Harvard: Fairness or "Diversity" ?

[drbubb 0]

"The Female Jordan Peterson" ?
THIS was a great speech, and really needed saying

The Diversity Delusion | Heather Mac Donald

To protestors:  "ARE YOU KIDDING ME? you are the most privileged group in history!"

[drbubb 0]

No Safe Space at Harvard, unless you are a Leftwing SJW Zombie

Female Harvard Student With MAGA Hat Finds Roommates Searched Her Room For Guns. Then This Happens.

November 30, 2018 News

A female Harvard University graduate student who had a MAGA hat and legally-owned guns in her room was asked by her apartment owner to move out after her roommates reportedly searched through her room and found the guns.

Leyla Pirnie had been living in her apartment with six roommates since September. She told The Washington Free Beacon:

> http://www.madnesshub.com/2018/11/female-harvard-student-with-maga-hat.html

[drbubb 0]

Is this how Harvard wants the Student body to see itself?

> source:

Diverse, but maybe not fair... and diversity in a direction where White Males are made obsolete?

Do they really expect to get any donations from White Male graduates where they are pursing this vision? 

Check out the Harvard Alumni page on Facebook

> https://www.facebook.com/HarvardCollegeAlumni/

 

[drbubb 0]

University hosts 'critical look at whiteness' forum...

Fraternities, sororities sue Harvard over single-sex club crackdown...

[drbubb 0]

The Stakes for the Harvard Trial Are Higher Now That It’s Over

The Ivy has spent the past three weeks being grilled about whether it discriminates in its admissions process. But the legal battle over affirmative action will likely rage until the Supreme Court weighs in.

BOSTON—There was a fog over the John Joseph Moakley Courthouse in mid-October. Harvard was headed to court to defend its admissions policies; a coalition of Asian American students, cobbled together by the conservative legal strategist Edward Blum, was there to challenge them. The group, Students for Fair Admissions, alleged that Harvard had discriminated against them. But there was a broader question: Could the case be the first nail in the coffin of the use of race in college admissions?

As the trial wore on, the surge of people in the entrance to Judge Allison Burroughs’s courtroom turned to a slow trickle. Passionate arguments for diversity gave way to murky debates over the validity of regression models. John Hughes, a lawyer for SFFA, tried to clear the muck in his closing arguments. “All of the claims are important,” he told Burroughs. But SFFA wanted to focus on one: that Asian American students face intentional discrimination in Harvard’s admissions process. SFFA’s argument hinged on the personal rating, one of the metrics the university uses to measure applicants, which the group argues is how Harvard adds a plus factor to students of certain racial backgrounds. The personal rating, Harvard says, is generated using a bevy of information, including teacher and counselor recommendations as well as alumni interviews. “You see the substantial preferences for African Americans and Hispanics in the personal score,” Hughes told the court.

The main question is: If race is a plus for some students, is it also a minus for others? The plaintiffs argue that there is a racial penalty for Asian students. And they allege that implicit bias on the part of Harvard’s admissions officers when reviewing applications is the reason for that supposed minus. “Evidence of bias and stereotyping can suffice to show intentional discrimination,” Hughes said.

Over the course of the trial, SFFA ran both a legal and a public-relations campaign. They leaned on several thorny issues that often frustrate the public: Harvard’s legacy-admissions process, preferences for children of donors, and the advantage that recruited athletes get. But none of that mattered on Friday. The personal ratings, and the alleged use of race in them, was the focus.

. . .

Judge Allison D. Burroughs, the daughter of a Harvard graduate, sought to be a Harvard graduate herself, but did not get in.

How much diversity is necessary, and is the use of race necessary to achieve that goal?

Right now, only one person can answer that question: Judge Burroughs, who will issue judgement on the case. (This was a bench trial, meaning there was no jury.) She is under no obligation to issue an immediate decision. But when her decision does come down, it could have major implications for the colleges that use race when considering applicants. Yes, there are four decades of precedent, but the Supreme Court looks very different than it did in the time of Bakke, or even Fisher v. the University of Texas, another major affirmative-action case from 2016. And the majority of the court now appears more skeptical of policies based on race.

[drbubb 0]

It is about time we saw this ... so unbalanced has academia become

Now The Unfairness is so blatant

Jordan Peterson, Dozens of Academics Blast Ivy League for Anti-Male Bias

• USC Ph.D. student Kursat Christoff Pekgoz has targeted Yale University and his own school for alleged anti-male discrimination. Now, he's going after Cornell.
• A Title IX complaint cites the existence of women-only centers and scholarships on campus, but notes that there are no men-only counterparts.
• Some BIG names, such as Professor Jordan B. Peterson and scholar Christina Hoff Sommers, have signed onto the complaint.

