Vanguard News Network
VNN Media
VNN Digital Library
VNN Reader Mail
VNN Broadcasts

Old January 21st, 2006 #1
Sean Martin
......
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Posts: 9,397
Sean Martin
Default UCLA students bribed to spy on and expose non-PC professors

UCLA students urged to expose 'radical' professors

By Steve Gorman

LOS ANGELES (Reuters) - A conservative alumni group dedicated to "exposing the most radical professors" at the University of California at Los Angeles is offering to pay students $100 to record classroom lectures of suspect faculty.

The Web site of the Bruin Alumni Association also includes a "Dirty Thirty" list of professors considered by the group to be the most extreme left-wing members of the UCLA faculty, as well as profiles on their political activities and writings.

UCLA Chancellor Albert Carnesale Thursday denounced the campaign as "reprehensible," and school officials warned that selling or distributing recordings of classroom lectures without an instructor's consent violates university policy.

News of the campaign prompted former Republican congressman James Rogan, who helped lead impeachment proceedings against former President Bill Clinton in the U.S. House of Representatives, to resign from the group's advisory board.

"I am uncomfortable to say the least with this tactic," Rogan, now a lawyer in private practice in California, said in an e-mail resignation made public by the Los Angeles Times. "It places students in jeopardy of violating myriad regulations and laws."

At least two other members of the group's advisory board, which consists of more than 20 individuals, also have quit over the group's efforts to have students record their professors.

The group, which is not affiliated with UCLA or its official alumni association, is the creation of Andrew Jones, a 2003 UCLA graduate who said he runs the organization mostly on his own with $22,000 in private donations.

Jones told Reuters he is out to "restore an atmosphere of respectful political discourse on campus" and says his efforts are aimed at academics who proselytize students from either side of the ideological spectrum, conservative or liberal.

"We are concerned solely with indoctrination, one-sided presentation of ideological controversies and unprofessional classroom behavior," Jones said on his Web site.

Jones' site describes his campaign as "dedicated to exposing UCLA's most radical professors" and his list of the university's "worst of the worst" singles out only professors he says hold left-wing views.

Jones said he would only accept recordings from students whose professors consented in writing to have their lectures taped. And students would only be paid $100 if they furnished complete recordings of every class session, as well as detailed lecture notes and all other teaching materials from the class.

Jones, who also is offering to pay $50 for notes and materials only, said one student has signed up to participate and two others have expressed interest so far.

UCLA spokesman Phil Hampton said the university planned to send Jones a letter warning him that faculty hold copyrights to all their course materials and that his campaign encouraged students to violate school policy.

http://reuters.myway.com/article/200...ERSITY-DC.html
__________________
http://www.vnnforum.com/showpost.php...64&postcount=9
Doppelhaken, Draco, Richard H, ToddinFl, Augustus Sutter, Chain, Subrosa, Jarl, White Will, whose next?
 
Old January 21st, 2006 #2
H.N.
Waiting for the 4th Reich
 
H.N.'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Tennessee/Mississippi
Posts: 991
H.N.
Default

Yea, no shit their radical. Its Jew-CLA for gods sake!
 
Old January 21st, 2006 #3
ThemeOfSadness
Member
 
ThemeOfSadness's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: The West
Posts: 275
ThemeOfSadness
Default

I have been following this story and the Jew/Marxist professors have already began pouring their collective effort into slandering the alumnus who started this project. Basically what this will lead to is the student have his degree stripped, while the perpetrators of destruction remain free to preach their vitriol. It is a short sided effort, but at least they kid has the courage to stand up to this circus of jews, dykes, commies, and race-traitors.

But, what the hell does left-wing mean?
Certian kinds of people are drawn to the left wing. When one begins to abandon these suffocating labels, and extracts the bits of reality that remains in their obversations they will see one word glaring and liberated from the mythology surronding it - Jew, Jew, Jew, Jew
__________________
"It seems that the American idea of democracy is rape and murder" Iraqi News Correspondent
 
Old January 21st, 2006 #4
lawrence dennis
Anti-anti-antisemite
 
lawrence dennis's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Rocky Mountains
Posts: 1,265
lawrence dennis
Default Here are the so-called 'Dirty Thirty' -- the worst professors at UCLA

The website devoted to exposing these intellectual farces is http://www.uclaprofs.com/

As always, Jews seem to constitute the largest percentage, but there are niggers and spics and even a couple of gooks:

The Dirty Thirty (12/29/05)
Ranking the Worst of the Worst

Quote:
Rankings for January 9, 2006-January 24, 2006

1. Peter McLaren (5/5 Power Fists)
This Canadian native teaches the next generation of teachers and professors how to properly indoctrinate students – Paolo Freire-style. Thanks to his hard-charging efforts, McLaren debuts at the top of the charts. Long live the king!


2. Kent Wong (5/5 Power Fists)
In any other group, Kent Wong, the dyed-red laborista radical, would be hold an undisputed title for heavyweight extremism. If Wong keeps up his public attack on everything to the right of Chairman Mao, he may still do it. Stay tuned!


3. Douglas Kellner (5/5 Power Fists)
Got a conspiracy theory involving President Bush, or any other member of his family? Douglas Kellner, the clown prince of the Education Department and king of Austin, Texas public access television, is your go-to guy. While it’s difficult to see his views becoming any more hysterical in tone and content, Kellner remains a dark-horse threat for the top ranking


4. Gabriel Piterberg (5/5 Power Fists)
Born in Argentina but raised in a Jewish Israeli household, Piterberg takes the term “self-hating Jew” to a new level. Piterberg has left behind all ethnic and religious affiliations for a new identity along the lines of the “new Soviet man.” Due to his tireless anti-Israel activism, Piterberg will always be within striking distance of a top-3 rank.


