Friday, November 24, 2023

China Spends Gets results. America Spends Gets More Dependents. Patriotic Friend. Unwoke, Reviewed. DEI Standards.






 


+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
The attached  from a very dear and bright friend who is also a fellow reader and a true patriot.
+++
Hello Dick:

I hope you are well. Thanks for sending all of the commentaries.

Very troubling times. I never thought we would see the likes of the Nazi mobs on our streets or sympathizers within our own White House.  The next eleven months are going to be difficult, but even here in dark blue Massachusetts there are signs of “rebellion” against the woke gang.  

I’ve taken a leadership position in Mass with the Trump Campaign and have been writing for a conservative monthly newspaper here, The Boston Broadside, that has a circulation of about 25,000….and growing.  The recent article is attached.

Lloyd

Silence Is Acceptance
Commentary by Lloyd F. Thompson

Too often you hear people say that we can’t talk about politics and, heaven forbid, about
religion. How ridiculous and uninformed they are.

Politics and religion are the two primary forces that shape civilization. Our American
civilization, and the freedom inherent in it, is based upon a Judeo-Christian ethic and
reinforced by the radical idea that people are capable of governing themselves; despots
need not apply. Some of these ideas are not new and reach back to Plato and Saint Paul.
More recent thinkers like John Locke provided the intellectual framework for Madison,
Jefferson, Washington and Morris as they went about creating this social experiment that
we call America. None of these great thinkers shied away from open and vigorous
discussion of who we are and why we should succeed. All of them knew that with
freedom came great responsibility.

Edmund Burke told us that the only thing evil needs to succeed is for good men and
women to say nothing. Silence is acceptance.

Yet, today our society is riddled with people who are either unwilling, lazy, or afraid to
voice an opinion or two. Such bold action could bring disaster – being unfriended on
Facebook, for instance. The result is a simmering cauldron of political discourse filled
with vile propaganda, misinformation and misunderstanding. All of which is targeted to
erode public confidence, erupt the society and usher in a new and corrosive philosophy of
governing that is Marxist in nature and feel.

We are facing a global crisis – a clash of beliefs not seen since World War II, and one that
is even more deadly. At this moment in time Israel happens to be the flash point where a
barbaric invasion has ignited the land. Have we forgotten that this is land of our religion
and birthplace of Jesus? Have we forgotten that Israel is our strongest ally in the Middle
East and this tiny state is a buffer for us? Have we forgotten that there is strength in unity
and that success demands taking the offensive?

Shameful, vicious anti-Semitic attacks have sullied campuses and streets in our country,
yet this White House only offers tepid condemnation and then pivots 180 degrees to
condemn Islamophobia.
Solution? A start is to stand up and speak out for our country. Liberty is on the line.
Unlike the phony existential threat of climate change, the real existential threats are the
Quislings in the White House. With dedication, clear thinking and unity we will replace
them with Patriots – because we can’t get it wrong again.

“Where there is no law there is no freedom.& quote; ~ John Locke
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

https://www.eia.gov/todayinenergy/detail.php?id=61002#:~:text=the%20Arabian%20Sea.-,The%20Strait%20of%20Hormuz%20is%20the%20world's%20most%20important%20oil,of%20global%20petroleum%20liquids%20consumption.

++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

And we have unions:
+++

++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Chapter 5, in "Unwoke," is devoted entirely to the social media companies whose owners are liars and whose employees are predominantly left wing cultural Marxist's.  The author cites many known and revealed instances where those who posted articles, Op Ed's and other conservative type comments that opposed the beliefs and thinking's of Marxists were eliminated, hidden from view, blocked etc.

In every instance those who worked for these companies denied these accusations and/or efforts to deny access were true.

In every instance, those who designed the algorithms did so with a purpose of denying those their right to free speech.
These companies and their owners must be controlled and this includes Tic Tok. Sen. Cruz set forth his legislative ideas a to how their biases can be controlled.
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++

From the Shoulders of Giants: The World Has had Enough of Klaus F***ing Schwab


https://pjmedia.com/kevindowneyjr/2023/11/24/on-the-shoulders-of-giants-the-world-has-had-enough-of-klaus-schwab-n4924189
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
 
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Biden continues to put pressure on Bibi to extend the time Hamas can try and regroup and thus, cause Israel's IDF to lose momentum they have achieved because he is losing voters.

It is all about re-election to him and retaining power and luxury living.
+++
Cultural Marxist's goal is to bring down America and one way ,having spread the word we are a racially bigoted nation, is to force us to seek equity not equality.  The way this is accomplished is to focus on DEI and that becomes a measurement in hiring.  Competence is no longer the standard because it is prejudicial and biased towards whites.
+++

Inside Ohio State’s DEI Factory

I obtained 800 pages of ‘Diversity Faculty Recruitment Reports.’ Here’s what I found.

