Monday, July 23, 2007

Group Profile: Eduardo Bonilla-Silva

[Change in schedule: With week-in-review posts moving to Friday, the series profiling Group of 88 members will now appear on Mondays.

To date, the series has included posts on Wahneema Lubiano,
Pete Sigal, Grant Farred, Sally Deutsch, Joseph Harris, Jocelyn Olcott, Irene Silverblatt, and Kathy Rudy. The posts examine the scholarship and teaching of Group members, trying to delve into the mindset of professors who last spring abandoned both the tenets of Duke’s Faculty Handbook and the academy’s traditional fidelity to due process. An item to keep in mind: in higher education, professors control the hiring process. The people profiled in this series will craft future job descriptions for Duke professors; and then, for positions assigned to their departments, select new hires.]

Group of 88 signatory and “clarifying” faculty member Eduardo Bonilla-Silva teaches in the Sociology Department. He received his Ph.D. from the University of Wisconsin; his academic career has promoted a structural explanation of racism in the United States. In effect, he has argued that a quest for white supremacy is embedded within American society, and can be overcome only through government intervention to create an “equality of outcome” between whites and minorites.

At various points in his teaching or scholarship, Bonilla-Silva has used other names for the country of which he is a citizen. In his most recent book, his preface described the United States as “gringoland.” In a course syllabus used at his previous institution, Texas A&M, he wrote, “We conclude the class with a discussion of some of the solutions that have been proposed to deal with the racial dilemmas plaguing the United States of Amerikkka (I will remove the three Ks from this word when the USA removes racial oppression from this country!).” Without explanation, he dropped two of the “Ks” in a forthcoming essay entitled, “Latinos in the Midst: Where Will Latinos Fit in the Emerging Latin America-Like Racial Order in Amerika.”

Bonilla-Silva has authored two books: White Supremacy & Racism in the Post-Civil Rights Era and Racism without Racists. Here’s how he described the thesis of the latter book shortly after its publication:

Racism without Racists opens with the following claim: “In this country, racial ‘others’ of dark complexion are always viewed as incapable of doing much; we are regarded and treated as secondary actors only good for doing beds in hotels or working in fast-food restaurants.” [emphasis added] Simplistic, overblown claims are normally easy to rebut: in this instance, it’s hard to see how the careers of Condoleeza Rice, Colin Powell, Barack Obama, Oprah Winfrey, or Carol Moseley-Braun (to take five high-profile examples) could be reconciled with Bonilla-Silva’s absolute proclamation.

According to Bonilla-Silva, the United States has scarcely moved beyond the era of legalized segregation. Contemporary America, he has written, features “a rearticulation of some racial practices characteristic of the Jim Crow period of race relations.” This new racialized system, which he calls “colorblind racism,” is upheld in part “through social control (the criminal justice system, arrest rates, etc.).” Few would deny that minorities are, for example, disproportionately the victims of prosecutorial misconduct. Bonilla-Silva appears to believe, however, that Jim Crow-like attitudes among whites provide the only logical explanation for the disparate incarceration rates between whites and African-Americans.

University of Wisconsin sociologist Myra Loveman countered that Bonilla-Silva’s analytical framework “depends on the ‘reification’ of race.” Moreover, for someone who claims a “global” perspective,” Bonilla-Silva is quite U.S.-centered: as Loveman observed, he seems to take “differences that are peculiar to the United States at particular times in its history . . . as bases for conceptual generalization.”

Beyond criminal justice issues, what are some of the negative characteristics of this “racialized system” that Bonilla-Silva has detected? Meritocracy, for one. Whites, the Group of 88 member claims, “justify racial inequality” by supporting merit as an avenue for advancement or admission to school; such color-blind racism only helps whites “justify contemporary white supremacy.”

In his writing, Bonilla-Silva regularly employs generic quotes, often invented by him, that he argues typify the “white” viewpoint. (These quotes almost always portray their “white” speaker as transparently racist.) His own style must have made the 88’er particularly amenable to the strategy employed by statement author Wahneema Lubiano, who used anonymous quotes from alleged Duke students to frame the Group’s anti-lacrosse ad.

Bonilla-Silva denies that he seeks “to demonize whites.” After all, he noted, “Historically, many good people supported slavery and Jim Crow”—just like the “good people” in the current environment who “oppose (or have some reservations about) affirmative action.”

I doubt that the majority of voters in California, Washington, and Michigan (all states that have passed referenda banning the use of racial preferences in public jobs) would be comforted knowing that Bonilla-Silva sees them as “good people” even as he compares them to 19th century advocates of slavery. And, of course, branding those who oppose his views as the contemporary equivalent of slavery’s defenders gives a sense of how willingly Bonilla-Silva tolerates dissenting opinions.

When translating his theories into specific policy recommendations, Bonilla-Silva lapses into either the banal or the extreme. (Little else could be expected from someone who claims that “today there is a sanitized color-blind way of calling minorities niggers, Spics, or Chinks.”) For instance, here’s a paean to the race/class/gender worldview:

How, exactly, will this race/class/gender “coalition for humanity” be accomplished? Bonilla-Silva doesn’t say.

The Group of 88 member has urged minorities to “become militant once again” and adopt “a new, in-your-face, fight the power civil rights movement.” The goal? This movement “must have at the core of its agenda the struggle for equality of results.” In other words, the traditional goal of civil rights activists in the United States—equality of opportunity—would be set aside, replaced by implementation of absolute quotas.

Bonilla-Silva has also devoted some thought to the education system—which is, he has claimed, a place to “nurture a large cohort of anti-racist whites.” For students at Duke, he’s had a direct message: “If you are a college student in a historically white college, you must raise hell to change your college” demographically.

But when minority students at his previous position, Texas A&M, didn’t support his agenda, Bonilla-Silva lashed out. After witnessing a panel in which black and Hispanic A&M students downplayed the racism that Bonilla-Silva sees everywhere, the professor dismissed them as racial Uncle Toms:

At Duke, Bonilla-Silva teaches race-based courses such as “Contemporary Analysis of Racism” and “Comparative Race/Ethnic Studies”; the latter explores “the social, legal and cultural construction of racial and ethnic hierarchies in a comparative international context with the United States and the United Kingdom of central analytical concern. Racial formation and racial segregation in specific historical and national contexts including the normative case of the Anglo-Saxon core in the United States and how its dominance has led to patterns of ethnic antagonism and discrimination; the historical context of racial stereotypes and their representation in various mediums.”

He has conceded that “some times[sic] students perceive some of the material he teaches as “anti-White,” but that those who enroll in his classes needed to keep in mind that “the very mission of the University is to challenge ‘dogmas’ in pursuit of the always elusive ‘truth.’” Of course, Bonilla-Silva’s definition of what constitutes “dogmas” would seem far out of the mainstream. It seems unlikely, for instance, that he would consider the current “diversity” fad in higher education to be a “dogma” worth challenging, despite its overwhelming support from the contemporary professoriate.

Here’s how one student remembered a class with Bonilla-Silva: “Makes fun of you if you answer incorrectly. Hates Duke students (called us ‘spoiled private school kids’). Wastes time in lecture with stupid drawings . . . Is biased.”

Bonilla-Silva didn’t seem to like his students very much at Texas A&M, either. “I am not an Aggie or believe in any of the so-called ‘traditions’ or ‘heritage’ of this institution,” he informed one class at the university he dismissed as “Crackerland.” Here’s his response when asked if white students at A&M were racists:

With typical overstatement, he compared the thematic difficulty of one of his A&M classes, “Sociology of Minorities,” to the intellectual challenges associated with studying “calculus or the second law of thermodynamics.”

The syllabus for the course stated that students needed to control their “body language” and avoid “irresponsible contestation” with his arguments. Bonilla-Silva further asserted that he would “not accept anecdotal ‘data’ (e.g., ‘I know this because Georgino Bushinsky Presidensky said so and he must know’).” The class ended with a lecture on “Amerikkka’s Racial Future and Social Policy Options to deal [sic] with Racial Problems.”

Imagine the appropriate condemnation if a white professor stated on his syllabus that he would “not accept anecdotal ‘data’ (e.g., ‘I know this because Jesserino Jacksoninsky Fakereverendy said so and he must know’),” and accused African-American students in his class of displaying threatening “body language.”

When asked by the Chronicle about the inappropriate language of the syllabus, the Group of 88’er asserted that “his syllabus was tailored to ultra-conservative students at Texas A&M, some of whom use The Bible as the main source in an essay.” (Of course, not all or even most students at A&M would be considered “ultra-conservative”; and there’s little reason to believe that Bonilla-Silva sees the student body at Duke or any other historically white school as fundamentally different ideologically.) Incredibly, the chairman of Duke’s Sociology Department, Philip Morgan, dismissed as irrelevant concerns about Bonilla-Silva’s using his syllabus to score ideological points.

With these research and teaching interests, is it any wonder that Bonilla-Silva rushed to judgment in spring 2006; and then refused to apologize for his actions last January?


In his first book, Bonilla-Silva claimed that “writing about a racial ideology that is alive and well and shapes the views of most whites in the United States is a risky business.” Indeed, for him, it has been so “risky” as to secure a lifetime position with a six-figure salary at an elite university.

Bonilla-Silva is a tenured full professor. A favorite of the American Sociological Association, he arrived at Duke in 2005, as part of a wish list” of faculty members that the Brodhead administration particularly wanted to bring to Durham.


Anonymous said...

KC, everytime you do one of these profiles I have to ask myself if this is really happening! Isn't it great that this son of an immigrant can come to the US, take advantage of the wonderful opportunities afforded him, get rich and made a wonderful life, and tell America how awfully racist and horrible it is.

If only we had more like him. I really hope parents at Duke know about this sad state of affairs.

Anonymous said...

It's encouraging to know the Texas export initiatives work well. Maybe we can find a few more to "promote".

Another reason why Brodhead should be fired...

Anonymous said...

You realize the additional problem with the FERPA violation is that Duke likely has no way to assure that ONLY lacrosse player data was released this time or in the past.

They lack transparency, governance, and leadership.

Anonymous said...

Duke obviously has no shame. Another pathetic professor — a favorite, no less, of the American Sociological Association. Professpr Johnson, if you have time, tell us more about the ASA,

Anonymous said...

JLS says...,

Well all I can do is shake my head again.

Gary Packwood said...

Bonilla-Silva may have acquired a burr under his saddle while he was over here teaching at Texas A&M.

For those who are not familiar with the A&M Corps ...take a peek

Texas A&M University Corps of Cadets

Suppose this bunch of students chased him out of town all the way to Durham?

Anonymous said...

Well at least this explains why the Group of 88 can’t defend themselves. They don’t even listen to conflicting points of view so they can’t defend their beliefs.

Actually I though we hit bottom with floating phallus guess I was wrong.

Anonymous said...

Can you possibly imagine this man or any of his peers, who perpetually whine about how the Man exploits workers and minorities and who demand their version of racial discrimination, meeting a payroll?

Free market capitalism does not reward hatred, parasitism, or evasion. Which is why they loathe it so much.

Anonymous said...

I'm an Aggie (and a NC Attorney). All I can say is, thank goodness this idiot no longer teaches at A&M.