5. Robert Watson (5/5 Power Fists)
While his father Goodwin was pursued by HCUA for good reason, Robert Watson was fortunate to become an outspoken radical in a far more tolerant time. Watson is best known for his Daily Bruin fecundity, typically cramming half a dozen wild-eyed anti-Bush accusations in a single sentence. If Watson can come out of his shell as he did during the remarkable 2000-2002 stretch, his stock could jump.


6. Sondra Hale (5/5 Power Fists)
The female equivalent of Gabriel Piterberg, Hale’s ardent anti-Israel and anti-Zionism stands out in a crowded female field. Hale first came to infamy in 1982 as department chair of the militantly pro- (and personally-)lesbian Women’s Studies department at Cal State Long Beach – and hasn’t let up since. If you believe the old canard of women earning 76 cents on the dollar to men, then you know Hale’s going to have to work extra hard just to keep her #6 rank.


7. Saree Makdisi (5/5 Power Fists)
He boasts the same anti-Israel and anti-Zionist credentials as Piterberg and Hale, but Makdisi’s resume simply isn’t as long. Provided Makdisi stays as irrepressible as ever, and grows into the big shoes of his uncle Edward Said, you can expect to see him continue his meteoric rise.


8. Vinay Lal (5/5 Power Fists)
Beaten up as a child for his slight stature, Lal’s Napoleonic complex has taken the form of snobbish hatred of President George W. Bush. With two years left in the President’s term, Lal still has plenty of time for several more venomous hit pieces.


9. James Gelvin – (5/5 Power Fists)
Slammed early and often for his biased Palestinian classroom proselytizing, Gelvin remains a threat for the top five based on sheer fervor alone. As they say on SportsCenter, you can't stop James Gelvin, you can only hope to contain him.

10. Adolfo Bermeo (5/5 Power Fists)
Owing to his recent “resignation” (read, forced retirement), Bermeo has begun a steep free-fall. In due time, the fresher, more outrageous exploits of current Bruin professors will likely relegate Bermeo to obscurity. But for those who attended UCLA before October 2005, we’ll always remember the times we had...


11. Juan Gomez-Quinones (5/5 Power Fists)
The prototypical Hispanic irredentist, Gomez played a leading role with MEChA as the imaginary “Age of Aquarius” bled painfully into the Age of The Weathermen. Gomez played defender and enabler to a new generation of radical Hispanic students, culminating in an epic 1993 hunger strike battle with gutless Chancellor Charles E. Young. With his salad days behind him, Gomez is unlikely to move anywhere but down this list.


12. Karen Brodkin (5/5 Power Fists)
This militant lesbian feminist has hitched her star to the whiteness studies movement, and displays no patience for those who see women’s issues in a broader context than her own. Unless Brodkin can develop a theme for her radicalism, the all-over-the-place character of her current activism dooms her chances for moving up the list.


13. Ellen DuBois (5/5 Power Fists)
Like Karen Brodkin, DuBois has been a reliable participant and supporter of any number of radical causes. DuBois, however, distinguished herself by co-authoring a widely-signed Historians Against the War petition with the help of usual suspect Joyce Appleby. With a few more inspired choices like this, DuBois’ stock could really rise.


14. Gary Blasi (5/5 Power Fists)
While discouraged by budget cuts at the UCLA Labor Center, Gary Blasi has been productive in times of crisis. Thanks to the labor of students in his clinical law class, Blasi presented research that lead to the ACLU case Williams v. California. If his old friends keep calling, lightning could strike twice.


15. Richard Abel (4/5 Power Fists)
The King of All Petitions! As they say in sports clichés, if Abel just focuses on signing the open letter in front of him, the statistics will take care of themselves. But if Abel can’t keep his signing pen hot, he might see a steep drop in rank. Only time will tell.


16. Christine Littleton (4/5 Power Fists)
Part of the UCLA power-lesbian troika alongside Karen Brodkin and California State Senator Sheila Kuehl, she’s essentially at the crest of her career. If she wants to increase her ranking, she’ll need to push her politics a lot harder in the classroom.


17. Jerry Kang (4/5 Power Fists)
While common sense says that Kang, a (Korean) model minority if there ever was one, shouldn’t even be on this list, you have to admire the ferocity of his politics. There seems to be nothing but potential for this rising radical star. If past is prelude, we can expect Kang to produce many more pseudo-scientific studies on the subject of race relations.


18. Carole Goldberg (3/5 Power Fists)
A great favorite of California Indian tribes, Goldberg’s pro-gambling activism has been rewarded richly by the tribes her work made rich. With the basic battles already won, Goldberg needs to find a new focus for her radical energies, or watch her rank drop precipitously.


19. Sharon Dolovich (3/5 Power Fists)
While Dolovich rightly earned her spot in the Dirty Thirty through an unrelenting focus on softening the criminal justice system, she’ll need to step up her rhetoric if she hopes to even keep her current spot. Her comments in many spots are laughable, but they don’t have the raging burst-blood-vessel mien of her radical colleagues’ views.


