Orwell Was Only Off by 31 Years

Just wow – from The College Fix, which I am assured is not a satirical website:

“America is the land of opportunity,” “There is only one race, the human race” and “I believe the most qualified person should get the job” are among a long list of alleged microaggressions faculty leaders of the University of California system have been instructed not to say.

These so-called microaggressions – considered examples of subconscious racism – were presented at faculty leader training sessions held throughout the 2014-15 school year at nine of the 10 UC campuses. The sessions, an initiative of UC President Janet Napolitano, aim to teach how to avoid offending students and peers, as well as how to hire a more diverse faculty…

…Other sayings deemed unacceptable include:

● “Everyone can succeed in this society, if they work hard enough.”

● “Where are you from or where were you born?”

● “Affirmative action is racist.”

● “When I look at you, I don’t see color.”

These phrases in particular are targeted because they promote the “myth of meritocracy” or represent “statements which assert that race or gender does not play a role in life successes.” Others are said to be color blind, apparently a bad thing that indicates “that a white person does not want to or need to acknowledge race,” according to the handout, “Tool: Recognizing Microaggressions and the Messages They Send.”

If you’re thinking of going to college, I suggest a career in plumbing or farming – something which doesn’t require a person to be immersed in a place which says that meritocracy is racist.

The good news is that this sort of nonsense just cannot stand for long – the people who are de-educated in such a setting will simply not be able to compete in the real world and so those who managed to get a real education will outplay them for life’s rewards…

27 thoughts on “Orwell Was Only Off by 31 Years

  1. Retired Spook June 12, 2015 / 9:53 am

    When the backlash to political correctness finally comes, it’s going to take a lot of people by surprise. There’s a certain delicious irony in the fact that civil disobedience, pioneered by the Left, is going to be the weapon that defeats them.

    OT, but I read this piece by Wayne Root and immediately thought of Mark. Is what he says true?

    • Amazona June 12, 2015 / 10:11 am

      That’s quite an article by Root. I think it should be mandatory reading for every Republican in every elected office in this country, along with a notation that this kind of reaction to Liberal antics by elected Republicans is widespread.

      Looks like time for a third party, doesn’t it? If we can’t reform the GOP, anyway.

    • Cluster June 12, 2015 / 10:32 am

      I read that article too earlier this morning and had to shake my head. The insatiable appetite of government has infected both parties and that is a sad statement. My opinion is that it is because politics is now a career not a service, and those that play the game right become fabulously wealthy. We really need to enact term limits at all levels. If it is good enough for the POTUS, it’s good enough for everyone.

  2. Amazona June 12, 2015 / 10:12 am

    …as well as how to hire a more diverse faculty…..”

    “diverse”, of course, meaning in complete lockstep with radical Leftist ideology

  3. rustybrown2014 June 12, 2015 / 4:42 pm

    The term “microaggression” makes my skin crawl. You’re right–totally Orwellian. What the hell is happening to young people these days (Jesus that sounds like an old fart talking), why is everybody such a special snowflake and when did everyone get the idea they have a right to not be offended? This is one liberal who won’t teach his kids this pablum.

    • Cluster June 12, 2015 / 7:40 pm

      Right on. Right on. Right on. Our overly sensitive culture is a big problem.

    • M. Noonan June 12, 2015 / 10:22 pm

      Good for you – and I have seen a few other liberals take a stand…but the deeper problem, as it relates to higher education, is fear: everyone in those places seems deathly afraid of being the target of the next attack, other than tenured professors, of course…though I note with great care that colleges appear to be limiting the number of tenured professors.

      All it takes for an adjunct to get the axe is one student getting ticked off…and anyone who can figure out just what might tick off a 19 or 20 year old is a better man than me. While legal adults, such people are still rather immature both in their views and in how they handle stress and opposition. Add to this that there is a subset of people who really like to wield power over others…and the more unfair and arbitrary the power, the more they like it…this was seen at its worst in places like Nazi concentration camps and GULAG, of course, but it is a trait which can be found anywhere.

