Category Archives: Political Correctness

Participating in a legislative hearing on housing discrimination last week, state Rep. Michael Winkler, D-Vernon, may not have known (along with most of his constituents) a couple of disgraceful aspects of United States history: the Chinese Exclusion Act of 1882 and the internment of U.S. citizens of Japanese descent during World War II when they were falsely suspected of disloyalty. Or maybe Winkler just forgot about them. That can happen.

So Winkler mistakenly remarked that a Greenwich housing official who was defending his town against complaints of exclusivity should not have counted residents of Asian descent as members of oppressed minorities because Asian Americans never faced discrimination.

While mistaken, Winkler had not "disparaged" people of Asian descent, as some people inferred and some news organizations reported. He was just opposing exclusive zoning and was a bit inept as he argued, accurately, that wealthy Greenwich is not as open residentially as it might like to pretend, and that Blacks are the most disadvantaged of Connecticut's minority groups.

But since this is the era of political correctness, indignation, intimidation, and posturing, Winkler's colleagues at the state Capitol couldn't just cordially correct him. They had to demonstrate their righteousness by denouncing him as if this avuncular liberal Democrat was actually a grand dragon of the Ku Klux Klan.

The next day state Attorney General William Tong, himself of Asian descent, carved time from his busy schedule posturing elsewhere to pile on, though Winkler had already apologized contritely at the end of the hearing the night before. His contrition did Winkler no good. The verdict was already in: Off with his head!

Tong bellowed: "The history of bias and hate against Asian Americans in this country is long and largely invisible, an unfortunate reality that has been highlighted by the ignorant comments made by Representative Winkler. The myth of the so-called model minority' is a dangerous fiction that for too long has allowed this country to erase and ignore this shameful history."

Of course nearly everybody these days wants to be considered a victim of one thing or another because victimhood is so powerful politically. If you're a victim, everyone is supposed to be cowed into doing whatever you demand, even if it isn't any fairer than what was done to you. Victim status is especially useful to politicians, even those who have reached high office, thereby inadvertently giving evidence that maybe they weren't such victims.

Anyone who questions this racket risks getting called an ugly name. So most people in politics endure it in silence.

But the "model minority" isnota myth about people of Asian descent in America. The social science and occasional political controversies suggest that despite the bigotry they have faced -- much reduced now, the Chinese Exclusion Act being long repealed and the internment of the Japanese Americans long repudiated by statute and reparations -- Americans of Asian descent indeed tend to work harder than they complain. As a result their success, as a proportion of their numbers, is much greater than that of other ethnic groups and whites, especially academically. This may have more to do with culture and family values than genetics.

So the bigger history here is not, as Tong says, "shameful" butheroic-- a history of overcoming injustice and thus making the whole country more just. Indeed, that remains the American story generally, which in turn is part of what used to be called the ascent of man, though it may have slowed lately.

Even as the attorney general postures about injustice to people of Asian descent in the distant past and in the present inotherstates, he has dismissed injustice to them right in his own state. For Tong has taken the side of Yale University against the litigation brought on behalf of students of Asian descent who claim that in pursuit of "diversity," Yale, like other elite institutions, has imposed a quota on their admission, just as higher education long has done against Jewish students with superior qualifications.

If academic achievement determined admission, student populations in higher education would be even more Asian and Jewish than they already are. But the political correctness Tong strives to serve in pursuit of even higher office confuses diversity with justice.

Chris Powell is a columnist for the Journal Inquirer.

Read the original here:

Winkler isn't a Klansman and Tong is hardly a victim - Journal Inquirer

"Look at the state of the pathetic excuse for a proffessional. Her rediculous appearance says it all but she thinks she looks radical." (sic)

100% agree .. her adolescent stance is concerning considering her academic achievement. Covid celebrity and full of self-importance.

She loves her own voice.

She has zero scientific integrity.

The doctor needs a good taxidermist.

Just a big fat pig.

Actually she doesnt look very professional at all never thought she was anything but a mouth full of rubish [sic].

Prof Wiles has a PhD in microbiology from Oxford University, she has won numerous awards for her research and communication efforts, including the Prime Ministers Science Media Communication Prize, she has been a finalist for the 2018 New Zealander of the Year Award and in 2019, was appointed a member of the New Zealand Order of Merit for services to microbiological and science communication but, of course, none of that matters because she is just a big fat pig.

This type of vitriol is not isolated and many high-profile women are recipients.

A few years ago, I attended an event, Women you can Bank on, where Raelene Castle, CEO of Sport New Zealand and past CEO of Rugby Australia and the Canterbury-Bankstown Bulldogs, was the guest speaker.

She shared with the audience the abhorrent social media bullying she was subjected to. I remember reading the comments, and feeling physically sick, then asking myself , Why are we letting this happen?.

To all those people who complain about political correctness, woke cultures and cancel cultures, please have another think.

We have to do all that we can to address the inequities women face in terms of societal expectations around their physical appearance, especially when they dare to be in the public profile.

Congratulations to Wakatipu High School who have tweaked their Grease musical Summer Nights lyrics, "Tell me more, tell me more, did she put up a fight?" so that the play is more suited to modern thinking.

This is not taking a politically correct approach as described in the Otago Daily Times (March, 28, 2021), this is taking an approach which is respectful to women. By using the phrase politically correct we are undermining those seeking change and boy, do we need change.

Ex-prime minister of Australia, Julia Gillard and the director-general of the World Trade Organisation, Ngozi Okonjo-Iweala, have published a book, Women and Leadership, demonstrating that these problems are global. They recognise this is not a male against female issue, but a society against female issue.

A stark demonstration of this was when internationally recognised feminist, Germain Greer, said of Julia Gillard, What I want her to do is get rid of those bloody jackets, every time she turns around youve got that strange horizontal crease, which means theyre cut too narrow in the hips. Youve got a big arse, Julia. Just get on with it.

March-on Wakatipu High, march-on Prof Siouxsie Wiles, march-on Raelene Castle, march-on Julia Gillard and march-on all women who strive to lead in the face of such abuse.

Why do we need to address this?

Many reasons, the most urgent being the future of young women.

My daughter is 15, her generation of young women are growing up in perhaps the most horrific time for young women in relation to body image. Its hard to compare across generations and other generations of women have had different challenges, but the proliferation and accessibility of pornography, social media bullying, botox and surgical enhancement offerings, mean these young women need all of our support in valuing them for who they truly are.

They need all of our support to show them that they are worth more than their looks that their actions, character and achievements mean more to us than the size of their bottoms.

We need to stop undermining and belittling this movement with snide comments about woke culture, and political correctness.

When we undermine these movements, we undermine the ambitions of many young women and in doing so, potentially create a body image crisis that will irreparably damage years of progress for womens equality. Please people, enough is enough.

More:

Time to fight the attack on young women's image - Otago Daily Times

In the name of equality Joe Courtney has single handedly led an assault on young girls, at-risk mothers, religious institutions and on each and every voter from Groton to Vernon, from Connecticut to California. In a monumental gesture of overreach, Representative Joe Courtney co-sponsored one of the most destructive and dangerous legislations in decades.

Representative Courtney wants to add Gender Identity to the wording of the 2019 Equality Act legislation. Sounds benign, doesnt it? Nobody wants to see discrimination against any group.

But here is what Americans are not being told. The current Equality Act, as co-sponsored by Joe Courtney, will destroy opportunities for young girls, create unsafe environments for homeless and abused Mothers and their daughters, diminish our parental rights, and force business owners and religious institutions to conform to government defined norms.

H.R.5 adds Gender Identity as a protected class and will compel athletic institutions with sports ranging from girls softball and field hockey to track and field, from the youth level to high school to professional sports to allow biological males to compete, side by side, with young girls. Imagine a 220lb male on the Pomfret womens field hockey team?

