That's the same mentality that has led to males having no right to due process if accused of sexual assault on a college campus. My right to my own bank accounts and credit, along with the same protections and opportunities under the US Constitution (feminism), is only destructive to those who believe women should be in burqas. We either have the same rights or the Constitution is meaningless. There's no middle ground.
Feminism was a contrived Neo-Marxist ideology introduced in the 60s/70s. It was never actually about women's rights....that was just the cover and the hook.
Such nonsense. Women were given the vote in only the 20s, and into the 50s women were consigned to the Leave it to Beaver role of stay at home Moms. Since then it has been an upward climb with women consigned to the lower echelons of the work world. The latter has been a function of women's belief that they could do no better, being held back by the world of work leaders and/or, yes, because sometimes they didn't want a life in the work world. It has only been in the 2000s that the idea of a woman being president has even been in the realm of the possible.
So no, thinking about women and their rights remains important.
Actually, Anthony, your time line and overall perspective on the status of women in US history is off. Wyoming gave women the vote in 1869, and other states followed, such that 22 states and territories of the US had already granted suffrage to women when the 19th Amendment was ratified on August 26, 1920 (not "the 20s"). More importantly, women and women's groups played a very significant role ion shaping American politics for at least a century prior to that. Women's group were critical to both the Abolitionist movement and Prohibition, to name just two (there are many more). Women, through their actions as lobbyists and reformers, were arguably more important in shaping American politics in the century prior to the 19th Amendment than they have been in the century since--fun fact!
And the idea that all women were forced into being June Cleaver as late as the 50s is also false... as early as the 1920s, 1/3 of all college students in the US were female, many of whom went on to play major roles in American life as "career women," particularly in education. What you don't seem to grasp is that the "stay at home" mom of the 1950s was only made possible by the prosperity of that era-- there are many many women today, feminist and otherwise, who would love to be "stay at home moms" but who are forced by economic necessity to work to make ends meet.
Yes, we need to "think" about women's rights, but we must do it through a historically correct perspective, not a feminist caricature of that history.
LOLOLOL! Thank you for the comedy break! You must be one of the "professors" who Rufo helped sh!tcan and now you're here trolling. But we see you. And know your type is full of shite. And dispose of your words accordingly. Right down the sewer of Marxism.
Actually Anthony, your "women are oppressed" argument is hollow. My mother wanted to go to law school in the early 1940s. She was the first woman ever in her law school. But guess what; the school was "seeking" a woman applicant for years.
Men love women and have always. It is natural. This sits in contrast to "feminists" who are driven by anger towards men. By angry misfits. And by the toxic "feminist" culture that does not rejoice in women's many fine traits -- opting instead to focus on the rights of women to kill their fetuses or enter male-dominated jobs -- ignoring motherhood, women's superior caring capabilities, and the power of beauty. It is no accident the left would not have any power if it were not for impressional angry single women.
The ideology we call "feminism" was never about women's rights. That is where you are mind-blind, Anthony. You are arguing apples when I am saying oranges.
Wrong. If women having the same rights to their own bank accounts, credit and opportunities is Marist, then our Constitution is Marxist. One of the founders of feminist thought can be traced to the 18th century writings of Mary Wollstonecraft. As feminists made legal progress in the 20th century, the McCarthy Misogynists incessantly tied together feminism and Marxism until they were seen as inseparable. I can just as easily say any group fighting for men's rights (i.e. custody in divorce) is a Neo-Marxist ideology.
But we are not talking about women at all in feminism. We are talking about how best to grab power. What kind of ideologies will do the trick. You still do not see the bigger picture here. You still think it has to do with the cover story. It does not. The cover story is incidental.
"The issue is never the issue. The issue is always the Revolution"
Feminism as we know it from the 60s/70s was always a front. A Neo-Marxist tactic. Just like using the word "JOY" as a Pavlovian trigger-word, or redefining what racism means.
