The Results of Social Justice Teaching. How’s that Working Out? (Be Careful: Questions are Offensive)
Share and Enjoy
Social Justice Warriors: Rejoice! Your curriculum is seeing your desired effect in the general population. Student feelings are paramount over constitutional rights and anyone in a classified minority is indeed a special snowflake. How does this translate into real life situations? How’s that ’emotional competency’ desired by education reformers reveal itself when students are faced with difficulties?
The Australian video (below) illustrates the outcome of social justice teaching and its effect on academic dialogue and study. It’s a vignette of group correctness and group think run amok with disastrous results for the individual. Students must be careful what they say because words have severe consequences if not politically correct in the totalitarian view of the social justice education reformers. From Modern Educayshun:
Modern Educayshun delves into the potential dangers of our increasingly reactionary culture bred by social media and political correctness.
Welcome to the new world of ‘critical thinking’ of social justice. The video illustrates living in a world of
- politically correct terms (deemed correct by totalitarians)
- process is paramount over concrete answers (1 + 1 is NOT two and emotions are more valuable than actual research/data)
- equality for all tempered with privilege (victim) points (remember, all animals are equal but some animals are more equal than others)
- group think valued over individual effort (how’s that collaboration theory working out for students?)
Social justice warriors would argue that Modern Educayshun is just satire. They would insist that those opposed to their theories are hateful, spiteful, homophobic, etc etc etc. Let’s move on from the satirical film and take a trip to the Yale campus where we witness the outcome of social justice teaching. A student cannot tolerate another person’s opinion because it doesn’t agree with hers. From National Review and Video: This Is What a Social Justice Warrior Looks Like shows what occurs when the emotional distress becomes too great for a student as she reacts to a professor’s wife’s letter questioning student insensitivity about Halloween costumes (and no, this is NOT from The Onion):
The video below has been making the rounds on the internet. It shows a young woman screaming in the face of Yale professor Nicholas Christakis about the alleged plight of minority students. Why the hysterical shrieking? Because the professor’s wife (a Yale lecturer) had the audacity to write an email to students at Silliman College, one of Yale’s so-called “residential colleges,” questioning excessive sensitivity over Halloween costumes. Yes, Halloween costumes. Before you watch the video, here is the core argument in the email:
Even if we could agree on how to avoid offense – and I’ll note that no one around campus seems overly concerned about the offense taken by religiously conservative folks to skin-revealing costumes – I wonder, and I am not trying to be provocative: Is there no room anymore for a child or young person to be a little bit obnoxious… a little bit inappropriate or provocative or, yes, offensive? American universities were once a safe space not only for maturation but also for a certain regressive, or even transgressive, experience; increasingly, it seems, they have become places of censure and prohibition. And the censure and prohibition come from above, not from yourselves! Are we all okay with this transfer of power? Have we lost faith in young people’s capacity – in your capacity – to exercise self-censure, through social norming, and also in your capacity to ignore or reject things that trouble you? We tend to view this shift from individual to institutional agency as a tradeoff between libertarian vs. liberal values (“liberal” in the American, not European sense of the word). Nicholas says, if you don’t like a costume someone is wearing, look away, or tell them you are offended. Talk to each other. Free speech and the ability to tolerate offence are the hallmarks of a free and open society. But – again, speaking as a child development specialist – I think there might be something missing in our discourse about the exercise of free speech (including how we dress ourselves) on campus, and it is this: What does this debate about Halloween costumes say about our view of young adults, of their strength and judgment? In other words: Whose business is it to control the forms of costumes of young people? It’s not mine, I know that.
The article continues:
Whenever I write about political correctness on campus, readers will post a number of comments noting how poorly this kind of behavior works out in the “real world.” Yet it’s crucial to note that many social justice warriors never enter that ”real world.” They stay on campus as professors or activist administrators, or they join left-wing nonprofits, or — worst of all — they join the leftist quarters of the bureaucracy, where they turn their temper tantrums into policy. There exists an entire parallel universe that is almost entirely insulated not just from the rough and tumble of the market, but also from the inconvenience of contrary ideas. And in that parallel universe that young student is a hero.
She spoke “truth to power,” and she’s on her way to greater respect and influence at Yale and beyond. Elsewhere, however, that behavior is self-limiting and ultimately self-defeating. In social justice-land, fit-pitching is the path to power. Everywhere else, it’s the path to parody.
Those bureaucrats become the henchmen for the education reformers and non-governmental organizations who insist that your children adhere to their rules of becoming a social justice warrior. These bureaucrats are the disciples of political correctness, insistence on equitable outcome for all, process over content, group consensus and behavior over individual thought and liberty. You can see how it it’s working at Yale where the brightest students are supposedly admitted. How’s social justice working out at the University of Missouri?
Social Justice 101 is apparent in the video embedded in this article: Video: Mizzou Protesters Are Strong Enough to Depose a President but too Weak to Talk to the Press? It captures the temper tantrums and totalitarian rules from alleged student victims and the insistence on inhabiting a ‘safe space’ while demonstrating on public land. There’s a longer video (same protest) embedded in the Washington Post about a journalist denied access to film on public land of a public demonstration:
Tim Tai was just a stringer on assignment for ESPN — one of many trying to document protests at the University of Missouri over incidents of racism that resulted in the resignations of the school’s president and chancellor this week.
But Tai, taking photographs of an encampment built on Mizzou’s campus by a group called Concerned Student 1950, was challenged by protesters who didn’t want him there.
“You’re pushing me,” Tai said.
“You don’t have the right to take our photos,” a protester said.
Tai said he did have the right to take photos, citing the First Amendment — “the same First Amendment that protects you standing here,” he said.
“Hey hey, ho ho, reporters have got to go!” the protesters shouted.
After the fracas, Mark Schierbecker, who was shooting the video, approached a woman near the tent city.
“Hi, I’m media,” Schierbecker said. “Can I talk to you?”
“No, you need to get out,” the woman said. “You need to get out.”
“No I don’t,” Schierbecker said.
The woman grabbed Schierbecker’s camera and pushed him away.
“You need to get out,” she said again.
“No I don’t,” Schierbecker said again.
“All right,” the woman said. “Who wants to help me get this reporter out of here? I need some muscle over here.”
Correction: A headline on an earlier version of this story said Melissa Click was a journalism professor at the University of Missouri. She is an assistant professor of mass media at the Department of Communication, not the Missouri School of Journalism.
Does anyone still believe that Modern Educayshun is parody? As one commenter wrote:
A thriller which is actually the reality. If anyone in a Western World country has never seen something like this happening at least ONCE, then you haven’t been in school at all.