Protesters gathered on the main stairwell of Berry Library.
On Monday, November 16, Latino groups on campus organized an “emergency community meeting” in the Cutter Shabazz Mural Room, in response to the alleged assault of a Dartmouth student by a Brown University Department of Safety officer at the Latinx Ivy League Conference. Despite the official purpose of the gathering, the well-attended event quickly shifted into discussion of the November 12 Black Lives Matter protest, and particularly The Dartmouth Review’s coverage of that event.
Much of the meeting was spent discussing the backlash to the Black Lives Matter protest and justifying the protesters’ actions. Students reiterated how they felt unsafe on this campus how unsafe Dartmouth is for people of color in general. In particular, attendees noted and complained about offensive comments on Yik Yak. The recent effort to change the theme of Winter Carnival to “Snow Justice, Snow Peace” was also discussed.
While much of the rhetoric at the meeting was unexceptional in comparison to the Black Lives Matter protest, it is notable that Vice Provost for Student Affairs Inge-Lise Ameer was in attendance. The two times she spoke throughout the hour-long meeting, she expressed unqualified support for the protesters, not only with respect to their safety and right to protest but also their demands and actions. “The protest was a wonderful, beautiful thing,” she said, explaining that the administration was telling the news media anyone that would listen that the protest had been justified. “There’s a whole conservative world out there that’s not very nice,” she added.
Vice Provost Ameer went even further in support of the protesters. She offered to reread the Freedom Budget and revisit the feasibility of many of its proposals. “Our new Provost is very much in support of all this,” Ameer said, specifically pointing to new faculty diversity initiatives. She requested regular meetings with the leaders of various minority groups as to help her better meet their requests. Then, she reiterated that she thought that the protest was a “wonderful, peaceful march” and asked the numerous “faculty and administrators in support” of the protesters present to raise their hands. Several of them did.
The Review maintains that the protesters who singled out students for harassment, including physical shoving and pointed racial insults, should be held accountable for their actions. We are disappointed that senior administrators are expressing support for the Black Lives Matter protesters in the face of facts that contradict their narrative. In a conversation with The Dartmouth, campus NAACP President Jonathan Dikawana ’16 claimed that “comments such as ‘F*** your white privilege’ were not personal or racist attacks on individual white persons in the library,” despite the testimonies that the protesters isolated, physically touched, and trailed the students they were addressing. We don’t believe that Dikawana’s explanation provides sufficient grounds for our administrators to look the other way.
Furthermore, we are disappointed that Vice Provost Ameer displayed an apparent bias against the many students who reported the protesters clear list of infractions. In doing so, the administration is undermining its own credibility and the credibility of the College.
The Review corroborated every anecdote cited in our coverage with multiple student eyewitnesses. We stand by our coverage of the Black Lives Matter protest in “Eyes Wide Open at the Protest” and hope that the attention this incident has garnered will prevent future protest movements from “pivoting” from political speech to overt personal harassment.
Addendum: The Review has obtained footage of this “emergency community meeting” in which Ameer attempted to appease the protesters. Some of her highlights at said conference can be seen here:
Seems there is no winning with persons who have created their own reality – based upon false narratives and inherently corrupt ideologies that embrace an ‘ends justifies the means’ revolution.
Students are harrassed, threatened, called names and assaulted – yet the event is declared to be a ‘wonderful, peaceful, beautiful thing.’ No, the so-called ‘protest’ was a grotesque farce based upon falsehoods and exaggeration, which crossed over the line of propriety into actual real acts of racist agression (in the name of ‘protesting’ racial agression). Adding more lies will not make it go away.
A class action seems in order.
A safe segregated echo chamber within which to amplify their racist delusions is not what these people need. They need a cold dose of reality.
Exactly. If the shoe were on the other foot ? White on black harrasment ? One can only imagine the response and result.
Its confirmation bias.. and these little cultural Marxists are full of it…
Thanks for having the courage to report the inconvenient truths. None of the kids who were the target of this racist bullying had done anything other than studying while white. Studying is what one might consider the core activity of students at a university. If the administration is too biased or too cowardly to protect students in their core activity, its alumni, donors and trustees need to remove them. For my part, as I am none of the above, I will simply ensure that my fully qualified child never applies to this rotten institution unless it is visibly overhauled to make it a safe space for what is supposed to happen at a legitimate university.
it is not implausible that no employer would want someone from this school, what is next is attacking fellow employees.
Grammar fail. Ivy league? Ho!
Yeah and I’ve read some of your recent posts, you stink as a grammar Nazi. Chump.
Actually what is next is normal people removing Dartmouth from a list of prospective colleges. The damage to the brand is enormous. Soon a degree from Dartmouth will mean identification with this sort of insanity. It will be easy for Dartmouth to fill their school with 1,000 far left freaks with high scores every year. But that is what they will be identified as – far left freaks with high scores, supporting racism and cultural decay.
“….one thousand Far Left freaks with high test scores…” Nearly all of the Latins, Natives, and Blacks at elite universities and colleges have test scores and G.P.A.s that are mediocre. They belong at a Spellman, a Morehouse, in community colleges, or state colleges that accept applicants who do not possess good academic records. By the way, I apologise in advance for accidentally using any trigger words. In the Black Vernacular, my bad.
Roch –
My comment does not have to do with the scores and abilities of the current race admitted students, as I’m sure you know – about 25% of whom are actually competitive. (And actually we don’t really know if more could be more competitive – for a Black kid, hit 2100 SAT, and there is no need to try hard. So – AA actually works to retard their personal growth.)
It has to do with the other 75% of the students. So guys like me and you are disgusted, and don’t apply – but your lefty cousin and my lefty sister apply. Scores and grades wise – there is nominal difference between the 500 admitted normal kids and the next 500 kids on the application list. But culture and thinking style wise – a giant difference.
The kids don’t belong at Morehouse or Spellman – just some of the Dukies belong at UNC, some of the Dartmouths belong at Vandy/BC/BU, etc. And they would get a better education for it. it is abusive to put 2100s in competition in a room full of 2300s. And after the top schools peel off the >2100 tranche, the next tier – Vandys and Hopkins and etc – have to admit 1900s to hit their numbers, etc, in a cascading effect of poorly matching kids needs to schools. it is abusive.
The AA priesthood has the usual answer for mismatches:the problem doesn’t exist, so there’s no need to do anything differently!
Duke did a study a year or so back. It shows up as “students not graduating in their freshman major”. The data is there. The 2050 STEM kids get burned in a room full of 2250s, and switch to non-STEM majors (because they are already sold on the social value of the big name label school). So they graduate in Poli-Sci or Africana Studies.
These are kids who would have been solid engineers and scientists from – let’s say NC State, or Eastern Carolina instead of Duke.
AA for AA results in fewer AA graduating in STEM. plus – damages their self esteem. it is a very mean thing to do to a 19 year old kid.
Regardless of the stupidity of AA “leaders” – guys who know better need to speak up, regardless of our skin tone.
Of course it is. It’s ALWAYS Yo bad, ’cause you white. Quod erat demonstrandum!
I’m from China.
Not black enough, Yang! Go get some street cred:beat up a white kid and burn the stars and stripes!
Of course, your bad! What color are you?
My colour is high-yellow. What’s your colour and are you going to vote for The Donald?
“You’re”. You must be one of the mediocre GPA students that Roch Yang was talking about. What “color” do you think someone named “Yang” is, you moron?
And Dartmouth alumni should do their part by withholding contributions. That’ll get their attention.
They might have to go back to the bad old days when student unlikely to “,ake it’ academically were admitted ninth lessened were retained, irregardless of grades, entitle school could be reasonably sure the family’s resources had been drained dry. THEN, GPA became important-nota before!
“studying while white” — studyn b raciss!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
“raciss”. <—– says it all. Ignorant morons do not belong at elite schools.
It won’t be a “safe space” until the thought police gets to purge incorrect books from the shelves.
In a world where so much is taken for granted, when the stars hardly ever align, and when the fruits of our labor are so often lost to an early frost, let me take you all back to the year of 1976. In the spirit of being brief I will only say what is absolutely necessary. My friends, Smiley Rutterbridge and Flip Jequilt, and I were traveling across the plains of Missouri when we ran into a band of ruffians. We had just recently stopped at a farmer’s market and were carrying large sacks full of produce and several pounds of honeycomb. The ruffians terrorized us and cornered us in a boulder field. We hid out there for several days and nights before we believed it was safe to emerge. The boulder field turned out to be an old hide-out, and we were luckily able to nourish ourselves on spiced peaches and wild onions. I’ve been told that our story has been adopted into the book “Holes,” although I’ve never been able to collect any royalties (despite my frequent petitions). The band of ruffians turned out to be a small group of Richard Nixon supporters and it was never clear what they wanted with our honeycomb. Irregardlessly, it’s safe to say that Smiley, Flip, and myself were sufficiently shaken up after the incident. I relate this story to you all today because I think we can all learn something from it; however, as always, I will leave it to you to recognize the morals in this story. Please reply below and I look forward to engaging in meaningful conversation when I return from the Museum of Natural History. Sincerely, Roger Sherman III
I hope you will continue to report on this. I am concerned that the College will once again sanction behavior that is completely unacceptable. I copied below an email I sent to the “Office of the President” and an email I got in return. The email I got in response presents a different set of facts and reads a bit like an apologia. I am concerned that the prosecution of this incident will be driven more by a desire to avoid confrontation than get at uncomfortable truths. I thought the response to my email might provide some insight into how the administration is approaching this matter and perhaps guide further objective investigation into it.
My email to the “President’s Office”:
Every time one I read of one of these incidents, I feel sick. I realize that given Dartmouth’s rural setting and its (by Ivy League standards) conservative reputation, it fears the backlash that punishing any minority protestor might create. As a result, it has one set of rules and two sets of enforcement criteria: one for politically protected groups and one for everyone else. It appears that the College’s past
responses to similar incidents made it clear that almost any behavior, wrapped in
the rhetoric of “justice,” is acceptable. It is OK for one group to use racist
epithets, to trespass and to physically intimidate classmates and administrators
but other students, those on the wrong side of campus identity politics, live
in an Orwellian world of censored speech and McCarthyist intolerance. The
weakness of Dartmouth’s response to these campus incidents damages its
reputation — one online news site described Dartmouth as “America’s most
hopelessly and disturbingly fragile Ivy League school.” Will it require a
student’s death or perhaps a burned down building before the administration
starts respecting its own rules?
As an alumnus, I am very interested in hearing how the College intends to
investigate this incident and, based upon that investigation, appropriately
discipline the BLM protestors and start enforcing the College’s rules equally
and objectively.
Mark Soane ‘82
The response:
Dear Mark,
I understand you’re concerned about the Black Lives Matter protest on campus
last week.
In response to the vandalization of a Black Lives Matter art installation in
Collis Center, Dartmouth students organized a large, peaceful meeting on
November 12th in support of the national Black Lives Matter
movement. After the demonstration, a smaller group moved to the Baker-Berry
library, where they launched a political protest.
We are following up on all complaints related to the protest. However, it’s
important to note that as of today, we have received no complaints of physical
violence and we have not seen any video that shows physical violence.
Dartmouth is committed to the principles of free speech, public protest, and
inclusivity and we understand that these ideals may sometimes conflict with one
another; however, the safety, well-being, and support of all of our students
remain our highest priorities.
I, and members of the administration, have been meeting with concerned students
and we are re-doubling efforts to strengthen our community, to increase
communication and to ensure that no student ever feels intimidated or unsafe.
Thank you for writing, I appreciate your engagement on these
issues.
Warm regards,
Phil Hanlon ’77
Mr. Hanlon,
Your campus is now a location where Black students can verbally assault White students at will, and the Black students now know YOU WILL DO NOTHING ABOUT IT.
Welcome to hell. Can’t wait to see what happen to your enrollment numbers now. Perhaps you can apply to be the next HBC.
Nothing escalates like escalation. Unless it’s acceleration! Forward.
It’s a form letter. The response to my letter to Hanlon said exactly the same thing and addressed none of the specific points I wrote about.
Does he think we are too stupid to recognize this?
Hi, Parent of a ’16. I am an ’83 and have been complaining to President Hanlon about Dartmouth’s slide into progressive liberal purgatory for some time. I, too, have received responses from the President’s Office that are essentially form letters, spouting the Party line. I receive the same sorts of responses from my California Senator Diane Feinstein, and my CA Congressional Representative; all card-carrying members of the Democratic Politburo. American higher education is in deep trouble. The most similar example in history is the infiltration of 1930s-era German academia by the Nazis.
Have I lost perspective? No. I am just a well educated Dartmouth alum who is aware of history and current events and am just playing it safe.
Perhaps students/ parents who were impacted by this protest should pursue justice via the Department of Justice. Here’s the relevant section (Civil Rights and Educational Opportunities) the college is in violation of and the contact information:
How To File A Complaint:
The Civil Rights Division enforces civil rights laws in a wide variety of contexts. You may use the information on this page to find the
appropriate way to submit a complaint or report of a potential civil
rights violation. If you are not sure which Section is the appropriate
one to receive your complaint, you may contact the Civil Rights Division
at (888) 736-5551 or (202) 514-3847.
Educational Opportunities Section
Educational Opportunities
The Educational Opportunities Section enforces federal laws that
protect students from harassment or discrimination. The Section is
responsible for enforcing Title IV of the Civil Rights Act of 1964,
which prohibits discrimination on the basis of race, color, national
origin, sex, and religion in public schools and institutions of higher
learning; the Equal Educational Opportunities Act of 1974 which, among
other things, requires states and school districts to provide English
Language Learner (ELL) students with appropriate services to overcome
language barriers; and the Americans with Disabilities Act, which
prohibits disability discrimination. The Section also plays a
significant role in enforcing Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964
(prohibiting discrimination on the basis of race, color, and national
origin by recipients of federal funds); Title IX of the Educational
Amendments of 1972 (prohibiting discrimination on the basis of sex by
recipients of federal funds); and Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act
and the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (both of which
address disability discrimination and appropriate disability-related
services).
The Educational Opportunities Section accepts complaints of potential violations:
By e-mail to education@usdoj.govEmail links icon
By telephone at (202) 514-4092 or 1-877-292-3804 (toll-free)
By facsimile at (202) 514-8337
By letter to the following address:
U.S. Department of Justice Civil Rights Division
950 Pennsylvania Avenue, N.W.
Educational Opportunities Section, PHB
Washington, D.C. 20530
In order to properly respond to a complaint, the Section requests
that complainants provide their name, address, and the name of the
school/school district/university where the alleged discrimination
occurred. Additional information regarding how to file a complaint is
available here: http://www.justice.gov/crt/how-file-complaint#three
We need a more drastic response. Let’s call the ADL…
I am sure you know that this DOJ does not pursue cases under the Civil Rights Act where the plaintiff is white.
Wait….who vandalized a blm art installation?
Do they know? Is there video?
I was at this meeting. At the beginning of the meeting, Geovanni Cuevas ’14 asked for reporters to identify themselves: reporters from The Dartmouth and The Tab did so. Nobody from The Review identified him or herself. From this, the logical conclusion is that nobody from the Review was present at this meeting, yet it had the audacity to write an account on it. Maybe you read the D article, maybe you watched the video, but this event is no more than a 10 min walk from your dorm, you’re gonna write an article about it, and you can’t even get to the damn meeting? Are you really, honestly trying to understand the other side’s discourse if you don’t show up to a civil meeting?
Your comment is all ad hominem. I therefore conclude that the Review article above is an accurate description of what occured at the meeting.
You just put yourself on the witness stand, Dougie. So testify!
Since you don’t offer a detailed account of what happened, it’s difficult to credit that you even were there at the “damn meeting.” So exactly where were you, and when, and what did you say to whom? What exactly did you hear and see?
Did you yell at anyone? How close were you this the people at whom you yelled? Did you shove anyone? Did you threaten anyone? What exact words did you use?
BTW, since the “meeting,” as you dub it, wasn’t a static phenomenon but moved to various places at various times, your apparent but undetailed claim that it was “civil” doesn’t deserve a heck of a lot of weight.
Finally, to your alleged “argument,” when a student asks a group of people if any of them is a reporter, who says the reporter needs to raise his or her hand? Did you see what the thugs at Mizzou tried to do to the reporters there? Your so-called “logic[]” is pretty darned lame.
The video of this meeting, and the video from their, um, “demonstration” at the library, speaks for itself. This “movement” is infected by bullies, thugs, and low-grade morons. And the Dartmouth “administration” are spineless, PC panderers.
The video seems to imply they did show up and we can judge for ourselves how accurate this article is based on that.
Why should they be forced to identify themselves if its an open meeting?
Or are you saying you believe in censorship of the press so you can create more propaganda in support of the protesters?
These are immature students who are granted a short period of time in their lives to solicit change. It is sometimes referred to as the college experience. In China, students are expected to protest. The United States needs to accept this and welcome protests as they do effect awareness and change to a small degree. In this incident I suspect the student protesters selected the library because it was cold outside and they did not want to be in the cold. Further, not many people would have watched them outside. Too cold!
The protesters have much to learn about effectiveness. They were in a library. Libraries are a place of quiet study, research, and reflection. If the protesters were silent and had adequate signage, I suspect the protest would have been far more effective. Fear and disgust were the only outcomes.
Their protest was obliviously one sided. Being students at a major institution, one would expect that they are intelligent young people. However, to single out only black lives as being the basis of protest, leaves a great deal to be desired. Please correct me if I an incorrect, but all lives matter. If the protest were to have been aimed at all lives, it would have been far more effective, perhaps even novel.
Our Black population has and still does, experience less than acceptable treatment. Violence and name calling will change nothing. Anger and disgust are what will be generated. Black students at the college level will do the most good for reversing racial problems simply by individual study and education. Eradicating ignorance is the only way to stop racism. The United States if full of ignorant people. Most of them are white, but a good number of them are black. Education is the only answer.
I could write a book on the subject if I continued, but it would accomplish nothing. Anyone reading this would simply ignore it as too much to read or too much to digest in the short time we allocate to the reading of posted comments. Perhaps with contemporary technology, we have lost a great deal of tollerance for consumption of our precious time. We live too quickly.
Protests with violence, hate, name calling, and disruption, solve little in the here and now. Education will take time, but is far more effective than protest.
Black lives, white lives, red Iives, brown lives, yellow lives, gay lives, lesbian lives, handicap lives, young lives, student lives, police lives, blue lives, old lives!!!
All lives matter!!! Please recognize this. If you protest do it for all of us.
As you clearly DON’T know, All Lives Matter has been floated and sunk by the BLMers. It’s just more racism, dontcha know.
I had I had no idea. Please forgive me my friend.
I seriously doubt that the BLMers, as you say, could realistically sink [sic] the statement that all lives matter. You may allow this as an individual, but it would be impossible to destroy the full meaning of ‘all lives matter’ as a statement for all lives. Always have an open mind and examine everything for exaggerated or distorted truth. The BLMers did not sink anything, you did, by allowing them to affect you.
“The United States if full of ignorant people. Most of them are white, but a good number of them are black. Education is the only answer.”
It’s just that blacks seem to prove their ignorance in a very large obnoxious way.”
You are quite correct, however we need to remember the 1960’s and the violent white student protests of the Vietnam War.
I would personally be interested in how Dartmouth would have handled the situation had the protesters been white students and did exactly what the black students did, but with black students quietly studying and using the library facilities. How about it Dartmouth admin. Think about it. Treat all as equals and have the same attitude as in this incident. I think not. Not a good way to educate and set examples of fairness. May we now hear from you folks.
I expect no redress from Dartmouth. That is sad! Shame, shame—-
“The United States if full of ignorant people. Most of them are white…” I must say I was almost with you until this statement. What is your evidence?
My evidence, without the dialogue of a lengthy dissertation, is simply this: the United States in full of ignorant (a state of being uninformed) people, not stupid (a state of lacking intelligence) people, although one could consider stupid people as ignorant.
Education is the key to eradicating ignorance. For the most part, stupid can’t be fixed. I can only assume you read my post because you are involved in the education process, hopefully as a student.
I meant no insult to the white population or any population of the United States. Research would guide you to your own conclusion that this is a reality throughout the world. Such in life.
I admire that you strive not to be included as one who is ignorant. You would not have responded as you did if you were stupid. Enjoy yourself. Only you are you.
Your attempt at a high-minded reply did nothing to bolster your racist statement: “The United States if full of ignorant people. Most of them are white…” which of course disproves your next assertion “I meant no insult to the white population…” When you openly say that most of the ignorant people in the U.S. are white, how could that NOT be taken as an insult to the white population?
Substitute “black” for “white” if it’s still not clear.
The anti-white current in this country is very dangerous. If we object to anti-black or anti-Jewish or anti-Muslim or anti-any population, we should object to it for all populations, including whites.
Please understand, I am not anti-white and am not anti-any classified [sic] population. I do not like everyday classification of people by racial, ethnic, religious, or any referred to class of people. People are people. We are fortunate in the United States in that our constitutional government does not at present discriminate, people discriminate. People will always be part of government. Therefore, our government is looked upon as suspicious. To be equal to all, government must classify various aspects of population to assure equal treatment and to rectify past injustice. Discrimination is an individual choice. Individuals form groups, groups form movements and movements gather more individuals. A never ending cycle. This is true in government and in everyday life.
Using theory, evidence would show the white population to exceed that of the black population. It will also show or give reasonable process to understand why the predominate population will have a larger number of any given type of person, even though the percentage of that type of person may remain the same or similar throughout all classified populations. The obscure but useful 1% to 4% theory demonstrates this. Theory is very useful and with empirical evidence can sometimes be elevated to scientific fact or simply remain theory. Einstein’s theory of relativity is a prime example. It is still theory, but is nonetheless useful.
Using data and accepted science, fact beyond theory, you would find data, empirical evidence, showing the white population to be the greater portion of the population in the United States. This being fact, the white population is classified as majority and all others classified as minority. If you need to see the difference in classified populations, I would suggest that you seek the assistance of well developed population trees for visual assistance in observing the difference. This method is used for visual representation of varied aspects of population throughout the world population. Classification is a necessary element in research and if used for unbiased research, is not looked upon as racist or prejudicial.
This method would show more ignorant (uninformed) and stupid (lacking intelligence) white people than it would show black people wih the same charteristics simply because there are more whites than there are blacks. Percentages may be different for both classifications, however the white population will have the greatest number of both ignorant and stupid members. The black population may have a disproportionate number of ignorant people (larger percentage) even though fewer in actual numbers than the white population. To investigate the reason for disproportionate numbers many variables must be considered. Variables such as opportunities, background, historical advancement, education, religion, past prejudice, society, empirical evidence, race, and many others, all of which could be construed as prejudicial, even though they are simply scientific variables. Seeing reality gives avenues for change and to pursue eradication of lack of equality.
Therefore it is reasonable to state that the white population has the greatest number (the most) ignorant people. Please feel free to do your own research and investigation. That is what eradicating ignorance is all about.
To further clarify my position I offer the following information: I am white, am not ignorant, am not stupid, and was born in the United States and have lived here my entire life. I have traveled throughout the world and have no desire to live anywhere but the Unitrd States. I have only one prejudice, if I may call it that, I do not like people or events causing injustice against fellow people, not only in this country, but throughout the world. I am not a racists. I like everyone except for the aforementioned bad guys (used as a colloquial reference, girls are included). Further, I am classified as an ‘older American’. I am amongst the mature in age and do not take kindly to this classification even though it is necessary to allow government to govern. I am part of a minority of the white population. Further, I realize this to beneficial to me, even though I do not like being classified. I consider myself to be me, an individual, not a classification. Anyone may choose to do the same.
It is quite oblivious that you have opinions that could be looked upon as somewhat prejudicial. Your assumption that I made racial and high-minded [sic] statements indicates this. I did not intend to cause this response. Perhaps I was somewhat remiss in my diction. I apologize if I led you astray.
I cannot offer you more in redress. I have no desire to compose a dissertation for you as an individual. I suspect that you will be satisfied in your quest only when you do your own unbiased search for fact. Kep your mind open, form your own opinions, but do so based on truth, not supposition.
I hope I have addressed your questions. I cannot make you accept my answers.
Thank you for your replies.
Well Mr. Needham, this is quite a well-constructed and intellectual, if somewhat loquacious, approach to the subject. From a purely academic point of view, one can correctly say that, since there are more white people in the U.S. than black by a factor of 5 to 6, based on the latest U.S. census (theory unnecessary), there are likely more ignorant white people than black, in absolute terms. One could also deduce, using similar data, that the percentage of ignorant blacks is higher than that of whites, using data points like rate of high school dropouts, rate of completed bachelor’s degree or higher, rate of incarceration, rate of single motherhood, and such. Other observations, such as the oft-repeated idea that being academic and/or intellectual is “white” as stated among those who value “street cred” and looking tough, as well as theories that whites developed AIDS to kill blacks etc., that are repeated in black churches and other venues, suggest a very high level of ignorance in the black community. Indeed, the high percentage of blacks who think that Trayvon Martin was a victim of racism when he was shot (aided by media like NBC who admitted editing the 911 call to make Zimmerman appear to volunteer that Martin “looked black”), that Michael Brown was profiled, stalked, and murdered for being black by Wilson (blatantly counter to the DOJ’s own report on the case), that Freddie Gray, Eric Garner, and any other black man shot by a white cop was absolutely a victim of police brutality and “systemic racism” before learning the facts, and indeed showing little interest in facts that contradict these ridiculous assertions, is another indication of a very dangerous type of ignorance. White cops have been killed, and their families left without a husband and father, because of this ignorance. It is this igorance that led to the BLM movement and their appalling assault at the Dartmouth library. Such a display should cause fear in all of us, especially when the Vice Provost refers to it as “beautiful” and apologizes to the thugs who behaved in such a disgraceful manner. This is a very dangerous time in this country. If it continues that assaulting, threatening, and hurling racial epithets at white people is met with apologies and rewards, one can only surmise that anarchy is not far away. The type of discrimination faced by blacks in the 1960s is hugely different from today’s environment, and if we keep indulging the thin-skinned crybullies like those that stormed the Dartmouth library or harangued the Yale administrator or surrounded the U of Missouri’s president’s car in a threatening manner and made up lies that the car “hit” them, we will have a society full of aggressive, hypersensitive complainers. When white students are suspended and investigated for calling blacks the “N-word” but black students are issued apologies and given money for programs for “students of color” when they hassle innocent white kids who are studying and call them “filthy white f * c k s” and “filthy white racist piece of s * i t,” we are in trouble. In what way is that justice? It smacks more of revenge to me and must be squashed if we are to have any real balance among the races. Weak, spineless, biased university administrators exacerbate this problem.
Thank you for the thoughtful exchange.
One of these violent black mobs is going to do this to the wrong person, in the wrong place, and all hell is going to break loose. Mark my words…
Indeed. Too bad the ROTC is no longer present. Coincidence?