By 

John Sailer


ILLUSTRATION: DAVID KLEIN

A search committee seeking a professor of military history rejected one applicant “because his diversity statement demonstrated poor understanding of diversity and inclusion issues.” Another committee noted that an applicant to be a professor of nuclear physics could understand the plight of minorities in academia because he was married to “an immigrant in Texas in the Age of Trump.”

These examples come from more than 800 pages of “Diversity Faculty Recruitment Reports” at Ohio State University, which I obtained through a public-records request. Until recently, Ohio State’s College of Arts and Sciences required every search committee to create such a report, which had to be approved by various deans before finalists for a job were interviewed.

In February 2021, then-president Kristina Johnson launched an initiative to hire 50 professors whose work focused on race and “social equity” and “100 underrepresented and BIPOC hires” (the acronym stands for black, indigenous and people of color). These reports show what higher education’s outsize investment in “diversity, equity and inclusion” looks like in practice. Ohio State sacrificed both academic freedom and scholarly excellence for the sake of a narrowly construed vision of diversity.

Each report required search committees to describe how their proposed finalists “would amplify the values of diversity, inclusion and innovation.” Some reports were dutiful and bureaucratic; others exuded enthusiasm. All were revealing. Racial diversity was touted as a tool to achieve viewpoint diversity, but viewpoint conformity often served as a tool to meet de facto quotas. One report said a candidate would “greatly enhance our engagement with queer theory outside of the western epistemological approaches which would greatly support us both in recruitment and retention of diverse graduate populations.”

Other committees valued political ideology as an end in itself. In a search for a professor of chemistry, the report notes that one candidate’s “experiences as a queer, neurodivergent Latinx woman in STEM has provided her with an important motivation to expand DEI efforts beyond simply representation and instead toward social justice.” Another report concedes that “as a white male” one proposed finalist “does not outwardly present as a diversity candidate.” In his defense it notes that he recently published on critical race theory.

The reports required search committees to describe how they evaluated diversity statements. The committees cited those statements as the sole reason for eliminating certain candidates in fields as varied as aquatic ecology, lighting design, military history and music theory.

In some cases, committees evaluated diversity statements through an explicitly ideological lens. A committee searching for a professor of freshwater biology selected finalists “based upon a weighted rubric of 67% research and 33% contribution to DEI.” To evaluate the statements, the committee used a rubric that cited several “problematic approaches” for which a candidate can receive a zero score—for example, if he “solely acknowledges that racism, classism, etc. are issues in the academy.” It isn’t enough for a freshwater biologist to believe that racism pervades higher education.

The rubric meanwhile gave a high score for DEI-focused activism outside academia, for demonstrating an understanding of “intersectionality” and for embracing a vision of “anti-racism” that “requires consistent and long-term growth, reflection, and engagement (and that they are prepared to put in this work).”

Viewpoint discrimination aside, these assessments reveal an issue of basic priority. For a search in astrophysics, “the DEI statement was given equal weight to the research and teaching statements.” This would strike many as a poor metric for judging astrophysicists.

A university spokesman told me that Ohio State updated its hiring practices in April “to exclude the use of required diversity statements except when mandated by federal law, research contracts, and licensure or accreditation.”

Candidates’ demographics also appeared to play a significant role in faculty hiring decisions. Throughout the reports, references to the race and sex of candidates abound. Many of the job candidates’ diversity statements emphasized their own “intersectional” identities—“a person of color and a member of the LGBTQ+ community,” “a first generation, fat, queer scholar of color” and so on.

This emphasis seemed to have an effect—sometimes a remarkable one—on the demographic makeup of the proposed finalists. For a role in communications, four of the 46 applicants were Hispanic—and so were two of the three finalists. One role in medical anthropology had 67 applicants. The four finalists include the only two black applicants and the only Native American applicant. “All four scholars on our shortlist are women of color,” the committee said.

In his email, the Ohio State spokesman said that colleges in the system now use “standardized evaluation tools” to assess job candidates without regard to demographic categories like race, sex and ethnicity. That’s what the law requires, even more clearly since the Supreme Court decided Students for Fair Admissions v. Harvard in June.

Some search committees at Ohio State were surprisingly forthcoming about their use of racial preferences. “Diversity and inclusion featured prominently in all our discussions,” wrote one committee in the division of geodetic sciences. “Naturally, most weight was given to candidates from URM”—underrepresented minority—“backgrounds, but we also gave considerable weight to the diversity statements that were provided by all candidates.”

One faculty position advertised last year was in French and francophone studies with a “specialization in Black France.” It yielded a more racially diverse but still majority-white applicant pool. The committee was adamant about its intended outcome. “In our deliberations to select finalists, the importance of bringing Black scholars to campus was deemed to be essential. We thus chose three Black candidates.”

It added: “We decided as a committee that diversity was just as important as perceived merit as we made our selections.”

Ohio’s flagship university invested heavily in DEI with an emphasis on faculty hiring. The result of that investment should be a wake-up call for Ohio’s citizens and lawmakers and a cautionary tale for anyone who cares about higher education.

+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++


No comments: