spontaneism Sui Iuris
    Autonomist Marxist Theory and Practice in the Current Crisis Brian Marks1 University of Arizona School of Geography and Development [email protected] Abstract Autonomist Marxism is a political tendency premised on the autonomy of the proletariat. Working class autonomy is manifested in the self-activity of the working class independent of formal organizations and representations, the multiplicity of forms that struggles take, and the role of class composition in shaping the overall balance of power in capitalist societies, not least in the relationship of class struggles to the character of capitalist crises. Class composition analysis is applied here to narrate the recent history of capitalism leading up to the current crisis, giving particular attention to China and the United States. A global wave of struggles in the mid-2000s was constituitive of the kinds of working class responses to the crisis that unfolded in 2008-10. The circulation of those struggles and resultant trends of recomposition and/or decomposition are argued to be important factors in the balance of political forces across the varied geography of the present crisis. The whirlwind of crises and the autonomist perspective The whirlwind of crises (Marks, 2010) that swept the world in 2008, financial panic upon food crisis upon energy shock upon inflationary spiral, receded temporarily only to surge forward again, leaving us in a turbulent world, full of possibility and peril. Is this the end of Neoliberalism or its retrenchment? A new 1 Published under the Creative Commons licence: Attribution-Noncommercial-No Derivative Works Autonomist Marxist Theory and Practice in the Current Crisis 468 New Deal or a new Great Depression? The end of American hegemony or the rise of an “imperialism with Chinese characteristics?” Or all of those at once? This paper brings the political tendency known as autonomist Marxism (H.
    [Show full text]
  • Academic Freedom and Controversial Speech About Campus Governance — Rogers Brubaker
    Academic Freedom and Controversial Speech about Campus Governance — Rogers Brubaker — Rogers Brubaker is Professor of Sociology, University of California, Los Angeles and UCLA Foundation Chair; Visiting Professor, CEU. Classical definitions of academic freedom focused on freedom of re- search and teaching. In the American context, the right of professors to speak freely as citizens outside the university has also been emphasized. But many recent controversies over academic freedom in the US—and I limit my comments to the US—have turned on speech inside the univer- sity yet outside the traditional domains of research and teaching. Research and teaching continue of course to be central to the defense of academic freedom in the face of external pressures, notably from private and public funders, government regulators, and the populist right. But I have been asked to address internal threats to academic freedom. And while some internal controversies have focused on the freedom of research and teaching, many have focused on other issues. The most widely discussed of these controversies have concerned invita- tions to controversial outside speakers. Public attention has focused on efforts by the campus left to “disinvite” or “de-platform” speakers such as Charles Murray at Middlebury and Milo Yiannopoulos and Ann Coulter 93 i6 AF - 00 Book.indb 93 2017.11.22. 9:01 at Berkeley. These widely publicized incidents have already generat- ed a substantial backlash: several conservative state legislatures have passed campus speech bills.1 The campus right has also sought to pre- vent or disrupt events involving controversial (especially pro-Palestinian) outside speakers. But there is another kind of internal academic freedom controversy that I would like to highlight.
    [Show full text]
  • Metoo, Discrimination & Backlash
    WOMEN GENDER& NO. 1 2021 RESEARCH #MeToo, Discrimination & Backlash WOMEN GENDER& RESEARCH VOL. 30, NO. 1 2021 WOMEN, GENDER & RESEARCH is an academic, peer-reviewed journal that: • Presents original interdisciplinary research concerning feminist theory, gender, power, and inequality, both globally and locally • Promotes theoretical and methodological debates within gender research • Invites both established and early career scholars within the fi eld to submit articles • Publishes two issue per year. All research articles go through a double-blind peer-review process by two or more peer reviewers WOMEN, GENDER & RESEARCH welcomes: • Research articles and essays from scholars around the globe • Opinion pieces, comments and other relevant material • Book reviews and notices about new PhDs within the fi eld Articles: 5000-7000 words (all included) Essays or opinion pieces: 3900 words (all included) Book reviews: 1200 words (all included) Please contact us for further guidelines. SPECIAL ISSUE EDITORS EDITOR IN CHIEF Lea Skewes Morten Hillgaard Bülow, PhD, Coordination for Gen- Molly Occhino der Research, University of Copenhagen, Denmark Lise Rolandsen Agustín EDITORS Kathrine Bjerg Bennike, PhD-candidate, Depart- Lea Skewes, PhD, Post-Doc, Business and Social ment of Politics and Society, Aalborg University, Sciences, Aarhus University, Denmark Denmark Tobias Skiveren, PhD, Assistant Professor, School Camilla Bruun Eriksen, PhD, Assistant Professor, of Communication and Culture, Aarhus Univer- Department for the Study of Culture, University sity, Denmark of Southern Denmark, Denmark Nanna Bonde Thylstrup, PhD, Associate Professor, Sebastian Mohr, PhD, Senior Lecturer, Centre for Department of Management, Society, and Com- Gender Studies, Karlstad University, Sverige munication, Copenhagen Business School, Sara Louise Muhr, PhD, Professor, Department of Denmark Organization, Copenhagen Business School, Denmark COVER ILLUSTRATION © Rebelicious.
