Cancelling Dr. Seuss

[mahagonny]

I haven't seen the CHE article. I stopped subscribing a year ago. I did see this though: https://uswallpost.com/education/when-professors-offend-students/

It's perfectly reasonable to be sick of hearing "black lives matter," one of the reasons being  people protest that you shouldn't say 'all lives matter.' If you can say one you ought to be able to say both. And if you were to say 'white lives matter' which you are already prompted to say since the media mostly ignores killing of white people by police, consistently a higher number than blacks, some of the students and academic culture would be comparing you to Hitler. And Americans, even conservatives, vastly overestimate the number of black individuals killed by police (although liberals overestimate it much more), so 'white lives matter' would be, apparently, information that is missing, while 'black lives matter' is not by any stretch of the imagination information that is missing. It's already a matter of broad, constantly reiterated consensus.

If Professor Cope is up to having lively discussions about currents events in class (I'm grateful that I can teach without doing it; I couldn't do it) a better choice might have been to start with 'I'm sick of not being able to say "all lives matter."' But she's still have to duck.

ETA: Another aspect I find interesting: when a group of students start calling for the professor to be fired, they probably envy the person standing in front of the class, who gets called 'professor,' figuring that person has good stable job with good pay and benefits. And if they do think that, the odds are that they're wrong, and that's fine with the college.

[marshwiggle]

I haven't seen the CHE article. I stopped subscribing a year ago. I did see this though: https://uswallpost.com/education/when-professors-offend-students/

Thanks for the non-paywalled link.

I think I'm starting to see why lots of people on the left are getting cancelled. From the article:

So she decided to spur her class into contributing. The day's lesson was about "cancel culture." Students had read a few articles on the topic beforehand. Cope wanted to present them with an opinion that, at first blush, they'd object to but that would actually be more nuanced than it appeared.

The naive idea that students want nuance, rather than crystal clear ideology shows an incredible degree of cluelessness. I think some on the left really think that as long as they're coming from the "right side", they will be able to speak freely. No wonder they get destroyed.

[mahagonny]

I haven't seen the CHE article. I stopped subscribing a year ago. I did see this though: https://uswallpost.com/education/when-professors-offend-students/

Thanks for the non-paywalled link.

I think I'm starting to see why lots of people on the left are getting cancelled. From the article:

So she decided to spur her class into contributing. The day's lesson was about "cancel culture." Students had read a few articles on the topic beforehand. Cope wanted to present them with an opinion that, at first blush, they'd object to but that would actually be more nuanced than it appeared.

The naive idea that students want nuance, rather than crystal clear ideology shows an incredible degree of cluelessness. I think some on the left really think that as long as they're coming from the "right side", they will be able to speak freely. No wonder they get destroyed.

While students may lack the analytical habits and skill that they hopefully will acquire in a few years, it's not really their fault. Especially when one considers the current environment around discussions of race.
The narrative, assiduously maintained by the left media, pro sports, Hollywood, most of academia is that our nation is hopelessly racist. Whereas to say something like 'I'm tired of saying "black lives matter"' could normally arouse curiosity, as in 'I wonder why exactly the Professors says this?' instead it just pushes the students' buttons. They hastily decide 'OMG! I've just met another wolf in sheep's clothing! A white person who hates us!" And the white students' buttons have been pushed too: "It's our job to call out racism.Silence is violence."

Notice, in the article, the diversity staff attributes the whole thing to a mere shift in the racial composition in the student body. Which is bullshit. Anything to feather their nest and make themselves important. In reality, they are more the problem.

From the article:

"Debates over what's suitable to bring up in the classroom, and how much latitude professors should be given to instruct how they wish, are nothing new. "We might be in a moment of slightly more accelerated social change," says Jennifer Ruth, a professor of film studies at Portland State University who writes regularly about academic-freedom issues, but there "has always been discussion around what's appropriate pedagogy."

"That accelerated social change stems in part from higher ed's shifting student demographics.
Over the last two decades, the share of undergraduates who identify as a race other than white has increased to about 45 percent from 30 percent. That rate of racial diversification has not been matched among the faculty. "Many of us in academia have come to learn by quote-unquote common sense what might be, like, good to say that stirs up critical thinking but doesn't offend people," says Hendry Ton, associate vice chancellor for health equity, diversity, and inclusion at UC Davis Health. But "we've learned that on a fairly homogeneous group of people ... the traditional group of students that we've seen highly represented in our universities," he says. As the student body changes, there's a need to "update our sensibilities."'

[Wahoo Redux]

Penn Law Rebukes Professor Who Said U.S. Would Be Better Off With Fewer Asians

[smallcleanrat]

Penn Law Rebukes Professor Who Said U.S. Would Be Better Off With Fewer Asians

What's the specific action here that makes this a 'cancel culture' story?

The primary event in this article is the dean releasing a statement criticizing Wax's views while emphasizing that she has the right to voice them.

One linked article talks about students petitioning for the prof to be fired, but the university's statement gives no indication that they will pursue this action. They state Wax has the right to make her claims and voice her opinions, and the students have the right to petition and protest.

This article and the linked articles report on previous controversies regarding this professor's claims. They mention other faculty voicing objections and making counterclaims, but no disciplinary action. The earliest incident mentioned goes back to 2006 and yet she's still teaching at the same university so it doesn't seem she was canceled.

The closest thing to a university response going beyond criticism is the mention of Wax being barred from teaching mandatory first year classes in 2017 (you can read the dean's reasoning for that decision here: https://www.insidehighered.com/news/2018/03/15/penn-says-amy-wax-will-no-longer-teach-required-first-year-law-courses-after-more). I don't know if this counts as disciplinary or not, and I don't know whether it goes out of bounds for the kinds of decisions deans are supposed to make.

But for this current story, it just looks like the dean felt compelled to offer some kind of commentary separating the university's policies from the opinions of a specific professor. Was that overstepping?

He does use what could be called strongly judgmental language ("anti-intellectual" "racist"). Is that the issue?

I honestly don't know enough about what a dean's role and responsibilities are to know if this is going too far. Is it atypical (or considered unethical) for a dean to publicly criticize the (publicly-stated) opinions of individual faculty?

[apl68]

There are good reasons for being concerned about high rates of immigration, given that societies have practical limits to how many immigrants they can absorb without running into significant economic and social issues.  But anybody who wants to voice such concerns needs to be very, very careful in phrasing them.  When somebody's as careless about this as Prof. Wax, it's entirely understandable that she would be rebuked for it.

I'm curious about a particular statistic mentioned in the article.  A commentator spoke of FBI data that shows that 19% of anti-Asian hate crimes involve black offenders, and 52% involve white.  So who commits the other 29%?  It sounds like proportionately the highest rates of anti-Asian hate crimes may be from some grouping other than black or white.

[marshwiggle]

I'm curious about a particular statistic mentioned in the article.  A commentator spoke of FBI data that shows that 19% of anti-Asian hate crimes involve black offenders, and 52% involve white.  So who commits the other 29%?  It sounds like proportionately the highest rates of anti-Asian hate crimes may be from some grouping other than black or white.

Can something be identified as a hate crime without any known suspect? If so, then those could be cases where the ethnicity of the perpetrator is unknown. (Such as racist graffiti or property crime.)

[smallcleanrat]

There are good reasons for being concerned about high rates of immigration, given that societies have practical limits to how many immigrants they can absorb without running into significant economic and social issues.  But anybody who wants to voice such concerns needs to be very, very careful in phrasing them.  When somebody's as careless about this as Prof. Wax, it's entirely understandable that she would be rebuked for it.

Based on her follow up statements, I don't think "careless wording" is what makes her statements worth criticizing. I think what she said is what she meant, and it wasn't concern about practical limits.

I know there are stories in which the people saying, "Wow, that's racist." are basing their judgment on exaggerations, misinterpretations, or misrepresentations of what was actually said. But I don't think this story is one of them.

[jimbogumbo]

There are good reasons for being concerned about high rates of immigration, given that societies have practical limits to how many immigrants they can absorb without running into significant economic and social issues.  But anybody who wants to voice such concerns needs to be very, very careful in phrasing them.  When somebody's as careless about this as Prof. Wax, it's entirely understandable that she would be rebuked for it.

Based on her follow up statements, I don't think "careless wording" is what makes her statements worth criticizing. I think what she said is what she meant, and it wasn't concern about practical limits.

I know there are stories in which the people saying, "Wow, that's racist." are basing their judgment on exaggerations, misinterpretations, or misrepresentations of what was actually said. But I don't think this story is one of them.

She made the remarks on The Glenn Loury show. She has a history of making incendiary statements, and does so for headlines.

[mahagonny]

Dr. Wax is concerned about the Asian population growing in the USA because, she claims they vote overwhelmingly democratic, and the democratic party lately has ideas that are bad for America. She's expressing a political belief. If she perceived that Asians were voting republican and also were more grateful for the opportunity to emigrate and had nicer things to say about our country, she would, presumably, be saying bring them in. It's a provocative way to word her point, but the point is fair. Maybe intentionally provocative.
Whenever someone complains about the attacks against them for what they say, I ask myself, did they want the attacks so they could complain?

