CONSERVATIVE CRIMINOLOGY
  • Home Page
  • Conservative Criminology
    • Why A Conservative Criminology
    • Principles of Conservative Criminology >
      • Conservative Principles: Science
      • Conservative Principles: Criminal Justice
      • Conservative Principles: Legislation
      • Conservative Principles: Universities
    • Conservative Websites and Books >
      • Conservative Websites
  • Academic Freedom
    • Studies Cited in Our Book
    • Advice To Liberal Students
    • Advice to Conservative Students
    • Conservative Faculty
    • Liberal Faculty
  • CCBlog
  • Who We Are

The PURGE is Here

11/26/2015

Comments

 
I’ve been reading a book by Roger Scruton (2015) titled “How to be a Conservative.”  It’s one of the those book loaded with penetrating observations and the occasional prose that reveals a remarkable degree of insight.

“Conservatism," Scruton tells us, “starts from a sentiment that all mature people can readily share: the sentiment that good things are easily destroyed, but not easily created.”  He tell us that a core principle of conservatism is that “....we have collectively inherited good things that we must strive to keep."

What are those “good things?"
  • The opportunity to live our lives as we will;
  • The security of impartial law;
  • The protection of our environment as a shared asset;
  • The democratic procedures that enable us to elect our representations and to pass our own laws;  AND
  • The open and enquiring culture that has shaped our schools and universities.

Scruton then lays out our “collective assets” that emerged over time from the labor of efforts but that remain vulnerable to destruction:
  • peace, freedom, law, civility, public spirit, the security of property and family life.

​Destruction, he notes, is “quick, easy, and exhilarating,” yet the work of creation is “slow, laborious, and dull."

I think Scruton’s comments apply broadly and serve as a caution based in wisdom and historical experience.  We take civilization for granted, assuming that our institutions will protect us and not enslave us.  We assume that efforts towards building a better society always, inevitably, lead to a better society.  We take for granted the conditions that have given rise to the remarkable degree of social altruism, cooperation, and trust we extend to others in our daily lives.

​And we always take for granted that our institutions of higher education will always be beacons of intellectualism, free inquiry, honest scholarship, and critical analysis.  Indeed, universities can and have been the focal point of human reason, creativity, art, philosophy, and the pursuit of truth. 


Despite the cautions raised by liberals and conservatives against the growing intolerance, parochialism, and anti-intellectualism that gained a foothold on American campuses decades prior, few paid attention.  

​Despite the cautions of critics of the potentially devastating consequences associated with what has broadly been defined as “political correctness” and despite a broader realization that a fundamentalist, almost totalitarian ideology had gained traction and spread across academic programs in the humanities and the social sciences, few in power objected.  Instead, they capitulated.

When demands for speech codes emerged, they capitulated.

When demands for ideologically oriented academic programs emerged, they capitulated.

When demands for racial and sexual quotas emerged, they capitulated.

When demands for political indoctrination emerged, they capitulated. 

When demands were made to create secret trials and to deprive accused students of basic due process rights, they capitulated.

Today we see the consequences of the decades long march towards capitulation.

​We see “diversity” used not as a principled objective but as a rhetorical weapon.  We see faculty suspended for using a word that offended a single student.  We see administrators lose their jobs for not capitulating fast enough.  We see entire departments of scholars willingly suspend judgement and critical thought in matters of social importance.  We see college presidents and their cronies seek to shut down social media sites and Facebook pages deemed offensive, and we see administrators apply remarkably disparate sanctions against students for their speech.  

This is not mob rule, as it sometimes appears.  Nor is it caused by students petitioning universities or asking their grievances be addressed.  It is, instead, the continuation of a process that has been ongoing since the 1960’s.  The only thing that is really different is that the process, the rhetoric, the players, the capitulation, and the betrayal is now visible for everyone to see.  It is no longer camouflaged by the prestige of the university, nor is it cloaked in the language of “academic freedom.”  Today we can see the corruption of reason, the subjugation of fact, and the elevation of brute political power on campuses.  

​Capitulation is a creeping corrosive.  It is the acid of freedom and liberty and open inquiry, slowly dissolving these pillars of higher education until they fracture, split, and eventually crumble.

Today I learned that the University of Kentucky president has decided to put a curtain up to hide a mural that has been part of UK since the 1930’s.  The mural, exquisitely painted and breathtaking in detail, attempts to show life in KY during an earlier period.  Unfortunately, a handful of students complained that it showed African-Americans working in the fields--which was not uncommon for the period.  In the language of “micro-aggressions” these relatively few students and their faculty mentors convinced the president of UK to hide its art.

​The president of UK said the mural made some students “uncomfortable.”  This was the justification for putting a curtain over a piece of art.

​Where, I ask, are those campus liberals who defend art and creativity?  Where are the campus liberals who defend all matters of provocation, either literary, symbolically, musically, poetically, or through paintings?  Where are those who chastise conservatives for their protests against art they find offensive, such as the “Piss Christ,” that showed a crucifix submerged in a jar of urine.  Where are those liberals who supported the artistic depictions of republicans as members of ISIS and the Nazi party at a recent conference at Cornell?

In 2002 then Attorney General John Ashcroft ordered that two curtains hide the statues that graced the halls of the Department of Justice.  The statues were of mother liberty and mother justice, with each showing exposed breasts.  

The hue and cry from the left was as loud as it was justifiable.  When the Obama administration, however, again covered the statues for their press conferences nothing was said.  Not a chirp.  Is this what we are now seeing on our campuses?  Is our outrage over the violation of core academic principles conditioned by which side of the political spectrum seeks to limit those principles?  If so, it is simply better that we quit pretending to have any academic principles at all.

The good things we have inherited, including our university’s culture of enquiry, are worth preserving.  They should not be destroyed to accommodate the prevailing ideology or the whims of any group, large or small.  

The idea of the university is a testament to our evolution, to our commitment to reason, to our belief in open inquiry, to our value of artistic creativity, to our acceptance of due process, to our belief in the necessity of dissent, and to our desire to pursue truth.  

Building the university has been “slow, laborious, dull,” to use Scruton’s language.  Destroying it, however, is “quick, easy, and exhilarating.”  Paraphrasing Scruton, one position is “true but boring,” while the other is “exciting but false."


May I suggest a little more boring and a lot less excitement.

​JPW
Comments

CryBullies........An Excellent Editorial from the WSJ

11/19/2015

Comments

 
​There are terms I wish I would have invented.  This is one of them: CRYBULLIES.

​http://www.wsj.com/articles/the-rise-of-the-college-crybullies-1447458587

Comments

Predicted.........

11/19/2015

Comments

 
All of this was predictable.  In an article that was prescient:

http://www.nytimes.com/1990/10/28/weekinreview/ideas-trends-the-rising-hegemony-of-the-politically-correct.html?pagewanted=all

Comments

If You Want Evidence of the Bias Against Conservatives on Campus---LOOK HERE.

11/19/2015

Comments

 
​A recent controversy at Dartmouth shows us what goes on behind the scenes--when people feel safe to express their views.  The conflict originated from a BLM protest held in the library.  The protest included black students shouting “Fuck you, you filthy white shits,” and “Fuck you, you racist shits” to white students.

​I don’t have to point out the double standard.....but I will.  One can only imagine what would have happened had things been reversed.  The police would have been called, students would have been expelled that night, and Dartmouth would have gone into a state of mourning.  But hey, who cares about treating people equally and with respect?

A cell phone video of the protest is shown below.

Also shown below, and what is truly interesting and revealing, is a video of Vice Provost Ameer holding a meeting with Dartmouth students concerning the protests and the backlash against the protests.  Does she condemn the protests?  Of course not, instead she calls them a “beautiful thing.”  

And then it gets interesting.  

​“There’s a whole conservative world out there that’s not very nice,” she tells the students referring to the backlash against the protests.  The students then laugh, shake their heads in agreement, and snap, snap, snap their fingers.  A student then yells out “yes, they are fucking racists.”

Of course, that was not a very nice thing to say......was it?

There you go. Virulent anti-conservative bias at a top university.  

​Intimidation, disrupting students while the study, and calling them racists is just fine--it is a “beautiful thing” according to the Vice Provost.  

What’s ugly is the reaction--apparently a reaction shared only by conservatives.  Odd, I know many liberals and they too were deeply troubled by the virulent racism and intimidation shown in the protest video.

Had this not been recorded, we would have never been able to witness this bias in action.  Instead, we would have received piecemeal reports about alleged biased statements and then, maybe  a statement from Dartmouth that they value all opinions.....or something like that.  

Maybe we now need to record all campus meetings?

There is a great book by Korhs and Silvergate titled “The Shadow University.”  In it the authors detail the rise of the academic class responsible for enforcing leftist ideology on campuses.  These folks are found in various staff and administrative positions--most often in student life offices, funding boards, and of course diversity offices.  They are people like Vice Provost Ameer--people so ideologically committed that they simply cannot understand why anyone would disagree with them.

​JPW


 




​
​
Comments

I Saw This At a Coffee Shop

11/16/2015

Comments

 
Picture
Comments

When You Create a Monster it Will Eventually Eat You

11/12/2015

Comments

 
For at least that last decade or two, critics of higher education have  pointed out various problems. Those on the left have primarily called attention to what they term the “ corporatization” of the university.  They point to issues that originate outside of the university and then filter in.

​Those on the right, however, have generally pointed to what has been happening inside the the university and thus what potentially seeps out to broader society.  

Conservative critics have pointed out (with data) 
the complete loss of viewpoint diversity in the social sciences and humanities.  They have pointed out the loss of freedoms caused by speech codes, free speech zones, Title IX, and the institutional protections of favored groups.  Still others have pointed out the growing influence of radicalized professors--professors predominately employed in “________ studies” programs.

Well, it looks like those criticisms have finally penetrated.  Look at Yale, where a shrieking “oppressed” college student yelled profanities at a professor who dared to support free speech.  Other students spit on people who left a discussion on free speech.  Look at Missouri, where a university president resigned because, well, because he didn’t tell protesters what they wanted to hear.  Look at the abuses of Title IX, where universities have employed abusive, corrupt processes to handle allegations of sexual harassment and assault.  

Lives and careers are being ruined--even those on the left.

Students are becoming LESS tolerant and more prone to abuse others with different views.  They are also less likely to understand the need--the critical need--to have their views challenged.  Many now equate free speech, disagreement, and even empirical evidence as harassing.

​All of this was predicted and predictable.  When universities continually capitulate to the demands of radicals, when they attempt to regulate speech, when they fight discrimination with more discrimination, when they empower the crazies and don’t support moderates or those who dissent, then THEY create conditions ripe for abuse, for tyranny, and for harm. 

The moral of Frankenstein was simple: If you build a monster, it will eventually turn on you.   Frankenstein has been around awhile on college campuses and the academic left said nothing when it attacked and destroyed their enemies.  Now that Frankenstein has his sights on them, they suddenly think there might be a problem.

​You know, just because the criticism came from conservatives didn’t make it wrong.

A free speech wall?  Check this out:


http://www.thecollegefix.com/post/25047/ 

Look at the broader reaction here:

http://www.mindingthecampus.org/2015/11/voices-of-the-yale-mizzou-eruptions/

Watch the video here:

​
​


Comments

Academic Pay and the 1%

11/12/2015

Comments

 
As a general rule, professors are not paid all that well.  Some are but many are not.  Part of this disparity is due to market factors that influence hiring, part of it is due to the fact that states have continually reduced their subsidies, and part of this is because we receive benefits that other professions don’t--like a flexible schedule.

​For these reasons, and others, I’ve typically
 been less than sympathetic about faculty complaints about pay.

There are, however, exceptions.  Here is one.  If you have followed what has happened to the North Carolina system you will know that 1) republicans took over control of the legislature and governorship a while back, 2) they summarily dismissed a very 
popular and very effective system chancellor, and that 3) most North Carolina faculty haven’t received a raise in years (ranging from 5 to 7 years on some campuses.)

When I worked in Tennessee, to state was hit with a serious economic downturn.  The cut funding to higher education because that was one place where funds were not encumbered.  In a short period of time, about 20% of the faculty left the state.

So, what gives?  Two things.  First, one cannot help to believe that part of what motivates the republican controlled legislature of North Carolina is political retribution.  Yes, retribution against universities.  

​It’s no secret, and we cover this in our book, that universities are overwhelmingly supporters of democrats and of the democratic party.  They mobilize students on behalf of the DNC, they invite democrats to give talks and to dinners, they provide the intellectual arguments for democratic candidates and office holders, and they dump large sums of cash into DNC coffers.  Hey, if you are a democrat what is not to like?

If your a republican, however, what is there to like?

​And this is the problem.  When professors and universities align themselves ENTIRELY with one political party over another they open themselves up to political retaliation.  

I’m not the only professor to have made this point. A recent editorial in Nature or Nature Genetics (I can’t recall right now) made the same point.    

​Don’t take my comments as supportive of what the governor and legislature have done.  I don’t like crass politics and political retribution.  My point, however, is simple: If you play politics, then you get consequences that are political.  

