George Justice - Arizona State University

Below is an aquarelle I sketched in 2021.  It was sent to the targets, who, unsurprisingly, did not deign to respond.  Imagine, Arizona State has more recently created a Center for Free Speech!  

Fostering Students' Free Expression

Below is the front cover and editorial of the latest issue of The American Dissident, Issue #46, inspired by The Chronicle of Higher Education.  Both were sent to the editors, depicted on the cover.  Unsurprisingly, not one of them deigned to respond...  

........................................................

Editorial

Censorship Now!

Freedom of Expression… in Higher Ed

Unfortunately, tenure has led to the ossification of American education.  The hiring, promotion, and tenure system has institutionalized sycophancy toward those in power.  

—Camille Paglia, Tenured Professor, University of the Arts

 

The rise of hate speech threatens… or so they say. But what is hate speech?… or so they don’t say.  Well, criticism is/can be hate speech.  So, I say, let hate speech rise!  Banning it is an act of censorship and a violation of the First Amendment. Banning serves to kill inconvenient truths, hurtful to hacks with thin skin, haters themselves who hate freedom of expression.  “Censorship now!” would be a slogan too truthful, too transparent.  And so the haters supplant it with calls to remove disinformation, misinformation, and malinformation… 

        Searching for some grist, I came across an ad (see store.chronicle.com/products/fostering-students-free-expression?variant=42345778348229?cid=cs-che-cdp-2022-section-front-footer-11) in the Chronicle of Higher Education for a book written and published by the Chronicle of Higher Education. The front cover of this issue, “The Chronicle of Higher Indoctrination,” thus resulted.  Since the author of the book description was not indicated, I depicted the top honchos of the publication, Editor-in-Chief Michael G. Riley, as well as a few of the other editors and managers (see www.chronicle.com/page/contact-us).  

    How not to question the very title, Fostering Students’ Free Expression.  A thinking individual might actually wonder how college professors and administrators might serve to foster that when they themselves have an overwhelming tendency to self-censor.  In fact, how might the very editors of the Chronicle do that when no doubt their rise to the top demanded turning a blind eye and team playing, certainly not individual rude-truth telling. Career success (climbing the ladder), in general, depends on such behavior. Evidently, speaking truth and career success do not make good partners.  

        The book in question is digital and contains 74 pages and was published in September 2023 and also does not list an author.  It costs a mind-boggling $179.  Might that really be for only one digital copy? The Chronicle states:  “Learn more about digital licensing options and request a quote. For group purchases of fewer than 100 users, please refer to our bulk pricing."  

n any case, according to the anonymous ad writer, “The pandemic made students feel more isolated and vulnerable. Unending political turmoil has left them frustrated.” Well, how about the profs and administrators? “Many professors say that students are reluctant to tackle tough questions in classroom discussions, and a 2022 survey by Heterodox Academy found that the majority of students who are timid when it comes to sharing opinions in class said they worried about the reactions they might get from peers.”  Couldn’t one say the same for the profs and administrators, and if not, why not?  After all, conformity is a synonym for team playing, which tends to be  obligatory in higher ed.  

          The description praises professors as “cultivating an environment that encourages discussion of difficult topics—and how administrators can support faculty members who do this work.”  Difficult topics, eh?  Might they include the higher ed ambiance that encourages team playing at the expense of truth telling and the reality of general professorial apathy to freedom of expression when ideology (e.g., DEI and CRT) demands it? Well, I sent this editorial and the front cover image to the editor/managers in question and asked them to consider publishing both as an example of their purported support for freedom of expression.  No response was ever received. 

    The back cover of this issue, “The Business of Writing,” depicts two GrubStreet leaders, Artistic Director Dariel Suarez and Founder/Executive Director Eve Bridburg. Waiting for my car inspection, I went through the magazines, leafed through Bostonia, the Alumni Magazine of Boston University.  “Big Moves at GrubStreet,” written by Grub publicist Joel Brown, grabbed my attention. It focused on Grub's “gleaming new home on the Seaport.” Of course, everything in alumni magazines tends to be glowing wonderment.  “GrubStreet always had a sense of inclusion from the very beginning [in 1997],” noted Bridburg, “and we’re trying to create something that is more welcoming, less paternalistic, and more inclusive.” How original!  Inclusion!  But, of course, NOT inclusion regarding criticism of GrubStreet!  “It isn’t just about bringing people in, ‘this is gonna step up our numbers.’  It’s about following through, even in the growth of our staff,” stated Suarez.  But perhaps writing should be about truth and free expression, not about increasing numbers. GrubStreet’s website echoes the overwhelming business/money and identity politics aspects of the writing industry today (see grubstreet.org/). 

