Quote:It is impossible to deny how far left all of America’s institutions have shifted in the past few years. Corporate board rooms, the media, sports teams and even the military all chant the same dogma and insist that you comply.

How did that happen? As Ernest Hemingway wrote on how one goes bankrupt, “gradually, then suddenly.” Indeed, our leading institutions face a moral bankruptcy unprecedented in American history.

This could not have happened without the left’s successful “long march through the institutions.” This term, made famous by radical academics in the 1960s, refers to the strategy used by “New Left” students of that era. They aimed to achieve long-term social and and political change by infiltrating and subverting key institutions, particularly the elite universities they often attended.

These radicals were the progenitors of the critical theories that plague our offices and our children’s schools today. They knew these ideas could never be sold democratically to the American public, so they instead sought to disrupt disciplines — sociology, anthropology, philosophy, and cultural studies — that were more amenable to their critical perspectives.

Through their research, teaching, and activism, they eventually came to dominate entire departments or even university leadership. This power was then used to launder their ideology to a new generation of students who would unquestioningly carry it with them into the “real world.”

A new Harvard survey on faculty political leanings reveals that the left’s long march was more successful than they likely ever dreamed. A whopping 75% of Harvard faculty identifies as “liberal” or “very liberal,” while only 2.5% identifies as conservative. A minuscule 0.4 percent identifies as “very conservative.”

As law professor Jonathon Turley points out, these figures massively overrepresent liberals compared to society overall. Roughly equal portions of Americans identify as conservative or moderate, while only 26% identify as liberal. More Harvard faculty identify as “very liberal” (32%) than Americans overall identify as “liberal.”

The figure is representative across large swathes of American academia. In 1969, one in four college professors was at least moderately conservative. Now, liberals outweigh conservatives on campus by roughly 12 to one.

Yet Harvard’s stark disparity stands out more than the rest because it is the best that American education has to offer — or at least it used to be.

Nevertheless, its name is still intrinsically associated with excellence and prestige that few other universities are accorded. If you are a Harvard graduate, you are likely to impact the highest levels of American power in whichever field you choose to pursue.

That is precisely the point. By capturing the Harvard banner, radical activists then got to decide what constituted excellence and prestige. Their radical ideologies gained the legitimacy associated with the Harvard name and serve as an example for lesser universities to follow. Molded by these new definitions, Harvard graduates carry them out to the world where they shape the halls of power in business, government, and media.

Harvard boasts the most alumni who later became CEOs of Fortune 500 companies. With 41 alumni CEOs, Harvard dwarfs the nearest runner up, the University of Pennsylvania, by almost double.

Harvard also has the largest number of Nobel Prize winners at 161. It boasts the largest number of Supreme Court justices in history, with four Harvard graduates currently on the bench.

Harvard also has the largest number of U.S. military Medal of Honor recipients (18) for any non-military school. This included 8 generals throughout history.

Given this legacy, Harvard will continue to recruit America’s brightest and most ambitious young minds. Many of them are likely pre-existing liberals, but many of them will not be. Blinded by the allure of the Harvard name, they will make themselves vulnerable to the ubiquitous leftism of their professors.

Even those who see what’s happening will likely go along to get along. If they do not bend the knee, all their hard work will be for naught, and their aspirations will crumble beneath them.

Conservatives must accept that the purpose of academia — to foster intellectual curiosity and challenge rigid ways of thinking — no longer exists as we all once imagined. The long march, which occurred gradually over decades, hit suddenly in the Trump era. There is no sign the radicals will allow dissent within Harvard or any other university any time soon.

Link

Well, I'd say thank you Captain Obvious (not to you)...

We didn't need a poll to know these things.

Interesting post. And it makes a lot of sense.

I don't think that there is much that can be done by the public at large to address the source head on. I've told both my undergrad and graduate school that my annual donations are suspended until they publicly disavow their DEI programs (or whatever disguised new term they attempt to use to preserve it). But I have little expectation that the loss of my small-time contributions will make any difference.

Where the battle can be more effectively fought is at the places where this cancer has spread. Such as Disney, Bud Light, Target, our local school boards. These are, in comparative terms, little battles - - not all of which can be won. But they are still worth fighting, even if source of it (academia) cannot be touched.

So when WKUYG dismissively scorns efforts by the right concerning "DESTROY THE WOKE LEFT" [https://csnbbs.com/thread-971007.html], he has a point. That cannot be the sole focus. But that does not mean it shouldn't be one of many important priorities.

(06-03-2023 09:38 AM)CrimsonPhantom Wrote:  

Quote:It is impossible to deny how far left all of America’s institutions have shifted in the past few years. Corporate board rooms, the media, sports teams and even the military all chant the same dogma and insist that you comply.

