Your team fuck jerry fuck jerry fuck jerry fuck jerry fuck jerry fuck jerry fuck jerry fuck jerry fuck jerry fuck jerry fuck jerry fuck jerry fuck jerry fuck jerry. BibMe Free Bibliography Citation Maker MLA, APA, Chicago, Harvard. Diversity Overreach at American University. American Universitys pervasive left wing political climate has not prevented nasty racial incidents, but it sure has facilitated official overreaction antithetical to academia. AU is rapidly moving further than many other colleges and universities to enshrine ideological indoctrination into the curriculum in the name of diversity and inclusion. Racist Incidents on AUs Campus. The campus witnessed two dramatic racist events during the past academic year. Watch Jerry Maguire Online Forbes' title='Watch Jerry Maguire Online Forbes' />If youre planning to see SpiderMan Homecoming in theaters, you can also watch SpiderMan and SpiderMan 2, starring Tobey Maguire, on Hulu. Hulu also has most of. Leigh Steinberg Contributor. I write about the world of sports entertainment full bio Opinions expressed by Forbes Contributors are their own. Watch Jerry Maguire Online Forbes' title='Watch Jerry Maguire Online Forbes' />Paul David Hewson, OL born, known by his stage name Bono b n o, is an Irish singersongwriter, musician, venture capitalist, businessman. A white student threw a banana at an African American student in her dorm room and scribbled obscene graffiti on her doors whiteboard. Later, during final exams, someone hung nooses with bananas marked with racist messages, including one attacking the African American sorority of the new student body president, at three separate locations on campus, and vicious white supremacist attacks on her followed. Both incidents were widely and laudably condemned by students, faculty, and administration alike in a positive exercise of free speech. The student who perpetrated the invasion of another students room was caught and disciplined by the university. AU has enlisted the FBIs assistance and vowed to catch and to punish the other guilty parties. But as those who follow campus news well know, racist or sexist events rarely end with punishment or a return to normality. They often trigger cries of systemic racism or sexism, curable only by reform programs, usually mandatory, to reshape the attitudes of all students. Required Indoctrination Courses Framed as courses designed to help students transitioning into their first year of college, two courses to be taught by diversity staffnot regular faculty will focus heavily on ideological indoctrination. The themes of AUx. This is a bare bones outline of one course Theme 1 Getting to Know Our Social Identities Key Concepts. Identity Grid Exploring Our Social Identities. Class Agreement Supporting Respectful and Productive Dialogue. Bias Discrimination and Racial Formation. White Privilege vs. White Disenfranchisement. Theme 2 Intersections of Social Identity Race in America. Code Switch Video Game About Multiracial Identity. Manifest Destiny and Native American Touch Points Group Presentations. Slaverys Realities Resonance Through Poetry. Allyship, Abolition, and Early Womens Movement. Immigration, Exclusion and Shifting Definitions. Letter to Civil Rights Leader. The Complexity of Contemporary Identities. Theme 3 Letter to a Former Stranger. Research the Life Stories of a Former Stranger. Watch Richard Pryor Live On The Sunset Strip Full Movie. Informal Reading of Letters. Watch The Beaches Of Agnes Online Hulu'>Watch The Beaches Of Agnes Online Hulu. AUx. 1 also contains four full weeks on promoting A Culture of Inclusion with topics such as Diversity, Bias, and Privilege. The allocation of university resources for these required courses is considerable. According to AUs website, there are 1. The administration has also expanded with the addition of a director and program coordinator, as well as seven full or part time staff people to assist AUx. Expanding Indoctrination into Regular Classes. The university is now in the process of converting AUx into regular classes and beyond. The Senior Director for the Center for Diversity Inclusion CDI has suggested Allowing students participation in the seven week Intergroup Dialogue program to serve as an alternative to another assignmentproject or extra credit. I look forward to hearing the administrations explanation to parents who pay phenomenal sums to send their kids to AU when they find out that a student managed to get out of a math assignment to attend a discussion group. The two Intergroup Dialogue topics for Fall 2. Islamophobia and Black Issues Experiences on and off Campus. There are also three segregated dialogue groups, creatively named as intragroup dialogue open only to those who identify within BlackAfrican diasporic communities on three topics Immigration Nationality, Stay Woke A Dialogue on the themes of Get Out, and Whiteness Anti racism. Allyship refers to the proper role for heterosexual whitessecondary, passive and supportive of leadership. In plain language, it means doing as youre told. My guess is that an African American student who questioned affirmative action would not be deemed woke even in his segregated safe space. In the AUx classes themselves, one cannot help but wonder if repeated challenges to the official dogma on white privilege or allyship might not harm the students grade in these mandatory diversity courses. Beyond promoting Intergroup Dialogues in place of academic work, the Center