Adding to cuda's post:
https://reason com/blog/2015/11/06/watch-students-tell-yale-to-fire-a-staff
Christakis began to say that he had a different view of his role at the college, but the student cut him off, saying:
“Then step down! If that is what you think about being a [inaudible] master, then you should step down It is not about creating an intellectual space! It is not! Do you understand that? It’s about creating a home here! You are not doing that. You’re going against that.”
It is not about creating an intellectual space, the students claim; it’s about creating safe spaces. This is as clear an articulation of students’ desires as they come, and it summarizes everything that's wrong with the modern college campus.
Students should of course feel free to challenge university administrators—this is the essence of free speech Students have every right to publicize their concerns and work to make Yale a more welcoming place for marginalized people (and administrators should listen) But a great many students, it seems, don’t actually desire a campus climate where such matters are up for debate By their own admission, they want anyone who disagrees with them branded a threat to their safety and removed from their lives
If these students get their wish to turn Yale and other campuses into zones of emotional coddling, they will succeed only in destroying the very point of college.
I have to say, having to hear someone use a racial epithet is not pleasant, but I believe the use of that word injures the speaker more than the hearer, unless, perhaps,
the speaker is an ESPN analyst.
One of the important things that distinguishes the West from the other cultures of the globe is the ability to examine multiple sides of issues, apply rational thought to them and select the best ideas to develop and implement.
* "Test all things, hold fast to that which is good."
* "The Scientific Method."
* "Judge people not by the color of their skin, but the content of their character."
There are all part and parcel of what made the West the dominant culture globally.
This has not been uniform, but it is generally true in ways in which it has never been true about pre-Columbian America, Africa, or Asia. It helps explain why we speak English in Alabama but they don't speak Cherokee in London.
Now these ideas are subtly retreating.
it is important for minority students “to have involvement in who’s going to be in authority and who’s going to have power over us instead of just the older, white men who only care about the money. It’s more than the money, it’s about the school itself. ”
That sounds like race prejudice to me.
Students who hear an ugly racial epithet are not materially damaged. It is just that small-minded people have self-identified as such. Now you know who not to hang out with But this does not give one group of students to power to block the speech of others or to place extraordinary demands on the University.
Specific proposals might help understand what these students want. Want a university "Office of Diversity?" Okay. Mizzou already has one. Want more African-American students. Well, that would depend on the quality of the applicants Want the race of applicants to count for more than GPAs, standardized testing, and extra-curriculars, in an effort to increase minority enrollment? That is a little more problematic. (See bullet number 3 above)
Here are some of the demands:
In the preamble, these students declare, "Concerned Student 1950, thus, represents every Black student admitted to the University of Missouri since then and their sentiments regarding race related affairs affecting their lives at a predominantly white institution." Really? How did Concerned Student 1950 get the authority to speak for every black student. Are there no dissenters from the positions taken by Concerned Student 1950? CS1950 speaks for all, simply based on their skin color? And wouldn't that be an example of race prejudice?
"Not only do our white peers sit in silence in the face of our oppression but also our administrators who perpetuate that oppression through their inaction." The oppression I am reading about consists of hearing others use racial epithets. They are also oppressed by not being allowed to stand in the road (in violation of law) to confront the car of the President of the University That level of "oppression" is not exactly "Mississippi Burning."
* "We demand the immediate removal of Tim Wolfe as UM system president " So, this group, which claims to speak for all African-American students, now gets to speak exclusively for all students in demanding that the president of all students resign. That does not strike me a terribly democratic.
"We demand that the University of Missouri creates and enforces comprehensive racial awareness and inclusion curriculum (
sic) throughout all campus departments and units, mandatory for all students, faculty, staff, and administration." So everyone is going to have to take racial awareness and [an] inclusion curriculum, whether they have demonstrated a need for such training? Who is going to pay for this? How does this add to the University's broader mission?
Here's a gem:
* "This curriculum must be vetted, maintained, and overseen by a board comprised of students, staff, and faculty
of color." So, apparently, only students, staff and faculty "of color" can vet, maintain and oversee this curriculum That sounds to me to be racially bigoted.
* "We demand that by the academic year 2017- 2018, the University of Missouri increases the percentage of black faculty and staff campus- wide to 10% " That sounds like a racial criteria Checked the data.
UM faculty & staff is now 2.2% Hispanic, 5.7% African-American, 7.3% Asian, 82.9% White, 1.9% other
The state as a whole is 4% Hispanic, 11.8% AA, 83.5% white, & 1.9% Asian.
So if we are going by proportion, whites are under-represented on the faculty/staff, African-Americans are under-represented and Asians are grossly over-represented. Will the University be substantively improved if they fired a bunch of the Asian faculty & staff and hired more African-Americans and a few more Hispanics? I don't know, how about hiring the best candidates regardless of race, color, creed, sex, but based on
competence, skill & will?
* "We demand that the University of Missouri composes a strategic 10 year plan by May 1, 2016 that will increase retention rates for marginalized students, sustain diversity curriculum and
training, and promote a more safe and inclusive campus." Who is marginalized and why are they having trouble being retained?
* "We demand that the University of Missouri increases funding, resources, and personnel for the social justices (
sic) centers on campus for the purpose of hiring additional professionals, particularly those of color." Besides the grammatical error, this is another appeal for money and to be spent based on race.