20. Katherine King (3/5 Power Fists)
Given the promising start of an arrest at a 1990 anti-military aid protest, the ‘90s were a surprisingly tame decade for King. Sure, there were affirmative action protests, in fact, quite a lot of them, but by 2004, King was reduced to the status of bystander as a new generation of hotheads made their political mark. While it’s late in her career, King needs to execute a turn-around, and quick, lest she relinquish her radical ranking altogether.


21. Paul Von Blum (3/5 Power Fists)
After four decades as either a student or teacher in the UC system, von Blum is no Johnny-come-lately to campus radicalism. While publicly most involved in African-American art, his classes (no matter the department hosting him that quarter) come down to his personal views on politics. If von Blum can see his way to embittering even more students with his classroom antics, he’ll be a long-term denizen of this list.


22. Rafael Perez-Torres (3/5 Power Fists)
Despite his thin resume, there would appear to be nothing but potential for Perez’s radical career. Perez began his career at UCLA with a bang in 1998, serving as the driving force behind the notorious 1998 faculty walkouts protesting the end of affirmative action. Perez has been mostly quiet since that time, but this would be a matter quickly corrected. With a concerted effort, Perez could easily see himself in the top ten by this time next year.


23. Daniel Solorzano (3/5 Power Fists)
The unofficial research arm of affirmative action interest groups like Society for American Law Teachers, Solorzano is mostly concerned with race, specifically his own. But pseudo-scholastic studies won’t keep him on this list for long if he won’t amplify the rhetoric, and quick.


24. Carol Pateman (3/5 Power Fists)
This hardcore feminist offers a typical blend of personal and professional activism. With a properly timed letter-to-the-editor, or an inflammatory public speech, Pateman could move higher.


25. Mark Sawyer (3/5 Power Fists)
Young, radical and in demand, Sawyer has nowhere to go but up. But after a promising start on the typical racial theme, Sawyer has been mostly incognito. As the Magic 8-Ball would say, “future cloudy.”


26. Victor Wolfenstein (3/5 Power Fists) The original Beverly Hills Marxist, Wolfenstein’s passions for Malcolm X have burned strong, even as his dreams of a communist future crumbled. If Wolfenstein can regroup, his long resume will push him strongly up the list.

27. Joel Handler (3/5 Power Fists)
The Republican Revolution hit this welfare-lover hard, and his hardcore support for a guaranteed income isn’t going to restore his relevancy. If Handler can find the gumption to play the race card, he could be movin’ on up.


28. Russell Jacoby (3/5 Power Fists)
Too thoughtful, and frankly, too theoretical, to be much of a concern, Jacoby has all the ideological ammo he’ll need to indoctrinate his students. Now, the only question is whether he’ll use it.


29. TBA

30. TBA
More professors have been added and categorized by both department and alphabetically by last name here: http://www.uclaprofs.com/profs/profsindex.html

Note that none of these professors teach in departments that are useful, like Math or Engineering or Business or Computer Science...

And of course they had to have a page devoted to: UCLA's Anti-Semitism Problem
__________________

How is the faithful city become an harlot! It was full of judgment: righteousness lodged in it, but now murderers. Thy silver is become dross, thy wine mixed with water. Thy princes are rebellious, and companions of thieves: every one loveth gifts, and followeth after rewards.

Xian WN!

"The Jew can only be understood if it is known what he strives for: ... the destruction of the world.... [it is] the tragedy of Lucifer."

Holy-Hoax Exposed, Hollow-Cost Examined, How Low Cost? (toons)

Last edited by lawrence dennis; January 21st, 2006 at 05:32 PM. Reason: grammar
 
Old January 21st, 2006 #5
lawrence dennis
Anti-anti-antisemite
 
lawrence dennis's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Rocky Mountains
Posts: 1,265
lawrence dennis
Default Anatomy of the Af-freakin'-Amerikwan studies department at UCLA

Put yo' hands in da air, shake 'em like ya' jess don' care. Let me here ya' say "I be somebody"...

UCLA in Black and White
Radicalism in the African-American Studies Department

Quote:
Joining the Multi-Cult

The identity politics which infest UCLA today are both a product, and a cause, of radical undergraduate academics. The politically-correct focus on women, minorities and gays serves as a lens through which all topics, from Shakespeare to the Civil War, the 1760’s to the 1960’s, are viewed.

By contrast with the ongoing radicalization of departments like English or Political Science, UCLA’s recently created multi-cultural departments were never subsumed by the Left. They couldn’t have been, because they were created by the left, to serve the goals of the left.

We’re in a brave new (UCLA) world now. For the student who wants to avoid the relative intellectual rigor of the other humanities and social-science disciplines, UCLA now boasts a long-list of victimoligist specialties. African-American Studies? Check. American Indian Studies? Check. Asian-American Studies, Chicano Studies, Lesbian/Gay/Bisexual/Transgender Studies, and Women’s Studies? Check, check, check, and…check.

Getting a sense of the multi-cultis’ pseudo-scholarship requires a close look at the class topics and assigned readings. This case study examines one typical department, African-American Studies, for one academic year, 2004-2005. Understanding that each department has its quirks, the troubling situation we find in African-American Studies offers strong backing to the anecdotal evidence available about the other five disciplines not examined here.

The following are brief profiles of problem classes characterizing the professionalized radicalism of the department. Despite confining the investigative focus to radical topics and readings, the study still endless problematic content in the department's offerings.