How is it that people like this are allowed to 'teach'. The group of 88 aren't teachers, they are indoctrinators.

Anonymous said...

Pathetic ... that B-S (how appropo) has a job, that it's as a professor, and that students actually take it.

I recall a sociology course I took exploring liberal arts studies ... the professor seemed actually insane. Incapable of communicating lucid thought, his TAs wound up holding "prep sessions" for exams, which turned out to be opportunities to learn what was actually on upcoming exams (so you could pass the course). With them, you had no clue what was going on.

My sister attended Duke, and I thought it was a good school. IF this guy represents what they do there, my kid will not attend Duke.

Anonymous said...

gary packwood,

Do you have a connection with Texas A&M or Texas?

R.R. Hamilton

Anonymous said...

Anonymous said...

I'm an Aggie (and a NC Attorney). All I can say is, thank goodness this idiot no longer teaches at A&M.

Several members of my family are current or former students at A&M. (I myself am the teasip blacksheep). Believe me, A&M is now as steeped in 88ism as is Duke or my own alma mater.

R.R. Hamilton

Gary Packwood said...

R.R. Hamilton 12:49 said...
gary packwood,

Do you have a connection with Texas A&M or Texas?
Sure. I live in Houston, Texas and have many relatives and friends who are graduates of Texas A&M...a truly wonderful place.

Anonymous said...

I hope SNL is reading this blog because these profiles really have to be seen to be fully mocked. The language and self absorption makes other tin-pot dictators seem possible. Tenure means never having to say you are sorry.

Anonymous said...

I am Professor Bonilla Silva's boyfriend. If Mac or any of you other meanies makes any nasty comments about Eddie-baby, I'll get very cross and call you all racists. So watch out.

Anonymous said...

OK, gary packwood, thanks. Was just curious.

Now, regarding Eduardo Bonilla-Silva, here's how a guy from South Texas would analyse this: First, look at his name. He's hyphenated his name. Google for other "Bonilla-Silvas" -- you won't find many. Why do some Hispanics hypenate their names? They do it when their mother's name is more prestigious than their father's name is. So automatically we know that B-S views his mother's family name as being more prestigious than his father's.

Next, what do we know about men who view their mother's family as more prestigious than their father's? (This was the only question LBJ ever wanted to know about a man -- where was the money in his family, on his mother's side or his father's? From there, LBJ knew how to manipulate the man.) These men have inferiority complexes.

Now look at his first name, Eduardo. His father named him. There were no Roman emperors or Spanish kings named "Eduardo", but several English kings were named "Edward". This is a man who despises his father and despises the "Anglo" name that his father gave to him. (To those who think I'm overblowing the Roman connection, think how common are the names "Julio", "Cesar", and "Julio Cesar" for Hispanics. And what did the original "Julio Cesar" conquer? Britain. To many Hispanics, the natural order is for Latins to rule Celto-Teutonic barbarians.)

Reading KC's essay on B-S, I was anticipating this paragraph that would revive the spectre of the ancient Latin rivalry with the Celts and Germanics:

At Duke, Bonilla-Silva teaches race-based courses such as “Contemporary Analysis of Racism” and “Comparative Race/Ethnic Studies”; the latter explores “the social, legal and cultural construction of racial and ethnic hierarchies in a comparative international context with the United States and the United Kingdom of central analytical concern. Racial formation and racial segregation in specific historical and national contexts including the normative case of the Anglo-Saxon core in the United States and how its dominance has led to patterns of ethnic antagonism and discrimination; the historical context of racial stereotypes and their representation in various mediums.”

B-S is not lying when he says he's "not anti-white". That's too broad. He's not anti-white where the whites are Polish or Greek or (best of all) Spanish. He's one of the many Hispanics who sees the current divisions between the Anglo-Americans and the Hispanic-Americans as part of a 2,000-year struggle. Once you are aware of this, everything else he says makes much more sense.

R.R. Hamilton

Anonymous said...

R.R. Hamilton

"To many Hispanics, the natural order is for Latins to rule Celto-Teutonic barbarians."

And for the romans to rule the Hispanics... as it was and should again be.

Guy from Italy (a modern day roman)

PS. Sorry, I coldn't help myself. ;D

Anonymous said...

Gig'em Ags! I am so glad my son is at A & M and Bonilla-Silva is at Duke.


Chicago said...

This man is very scary. He may be mentally ill, seriously.

Anonymous said...

Another affirmative action hire beating the drum of racism to advance himself professionally.

Who put him on Duke's wish list--Chafe, Holloway, Paula McClain? The only way Duke can rid itself of him is to have another university offer him a higher salary, as Vanderbilt did for Houston Baker.

Who takes his courses? What a joke and what a waste of funds to pay him a salary.

Someone way beyond the Department level, some people at the BOT level, need to review potential tenure hires and promotions. These race-class-gender propagandists are multiplying like pod people at universities.

To anonymous at 12:49, where will you send your child to avoid encountering an 88 type--not Harvard, Princeton, Yale, Penn, Brown, Vanderbilt, Stanford, Berkeley, Texas A & M, other major state universities, etc., most are infected. Maybe Brigham Young isn't, or Hillsdale, and I'm sure some bloggers here can provide other colleges free of race-class-gender professors. Better to inform your kid about the 88 mentality rather than try to find a school where it doesn't exist. Duke students do not have to study with Bonilla-Silva, and most don't. The tragedy is that a real scholar and teacher could have been hired in his stead.

KC is doing Duke a great service by bringing the scholarship of some of the 88 to the attention of the University and its alumni. I wish that every university was being scrutinized as Duke is. Higher education in the U.S. would be the better for such critical examination. Most people are afraid to criticize the 88 types at universities, for fear of being called racist or sexist, or worse, antediluvian. Administrators are the most fearful of all.

Anonymous said...

“... United States of Amerikkka (I will remove the three Ks from this word when the USA removes racial oppression from this country!).”

After reading his syllabus, how many white conservative students actually sign up for this guys class?

This guy is an Asss ( I will remove one S from this word when this guy removes racial oppression from his classroom and himself from Duke)

Anonymous said...

There's a movie about the leftist indoctrination happening across US campuses:

Also, check out FIRE, which defends academic freedom:

Anonymous said...

If this guy bothered to look at racial and gender politics in other countries, he might realized how good he's got it.

But, that would not support their extremist left-wing agenda, which includes undermining the US.

Anonymous said...

An interesting issue in Hispanic/Latino/a race. Where is this man from and how does he identify racially? This information likely informs his research and thus explains some of his writing.

Anonymous said...

This psychotic racist was considered a dream recruit by Brodhead? Devastating.


Anonymous said...

University presidents are not often involved in faculty recruitment. If you choose to blame people for the hiring of this man, look to the voting faculty, the department chair, the dean of the college and maybe the provost. President unlikely involved.

Anonymous said...

I wonder how 1:53 can expect students to learn other ideas and value their own without having them exposed to a variety of ways of thinking? No matter how seemingly out of whack... :P

Anonymous said...

Are all ethnic stocks created equal? Despite clear evidence to the contrary, all races have been declared equally talented and hard-working, and anyone who questions the dogma is evil. Consequences of this type of thinking? If hispanics and blacks are equal to whites in every way, what accounts for their poverty, criminality, and dissipation? Since any theory of racial differences has been outlawed, the only possible explanation for their failures is white racism. And since hispanics and blacks are markedly poor, crime-prone, and dissipated, America must be racked with pervasive racism. Nothing else could be keeping them in such an abject state. All of our discourse on the matter has been locked into logic. Explanation for black failure that doesn't fault white wickedness threatens to veer off into the forbidden territory of racial differences. Since blacks and hispanics fail to prosper in the U.S without intervention, there simply must be millions of white people we do not know about, who are working day and night to keep them in misery. The dogma of racial equality leaves no room for an explanation of failure that is not, in some fashion, an indictment of white people.

The logical consequences of this are clear. All failure or misbehavior by non-whites is standing proof that white society is riddled with hatred and bigotry. So, as long as non-whites fail to succeed in life at exactly the same level as whites, whites will be, by definition, thwarting and oppressing them. This obligatory pattern of thinking leads to strange conclusions. First of all, racism is a sin that is thought to be committed almost exclusively by white people. I mean, hey - it's argued that only white people "can" be racist. How else could the plight of blacks and hispanics be explained without flirting with the possibility of racial inequality? Although a few hispanics, blacks and liberal whites concede that non-whites can, perhaps, be racist, they invariably add that non-whites have been forced into it as self-defense because of centuries of white oppression. What appears to be non-white racism is so understandable and forgivable that it hardly deserves the name. Thus, whether or not an act is called racism depends on the race of the racist. What would surely be called racism when done by whites is thought to be normal when done by anyone else. The reverse is also true. Examples of this double standard are so common, its too tedious to list them.

There are over a hundred "historically black" colleges, whose fundamental blackness must be preserved in the name of diversity, but all historically white colleges must be forcibly integrated in the name of... the same thing. To resist would be racist. "Black pride" is said to be a wonderful and worthy thing, but anything that could be construed as an expression of white pride is a form of hatred. Blatant anti-white prejudice, in the form of affirmative action, is now the law of the land. Anything remotely like affirmative action, if practiced in favor of whites, would be attacked as despicable favoritism.

One of the favorite slogans that define the asymmetric quality of American racism is "celebration of diversity." It has begun to dawn on a few people that "diversity" is always achieved at the expense of whites and especially white males. Never the other way around. No one proposes that Howard University be made more diverse by admitting whites, Hispanics, or Asians. No one ever suggests that National Hispanic University in San Jose (CA) would benefit from the diversity of having non-Hispanics on campus. No one suggests that the Black Congressional Caucus or the executive ranks of the NAACP or the Mexican-American Legal Defense and Educational Fund suffer from a lack of diversity. Somehow, it is perfectly legitimate for them to celebrate "homogeneity." And yet any all-white group - a company, a town, a school, a club, a neighborhood - is thought to suffer from a crippling lack of diversity that must be remedied as quickly as possible. Only when whites have been reduced to a minority has "diversity" been achieved.

Lets be blunt here: To "celebrate" or "embrace" diversity, as we are so often asked to do, is no different from "deploring an excess of whites." In fact, the entire nation is thought to suffer from an excess of whites. Our current immigration policies are structured so that approximately 90 percent of our annual influx of legal immigrants are non-white. The several million illegal immigrants that enter the country every year are virtually all non-white. It would be racist not to be grateful for this laudable contribution to "diversity." It is, of course, only white nations that are called upon to practice this kind of "diversity." It is almost criminal to imagine a nation of any other race countenancing blatant dispossession of this kind.

What if the United States were pouring its poorest, least educated citizens across the border into Mexico? Could anyone be fooled into thinking that Mexico was being "culturally enriched?" What if the state of Chihuahua were losing its majority population to poor whites who demanded that schools be taught in English, who insisted on celebrating the Fourth of July, who demanded the right to vote even if they weren't citizens, who clamored for "affirmative action" in jobs and schooling?

