oldsalt

Ideological Reeducation

142 posts in this topic

NEWARK, Del., October 30, 2007--The University of Delaware subjects students in its residence halls to a shocking program of ideological reeducation that is referred to in the university's own materials as a "treatment" for students' incorrect attitudes and beliefs. The Orwellian program requires the approximately 7,000 students in Delaware's residence halls to adopt highly specific university-approved views on issues ranging from politics to race, sexuality, sociology, moral philosophy, and environmentalism. The Foundation for Individual Rights in Education (FIRE) is calling for the total dismantling of the program, which is a flagrant violation of students' rights for freedom of conscience and freedom from compelled speech. [...]

The university's views are forced on students through a comprehensive manipulation of the residence hall environment, from mandatory training sessions to "sustainability" door decorations. Students living in the university's eight housing complexes are required to attend training sessions, floor meetings, and one-on-one meetings with their Resident Assistants (RAs). The RAs who facilitate these meetings have received their own intensive training from the university, including a "diversity facilitation training" session at which RAs were taught, among other things, that "[a] racist is one who is both privileged and socialized on the basis of race by a white supremacist (racist) system. The term applies to all white people (i.e., people of European descent) living in the United States, regardless of class, gender, religion, culture or sexuality."

The university suggests that at one-on-one sessions with students, RAs should ask intrusive personal questions such as "When did you discover your sexual identity?" Students who express discomfort with this type of questioning often meet the disapproval from their RAs, who write reports on these one-on-one sessions and deliver these reports to their superiors. One student identified in a write-up as an RA's "worst" one-on-one session was a young woman who stated that she was tired of having "diversity shoved down her throat."

According to the program's materials, the goal of the residence life education program is for students in the university's residence halls to achieve certain "competencies" that the university has decreed its students must develop in order to achieve the overall educational goal of "citizenship." These competencies include: "students will recognize that systemic oppression exists in our society," "Students will recognize the benefits of dismantling systems of oppression," and "Students will be able to utilize their knowledge of sustainability to change their daily habits and consumer mentality."

At various points in the program, students are also pressured or even required to take actions that outwardly indicate their agreement with the university's ideology, regardless of their personal beliefs. Such actions include displaying specific door decorations, committing to reduce their ecological footprint by at least 20%, taking action by advocating for an "oppressed" social group, and taking action by advocating for a sustainable world."

In the Office of Residence Life's internal materials, these programs are described using the harrowing language of ideological reeducation. In documents relating to the assessment of student learning, for example, the residence hall lesson plans are referred to as "treatments."

You can read the whole article here.

Rousseau, Kant, Marx and Stalin, all rolled into one.

I had no idea that things had gotten this bad. When I read this, I was reminded of We the Living, and what Kira went through. Brrrrrrrr. I think I'll send this article to everyone I know with college age kids (or those close to it), along with a link for Founder's College.

Have any of you who have been to college lately any such stories?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There's a followup here as well.

Truly evil times for American universities. And as much as I've disliked Indiana culture (or lack thereof) in my life, there is something to be said for being in a part of the country that isn't at the cutting edge of insanity, as it appears to be on the east/west coasts. I doubt that students, or their parents, here, would tolerate such crap, yet.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What really gets me is that the people in these movements (feminism, multiculturalism, gay and lesbian movement, environmentalism) are always arguing that their opponents are fascists or victims of indoctrination.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There is nothing at all like this in my University. The most multicultural thing we have is that one of our busses has a bunch of different people, all painted black, that says, "What if you didn't see color?"

But that's it. We haven''t even recieved lectures on the first day in our classes about "equality" or "sensitivity" or "multiculturalism" or "diversity".

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
There is nothing at all like this in my University. The most multicultural thing we have is that one of our busses has a bunch of different people, all painted black, that says, "What if you didn't see color?"

But that's it. We haven''t even recieved lectures on the first day in our classes about "equality" or "sensitivity" or "multiculturalism" or "diversity".

May I ask what is your University?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Excerpts from University of Delaware Office of Residence Life Diversity Facilitation Training

Excerpts are taken from from the University of Delaware Office of Residence Life Diversity Facilitation Training document, linked in PDF form below.