The Board needs to fire Ameer and Dever at the very least. Wait until no full tuition paying white students apply anymore. Instead of cutting just the financial aid to Internationals, they will have to cut all financial aid. Just wait and see how much yield and applications from white students drops this year and next. My friend has a daughter who is considering applying to Dartmouth–I told him to take it off the list.
Don’t hold your breath. The number of applicants far outstrips the spots, and they can readily work the wait-list and early decision applicant pool to get those full tuition students and game the yield.
Where Dartmouth will get hit is in the quality of students, not the quantity.
Based on the “quality” of the students who participated in the protest, I’d say that ship has sailed…
That ship hit an iceberg.
That ship hit a reef and sank long ago!! Lol
You (as a class) may have a claim against the school for damage to the brand. As you are probably aware, these type schools were already on the bubble decision making wise for many of the non-PC crowd. This – pretty much puts them out. I can’t support this with $$, regardless of education. Very quickly the Dartmouth brand will mean Leftist freak. My children are already advised to limit interactions.
As for the quality of students – everyone with more than Kool Whip for brains already knows.
I would love to see the avg. ACT/SAT of these student protestors. Just how low below the bottom percentile does Darmouth go in admitting some of these students? Anyone know?
I would like to know who is paying their tuition. My guess is NOT themselves or parents.
Just above an Idaho spud
daniel –
I’ve been a student of these numbers for some time. In general, they don’t have to dig too deep to get their numbers. Average Dart = SAT 2200, with 25% > 2350 (nice!). To meet their diversity goals they need to dip down to the 2000/2050 tranch. put simply – there are fewer than 2,000 African American students every year with SAT >2050. Those 2,000 need to supply the entire country – all top schools. (Dropping to SAT 1900 picks up another 2,000 to spread around.) The problem, as many here probably know – is there is a significant communication gap between a 2300 guy and a 2000 person. Not being judgemental – it is what it is. The problem is – the 2050 kid got letters from all Ivies, and visit offers, etc. He has been messaged that he is a superstar. The 2300 guys have to downshift twice just to talk with him. This has nothing to do with race – it is just numbers.
You will never see how low Dartmouth goes – you can only infer from the generally available numbers.
This is COMPLETELY TRUE. The Alumni Fund and the underlying endowment can BUY students’ scholarships, keep the place full and pay the grossly bloated administration’s 18 gender deans…and survive for over another decade…by then, all of America will have come over to the “Dartmouth Plan”. Just remember: my freshman year, ENGLISH I was “The Dartmouth BIble”…edited by a D professor of religion, and read COVER TO COVER. Imagine that now….the times are a’changing. Dr. J 1955…a vertical dinosaur still sharp who remembers a great education.
Fire Ameer and Dever? They reacted the way they did specifically to keep their cushy jobs.
They were hired to organize this kind of thing.
Let’s see if the school gets away with it or not.
These students got into peoples faces in a very threatening manner; language and body language -never mind chasing people and pinning them against a wall. Why are they not ALL EXPELLED. If the school does nothing to address this horrendous behavior I think every kid who was threatened and called a white F—k in that library has a good case for a lawsuit against Dartmouth. Attention all lawyers!!
In order to expel someone for pinning a student against the wall….you would have to find a student who pinned someone against the wall. You would need a victim to come forward. You would need evidence – eyewitnesses, video etc. yet we have none of that. But the Review “corroborated every anecdote” or so they say.
No one will even if it happened because that is what happens to victims of bullies.
Well there have been published accounts of events by people unsympathetic to the protesters, as seen here:
http://www.dartblog.com/data/2015/11/012338.php
These detail the same kind of verbal harassment we see on video, but still no eyewitness reports of violence. It seems like most of the school is against what happened at the library, so I don’t think a victim would feel all that discouraged from reporting – unless most of her social circle were part of the protest.
However, Parent ’16 who has been commenting here told me that one student she knows confided in her that she was shoved. I encouraged her to call the school if she hadn’t already.
Your First Ammendment Right to spin this racial bigotry apology aside, unsympathetic is a curious word, so a video is less evidence that an eyewitness.
You are couching your thug behavior, so lets bring it out, a white coed will file a formal complaint and bring down more violence, opps sorry racial solidarity, on herself? Is that what you are saying.
Again you do sound like the Aryan Nation types on the Nazi war crimes. Interesting, the African American intelligentsia sounding like the Klan. Dr. King would be……..ashamed.
Stop, do you not have finals to study for?
Don’t you have a thanksgiving family gathering to attend? I was just checking my email and it looks like you’re responding to my comments one by one. How anything I’ve said reminds you of skinheads is really beyond me, so you’re going to have to take step-by-step through the logic on that one. But after thanksgiving.
Being a fool and taking pride in it is not what a formal education is about. You and alot of others do not understand you are playing into the whole affirmative action, unqualified argument. Dropping SAT scores led to this situation, allowing universities to garner more minority students. Thus lowering standards.
Age old racial issues aside, this is not now to address this. Dr. King’s whole message was assimalation, to become equal from the inside. There are videos of anglo students getting harassed in the library, the message is african americans were not in the library studying they were instigating, thus not serious students. They and you are playing into this architype. Might want to rethink this approach. With that I do not have any more time to waste.
Yes I have dual masters in engineering, National Honor Society and a student of Christ, Gandi and Dr. King, they are successful,
Uh…I think your comment was meant for someone else. There’s nothing in your comment that relates to anything I said.
I stuck it in. She didn’t say no. Even if no one was pinned against a wall, enough crimes were committed for the Hanover Police to be involved. Hanlon bought them off.
An example of Dartmouth’s finest…
You may want to stop, you bigotry is showing for all to see.
Bravo to the student journalists with guts to print the truth and Dartmouth Review to stand by its story. You can be certain you will be harassed, lied about and marginalized in the near future with the very tactics these minority supposedly condemn. Stay strong.
Yet the review has presented I evidence for physical assault.
Go back and read the article that reported the riot. Here’s a link just to make it easy for you: http://xpj.hnq.mybluehost.me//eyes…
I already had read that article. It doesn’t provide any citation for the claim that someone was shoved against the wall. Nor did any of the published accounts of the library events – both for and against the protest.
Howevern another commenter here, Parent ’16 has said that a student told her that she was shoved. I have no reason to doubt her, and encouraged her to call the university and pressure them to aggressively pursue any and all leads.
You cannot use a name that sounds like an aspiring ghetto hood rat and expect to be taken seriously.
You do sound like the skin head Aryan Nation types on the Nazi war crimes. Interesting, the African American intelligentsia sounding like the Klan. Dr. King would be……..ashamed.
That’s not what the Klan sounded like when the local authorities were covering for the Brotherhood of the White Sheets.They boasted about the damage they’d caused!
They can’t sound like the Klan-at least not like the original Klan , when Bedford Forrest was Grand Dragon!They actually had a sense of humor at the beginning, albeit a childish, Halloween prank one!
Videos all over YouTube of the black fascists.
And yet you don’t link to any…hmmm I wonder why that is. I will only accept evidence showing someone being shoved against a wall.
Second. Why are you on a four month old comment thread?
We can’t have the glorious project of Thought Control being undermined by people actually thinking, now can we? Once you let that start, it tends to spread!
What annoys me the most is that followers pretend they care if students were mistreated or harassed. We all saw the videos. Those kids are so spoiled that they don’t see what’s wrong with heckling other students. Dartmouth is unSAFE? How middle class to you have to be to consider rural Mass so dangerous to your fragile cultlke mind that abusing others is justified? I live in a city with a high black murder rate. These kids could not last ten minutes in a poor community and that is the problem. They are way way too precious to do the kind of ground work in the kinds of neighborhoods where black men are shot by cops. Cops don’t shoot Dartmouth kids. Why don’t these first world whingers go help the people they claim to care about instead of having temper tantrums in their cloisterd shangri las. Dartmouth has always done its best to keep the riff raft out so stop pretending you are not the very elite who keeps the masses down.
You as a college have a duty to ALL of your students, not just the ones getting media attention. You are allowing many of your students to be ostracized, stepped on, shut down, and discriminated against to appease others, none of which contributes to anything resembling a safe environment for anyone but these few.
You are minimizing legitimate issues in favor of politics. And in doing so, you are failing all of your students, the ones harmed in this so called “peaceful protest” but not giving them support to voice their feelings AND the protesters themselves by enabling their behavior. Shame on you.
None so blind as those who refuse to see.
Given what is going on in France right now, the infantile behavior of these students and, yes, administrators is actually stunning. These students should be worrying about the Islamic State, not imaginary oppression at Dartmouth, Yale, Columbia or wherever.
Here’s what these students feel about “what’s going on in France” & the terrorists of ISIS/ISIL~
http://www.breitbart.com/national-security/2015/11/14/mizzou-campus-activists-and-black-lives-matter-complain-about-paris-stealing-the-spotlight/
it’s mind blowing selfishness like I’ve never seen.
@ moonsuagrlily ❛ั﹏❛ัღ) ?
I encourage every innocent bystander at that library to take any video footage they have to the local police department and/or to a lawyer for inspection. The protesters appear to be guilty of disturbing the peace, at the very least. If any of them physically blocked other students from leaving, that’s also likely a crime under whatever state law is in effect there. The verbal insults, obnoxious as they are, are probably free speech but harassment and intimidation are definitely not. I don’t have much sympathy to speak of for these protesters, who have likely benefited from educational opportunities most kids their age can only dream of and who will be equally privileged when it comes time for a job search. Shame on all of them and shame on the gutless administrator who dared to apologize to them because others have criticized their disgraceful behavior.
The verbal insults, obnoxious as they are, are probably free speech
Not. They are clearly what the Supreme Court identified as ‘fighting words’, and should be actionable.
I read some of the definitions of “fighting words” and now I would have to agree that the insults allegedly directed at people studying in the library definitely qualified under the definition. The protesters are lucky that they did not incite a riot resulting in serious physical injuries, especially given the level of provocation.. If they had picketed the library while chanting and carrying signs with similar printed messages instead of directing the inflammatory language at specific individuals studying in the library, it probably would not have been “fighting words.” The protesters deserve to be charged.
The court has narrowed the concept of ‘fighting words’ over the years. As far as I know, there has been no recent application of the doctrine. Some first amendment scholars would even say that the doctrine is dead.
Oh yeah? Try getting in a Black person’s face and scream the N-word at them. Then see what legalities are enforced.
Didn’t Mizzou students get their president to resign due to a couple of people saying things that were racist? I think it’s actually considered hate speech. I’m just stunned at how Dartmouth is handling this. It’s completely nonsensical.
Weren’t those black Mizzou students labeled whiners, crybabies, and told to stay home with mommy and daddy if they are scared of words?
Actually, no. There is no verified racist verbal assault at the Univ. of MO that comes close to what just happened at Dartmouth.
And we now know that at least two of the claims were blatant lies. No KKK on campus, and Jonathan Butler is on video walking into the president’s car. He alleged he had been hit by the president’s car at a demonstration.
Technically, there is the Kappa Kappa Kappa fraternity.
Yea, they were, because that was what they were all protesting. and the student body president was outed as a liar.
Hate speech is protected under the First Amendment, as is profanity. I don’t see any direct threats of violence being made. What they aren’t allowed to do is harass people or prevent others from leaving or shut down the library. Security should have been called to throw them out and charges should be brought.
I agree, although if security is called….what next?
That’s exactly what the ‘protestors’ want. They want confrontation and to be forcible removed, thinking it will help galvanize their cause.
I don’t know the solution for these misguided bullies….perhaps ignore them totally until they collapse among themselves?
Tear gas right in the middle, one can only and they all run I bet
It is protected from consequences from the GOVERNMENT. The school itself can expel the cretins.
No, that’s what happened at all at that university.
I find it strange that the Review says it “corroborated every anecdote” yet refuses to share any sources in this article. And they have every incentive to do so now because the anecdotes run contrary to campus police reports.
Like Vice Provost Ameer, you manage to make a multitude of mistakes with only a few words. First, journalists don’t reveal the identity of sources who have asked to be anonymous. Whether The Review has an incentive to, or would like to, reveal its sources, it is ethically bound not to do so if those sources requested anonymity. Second, nothing the Review has written runs contrary to any police reports. The police have simply stated that they have not received any criminal complaints. That doesn’t mean that such criminal conduct didn’t occur. It just means that no victim has come forward to file a complaint with the police. Given the national media attention, the statements from Ameer making clear that the Dartmouth Administration has already decided to take the side of the protesters and the verbal and possibly physical abuse that the protesters would dish out to any victim who came forward publicly, it is not surprising that no victim has come forward on the record. Funny how the left claims that sexual assault is vastly underreported because victims are understandably afraid to report assaults to the police but the left argues that there must be no victims here if no one files a police report. Third, the Review is not the only source that reported on the behavior of the protesters. You are conveniently ignoring the similar eyewitness accounts on The Tab and Yik Yak. Are you insinuating that all of these are untrue or just The Review?
If there are other eyewitness reports of someone being pinned against the wall, then let’s see them. It really isn’t unreasonable to ask for a primary source for a physical assault claim for a case where there would have been dozens of eyewitnesses.
Furthermore, the Tab has an article written by various participants in the protest. They are all heavily biased, one will notice. Though they do all back up the claim that someone started crying and someone shouted “f#€¥ your white tears!”. However, none of them say anything about someone being pinned against the wall.
I haven’t seen anything from Yik Yak. I don’t live anywhere near Dartmouth, so would I even be able to? I don’t know how yik yak works, but I heard something about it being very localized. If there are any screen caps, that would be very helpful.
The reason I’m focusing on the physical assault claim is because it has been mentioned in all of the national media outlets that have covered this story, often in headlines. So it should be well supported. But instead we have denials by the protesters, no eyewitness reports, no campus safety reports, and nothing on that one video that we’ve all seen. At this point, the Review is looking about as credible as Rolling Stone. Unless, that is, someone comes forward with information.
Regardless of whether “physical” violence occurred (and I’m fairly certain it did because at least one student I spoke with was shoved), these students were verbally harassed merely because of their skin color-which is morally atrocious no matter what race the perpetrator is.Why don’t you check with OPAL how many bias incident reports have been filed as bias against race (whites) because of this protest?
“The reason I’m focusing on the physical assault claim is because it has been mentioned in all of the national media outlets that have covered this story, often in headlines”
You don’t read or listen very well then. Or are you making the spurious claim that because nobody got hit, beaten up, or killed, that verbally harassing someone in a threatening manner merely because of their skin color is perfectly acceptable? Then you are a racist.
No one in their right mind will come forward after Ameer’s remarks. Why should they open themselves up to more abuse from these tantrum-throwing jerks who get upset that someone may have a different opinion than them or they don’t want to engage with people (the BLM crowd) who don’t know how to treat other people with respect? The administration has made it clear they have no morality and choose not to enforce the student Code of Conduct or their new Citizenship Pledge, so yes, many of these students in the library now truly feel “unsafe” on campus.
Oh, but hey congratulations on making the Dartmouth campus environment worse for everyone! “Shut it down” indeed – only idiots who can’t problem-solve try to solve every problem with rage and anger. If you are angry with T-shirts being taken down, complain, write an editorial to inform people, hold a news conference, replace the t-shirts and vow that this will not continue – get people to empathize with you and get on your side. I think that T-shirt incident was horrible too, but to then verbally attack and harass innocent people because of the color of their skin in response to that? That is never justified. It just shows an infantile desire to take your anger and hatred out on some proxy, shows poor judgement, a lack of self-control, and some degree of sociopathy. If you can’t control your emotions better than that and come up with other solutions, then why would anyone bother to listen to you, when you have proven yourself to be racist hypocrites?
If you think that I think it was all okay as long as no one got shoved, you are mistaken.
“And I’m fairly certain it did because at least one student I spoke with was shoved”
Bingo! Now we have some evidence. Thank you. It’s monday morning, the school offices are about to open. If that student is unwilling to come forward, then you need to on her behalf. Call call call! Force them to aggressively pursue the allegation. I assume you know that student’s name, so we now have a victim’s name. Now all we need are multiple eyewitnesses and a perps name.
“No one in their right mind would come forward after Ameer’s remarks”. Unacceptable excuse for inaction. You know what will happen if you don’t try? Absolutely nothing. Now get to it!
I hope you expected the same level of proof when it was #oscarssowhite time.They had nothing,just blanket, detail-less spouts of drivel.”Institutional racism” but ZERO names of the people/companies accused.
In order to expect that same level of proof when it was #oscarssowhite time I would have first needed to pay attention to it.
Masterfully put… couldn’t have said it better myself…. this seems less about justice and more about revenge..
LOL – do you live under a rock?
What in my comment was inaccurate? Is there anything to verify the anecdote about someone being pinned against a wall? That’s something that should be taken very seriously. Is there video? Eyewitness testimony? A report by the victim?
Nice straw man. I never claimed your comment was inaccurate. Why don’t you answer the question? DO YOU LIVE UNDER A ROCK? Have you been asleep with Rip Van Winkle?
Any white kid who put any of this information forward would be subject to attack from the students and administration at Dartmouth as well as possibly the national media.
Do you seriously not understand this?
In this case the Black Lies Matter movement/mob is screaming racist insults – and the university tells them THEY are the ones who need a safe space?
Dude – everybody but you seems to know. That administration is racist to the core. People aren’t coming forward because they have already reached that conclusion.
All I’m looking for is a primary source for the Pinned Against The Wall anecdote. That’s it. I agree this administration had been incredibly irresponsible in its apparent condoning of the library incident. However, until someone can come up with a primary source for the Pinned Against The Wall anecdote, the only argument is “Listen and Believe”, and the Review has about as much credibility as Roling Stone.
It’s time for people to put their cards on the table.
Neither the administration nor the “activists” deny the remainder of their performance – the shouting of racial epithets etc. The fact that the Uni is condoning this – is all one needs to see.
The brownshirt tactics and propaganda of the modern left are well established. Anyone can observe them nearly any day.
Your comparison with Rolling Stone is weak and silly. Rolling Stone reported an event that didn’t even happen – the entire story was a fabrication. Here you wish to brush the lies of the left onto this story, based on lack of positive evidence of a claim. The comparison with the UVA case is not the reporting; the correct comparison is with the response of the administration. In fact – organizations were punished at UVA for an event that did not even occur. People have learned that lesson, they understand that the modern left University will punish the innocent and reward the guilty based on politics, and are correctly not presenting themselves for public abuse. People are learning machines, and this is what our world has taught them.
I disagree with your conclusion – no it is not time for people to “put their cards on the table”. What you are going to see is the opposite – people are withdrawing from interaction with these people. People are picking up their stakes and leaving the table. The time for expecting rational responses from irrational people is long past. Normal people are moving on. And this is the damage to the Dartmouth brand – anyone related to the school will have to overcome this PC hurdle in the future – they will be assumed to be part of this culture until they demonstrate otherwise.
In fact – if you look at the comments on this story it is normal people engaging each other. You don’t see them engaging the freaks. The freaks are lost, and normal people are not going to risk trying to catch a falling knife. Videos and photos undoubtedly exist – you are seeing the end of dialogue, not the start.
Well the brownshirts actually physically assaulted people. That’s one thing.
Either way, I think you misinterpreted what I meant by putting cards on the table. I meant “present your evidence.” I still haven’t seen any primary sources for anyone being pinned against a wall that night. All we have from the Review amounts to “listen and believe.”
Putting this in a broader left/right context will not conjure up any evidence for a physical assault. Either somebody pinned somebody else against a wall that night, or somebody didn’t. I really don’t think it’s unreasonable to ask for primary sources here.
Yes – I agree with you. You write “I really don’t think it is unreasonable ….” – and that is true. YOU don’t think it is unreasonable.
What I’m trying to explain to you is that a huge majority of us aren’t interested in making rational presentations to the irrational racists running these institutions. And that is why you don’t see the data. The administration is being trusted – to act like the racist dirtbags that they are.
No one has to prove anything to YOU, and anyone still treating this modern society and administrations as anything but racist frankly seems a bit slow or in denial.
Even within this article you have the administration responding to the Black Lies group, following their racist intimidation of an innocent student body – by saying things like “Conservative world is not very nice”. Dude – the person here short on the “listen and believe” capability – might be yourself. Because you can watch that on the video. Can you not see the forest for the trees?
I’m looking for one particular tree in this forest. And again, I’m bringing it right back to the claim that a student was pinned against the wall.
So, is there any evidence for that at all? There were dozens of eyewitnesses. At least one person was recording it with his phone.
Saying that the school administration is racist may be true, but all that line of argument does is serve as an excuse for the lack of any evidence for someone being pinned against the wall.
Again: it’s not unreasonable to ask for primary sources here. Nor is it unreasonable for me to keep bringing this thread right back to the claim that someone was pinned against the wall.
So I ask again: does anyone have anything to support the claim that someone was pinned against the wall that night at the library?
I will take my own advice. Goodbye.
Let’s recap: no evidence of physical assault. Lots of headlines saying there was. The Review refuses to elaborate on its “corroboration.”
I’ll keep looking for evidence.
LOL, you like yourself so much you favorite your own stupid comments.
Look for the #oscarssowhite evidence.Let me know if you find any.
Like I said, I didn’t pay attention to it months ago and I’m not paying attention to it now. How’d you find my comments anyway?
Victims of bullying do not typically come forward and would any sane person when the Admins backed the people disrupting things. You can’t even comment on the the Dartmouth FB page about it or they will take it down. Censorship anyone?
Victims, yes. But there are other eyewitness reports like these:
http://www.dartblog.com/data/2015/11/012338.php
That don’t describe any violence. However, Parent ’16, who has been commenting elsewhere, told me that a student confided in her that she was shoved. I have no reason to doubt her, so I encouraged her to call the school immediately.
I would also like to suggest that anyone supporting Our Bloc (https://www.linkedin.com/company/our-bloc?trk=ppro_cprof) be aware that their leadership was directly involved in direct harassment of the students in the library.
Be careful with what and who your company monies are supporting.
” There’s a whole conservative world out there that’s not very nice,” Her statement would have been accurate if she had simply left out the word “conservative”, but the truth doesn’t fit into their victimized, racist agenda.
So in the video, Ameer says, “We can adjudicate those students who are doing anything in any way that is threatening.” She was, of course, referring to her concern that “protesters” are being “threatened” by those who have criticized their actions. This is catastrophically bad judgment. It ups the ante by inviting “protesters” to enlist the support of the administration in taking formal disciplinary action against anyone who challenges the protesters. If you want matters to continue to spiral out of control, this is the perfect way to do it.
I am petrified this is going to get so much uglier. I hope & pray somehow this is slowed or diverted before it becomes so out of control that violence, & maybe even a Kent State type of reaction is the outcome.
Don’t *ANY* of them, students & faculty alike, don’t they see the dangerous road this is going down?
Peaceful protesting is fine. This…this shit is a 1-way ticket to race wars breaking out on campuses everywhere. I hope I’m completely wrong & overthinking this.
@ moonsugarlily (⊙﹏⊙✿)
They want the win, win.
A race war or continued intimidation and strong arm tactics against the white students.
The administration is being used and using the students of color to consolidate their power racist illegitimate power.
It is absurd for the administrators to suggest that shouting the mindless slogan “F*** your white privilege” was not “personally” directed at the students whose legitimate use of the library was disrupted very personally and directly. Do administrators understand the basics of the language. The pronoun “you” means “you over there.” Morons!
What this story also illustrates is that it is in fact the administrators who are running this disgraceful show. Oh, yes, in their typical and skillfully executed passive aggressive way. But make no mistake. It is the university administrations that stand to gain MORE bureaucrats, more power over student lives and manners of discourse, an unlimited reach in badgering and hectoring faculty as well as students, etc. Meanwhile, to pay for all those extra administrators and wasted diversity training programs, tuition goes up and up, along with student debt. The student protesters, whose insecurities and rage are fueled by higher debt, affirmative action’s cruel jokes, and watered down humanities curricula, are cannon fodder. The polite enablers of their rage are the very group, the only group, benefiting from it.
For what it’s worth, my generation (“baby boomers”) who started all this insanity with their hippy BS, druggie lifestyles and Vietnam War protests, owes every student at Dartmouth a big apology for the consequences of their selfish actions and neo-Marxist ideology.
Here is some of the background:
1. “The Origins of Political Correctness” http://www.academia.org/the-origins-of-political-correctness/
2. “The Hidden History of Political Correctness” https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0IticH5FwJs
It appears that the College Admin will indeed fully investigate the charges that these students were guilty of studying while white. Although the video appears to provide unmistakable evidence that the students were studying and many of them appear to be white, I hope that the College will not assume that they are guilty based solely on the color of their faces and the laptops and books in front of them. Some of the students may not have been studying but rather FaceBooking. Also, some who appear white may have the requisite amount of a favored heritage in order to escape punishment for being white. Still others may be able to prove a reasonable basis for identifying with another ethnicity, for example, an affinity for cooking a great grandmother’s Native American recipe. The accused should be given a chance to justify their attempt to use the library that evening.
In addition, mitigating circumstances should be considered when handing out the discipline. It is conceivable that even the whitest of the students sincerely regret choosing their parents to be white and if they had to do it all over again, they would have selected parents “of color.” Of course, a thorough hearing may also reveal circumstances that might warrant more harsh sanctions, such as if a white student looked at one of the protestors funny.
Nevertheless, the point is that justice should be served based on the facts, not innuendo. It may be challenging to imagine how the offenders might possibly defend themselves if caught red-handed in the ’02 Room with relatively pale skin and open books and laptops in front of them, but please give them a chance. Even if these studiers deserve to be Parkhursted for a term or two, their suspensions will not begin until next term anyway so a few weeks to sort out the evidence will not materially delay them being punished for their crimes against nature, the College and all humanity.
Students at the Dartmouth Review, GOOD FOR YOU!!!!!! This is actual journalism – reporting what you saw and refusing to back down when pressured by those above you. There are a growing number of people in this country that use double-speak to make things seem like they are not. They will try to make you think that what you witnessed with your own two eyes is not actually true and that you, in fact, are the problem. This is a very dangerous trend in our country. It is an eerily Orwellian trend that in the past has led countries like China, Cuba, USSR, and North Korea down the path of communism and complete control over it’s citizens. The purpose of such tactics are to silence those who do not follow the agenda, whose thoughts, opinions, and words do not fit the narrative. You, the younger generation, are the most vulnerable cohort of the population that is being targeted currently with this form of oppression. The black lives matter movement is using white guilt, shout down tactics, and now apparently violence to try to convince you that what you know to be true is wrong. Are there really egregious acts of racism being committed on these campuses? At Dartmouth? If so, why are they spending all of their time talking about Halloween costumes and Beats headphones? Really?! It’s racist to own Beats? Beats are produced by Dr. Dre. This is what I mean by double-speak. Just because people tell you something is true (over and over again), doesn’t mean it actually is. Even your administrators are are trying to make you believe that what you saw in the library didn’t actually happen. The provost said it was ‘a beautiful movement.’ Students of Dartmouth, it will only get worse if your generation doesn’t stand up and say ‘Enough, we choose freedom. Freedom of speech and freedom of thought!.’ Follow the lead of your fellow brave students at the Dartmouth Review and refuse to be bullied into guilt, silence, or worse yet, apathy.