Would Mexico - or any other non-white nation - tolerate this kind of cultural and demographic depredation? Of course not. Yet white Americans are supposed to look upon the flood of Hispanics and Asians entering their country as a priceless cultural gift. They are supposed to "celebrate" their own loss of influence, their own dwindling numbers, their own dispossession, for to do otherwise would be hopelessly racist.
There is another curious asymmetry about American racism. When non-whites advance their own racial purposes, no one ever accuses them of "hating" another group. Blacks can join "civil rights" groups and Hispanics can be activists without fear of being branded as bigots and hate mongers. They can agitate openly for racial preferences that can come only at the expense of whites. They can demand preferential treatment of all kinds without anyone ever suggesting that they are "anti-white."

Whites, on the other hand, need only express their opposition to affirmative action to be called haters. They need only subject racial policies that are clearly prejudicial to themselves to be called racists. Should they actually go so far as to say that they prefer the company of their own kind, that they wish to be left alone to enjoy the fruits of their European heritage, they are irredeemably wicked and hateful.
Here, then is the final, baffling inconsistency about American race relations. All non-whites are allowed to prefer the company of their own kind, to think of themselves as groups with interests distinct from those of the whole, and to work openly for group advantage. None of this is thought to be racist. At the same time, "whites" must "also" champion the racial interests of non-whites. They must sacrifice their own future on the altar of "diversity" and cooperate in their own dispossession. They are to encourage, even to subsidize, the displacement of a European people and culture by alien peoples and cultures. To put it in the simplest possible terms, white people are cheerfully to slaughter their own society, to commit racial and cultural suicide. To refuse to do so would be racism.
Of course, the entire non-white enterprise in the United States is perfectly natural and healthy. Nothing could be more natural than to love one's people and to hope that it should flourish. Filipinos and El Salvadorans are doubtless astonished to discover that simply by setting foot in the United States they are entitled to affirmative action preferences over native-born whites, but can they be blamed for accepting them? Is it surprising that they should want their languages, their cultures, their brothers and sisters to take possession and put their mark indelibly on the land? If the once-great people of a once-great nation is bent upon self-destruction and is prepared to hand over land and power to whomever shows up and asks for it, why should Mexicans and Cambodians complain?

No, it is the white enterprise in the United States that is unnatural, unhealthy, and without historical precedent. Whites have let themselves be convinced that it is racist merely to object to dispossession, much less to work for their own interests. Never in the history of the world has a dominant people thrown open the gates to strangers, and poured out its wealth to aliens. Never before has a people been fooled into thinking that there was virtue or nobility in surrendering its heritage, and giving away to others its place in history. Of all the races in America, only whites have been tricked into thinking that a preference for one's own kind is racism. Only whites are ever told that a love for their own people is somehow "hatred" of others. All healthy people prefer the company of their own kind, and it has nothing to do with hatred. All men love their families more than their neighbors, but this does not mean that they hate their neighbors. Whites who love their racial family need bear no ill will towards non-whites. They only wish to be left alone to participate in the unfolding of their racial and cultural destinies.

What whites in America are being asked to do is therefore utterly unnatural. They are being asked to devote themselves to the interests of other races and to ignore the interests of their own. This is like asking a man to forsake his own children and love the children of his neighbors, since to do otherwise would be "racist."
What then, is "racism?" It is considerably more than any dictionary is likely to say. It is any opposition by whites to official policies of racial preference for non-whites. It is any preference by whites for their own people and culture. It is any resistance by whites to the idea of becoming a minority people. It is any unwillingness to be pushed aside. It is, in short, any of the normal aspirations of people-hood that have defined nations since the beginning of history - but it is only racism so long as the aspirations are those of whites.

Anonymous said...

3:25 Something in your first few sentences made me cringe but I read on ... and on ... and on and what you said actually makes more sense than I'd like to admit. We might be crazy.

Anonymous said...

I treasure the compressed wisdom to be found in the writings of F. Hayek, especially "The Road to Surfdom". Because on about 5 pages he nails what really happens, every time, when a government is charged with gauranteeing an "equality of results". Such a government soon ends up needing (and demanding) unlimited powers. Because without such powers, such equality - which goes against every human instinct - will never be achieved.
Of course, that sort of a government may or may not have warm feelings for silly University Professors who are determined to destroy the "dogmas" of the society in which he lives.
This turn-about is sometimes called "irony". But that is way too pretty a word for garden variety stupidity and lack of foresight.

Anonymous said...

Is B-S a Communist?

Anonymous said...

That he was heavily recruited by Brodhead tells us once again that he also has the G88 mentality. Thus, is it any wonder that Brodhead did what he did?

Although he tried to portray himself as the honest but bumbling moderate, we understand that Brodhead is a G88-er, and, had he just been a faculty member at Duke, I can guarantee you he would have signed the infamous "We're Listening" ad, too.

Anonymous said...

Do you supposed the remaining 79 or so will spend anytime this week wondering if they'll be KC's next subject?

Keep it up KC....

Cedarford said...

The guy's supposedly Puerto-Rican, born to a "mulatto mother and black father" as his bio says. He graduated from a satellite branch of the University of Puerto Rico.
Then U of Wisconsin. Then his controversial stint at Texas A&M, where his anti-white views did not go over well with many in the student body.

Interestingly, like many anti-white black men, he somehow ends up with a white lady squeeze.

Mary Hovespian was brought in as a bonus, a trailing spouse as part of Bonilla-Silva's package for his "cutting edge anti-white racism" and books. She bought a happy little home in NC with Eduardo in 2004. She is listed on Duke Faculty as Assistant Visiting Professor - same deal as Kim Curtis's "significant other" got her in Duke's commonplace " hot professorial prospect with a nepotic special sweetener" deal. Mary teaches Sociology and of course specializes in critical and gender studies...

Like Bonilla-Silva she signed the Group of 88 statement.

Anonymous said...

3:25 - Very well said and on target. The radical feminists saw this effective strategy years ago and applied it to women. Thus the marriage between race/gender idéologues.

Anonymous said...

This guy is a clown. He makes himself a tiny bit relevent by pushing this "racist" theory. Who really wants to listen to his crap? He is just another Duke professorial "hater". He hates whites but doesn't mind sleeping with one. What a loser.

Anonymous said...

Fortunately for B-S (sometimes intials really do convey the full message), Duke's 40% minority enrollment will ensure he has a willing audience to listen to his hate-speech. Not all of them will buy in (as indicated by some of the students at A & M that didn't bite), but enough will want to hear someone champion the equality of outcome regardless of input message that he won't have to worry where his next meal or student is coming from.

As a white person, I find myself prejudiced against one sector of humantity: assholes. B-S could be an albino and he'd make the list.

Duke has a social disaster on its hands, alright, but it has a lot less to do with "racist" whites than with BS like B-S.

Anonymous said...

Just a second. What do you mean by characterizing Mexico as a "non-white" nation? Is it less "white" than the US? Is this an ideological identity? A constructed one? Pls. define terms. And explain the relevance to E BS, who seems to be of Puerto Rican origin. Thanks!!

Michael said...

My guess is that this guy would not make it in Massachusetts. Tough to spew this kind of racial hatred when you have Deval Patrick around as your Governor.

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

If B-S really wants to learn about racism and inequality, he should spend some time living in a Latin American country.

Anonymous said...

6:22 AM

No, he isn't a "loser." He is off the street and tough enough to make a way for himself being a rascist. It just shows how much this society has fallen apart. We are the losers, and when this scum Group88 "loses" as they did on the positon which they took on the hoax others had to pay the tab. Just dip into Dukes money . . . no problem . . . that's what its there for . . . ain't it. What a fraud all the way around. Duke is a joke.

Anonymous said...

Anonymous 3:25

Well spoken. I admire your restraint and temperance. I have several thoughts on this issue, but I know my thoughts will be taken out of context and used to put down this blog, and so will refrain from posting them. I would mention, though, that there are several excellent publications on the South during the Reconstruction era. Many of our current problems originated at that time. Hiram Revels, an African-American senator from Mississippi, wrote President U.S. Grant:

"Since reconstruction, the masses of my people have been, as it were, enslaved in mind by unprincipled adventurers, who, caring nothing for country, were willing to stoop to anything no matter how infamous, to secure power to themselves, and perpetuate it..... My people have been told by these schemers, when men have been placed on the ticket who were notoriously corrupt and dishonest, that they must vote for them; that the salvation of the party depended upon it; that the man who scratched a ticket was not a Republican. This is only one of the many means these unprincipled demagogues have devised to perpetuate the intellectual bondage of my people.... The bitterness and hate created by the late civil strife has, in my opinion, been obliterated in this state, except perhaps in some localities, and would have long since been entirely obliterated, were it not for some unprincipled men who would keep alive the bitterness of the past, and inculcate a hatred between the races, in order that they may aggrandize themselves by office, and its emoluments, to control my people, the effect of which is to degrade them."

Anonymous said...

Indoctrinate U. Movie link

Anonymous said...

Betcha ten bucks Amanda Marcotte thinks Eduardo Bonilla-Silva is a genius.

Anonymous said...

Sorry, didn't capture all of the link.

Indoctrinate U Documentary lik

Anonymous said...


Well stated. I have for some time been concerned about my progeny 100-200 years hence, when they are not longer politically powerful enough to withstand the agenda of all who share none of their northern European heritage and values (cultural and religious).

Do you think there is any possibility of a society dominated by those who loudly proclaim the oppression of their anscetors rescinding the abolition of slavery, but with the twist that caucasians find themselves in chains. Absurd, perhaps. But in looking at the broad sweep of history, stranger things have happened.

Anonymous said...

Inre: "I wonder how 1:53 can expect students to learn other ideas and value their own without having them exposed to a variety of ways of thinking? No matter how seemingly out of whack..."

At $60,000 per YEAR you must be kidding?

This doesn't account for the opportunity cost regarding how the supporting funds could be better utilized.

Anonymous said...

Bill Anderson--as another commenter here noted, I'm not sure Brodhead would be directly involved in individual faculty hires (even K.C.'s post refers to the hire as on the wish list of "the Brodhead administration," not the president specifically). The Chronicle article about B-S's hire refers to "Dean of the Faculty of Arts and Sciences George McLendon and other top academic officials" as the recruiters of these faculty members. Obviously, as President, Brodhead bears ultimate responsibility for what happens at Duke during his watch, but a lot that has happened at Duke over the past year and a half (as well as events at other universities such as Harvard) demonstrates that many university presidents at best share power with their faculties when it comes to academic matters--and often disagree with influential faculty at their peril.

To the commenter who noted Duke's 40% minority enrollment would provide a willing audience for professors like B-S--almost half of the 40% are Asians (17% of the undergraduate student body in Fall 2006); about the same number are African-American (10%) and Hispanic/Latino combined. The Duke website also lists 6% "International" and 6% "Other/unknown"--not sure which group is being included to make up the 40% minority figure.

It's also important to remember that these figures are based on self-identification and include students from a wide range of socioeconomic backgrounds. For example, a young woman of my acquaintance who graduated from Duke in 2006 counted as "Hispanic/Latino" because her maternal grandmother came from a wealthy Mexican family. Her other three grandparents where white Americans. Both of her parents were lawyers, and she enjoyed a high-quality private school education before attending Duke. I don't think she would have provided a very receptive audience for B-S's world view.

