Evil Honored in Academia
Posted by Wade on April 12th, 2006
What is wrong with institutions of so-called higher learning in America?
Well, this is a broad question with many answers. The main answer: a lot. But more specifically, there seems to be a problem with the moral compass, or lack thereof, of many academics and their accompanying places of employment. Now, don’t get me wrong, I am fully aware of numerous academics who have their compasses correctly magnetized, and this is by no means an attempt to attack all academics. But I read something this morning that is quite alarming. It is telling.
Numerous institutions of higher learning support and give praise to evil.
To name only a few, I’ll start with Antioch College, Evergreen State University, Occidental University and the University of California-Santa Cruz. Each one of these schools has honored convicted cop-killer Mumia Abu-Jamal as a commencement speaker (via audio-tape).
Harvard accepted Warren Kimbo in as a student. Kimbo has confessed to shooting a fellow Black Panther in the back of the head. Moreover, Kimbo has served as a dean at Eastern Connecticut State University.
Phillips Exeter Academy, a very prestigious prep school, gives an annual Edmund E. Perry Award for “diversity and cultural awareness.” Perry was a student at Phillips Exeter who was shot to death in Harlem while trying to mug a plainclothes cop.
Hamilton College in upstate New York has hired Susan Rosenberg as a writing instructor. Rosenberg who is an advocate of “collective violence” against the U.S. government, was caught with nearly 700 pounds of explosives in 1984, and went to prison to begin serving a 58-year term. After she was pardoned by Bill Clinton, Hamilton College hired her.
As I said, this is only a representative sample; there are many more. To read about Stanford’s support of Islamic terror, and Villanova’s attempt to pay tribute to a professor who murdered her Down syndrome baby, you can access the article here.
Note: I’ll be away from the blog for a few weeks. Finals are coming up and it’s time to kick into high gear. (By the way, I’m proud to announce that as far as I know, my school is not a general supporter of evil). I’m confident our new guest bloggers and Ryan and Eric will do just fine without me!
This really makes me wonder what they hope to gain. Crazy world.
Comment # 1 left by Eric on April 13th, 2006
It is definitely an interesting phenomenon.
Comment # 2 left by Wade on April 13th, 2006
I’m not sure if I’m scoffing or sighing or what, something in between, but it’s audible, and it’s an expression of extreme exasperation.
I feel sincerely like the often misguided moral ambiguity of campuses is not something unique to them, that they simply have the tendency to distill it from society-at-large, and magnify it.
Our entire society, and many of people’s base assumptions are simply misbred. How can they be otherwise in generations raised on the metareality presented in television??? I know, this is where I get to look like an extreme wacko, but really I’m not. In order for tv shows to be compelling, they have to push the envelope of acceptable societal behavior. Well, raise a generation watching that level of behavior, and y’know what, it’s not just in tv anymore. People adopt behaviors and standards that are more extreme than they otherwise would be, having their life experience flavored by these shows with the extreme behavior. As time goes on and society’s norms catch up with what’s presented on tv, the tv writers are forced to take it up yet another notch to keep it compelling, and the cycle goes on, and society becomes a parody of itself.
Universities, prep schools, colleges, and the like being the ivory towers of insight and thought that they are, in their quest for understanding must probe the furthest reaches of the boundaries of our behavior, and frankly, spending as much of their thought-time out in the fringe as they do, how could we expect anything but twisted sense of right and wrong???
There’s also the publicity stunt/notoriety/infamy factor at play there. There are *so many* schools for young scholars to choose from, and you gotta make your institution stand out in the crowd. Make a risky hire, get a little free publicity, and get your admissions stats a good bump in numbers, y’know???
Ugh, I say, Ugh! Ugh ugh ugh!
Comment # 3 left by Naiah Earhart on April 14th, 2006
Naiah:
I really like your insights here and I don’t think you’re very far off from reality. I agree with you entirely and therefore don’t think you’re a wacko.
I especially like your point about pushing things to the edge when you said, they have to push the envelope of acceptable societal behavior. This is all an effort to be compelling. True! And this is where the real issue is: people seek to be titllated or excited and fail to gain their own insight and excitement from reality or from studying classics. So we have the cycle you mentioned.
I think the necessity of being tenured may be a problem as well. There are far too many universities and far too many academics; it’s become very diluted. All of these aspiring academics need to be published in order to secure tenure. But they can’t publish anything that has been argued or published before; they must find something new. So, timeless truths are ignored as the search for “new” material leads them, and us, into absurdity, i.e. confused ethics.
Comment # 4 left by Wade on April 14th, 2006
Wade:
I really like your insights here and I don’t think you’re very far off from reality. I agree with you entirely and therefore don’t think you’re a wacko.
Hahaha, that’s a relief. At least I’m not alone.
You mention the need to find new ground to publish on. I think you’re totally right. With the classic areas covered, aspiring academics have little choice but to stretch the boundaries. Add it to the stack of ‘reasons why tenure will be the downfall of the university as an institution’.
Comment # 5 left by Naiah Earhart on April 14th, 2006
Have you folks read Horowitz’ The Professors? I’d be interested in your take if you have.
Comment # 6 left by Mogget on April 15th, 2006
Mogget:
I haven’t read Horowitz’ book, but thanks for the suggestion - I’ll get around to it sooner or later. I’m familiar with some of his other work; assuming his take is pretty negative?
Comment # 7 left by Wade on April 15th, 2006
assuming his take is pretty negative
Quite.
I brought it up here because there’s a bit of a debate over on Powerline about whether the issue is best framed as
a) A few really bad apples who are infecting the entire barrel
or
b) The fact that the entire academy seems to be pointed “left.”
Although I have grossly over-simiplified the real details, the point of b) is that in the absence of competing thought, the academy is unable to entertain the sort of debate that really enlightens us on the moral issues involved.
Anyway, I haven’t read it either, and I won’t be able to for some time. I just wondered if anyone around here had, and what, if anything you made of it all.
www.powerlineblog.com
Comment # 8 left by Mogget on April 16th, 2006
Thanks for the lead Mogget!
Comment # 9 left by Wade on April 16th, 2006
[…] 1) He claims the towers were brought down by controlled demolitions and the use of thermate; this is because he believes the burning jet fuel could not have “melted” the steel. I find it odd that a professor (of physics no less) can not understand that steel does not need to “melt” before it is weakened by the impact of a jumbo jet combined with lesser heat. Indeed, I suppose Mr. Jones has no interest in listening to what experts have said about the weakening of steel. His theory has long been debunked! Does anyone else besides me think it is extremely odd that a professor of physics doesn’t understand this? How does he maintain his job? Oh yeah, I almost forgot about that tenure thing. […]
Comment # 10 left by Blogger of Jared » Blog Archive » Steven Jones: Pandering to Paranoia for Popularity on September 8th, 2006