African-American Studies M107, titled “Cultural History of Rap,” uses Professor Cheryl Keyes’ own book Rap Music and Street Consciousness along with That’s the Joint! The Hip-Hop Studies Reader. Part of the rigorous intellectual demands of the course include couch time with BET and MTV. The syllabus states, “Students are strongly encouraged to view hip-hop related television programs, if possible, on a weekly basis.”[1]

In that same vein, the department also offers Professor Scot Brown’s “Recent African American Urban History: Funk Music and Black Popular Culture,” which is cross-listed with the History department.[2] This class, like 56% of the year’s African-American Studies courses, is co-offered by one or more other departments.[3]

It is this cross-listing that is perhaps the biggest problem with identity politics studies. Through this interdisciplinary charade, the multi-culti infection of identity group compartmentalization spreads to mainstream majors like English, History and Political Science. Such cross-listing results in a History major learning about the Civil War from the perspective of an African American, an Asian-American, a Chicano, and a lesbian, for good measure. But with their eyes focused firmly on the politically correct microscope, students miss the broader picture of our common American experience.

Meanwhile, courses which do not examine their subject through a racial lens are “re-educated,” and otherwise made to conform. Non-compliant courses, and any professors who will not bow to the system, simply disappear.

In Scot Brown’s “Recent African American Urban History: Funk Music and Black Popular Culture” course, the professor argues that “James Brown, Sly & the Family Stone, Parliament Funkadelic, Betty Davis, [and] Earth, Wind and Fire,” compose “multiple voices of anguish, protest and vision.” The final exam assigns a 3-5 page paper analyzing one of a limited choice of “songs as they relate to the course themes of realism and surrealism in funk music.” These choices include the deep thoughts of Chic’s “Everybody Dance,” which declares in part:

Everybody dance, do-do-do
Clap your hands, clap your hands
Everybody dance, do-do-do
Clap your hands, clap you hands
Everybody dance, do-do-do
Clap your hands, clap your hands
Everybody dance, do-do-do
Clap your hands, clap your hands [4]

Lots of people feel that funk is great music. Many people feel the same about polka. But neither deserves to the subject of academic study, much less a university’s final exam.

“Interracial Dynamics in American Society & Culture” is listed both as General Education Cluster 20, and African-American Studies M167. While deeper than classes that give credit for a straight-faced examination of Black Entertainment Television rump-shaking or ‘70s slap-bass virtuosity, “Interracial Dynamics” only digs a deeper grave of academic fraud. The course presents the usual theories and the usual suspects of the academic left. “White privilege,” “institutional racism,” and racial deconstruction – but only against whites – are par for the course here.[5]

Familiar from my own experience with a similar class, Chicano Studies 182, “Whiteness Studies,” is one assigned reading, George Lipsitz’s “The Possessive Investment in Whiteness.” Given the book’s subtitle, “How White People Profit from Identity Politics,” it’s clear that Lipsitz wasn’t writing about UCLA, where white people are in fact the only group not benefiting from identity politics.

As the final class activity of the “Interracial Dynamics” class, those students enrolled in the class through the African-American Studies department hold a debate on California’s Proposition 187 – but only after being properly “educated” by two articles: Rene Sanchez’s “Divisive Prop. 187 Is Voided,” and Tamar Jacoby’s “Anti-Immigration Fever In Arizona.”[6] As with most academics at UCLA, students aren’t expected to reach their own conclusions on controversial topics. Professors prefer to do it for them – and then confirm their indoctrination as creatively as possible. [Say, this sounds suspiciously like the behavior of that 'unnameable' ethnic group that controls the media. --L.D.] For “Interracial Dynamics,” that method is a sham debate that the pro-187 side could not possibly win without independent study above and beyond the course readings.

In the next quarter of the “Interracial Dynamics” General Cluster class, the “Civil Rights and Black Power Movements” module consists of selections from Stokely Carmichael, Charles V. Hamilton, Huey P. Newton, and Bobby Seale.[7] The views of independent historians, for or against that ugly period of America history, are noticeably absent.

Writers contrarian to the hagiography of what was in reality a Marxist street gang, like David Horowitz, Peter Collier, or Kate Coleman, are not presented for the students’ benefit. Contrarian voices, as a close reading of the class syallabi make clear, are only welcome coming from the left. Thus are students assigned to read Edward Said’s “Islam As News,” and in further reading on immigration issues, are favored with Augusta Dwyer’s “Let’s Shoot Some Aliens: The US Border Patrol.” :cheers: [8]

Wrapping up the winter quarter for GE Cluster students is a debate on “Income-based vs. Race-based Affirmative Action in Higher Education Admissions.” There’s no mention of the possibility of no affirmative action at all; and, given the assigned readings of “Regents of the University of California v. Allan Bakke (Justice Marshall’s Dissent)” and Nell Irvin Painter’s “Whites Say I Must Be on Easy Street,”[9] the reason is clear: you can’t debate an idea you haven’t learned.

Making the outrageous content of the “Interracial Dynamics” class detailed here is that it is derived only from a brief review of the two course syllabi. Were there enough time and resources for a close review of every single author, work, and film in this class (or others), the result would be the enumeration of far more examples of radical works disguised by bland titles.

A prime example illustrating this problem is the course screening of “I’m the One That I Want.” The title itself is rather innocuous, not wearing its politics on its sleeve. However, the film is noted anti-war leftist Margaret Cho’s foul-mouthed exposition on her life as a self-proclaimed Korean “fag hag.” In the recording, which is simply a tape of her stand-up performance at San Francisco’s Warfield Theater, Cho notes that “straight men are scary,” and discusses, among other scholastically relevant topics, vagina-washing and oral sex.[10] This one example is bad enough, but it represents only the tip of the radical iceberg.

