Free Markets, Free People

The updated version of “you reap what you sow”

The subject is academia.   The writer, Bret Stephens at the WSJ prefaces his results with this:

“Liberal Parents, Radical Children,” was the title of a 1975 book by Midge Decter, which tried to make sense of how a generation of munificent parents raised that self-obsessed, politically spastic generation known as the Baby Boomers. The book was a case study in the tragedy of good intentions.

“We proclaimed you sound when you were foolish in order to avoid taking part in the long, slow, slogging effort that is the only route to genuine maturity of mind and feeling,” Miss Decter told the Boomers. “While you were the most indulged generation, you were also in many ways the most abandoned to your own meager devices.”

To say that as a generation, Boomers were over indulged, is a bit of an understatement.  And the indulgence that has done the most damage to the fabric of this country is tolerating leftist orthodoxy.  That orthodoxy, of course, found its unchallenged home in academia.

Results?

For almost 50 years universities have adopted racialist policies in the name of equality, repressive speech codes in the name of tolerance, ideological orthodoxy in the name of intellectual freedom. Sooner or later, Orwellian methods will lead to Orwellian outcomes. Those coddled, bullying undergrads shouting their demands for safer spaces, easier classes, and additional racial set-asides are exactly what the campus faculty and administrators deserve.

In other words, the radical children who grew up to run the universities have duplicated the achievement of their parents, and taken it a step further. In three generations, the campuses have moved from indulgent liberalism to destructive radicalism to the raised-fist racialism of the present—with each generation left to its increasingly meager devices. Why should anyone want to see this farce repeated as tragedy 10 or 20 years down the road?

No, because this is the idiocy it has spawned.  Like this:

One of the panelists at the event was black Columbia student Nissy Aya. Aya was supposed to graduate in 2014, but instead is only on track to receive her degree in 2016. That, Aya says, demonstrates “how hard it has been for me to get through this institution,” though it’s worth noting she is an exceptional case, as Columbia has one of the highest four-year graduation rates in the country.

Aya attributed some of her academic troubles to the trauma of having to take Columbia’s current Core Curriculum, which requires students to take a series of six classes with a focus on the culture and history of Western, European civilization. Aya says this focus on the West was highly mentally stressful for her.

“It’s traumatizing to sit in Core classes,” she said. “We are looking at history through the lens of these powerful, white men. I have no power or agency as a black woman, so where do I fit in?”

As an example, Aya cited her art class, where she complained that Congolese artwork was repeatedly characterized as “primitive.” She wanted to object to that characterization but, in the Spectator’s words, was “tired of already having worked that day to address so many other instances of racism and discrimination.”

And this:

12247089_1184411414920738_7042875426954692723_n

 

Yes, in terms of today, Lincoln was racist.  But this campus protester in Missouri likely has no idea Lincoln also sacrificed very heavily politically to do what was done to abolish slavery.  Historical context, however, is another victim of this nonsense.

This is what academia has become.

“The most fundamental fact about the ideas of the political left is that they do not work. Therefore we should not be surprised to find the left concentrated in institutions where ideas do not have to work in order to survive.” -Professor Thomas Sowell

And it’s even unravelling there.

Pretty, isn’t it?

~McQ

Tweet about this on TwitterShare on FacebookShare on Google+Share on TumblrShare on StumbleUponShare on RedditPin on PinterestEmail this to someone

5 Responses to The updated version of “you reap what you sow”

  • If Nissy Aya was born and grew up in the United States, unless her parents are Congolese, no part of the Congo is her culture.
    If she did not grow up in the ‘Congo’ and her parents were born in the US – how does she know she has any claim to any aspect of Congolese culture that she should be concerned about how it’s art is described.
    If she can’t trace her roots to the Congo a bit more recently than say, the last 80 years, she’s stuck with the rest of us in ‘Western culture’.
    And if she’s worried about primitive art, in my opinion she need look no further than Jackson Pollock or some of Pablo Picassos’s work.

    Her skin color does not allow her to inherit whatever culture she can imagine from an entire continent with different cultures, any more than mine means I can claim I’m an inheritor of Russian culture.

    • For all her very expensive classes, she isn’t getting any fundamental understanding of history.
      Lesson: You don’t have to like it, or agree with it, you just have to understand it enough to pass the exams.
      Hence why it is taking her 6 years (and counting) to complete a 4-year education.
      Maybe she should do a study on why Asians are completing their 4-year degrees in 3?

  • I’ll just be honest here- Western Civilization/history is MORE RELEVANT to the world yesterday today and tomorrow than any African history. Sorry honey but that’s just the way it is.

    I’m sure there’s some interesting stuff in there but overall it’s second-tier stuff. Deal with it

    • Abso-freaking-lutely. There are pockets of progress in history, but since the Ancient Egytians, not much has come from the entire continent of Africa.

      • Ref your “…not much has come from the entire continent of Africa.”

        I was going to mention the ascension of “pResident Fresh Prince”, but then … heh, heh, yeahhhh. . . . When you’re right, you’re right.