  4. Cluster June 14, 2015 / 8:11 am

    Hillary is channeling her inner communist:

    “real and lasting prosperity must be built by all and shared by all.”


    And in the article the author notes that Hillary “could be the first woman President”. The obvious immaturity of that statement aside, I don’t remember the MSM saying that about Carly Fiorina when she announced her candidacy.

    • Amazona June 14, 2015 / 7:34 pm

      That single phrase, standing alone, is not that big a deal. After all, real and lasting prosperity SHOULD be “built by all”—–everyone should have a stake in making the nation prosperous. And certainly everyone who participates in building prosperity ought to share in it as well. The problem is that this statement, which on the surface has nothing wrong with it, is twisted and distorted into Leftist ideology, making it mean something very different.

      I am appalled by the new “shopping list” approach to electing our presidents, a check list dependent on some superficial criteria—-gender, race, maybe then sexual orientation or whatever. I can just imagine future Lefties being all giddy as they choose the next “first”: The First Vegetarian President, the First Transgendered President, the First Amputee President, etc. How too too boring, too too “originalist”, too too rigid, too too old-fashioned, to base presidential choices on things like Constitutional eligibility, qualifications in leadership, etc.

      • Cluster June 15, 2015 / 8:23 am

        I am appalled by the “day care” approach Democrats take towards governing this country and Hillary is rallying the children:

        Clinton laid out a wish list of Democratic policies: universal pre-K education, increased regulation of the financial industry, paid sick leave and equal pay for women, a path to citizenship for immigrants living in the country illegally, campaign finance overhaul and a ban on discrimination against gay people and their families.

        One question that you see more and more of in polls is “does this candidate care about me”? – that is an absurd question and more than a little juvenile. Friends and family should care about you, the POTUS should be an accomplished, competent steward of a very large and complex business. Unfortunately, we are now at a place where too many people see the federal government as some kind of parent who will catch them when they fall and kiss their bruises.

      • M. Noonan June 15, 2015 / 12:01 pm

        A completely base-motivating program – she doesn’t care that a majority of all Americans would be against this…she’s counting on goosing her base and using the Clinton Slander Machine to so destroy the eventual GOP nominee in the public mind that she’ll eke out a narrow victory…even if not in the popular vote, then in the Electoral College. This is the template from California’s 2002 gubernatorial campaign: I knew the Democrats would keep using it when they have an unpopular candidate for office. You might recall that then-Governor Gray Davis was massively unpopular and headed for likely defeat…so they just outright slandered the GOP…at the end of the day, moderates were turned off from the whole process and didn’t turnout to vote…with the Democrat base being larger than the GOP base, Davis won.

        It will take a great deal of skill on the part of the eventual GOP nominee to get past all that Team Hillary will do to him or her…

      • Cluster June 15, 2015 / 12:06 pm

        Yes, but we have plenty of ammunition ourselves and we had best use it. Aside from the obvious email and Clinton Foundation scandals, we can tie her directly to the complete failure of the Obama foreign policy.

        It’s important that we nominate someone fresh, meaning anyone other than Bush, and that that nominee seriously consider Fiorina as the Veep. The more I see and hear her, the more I like her. She can then be unleashed on Hillary and couldn’t be labeled a sexist for doing so.

      • M. Noonan June 15, 2015 / 12:08 pm

        Carly has some excellent points – Veep is definitely possible, though I’d still prefer Governor Martinez.

      • Cluster June 15, 2015 / 12:30 pm

        I like the idea of keeping GOP governors in place. And I don’t think Martinez is as ready as Fiorina is.