What will Joe say to a female athlete who trains relentlessly to compete in sport only to lose a championship and the chance to break school records to a biological male? If you dont think this could happen, it has, right here in Connecticut. Imagine the demoralization of Seana Soule not just losing the CT State Championships in Track & Field but also losing the scholarship opportunities that disappeared that day. In one

stroke of the pen Joe Courtney will have destroyed decades of equality for women under Title IX. Girl sports under the Equality Act will cease to exist.

Joe Courtneys new definition of Equality affects more than female athletes. At risk mothers and their daughters seeking sanctuary from abusive domestic partners will find no peace of mind in shelters like New Londons http://www.safefuturesct.org. Biological males will have full access to womens shelters, bathrooms, living quarters because these facilities will be compelled by Joe Courtneys law to let men in if they identify as female. Really? Dont believe it? Read the incredible story from Anchorage, Alaska.

The risks do not end with the horrific problems described above. Parental rights can be forfeited for blocking a child from hormone therapy. Churches and religious institutions will be forced to comply with government mandates on Gender Ideology that are in direct conflict with their beliefs and teachings. Teachers can be fired for not conforming to the proper pronoun usage. Business owners will face new minefields of political correctness that will cost time and money they can ill aord.

While the citizens of Eastern Connecticut work to rebuild lives torn apart by the Pandemic, getting businesses on track, returning to school, restoring normalcy to their lives, Representative Courtney has different priorities. Instead of rebuilding our fragile society, Joe Courtney is ripping it apart in ways that diminish family, social norms, and the safety of the most vulnerable.

We must all speak out to Congressmen Courtney and remind him that he works for all of us not the progressives with revolutionary theories of societal norms. All citizens must tell Joe that the Equality Act is not about equality, and is not the right direction for our state and country.

Dominic RapiniBranford, CT

See more here:

Equality Act a 'Monumental Gesture of Overreach' - CT Examiner

COLUMBUS, Ohio -- On Monday, Lt. Gov. Jon Husted doubled down on his public use of the phrase Wuhan virus to describe the coronavirus, dismissing those who said the term encourages bigotry against a backdrop of heightened concern over prejudice and violence against Asian-Americans.

Husted told a Cincinnati radio host that what he actually meant in his 10-word tweet last Friday was to criticize the Chinese government for not being more transparent about its possible role in the pandemic. He said there should be an independent international investigation into the origins of the virus, and he framed any criticism of his tweet as a form of stifling political correctness.

These are legitimate questions and we shouldnt avoid them, we should confront them, Husted said. The same thing -- if America creates a global problem, America should be called out by name. China should too.

Husted used his Twitter account on Friday to share an article in which former CDC Director Robert Redfield told CNN the coronavirus may have been inadvertently released from a Chinese research lab in Wuhan, a theory that has not been proven. Husted commented in the tweet: So it appears it was the Wuhan virus after all?

The tweet prompted swift social-media backlash from Democrats and others. Several officials with Ohio Asian-American advocacy groups said Husteds use of the term promoted anti-Asian sentiment.

Siu Yan Scott, a member of the OCA Greater Cleveland Chapter who volunteered at a Stop Asian Hate rally in Cleveland on Sunday that was attended by hundreds, said Husteds comments break from guidance from the World Health Organization, which since 2015 has recommended against naming new human viruses after regions to minimize harming any specific group.

Scott said using the phrase Wuhan virus, especially coming from people in positions of leadership, contributes to the perception that people of Asian descent who live in the United States are a public health threat, and is a factor in the recent spike in crimes targeting Asians.

The very insensitive nature of his comments show a huge lack of awareness on his part that is very disappointing to see in our leaders, Scott said. We need our leaders to show support for the Asian-American community.

Husteds tweet came days the Cleveland rally, and days after a video clip went viral that showed a Chinese-American township trustee in the Cincinnati area, while addressing hateful comments directed a local Chinese restaurant, removing his shirt during a public meeting showing scars hed received while serving in the U.S. Army.

Husted responded to criticism by clarifying his tweet was meant to criticize the Chinese government.

Rather than back away from the controversy, Husted promoted the Monday radio interview with WLWs Scott Sloan through his official social media accounts, including sharing audio of the complete interview on Twitter.

No one gets to assign motive to my comments that clearly were focused on the virus and the Chinese government, Husted said Monday. And there are people who want to manipulate that and focus on that, so thats why Im on your show today. Im going to talk about it, Im going to focus on it, and Im going to call people out who want to manipulate the situation.

A spokesman for Gov. Mike DeWine declined to comment for this story. But asked about Husteds tweet on Monday, DeWine told reporters the Chinese government hasnt been transparent about the pandemic.

Youll have a chance to talk to him tomorrow. But I know Jon Husted. Theres no prejudice there at all, DeWine said, according to the Athens Messenger, while appearing at a COVID-19 vaccination site in Vinton County.

DeWine and Husted, both Republicans, are running for re-election next year, and could face a primary challenge amid rising criticism from the political right over DeWines handling of the coronavirus pandemic.

Concern over rising anti-Asian sentiment in America tied to the coronavirus pandemic has been publicly heightened over the past year, especially since a Georgia man killed eight people, including six people of Asian descent, during a series of shootings at massage parlors in the Atlanta area earlier this month. Police havent officially declared a motive, but the shootings are being investigated as a possible hate crime, according to the Atlanta-Journal Constitution.

An analysis of crime data from major U.S. cities from the Center for the Study of Hate and Extremism at California State University, San Bernardino, found that anti-Asian hate crimes more than doubled in 2020, when overall hate crimes were down 7%.

Originally posted here:

In radio interview, Lt. Gov. Jon Husted doubles down on coronavirus tweet criticized as offensive by Asian-Am - cleveland.com

Political correctness and its cancel culture are starting to evoke the second great Red Scare and the tactics of Sen. Joseph McCarthy in the 1950s.

Last week the talented young political journalist Alexi McCammond was pushed out of the editorship of Teen Vogue magazine just as she was starting the job. Anti-Asian and anti-homosexual comments she had made on the internet 10 years ago, when she was 17, galvanized the magazine's staff against her, and two advertisers threatened to withdraw. The magazine's owner, the Conde Nast chain, which had been aware of McCammond's old offense, turned on her.

It didn't matter that McCammond, who is Black may have come to recognize her own bigotry as she grew up. Two years ago she had acknowledged and publicly apologized for the mean comments and alerted her prospective employer about them. Conde Nast first thought that youthful mistakes might well be forgiven when sincerely repented. But the PC cancel culture, which seems especially virulent among journalists, quickly intimidated management out of its quaint attitude.

McCammond's hateful adversaries are teaching not only that there can be no forgiveness for thought and speech crime even when it is repented but also that it merits a virtual death sentence. For how is McCammond to get another job now? What employer will consider hiring her and risking a confrontation with the woke mob?

And if there is to be no forgiveness, why should anyone repent anything?

The prophet of old taught: "Go and sin no more." The prophets of the cancel culture teach: "Go and cut your throat before we do it for you."

* * *

COLLEGE LOAN RACKET: With its first tranche of college loan debt cancellation, the Biden administration has confirmed that much of higher education is a racket and aid to it is not support for education at all but just for educators, who are a big part of the Democratic Party's army.

The cancellation, announced this week by U.S. Education Secretary Miguel Cardona, will erase obligations to repay about a billion dollars in loans taken by students who claim that their colleges deceived or defrauded them in some way. This billion dollars is a small fraction of the estimated $1.7 trillionowed by about 45 million college borrowers. While most of them are quite able to pay, the Biden administration is expected to follow with more loan forgiveness.

The college racket goes far beyond college borrowers who have not found employment that pays well enough to support a decent living as well as loan payments. The racket also encompasses the millions of college graduates and dropouts who hold jobs for which no higher education is required.

Secretary Cardona did not announce prosecutions of any colleges that defrauded or deceived students, nor any reconsideration of the self-serving attitude prevailing in educational circles that everyone should go to college. In his brief tenure as Connecticut's education commissioner, Cardona never addressed the remedial nature of public higher education in the state, where most freshmen at public colleges never mastered high school work and so must take remedial courses.

College loans are not the country's big educational problem. The failure oflowereducation is.

* * *

UNJUSTIFIED GUILT: No matter how much they scramble and publicize, state and municipal government officials can't satisfy themselves over what they call the "equity" of their campaign to get people vaccinated against the virus epidemic. Vaccination in Connecticut so far has covered a much larger share of the white population than the racial minority population.

Officials should stop lashing themselves about this, for it is only to be expected. Racial minorities long have lagged in the metrics of many good things and have led in the metrics of many bad things -- because race correlates heavily with wealth and poverty.

People with more money can afford to take better care of themselves. They tend to be better educated and more engaged with society and to know more about how to deal with the world.

Not so with the poor. Extra efforts always must be made with them, and even then they may be suspicious and standoffish.

Thereisa big "equity" issue here but it has little to do with vaccinations. It is the failure of welfare and education policy -- and it can't be discussed.

Chris Powell is a columnist for the Journal Inquirer.

More:

Cancel culture mob teaches that there can be no forgiveness - Journal Inquirer

It was one Australian television's most beloved shows and host Daryl Somers and the rest of his crew were household names. Hey, Hey It's Saturday was loaded with slapstick humour, double entendres and corny jokes: it was family entertainment at its finest. Or was it?

After Daryl Somers pre-empted his comeback as a co-host of Dancing with the Stars by saying he thought Hey Hey wouldn't get made today because of political correctness. Australian singing legend and Hey Hey regular guest Kamahl hit back, saying he was regularly humiliated on the show and the butt of racist jokes. So what does that mean in terms of how we look back on our cultural history and what are the lessons to be learnt looking forward to the future of Australian television?

Dr Jason Sternberg in a Senior Lecturer with the Creative Industries Faculty at Queensland University of Technology and he's chatting with ABC Radio Brisbane Afternoons presenter Kat Feeney.

Read more here:

Hey Hey It's Saturday and cancel culture - Afternoons - ABC Local

Silent majority must speak out

In America, when a small group complains loudly enough about perceived injustices, the silent majority, peaceful to a fault, yields to the demonstrative minority. It began in the 1960s with the banning of school prayer.

The elimination of Chief Illiniwek at the University of Illinois because of a small vocal group who claimed to be offended or attempts to force sports teams to change names is part of political correctness. Holiday parties supplant Christmas parties. Merry Christmas is no longer spoken because it might offend someone? Really!?

People come here seeking liberty, the pursuit of happiness and equal opportunity, not equality. Immigrants dont sail in leaky boats, swim rivers or cram into stifling trucks because we are politically correct. The rush to enter the United States, legally or illegally, isnt because we stopped saying Merry Christmas, removed the Ten Commandments or banished Bibles.

Many of these changes originated on college campuses. The elitist few have indoctrinated our youth and shoved their beliefs down the throats of the rest of the country. We have adopted the campus philosophy.

In spite of the spiritual foundation of this nation, those in authority are saying we are not a spiritual nation and that there must be stricter boundaries on our spiritual expressions.

Correct speech is the beginning of totalitarianism. Read the true history of how tyrannies grew in Europe and China, for example. In the face of adversity and resistance, the silent majority must speak out. Be courageous.

DAVID BOYD

Champaign

Read more from the original source:

Letter to the Editor | Silent majority must speak out - Champaign/Urbana News-Gazette

Richard D. Wilkins lives in DeWitt.

How dark the picture that SUNY Geneseo Distinguished Professor Michael Leroy Oberg paints of American history, while nastily attacking those who would celebrate it (The Republican War on American history, Feb. 12, 2021). Slavery and Jim Crow unquestionably deeply stained Americas story, but were hardly central to it. The New York Times 1619 Project he promotes has been heavily criticized by leading historians. such as Peter Wood, Ph.D., president of the National Association of Scholars. America didnt begin in 1619, with a handful of indentured servants landing in what is now Virginia, but in the 1620 Mayflower Compact, among a group of religious freedom seekers.