Gas lighting has become a popular tactic.
Now if only the Review would publish some actual evidence of a student being pinned against the wall.
Admit it you are one of the BLM people at Dartmouth.
Maoist Red Guard ring a bell?
Black on white violence is not a crime. It’s REVENGE! Quite justified revenge. Any of you tidy whiteys who show up for these riots thinking you are immune, think again. It is not the content of your character. It is the color of your skin. And that ain’t changing. Or, more to the point, it ain’t improving. There is always room for precipitous decline as long as the campus is not burning. Forward.
Huh?
So I guess ‘F*** your black privilege’ shouted in the face of a black student would not be considered personal or racist? Good to know…
I’m amazed there isn’t a “try it to my face” response below this lol.
They need to throw this provost out. Disgusting behavior.
Explain to me why I would want to spend $65,000 a year to send a child to Dartmouth. A place where the library is a place to be harangued and harassed, not a place to study.
Hmmm sounds like the the same complaints of black students who have the N word screamed at them as they walk across campus…
Really? Can you name one such incident at Dartmouth?
You’ve been challenged to cite certified examples of what you just claimed.
The Internet is waiting….
I think it’s ok now to just “say” some people did that, or even that you think someone thought that, you know, because they didn’t join in the “protest,” or really, just because they were white. Then that makes everything else ok: overt racism, threats, even actual assault. Sometimes you have to destroy the safe place to save it.
In Dartmouth? Someone screaming the N word? You are talking nonsense…and you are well aware of it.
These same students who listen to rap music with repetitive uses of the ” N word ” ? Repetitive uses of slurs and slogans degrading women ?
These same students who just can’t help calling their brothern the ” N word” ?
Are we talking about these same students ?
Because the students I’m talking about live by the mantra of :
It’s ok for me and my peps to use certain ” words” , but don’t let me dare hear you even mumble the words me and my people use. Ever.
Is it the same students? No way to know. But surely you realize that rap music doesn’t justify anyone yelling a racial slur.
Do you really believe BLM members listen to country or southern rock ?
I’m not saying rap music justifies you yelling out slurs. But it sure is hypocritical in the highest honor, when blacks call everyone from their father to their sons ” nwords”, but if a white even thinks of that ” word” he or she is guilty of high crimes.
First of all, “blacks” don’t necessarily listen to rap music or call each other the n word. Individual black people make that choice.
And if they do, you have to see it for what it is-appropriating a word that’s been used to denigrate you to take away some of its power.
For example, my girlfriends and I call each other b*tch because we’re proud of one of us standing up for herself, or as a joke. But that doesn’t mean that you can walk up and say “hey b*tch” to me.
I’ve seen overweight people call themselves fat. Does that make you feel like you can call them that, too?
You must have never lived among blacks. Take it from me country gal, they are nothing like the huxtables.
Take it from me, nobody wants to hear your bigoted crap.
Bigoted crap ? Answer the easy question. Have you ever lived in and around a large majority of blacks ?
Or are you a country girl or suburbanite that only knows what your TV shows you ?
Nobody wants to hear your bigoted crap. Nobody wants to hear your pathetic observations. Nobody is interested in hearing you pretend to be an expert on a group that you aren’t even bright enough to see as individuals.
Ohhh ok. So I should move quickly to the back of the bus, and stfu? How open and tolerant of you. You must be a modern day liberal ? Is that safe to assume ? If so, it must be safe to assume that youre vehemently against the high practice of identity politics , used by the left ? Or otherwise your a major hypocrite, and very ignorant. I suppose that’s safe to assume since you contridict individual judgement over identity politics ?
Actually, many, many people in this country are extremely interested in what Sean Bro and others like him have to say if it is true. Uncomfortable truths are still truths. Simply labeling what he says as “bigoted crap” and claiming that you speak for everyone is not “bright” at all, nor does it win an argument. You asked for no evidence or supporting fact. You simply, viscerally, pulled out the “bigot” label and dismissed him because you don’t like uncomfortable truths about black culture in this country. I also notice that you still refused to answer the question – Have you ever lived in and around a large majority of blacks?
Oh, I didn’t “pull out” the bigot label. I simply told an uncomfortable truth.
A person who wants to justify using the n word because the n word shows up in rap music is a crap-filled bigot.
Where I live/have lived/don’t live doesn’t make it all right for him to complain about not being able to freely use the n word.
“Oh, I didn’t “pull out” the bigot label. I simply told an uncomfortable truth.” What truth exactly did you tell?
“A person who wants to justify using the n word because the n word shows up in rap music is a crap-filled bigot.” Where exactly did SeanBro “justify using the n word?”
“Where I live/have lived/don’t live doesn’t make it all right for him to complain about not being able to freely use the n word.” Where exactly did he “complain about not being able to freely use the n word?” You may want to read his posts carefully before you answer.
And you still haven’t answered his question. Have you ever lived in and around a large majority of blacks? If you have, then you’d understand part of his point.
I read his posts carefully the first time.
Here’s the uncomfortable truth that I told:
“First of all, “blacks” don’t necessarily listen to rap music or call each other the n word. Individual black people make that choice.
And if they do, you have to see it for what it is-appropriating a word that’s been used to denigrate you to take away some of its power.
For example, my girlfriends and I call each other b*tch because we’re proud of one of us standing up for herself, or as a joke. But that doesn’t mean that you can walk up and say “hey b*tch” to me.
I’ve seen overweight people call themselves fat. Does that make you feel like you can call them that, too?”
I already addressed the baiting question. Where I live doesn’t matter. Where you live doesn’t matter. Everyone got his lame point, and nobody [at least nobody with any sense] wants to hear his explanation or complaints.
Nice cutting and pasting. You have failed to use any original logic to explain your comments. That said,
“Here’s the uncomfortable truth that I told: First of all, “blacks” don’t necessarily listen to rap music or call each other the n word. Individual black people make that choice.” And your evidence is? Note that SeanBro’s evidence is his direct experience living among a majority-black population. What is your evidence?
“And if they do, you have to see it for what it is-appropriating a word that’s been used to denigrate you to take away some of its power.” Why do I HAVE TO see it that way? Where did you learn this nonsense? No doubt some social issues class taught by a leftwing loon who wants to redefine everything to make objectionable behavior by blacks sound better. SeanBro is absolutely correct. The term n i g g e r is disrespectful no matter who says it, and it is a mark of a low-brow person to call someone that in jest. Girls who call each other “b i t c h” are likewise low-brow. If it’s a rude term, no one should use it. Period. Making up some twisted rationale that blacks are somehow “taking back power” is simply ridiculous.
Where exactly did SeanBro “justify using the n word?”
Where exactly did he “complain about not being able to freely use the n word?”
“Everyone got his lame point” Based on your comments, no, not everyone got it.
“nobody [at least nobody with any sense] wants to hear his explanation or complaints” Incorrect. Plenty of people with “sense” want to hear his explanations because they are totally valid. The urban black community’s irreverant behavior, including calling each other “n i g g e r,” dressing like criminals, calling black conservatives “sellouts,” “Uncle Tom,” “house n i g g e r,” etc., is simply degenerate in nature and needs calling out. The hyprocrisy in calling other blacks “n i g g e r” is called out by plenty of educated blacks, not just folks like SeanBro. It is entirely valid. You are so invested, however, in a certain narrative that requires defending bad behavior among blacks or shielding them from any kind of criticism that you cannot see these issues objectively.
Questions: do you support the BLM movement’s chants of “pigs in a blanket – fry ’em like bacon!” in Minneapolis? Or their chanting “what do we want? Dead cops! When do we want it? Now!” Or the murder of innocent cops in recent months by black thugs admitting they were seeking revenge for Martin, Brown, etc.? Or, to the point, the racist insults hurled at white kids studying in the Dartmouth library that night?
As I had already explained it once, a cut and paste was definitely the way to go.
Are you seriously arguing that every single black person uses the n word? Why would I need to prove that not every black person uses the n word, isn’t it obvious?
You have to see it as appropriating a term that’s been used to attack black people because that’s reality. This is not some complicated esoteric idea, you understood perfectly what I meant as soon as I gave other examples of the same thing-women using b”itch and overweight people using fat.
Sean’s entire post was a complaint about black people using the n word while if a white person like himself used it, they’d get beaten up. Didn’t you read the post at all?
Nobody with any sense wants to hear Sean’s complaints that black people use the n word while he cannot use it without taking a risk.
Question: Why are you so confused? You seem to think that black people refering to themselves with the n word is the same as yelling out violent abuse at others, which makes no sense at all.
What is your evidence for this statement: “blacks” don’t necessarily listen to rap music or call each other the n word. Individual black people make that choice?”
“Are you seriously arguing that every single black person uses the n word? Why would I need to prove that not every black person uses the n word, isn’t it obvious?” This is a different statement. SeanBro didn’t say “every black person uses the n word” so why change the assertion?
“You have to see it as appropriating a term that’s been used to attack black people because that’s reality.” What a weak answer. What is your evidence that it’s “reality?”
Such terms are rude no matter who uses them; to excuse blacks’ or others’ use of rude terms is just bizarre.
I find it telling that you refuse to answer these questions:
Where exactly did SeanBro “justify using the n word?”
Where exactly did he “complain about not being able to freely use the n word?”
Do you support the BLM movement’s chants of “pigs in a blanket – fry ’em like bacon!” in Minneapolis? Or their chanting “what do we want? Dead cops! When do we want it? Now!” Or the murder of innocent cops in recent months by black thugs admitting they were seeking revenge for Martin, Brown, etc.? Or, to the point, the racist insults hurled at white kids studying in the Dartmouth library that night?
Question: what makes you think I am confused? I am simply asking for evidence of your assertions, which you are unable to provide. “Reality” is not evidence.
“You seem to think that black people refering to themselves with the n word is the same as yelling out violent abuse at others, which makes no sense at all.” I “seem to think” that? Based on what? You are making up things that you think I think and then saying they don’t make sense. Are you presently high on something?
I think you are confused because you ask questions that make no sense, and when I answer them again you still complain that I haven’t answered them. You are unable to comprehend on more than a superficial level.
Sean recited a tired cliche about the n word being used in rap songs and among black people to other black people. He wondered, as every lame a$$ person who makes such comments always wonders, why black people say it among themselves but they will get angry if a white person uses that same word toward them.
To ask such a question is to admit to being an idiot in a historical sense, a moral sense, and a logical sense. You got my meaning when I compared it to girlfriends calling each other b!itch and overweight people calling themselves fat.
Why am I excusing or not excusing a word used among friends? Why are you? Who exactly is it that you think you are? I don’t use the n word, I don’t have friends, white or black, who use it. But I certainly understand the reason for appropriating a word, see the previously mentioned b!tch if you really don’t understand.
You seem to think that because I explained what should have been obvious to Sean, I need to answer a series of random questions about stories you’ve heard on the Internet and get me to comment on them. Again, this is an example of your confused state of mind, and/ or your limited comprehension and logic skills.
“I think you are confused because you ask questions that make no sense, and when I answer them again you still complain that I haven’t answered them.” If the questions I ask truly make “no sense,” then how are you able to answer them? How does “what is your evidence for this statement?” make no sense? How does “why change the assertion” make no sense? How does “What is your evidence that it’s “reality?” make no sense? In fact, I would like you to cite specific questions I have asked that “make no sense” and lay out, in a logical manner, why they “make no sense.” Good luck.
“You are unable to comprehend on more than a superficial level.” Here we go with the ad hominem attacks. I comprehend more than you are aware my dear. All I am doing is asking you to prove your silly assertions, which you have yet to do. That’s not my shortcoming.
“Sean recited a tired cliche about the n word being used in rap songs and among black people to other black people…” This is not a tired cliche. It’s factual and a valid question. It obviously points out the hypocrisy, which you refuse to see, because it exposes one among many weaknesses in the urban black culture that it isn’t fashionable to acknowledge. So you attack the messenger with more ad hominems: “To ask such a question is to admit to being an idiot in a historical sense, a moral sense, and a logical sense.” THAT is tired cliche.
“…overweight people calling themselves fat.” So you object when someone notes that blacks call each other “n i g g e r” but are OK with claiming that overweight ppl call themselves fat. Logical breakdown, that.
“Why am I excusing or not excusing a word used among friends?” I have already explained this, but you appear to need reinforcement. A rude term is rude no matter who says it. When you claim it’s OK for blacks to call each other a rude word because they are “appropriating” the word, you are excusing it. Such a description is ridiculous. I suppose in your world it’s OK for friends to refer to each other as “a s s h o l e,” but in civilized society it’s simply rude.
“You seem to think that…” Again, you are making up what you think I think and then criticizing what you have made up. I asked those questions because I want to see how you will respond. Pretty simple. Yet you reinterpret so many things and make them more complicated. It is also laughable that you indict my logic skills right after playing this little fantasy game. Why not just answer the questions? And by the way, these are not “stories I’ve heard on the Internet.” I actually read a newspaper. Do you?
Where exactly did SeanBro “justify using the n word?”
Where exactly did he “complain about not being able to freely use the n word?”
Do you support the BLM movement’s chants of “pigs in a blanket – fry ’em like bacon!” in Minneapolis? Or their chanting “what do we want? Dead cops! When do we want it? Now!” Or the murder of innocent cops in recent months by black thugs admitting they were seeking revenge for Martin, Brown, etc.? Or, to the point, the racist insults hurled at white kids studying in the Dartmouth library that night?
The questions that make no sense were the ones asking me if I approved of this or that story on the Internet. Not only are they off topic, and unsourced, they’re obviously nothing more than attempts to bait. I’m not asking you if you approve of the police shooting innocent people in the back, It would an off topic derailment and an attempt to bait you-you should follow my lead.
It’s great to see that you suddenly think that ad hominem attacks are inappropriate when they are directed at you. Now expand your view to include others.
Sean’s argument is extremely tired, old, recycled, bigoted nonsense. I do not believe that you think it is new or clever, and it is obvious that you understand what I’m saying about how people deal with being less than fully accepted in a culture.
When you ask again and again when Sean complained about not being able to use the n word it does make me wonder about your reading comprehension. Read his post and focus this time.
You and Sean keep asking if I’ve lived around large numbers of black people, and assuring me that if I had I would understand. And you’re just pointing out the hypocrisy of their using the n word when you can’t! Nobody knows the trouble you’ve seen! LOL
“The questions that make no sense were the ones asking me if I approved of this or that story on the Internet.” Amazing how you restate things to the point of inaccuracy. I never asked you to approve of a “story on the Internet.” Did you not read the part where I said they didn’t come from “the Internet?” Unbelievable. You may have a fever, or be on drugs, as your brain is clearly malfunctional. What I asked is whether you supported certain actions which are well-documented in NEWSPAPERS and other credible media. I suggest you read one so you may be informed on what is happening in the world around you. Once again: Do you support the BLM movement’s chants of “pigs in a blanket – fry ’em like bacon!” in Minneapolis? (HINT: it actuall happened, i.e. it is a FACT.) Or their chanting “what do we want? Dead cops! When do we want it? Now!” (HINT: another FACT.) Or the murder of innocent cops in recent months by black thugs admitting they were seeking revenge for Martin, Brown, etc.? (HINT: FACTS.) Or, to the point, the racist insults hurled at white kids studying in the Dartmouth library that night? (HINT: FACT.)
Again, why not just answer the questions?
“I’m not asking you if you approve of the police shooting innocent people in the back” Cite me a specific example and I will gladly answer this. Please, I look forward to it. I have a feeling I know what person you mean but want to be certain, so go ahead, say his name. And remember that I have read extensively on that case, including excerpts from the DOJ report that totally corroborated the cop’s story.
“It would an off topic derailment and an attempt to bait you-you should follow my lead.” Wrong. It is totally on-topic because, by your comments here, you are clearly on the left on these issues, and I want to see whether you will acknowledge the truth about recent events (if you even know about them, which is in doubt) that are related in concept to this library disruption due to BLM’s involvement. Second, based on the bubble-gum-and-tape, convoluted way you seem to think, trust me, I would never want to follow your “lead” on anything. Whatsoever.
“It’s great to see that you suddenly think that ad hominem attacks are inappropriate when they are directed at you. Now expand your view to include others.” Once again, you twist things around to mean something different from what I said. My point was that ad hominems don’t help your already weak argument. But keep trying.
“Sean’s argument is extremely tired, old, recycled, bigoted nonsense.” Prove that it is “bigoted nonsense.” Good luck.
“you understand what I’m saying about how people deal with being less than fully accepted in a culture.” Yes, I understand what you THINK is true about this, but what you don’t want to see is (1) they are more accepted than you want to believe and (2) to the extent they are not “fully accepted,” you should ask yourself – with a sober, rational mind – why that is the case. As you ponder this, you might want to peruse the DOJ crime statistics that I have viewed myself and do some calculations.
“When you ask again and again when Sean complained about not being able to use the n word it does make me wonder about your reading comprehension. Read his post and focus this time.” I love this one. Quote me where he complained “about not being able to freely use the n word” and where he justified “using the n word.” Just so you know, reading comprehension does not equal seeing words that are not there.
“You and Sean keep asking if I’ve lived around large numbers of black people, and assuring me that if I had I would understand.” Yes, and you continue to refuse to answer that question. Why is that? (We both know why.)
“And you’re just pointing out the hypocrisy of their using the n word” BINGO, she finally gets it. What do we have for her, judge?
“…using the n word when you can’t!” Actually, we have this thing in this country called free speech (at least as long as the 40% of Millennials who say they would ban speech that offends minorities don’t get their way – what a bunch of Constitutionally and historically ignorant, facist hypocrites; I suppose speech that offends the majority is OK with them – more support for Dershowitz’s excellent analysis), so I can say n i g g e r or write n i g g e r as much as I want. What’s unfortunate is the atmosphere in which those who are not black and use the word should expect immediate social and possibly physical retribution for it, while the same discouragement is not applied to urban blacks by ppl exactly like you. If you truly believed in equal justice, you wouldn’t apply two different standards in such an obviously bigoted and hypocritical manner.
“Nobody knows the trouble you’ve seen! LOL” LOL? What are you, 12? Grow up.
Calm down.
I wasn’t asking you to comment on whether or not you thought a particular person should be shot in the back by the police. I was giving a parallel to your dumb questions in the vain hope that you might realize that your questions were..well, dumb. I was also trying to point out that if you took the ad hominem out of your arguments, your arguments would simply cease to exist.
“Yes, I understand what you THINK is true about this, but what you don’t want to see is (1) they are more accepted than you want to believe and”
Oh, your understanding went deeper than that. You suddenly understood this wasn’t some obscure sociological theory. You realized that you’d seen it many times before, and even done it yourself. You’ve pretended you’re too good to call one of your girlfriends a bit@h, or laugh about yourself and call yourself a bitch, and you’ve pretended that you never saw the word fat at all. But I know that those examples clicked with you.
“(2) to the extent they are not “fully accepted,” you should ask yourself – with a sober, rational mind – why that is the case. As you ponder this, you might want to peruse the DOJ crime statistics that I have viewed myself and do some calculations.”
Do you ever go back with a sober, rational, mind and read your own posts? Surely you didn’t go back and read this, because you’d have realized 1). how completely you’ve contradicted yourself there and 2) how totally irrational you’re being. No DOJ statisics can provide a rational explanation for racism. You’re asking that people “be rational”….and come to your irrational conclusion.
Please give your free speech speech to Sean, he’s the one concerned about using the n word without getting beaten up. You are not only free to use the n word anytime you like, to anyone you like, you are free to live in any area of the nation where you won’t have to live around “large numbers of black people”.
Oh, BTW, LOL. ROF, LOL. LMFAO @ U.
“Calm down.” Already calm, sweetie. I figured if I repeated things or used caps you might finally receive, but evidently not. As for innocent people getting shot in the back, do you have any examples? It seems a strange coincidence you would ask that question in this discussion. More to the point, was Michael Brown “innocent,” and was he shot in the back? (HINT: I already know the answers, so let’s see how informed you are, though based on your performance thus far, you will refuse to answer this just as you refuse to answer the other questions, much like a 2-year-old refusing to eat her carrots.)
So now you assert that my questions are “dumb.” You earlier couldn’t prove that they “make no sense,” and now you call them “dumb.” Whoa, Nellie! You are really bringing out the intellectual firepower now. Dumb. Wow. Can you prove that these questions are “dumb?” More to the point, why don’t you answer them?
Do you support the BLM movement’s chants of “pigs in a blanket – fry ’em like bacon!” in Minneapolis? (HINT: it actually happened, i.e. it is a FACT.) Or their chanting “what do we want? Dead cops! When do we want it? Now!” (HINT: another FACT.) Or the murder of innocent cops in recent months by black thugs admitting they were seeking revenge for Martin, Brown, etc.? (HINT: FACTS.) Or, to the point, the racist insults hurled at white kids studying in the Dartmouth library that night? (HINT: FACT.)
If you are trying to imply your answers to those “dumb” questions is “no” by asking about innocent ppl getting shot, I would only ask, again, why you couldn’t simply answer “no.”
Have you ever lived around large numbers of black ppl?
“Sean’s argument is extremely tired, old, recycled, bigoted nonsense.” Prove that it is “bigoted nonsense.” Good luck. (HINT: saying “it’s reality” is not proof.)
“I was also trying to point out that if you took the ad hominem out of your arguments, your arguments would simply cease to exist.” If you think this is true, then you don’t understand what an ad hominem is.
“Oh, your understanding went deeper than that. You suddenly understood this wasn’t some obscure sociological theory. You realized that you’d seen it many times before, and even done it yourself. You’ve pretended you’re too good to call one of your girlfriends a bit@h, or laugh about yourself and call yourself a bitch, and you’ve pretended that you never saw the word fat at all. But I know that those examples clicked with you.” In order to “know” all these things, you would need to be able to read someone’s mind. But since your conclusions are false, it’s clear that you don’t have that ability. So quit with the absurd speculations.
What I don’t call myself, or anyone I know, are racial slurs just for fun. Why? Because it’s simply rude, not to mention low-brow. As in, plebeian, uncultivated, unrefined, philistine, coarse, uncouth, common, vulgar, trashy. Get it yet?
Not only that, but I don’t call myself or anyone I know such things only to unleash a torrent of hate, vitriol, and potentially violence on someone outside the group approved for using those words. Why? Because that would be hypocritical, artificial, backhanded, counterfeit, double-dealing, double-faced, fake, feigned. This was Sean’s whole point, the perfect validity of which you refuse to see. Get it?
“Surely you didn’t go back and read this, because you’d have realized 1). how completely you’ve contradicted yourself there and 2) how totally irrational you’re being. No DOJ statisics can provide a rational explanation for racism. You’re asking that people “be rational”….and come to your irrational conclusion.” Wow. Your mind works in a very dysfunctional way, without any logic at all. This must be why you are unable to present any rational arguments. That said, prove that I contradicted myself and that I was irrational. Good luck.
Moreover, where exactly did I say “DOJ statisics can provide a rational explanation for racism?” Good luck searching, because it isn’t there. Your inability to make the connection between behaviors among many blacks and how they are perceived, or “accepted” in your terms, is astounding.
“you understand what I’m saying about how people deal with being less than fully accepted in a culture.” With the above paragraph that contains relevant facts (gratis I might add) as contect, why are they “less than fully accepted?”
“Oh, BTW, LOL. ROF, LOL. LMFAO @ U.” OK, I guess are are 12 after all. As for the LMFAO declaration, I suggest you don’t do that, as you would then lose whatever little mental capacity you have.
You misunderstood why I was telling you to calm down. I was referring to your dumb complaint about my using “LOL”.
I never said that you called yourself a racial slur. I said you called yourself “a bitch” and “fat”, among friends, as a joke.
You asked this: “As for innocent people getting shot in the back, do you have any examples? It seems a strange coincidence you would ask that question in this discussion. More to the point, was Michael Brown “innocent,” and was he shot in the back?”
You said it in response to this comment of mine: “The questions that make no sense were the ones asking me if I approved of this or that story on the Internet. Not only are they off topic, and unsourced, they’re obviously nothing more than attempts to bait. I’m not asking you if you approve of the police shooting innocent people in the back, It would an off topic derailment and an attempt to bait you-you should follow my lead.”
My comment was extremely clear: You and SeanBro are asking off topic questions as a litmus test and as an attempt to derail the discussion. Not only was my comment clear, a literate person would have noticed that I used the word “people”. Michael Brown was a person, not “people”.
I specified exactly where you contradicted yourself, here it is again:
“they are more accepted than you want to believe and to the extent they are not “fully accepted,” you should ask yourself – with a sober, rational mind – why that is the case. As you ponder this, you might want to peruse the DOJ crime statistics that I have viewed myself and do some calculations.”
They’re “more accepted than I want to believe” [I’m not sure what the “want to believe” is supposed to mean, BTW], but “to the extend that they aren’t, here are crime stats [and right there, not only do you contradict your earlier claim about your acceptance, you’re still trying to justify your racism by showing DOJ stats.] Yes, you did both of those things.
Crimes are committed by individuals. Not by races.
“I was referring to your dumb complaint about my using “LOL”. You really like using the word “dumb,” again suggesting you are of junior high-school age, in large part because those who purport themselves to be “laughing out loud” at someone else’s statements imply that they are somehow superior. It’s a very childish response. Only the use of facts, reason, and well-constructed argument would raise your standing here, not silly things like LOL.
“I never said that you called yourself a racial slur. I said you called yourself “a bitch” and “fat”, among friends, as a joke.” Here again you use a myopic approach and fail to see the thematic connection among your comments. This whole topic was sparked by whether it’s hypocritical for blacks to call each other n i g g e r but to condemn non-blacks who use the term. So you trotted out these weak analogies about calling friends b i t c h and oneself fat, etc. So you never had to actually say I call myself a racial slur – it’s the same issue. I don’t call myself a racial slur, nor b i t c h, nor fat, nor do I call me friends those things, because that is, as I’ve said many times, a low-class thing to do. Just because you approach life with such low standards of behavior doesn’t mean you should assume everyone else does as well.
I use the word dumb because it’s the best word to describe your comments. Your comments are dumb, and you make dumb arguments.
“So you trotted out these weak analogies about calling friends b i t c h and oneself fat, etc. So you never had to actually say I call myself a racial slur – it’s the same issue. I don’t call myself a racial slur, nor b i t c h, nor fat, nor do I call me friends those things, because that is, as I’ve said many times, a low-class thing to do. Just because you approach life with such low standards of behavior doesn’t mean you should assume everyone else does as well.”
Yes, yes, I know. You are irony impaired.
“You asked this: “As for innocent people getting shot in the back, do you have any examples? It seems a strange coincidence you would ask that question in this discussion. More to the point, was Michael Brown “innocent,” and was he shot in the back?”‘ Yes, and you didn’t answer. Do you have any examples? Was Brown “innocent?” Was he shot in the back?
