October 30, 2007

Why hate crimes are a joke part 5783, and why the University of Delaware digs 'em

What a day for Delaware in the [politically correct] news. First, FIRE (Foundation for Individual Rights in Education) comes out with a devastating report on the University of Delaware's outright Maoist approach to thought control by RAs on campus. The report was picked up by uber-blog Instapundit and later by national columnist John Leo.

From FIRE's press release on the UD matter (my emphasis):

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 to 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.”

So, there you have it. This is some sick stuff, folks. For all those aghast at George Bush's America supposedly "leading us down the road to fascism," the sad fact is that all you have to do to really find it is just take a trip to Delaware's own Newark (that's pronounced "new ark" for non-Delawareans) campus.

Elsewhere today, we have an incident whereby a white cop supposedly raped a black woman. As with most Wilmington News Journal stories, the article leaves more questions than answers, but the telling part of the article for me was this:

[Plaintiff Gail] Weal’s attorney, Thomas S. Neuberger, called the assault a hate crime. Weal is black, [defendant Kevin] Hovatter is white.

“So now a jury and the courts will have to settle this dispute and compensate this victim for a black woman’s worst nightmare - being stopped by a renegade racist white cop in the middle of the night, being violently raped and wondering whether you will be killed,” Neuberger said.

Nowhere does the article state that Hovatter had any racist intentions nor uttered any racist epithets during the alleged rape. Is Neuberger making his case for a hate crime based on some esoteric social science that black women "have nightmares" about being raped by white men? If this is supposed to set some sort of precedent, will white women (or men) be permitted to make accusations of hate crimes based on "nightmares" of being attacked by black people?

Don't count on it. Because if Neuberger is using the same ridiculous psychological mumbo jimbo as the University of Delaware, white Americans shouldn't be allowed to ever invoke hate crime statutes -- because they're all inherently racists in the first place.

Posted by Hube at October 30, 2007 07:31 PM | TrackBack

Comments  (We reserve the right to edit and/or delete any comments. If your comment is blocked or won't post, e-mail us and we'll post it for you.)

The News Journal's coverage of the FIRE report was great (crickets chirping, pins dropping)

Posted by: BadIdeaGuy at November 1, 2007 11:40 AM

We've been talking about this at work today, as it was on Glenn Beck's show - most of the people that I supervise are current UD students or recent grads.

From UD's press release, Oct 31st:

"Students in residence halls are not forced to participate, and certainly are not forced to agree with any particular point of view. Students are faced with questions, but the answers to these questions are their own. There are no "correct" answers."

Bullcrap. The students are called out of their dorm rooms for these sessions, consisting of 3-6 freshman students and a Residential Life rep, and are told that the sessions are mandatory, and that non-participation will result in (unspecified) strict reprimands or sanctions. There may not be actual punishment, but they're freshmen so they're easily cowed into going along.

Also from the press release:

"Students who choose to participate in the residence life educational program are not required to adopt any particular points of view but are presented with a range of ideas to challenge them and stimulate conversation and debate so that students can reflect on various topics, including diversity."

Once again, they don't really have a choice but to participate. These sessions invariably consist of a number of white students and at least one minority student, ostensibly to insure that the white students are not free to express their true feelings or opinions on sensitive subjects for fear of offending the minority student.

This isn't Orwellian, this is a classic Cultural Revolution "struggle session" against class enemies.

Posted by: G Rex at November 1, 2007 12:05 PM

I still can't get over the definitions provided by UD to govern the "Diversity Facilitation Training." "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 living in the United States, regardless of class, gender, religion, culture or sexuality. . . ."

Wow. Isn't convenient to define a word with itself? Of course, it's such a bad definition that it's meaningless. If I were a UD student, i would simply say, "Thank goodness. I'm white, but at least I'm not privileged by a white supremacist system." The definition begs so many points as to be laughable. And I don't even know what in the hell "socialized" means in this sentence.

Posted by: inkmiser at November 5, 2007 12:56 PM