Freedom was the overarching idea inspiring colonists to declare independence, and forge an enduring Constitution. Slavery was then deeply embedded in the agrarian Southern economy. Unanimous passage required reluctant compromise, but abolitionists succeeded in ending slave importation by 1808, and inserted the much misunderstood 3/5th rule, limiting Southern political power.

The continuing struggle forced balanced free and slave state admissions into the Union, characterized by the Compromises of 1820 and 1850. A bloody Civil War brought forth Lincolns Emancipation Proclamation, and Amendments 13, 14, and 15, which promised, though soon thwarted, equal rights for all citizens. That awaited Brown v. Board of Education, 1960s Civil Rights acts, and subsequent reparative measures.

That large, but limited, blemished beginning cant begin to account for how a cluster of competing colonies, thinly spread along the Atlantic littoral, soon traversed the continent, becoming the greatest and most prosperous nation in world history. It ignores the multitudes who, throughout, advocated, fought and died for the achievement of equality for all, It ignores the millions who flocked to these shores, fleeing oppression and persecution, in search of freedom, and who have contributed so much to its development.

Southern wealth from enslavement was soon gone with the wind. Contra Obergs reductive analysis, the nations great wealth was generated in the North, with its massive industrialization, employing free native and immigrant labor, and powered by inventiveness and ingenuity. Even the cotton gin, savior of the Southern economy, was developed there.

The Academy has opened a Pandoras Box of societal ills: political correctness, multiculturalism, Critical Race Theory, antiracism and phantom cancel culture. Not so slowly, but surely, though not yet by Congress, First Amendment freedoms of speech, press, worship and peaceable assembly are being seriously eroded. Having ever said, or done, anything now objectionable, regardless of intent or age, can bar one permanently from the public square. One can publish anything they want , as long as Big Tech approves. Religious conscience must now bend before government edict. In the name of public health, more persons have been allowed at a time into casinos than into congregations. Contributing to a disfavored cause, or supporting a disliked public figure, can get one doxxed, physically confronted or fired.

History as civic education is for K-12, history as a discipline for higher education. Schoolchildren are being ideologically indoctrinated, not americanized. They are being prepared not for the work, but the woke world, groomed for political activism, not for the rights and responsibilities of citizenship. Instead of encouraging individual talent and initiative, all must be tethered to the least common denominator. Equality of opportunity for all, inevitably resulting in disparate outcomes, is being replaced by equity, an impossible demand for equal collective outcomes, among warring racial, sexual, and ethnic clans.

America remains an exceptional nation. Yet, it seems rapidly devolving into the Disunited States. Such social unraveling desperately needs to be arrested. In strikingly similar times, Lincoln wisely warned that a house divided against itself cannot stand.

That was true then; it remains true today.

Related: The Republican war on American history (Commentary)

More here:

Freedom was the overarching idea of America, not slavery (Commentary) - syracuse.com

I am not the target audience for this. I found this thought echoing around my head as I read Andrew Reeds March 12 column Steven Pinker Wants to Repair Campus Culture. The piece has a pretty veneer and frames itself as hopeful, but concerned. I am not convinced its true purpose is quite so positive.

The essay is a discussion with Steven Pinker, focusing primarily on the recent wave of illiberalism, particularly on college campuses. A full and nuanced rebuttal of the article would be the length of a novel, which Im sure is by design. It is riddled with over-simplifications, misrepresentations and conservative buzzwords that mean very little but have loaded connotations. Anyone familiar with these rhetorical strategies, or indeed with the content Reed discusses, will immediately recognize how the focus of the argument skews reality. This is why I was quickly convinced that the article wasnt written with my fellow Brown students and me in mind. Instead, it seems aimed at those who already believe that there is an epidemic of political correctness and cancel culture ruining our institutions of higher learning. It says to these people: You are right, this is an issue you should be focused on, and I can give you more evidence to confirm it.

Reed opens with an introduction of Pinker, a Harvard professor turned celebrity intellectual. Pinkers work argues that society is improving on the whole, but he has recently become concerned about cancel culture and censorship. Reed, a staff columnist at an Ivy League newspaper, does not note the irony of his discussion of this topic with a tenured professor who has published 16 books. Clearly, both are able to broadcast their views on prestigious platforms despite Pinker receiving criticism from members of the Linguistics Society of America, the New York Times, the Washington Post and the general public; as well as becoming embroiled in controversy over connections with Jeffrey Epstein.

Pinker claims that illiberalism on college campuses is not new, but that it originated in the 70s and has gotten steadily worse since. Reed cites several recent examples of cancellation: He writes that In 2017, Evergreen College in Washington State descended into chaos when a white professor refused to leave campus after a group of activists organized a day without white students and faculty. Interested to learn more about this clearly outrageous occurrence, I looked at the source he provided. As it turns out, the issue is not quite as Reed has presented it; Evergreens Day of Absence is an event that has been held for decades, and usually involves students and faculty of color leaving campus while white community members stay behind. In light of Trumps election and incidents of harassment at Evergreen (including a police officer shooting two Black students in 2015), organizers proposed a reversal of tradition. Of course, controversy followed and one professor publicly opposed white students and faculty being encouraged to leave campus. A video of student protestors later engaging with the professor and calling for him to be fired went viral, and he went on Tucker Carlsons show on Fox News to talk about being silenced. The school, student activists and a Black professor were then targeted by the alt-right and were doxxed and threatened. Not only was the event canceled the next year, but so were classes after an anonymous caller claimed he had a weapon and was going to execute as many people on that campus as I can get a hold of. Even this description is a simplification, but Reed summarizing the incident as chaos conveniently ignores that the people who suffered most were students and activists who already felt unheard and unrecognized.

The other examples Reed employs are similarly not quite as supportive of his argument as they appear: the Middlebury College incident was also complex and student protesters who did not participate in the violence were disproportionately punished. Rather than quashing debate, the incident sparked fierce discussion on the campus; rather than de-platforming Charles Murray, he became the topic of national conversation and was actually invited back to the school for the third time last year. Finally, the Lisa Littman case is far from an example of illiberalism in academia, but rather an incident of rigorous academic critique and revision to create better scholarship. Littman retained her position at the University and her work is still published.

These tactics continue throughout the rest of the piece, where Pinker goes on to claim that college administrators are now part of the problem. He invokes postmodernism and Marxist critical theory, academic terms which have been co-opted and muddied to the point of uselessness by conservative talking heads, and manages to define the ideologies behind them in a way that is painfully dishonest. These are umbrella terms for complicated and diverse schools of thought, which often contradict each other and cannot be distilled down to statements like history is a struggle.

In one particularly amusing quote, Pinker says that nowadays, the radical student protesters bring in the campus bureaucracy to multiply their own power, something they wouldnt have been caught dead doing when he was an undergraduate. Pinker studied for his Bachelor of Arts at McGill from 1973 to 1976 and he may be partially correct the relationship between student activists and university administrations was certainly strained in the late 60s and early 70s. There could be shocking, disproportionate consequences for disruptive advocacy. McGill fired a professor in 1969 for leading protests, and in 1970, four student activists were killed by the Ohio National Guard in what is now referred to as the Kent State Massacre. I hardly think that students and university administrators are allied now (the Middlebury case that Reed references illustrates this), but surely improvements from the antagonistic relationship of 50 years ago make students and faculty safer and therefore benefit open debate.

Though I find Reeds piece to be a disingenuous representation of the culture in higher education, I share his and Pinkers concerns about narrow viewpoints, and I agree that there is a lot at stake. Who controls the conversation in academia? What are the best ways to make sure that there are diverse viewpoints? In answering these questions, Pinkers emphasis on cancel culture overblows the issue and distracts from the more pressing problem of accessibility in academia especially at elite universities like Brown and Harvard a problem that far more directly restricts campus discourse and narrows the range of acceptable viewpoints. Around 29 percent of Brown students come from private schools suspiciously higher than the two percent of American students at large who are in the private school system. Almost 20 percent of Brown students are from the top one percent of incomes in the United States, with a whopping 70 percent of students coming from the top 20 percent. When Pinker started his Bachelor of Arts at McGill, Brown had only been fully co-educational for two years. Progress was made during the 70s because of lawsuits and student activism that forced the school to be more accessible to and supportive of its underrepresented faculty and students.

My time at Brown exposed me to a huge range of ideas and perspectives. These changed how I see the world and taught me how to communicate productively with people who hold different views from mine. Its clear, however, that there is more work to be done. Though I never felt silenced by my peers, I often felt out of place and insignificant beside the vast wealth and power of the administration. The University was built to serve the needs of white men from private schools. When I see discussions about who deserves a platform, I think about how hard my fellow students with marginalized identities have had and continue to have to fight for their voices to be heard. In order to convince their audience to fear the perils of censoring other viewpoints, Pinker and Reed inaccurately describe and fail to contextualize the people and views they critique. The essay is emblematic of how lamentations of cancel culture often work, more effectively than any protest, to silence others.

Anna House 20 can be reached at anna_house@alumni.brown.edu. Please send responses to this opinion to letters@browndailyherald.com and op-eds to opinions@browndailyherald.com.

See the rest here:

House '20: Steven Pinker and who decides how campus culture should be repaired - The Brown Daily Herald

Late Night with Seth Meyerscalled out Fox News and Republicans in A Closer Look, arguing that their opposition to stricter gun control is without merit. Seth Meyers made his case for why Republicans, Fox News personalities, and the gun lobby are a small minority obstructing actually progress

In less than a week, there were two mass shootings that resulted in 18 deaths. The massacres in Atlanta, Georgia and Boulder, Colorado reinvigorated calls for federal assault weapon bans and immediate gun legislation reform.

As usual, these calls to action were met with resistance from some conservatives who claimed it would be politicizing the tragedies.The Late Show with Stephen Colbertpushed back against this stance earlier this week.

Wednesday night was Seth Meyers chance to do the same. In A Closer Look, theLate Nighthost referenced specific individuals he claims are acting as roadblocks when it comes to gun control reform by spreading lies.

Since President Donald Trump left office, Seth Meyers has noticed a pattern among Fox News personalities and Republicans. According to Meyers, their priorities have changed to a culture war that fixates on cancel culture and political correctness. The late night comedian cant quite understand why these issues are so important during an ongoing pandemic and now two mass shootings in a week.

Meyers calls out Sean Hannity for failing to cover the shooting in Boulder and then goes after Senator Ted Cruz for criticizing Democrats calling for change. A Closer Look cites an epidemic of gun violence and public support for stricter gun control for reasons why change should happen immediately.

Resistance to gun legislation is often framed as a politician defending the Second Amendment. Its what Sean Hannity suggested Sen. Cruz was doing and its what many pro-gun Republicans say while campaigning.

Seth Meyers takes issue with this idea, calling it a ridiculous lie to think that opposition to any gun safety legislation means standing up for the Second Amendment. Meyers points out that modern gun ownership doesnt reflect the well-regulated militia referenced in the Constitution. But the point has been lost thanks to what A Closer Look refers to as one of the greatest cons in the history of politics.

Meyers concludes that conservatives like Hannity and Cruz have no logical argument for opposing even the smallest changes to gun ownership laws. Despite a majority of Americans supporting these reforms, A Closer Look makes it clear nothing will happen as long as the Republican Party remains in the way of change.

What did you think of this installment of A Closer Look? Share your thoughts in the comment section below.

Read more:

Seth Meyers: A Closer Look at Fox News and GOP on gun control - Last Night On