Brave University of Chicago student speaks out against the leftist war on whites
An anti-white racial inquisition is poisoning America. If you don't believe it, read my new book, The War on Whites: How Hating White People Became the New National Sport. The inquisition received support from the prestigious University of Chicago when it decided to offer a new course entitled "The Problem of Whiteness." This is not surprising when you realize that the left has taken complete charge of academia and can get away with overt anti-white racism.
By a margin of more than ten to one, left-leaning professors outnumber conservatives at our colleges and universities. New professors are required to sign a diversity pledge, a ruse that guarantees leftist control on campus well into the future. A friend of mine who is a professor at a prominent university told me that he is forced to keep his conservative views to himself or risk being ostracized by his peers.
Ironically, campus commitment to diversity excludes the all-important diversity of ideas. "They are openly hostile to mainstream conservative values," said Rita Panahi at SkyNewsAustralia. If you are a conservative student in America, you'd better keep your mouth shut.
One brave student at U-Chicago refused to keep his mouth shut. Sophomore Daniel Schmidt called out "The Problem of Whiteness" for what it is. "This is clearly racist and anti-white," said Schmidt. "What the heck is that suggesting, that there is a problem with white people or whiteness and there is a solution? It is the most egregious example of anti-white hatred I've ever seen."
Part of the liberal campus playbook includes active participation in the war on white people. Whites are demonized and marginalized without mercy on today's campuses. The majority of students are intimidated from complaining, fearing poor grades or even expulsion for going against the party line. Not Daniel Schmidt. You have more power than you think as a student, Schmidt said, as he put his academic career at risk.
It was no surprise when the course instructor, Rebecca Journey, filed two separate complaints to get Schmidt expelled. The justification, she said, was that Schmidt led a harassment campaign against her and incited violence. Journey received death threats, which she blamed on Schmidt. Journey was supported by the New York Times and CNN, both of them calling Schmidt a cyber-bully. "That's what you get in America and around the world," said Schmidt, "if you're a white student and you call this stuff out."
"I never once called for cyberbullying or attacks on this professor," said Schmidt in self-defense. "This is deliberate smearing designed to scare me away from calling out blatant anti-white hatred. Leftists have ruined the lives of countless people they disagree with, destroying careers and waging harassment campaigns. They get away with it every time and are often even praised. But when I publicly expose a blatantly anti-white course and name the professor teaching it, I am a 'cyberterrorist' who needs to be publicly condemned by my university."
Fortunately for Schmidt, U-Chicago refused to expel him. That didn't sit well with Journey. "This was a malicious attack not just on me as a teacher but on anti-racist pedagogy writ large," Journey responded. "The University has permitted the opportunist to terrorize an instructor, her students, and I would also argue our campus," she said. "A teacher is not free to do her job if she is fearful that an armed white nationalist, activated by a provocateur, will track her down and shoot up her classroom. We can't let cyberterrorists win."
Amanda Woodward, dean of U-Chicago's social sciences division, tried to show support for the racist course. "While differences of opinion over course material may arise," Woodward said, "the university does not cancel classes because of such differences, and the university defends the freedom of instructors to teach any course that has been developed through our faculty-led curricular processes, including courses that may be controversial."
Controversial? Are you kidding? Outright racist is more like it. "It doesn't take a vivid imagination to predict what the typical conversation in Journey's classroom might look like," said Steve Robinson at The Maine Wire. "It suffices to ask whether Journey and her ilk would shrug off another university offering a course called 'The Problem with Black People,' or a Harvard course, 'The Problem with Asians.'"
"Journey," Robinson continued, "blithely asserts that since someone did a tweet or sent an email she doesn't like, therefore violence has been committed against her. It's a type of power move liberals invoke when they've been exposed for harboring or advancing radical ideas, like teaching an entire class about white people being a problem. If they're the victim, you see, they can't possibly be in the wrong. The undercurrent of her entire post, like much of modern leftist rhetoric, is that freedom of speech is a problem, and institutions like U-Chicago need to use their power to punish those who use their free speech in ways powerful liberals oppose."
The left was outraged that Schmidt was allowed to exercise his free speech. "What we have," claimed one angry left-wing blogger, "is a professional kvetcher who comes down on liberals." On the contrary, what we have is an articulate teenager who is offended by the war on whites and has the courage to say so.
Ed Brodow (www.edbrodowpolitics.com) is a conservative political commentator and author of The War on Whites: How Hating White People Became the New National Sport.
Image: PhotosByMahin via Pixabay, Pixabay License.