-----

“A RACIST: A racist is one who is both privileged and socialized on the basis of race by a white supremacist (racist) system. The term applies to all white people (i.e., people of European descent) living in the United States, regardless of class, gender, religion, culture or sexuality. By this definition, people of color cannot be racists, because as peoples within the U.S. system, they do not have the power to back up their prejudices, hostilities, or acts of discrimination. (This does not deny the existence of such prejudices, hostilities, acts of rage or discrimination.)" - Page 3

-----

“REVERSE RACISM: A term created and used by white people to deny their white privilege. Those in denial use the term reverse racism to refer to hostile behavior by people of color toward whites, and to affirmative action policies, which allegedly give 'preferential treatment' to people of color over whites. In the U.S., there is no such thing as 'reverse racism.'" - Page 3

-----

“A NON-RACIST: A non-term. The term was created by whites to deny responsibility for systemic racism, to maintain an aura of innocence in the face of racial oppression, and to shift responsibility for that oppression from whites to people of color (called "blaming the victim"). Responsibility for perpetuating and legitimizing a racist system rests both on those who actively maintain it, and on those who refuse to challenge it. Silence is consent." - Page 3

-----

"Have you ever heard a well-meaning white person say, 'I'm not a member of any race except the human race?' What she usually means by this statement is that she doesn't want to perpetuate racial categories by acknowledging that she is white. This is an evasion of responsibility for her participation in a system based on supremacy for white people." - Page 8

-----

"The notion of indigenous people as more akin to animals than human beings is at the basis of U.S. policy toward Native Americans. In 1784 George Washington, famous Indian fighter, large landholder and slave owner, advised the Continental Congress that it would be cheaper for the new nation to buy up Indian land than to make war on Indian people for the land. If you make war, Washington cautioned, 'the savage as the wolf' - both wild beasts of the forest - will retreat for awhile and then come back to attack you. Washington's metaphor stuck. The young U.S. nation-state, and all sectors of European- American; began to view the Native American as a wild animal." - Page 10

Attached Files

* University of Delaware Office of Residence Life Diversity Facilitation Training, PDF, 2.1 MB

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
There is nothing at all like this in my University. The most multicultural thing we have is that one of our busses has a bunch of different people, all painted black, that says, "What if you didn't see color?"

But that's it. We haven''t even recieved lectures on the first day in our classes about "equality" or "sensitivity" or "multiculturalism" or "diversity".

May I ask what is your University?

I go to the same school so I'll answer:

Texas Tech University, in Lubbock Texas

Here is Lubbock's location: http://pix.epodunk.com/locatorMaps/tx/TX_26724.gif

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
There is nothing at all like this in my University. The most multicultural thing we have is that one of our busses has a bunch of different people, all painted black, that says, "What if you didn't see color?"

But that's it. We haven''t even recieved lectures on the first day in our classes about "equality" or "sensitivity" or "multiculturalism" or "diversity".

May I ask what is your University?

I go to the same school so I'll answer:

Texas Tech University, in Lubbock Texas

Here is Lubbock's location: http://pix.epodunk.com/locatorMaps/tx/TX_26724.gif

At the very heart of the incestuous impending theocracy? Due to that threat nothing in Texas should be supported, even good Texans. You should both immediately transfer to the University of Delaware and endorse their residency requirements in acknowledgment that only the progressive new left is defending individual rights. Nothing is more important than the impending theocracy and the overwhelming cultural power of belief in the supernatural that is causing it despite all other ideas. Anyone who doesn't understand that and is still in Texas instead of Delaware by midnight tonight does not understand Ayn Rand. Go! :lol:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
You should both immediately transfer to the University of Delaware and endorse their residency requirements in acknowledgment that only the progressive new left is defending individual rights.

A better analogy might be comparing U. Delaware to a hard-core Christian school that demands Bible study every day and probably expulsion for having sex. But given the culture today, unfortunately the the leftist threat is much more pervasive - and if it's the cure, then surely the cure is worse than the disease.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
-----------------

According to the program's materials, the goal of the residence life education program is for students in the university's residence halls to achieve certain "competencies" that the university has decreed its students must develop in order to achieve the overall educational goal of "citizenship." These competencies include: "students will recognize that systemic oppression exists in our society," "Students will recognize the benefits of dismantling systems of oppression," -------------

----------------

Any chance the students will be smart enough to apply the competencies to their own university?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
There's a followup here as well.

