Connect with us


Dartmouth Disavows But Keeps Prof Who Justifies Violence





A Dartmouth professor is currently on a nationwide tour in support of his new book and will donate half of the money he gets from book sales to Antifa.

Dartmouth professor Mark Bray’s new book, “Antifa: The Antifascist Handbook,” chronicles the history of the antifascist movement and Bray will contribute half of the books proceeds to a fund for Antifa’s medical, legal, and personal expenses, reported Campus Reform.

In a tweet, the Dartmouth professor stated, “to me, physically stopping a neo-Nazi group before they come to you is self-defense, b/c neo-Nazism is a threat to humanity.”

But it’s not self-defense if you strike first and who is a Nazi? With psychology professor Dr. Jordan B. Peterson and Jewish author Ben Shapiro getting branded as Nazis and Antifa protesting them, you’d think Bray would want to define his terms, as well as give the antifascists even a little bit of scrutiny, particularly when the Department of Homeland Security labeled Antifa’s activities “domestic terrorist violence.”

Bray isn’t the only Antifa supporter in the ivy towers. There’s Eric Clanton, the former Diablo Valley College professor who bust a bike lock on a Trump supporter’s head. There’s also George Ciccariello-Maher, the Drexel University professor who said all he wanted for Christmas was a “white genocide” and who blamed the Las Vegas and Texas massacres on white “Trumpism.”

In a statement, Dartmouth president Philip Hanlon said, “we condemn anything but civil discourse in the exchange of opinions and ideas…the endorsement of violence in any form is contrary to Dartmouth values.” Yet more than 100 of Bray’s colleagues in academia want Hanlon to retract the statement, saying Bray didn’t call for violent protest. Conversely in the same statement those same colleagues ceded that Bray called for self-defense against violent fascists…except Bray never said the so-called fascists had to strike first.

Continue Reading

Princeton University

Princeton Students Cut ‘Misogynistic’ Little Mermaid Song



The Tigertones, a Princeton University a cappella group, perform “Kiss the Girl,” a song from The Little Mermaid, reported Campus Reform.

But not everyone’s a fan. Princeton student Noa Wollstein wrote an op-ed in the student paper calling the song “misogynistic.” Noa says that “even when gently crooned by an animated crab, the song…is more misogynistic and dismissive of consent than cute.”

She notes that a sea-witch had cursed Ariel, taking her voice away and making the mermaid unable to give verbal consent. But if you’ve seen the scene from The Little Mermaid, you’ll remember that Ariel’s expressions make her feelings pretty obvious.

Leaning in for a kiss, looking dejected when Eric backs out, giving a big ol’ goofy smile, and grabbing his hand, that doesn’t exactly look like sexual assault, folks.

But what does Noa want? Well, when the Princeton Tigertones sing “Kiss the Girl,” they pick a male and female audience member to act out the parts of Ariel and Eric. This means that they’re persuaded to kiss at the end of the song.

The student columnist says she’s seen many female students not happy with the practice and she asked the Tigertones to stop singing the song. The a cappella group complied, but here’s the thing: who’s responsible here? Peer pressure’s really annoying, don’t get me wrong, but if students at an Ivy League institution can’t even cope with that, I’m a bit worried about our next generation of leaders.

Continue Reading

Clemson University

Students Triggered By ‘Caravan’ Sandwich



Here’s how Loose Change, a restaurant by Clemson University, advertised its Tijuana Chicken Sandwich:

“Big enough to feed a caravan. Built high enough with smoked chicken, lettuce, tomato, pepperjack, bacon + guac. Bordered with a side of pub chips. So good, it should be illegal,” according to Campus Reform. As you can probably imagine, Clemson students were…not happy. 

“The sign was offensive and very distasteful. CUSG stands for the voices of all students, and it is concerning that Loose Change would block the social media accounts of several student organizations after they expressed their concerns with the incident,” Clemson’s undergraduate student government said. “This situation greatly disappoints us, as we will not stand for any voice to be censored.”

OK, so apparently the restaurant blocked accounts of student groups whining about the sign. I for one have never blocked a soul on Twitter but guys, blocking doesn’t equal censoring. It’s like wearing headphones in a room with squealing babies instead of giving them pacifiers. In case it isn’t obvious, the students are the babies in this analogy.

And it wasn’t just the student government. Clemson frat Lambda Theta Phi took to Instagram, saying “as members of the Clemson community, and former patrons of your establishment, we are writing to express our disapproval of your tasteless appropriation of humanitarian crises for the sake of generating profits.”

Tasteless appropriation? Surely it had some kind of taste. Seriously though, do you see what appropriation outrage does? Those who stoke it make the assumption that you’re not just politically opposed to them but that you are also somehow morally deficient. Cultural appropriation also sets limits on humor — a primary means by which we, as humans, convey information — by insisting that in order to comment on something, you have to BE that something.

Now, Loose Change has apologized profusely for the post, but you can never just say sorry and move on with these people. Once they smell blood, they’re never appeased until they have complete and utter submission.

Continue Reading

University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill




University of North Carolina faculty and TAs who are unhappy with the school’s decision to construct a $5 million building for a Confederate statue torn down by protesters — instead of, I guess, removing it from campus entirely — are going on a “grading strike” and withholding grades from their students in protest, reported Campus Reform. But it seems like UNC provost Bob Blouin, at least, is taking a stand.

He wrote an email to the school’s deans saying “Our students are entitled to receive their grades in a timely manner. It is especially critical for the students preparing to graduate next Sunday, as well as the thousands of students whose scholarships, grants, loans, visa status, school transfers, job opportunities, and military commissions may be imperiled because lack of grades threaten[s] their eligibility….The proposed strike exposes the University and individuals who withhold grades to legal claims for the harm they cause to students.”

Bob threatened “serious consequences” for instructors who do withhold grades. And that’s very good. You have to remember that these people aren’t the compassionate little angels they’d have you believe. No. These are single-minded ideologues who are prepared to sacrifice the scholarships, the job opportunities, and the general peace and sanity of their fellow students and faculty to get what they want, in this case, the removal of a symbol representing North Carolina’s history. Now the provost also mentioned that some UNC instructors are asking their students to take a position on the strike.

He said “such actions have been interpreted as coercion and an exploitation of the teacher-student relationship and in fact are a violation of students’ First Amendment rights as well as federal law.”

Yeah I don’t think I’d be too comfortable going on the record about the statue to someone who has control over my grade and, ergo, my future livelihood.

Continue Reading


%d bloggers like this: