Slashdot Mirror


UCLA Students Urged to Expose 'Radical' Professors

rts008 writes to tell us Reuters is reporting that a conservative alumni group is working hard to expose 'radical professors'. The group is a creation of 2003 UCLA graduate, Andrew Jones, who stated that he runs the organization on his own with $22,000 in private donations. From the article: "Jones told Reuters he is out to 'restore an atmosphere of respectful political discourse on campus' and says his efforts are aimed at academics who proselytize students from either side of the ideological spectrum, conservative or liberal. 'We are concerned solely with indoctrination, one-sided presentation of ideological controversies and unprofessional classroom behavior,' Jones said on his Web site." The tactics used by Jones and his group are raising quite a few questions, however, offering to pay students for recordings or teaching materials that could provide 'evidence' against professors in question.

13 of 1,229 comments (clear)

  1. This is why we need article moderation. by Spazntwich · · Score: 0, Flamebait

    Because this one is nothing but flamebait.

  2. Re:Hey, the right to speek freely... by revscat · · Score: 0, Flamebait
    There is a line between criticism and intimidation. Given the fascist tendencies of the modern conservative movement this has more characteristics of the latter than the former.

    But don't worry. I'm sure some Democrat somewhere at some point did something similar, which justifies, of course, anything.

    Having said that this, at least, is hopeful:

    News of the campaign prompted former Republican congressman James Rogan, who helped lead impeachment proceedings against former President Bill Clinton in the U.S. House of Representatives, to resign from the group's advisory board.

    Good for you, Rep. Rogan.

  3. Re:They're not "conservatives". by Pig+Hogger · · Score: 0, Flamebait
    Conservatives stand for freedom, liberty, individual responsibility, honest prosperity, and peace.
    Cheap-labour conservatives (that's their real name) only stand for their own selves. They don't care for others and the future. That's why they have guns (to "protect" themselves from the poor) and they drive SUVs (so they can squish the poor on the road).
  4. Re:This sounds less like by Pig+Hogger · · Score: 0, Flamebait
    Much of academia - especially at UCLA - is far to the left of Joe Stalin.
    So that makes them far-centrists, because Stalin was just as right-wing as Hitler was, the only difference being that Stalin WON the war and Hitler lost it.

    And, when you look at it, compared to Stalin, Hitler was an amateur with his paltry 6 million people killed in death camps. Stalin killed 10 million MORE, and despite that, he emerged as a "benefactor of mankind" (he would have, if those 16 million killed were spammers and telemarketers).

    Don't bother looking for an actual conservative professor at that university. You won't find one - who talks about it.
    Does it surprises you? Conservatives and right-wingers aren't especially noted for broad intelligence nor education.
    What happened is "political correctness" - brainwashing techniques honed in the totalitarian regimes of the Soviet Union, China, and other Communist countries and revolutionary movements, transplanted onto campus by the radical left.
    Quite nothing compared to the right-wing brain-washing that occurs every sunday in a church near to you.
  5. Re:They're not "conservatives". by CyricZ · · Score: 0, Flamebait

    No. Republicans and Democrats stand for the status quo. Look who makes up the American government: it's mainly Democrats and Republicans! And like we've established, Democratism are a separate political ideology from liberalism, and Republicanism is a separate political ideology from conservatism.

    Indeed, there are political groups who follow such ideals. They're the true conservatives in America. Yet they often are not represented in government because they hold those ideas.

    In order to become seriously represented in the government they would have to basically follow Republicanism, rather than conservatism. Thus within the confines of the current system, they couldn't become part of the government as conservatives; they most likely have to become Republicans. And when they become Republicans, they are no longer conservatives.

    --
    Cyric Zndovzny at your service.
  6. Re:Hey, the right to speek freely... by MechaStreisand · · Score: 0, Flamebait

    1) McCarthy was right - he did find a lot of communists, and
    2) What the hell is wrong with collecting documents and recordings of things that the profs themselves said? It's not like they're making anything up here - they're just bringing them to light. As someone else has already said, a lot of the radical tenured professors are left of Josef Stalin in outlook.

    --
    Disclaimer: IANAL. This post is, however, legal advice, and creates an attorney-client relationship.
  7. Re:They're not "conservatives". by khallow · · Score: 1, Flamebait
    I believe the definition of conservative would more accurately mean those seeking preservation of the status quo. Depending on the society in power at the time, that may mean preserving slavery, segegation, dominance of a single racial group, sex, or class, etc.

    Why do you push unaccepted definitions? Use a dictionary.

  8. Re:Hey, the right to speek freely... by vargasgrey · · Score: 0, Flamebait

    A lot of people engage in suppression of ideas, not just right-wingers and for your information ID IS a science. The fact that you parrot what is told to you about ID belies your own laziness and ignorance in understanding what it actually is. The state US education is grim indeed when it produces parrots like you.

  9. Re:Hey, the right to speek freely... by linzeal · · Score: 0, Flamebait

    Some of us worry about your religious beliefs effecting your children as well. Not to say that anyone would ever legislate against parents raising their children in their own religion, yet it seems to me that by forestalling any choice in the matter whilst they are in their formative years is an ethical dilemma of some import. Perhaps no one under 21 should be allowed in churches since no one under 21 is allowed in my churches (strip clubs and bars).

  10. Re:Works for me by ObsessiveMathsFreak · · Score: 0, Flamebait

    Ward Churchill is NOT a nutjob professor. His writing and teaching is widely respected.

    But perhaps his methods are...unsound.

    --
    May the Maths Be with you!
  11. Missing the real radicals ... by whitehatlurker · · Score: 0, Flamebait
    The blacklist assembled on the website so far is mostly of people in the humanities and social sciences (and law, where-ever that fits in). The "alumni association" has missed all of those in the physical sciences who may support such radical ideas as:
    • Non-Aristotelian physics
    • Non-Euclidean geometries
    • Heliocentric models of the solar system
    • "Round Earth" theories (not flat!?)
    • Microbial based diseases (when we all know they're all caused by imbalances in our aqueous humours)
    • People flying in machines heavier than air
    • and even (gasp) anti-creationalism (self-styled "evolutionists")

    UCLA faculty - make money now by turning yourselves in if you or a colleague exhibit any of these radical ideas.

    --
    .. paranoid crackpot leftover from the days of Amiga.
  12. Ah Freedom of Speech by nurb432 · · Score: 1, Flamebait

    Gotta love it when you are attacked for speaking your mind. Did we just teleport back to the 50's or what?

    --
    ---- Booth was a patriot ----
  13. Re:In the US the government is the general public. by ccmay · · Score: 0, Flamebait
    Remember, the US is supposedly a republic. In a republic, the government is not exactly a separate entity from the general public. Indeed, it is indirectly made up of each and every voting individual.

    You have confused "republic" with "democracy". Two different things.

    So when a private groups resorts of fascism, and they support the republican-style government, then it is a case of fascism.

    This doesn't make any sense at all. What are you trying to say?

    -ccm

    --
    Too much Law; not enough Order.