[drbubb 0]

At Last!  Oxford Stands up !

NO!  To Black Thugs Murdering... History

Lord Patten, Chancellor of Oxford

RELEVANT TO MOBS IN U. S. CITIES DEMANDING THE DEMOLITION OF “RACIST” MONUMENTS

- Subject: About Rhodes scholars

This really did happen (2016) and even more important Lord Patten of Barnes still is the Chancellor of Oxford University.

The letter (below) is a response from Oxford University to black students attending as Rhodes Scholars who demanded the university remove the statue of Oxford benefactor, Cecil Rhodes.

Interestingly, Chris Patten (Lord Patten of Barnes), the Chancellor of Oxford University, was on the Today Program on BBC Radio 4 on precisely the same topic.  The Daily Telegraph headline read, "Oxford Will Not Rewrite History!"  

Lord Patten commented:  "Education is not indoctrination.  Our history is not a blank page on which we can write our own version of what it should have been according to our contemporary views and prejudices.

Dear Students,

Cecil Rhode's generous bequest has contributed greatly to the comfort and well being of many generations of Oxford students--a good many of them--dare we say it, better, brighter and more deserving than you.  This does not necessarily mean we approve of everything Rhodes did in his lifetime--but then we don't have to.  Cecil Rhodes died over a century ago.  Autres temps, autres mouers.  If you don't understand what this means--and it would not remotely surprise us if that were the case--then we really think you should ask yourself:  "Why am I at Oxford?"

Oxford, let us remind you, is the world's second oldest extant university. 

Scholars have been studying here since at least the 11th century.  We've played a major part in the invention of Western civilization, from the 12th century intellectual Renaissance through the Enlightenment and beyond.  Our alumni include William of Ockham, Roger Bacon, William Tyndale, John Donne, Sir Walter Raleigh, Erasmus, Sir Christopher Wren, William Penn, Rep. Adam Smith (D-WA), Samuel Johnson, Robert Hooke, William Morris, Oscar Wilde, Emily Davison, Cardinal Newman, Julie Cocks.  We're a big deal.  And most of the people privileged to come and study here are conscious of what a big deal we are.  Oxford is their alma mater--their dear mother--and they respect and revere her accordingly.

And what were your ancestors doing in the period?  Living in mud huts, mainly.  Sure, we'll concede to you the short-lived Southern African civilisation of Great Zimbabwe.  But let's be brutally honest here.  The contribution of the Bantu tribes to modern civilisation has been as near "damn it" as to "zilch."

You'll probably say that's "racist."  But it's what we at Oxford prefer to call "truth."  Perhaps rules are different at other universities.  In fact, we know things are different at other universities.  We've watched with horror at what has been happening across the pond from the University of Missouri to the University of Virginia and even to revered institutions like Harvard and Yale:    the "safe spaces"; the  black lives matter; the creeping cultural relativism, the stifling political correctness; and what Allan Bloom rightly called "the closing of the American mind."  At Oxford, however, we will always prefer facts and free, open debate to petty grievance-mongering identity politics and empty sloganeering.  The day we cease to do so is the day we lose the right to call ourselves the world's greatest university.

Of course, you are perfectly within your rights to squander your time at Oxford on silly, vexatious, single-issue political campaigns. (Though it does make us wonder how stringent the vetting procedure is these days for Rhodes scholarships, and even more so for Mandela Rhodes scholarships).  We are well used to seeing undergraduates--or in your case, postgraduates, making idiots of themselves.  Just don't expect us to indulge in your idiocy, let alone genuflect before it.  

You may be black--"BME" as the modern terminology has it--but we are colour blind.  We have been educating gifted undergraduates from our former colonies, our Empire, our Commonwealth and beyond for many generations.  We do not discriminate over sex, race, colour, or creed.  We do, however, discriminate according to intellect.

This means, inter alia, that when our undergrads or postgrads come up with fatuous ideas, we don't pat them on the back and say, "Ooh, you're from South Africa.  What a clever chap you are!"  No we prefer to see the quality of those ideas tested in the crucible of public debate.  That's another key part of the Oxford intellectual tradition:  you can argue any damn thing you like but you need to be able to justify it with facts and logic--otherwise your idea is worthless.