You cannot read. I answered this days ago, in the simplest possible way.
Again: I was giving an example of a baiting question. Of course you do not support innocent people being shot in the back. I was not trying to say that you did. My question was a parallel to your parade of dumb@$$ baiting questions. Not a reference to Michael Brown.
“My comment was extremely clear: You and SeanBro are asking off topic questions as a litmus test and as an attempt to derail the discussion. Not only was my comment clear, a literate person would have noticed that I used the word “people”. Michael Brown was a person, not “people”.’
No. These questions are not “off-topic.” You seem utterly unable to learn new information. It is completely on topic because it relates to the BLM movement and where/how it started.
“I used the word “people”. Michael Brown was a person, not “people”.’ WOW. You are aware that multiple indivdual persons make up “people,” right? In any case, what a meaningless rhetorical diversion. Why not just answer the questions about Brown? Why all the diversions? You really appear to be afraid of something.
As I said “innocent people”, it would be clear to a literate person that I was speaking of multiple incidents. You read “people” as meaning “Michael Brown” because you’re about to wet yourself to get into a discussion about him.
You are using off topic questions to sidetrack the discussion.
I am in full control of my bladder, thank you. Why don’t you just answer the questions about Brown? Are you aware that his case is one of the key foundations of the fraud that is the BLM movement? Why not just answer the questions?
Why don’t you make your case about BLM rather than almost wetting yourself to bait me?
Why do you answer a question with another question?
You have this unshakeable belief that I am trying to “bait” you. All I am trying to do is find out (1) how much you really know about BLM, (2) how much you know about the Martin and Brown cases in particular, and (3) given (1) and (2), whether you buy into the popular narrative about these cases and BLM or are aware of the seriously dangerous misrepresentations that are being maintained about all this in order to stoke division and achieve high media ratings.
Above all, I am interested in truth, no matter how uncomfortable. Are you?
It’s not a “belief”. It’s beyond obvious that you are asking baiting questions. You are afraid to make any statements of your own, so you want to draw me into making a statement you can attack. It’s very low risk and low effort for you, and apparently at some point it’s paid off. Just not this time.
Be brave. Put yourself out there. Make your own case.
“They’re “more accepted than I want to believe” [I’m not sure what the “want to believe” is supposed to mean, BTW],” You’re not sure? You may want to engage Mr. Brain here. You obviously believe that blacks are experiencing high levels of racism, perhaps “institutional” or “systemic” racism in this country. It’s easy to infer that from your comments. When I say you “want” to believe it, it’s because the facts do not support such a view. Ask yourself if the black experience in America is any better today than in the 1700s. 1800s. 1920s. 1950s. 1960s. Then get back to me with what you determine.
‘”to the extend that they aren’t, here are crime stats [and right there, not only do you contradict your earlier claim about your acceptance” Quote my exact “claim” about my “acceptance.” Again you are making things up out of thin air.
“you’re still trying to justify your racism by showing DOJ stats.] Yes, you did both of those things.” No, I did neither of those things. Where did I say “crime justifies racism?” Moreover, I have made no statements whatsoever about my own “racism” or lack therof. You are having trouble keeping this about the facts and continue to try to make it personal. Another form of ad hominem.
Why are blacks “less than fully accepted?”
“Crimes are committed by individuals. Not by races.” I LOVE IT! This one takes the cake. Wow, such a perfectly PC little statement. How incredibly cute! Such a good little liberal, I wish I could send you a ribbon for parroting these meaningless phrases. I would love to be there when you said this to a police officer who works in homicide.
If you believe your statement, then answer this. You have before you a 12-year-old blond white girl with blue eyes, holding a lunch box and wearing a school uniform; a 25-year-old black male with an afro, tattoos, a black hoodie, and jeans whose waist rests 6 inches below his waistline; a 67-year-old Indian woman wearing a brightly colored sari; and a 40-year-old clean-shaven white male wearing a suit. Which one is most likely to commit a violent crime?
That “life is better” today for black and brown people is not proof that there is no institutional racism.
When you claim that black people are more accepted than I want to believe, and to the extent that they aren’t here’s some crime statistics is completely incoherent. You’re making two contradictory claims.
“Crimes are committed by individuals. Not by races.” I LOVE IT! This one takes the cake. Wow, such a perfectly PC little statement.”
You really didn’t know this. I actually needed to explain this to you, you really thought that skin color predicted criminality?
Please explain how that works.
“How incredibly cute! Such a good little liberal, I wish I could send you a ribbon for parroting these meaningless phrases. I would love to be there when you said this to a police officer who works in homicide.”
What would this imaginary police officer say to me?
“If you believe your statement, then answer this. You have before you a 12-year-old blond white girl with blue eyes, holding a lunch box and wearing a school uniform; a 25-year-old black male with an afro, tattoos, a black hoodie, and jeans whose waist rests 6 inches below his waistline; a 67-year-old Indian woman wearing a brightly colored sari; and a 40-year-old clean-shaven white male wearing a suit. Which one is most likely to commit a violent crime?”
You do not understand probability at all. I know you think that you do, but you don’t.
“That “life is better” today for black and brown people is not proof that there is no institutional racism.” One step at a time, grasshopper. The first step is to ensure that you accept the reality that life is so much better for blacks today than even 20 or 30 years ago. It appears you at least accept that. The next step is to ask this: if life is so much better, why do you believe there is institutional, systemic racism in this nation? You need to provide evidence of this (incorrect) assertion.
“When you claim that black people are more accepted than I want to believe, and to the extent that they aren’t here’s some crime statistics is completely incoherent. You’re making two contradictory claims.” No. Try to follow this, now. It’s a comparison. With me so far? Compare how accepted blacks actually are to how accepted YOU BELIEVE they are. That gap needs to be exposed and eliminated. THEN, once you have your head straight about reality and to what extent blacks are not “fully accepted,” you need to understand the reason for that remaining lack of acceptance. This is in no way contradictory but does require the ability to think clearly and separate one concept from another, which appears to be a huge challenge for you. So why do you believe blacks are not “fully accepted?”
‘”Crimes are committed by individuals. Not by races.” I LOVE IT! This one takes the cake. Wow, such a perfectly PC little statement.”
You really didn’t know this. I actually needed to explain this to you, you really thought that skin color predicted criminality?”
You are either being deliberately obtuse or are truly a fool. To give you the benefit of the doubt, I will assume the former. In that case, your statement about individuals vs. races is not something that you “needed to explain” because it is meaningless and has no merit. It is a slogan lefists use to pull attention away from uncomfortable facts. And in case you didn’t notice, I was mocking your statement.
“Please explain how that works.” As I have said, take a look at the DOJ crime statistics to see how that works.
“You do not understand probability at all. I know you think that you do, but you don’t.” What a coward. Rather than answer the question, you try to claim that I “do not understand” certain things. Yet another ad hominem. Answer the question. Which of the above is most likely to commit a violent crime?
Do you believe that we have an equal society when it comes to race?
Do you believe that slavery, Jim Crow, redlining, segregated schools, lynching, denial of farm loans by the FHA, denial of goverment home loans, and preexisting bias against black people have zero impact on black people today?
“As I have said, take a look at the DOJ crime statistics to see how that works.”
I said explain it. Now.
You do realize that you have used ad hominem in every post you’ve made to me, right? Has that gone over your head?
“Do you believe that we have an equal society when it comes to race?” Certainly not. The anti-white sentiment that is being cultivated and aggravated by the left is very dangerous, from events like the one in the library to this new “white privilege” buzzword to all the bean-counting by race by HR departments to ensure there aren’t too many white males (oh the horror!) to the racist-witch-hunt industry to the hyped-up media coverage – selectively – of shootings of “unarmed” black men (ignoring how many white men are shot by cops – do you know by what multiple they are shot vs. black men?) to the liberal grade school teachers telling kids that blacks cannot be racist to the ridiculous “microaggressions” and “trigger warnings” in universities that all but brand whites and conservatives with a TOXIC label etc. etc. etc. You need to realize that any addressing of racism against non-whites will have no credibility when the approach is to demonize whites in so many ways. All the while, ppl just like you are ignoring the problems in the black community that arise from their own behavior.
“Do you believe that slavery, Jim Crow, redlining, segregated schools, lynching, denial of farm loans by the FHA, denial of goverment home loans, and preexisting bias against black people have zero impact on black people today?” Thank you for saying this. It’s a prime example of the distorted mindset of today’s leftists. You claim to be “progressives” but in fact are regressive in so many ways, constantly living in the past as if those things occur today. I assume you have heard of the Civil Rights Act of 1964. (BTW, are you aware that the DOJ under Eric Holder, a BLACK attorney general, refused to prosecute Civil Rights Act cases where the injured party was white? Angry blacks in power like him, Obama, Stephanie Rawlings-Blake, Marilyn Mosby, Elijah Cummings, Frederica Wilson, et al. are doing the same damage to race relations as the BLM.) You will never totally eliminate racism. But we can at least look honestly at what problems are self-imposed vs. imposed from the outside – and stop blaming the outside for what is self-imposed.
“As I have said, take a look at the DOJ crime statistics to see how that works.”
“I said explain it. Now.” Well, pardon me! You said now! Lord help me, I should hop right to it, shouldn’t I? I’ll make you a deal. You sincerely, without rhetoric or sarcasm, answer every question I have asked that you have dodged, and I will lay out in very specific terms how these crime statistics and probability work. As if you don’t already know but are purposely avoiding because you know where they lead.
“You do realize that you have used ad hominem in every post you’ve made to me, right? Has that gone over your head?” Again, you clearly don’t understand what ad hominem is. It is, literally, an attack “against the man” used as a response in a debate in place of fact and/or reason. This is what you have done for much of this wonderful exchange. I, however, have used fact and reason alongside observations of your absurdities. Not the same.
So you believe that instead of white privilege, there is black privilege in America.
Can you show any evidence of that?
“Thank you for saying this. It’s a prime example of the distorted mindset of today’s leftists. You claim to be “progressives” but in fact are regressive in so many ways, constantly living in the past as if those things occur today. I assume you have heard of the Civil Rights Act of 1964. (BTW, are you aware that the DOJ under Eric Holder, a BLACK attorney general, refused to prosecute Civil Rights Act cases where the injured party was white? Angry blacks in power like him, Obama, Stephanie Rawlings-Blake, Marilyn Mosby, Elijah Cummings, Frederica Wilson, et al. are doing the same damage to race relations as the BLM.) You will never totally eliminate racism. But we can at least look honestly at what problems are self-imposed vs. imposed from the outside – and stop blaming the outside for what is self-imposed.”
That is not an answer. Do you believe that there are lingering effects of those government policies that impact black people today?
“I said explain it. Now.” Well, pardon me! You said now! Lord help me, I should hop right to it, shouldn’t I? ”
Yeah, that’s kind of how I felt, the 99 times you told me to explain something, and provide evidence-I made a little joke at your expense.
I am asking again, interpret those DOJ crime statistics. Tell me what you gather from them.
“Again, you clearly don’t understand what ad hominem is.”
Sure I do. It’s what you use in place of a substantive response, but complain about when it’s pointed out that you’re one big old hypocrite.
“So you believe that instead of white privilege, there is black privilege in America.” This is not what I “believe.” It’s fact. I can present plenty of evidence and will do so, after you provide support for your assertions and answer all the questions you have avoided.
If life is so much better, why do you believe there is institutional, systemic racism in this nation? You need to provide evidence of this (incorrect) assertion.
Why do you believe blacks are not “fully accepted?”
Which of the above is most likely to commit a violent crime?
Quote my exact “claim” about my “acceptance.”
“you’re still trying to justify your racism by showing DOJ stats.] Yes, you did both of those things.” No, I did neither of those things. Where did I say “crime justifies racism?”
These are but a few.
“So you believe that instead of white privilege, there is black privilege in America.” This is not what I “believe.” It’s fact. I can present plenty of evidence and will do so, after you provide support for your assertions and answer all the questions you have avoided.”
No, we’re not playing that any longer. Make your case, if you can.
“Why do you believe blacks are not “fully accepted?”
Because of racists like you.
“Which of the above is most likely to commit a violent crime?”
You do not understand probability. You cannot predict criminality based on skin color. This is not being PC, this is being rational.
” I only had to ask you “99 times” because you didn’t answer the first 98 times I asked. Again, why not simply answer? What are you afraid of?”
You miss the point and misrepresent the problem. No shock there. You randomly selected sentences and demanded that I “prove” them, and demanded that I give links to back it up.
“I am asking again, interpret those DOJ crime statistics. Tell me what you gather from them.” And I am telling you again, answer all my previous unanswered questions, and I will gladly explain it.”
No, I’m not going to answer your random baiting questions. You are making a claim, try to explain yourself.
“No, we’re not playing that any longer. Make your case, if you can.” We never were “playing that” because you refused to answer questions. And we both know that’s because if you answered them honestly, you would reveal the severe flaws in your entire position.
‘”Why do you believe blacks are not “fully accepted?” Because of racists like you.”
There it is, the ubiquitous “racist” card that all good leftists love to play. So you actually believe that blacks are not “fully accepted” because of racism – and for no other reasons whatsoever – I am paraphrasing to help you along. Incredible. Now prove it.
‘”Which of the above is most likely to commit a violent crime?”
You do not understand probability. You cannot predict criminality based on skin color. This is not being PC, this is being rational.” Wrong. It is you who do not understand probability. If you are really telling me that you would not avoid a large number of loud, young, boisterous, black males dressed in urban / pseudo prison garb walking down the street toward you any more than you would avoid a group of white ladies in thier 60s wearing their church clothes, then you are more likely to get mugged and/or raped than someone who WOULD avoid the former group. How’s THAT for probability?
:You randomly selected sentences and demanded that I “prove” them, and demanded that I give links to back it up.” Yes, that’s how it works. She who asserts must prove. You have done a lot of asserting but no proving.
“No, I’m not going to answer your random baiting questions…” They are neither random nor baiting but are totally related to this subject. It’s obvious that you won’t answer because the honest replies will weaken your emotionally-based house of cards on the subject of race.
“You are making a claim, try to explain yourself.” BINGO! This is exactly what I have been asking you to do. Why should you be able to make claims without backing them up, while you presume to ask me to back up mine?
I’ve explained and backed up my claims. I’ve refused to take your bait.
America has an institutional race problem. It is a far greater problem for our nation than individual racists like yourself.
Black people were enslaved in America for 250 years. The Emmancipation Proclaimation was issued in 1863 – 152 years ago. Black people were slaves in America longer than they’ve been free. At the end of the Civil War, black people were freed but a series of laws were put in place that made rising economically near impossible.
http://www.hamptoninstitution.org/sharecropping.html#.VnRz1rYrLIU
That’s three centuries of economic theft of the fruits of their labor.
https://books.google.com/books?id=Y03WKII5m7QC&pg=PT54&lpg=PT54&dq=someone+lynched+or+burned+alive+every+four+days&source=bl&ots=7w3rb1nsWr&sig=wMW4VLK3EEPUuGEEM2llX3KZXn4&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwjc74qxp-bJAhXH2T4KHRNTBvIQ6AEIMDAD#v=onepage&q=someone%20lynched%20or%20burned%20alive%20every%20four%20days&f=false
Every four days. Someone lynched or burned alive every four days. Nothing could be more intimidating.
Here’s more denial of economic opportunity.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pigford_v._Glickman
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mortgage_discrimination
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Redlining
The Great Society programs, school integration, the Civil Rights Act, the Voting Rights Act -these have helped to address the systematic theft of wealth and opportunity our government perpetrated against black Americans. But it takes time to get over 350 years of robbery.
Here’s the proof of ongoing discrimination:
http://ac360.blogs.cnn.com/2008/08/09/study-black-man-and-white-felon-same-chances-for-hire/
http://www.politifact.com/punditfact/statements/2015/mar/15/jalen-ross/black-name-resume-50-percent-less-likely-get-respo/
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sentencing_disparity
http://www.theatlantic.com/business/archive/2015/09/public-school-funding-and-the-role-of-race/408085/
http://www.apa.org/news/press/releases/2014/03/black-boys-older.aspx
There is no biological basis for race.
http://www.newsweek.com/there-no-such-thing-race-283123
The concept of white supremacy was promoted by slave owners to justify owning other human beings.
You cannot look at skin color and predict that an individual is more likely to commit a crime based on skin color. It is irrational to attempt it.
I suppose it escaped your attention that your mortgage discrimination post has a nice big banner on it that says the post’s “neutrality is disputed.” The fact is that today, the CFPB looks for discrimination by guessing the race of applicants based only on their names and then assumes discrimination did or did not occur. Yet you make no mention of this absurd practice.
Likely you have never even heard of the CFPB, because you don’t read a credible newspaper. Instead you spend your time reading fucking blogs and other biased crap online.
How does it actually work in today’s economy? If you have the credit, you get the loan. Unless of course some government body insists that certain ppl need a boost – in that case you get the loan even if your credit is crap. This was the root of the recent financial crisis. Keep trying.
Your debt slavery article describes conditions from over 100 years ago. A little stale.
Your citation about lynching every 4 days also covers a period about 100 years ago. Also stale.
You fail to mention re: the Pigford suit that of late, anyone can claim to have been a black farmer in that period, with no evidence, and get money, thanks to the Racist-in-Chief Obamunist.
Redlining is likewise an old practice. Someone who tried that now would have the left-wing cavalry, the NAACP, Al Sharpton, etc., and probably Obullshit would weigh in as well.
Your ac360 article is suspect, as Anderson is a known left-wing loon. Likely he doctored the data to make it sound worse.
You fail to cite any evidence of the anti-white discrimination that goes on in hiring. Why? There are multiple cases of HR departments telling hiring managers that “this position is slated for a____” with the blank being some minority. Illegal, of course, but it goes on.
Your final offering, though, takes the cake. There is no biological basis for race? See this article for an appropriate rebuttal: http://www.unz.com/runz/does-race-exist-do-hills-exist/
Stop living in the past and wallowing in the slavery story to explain modern black problems, all the while ignoring stats that show young black males to be several times more likely to commit a violent crime, drop out of school, impregnate and abandon women, do drugs, etc. etc. If you at least admitted the latter, you might seem credible. But this one-sided, willfully blind crap makes you totally irrational and dangerous in this debate.
As for all the “theft” of wealth, what responsibility do you assign to the Africans who SOLD these slaves – their own ppl – in the first place?
Do you now recognize that slavery has occurred in nearly every race across history? Yet you live in the rear-view mirror, belying the whole term “progressive.” What a mockery.
Your post is a joke of a response. The problem with each section is listed.
Nitpicking:
A month ago it might not have said that the neutrality was disputed! You don’t have a clue WHY the neutrality is disputed, or you’d say.
Factual Error:
You don’t know what you’re talking about. The recent financial crisis was not caused by the Community Reinvestment Act.
http://www.federalreserve.gov/faqs/banking_12625.htm
http://www.cbsnews.com/news/loans-to-low-income-households-did-not-cause-the-financial-crisis/
Poor reading comprehension:
I posted information about debt slavery and lynching as a part of the history. That is why the links tell of things that happened long ago. You can’t complain that links about the past happened before now. You sound dumb.
Factual Error:
The Pigford lawsuit was settled in 1999. Obama was not president in 1999, Eric Holder was not the Attorney General. Neither Obama or Holder have anything to do with the payout process.
Irrelevant:
I brought up redlining as a part of explaining the systematic discrimination against black people that has robbed them of wealth. You babble something about Al Sharpton. Again, I’m laying out the evidence of systematic racism for you. That means we look at history. The PAST.
General Stupidity:
Anderson Cooper cannot “doctor the data” that was gathered in a research study. The study was published independently for anyone to read. Anderson Cooper was the reporter. It is not possible for him to “doctor the data” without getting caught.
Incoherence:
If you have sources that show anti-white discrimination in hiring, YOU provide them. It’s YOUR claim. You ramble off some allegations and expect me to prove your random anecdotes? Are you crazy?
Ignorance:
You cannot refute my scientific article by posting some right wing blog dumbassery about race.
Lack of logic:
If a problem occurs systematically within a group, there’s an explanation. It’s either an internal factor, or an external factor. If you believe that an internal factor causes black people as a group to be more likely to commit crimes, dropout of school, get women pregnant and abandon them, then you need to explain the science behind that conclusion. How does that work?
Diversion:
Yes, much of the time, black people were sold into slavery by other black people. Why is that of any importance? Black people are not a unit. They are individuals. How does pointing out that black people sold other black people to white people change any of the point?
Irrelevance:
Apparently the new white supremacist strategy is to point out that slavery is an old institution, as if that absolves America of its founding sin. Why does it matter that slavery has existed before? How does that change that a nation that claimed to be based on freedom kept people and their descendants in slavery until a war stopped it?
“A month ago it might not have said that the neutrality was disputed! You don’t have a clue WHY the neutrality is disputed, or you’d say.” The neutrality of what? What does this mean?
“Factual Error:
You don’t know what you’re talking about. The recent financial crisis was not caused by the Community Reinvestment Act.” I don’t know what I’m talking about? Sorry honey, but someone with an MBA in finance who actually works in the investment industry and has first-hand knowledge of what actually happened (i.e. ME) clearly knows what he’s talking about, whereas an ignorant, emotionally driven, willfully blind liberal (i.e. YOU) relies on others’ writings. If you think you know what you are talking about, lay out, IN YOUR OWN WORDS, why the spiking default rates of high-yield mortgages did NOT play a role in the economic collapse. Then lay out, miss genius, how those loans were issued in the first place, when the applicants were clearly not qualified. Then lay out the role of FNMA and FHLMC in that issuance. Also show the difference in loan quality before and after 1992, and explain the cause of the difference. Don’t bother citing cbs news reports, as it’s clear you are oblivious to the bias in mainstream media, which is run by liberals who would rather decapitate their own kids than admit that their policies have caused disasters. As for the Fed, you clearly don’t know the extent of Obama’s power in influencing GSEs.
“Nitpicking:
A month ago it might not have said that the neutrality was disputed! You don’t have a clue WHY the neutrality is disputed, or you’d say.” The extent to which you will go to deny reality is amazing. You send an article whose neutrality is disputed as support for your wild claims, and when I question the article for that reason, this is your response? What’s the difference WHY the neutrality is disputed? It’s clearly not rock solid evidence. Do you have ANY standards, or does any rag at all that supports your loony positions make your low bar?
“Poor reading comprehension:
I posted information about debt slavery and lynching as a part of the history. That is why the links tell of things that happened long ago. You can’t complain that links about the past happened before now. You sound dumb.” You sound dumb? I am becoming more convinced that you are not even in college but must be 12 years old.
My point was obvious, but the willfully blind like you refuse to get it. Posting pieces about events that happened decades or more ago as evidence of PRESENT-DAY “institutional racism” is not valid. Keep trying.
“Factual Error:
The Pigford lawsuit was settled in 1999. Obama was not president in 1999, Eric Holder was not the Attorney General. Neither Obama or Holder have anything to do with the payout process.” You are responding to things I haven’t even said! What is your major malfunction? Nowhere did I say Obamunist was pres in ’99; the point is that they are allowing these payouts to occur TODAY because he is POTUS TODAY. Follow? So if Holder announced the hugely expanded judgment fund in 2010 WHILE AG, how is it true that Holder has “nothing to do with the payout process?” Do you even bother checking facts? The whole thing was a bum-rush by greedy minorities to get free money. All they had to do was claim they were considering farming and got money, ALL UNDER OBAMUNIST AND HOLDER you ignorant fool. http://www.americanthinker.com/articles/2013/06/pigford_the_unexamined_obama_administration_scandal.html So whose Factual Error is it now, ignoramus?
“Irrelevant:
I brought up redlining as a part of explaining the systematic discrimination against black people that has robbed them of wealth. You babble something about Al Sharpton. Again, I’m laying out the evidence of systematic racism for you. That means we look at history. The PAST.” Just because you are unable to understand the connection between two things doesn’t make one “Irrelevant.” The point is that the financial industry has liberals living in their rectal cavities with so much scrutiny, so if redlining were really occurring today, folks like Sharpton would be all over it. To you I suppose this is babble, as you can’t even recognize a complex sentence, but if you think long and hard, maybe you’ll get it. As for looking at the PAST, you were supposed to provide evidence of PRESENT-DAY “institutional racism.” Instead you provided crap about the PAST; i.e. Irrelevant. Keep trying, though, even a broken clock is right twice a day.
“General Stupidity:
Anderson Cooper cannot “doctor the data” that was gathered in a research study. The study was published independently for anyone to read. Anderson Cooper was the reporter. It is not possible for him to “doctor the data” without getting caught.” Are you sure he cannot “doctor the data?” How naïve. You need to look at how writers skew their reporting to cherry-pick “facts” for their aims. NBC had to apologize for editing the 9-1-1 tape of Zimmerman, so if NBC can “doctor” a report, what makes you so naïve to think Cooper cannot? NBC doctored and data and got “caught.” In any case, you get the Failure of Critical Analysis stamp on your ignorant forehead for not realizing that all the jobs cited were entry-level, menial jobs. No professional jobs were cited. The “experiments” occurred in only two cities in a nation of 50 states. It says whites were “twice as likely” to get a callback but mentions nothing about other possible factors. Did applicants interact with the employers? How personable were they? Employers consider more than just what is on an application, but of course this isn’t mentioned because the study wants to prove a foregone conclusion. It also describes the black applicants as “bright college kids” (like the BLM thugs at Dartmouth?) who were “models of discipline and hard work” (could he kiss ass any more? what about the white applicants? We have no evidence of these claims.) The article is a joke, so since you are into labeling ppl, you get the Failure of Critical Thinking plus Naïve Beyond Belief and Racially Biased stamps.
“Incoherence:
If you have sources that show anti-white discrimination in hiring, YOU provide them. It’s YOUR claim. You ramble off some allegations and expect me to prove your random anecdotes? Are you crazy?” The only crazy one here is clearly you, as you believe things are the opposite of what they really are (good little liberal pig).
Among many others,
we have http://www.wnd.com/2013/03/anti-white-racism-found-in-chicago-transit-hiring/
and http://www.breitbart.com/tech/2016/02/08/report-anti-white-agenda-revealed-at-githubs-diversity-team/
and this doozy that Sam’s Club’s “black, female CEO Rosalind Brewer planned to call a supplier she met with because she was disgusted that his management staff was filled with all white males.” http://www.bizpacreview.com/2015/12/16/sams-club-responds-after-black-ceos-anti-white-male-discrimination-stirs-calls-for-boycott-284947
and discrimination in Fed govt. hiring http://www.theoccidentalobserver.net/2011/07/discrimination-against-whites-in-federal-employment/
And as for my “anecdotes,” they are real. Conversations with someone I know who is a manager at a very large bank show that in hiring, blatant anti-white male discrimination is occurring. When there are openings, they literally say “this job is slated for a ___” with the blank being filled in by black female, black male, Asian female, etc. – anything but white male. Do you believe that specifying the race and gender of a desired hire is NOT racial / gender discrimination?
It’s going on every day all around you, and you want so desperately to believe that we have an institutional racism problem against blacks. Why do you want to live like an ostrich?
“Ignorance:
You cannot refute my scientific article by posting some right wing blog dumbassery about race.” I LOVE THIS! Your “scientific article” vs. my “blog dumbassery?” Is your brain that limited that you can’t see the problem with your “scientific article?” Why don’t you lay out the central assertion of your “scientific article” – why EXACTLY does it claim there is no biological basis for race (which is like saying the sun doesn’t rise in the east)? Then refer to the theoretical physicist’s (right wing blog dumbassery?) response, especially with respect to whether hills exist. Your “scientific article” is so ludicrous that I know without doubt that you are way on the fringes of society, willing to believe any claim, no matter how outrageous, as long as it supports your loony left-wing views. Indeed, the physicist (an actual scientist, unlike you) says “All too many socially-conditioned Americans (like you) have absorbed the Lewontin-Gould mantra that “Race Does Not Exist” which from a scientific perspective is roughly similar to claiming that “Teeth Do Not Exist” or perhaps “Hills Do Not Exist,” with the latter being an especially good parallel. Did you actually read his article? If so, did you then THINK about the article? I doubt it. Likely you realized he was showing your assertion to be utter refuse, at which point the anti-truth portion of your liberal brain (every liberal has this structure) sounded a warning and shut the wall to any further input. How do you sleep at night?
“Lack of logic:
If a problem occurs systematically within a group, there’s an explanation. It’s either an internal factor, or an external factor. If you believe that an internal factor causes black people as a group to be more likely to commit crimes, dropout of school, get women pregnant and abandon them, then you need to explain the science behind that conclusion. How does that work?” Your Lack of Logic label is misplaced here. How is it not logical to recognize that certain mores within a certain culture, the American black culture in this case, have strong influences on members’ thinking and thus behavior? Have you not heard of the idea popular among many blacks that being educated and intelligent is being “white” or an “Oreo” or whatever, thus implying intellectual pursuits are not “black” enough, thus causing a rejection of intellectual development? Do I actually need to cite these things for you? Concepts of “street cred” where someone is cooler for having been to prison; calling black conservatives “house n i g g e r” or “house slave” or “Uncle Tom,” thus discouraging an embrace of self-reliance while encouraging a spirit of blaming others for your own problems. Yet blacks who reject all this self-defeating nonsense do well. Herman Cain, Thomas Sowell, Clarence Thomas, Ben Carson, and many others embraced the idea that the individual alone is responsible for his own actions, success, and failure. You get a Willful Blindness and Extreme Naivete label for this crap.
“If you believe that an internal factor causes black people as a group to be more likely to commit crimes” – this is not my belief, it’s fact that you insist on denying. No one is forcing these ppl to do these things. They make the decision, and they do it with much greater frequency than almost any other group. but why pay attention to truth? Just go on sticking your ignorant, liberal, malfunctioning head in the sand and claim that young black men are no more likely to commit crime than middle-aged white women or young white men or almost ANY group in the nation!
“Diversion:
Yes, much of the time, black people were sold into slavery by other black people. Why is that of any importance? Black people are not a unit. They are individuals. How does pointing out that black people sold other black people to white people change any of the point?” You aren’t even aware of why you assert things, are you? You claimed we have institutional racism against blacks; I asked you to prove it. In your attempt to prove it, you said “The concept of white supremacy was promoted by slave owners to justify owning other human beings.” Do you not see the connection? Moreover, i didn’t say it was only black ppl selling black ppl to white ppl; I said slavery has occurred across continents among virtually ALL races throughout human history. The narrow-minded, evil left only like to talk about whites owning black slaves and ignore the rest, for obvious reasons. You get again the Willful Blindness label, plus one for being Myopic.
“Irrelevance:
Apparently the new white supremacist strategy is to point out that slavery is an old institution, as if that absolves America of its founding sin.” White supremacist strategy? Neither you nor I have cited any white supremacist groups’ claims, so where do you get this idea? And who exactly is attempting to “absolve” America of anything? “Why does it matter that slavery has existed before? How does that change that a nation that claimed to be based on freedom kept people and their descendants in slavery until a war stopped it?” Again, you fail to see connections. When you and the rest of the left keep harping on black slavery in America as a cause of their present-day troubles, along the way castigating white men for owning slaves, you do this for a reason. The point, obvious to all but the deliberately dumb, is that slavery was a COMMON PRACTICE for many, many years. We cannot apply today’s moral standards to past behavior and act all outraged. Moreover, the Founders had differing opinions as to whether Negroes were “men” or not; many ppl thought of them as savages or sub-human. To civilized white Europeans, could black figures living in such primitive fashion not seem unevolved? And spare me any nonsense about bigotry or white supremacy on my part for making a reasonable observation. You don’t understand history and need to do more reading if your analysis is so simplistic. In any event, none of this proves that modern America is institutionally racist against blacks. You grasp at every straw of other people’s thoughts in a childish, desperate, lemming-like attempt to prove it but cannot do so because it’s simply not true. You deny any role of the black culture in causing fear and suspicion of blacks among reasonable ppl. You deny basic math, while audaciously claiming that it is I who don’t understand probability (get real), that shows real behavior problems among blacks that will never get solved as long as self-righteous, willfully blind, emotion-driven leftist loons like you continue to beat these insipid drums that blacks are always victims and whites are racist devils. Yawn, how boring. You refuse to answer myriad questions that expose the glaring flaws of your positions, which were fed to you like IV fluids by a bunch of leftist brainwashing indoctrinators. You cannot think logically; yet you call my perfectly reasoned assertions illogical. Poor deluded creature. Maybe one day you’ll get mugged, assaulted, or even raped by a Negro or bunch of Negroes who call you “white b i t c h” and say “f u c k your white privilege,” and afterwards you will no doubt say they weren’t racists and it could’ve just as likely been white guys…
You have backed up nothing; all you’ve done is refuse to answer questions whose honest answers would show your whole position to be nothing but emotionally driven fantasy.
“America has an institutional race problem.” Prove it.
“individual racists like yourself.” Prove that I am a racist.
You don’t ask honest questions, Tellement.
I proved above that America has an institutional race problem. Review the evidence again.
I said that individual racists like yourself are not the big problem, the problem is the institutional racism.
“You don’t ask honest questions, Tellement.” In what way are these not honest questions:
Which of the above is most likely to commit a violent crime? (NOTE that anyone in law enforcement can easily answer this question. Only willfully blind ppl like you refuse to answer.)
Would you avoid a large number of loud, young, boisterous, black males dressed in urban / pseudo prison garb walking down the street toward you any more than you would avoid a group of white ladies in thier 60s wearing their church clothes?
What is the race and gender of ppl who made these statements:
(1) “I agree that some of the minority students being recruited by high-powered colleges would be better served at schools like my own, where they could proceed at a pace more in tune with their preparation.”
(2) “For decades, diversity-obsessed college administrators have tried to conceal information on admissions and student outcomes broken down by race, but the data that have
become public is devastating. An analysis of black students at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology in the mid-1980s found that they had scored in the top 10% nationally on the math portion of the SAT but in the bottom 10% among their classmates at MIT. As a result, black students were dropping out at much higher rates.”
(3) “There is nothing more painful to me at this stage in my life than to walk down the street and hear footsteps… then turn around and see somebody white and feel relieved.”
Another thing I will point out is you don’t even realize you are proving MY position with your offerings. Assume the stories of lynchings and their frequency are true. When was the last time 66 blacks were killed for being accused of “insult to a white person” or “making boastful remarks” (every rapper would be dead right now) or “trying to act like a white person” (in this case he might be killed by other blacks)?
Get the point, thickskull?
These things don’t happen, because blacks’ lives are infinitely better today than they were even 50 years ago, let alone 100. Yet “progressives” like you continue to live in the rear view mirror and act like it’s still 1860, while ignoring realities right in front of your fucking ignorant faces. Brown was a thug who attacked a cop and got shot for it. Yet you ignore that. Martin was a thug who attacked another person and got shot for it. Yet you ignore that. The thugs that hassled innocent kids in the Dartmouth library are racist bullies who should have been expelled; yet the biased, self-righteous, white-guilt-laden provost calls their thuggery “beautiful” while calling conservatives “not very nice,” and you pretend not to know of her bias. You want so desperately to believe this narrative that blacks have it so awfully hard that you ignore hard evidence that they are responsible for many of their own problems.
That’s not rational.
That’s not intelligent.
That’s not mature.
Grow up and open your eyes before someone else gets hassled, harassed, threatened, or killed b/c of ppl like you.
Please share your evidence that “they are responsible for many of their own problems”.
Then explain to us how it is that black people systematically have these problems.
“Please share your evidence that “they are responsible for many of their own problems”.” How interesting. You offer up sob stories from decades or more ago about blacks who were killed for trying to act like a white person, and I respond with the fact that these things just don’t happen anymore, and what is your response? Asking me to prove something that is so obvious that only the willfully blind like yourself don’t see it. I will easily provide the evidence if you answer this question: Do you acknowledge that the type of racism you cited simply does not exist today? If so, why bring it up today?
Further, do you still maintain that the provost is not biased when she calls campus thuggery “beautiful” while calling conservatives “not very nice?”
The other point to emphasize is this idea of “preexisting bias against black people.” What I am trying to determine is whether you naively believe that 100% of this “preexisting bias” is unjustified – is purely and totally based on skin color and not behavior. The fact that you refused to answer which of the examples of people I listed earlier is most likely to commit a violent crime suggests you know it is not purely and totally based on color, but admitting that would be problematic to your neat little narrative that blacks are just innocent victims of all this horrible bias that has plagued their pour souls for “hundreds of years” at the hands of all those evil, racist, bigoted white men for no reason whatsoever other than their color, and this bias continues today in the same amount and intensity as it ever did.
What percentage of this “preexisting bias” do you believe is based totally on skin color? Do you believe that percentage has changed at all since 1400? 1600? 1800? 1960?
Do you believe the Vice Provost was unbiased when she called the BLM library attacks “beautiful?” When she apologized to them for the unfavorable media coverage that thugging received? When she called conservatives “not very nice?” That her kind of bias is helpful to race relations?
“The other point to emphasize is this idea of “preexisting bias against black people.” What I am trying to determine is whether you naively believe that 100% of this “preexisting bias” is unjustified – is purely and totally based on skin color and not behavior. The fact that you refused to answer which of the examples of people I listed earlier is most likely to commit a violent crime suggests you know it is not purely and totally based on color, but admitting that would be problematic to your neat little narrative that blacks are just innocent victims of all this horrible bias that has plagued their pour souls for “hundreds of years” at the hands of all those evil, racist, bigoted white men for no reason whatsoever other than their color, and this bias continues today in the same amount and intensity as it ever did.”
These comments are incoherent.
“What percentage of this “preexisting bias” do you believe is based totally on skin color? Do you believe that percentage has changed at all since 1400? 1600? 1800? 1960?”
If you actually think that this is something that can be quantified, then I am saying again that you just don’t understand statistics.
“Do you believe the Vice Provost was unbiased when she called the BLM library attacks “beautiful?” When she apologized to them for the unfavorable media coverage that thugging received? When she called conservatives “not very nice?” That her kind of bias is helpful to race relations?”
I can’t get into her mind, and I can’t figure out why anyone would care. Why do you care? Are you trying to pretend that if she’d reacted differently, you’d be less racist? Seriously?
“These comments are incoherent.” You appear to not know what certain words mean. So let me help you. Incoherent means expressed in an incomprehensible or confusing way; unclear. Is it the complex sentences you have trouble following? It’s an advanced form of language use, I admit, but I thought you could handle it. I guess I was wrong. Or is it something else? Let me simplify using algebra (I hope you can understand simple algebra). The fact that you refused to answer X suggests you know Y, but admitting that would be problematic to your narrative that Z. Follow? Not incoherent whatsoever, just requiring an ability to follow complex thought.
“If you actually think that this is something that can be quantified, then I am saying again that you just don’t understand statistics.” Once again, you are playing small ball here. If you think at a higher level, you will recognize that I am asking for an approximation. If you have trouble with quantitative concepts, as most liberals do, then try a scale more at your level, such as “not at all, neutral, somewhat, or completely.”
“I can’t get into her mind, and I can’t figure out why anyone would care. Why do you care? Are you trying to pretend that if she’d reacted differently, you’d be less racist? Seriously?”
It doesn’t require getting into her mind to determine whether her comments were biased or helpful. Did you view the video? Do that and you will have enough material to answer the questions. Try again.
The problem with that post was not the receiver. It was the sender. You typed near gibberish surrounded by those ad hominem attacks you claim to oppose. What are you trying to say about black people, and how do the crime statistics you cite support your point?
To give a “percentage of preexisting bias” is not ” thinking “big picture”. It’s being a mathematical idiot. You prove again and again and again that you have no idea how to understand any kind of data.
“The problem with that post was not the receiver. It was the sender. You typed near gibberish surrounded by those ad hominem attacks you claim to oppose.” I suppose to someone like you, a complex thought is so beyond comprehension that it is “near gibberish.” This kind of thing is typical among liberals. Rather than do some rigorous thinking, they just slap a label on the speaker and keep their closed minds closed.
“What are you trying to say about black people, and how do the crime statistics you cite support your point?” Answer all my unanswered questions, and I will gladly answer this one.
“To give a “percentage of preexisting bias” is not ” thinking “big picture”. It’s being a mathematical idiot. You prove again and again and again that you have no idea how to understand any kind of data.” I asked you to approximate using terms such as “not at all, neutral, somewhat, or completely.” As in how much of this “preexisting bias” is based totally on color? None, evenly split with something else, some of it, or all of it? In what way is asking for this kind of approximation not understanding “any kind of data?” Once again, slap a label on the speaker and ignore tough questions. Why are you so weak?
What you typed was not complex at all, it was incoherent.
“What are you trying to say about black people, and how do the crime statistics you cite support your point?” Answer all my unanswered questions, and I will gladly answer this one.”
Trust me, I take back my request. You are not able to explain yourself. You know that what you think is disgusting to most people, so you try to couch it in language that you think will sound intelligent. It’s not working.
“What you typed was not complex at all, it was incoherent.” You may want to go back to grade school English classes when they covered complex sentences, as you clearly missed that topic. But let me help you. A simple sentence would be “See the liberal lie,” or “Hear the liberal deny reality.” With me? A complex sentence would be what I wrote, which you, in a very ignorant fashion, call “not complex at all.” If you still doubt me, show the sentence to a qualified English teacher and ask whether it is simple or complex.
“What are you trying to say about black people, and how do the crime statistics you cite support your point?” Answer all my unanswered questions, and I will gladly answer this one.”
“Trust me, I take back my request. You are not able to explain yourself.” Incorrect. I can very clearly explain what the DOJ statistics say about young black men vs. young white men. Even Jesse Jackson is aware of it. But for whatever reason, leftists don’t like what these numbers say, so they either ignore them or deny their validity. And you refuse to answer tough questions. All the while, the problem grinds on and the crime continues…
I am well qualified to give this opinion. Your post was incoherent. You are able to type insults. You are not able to explain your views.
“I am well qualified to give this opinion.” What you are is very deluded if you cannot even recognize a complex sentence as opposed to a simple sentence. The only thing worse than ignorance is arrogant ignorance, like the kind you display.
Oh yeah, I forgot about that.
Where is that link for the video & news coverage where the staff, faculty & other students are in support of the ppl yelling the N-word at students?
¯_(ツ)_/¯
When did this happen?…..I call bullsh*t.
You are a liar.
First, let’s not dismiss the possibility of lasting effects on the victims. I would hope the College is working to identify and meet with those who were impacted. Some lives were likely changed forever as a result of what happened in Baker.
Second, Black Lives Matter is about segregation. BLM brings
with it the implied violence of Ferguson. Its main intellectual tenet is intolerance for views other than its own. The direction BLM is taking is exactly the opposite of the direction stated in “Moving Dartmouth Forward.” The administration should ask BLM leadership the following: Do you want to integrate with the Dartmouth community as outlined in “Moving Dartmouth Forward.”? And the administration should get a written response. Jonathan Diakanwa should coordinate the response.
Third, for Inge-Lise Ameer to describe conservatives as mean while tolerating the bullying and harassment of BLM would suggest a stunning lack of intellectual depth. It should be a source of embarrassment to the college, the students, and
alumni. By praising BLM she has violated one of the key tenets of MDF: Students
are free of extreme behaviors and part of a safe and healthy environment.
Fourth, I would simply ask the administration and
Inge-Lise Ameer if “Moving Dartmouth Forward” is fact or fiction. I believe Inge-Lise Ameer owes the Dartmouth community a written response to this question.
As a Dartmouth ’83 who has given loyally to the Dartmouth College Fund every year since my graduation, I have come reluctantly to the sad conclusion that the only way to stop Dartmouth’s slide into progressive liberal purgatory is to starve the beast. instead, I will give to the DOC and certain “Friends of” athletic programs. As a place holder for a better future, I will give $1 dollar to the Dartmouth College Fund.
And please let them know why!
Because the college touts its participation percentage as being the second highest after Princeton, I think I’m going to break my own track record and not donate at all. I don’t see any other way to get through to the administration. I’m sure they believe this will blow over, as have other conflicts. But to me, this is at a whole new level–students targeted because of their race and because they dared to study at an Ivy League college–and the administration choosing to publicly side with the protesters.
“Starve them out”, and use a process of “selection” to maintain favorable status quo Control… it worked for a while during generalized slavery!
One wonders why Ameer didn’t offer the recently published Dartmouth citizen pledge instead of the Freedom Budget. Here’s what Hanlon’s pledge says in part:
I affirm that in the Dartmouth community:
We learn together.
We teach one another.
We create knowledge together.
We treat ourselves and each other with dignity.
We recognize that our diverse backgrounds broaden our understanding of the world.
We appreciate that an honest and respectful exchange of ideas – even
conflicting ones – strengthens our intellect and makes for an inclusive
community.
If these sub humans what to go back to Segregation, I’m sure I have some chains lying around for their welcome home party.
Dartmouth is no longer an institution of higher learning…
Shame on these morons and their Provost for destroying a fine organization.
Well said. Proud to see that you are standing up for innocent Dartmouth students against this overt bullying and terrorist like behavior. It is disappointing that the Dartmouth Administrators have endorsed the thugs that participated in this. I would hope the parents of these kids are notified and that the parents of the law abiding students cease their tuition payments. Unless it hits the school where it counts, things will go downhill real fast.
Here are a few suggestions
– organize counter demonstrations
– get in BLM member’s faces. They look like a bunch of weaklings and if you metaphorically punch back twice as hard they will quickly cave
– pool your resources, hire a great litigator and sue BLM, it’s members and the school. Nothing like hitting people in the wallet.
Class officer, 1955…the only thing the Marxist college with its LBGT deans and milquetoast president understand is NO GIFTING anymore. Since ROTC was tossed off campus (73% of our Class graduated to the military and those funds, plus working Thayer/Buildings and Grounds paid tuition)…I have refused to give. Just as I would not donate to ISIS, I will not support sick ethics at a once-great college. None of my grandkids attended “Grampie, those kids are sloppy and sick” nor would I ever again.
It is OVER and cannot recover….but our old men bask in the fading glow of the bonfire, totally oblivious to what lies just under the surface. Pretty sad. JNB 1955
This is part of the hippie takeover of our nation’s posts of influence. See the recent WSJ editorial (last week or so) in which a leftist professor, a self-admitted 60s hippie, says that in the 60s they had little influence but protests, but now “we have tenure.” This transformation has been happening under our noses for 50 years. They have infiltrated the mainstream media and the universities – drugged-out hippies who hate this nation and minimize its great achievements by calling it a racist oppressor. What a sad time. One can only hope that they have enough rope now to hang themselves with displays like this at Dartmouth so that the pendulum swings the other way.
We are not all asleep at the campfire.
I tell my wife that events like this are really important. We understand the general slide of society and these associated trends, but when the slide is gradual the frog is boiled. Something like this is just so outrageous AND easy to understand that it causes quite a few to wake up.
Each outrageous shock wakes up more.
It is amazing that the Vice Provost of an American University can refer to a violent outburst of hysterical violence as a “wonderful beautiful thing”. Just what sort of idiots are administering your universities? If I were a parent I would certainly not pay thousands of dollars a year to have my children inducted into the Red Guards.
Ameers statement is Orwell personified.
Yes, stumpy, it certainly is.
Have you seen any evidence of a student being pinned against the wall?
It was sufficient to see the video of the behaviour of those morons. Their behaviour is that of fascist mobs, or Mao’s Red Guards. It was evident that they are unable to benefit from being in a university, and should be removed forthwith.
It’s insulting to fascists (who took the time to organize these things) to compare them to this mob, which is just a mob.
The video was bad enough, but I have to insist upon demanding evidence or at least testimony for the pinning against the wall claim.
A quick google search about the library protest clearly shows that much of the media siezed upon that specific allegation for their headlines.
If it’s true, then the administration is all the more guilty of ignoring its own policies and all the more complacent in creating a hostile environment.
If it’s false, then the provost’s speech was justified, because the media’s headlines were referencing a falsehood. Furthermore it would mean the writers of the Review are deliberately defaming their peers.
So as we can see, it is very important that the Pinning against the Wall allegation be investigated. A lot of people’s reputations are at stake here.
Hi Masta:
As a Canadian, all that concerns me is that America is circling the toilet bowl. If you people don’t get control of this situation you’ll be flushed…and I’m afraid of being pulled down with you.
I hope you have emergency maple reserves then.
But I’ll give it to you straight: I’m hopped up on adderal right now. So literally the only thing in the world that I care about is that one claim that a student was pinned against the wall at that mob protest. That’s it, and that’s the way it’s gonna be for the next few hours.
So, do you have any evidence for or against the claim that a student was pinned up against the wall during that protest?
Personally I have no evidence. Moreover, I don’t care. I’ve had about enough of American idiocy…
There is no forgiveness for Justin Bieber
On that we agree. You oughta go and lie down
Not resting until the Review either caughs up their evidence for someone being pinned against the wall or admits they were wrong.
Have it your own way (Is that possible in Dartmouth?) but drink plenty of fluids. Molson’s Canadian comes to mind.
Man you must be woefully unaware of whats happening on Canadian campuses then… these SJW’s are entirely everywhere, and they will stoop to any underhanded tactic to get the results they want… truly frightening.. check out what is happening to Gregory Allen Elliot right now and get back to me… he is facing criminal charges for disagreeing with a feminist online.. charged with harassment..
Meer does want “anyone feeling unsafe”? If I were one of the students studying in that library I would have felt unsafe. But does Ameer care about that? Apparently not. American parents should know that there are good, peaceful universities, with high academic standards, in Canada. And they are a lot more affordable than left wing indoctrination camps like Dartmouth.
Assault and Battery?? Clearly the actions of this faux BLM mob combined these two violent crimes: assaulting the students (the threat of violence) and battery (physical violence) by grabbing/touching. These students have criminal cases and should proceed with criminal and civil torts.
If only someone could provide some evidence of a student being pinned against the wall…
We have always been at war with Eastasia. Ameer is channeling Orwell with every breath.
Many administrators and students should read the recent comment by Harvard Professor Alan Dershowitz on this subject. He said in part:
“They may want superficial diversity, because for them diversity is a code word for ‘more of us,’” he said. “They don’t want more conservatives, they don’t want more white students, they don’t want more heterosexuals.”……”I think the most important thing to point out is the double standard and the hypocrisy,” Dershowitz said. “These are students who want safe spaces for themselves but not for others. They’re prepared to spit on people going out of lectures.”….”These students don’t want me to be safe,” he said. “They don’t want students who agree with me to be safe. They just want their ideas to be safe and protected from any contrary point of view.”
more at: http://www.theblaze.com/stories/2015/11/18/prominent-harvard-professor-uses-no-filter-sends-scathing-message-to-student-protesters/
and at: http://www.businessinsider.com/alan-dershowitz-thinks-student-protesters-dont-want-true-diversity-in-colleges-2015-11
What Dershowitz said makes no sense at all. There are a limited number of slots for a university, how would increasing the number of white students increase diversity?
Did you even read the article? Are you really this dense? He’s saying diversity should be more than just being around people of different skin colors and races–that it is the diversity of different ideas and thoughts in an academic setting that is the much more important contribution to one’s education…
I read the article. His comment made no sense, it is an irrational complaint.
“His comment made no sense, it is an irrational complaint.” Prove this statement.
It’s self-evident. You can’t increase racial diversity by increasing the number of students you have the most of.
I didn’t ask you to prove the statement “you can’t increase racial diversity by increasing the number of students you have the most of,” since Dershowitz is not saying that. I asked you to prove this statement, about the Dershowitz quote: “His comment made no sense, it is an irrational complaint.” Since Dershowitz is an attorney, he is well practiced in the use of reason, so for you to call it “irrational” is rather bold and requires proof. Good luck.
I just explained it to you. Dershowitz said “They don’t want more white students, they don’t want more heterosexuals”. As both those groups are the majority, increasing those groups would lead to less diversity. Think of the total student body, with a majority of that student body white and heterosexual, as both are the majority in this country. If even more of the student body is white and heterosexual, an increase in those would lead to less diversity. It would crowd out more nonwhite and homosexual students.
Dershowitz is either irrational or he’s pandering, or both. Because this is not complicated.
The only correct thing you said is this is not complicated. Yet you either refuse to see it or are unable to see it, so I will explain it for you. What Dershowitz is doing is pointing out the obvious hypocrisy in the diversity crowd’s aims. They claim to want diversity but are only interested in more people like themselves, not a more diverse mix where all are accepted. Understand the difference? These are the same people who claim to feel “unsafe” in a room full of white people. How ridiculous. The same ones who look at a Republican party gathering and call the entire party “racist” because they see a lot of whites. It’s nothing to do with acceptance of differences, only with more influence for people like them and less for those who aren’t. This is the point Dershowitz makes that you can’t seem to grasp. It’s neither irrational nor pandering; it’s truth. Because this is not complicated.
I responded to Dershowitz’s statement- he said that they do not want more white or heterosexual students. Increasing white and heterosexual students would decrease non white non Herero students, thus Dershowitz is pandering to you, or he is irrational. I understand that you only want to focus on part of the sentence and want to ignore the rest of it, but that doesn’t make it go away.
It is incredible how thick you are. Did you follow either link to read the entire article and get the full context of his totally correct remarks? It’s not that long, so you should be able to handle it, though I doubt you did, so here’s a little more to help you. He is not asserting that diversity would increase if you raised those aleady in the majority. This is not his focus. His focus is on the HYPOCRISY of those who scream for diversity. For example, they spit on other students who attended a free speech event at the William F. Buckley Jy. program at Yale. Translation: they don’t like conservatives, so they spit on them. Those who protest racial injustice are the same ones who yelled “Zionists out of CUNY” when Dershowitz, a Jew, spoke at CUNY. Translation: they don’t like Jews, so they yelled anti-Semitic slurs. These champions of “diversity” are HYPOCRITES – they want more people LIKE THEMSELVES and fewer of those UNLIKE THEMSELVES. Do you understand this now, or are you willfully blind?