        A final comment: The hate-speech attack on free speech has become an establishment weapon of the ruling oligarchy to further We, the In-Lockstep People. Biden failed to embed his Orwellian Disinformation Governance Board into the bureaucracy. But CISA (Cybersecurity & Infrastructure Security Agency) has existed since 2018. 

CISA defines mis-, dis-, and malinformation (MDM) as “information activities.” This type of content is referred to as either domestic or foreign influence depending on where it originates.

• Misinformation is false, but not created or shared with the intention of causing harm.

• Disinformation is deliberately created to mislead, harm, or manipulate a person, social group, organization, or country.

• Malinformation is based on fact, but used out of context to mislead, harm, or manipulate.

     And so, facts must be destroyed if they harm.  P. Maudit cartoons are clear examples of malinformation because they openly seek to harm, via facts and logic, buffered cogs of the establishment. How many more terms will be created by Big Gov/Academe in an effort to kill truth and free expression and further control We, the People?  Sadly, America is following the European Union in that oligarchic endeavor.  Democracy—freedom of speech—is dying, which is why I continue to speak/write rudely and openly.  Inevitably, one day in the near future, in America, a journal like The American Dissident will not simply be ostracized—excluded from library shelves and listings of journals (NewPages and P&W)—, but will be strictly prohibited and forced into the realm of samizdat… 

 

William Pannapacker

 

The cartoon below was sketched in 2007, but not posted on the blog.  Privileged Pannapacker is still yelping on his platform on the Chronicle of Higher Education, which is why I post it now.

..............................................................................

.............................................................

Below is our brief correspondence.

..............................................

December 12, 1998

The Chronicle of Higher Education

“Directly from Diapers to the Ivory Tower”

Dear Bill Pannapacker, 

First the idiot comic strips, then Ms. Mentor, now your essay. The systemic crap that the Chronicle prints is disturbing, yet wholly comprehensible for it serves that diversionary purpose in the Chomsky sense. While ivory tower corruption florishes in all sorts of forms, lying deans, cowardly professors, cheating students, corrupt evaluation and sexual harassment procedures etc., garbage essays, yes cloaked in tweed and radiating that false "Life," as you call it, like cheap wallpaper in ghetto rooms indeed serve America well, but in what sense? 

Pierre Vadeboncoeur stated, "Il faut renverser les monuments pour voir les vers grouillent." Well, when are you going to turn over the Harvard monument and its media wing The Chronicle? 

G. Tod Slone, Ed. 

P.S.:  P.S.: "Have you had a job-seeking experience you'd like to share?" asks The Chronicle at the end of your essay. I have over and over and over tried to share my experience at Fitchburg State College (MA) and with the MTA, but of course the paper’s editors did not want that kind of thing in their lily white newspaper. 

Some of the most cowardly and in that sense corrupt professors that I knew at FSC came from Harvard's education program with their Harvard doctorates. 

P.S.: Please circulate the following flyer. Thank you. 

............................................

From: William Pannapacker <pannapac@fas.harvard.edu>

To: Tod Slone <ENMARGE@prodigy.net>

Date: Saturday, December 12, 1998 9:37 AM

Subject: Re: PS

Tod,

I'd like to see as many grad students and adjuncts as possible come forward with their stories. In fact, I'm preparing a collection of them for publication. If you're interested, send me a description of a 20-page essay you might like to write. Maybe it can be included. Also, I might be able to quote you in future columns or speeches. So, any comments or narratives you have are appreciated. I hope you don't count me among the lily-white Harvard types!

--Bill Pannapacker

....................................................

December 12, 1998

Dear William, 

Perhaps it is because you are not yet in regalia that you have responded. I have been at this for two years now, blacklisted, unable to continue my passions of French and Spanish in academe (My doctorate is from the Universite de Nantes in sociolinguistics. I received excellent student evaluations and two ad hoc committe evaluations). I was nearly hired this past August but the dean of a southern university, after having flown me out, wined and dined me, decided not to hire me, despite the desire to hire me of the department members and chair, because I had not gotten tenure, though I suspect he called up Fitchburg State at the last minute. I won a monetary settlement from the latter... but not that much. In a state where cronyism and nepotism (legalized in 1986) is rampant, there's not much one can do except publish a review like The American Dissident. 

Anyhow, I have little faith in you, though, there is always hope. I found your essay to be quite very lily-white Harvard. Can you actually tell me it wasn't? If I hadn't, I wouldn't have responded. Let's just say, like the Ms. Mentor column (I also responded, but of course she never wrote back), your essay provoked my response. 

