Thursday, March 15, 2007

The Group's Continued Delusions

The unintentionally revealing comments keep coming from the Group of 88.

Here is Group member Lee Baker, on the suffering Group members have endured:

Our syllabi are getting scrutinized. There are a couple Web sites that instruct people to go to ratemyprofessor.com and give negative comments. The white supremacists sites have our names and e-mails.

It’s unclear precisely what sites Baker is talking about in his second and third sentences; I certainly haven’t run across such examples.

But let’s assume, for the sake of argument, that what he says is true. A college professor has compared having fraudulent evaluations and being targeted by hate groups to having his syllabi “scrutinized.”

Most professors do not consider their syllabi to be secret documents, to be shielded from public view. (I put all of mine on line, and have for years.) Can Baker seriously maintain that having outsiders examine what, exactly, Duke professors teach is out of bounds?

A quick glance through Baker’s list of offerings suggests that he would be a prime beneficiary of the proposed Group of 88 Enrollment Initiative.

Take, for instance, his “Life in America”—an offering that focuses on . . . race. (Who could have guessed—a Group of 88 class oriented around race, class, and gender?) [Note: After this post appeared, the syllabus vanished from the Duke University website. A cached version of the syllabus is, however, still available.]

Assignments include such readings as,

  • “We’re Here, We’re Queer—And We’re Better Than You: Representational Superiority of Gay Men to Heterosexuals on Queer Eye for the Straight Guy”;
  • “The Politics of Labeling: Latino/a Cultural Identities of Self and Other”;
  • “The Great American Football Ritual: Reproducing Race, Class, and Gender Inequity”;
  • “Morphing Race into Ethnicity: Asian-Americans and Critical Transformation of Whiteness”;
  • “Cyborg Violence: Busting Bodies and Borders with Queer Machines.”

This is the sort of class that the Campus Culture Initiative wants to require for all Duke students.

[Update, 11.41am: Prof. Baker e-mailed to provide a link to a white supremacist site called stormfront.org. In a 51-page comment thread, the site had one (anonymous) comment listing the membership of the Group of 88, with links to their webpages (but not e-mails) and to their ratemyprofessors.com site. The same site had one (anonymous) comment in the same 51 pages attacking Reade Seligmann's Jewish ancestry.

I should point out, as a caveat, that ratemyprofessors.com is a site of little usefulness. In my experience, after I took a position on a campus issue relating to the Brooklyn Education Department, I noticed that I had a number of quite negative ratings from students, complaining about the in-class bias I exhibited in my classes in Political Science and Core 9. There was only one problem: I'm a History professor, and so don't teach any Political Science classes, nor have I ever taught Core 9. The moral: anyone can post on ratemyprofessors.com, and the site has no vetting process to determine whether the poster actually is a student who took a class from the professor. So anything in the site about the Group of 88 is of little value.]

[Update, II, 12.26pm: An excellent response in the comment thread:

Here is the obvious perspective on the whole "white supremacists have my email address"/"people have made death threats against the G88"/"somebody, somewhere has been discriminated against".

What does that have to do with rational criticism of your position and actions?

I'm sure that the President of the United States gets death threats from all manner of nutjobs and enemies. That doesn't mean that we should allow him/her to implement whatever economic or social policies he/she wishes without scrutiny.

No reasonable person wants anyone to feel physically intimidated or in mortal danger. However, rational analysis of a person or position necessitates a level of compartmentalization that allows for heavy criticism of one element of a situation as well as deep sympathy for another element.]

87 comments:

bill anderson said...

The M.O. of the G88 is pretty much the same as we have seen across the country. First, there is a "crisis" that must be addressed, and, second, that "crisis" is met by requiring courses for students that they otherwise would avoid.

These things are done, of course, in the name of tolerance. The classes are little more than crude propaganda that is worthy of Goebbels or Stalin, but this is what is passing as "academics" these days.

The G88 identity studies people remind me of the Snopes family in William Faulkner's The Hamlet. Rumor has it that the family burned down someone's barn, so as they slowly take over the community of Frenchman's Bend, the people acquiesce because they don't want anyone burning down their barns.

The G88 come in with, frankly, much worse credentials than most Duke faculty members. They teach courses that are more propaganda than actual academics in the traditional sense. So, what do they do? The create "crises" or they take advantage of incidents on campus to call attention to themselves.

Their answer always is the same: Make students take our courses. They gain more power, and they intimidate other faculty members and threaten them with retaliation.

Yes, we can say that many of the G88 are academic "Snopses," except that the Snopes family once in a while gave "a little sweetening for the chaps."

Anonymous said...

The Gang88 are sweating because as a result of their vile smear campaign they are being held up for public ridicule.

They are ashamed of the rot they teach. It shows that most should never be allowed to be at a place like Duke.

They opened a Pandora's box and now they're whining about the consequences for themselves.

Anonymous said...

Jumping back to Coach K, there is new opportunity for his leadership. He can work with the athletic department staff members to approach Brodhead with a plan to direct 2/3’s of this year’s Duke NCAA tournament revenues to the legal defense funds in support of the targeted Duke student athletes.

Anonymous said...
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
P. Rich said...

So, the Stoopid 88 are spending time on white supremacist web sites? And it seems clear that they exchange "information" about the evil world out there that is persecuting them. What a dark and scary place the inside of their heads must be.

Anonymous said...

Carolyn says:

Bill Anderson - excellent post. You nailed the Gang of 88 precisely.

Of course, you WOULD fight dirty - using facts, logic and clear, readable syntax. Tsk. You call yourself a professor?

Anonymous said...

One thing I noticed for Professor Baker's class is that he has assigned his own textbook as a required text.

When I went to college (lo, these many years ago) that was a big no-no. Asking college/unniversity teachers out there: have things changed?

Anonymous said...

Just look at this example at what these G88 folks try to pass off as "education" at Duke. Clearly, Brodhead hasn't the desire or "brass" to fix this problem. Given the gross, abject default in administrative leadership at Duke, this mess squarely falls onto the collective shoulders of the Trustees. Why would *anyone* donate any money to Duke for this crap?

rabbi-philosopher said...

Until the G88 call for dismissal of all charges against the Lax Three, I can only hold them in disdian.

Anonymous said...

KC, considering your strong defense of the lacrosse players, can we expect you to donate the profits from any forthcoming book you would write about the affair to their legal defense team? Now that would be an indication of your sincerity--in not wanting to profit from this affair, and your good faith in the students and the issues you have made so much a part of your life for the past year.
So yes or no? Profits to the defense fund?

wayne fontes said...

I checked Rate My Professor and Lee Baker isn't even listed. I looked at 6 to 8 other G88 professors and there is no evidence of a campaign to give them bad ratings. Once again the G88's allegations prove spurious when compared to hard data.

KC's own rating was mediocre with the chief complaints being that his class was hard and he was biased. More interesting was that he had a very high number of ratings. Why do you think so many of your students take the time to rate you KC?

Anonymous said...

Next G88 statement:

"People are scrutinising our syllabus. The proper context to understand this is the alleged mass-murder of 4 million people in 1940s by rightwing activist. We are are the true and sole victims in this campaign."

bill anderson said...

Of course, you WOULD fight dirty - using facts, logic and clear, readable syntax. Tsk. You call yourself a professor?

I know, I know. Hitting below the belt and all that. Actually, I cannot do mathematical modeling well enough to be a Duke econ professor. (True confessions here.) So, I don't have to worry about retaliation from the G88!

By the way, as soon as the Econ guys sent out their letter, G88-ers were sending them nasty emails, something I heard from some of the econ people.

Believe me, the G88ers really do act like thugs, or at least like a mafia. They constantly are trying to intimidate people, and often it works.

Anonymous said...

Pathetic.

Anonymous said...

Im not sure why anyone is surprised. Do you think these G88 people are used to scrutiny? The sorry state of Hmanities in Academia today is our own fault.

Hardly.

Any time someone starts discussion on race and gender, my eyes glaze over and I start doing shopping lists in my head. I may nod politely, but I am not listening to a thing the person says.

When was the last time soneone said to a graduate of the fine "Grade-less" institution of Santa Cruz, as they pontificated mightily ... That is the stupidest thing I ever heard,... youre fired as a waste of oxygen!

99 Students out of 100 go, make the appropriate noises, get their B and move on. The 1 in 100 goes on to join the ever increasing ranks of alternate welfare professors.

locomotive breath said...

I'd like to see Prof. Coleman's e-mails of the last year. Anyone want to give odds if "oreo" and "Uncle Tom" have appeared? You don't find him whining.

Anonymous said...

Bill Anderson wrote:

Believe me, the G88ers really do act like thugs, or at least like a mafia. They constantly are trying to intimidate people, and often it works.

Shortly after the Duke Chronicle opened its discussion board, there was an interesting post to the effect that many Duke faculty memebers felt intimidated and threatened when the Gang of 88 was seeking signatures for the Listening Statement.

The poster was responding to criticism about the silence of the majority of the Duke faculty. He argued that the atmosphere at Duke was so bad that silence itself was an act of courage. The cowards did what they were told by the Gang of 88 thugs and signed.

Nice place!

scott said...

Clearly, I am too stupid to attend college in the 21st century.

From the titles, I think I grasp the concept of what is contained in the "We're Here, we're Queer" reading, and I'm likely to agree that the wardrobes of most homosexual males are superior to mine. I'm not as sure about what the next 3 on the list would cover. As to the last, I do not have a clue. What is a "queer machine"? Buehler? Buehler? Anyone?

Sure glad I finished over 35 years ago.

Anonymous said...

10:31--I hope and pray KC makes a ton of money off of this and I do not care what he does with his money. Insinuating a lack of sincerity on his part by asking if he will donate profits to the defense fund is a silly little ploy. In my mind, what he is doing with this blog and elsewhere has been more valuable than any monetary donation...and I HAVE donated to the fund.

Deklan Singh said...

Here is the obvious perspective on the whole "white supremacists have my email address"/"people have made death threats against the G88"/"somebody, somewhere has been discriminated against".

What does that have to do with rational criticism of your position and actions?

I'm sure that the President of the United States gets death threats from all manner of nutjobs and enemies. That doesn't mean that we should allow him/her to implement whatever economic or social policies he/she wishes without scrutiny.

No reasonable person wants anyone to feel physically intimidated or in mortal danger. However, rational analysis of a person or position necessitates a level of compartmentalization that allows for heavy criticism of one element of a situation as well as deep sympathy for another element.

becket03 said...

Lee Baker: “the white supremacists sites have our names and e-mails.”

Prof Johnson: Prof. Baker e-mailed to provide a link to a white supremacist site called stormfront.org.


So we see that white supremacist sites (plural) have become the singular, and deplorable, stormfront.org, a well known gathering place for haters and losers.

Baker exaggerated, and had to data mine 51 pages of dreck to find the one instance.

Well, I suppose we should give him credit for having an actual fact, however originally misstated, to back up his claim.

I think it's likely he does know of other sites where the G88 were listed, but, although he and his pals may privately refer to such sites as "white supremacist," he's probably not prepared to defend that characterization publicly, most likely because any objective investigation of the charge would show it to be untrue.

beckett

Anonymous said...

KC, considering your strong defense of the lacrosse players, can we expect you to donate the profits from any forthcoming book you would write about the affair to their legal defense team? Now that would be an indication of your sincerity--in not wanting to profit from this affair, and your good faith in the students and the issues you have made so much a part of your life for the past year.
So yes or no? Profits to the defense fund?

Mar 15, 2007 10:31:00 AM

------------------------------------
Now let me get this straight. Because K. C. Johnson has already spent vast quantities of his time without compensation, and incurred significant costs without reimbursement, to investigate and expose an injustice in the criminal justice system, you think he should write a book for free as well? Are you nuts? You think he should work for nothing "as an indication of sincerity"? As if his unpaid year of work to date on behalf of the falsely accused students and against their persecutors (in law enforcement and at Duke) doesn't establish "sincerity"? I have no connection to the defendants or their families, but I'm quite sure that they are all immensely grateful to Professor Johnson, have no doubt about the sincerity of his efforts on their behalf, and don't begrudge for a moment the profits which we all hope his book yields.

Anonymous said...

"can we expect you to donate the profits from any forthcoming book"
10:31

HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA

If people can earn six figure salaries from race/gender/class crimes that did not happen, the professor should be able to make a buck off of a very real injustice.

Get rich, KC. Filthy, stinking rich. Then, buy yourself a bow tie made with platinum and gold threads and gemstones. Just remember to wave when you drive by in your new Rolls Royce.

Looking forward to the book signing. Put me down for five (5) copies.

SAVANT

Anonymous said...

Here is a nice article by Ms. Mentor of the 3/13/07 Chronicle of Higher Education on what "forthcoming" really means about one's books: http://chronicle.com/jobs/news/2007/03/2007031301c/careers.html

Perhaps Ms. Lubiano's work that got her tenure at Duke University falls under the category of forthcoming for years, as Ms. Mentor describes it: "We have several tenured colleagues whose books have been "forthcoming" for years, and one suspects that if one called their alleged publishers . . . but that is not the sort of thing a good person does, really." (Chronicle, Ms. Mentor, 2007).

Anonymous said...

Who was the judge that approved the $ 400,000 bail?

becket03 said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Kilgore said...

For anyone interested - I just spoke with a rep of the IWF and she told me that they will be videotaping tonight's panel on the duke lacrosse situation and plan to have the video on their website sometime tomorrow to be available to anyone on the net. Bless their hearts!

For those of you who may not be familiar with the IWF they have been fighting the good fight against the likes of the gang of 88 for a number of years. Their web site has plenty of resources including a paper by Christine Stolba called "Lying in a Room of One's Own: How Women's Studies Textbooks Miseducate Students" It takes a critical look at women's studies programs. It's a good read.

John Bruce said...

I checked ratemyprofessors.com maybe a month ago, and at that time, KC had the highest rating. I wonder why it's gone down recently?

Let's not forget the phenomenon of projection, whereby people project onto others their own motivations.

On the question of whether it's a no-no to assign one's own text, it's worth pointing out that there are in fact almost no real standards of professional ethics in the academic biz. Most schools, for instance, have no policies against romantic involvement between professors and their students, and the ones that exist are recent and unenforced. The only professional canons are the AAUP 1940 Statement and whatever additional standards are given by the professional bodies of individual disciplines, such as the MLA, but these again are largely vague and almost completely unenforced. It took Colorado University more than a year to find a reason to fire Ward Churchill, who had a long record of falsified employment qualifications, plagiarism, fabricating sources, and assault threats.

This is an underlying problem not just for the 88, but for the academy generally.

jamil hussein said...

It is amazing that these kind of people can be (well-paid) professors in an US university. It is even more amazing that the universities, including university president and alumni, tolerate these kind of people. Also, it is sad (but hardly a surprise) that the mainstream media (drive-by media) is openly supporting them and refusing to question them.
It is great to have free speech and blogs (at least until the next administration shuts them down as hate speech).


Gang88 and their ilk live in a bizarro world where the exact opposite is true. They are telling that they are against racism and prejudice, yet they themselves are openly advocating bias and hatred against certain race (and gender). Terrorists are freedom fighters, dictatorships are people's democracies. Everything is allowed to them because "they are right". They want debate, yet they refuse to debate anybody who has different opinion. If somebody wants to see their syllabi it is hate crime or harassment according to the jimmy carters or gang88 of the world.

Anonymous said...

10:31--

Not only do I not give a whit about what KC (and Taylor) do with their book profits, but I hope they make a ton of money. Moreover, if the "brilliant" "leaders" at Duke had any sense whatsoever, Broadhead would *require* that every Duke student (present and future) read KC's forthcoming book. In fact, the Trustees should purchase copies of the book in bulk and *give* each Duke student a copy. Finally, every one of the G88 should be *required* to pass a test on the book and write (as best they can) a report on "what I learned from KC's book." That is, assuming they can read.

Anonymous said...

http://www.newsobserver.com

Check this out.

Anonymous said...

Alev says:

Perhaps the writers of the emails being mischaracterized should forward the emails containing the complete exchanges to department heads, administrators, and those who run alumni fund-raising. Who knows, there may be reasonable people somewhere who value the exchange of ideas and the input of concerned alumni.

On the point of racist posts on blogs, to be fair, I've read posts on nearly every blog, including this one, that I've found racially offensive. There are a lot of people, of any skin color, who dislike, resent, or feel superior to people of other skin colors. In a forum where there is a free exchange of ideas, and the choice to be anonymous, that kind of thing will come out.

KC has made a choice not to edit for content, but to remove off-topic posts, which has eliminated most of it here. However, it was here before; the postings on IQ were an example that comes to mind. I'm sure similar stuff to the IQ postings could be found on white supremacist boards, where it would actually be believed. On the other hand, blogs supporting the woman who made the accusation tend to contain equally racially offensive matter,just directed to a different group. So, on that point, I would agree with the 88.

However, they appear to make an effort not to notice that it cuts both ways. If they did, they would use their own letter as a teachable moment and say, "See. The tendency to jump to conclusions based on preconceived racial, class, and gender stereotyping exists in all of us. It's something we all have to guard against, no matter how well-intentioned we are." Self-examination questions can produce change: What was the environment that fostered that prejudgment? How can we all constantly check ourselves against group think, so we're not surprised when 90% of people read our statement a certain way? Rather than "blame the victim" for poor reading ability, how did we fall into the trap of "talking in code" that only "in members" of OUR group can "rightly" discern? What do you do when you realize that you've actually harmed someone with your words? By admitting that we are human and erred, we're modeling for you students what you can do when you, too, stick your foot in your mouth, or are caught in conclusions that could be explained only by being in your own little world. We'll model for you the courage of saying, "I was wrong and here's why. I won't stop until I've done everything in my power to set things right "
If the professors of diversity actually taught courses like that instead of catechisms, the courses would be well worth taking.

Instead, we read defenses that say, "We're NOT listening."

Anonymous said...

Anonymous said...
Alev says:

Perhaps the writers of the emails being mischaracterized should forward the emails containing the complete exchanges to department heads, administrators, and those who run alumni fund-raising. Who knows, there may be reasonable people somewhere who value the exchange of ideas and the input of concerned alumni.

On the point of racist posts on blogs, to be fair, I've read posts on nearly every blog, including this one, that I've found racially offensive. There are a lot of people, of any skin color, who dislike, resent, or feel superior to people of other skin colors. In a forum where there is a free exchange of ideas, and the choice to be anonymous, that kind of thing will come out.

KC has made a choice not to edit for content, but to remove off-topic posts, which has eliminated most of it here. However, it was here before; the postings on IQ were an example that comes to mind. I'm sure similar stuff to the IQ postings could be found on white supremacist boards, where it would actually be believed. On the other hand, blogs supporting the woman who made the accusation tend to contain equally racially offensive matter,just directed to a different group. So, on that point, I would agree with the 88.

However, they appear to make an effort not to notice that it cuts both ways. If they did, they would use their own letter as a teachable moment and say, "See. The tendency to jump to conclusions based on preconceived racial, class, and gender stereotyping exists in all of us. It's something we all have to guard against, no matter how well-intentioned we are." Self-examination questions can produce change: What was the environment that fostered that prejudgment? How can we all constantly check ourselves against group think, so we're not surprised when 90% of people read our statement a certain way? Rather than "blame the victim" for poor reading ability, how did we fall into the trap of "talking in code" that only "in members" of OUR group can "rightly" discern? What do you do when you realize that you've actually harmed someone with your words? By admitting that we are human and erred, we're modeling for you students what you can do when you, too, stick your foot in your mouth, or are caught in conclusions that could be explained only by being in your own little world. We'll model for you the courage of saying, "I was wrong and here's why. I won't stop until I've done everything in my power to set things right "
If the professors of diversity actually taught courses like that instead of catechisms, the courses would be well worth taking.

Instead, we read defenses that say, "We're NOT listening."

Anonymous said...

off topic but interesting news

http://www.newsobserver.com/1185/story/553776.html

Anonymous said...

Looks like Baker has taken his syllabus offline now, following the latest DIW post. Unbelieveable.

Nifong's hat trick said...

KC, you are exactly right! Course Syllabi are not secret documents. If Lee Baker is truly comfortable that his syllabi reflects what he teaches, then scrutiny of it should not concern him in the least. Since he is concerned, we can only ask why?

Anonymous said...

The words "cry babies" come to mind.

Anonymous said...

K.C. et al please read the following quote, and see just how full circle the Group of 88 have come, with claims of outside agitation:
"Like Paul, I must constantly respond to the Macedonian call for aid. Moreover, I am cognizant of the interrelatedness of all communities and states. I cannot sit idly by in Atlanta and not be concerned about what happens in Birmingham. Injustice anywhere is a threat to justice everywhere. We are caught in an inescapable network of mutuality, tied in a single garment of destiny. Whatever affects one directly, affects all indirectly. Never again can we afford to live with the narrow, provincial "outside agitator" idea. Anyone who lives inside the United States can never be considered an outsider anywhere within its bounds."

Many of you may recognize this snipet from a letter to the Clergy by Martin Luther King Jr., his words stand the test of time, and the hoax screams for the same kind of demonstration, thank you K.C. for your articulate demonstration.
The group of 88 should see how this case is defeating the very justice so many great men have been trying to deliver to us all.

R.B. in Kailua, HI

Anonymous said...

law school '72

Good news for anon 10:14 and others who ask"why would anyone donate any money to Duke for this crap?" Brodhead and Trustees take note. I just finished up revising the estate plan for a client. He is a retired professional who met his bride at Duke years ago.He was getting his professional training and she a very pretty co-ed. They married and raised the kids who are doing well and raising very promising grandkids. Recently she passed away-- too soon but it happens. He came in wanting among other things to make an immediate gift to Duke in his wife's memory but very disturbed about the gang of 88 and how the administration at Duke ever let such a bunch of losers get a start.He is an avid fan of Duke sports in general. He had planned to give the sum of $500,000. A nice piece of change but not so much that it would be very useful if subject to restrictions. He was unsettled to think that his gift would be used to support victim studies or other gross stupidity. He doesn't trust the administration to spend it wisely. At my suggestion he has decided that the gesture can be made just as well by gifting his undergrad alma mater. Tonight when my secretary leaves she will be taking a check in the amount of $500,000.00 and putting it in our escrow account. Next week when it has cleared I will be sending it out to benefit a school other than Duke. I am just one lawyer and he is just one moderately successful graduate. We can just hope that we are a small part of a much greater trend that may in time work a change for the better at Duke.

Zombie said...

I heard Fox News was interviewing Coach K tonight and he had a book coming out, cannot verify, tho.

Anonymous said...

SAVANT (12:37) wrote: "Put me down for five (5) copies."

KC--While you're at it, be sure to put me down for six (6) copies of your forthcoming book--one for everyone in my home.

Looking forward to seeing you on the NYT bestseller list.

Anonymous said...

Baker took his syllabus off line. Are you kidding us???? obviously, he teaches c^^^. There was a criticizm that his own book was part of the course and not done? Is this true? They never cease to embarrass themselves.

gak said...

John Bruce said

On the question of whether it's a no-no to assign one's own text, it's worth pointing out that there are in fact almost no real standards of professional ethics in the academic biz.

In '77 at Catawba College, I took a religion course from a professor named James K West. The required text was written by him. The prevailing logic was that it was tailored to the class. I still don't see problem with that unless the book itself is truly trash.

Anonymous said...

I hope KC and Bill A..make a million plus on their books and do what they will with the money. I hope thar Reade, Collin and Dave are smart enough to be co-writing a book right now - with or without ghost writer. I received an email from Rud today accussing me of being a troll. The email address is no mystery - i would like to see Gail Dines, the 88 and all those who complaing about hate mil publish it online.

gak said...

Wayne Fontes said
KC's own rating was mediocre with the chief complaints being that his class was hard and he was biased.


Do they give dates on when the last posts were. That would be VERY TELLING indeed.

Anonymous said...

The group of 88 brought attention to themselves. They had an opportunity to divert that attention but declined. Certainly everyone, but especially Duke alums, and parents of present Duke students and past Duke students havde a right to know all that is being taught. I think everything a professor writes or teaches should be open for review and comment. What makes these professors think they can conduct their agenda in secret. They work for a private university that is supported by the tuition paid by its students, donations from loyal and generous alumni, corporations and yes even tax money. Everyone that is providing that money should be able to know what is going on.

Anonymous said...

KC Johnson is a DICK! Talk about bias and slighting people. What a DICK!

Georgia Girl said...

First off, the comment posted by "anon at 10:31 a.m." is absolutely absurd! As if this commenter would donate personal funds to Group88. I think not.

Secondly ... let me think

Anonymous said...

To law school 72 at 3:37: I hope that the gentleman who had planned to donate $500,000 to Duke but decided to give the money to another school will promptly inform the Duke trustees and administration why he is doing so. Otherwise, Duke will not learn.

Gary Packwood said...

Law School 72 - 3:37 Said...

We can just hope that we are a small part of a much greater trend that may in time work a change for the better at Duke.

Absolutely! That is the only reason to spend time on this mess.

And...I look forward to the day that the Board of Trustees, their executive officer, the Alumni and Faculty take back their wonderful school so I wont have to worry about them.

Anonymous said...

Is it possible that the remaining charges against Reade, Collin and Dave could be dropped tomorrow?? Friday is a great day to do this sort of thing, politicians always use fridays to put out news.

Anonymous said...

The whites who lynched Emmett Till provided the appropriate historical context through which to interpret this scrutnizing of syllabi.

Anonymous said...

One aspect of Crystal's accusation that I have not seen discussed is that it would be physically for three males to simultaniously rape her orally, vaginally and rectorally in that small bathroom.

Anonymous said...

I wonder where KC will end his book? If he waits till the Civil Cases have worked there way through the system it may be awhile before the ending is written.

HumboldtBlue said...

I'm with Savant KC, buy a brand new gold-spangled, diamond-studded bowtie, maybe even a new tricked-out bicycle and have fun.

I hope you make a mint.

(and say hey to the boys in Canarsie)

Anonymous said...

So now all the blog hooligans are white supremicists? LOL

Bill said...

It's increasingly clear tha the "88" have confused the right to academic freedom with the right to a fan club. I suspect any criticism no matter how articular, rational and on the money, dare I even say criticism from Duke's own lawyers would be seen as hate speech and attempts to violate their rights as profs.

I hate to see how they'd respond to a NSF or NEH propsoal that rated below a "Good" (heck even a "Good") or get a paper rejected.

rod allison, detroit said...

"This is the sort of class that the Campus Culture Initiative wants to require for all Duke students."

That's right. If Duke makes these classes a requirement, they're telling the incoming students that they are probably racists and, as such, aren't morally fit to attend Duke until they get re-educated by one of these wierd, spoiled, pampered, and overpaid, hatemongers.

Cedarford said...

Off-topic but bearing on JohninC's, KC Johnson, and certain posters work to bring back the Crimestoppers and Vigilante posters significance and whodunits..

Pretty interesting stuff from a JohninC poster:

QUOTE
The first demand any of the 50+ parents had at 12:15 p.m. meeting 25 March 2006, was that L. Minneta, S Wasiolek, J Alleva, immediately remove from GODUKE.COM the 2006 roster. The group that assembled after the cancellation of the Georgetown was assured the roster would be removed. It is interesting that Dean Sue on the board of CS; before Duke removed the pictured roster from the web site GODUKE.COM she assisted ptl. Addison produce the vigilante/wanted poster. END QUOTE



I discount the posters later accusation that Dean Sue assisted in the production of either set of posters, or that even Addison had anything to do with the Viligante Poster.

But the 1st part, if true, about a March 25th meeting and a demand of Duke Admin principals quickly take down the names, pictures, and hometowns of the players to protect them from exposure to danger or harassment is awfully important.

1. Parents warned of a specific danger.
2. Duke, in the role of loco parentis under liability law, did nothing for 9 days.
3. This allowed the construction of the Vigilante Poster (April 4th-5th)which ended up getting postered all over North Carolina in the form of the N&O publication and nationally on "anti-white" websites.
4. Players were harassed, retaliated against, and threatened in consequence. Many were pulled from school and studies disrupted because of the danger. Significant follow-on financial expenses of the parents happened in consequence.
5. It gets harder for Dean Sue and others to argue that the Crimesoppers Wanted Posters and the Vigilante were completely off their radar. It only makes them look even more careless and negligent about addressing a danger the parents demanded Duke fix in their loco parentis role to claim ignorance of the existence or ramifications of the posters.

Because the JohninC poster appears to have mixed in bad information with what appears credible - the March 25th meeting, warnings, and Duke Admin attendees, I would ask any well-informed poster or actual student or parent involved if they can confirm the March 25 meeting happened as the poster recounted. And, if notes or minutes exist

Anonymous said...

Odd comments here this evening - the moon isn't full, Duke is out of session, must be non-NCAA Championship fans.

Welcome aboard, and if that is your best game, you can take that weak stuff back under the bridge from whence you came.

Anonymous said...

@ gak 5:15

An author makes royalties from books sold. Is it ethical for a teacher to basically enrich himself by forcing an essentially captive audience to buy it if they want to take the class? Anyway, I personally don't think it is ethical(and apparently my school system back in the 80's agreed with me).

Anonymous said...

The idea of requiring diversity courses reminds me of the old communist Chinese reeducation camps designed to rectify one's thinking. The powers that be get to decide when you are cured. When your racism, sexism, and homophobia are defined as latent, it's hard to know when you are cured.

Anonymous said...

Domain Name: COLLINFINNERTY.US
Domain ID: D9959882-US
Registrant ID: DI_4687341
Registrant Name: DNS Administrator
Registrant Organization: The Delaware Consulting Group
Registrant Address1: 1623 Military Road
Registrant Address2: #651
Registrant City: Niagara Falls
Registrant State/Province: New York
Registrant Postal Code: 14304-1745
Registrant Country: United States
Registrant Country Code: US
Registrant Phone Number: +1.3122390833
Registrant Email: dns.administrator@delawaregroup.us
Registrant Application Purpose: P1
Registrant Nexus Category: C31/US

Set up around 11/20/2006.

sceptical said...

Reade Seligmann, Collin Finnerty, and Dave Evans are political prisoners.

They are political prisoners because Mike Nifong was running behind in the primary race for Durham District Attorney, had loaned personal funds to his faltering campaign, and needed more years in office to ensure his pension. Mike Nifong needed a case to run on, a case that would appeal to the Durham's black community-- his core supporters. No matter that he never talked to the accuser about the details of the incident or that the DNA was negative. He needed indictments and he needed them soon. Reade,Collin, and Dave are hostages to Nifong's electoral ambitions.

They are political prisoners because of North Carolina's corrupt legal system. The DA's control the court calendars, and then become judges in a "old boy" network. There is no oversight of DA's who have virtually unchecked powers. The "case management system" slows proceedings with multiple "settings" so that poor defendants languish in jail for months. Defendants out on bail, like Reade, Collin, and Dave, are bled dry from legal fees as the "settings" drag on. The grand jury system is flawed with no recordings or records of the sessions, and a rubber-stamp approach to indictments.

They are political prisoners because of the corrupt politics of Durham and the uneasy relationship between Durham and Duke University. The Durham PD was on a mission to control "crimes" by Duke students such as open beverage violations and under-age drinking. So when a cop like Mark Gottlieb, who despised Duke students, had a chance to nail some Duke athletes, he jumped ahead with misrepresentations and exaggerations, starting a cycle of lies. He was backed up by a Durham PD which was happy to turn the case over to Mike Nifong. After the ball got rolling, Patrick Baker and Bill Bell (the Durham City Manager and Mayor) justified the shoddy investigation and prosecution. Duke President Brodhead, with classic white liberal guilt, placated the Durham power structure and potbangers and "Group of 88" as he called for presumption of innocence but acted until December as if the players were guilty.

They are political prisoners because of the racial tensions and history of Durham and the South. Reade, Collin, and Dave continue to be called guilty no matter what the facts because they are white and the accuser is black. Those who promote the politics of victimhood-- the NAACP, the "Group of 88," the potbangers and others-- jumped on this case to promote their own political agendas. They have no true concern for the accuser or the defendants, just a cynical desire to use them for their own purposes.

They are political prisoners because of the higher ambitions of Roy Cooper and Mike Easley. The case has been under review by the special prosecutors for over two months now, and NC Atty. Gen. Cooper staged a photo-op today at 610 N. Buchanan to show his involvement. The case is not so complicated that it would take this long to thoroughly review it. Cooper is acting in a political farce so that if the charges are dropped, his can try to protect his standing among North Carolina's black voters, the base of Democratic Party support in the state. Gov. Easley has been invisible, avoing this scandal like he has with all the other ones, such as the case of the former House Speaker Black. He is the "teflon" governor.Instead of taking a stand, he just said that Nifong was his "worst appointment." Why doesn't he comment on the harm this case has done to the reputation of North Carolina? Why doesn't he call on Nifong to resign? Why doesn't he champion legal reform in the state?

It's time to free Reade, Collin, and Dave-- it's a time for justice and not politics!

Anonymous said...

So now all the blog hooligans are white supremicists? LOL

This must be the vast right-wing conspiracy that leftwing keeps talking about. How can I join?

Anonymous said...

Carolyn says:

Ohmigod, I just read the post saying how Duke just lost $500,000 because of the Gang of 88. And this is just the one we were TOLD about! Unbelievable.

Duke's endowment is disappearing faster than Baker's syllabus!

Anonymous said...

The UPS Store # 2194
1623 MILITARY RD
NIAGARA FALLS, NY 14304-1745 - USA
Phone: (716)298-4461

Anonymous said...

Just to be clear, it seems the person who registered the offensive site is hiding behind a UPS Store postal address.

eric said...

to 4:00
Its Coach Pressler being interviewed on fox news - americas newsroom - 9:00 to 10:30 ET. Not Coach K who was interviewed on HBO -Bob Costas

gwallan said...

Regarding lecturers assigning their own books - it forces others to actually purchase them. Those doing it clearly have a financial motivation for doing so.

Personally I view it as unethical.

Gary Packwood said...

Anonymous 9:57 said...

Domain Name: COLLINFINNERTY.US
Domain ID: D9959882-US
Registrant ID: DI_4687341
Registrant Name: DNS Administrator
Registrant Organization: The Delaware Consulting Group
Registrant Address1: 1623 Military Road
Registrant Address2: #651
Registrant City: Niagara Falls
Registrant State/Province: New York
Registrant Postal Code: 14304-1745
Registrant Country: United States
Registrant Country Code: US
Registrant Phone Number: +1.3122390833
Registrant Email: dns.administrator@delawaregroup.us
Registrant Application Purpose: P1
Registrant Nexus Category: C31/US

Set up around 11/20/2006.

What's your point? It is a domain for sale.

Same as ...

http://www.readeseligmann.com/

eric said...

Gee

It takes 9 days to shut down the lacrosse team Roster site.

It takes 1 afternoon to shut down Lee Bakers syllabi site.

Anonymous said...

This must be the vast right-wing conspiracy that leftwing keeps talking about. How can I join?


"So if anybody tells you there is no vast right-wing conspiracy, tell them that New Hampshire has proven it in court."

The Junior Senator from New York
3/14/07

Insufficiently Sensitive said...

This may make no sense to youse liberal arts majors, but back in engineering school some of us had texts by our professors and were damn glad to have them. Many of said professors were at or near the top of their fields, and hardly anyone could have written better on the subjects covered. A rule forbidding this practice would have subtracted from, instead of adding to, the sum of human knowlege.

That said, I recognize that liberal arts subjects are far more like collections of centuries of opinions and arguments, none having one rigorously True Answer. But if one were to insist, say for the sake of 'diversity', that Joe Blow's analysis of materials, by critical theory or whatever, was as good as that of Timoshenko, the ground under the ruins of buildings and bridges designed on the Blow principles would be littered by the bodies of innocents.

And it seems that the edifice of education erected by G88 on 'diversity' principles is in process of crumbling, and only by luck do we not find the bodies of three Duke LAX players in the rubble.

Anonymous said...

Nah, in most universities, if we assign our own books, we just cannot profit from them- the per book profit has to be donated somewhere else is all. Most of us write a book because it fits with a long beloved class, and no one else quite does it the way we want the book put together- so we write our own. But, it is unethical and usually against a formal policy to make a profit from one's own students on a book. Other students elsewhere, fine.

Anonymous said...

A comment on a blog is meaningless, perhaps even less than meaningless. A nice story about money from an estate being diverted away from Duke is just that - a nice story. Believed by those who want to believe. But significant of nothing.

Duke has several billion dollars in its endowment - it might miss a half million here and a half million there, but amounts in that magnitude are just small potatoes.

So, put away the sack cloth and ashes, Duke lives.

Anonymous said...

KC Please activate the moderator - they are writing about body parts ans fluids again. Poor Till was not lynched = beaten to death.

Gary Packwood said...

KC Quoted Update, II, 12.26 PM...said..

...No reasonable person wants anyone to feel physically intimidated or in mortal danger. However, rational analysis of a person or position necessitates a level of compartmentalization that allows for heavy criticism of one element of a situation as well as deep sympathy for another element.

I believe the expression of those values with respect to the core values of the academy actually opens the door for really strange faculty type people to enter the door.

Who would ever believe that environmental terrorists would be members of a university faculty? They are you know!

The G88 are rank amateurs compared to environmental terrorists I believe, but they have one similar trait...they are not reasonable people and should never be treated as reason people.

Apparently, administrators and boards of universities are unable to manage these unreasonable people which ...opens the door for Bloggers. If these faculty members can't be managed, we at least, can expose their disposition towards terror.

Anonymous said...

Will this topic be continued tomorrow? I missed most of it.

Georgia Girl

Gary Packwood said...

Insufficiently Sensitive 10:43

Very thoughtful comments. Thanks

The G88 should probably be required to teach me and ...require that I purchase their book. If they can help people like me then they are allowed to teach the youngsters at Duke.

I would be a challenge with respect to diversity issues.

It still just baffles me that I have to Press 1 for English.

Anonymous said...

[re: COLLINFINNERTY.US]

What's your point? It is a domain for sale.

The point is that someone bought this domain and put up a hate site, including contact information. And, they did this while hiding their own identity.

Anonymous said...

The point is well take about the hate site, really awful. Can anything be done about it? Until you see it, you can not even imagine how bad it is.

Anonymous said...

When one of mine went to Chicago for an MBA, we had to buy an Apple computer. I thought that was questionable - specifying Apple. Buying the Professor's book, has got to be violating something.

Anonymous said...

Gary - This was a lot of trouble to set this up. Anyway of finding out who did this. I am not a conspiracy thinker but this is serious. Who would do this? In November????

Anonymous said...

Getting to the site was a link through Rud and the perfect storm -did anyone else know about this site? How did Rud?

Gary Packwood said...

Anonymous said... 12:39

Gary - This was a lot of trouble to set this up. Anyway of finding out who did this. I am not a conspiracy thinker but this is serious. Who would do this? In November????

I sent the site information over to four friends in the computer business and all four think that some enterprising person is hoping that you will click on the site selection and offer to purchase the site.

The idea being that name recognition is worth big bucks.

I spent a great deal of time on the site and nothing came up when I clicked on the categories.

I will keep checking.

GP

PS: The telephone number is a Chicago exchange

Gary Packwood said...

Anonymous 12:45 said...
Getting to the site was a link through Rud and the perfect storm -did anyone else know about this site? How did Rud?

I have been looking at the .com site. I did not notice that the site under discussion is a .us site.

Two different web sites.

Yes, I saw the .us web site several months ago.

I thought originally it was an attempt to set up a for-profit Blog via advertisements. I did not give it any thought and figured that the defense attorneys know about it because the site is so visible.

GP