Students

Yet more radical leftist ideology at our publicly funded schools

331F2D22-3252-499E-9CD8-9FB3A945E0A2

Given it is the Marxist state of Victoria we should not be surprised, yet the government funded University of Melbourne allows an artistic performance that requires “paying” white customers access on the basis of signing acknowledgement of white privilege. The Australian columnist, Janet Albrechtsen writes,

On Saturday afternoon, about 30 people waited to enter a theatre in the centre of a big, cosmopolitan city for a matinee session of a modern dance performance. A voice in the lobby invited people of colour, brown people, indigenous people and members of the Asian dias­pora to enter the theatre. The white people were forced to stay behind, denied entry on the basis of their skin colour. The same people were then harangued for their skin colour by four young women aiming a volley of accusations at them about their white privilege….After this, the people with white skin were invited into the theatre, but only if they first signed something acknowledging agreement with a particular set of views…

…Race-based identity politics in the 21st century is toxic because it is untethered from the fine aims of the civil rights movement of the 20th century. Back then, activists fought for equal rights for people regardless of colour, creed or sexuality. Today we have returned to a dark place of defining people according to inherited characteristics such as skin colour. Isn’t that what racists do?”

Somehow the radical left believes that in today’s world of inclusivity and diversity that they push so hard for allows for a caveat emptor with respect to blatant exclusion, identity based and resent ridden ideologies. The types of teachings where students are marked down for not using appropriate gender neutral language (compelled language) rather than the quality of the content and reasoned argument (which no doubt must gel with the radical leftist professors).

The Holy Trinity of diversity (not of thought, but sexual orientation, gender or ethnicity), equity (not of opportunity but outcome) and inclusion (quotas not based on ability) will somehow level the playing field by their activism. We as taxpayers are underwriting this Marxist rubbish. We need not remind ourselves of the success of such application of said ideologies in Soviet Russia, China, North Korea, Vietnam, Venezuela or Cambodia.

The $600mn+ taxpayer funded University of Melbourne’s motto is Postera Cescam Laude, which is Latin for “We shall grow in the esteem of future generations.” It is not clear whether the founders of the UoM had Marxist theories at the forefront of their minds in 1853. Growing the esteem of future generations was not to come by cutting down those whose passions as individuals cause them to strive for greatness. Yet the radical leftists believe esteem comes not from effort but from allocation.

Compelling student language

E34A64D7-F2A2-4384-9ADF-81DF9C6D359A.jpeg

Let’s not kid ourselves. Students are paying customers.  They may be there to learn but where does Sydney University get off marking student papers down on using language such as ‘mankind’, ‘workmanship’ or similar words in assignment work? Surely essays or theses should be marked on the quality of the content and validity of argument  rather than provide radical leftist lecturers a petty power trip by compelling student speech.

At what point does the Vice Chancellor tell the faculty staff to grow up and more importantly reprimand them for unprofessional and unethical behaviour? Instead of striving for global excellence to attract reputation, these teachers think that making gender neutral language is a higher goal. What next? Will students who express different views in a political science class than their lecturer be punished?

So much for universities being centres for open thought. Forget that. Hoist the red flag over the People’s University and await the next war on free speech. They recently had a win at the ANU preventing a school of Western Civilization. Forget whether there is ample demand from customers to choose of their own free will.

While some may view this as petty, the slippery slope follows. It was only last month when a Professor Peter Ridd was sacked from James Cook University because he exposed the unethical way his colleagues were manipulating data and conditions of the Great Barrier Reef to achieve the outcome they wanted. Apart from having no pride in preserving scientific integrity, the Vice Commissar figured cauterizing reality is another step toward higher learning.

Perhaps there should be centers for ethical excellence but it is unlikely many of the existing faculty would qualify to run them.  Another win for the Ministry of Truth.