AMac said...

In "The Latin Americanists" thread, Wayne Fontes gave a link to Dave Thompson's blog. His posts and the lively discussions give great background for one of the underlying questions for this series on G88 scholarship:

"To what extent are Post-Modern and Marxian analyses legitimate, prominent tools for scholarly inquiry, and to what extent are they a scam?"

Today's post takes up where KC left off on Pete Sigal's Floating Penis. Thompson's posts of July 11 and 10 have some spirited interchange in the comments between Thompson and like-minded commenters and Post-Modernism defender "Dr. Dawg." "Very Big Language" and the preceding "Playing the Rube".

Maybe Dr. Dawg could offer some apologias here--he surely makes a better (if not exactly persuasive) case than the anonymous 88 Defenders who grace these threads with snark from time to time.

Anonymous said...

3:25 Well done.

Inre: "This is like asking a man to forsake his own children and love the children of his neighbors..."

I'm just finishing "The War Against Boys" by Christina Hoff Sommers which is a solidly documented expose how intellectuals are currently executing exactly what you describe rhetorically.

Harvard professor Carol Gilligan and others are similarly exposed as frauds for their lack of scientific approach, consideration of studies that disprove their wacky theories, and use of the MSM to create a crisis where none exist.

Our youngest and most impressionable children are at risk and it is not just the boys. This crisis is substantively different than the one at Duke and other Universities because the material is not voluntary. Effectively CCI styled initiatives are already in place. The Dept. of Education gladly funds these undocumented studies and the MSM announces the results as if they are grounded in truth/facts. They are not.

This book is a great read and the source material is impeccable. Our education system is badly broken and the Department of Education needs to be reformed or many even dismantled.

Anonymous said...

Query #1: What about the following statement is NOT racist?

"The Government should ensure not just equal opportunity for minorities, but in fact equal outcomes."

Is that statement inherently based on the assumption that minorities are unable to capitalize on the equal opportunity handed to them? If not, is there any other plausible explanation?

Further, let me get this straight:

B-S thinks we should let people into to college based on skin color, thinks everyone is out to get him because of his race, thinks that certain races are inherently racist and he need not inquire into what any individual within a given race actually believes because by their skin color he can tell what they are thinking, and thinks the government should act as the grand referee to ensure that each race gets an equal outcome (and not just equal opportunity), yet he thinks that between the two of us, I am the one that is racist?

If there is any proof that Brodhead sought this imbecile out, he (Brodhead) had better be gone by lunch time. Would the last competent and credible Dook professor to leave campus please turn out the light?

Query #2: How many secret phone calls has Brodhead made over K.C.'s head to the admin in Brooklyn to get K.C. to quit exposing his faculty? I can't help but think that Brodhead views someone holding his faculty accountable (!) for their own words and deeds as something of an escalation.

Keep up the good work K.C. I can't wait to read the book!

Anonymous said...

3:25- Thank you. I agree totally.
But what is to be done? Given that corporate America has "embraced diversity", along with all institutions of higher learning, how and where do we begin to undo this?
KC is usually ahead of the curve. Let's ask him, as a tenured member of the professoriat: How and where do we start? We let this get away from us via our tolerance and self-doubt. Can it be undone?

Anonymous said...

In his first book, Bonilla-Silva claimed that “writing about a racial ideology that is alive and well and shapes the views of most whites in the United States is a risky business.”


The only apparent thing Bonilla-Silva knows about "most whites" is that he hates them.

Its no wonder he racially profiled the three white guys. He's nothing but a racist pig.

Anonymous said...

Students come, and students go, but class/race/gender faculty, like herpes, are forever.

Jack said...

iman said @ 8:45 am

"Do you think there is any possibility of a society dominated by those who loudly proclaim the oppression of their ancestors...?"

Yes, a society may be dominated by such, but not a dominant society.

mac said...

C'mon, y'all! You're just picking on Bonilla-Silva because he's
a racist!

I've read and heard more and more people writing
and speaking the language of 3:25,
and it appears that 3:25 has concluded
what anyone of any race should
conclude: rational self-interest
has a place in all societies and for individuals of all races.

It's a shame that RATIONAL self-interest isn't part of B-S's
perspective; there's nothing
rational about his self-interest.

What B-S is stating is that he should be King.
"It's good to be King!" (Mel Brooks)

Anonymous said...

Very odd...I had some of KC's book, "Until Proven Innocent" on order at Amazon. I was just going to add to the order. My gift list is growing and the order was not there.

It is priced at $17.79 with free super-saver shipping.

Way to go KC and Stuart, well done.

Anonymous said...

American Sociological Association----
American Pathological Association is more like it.

Brodhead is looking more and more like the idiot he is. Duke may have a great hospital but the university itself is nothing but a hotbed of racism and sexism. Change the campus classrooms and dorms to clinics and get rid of the vermin.

Thank heaven it is not a completely publicly funded institution. We should all appeal to our legislators to cut off funding to the university NOW. This guy needs some serious help. He is definitely one reason that racism can be alive and well. The extreme racism he exhibits should not be condoned in today's society.

mac said...

American Sociological Association (ASA)
started as the American Sociological Society (ASS) in 1905.

Sounds like a historical shift backward.

Anonymous said...

I guess it's a cheap shot, but I especially like the way that, on one of the sound clips, he talks about "race, class, and yender".

Anonymous said...

No justice...
what are you talking about? Your message makes no sense.

mac said...

KC's snippet from B-S's syllabus in the A&M class is funny,
especially the part where there's a directive
for students to control "body-language," and avoid
"irresponsible contestation."

Sounds like he's been backed down
by an angry student or two in the past,
challenging a grade - (or more likely, a ridiculous premise.)

It's interesting that Asian students
rarely use their hands while speaking, and rarely
(meaning almost never) contradict
their professor/instructor.

Which people-groups, professor BS,
are most likely - as a group -
to engage in wild gesticulation and
loud verbage when articulating
their point?

A note to BS:
There may be self-defense courses
available at the local Y, Dr. B-S,
though you might want to also consider
taking an entry-level (1st or 2nd grade)
course in self-esteem building.

Lest I be misinterpreted:
no professor should be subjected
to physical or verbal threats,
but the problem in this "H-case,"
it would appear, comes from
within the noggin of the nut.

What a pinata-head!

Anonymous said...

This psychotic racist was considered a dream recruit by Brodhead? Devastating.

Nightmare is more like it.

mac said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Anonymous said...

To 3:15
In fact university presidents and chancellors are directly involved in these types of hires. On the lower level universities have full time people whose job it is to identify and recruit affirmative action hires. At the full professor level universities have wish lists and presidents are very involved in wooing these higher profile prizes away from the other institutions, e.g., Harvard to Princeton, Duke to Vanderbilt. Musical professorial chairs, ever increasing salaries.

Anonymous said...

Well, I for one am changing my name to Wahneema Silva-Islam-Okeechobee.

You guys are a bunch of honky racists.

Hey Brodhead, you can get me for only $150K a year.

AMac said...

At 5:56am, the usual anon asked her usual question --

> Is B-S a Communist?

Hey, good query! The answer turns out to be "no."

From Bonillo-Silva's c.v., here is the abstract of his 2006 essay in "Contemporary Sociology":

"In this long review article (2,400 hundred words) [sic] I challenge the radical Marxist project in American sociology. First, I challenge its whiteness. Second, I challenge its male orientation and blindness to the centrality of gender. Third, I critique its class reductionism. Fourth, I challenge its eurocentrism. Fifth, I criticize their anal retentive focus on perfect theory and their concomitant limited engagement in practical struggles. Lastly, I suggest that their incorporation into the mainstream has had some negative consequences--and most members of the cohort that led the battle for Marxism to be part of mainstream sociology seem unaware of the perils of incorporation."

In other words, Anon 5:56am, Prof. Bonillo-Silva damns communism from the left because it pays insufficient homage to the Holy Trinity. (You know which one.)

Anonymous said...

is Duke a state school like NCCU and UNC?

Anonymous said...

haskell said...

Well, I for one am changing my name to Wahneema Silva-Islam-Okeechobee.

You guys are a bunch of honky racists.

Hey Brodhead, you can get me for only $150K a year.

Jul 23, 2007 10:34:00 AM

This is an essential part of your job application resume for a U.S. university faculty position, but you need to flesh it out a bit.

By the way, tell Brodhead he's a racist if he doesn't hire you.


Anonymous said...

How long before the Duke lawyers (at the request of Brodhead, Burness, Steele, etc.) approach KC Johnson and offer a "settlement" to quit exposing Duke's agenda-driven faculty?

D White

Anonymous said...

I just read some of Bonilla-Silva's work -- to get a flavor for his intellect. He is quite articulate in his writing, however misplaced one views his theories about race and race relations.

It is clear that B-S (please forgive the obvious pun) believes that superordinant groups purposefully create social structures to maintain their position. Further, he seems to believe that minority status with an almost deterministic political, economic and social result are due to those structural impediments to equality.

Hence, B-S must have seen the Duke Lacrosse Burning is an absulotely acceptable attack on a structure that had racism at its core.

I'm not sure I accurately portayed his work and, forgive me, I gave it only a cursory reading. But, well,,,what the heck.

What I don't think has been investigated is the extent ot which various groups have a genetic pre-disposition born during the time of Cro-Magnon and Neanderthal man. Although these "races" evidently co-existed for some 60,000 years, some believe that Cro-Magnon man is responsible for the extinction of Neanderthals. If true, then surely a survival instinct was at the core of this extinction process. Survival instincts relate to basic needs and the allocation of resources. As such, the evolution of man must have genetically prediposed him to attack a group that threatened its survival (at least in part).

B-S is thus a logical consequence of 40,000 years of evolution with clear Cro-magnon and Neanderthal roots. Genetically pre-determined survival instincts predicated on race provide a raison d’être for his work.

mac said...

D White 10:50

What a novel idea!
Bet they don't offer as much as he gets from the sale of his book!

Anonymous said...

"Eduardo Bonilla-Silva has received the Lewis A. Coser Award for Theoretical Agenda-Setting ..." (Sociology at Duke -- home page)

mac said...

In other words, he thinks like Polanski,
but chooses different remedies.

AMac said...