Now comes news that the Board granted some rather remarkable raises to most of the Chancellors of the UNC system (we call them college presidents).  Raises ranged from 8% to almost 20%.  We are talking about raises that range from 40K to 70K.  And don’t forget that these folks also get lavish expense accounts, houses, bonuses, vehicle stipends............... cha-ching.

​What did faculty and staff receive?  A one time $750 bonus.  Cha-No-Ching.

No raises in years + inflation = Faculty and staff in North Carolina have lost a lot of economic ground.  This is shameful.

The North Carolina system was a gem.  If one thing will kill a great system it is partisan politics.

​JPW   
  



Comments

Satire or Documentary?  You Decide.....

11/12/2015

Comments

 
Comments

Dial 911 in Case of Hurt Feelings

11/11/2015

Comments

 
Picture
In an earlier post I discussed the appropriateness of using a campus police department to criminally investigate ignorant comments posted on a social media site.  

Well, if you have been following the sheer lunacy going on at the University of Missouri, then you will know that their university police department sent out the email posted above.

I wish I was joking but this is not a joke.  It is, instead, dangerous.  Yes, DANGEROUS.  

We do not hire police, even campus police, to hunt down people who use “hurtful” speech.  Not only is it a waste of police time and resources, the implications are staggering.  

In our book we talk about the soft authoritarianism found in the American progressive movement.  The warning signs, however, are now telling us that something more ominous is awakening.  Soft authoritarianism is morphing into something much more potent and something much more militant.  

That such a monster is emerging on our college campuses is disgraceful.  That is is occurring under the umbrella of “social justice” or “diversity” is all the more repugnant.







Comments

Veterans Day

11/11/2015

Comments

 
I come from a long line of veterans.  My grandfather was drafted at the age of 28.  He was already married and had a son.  When he received his draft notification he also found out soon thereafter that he had twins on the way.  

​He went into the Army and trained to fight in the Pacific theater.  Of course, everything changed and he ended up on a Liberty ship traversing the Atlantic on a voyage to England so he could fight in Europe.  His brother, however, went to fight in the Pacific theater.  

​My grandfather’s first experience with war came in the form of a “buzz bomb,” a rocket developed by the Germans that carried a powerful warhead.  One of those rockets landed in between two chow halls during mess--killing or wounding over 1,000 men.

In due time, he boarded another ship to participate in the landing at Normandy.  He was on the third wave that landed on the beaches and he told me of his memories of the dead and wounded, of the blood in the water, and of his fear.  

He fought with from Normandy, through France, and into Belgium.  I recall his stories of being shot at, of the horror of artillery barrages, and of the cold he experienced during the Battle of the Bulge.  He was also with a unit that found a concentration camp.  They shot the guards and paraded the citizens of the town through the camp.

Ultimately, he reached Germany and when the war was over, he prepared for the invasion of Japan.  

My grandfather’s brother was killed by the Japanese.  He was a frogman and in the dead of night had swam ashore to help prepare the beach for the invasion that would be forthcoming.  He was found and summarily shot.

​After the war, my grandfather came home and worked in a paper factory for the next 28 years.  He walked to work--about 1 mile--every day.  He also smoked like a chimney and drank beer.  I was fortunate to be with him when he passed away.    

His two sons, my uncles, would find themselves in Vietnam.  One drafted by the army the other joined the Marines.  I spent many years with my Marine uncle.  He taught me how to hunt, how to fish, and how to shoot.  He was an amazingly hard working man, entirely crass, and intelligent.    

People contribute to our country in many ways.  On this day, let’s recognize those who served our country with honor and distinction in conflicts they did not chose and did not want.  



 
Comments
<<Previous

    John Paul Wright and Matt DeLisi

    Professors of Crime and Criminology

    **Views expressed on this blog are ours alone and do not reflect the official views of our respective institutions.

    Tweets by cjprofman

    Archives

    January 2017
    December 2016
    November 2016
    October 2016
    September 2016
    July 2016
    June 2016
    May 2016
    April 2016
    March 2016
    February 2016
    January 2016
    December 2015
    November 2015
    October 2015
    September 2015
    August 2015

    Categories

    All
    Conservatism
    Crime
    Criminal Justice
    Diversity
    Due Process
    Free Speech
    Ideology
    Intellectual Freedom
    Research

    RSS Feed

Proudly powered by Weebly