Your ludicrous notion that a bronze statue of Cecil Rhodes should be removed from Oriel College because it's a symbol of "institutionalized racism" and "white slavery"--well, even if it is--which we dispute--so bloody what?   Any undergraduate so feeble that they can't pass by a bronze statue without having their "safe space" violated does not deserve to be here.  And besides, if we were to remove Rhodes' statue on the premise that his life wasn't blemish free, where would we stop?

As one of our alumni, Dan Hannan, has pointed out, Oriel's other benefactors include two kings so awful--Edward II and Charles I--that their subjects had them killed.  The college opposite--Christ Church--was built by a murderous, thieving bully who bumped off two of his wives.  Thomas Jefferson kept slaves:  does that invalidate the US Constitution?  Winston Churchill had unenlightened views about Malians and India:  was he then the wrong man to lead Britain in the war?

Actually, we'll go further than that.  Your "Rhodes Must Fall" campaign is not merely fatuous but ugly, vandalistic and dangerous.  We agree with Oxford historian RW Johnson that what you are trying to do here is no different from what ISIS and the Al-Qaeda have been doing to artifacts in places like Mali and Syria.  You are murdering history!

And who are you anyway to be lecturing Oxford University on how it should order its affairs?  Your "Rhodes Must Fall" campaign, we understand, originates in South Africa and was initiated by a black activist who lectured "whites have to be killed."  One of you --Sizwe Mpofu-Walsh--is the privileged son of a rich politician and a member of a party whose slogan is "Kill the Boer; Kill the Farmer."  Another of you, Ntokozo Qwabe, who is only in Oxford as a beneficiary of an Oxford scholarship, boasts about the need for "socially conscious black students" to "dominate white universities ruthlessly and decisively!"

Great.  That's just what Oxford University needs--some cultural enrichment from the land of Winnie Mandela, burning tyre necklaces and an AIDS epidemic almost entirely the result of government indifference and ignorance, one of the world's highest per capita murder rates, institutionalised corruption, tribal politics, anti-white racism, and a collapsing economy.  Which of the above items will enhance the lives of the 22,000 students studying here at Oxford?

And then please explain what it is that makes your attention-grabbing campaign to remove a listed statue from an Oxford college more urgent, more deserving than the desire of at least 20,000 of the 22,000 Oxford students to enjoy their time here unhampered by the irritation of spoilt, ungrateful little tossers on scholarships they clearly don't merit while trying to win the life and fabric of our beloved university.

Understand us and understand this clearly:  you have everything to learn from us; we have nothing to learn from you!

Yours,

 Chris Patten (Lord Patten of Barnes)

=====

What a Great & Brave Letter. 

You have to be brave to say to angry young blacks: "what were your ancestors doing in the period?  Living in mud huts, mainly" ... and call them "spoilt, ungrateful little tossers on scholarships."  At last!  Someone willing to stand up for Western traditions and our history. Next time, I get a letter from Lawrence Bacow, revealing the lasted bit of appeasement to angry young students, I am going to send him back THAT letter. Who is Lawrence Bacow? The President of Harvard, and that is my alma mater. 

NO DONATIONS EVER from me, so long as Harvard stays on the road to appeasement.

[drbubb 0]

Those who pander to Diversity fads... seem capable of Bad & unfair decisions

GREED?: Harvard to Charge Full Tuition of Nearly $50K for Completely Online Classes

Harvard University announced Monday that it will implement online learning for all students and courses during the 2020-21 academic year, while still charging full tuition of nearly $50,000.

The school will allow up to 40% of undergraduate students to live on campus this fall, including all freshmen. Seniors will return to campus in the spring semester, as first-year students return home to finish the school year through distance education.

Whether a student is living at home or on campus, they will be required to take part in online instruction.

"We have sought a path to bringing all students back as soon as conditions allow, while continuing their academic progress in the meantime and remaining a vibrant research community across our broad range of disciplines," Harvard President Lawrence Bacow wrote in a statement. "But we also recognize that, fundamentally, there is an intrinsic incompatibility between our highly interactive, residential Harvard College experience and the social distancing needed to mitigate COVID-19 transmission."

Students living on campus will have their movements and experiences limited, the university said.

[drbubb 0]

Harvard: Fairness or "Diversity" ?

DOJ backs Fairness... at Last

Yale Discriminates Against White and Asian Applicants, Claims DOJ

==

"Change your criteria ... Or get sued"

[drbubb 0]

Why Diversity is garbage (as an ex-Google tech lead) /

"This isn't about me. It is for future generations" "I support everyone getting into Tech. But it should be a meritocrisy"

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pizXzR7ZQ8Q

[drbubb 0]

YES, there is Institutionalized Racism!

