SCOOP: Texas A&M has created a radical DEI bureaucracy that has condemned the United States as a "white supremacist society," blasted Gov. Greg Abbott as a vestige of "systemic racism," and said its role is to "[take] a progressive stand on issues of social justice."
Thread. 🧵
I've obtained a collection of documents through public-records requests that reveal a stunning process of ideological capture. Virtually every academic and administrative unit at Texas A&M has adopted DEI ideology and pushed discriminatory measures to promote "social justice."
Following the death of George Floyd, the university leadership pushed the narrative that Texas A&M itself was a systemically racist institution: "Racism, hate speech, safety, and belonging issues are evidence of systemic, cultural problems that are enduring trends at Texas A&M."
The DEI programs are explicitly political and ideological. The School of Dentistry, for example, hosted a guest lecture by University of Texas professor emeritus Robert Jensen, who told the audience that the United States is "appropriately called a white supremacist society."
The academic departments promised to "embed discussion of DEI and anti-racism throughout the undergraduate curriculum," to use a "land acknowledgement statement," and develop a "Black Lives Matter special topics course"—all part of a left-wing activist narrative.
The new DEI orthodoxy has resulted in a policy of widespread racial discrimination and segregation. DEI leaders want to achieve "structural diversity" using racial quotas, DEI statements, activist hiring committees, and racial and sexual preferences.
The final goal of A&M’s DEI programs is left-wing activism. DEI officials have made it clear that their goal is to promote "critical race theory," "intersectional feminism," "decolonizing practices," and left-wing social movements such as Black Lives Matter.
Texas A&M DEI officials have maligned Texas Governor Greg Abbott as a vestige of "systemic racism," pushed social media content telling readers to "stop centering whiteness," and said their role was to "[take] a progressive stand on issues of social justice."
Tucker Carlson is the best of the best and consistently put in extra time to cultivate new talent on the Right. He's always downplayed the possibility of running for president, but that's an open possibility now. If he stays in media, I'm excited to see what he does next. twitter.com/i/web/status/1…
Tucker has a great aptitude for reinvention. He once told me that he had been fired from a number of jobs—most famously from CNN Crossfire—which forced him to learn how to adapt, compete, and innovate. And every time, he emerged with a bigger platform than before.
The challenge this time will be significant. The pure distribution power of Fox News should not be underestimated. Many big-name stars have left the network for other opportunities, but none have managed to build the same level of influence. Will Tucker buck the trend? We'll see.
I've been through a bizarre sequence of events the past few days—a home invasion, stolen passports, identity theft, delayed travel—and want to thank the Budapest police, US Embassy, and Danube Institute for helping my family navigate through it.
A little story for you:
During the first week of our stay in Budapest, my family went out while I took a nap to recover from jet lag. I awoke to the sound of someone in the apartment. When I went to the main room—bleary-eyed, in my underwear—I discovered that a man had broken in and was stealing items.
I confronted him, recovered an electronic device, shouted him out of the house, and he ran away. I didn't think much of it until we were preparing to leave a few days ago and realized that he had stolen all of our passports and, consequently, we had no way to leave the country.
There is a lot of speculation around the organization FAIR. I can't speak to the experience of others, but I resigned from the advisory board in September 2021 because it felt more like a center-left brand-building exercise than an effective vehicle for fighting woke ideology.
It was a good idea in theory, but quickly following the launch, FAIR started offering DEI programming, took credit from other organizations, spent a significant amount of time counter-signaling conservatives, and settled on the vacuous brand of "pro-human."
There are many former employees of FAIR who have reached out to me with stories of alleged mistreatment and mismanagement, but they are bound by NDAs and afraid to come forward. They should be released and allowed to speak publicly—that's only fair.
SCOOP: Florida International University has adopted radical DEI programming that condemns the United States as a system of "white supremacy," segregates scholarships and student programs by race, and trains students for participation in violent left-wing protests.
Thread. 🧵
The story begins with the death of George Floyd. As riots spread, the university held a racially segregated discussion program—one for "self-identified People of Color," another for "self-identified White Students"—to induct students into the ideology of left-wing racialism.
The university's DEI bureaucrats published an official "Inclusive Language Guide" that condemns words such as "husband," "wife," "mother," "father," "Mr.," and "Mrs.," as "non-inclusive." Instead, students are told to use the words "partner," "caregivers," "Mx.," and "they/them."
I've noticed a pattern at our New College of Florida board meetings: a huge number of the public commenters are the mothers of current students. I would have been mortified if my mom came to my university dressed in a costume, screaming about "fascism." Bizarre development.
In the 1960s, protests at universities were led by the students. Now they're led by the students' parents, as if their children were attending primary school. This pattern seems to reinforce both the "helicopter parent" thesis and the "coddling" thesis. Not healthy.
Some parents showed up in Handmaid's Tale outfits, which doesn't even make sense. And one parent said she has been sleeping in a hotel near the university for the past five weeks, single-mindedly devoting herself to opposing our reform efforts.
Curtis Yarvin has published a friendly critique of our campaign to transform New College of Florida. He understands the difficulties of the task ahead, but is far too pessimistic about the prospects for the future. Here's why. 🧵 graymirror.substack.com/p/acorns-for-t…
Yavin's basic theme is that the progressive-managerial state, or Cathedral, is so powerful, that any action to challenge it will end up reinforcing its power. This is right-wing doomerism—if the beast is all-powerful, better to adopt the position of a prey animal and do nothing.
But even if we accept Yarvin's premise of inevitable failure—and I do not—he should remember the words of Leo Strauss, who, in a critique of Burke, counseled that even against immense odds, there is nobility and utility to "last-ditch resistance."