A question for those with access to databases covering academic publications in sociology and related fields:

Is there anything that Eduardo Bonilla-Silva has published that has even the appearance of rigorous scholarship? On Bonilla-Silva's web page, the listed titles are bombastic and cliched. Here they are:

--begin c.v.--

1. “They Should Hire the One with the Best Score: White Sensitivity to Qualification Differences in Affirmative Action Hiring Decisions”
2. “The Future of American Racial Stratification”
3. “When Whites Flock Together: White Habitus and the Social Psychology of Whites’ Social and Residential Segregation from Blacks”

Book Reviews
1. “Prejudice in Politics: Group Position, Public Opinion, and the Wisconsin Treaty Rights Dispute”
2. “Towards a New Radical Agenda: A Critique of Mainstreamed Sociological Radicalism”

Book Chapters
1. "Latinos in the Midst: Where Will Latinos Fit in the Emerging Latin America-Like Racial Order in Amerika"
2. "Anything but Racism"
3. A version of my paper on the Latin Americanization of racial stratification in the USA
4. “`We are all Americans!’ The Latin Americanization of Race Relations in the USA”
5. Paper on “New Racism
6. “`We are all Americans!’ The Latin Americanization of Race Relations in the USA” [sic]
7. “Fight the Power! Racism, Revolution, and the Role of Education in the Anti-Racism Movement”
8. “Black, White, and ‘Other’ Latinidades: How Will the Multiple Racial Identities of Latinos Impact America’s Racial Future”
9. “Black, White, and ‘Other’ Latinidades: How Will the Multiple Racial Identities of Latinos Impact America’s Racial Future” [sic]
10. “The (White) Color of Color Blindness in 21st Century Amerika”
11. “Introduction” in Critical Pedagogy and Race
12. “Racism Without Racists: ‘Killing Me Softly’ With Color Blindness”
13. “Black, Honorary White, White: The Future of Race in the United States?

Articles and Chapters
1. “‘Every Place Has a Ghetto…’: The Significance of Whites’ Social and Residential Segregation”

--end c.v.--

Is there anything here that's even good enough for serious left-wing intellectual presses like "The New York Review of Books" or "The Guardian?"

This bombast is grist for the Monty Python mill.

Who was on the Duke committee that recruited this mope? Who on the faculty signed off on the offer? Which deans looked at this scholarship and thought, "Hey, Great!"?

Anonymous said...

B-S presence at Duke is a travesty. Advancement according to merit is and should always be the American way.

But so should giving helping hands and opportunities to people whose abilities have not been recognized because people like Anon @3:25 apparently believe that all members of non-white races are inferior to whites. He doesn't rail so much at Asians, though he might still bless us with multiple paragraphs on the inscrutable and dishonest slant eyed races.

Since there seem to be several admirers of 3:25 I'll simply dissent. I started to clip selections for specific rejoinders, but when I reached a full typewritten page of material I disagreed with, I found the task too daunting and didn't want to further derail KC's board with the racial divide debate.

Anonymous said...

10:09 Excuse my lack of clarity. KC Johnson and Stuart Taylor have written a book about the lacrosse hoax. I've order some to gift people who need to understand the lunacy of what is happening at their beloved Duke.

After reading some of KC's expose of the fraudulent work of the Gang of 88, I've decided my initial pre-order did not include enough, so I went to Amazon to order more and my initial pending order was gone.

The price is self-explanatory.

I have been amazed that many Duke alumni, friends with prospective students, and other otherwise informed citizens have no clue at the depth of the filth surrounding this hoax.

One way to solve that problem is shining light.

Another is to quit giving and encourage others to do the same. The book will reinforce that decision, especially for my wife, father-in-law, and some other Duke alumni I see socially. I'm not just talking about annual pledges, but modification of estata planning, and some are positioned to endow chairs and/or influence foundations.

Thanks for asking.

Anonymous said...

I have a phenomenal idea for a KC sideline career!

KC is already a tenured professor. No need to worry about backlash or repercussions regarding his business outside of university.

Also, he'll most likely be a babe-magnet after the book comes out and becomes a bestseller.

And this is huge. This kind of popularity will make him untouchable.

The best thing he can do now that he has such a following is to pay a cyber visit to every major university in the United States and dissect them as he has done with Duke's Gritty Gang of 88.

A cool, clean, and meticulous dissection.

The name of this blog could evolve into just Wonderland.......encompassing all areas of nutty 88-esque academia.

Wonderland might never end!


Anonymous said...

Bonilla-Silva, man.....hey homes.....

¡ Hay caramba ! Tu es muy loco, homes.

Yo no comprendo porque hablas todo este. Que es su problema? Los Estados Unidos es un pais grande. No te gusta?

¡ Que lastima !

Tu es muy loco, homes.

(With apologies to all the real homies. My Spanish is not as fluent as it used to be......but you get the idea....don't you, INSANE Bonilla-Silva?)


Anonymous said...

Makes me glad I moved to Texas after graduating from Duke!

And darn straight my boys are more likely to go to A&M than Duke, the way things have gone the last year! NEVER thought I'd say that before March, 2006.

Anonymous said...

Where are the professors who have researched and published works on racist beliefs held by 'people of color'?

If I were to set myself up in business as an academic I think I'd have a virtually unlimited series of university holes to mine. (Wait a minute, that didn't come out sounding so good.)

Do you think I'd get any takers for a PHD thesis along these lines?


Anonymous said...

Several posters have asked if Duke is a state school. No, it is not, it is a private university. However, the problem is just as bad at public colleges and universities. See the Ward Churchill case at the University of Colorado. The race / class / gender rot has set in, and higher education is badly riddled with it. So what is to be done?

NJNP at 11:10 gives some good advice.

1. Shine light on the problems you find. Demand public accountability for what you find. Keep demanding it, and press the points with the political leaders in your community.

2. Do not support schools which engage in practices like hiring the G-88. That means stop your giving, all of it: No more annual fund donations, estate gifts, and the like. All well and good. These people do understand money. Turn off the dollar spigot.

3. Shop around, and send your child to the least PC school you can find. (Good luck - you may have a very short list, if any!) I still maintain that a community college diploma in auto mechanics, carpentry, electrician training and plumbing are all better choices than majoring in any of the identity study degree programs at four-year schools. Or sociology, which has clearly fallen into being a self-parody of anything academic. (But I digress.)

4. Politics. Keep pressure on your elected officials to demand change in publicly funded institutions, and to force accountability. This means you need to be careful who you vote for. Professor Johnson is supporting a candidate for President who was one of the only presidential candidates to call for investigation of the Duke Lacrosse Burning (Obama). The well-known candidate from North Carolina said nothing, but hired a blogger who continued to accuse the innocent victims of the affair of being guilty of "something" after the fraud was well known (Edwards). This isn't saying one party is better than another, but look carefully at the candidates you vote for - how is their track record for openness in academe?

Lastly, I repeat - this will NOT be a fast project. It took over 30 years for the race class gender crowd to take over the academy; it will probably take as long for the public to take it back. You cannot go into this expecting a quick win, or to win every battle. But if we are willing to work steadily, over the long haul, it may be possible to regain control of the colleges and universities. If not, then, as Bill Anderson said, "Welcome to Hell."

Anonymous said...

re: anonymous at 10:02:00

[I guess it's a cheap shot, but I especially like the way that, on one of the sound clips, he talks about "race, class, and yender".]

I haven't listened to the clip (life is waaay too short) but that would be an interesting choice in pronunciation. I would expect the hispanic pronunciation of the letter 'g' (or 'j') to be more of an extended 'h' sound. Double L comes to mind if I hear 'y'.

But what do I know? I was raised in Connecticut.


Anonymous said...

For a photo of Bonilla-Silva, he's the second race hustler as you scroll down:



Anonymous said...


I appreciate your thorough analysis of little Bonnie Silva; however, don't go too deep into the Hispanic culture with this.

Bonilla-Silva is as much a black man as he is Hispanic. One of his parents is most likely black.

Consequently, he's steeped in the whole black victimhood thing....along with every grievance a migrating Latin might conjure up.

Our Bonnie boy is a boiling pot of RAGE.



Anonymous said...

Maybe B-S needs to spend a couple of years teaching with his mentor Hugo Chavez. But then ol Hugo says government employees are paid too much, and I imagine the pay for a college professor would be way lower in Venezuela than at Duke.

Anonymous said...

How come I can't get the "snips" above to work when I click on them?

Do they have an expiration?


Anonymous said...

Career racists (and sexists) lecturing others about racism (and sexism): Neat! It seems clear that this "it-takes-one-to-know-one" model is the pinnacle of Angry Studies 'scholarship.'

1:53am is exactly correct when s/he notes that employing G88 types is a complete waste of resources. How many useful and talented scientists, engineers, medical and other professionals have been lost because finite resources have been squandered on people like Bonilla-Silva? What are the lost opportunity costs vis-a-vis missed advances in science and technology when we waste time and energy on Angry Studies twaddle? Not only have these people contributed (for all practical purposes) nothing of value to society, they actually damage society with their hatred and mental masturbation.

The academy is sick, very sick, and only drastic surgery to excise the Angry Studies disease from it's fading corpse will save it. As it stands, the academy is on life support, being kept alive by the (for the most part) science, engineering and medical components that seem to be some of the last vestiges of worthy productivity left.

Anonymous said...

TO 11:44AM--

You're right.

The "G" in Spanish has an "H" sound most of the time.

And a "Y" sound is the result of double "L's".

Don't know why Bonnie says "yender".



Anonymous said...

Debrah -

Maybe the man's not authentic?


Anonymous said...

Here's an N&O article of interest:


(Discuss among butta.)


Gary Packwood said...

As I learn more about these professors I am beginning to see how they build their own sense of community across the country by returning to the old labor vs. management dichotomy.

The rich and powerful colorblind racists are 'Roger" [Management] and the Anger Studies crew become the 'Me' [Labor] in the wildly successful 1989 film... Roger and Me... by Michael Moore.

From the Yacht Club to the Golf Club to the Hunt Club, Bonilla-Silva and his group, like Michael Moore, are taking us on a tour of the havens of the rich and powerful in their seemingly futile attempt to establish the real America rather than gringoland or Amerikkka.

Dismissing his A&M students as 'racial Uncle Toms' almost sounds like a line from Moore's movie ...Roger and Me.

Bonilla-Silva and his colleagues across the country attempt to crush what they 'perceive' to be the modern American monarchy and in the process of doing so they have become Royalists creating their own monarchy and now... they are cartoon characters.

Their job is to 'hate' the colorblind racists ...not teach and mentor them in a classroom of all places...for a paycheck.

Who would be crazy enough to stand in front of helmeted athletes and make them out as demons?

It might be a good idea for them to rid the campus of helmeted athletes! Suppose?

Duke has a opportunity now to embrace quality education for students and turn over management of Bonilla-Silva and his group of 'haters' to Yale and Harvard who, unlike Duke, have figured out how to management them.

Duke alumni might also ask themselves if they are playing into this game plan by attending alumni events on campus where wine reserved for the monarchy, is served in elegant crystal while the rest of the adults on campus are not allowed to consume all.

Management vs. Labor.

Anonymous said...

TO TombZ--

In my opinion, Bonilla-Silva is about as authentic as a plastic Louis Vüitton......being hawked in some alleyway of the Bronx.


Anonymous said...

That conference that appears in the B-S link "Preparing for the Revolution" was apparently sponsored by Swarthmore College. Going back a ways, Swarthmore had a terrific reputation as one of the finest liberal-arts colleges in the country (and it's neighbors---Haverford and Bryn Mawr were also well regarded).

But it has apparently gone full monty into PC/Anger Studies, and may be beyond saving.

One hopeful note was Antioch College recently closing it's doors. Market forces eventually catch up with institutions that lose their relevance.

D White

Anonymous said...

Debrah -

Then no wonder he couldn't stand Texas. I imagine it would've been hard to maintain his 'authenticity' there for long.


Anonymous said...