More of the Same (Radicalism)

Professor Cheryl Harris teaches African-American Studies C191, titled “Race, Equal Protection and the Law.”[1] Harris assigns her own Harvard Law Review article, “Whiteness as Property” which expands on her suspect racial theories. Also assigned is Omi and Winant’s “Racial Formation in the United States,” another pair of the usual suspects from the “Whiteness Studies” field of academics. The two contend that “racial meanings pervade U.S. society,” and argue that “race in the United States [must be treated] as a fundamental organizing principle of social relationships.”[2]

In that same vein is Harvard Professor Noel Ignatiev’s article “Immigrants and Whites,” from his celebrated – and intellectually lightweight – publication Race Traitor. Ignatiev’s magazine, which caught the fancy of academic radicals when it debuted in 1992, trumpets the confused slogan “treason to whiteness is loyalty to humanity.” Ignatiev himself states on the Race Traitor website, “It is not fair skin that makes people white; it is fair skin in a certain kind of society, one that attaches social importance to skin color.”[3] Fair enough. Since Ignatiev wants to “abolish the white race,” we eagerly await, albeit without holding our breath, the announcement of his desire to abolish the black race as well. But don’t count on it.

Professor Harris thinks highly enough of academic hacks like Omi, Winant and Ignatiev to assign their works in the limited ten-week duration of the class. And while it’s bad enough that undergraduates are being force-fed such rubbish, it’s far worse that Professor Harris, with her belief that race underlies everything in our nation, also holds the privilege of educating this nation’s future lawyers.

For an academic field seemingly uninterested with classic areas of inquiry, another pop culture class in African-American Studies is hardly surprising. Professor Paul Von Blum’s “African-American Film” “serves as an alternative vision” to the “dramatic disrespect,” and “racial distortions, caricatures, and stereotypes” of the white film establishment. Films screened include blaxploitation classics “Sweet Sweetback’s Baadassss Song,” “Shaft,” and “Cotton Comes to Harlem.” Von Blum also samples more recent, violent fare like Spike Lee’s “Do the Right Thing,” and John Singleton’s “Boyz in the Hood.”[4] As with 1970’s funk, pop culture is fun, but hardly academic fodder.

For a developing discipline, African-American Studies’ amateurish focus on music and movies does itself no favors. This shortcoming, however, is inevitable. African-American Studies, like all multi-cultural studies, is simply too narrow a pedestal on which to mount an entire academic field. In slicing and dicing the common American experience into color-coded segments, multi-cultural academics miss the forest for the trees, because the story of African-Americans is the story of America – and the story of America is history.

UCLA’s multi-cultural studies departments make a brave attempt to weave their separate, narrow threads into a common tapestry. But the attempt backfires. When multi-cultural studies intersect, the story is no longer even about the particular minority group as a whole – itself already too narrow by comparison to broad narrative of American history. The intersections instead create, for example, tiny subfields like African-American women, African-American lesbians, transgendered African-Americans, and so on. Does the transgendered Chicano have a different cultural experience from the transgendered African-American? Possibly. But what of it?

Von Blum’s “African American Films” ignoring the obvious inanity, indulges this minority-of-a-minority obsession by spending class time on gay black filmmaker Marlon Riggs’ execrable PBS documentary “Tongues Untied.” An almost indescribable pastiche of spoken-word drum-circle nattering and soft-core gay pornography, it served in 1989 as the catalyst for Senator Jesse Helms’ condemnation of National Endowment for the Arts funding practices. Riggs bitterly dismissed the criticism as the work of “white arch-conservatives and religious fundamentalists,” but readily admitted the inclusion of “words like ‘fuck’…images of two black men tenderly embracing…[and] highly diffused, silhouetted nudity.”[5] The film’s NEA funding and PBS distribution are clear evidence of these institutions’ cooptation by political radicals. That a UCLA class would examine Riggs’ work with a straight face is abundant evidence that the same has happened to the African-American Studies department.

“The Psychology of Race and Gender Among African-Americans,” cross-listed in African-American and Women’s Studies, has a promising title, one which might even indicate the possibility of an actual intellectual discussion on race issues. But Professor James Cones’ inclusion of the radical author bell hooks [sic] tempers even this possibility.[6] hooks is famous for her lesbian radicalism, manifested in an infamous essay in which she confessed to feeling a “homicidal malice” toward an anonymous white man on an airplane. Defending her fury, hooks noted, “Blacks who lack a proper killing rage are merely victims.”[7] Nihilism also characterized hooks’ remarks in her 2002 commencement speech at Southwestern University: “Every imperialist, white supremacist, capitalist, patriarchal nation on the planet teaches its citizens to care more for tomorrow than today.”[8]

Professor Cones, no doubt cognizant of hooks’ well-known radicalism, nonetheless assigned the radical’s book, “Where We Stand: Class Matters.” The Library Journal notes that the work “illustrates how everyday interactions reproduce class hierarchy while simultaneously denying its existence.”[9] Marxoid theorems aside, the Journal also praises the book’s “valuable framework for discussing such difficult and unexplored areas as…the ruling-class co-optation of youth through popular culture, and real estate speculation as an instrument of racism.”[10] Knowing the specifics of the book, Cones could only properly have assigned it as an example of abnormal “Pyschology of Race and Gender.” But if the syllabus is any indication, hooks’ work and its ideas are taught with the greatest respect, alongside other marginal works like J.L. King’s “On the Down Low: A Journey Into the Lives of ‘Straight’ Black Men Who Sleep With Men.”[11]

Professor Cheryl Keyes returns in a Winter 2005 class, cross-listed with Ethnomusicology, titled, appropriately enough, “African American Musical Heritage.”[12] This predominance of music and film classes within the African-American Studies department serves to outline its narrow academic boundaries – race, music, film, and political radicalism. Other notable – but distastefully conservative – aspects of the African-American experience, like evangelical religion, are denied a place at the table.

