Another blunder from the Stanford suits

 It's been a rough year at my law school alma mater, Stanford University. They've taken a major public relations hit over the Trump quack doctor Scott Atlas, who operates out of the university's misguided, reactionary "think" tank, the Hoover Institution. And another Hoover dude, Davis Hanson, went on a Fox News tirade about how mail voting is unprecedented and dangerous. When faculty, alumni, and students all howled about Hoover, the provost told everybody that they had to suck it up. "Hoover is us" were the words used, I hear.

That's got me holding back the measly pittance I have been giving the school. And I'm sure I'm not alone in that regard.

Yesterday the university plunged deeper into p.r. hell. Outraged faculty revealed that in response to an absurd order from the Trump Education Department, Stanford was now prohibiting employees from acknowledging that systemic racism exists, anywhere in the world, but particularly at Stanford.

This new set of taboos, contained in a "diversity training memo," went beyond what the Trump order requires, and it sparked an immediate wave of criticism, so much so that the administration is now reconsidering it. The Stanford Daily is all over it.

Stanford educators sharply criticized the University for the content of the memo, contending that the University was willing to sacrifice working toward racial justice to protect its federal funding and ensure compliance with the order.

“The expansive reading of the executive order — extending it materially beyond its plain text — and deeming of established scholarly work on ‘implicit bias’ as taboo suggests a troubling blind spot when it comes [to] race, speech, and law,” said law and political science professor Daniel Ho.

Other professors said the examples of prohibited content in the memo go beyond what is required by the order. Law professor Michele Dauber tweeted on Monday that “the examples, which are not part of Trump’s [executive order], go much further than Trump and give you a window into Stanford’s mindset.” 

She cited the restriction of the statement that “systemic racism exists at Stanford” as a “frightening” extension. Though the order prohibits training programs from asserting that the U.S. is fundamentally racist, it does not make mention of systemic racism or explicitly state that programs cannot make statements about racism within individual institutions.

Similarly, comparative literature professor David Palumbo-Liu tweeted that “if diversity training cannot use this language it [is] censorship, period.” He added that he is “appalled by Stanford’s unquestioning, knee-jerk acceptance” of the order.

Of course, the real problem is the clown in the White House, and his hideous "education" henchperson, Betsy DeVos. In 63 days, we will be rid of them. But they have done us a service by bringing out the true colors of the Stanford suits, who seem just fine with Trumpism. Maybe there needs to be a regime change in Palo Alto pretty soon, too.

Comments

  1. Of course, there's systemic racism. Just look at the African American rates of incarceration for crack. Meanwhile Hunter Byden shows up in pictures smoking a crack pipe and nobody even mentions the notion that he could go to prison for this. You'd expect some debate about how different races are treated differently by the system but that didn't even happen. The chances of him being incarcerated for crack are so remote that they're nonexistent - it didn't even cross our minds. We didn't even mention it. Meanwhile thousands of black men are sitting in prison right now for the same thing Hunter Biden was doing. That's systemic racism.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I was stunned at the time, and still marvel that when Obama signed the Fair Sentencing Act, it wiped out the 100 to 1 sentencing disparity between cocaine and crack, and replaced it with an 'only' 18 to 1 difference. Heckuva job there.

      Delete

Post a Comment