      • Amazona June 15, 2015 / 10:55 am

        ..universal pre-K education…

        True, this IS daycare, but not awful, either—-as long as the citizens of any given state vote to provide it, and as long as it provides more than baby-sitting services. “Universal” seems a little far-reaching, though: I’d keep it not only within US boundaries but within the boundaries of the states voting for it.

        increased regulation of the financial industry

        Not quite sure just what additional “regulation” she has in mind, as the existing regulations have pretty much paralyzed the financial industry. No doubt it includes more social engineering in the tradition of forcing financial institutions to subsidize various Leftist vote-buying schemes.

        paid sick leave and equal pay for women

        No problem there, and this is really a straw man (straw woman?) as women now do receive equal pay for equal work (except when working for the highest tier of Dems, including the State Department and the White House). Most bigger companies and I believe all government agencies already provide paid sick leave. I have a feeling she might be purposely conflating “paid sick leave” with months off, with full pay, for new mothers, and for people caring for children and family members.

        a path to citizenship for immigrants living in the country illegally

        No, no, a thousand times no. A path to legalization of status for those who meet stringent requirements, such as having been here for a time that means they have no “home” to return to, who have worked and obeyed the law, who have contributed to the country. But no path to citizenship, ever. Be compassionate, be fair, but do not REWARD law-breaking.

        campaign finance overhaul

        Instead of an “overhaul” let’s just enforce existing campaign finance laws, especially those prohibiting contributions from foreigners. Hillary will certainly not advocate that—-it would cut off way too much of her own money.

        and a ban on discrimination against gay people and their families.

        MORE bans on “discrimination”? Another straw man and more pandering.

      • Cluster June 15, 2015 / 11:50 am

        It’s 100% pandering. Nothing but a platitude festival and the LIV’s and progressive sheeple still buy it hook, line and sinker. Consider all the lies and platitudes that Obama spewed out during his campaigns with no accountability whatsoever. The hypocrisy of it all is that Hillary has lived off OPM her entire life, is a bona fide member of the 1%, avoids taxes, and has become fabulously wealthy just in the last 10 years in a very non transparent suspicious manner, yet all of that is of no concern anymore to the media or to her base.

      • Amazona June 15, 2015 / 11:07 am

        During Hillary Clinton’s big rally speech in New York on Saturday, she made a comment one CNN reporter could not ignore. About 30 minutes into her speech, Clinton said:

        “We have to stop the endless flow of secret, unaccountable money that is distorting our elections, corrupting our political process, and drowning out the voices of our people!”


        Hillary seems to be pretty confident that she can convince her sheeple (not that many of them show up to her “rallies”) that the only “secret, unaccountable money that is distorting our elections” is from the Koch Brothers—-certainly not from any of her, and/or Bill’s, overseas sources or George Soros or any of their other fat cat supporters. But why shouldn’t she feel confident that she can pull this off? How many Clintonistas have been upset at any of the foreign money transactions that have been made public over the years? (Hint: About the same number as are upset about the Pay to Play policies of the State Department under Hillary.)

      • Cluster June 15, 2015 / 11:51 am

        Tom Steyer?

      • M. Noonan June 15, 2015 / 12:06 pm

        Because her base will believe it – remember, her base has not been informed of her hopelessly corrupt foundation. The news outfits they watch simply don’t report on it, certainly not enough to drive it into their minds. To her base, a vote for Hillary is a vote to get corrupt money out of politics.

        I’m both encouraged and worried a bit lately – encouraged that a young lady I know (poor, with children to take care of) despises Hillary and won’t vote for her. I’m less encouraged that another lady I know (wealthy, highly educated) is planning on voting for her because “she gets things done, and even if corrupt we need someone who can get things done”. Geesh!

        Key to victory will be to motivate the GOP base (sorry, Jeb, that means you’re out) while also managing to break through the MSM Wall of Lies about Hillary so that the LIV can really get a good look at how bad she is.

      • Cluster June 15, 2015 / 1:46 pm

        You know another thing the GOP has to say and keep it real simple is that “if you like how things are going now, a vote for Hillary will be more of the same.”

