|
Post by hcpride on Nov 29, 2019 18:35:58 GMT -5
While some might find her academic background impressive (Yale [BA], Cambridge [MA], and Stanford [JD]), I don't think she has made claims of being a trained sociologist, etc.
A few years ago she caught my eye when she spoke on a few college campuses criticizing Black Lives Matter - talk about skewering the prevailing campus orthodoxy. Apparently the students hadn't heard much of a critque from outside the academy. And just the sort of triggering one would imagine occur did occur. Don't believe she made claims at the time to being a trained criminologist. She had a book out at the time related to her speaking topic.
Wouldn't take this stuff too seriously - the campus reactions are very predictable.
|
|
|
Post by Crucis#1 on Nov 29, 2019 18:42:01 GMT -5
I agree with HCpride regarding not to take this too seriously. There is one word to describe her writings based on their empirical matter “Hogwash” !
Too bad when she played the victim card, to sell books, she did not mention her speech at Claremont McKenna, instead she singled out HC. Sounds like a convenient foil especially being a religious institution.
I still would like to see her address her atheism while speaking at a fundamentalist Christian University in the Bible Belt. I sincerely doubt she would be invited. If so, I want to see the unedited presentations on Utube. If she does, then she may gain some valid respect. Until then, I repeat “Hogwash”!
|
|
|
Post by KY Crusader 75 on Nov 29, 2019 21:52:47 GMT -5
You are contradicting yourself from sentence to sentence
"I endorse the right to protest by the students - picket, demonstrate, stamp their feet chant, sing, etc."
'What I don't endorse is the denial of a person's right to make a speech and present his/her ideas in the public square no matter how detestable I may find these ideas. I don't endorse safe spaces, triggers and all efforts to stop people from being heard."
If people are stamping their feet or chanting or singing while the speaker is trying to speak then the audience will not be able to hear his/her arguments.
|
|
|
Post by rgs318 on Nov 29, 2019 21:57:54 GMT -5
They could do all of those things outside of the site. It allow their points to be heard and will get publicity for whatever cause they support. All can be done without walking over the freedom of speech of the speaker and the right of the audience to hear what the speaker has to say.
|
|
|
Post by KY Crusader 75 on Nov 29, 2019 22:09:04 GMT -5
I give up--
|
|
|
Post by td128 on Nov 30, 2019 4:49:59 GMT -5
I welcome submitting the following for purposes of this discussion: Remember, That Famous Voltaire “Quote” About Free Speech Was Written By a Woman (January 2015)"The importance of free speech has been a salient and frequent talking point in the cultural zeitgeist for the last few months, so it’s more than likely that you’ve seen somebody tweet or update their Facebook status with the iconic phrase, “I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it.” But do you know where that line actually comes from? Because it sure as hell wasn’t Voltaire.
While the “defend to the death” quote properly summarizes the political beliefs of the French enlightenment thinker and 18th century writer to which they are so often misattributed, the words themselves were never said by him—they were said about him, in a 1906 biography called The Friends of Voltaire. English writer Beatrice Evelyn Hall published the book under a pseudonym, S. G. Tallentyre, and intended for the line to be a reflection of Voltaire’s attitude towards Claude Adrien Helvétius, another French philosopher:
""What the book could never have done for itself, or for its author, persecution did for them both. ‘On the Mind’ became not the success of a season, but one of the most famous books of the century. The men who had hated it, and had not particularly loved Helvétius, flocked round him now. Voltaire forgave him all injuries, intentional or unintentional. ‘What a fuss about an omelette!’ he had exclaimed when he heard of the burning. How abominably unjust to persecute a man for such an airy trifle as that! ‘I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it,’ was his attitude now.""
But because she wrote this line in first person, people mistook it for something Voltaire said himself, because despite how much we complain about the Internet, humanity as a species has always been surprisingly terrible at reading comprehension. (The fact that the earlier omelette line had been attributed to Voltaire in an earlier 1881 book by James Parton, The Life of Voltaire, probably didn’t help matters.)
It’s also possible Hall was inspired by a different quote attributed to Voltaire in a 1770 letter which said, “I detest what you write, but I would give my life to make it possible for you to continue to write.” Even that quote, however, is hotly debated by scholars. Either way, The Friends of Voltaire wasn’t the only time she used the line—she also recycled it in her 1919 Voltaire in His Letters.