Of course, I'd be interested in sending you an essay, but again doubt it would go anywhere. As mentioned The Chronicle won't touch the subject. I have also written numerous poems on corruption in academe, some published here and there in the littles. I've written a play, "In The Year of the Citizen," and two novels as well as many essays on corruption in the Massachusetts educational system. None have been published. I've sent out everywhere, even to Harvard University Press. My recent novel, Junk Country: Total Chaos in the Underbelly of a National Blue-Riubbon High School , is being considered by an obscure publisher, but I doubt it will go anywhere because of the omni-important marketability factor. Of course, the conclusion could be that my writing sucks... But Bill Moyers himself stated that the system does not give much heed to dissidents (good writing or whatever). In any case, it's about my recent experience at Martha's Vineyard Regional HS as a Spanish teacher. I was fired five days after I published a letter to the editor decrying chaos at the school, a good example of the consequences of exercising free speech in America. Lawyers cost $100,000 to take a case like mine. I did write every lawyer-professor at Harvard Law (12 of them) with a specialty that might be apropos. Only two responded. One was no longer practicing, while the other wanted $250 up front before discussing my case. 

I have contacted many academics throughout the country, none but you and one or two others responded. Academics loathe criticism, probably more than any other characters. I even sent Michael Lewis a letter praising his recent book, Poisoning the Ivy, though questioning his own lack of action relative to corruption in his particular ivy tower (U. Mass.). By the way, my writing tends to be very concise, to the point, and quite lacking in obfuscatory or diversional imagery and metaphor. 

Amen. Hope to hear from you. If you are truly interested, please be more specific as to what kind of essay you would like. 

G. Tod 

P.S.: I just received a rejection for my essay, "Nepotism in Massachusetts," from CommonWealth. The editor was not all interested in the subject, yet he professes to be interested in matters that concern the citizens of the CommonWealth. He commented that my essay was full of personal animus, yet I did not mention one name in it. Just the same, the "personal animus" response seems to be quite common when you poke a nerve. 

............................................

From: William Pannapacker <pannapac@fas.harvard.edu>
To: Tod Slone <ENMARGE@prodigy.net>
Date: Saturday, December 12, 1998 5:42 PM
Subject: Re: PS

Tod,

Please call me Bill. I'm not eacatly sure what "lily-white Harvard" means, though I assume it means I'm not as radical and angry as you seem to be.

I like your zeal, but, as you probably know, I can't really publish anything that attacks particular individuals. While we can attack institutional practices, I'm afraid we must remain silent on some of the specifics. Otherwise, I'll never find a publisher for the collection and, more importantly, the causes I think we both represent will never get a fair hearing and redress.

The question is what specific issue do you think is most important in the reform of higher education? What can you speak most eloquently about?

Bill

.......................................

December 13, 1998

Bill, 

My experience tells me this little conversation of ours will end up in the garbage bucket, but I shall continue my efforts nonetheless... for that is what I do. 

First, as already stated, my writings do not mention particular names of people or institutions, though this really hasn't made much difference at all relative to getting published. The system will always find a reason for not wanting to publish something that is clearly against it. My dealings with the NEA's Thought & Action have taught me that. First, they rejected an essay because it was too personal. I rewrote and resubmitted it, then the NEA told me it was too impersonal... and I simply laughed. 

Although you might have the will and sincerity, I doubt you could ever really understand why I am angry and "radical," as you mentioned, without going through the mill yourself. 

In any case, I tend to answer all questions posed. Most of my correspondants rarely do that. What does lily-white Harvard mean? Well, it means somebody either born into the system's elite or somebody born in an industrial district awe-stricken by the amassed wealth and superficial mannerisms (call it culture), etc. of the elite and desiring to be part of that, as you seemed to mention in your essay. I suppose I could have chosen a better term, but, as mentioned, your essay got me ripping. The Chronicle pisses me off because of the type of essay it tends to publish (e.g., Ms. Mentor). As mentioned, The Chronicle does have a monopoly on academic news... thus, it can publish whatever it wants and can and does alter reality. In brief, the academy owns the Chronicle... it is not independent, as the media should be, though rarely is. 

Relative to your question on the important issues in higher education, they haven't really been mentioned as far as I'm aware. I suppose by giving you my thoughts, you can incorporate them into your project, dump me, then get published by Harvard University Press. Well, so be it. I'm not sure if I really care, so here goes. 