"Despite the nation's great achievements in race relations, there remains institutional racism, namely the widespread practice of treating a person or group of people differently based on their race. Most institutional racism is practiced by the nation's institutions of higher learning. Eric Dreiband, an assistant attorney general in the Civil Rights Division of the Department of Justice, recently wrote that Yale University "grants substantial, and often determinative, preferences based on race." The four-page letter said, "Yale's race discrimination imposes undue and unlawful penalties on racially-disfavored applicants, including in particular Asian American and White applicants."
Yale University is by no means alone in the practice of institutional racism. Last year, Asian students brought a discrimination lawsuit against Harvard University and lost." 

FAKE Narrative?

Walter E. Williams: SJW’s Use ‘Systemic Racism’ Because They Can’t Identify Individual Cases of Racism (If people of color wind up with less wealth, it can ONLY be becuz of Racism, right?  NOT: less education, lower IQ, less commitment, or less discipline > even tho we see all those things. They need to keep their LIES alive)

> https://townhall.com/columnists/walterewilliams/2020/08/26/institutional-racism-n2574936

How screwed up are Yale & Harvard!  as a Harvard grad, I hate it, and tell then what I think of this every time they ask me for money.... 

BTW, among the blacks who get admission to get in, many wind up on the bottom of the class, and some blame "Racism" rather than the stupidity of an unfair admissions policy.

This is also unfair to the blacks who would have been admitted without the boost, since they get stigmatized by Affirmative action.

[drbubb 0]

Princeton's President screwed up... No Peace comes from Pandering to Thugs

He Admitted Systemic Racism (in Virtue-signaling Letter of Apology). Now Government funding is at risk

BARR: Do Not Let Princeton University’s 'Woke' President Off The Hook

... Two weeks after the Princeton President’s highly unusual mea culpa, Robert King, the Education Department’s Assistant Secretary for Postsecondary Education, sent a letter to the university demanding that the admissions made by Eisgruber be explained and documented. The Department gave Princeton 21 days to provide the required evidence of its self-admitted racism, and one more week after that to schedule interviews “under oath” by Eisgruber and other Princeton officials.

... The stakes for Princeton and other schools that receive taxpayer dollars are hardly inconsequential. As noted in Assistant Secretary King’s letter, over the course of Eisgruber’s seven-year tenure at Princeton’s helm it has received “well over $75 million” in federal funds. Problematically for Princeton, however, as with other postsecondary schools receiving such monies, Princeton has been required regularly to certify that it does not engage in racial or other unlawful forms of discrimination — the very practices to which Eisgruber so blithely admitted just one month ago.

In thus placing Princeton on notice that its “woke” claims of systemic racism are, to say the least problematic and at worst clear violations of federal laws, the Trump administration is hoisting Princeton on its own petard as the Shakespearian expression colorfully describes.

... If the school actually provides evidence that it has engaged in and continues to practice racially discriminatory policies, as its president has declared, it not only risks losing significant federal funds going forward, but could be liable for repayment of monies already received.

If, on the other hand, the school admits it was making the statements about systemic racism for the sole purpose of burnishing its “wokeness” credentials as a sop to leftwing activists, it will discredit not only its own leadership and pedagogy, but that of much of our country’s post-secondary education system.

The most likely outcome, at least in the short term, will be for Princeton to stall for time, hoping that November 3 will usher in new leadership at the White House and at the Department of Education; leadership that will be far more “understanding” of the rank hypocrisy deeply infecting the country’s post-secondary education system.

===

I have the Letter... "Peace in our time" > Like Neville Chamberlain?  Eisengruber caved to power-mad people

Dear members of the Princeton community,

In June, I wrote to you as America entered a profound national reckoning with racism.  That reckoning is at once painful, because the harms done by systemic racism have been exposed so starkly, and promising, because we are seeing widespread and urgent desire to take action to achieve a more just society.

With that goal in mind, I charged my Cabinet in June to develop plans to combat systemic racism at Princeton and beyond.  In my letter, I invited suggestions from all of you, and many individuals and groups responded.  I am grateful for your input, and I write now with an update about our progress.