This whole thing is horribly disgusting. Yet, I took some delight and even laughed out loud when I read the excerpt from one of the RAs e-mails to the students (which can be seen at the link Phil provided):

Another [RA], named Lindsay, wrote:

"I just wanted to remind you all that floor meetings ARE mandatory. While I am a very understanding person, there is NO WAY that HALF of you weren’t able to make it last night. Also, NONE of you e-mailed me about prior commitments."

Awe, boo hoo. Looks like at least a number of the students are reacting appropriately. What are they going to do, expel them? This place acting abominably, but hopefully they are digging their own graves.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
You should both immediately transfer to the University of Delaware and endorse their residency requirements in acknowledgment that only the progressive new left is defending individual rights.

A better analogy might be comparing U. Delaware to a hard-core Christian school that demands Bible study every day and probably expulsion for having sex. But given the culture today, unfortunately the the leftist threat is much more pervasive - and if it's the cure, then surely the cure is worse than the disease.

While I agree with this, I would point out that you are comparing private and public universities. If a private school makes its rules known, then no one has any complaint to make about them, no matter how loathsome they are. The University of Delaware, however, is a state school supported by tax money.

It is disturbing enough to read this tripe, but even more so to realize that it hasn't been met with a resounding and emphatic "no!" from those subjected to it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Scott, it looks like we were posting at the same time. And came to two different conclusions. I didn't read that partiular comment, though I read most of the piece. I was taking consolation from the person who told the RA to mind his own business.

The RAs sound like brownshirt trainees.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
The University of Delaware, however, is a state school supported by tax money.

It is disturbing enough to read this tripe, but even more so to realize that it hasn't been met with a resounding and emphatic "no!" from those subjected to it.

That is an excellent point, Janet.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Anyone who doesn't understand that and is still in Texas instead of Delaware by midnight tonight does not understand Ayn Rand. Go! ;)

I'm packing my bags as we speak :)

I just hope a pack of rabid Christians don't catch me while I make my escape! :lol:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
While I agree with this, I would point out that you are comparing private and public universities. If a private school makes its rules known, then no one has any complaint to make about them, no matter how loathsome they are. The University of Delaware, however, is a state school supported by tax money.

That distinction to me only goes so far...

If any school had the kind of thought control that UD showed, it would already be bad; if applied to such loathsome purposes, it would be catastrophic. So more than just being a state school, it's merely the condition of some of our universities at this time. And not only universities, but whole states that surround them. While many in Texas support secession from the leftist Union, Vermont in an unlikely scenario is enthusiastically joining them, so that it will not be constricted by federal rules and can unleash environmentalist and collectivist training in full force. Similarly, while it's absolutely outrageous to force the Delaware taxpayers to pay for the kind of tripe the opening post showed, the fact that they're not rebelling, and not impeaching the state governor tomorrow, to me proves that they plainly get what they deserve.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
If a private school makes its rules known, then no one has any complaint to make about them, no matter how loathsome they are. The University of Delaware, however, is a state school supported by tax money.

What's worse is they are using the tax money for the establishment of religion: the leftist religions of multiculturalism and environmentalism.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
If a private school makes its rules known, then no one has any complaint to make about them, no matter how loathsome they are. The University of Delaware, however, is a state school supported by tax money.

What's worse is they are using the tax money for the establishment of religion: the leftist religions of multiculturalism and environmentalism.

Do you mean, Betsy, the impending Theocracy which will happen frighteningly soon?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ideological Reeducation has been going on for decades at the service academies. You can't get anymore Kantian than when you teach the best and brightest this country has to offer the following ideology.

Duty to God, Country, Family.

Because we are at war and Midshipmen continue to drink beer and have sex the U.S. Naval Academy has instituted Draconian policies that are far more severe than what the University of Delaware is trying to implement. When January rolls around in a couple of months the Dark Ages for those Midshipman in Bancroft Hall will definitely be dark. In some places in this country, the theocracy has already arrived.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Ideological Reeducation has been going on for decades at the service academies. You can't get anymore Kantian than when you teach the best and brightest this country has to offer the following ideology.

Duty to God, Country, Family.

Because we are at war and Midshipmen continue to drink beer and have sex the U.S. Naval Academy has instituted Draconian policies that are far more severe than what the University of Delaware is trying to implement. When January rolls around in a couple of months the Dark Ages for those Midshipman in Bancroft Hall will definitely be dark. In some places in this country, the theocracy has already arrived.