These issues haven't been mentioned because they would invariably challenge the very system of American capitalism of which higher ed is evidently an important cog. From my personal travails, I'll tell you what the issues are. As mentioned, I already have essays regarding these issues, have already attempted to get them published and have failed... which is why I created The American Dissident... to give voice to those whose voice has been suppressed. Please post my flyer on a wall somewhere. Thanks. 

There are two crucial areas that desperately need reform: 

1. evident suppression of free speech and criticism of academics by academics, colleagues by colleagues (Clearly, Ray Flynn's loyalty, loyalty, loyalty, semper fi garbage is responsible for this state of affairs... learned at an early age via emphasis on team-playing, networking, etc.. Academics should be zeroed in on truth seeking, not on how to be more loyal! Just try criticizing as an untenured professor the president of your college!) 

2. the consequent nature of most academics as sheep-like, obedient, non-questioning, etc.. 

Clearly, the emphasis on team-playing, networking and all the other latter day corporate crap has something to do with this state of affairs. Rampant nepotism and cronyism in public higher education also result in creating the type of academic beast mentioned. 

Would you like to see my essay on nepotism in Massachusetts? Or my essay on life in a blue ribbon high school? Or my essay on the aftermath of an arbitration settlement? 

True. If you want to get your collection published, keep it lily-white Harvard. 

Best, 

G. Tod 

Tran Huu Dung and Denis Dutton

......................

Cartoon sketched in 2006

David D, Perlmutter

Christian Smith

.......................................................

NB:  Well, I’m tired of the general BS complaints about the general BS in higher ed.  Christian Smith’s list of BS conveniently fails to address the prime cause for the BS:  careerism and its number one taboo:  thou shalt not criticize the hands that feed.  In his case, the hands are the University of Notre Dame.  And what makes his silence pitiful is that he is tenured.  Having the courage to actually bite the hands that feed might initiate the beginning to an end to the BS.  In Smith’s article, Chronicle of Higher Education article, “Higher Education Is Drowning in BS,” not one university or professor was named to illustrate the bullshit.  Not one!  His University of Notre Dame is designated a red light university by the Foundation for Individual Rights in Education, which means the institution has free speech issues (see https://www.thefire.org/schools/university-of-notre-dame/#search-results).  Do the student editors care about that?  Nope!  Do the professors care about that?  Nope!  Will Smith write an essay about that particular bullshit?  Nope!  

          Unsurprisingly, Christian Smith did not respond to the above cartoon.  Unsurprisingly, Smith’s colleagues did not respond to it.  Professors tend to hate vigorous debate, cornerstone of democracy.  Unsurprisingly, the student editors did not respond to it and of course will not publish it.  Why unsurprisingly?  Murky waters of democracy, that's why...  Read Smith’s essay here: https://www.chronicle.com/article/Higher-Education-Is-Drowning/242195?cid=wcontentgrid_hp_2.  

...................................

From: George Slone

Sent: Saturday, February 10, 2018 10:18 AM

To: viewpoint@ndsmcobserver.com; editor@ndsmcobserver.com

Cc: christian.smith@nd.edu

Subject: One of your professors satirized in a new P. Maudit cartoon

To Editor-in-Chief Ben Padanilam and Managing Editor Katie Galioto, The Observer, Student Newspaper, University of Notre Dame:  

Attached is a cartoon you will highly likely NOT publish.  Why not?  Because you are not being taught and not learning to appreciate freedom of speech and vigorous debate, democracy’s cornerstones.  “To uncover the truth and report it accurately,” your motto, is likely (hopefully not!) just another instance of the BS decried by your professor, Christian Smith:  https://www.chronicle.com/article/Higher-Education-Is-Drowning/242195?cid=wcontentgrid_hp_2.  Well, of course, he wouldn’t have decried that particular instance.  After all, that would take a little career-shaking courage.  

Finally, you ought to rethink endorsing candidates, student or other, for how can you possibly be objective when reporting with regards endorsed candidates?  Not possible!  Think!  Look at the New York Times, as a sad example.  

So, guts and individuality… or PC-groupthink teamplaying?  Which is it?  Look forward to your response.  

..................................................................

From: George Slone

Sent: Saturday, February 10, 2018 2:55 PM

To: soc@nd.edu; christian.smith@nd.edu; berends.3@nd.edu; kbeyerl1@nd.edu; jorge.A.Bustamante.1@nd.edu; wcarbona@nd.edu; gilberto.Cardenas.7@nd.edu; jlcollett@nd.edu; russell.S.Faeges.4@nd.edu; dgibson1@nd.edu; david.S.Hachen.1@nd.edu; eugene.W.Halton.2@nd.edu; jjones23@nd.edu; tkay@nd.edu; MaryEllen.Konieczny.1@nd.edu; alangenk@nd.edu; olizardo@nd.edu; emcclint@nd.edu; erin.mcdonnell@nd.edu; tmcdonn2@nd.edu; rory.M.McVeigh.3@nd.edu; ann.E.Mische.2@nd.edu; atalia.Omer.3@nd.edu; smustill@nd.edu; atalia.Omer.3@nd.edu; david.Sikkink.1@nd.edu; lynette.P.Spillman.1@nd.edu; jspring1@nd.edu; erika.m.effler.1@nd.edu; mim.t.thomas.213@nd.edu; J.S.Valenzuela.1@nd.edu; andrew.J.Weigert.1@nd.edu; richard.A.Williams.5@nd.edu

Subject: A Notre Dame sociology professor lampooned in a new P. Maudit cartoon

To the Department of Sociology, University of Notre Dame:

Attached is a cartoon I just finished on one of your colleagues.  Why not examine it?   The response I received from that colleague was ABSOLUT MINDNUMBERY and is highlighted in the cartoon, which really does strike at the very crux of the problem:  your problem, academe’s problem, and consequently America’s problem.  I welcome your reaction, though will be surprised if I receive any considering general professorial disdain for vigorous debate, cornerstone of democracy...

Carolyn Petrosino

[The following essay was sent to Editor Andrew C. Holman and Assoc. Editors Norma Anderson and Ellen Scheible (Bridgewater Review, Bridgewater State University (MA);   Ed.-in-Chief Daniel Creed and Faculty Advisor Sherri Miles, The Comment (BSU student newspaper); Professors Carolyn Petrosino and Benjamin Carson; and BSU Library Director Michael Somers.  It was also sent to The Chronicle of Higher Education and Inside Higher Ed.  Not one person deigned to respond.]  

In the Crosshairs of the Cultural Marxist Movement: 

Is Bridgewater State Ready… Or Has It Already Submitted?  

Some ground rules at the Snowden Multicultural Center’s Whiteness Group: If you have an unpopular opinion, speak up. No white person can ask a person of color questions; white people must try to answer their questions for themselves. And no spreading rumors about what people say during the meetings.

—the Kenyon Collegian, Kenyon College 

The problem is that this system gives a perverse incentive for protesters to make conservative speakers prohibitively expensive.  The more violence and trouble that groups cause, the more money sponsors will have to pay.  As a result, groups will not be able to invite speakers opposed by these groups.  Both cities and colleges are supposed to be forums for free speech.  It is not a luxury for which you pay a user fee.  Those groups like Antifa are the ones causing disruptions and interfering with free speech. 

—Jonathan Turley, liberal constitutional law professor 

Over the years, an insidious takeover of colleges and universities across the nation has seemingly been achieved, not by white nationalists, but rather by cultural Marxists, who do not favor freedom of speech and vigorous debate, cornerstones of democracy.   Are the Chronicle of Higher Education, Inside Higher Ed, and Bridgewater Review concerned about that?  If not, why not?  Perhaps the editors are cultural Marxists themselves or lean in that direction.  As for white nationalism, clearly it has not even made a dent in higher education… and certainly not at Bridgewater State.  

Ideology has been rapidly supplanting reason and freedom of expression in higher education.  It is well known that right-leaning speakers, including Murray, Coulter, and Yiannopoulos, have been shut down and threatened with violence on campuses from Berkeley to Middlebury, NYU, and William & Mary, for example.  At which campuses have white nationalists managed to shut down left-leaning speakers?  

Speech codes have supplanted freedom of speech in many institutions of higher education.  If unaware of this, check out the numerous reports at the Foundation for Individual Rights in Education.  A quick search on Bridgewater State will reveal that “Bridgewater State University has been given the speech code rating Yellow.  Yellow light colleges and universities are those institutions with at least one ambiguous policy that too easily encourages administrative abuse and arbitrary application.”  Is there a  professor at Bridgewater State who even cares about that?  

Are vigorous debate and freedom of speech cornerstones at Bridgewater State?  Would Bridgewater Review, published by Bridgewater State professors and librarians, or the student newspaper, The Comment, publish this counter-essay?  Perhaps not.  Why not?  Well, back in 2011, I tested the waters of democracy regarding Bridgewater State’s English Department. 