I read the statement. You can pretend to only see part of his statement, but that doesn’t make the rest of it go away. It was an irrational statement, but you liked the rest of what he said, so you loved it. The entire point was to pander to people like you. Only a conservative could believe the line of BS he’s running. Only a conservative could believe that black people demanding not to be called the n word on campus is an example of fascism.
A finer example of willfully blind I have rarely seen than you. “You can pretend to only see part of his statement, but that doesn’t make the rest of it go away.” I have pretended nothing, and what I have done is the exact opposite of what you are saying, because I read the whole article. It is you who are only seeing part of his statement. Why won’t you read the whole (short) article?
What part do I “pretend not to see?” I eagerly await the answer to this one, since I read the entire article and saw it all, unlike you.
“It was an irrational statement.” Prove this silly assertion. Good luck.
“The entire point was to pander to people like you. Only a conservative could believe the line of BS he’s running.” Only an irrational, emotionally driven, intolerant, liberal fool would call what he has done “pandering” and “BS.”
“Only a conservative could believe that black people demanding not to be called the n word on campus is an example of fascism.” Show me where Dershowitz or ANY conservative said “black people demanding not to be called the n word on campus is an example of fascism.” This distortion shows you either didn’t read the whole article or “pretended not to see parts of it.”
This kind of behavior is why we have such division in this country. The intolerance of the left, which you have perfectly demonstrated here, is so pervasive, so perverse, that any valid observation a conservative makes, and there are myriad of them, is immediately reconfigured in the “brain” of the liberal to mean something else entirely, nearly always sinister, so that the liberal can continue to demonize conservatives and feel justified doing so, comfortably, if bitterly, protected in their cocoons of utterly homogenous thought, totally bereft of any true diversity, remaining fixed in their “my way or you suck” way of thinking. Wretched.
But please, prove me wrong. Prove that there is at least one liberal out there who can be reasonable. Read his article, think objectively, openly, TOLERANTLY, with “diversity” in mind, and then respond. I look forward to it.
Dershowitz said “they don’t want more white students, they don’t want more heterosexual students”. I read the article last week. You can’t make that silly statement disappear by praising the rest of what Dershowitz said. The context doesn’t fix the silliness. It’s especially silly considering that he’s an extremely well educated, logical person. Why does person who is capable of logic make a statement like that? He’s pandering to you. You’re eating it up.
Black students on campus have been attacked as facsist, and as wanting to repress free speech, when what they’ve complained about is having the n word shouted at them.
The reason we have such division in this country is that we are dealing with the lingering effects of centuries of white privilege. Black and brown people are in more places now that ever in our history, in spots that were formerly occupied by white people. A lot of people just cannot handle that, and they respond with racism.
If any student spit on Alan Dershowitz, for any reason, that’s a terrible assault on his dignity and it undermines their message, just like this protest in the library. That doesn’t condemn the entire movement or their message.
It’s incredible how obtuse you are. “Why does person who is capable of logic make a statement like that? He’s pandering to you. You’re eating it up.” You still fail to prove that he is pandering. Why? Because he is not pandering. You take these particular statements too literally. What he is getting at is the anti-white, anti-male undertone to these movements, proven by their lashings (“f * c k your white comfort,” etc.) and your own parroting of this whole “white privilege” garbage. That sentiment is not welcoming to all; it is UNwelcoming to some – isn’t that the very thing to which they claim to object?
“Black students on campus have been attacked as facsist, and as wanting to repress free speech, when what they’ve complained about is having the n word shouted at them.” And did they do this in a calm, respectful, inclusive, decent manner? Once you answer that honestly, you will see why they have been called thugs, hypocrites, crybullies, etc. Why are you ignoring their low-brow, harassing, blatantly racist behavior?
“The reason we have such division in this country is that we are dealing with the lingering effects of centuries of white privilege.” Good girl, your liberal indoctrinators would pat you on the head for repeating that nonsense. Prove this statement. (Good luck, as it’s utter hogwash.)
“If any student spit on Alan Dershowitz, for any reason, that’s a terrible assault on his dignity and it undermines their message, just like this protest in the library.” This is the only thing you’ve said in this post that makes any sense. Totally correct. What you’re missing, however, is that the very premise of BLM is flawed and based on lies, which anyone who has regularly read a reputable newspaper would know.
As for the causes of divisions, that could take a while to lay out, but one major cause is the behavior of the far left, including Obama, who has personally insulted so many ppl in this nation that it’s astounding. He scolds and insults anyone who disagrees with him or isn’t in his favored group. The truly sad part is that so many young ppl who have grown up only knowing him as their “president” who don’t know that this is not how presidents who are worthy of the office behave. No POTUS has acted this way. It is simply not how a leader at that level comports himself. But he is part of the New Left that are eager to demonize whites, conservatives, upper-income ppl, religious ppl (except of course Muslims), so they rip open old wounds and dig those divisions deep in a classic divide and conquer move. Unity, acceptance of differences, true “diversity” are not the goal, and that is part of Dershowitz’s totally correct argument, which only the willfully blind and obtuse don’t accept.
Dershowitz’s statement is irrational-only an irrational person who is oblivious to their own privilege could fall for such blatant pandering.
” And did they do this in a calm, respectful, inclusive, decent manner?”
What a pathetic comment. Why does anyone have to ASK that you PLEASE not call them a racial slur, please not insist that they only got into a university because they are black, please stop using the n word in a fraternity chant, and please not use an illustration like this in the student newspaper:
https://www.jbhe.com/2015/11/student-newspaper-editors-apologize-for-printing-offensive-illustration/
Amazingly, many students have dealt with the abuse of having the n word yelled at them, being patronized and harassed, in a respectful manner. ”
“Prove this statement.”
Only an utter idiot could be oblivious to the lingering effects of white privilege. Even you aren’t this clueless.
“What you’re missing, however, is that the very premise of BLM is flawed and based on lies, which anyone who has regularly read a reputable newspaper would know.”
The papers that I read are all in agreement-black lives do matter. What are you reading?
Obama’s election revealed the disease of racism. During the 2008 campaign, Obama got more death threats than any previous candidate. We saw endless discussions of Obama’s birth certificate. We saw one Republican after another get caught sending racist jokes via email. And we’ve seen a series of events – the arrest of Professor Gates, the shooting of Trayvon Martin, the murder of Eric Garner, of Tamir Rice, of Freddie Gray, of John Crawford…none of that was caused by Obama-you just weren’t aware of it. In Ferguson, we learned that the citizens of that community are routinely ticketed for minor offenses.
[http://www.cnn.com/2015/03/06/us/ferguson-missouri-racism-tickets-fines/]
Something else interesting-Dershowitz’s account of being spit on isn’t being questioned. You just accept it as fact. ; )
“Dershowitz’s statement is irrational-only an irrational person who is oblivious to their own privilege could fall for such blatant pandering.” WOW. You seem to believe you can tell the race and gender of someone just by the person’s comments. SO tell me, mind reader, what were the race and gender of the ppl who said these things (these are actual quotes, not made up):
(1) “Racial preferences almost certainly result in fewer black professionals than likely would exist in the absence of such policies, which is bad enough. But they also have a long track record of poisoning the academic environment. The racial unrest on campus today is a byproduct of college admissions schemes that place race above ability.”
(2) “I agree that some of the minority students being recruited by high-powered colleges would be better served at schools like my own, where they could proceed at a pace more in tune with their preparation.”
(3) “For decades, diversity-obsessed college administrators
have tried to conceal information on admissions and student outcomes broken down by race, but the data that have become public is devastating. An analysis of black students at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology in the mid-1980s found that they had scored in the top 10% nationally on the math portion of the SAT but in the bottom 10% among their classmates at MIT. As a result, black students were dropping out at much higher rates.”
Good luck, and provide your rationale for your responses.
Then perhaps you can guess at my actual race and gender. Black female? Hispanic male? Asian female? White male? Black male? Looking forward to that.
I have patiently explained how out of place Dershowitz’s comment about not wanting “more white students” and “more heterosexuals” was in the context of the rest of his remarks. That the fact that he made such an irrational statement, given that he is an intelligent man, is evidence that he is pandering to you. You understand what I’m saying perfectly well.
” And did they do this in a calm, respectful, inclusive, decent manner?”
“What a pathetic comment. Why does anyone have to ASK that you PLEASE not call them a racial slur, please not insist that they only got into a university because they are black, please stop using the n word in a fraternity chant, and please not use an illustration like this in the student newspaper”
Your response is nothing but ad hominem and rhetorical questions. Answer the question. Dd they do this in a calm, respectful, inclusive, decent manner? Your reluctance to answer shows you are aware that the true reply will not help your feeble case.
“Amazingly, many students have dealt with the abuse of having the n word yelled at them, being patronized and harassed, in a respectful manner…Something else interesting-Dershowitz’s account of being spit on isn’t being questioned. You just accept it as fact. ; )”
So you accept “as fact” the idea that “many students have dealt with the abuse of having the n word yelled at them, being patronized and harassed” and that they have “dealt” with this “abuse…in a respectful manner.” And yet you would question whether Derhsowitz was in fact spat upon?
Why would you automically believe young blacks, some of whom harassed and racially attacked innocent white kids in the library, but be suspicious of an acclaimed Jewish attorney?
So you’re going to pretend that your demand that black students “respectfully” ask not to be called the n word wasn’t an instance of epic stupidity?
“Prove this statement.”
“Only an utter idiot could be oblivious to the lingering effects of white privilege. Even you aren’t this clueless.” Again, nothing buit ad hominem. Can you prove your statement or not? Do you just go around making assertions without first having fact and specific, credible sources, and then call anyone who challenges you an “utter idiot,” “oblivious” and “clueless?” I had originally thought you might be a student at Dartmouth; now I am beginning to think you have never attended college, as I see no evidence of a rational, educated mind at work here.
Well, Tellie, you won’t back up your claims, and you won’t read what I provide to back up mine. You are a deeply racist person. Given all that, it seemed like a bit much to do more than point out the obvious-that even you know enough history to understand that white priviledge goes back before our founding, and that you aren’t a complete idiot, you know about slavery, sharecroppers, Jim Crow, lynching, housing discrimination and loan discrimination, often from our own government, segregated schools, and redlining.
Since even you know about those things, but you still pretend that there’s no white privilege, why should I post a lot of links that you’ll pretend you don’t see? So you can launch more half witted questions at me?
“What you’re missing, however, is that the very premise of BLM is flawed and based on lies, which anyone who has regularly read a reputable newspaper would know.”
“The papers that I read are all in agreement-black lives do matter. What are you reading?” Incredible lack of reading comprehension. Where did I say black lives do NOT matter? You miss the point again. So let me ask you, since you claim to read “papers” – as in more than one – which is hard to believe. Which paperS are you reading? And what is the premise of BLM? How did it start? What events led to its inception? Cite examples, be specific, and try to avoid flippant ad hominem, shallow replies like the one quoted herein.
Once we establish the facts of how BLM began, you can then try to understand why its premise is flawed and based on lies. That is, if you really are interested in truth rather than biased views of events that allow you to be in line with the PC bully crowd.
“Incredible lack of reading comprehension.”
Yeah, that’s what I’m thinking about you. Comebacks go right over your head. Patient explanations dumbed down to first grade level don’t get through to you. I bring you links, and you can’t understand them, so you ask the same question again. You make claims, won’t back them up, and tell me to research them for you. You’ve got no logic, no reading skills, limited knowledge, and an obvious anger management problem.
If you would like to back up your own claims about BLM, go for it. I’m waiting.
“Obama’s election revealed the disease of racism. During the 2008 campaign, Obama got more death threats than any previous candidate.” First, his election would not have happened but for millions of white ppl voting FOR him, many of whom were Republicans and/or Independents. Second, prove that getting the most death threats means racism was the basis for the threats. Good luck, and provide citations.
“First, his election would not have happened but for millions of white ppl voting FOR him, many of whom were Republicans and/or Independents.”
Well, Effie, that doesn’t contradict my point in any way. Why would you believe that it did?
Obama got Secret Service protection earlier than any other candidate. Many of the threats were explicitly racist, or were from white supremacist groups.
“We saw endless discussions of Obama’s birth certificate.” Prove that these discussions were driven by racism. Good luck.
That’s been discussed extensively in the media. Surely a person like yourself, who claims to be well read, is aware that these attacks were driven by a hostility toward Obama’s racial background.
“We saw one Republican after another get caught sending racist jokes via email.” One R “after another?” Provide citations of how many exactly did this. Then calculate what percentage of Republicans that count represents. Ensure you can prove the comments came from Republicans. Good luck.
What is wrong with you, exactly? “Calculate the percentage”? Is there some percentage you believe is acceptable for racist Republicans?
http://www.mediaite.com/tv/orange-county-gop-official-solves-birther-mystery-presidents-parents-were-monkeys/
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/07/02/montana-judge-racist-obama-email_n_5552853.html
http://newsone.com/121301/california-mayor-emails-white-house-watermelon-picture/
http://www.cnn.com/2009/POLITICS/06/16/tennessee.email/index.html?eref=ib_us
http://adamholland.blogspot.com/2008/11/florida-republican-partys-racist-email.html
https://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/44/post/obama-impersonator-makes-racial-gay-jokes-at-gop-gathering/2011/06/18/AGVLAUaH_blog.html
http://thinkprogress.org/politics/2008/10/16/30814/obama-bucks/
http://gawker.com/5064741/the-racist-anti-obama-gop-newsletter-listicle
This about from the Ferguson police:
http://talkingpointsmemo.com/livewire/ferguson-racist-emails-reagan-obama-monkey
http://www.ibtimes.com/ferguson-police-racist-emails-released-depict-obama-baby-ape-1869312
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/post-nation/wp/2015/03/04/the-seven-racist-e-mails-the-justice-department-highlighted-in-its-report-on-ferguson-police/
“And we’ve seen a series of events – the arrest of Professor Gates, the shooting of Trayvon Martin, the murder of Eric Garner, of Tamir Rice, of Freddie Gray, of John Crawford…none of that was caused by Obama-you just weren’t aware of it.” Where did I say that these event were “caused by Obama?” Moreover, and this gets to the heart of the matter, did you read extensively the facts surrounding these events? Are you aware, for instance, that Obama opened his racist mouth to say the police “acted stupidly” before knowing all the facts in the Gates case? That the police did nothing wrong in that case, that Gates was indeed over the top and himself behaving in a racist fashion? As for Trayvon, prove that his shooting was simply a case of anti-black racism in which he was totally innocent of any wrongdoing whatsoever. I notice you left out Michael Brown. Interesting. Do you list that among the myriad cases of “racism?” Do you believe he was “innocent?” That he put his hands up? That he spoke the words “Hands up – don’t shoot?” What about Garner? Racism again? And all the others? Prove it. Then you talk about tickets? And?
It’s nice that the home is letting you use the computer two days in a row!
You said: “Where did I say that these event were “caused by Obama?”
I was referring to this comment:
“As for the causes of divisions, that could take a while to lay out, but one major cause is the behavior of the far left, including Obama, who has personally insulted so many ppl in this nation that it’s astounding. He scolds and insults anyone who disagrees with him or isn’t in his favored group.”
“Moreover, and this gets to the heart of the matter, did you read extensively the facts surrounding these events?”
Yes.
“Are you aware, for instance, that Obama opened his racist mouth to say the police “acted stupidly” before knowing all the facts in the Gates case? That the police did nothing wrong in that case, that Gates was indeed over the top and himself behaving in a racist fashion?”
Obama knew more of the facts then than you know today. The police did act stupidly. The officer has admitted that he believed that Gates was the resident of the house, but he asked for Gates’ ID anyway. The officer demanded that Gates step out onto his front porch. Gates was arrested for “tumultuous conduct” in his own front yard. The charges were laughable…and stupid.
“As for Trayvon, prove that his shooting was simply a case of anti-black racism in which he was totally innocent of any wrongdoing whatsoever.”
Post after post, you take a sentence and make some irrational demand like this. Trayvon is one of the reasons for racial division in this country. It’s not necessary that I even attempt to prove racism to a stone cold racist like yourself, your own words prove that you also feel this was an event that caused racial division.
“I notice you left out Michael Brown. Interesting. Do you list that among the myriad cases of “racism?” Do you believe he was “innocent?” That he put his hands up? That he spoke the words “Hands up – don’t shoot?”
You’ve tried to bring up Michael Brown again and again, and you’re so anxious about him that I hope you’re wearing your Depends. The community of Ferguson is a great example of what happens over decades when you privilege one group over another.
“What about Garner? Racism again? And all the others? Prove it.”
These cases: Tamir Rice, Trayvon Martin, Professor Gates, Michael Brown, John Crawford, LaQuan McDonald, Eric Garner-have brought to everyone’s attention what black and brown people already know-that contact between the police and any black or brown person is more likely to end in death than contact between the police and a white person. Consider for a minute what happened with Cliven Bundy-a protester was shown with a rifle trained on a law enforcement officer-and try to imagine that scenario if Bundy and the “protester” were black.
“Then you talk about tickets? And?
I gave you a link. You want to be spoon fed every step of the way.
http://www.cnn.com/2015/03/06/us/ferguson-missouri-racism-tickets-fines/
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/morning-mix/wp/2015/03/05/ferguson-shows-how-a-police-force-can-turn-into-a-plundering-collection-agency/
I would encourage everyone to watch or re-watch the video of Vice Provost Ameer’s meeting with the protesters. It really is stunning how many ways she evidences political bias, disinterest in facts and truth, pre-judgment, hypocrisy and poor judgment. Her performance is a classic display of the spineless, appeasing and ass-covering behavior of administrators at Dartmouth and other elite schools that is validating and, indeed, encouraging the self-righteous and intolerant current wave of campus protests. Here is just a partial bill of particulars, in no particular order: First, according to Ameer the conservative world is not nice. This statement is not directed at any particular conservatives and no evidence is provided as to what exactly any or all conservatives did that was not nice behavior. Apparently, in this meeting it was safe to assume that all in attendance were not conservative and that anyone who is conservative is not nice and by clear implication a bad person. Note that Ameer does not even challenge the inadvertently self-parodying and self righteous student who excitedly and repeatedly asserts that all conservatives are “fu##ing racists”. How can a university claim to promote diversity of thought, open inquiry and dialogue, etc when senior administrators are openly disdainful of differing viewpoints and fail to challenge sweeping and unsupported ad hominem attacks on those who hold such differing viewpoints? Second, any pretense that the Dartmouth administration is neutrally and objectively investigating what occurred at the Thursday night protest went out the window with Ameer’s statements that the protest was “beautiful” and that the verbally and physically threatening behaviors reported in The Dartmouth Review, The Tab and on Yik Yak are not true. Ameer effectively states that all the eyewitnesses that were interviewed by The Dartmouth Review or otherwise came forward are liars. Where is her evidence supporting this conclusion less than four days after an event involving hundreds of participants and witnesses? There is none. Ameer sends a clear message to all the protesters in attendance that facts and truth don’t matter. All that matters is the narrative that a bunch of like-minded protesters and their faculty and administration supporters and enablers decide upon as their version of truth. What is galling here is the hypocrisy of those in attendance who self-righteously accuse others of not facing up to the truth regarding systemic racism in America while demonstrating utter disregard for truth when the truth is inconvenient for them. What is even more galling here is the administration’s obvious attempt to discourage eyewitnesses from coming forward on the record. What student who has to live within the Dartmouth community would come forward with eyewitness testimony of physically or verbally abusive behavior by the protesters when the administration has already declared any such accounts to be lies and already rendered a verdict that the protest was beautiful. Third, Ameer’s utter hypocrisy as regards student safety and free speech is breathtaking. She shows not one iota of concern that students quietly studying in the library might have felt physically threatened when dozens of screaming protesters occupied the library and got in the faces of the studying students. But she evidences bottomless concern for any protesters who now feel unsafe because they chose to participate in a very public and deliberately disruptive protest but now find that they are being individually identified through the video of the event and Yik yak posts. What is the message here being sent by the administration. That the school will protect those who only feel comfortable and empowered in an unruly mob from ever being individually identified. The administration should be ashamed for legitimizing and enabling such cowardice. And then there is the repeated student requests at the meeting for the administration to censor and/or disavow any statements on Yik Yak, The Dartmouth Review and anyone else who writes critically of the protesters. “Mommy, those bad people are saying mean things about me. Make them stop.” Presented with this opportunity to educate the protesters that choosing to be involved in protests and otherwise being outspoken politically comes with having to suffer the verbal slings and arrows of those who disagree with you (little things we like to call democracy and the right to free expression), what does Ameer do. She makes it clear that the administration shares the protesters’ pain and is doing everything it can to censor the people saying mean things. Ameer’s performance is shameful. She should be fired immediately.
Great comment. My thoughts exactly.
Thanks…so many of my friends have said “John, don’t waste your time. You have plenty of great causes and responsibilities. Let Dartmouth just die.” I have tried, but I did/do LOVE IT, and believe me, it hurts to see it plunge. Just read the 200 best Colleges/Universities in Fortune…Dartmouth there was in the 20’s…income, debt, courses, etc. I PREDICT if things stay the same, enrollment will NOT drop, but QUALITY of student body will crater….on the list Dartmouth was lucky..As a lecturer at many of those on the list, I can state categorically that MANY in the 50 range are better, cheaper and finish a wonderful student with values and professional offers for employment.
The quality of student is a very interesting thing. Numbers wise – the scores/grades of the next 500 genius Leftist wackjobs who replace 500 genius normal people – will have very little impact on the scores and grades meter.
What they will miss – certainly – is the fact that the students (and parents) choosing not to attend have a very different thinking style than the high scoring mush heads by whom they will be replaced.
It is obvious; one can consume a steady does of Ivy degreed idiocy on nearly any topic (Bill Nye?) Over time the university will become home to only these mush heads, and everyone will know
My 800 math SAT 8th grader – will be skipping this school, among others.
African American Early Decision applications to Ivy League up 8% for class of ’20, while, overall, ED applications are flat. Admissions Directors are celebrating their great job. So who is worried about “safe places”? If you read dartblog.com, you will see first person accounts of the library incident. These kids would have been taken in front of Honor Council and at least suspended if they were any other student group. The passive, weak response of the current President to complaining students and parents is embarrassing. My sons both attend a different Ivy League University – would not even apply to Dartmouth.
People don’t realize it – but this is a watershed moment in the bifurcation of our society. Dartmouth is no more or less out of control on their PC culture than most of the rest – see news of Brown today, or the standing joke of Cornell (alum ’83), or schools with names that are punchlines for jokes, like Bezerkely.
Conservatives (in our society = traditionalists, including traditional liberals) have the un-fun job of trying to find which school will be the least damaging to their white male heterosexual Christian kids.
It will be interesting to see if the modernist devolved culture wins in the end. As for me – I’m sick of this stuff. There is no reason to continue interacting with the modernists and their con. Dartmouth would need to suspend some students, fire the Dean, and at this point probably fire the President to even get close. Everyone knows they need to clean house – that this culture and thinking style dominates their entire campus. This isn’t the start of an event, it is the end of a long trend. Dartmouth is so out of touch with reality that they don’t even know this, while >half the population looks on and says “eeeewwww – something stinks”.
“Conservatives (in our society = traditionalists, including traditional liberals) have the un-fun job of trying to find which school will be the least damaging to their white male heterosexual Christian kids” Precisely. Any advice?
Unfortunately no.
In general – the southern schools are going to have more Christians. (I’m not a Bible thumper – but I’d rather my kid hangs around with them than the “moderns” (humanists).) Personally I think there is a big transition in college choice right now; the data always lags the trend, but we will look back and see a real change. College campus culture changes over in approx 4-8 years (in 8 years no one knows anyone from 8 years ago.)
Modern kids understand their society better than we do. I look and am appalled, but they are used to it. Some buy into the modern indoctrination, others “keep two sets of books” and appear one way in public while they think entirely different things in their heads. example – They know what is expected to get an A in environmental “science” – they just repeat back what the indoctrinators want to hear.
If your decision is not imminent, the schools should start to shake out within 4-6 years. Maybe. It is unfortunate, but these moderns are the dominant culture in the US right now. People are learning machines, and right now they are learning that the race, gender, culture war is real. So – a reaction will occur. Ivies probably won’t change – because there is no forcing factor – they will just take the next 500 smartest kids – who are practically indistinguishible from the 500 they lose. I would look for shakeout at the next tier down – somebody will realize they can appeal to an under served market – Chicago or Vandy of Hopkins etc – will fill the gap.
Or you can weight the damage by going to eng school – the higher the “applied science”:humanities ratio, the less BS.
But she headed the Administration Deanship for LGBTQ before Hanlon moved her up a notch to Associate Dean. She is now “un-touchable”, unless you want to be called names and crucified upside-down. It started LONG ago, when Cutter Hall got re-named “Shabazz Hall”…look up who that was. Then the die was cast and it has been all PC downhill from there…160 student “organizations”, many ethnic/race/nationality/sexual persuasion oriented. The quest for diversity from the get-go created black dining tables, affinity houses and SEGREGATION. It didn’t/doesn’t work. They can do it all…much of it is just “WRONG”, ethically and morally, but stay the HELL OUT OF MY FACE. You are NOT the majority. They sleep and were sheep or cows sitting in Baker, afraid to slug a punk screaming obscenities at a nice lady student. Pathetic.
Very well said. What terrifies me is when I fast-forward in time. When these thugs graduate and interview for jobs with their Dartmouth degrees and, I would expect, inflated grades thanks to the diversity bonus in grading, companies will be eager to hire them, to reinterpret their lousy interview answers to sound better (I personally know a manager whose department head did this when advised of woeful interview performances by “diversity” candidates), to “mentor” them, promote them, and of course overpay them, all to boost their diversity scores. Of course those who have to deal with such entitled, spoiled brat thugs can say nothing, lest they be branded racists and lose their jobs, or at minimum be labeled uncooperative. So where does this lead? A soft, cushy, protected “safe” life for these crybullies; in effect, a life of … entitlement. How ironic. Isn’t “white entitlement” or, as the current buzz goes, “white privilege” the target of so many “civil rights activists?” The liberals who have created this insidious, nearly cradle-to-grave system of protection for minorities have either done this deliberately or are so willfully blind to it as to be depraved – they have created for minorities the very conditions to which they have objected for decades, conditions that they say have benefited whites. The only way I can see of dismantling this sick scheme is to ensure that we teach anyone who will listen what is happening so we are all aware and can fight against it wherever and whenever possible.
Where is the ACLU on this?
I have read a lot of posts here, but how many of you sent emails to the university president?
I have and to the Board of Trustees as well. However, other than Hanlon’s lazy, boilerplate response…crickets.