for Diversity Inclusion also encourages faculty to incorporate CDI programs into their syllabus by Inviting Rainbow Speakers Bureau to host a panel in your class or Requesting a workshoptraining or Diversity Peer Educator session. Not a bad way to get out of grading and teaching if you can stomach the agitprop. Faculty Reaction. Faculty reaction to the initial AUx proposal was somewhat muted. Arts and Sciences Dean Peter Starr co chaired the committee in charge of it, and Provost Scott Bass pushed it heavily, so people were none too keen on futilely challenging the people who determine their salaries or become identified as an opponent of diversity. Nevertheless, faculty feedback included complaints about AUx inculcating a political viewpoint. Despite ritualized requests for feedback, Starr made clear that he was uninterested in more than cosmetic changes. Here is the official short summary of changes made to AUx AU Experience I II Course content is being developed for an online platform by faculty members with expertise in each area. Both courses will blend academic content and discussion methods, much the way traditional courses do. AUx. 2, in particular, now focuses on inclusion, with the explicit goal of creating a community of learners. The staffing of discussion leaders for AUx is a complex concern involving other campus initiatives such as the Reinventing the Student Experience Ri. SE project, and will likely be solved outside of this proposal. That said, all discussion leaders for AUx. AUx. 2 will be highly credentialed and complete training in advance of leading these courses. The above is an impressive example of managing to write a whole paragraph saying nothing. The short summary sent to the Faculty Senate notes, however, that In addition to focusing on psycho social development, AUx. The sole class on free speech remains heavily outweighed by the far greater number spent indoctrinating students on white privilege, bias, and exclusion. The Faculty Senate approved the changes to the general education curriculum, including the AU experience, unanimouslynot really surprising, as the faculty contains many promoters of this approach and is normally cowed by the administration anyway. Never Enough, so the Cycle Repeats. Ironically, albeit utterly unsurprisingly, these changes were deemed wholly insufficient by student protesters who berated the administration and faculty alike at an administration organized public meeting and during a student takeover of a Faculty Senate meeting. The response of both faculty and administration has been to double down. During the Faculty Senate takeover, one student complained about the response of a fellow student on Facebook that included a photo of a noose. Provost Scott Bass took down the name of the offending student. Others demanded the immediate firing of faculty for racist comments and expulsion of students for racist actions. The Faculty Senate immediately adopted a resolution calling for a permanent university commission on discrimination with a mandate to create a cutting edge model of campus inclusivity as well as creating a related Faculty Senate committee, which was immediately constituted by four volunteers. Apparently, this is on top of the Faculty Senate Ad Hoc Committee on Diversity Inclusion. Minding The Campus. As intellectual historians have often had occasion to observe, there are times in a nations history when certain ideas are just in the air. Admittedly, this point seems to fizzle when applied to our particular historical moment. On the surface of American politics, as many have had cause to mention, it appears that the main trends predicted over a decade ago in Francis Fukuyamas The End of History have come to pass that ideological if not partisan strife has been muted that there is a general consensus about the most important questions of the day capitalism, not socialism democracy, not authoritarianism and that the contemporary controversies that do exist, while occasionally momentous, are essentially mundane, concerned with practical problem solving whether it is better to count ballots by hand or by machine rather than with great principles. What Will America BeAnd yet, I would argue, all that is true only on the surface. For simultaneously in the United States of the past few decades, recurring philosophical concepts have not only remained in the air, but have proved influential, at times decisive, in cultural and legal and moral arguments about the most important questions facing the nation. Indeed Prosaic appearances to the contrary, beneath the surface of American politics an intense ideological struggle is being waged between two competing worldviews. I will call these Gramscian and Tocquevillian after the intellectuals who authored the warring ideas the twentieth century Italian thinker Antonio Gramsci, and, of course, the nineteenth century French intellectual Alexis de Tocqueville. The stakes in the battle between the intellectual heirs of these two men are no less than what kind of country the United States will be in decades to come. Refining Class Warfare Well begin with an overview of the thought of Antonio Gramsci 1. Marxist intellectual and politician. Despite his enormous influence on todays politics, he remains far less well known to most Americans than does Tocqueville. Gramscis main legacy arises through his departures from orthodox Marxism. Like Marx, he argued that all societies in human history have been divided into