Letters to a Young Department Chairperson:
I do appreciate your quick reply. Yet how is it possible that “one of the most vibrant departments” at a state university would not express an iota of interest in The American Dissident, a unique journal devoted to Literature, Democracy, and Dissidence? Well, it is true that“vibrant” means “pulsating with vigor and energy” (i.e., a lot of running around), and not necessarily with curiosity and courageousness. You note the “rich array of courses” at your institution, yet do not offer any courses even remotely similar to “Literature, Dissidence, and Democracy,” the one I created and in which you also failed to express an iota of interest. In fact, how does such lack of interest and curiosity reflect the statement preceding your job ad for English adjuncts: “Applicants should be strongly committed […] to working in a multicultural environment that fosters diversity”? Or am I quite wrong in thinking that by “diversity” you meant diversity of opinions, as opposed to superficial skin color, and diversity of guts, as opposed to mere ethnicity? 

Finally, why not mention in your “Chair’s Welcome” that you encourage student and faculty questioning and challenging of all things, including and especially multiculti- ideology and the Academic/Literary Industrial Complex—its mass of institutions (e.g., NEA, Guggenheim, state cultural councils, and universities), prize-winning icons (Beatniks et al), award-winning journals (Agni, Poetry, the Bridge et al), grant-receiving professors, and of course Holy Canon. 

Remember: the noble title of "chairperson" must be earned rather than claimed; it connotes conformity and safety rather than mere agreement. Yes, I did paraphrase that from Christopher Hitchens’ Letters to a Young Contrarian. 

For Chairperson Benjamin D. Carson’s response and my further retort, see http://wwwtheamericandissidentorg.blogspot.com/2012/01/benjamin-carson.html.  I’d also tested the waters vis-a-vis the university president and student newspaper editors at The Comment.  Part of that post includes a cartoon drawn on Professor Carson and a letter sent to then President Dana Mohler-Fariaboth, regarding Bridgewater State’s shameful speech codes.  Back then it had the worst possible rating, the red light!  Neither the student editors, nor the president deigned to respond after I’d sent the items to them.  How odd that student editors did not think free speech at Bridgewater State, or rather lack thereof, to be something that might interest students!  Of course, the apathy of the president was quite understandable.  In vain, I’d also attempted to interest the university library in subscribing to The American Dissident.  After all, where else might students be able to read such criticism?  Well, I digress… or sort of.

“In the Crosshairs of the White Nationalist Movement:  Is Bridgewater State Ready?”, authored by 

Professor Carolyn Petrosino (Department of Criminal Justice), evidently reflects cultural-Marxist biases.  “Social movements that are negative—that advocate the institutionalized devaluation of others—are what I refer to as dark social movements,” notes Professor Petrosino.  “The White Nationalist Movement is in that category.”  Okay.  I agree.  BUT why not also mention the cultural Marxist movement, especially the highly violent, free-speech-hating group Antifa, not to mention BLM, New Black Panthers, and Nation of Islam.  The cultural Marxist movement created the it’s-okay-to-hate-whitey enterprise, spread via large numbers of campus workshops, speeches, and mandatory diversity training sessions aka indoctrination sessions.  That movement has even begun to penetrate Quebec:  Le racisme antiblanc est-il un humanisme?  It also invented the absurd inclusion (i.e., exclusion) mantra that defies logic and reason.  Professor Petrosino notes she’s taught courses on hate crimes.  Does she mention to students that designation is controversial?  Why, for example, should a poster or flyer or graffiti constitute a hate crime, instead of an instance of freedom of expression?  Well, the cultural Marxists in power easily get around that by designating the poster or flyer or graffiti they do not like as litter or vandalism, which indeed are crimes, therefore hate crimes.  Moreover, the term hate is of course subjective.  Does Professor Petrosino mention that racism can and might often be black on white or that anti-Semitism is ingrained in the Qu’ran and likely openly expressed by many Muslim Student Association members? 

Does Professor Petrosino include, in her examples, hate crimes committed against whites by blacks?  Professor Tony Brown at Vanderbilt University notes in a research paper that "African Americans are the only group of persons categorized in significant numbers as both victims and perpetrators of hate crimes.”   Can there really be no examples of white students, as hate-crime victims?  Professor Petrosino mentions the “Stop (or Fight) White Genocide” email received by faculty and students as “disturbing.”  Sadly, in academe, it also seems to be very “disturbing” whenever anyone stands up and dares counter the reigning cultural-Marxist narrative.  Does Professor Petrocino mention that some blacks want the “Tanning of America”?  How is that not anti-white and not constitute a desire for white genocide, and why does Professor Petrosino not mention that?  The Root’s Tracy Clayton and Tracey Ross (the links are for the two cartoons I sketched several years ago) are proponents of that racist wish. 

From: todslone@hotmail.com
To: press@theroot.com; readerfeedback@theroot.com
Subject: Dialogue on Racism? Or rather Racist Indoctrination!
Date: Tue, 21 May 2013 08:36:25 -0400
To the Editors of The Root,
You evidently are not seeking dialogue on racism at all. What you are seeking is to disseminate pro-black, anti-white racist indoctrination, nothing more, nothing less. The Root is a racist online publication, which is why I have decried it, especially in three cartoons. LOGIC is the motor in my cartooning. Indoctrination, racist or whatever, can never defeat LOGIC. For the latest cartoon, inspired by The Root, see “Stupid White Women.”  Scroll down to see toons on Dawkins, Goff, and Tim Wise. A cartoon on Tracy Clayton will be published next week. Conversation on racism?  Silence is not conversation! 

Did The Root respond?  No!  So, Professor Petrosino is concerned about “White nationalist recruitment efforts on campus.”   Okay.  But what about Antifa, New Black Panthers, BLM, or Muslim Student Association recruitment efforts on campus, not to mention the Office of Institutional Diversity and Diversity Consortium efforts to indoctrinate?  Might diversity and inclusion practices exclude opinions apt to question and challenge the inclusion mantra?  Any mandatory diversity workshops or training courses at Bridgewater State?  Any discussion about the white students who might have been rejected by Bridgewater State because of Affirmative Action’s preference for black students? 

Professor Petrosino notes that in the 1980s the FBI reported an increase in neo-Nazi skinheads.   But she fails to mention the violent Black Panthers of the 1970s.  Why?   She underscores that the Anti-Defamation League reported at least 147 incidents involving the distribution of racist flyers on 107 different campuses.  But what about the BDS (Boycott, Divest and Sanctions) movement and anti-Semitic flyers or posters authored by Islamists on college campuses?  What about the Muslim Student Association, attached to the Muslim Brotherhood, which adores homosexuality, kuffars, apostates, and non-hijab-adorning alpha females?  

Professor Petrosino aberrantly evokes Trump, as a “symbol of white nationalism.”  Was Obama a symbol of the black nationalism espoused by “outstanding human being” Jew-hater Louis Farrakhan?   Is there a photo of Trump posing with Richard B. Spencer?   Well, there is definitely a photo of Obama posing with Farrakhan!  Here it is in case you live in a fully-protected cultural-Marxist safety cocoon and never saw it:  “The Media’s Ugly David Duke-Louis Farrakhan Double Standard.”  And what about Obama’s fling with “racialist” Jeremiah Wright?  

Professor Petrosino and so many others do not understand, let alone appreciate, the First Amendment.  In Europe and Canada, citizens can and have been arrested for simply expressing an opinion.  Thankfully, in America, that is not supposed to happen.  Far too many people do not understand the intrinsic problem with so-called hate-speech legislation.  Hate is subjective.  Hate is subjective.   Capiche?  Professor Petrosino puts forth an argument against the First Amendment:  “When hateful speech influences public perspectives, it has the potential to shape law and create public policy that negatively impacts vulnerable groups.”  How not to mention Islam in Europe?  Indeed, hate-speech legislation has been adopted there to essentially not only stop criticism of Islamic ideology, but also nefariously to stop criticism of government policy regarding Islam and Muslim immigration.  One can actually be arrested and incarcerated for doing the latter!  In Europe, not only right-wing hate speech, but also left-wing hate speech has been prosecuted.  

As for the Southern Poverty Law Center, it has become a controversial left-wing, pro-Islamic organization.  Professor Petrosino does not mention that.  Instead, egregious bias blinds her, preventing her to question and challenge that which evidently needs to be questioned and challenged.  She notes, SPLC reported that “at least 23 candidates for public office with radical right-wing views” existed.  She fails to stipulate precisely what “radical right-wing views” might be.  Is criticism of political Islam a radical right-wing view?  Does SPLC list radical left-wing candidates?  If so, how many?  If not, why not?  Is SPLC at all objective?  Professor Petrosino states, “Steve Bannon, the former chief strategist for President Trump, has provided a media platform of the alt-right movement (Breitbart News), which supports and advocates white nationalist ideology.”  Well, I consult Breitbart News every morning and have yet to come across an article that supports that statement!  Has Professor Petrosino ever even examined it?  By the way, I also consult the New York Times and Washington Post every morning and am ever disappointed by the important stories on which they fail to report, whereas Breitbart News reports on them.  Why, for example, published on the same day, are the NY Times stories, “Woody Allen Meets Me#Too” and “On ‘S.N.L.,’ Trump Calls In to ‘Fox & Friends’” more important than the two Breitbart News stories, both ignored by the NY Times, “Antifa Extremists Try To Shut Down Jacob Rees-Mogg Speech” and “Belgian Senator: Multiculturalist Elites Manipulated Stats to Transform Society with Mass Migration”?  Of course, Breitbart News also publishes its share of pop stories.  But to simply dismiss it as “white nationalist ideology” serves to assist democracy’s death in darkness, to paraphrase the Washington Post.   