Thanks for taking action. I emailed the vice provost and president. I told them that the way they handled the situation was a disgrace. I also told them to check their donor list. They may have offended the wrong person.
Thank you also!
Sadly I think the depravity of leftists like Ameer is so profound that they would brand you, Parent ’16, and any similar others racists for not supporting the school on this issue and would be glad to have purged racist money from the coffers. Should funds get short, they’d just appeal to Soros or Obama for assistance. We are living a nightmare in the U.S.A.
Those emails and letters are similar to telling a president that Radical Islam just exploded Paris. It won’t really matter. Both jobs are secure and your opinion does not count. Only the money. Follow the money. But thanks for trying.
I emailed President Hanlon and it was not kind and gentle. I await my pre-written letter such as those some of you have already received. It’s nice to have a cover letter all set to go! The inmates run the institution now, from top to bottom. ’55 back when………..
Tax the heck out of the Dartmouth Endowment. As Provost Ameer just proclaimed that Dartmouth is a political organization (non-conservative) they are officially no longer a tax exempt organization. The huge Dartmouth Endowment is now subject to taxes at the state and federal level. The university will now have to pay its fair share of property taxes.
Equality Now! Redistribute the Dartmouth Endowment! Tax these rich universities, especially since their own administration agree they are political organizations.
Those endowments are reason that bottom feeders like you can attend school on a needs blind basis.
Any one who took the trouble to watch the various video evidence would plainly see that multiple assaults took place that eve. The miscreants who abused their the privelige of being students at Dartmouth (many on an undeserved free ride) should be expelled. If the administration won’t take up disciplinary action against the BLM malefactors then the white students who were assaulted should go to the police. Those students should also hire good litigators and sue the school for creating an environment where their civil liberties were ingringed upon with impunity.
If the campus police will not deal with it, the students should go to the city police.
Agreed. The irony is that, here these “disadvantaged” students are, attending one of the most prestigious colleges in the country, perhaps world, on a subsidized basis – so that they can be around highly intelligent, in many cases materially privileged, white students, in part to get them out of their “disadvantaged” backgrounds, and they attack and assault those very students for their “comfort” and for being white?
Even if it is proven that the protestors were not actually students, the point is the same – you want to give access to the halls of privilege to “disadvantaged” people even as you attack the “privileged” students you want as their colleagues?
My, but leftists are an insidious bunch.
The majority of white kids at Dartmouth get financial aid, too. Myth of rich, private school kids. The Ivy’s are 60% visible minority and something like 80% are on aid. (our Federal dollars for all).
If the Ivy schools are indeed 60% minority, then by definition they are getting a boost to attend such schools (because, obviously, “minorities” don’t make up 60% of the population) which all include materially privileged white kids, usually the most privileged, so my point still stands; note that I said the white students were materially privileged “in many cases.” Again, if the protestors were students, having been handed seats at these schools in part due to their race, how dare they?
There are videos showing multiple assaults…care to share any links with us? Or are we to take you at your word?
Watch the video…threats of violence, they spat on one girl all considered assault…
Someone being spat on – assault no question. Threats of assault – worthy of disciplinary action and possible suspension. No argument here.
But no reports or evidence of anyone being pinned against a wall.
You said “various video evidence”. But I only know of one video, the 1:38 video that shows the bespectacled girl getting in the cameraman’s face. Are there more videos?
Dartmouth alums should cease making financial contributions to the school if attempted intimidation by the blacks is not stopped. That will get the administration’s attention.
Unfortunately, Dartmouth and others fund raise aggressively for alumni buy-in and support, but they just need a few 10-100M donations. (and they get those). All of us withholding our donations won’t matter much.
My sons didn’t even apply. (both attending another Ivy League institution) Vilifying white boys, disbanding fraternities while encouraging and supporting black, asian, gay, native american kids to live in their own, exclusive residences – Dartmouth’s clueless Admin. just don’t see the hypocracy. Bottom of the Ivy League. Still Losing status.
It’s time for the trustees to admit that they have once again made a mistake. Hanlon has to go. Dever and Ameer too. (Hanlon can go through the motions pretty well, but Dever and Ameer are embarrassing and out of their league.) Alumni have cut back on giving. The Admissions Office is playing games with the numbers. Dartmouth University will soon be at the bottom of the Ivy League. So many people have been watching this coming for so long that it is hard to believe nothing has been done. Managing hedge funds must be easier than guiding a college.
what a cuck
I’m pretty sure “cuck” is a term used exclusively by real actual white supremacists. You know the cross-burning, holocaust-denying, meth-smoking crowd.
. “The protest was a wonderful, beautiful thing,” she said, explaining that the administration was telling the news media anyone that would listen that the protest had been justified. “There’s a whole conservative world out there that’s not very nice,” she added.”
So the administration agrees and admits that they practice ” institutionalized racism ” against black students ? By agreeing that this Nov 12th protest was totally justified ?
Or is the administration openly admitting that a majority of THEIR White students are openly racist bigots ?
It has to be one or the other, to openly admit as a collective, that this BLM protest in the library was justified. So the administration collective either sees : all their White students as racist hillbillie bigots. Or that the administration is practicing some form of Jim Crow. Again, I must ask , which one is it ?
And lastly. We all know the Darthmouth administration is lock and stocked full of ” liberal ” ” progressives”. And has been for decades.
And one more thing. This was far from a grass roots protest. This was a copy cat staged event. And trust me , outside sources where involved. And outside sources are keeping this on the hush, hush. Can’t let the American public see BLM treating people exactly, the way there protesting against.
I think shouting you white raycissst piece of explicit, might be considered a ” micro aggression ” but forgive me if I’m wrong, I’m not up to date on critical race theory.
I think the comments here are generally far too diplomatic. Those protesters are violent assholes and should be arrested. The victims have every right and justification to file civil lawsuits against the protesters and Ameer. And they don’t seem to realize that this behavior will backfire – Young whites will flock to conservative law & order viewpoints in ever greater numbers (except for the utterly stupid white protesters). My nephew WAS considering Dartmouth, but crossed it off his list.
Why people are paying and donating to this college is beyond comprehension—-Does this school also have classes on lady ga ga ?–they’ll be working at micky d’s making 15 bucks an hour, knowing only, how many shakes of salt that you put on the fries.
College kids that appose these types of protests and the language being used need to stop remaining silent and they need to form an opposing group that engages on campus. The college can’t placate both groups and it will boil down to basic arithmetic in the end. If you’re tired of being a punching bag for POC racists thirsting for an outlet for their prejudice then I suggest you act.
She wants to keep her job. She thinks she knows what she has to say.
You must complain to the university, yes, even though it will not do that much. Then when it does little, you can then complain to the US Department of Education Office of Civil Rights. Ironically, it is the ultimate SOURCE of much of this bad behavior, by giving special power to black students on campus, but it will have great difficulty avoiding the conclusion that white students were mistreated on the basis of their race and that the school did nothing, based on the race of victims and perpetrators. So it may have to act, as it should, and as it does not wish to. And if it does NOT so act, that will impugn its credibility, and make its ability to provide future support to black radicals, false rape complainants, and the like, much weaker. Which is ALSO a victory. So complain NOW, complain to the university, and complain to DOE OCR. If they act on your complaint, you WIN. And if they DON’T, you may also, in a sense, win.
But if you do nothing, you will LOSE.
So please, FILE the complaints, NOW. And DOCUMENT your complaints.
And send a copy of your complaints to a group like the Foundation for Individual Rights in Education (FIRE) so that when your college imposes a speech code on you, in the guise of fighting harassment, and tries to enforce it, they will have a copy of the complaint history, and can have it voided for discrimination based on their failure to act here.
The absolute grovelling is sickening.
What fatuous remarks. Dartmouth should be ashamed.
Fay Wells is a Dartmouth alum we should all support. Scary stuff https://www.washingtonpost.com/posteverything/wp/2015/11/18/my-white-neighbor-thought-i-was-breaking-into-my-own-apartment-nineteen-cops-showed-up/
Now think of a woman/man in Baker as the BLM crowd marches by bullying and harassing. The analogy is clear
Time for the administration to get a wake up call. All students who disagree with the College’s handling of this event should withhold tuition payment until the administration disciplines the BLM students for their disruptive and threatening behavior.
Won’t help. All they will do is prevent your child from going to classes and kick them out of their dorm room. There’s no “conscientious objector” provision to withhold tuition because you think the administration is amoral. Kind of wish there was though…
Great reporting, really rare to see.
Dartmouth’s addressing of the abuse of students
by protestors is paramount to maintaining a suitable and healthy environment
for learning in a pluralistic society. Some of the offenses are race related and violations of the Civil Rights Act. Unless we see the College punishing the
protestors for their offensive, illegal behavior and fascist approach to forcing their
views on other students as has been reported perhaps alumni should rally to withhold any donations to the school.
The Alumni Association has power through financial support. Make your voices heard to protest and to demand that the administration stop bowing to political correctness. There are much more productive ways to address racial inequality. The “protest” at the Library walked a thin legal line and, rather than generate broad support, repulsed the general public through the violent racial overtones.
Would the Head of the Alumni Association issue a statement condemning the Administration or a vote of no confidence? That would be a good start.
Parent’16
At the very least, a statement disavowing support for this form of protest, and a vote of no confidence for the Dean who is fostering intolerance and threats. The alumni should not have to point out the obvious; these protests are actually diminishing the College. But it seems the administration is unwilling or unable to address.
I am not a student, but I really think i should speak to this protest.
I have severe post traumatic disorder. I have been considering returning to college to learn a vocation that I might be able to do with such a condition. I must be honest here, Had I been in that library and ANY protesters came in and used mental and physical aggression to make some point the situation would have become very dangerous, and ultimately at least lead to my death.
How can you categorically dismiss such mental brutality in the name of “equality”? How can you begin to know who was in that library, and what they might have been dealing with BEFORE this angry mob barged in?
What excuse do these students have for exercising mental and physical cruelty on other human beings? And how does the staff condone promoting violence and hate as a way to motivate peace and equality?
You claim a lot of crap but you are clearly unfit to remain in civilized society when you don’t care who you are harassing or terrorizing as long as you get someone. It’s traumatized me, and I wasn’t even there. It keeps playing out in my mind.
Seriously, who are You that other humans are so beneath You?
Thank you for writing this. I completely agree with you that regardless of one’s motives, treating other people as though they are less than human and then trying to justify it after the fact is the kind of corrupt, amoral behavior that makes me weep for humanity.
PTSD is a frightening thing to deal with. I wish you all the best in your recovery and please know that many others do have empathy for your struggle.
Absolutely correct. In Nam, I served with young men of college age who were heads and shoulders above those protesters in bravery, dedication, ethics and purpose. I came home Completely without racial or ethic prejudice, as after 1,800 operations as chief of surgery at the 24th Evac (67-69) I can tell you all people are the same under the skin. It’s what’s in their HEADS and HEARTS that matters most, and the Dartmouth protesters, by my standards, are COWARDS and THEY are the racists. My god…they are students at Dartmouth and probably going for free. And they PROTEST. Throw them out. Dr. J, Class Officer, the great Class of 1955
Race hustlers taking over our universities…
As Malcolm X once said, ‘The Negro revolution is controlled by foxy white liberals, by the Government itself. But the Black revolution is controlled only by God.’
I used to like Black Lives Matter, but the movement lost my respect because they are acting like these politically correct leftist radicals. I suggest Black Lives Matter should go back to what it was before and since the government failed in serving the black people, the black people should serve themselves (let them own their businesses and give the black people greater responsibility.
The problem with BLM is that its premise is totally flawed by falsehoods. Trayvon Martin initiated a violent, mixed-martial-arts attack on Zimmerman and was shot in self-defense. Michael Brown attacked the cop and was shot in seld-defense. Even Holder’s DOJ report backed up the cop’s account in the Brown case. “Hands Up – Don’t Shoot” was never uttered by Brown. Eric Garner was overweight with health conditions that contributed to his death. These facts and others inconvenient to the BLM narrative are ignored, and cops are getting shot due to all this gross misinformation. BLM is a farce, a very dangerous one. We cannot ignore facts that don’t fit a narrative. People’s lives are literally at risk because of it. Try explaining to the dead cops’ kids why their dads were shot and won’t be there for their birthdays, graduations, weddings, or just to go to the park or for ice cream.
Hello!
What’s up?
Here’s my comment!
You mean a conservative took a photo with an Asian kid? But the Dartmouth kid said conservatives were f * c k i n g racists…
“it’s scary to file a report!…or even write one”!
*snap* *snap* *snap* *snap* *snap* *snap* *snap* *snap*
Gentlemen, sorry about the problems you’ve had with the SJW onslaught. They are America’s antifa, and the song by the same name is a Remarkable Video on the micro and macro aggressions spawned by the Bolsheviks, Enjoy;
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GPzvcBFHnI0
Thanks for this post. I learned something. The song is awesome, I’m sure it is better understood in its proper social, geographical, and language context.
Our problem here is bit different, in that although they are our “antifa” – they are also running our government and major institutions, with full legal and financial support all the way to the top.
you could list terms w/post substitute American terms in brackets in a second set of English subtitles; Petainist is Vichy, Manuel Valle is PM, Rasta is short for Rastafarian, Trotsky refers to Gulags,antifa is SJW.
The more they push, the more you push back by refusing to associate with others if you don’t have to, wear shirts of Thomas Jefferson or Robert E. Lee, and use words that are fringe ‘dark days are upon us’
They have several videos, including ‘The Great Replacement’ which specifically shows who is behind this. Other tactic you can use is to feign statements that you are trying to work with them, but below the surface the message is elsewise.
The topic is interesting intellectually and personally. Most people seem frozen in fear.
Our forefathers rose to the occasion. “Is life so dear, or peace so sweet, as to be purchased at the price of chains and slavery?” “Better to die on your feet than live on your knees” Is your 240 year old country and 2000 year Civilization worth fighting for ?
If conservative students harassed and practically assaulted Black students in the library, there would be Jesse Jackson and Al Sharpton there in a flash. What we are witnessing is oppression, and racism against white people. This ridiculous and dangerous behavior has got to stop. The administration has got to get a backbone, and start to expel unruly, thuggish students of any damned color. these coddled victocrats do not appreciate the first class education they are receiving b/c most did not deserve it in the first place. Diversity is now all minority and no whites. I will not support Dartmouth any longer as an alumni. Sadly, the administration is not protecting the entire student body.
An equation: Spineless Administrators + Crybullies = Death Spiral for Higher Ed
Boosters, cut this institution off. There is no way I’ll allow my children to attend a racist university such as Dartmouth. How craven of the “administration” to align itself with the disgusting, anti-American, over-privileged cabal of whining children known as Black Lives Matter.
Where can conservatives send their kids in this left-tainted academic environment?
I have no problem sending my kids to a school where liberals rule the roost (after all, they need to be challenged and I don’t believe in shielding them from reality). Further, if following a careful application of reason and experience, they come to the conclusion that liberalism offers a better approach, so be it. That said, I am not going to send them to an institution run by COWARDLY liberals or liberals who allow a vicious group of children to make inane demands and then cave in to such demands.
There are institutions that have a far more balanced, or even conservative, bent, such as Hillsdale College.
While I agree in principle, today’s academic left can place our kids in peril. For instance, if you have a son and he attended a snake-pit liberal school where he was falsely accused by a girl of sexual assualt, he would be essentially presumed guilty (see the recent cases where this has happened and resulted in expulsion of the male student). These types of things could only get worse. Indeed, what if a white female student was raped by a black student and the liberal admin refused to punish him? The sinister ways of the left cannot be overstated. In any case, if you can recommend a source for identifying balanced or conservative schools, I would be interested in knowing what it is.
Those people are not liberals. I am a liberal (but in this society I am labelled conservative, because I think we should follow the Constitution, and have a budget passed – so I am “far right”). They are social liberals. With traditional liberalism, you get Thomas Jefferson. With social liberalism you get FDR, speech codes, treating people differently based on face and gender, centralized control of markets, education, and health care, etc. None of these people are defenders of liberalism – they are in fact the opposite; they undermine liberal values at every turn.
The actions of these modern leftists is not news – they don’t “allow a vicious group of children to make inane demands” – they promote and teach that these inane demands are just. The school President for Missouri visited with the POTUS prior to his attacks on reason. Cornell hires and promotes Duke gang of 88 professor Grant Farred AFTER his demands for abuse of legal system and rights of lax playing students. President of UVA has written books with Elizabeth Warren, etc.
Sorry to bust reality into your bubble – but these folks certainly are not liberal. They are anti-liberals, calling themselves liberals. Look who they identified with after the Black Lies Matter protest at Dartmouth – hmm? Similarly – the Profs were out WITH the students at Missouri.
Just because the modern world allows Bruce Jenner to call himself a woman does not make him one. Neither should we allow these people to call themselves liberals. Would I be a pro football player, if I just decided to call myself one? If so – you can claim to be in a discussion with Tom Brady today. I trust you can see the difference there – so ……
Pedantry is not becoming…
LOL. How modern of you.
Let me explain. Despite the fact that we evidently share very similar opinions of modern liberals, you ignored the substance of my comment, instead focusing on the (tired, obvious) fact that the term “liberal” has a modern connotation that is very different from its 18th and 19th century variant. Yes, Neil, every sentient person knows that modern “liberals” are very “illiberal.” Bravo! And good luck on your crusade against the shifting meaning of that term! (You strike me at the kind of person that fulminates that “We’re NOT a democracy, we’re a REPUBLIC!” at every opportunity.)
Maybe you should focus your energy on picking arguments with people who ACTUALLY disagree with you on substance?
(And, at the risk of being so myself: “pedantry” is not something unique to modernity.)
My comment concerning your modernity is that you decided to respond to me with a meaningless put down. As I’m sure you are aware, the personal attack is common for the modern.
You use the term “liberal” 4 times in your short note, including the offer that “if they come to the conclusion that liberalism offers a better approach, so be it.” Yet – what is being pushed is not liberalism.
I apologize if I have upset your sensibilites by making the point – which you then in response admit – “every sentient person knows that modern “liberals” are very “illiberal.”” (Followed by more denigration with your “Bravo”).
It is my position that if people like you and I do not speak up and point out that modern “liberals” are not liberal – then who will do it? Because you should know, as I do, quite a few “sentient people” with Ivy educations – including some quite squared away and successful people – have zero idea about this.
My goal was not to pick an argument with you. My goal was to remind you that when we let them take the language, we have started to lose.
As for final words – our society has been dream walked off course by a 40 year propaganda assault. If people such as you and I do not speak up, I do not see how they will change course. It is my opinion that if we can – repeatedly, directly, and accurately, point out to them that in fact they are not liberal, that we may be able to wake some good decent people up. If you have a better suggestion, then I am all ears. I am not picking an argument with you; I am requesting your leadership.
I am trying to lead – by telling people such as yourself not to be afraid. If we are fighting totalitarians or socialists (or whatever term you prefer for these people), it is perfectly OK to use the language correctly. Their abuse of the language is a con.
I’m certain that I don’t disagree with any of your substantive points. But the ship has sailed regarding the use of the term “liberal,” my friend. I never said that they weren’t “totalitarians” or “socialists” and I think it is certainly accurate to label them as such. For me, “liberal” (in the modern sense!) is, more or less, equivalent to socialist in most cases, and totalitarian, in many cases. I am constantly calling them out and engaging them (when they will engage, which isn’t very often).
My perspective is as follows: argue the IDEAS and not the labels. While it can be satisfying to condemn people (accurately or not) as ideologues, demagogues, totalitarians or fascists (etc.), it is more useful to point out how wrong-headed and destructive their ideas are. I entertain little hope of ever converting anyone that I engage on Salon.com or HuffPo or the like, it is very reasonable to expect that more “moderate” readers may happen upon the discussion and take note of the calm, measured tone taken by the conservative, and contrast it favorably with the hysterical tone taken by the progressives. In this way we may actually do some good (provided we are able to keep our blood pressure down in the process, that is).
And your point regarding language is well taken. As you are well aware, this is a tactic that has been refined to perfection by the left. And its employment will never end. Now, while I don’t mind resisting current attempts to escape the negative connotations that (inevitably) attach to them (as well as most of their ideas; e.g., liberal is now progressive, global warming is now climate change, etc.), I also don’t want to fight battles that are, for all intents and purposes, over.
So, keep up the good fight and accept my best wishes as well as my apologies for my sarcasm and condescension – they are bad habits I have fallen into after scores of Internet board battles!
Thank you for your kind words.
My vision is that people usually need a “shocker”/wake up call to break through what they perceive to be the he said/she said/left/right brouhaha. it is VERY easy for them to stay in denial, and claim they are “centrists” who are “above this left right politics” – etc – as I’m sure you have seen. So I look for simple, easy to understand stories, that are crystal clear.
This could just be my own personal experience – for me it was NOW supporting Clinton re Lewinski. I could not understand how they could support him – then I realized – “Oh – it is all a con. They don’t actually believe anything they claim.” You can’t un-ring that bell.
So I go around pointing out that the Constitution is the greatest achievement of liberalism in human history, and point out that the second amendment is a fantastic achievement of liberalism, etc.
Maybe it is the wrong approach, but that is my logic.
Fight on! Time to watch the Pats.
Ah well good luck! I am fervently hoping to see my Packers meet your Patriots in the next Superbowl.
Where’s the protection for the students reduced to tears and the students in the video from 3fb. Where is the meeting and apology for the other side of the library. It’s hard for me to see what this woman’s redeeming quality is at this point that qualifies her to have any part of the Dartmouth administration. I’m embarrassed to go to this school.
Just curious – do you know how small or big a group the BLM sympathizers are on campus? Are most Dartmouth students sympathetic, or do most see this group for what it is? I fear that so many young people have been brainwashed against whites, especially conservatives, but I wonder how pervasive it is. Any insight from your POV as a student would be appreciated.
To be honest I was fairly ignorant to any of the feelings the students that participated had, and was very interested in listening, learning and figuring out how I can use my education and time at Dartmouth to become more aware until it turned aggressive and hateful. I can’t speak to how these students came to these conclusions because I don’t believe Dartmouth perpetuates antiquated ideas and practices of racism intentionally. I don’t know where they are finding proof other than cowards on Yik Yik about the conclusions they’ve drawn regarding my race and more specifically, all white people at Dartmouth, so I will hold any comment on that to not come off as ignorant and uninformed as Provost Ameer does.
I can help a little in the way of background, as the BLM movement has been all over the news for some time, especially since the Michael Brown incident. BLM is mainly a response to what its members perceive as institutionalized racism against blacks in the U.S., practiced in part in the form of police brutality. They have used distorted views of cases like Trayvon Martin, Michael Brown, Freddie Gray, Eric Garner, and others to perpetuate the idea that police target blacks for harassment and killing simply for, as some loons have put it, “walking while black” and other similar nonsense. The Brown case is the origin of their “Hands Up – Don’t Shoot” slogan, and the Garner case of the “I Can’t – Breathe” slogan. Unfortunately, Brown never put his hands up in surrender, nor did he say “hands up – don’t shoot.” See the DOJ report which corroborates the cop’s version of events entirely. Brown was a thug, plain and simple. he had robbed a convenience store, assaulted the clerk, and was walking in the middle of the street when questioned by Wilson, the cop, whom Brown attacked in the squad car, where Brown tried to get Wilson’s gun. Wilson then shot Brown in the car. Brown moved away but then charged Wilson in a football-style move despite Wilson’s warnings. Wilson shot the very large Brown multiple times before he finally fell. (cont)
I have to say, I think our views on the BLM movement differ. These instances were in my opinion an abuse of power, however I know as a family member of a former police officer that they are forced to react how they believe is best and will eliminate danger. I am not afraid to call myself an ally to black students and the black population of America that is truly marginalized and discriminated against. I think most Dartmouth students would agree with me, besides the cowards behind Yik Yak posts, and supported the protest all of Thursday until the library. That is where most supporters, and even some protestors drew the line. One instance however does not undermine the overarching meaning of Black Lives Matter. My problem at this point is with the lack of response by the administration and the lack of accountability they have yet to force the students who violated their fellow classmates both verbally and physically to hold.
“My problem at this point is with the lack of response by the administration and the lack of accountability they have yet to force the students who violated their fellow classmates both verbally and physically to hold.” This is modern liberalism – willful blindness to bad behavior by people they favor, and it is happening all over the country. For Ameer to call the harassment and assault in the library “beautiful” is to provide perfect evidence of this reality.
What I provided to you was not my “view” on BLM but the
facts. The group was founded on a false premise: that a disregard for black lives is what caused the deaths of Trayvon Martin, Michael Brown, and others. In the Martin and Brown cases, this is utterly and provably false. Their chant “Hands Up – Don’t Shoot” is based on lies. Why would you support such a group? I have read extensively on both
cases. Have you? Any time a black person is shot by a white cop, there is a reckless, visceral rush to judgment to assume the cop(s) was/were racist(s) and that the black victim was totally innocent. Witness Maryland State Attorney Marilyn Mosby’s quest to get “justice for Freddie” before knowing all the facts.
You say “These instances were in my opinion an abuse of power,” so I ask you – in what way is defending your life against an attacker an “abuse of power?” Was Zimmerman supposed to just lie there and let Martin beat him to death? Was Wilson supposed to allow Brown to beat him up, take his gun, and shoot him? It is beyond astonishing to me – and dangerous – that so many people are defending attackers who get shot. The facts simply do not back that up.
Moreover, when you say you are “an ally to … the black
population” and “One instance however does not undermine the overarching meaning of Black Lives Matter,” you show that you have either not researched this group’s misplaced origins (see above) and dangerous actions, or you are
willfully ignoring them. For example, do you support the BLM chants of “pigs in a blanket – fry ‘em like bacon” in
Minnesota on 8/29/15? Or their chants of “what do we want? Dead cops! When do we want it? Now!” in New York in December 2014? The dropping of a garbage can on police, injuring them, by protestors at the same event? Do you support the deliberate shooting of police officers by black assailants in recent months? Shootings that were directly “inspired” by the deaths of Eric Garner and Michael Brown – deaths that are demonstrably NOT the result of a disregard for “black lives?” These are cops with families. If you object to the shooting of those poor souls in the Charleston church just for being black, how do you explain to these cops’ kids why their dads were shot just for being cops? Do cops’ live matter?
The reality is that the library incident is not “once instance” that you can dismiss – it is consistent with the hateful, biased, misinformed, bigoted, violent view of the BLM movement and many who support it.
As for your reference to the “black population of
America that is truly marginalized and discriminated against,” what is your evidence?
Have you read extensively on the Martin and Brown cases? Using credible sources? Do you support the BLM chants of “pigs in a blanket – fry ‘em like bacon” in
Minnesota on 8/29/15? Or their chants of “what do we want? Dead cops! When do we want it? Now!” in New York in December 2014? The dropping of a garbage can on police, injuring them, by protestors at the same event? Do you support the deliberate shooting of police officers by black assailants in recent months? Shootings that were directly “inspired” by the deaths of Eric Garner and Michael Brown – deaths that are demonstrably NOT the result of a disregard for “black lives?” These are cops with families. If you object to the shooting of those poor souls in the Charleston church just for being black, how do you explain to these cops’ kids why their dads were shot just for being cops? Do cops’ live matter? As for your reference to the “black population of
America that is truly marginalized and discriminated against,” what is your evidence?