two basic groups the privileged and the marginalized, the oppressor and the oppressed, the dominant and the subordinate. Gramsci expanded Marxs ranks of the oppressed into categories that still endure. As he wrote in his famous Prison Notebooks, The marginalized groups of history include not only the economically oppressed but also women, racial minorities and many criminals. What Marx and his orthodox followers described as the people, Gramsci describes as an ensemble of subordinate groups and classes in every society that has ever existed until now. This collection of oppressed and marginalized groups the people lack unity and, often, even consciousness of their own oppression. To reverse the correlation of power from the privileged to the marginalized, then, was Gramscis declared goal. Power, in Gramscis observation, is exercised by privileged groups or classes in two ways through domination, force, or coercion and through something called hegemony, which means the ideological supremacy of a system of values that supports the class or group interests of the predominant classes or groups. Subordinate groups, he argued, are influenced to internalize the value systems and world views of the privileged groups and, thus, to consent to their own marginalization. Delegitimate Belief Systems Far from being content with a mere uprising, therefore, Gramsci believed that it was necessary first to delegitimize the dominant belief systems of the predominant groups and to create a counter hegemony i. Moreover, because hegemonic values permeate all spheres of civil society schools, churches, the media, voluntary associations civil society itself, he argued, is the great battleground in the struggle for hegemony, the war of position. From this point, too, followed a corollary for which Gramsci should be known and which is echoed in the feminist slogan that all life is political. Thus, private life, the workplace, religion, philosophy, art, and literature, and civil society, in general, are contested battlegrounds in the struggle to achieve societal transformation. It is perhaps here that one sees Gramscis most important reexamination of Marxs thought. Classical Marxists implied that a revolutionary consciousness would simply develop from the objective and oppressive material conditions of working class life. Gramsci disagreed, noting that there have always been exploiters and exploited but very few revolutions per se. In his analysis, this was because subordinate groups usually lack the clear theoretical consciousness necessary to convert the structure of repression into one of rebellion and social reconstruction. Revolutionary consciousness is crucial. Unfortunately, the subordinate groups possess false consciousness, that is to say, they accept the conventional assumptions and values of the dominant groups, as legitimate. But real change, he continued to believe, can only come about through the transformation of consciousness. Use the Intellectuals. Just as Gramscis analysis of consciousness is more nuanced than Marxs, so too is his understanding of the role of intellectuals in that process. Marx had argued that for revolutionary social transformation to be successful, the world views of the predominant groups must first be unmasked as instruments of domination. In classical Marxism, this crucial task of demystifying and delegitimizing the ideological hegemony of the dominant groups is performed by intellectuals. Gramsci, more subtly, distinguishes between two types of intellectuals traditional and organic. What subordinate groups need, Gramsci maintains, are their own organic intellectuals. However, the defection of traditional intellectuals from the dominant groups to the subordinate groups, he held, is also important, because traditional intellectuals who have changed sides are well positioned within established institutions. The metaphysics, or lack thereof, behind this Gramscian worldview are familiar enough. Gramsci describes his position as absolute historicism, meaning that morals, values, truths, standards and human nature itself are products of different historical epochs. There are no absolute moral standards that are universally true for all human beings outside of a particular historical context rather, morality is socially constructed. Historically, Antonio Gramscis thought shares features with other writers who are classified as Hegelian Marxists the Hungarian Marxist Georg Lukacs, the German thinker Karl Korsch, and members of the Frankfurt School e. Theodor Adorno and Herbert Marcuse, a group of theorists associated with the Institute for Social Research founded in Frankfurt, Germany in the 1. Marx and Freud. All emphasized that the decisive struggle to overthrow the bourgeois regime that is, middle class liberal democracy would be fought out at the level of consciousness. That is, the old order had to be rejected by its citizens intellectually and morally before any real transfer of power to the subordinate groups could be achieved. Gramscis long reach. The relation of all these abstractions to the nuts and bolts of American politics is, as the record shows, surprisingly direct. All of Gramscis most innovative ideas for example, that dominant and subordinate groups based on race, ethnicity, and gender are engaged in struggles over power that the personal is political and that all knowledge and morality are social constructions are assumptions and presuppositions at the very center of todays politics.