Several days ago I noted a new discriminatory “diversity” hiring policy at Columbia: 15 million dollars to hire more “female and minority” faculty members. “White men” (and presumably Asian, Arab, and other men), however, will only be considered if they can demonstrate, “through their scholarship and teaching and mentoring,” that they can “in some way promote the diversity goals of the university.”
Anyone interested in a fuller, deeper discussion of Columbia’s race and gender pandering should take a look at Prof. K.C. Johnson’s dissection of it here. Among his observations:
Let’s take, then, the example of a white male professor, of distinguished scholarship and teaching, in political science or sociology. Let’s say, further, that this professor has publicly argued that a color- and gender-blind legal code is the best way to sustain a diverse society. Columbia’s academic freedom policy “guarantees that [its faculty] will not be penalized for expressions of opinion or associations in their private or civic capacity.” But does anyone seriously believe a white male who has taken such a position would pass [Columbia “vice provost for diversity initiatives” Jean] Howard’s “diversity” test? How, then, can the pro-diversity white men aspect of this initiative be reconciled with Columbia’s academic freedom policy?
How indeed. Probably the same way, and to the same extent, that racial and gender preference can be reconciled with equal treatment. Which is to say, not at all.
Such a prodiversity policy would generate a monolithic anticaucasianism, unless the underrepresented are not required also to be that way. The faculties of 100 years ago were not required to be all antiblack. Possibly Hitler did not even enforce a policy that all college teaching staff be antisemitic. What does it mean if a college is said to be better for having a smaller percentage of one race? Doesn’t such a policy itself demonstrate hostility against the group it is said that there are always too many of? Why is columbia not too embarassed to show such racial hostility? Can a school be expected to contribute to the furtherance of civilization, if it is about racial patronage disputes, but not about ideas first and foremost? Perhaps this is why there have been no great breakthrough ideas to win general acceptance in academic subjects, in decades.
I suspect the only ‘white males’ Columbia will hire under this plan will be self-hating ‘white males’, steeped in socialist rhetoric and mindless “diversity” slogans.
And woe be to any self-hating ‘white male’ who has a change of heart and realizes that the diversity fascists are wrong. No tenure for you — get to the back of the bus…