“That Book Grabbed My Ass!”
Via Ace; from Ohio State University, another shining moment for the politics of the academic left;
Scott Savage, who serves as a reference librarian for the [Ohio State] university, suggested four best-selling conservative books for freshman reading in his role as a member of OSU Mansfield’s First Year Reading Experience Committee. The four books he suggested were The Marketing of Evil by David Kupelian, The Professors by David Horowitz, Eurabia: The Euro-Arab Axis by Bat Ye’or, and It Takes a Family by Senator Rick Santorum. Savage made the recommendations after other committee members had suggested a series of books with a left-wing perspective, by authors such as Jimmy Carter and Maria Shriver.
Savage was put under “investigation” by OSU’s Office of Human Resources after three professors filed a complaint of discrimination and harassment against him, saying that the book suggestions made them feel “unsafe.” The complaint came after the OSU Mansfield faculty voted without dissent to file charges against Savage. The faculty later voted to allow the individual professors to file charges.
The politics of “diversity”. The politics of “tolerance”. The politics of “Give us the child for 8 years and it will be a Bolshevik forever”.
Docs (PDF)
I’m stunned…..not a SINGLE voice of dissent? Sad. Well, at least their not pre-occupied with “celebrate diversity”.
where is the support for scott savage? these battles are lost more by apathy and cowardice on the right, than by any real strength on the left. resist them and they will flee!
No this is perfectly reasonable. If freshmen are allowed to read opposing views, they could develop questions. They could dissect the opposing arguments in search of truth. How safe would these professor’s delusions be if students developed critical thinking skills. They could be forced to defend their views. They could be forced to face their fallacies. Their whole world view could be called into question. They could very well not survive such psychic distress. How safe would you feel under such circumstances?
Reasoned discourse cannot be allowed to develop. Alternate viewpoints must be suppressed. Reality cannot be allowed to rear its ugly head.
I’ve never seen a group of academics agree about anything without dissent. I suspect we haven’t heard the full story yet. Neither of the two faculty votes described make much sense to me, much less the two votes together. What does it mean for a faculty to “file charges” anyway?
I�ve never seen a group of academics agree about anything without dissent.
Indeed.