So the next time you see someone using that particular quote, kindly remind them Voltaire wrote a great many influential things, but definitely not that. And if you want to quote Voltaire on free speech, here’s something that he did write once, in his 1763 Treatise on Toleration: “The supposed right of intolerance is absurd and barbaric. It is the right of the tiger; nay, it is far worse, for tigers do but tear in order to have food, while we rend each other for paragraphs.” That’s something probably everybody on the Internet could stand to think about, ourselves included." www.themarysue.com/voltaire-beatrice-evelyn-hall/
|
|
|
Post by td128 on Nov 30, 2019 5:29:03 GMT -5
Very regrettably, I firmly believe what we have seen transpire at Alma Mater and subsequently throughout our alumni community as a result of the expressions displayed on the pages of the WSJ is that "nothing good happens in a vacuum of leadership."
|
|
|
Post by longsuffering on Nov 30, 2019 10:56:26 GMT -5
I don't think anyone is surprised at the student chants/disruption - I would be surprised at the lack of such conduct at a progressive institutuion. As I noted before, it is absolutely vital (under the white privilege theory) that certain racial (and other) groups are uniformly oppressed and know that they are oppressed and that others know they are oppressed. This ongoing state of oppression is the lynchpin and justification for numerous school and governmental policies and programs. Heather MacDonald (like so many others outside the academy) doesn't buy the privilege theory...believes and states that students at awesome places like Holy Cross are, in fact, a privileged bunch (minority, gender, sexual orientation status notwithstanding) and that explains (the otherwise nonsensical) repetitive chanting..."my oppression is not a delusion...my oppression is not a delusion...my oppression is not a delusion" and other steps to disrupt her speaking. As jarring as it might sound (to those unfamiliar with privilege theory and its implications) it is VERY important to those students that they are oppressed victims in US society and that others know and acknowledge their oppression. At the same time, author ("The Diversity Delusion" is her latest) Ms. MacDonald is doubtlessly hoping to sell as many books as possible. The stronger and sillier (to those outside the academy) the student reaction the better. I would suggest she schedule an appearance at Berkley and then at Oberlin to further boost her sales. Thanks for the explanation of white privilege theory. Makes sense. My eyes glaze over when this stuff is in an op-ed column, but I'll read and learn on Crossports.
|
|
|
Post by longsuffering on Nov 30, 2019 11:04:21 GMT -5
td - I agree that it appears the whole episode was mishandled. The school should have taken a more proactive, stronger hand in preparing for MacDonald's speech. Surely, someone in authority had to sign on to MacDonald's appearance. (Fine with me in the interest of presenting various viewpoints.) Student protests were predictable. Possibly pre-speech student discussion forums to discuss her ideas might have helped. As I previously wrote - possibly a debate or if that's a lousy idea a short speech with a panel discussion. They should have found a way to try to cool things down a bit and keep the situation calmer. Security within the room should have been available to calmly escort any students out and thus they could have quickly staged their walkout and left, having made their point. I assume that protests - pickets, demonstrations , shouting could have been kept outside, off site. All in the interests of allowing MacDonald to speak and be heard while at the same time providing an opportunity for the protesters to exercise their right of free speech, too. Obviously, as is commonly done, this speech was part of a book tour to promote sales of her book. And the promotion succeeded at HC. She ought to write a "thank you" note to the school for the invite and to the student protesters for providing publicity. HC got some unwanted publicity too as it joined the ranks of other colleges across the nation in which students have attempted to shout down various speakers. I don't think it was a major blow despite the efforts of the author in her post speech appearances. She probably is quite pleased that "The Cross" got negative publicity. These types of things tend to briefly blow hot then are quickly passed by in the flow of other onrushing events/controversies. Question: What steps do you think should have been taken by Fr. Boroughs and the school leadership team? LoveHC Fr. B. could advise students to please continue sensitizing people to concepts such as privilege and oppression, but don't throw a nutty over it. You don't go to college to learn how to shout down a speaker. Employers don't hire the loudest screamers, so please save the leather lungs for the Hart Center and make that place a pit for opposing teams.
|
|
|
Post by Crucis#1 on Nov 30, 2019 11:41:20 GMT -5
Interesting that just like at Claremont McKenna, she is playing the victim/fear card. Guess she needs a new target being HC, since Claremont McKenna is old news.