      • M. Noonan June 15, 2015 / 2:47 pm

        Tying her to Obama will be a big part of winning – because she cannot run on Obama’s disastrous record. Watch carefully – when she does talk up ObamaCare and amnesty, it will be in front of Democrat audiences and the MSM won’t give large coverage to what she says on those subjects. For the Obama true believers, Hillary will signal that she’s Obama, Continued…but for the rest of the people, it will be, “Obama? Never heard of him…”

      • Amazona June 15, 2015 / 8:57 pm

        “Tom Steyer?”

        Thanks….I couldn’t remember his name.

      • Amazona June 15, 2015 / 9:06 pm

        “another lady I know (wealthy, highly educated) is planning on voting for her because “she gets things done, and even if corrupt we need someone who can get things done”. “

        I guess my question is, “what has she gotten done?” From her days as co-president she couldn’t get Hillarycare pushed through, as a Senator she didn’t do anything of note, and as Secretary of State she was an abysmal failure. The “reset” with Russia was a joke—-a joke on us, given the fact that the Secretary of State of the United States of America couldn’t even be bothered to have this silly button vetted by someone who, oh I don’t know—SPEAKS RUSSIAN!!! She couldn’t deal with a simple and often-repeated request for more security at a consulate in a dangerous part of the world, she couldn’t even take responsibility for the outcome of this failure.

        Sorry, but if someone tells me Hillary is someone who “can get things done” I have to wonder just what she is thinking of. Even the rollout of her campaign is clumsy and poorly planned and executed. As far as I can see, the only thing she is good at is scamming money for her and Bill, and ignoring stained blue dresses.

        And what does this woman you know consider “corruption”? If she is willing to overlook using the government of the United States to line her pockets, that is one thing—–how does she feel about the lying? From the story about being under fire as her plane landed to the repeated lies about the deaths in Benghazi being due to some spontaneous protest about a video—-a lie told to the parents of one of the dead—-we are talking about someone who simply cannot be believed no matter what she says. This is OK?

      • M. Noonan June 15, 2015 / 11:23 pm

        Hillary has the appearance of accomplishment…Senator, SecState, Front Runner for White House…but we know she’s only got all that because she won the marriage lottery (in a certain sense!). Compared to someone like Carly – or Governor Martinez – she’s a complete zero. But the Narrative has been advanced…and we’re going to be told until we’re sick of it that it is “time” for a woman to be President.

        But, you’re right, we can reach people – we just need an effective message and messenger…and as it turns out, I don’t think that Jeb, Christie, Graham or Huckabee will be that…

      • Amazona June 15, 2015 / 9:17 pm

        Hillary’s base will vote for her no matter what. They will never admit that she is corrupt, and nothing will turn them against her. We can just ignore them, write them off, and concentrate on those with integrity and open minds. Sorry, but I simply cannot find a scintilla of respect for anyone who would vote for her, knowing what we know about her. But there are a lot of people out there who do have some dignity, some integrity, who can be educated in spite of the efforts of the Complicit Agenda Media to cover for her.

        Obama won by a hair more than 4% of the vote. Assuming the same turnout, which of course also means the same motivation of black voters to turn out, we only need to shave 3% off the Dem vote, if that 3% shifts to the Republican side. If someone says she will vote for Hillary even thinking she is corrupt, at least she realizes that Hillary IS corrupt, which is a start, and it is about 17 months till the election. If a Hillary voter is already at the point of admitting that she is corrupt, but still trying to find an excuse to overlook that and vote for her anyway, she is halfway to changing her mind. Remember, right now she doesn’t have a choice, as there is no designated Republican candidate to measure her alleged accomplishments against.

        Hillary can get things done and Carly Fiorina can’t? That would be a hard argument to make. Hillary can get things done and Scott Walker can’t? Ditto. Personally, I’d be very comfortable putting a successful CEO of a huge company and a successful governor who has been savaged by the Left and not only come out on top but turned a failing state around up against a mediocre Senator/failed Secretary of State whose only “accomplishment” is putting a lot of miles on the clock.

Comments are closed.