Les all listen to Snopp Dog . . . like you know it be better . . . than listenin' to this hyprocrite lookin' and soundin' thing shaggin' a white woman looking all rascist and all Puerto Rican lookin' thing tryin' to move up in the Cuban hood with us . . . you know what I'm sayin' . . . 'cause it all be good in the hood. Man, I almost didn't make it on that last one . . . man, that reefer can relax ya . . . it's all right now . . . , but hey, Ricky whatever happened to those lacrosse boys . . . yo, man somethin' happened . . . like . . . you know, but I must have missed it. Yoy did, everyone did. Oh, does that mean nothin' happened? It used to, but we got scholarship now . . . .

Anonymous said...

The scary thing is the course description...imagine paying for a class like this??!!??

The social, legal and cultural construction of racial and ethnic hierarchies in a comparative international context with the United States and the United Kingdom of central analytical concern. Racial formation and racial segregation in specific historical and national contexts including the normative case of the Anglo-Saxon core in the United States and how its dominance has led to patterns of ethnic antagonism and discrimination; the historical context of racial stereotypes and their representation in various mediums. Social justice movements and public policies designed to challenge racial and ethnic domination including controversial topics such as "positive discrimination" (United Kingdom) and Affirmative Action (United States/South Africa). May include comparative case studies from India, South Africa, Brazil, and continental Europe. Instructor: Staff

wayne fontes said...

for those of you asking what would happen if the race-class-gender harpies were actually put in charge of a company view the documentary Lefties which also comes from David Thompson's blog. The documentary covers Britain's hard left during the late 70's early 80's. Ideology doesn't translate into sound management practice. The whole documentary runs about four hours. The three labeled "Balls" explored the lefts attempt to run a newspaper.

I warn to be careful about drinking liquids while you watch this.

Jerri Lynn Ward said...

I attended Texas A&M during the 1970's. This professor would not have tried this crap with Aggies back then--and I don't mean just because of the Corps. Back then, we would have walked out on his class and dropped it and left him teaching empty classes.

We had plenty of marxist-type professors in those days, but they had no power over or traction with us. They were afraid of the students--not the administration. Because of the Corps of Cadets and the Colleges of Agriculture and Engineering--we could organize a boycott in a matter of hours--and we did. (although it was over an increase in the price of football tickets)

Aggie students of the 1960's would have taken an even more direct approach. They would have tarred and feathered the professor and put him in one of the boxcars on an outgoing freight train. They actually did this to a few hippies who showed up at A&M--or so the story goes.

Anonymous said...

I know how frustrating it is to see the leftist agenda going on in American universities and one wants to look for ways to correct what has gone on too long. No one can change it. It has gone on too long. There are too many people invested in it. It will not only continue, it will get even worse. I’m not being a pessimist, I’m being a realist.

I’m on vacation in Chicago right now. Can I change the crime rate here? Can anyone change it? No. All I do is take precautions. I know what areas to stay away from. I know to avoid being out at night in certain areas. I am aware of my surroundings. And that’s all students can do. Be aware of your surroundings. Your goal is to graduate. Know that most colleges are very left-minded and chose your courses carefully. Don’t fight it. They are in control for now, but in 4 years you will be free. Remember, you are only 18. There are many people much older and with more education and experience than you who have tried to bring these professors down. They have failed and so will you. Study hard, have fun and graduate. When you have children, prepare them before they go off to college.
KC is doing a great service. He’s showing all the academy tries to minimize. I don’t see it as a call to arms.

Anonymous said...

Divah said...

I have a phenomenal idea for a KC sideline career! ....

The best thing he can do now that he has such a following is to pay a cyber visit to every major university in the United States and dissect them as he has done with Duke's Gritty Gang of 88....

The name of this blog could evolve into just Wonderland.......encompassing all areas of nutty 88-esque academia.

Jul 23, 2007 11:25:00 AM

Do we really need another version of David Horowitz? Besides there are lots of such sites already, such as the one by Texas A&M students featuring B-S:

As a public service, I will reprint here the text about B-S. There are four others also described, which are very much worth reading.

Eduardo Bonilla-Silva - Sociology 317 - Syllabus
“We conclude the class with a discussion of some of the solutions that have been proposed to deal with the racial dilemmas plaguing the United States of Amerikkka (I will remove the three Ks from this word when the USA removes racial oppression from this country!)” The previous statement is a direct quote from Bonilla-Silva's course syllabus for his Sociology 317 class, Sociology of Minority Groups. Among other things in the course syllabus, Bonilla-Silva states that “Aggie-morons”, Bible reading, or “fanatics (religious, political, or otherwise)” do not belong in his class. Bonilla-Silva makes it clear that he is “not an Aggie or believe[s] in any of the so-called ‘traditions’ or ‘heritage’ of this institution”. He also refers to Texas A&M as “Crackerland”. Students are also required to read Bonilla-Silva’s book that focuses on what he calls an “elusive phenomenon,” a conspiracy by whites that works in the shadows to “keep blacks in their place.” While explaining that some stereotypes are true, he makes students stand in front of the class and read aloud excerpts from a medical journal, explaining the sizes of certain races’ sexual organs. Bonilla-Silva also routinely refers to conservative students as “terrorists”, “Nazis”, or “klan-like”. In a letter to a campus paper, he speculated that the grandparents of today’s conservative college students were members of racist organizations during the 1950s. Bonilla-Silva cautions students in his course syllabus against “irresponsible contestation” of the material he teaches, but allows any type of agreement.


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


B-S is far more Hispanic than black. In fact, it's likely that he doesn't view himself as black at all. Everyone with even a passing knowledge of Latin culture (even dumbass rednecks from Texas) knows that Latin culture is farrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrr more racist against blacks than is Anglo culture. If B-S was genuinely concerned about anti-black racism, he'd be urging Latin cultures to become more like Anglo cultures. That he does not do this proves that he is,in his mind, a Latin warrior out to reverse the Anglo ascendancy of the last two millenia.

I'll leave you with some stats, posted at a Hispanic site, but ironically originating from a Duke University survey of Durham residents:

Researchers found that 58.9 percent of Latino immigrants -- most Latinos in Durham are from Mexico -- feel that few or almost no blacks are hard-working. About one-third, or 32.5 percent, of Latino immigrants reported they feel few or almost no blacks are easy to get along with. More than half of the Latino immigrants, or 56.9 percent, feel that few or almost no blacks could be trusted....

“One might think that the cause of the Latinos’ negative opinions about blacks is the transmission of prejudice from Southern whites, but our data do not support this notion,” the researchers wrote.

White residents in Durham actually have a more positive view of blacks, leading researchers to conclude that Latinos’ negative views were not adopted from whites.

In the survey, only 9.3 percent of whites surveyed indicate that few blacks are hard-working; only 8.4 percent believe few or almost no blacks are easy to get along with; and only 9.6 percent feel that few or almost no blacks can be trusted.

To sum up:............................ Latins....Anglos

Blacks can't be trusted.................. 57%.....10%
Blacks not easy to get along with..... 33%......8%
Blacks not hard working................... 59%......9%

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

Full Employment for the 88 Act:

Kids, get your student loans repayable...whenever!
If you should decide to pursue a major that leads to a career that
doesn't pay the bills, remember:
Congress is looking out for YOU!

There's a move in Congress to cap monthly payments
of student loans for low-income students.

The flaw in this logic is, when
students begin
paying these loans back, they're not usually students anymore:
they're either graduates or

So, students...take whatever worthless courses
that you can or wish to take -
(your choice) - and don't pay any attention whatsoever to the fact
that your choice of course/major
could have an effect upon the rest of your life!

Certainly don't look at schools by cost, either:
if you can't get a grant prior to entering,
then you probably weren't low income.

How do you become low-income
AFTER leaving school?

Not only loan caps are being considered:
outright loan forgiveness is being considered as well.

Support the legislation!
Full Employment for the 88!
Ensure your right to take the worst classes
in some of the dumbest majors
from some of the least credible educators!

Call your Senator or Representative now!

You have the right not to be held accountable for
taking worthless courses!

Anonymous said...

TO RRHamilton--

Sure, no doubt he was reared inside a household who identified as Hispanic.

When I go down to San Juan, Puerto Rico....even around the quaint cobble streets of Old San Juan....there are a few Puerto Ricans who look, physically, like any black citizen of the U.S.......yet they speak Spanish and consider themselves to be Puerto Rican.

But it was not their ancestors who sailed the seas and landed on that island all those centuries ago. It was not their ancestors who built El Morro.

Bonilla-Silva has African ancestry. That is what he is. He is a black man.....who was raised within Hispanic culture.

If I were to see him walking down the street, I would think of him as black.

Then he opens his mouth....(the snips above).....and I know that he is also INSANE.

He can be what he wants. He's effing crazy.


AMac said...

anon 1:45pm wrote --

> kindly cite valid scientific evidence that any race is inherently superior or inferior

Kindly don't. That is off-topic for this post, and for this blog. It's the lead in for a "flame war" that--conveniently--drives the discussion far, far away from the scholarship (if any) of Prof. Bonilla-Silva.

Those who want to explore the fascinating questions of variabilities of characteristics within and between different racial groups can profitably employ Google in their quest.

mac said...

I hear pay for Sociology grads is
reeeeally high!

mac said...

Students might begin to organize -
and they do: they're called "fraternities"
and "sororities."

One of the reasons the 88 and their ilk hates these
groups so much is the fact that they look out for
each other, and tend to
steer their group away from
stupid courses taught by stupid,
self-obsessed or insane instructors.

If I were a parent now, I'd insist
my kid join one of these - especially if he/she went to Dook.
Someone'd be looking out for my kid's back, since it's obvious
that the administration doesn't
care what happens to them.

Anonymous said...

“Let justice be done though the heavens should fall.” —John Adams

Anonymous said...

TO RRHamilton--

The reason so many Hispanic residents of Durham despise, or are afraid of, blacks is that there has been such a crime spree aimed right at them.

Black criminals in Durham have long assaulted, robbed, raped, etc....etc...etc.....Hispanic laborers because it is well-known that they have no bank accounts and keep all the money they make inside their dwellings.....having made their hard-earned cash doing jobs that poor blacks are too lazy to do because, in Durham, they easily rely on the Social Services office as their second home.

How would Bonnie Silva reconcile this scenario within his black and Hispanic self? living in Durham and being such a respected scholar at Duke?


Anonymous said...

Who declared all races are equally talented? Are there no differences between races? Are races equally talented in all qualities? Are all equally intelliqent?

Kindly cite valid scientific evidence.

Anonymous said...

Several bloggers have suggested that Brodhead is the impetus behind the hiring of the whack-jobs among the 88. If only that were true, the infection could be easily cured.

While presidents of smaller universities and colleges may be active in appointments of professors, at larger universities that is usually not the case. There are, however, exceptions, such as the president being asked to woo a Nobel prize winner or other preeminent person or being requested to run interference for a powerful faculty member or department by backing a particular candidate. The policy of the BOT at Duke and other universities to increase diversity has accounted for many of the hires. Then these hires become a political group influencing subsequent hires.

Note that KC prefaces each of his profiles with the statement: "The people profiled in this series will craft future job descriptions for Duke professors; and then, for positions assigned to their departments, select new hires."

Faculty governance is alive and well (or sick). The presidents become the hand maidens of the strident affirmative action hires but usually don't play a direct role in their hiring.

Anonymous said...

Pick a Prof

Pick a Prof is another way to get feedback regarding professors.

I also insist that I review my son's course selections and any work published by the professors.

It is difficult to find, but there are Western Civ. classes that are not deconstructionism. I actually called and spoke with a couple of professors and encouraged my son to meet them.

I let him fly solo the first semester and select his own course load with the help of an advisor.

He struggled through a History course that was presented as a look at the war (WWII) effort at home. He thought it might include a study the amazing transformation of a peaceful economy to a war economy. Imagine his surprise when the first third of the class dealt with the Lavander Revolution and war time homosexuality. That was news to me...

We agreed that any other courses like that were on his dime and not mine.

Anonymous said...

3:25 tells me all I need to know about the supporters (I have nothing to say of KC himself) of this site.

Anonymous said...

"Several bloggers have suggested that Brodhead is the impetus behind the hiring of the whack-jobs among the 88. If only that were true, the infection could be easily cured."

He signed off on elevating AAAS to department status. He may not be the only one doing it, but he's helping as much as he can.

Anonymous said...

"3:25 tells me all I need to know about the supporters (I have nothing to say of KC himself) of this site.

Jul 23, 2007 2:50:00 PM"

It's KC, not just his supporters. Among his many other achievements, KC is the author of the time-travel plug-in for Firefox.

Anonymous said...


I've read several suggestions directed to you concerning topics you might consider writing about.

Here is mine.

Just as your current series is exposing the guiding principles and philosophies held by the Group of 88, perhaps you would consider publishing the backgrounds of Duke's BOT members.

This is ONLY group of people who have the power to actually do something to change the culture at Duke, beginning with President Brodhead and his 88 disciples.

It is well past the time when the broad Duke community and the general public learned more about these people and perhaps the public exposure, shame and embarrassment would cause them to make the hard decisions they have avoided until today.

Anonymous said...


Paula D. McClain is the lead author of the study that you referred to.

The most interesting part of the study for me will be how she interprets the data.

Anonymous said...

If you were an untenured professor (assistant or associate) in the Sociology Department and were approached by a Bonillas-Silva type (who would vote on your future) to sign a listening statement or to support a particular candidate in a search for a new professor, what would you do? Remember that B-S has stature in his field and is quite capable of writing letters to his friends at other universities if you were to apply for a job outside Duke.

Anonymous said...

To Ralph Phelan at 2:52 p.m.

I'm not defending Broadhead, but do you think any president of a major American university would dare to not sign off on the creation of an AA department if funds were availabe?

Anonymous said...

To 2:38

Presidents of the larger universities are minimally involved in hiring these folks? Disagree.

Large institutions, e.g., Harvard and Stanford, frequently have people who spend considerable time and effort in the recruitment of high profile minorities. These are staff people who might have an adjunct faculty appointment but they're reporting to the president, not the faculty council.

Anyone being hired at a high salary and with non-tradiational qualifications needs the support of the president and BOT.

Anonymous said...

anon 1:45


removed and rebuked


one apologizes

Anonymous said...

These profiles are useful and likely are being noticed by the rest of faculty. I wonder what their reaction would be if the profiles also included the salaries of these professors. Imagine: Some of them with much longer publications lists in reputable journals, possibly in fields where salaries are typically higher, find out that they are paid much less...

Anonymous said...

I believe it may have been the German statesman Bismarck who stated that the making of laws and sausages were best not observed by the consumers .
It occurs to me that consumers of higher education -students , and parents who write tuition checks, have ignored faculty idealogy in selecting schools . People like Brodhead have been banking on that . My son starts as a freshman this coming September( not Duke) . We've looked at faculty/ student ratios , library size , opportunities for underage drinking , dorms ,placement success rates but not who is doing the teaching ( beyond where faculty received their respective degrees ) . Those of us purchasing higher education services should be looking at the "PC factor" . The college guidebooks don't seem to have such a category .

Anonymous said...

"but do you think any president of a major American university would dare to not sign off on the creation of an AA department if funds were availabe?"

I really don't know. All other things being equal, no administrator is ever going to turn down free money, no matter how useless the purpose it's earmarked for.

But on theother hand, if my AAAS faculty had just caused national public embrassment for my university I might be tempted to turn down the money just to teach them a lesson in "if you want your backs cratched you'd better scratch mine."

There's plenty of evidence that Brodhead doesn't just tolerate these loons, he actively supports them.

I really don't know a lot about how academic governance works, and it's something I'm really curious about. The 88 have cost Duke national embarrasment, lots of distraction for the administration, a lot of Brodhead's personal time for his "listening" tour, unknown legal bills, an estimated $30,000,000 in hush money, and still plenty more to come. Assuming the BOT is rational, the fact that they haven't been kicked to the curb yet indicates that either:
(A) They bring benefit to the institution even greater than the damage they've caused, or
(B) If crossed, they ould cause even more damage than they already have.

Given KC's examination of the 88ers it's hard to believe in A, so it's got to be B.

So what is the incredibly huge club they wield? The threat of bringing in Jesse and Al? If so, is that threat really as great as the BOT fears? The threat of the Federal Government coming in and prosecuting them for discrimination on the basis of unequal outcome, the way they're doing to the NYFD? The threa of a cutoff of funds from AA true believers at the Ford and Rockefeller foundations? Some combination of the above?

Anonymous said...

re RRH and Debrah

Just some thoughts. I agree that Hispanics can be "racist". I hate to use that word because it's so loaded. I guess I would say they have strong preferences. Many of them think they are better than Black. So of course Bonilla-Silva wants to be Hispanic. He was raised to think that Blacks are not as good.

But to compound that, people from the islands or Mexico do not identify themselves by race. We discovered how bad our statistics were when it was discovered that students from these places routinely x'ed Hispanic even though they were as black as the ace of spades.

Going back to the racist comment I made. Many people are called racist just becasue they have opinions on race that are not PC. Many years ago I worked as a loaded executive to United Way. I was to convince Korean business owners to support generously to our campaign to help poor in south central LA. Boy, did I get an ear-full. Someone else would have said they were racist. I did not think that. They were hard workers, they had learned English, their kids were top students, they were almost always victimized by blacks. And then I had the temerity to ask for money for this group of people? What they said makes sense. But you cannot say that out loud--or you are labeled a racist.

Anonymous said...

Oops! I clicked on publish and not preview. Excuse the errors.

Anonymous said...


My children have now all graduated from college (one from Duke) so I'm no longer in the market for guidebooks but I like your idea of including a PC rating. You can probably already figure it out but an independent evaluation would be helpful.

One thing I would definitely take a closer look at is town/gown relations. We just sort of glossed over this category but I can't see last year's fiasco happening anywhere else but Durham.

Anonymous said...

3:46 said,
"Those of us purchasing higher education services should be looking at the "PC factor" . The college guidebooks don't seem to have such a category"

Good point. I'm curious as to what institutions you found that seem to have both high academic qualifications and a "low PC factor". I suspect that some state schools might represent a better profile in this regard than some of the so-called elite private schools.

D White

Anonymous said...

"To sum up:............................ Latins....Anglos

Blacks can't be trusted.................. 57%.....10%
Blacks not easy to get along with..... 33%......8%
Blacks not hard working................ 59%......9% "

"The most interesting part of the study for me will be how she interprets the data."

My cynical interpretation:
Whites have learned that it's just not polite to speak the truth about such matters, especially to an earnest university researcher. Recently arrived Hispanics are not yet sufficiently acculturated in PC to say what they're "supposed to" instead of what they really believe.

Modern economists, market researchers, and those social scientists who are actually scientists rather than propagandists, have moved away from using surveys whenever possible. They prefer experiments in which subjects' behavior in actual situations is recorded. Even if the situation is an artificial one, the subject is making a real choice with a real effect on them. Often it involves receiving or giving up money. Data about what people do is worth a lot more than data about what they say they would do, which can be wrong either by their not telling the truth or by their not being very good at introspection.

In short this whole project is a waste of funding - never mind the researchers missing two obvious questions:

(1) The missing rows. Are whites just overall more trusting and easygoing than hispanics? What would they say about themselves and about hispanics and about asians compared to what hispanics say?
(2) The missing column! What do blacks think of other blacks?

By increasing the number of subject 50% and tripling the size of the survey they could have had a full matrix that would have actually meant something. Obviously somebody hasn't heard of DOE (and I don't mean the Department of Energy.) Doesn't Duke have any staff statisticians?

And then there's the final question, one that is of course difficult to define let alone measure, yet which is overwhelmingly important to knowing what, if anything, this all means: How well do either group's perceptions match their objective experience? Of course that experience might not be the same for all groups - blacks may treat whites and hispanics differently.

Anonymous said...

Addendum to my 3:35 question to 3:16.

My biggest question regarding the mysteries of academic administration regards the puzzling career of Houston Baker:

In Pennsylvania he turned what could have been a minor campus flap into the nationally reported "water buffalo" flap. At Duke he enthusiastically contributed to increasing the national profile of what surely had to be a major embarassment to the administration.

This guy's got Jesse Jackson on his speed dial and an itchy finger. He has caused his last two employers unnecessary headaches. You'd think this guy would be box-office poison by now.

So why did Vanderbilt hire him? Are university administrations really that masochistic?

I'm just having trouble understanding how this industry works. Even Hollywood, reknowned for putting up with outrageous behavior from stars, has limits and will eventually drop a star who makes enough trouble.

So what kind of Teflon does Houston Baker have that Mel Gibson and Tom Cruise don't?

Cedarford said...

B-S is not lying when he says he's "not anti-white". That's too broad. He's not anti-white where the whites are Polish or Greek or (best of all) Spanish. He's one of the many Hispanics who sees the current divisions between the Anglo-Americans and the Hispanic-Americans as part of a 2,000-year struggle. Once you are aware of this, everything else he says makes much more sense.

R.R. Hamilton

RR, you need to read a little more on the guy. He's a Black Puerto Rican who writes of white and "mixed" PR persecution of blacks. The social hierarchy of Puerto Rico is complicated, but like much of Latin America, dark-skinned blacks brought in as cane-cutter orginally are on the bottom - though that is less important than Family. Blacks from a Family of accomplishment over time have more status than a white one of nere' do wells.
However, a black from a good family who acts all racist towards PR whites and "mixed" types best relearn his sugar cane cutting skills or come to America, marry a white women, and accept a full Professorship at Duke with full perks.

mac said...
BS is pretty obviously a "reconquistadore,"
part of the so-called "Mexica Movement."

No wonder he was in fear at Texas A & M.

You're speaking half-cocked. B-S is not Mexican.
He is not of the MEChA Reconquista.

He calls himself "Hispanic" because that entitles him, along with his carefully cultivated "Geraldo!" moustache (taking after the Master of claiming Hispanic-hood as a career booster) - to the nobility of Double Victimhood in the liberal academia Caste System. He's black and angry and powerless and hates "Amerikkka" while milking rich whities to the max , but he also knows when to swing his Hispanic "chic" in front of Brodhead's slavering chops.
I share DukeParent09's view of the 3:25 "WHite People Arise!" screed. It was a cut n' paste having nothing to do with Bonilla-Silva intended to get a rise from the usual crowd of posters here with strong racial grievances.