Feminism of that time was just a tool of deceit. It was never about anyone's rights, but it was an excellent way to get the Baby Boomers to jump on the leftwing "progressive" bandwagon. It was a lure. It was bait. Nothing more than an indoctrination tactic.
Feminism is a big part of WOKE. Why doesn't that give everyone a major clue? Staring them right in the face!
It is as much a part of leftwing totalitarian upside-down land as everything else they do. Nothing genuine there. Scratch the surface image, and you find destructive rot. Just like every other leftwing initiative of the past 50+ years.
Why did anyone consider feminism different from their standard moves?
Men's rights are a big part of WOKE. The "right" of deranged males to obliterate female sports and the deranged handmaidens who will do anything for a deranged male is a fight for men's rights. There are very few feminists on the left, and those still there are distraught with where their party has gone. Then there's the male right to destroy as many of his IVF embryos as he wishes. The fact that both dems and republicans came together on this shows where the rubber meets the road. But put that same embryo in a woman's body and prone to the decision of only a woman, pearl clutching ensues.
And now Trump wants the federal government to pay to destroy those IVF fetuses. The irony can only make a sensible centrist like me smile or lol. How the hell can his cult wrap their little minds around that one?
Very few feminists on the Left? The Left spawned feminism. The Leftwing Neo-Marxists were synonymous with feminism. It was their greatest ideological trick. Feminism is one of the major pillars of DEI. It went on to give birth to the other gender ideologies. Without feminism, there would be no T-genderism.
I have to giggle at JK Rowling sometimes. She plays the crusading feminist. Not that protecting women is wrong -- quite the contrary, But feminism is the power that brought to life T-genderism, which is now turning around and eating its creator!
I am a woman who was wise enough never to jump on the crowded bandwagon of feminism. I saw what it was from the start.
Nope. I don't think you are aware of what feminism actually is. You are taking it at face value, assuming it is really about women's rights. This is the hole in the argument of almost every feminist.
No, you are playing "gotcha." I may be wrong here in thinking you're suggesting that if I switched to using the 2-word phrase "women's rights" rather than use the word feminism, the misogynists would be satisfied. Feminism, like the word woman, still means the same thing no matter how many times you (and the left) repeat the propaganda.
This is good news. I am closely following what's going on at New School in addition to Ralston College, UATX, University of Dallas and Hillsdale. We pulled our daughter out of the public school in 7th grade after learning that they were promoting radical ideology and enrolled her in a Classical Christian School. That school is growing as are home schools and micro schools and all of those parents and students are seeking higher education aligned with their values. I'm happy to see New College, Ralston College and UATX join the ranks as options to the existing Christian Colleges choices. Please continue to inform us on the developments at New College as well as other schools. And it would be great if you and someone like Luke Rosiak could join your investigative efforts and create a list of schools and professors that are focused on education rather than ideology and DEI.
Well done. The public schools now exist to teach children to hate themselves and their country, or to see themselves as helpless victims with no control over their lives, beholden to Big Brother for what scraps they are allowed to receive. A good housecleaning is needed in the state colleges of education, as well.
When we considered educational options for our daughter over 20 years ago, we rapidly dismissed public schools and determined to home school and did so for 12 years. Although neither my wife nor I have education backgrounds, she graduated at a liberal arts school with Summa Cum Laude standing.
That’s for certain and the resources available for today’s homeschoolers are much more expansive than when we were struggling to cobble together a curriculum!
Did you know the FBI agent that initiated the Russia Collusion investigation was a graduate of Hillsdale?? And another agent that played a role in it graduated from Hampden-Sydney!! 😝
Used to be fairly easy to find the names of such colleges. I looked them up twenty years ago. There was already a fair amount of internet information on the subject then.
I bet the media continue to gnash their teeth about this, and the more successful you are, the more violent the gnashing. You are leading the way for other states to follow, if they are brave enough. Bless you and bless Governor DeSantis for this worthy endeavor.
The faculty should run the university but, when the faculty screw up royally, the representatives of the taxpayers should step in. Thank you for stepping in.