Keyes’ survey of African-American music returns to her unfortunate fixation on rap with the caustically titled Ebony article “Why Whites Are Ripping Off Rap and R&B.” Never mind that music is constantly evolving and is owned by no race, ethnicity, or individual. Keyes’ readings teach her students otherwise. Unfortunately, the endorsement of childish possessiveness of a universality like music is characteristic of the political radicalism and racial rage which permeates the department and its faculty.


This Is Academics?

African American Studies 118, which is cross-listed with American Indian, Asian American, and Chicano Studies, is the penultimate example of the peculiarly UCLA propensity toward navel-gazing. The class, “Issues in Student-Initiated Retention and Outreach: Student-Initiated Retention and Social Change in Los Angeles,”[1] runs in the same vein as Asian-American or Chicano Studies classes that chart the history of their race’s militant ethnic organizations from the 1960s to present. But the “Issues” class is even worse, because there’s not even a separation of 30 years to provide perspective. The class description admits that the “focus [is] on UCLA as a case.” What it doesn’t admit is that like many other multi-cultural classes, the philosophy, learning, and outcome is centered on conducting radical activism for credit.

As the website explains, “For the past fifteen years, the Campus Retention Committee (CRC) has provided a vehicle for the organized participation of students in their own retention and successful matriculation. The Student-Initiated Outreach Committee (SIOC) has similarly focused student efforts on the development of student-run outreach programs for K-12 students, particularly those from underrepresented, disadvantaged communities. The CRC and SIOC represent the most elaborate expressions of student-initiated retention and outreach activity in the country. Collectively, they support, fund, and evaluate 12 student-initiated retention and outreach projects employing more than 60 student staff and over 100 student volunteers in service of nearly 2000 of their fellow undergraduates and 1500 K-12 students annually. The CRC and SIOC provide a broad, creative range of services, uniquely harnessing the collective experiences, energies, and aspirations of students to improve the quality of life and education at UCLA and in the community.” The website further notes that “The CRC has acknowledged the impact of social change theory and practice on its own retention methodology. Students will have the opportunity to consider whether the CRC has made a reciprocal contribution through its alumni and former students.”[2]

Translation: through the use of all students’ mandatory undergraduate student government fees, minority students on campus have built a recruitment and retention machine on campus that offers special outreach to prospective students, and members-only tutoring and other support services to current students. Well, that is, if you’re a minority student. If you’re a middle-class black student, even upper-class, the CRC and SIOC machines will seek you out, offer you priority enrollment, proprietary tutoring, and full-time employees whose only task is aiding your academic efforts at UCLA. But if you’re an Iranian émigré, or the poorest of white trailer-park trash, the CRC and SIOC’s doors, and their noble goals of “social change,” are closed to you. As with the issue of diversity, minorities are UCLA’s Chosen People. If you’re not one, you are a nobody, an un-person.

This entire UCLA class revolves around the idea that such a deeply corrupt system of preferential treatment is in fact deeply right, and deeply just. Rather unnecessarily – given the almost exclusive enrollment of committed student radicals – the syllabus warns that the class will not “tolerate racist, sexist, homophobic or other discriminatory, rude, insensitive or personal remarks.” That is, of course, unless the rude remarks come from class readings like bell hooks’ “Let Freedom Ring,” from “Why LA Happened: Implications of the ’92 Los Angeles Rebellion.” This is one of two class readings which refer coyly to the 1992 Los Angeles riots as a “rebellion.” A third selection, from UCLA Professor Paul Von Blum, lauds “Resistance Art in Los Angeles.”[3]

The syllabus also assigns “Economic Justice in the Los Angeles Figueroa Corridor,” and “Fighting for a Living Wage in Santa Monica,” both from the radical UCLA Center for Labor Research and Education title, “Teaching for Change.” It is made clear through the syllabus’ reading assignments and general outline of topics that, for this class and its leaders, teaching is not a dispassionate calling. Instead, “Education is Change” (bell hooks), “Education is Politics,” and teachers are to pursue “social change,” “equality, self-determination, [and] community empowerment.”[4]

In this spirit of teaching change, students are assigned to complete ten hours of fieldwork “with a local community-based organization that includes 1) volunteering/site visits/workshops and 2) informational interviews with key staff members.” Based on the backgrounds of class participants, and on the radical political philosophy underlying the very premise of the class, it’s safe to assume that the fieldwork isn’t with the Westwood Rotary Club, or the Los Angeles-based libertarian Reason Magazine.

Rather, count on it being with the type of community organizations known as labor unions. To make this preference crystal-clear, the course website features an informational link about “Organize to Improve,” a February 24, 2005 gathering held by the UCLA Labor Center in downtown Los Angeles.[5] The event featured UC Berkeley professor Steven Pitts discussing the “security officers campaign, the electrical workers’ push to bring African Americans into the trade, and homecare workers’ struggle to maintain dignity for workers.” Macias’ deception in mandating work with “community organizations” when that category is essentially confined to labor unions and radical organizations, is characteristic of the deception behind the class itself: turning legitimate academics into liberal activism....
continued below...
__________________

How is the faithful city become an harlot! It was full of judgment: righteousness lodged in it, but now murderers. Thy silver is become dross, thy wine mixed with water. Thy princes are rebellious, and companions of thieves: every one loveth gifts, and followeth after rewards.

