{"id":543,"date":"2018-10-13T16:56:30","date_gmt":"2018-10-13T20:56:30","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/conservativeproletariat.com\/?p=543"},"modified":"2018-10-13T16:56:30","modified_gmt":"2018-10-13T20:56:30","slug":"nutty-professors","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/conservativeproletariat.com\/?p=543","title":{"rendered":"Nutty Professors"},"content":{"rendered":"

\"\"\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0<\/a>\"\"<\/a><\/p>\n

by Reid Fitzsimons<\/p>\n

I\u2019m pretty sure I\u2019m not a \u201cGun Nut,\u201d unless progressive lexicologists have recently redefined it to include anyone supportive of the second amendment to any degree. I was certainly not a member of the NRA when, in 2004, I heard a speech by Wayne Lapierre, a major player in the NRA. I assumed it would be similar to Arlo Guthrie\u2019s lyrics in Alice\u2019s Restaurant, when he was talking to the draft board psychiatrist and repeatedly declaring \u201cI want to kill!\u201d Disappointingly, however, it was a low-keyed and well-reasoned talk. Several years ago I did <\/em>join the NRA and, though my membership has lapsed, the motivating reason was more philosophical\/sympathetic than practical (no desire for a hat, t shirt, pocket knife, etc).<\/p>\n

In June 2013 Christopher Swindell, a journalism professor at Marshall University in Huntington, W.V., posted a somewhat fanciful op-ed in the Charleston Gazette which included an assertion that \u201cThe NRA advocates armed rebellion against the duly elected government of the United States of America. That\u2019s treason, and it\u2019s worthy of the firing squad,\u201d and several other similar pearls. Having been fairly confident the NRA didn\u2019t \u201cadvocate armed rebellion\u201d I felt it appropriate to join the NRA; what the heck, if the conservative Heritage Foundation suggested summary executions of ACLU members I might be motivated to sign up with the ACLU.<\/p>\n

<\/p>\n

Increasingly it seems <\/em>that people who in some manner hold the title \u201cProfessor,\u201d like Swindall, say the silliest things. I use \u201cseems\u201d because many of these stories are reported in a sensational manner, but are often verified by insincere apologies, angry or weak justifications by the professor activists and\/or their employers, or deleting the social media posting. A few examples:<\/p>\n

\u201cA victim\u2019s testimony is legally sufficient evidence by itself to convict someone of sexual assault,\" \"no other evidence is required,\" declared (former) University of Georgia - Athens adjunct law professor and CNN legal analyst Page Pate.<\/p>\n

Felix Coe, a professor of biology (University of Connecticut), had posted signs on the door to his office directing students to \u201cREMOVE SHOES BEFORE ENTERING\u201d and \u201cKNOCK FIRST, THEN REQUEST ENTRY Say: Bismillah (in the name of Allah).\u201d \u201cI am a Muslim,\u201d Coe explained to a student. \u201cYou don\u2019t come into my office with dirty shoes; that\u2019s a curse.\u201d<\/p>\n

Professor Lance \"Lj\" Russum<\/a> at Polk State College has (allegedly) failed a humanities student after she refused to concede that Jesus is a \u201cmyth\u201d or that Christianity oppresses women during a series of mandatory assignments at the Florida college.<\/p>\n

\u201cAntifa\u201d activist Professor Michael Isaacson (John Jay College, known for its Criminal Justice courses) observed \u201c\u2026it\u2019s a privilege to teach future dead cops.\u201d Later, the now ex-professor characterized police mortality stats as \u201cpig death stats.\u201d<\/p>\n

Georgetown University Distinguished Associate Professor Christine Fair shared her thoughts on Republican males on the Senate Judiciary Committee: \u201cLook at thus [sic] chorus of entitled white men justifying a serial rapist's arrogated entitlement, all of them deserve miserable deaths while feminists laugh as they take their last gasps. Bonus: we castrate their corpses and feed them to swine? Yes.\"<\/p>\n

Randa Jarrar, a tenured (\u201cI will never be fired\u201d) English professor at Fresno State offered her own unique eulogy upon the death of Barbara Bush: \u201cEither you are against these pieces of [excrement] and their genocidal ways or you\u2019re part of the problem. That\u2019s actually how simple this is. I\u2019m happy the witch is dead. Can\u2019t wait for the rest of her family to fall to their demise the way a million and a half Iraqis have. Byyyeeeeeeee.\u201d<\/p>\n

I have a long-standing relationship with an excellent and serious scholar in the throes of completing his dissertation. I forwarded him a link to an article in The Atlantic that had been forwarded to me: https:\/\/www.theatlantic.com\/ideas\/archive\/2018\/10\/new-sokal-hoax\/572212\/<\/a><\/p>\n

The subject at hand was the ease that some real but iconoclastic academics experienced in having intentionally absurd articles published in ostensibly scholarly journals, largely by using progressive-oriented titles and jargon. Here are two sample titles: \u201cRubbing One Out: Defining Metasexual Violence of Objectification Through Nonconsensual Masturbation,\u201d and \u201cHuman Reaction to Rape Culture and Queer Performativity at Urban Dog Parks in Portland, Oregon (Do dogs suffer oppression based upon perceived gender?).\u201d<\/p>\n

My scholar friend responded with the following:<\/p>\n

\u201cI did notice this (the Atlantic article), however I want to highlight the following excerpt from the article:<\/p>\n

\u2019There are many fields of academia that have absolutely no patience for nonsense. While the hoaxers did manage to place articles in some of the most influential academic journals in the cluster of fields that focus on dealing with issues of race, gender, and identity, they have not penetrated the leading journals of more traditional disciplines.\u2019<\/p>\n