I would have liked to see her address her rationale for being an avowed atheist, particularly since she was at a Catholic college. That topic would have been more of interest to me speaking at HC, than a topic she does not provide empirical or historical psychological data regarding the groups that she has targeted.
I am eager to see her speeches and forums at Liberty, Oral Roberts, and Ave Maria Universities to name some of the previously schools mentioned regarding the topic of her being an Atheist. Sincerely doubt she wants to play the Christians are persecuting me card. Also, it won’t happen because it will not sell any books or generate many speaking engagements.
Paraphrasing Obi Won Kanobi, “She is not the Crusader you are looking for” to carry the mantle for an enlightened and equal society. Just a person selling books for her own self interest.
|
|
|
Post by longsuffering on Nov 30, 2019 13:14:03 GMT -5
The conservative Christian campuses will probably engage her about aethism. My sense is today's student body members who are defenders of the Catholic Faith are not as loud as the the protesters and would have a live and let live approach to aethism. The loud protesters might defend aethism vs the oppressive, white male dominated Catholic Higherarchy.
|
|
|
Post by rgs318 on Nov 30, 2019 14:54:38 GMT -5
Of course some in each of those categories has experienced being oppressed. However, if demonstrators have the right to claim oppression because some people in a group with whom they identify are oppressed (but not them), then MacDonald should have the right to generalize that these college students at a top college are not oppressed - since many are not. Also, you have said repeatedly that HM does not have any facts. to support her poijtof view. On what facts do you base that belief?
|
|
|
Post by Crucis#1 on Nov 30, 2019 16:01:09 GMT -5
As sons and daughters of HC, logically is should be hard to believe that any of us would identify with a self aggrandizing avowed atheist.
Would still be interesting to see Free Speech and how she would be received at a fundamentalist Christian school. If she is well received we will see that her bias is approved over her belief in Our Lord. Where is the honesty in Christian beliefs.
|
|
|
Post by Crucis#1 on Nov 30, 2019 16:06:06 GMT -5
Seems as if oppression is being looked at in a monolith only about college students.
I am sure that people regardless of race, that are suffering from manic depression as well as a host of other psychological issues may fell they are oppressed. Can we agree that oppression comes in many forms, financial, economic, class, psychological, cohort etc.
For those that fell oppressed, counseling may be necessary to become empowered.
Please reread Lord of the Flies.
|
|
|
Post by Crucis#1 on Nov 30, 2019 16:14:39 GMT -5
Seems as if oppression is being looked at in a monolith only about college students. I am sure that people regardless of race, that are suffering from manic depression as well as a host of other psychological issues may fell they are oppressed. Can we agree that oppression comes in many forms, financial, economic, class, psychological, cohort class, etc. Please reread Lord of the Flies. And, race, gender and sexual orientation, too. Exactly! Many people lack true empathy or have the ability to walk a mile in some other moccasins. They do not have the ability to step out of their universe and into another person’s universe. Someone’s beliefs should be respected, however they should not attempt to infringe or oppress their beliefs upon me. If you are being psychologically oppressed (psy ops) while you are within a seemingly privileged cohort, are you still not oppressed? Who can answer that question? Maybe only the person who is being affected.
|
|
|
Post by moose1970 on Nov 30, 2019 17:51:38 GMT -5
fwiw- i have no knowledge, interest in ms mcdonald, burger queen, wendy or whatever name she flaunts.
unless her message is in support of pedophilia, ethnic cleansing, slavery, etc then let her rant and ignore her. demonstrations, disruptions just encourages her and her followers.
whatever the issue put forth a qualified spokesparson to offer to engage her in a debate. if she refuses that is proof positive that she knows that her position lacks merit.
|
|
|
Post by td128 on Dec 2, 2019 5:36:04 GMT -5
In the course of my regular reading, I came across these two video clips embedded in stories. Interesting that both documentaries utilize the same two key words in their titles. I would guess that that is intentional on the part of those who produced the second documentary. I welcome sharing them here in furtherance of this discussion. Created Equal: America's Civil Rights Struggle: This clip is only 4 minutes and addresses a series of documentaries produced between 2013 and 2016. I am shocked that this promotional video has seemingly only been viewed 319 times. Maybe I am missing something but that hardly seems possible or if in fact true that is a shame. Here is a link to the National Endowment for the Humanities site covering these documentaries: createdequal.neh.gov/I also welcome sharing a video clip that runs only a few minutes. This promo addresses the story of fellow Crusader Clarence Thomas. The documentary is scheduled to be released in spring 2020. Those who read the book Fraternity know how highly Clarence Thomas holds Fr. John E. Brooks S.J. as a mentor and friend. This video has in excess of 21,000 views. Here is a link to the producer of this documentary: manifoldproductions.com/ClarenceThomasfilm.htmlCreated Equal: Clarence Thomas in His Own Words: I think the college could elevate itself on the national/international stage if it hosted a symposium and invited both Justice Thomas and perhaps Ted Wells or a noted civil rights historian to address the topics covered within these documentaries. That sort of symposium strikes me as what a Jesuit Liberal Arts education is and should be all about unlike the recent clashing of cymbals and disrespect displayed on our campus and further spread via the WSJ. At a bare minimum, I would hope that the administration would seize the opportunity and show these documentaries side by side in the Seelos Theatre or Hogan Ballroom given the demand for seats and then have a Q/A with profs, alums, et al who can speak in a meaningful fashion on the topics covered. Invite Ms. MacDonald back to be part of the forum. Live stream the discussion so that the entire Holy Cross community can observe. #LEADERSHIP
|
|
|
Post by moose1970 on Dec 2, 2019 13:36:36 GMT -5
In the course of my regular reading, I came across these two video clips embedded in stories. Interesting that both documentaries utilize the same two key words in their titles. I would guess that that is intentional on the part of those who produced the second documentary. I welcome sharing them here in furtherance of this discussion. Created Equal: America's Civil Rights Struggle: This clip is only 4 minutes and addresses a series of documentaries produced between 2013 and 2016. I am shocked that this promotional video has seemingly only been viewed 319 times. Maybe I am missing something but that hardly seems possible or if in fact true that is a shame. Here is a link to the National Endowment for the Humanities site covering these documentaries: createdequal.neh.gov/I also welcome sharing a video clip that runs only a few minutes. This promo addresses the story of fellow Crusader Clarence Thomas. The documentary is scheduled to be released in spring 2020. Those who read the book Fraternity know how highly Clarence Thomas holds Fr. John E. Brooks S.J. as a mentor and friend. This video has in excess of 21,000 views. Here is a link to the producer of this documentary: manifoldproductions.com/ClarenceThomasfilm.htmlCreated Equal: Clarence Thomas in His Own Words: I think the college could elevate itself on the national/international stage if it hosted a symposium and invited both Justice Thomas and perhaps Ted Wells or a noted civil rights historian to address the topics covered within these documentaries. That sort of symposium strikes me as what a Jesuit Liberal Arts education is and should be all about unlike the recent clashing of cymbals and disrespect displayed on our campus and further spread via the WSJ. At a bare minimum, I would hope that the administration would seize the opportunity and show these documentaries side by side in the Seelos Theatre or Hogan Ballroom given the demand for seats and then have a Q/A with profs, alums, et al who can speak in a meaningful fashion on the topics covered. Invite Ms. MacDonald back to be part of the forum. Live stream the discussion so that the entire Holy Cross community can observe. #LEADERSHIP good luck on getting clarence "no comment" thomas to agree on any kind of a debate. ted wells is an interesting choice but do not know if he would want to get involved or be the best choice.
|
|
|
Post by alum on Dec 2, 2019 13:52:47 GMT -5
Justice Thomas speaks to friendly audiences. www.scotusmap.com/justices/12I'm not sure that he would view HC as a friendly audience and I doubt that is interested in getting into a debate with anyone. (FWIW, I don't think Supreme Court justices ought to get involved in debates, friendly or otherwise, outside of the confines of their workplace.)
