I’m going to break my rule of no longer retweeting this asshat because these needs to be exposed and called out. You don’t blame Jews for anti-Semitism.
Holy hell. Look how this Orban shill wastes precisely zero time climbing into the anti-Semitic mud with Lindsay, so great is his partisan hatred for the Left.
Re. The Tablet article on California's proposed Ethnic Studies curriculum, I really do think there's much less there than meets the eye. At least it pertains to Jews and Judaism. Read the sample lessons (Appendix A: pp. 485-514) and see for yourself.
Most of the "objectionable" stuff discussed in The Tablet was either stripped out after the 2nd draft or is irrelevant (the past statements of the curriculum's authors). Meanwhile, the 3rd draft DOES include information on campus anti-Semitism and hate crimes against Jews.
The main point of contention, at least in regards to Jews, is the claim that some Ashkenazi Jews possess white privilege because they can pass as white, and that they non-Ashkenazi Jews don't because they can't. Make of that what you will.
I regret to inform you that he is right. Obviously it's great that Trump is off Twitter, but watching multiple platforms flex their muscle in unison like this is terrifying and will absolutely be used to crush someone or something you care about.
I am not on board for this. I really want to be, but this feels like a terrible development, one that will absolutely be used someday against those trying to unionize Big Tech, expose industry wrongdoing, or threaten its political interests.
But dammit. Look at this. This is why we're in the position that we need private governments to solve the problem: because our public one was either unwilling or unable to act on its own.
Every time I post a new study showing that university indoctrination does not happen (and there's usually one every 2-3 months), I get the same stubbornly dismissive range of responses. People just don't want to believe it. They refuse.
I don't have a long thread on this. I'm just very frustrated by the phenomenon, especially since it typically comes from people who've built their online personas around being fact-driven, hyper rational skeptics.
Most of them just say "Well, that wasn't my experience," or "Oh, academic proves academics are great, how persuasive! HAHA", which I get. A few also make vague science-esque sounds about sample size, constructs, control groups, etc. But there's never any substance to it.
New from me: Drawing on a survey of 20K+ students from 55 universities, @RealClearEd and @TheFIREorg have ranked schools according to how healthy the free speech climate is on campus. Unfortunately, its design has a strong anti-liberal bias.
Quick summary: In the survey, students are assigned a Tolerance Score, which is supposed to measure how tolerant they are of controversial speakers. And one of the major findings is that conservatives score much higher on Tolerance than liberals.
But there's a problem.
Here's the question used to measure tolerance. See if you can spot where things go wrong.
The Lincoln Project and the IDW were the two highest profile projects launched by centrists during the Trump years. The first tried to rescue conservatism from Trump. The second tried (ostensibly) to tamp down the Culture War. Both have failed. Why?
Lots of reasons, obviously! But for myself, I keep coming back to tribalism. Not as a causal factor, but as an analytic framework. More than any other, tribalism has been the frame used by centrists to make sense of US politics. An atavistic flight from rationality.
I think this frame has served them very poorly, for two reasons. First, it permits them to shift the debate from matters of pressing political concern to one about the right and proper way to talk about those matters of pressing political concern.
2016: Again over the objections of its own justices, the Georgia GOP expands the court from 7 to 9. This represents something of a compromise for state Republicans, as they had previously sought to expand the court to 13.