Just like at a black student site discussing blacks in the sciences can be derailed by an off-topic detailed cut n' paste about how awful a particular Louisiana plantation in 1835 was as hundreds of black slaves there were dying and being whipped.

Off topic!

3:25 only sets up race venting and has absolutely nothing to do with Bonilla-Silva's thinking or role at Duke or the Group of 88.

I'm more interested in Bonilla-Silva and his Trailing Spouse. Both are members of some pretty radical external groups, like "Sociologists Without Borders" and anti-West outfit.

Both are Group of 88 members.

I find it interesting that his white babe was hired by Duke and given the same title as Kim Curtis got for landing her "much-prized" husband. Mary Hovsepian is an Armenian from the Middle East who graduated in 1982 from Bir Zeit University in Occupied Palestine. (BZU is located 7 km north of scenic downtown Ramallah). She was one of three teachers at Texas A&M "Woman's Studies Group" in 2004. At Duke, her teaching is of the critical studies, gender studies, western white oppression of the powerless in the ME, sort.

mac said...

You're right: I was writing half-

Anonymous said...

I'm more interested in Bonilla-Silva and his Trailing Spouse."

I am too. Are "twofers" common in academia? It's entirely possible that spouses are equally qualified to teach but since both Hovsepian and Curtis are Visiting Professors, it makes me wonder.

Anonymous said...

It is VERY common in academia (at Duke and elsewhere, such as Baker's wife at Vandy) to offer spousal hires, particularly when the candidate is particularly appealing/sought after.

Charlotte Pierce-Baker (Houston's wife) was a spousal hire at Duke and rumor had it that part of the reason he was seeking to leave (I had heard such rumors predating March 2006) had to to do with the fact that his wife could not get tenure at Duke. I am not sure if he is TT (tenure-track) at Vandy, but nonetheless.

Anonymous said...

edit that last comment to say that I am unsure if *SHE (Charlotte Pierce-Baker) is TT

Anonymous said...

Mike Adams wrote a funny piece about hiring practices at UNC Wilmingotn--they were looking for an AD and had 2 finalists. Kelly Landry Mehrtens, black female and Kevin McNamel, white male. Their resume meant nothing--what was really important was their gender, race and sexual orientation. Here's an excerpt:

"In this case, of course, Landry Mehrtens was at a distinct advantage because she is a black female. She immediately had a two to nothing lead over McNamee who has the great misfortune of being a white male. So, upon his arrival for the interview, McNamee had only one way to – at least, partially - “catch up” with Landry Mehrtens.

Only by claiming that he is a homosexual could McNamee have made this decision difficult for the DePaolo administration. But, unfortunately for him, he is straight. On second thought, he could have qualified for the job by a) getting a sex change and, b) continuing to be “oriented” towards women. This would even the score to Mehrtens two (black and female), McNamee two (female and homosexual). The tie would have then been broken by relevant considerations. In such a scenario, McNamee would win.

In your letter you also questioned why Mehrtens was even called for an interview when, in your opinion, the other candidates were so much more qualified. This decision was inevitable because the previous AD was a straight white male. You misspoke when you claimed that a straight white male doesn’t have a chance of getting hired these days. Actually, the rule at universities is that straight white males can, in fact, be hired but that the same position cannot be filled by a straight white male if its previous occupant was also a straight white male. In other words, the situation is not quite as bleak as you have portrayed it to be.

Let me conclude by saying that, angry as you are about this decision, you should not let it get you down. Angry white heterosexual males will not have to tolerate unqualified minority candidates much longer. With separate black graduations, African-American Centers, and minority achievement awards, we are headed back to the good old days of complete racial segregation at UNCW.

Before long, half of our campus will be called UNC-W (White) and the other half will be called UNC-B (Black). I’m hope and pray that McNamee will agree to another interview when the UNC-White position becomes available. I guess you could say that I have a dream.

Mike Adams is a criminology professor at the University of North Carolina Wilmington and author of Welcome to the Ivory Tower of Babel: Confessions of a Conservative College Professor.

Anonymous said...

@ NJNP @ 2:11

John Adams may have said it, but it was a quotation many centuries old in the 18th century: Fiat justicia ruat coelum, let justice be done though heaven falls.


Anonymous said...

To Ralph Phelan from anon at 3:16 p.m.

I share your wonderment at Baker's teflon career and at university administrations appearing to be unaware of the troubles they are hiring. As to why Vanderbilt sought him, the excerpt from VUCAST, Vanderbilt U's News Network, will give something of an explanation. Vandy's trying to outdo Duke. The entire paean to the five new hires, including Baker's wife, can be found by googling "Houston Baker Vanderbilt" and finding the VUCAST article, now the second listing.

Two bits of irony, one humorous, one not. Baker was an expert on Oscar Wilde before he found AA more lucrative. While at the University of Pennsylvania, his wife was raped--by a black man.

Note in the excerpt below that Vanderbilt's Chancellor and Provost were credited for being instrumental in hiring these 5 sought-after academics.

From VUCAST, May 25, 2006:
NASHVILLE, Tenn. - Vanderbilt University has hired five prominent African American literature scholars in a blockbuster recruiting coup that advances its efforts to be a major player in the study of African American literature and deepen scholarship of Southern and American literature.

Houston Baker, Ifeoma Nwankwo, Charlotte Pierce-Baker, Alice Randall and Hortense Spillers all begin work at Vanderbilt during the fall 2006 semester.

The new hires will be tapped by Vanderbilt to be leaders in continuing efforts to pursue interdisciplinary studies, train minority scholars and reach out to historically black colleges. Successful programs in collaboration with historically black colleges are already in place at Vanderbilt in fields including physics and medicine. Vanderbilt’s Robert Penn Warren Center is planning a year-long seminar on black European studies in 2007-2008.
Baker, who leaves Duke University to become a distinguished university professor at Vanderbilt, is one of the most wide-ranging intellectuals in America....
Spillers, who leaves Cornell University to become Gertrude Conaway Vanderbilt Professor of English, “is one of the most brilliant intellectuals working in literary criticism and theory from the 1970s onward,” Clayton said....Pierce-Baker leaves Duke to become a professor of women’s and gender studies and professor of English at Vanderbilt. She was nationally acclaimed for her 1999 book Surviving the Silence: Black Women’s Stories of Rape, and will teach sociolinguistics for the English department....Randall, a former visiting professor at Vanderbilt, returns for a three-year term as writer-in-residence. Her debut novel The Wind Done Gone, a parody of Gone With the Wind, sparked a First Amendment court battle....Nwankwo, who leaves the University of Michigan, was one of the most heavily recruited mid-career professors in the country before Vanderbilt lured her to be an associate professor of English. She is a specialist in Caribbean literature and culture with a book soon to be published by the University of Pennsylvania Press....

Chancellor Gordon Gee and Provost Nicholas Zeppos were instrumental in the recruitment of the five new faculty members, Clayton said. “Our ability to build this constellation is a direct result of their vision for interdisciplinary scholarship and their commitment to making it happen,” he said.

M. Simon said...

There may be another explanation:


Anonymous said...

Anonymous said...

re RRH and Debrah

Just some thoughts. I agree that Hispanics can be "racist". I hate to use that word because it's so loaded. I guess I would say they have strong preferences. Many of them think they are better than Black. So of course Bonilla-Silva wants to be Hispanic. He was raised to think that Blacks are not as good.

But to compound that, people from the islands or Mexico do not identify themselves by race. We discovered how bad our statistics were when it was discovered that students from these places routinely x'ed Hispanic even though they were as black as the ace of spades.

This isn't hard to understand. If you have a choice between claiming to be the descendant of slaves or the descendant of conquerors, which do you pick? Especially when either choice gets your doorknob polished by pale-faced American college administrators?

R.R. Hamilton

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

Polanski has a stutter tonight.

Anonymous said...

Duke University policy may stipulate that spousal hires, those not hired in a general search, be given permanent adjunct status. This should not necessarily be seen as a criticism/denigration/rejection of the spousal hiree's abilities. Each university does it differently. As the Professor how Brooklyn College does it. Brooklyn may not have a well developed policy, because it is in a big urban area where spouses could presumably more eacily obtain academic positions than elsewhere.

Anonymous said...

Having had the unfortunate circumstance of far too much contact with B-S... I can say without a doubt that he is himself racist, as well as sexist.

Racism is his religion and he is
just another charismatic on a crusade not to unite or save, but to divide and damn.

Unknown said...

I just met with Eduardo Bonilla Silva at Loyola University Chicago and wanted to add, he is an inspiration to all those who think justly. Against Affirmative Action? Me too, end white privilege now!

Anonymous said...

I'm a 2%er at Texas A&M University, and a few years ago during my freshman year, I had the displeasure of indirectly experiencing this jerk. His girlfriend/fiancee/what have you was my professor, and of course, I had to read that godawful book Racism Without Racists. As the end of semester neared, I e-mailed her to ask about how the grades plan out. Uncharacteristically, she sends back an e-mail in all caps, saying that she won't be giving out grades anytime soon and to stop e-mailing about it. Obviously, it wasn't her. I bet B-S typed that out. Horrible and tactless he is.

Anonymous said...

Oh white you ever tire of levying the charges of "stupid", "insane", "crazy", "idiot", like 2-year olds? So interesting that the majority who post here do not say that B-S is merely extreme, nor that he hasnt been nuanced enough in his analyses. You aim to discredit him entirely, and more importantly you are zealously intent on discrediting the notion of 'white supremacy' as an interpretational scheme. More than a few of you have been explicit in your (antiquated) belief in your own biogolical superiority. Yes, you are so smart, but you fail to catch whiff of the stinch of self-service that attends your own faux-moral appeals, don't you? Listen at you...the descendents of slavemasters...claiming to be oppressed by a hispanic...even as you kill, exploit, and deport hispanic families with no qualms. I know that you'll say this post is "stupid", "idiotic", ect, either that or you'll ignore it, or the administrator will erase it. Just know that I feel sorry for you. God Bless

Anonymous said...

Wow, this article is filled with errors. I personally know Eduardo and this is a misrepresentation. I agree that he is extreme and sometimes find it offensive, but he is passionate about ending racism in America. I do no think it is fair to judge this man based on this very biased article.

kcjohnson9 said...

To the 1.43:

Many thanks for your comment. I note that while you asserted, "wow, this article is filled with errors," you did not identify even one error.

Culvey60 said...

Well we have a Grad student here at Washington State University that seems to think that EVERYTHING Silva says is right, and has been trying to drill it into our brains the whole last 4 weeks... and now i have to write some damn essay about the book as if accept the arguments and stuff he is making... as well as write a letter to the editor about an article that employs "color-blind racism"
PS i really hate this Grad Student as an Instructor, and this book, he has a few good points in the book, but he takes them to the extreme unfortunately, which in my mind, as well as obviously a lot of yours, completely removes any credibility he may have.