Would be great to see a climate science department, reporting on what is really going on and not the climate alarmism narrative. Matthew Wielicki would be a great addition.
There has been a widespread and well-supported homeschooling movement in the U.S. for over 40 years now. Less so in Canada, but there have been some participants. Many such families have chosen the classical curriculum. I know that I did, when we homeschooled years ago. Of course, there are also numerous private schools now based upon the classical curriculum.
There should be enough such families to want similar post-secondary choices. I realize there is Hillsdale, as well as a number of other classical colleges in the U.S. Good to see that option grow.
As I have said before, there are two issues facing once-democratic societies now. One is to stop totalitarianism. The other is to re-build. This appears to be an excellent re-building initiative.
There were some such colleges all along. This is not entirely new, but an extension of such colleges pre-WWII. Classical education was the standard for 2500 years across the West.
New College heavily recruited me in the early 1980's. As a Florida high school student with test scores and an academic profile they sought. Must've received over a dozen mailings, expensive brochures, etc. It was a nice campus, located near my extended family, the small, intimate educational environment was appealing. But I could tell they did not share my values even back then. They made a nice offer. But not worth the price of indoctrination. Hope the reforms continue to be successful, grow, build, become a model.
I am a philosophy professor. I am retiring this year after teaching philosophy for 45 years. (I started when I was 25.) I studied Existentialism and Freud; then I went through the deconstruction years which soured me on relativism and gibberish jargon. I ended up a conservative and studied and taught mostly the history of Western philosophy and ethics. This year I am teaching Robot Ethics and AI and our world. The point is, today I was getting out of my car, a bit maudlin as my career ends and I thought. I just do not fit in this academic world anymore. A student asked at the end of class today, do I think that there is good and bad, he whispered it looking to see if anyone heard him. He was genuinely scared to ask! I said yes the Good really is Beautiful and the Beautiful really is Good. It was if I had told him a dangerous secret and he was so so pleased. You are doing a Good thing with this school and it will be Beautiful if it is indeed Good. Final Cause First!!
The math is in your favor for reforming these hyperwoke colleges because there are more PhDs than professor positions. If the activist teachers leave it will be very easy to find educators who just want to teach, not indoctrinate.
This is a disingenuous vitriolic quote. Clearly most conservatives are taught to not value diversity, equity, and inclusion. Sowell knows this but is simply being spiteful.
Off subject, but I hovered over you name to see your profile blurb, professor, background financial economics. I majored in Finance, we learned about the Pareto principle, 80-20 rule, and some of his other contributions to economic theory. But I never learned more about the man, Vilfredo Pareto, until recently. Quick wiki (gov't approved narrative) searches made me more curious about him, wonder if you've every looked deeper into him?:
His theory is consistent with the ideas of big political theory influencers like Harold Lasswell and Noam Chomsky. Of note, in Chomsky's Manufacturing Consent is this idea:
"You know, it’s very striking that continually people move from one position to the other, very easily. And I think the reason for the ease is partly because they’re sort of the same position. So you can be either a Marxist-Leninist commissar, or you can be somebody celebrating the magnificence of State capitalism, and you can serve those guys. It’s more or less the same position. You pick one or the other depending on your estimate of where power is, and that can change."
I believe this idea to be instructive about our time, the trajectory our civilization is on and how to change it. Those leading it aren't necessarily wedded to Marxism/Fascism or any particular ideology, ideas of governance. Just that they want to hold high status in it, whatever "it" is. Our opportunity is in changing their estimate of where power is.
The "elites" circulate, as Pareto described. And I was inspired to share this with you in hopes that as a financial economics professor you may have familiarity with his other theories and principles. And through them have an opportunity to spark curiosity in young minds about his non-economic theories that are valuable knowledge to have.
I want to read this line, "terminating the gender-studies program," more often. Make them as rare as paraspychology departments.
I hope the idea spreads everywhere!
Let me know how we can organize that
Yes. Agree 💯. A most useless degree.
I take it farther. Feminism itself is not only useless, but highly destructive.
That's the same mentality that has led to males having no right to due process if accused of sexual assault on a college campus. My right to my own bank accounts and credit, along with the same protections and opportunities under the US Constitution (feminism), is only destructive to those who believe women should be in burqas. We either have the same rights or the Constitution is meaningless. There's no middle ground.
Feminism was a contrived Neo-Marxist ideology introduced in the 60s/70s. It was never actually about women's rights....that was just the cover and the hook.
Such nonsense. Women were given the vote in only the 20s, and into the 50s women were consigned to the Leave it to Beaver role of stay at home Moms. Since then it has been an upward climb with women consigned to the lower echelons of the work world. The latter has been a function of women's belief that they could do no better, being held back by the world of work leaders and/or, yes, because sometimes they didn't want a life in the work world. It has only been in the 2000s that the idea of a woman being president has even been in the realm of the possible.
So no, thinking about women and their rights remains important.
Actually, Anthony, your time line and overall perspective on the status of women in US history is off. Wyoming gave women the vote in 1869, and other states followed, such that 22 states and territories of the US had already granted suffrage to women when the 19th Amendment was ratified on August 26, 1920 (not "the 20s"). More importantly, women and women's groups played a very significant role ion shaping American politics for at least a century prior to that. Women's group were critical to both the Abolitionist movement and Prohibition, to name just two (there are many more). Women, through their actions as lobbyists and reformers, were arguably more important in shaping American politics in the century prior to the 19th Amendment than they have been in the century since--fun fact!
And the idea that all women were forced into being June Cleaver as late as the 50s is also false... as early as the 1920s, 1/3 of all college students in the US were female, many of whom went on to play major roles in American life as "career women," particularly in education. What you don't seem to grasp is that the "stay at home" mom of the 1950s was only made possible by the prosperity of that era-- there are many many women today, feminist and otherwise, who would love to be "stay at home moms" but who are forced by economic necessity to work to make ends meet.
Yes, we need to "think" about women's rights, but we must do it through a historically correct perspective, not a feminist caricature of that history.
LOLOLOL! Thank you for the comedy break! You must be one of the "professors" who Rufo helped sh!tcan and now you're here trolling. But we see you. And know your type is full of shite. And dispose of your words accordingly. Right down the sewer of Marxism.
Actually Anthony, your "women are oppressed" argument is hollow. My mother wanted to go to law school in the early 1940s. She was the first woman ever in her law school. But guess what; the school was "seeking" a woman applicant for years.
Men love women and have always. It is natural. This sits in contrast to "feminists" who are driven by anger towards men. By angry misfits. And by the toxic "feminist" culture that does not rejoice in women's many fine traits -- opting instead to focus on the rights of women to kill their fetuses or enter male-dominated jobs -- ignoring motherhood, women's superior caring capabilities, and the power of beauty. It is no accident the left would not have any power if it were not for impressional angry single women.
The ideology we call "feminism" was never about women's rights. That is where you are mind-blind, Anthony. You are arguing apples when I am saying oranges.
Wrong. If women having the same rights to their own bank accounts, credit and opportunities is Marist, then our Constitution is Marxist. One of the founders of feminist thought can be traced to the 18th century writings of Mary Wollstonecraft. As feminists made legal progress in the 20th century, the McCarthy Misogynists incessantly tied together feminism and Marxism until they were seen as inseparable. I can just as easily say any group fighting for men's rights (i.e. custody in divorce) is a Neo-Marxist ideology.
But we are not talking about women at all in feminism. We are talking about how best to grab power. What kind of ideologies will do the trick. You still do not see the bigger picture here. You still think it has to do with the cover story. It does not. The cover story is incidental.
"The issue is never the issue. The issue is always the Revolution"
Says it all.
A. The feminism u talk about has been shot in the head by marxism. It is dead.
Feminism as we know it from the 60s/70s was always a front. A Neo-Marxist tactic. Just like using the word "JOY" as a Pavlovian trigger-word, or redefining what racism means.
Feminism of that time was just a tool of deceit. It was never about anyone's rights, but it was an excellent way to get the Baby Boomers to jump on the leftwing "progressive" bandwagon. It was a lure. It was bait. Nothing more than an indoctrination tactic.
Look at the many millions who fell for it!
Feminism is a big part of WOKE. Why doesn't that give everyone a major clue? Staring them right in the face!
It is as much a part of leftwing totalitarian upside-down land as everything else they do. Nothing genuine there. Scratch the surface image, and you find destructive rot. Just like every other leftwing initiative of the past 50+ years.
Why did anyone consider feminism different from their standard moves?
Men's rights are a big part of WOKE. The "right" of deranged males to obliterate female sports and the deranged handmaidens who will do anything for a deranged male is a fight for men's rights. There are very few feminists on the left, and those still there are distraught with where their party has gone. Then there's the male right to destroy as many of his IVF embryos as he wishes. The fact that both dems and republicans came together on this shows where the rubber meets the road. But put that same embryo in a woman's body and prone to the decision of only a woman, pearl clutching ensues.
And now Trump wants the federal government to pay to destroy those IVF fetuses. The irony can only make a sensible centrist like me smile or lol. How the hell can his cult wrap their little minds around that one?
Very few feminists on the Left? The Left spawned feminism. The Leftwing Neo-Marxists were synonymous with feminism. It was their greatest ideological trick. Feminism is one of the major pillars of DEI. It went on to give birth to the other gender ideologies. Without feminism, there would be no T-genderism.
I have to giggle at JK Rowling sometimes. She plays the crusading feminist. Not that protecting women is wrong -- quite the contrary, But feminism is the power that brought to life T-genderism, which is now turning around and eating its creator!
I am a woman who was wise enough never to jump on the crowded bandwagon of feminism. I saw what it was from the start.
Nope. I don't think you are aware of what feminism actually is. You are taking it at face value, assuming it is really about women's rights. This is the hole in the argument of almost every feminist.
They gotcha!
No, you are playing "gotcha." I may be wrong here in thinking you're suggesting that if I switched to using the 2-word phrase "women's rights" rather than use the word feminism, the misogynists would be satisfied. Feminism, like the word woman, still means the same thing no matter how many times you (and the left) repeat the propaganda.
All the “isms” and “ists” seem to be some form of destruction.
Love that! In 10 years, if gender studies is viewed the same way we view phrenology today, it will be because of people like Chris.
I have used the term "gender phrenology" before to describe it
Given the choice, I would prefer parapsychology over gender studies. The former does less harm than the latter.
This is good news. I am closely following what's going on at New School in addition to Ralston College, UATX, University of Dallas and Hillsdale. We pulled our daughter out of the public school in 7th grade after learning that they were promoting radical ideology and enrolled her in a Classical Christian School. That school is growing as are home schools and micro schools and all of those parents and students are seeking higher education aligned with their values. I'm happy to see New College, Ralston College and UATX join the ranks as options to the existing Christian Colleges choices. Please continue to inform us on the developments at New College as well as other schools. And it would be great if you and someone like Luke Rosiak could join your investigative efforts and create a list of schools and professors that are focused on education rather than ideology and DEI.
Well done. The public schools now exist to teach children to hate themselves and their country, or to see themselves as helpless victims with no control over their lives, beholden to Big Brother for what scraps they are allowed to receive. A good housecleaning is needed in the state colleges of education, as well.
When we considered educational options for our daughter over 20 years ago, we rapidly dismissed public schools and determined to home school and did so for 12 years. Although neither my wife nor I have education backgrounds, she graduated at a liberal arts school with Summa Cum Laude standing.
I told my niece, who is bravely homeschooling her children, that she can't do worse than the public schools.
There are some amazing homeschooling resources out there today.
That’s for certain and the resources available for today’s homeschoolers are much more expansive than when we were struggling to cobble together a curriculum!
Ask your niece if she knows about the "Classical Conversations" education program.
I homeschooled also. Several children. As you know, it certainly can be done successfully.
This article on Classical Schools was just posted: https://www.heritage.org/education/report/classical-schools-america-movement-hope?utm_source=THF_Email&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=TheAgenda&mkt_tok=ODI0LU1IVC0zMDQAAAGVVvygZXf7YLRxYWEAvWHP5JEaq70LTe5-BCpr0k7myjzlhiZxbXXIcGyslamfOGkJgK17fnPmW5bRKIc7NEDQwsBQsH1ujH6EYeMsORBM_aBvGbHTEQ
Did you know the FBI agent that initiated the Russia Collusion investigation was a graduate of Hillsdale?? And another agent that played a role in it graduated from Hampden-Sydney!! 😝
Used to be fairly easy to find the names of such colleges. I looked them up twenty years ago. There was already a fair amount of internet information on the subject then.
The "Hillsdale of the South"? :-D Bless your work.
I bet the media continue to gnash their teeth about this, and the more successful you are, the more violent the gnashing. You are leading the way for other states to follow, if they are brave enough. Bless you and bless Governor DeSantis for this worthy endeavor.
Any hiring of a slightly more conservative than average professor would make the faculty shift rightward 😅.
Hiring anyone to the right of Stalin would yield a more conservative faculty!
The faculty should run the university but, when the faculty screw up royally, the representatives of the taxpayers should step in. Thank you for stepping in.
When the students read The Odessey, remember to tell them about the poem Ithaka by Cavafy https://www.greeka.com/ionian/ithaca/about/poem/, Sean Connery reciting the poem to the music of Vangelis https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1n3n2Ox4Yfk, and Frank Rhode's commencement speech based on the poem: http://labs.plantbio.cornell.edu/wayne/pdfs/Ithaka.pdf. The last link is a reminder that a scholar once inhabited the president's office at Cornell.
A scholarly president at Cornell??? This surely preceded DEI hiring!
He was president from 1977-1995. He was a paleontologist...but could talk about anything. A true gentleman and scholar. https://news.cornell.edu/stories/2020/02/frank-rhodes-cornells-ninth-president-dies-93
A true gentleman and scholar you say? Definitely pre-DEI…..
excellent speech & poem.
Carry on brave sir
I am reminded of the following quote.
“The next time some academic tells you how important diversity is, ask how many Republicans are in their sociology department.” Thomas Sowell
They’ll answer that they don’t keep such statistics. The cowards.
Would be great to see a climate science department, reporting on what is really going on and not the climate alarmism narrative. Matthew Wielicki would be a great addition.
What a great idea. This never occurred to me, and I've been at this quite awhile: "Understanding Climate Change - 97% of scientists agree with whoever is funding them": https://daveziffer.substack.com/p/understanding-climate-change
There has been a widespread and well-supported homeschooling movement in the U.S. for over 40 years now. Less so in Canada, but there have been some participants. Many such families have chosen the classical curriculum. I know that I did, when we homeschooled years ago. Of course, there are also numerous private schools now based upon the classical curriculum.
There should be enough such families to want similar post-secondary choices. I realize there is Hillsdale, as well as a number of other classical colleges in the U.S. Good to see that option grow.
As I have said before, there are two issues facing once-democratic societies now. One is to stop totalitarianism. The other is to re-build. This appears to be an excellent re-building initiative.
If this school had existed in the 1980s I might have stayed in academia!
There were some such colleges all along. This is not entirely new, but an extension of such colleges pre-WWII. Classical education was the standard for 2500 years across the West.
New College heavily recruited me in the early 1980's. As a Florida high school student with test scores and an academic profile they sought. Must've received over a dozen mailings, expensive brochures, etc. It was a nice campus, located near my extended family, the small, intimate educational environment was appealing. But I could tell they did not share my values even back then. They made a nice offer. But not worth the price of indoctrination. Hope the reforms continue to be successful, grow, build, become a model.
I am a philosophy professor. I am retiring this year after teaching philosophy for 45 years. (I started when I was 25.) I studied Existentialism and Freud; then I went through the deconstruction years which soured me on relativism and gibberish jargon. I ended up a conservative and studied and taught mostly the history of Western philosophy and ethics. This year I am teaching Robot Ethics and AI and our world. The point is, today I was getting out of my car, a bit maudlin as my career ends and I thought. I just do not fit in this academic world anymore. A student asked at the end of class today, do I think that there is good and bad, he whispered it looking to see if anyone heard him. He was genuinely scared to ask! I said yes the Good really is Beautiful and the Beautiful really is Good. It was if I had told him a dangerous secret and he was so so pleased. You are doing a Good thing with this school and it will be Beautiful if it is indeed Good. Final Cause First!!
"A student asked at the end of class today, do I think that there is good and bad, he whispered it looking to see if anyone heard him."
That is Really Scary! Scary that he didn't want anyone to see him ask, That he Had to ask. Not sure which one is scarier.
Steve—Tell the student to read all three volumes of The Gulag Archipelago, or lacking time, Elie Wiesel’s Night.
Is There Good An Bad?
Maybe its me being a geezer, but the Sisters at St John The Evangelist Parochial School had that covered by 3rd grade.
Nice to meet you, Someone.
In terms of WOKE takeovers, they are still marching forward whenever they find openings:
"A woke takeover is coming for Canadian physician training
Radical reformers are months away from requiring new doctors to prioritize social engineering over their knowledge of medicine"
Leigh Revers, Special to National Post
Sep 03, 2024 •
The ability of people to get the health care they need will suffer as a result.
That's part of the plan.
The math is in your favor for reforming these hyperwoke colleges because there are more PhDs than professor positions. If the activist teachers leave it will be very easy to find educators who just want to teach, not indoctrinate.
The next time some academics tell you how important diversity is, ask how many Republicans there are in their sociology department.
Thomas Sowell
This is a disingenuous vitriolic quote. Clearly most conservatives are taught to not value diversity, equity, and inclusion. Sowell knows this but is simply being spiteful.
What is your definition of diversity? I suspect it's different than Thomas Sowell"s.
I am using the same meaning of “diversity” as Sowell here.
Excellent work by all! Thank you so much!
Off subject, but I hovered over you name to see your profile blurb, professor, background financial economics. I majored in Finance, we learned about the Pareto principle, 80-20 rule, and some of his other contributions to economic theory. But I never learned more about the man, Vilfredo Pareto, until recently. Quick wiki (gov't approved narrative) searches made me more curious about him, wonder if you've every looked deeper into him?:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vilfredo_Pareto
Specifically his "Circulation of Elites" theory:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Circulation_of_elites
His theory is consistent with the ideas of big political theory influencers like Harold Lasswell and Noam Chomsky. Of note, in Chomsky's Manufacturing Consent is this idea:
https://chomsky.info/19890315/
"You know, it’s very striking that continually people move from one position to the other, very easily. And I think the reason for the ease is partly because they’re sort of the same position. So you can be either a Marxist-Leninist commissar, or you can be somebody celebrating the magnificence of State capitalism, and you can serve those guys. It’s more or less the same position. You pick one or the other depending on your estimate of where power is, and that can change."
I believe this idea to be instructive about our time, the trajectory our civilization is on and how to change it. Those leading it aren't necessarily wedded to Marxism/Fascism or any particular ideology, ideas of governance. Just that they want to hold high status in it, whatever "it" is. Our opportunity is in changing their estimate of where power is.
The "elites" circulate, as Pareto described. And I was inspired to share this with you in hopes that as a financial economics professor you may have familiarity with his other theories and principles. And through them have an opportunity to spark curiosity in young minds about his non-economic theories that are valuable knowledge to have.