It isn't just decades, but throughout the history of the Naval Academy. Yes, the military academies teach this, as well as self-sacrifice. And they are supported by tax money. But you cannot conflate the structure of a military academy with any other university. These people are in the military. They operate under military rules. Their standards of behavior would be considered draconian by almost any freshman entering any university. That the rules are stricter during a time of war isn't anything new either. There are valid reasons behind these rules. There are a lot of problems mixing the sexes in the military. They aren't talked about because the PC atmosphere is such that anyone who brings it up, especially within the hearing of civilians, are vilified as sexist throwbacks. The military mirrors the society from which it is drawn.

To call any of this a "theocracy" is to ignore the entire history and tradition of the military--not just the Navy.

To me, your example is like that of the viros who are saying that the California fires are caused by global warming, while they ignore the entire context, including the nature of the geography, the weather patterns at this time of year, the nature of the topography and vegetation--and the laws and regulations governing land use. To say that the motto and wartime restrictions constitute a theocracy is to ignore the facts in furtherance of a belief. It is not an argument one way or another.

The point Scott made about those who ignore the "treatment" is important. Just because someone is taught a particular thing doesn't mean they suddenly join the Borg, regardless of the aspirations of the teachers. Even those who may try on a philosophy or two usually settle on an eclectic collection of whatever suits them. The crying shame of it is that they end up trying on philosophies instead of learning how to think about and choose one at the place designated for the job.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Ideological Reeducation has been going on for decades at the service academies. You can't get anymore Kantian than when you teach the best and brightest this country has to offer the following ideology.

Duty to God, Country, Family.

Because we are at war and Midshipmen continue to drink beer and have sex the U.S. Naval Academy has instituted Draconian policies that are far more severe than what the University of Delaware is trying to implement. When January rolls around in a couple of months the Dark Ages for those Midshipman in Bancroft Hall will definitely be dark. In some places in this country, the theocracy has already arrived.

It isn't just decades, but throughout the history of the Naval Academy. Yes, the military academies teach this, as well as self-sacrifice. And they are supported by tax money. But you cannot conflate the structure of a military academy with any other university. These people are in the military. They operate under military rules. Their standards of behavior would be considered draconian by almost any freshman entering any university.

You might want to take a look at the following.

Secular Humanism at the Naval Academy

Cultural Marxism at the Naval Academy

The policies the new Supe has instituted are not because of the fact we are at war, they are the result of the scandals which involve sex and alcohol that continue to plague the academy. Maybe its just me, but when you look at the history of this country I am far more concerned with what is happening at the U.S. Naval Academy vs. the University of Delaware. Maybe you can identify an Alumni from the University of Delaware who has made a major impact on the direction of this country. I can't. If you want to worry about what is happening in the dorms at the University of Delaware, than I am not going to stop you. What is far more important to the future of this country is what is happening in Bancroft Hall.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Ideological Reeducation has been going on for decades at the service academies. You can't get anymore Kantian than when you teach the best and brightest this country has to offer the following ideology.

Duty to God, Country, Family.

Given the full context of the people who say this, I think this is a good thing. When a good Christian man says he believes in a duty to God, I don't recoil in horror and brandish "The Case Against Atheism" at them like a cross at a vampire. I think to myself, "This is a good, moral person. He has wholesome values, and shows solid virtue in pursuing values, and to him God represents the highest possible good there can be, and a model of moral perfection that a Christian man should strive to be. Given that context, is duty to that God so bad?"

If Rationality existed as some Platonic but physically real demi-god that floated in the heavens, would you be worried about people who swear a duty to serve Rationality?

Also, when you officially sign the papers to join the Military, how are you not officially declaring that it is now your sworn duty to protect your country? I thought that's what joining the military was all about.

To write this off as Kantian is extremely unfair.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Also, when you officially sign the papers to join the Military, how are you not officially declaring that it is now your sworn duty to protect your country? I thought that's what joining the military was all about.

To write this off as Kantian is extremely unfair.

There is a difference between taking the oath to defend the Constitution of the United States vs. Duty to God, Country, Family.