How did that happen? As Ernest Hemingway wrote on how one goes bankrupt, “gradually, then suddenly.” Indeed, our leading institutions face a moral bankruptcy unprecedented in American history.

This could not have happened without the left’s successful “long march through the institutions.” This term, made famous by radical academics in the 1960s, refers to the strategy used by “New Left” students of that era. They aimed to achieve long-term social and and political change by infiltrating and subverting key institutions, particularly the elite universities they often attended.

These radicals were the progenitors of the critical theories that plague our offices and our children’s schools today. They knew these ideas could never be sold democratically to the American public, so they instead sought to disrupt disciplines — sociology, anthropology, philosophy, and cultural studies — that were more amenable to their critical perspectives.

Through their research, teaching, and activism, they eventually came to dominate entire departments or even university leadership. This power was then used to launder their ideology to a new generation of students who would unquestioningly carry it with them into the “real world.”

A new Harvard survey on faculty political leanings reveals that the left’s long march was more successful than they likely ever dreamed. A whopping 75% of Harvard faculty identifies as “liberal” or “very liberal,” while only 2.5% identifies as conservative. A minuscule 0.4 percent identifies as “very conservative.”

As law professor Jonathon Turley points out, these figures massively overrepresent liberals compared to society overall. Roughly equal portions of Americans identify as conservative or moderate, while only 26% identify as liberal. More Harvard faculty identify as “very liberal” (32%) than Americans overall identify as “liberal.”

The figure is representative across large swathes of American academia. In 1969, one in four college professors was at least moderately conservative. Now, liberals outweigh conservatives on campus by roughly 12 to one.

Yet Harvard’s stark disparity stands out more than the rest because it is the best that American education has to offer — or at least it used to be.

Nevertheless, its name is still intrinsically associated with excellence and prestige that few other universities are accorded. If you are a Harvard graduate, you are likely to impact the highest levels of American power in whichever field you choose to pursue.

That is precisely the point. By capturing the Harvard banner, radical activists then got to decide what constituted excellence and prestige. Their radical ideologies gained the legitimacy associated with the Harvard name and serve as an example for lesser universities to follow. Molded by these new definitions, Harvard graduates carry them out to the world where they shape the halls of power in business, government, and media.

Harvard boasts the most alumni who later became CEOs of Fortune 500 companies. With 41 alumni CEOs, Harvard dwarfs the nearest runner up, the University of Pennsylvania, by almost double.

Harvard also has the largest number of Nobel Prize winners at 161. It boasts the largest number of Supreme Court justices in history, with four Harvard graduates currently on the bench.

Harvard also has the largest number of U.S. military Medal of Honor recipients (18) for any non-military school. This included 8 generals throughout history.

Given this legacy, Harvard will continue to recruit America’s brightest and most ambitious young minds. Many of them are likely pre-existing liberals, but many of them will not be. Blinded by the allure of the Harvard name, they will make themselves vulnerable to the ubiquitous leftism of their professors.

Even those who see what’s happening will likely go along to get along. If they do not bend the knee, all their hard work will be for naught, and their aspirations will crumble beneath them.

Conservatives must accept that the purpose of academia — to foster intellectual curiosity and challenge rigid ways of thinking — no longer exists as we all once imagined. The long march, which occurred gradually over decades, hit suddenly in the Trump era. There is no sign the radicals will allow dissent within Harvard or any other university any time soon.

Link

There's a lot of poison in the Ivy League.

In a nutshell, these idiots think that they're still gonna be in charge of their companies. What a con job ol' Lucifer has instilled in their puny brains. Ha, ha, they'll be sorrrrrryyyy.

Someone should show what happens in a Marxist society, you know, like in Venezuela, Cuba, etc. and etc. LOL

(06-03-2023 01:49 PM)olliebaba Wrote:  In a nutshell, these idiots think that they're still gonna be in charge of their companies. What a con job ol' Lucifer has instilled in their puny brains. Ha, ha, they'll be sorrrrrryyyy.
Someone should show what happens in a Marxist society, you know, like in Venezuela, Cuba, etc. and etc. LOL

But in a fascist society they get to keep their positions. And the more I look at the USA left, the more I see fascism.

Andrew Brietbart told us what was happening before he died

(06-03-2023 04:56 PM)shere khan Wrote:  Andrew Brietbart told us what was happening before he died

you talkin' 'bout this guy, chief...

Quote:Breitbart was said to be working meticulously on a series of unpublished videos of Barack Obama while a student at Harvard. The videos, according to Breitbart are supposed to show an Obama intent on class warfare and racial division. There are some reports that the activist was just hours away from releasing the videos, which are supposed to damage Obama's reelection chances.

So 3/4 of Harvard faculty don’t know what a woman is?

(06-03-2023 10:12 AM)AdoptedMonarch Wrote:  Interesting post. And it makes a lot of sense.

I don't think that there is much that can be done by the public at large to address the source head on. I've told both my undergrad and graduate school that my annual donations are suspended until they publicly disavow their DEI programs (or whatever disguised new term they attempt to use to preserve it). But I have little expectation that the loss of my small-time contributions will make any difference.

Where the battle can be more effectively fought is at the places where this cancer has spread. Such as Disney, Bud Light, Target, our local school boards. These are, in comparative terms, little battles - - not all of which can be won. But they are still worth fighting, even if source of it (academia) cannot be touched.

So when WKUYG dismissively scorns efforts by the right concerning "DESTROY THE WOKE LEFT" [https://csnbbs.com/thread-971007.html], he has a point. That cannot be the sole focus. But that does not mean it shouldn't be one of many important priorities.

You are kind of misreading what I meant and sometimes I dont make my point clear enough. I have no problem with you, me, anyone else, going after any company we don't agree with...by withholding our dollars.

I think the Governor of Fl. is wrong by doing this as "government"

You fight that at the legislation level not by punishing a company that you disagree with on politics. Especially if its 1st amendment. I might not like what someone says or does with their company. I might even change how I spend my money with that company. But as long as they are not breaking laws....

I will fight for their right to hold those beliefs when attacked by government. I'm someone that want less government and that doesn't change just because I'm 100% against what they are saying or doing.

As I said those issues are fought at the local level and then legislation....through the votes of electing those that are willing to put laws in place that are held up.

Its easy to set back and blame the left and to blame the college professors. Almost everyone in American that is against what is being taught today.....

set back and let it happen

Why is it that more people that believe these views become teachers? Why is it so easy for them to change the minds of their students?

In my opinion most teachers go into it because they want to help people. A lot and probably most came from a background of being that person that didn't have it easy in school (social). So of course they are going to teach to those beliefs. The biggest why its so bad today....more people with different beliefs dont want that job. They had it a lot easier socially growing up and see the way to a middle/high class through a different career.

If you want change then as a people you dont set back for the next 30 years and let those people take these jobs shaping minds. But even if all of us know this is a problem and the only answer is to get more teachers in there that think like you....

parents will not push their children into those roles

That leads me to the answer on the other question of why is it so easy for teachers over 4 years to change the mindset of most of these young people? As parents we are not doing our part. We are not doing our JOB of shaping our children if its so easy for a Stanger to shape their minds. Plus we want to protect them from people that are different than your values. We do not expose them to the world....

so once they leave the nest its easy to see how wrong a lot of things they were told at home just isn't right. If not it wouldn't be that easy for a complete strangers to turn around in a very short time what was being taught at home by parents for 18 years.

Look in the mirror....

we are the failures
we are a huge part of the why
we set back and saw this taking place for 30 years and the best we could and can do is complain

(06-03-2023 05:26 PM)stinkfist Wrote:  

(06-03-2023 04:56 PM)shere khan Wrote:  Andrew Brietbart told us what was happening before he died

you talkin' 'bout this guy, chief...

Quote:Breitbart was said to be working meticulously on a series of unpublished videos of Barack Obama while a student at Harvard. The videos, according to Breitbart are supposed to show an Obama intent on class warfare and racial division. There are some reports that the activist was just hours away from releasing the videos, which are supposed to damage Obama's reelection chances.

Jug ears graduated from the seeeyea

Anyone with half a brain knows that Barry is the one pulling Joe's string. The real question is who is pulling Barry's string?

(06-04-2023 11:48 AM)TigerBlue4Ever Wrote:  Anyone with half a brain knows that Barry is the one pulling Joe's string. The real question is who is pulling Barry's string?

Exactly

(06-03-2023 04:56 PM)shere khan Wrote:  Andrew Brietbart told us what was happening before he died

IIRC, weren't the circumstances of his death a bit sketchy? As in, improbable?

(06-03-2023 06:38 PM)Garrettabc Wrote:  So 3/4 of Harvard faculty don’t know what a woman is?

They know good and well what a woman is. They just want you confused.

(06-04-2023 11:48 AM)TigerBlue4Ever Wrote:  Anyone with half a brain knows that Barry is the one pulling Joe's string. The real question is who is pulling Barry's string?

Like Ollie said, Satan.

(06-03-2023 04:56 PM)shere khan Wrote:  Andrew Brietbart told us what was happening before he died