I'm curious about a particular statistic mentioned in the article.  A commentator spoke of FBI data that shows that 19% of anti-Asian hate crimes involve black offenders, and 52% involve white.  So who commits the other 29%?  It sounds like proportionately the highest rates of anti-Asian hate crimes may be from some grouping other than black or white.

Can something be identified as a hate crime without any known suspect? If so, then those could be cases where the ethnicity of the perpetrator is unknown. (Such as racist graffiti or property crime.)

Sure they can. I hear about it in the news. Vandalism with graffiti particularly. Blacks are proportionally the biggest contributors to crime in the USA. Of course, most black people are not criminals and understandably hate being victimized when it happens.

[mahagonny]

https://www.city-journal.org/black-lives-matter-reuters-and-the-price-of-dissent?skip=1

https://abigailshrier.substack.com/p/the-chronicle-cries-for-activist

[Wahoo Redux]

ABC on Amy Wax

Penn students created a petition demanding the school take action against Wax, a tenured professor.

"I think that the university needs to suspend her from all teaching duties," said Apratim Vidyarthi, a third-year law student. "She shouldn't be allowed to come on campus, she shouldn't be allowed to interact with students while this investigation is ongoing."

The initial article I posted may not have been specifically "cancel culture," but come on, who didn't see this sort of thing coming?  Who thinks it will end here?

It is clear, BTW, that whatever her reasons, Wax is a frothing bigot and a disturbed person.

[mahagonny]

ABC on Amy Wax

Penn students created a petition demanding the school take action against Wax, a tenured professor.

"I think that the university needs to suspend her from all teaching duties," said Apratim Vidyarthi, a third-year law student. "She shouldn't be allowed to come on campus, she shouldn't be allowed to interact with students while this investigation is ongoing."

The initial article I posted may not have been specifically "cancel culture," but come on, who didn't see this sort of thing coming?  Who thinks it will end here?

It is clear, BTW, that whatever her reasons, Wax is a frothing bigot and a disturbed person.

She may indeed be bigoted and if so I make no excuses for her. At the same time I speculate from afar that, regarding her claim that Asians living in the USA should be more grateful to the country they have emigrated to, there would be a range of attitudes towards the USA among people living here who were born and raised in, say India, Nigeria, the Caribbean, South Korea, and these attitudes are not necessarily identical, at all. If one were to do a study by compiling data about those attitudes they should then be able to publish that data.

[smallcleanrat]

Yeah, students are complaining and making demands, but Wax has a decades-long history of making provocative statements and the university has a history of emphasizing that she has the right to say those things.

Wax herself is asserting there should be fewer non-whites in the country and in universities. If Wax says she doesn't want Asians in the medical schools or that most of the black students at her own university shouldn't be there, are the students doing so much worse by saying they don't want Wax there?

The university has a history of not caving in to such demands. What's different about this time? Are you expecting them to give in this time because of the relatively recent increase in 'cancel culture' fervor? Maybe they will. If so, that would be a shame.



A lot of what she says does come across as more ranting than academic argument. She talks like white vs. nonwhite is exactly the same as European vs. non-European. Then she says its not about race, its about
"culture". And then there's that armchair psychologizing she does when she "speculates" as to why an Asian-American might vote Democrat...egad. And using what party someone votes for as a proxy measure of 'objective gratitude'?

She reminds me a lot of the city council lady in Michigan who stated she wanted a "white community as much as possible." An interviewer asked her why, and she made this same its-about-culture (but-not-really) argument. When she said she wouldn't want immigrants because she wants an American community, the interviewer asked how she would feel about someone who moved to the country from Germany. She said that person would be welcome because they would be white. The interviewer tries to point out that she's contradicting herself and its like she blue screens because she can't understand what he's getting at.



A more general question:

Does there ever come a point when someone's academic work goes so far off the rails it can't be taken seriously by the rest of the field?

Like a historian who makes claims based on private interviews he swears he's conducted with long-dead historical figures who visited him in his dreams. Maybe not quite that far out, but some case in which basic principles or standards of evidence go out the window.

Is there a point far enough to warrant some kind of response from the university?

[mahagonny]

A lot of what she says does come across as more ranting than academic argument. She talks like white vs. nonwhite is exactly the same as European vs. non-European. Then she says its not about race, its about
"culture". And then there's that armchair psychologizing she does when she "speculates" as to why an Asian-American might vote Democrat...egad. And using what party someone votes for as a proxy measure of 'objective gratitude'?

Normally, over the course of my already long life I would say no, but recently, pissing all over America is de rigeur for democrats, so...sure. When the shoes fits, they are welcome to wear it. Of course, to be consistent, Dr. Wax should then be calling out her fellow Jews for the same voting preferences.