|
|
|
Post by longsuffering on Dec 2, 2019 16:02:25 GMT -5
The elephant in the room. The so-called substance. I agree that generalizations are useless but certainly there is some commonality of experience. Doesn't anyone on this board believe that minority students, women, LGBTQ students are and have been oppressed? Aren't those that believe this protesting against a speaker who without any experiential knowledge or data makes the all-knowing claim that these kids are not oppressed and have no right to express their feelings of oppression? Does anyone actually believe that these students have not felt or believed they were oppressed until they were taught to think /feelthis way at HC or in HS? Come-on man, if you think so, then you don't know what you are talking about. Why would this speaker repeat this canard without any first hand knowledge?Ask yourself, where is MacDonald coming from? What are her feelings about those who are marginalized or at least have feelings of marginalization? Does anyone believe that this white, English schooled, Canadian female has any standing to make her claim? What is her basis? Where is her experience outside of her privileged white, Yale/Cambridge world? Where is her statistical analytical support? Isn't she just blowing off her opinions? Could her claims be based on an a priori animus against "the other" as she in her background and education was stimulated to feel? When MacDonald criticizes so called "white privilege theory" what is she really appealing to in our hearts. Is she reflecting the love spoken by Our Lord and Savior? Is she reflecting the mission of Holy Cross of being men and women for others? Are these Catholic concepts important to her? Are these concepts important to us? I believe that her comments are clearly based in her bigotry against "the other" as part of an attempt to upend what in her view is the liberal order. That is it, pure and simple. Am I the only one on this board who sees where she is coming from? Are we so entirely mired in medieval, outdated, syllogistic thinking which is so narrowly defined as to exclude much of modern thought and experience? Are we so out of touch in our age, experience and background not to see this? Sometimes, I feel that I am witnessing an alternative, fantasy "reality." Look, she has the right to spill her stuff in speeches and sell her books but I, for one, do not buy into what she is saying and find her views offensive. And, I dot NOT find those of my HC alum siblings who agree with her to be offensive. We just differ. I believe that HC alums are motivated by honest , loving Catholic thought andfeelings. And, please do not try to turn this back on me in a personal way with some supercilious insults because we may disagree. Insults hurt. Repeat,I am not criticizing any poster's motives or character. But, man, get real. MacDonald is a provocateur. Thankfully, this stuff soon shall pass. LoveHC Oppression is an interesting concept. I had a business colleague many years ago, and although we became friendly it was apparent he wasn't very capable and was a big drinker also. His wife was very capable , a fabulous mother and homemaker and brought in about 75% of the family income. She did everything but really appreciated that her husband did the "men's work" of taking out the garbage, mowing the lawn, shoveling the driveway, etc. I had several of her fabulous meals and as best I could tell she did not feel oppressed at all. For context, this was in the mid eighties but even then I marvelled at how well the marriage seemed to work with such little measurable work from the husband and how the wife seemingly had everything managed exactly as she wanted it by doing almost everything herself, with contentment, not protest. Maybe that scenario would be extremely unlikely today, but was the woman oppressed? I thought she was being taken advantage of but she didn't. Even in the hunter gatherer era, the hunters probably oppressed the gatherers to some extent. Today's students would stand up for the gatherers and I guess that is positive.
|
|
|
Post by Crucis#1 on Dec 2, 2019 16:14:22 GMT -5
A personalized email was sent on official college letterhead this afternoon to all Holy Cross Volunteers from Tracy Barlok regarding Ms MacDonald. I have copied the letter for the pleasure of those not on the original distribution.
  Dear xxxxx,
I hope you enjoyed a wonderful Thanksgiving with family and friends.
Over the weekend, many on our staff heard from alumni and volunteers about an opinion piece posted in the November 27th issue of The Wall Street Journal. The article, written by Heather Mac Donald, references her recent lecture on campus. As it has sparked a fair amount of inquiry, we want to make sure you have the facts and context about the event if you get questions.
Michele Murray, our Vice President or Student Affairs and Dean of Students shared the following:
Ms. Mac Donald spoke at the College on November 18th as a guest of The Fenwick Review. As you know, we are working hard to ensure Holy Cross is a place where all of our members feel that they belong and have the skills and opportunities to dialogue with those who hold different perspectives. As such the College supported Ms. Mac Donald’s invited lecture.
Staff in the Office of Student Involvement (OSI) worked extensively with students from The Fenwick Review and with Ms. Mac Donald prior to the event, including planning contingencies for scenarios where her visit might attract protest or where she might be disrupted to the point of being unable to speak. Although Ms. Mac Donald omitted this detail in her WSJ piece, she was able to deliver her complete remarks and engage audience members in a fairly lengthy Q&A as planned.
Prior to the event, it became clear to OSI staff that there was a growing interest from students representing the full range of political affiliations. OSI staff worked with Public Safety and campus risk managers to ensure the event would proceed safely. Some of the steps they took included: 1) moving the event from a conference room in Hogan to the largest available venue, which added 220 seats over the capacity of the original location; 2) deciding to decline entry to the event once the lecture began; and 3) recommending that The Fenwick Review reserve seats for their members and guests.
As Ms. Mac Donald’s opinion piece outlines, the majority of the audience of 360 walked out of her talk mid-way through. They were responding to her premise that discrimination no longer exists and students of color do not belong at elite institutions. The walkout involved between 250 and 300 students and lasted three minutes, after which Ms. Mac Donald resumed her planned remarks. A small subset of the 300 participated in a call-and-response chant while they were exiting. In subsequent days, Ms. Mac Donald has poked fun at these protesters and used their disagreement as a platform to promote her ideas with a wider audience.
After her lecture, there was a robust 30 minute Q&A session during which many other students who also disagreed with Ms. Mac Donald’s premises asked questions and engaged the speaker in dialogue.
Although Ms. Mac Donald’s opinions are distasteful to some of our community members, a group of students wanted to host her on campus, and we made that possible for them. As our drafted Freedom of Expression Philosophy states, “We affirm the right and responsibility of each member of our College community to participate in the free exchange of diverse ideas and perspectives. We recognize that we will be challenged to expand our own perspectives in our mutual pursuit of truth.” As such we supported The Fenwick Review’s event.
The difficult work ahead of us will be to find ways to bring together those who hold various, and sometimes conflicting, perspectives for productive dialogue. This effort has begun and will continue as long as fractures along ideological lines threaten to tear us apart. At the most basic level, we must begin listening to one another and recognizing the humanity of those with whom we disagree. The entire Mac Donald episode has presented opportunities for learning for all of us.
I hope this background is helpful for those of you who have reached out. If you have further questions, please do not hesitate to contact me.
As we begin busy calendar year-end work, please know how grateful we are for your continued loyalty and support.
Best,  Tracy W. Barlok P19 Vice President for Advancement Distributed to: 1843 Committee Board of Advisors Class Chairs and Correspondents Crusader Athletics Fund Executive Committee HCAA Board and Senate HCF National Council Holy Cross Leadership Council of NY Volunteers Regional Club Presidents Parents Fund Committee President’s Council Executive Committee Reunion Chairs and Committees  Office of Advancement One College Street Worcester, MA 01610-2395 (508) 793-2421 vp-adv@holycross.edu holycross.edu     College of the Holy Cross
1 College Street
Worcester, MA 01610
United States Unsubscribe
|
|
|
Post by sader1970 on Dec 2, 2019 16:39:27 GMT -5
Crucis, as you know, this letter from Tracy Barlok is being disseminated to various folks in the Holy Cross community. My Class Chairs and I discussed the letter on line and without going into a lot of detail, here's what I told them:
Whether someone is "oppressed" or not might be a subjective interpretation, saying non-whites don't belong in elite institutions is blatantly racist.
Does anyone here know if MacDonald actually said this either at her talk or in her book?
|
|
|
Post by Tom on Dec 2, 2019 17:11:03 GMT -5
Crucis, as you know, this letter from Tracy Barlok is being disseminated to various folks in the Holy Cross community. My Class Chairs and I discussed the letter on line and without going into a lot of detail, here's what I told them: Whether someone is "oppressed" or not might be a subjective interpretation, saying non-whites don't belong in elite institutions is blatantly racist. Does anyone here know if MacDonald actually said this either at her talk or in her book? That line jumped out to me as well. Also wasn't at the talk and didn't read the book, but based on what I have read on Crossports, I assumed her premise was that anyone fortunate enough to go to an elite college can't be oppressed. It might be worthy of an E-mail to the Fenwick and ask them this question. If true, it is wild that someone today could say that and get a speaking engagement outside of some radical off shoot of the KKK
|
|
|
Post by longsuffering on Dec 2, 2019 17:12:06 GMT -5
That Ms. MacDonald would say that is not believable. A position that being a student at an elite U.S. college in 2019 makes the person one of the least oppressed people in history has a certain logic to it. I don't think she could have access to the main stream media and educational institutions with overt racism.
|
|
|
Post by rgs318 on Dec 2, 2019 17:21:15 GMT -5
When I saw that quote attributed to Ms MacDonald in the letter, ("students of color do not belong at elite institutions" I tried to find it somewhere. I cannot. That doesn't mean it does not exist somewhere, but I must hope including that line as if it were a fact was an error and not an attempt to coddle favor with a small subset of HC students or to be a spin of her belief that students at an elite institution are not "oppressed" by the very fact of the privilege they enjoy by being there. I am afraid that letter did not "placate" me in any way.
|
|