    [Show full text]
  • The Intolerant Fifth
    21 Fordaiiy.analy.~isand.debateonAmeric~ ~nsit' Economistcom/_uMtedst~gs ~: , Ecopomist.com~blo~s/demperabytnamerla Speech on campus ing, according to recent survey published by the Brookings Institution immediately The intolerant fifth after the violence in Charlottesville. Though outnumbered, this vocal mi- nority can have a chilling effect on what everyone else thinks they can say. At Yale, 4z% of students(and n% of conservatives) LOS ANGELES AND WASHINGTON, DC say they feel uncomfortable giving their opinions American universities have afree-speech problem.But it is not what it seems on politics,race, religion and gen- der. Self-censorship becomes more com- «TIBERALISM is white supremacy!" Illiberal impulses can be found in many mon as students progress through univer- l~shouted the students, as their hap- comers of society. But young Americans sity: 6i% of freshmen feel comfortable less speaker—Claire Gastanaga of the who have attended college are in fact more gabbing about their views,but the same is American Civil Liberties Union (ncLv)— accommodating of controversial speakers, true ofjust 56% of sophomores, q9% ofju- looked on.The protesters at the College of like avowed racists, than the general popu- niorsand 30% of seniors. William_ and Mary, the alma mater of lation is (see chart on next page). Nor has University administrators, whose job it Thomas Jefferson, went further still. "The tolerance of extreme views among stu- is to promote hazmony and diversity on revolution will not uphold the consritu- dents changed much in recent years ac- campus,often find the easiest way to do so tion" they chanted on September z~th.
    [Show full text]
  • Evolutionary Psychology As a Unifying Framework and Meta-Theory
    Part V | Chapter 1 Chapter 1 Ultimate explanations: Evolutionary psychology as a unifying framework and meta-theory The term ‘evolutionary psychology’ (EP) was coined during “lengthy and intensive debates about how to apply evolution to behavior” (Tooby & Cosmides, 2005, p. 15) between Martin Daly, Margo Wilson, Don Symons, John Tooby, Leda Cosmides, and David Buss in the 1980s. It is a relatively young and developing way of thinking in psychology that can serve as a meta-theoretical framework, as it builds directly on the foundations of biology. More spe- cifically, EP is based on the only scientific explanation for the complexity of earthly life forms, namely evolution by natural selection. In the scientific community, it is largely ac- knowledged that humans are a product of evolution by natural selection too. We are mammals belonging to the branch of the tree of life called primates and our closest living relatives are the chimpanzees and bonobos, with whom we share a common ancestor that lived some 6 to 7 million years ago. Though such long time spans are beyond our ‘natural’ capacity to comprehend, consider this: the process of evolving from a light-sensitive cell to a human eye can happen in fewer than 400,000 years (Nilsson & Pelger, 1994). Researchers named our species homo sapiens and contemporary researchers have deter- mined our ‘start date’ to be at least 300,000 years ago, based on new homo sapiens findings in Morocco (Hublin et al., 2017). ‘Start date’ is a bit of a misleading term, as there is of course no ‘sudden appearance,’ but a very slow, invisible, and gradual change.
    [Show full text]
  • Fall 2020 Report
    Fall 2020 Report Pictured: Judge Amy Coney Barrett with Professor Robert P. George, October 11, 2019. Judge Barrett visited the James Madison Program to deliver the annual Walter F. Murphy Lecture in American Constitutionalism on “The Constitution as Our Story.” Contents Program Updates 02 Current Visiting Fellows 03 Madison’s Notes Podcast 04 Looking Back: The First 20 Years 06 Academic Year 2019-20 09 About the James Madison Program in American Ideals and Institutions Initiative on Politics and Statesmanship 12 Founded in the summer of 2000, the James Madison Program in American Ideals and Institutions in the Department of Politics at Princeton University is dedicated to exploring Undergraduate Fellows Forum 13 fundamental and enduring questions of political thought and constitutional law. The James Madison Program promotes a greater appreciation of the Western tradition of legal and political 2020-21 Lecture Series and Events 17 thought. It also supports the application of fundamental principles to modern social problems, particularly as they are manifested in the domain of public law. By supporting the study of foundational issues, the James Madison Program seeks to fulfill its mandate of offering civic “The Challenge to ‘Brain Death’: Are We Taking Organs from Living Human education of the highest possible quality. Beings, and If We Are, Does It Matter?” A panel discussion cosponsored by the Center for Human Values, featuring (from L to R): Peter Singer, Princeton James Madison, a graduate of Princeton University, was the principal architect of the University; Patrick Lee, Franciscan University of Steubenville; D. Alan Shewmon, Constitution and fourth President of the United States.
    [Show full text]
  • Noel Casler 12 1 18 Gotham Vet Show 215,989 Views Gad Saad
    Gay Millennial and Conservative: Guy Benson (Full Interview) Gad Saad and Dave Rubin: Greg Gutfeld on Fox News Hate and Berkeley’s Intolerance (Pt. 1) Taking the Knee: Players Owners Trump and You. Greg Gutfeld on Issues with Mainstream News and Evolving Views on Trump (Pt. 2) Psychology of Trump Bob Saget on Comedy Trump and Political Correctness (Full Interview) Pia Malaney and Dave Rubin: Economics and Politics (Full Interview) Dr. Mike Munger and Dave Rubin: Political Science Trump and Libertarianism (Full Interview) Steven Pinker on the Case for Reason Science Humanism and Progress (Full Interview) Candace Owens on Her Journey From Left to Right (Live Interview) Bill Whittle on the Need for a Fair Press the Abortion Debate and Common Sense (Pt. 2) Richard Dawkins and Dave Rubin: Live at the 92nd Street Y Men vs. Women and Robotics (Full Interview) Who Was Thomas Jefferson? Universal Basic Income and the Role of Economics in Politics (Pia Malaney Pt. 2) Lauren Southern and Dave Rubin: Milo Immigration and Violent Protests (Full Interview) John Stossel and Dave Rubin: Personal Freedom and the Role of Government (Full Interview) Ben Shapiro and Dave Rubin: Trump the Alt Right Fake News and More (Full Interview) David Horowitz and Dave Rubin: Communism Trump and Leaving the Left (Full Interview) Ben Shapiro on How Trump Won and Shifting American Politics Scott Adams and Dave Rubin: Trump’s Persuasion and Presidency (Full Interview) 122,850 views What to Wear on Halloween Stefan Molyneux on Abusive Relationships Atheism Race and IQ (Full Interview) Katie Hopkins and Dave Rubin: Identity Politics Islam and Hate Speech (Full Interview) Dinesh D Souza and Dave Rubin: Hillary Clinton the Democrats and Trump (Full Interview) What is The Rubin Report? Antifa and UC Berkeley: LIVE with Tim Pool The Myth of Systemic Racism (Coleman Hughes Pt.
    [Show full text]
  • Academics Are Living in a Culture of Fear Say The
    Academics are living in a Culture of Fear Say the wrong words and lose your job? What is this craziness in America today? Many intellectuals document it and explain it. The Heterodox Academy is growing ​ ​ ​ rapidly (currently 4000 members) with bi-weekly podcasts, annual meetings, etc. Enjoy ​ their website. A registered charity in the USA. I intend to give them money. ​ ​ ​ Stanford renaming buildings. Brain washing. ​ ​ ​ I’ve gathered for you links to podcasts/Youtubes of deep thinkers. Each of the names below is a link to a search of Youtube for the person’s interviews. Most are long. Breath deeply and take your pick. Save your job and save your institution! Eric Weinstein Math Ph.D. Harvard, the “Intellectual Dark Web” ​ Heather Heying Evolutionary Biologist, woman, “professor in exile” ​ Coleman Hughs Podcast host, age 24, Black ​ Ben Shapiro Youngest syndicated columnist in the US (conservative) ​ Dave Rubin Author, talk-show host, 280 million views ​ Stephen Pinker Experimental psychologist, author of 9 books, Harvard U. ​ Bret Weinstein Theoretical Evolutionary Biologist, “professor in exile” ​ Jordan Peterson Clinical psychologist, Toronto University ​ Joe Rogan Proprietor of a $100 million interviewing show. ​ Sam Harris Neuroscientist, author, 33 weeks on NYT bestseller list ​ Stefan Molyneux Banned “scientific racist” ​ John McWhorter Columbia U, prof Comparative Literature, NAACP award ​ Jonathan Haidt Business ethics, NYU ​ (((I’m a retired Stanford University Professor elected member of the US Academy of Engineering. My political bent has been libertarian until 4-5 years ago when I began thousand-dollar donations to three Democrat presidential candidates (Sanders, Yang, Gabbard).))) I welcome your suggestions on how to improve this page and how to distribute it.
    [Show full text]
  • The Vanguards of Free Thought and Reason
    The Vanguards of Free Thought and Reason Shôn Ellerton, January 17, 2021 My thoughts and views of some of my favourite podcasters who have given so much to fill the void which mainstream media ignores. Ever since I was a child, I had a fascination with books. I wanted my own library; one of those stale musty antiquated rooms with leather-bound furniture complete with a little spiral staircase to access tiers and tiers of books, most of which, I would never be able to read in a lifetime. But alas, I do not have such a room; however, I do have a sizeable collection of books, most of which, I confess, I have not read. My collection of books mainly consists, what many would consider, to be on the heavy side of reading. Works by Dante Alighieri, Ayn Rand, Edgar Allan Poe, Friedrich Nietzsche, Franz Kafka, and many others adorn my shelves along with a scattering of science fiction from the likes of Isaac Asimov and H.P. Lovecraft and a few light-hearted books from Bill Bryson and Jeremy Clarkson. Whether fiction or non-fiction, I have learnt so much from reading, particularly that of ethics and how to think rationally and critically. At least, to the best of my abilities because there is always room for improvement! We now live in a world of one-liner tweets and pointless meme posts on social media, and I fear that our modern generation is being deprived of self-agency to free thought and wisdom, both attributes which may be obtained through the written and spoken learnings through others in full context.
    [Show full text]
  • SPEAK FREELY: LESSONS from MIDDLEBURY and EVERGREEN STATE KEEGAN CALLANAN Assistant Professor of Politi Cal Science, Middlebury College HEATHER E
    SPEAK FREELY: LESSONS FROM MIDDLEBURY AND EVERGREEN STATE KEEGAN CALLANAN Assistant Professor of Politi cal Science, Middlebury College HEATHER E. HEYING Professor in Exile, formerly of Evergreen State College ALLISON STANGER Russell J. Leng ‘60 Professor of International Politics and Economics, Middlebury College BRET WEINSTEIN Professor in Exile, formerly of Evergreen State College Moderated by KEITH E. WHITTINGTON William Nelson Cromwell Professor of Politi cs, Princeton University Author of the 2018 Princeton Pre-Read, Speak Freely Friday, September 14, 2018 James Madison Program in American Ideals and Institutions 4:30 - 6:15 p.m. 609-258-1122 Arthur Lewis Auditorium, jmp.princeton.edu Robertson Hall KEEGAN CALLANAN is Assistant Professor of Political Science at Middlebury College, where he has teaching responsibilities in the history of political philosophy and contemporary political theory. His primary research is in modern political thought, and he is the author of a book on the political philosophy of Montesquieu titled Montesquieu’s Liberalism and the Problem of Universal Politics (Cambridge University Press, 2018). His work has appeared in journals such as History of Political Thought and Political Research Quarterly. Prior to his appointment at Middlebury, he taught at the University of Virginia as a Post-doctoral Fellow in the Department of Politics. He was a 2017-18 Visiting Fellow in the James Madison Program. A graduate of Bowdoin College, he received his M.A. and Ph.D. from Duke University. HEATHER HEYING is a scientist and an educator. She was a professor of evolutionary biology at The Evergreen State College for 15 years, where she provided undergraduates an evolutionary toolkit with which to understand how to be critical, engaged citizens of the world, in part through exploring remote sites in the neotropics.
    [Show full text]
  • The Intellectual Dark Web? You Have to Be Kidding Me by Miles Mathis
    The Intellectual Dark Web? You have to be kidding me by Miles Mathis First published July 10, 2021 Tucker Carlson had Bret Weinstein on his special edition last night, so I looked him up. He is supposed to be part of the “intellectual dark web”. You have to laugh. I am sure a Weinstein is going to be part of an intellectual dark web, telling hard truths in the face of huge pressure. Funny, since it is the second time in a week I have seen that term “intellectual dark web”. It was also applied to Lindsay Shepherd, the alleged Ontario graduate student who allegedly assigned a Jordan Peterson video to her class and was dressed down for it. She ended up becoming semi-famous for that one thing. At that last link, also notice the name of the author of the article promoting her: Tennant. I could tell just at a glance that Shepherd was planted in this story by Intelligence for her looks—which are admittedly smashing. Because nothing else about that story rings true. The same goes for the Bret Weinstein story, which is that his small fame came from being attacked by students at Evergreen State College, where he taught. That by itself is enough to out him, since I have previously outed Evergreen as one the top ten premier CIA-front colleges. They all are now, but these small colleges like Evergreen are wholly owned subsidiaries of Intel. Absolutely everyone on campus is a spook, down to the cleaning and gardening staff. You begin to understand how I could read this whole project just from the names.
    [Show full text]
  • Critical Race Theory, the New Intolerance, and Its Grip on America Jonathan Butcher and Mike Gonzalez
    BACKGROUNDER No. 3567 | DECEMBER 7, 2020 Critical Race Theory, the New Intolerance, and Its Grip on America Jonathan Butcher and Mike Gonzalez s its name should make abundantly clear, Crit- KEY TAKEAWAYS ical Race Theory (CRT) is the child of Critical ATheory (CT), or, to be more precise, its grand- Critical Race Theory makes race the prism child. Critical Theory is the immediate forebearer of through which its proponents analyze all Critical Legal Theory (CLT), and CLT begat CRT. As aspects of American life. we discuss in this Backgrounder, however, there are strong thematic components linking CT, CLT, and CRT. Among these are: CRT underpins identity politics, which reimagines the U.S. as a nation riven l The Marxist analysis of society made up of cate- by groups, each with specific claims gories of oppressors and oppressed; on victimization. l An unhealthy dollop of Nietzschean relativism, CRT’s intolerance can be found in schools, which means that language does not accord to an the workplace, and the entertainment objective reality, but is the mere instrument of sector, “normalizing” belief in systemic power dynamics; racism for the average American. This paper, in its entirety, can be found at http://report.heritage.org/bg3567 The Heritage Foundation | 214 Massachusetts Avenue, NE | Washington, DC 20002 | (202) 546-4400 | heritage.org Nothing written here is to be construed as necessarily reflecting the views of The Heritage Foundation or as an attempt to aid or hinder the passage of any bill before Congress. BACKGROUNDER | No. 3567 DECEMBER 7, 2020 | 2 heritage.org l The idea that the oppressed impede revolution when they adhere to the cultural beliefs of their oppressors—and must be put through re-education sessions; l The concomitant need to dismantle all societal norms through relent- less criticism; and l The replacement of all systems of power and even the descriptions of those systems with a worldview that describes only oppressors and the oppressed.
    [Show full text]