> https://www.princeton.edu/news/2020/09/02/letter-president-eisgruber-universitys-efforts-combat-systemic-racism

*Pandering to Hitler at Munich, did not lead to "Peace in our Time"- It was an act of cowardace

Before leaving the "Führerbau," Chamberlain requested a private conference with Hitler. Hitler agreed, and the two met at Hitler's apartment in the city later that morning. Chamberlain urged restraint in the implementation of the agreement and requested that the Germans not bomb Prague if the Czechs resisted, to which Hitler seemed agreeable. Chamberlain took from his pocket a paper headed "Anglo–German Agreement," which contained three paragraphs, including a statement that the two nations considered the Munich Agreement "symbolic of the desire of our two peoples never to go to war again." According to Chamberlain, Hitler interjected "Ja! Ja!" ("Yes! Yes!") as the Prime Minister read it.^[130] The two men signed the paper then and there. When, later that day, German Foreign Minister Joachim von Ribbentrop remonstrated with Hitler for signing it, the Führer replied, "Oh, don't take it so seriously. That piece of paper is of no further significance whatever."^[131] Chamberlain, on the other hand, patted his breast pocket when he returned to his hotel for lunch and said, "I've got it!"^[132] Word leaked of the outcome of the meetings before Chamberlain's return, causing delight among many in London but gloom for Churchill and his supporters.^[133]

Chamberlain returned to London in triumph. Large crowds mobbed Heston, where he was met by the Lord Chamberlain, the Earl of Clarendon, who gave him a letter from King George VI assuring him of the Empire's lasting gratitude and urging him to come straight to Buckingham Palace to report.^[134] The streets were so packed with cheering people that it took Chamberlain an hour and a half to journey the nine miles (14 km) from Heston to the Palace

> wiki: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neville_Chamberlain

[drbubb 0]

Yale takes a bullet

DOJ sues Yale over admissions practices for Asian-American and white applicants MarketWatch

[drbubb 0]

Next Time Harvard asks for money...

Send them a link to this article, with a message:

"FK THAT!, what ever became of VERITAS?"  (Truth);

Harvard Panel Claims ‘Not All Who Give Birth’ Are Women, Uses Term ‘Birthing People’

A Harvard Medical School department Twitter account referred to women as “birthing people” in a tweet, and claimed that “not all who give birth” are women.

“Globally, ethnic minority pregnant and birthing people suffer worse outcomes and experiences during and after pregnancy and childbirth,” tweeted Harvard Med Postgraduate and Continuing Education in November, promoting a panel on “maternal justice.”

[drbubb 0]

FAIR HARVARD?  Or far from Fair?

Disbarring Senators for their Speeches is Un-American.

A ridiculous petition signed by 5000 law school professors and students is calling for the disbarment of Senators Cruz and Hawley for statements they made on the senate floor.

> https://rumble.com/vco597-disbarring-senators-for-their-speeches-is-un-american..html

==

[drbubb 0]

The madness spreads to the Harvard Houses

"Go ahead, and name if after George Floyd,  Harvard;'s going to Hell-in-a-handbasket anyway.  Make it obvious to all"

THAT was one comment in response to this email

Lowell House

We are convening five informal zoom discussion groups that will meet in January and are organized in terms of their scope of outreach to the broader Lowell community: i.e., the Junior Common Room (JCR), Senior Common Room (SCR), the Lowell House Staff, and Lowell House alumni.  The meeting below is focused especially on alumni input.  Please join us to learn about the House’s history and to share your own views about how we should move forward.  

 

Lowell House naming conversation (January 15; noon-1:30 ET)  

https://harvard.zoom.us/j/94451974445?pwd=ZjV6UWI5ejB5QTExWVhHbXlsN2QxQT09 Password: 254962  

 

We encourage participants to turn their cameras on if possible.   

 

As you may know, we have started discussing some possible alternative names with the Lowell community (listed here in historical sequence by birth): John Lowell House (after the abolitionist Massachusetts judge and co-author of the article in the Massachusetts Constitution which abolished slavery in this state in 1783), James Russell Lowell House (after the 19th century abolitionist, whose poetry was quoted by W. E. B. Du Bois and Martin Luther King), Amy Lowell House (after the Pulitzer Prize winning poet, who lived with her gay partner at the same time that her brother purged gay members from the Harvard community), W. E. B. Du Bois House (after the ground-breaking sociologist, with a Harvard A.B. and PhD, who revolutionized the field of sociology, studied racism, and co-founded the NAACP), and Cecilia Payne-Gaposchkin House (after the path breaking astronomer whose own path to tenure was initially blocked by Abbott Lawrence Lowell).  This is not a short-list, but rather an illustrative and conceptual list that we hope will stimulate conversation and creativity.