PART 2. Many “witnesses” claimed all sorts of nonsense, such as Wilson shot Brown in the back or when he had his hands up in surrender. Investigations, including the DOJ’s, showed these claims to be utterly false. Nonetheless, the race-mongers in this nation jumped on the case and turned it into another supposed case of a white cop killing an innocent, “unarmed” black man simply for walking down the street. Meanwhile, Wilson’s life is ruined. The Martin case was similar in that it was Martin who attacked Zimmerman, beating him in a mixed-martial-arts style pound and ground and reaching for Z’s gun. Just as Wilson had to shoot or risk death, Z had to shoot Martin. All forensic evidence support these facts. In that case, the narrative became Martin was shot for being black while walking in a gated community, armed only with his iced tea and Skittles. These ppl like to ignore that one’s own fists can be deadly weapons. On and on it went until BLM was born. They go around harassing white ppl and disrupting innocent ppl’s lives all based on falsehoods. It’s disgusting. In Dartmouth’s case, it’s accusations of anti-black racism that is their excuse. But as you have acknowledged, shouting “f * c k you, you filthy white f * c k s,” or “you filthy racist white piece of s * i t” or “filthy white b * t c h” at a white female student is not peaceful protest. It’s oppressive, intolerant, bigoted, hateful assault and should be crushed by expulsion, not rewarded with an apology and more money for programs for “students of color.” What message does that send? Thug it up and get rewarded. Very dangerous.
I hope that you are cautious and that you remain safe while at Dartmouth. It sounds like simply being white could invite hate and possibly violence by these animals. Best wishes to you.
One final thought. In this day of hypersensitivity to racism against non-whites, replete with diversity programs in universities and companies, sensitivity training, all manner of extra efforts to accommodate non-whites and strongly discourage racism, along with watchdogs in the national mainstream media and groups like the NAACP, Sharpton’s National Action Network, and others, the idea that institutionalized racism pervades the nation is simply ridiculous. Racist acts against non-whites are likely at the lowest levels in our history. Cross burnings, lynchings, public humiliation and assault, intimidation, state-sponsored segregation, and so on are relics of the past. Today, public schools are reluctant to punish black students. Black flash mobs strike fear in multiple cities. Young black men play the “knockout game.” School teachers, professors, administrators, media reporters look the other way when blacks cause trouble, asking us to show “understanding” for why they behave this way, or even flat out denying the statistics – from the DOJ headed by two black AGs in a row – that show young black men to be multiple times more likely to commit violent crimes than white males. As this aggression goes on, most whites are afraid to say or do anything, out of fear either of being called a racist or of violent reprisals. And based on the reactions of liberal university administrators in recent months, such reprisals would not only escape punishment but might be rewarded with apologies for poor media treatment, and with extra money, training for the evil white racists who oppress them, and even more efforts to improve “diversity.” It’s like living a combination of The Scarlet Letter and 1984. The only way to stop it is to get ppl, especially young ppl, to see the truth and refuse to be bullied by these race pimps and their white guilt rhetoric. It simply replaces one form of intolerance with another.
Well – looks like the protesters and the administration have gone out of their way to assist you in your educational goals.
They have come straight out and shown you what they are.
The question that remains is – are you open minded enough to accept them for what they are?
Here’s a devil’s advocate for the first part: “Oh, tears? I made you cry? Talk about entitlement you crybaby.” Etc. etc. no right not to be offended etc.
And more food for thought: these people aren’t strangers to one another. Imagine being a freshman in this library situation and then being paired up as a lab partner with a protester next semester.
How “safe” do conservative students feel in this environment?
When the Vice Provost expresses clear anti-conservative sentiment and many students laugh, how is a conservative student, or any conservative watching this, to feel, knowing that at least one person in authority there is against them?
Does she challenge the biased, charming statement of the male attendee who calls conservatives “f * c k i n g racists?” Does she ask for proof of such a statement? Does she ask for civility or caution against painting an entire group with such an indictment?
Ironic, isn’t it, that she purports to be against the wholesale maltreatment of non-white students simply because of their race or color but at the same time commits that very act when she calls conservatives “not very nice” and doesn’t challenge the maggot’s assertion that they are all “f * c k i n g racists?” Or perhaps not ironic at all, as she is likely fully aware that the leftists’ mission of brainwashing our youth into thinking that conservatives are racists has succeeded, at least in part. After all, with the hostile climate against anyone even suspected of being racist, why would anyone even listen to one syllable uttered by racist conservatives who are “not very nice?” Thereby the left have a lock on young minds closed to those evil right-wingers…
Where’s the outrage from Dartmouth alums? Better start making some noise.
I have. ’71.
Sadly, the depraved, self-righteous leftists who have taken over universities like Dartmouth have no interest in what dissenting alumni, or anyone else for that matter, have to say. You will get a nice, high-minded form letter while all these shenanigans continue, as they are certain that they know better than you what needs to be done. The takeover of our public elementary and high schools, our universities, our national media, our HR departments, has been under way for decades. Since these cretins are either permanently altered by their pharmaceutical experiments of the 60s and/or totally invested in their emotionally driven craziness, there is no reasoning with them. They are autocrats. The only way to stop their madness is to educate as many people as possible, especially the children in our lives, with the truth. The more organized the effort, the better. Eventually, the leftist lunatics will die off, and we can return to normalcy and personal responsibility.
If there is anyone who should feel unsafe on an Ivy League campus today, it is a political conservative. These madrassahs of leftist indoctrination are run by and for the benefit of the very people claiming to be victims of oppression. All they have to do is claim they feel unsafe to bring the entire force of the liberal authoritarians down on the head of anyone they choose to ruin. And it works. For now. But that is going to change, and soon.
Omg I have seen the library video and I agree the school ignored it’s own policies. Many have said the snake will slowly eat itself and that’s clearly happening now to these special little snowflakes.
Parent of an RPI student, and I can’t stop watching this train wreck. In My Day… we peacefully protested our small liberal arts college’s endowment investment in Apartheid-era S. Africa. I remember the excitement of being part of something important and that we were doing our part to match other colleges across the country. It never occurred to us that we could issue “demands” to the administration, and that if they didn’t comply, we would demand administration officials be fired. These BLM tactics should be shut down by every school admin. with the answer, “we don’t respond to demands or intimidation, a constructive dialogue is always welcome and will solve problems.”
I think we still have parenting to do before these newly minted fascists gain any more of a toehold in this society.
Today’s news story about the copy-cat protest at our local Clark University (small liberal arts) actually had this quotation from a student, ‘”We don’t want to be listened to. We want to be understood,” said junior Caleb Encarnacion. “Empathy over sympathy… SOME VOICES NEED TO BE HEARD LOUDER THAN OTHERS.”‘ (My emphasis)
This is straight out of Orwell’s Animal Farm. His line was: “All animals are equal, but some animals are more equal than others.”
This distortion of reality, creative victimhood, selfishness, and provocational anger at people just trying to go about their business is tough to get a handle on, but we have to do it.
All parents need to ensure their kids understand the difference between respectful, constructive, effective dissent, e.g. MLK, Ghandi, and this kind of fascist bullying. The loons are trying to indoctrinate our kids. Let’s not let it happen.
The following message was posted to The Dartmouth and was deleted in less than two minutes;
As a member of the community of deaf humans, what I find horrible about the bullying at Baker-Berry is that one of the students assaulted and intimidated is deaf. Imagine not having one of the most overlooked and taken for granted senses, being subjected to this threatening behavior in what should have been a place for study and intellectual enrichment. In messages to the community sharing forum at the nation’s largest association of the deaf, the young student has sought support after being terrified, utterly confused and traumatized by the totally unprovoked attack.
Ms Ameer failed an individual who is a member of a vulnerable group of people that spans all ethnic groups, religions, races and nationalities. Is it not enough an encumbrance that the deaf, the blind, the mute are judged in an instant, by appearance? Now we must be subjected to terrorism for wrongs we are not responsible for?
Dartmouth not only failed to further the stated mission of its library, “Values: In our daily work, we adhere to the principles of fairness and equality, and we believe that each user of the Library is unique and important. We aspire to provide the best
possible patron experience while maintaining a comfortable, welcoming and secure place for study, research, work, reflection and interaction. We anticipate and contribute to scholarly inquiry and embrace our role as collectors and custodians of the intellectual record.”
Dartmouth failed its own mission statement; “Dartmouth fosters lasting bonds among faculty, staff, and students, which encourage a culture of integrity, self-reliance, and collegiality and instill a sense of responsibility for each other and for the broader world.”
If President Hanlon doesn’t have the wherewithal to address this crime appropriately, he and Ms. Ameer should both tender their resignations. The hearing impaired community waits and watches.
I think the hearing impaired community, along with every student who was harassed that night in the library, should sue the university. Waiting and watching results in the kind of liberal totalitarianism we are facing now.
Black Lives Matter is becoming a Fascist movement.
Ameer has clearly disgraced herself by siding with the thuggish protestors.
Back in the day when I went to college, groups could only demonstrate out on the mall. Libraries, dorms,cafeterias, and student union were off limits so as not to alienate any other student from the use of that building. Anyone involved in the disruption of any other student trying to pursue their education and the sole purpose of their stay at the university should be prosecuted.I can’t believe they were protesting against their own peers. What do they expect other college kids to do? Stand up and denounce their whiteness. I cannot believe that the university is protecting this group and allowing it to barge in where ever they want. Maybe next time the ” black lives matters” will target the administrative offices and the president’s residence in hopes of getting their message to the correct people. Then I wonder how the administration will “back” these bullys.
Protesting against their peers. You hit the nail on the head here. At a school of 5000 students these people are bound to cross paths regularly. Why would amyome go out of their way to create that kind of animosity?
The protesters go out of their way to create this kind of animosity because they are entitled, self-righteous and wallowing in their own perceived victimhood. Thus they have declared themselves as morally superior to everyone who disagrees with them or even those who are not loudly enough proclaiming their agreement with them. This entitles the protesters, in their minds, to do whatever they feel appropriate to make sure that privileged white kids experience the same discomfort and marginalization that students of color claim to experience every day. The leaders of the protest said so explicitly in justifying the protest after the fact. Hey, when you are sure you are right and that you’ve been sent here by some higher being to enlighten the ignorant and apathetic masses, and you’re feeling the rush of self-righteousness, ruffling a few feathers in the community you live in isn’t going to stop you from spreading your gospel.
Corroborate every anecdote? Really?
Have you contacted the campus police with information about the student who was pinned against a wall? Because the campus police have gone on record saying there have been no reports of such an event. If you have a victim or an eyewitness who can identify who committed that assault, it is your duty to contact the campus police about it.
Don’t just say “we stand by our coverage.” Put your money where your mouth Is.
Journalists do not have a duty to report past crimes to the police that journalists become aware of through interviewing witnesses. Neither do lawyers as regards their clients, doctors and psychiatrists as regards their patients, clergy as regards those who seek spiritual guidance, rape counselors as regards rape victims they are counseling, etc. Indeed ordinary citizens generally have no legal duty to report a past crime. There are sound public policy reasons for why our society has arrived at not imposing any such duties. The Review has done admirable, honest and courageous reporting in this instance. That is the role of the media. If you have evidence that anything the Review has reported is inaccurate, let’s hear it. Otherwise, maybe you should keep your mouth shut so you aren’t repeatedly inserting your foot in it.
I will end and I encourage other Dartmouth graduates, to stop donating money to this university that has clearly been hijacked by a malformed agenda. I wil not hire Dartmouth grads ever again and will cease all my donations, specifically the lead donor gifts I have made. Shame on this administration and these black students.
https://twitter.com/idahbish/status/664982029235306496
We are literally in the library roasting white people. WHAT A TIME TO BE ALIVE
How do you need more proof than this?
There is nothing surprising about this considering we currently have a United States president who publicly comments on legal cases before a grand jury based on whether or not those involved would have looked like his son or daughter…
Let me put it to you this way, in my neighborhood here in CA there’s an inclusion of all kinds of different people on my block. Would it look well on me to go block my neighbors trying to leave for work in the morning and shouting them down that they better acknowledge me. No, they would call the cops on me for acting like a nut job.
So let’s keep this into perspective. We don’t go to school to incubate in fantasy factories. This seems to be a trend for the Ivy League. You kids want some real lessons on diversity. Deregister from Dartmouth and take your undergrad at your local state sponsored Community College.
You’ll see students from black, white, Latino what have you going to class, learning the subject matter, going home and immediately going to work in order to survive, take care of their families etc. People ranging from 18-40. These people don’t have time to walk around campus putting any feelings into building names or what types of student clubs are on campus. If you have time to get into that stuff great but most dont.
The IVY LEAGUE pushes the curriculum back down to the community college level, so you won’t be missing anything. If you have time to spend 24/7 at school functions you will get to help someone who REALLY needs it.
Attending The IVY LEAGUE is more or less just an accolade that gets you the one up on your end goals. A JOB. If the administration wants to let a small portion of the students create internal conflict and disrupt the whole idea of the IVY LEAGUE I’m sure that past Alumi and donors will also want the administration to act more responsibly.
I can’t imagine that every black or Latino person on campus is part of this movement. If they are equating campus security confrontations with that of the turmoil of American inner cities than I doubt a number of these students have the real accolades to pump their chest about their minorityness. I mean are they selling drugs and endulging in a life of crime to survive Dartmouth?
Want to be’s.
Every flag taken down at Ole Miss, building renamed at Princeton, statue removed or book dropped from the curriculum is a hateful microaggression against the Posterity of the Founding Fathers by those primitives with Black Privilege agitated by those subversives with Hebrew privilege
Hanlon and Ameer have won. Fall term is over. This is a dead issue. Nobody will remember in January. It’s not like cutting the swim team. The alumni needs to get more angry. Most alums are clueless. David Spalding was successful in alienating and neutralizing the alumni. (Now he is a fat man in pig city.) The College will continue to slide down. There is no stopping now. Hanlon will get paid. The trustees will make their fund management fees and donate their eyesore buildings. It’s time to give up. Say goodbye. Apply to Williams, Amherst, Swarthmore, Dartmouth’s days as the college for HYP rejects is over.
Why don’t the students of color who are unhappy with the curriculum at Dartmouth attend an “Historically Black” college where they will feel more welcome and appreciated, and less discriminated against. Or they can start their own “Hysterically Black” college and plan and execute their own curriculum. They seem to know what they wish to be taught, and not taught! They will be free to validate themselves all they wish.
What it looks like to an outside observer is that (most of) the Black students are having a hard time cutting it in such a demanding environment. Frustrated by the high expectations, they seek to distract attention from their poor performances in the classrooms. I dare any journalist to look into the academic performances of the members of the mob currently terrorizing Dartmouth faculty and students.
As for them not liking the “white centric” curriculum, whatever happened to “Know thy enemy”? Frantz Fanon studied medicine, psychiatry, literature and philosophy.
So the only anwer is to segregate! I am sure that Obama would appropriate the proper amount of tax payer funds for such a venture. Oprah, Jay Z and Spike Lee and other assorted, oppressed, filthy rich minorities might help fund the project. If Oprah can start schools in Africa why not here? In San Francisco we have Zaytuna College, a Muslim university.
https://www.zaytuna.edu/about/
Credit to the journalists at the Review for reporting on this. There is a lot of orthodoxy on campus, and any orthodoxy leads to abuses. Nothing better than sunlight to keep everyone honest.
The best thing you can do as a white person is to remember this BS when you make a choice on who to hire/fire or promote.
Wow, that’s insane
We can fix the Black and illegal immigration problem. Every time a Mexican comes over we will send a nappy over to Mexico. Since they are so unhappy here we will help them relocate to a better place (less racist). I promise you in two weeks Mexico will build a wall so big that it will block out the sun light , hurricanes and yes airplanes (No Returns). Yes their military will guard the boarder for us saving the USA billions. And the way I see it we owe them about 20 million Nappy heads. It’s a win win. Blacks are gone to a better place and we get people who will work for a living. Oh wait I didn’t say that !!!! :-0
In its article documenting what happened in the Library, Dartmouth Review reported:
“Students who refused to listen to or join their outbursts were shouted down. “Stand the f*** up!” “You filthy racist white piece of s***!” MEN AND WOMEN ALIKE WERE PUSHED AND SHOVED BY THE GROUP. “If we can’t have it, shut it down!” they cried. ANOTHER WOMAN WAS PINNED TO A WALL BY PROTESTERS who unleashed their insults, shouting “filthy white b****!” in her face.” (http://xpj.hnq.mybluehost.me//eyes…
Under New Hampshire law, the crime of “assault” is defined as unwanted physical contact:
“In New Hampshire, assault is any sort of unprivileged physical contact
against another person. The seriousness of the charge is determined by
the defendant’s intent, and/or by the degree of injury to the alleged
victim.” (See: http://www.nhcriminallawyer.co…
Just like Hitler’s “brownshirts”, the individual(s) who committed these acts are attempting to “get justice” by assaulting and intimidating other students. I guess no one ever taught them that behavior has consequences, or that we live in “a nation of laws, not of men.” The individuals who pushed, shoved and man-handled other students need to be arrested and prosecuted. I hope the real victims of the Library riot are brave enough to stand up and testify in court.
Save all these pics and vids of these creeps.
Absolutely pathetic. Lise-Ameer wants to protect whom? Certainly not the white students who were intimidated and called racist names.
If I were a Dartmouth student, I would vote with my feet. Find another school and leave it to the protesters and people like Lise-Ameer.
The great American progressive ‘boogie man’ (excuse the expression), is white racism. Because it is rarely found to genuinely exist anymore, it must be created out of whole cloth. Blacks are guilty of more acts of aggression and racism than any other segment of American society, and yet whites are declared to be the great racial aggressors. Blacks must fabricate white racism and white racists to keep the lie alive. Case in point, if you can’t find real racists on campus, then falsely accuse innocent whites of racism in the library and vent your lie-based racism on them. And, since you are really the privileged class, you will not only get away with this assault, you will be praised by progressive authorities in the process. Blacks have for years enjoyed protected and privileged class status – yet whites are branded as the privileged ones.
Further case in point, African American racists must obsessively declare every white cop defending himself against a felonious black in the line of duty as a racist perpetrator – even after those cops are exonerated by a black department of justice. The unfortunate reality is that the inner city urban African American society is in full-blown violent collapse. Placing people of color in charge of every level of city government has not fixed the problem. Offering African Americans every conceivable governmental privilege has not fixed the problem. Blaming the white racist ‘boogie-man’ is definitely not going to fix the problem.
Finally, here is another example of a racist ‘ends-justifies-the-means’ hoax (How many of the recent Mizzou incidents were genuine – after all, the highly privileged student agitator Jonathan Butler actually faked, and lied about, being hit by the presidents car). In this case, the black agitator hate-crime perpetrator only receives a privileged slap on the wrist:
http://pix11.com/2015/12/01/black-alum-and-protest-leader-at-kean-university-allegedly-threatened-to-kill-black-students-in-shocking-tweets/
White racism is very prevalent in this nation. There’s so much proof it’s overwhelming.
There are disparencies in schools, in home loan rates, car loan rates, stop and frisk rates, sentencing for drug offenses, differences in police shootings, and there’s research showing that a white ex convict is more likely to get a call back for a job interview than a black person with no criminal record.
Blue, I am assuming you are not black, otherwise you would of
course have personal stories to share related to your ‘proof.’ Here are some statistics for you:
There are five times fewer black people than white people in
America and, yet, they consistently carry out a larger share of the
crimes. African-Americans commit offenses with firearms at a rate at least five times more than any other group. DOJ
statistics show that between 1980 and 2008, black people
committed 52% of all homicides. In 2012, white males were 38 percent of the population and committed 4,582 murders. That same year, black males were just 6.6 percent of the population but committed a staggering 5,531 murders. In other words: black people–at just a fifth of the size–committed almost 1,000 more murders than their white counterparts. There were 1,460 more black Americans killed by other blacks in just two years, than were lynched from 1882 to 1968, according to the Tuskegee Institute.
Given this rate, it’s no wonder that there are many instances
where African Americans place themselves in hazardous contact with law enforcement, and where cops end up killing black criminals. The rate of incarceration by race places African-Americans at a level nearly eight times higher than whites. African Americans are re-incarcerated at a rate at least three times that of whites.
Given the incredibly disproportionate crime and
incarceration rate among black males, people in urban centers should never be guarded or suspicious of such persons, right? If they are, they are plainly racist, right? People should be bending over backwards to give persons coming from these neighborhoods jobs and loans right? If they aren’t, they are just plain racist right?
Why this horrible condition in African American society? Should
we blame those in law enforcement who are risking their lives to prevent the crime and murder rate from further multiplying by orders of magnitude? Should we blame racist privileged whitey? No, poor people of any race are still responsible for their actions. They are not being ‘forced’ to commit crimes. People of other races who are equally poor and disadvantaged are not developing these statistics.
The collapse of the black family (75% unwed mothers) and the resulting vicious cycle of fatherlessness is the major cause of these problems – not white racists and white racist privilege. Continue to drink the cool-aid if you want. Your perspective will not solve the plight of African Americans.
You talk about effects as if they were causes.
You’re ignorant of sentencing disparities.
You don’t realize that white people use cocaine, OxyContin and a host of other drugs at a higher percentage than black Americans, yet black Americans are more likely to go to prison.
You don’t know of the disparate treatment in home loan applications when other factors are held constant.
You’re ignorant of research showing differing responses to job applications received in the mail if the applicant is believed to be black.
All of that show of ignorance, and then you put sneering quotes around the word proof, as if no one could ever prove racism.
You’re the one who needs my help.
Proving racism on America’s elite campuses is difficult indeed – unless you look at the BLM movement. Do you think the behavior in Baker Library was justified?
Are you saying that the collapse of the black family is due to white oppression and white racism? Is it possible there may be other root causes?
I am not ignorant of sentencing issues and the injustices of the criminal ‘justice’ system (blacks are not the only ones that suffer). I spent 20 years working to rehabilitate black men in prison. What have you done?
It’s very dishonest, or very ignorant, for you to claim it’s difficult to prove racism on elite college campuses. There are many documented instances of race based harassment. Do you approve of those?
“The collapse of the black family” is an overstatement. It’s obvious that institutional, structural racism has had a profound impact on black people and black families. No honest person can look at centuries of wage theft through slavery and share cropping, decades of Jim Crow laws which meant further economic oppression, and discrimination from their own government by denying FHA home loans and agricultural loans, differentially funded schools, and put the blame on black Americans collectively for their comparative poverty and all the problems that go along with poverty.
Do you think the behavior in Baker library was justified?
Caught ya red handed. You want the answer, READ WHAT YOU’RE RESPONDING TO!
I’m sorry. I am glad you do not approve of that behavior. I did read through your post. Somehow I missed that sentence. It must be because I am an ignorant dishonest racist and in need of your yelling print help. You seem well read in leftist ideology in these matters. Can you recommend something worthwhile to read? Something offered at a class at Dartmouth perhaps? I’m convinced now that a doctoral degree from a black university and 20 years in the trenches with black men will not suffice.
You missed my answer to your litmus test. I made a joke about it. You don’t like it? Bless your heart.
Please continue explaining that black people in America are damn lucky sonsabitches despite all evidence to the contrary. They get every conceivable government privilege! They hold offices at every level of government! They’ve had the benefit of the services of a man who spent twenty years with their kind in spite of his obvious distain for them! What more can they possibly want?
Such a mystery why the GOP is left with only a remnant of society. So puzzling.
It is no mystery that the cities in the worst shape have been under the complete control of Democrats and liberal policies for decades. I’m sorry, I’m done Blue. I don’t want to stir up any more of your accusatory vitriol. If you want to ventilate I recommend you try going to Baker.
Vitriol? You need to look that word up. You don’t know what it means.
Again and again, you confuse effects with causes.
You have misused statistics repeatedly, but this one really needs to be singled out for correction:
http://abc7chicago.com/news/despite-chiraq-label-data-show-chicago-not-even-close-to-iraq/886958/
Wow. My kids won’t be applying to Dartmouth.
I know how to fix the immigration problem and make Blacks people happy. Every time a Mexican comes over we will send a black person over to Mexico. Since they are so unhappy here we will help them relocate to a better place. I promise you in two weeks Mexico will build a wall so big that it will block out the sun light and hurricanes and yes airplanes. Yes their military will guard the boarder for us saving the USA billions. And the way I see it we owe them about 20 million Nappy heads. Its a win win. Blacks are gone and we get cheap yard service. Oh wait I didn’t say that !!!! 🙁
I completley agree with you. My children will never think of attending an institution such as Dartmouth, immoral dump that it has become.
I recently have a good luck spell cast on me by dr.udo and I want anyone to tell me how it use to work because still I had this spell cast on me different companies
has been coming to me for me to work with them and I do not really know which of the companies is the right one for me and I’m so happy because since last 7months I
lost my job and I have been looking for job and I was unable to get one for myself till I had this spell cast on me so is there anyone that can advice me on which of
the companies that is right for me? And I also thank dr.savior for his help too anyone in need of help with spell I will advise you to contact him on this
{dr.saviour12@gmail.com}
mmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmbbbbbbbbbbbbv
The “whole conservative world” may not be very nice, but it is founded in reality and self responsibility. Conservatives give more money and donate more time to charity and the community than all these spoiled and racist students ever will. They are clearly the real bullies here. Black lives matter is using nazi tactics and lies about it.
The progressive marxist world is outright evil and crazy. These students dont feel safe at Dartmouth? Are you kidding me? Tell you what, why not join me next year in liberia or haiti with doctors without borders… then tell me how dangerous dartmouth is.
This is ridiculous, these people should grow up and get some backbone.
These kids need to shut up and hit the books. I never once felt unsafe on campus for being a minority. This PC idiocy has gotten out of hand.
What it that hideous daubon the back wall?! Fauvism de Dartmouth?
“The protest was a wonderful, beautiful thing,” she said, explaining
that the administration was telling the news media anyone that would
listen that the protest had been justified. “There’s a whole
conservative world out there that’s not very nice,” she added.
I came across a sign at a lacrosse game, this was posted. “PROFANITY,
RACIAL OR SEXIST COMMENTS,OR OTHER INTIMIDATING ACTIONS DIRECTED AT
OFFICIALS, STUDENT ATHLETES,COACHES,OR TEAM REPRESENTATIVES WILL NOT BE TOLERATED AND ARE GROUNDS FOR REMOVAL” so……. punished at a sporting event, but celebrated as beautiful in the library.
Good luck Dartmouth College.
What ever happened to the idea that you go to college to learn the skills needed to get a job to support a family? Why would anyone pay good money to study queers? Hopefully there’s no tax payer money for this, but there probably is.