Xian WN!

"The Jew can only be understood if it is known what he strives for: ... the destruction of the world.... [it is] the tragedy of Lucifer."

Holy-Hoax Exposed, Hollow-Cost Examined, How Low Cost? (toons)

Last edited by lawrence dennis; January 21st, 2006 at 06:35 PM. Reason: formatting
 
Old January 21st, 2006 #6
lawrence dennis
Anti-anti-antisemite
 
lawrence dennis's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Rocky Mountains
Posts: 1,265
lawrence dennis
Default Af-freakin' Amerikwan studies at UCLA continued

...continued from above

UCLA in Black and White
Radicalism in the African-American Studies Department

Quote:
A Shallow Academic Pool

African American Politics is in truth anything but a one-way street. While Democrat registrations still predominate, religious conservatism in the black community drives a strongly Republican streak in a mostly liberal population. But not to hear UCLA tell it.

Like so many other classes, the radicalism of the Winter 2005 course “African American Politics” infects the Political Science department by cross-listing. In this class’ examination of affirmative action, the philosophy of ‘teaching for social change’ seems to have strong root. Not one to use a rubber mallet when he could overdo it with a sledgehammer, Professor Antonio Brown provides a startlingly one-sided view of affirmative action, assigning Nathan Glazer’s “A Case for Racial Preferences,” along with three other articles. Not one of the selections offers the faintest suggestion of opposition. Rounding out his one-sided argument, Professor Brown helpfully suggests reading the affirmative action apologia “Shape of the River.” The book, cited endlessly by defenders of preference for its quasi-scientific character, purports to show that affirmative action does no harm to whites, while simultaneously lifting up deserving minorities – who were not one bit less qualified, they’ll have you know! No Ward Connerly, no Dinesh D’Souza, no David Horowitz, no National Review articles…sounds like just another fair and balanced examination of racial issues at UCLA.

Professor J.C. Djedje’s “The African-American Musical Heritage,” is another of the innumerable music and film classes that comprise the shallow academic wading pool of African American Studies. And, as with every other African American music class, the professors insists on straining credulity by placing the violence and misogyny of rap into an academic context, here, the article, “Kickin’ Reality, Kickin’ Ballistics: Gangsta Rap and Postindustrial Los Angeles” from the collection
Droppin’ Science: Critical Essays on Rap Music and Hip Hop Culture.[1] Unfortunately, African-American academics have taken the fact that the music form happened to have originated with African-American musicians as sufficient justification for its academic study.

Professor Scot Brown’s “Introduction to Afro-American History,” cross-listed with the History department, presents the works of two well-known radicals.[2] “Propaganda as History,” by John Hope Franklin, features the thoughts of the Duke professor emeritus who has been at the vocal forefront of the reparations movement. Franklin went so far as to attack David Horowitz, and the anti-reparations advertisement Horowitz placed in the Duke Chronicle in 2001. Franklin made the radical contention that “Most living Americans do have a connection with slavery,” and that “All whites and no slaves benefited from American slavery.”[3]

The course also features, as do other UCLA African American Studies courses, the works of long-time Communist Party member Paul Robeson. Robeson is idolized by, among others, the infamous long-time radical Columbia professor Eric Foner. Foner, at the 2001 Columbia teach-in that saw Professor Nicholas De Genova call for “a thousand Mogadishus,” recalled Robeson’s declaration: “The patriot is the person who is never satisfied with his country.”[4] Dissatisfied with America as he might have, Robeson was notably satisfied to receive a Stalin Peace Prize in 1952 from the dictator himself, and a Peace Medal from Communist East Germany. Professor Brown proudly includes a selection from Robeson’s self-justifying autobiography, “Here I Stand.”

Professor Kyeyoung Park offers her addition to the African American Studies rolls with her class “Race and Racism” (which for good measure is cross-listed with Anthropology and Asian American Studies). The same small group of pseudoscholars in the field of “whiteness studies” are trotted out: Brodkin, Roediger, Winant, and Riggs. Park admits that race is a “historically constituted, socially constructed, and politically contested process,” yet in the same breath complains that “the consequent denial of the existence of race has been used to justify cutting various social programs.” Park’s words are a coded complaint about the horrors which political radicals have confronted in recent years – means-testing and time limitations on welfare, a developing state-by-state battle to end affirmative action and other “reactionary” events.[5]

Park hoists herself on her own petard – admitting that race is an invention, but remaining reluctant to abandon it and the benefits that being an “oppressed” minority now confer. What’s a good leftist to do?

The answer, so it would seem, is to avoid the question. Thus, all the readings in this African-American class are about white racial identity – giving the inadvertent appearance that blacks are only able to define themselves through opposition with the prevailing white standard. In the course, the dead horse of “whiteness” is flogged plentifully, with articles like “The Invention of the White Race: Racial Oppression and Social Control,” “The Wages of Whiteness: Race and the Making of the American Working Class,” “The Possessive Investment in Whiteness,” “Establishing the Fact of Whiteness,” “Whiteness and Americanness: Examining Constructions of Race, Culture, and Nation in White Women’s Life Narratives,” and “Racial Faultlines: The Historical Origins of White Supremacy in California.”