Professor Petrosino ought to include one, just one, Breitbart News article indicative of a connection with white nationalism and then also attempt to disprove “National Public Radio Falsely Links Breitbart to White Separatists.”  If she is indeed concerned about the “vulnerability” of students to the messages of white nationalists, why is she not concerned about the “vulnerability” of students to the far more potently ubiquitous ideology of cultural Marxism likely pushed by some Bridgewater State professors themselves?   She expresses concern for “acts of bigotry” on campus, but fails to mention the left’s ubiquitous “white privilege” courses, workshops, speeches, and mandatory training, as acts of bigotry against white students.  Blatantly anti-white racist student campus “whiteness groups” also exist and even kindergarten children are now being “taught” (i.e., brainwashed) about purported “white privilege.”  Well, you will not learn about those two realities if you only consult the New York Times and Washington Post!  

Now, what to say about “Bridgewater State Professor Says ‘Fuck Any’ Students Who Voted For Trump, They Are KKK And Are Not Welcomed In His English Class”?  Freedom of speech?  Definitely!  But how can professors, including Garrett Avila-Nichols, who proffered that statement, and the Board of Trustees state, without being egregiously hypocritical, “We re-commit ourselves to actions that put into practice our individual and institutional values of diversity, inclusion, and equality for all,” while simultaneously engaging in identity politics, demonization of whites, and exclusion of student Trump voters and alt-opinions in general?  How can egregiously biased, cultural Marxist professors like Avila-Nichols possibly make a statement that “We reject all forms of bias…”?  

In academe today, it seems “let’s have a conversation about race” has become in reality “let’s have a cultural Marxist monologue about race.”  Does Bridgewater State want to graduate questioning and challenging students with the capacity to reason with logic or well-indoctrinated Democrat-Party students with the capacity to skillfully use ad hominem (e.g., KKK) in an effort to demonize anybody daring to proffer uncomfortable truths and/or alt-opinions?  Will Bridgewater Review publish this counter-essay, considering that I must certainly be a Nazi white nationalist, racist, homophobe, islamophobe, sexist, who believes that FREEDOM OF SPEECH, not diversity, is our real strength?  Does Bridgewater Review want to have a conversation or a monologue about race?  Well, as noted, it is closed to outsiders:  “Bridgewater Review invites submissions from full- and part-time faculty members and librarians, and others in the BSU community.”  In fact, it is not even available online.  It is a members-only journal.  And yet, as a public university periodical shouldn’t it be open to the public?   One must wonder if any non-cultural Marxists even teach at Bridgewater State, especially in the so-called social sciences.  It is highly likely that its “forum for campus-wide conversations pertaining to research, teaching, and creative expression” will not include any questioning or challenging of Professor Petrosino.  Its forum is likely nothing but a safe space for campus-wide cultural Marxist groupthink monologues… and thus is perhaps the state of higher education in a nutshell.  

Finally, objectivity needs to somehow overcome the massive left-wing egregious bias controlling academe today.  We have gotten to the sad point where objective facts can now be skillfully warped by hardcore ideologues into subjective falsehoods.  Sanctimonious statements of equality and inclusion professed by those like Professor Petrosino are vacuous when the reality is exclusion and inequity.  Will Professor Petrosino or any of her colleagues even dare step out of their protective bubble and respond to this counter-essay?  

Denis Dutton

Professor Denis Dutton created “Arts & Letters Daily” on The Chronicle of Higher Education website and died recently. "I think that he has been an incredibly passionate advocate for ideas and truth,” noted his son. Yet Dutton refused to permit the ideas and truth of The American Dissident on that website, despite my requests. Dutton was a little-caesar gatekeeper, keeping the doors closed to ideas and truths that he did not like. Should we mourn his death? Not in the least.

Does the following, on the Arts & Letters Daily website, represent passionate advocate for ideas and truth... or business-as-usual in the established-order literary milieu? "Allen Ginsberg had a serene air about him, like Yoda, but with bigger ears. At least that’s what Tyler Stoddard Smith remembers about him. Oh, and that Ginsberg peed on his shoes..."

The cartoon above is a satire of Dutton's book.