“Woke” is now a dirty word despite the fact that the original meaning was being aware of racism and prejudice and societal inequalities. Why anyone or anything would want to be labeled “anti-woke” is beyond me, but we are also living in a world where it’s not ok in some circles to even talk about racism and prejudice and social inequalities.
7 Likes
So Fox News (the source of my link in the OP) is too far left for you?
I live in Deep Red. Most are in love with that source.
Personally, I read from a variety of sources to try to get the most info about something of interest, but if Fox is too far left for you, then I probably don’t read your sources.
2 Likes
There may be more who “jump ship,” but it is tricky to tell because they aren’t really on the “ship” to begin with. As the planned university admitted after the public (and presumably private) comments of some of these “advisors,” the planned university over-hyped the role of the “advisors” and blurred the distinction between “advisors” and the real founders. The advisors have no skin in the game and don’t necessarily support or agree with what the actual founders are doing or saying. So given they have no tangible role in the planned university, have not signed on to its philosophy or reasons for existence, it is not clear what jumping ship would actually entail, other than further embarrassing the project (and themselves) by having their names removed from the website.
@Catcherinthetoast, While it is marked ambiguously and could/should have been more clearly identified as “Opinion” the Guardian column is obviously opinion piece, is listed among the opinion pieces (along with Robert Reich’s piece), and even has a “More from Opinion” option at the bottom of the page. As an opinion piece, is is perhaps less bombastic or hyperbolic than the information being put out by the founders of this university.
Have you read the pieces by Kanelos, Weiss, etc? Do you consider their portrayal of those involved in higher education as maniacs, hijackers, thought police, authoritarian, crazy, insane, etc. to be honest and respectful portrayals? Do they really seem concerned with founding an institution where people will “listen to one another, empathize, or even seek out common purpose and respectfully disagree.” Or is this, essentially, the “yelling” of which you speak? Have any of the actual founders (as opposed to the amorphous “advisors”) given any real life indication that they are truly concerned with the goals you mention? Or do their records of culture war flag waving and pot stirring indicate otherwise?
Here is another Guardian opinion piece, this one clearly marked as such. It is satire, but the point is salient, given the past actions of the actual founders.
3 Likes
The linked article shows that there are few (if any) clean hands when it comes to freedom of speech. Though it is written satirically, the author has a point when he illustrates the different impact “cancelling” has on well known, and popular, public figures (negligible) versus those whose livelihoods have been destroyed (and by that I don’t mean people who keep their tenured positions and continue to be heard in the public sphere - a la Niall Ferguson).
3 Likes
I perhaps misinterpreted this statement to suggest I wasn’t adequately informed to express an opinion about civility and political tone unless I had read the aforementioned (which I have).
I didn’t think I had been ambiguous in my admonishment of “BOTH” sides.
“I agree but think it’s relevancy is emblematic of a broader problem perpetuated by both extremes.”
“As a society the fact that both sides are so entrenched and determined to pursue a strategy to shout one another down in an academic setting should alarm people of good conscience regardless of political beliefs.”
“Reading through this thread I am struck by posters outrage at the other side”
I will try to be clearer going forward😀
I understand (and often share) your inclination to passionately respond to others with whom I disagree politically. While I may disagree or even be repulsed by their views I think it important that we engage in a respectful discussion.
FYI I enjoy your posts and wish you well!
3 Likes
Fair enough.
1 Like
MODERATOR’S NOTE: Please get back on track and stop the sniping. I deleted several posts.
Another important point is that Weiss has been leading the charge in trying to “cancel” pro-Palestinian intellectuals since she was at Columbia, and other founders have been equally hostile to other schools of thought with which they disagree. (Almost all have supported, to some degree, positions trying to “cancel” CRT in education, for example.) That’s why the satire is so effective. The founders have shown a willingness to cancel speech (and/or schools of thought) with which they strongly disagree.
1 Like
I don’t think she meant this as voluntary. Several additional posts deleted. Thread put on slow mode. The next flagged post will likely lock the thread
What’s on or off track for this thread?
1 Like
I was not even concerned with off-track. It was the snarky comments aimed at other users that has been problematic.
As a reminder, you all agreed to abide by the Forum Rules upon registering, which says,
“Our forum is expected to be a friendly and welcoming place, and one in which members can post without their motives, intelligence, or other personal characteristics being questioned by others."
3 Likes
Yes, I really meant “off track” in terms of civility. Please act like adults.
Oy. 
Maybe this is outdated based upon some “adult” behavior that has been going on from Little League parents to (insert topic of choice) - all adults. 
I wonder what we could use instead. Act like we actually learned the lessons we were supposed to have learned in kindergarten?
I’m fairly certain that every recent poster on this thread is not only an adult, but a parent. As an adult, users have heard me explain the rules of behavior. As a parent, I would hope that it is not common for your kids to behave the way some posters did.
As for another way of phrasing, I refer you to the late, great Prince Rogers Nelson - Act your age, not your shoe size. And to be clear, that’s US shoe sizes.
7 Likes
All-time fave rave from 1986 (putting me clearly in the parent category)!
Ok, since I am probably one of the posters at issue and have learned my lesson, I’ll add, FWIW:
“You don’t have to watch Dynasty
To have an attitude, uh”
(and to date me even further, I’m referring to the original 1981 Dynasty, not the new one, which I didn’t even know about until DD mentioned they are doing a remake!)
And, yes, I know this is WAY off-topic.
I don’t know the quote - to add levity, all I remember from that show is that at some point there’s a wedding and a woman has to choose the music and my mother said “I bet she doesn’t know the difference between xxxx and zzzz” (two famous wedding marches) two seconds before the show made the same reference. It impressed me mightily but also indicated it was a boring show about old people and weddings, so that’s the extent of my Dynasty knowledge.
Right now, this can’t be a fake university, since it’s not a university yet. It’s a project. If it comes to fruition, it can be an interesting one to follow.
1 Like
From the Prince masterpiece “Kiss”, which @skieurope also cited! I think the line he cited and the one I did are probably the only ones appropriate for CC, but the first is a GREAT one!
The satirical point of the second of the two Guardian pieces would appear to be that the suppressions of the pro-Palestinian academics which it cites are as offensive to the objectives of free speech as the suppressions of conservative academics. That is, the piece, while obviously skeptical of the good faith of the founders of the new school, doesn’t attack the idea on which it was founded - that the speech of all of us deserves protection. Whether the school will live up to its objectives can’t of course be known with certainty. Whether it is likely to is at least a debatable question. I have seen no reason to think otherwise beyond the positions taken by Weiss during her student days. Nevertheless, I am all for holding her feet to the fire along with those of all concerned. A school founded on such a resounding principle would be very ill-advised to make exceptions on the basis of favored ideologies. That is the very basis of its claim to be different from existing American universities. But if a skepticism on this point is the basis of your criticism of the school, then that necessarily means you have accepted its objectives - assuming it’s a critique made in good faith.