This being a UCLA African American studies class, there are several requirements:

  • A selection from bell hooks, here, “Reflections on Race and Sex”
  • An obligatory examination of homosexuals: “‘Claiming’ and ‘Speaking’ Who We Are: Black Gays and Lesbians, Racial Politics, and the Million Man March.”
  • Assignment of the professor’s own work. Park includes in Week 10’s segment, “Race and Resistance: 1992 Los Angeles Civil Unrest” his essays, “Confronting the Liquor Industry in Los Angeles,” and “South Central Aftermath: Black and Latin Commentaries on Koreans.”
  • Apologia for the Los Angeles riots, described in Park’s title as an “unrest,” and put in scare quotes in the title of fellow UCLA Professor Darnell Hunt’s work “Screening the Los Angeles “Riots”: Race, Seeing and Resistance.” It is typical Leftist Orwellian redefinition to call riots “unrest.” Unrest is solved with Unisom; riots are solved with the National Guard.[6]

The Dynamic Duo

Rounding out the selection of African American Studies classes for the Spring 2005 catalog is “Non-Violence and Social Movements,” co-taught by two of the most usual of all usual suspects: anti-war radical and dyed-red laborista Kent Wong, and one-time Reverend Martin Luther King, Jr. crony Reverend James Lawson.[1]

The class’s
main philosophy, and operating assumption, is that nothing is accomplished by violence. Lawson’s view is understandable, given that the defining moment of his life was his leadership of the successful Nashville, Tennessee lunch-counter sit-in movement. But Lawson’s success has warped his view of the world, and convinced him that, as the Daily Bruin summarizes his views, “Violence is effective in creating a change of power, but does not create lasting social change.”[2] The sit-in was right for the time and place – but did not constitute, as Lawson seems to think, a new paradigm for all human relations. Any level-headed look at the very warlike, very successful example of World War II will show that sometimes, the best choice is to meet force with force.

Part and parcel of Lawson’s radically inflated self-perception are his and Wong’s radical scholarship. Mandatory reading for their class features Wong’s own work “Teaching for Change: Popular Education and the Labor Movement,” published by Wong’s Center for Labor Research and Education. The very title, “Teaching for Change,” is epitomized in Wong’s dogmatic lectures with titles like “Nonviolence and the War in Iraq; The War at Home: Attacks on Civil Liberties.” With all the room for dissent that is breathed into a lecture topic like that, the subpoints outlined in the syllabus, like “Why are we waging War in Iraq?” and “Selective Repression” become far more understandable
.

Just as biased is the syllabus’ list of possible final paper topics, including “The Peace Movement and the War in Iraq,” “The United Farm Workers Movement,” “The Living Wage Movement,” “Homeland Security and the Attacks on Civil Liberties,” “Student Anti-Sweatshop Movement,” “Affirmative Action,” and “Student Movement for Ethnic Studies.” It need not be spelled out that, from a grading basis, arguing against any of those concepts, other than Homeland Security, would not be advisable. To paraphrase the course description from the infamous Berkeley class “The Politics and Poetics of Palestinian Resistance,” conservative thinkers would be advised to seek other sections. And, if you’re not in agreement with the radical precepts governing UCLA’s African-American Studies, or any other multi-culti major, you’d do best to simply move out of the department altogether.
__________________

How is the faithful city become an harlot! It was full of judgment: righteousness lodged in it, but now murderers. Thy silver is become dross, thy wine mixed with water. Thy princes are rebellious, and companions of thieves: every one loveth gifts, and followeth after rewards.

Xian WN!

"The Jew can only be understood if it is known what he strives for: ... the destruction of the world.... [it is] the tragedy of Lucifer."

Holy-Hoax Exposed, Hollow-Cost Examined, How Low Cost? (toons)

Last edited by lawrence dennis; January 21st, 2006 at 06:10 PM. Reason: formatting
 
Old January 21st, 2006 #7
ThemeOfSadness
Member
 
ThemeOfSadness's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: The West
Posts: 275
ThemeOfSadness
Default

Something is gefilte fishy about this list. I sure don't see them going after enough "steins" and "witzes" et. al. Though he does list a few. This school is teeming with radical Jewish professors. Our own VNN has done the research on this one.
__________________
"It seems that the American idea of democracy is rape and murder" Iraqi News Correspondent
 
Old January 21st, 2006 #8
Chain
Banned
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 4,365
Default

re Sean's thread title:
Quote:
UCLA students bribed to spy on and expose non-PC professors
From whose perspective are Marxist profs "non-PC", Sean? Yours?
 
Old January 21st, 2006 #9
ThemeOfSadness
Member
 
ThemeOfSadness's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: The West
Posts: 275
ThemeOfSadness
Default more worthless politics

The more that I think about it this whole thing is just stupid reactionary politics and proves why mainstream conservatism is worthless. Sure, these professors may be offensive, but they don't have the impact that say a revisionist such as Jared Diamond has (who tries to sell jewish pc politics in a non political discipline.) Or how about the business school at UCLA which surely pushes anti-white globalism. The law school??? Typical of most system Conservatives they flock to immediate controvery just as leftist and Jews do. In a sense this guy is no different than the left-wing goyim he is going after. He is just trying to get a rise. I wouldn't doubt if he associates himself with the Zionist friendly right, ie. Horowitz school.
__________________
"It seems that the American idea of democracy is rape and murder" Iraqi News Correspondent
 
Reply

Share


Thread
Display Modes


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 06:19 PM.
Page generated in 0.30788 seconds.