The Republican war on colleges
axios.com
Former President Trump and Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis, the two GOP presidential frontrunners, have both promised a crackdown on colleges should they occupy the White House — a stark reflection of the right's growing skepticism of higher education.
Some Republican complaints about colleges are related to broader concern about "wokeness" and free speech. But others hint at deeper questions about the value of college, and how to ensure a degree comes with an appropriate economic return.
You are viewing a single comment
Colleges war on Republicans*
It's pretty simple - the left gives a ton of money to colleges, why wouldn't they try to push left talking points and get more money? If republicans would give more money to colleges, we all know that the colleges would push more right wing talking points.
Maybe Republicans could try becoming as successful as Democrats. Or having any policies or direction whatsoever. Or maybe they could try helping people instead of stripping individuals of their rights whilst also bending over and spreading their corp tax and reg cuts.
Exactly what talking points are you referring to being pushed in higher ed across the country?
anti-racism, political violence, CRT, gender theory, marxism
All you did was list off right wing buzzwords lmao. Have you ever stepped foot in a university? Do you think random electives are being forced on every student or something? I have 2 degrees and didn't experience any of the above.
edit: also "anti-racism" sounds like some white supremacist dog whistle
I went to college from 2012-2017, I witnessed it first hand.
Sociology was, which we had CRT curriculum.
It's the lefts all encompassing buzz word, so the left can criticize people for not being racist.
If I say 'I'm not racist" they respond "well it doesn't matter if you're racist or not, if you aren't anti-racist you're perpetuating white supremacy."
So maybe I'm just misinterpreting your idea of what "anti-racist" means, but it sounds like a business owner saying "I don't actively discriminate against people based on race, but they're saying if I don't support measures so other people can't discriminate against people based on race, I'm perpetuating white supremacy." That seems a pretty reasonable stance.
Being otherwise neutral to an established system is perpetuating it, even if you don't participate in it yourself. I'm not sure what's confusing about that. Again, unless I'm misunderstanding your interpretation of "anti-racist."
You are. Anti-racism is the lifestyle of fighting 'racism' in every day life. However, the definition of 'racism' has changed in academia so it's not actually about treating races unequally, it's treating the right races unequally.
So, in your example, if that business owner isn't hiring minority races over white races, they are not anti-racist, therefore, they are racist.
See you're doing it here. Someone can be neutral to race; not making any determinations based on race, but if you say the established system, which you can't define, is racist (once again, the 'updated' definition of racism which says only white people can be racist), you want to claim anybody that isn't donating to the right charity, or supporting your causes, is racist?
So essentially, you've made 'racism' entirely subjective based on policies that you yourself (or the left in general) determines.
Racism used to mean a very objective thing: if you treat people differently based on their race. Now it's entirely subjective at the whim of one political parties definition.
Sorry, you're saying that's a bad thing?
Are you saying like the DNC actually gives money to colleges? Or maybe people you just don't like make private donations, which has nothing to do with what's taught
Idk about colleges, but the DNC and teachers unions definitely.
Some. But what I'm saying is democrats tend to fund colleges at a much higher rate. Why wouldn't the colleges buddy up for privileges?
This is what we call "Conflict of Interest"