I know from personal experience having published in and reviewed for historical journals that we as a discipline maintain rigorous standards. What's frustrating to me is when people in the media (especially right wing media) treat these stories as if they broadly apply to all disciplines outside of the hard sciences, when in fact 90% of the crazy stuff emanates exclusively from the \"studies\" departments and certain sociology departments. History as a field isn't part of this problem. I hope people can realize this.\u201d<\/p>\n

And my response to him:<\/p>\n

I\u2019m sure you well know I both understand and agree with difference between true academia versus \u201cstudies\u201d academia, but I think it\u2019s becoming a significant problem, not unlike overtly political \u201cscience\u201d people (Bill Nye, for example), who denigrate science by using it for obvious political purposes. Let me make a few points-<\/p>\n

1) We can probably stipulate that the majority of academia could correctly be described as progressive leftist, perhaps even adding the adjective \u201cvast.\u201d This is across the board- professors of all levels, administrators, and students. This becomes self-replicating and leads to an insular and exclusivist mindset.<\/p>\n

2) There was a tradition that true academics and scholars, by definition and assumption, viewed whatever topic or issue objectively, intellectually, with a full historic perspective and, most importantly, unemotionally. This is what held them in high esteem.<\/p>\n

3) Partly through the unfortunate means of mass, social media, a portion of the academic world has shown themselves to act purely on emotion and even hatefully, devoid of reasonable perspective and thoughtfulness, and at times using their credentials to enhance their emotional exuberance. Many of these utterances are at the same level as stereotypical ignorant white supremacists.<\/p>\n

4) The \u201cright wing\u201d media certainly exploits this (though I don\u2019t consider The Atlantic \u201cright wing\u201d). They use the term \u201cprofessor\u201d loosely, everyone from a 20-something TA with a \u201cman bun\u201d (a new phrase for me) to tenured professors, and probably most people won\u2019t bother to differentiate between the actual credentials or the department involved (eg lesbian and gay studies versus true history). While this can certainly be annoying and suggest the incidence is greater than it is, it does have a basis. When the regular leftist media jumps on a conservative \u201cfamily values\u201d politician caught with a prostitute, a similar dynamic is in play- including a misleading suggestion that it can be widely extrapolated. It does not mean they are wrong to report it.<\/p>\n

5) Here is a significant problem- when \u201ccaught\u201d or exposed, the initial reaction is to predictably circle the wagons, with the same tired justifications of \u201cacademic freedom,\u201d \u201cfree speech,\u201d \u201ctrying to start a discussion,\u201d stimulating \u201ccritical thinking,\u201d and the like. Fellow professors and administrators almost uniformly parrot these rationalizations in an initial defense, unless of course the offending party was a conservative or said something contrary to progressive dogma- when this is the case the offender is skewered with claims of bigotry, Nazism, etc, and accused of making the campus unwelcoming and unsafe: in other words, a significant and hypocritical double standard.<\/p>\n

6) If enough pressure is applied there will be the inevitable vacuous apology, removal of the offensive post from social media, and various administrative players may make some make some kind of appeasing gesture. In the recent case of the \u201cDistinguished Professor\u201d of Security Studies (not sure what that means) at Georgetown, who said all white males on the Senate Judiciary Committee who supported Kavanaugh should be killed then castrated, she was, with relative haste, given a 1-2 years all expenses paid sabbatical.<\/p>\n

7) Now here is a bit of paradox- there is and should be a difference between what is said acting as a professor and acting privately. A question can be asked, however, if a professor makes obscene or outrageous statements on a personal basis but through public means (eg social media), can this be extrapolated to have bearing on his or her academic temperament? In other words, if there is a standard associated with academic status should it also be applied to private lives to some extent? Note I\u2019m differentiating between two types of private- truly personal\/private versus intentionally making public statements but not in the capacity of a professor.<\/p>\n

Whether right or not, the prestige and credibility of academia and scholarship overall is being challenged by unthoughtful, immature, and even poorly educated professionals who somehow find their way into college administration or to the title \u201cProfessor.\u201d Perhaps there is no unifying solution, but a start would be to not<\/em> hire people on superficial bases such as \u201cdiversity;\u201d reduce or limit the nebulous and non-rigorous \u201cstudies\u201d programs and similarly disallow advanced degrees in such programs; and to change the standard administrative response from \u201cthey have the right to free personal speech,\u201d etc to a censorious \u201ctheir behavior is inconsistent with the expectations of a mature and thoughtful professional, but it did not occur in association with their positions at the college and therefore we cannot officially admonish or punish him or her.\u201d Let\u2019s drop the knee-jerk but misguided support of these nutty professors.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0 by Reid Fitzsimons I\u2019m pretty sure I\u2019m not a \u201cGun Nut,\u201d unless progressive lexicologists have recently redefined it to include anyone supportive of the second amendment to any degree. I was certainly not a member of the NRA when, in 2004, I heard a speech by Wayne Lapierre, a major player in the NRA. ...continue reading →<\/span><\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"spay_email":"","jetpack_publicize_message":"","jetpack_is_tweetstorm":false},"categories":[7,2],"tags":[],"jetpack_featured_media_url":"","jetpack_publicize_connections":[],"jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"jetpack_shortlink":"https:\/\/wp.me\/p5ynMC-8L","_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/conservativeproletariat.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/543"}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/conservativeproletariat.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/conservativeproletariat.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/conservativeproletariat.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/conservativeproletariat.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcomments&post=543"}],"version-history":[{"count":1,"href":"https:\/\/conservativeproletariat.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/543\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":546,"href":"https:\/\/conservativeproletariat.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/543\/revisions\/546"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/conservativeproletariat.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fmedia&parent=543"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/conservativeproletariat.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcategories&post=543"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/conservativeproletariat.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Ftags&post=543"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}