As to the charge of being unfair, you might want to educate yourself on who George Bancroft was and what role he played in the course of American history. You might also want to take a look at what Alfred Thayer Mahan thought about duty. Other individuals of interest are Jimmy Carter, Robert McFarlane, Oliver North, John Poindexter, Ross Perot, James Stockdale, John McCain and James Webb. Take a look at these individuals and then decide whether or not my charge of Kantianism is unfair or not.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Given the full context of the people who say this, I think this is a good thing. When a good Christian man says he believes in a duty to God, I don't recoil in horror and brandish "The Case Against Atheism" at them like a cross at a vampire. I think to myself, "This is a good, moral person. He has wholesome values, and shows solid virtue in pursuing values, and to him God represents the highest possible good there can be, and a model of moral perfection that a Christian man should strive to be. Given that context, is duty to that God so bad?"

If Rationality existed as some Platonic but physically real demi-god that floated in the heavens, would you be worried about people who swear a duty to serve Rationality?

What full context is that, please explain because mine full context must be different.

During my last enlistment in the Marine Corps the Commandant was a Born Again Christian and I can guarantee you that his ideas on what is proper as self-defense is not the same thing as an Objectivist nor the Founding Fathers. The religious people that I know have fundamental philosophical problems and are full of contradictions and are just as willing to lie and sacrifice you if the ends demand it.

But rationality does not and it is rediculous to even attempt to discuss it, just like it is discussing a god. If you want to have allegiance to something, reality would be a good place to start.

On a different note, I attended college at West Virginia University in the 1980s and we had similar demands upon us by the RAs and other universtity staff. I remember the RAs holding these meetings just before Monday Night Football just to get people to attend. But, most of what they discussed went right past most of the people that were sitting there as they did not care. I remember listening, thinking it was BS and then discarding it. And by most of the people's actions around me, I think they did the same.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Ideological Reeducation has been going on for decades at the service academies. You can't get anymore Kantian than when you teach the best and brightest this country has to offer the following ideology.

Duty to God, Country, Family.

Because we are at war and Midshipmen continue to drink beer and have sex the U.S. Naval Academy has instituted Draconian policies that are far more severe than what the University of Delaware is trying to implement. When January rolls around in a couple of months the Dark Ages for those Midshipman in Bancroft Hall will definitely be dark. In some places in this country, the theocracy has already arrived.

It isn't just decades, but throughout the history of the Naval Academy. Yes, the military academies teach this, as well as self-sacrifice. And they are supported by tax money. But you cannot conflate the structure of a military academy with any other university. These people are in the military. They operate under military rules. Their standards of behavior would be considered draconian by almost any freshman entering any university.

You might want to take a look at the following.

Secular Humanism at the Naval Academy

Cultural Marxism at the Naval Academy

The policies the new Supe has instituted are not because of the fact we are at war, they are the result of the scandals which involve sex and alcohol that continue to plague the academy. Maybe its just me, but when you look at the history of this country I am far more concerned with what is happening at the U.S. Naval Academy vs. the University of Delaware. Maybe you can identify an Alumni from the University of Delaware who has made a major impact on the direction of this country. I can't. If you want to worry about what is happening in the dorms at the University of Delaware, than I am not going to stop you. What is far more important to the future of this country is what is happening in Bancroft Hall.

As someone raised in the Navy, and served myself, I don't have to take a look, I've lived it and am fully aware of the history. But you missed my point completely. You see these facts and see a theocracy. I see these facts and see history. I used the viros as an analogy for a reason. These people seem to wake up in a new world every day. Events that have a long history are seen as new evidence to bolster their belief in man-made global warming, ignoring the history. You see what is happening at Annapolis and you see a theocracy, ignoring the history. You cannot simply erase the fact that this country was founded by the faithful, whether they were Deists, or Puritans, or Quakers, or any of the other myriad sects. Our founding documents were based on Enlightenment ideas, but they were often couched in religious terms. Read your Locke. Religion is a part of the whole of human history, with only very brief moments of respect for reason. Kant rules the whole of Western Civilization. We are living with the consequences of the prevailing philosophies, religious and otherwise. Surprise! It is obviously dangerous. But to focus one's attention on the religion, while ignoring everything else, takes one out of the full context of what is happening in this country.

Please understand, Rick, that I do not minimize the enormity of the problems we face as we struggle to bring a new Renaissance. But it is a problem that has always plagued mankind. It has always taken an enormous amount of effort to drag humanity into the light of reason, and has seldom been accomplished. Seeing the problems does not make me run in circles shouting that the sky is falling, but impels me to take what positive steps I can take to make what change I can. I take courage from the fact that a very small number of men, with very flawed ideas, managed to bring about the Enlightenment and the Industrial Revolution within a religious culture that burned them at the stake.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites