Archive for the ‘Academia and Trump’ category

Right Angle – Trump Derangement Syndrome: Losing Their Minds – 10/18/17

October 19, 2017

Right Angle – Trump Derangement Syndrome: Losing Their Minds – 10/18/17 via YouTube

(Please see also, Trump’s Constructive Chaos. — DM

The blurb beneath the video states,

Trump Derangement Syndrome seems to infect everyone on the Left who is incapable of coming to terms with the fact that President Trump emerged victorious a year ago. From late night shows to washed up comedians, it appears they are hell bent on making complete fools of themselves. It has even infected academia, where a Harvard Law professor named Lawrence Lessig suggested that Hillary could still be President. How is Trump able to drive these people crazy? Bill, Steve, and Scott explain this phenomenon.

Getting Them Young

October 12, 2017

Getting Them Young, FrontPage MagazineMatthew Vadum, October 12, 2017

People in Edina are tired of all of this.

They are angry about political agendas being pushed at the expense of education. At the same time they are afraid to speak out for fear of reprisals, Kersten writes.

Though a growing number of parents, students and teachers are angry and frustrated about recent developments, they hesitate to protest publicly. Students and parents fear bullying and retaliation in terms of grades and classroom humiliation. Teachers who don’t toe the orthodox line fear ostracism and a tainted career. The climate of intimidation is so intense that not one of those interviewed for this article would speak on the record.

**************************

In places like Edina, Minnesota, the Left has transformed K-12 schools into indoctrination factories whose overarching purpose is to train students to be reflexively racist and anti-American.

Educators in Edina, a wealthy Minneapolis suburb, don’t even try to conceal their sinister goals. Elementary school students there are subjected to an A-B-C book titled A is for Activist. Among the alphabetized propaganda points are these gems:

“A is for Activist. Are you an Activist?”

“C is for … Creative Counter to Corporate vultures.”

“F is for Feminist.”

“T is for Trans.”

“X is for Malcolm as in Malcolm X.”

When Donald Trump won the election last November, anarchy and partisan bullying paralyzed the high school.

“I felt like the school was descending into mass hysteria,” one student said of the day after the election. Another said Trump’s victory was treated as “the end of the world as we know it.”

Students reported “[e]very teacher was crying in class, one even told the whole class ‘Trump winning is worse than 9/11 and the Columbine shooting.’” The sheer volume of “liberal propaganda that was pushed every single day in class this year was worse than it’s ever been–and you’re bullied by the teachers and every student if you dare speak against it.”

“[T]he teachers can absolutely do whatever they want. The administration will do nothing about it!! The day of the election every single student was in the commons chanting ‘F*** TRUMP’ and the teachers never did anything. A LOT of people are starting to complain and my mom has some friends who are leaving the school district.”

Teachers in Edina use totalitarian methods, particularly self-criticism sessions, to enforce ideological rigidity and reinforce social cohesion.

One mother complained of a humiliating Khmer Rouge-like denunciation process her son was forced to endure. In a 10th grade AP World History class, the teacher “called out any Trump supporters and asked them to assure the class that they weren’t racist.” In much of the United States, sending one’s children to public schools is already tantamount to child abuse. Too often elementary and secondary schools, especially in the inner cities, fail to teach pupils even the basics of reading, writing, and thinking critically. Nowadays they focus on crusades for so-called social justice instead of doing their jobs. This includes pedagogical sermons excoriating President Trump for the crime of trying to “Make America Great Again.”

In Edina radical indoctrination has supplanted actual education that helps students prepare for the real world.

Test scores in the community’s once top-rated schools have been plummeting, writes Katherine Kersten, senior fellow at the Minnesota-based Center for the American Experiment, in Thinking Minnesota magazine.

“There’s been a sea change in educational philosophy, and it comes from the top,” she writes.

In recent years teachers have been shoving so-called white privilege, along with Marxism, feminism, and post-colonialism, down their young charges’ throats.

It’s no secret that public school teachers across America are largely driven by ideology, not a desire to educate. They teach students that America, a nation flawed in its conception by the original sin of slavery, has never truly experienced reforms. It is as if the Civil War and the Civil Rights Era never happened. Corporations and the rich oppress the citizenry daily as the U.S. unjustly pushes around less powerful countries, especially Muslim ones. America is so fundamentally corrupt and evil in their view that it can only be fixed by radical changes like those espoused by educational theorists like Paulo Freire and Bill Ayers.

In Pedagogy of the Oppressed, Freire argued that schools be used to inculcate radical, revolutionary values in students so they become agents of social change. Generations of teachers answered his call.

Freire was only expanding on the ideas of Vladimir Lenin who said, “Give me four years to teach the children and the seed I have sown will never be uprooted.” Teachers in publicly-funded elementary and secondary schools get a full eight years more than Lenin required to intellectually cripple students, perhaps for life.

“If we want change to come, we would do well not to look at the sites of power we have no access to; the White House, the Congress, the Pentagon,” Ayers said in 2012. “We have absolute access to the community, the school, the neighborhood, the street, the classroom, the workplace, the shop, the farm.”

Teachers in Edina take the ideas of Freire, Lenin, and Ayers seriously.

At Edina’s Highlands Elementary, teachers indoctrinate five-year-olds in order to radicalize them and encourage them to become activists obsessed with race.

The school district’s “unrelenting focus on skin color is the leading edge of a larger ideological campaign to shape students’ attitudes and beliefs on a range of controversial issues—most importantly, the familiar litany of ‘race, class, gender,’” Kersten writes.

While this is happening “ordinary students are too often falling through the cracks and gifted education is languishing.”

Edina embraces something called the All for All plan. Its “fundamental premise is that white racism—not socio-economic factors like family breakdown—is the primary cause of the achievement gap.”

School staff meetings there are social justice pep rallies. One teacher told Kersten that “equity was the only thing we talked about, not the nuts and bolts of teaching reading and math.”

Equity in this context doesn’t refer to equal treatment for all, she notes. Here the word “signals an obsession with ‘white privilege,’ and an effort to blame any academic challenge that minority students may have on institutional racial bias.” In other words, race-based identity politics rules.

At the elementary school, teachers of K-2 students dwell endlessly on skin color and encourage white pupils to feel guilty about being white. “Equity” is identified as the key criterion used to evaluate the school district’s K-5 math curricula.

Children have to watch their language and self-censor for fear of incurring the wrath of teachers.

“My kids have written things they don’t believe just to survive,” one mother told Kersten.

“They know exactly what the teacher wants. They almost don’t see anything incorrect in doing that anymore, because it’s so engrained. They have endured enough public shaming to say they will not put themselves in that position again.”

Another parent “was absolutely sickened” by the officially sanctioned psychological torture to which her young son was subjected. He explained that he was “labeled a racist, sexist and rapist — yes, a RAPIST — because he is a white male.” The parent added, “This was all in a Venn diagram on the white board. We have a photo.”

At the Edina high school’s multicultural show in April this year, student performers used the event to call for “students, faculty, staff and administrators to act en masse to address racial injustice,” according to the school’s student newspaper. Student organizers tried to “ignite a conversation pertaining to white privilege and the Black Lives Matter movement.”

A female student gave an explicit speech about the sexual fantasies she had about a classmate that sounded like a “Dear Penthouse Forum” letter. “I spent seventh-grade music classes imagining her legs intertwining with mine, her body constantly reminding me of a violin, and I was begging to be allowed to pluck one string.”

A male student revealing his sexual desires probably would have been kicked off the stage and accused of sexual harassment, Kersten writes.

Getting students to hate and distrust law enforcement officers is also a priority. One teacher was so wrapped up in cop-hatred that she claimed just saying the word police “made her feel physically ill,” according to a parent.

Teachers in Edina and across the fruited plan saturate students with information about real and imagined instances of racial injustice in America in a nonstop barrage of historic facts and ahistorical nonsense. And in the culture at large, the media, politicians, and the entertainment industry can’t stop talking about race. The last thing any young student in America needs is to be taught about is race. Race matters only to America-hating radicals.

People in Edina are tired of all of this.

They are angry about political agendas being pushed at the expense of education. At the same time they are afraid to speak out for fear of reprisals, Kersten writes.

Though a growing number of parents, students and teachers are angry and frustrated about recent developments, they hesitate to protest publicly. Students and parents fear bullying and retaliation in terms of grades and classroom humiliation. Teachers who don’t toe the orthodox line fear ostracism and a tainted career. The climate of intimidation is so intense that not one of those interviewed for this article would speak on the record.

Remaining silent is no way to win a culture war.

New Book Sheds Light on Anti-Trump Agenda in Public Schools and Politicization of the Classroom

October 1, 2017

New Book Sheds Light on Anti-Trump Agenda in Public Schools and Politicization of the Classroom, Washington Free Beacon,  , October 1, 2017

Getty Images

In his newly published bookThe Corrupt Classroom, Lance Izumi of the Pacific Research Institute illustrates how the public school classroom has become increasingly politicized, with liberal teachers indoctrinating students with an anti-Trump and leftist agenda.

Izumi makes the case that while many school choice supporters rely on academic school performance data to show that public schools are failing, there are many other equally important reasons to support it.

“Many parents, for example, are rightly concerned about the growing politicization of the classroom,” Izumi explains. “Far from being mere anecdotal incidents—and there are lot of those—political bias is becoming systemic in public school systems and has turned many public schools into indoctrination centers for progressive ideologies and causes.”

For example, the United Educators of San Francisco, a teachers’ union, created an anti-Trump lesson plan and distributed it to 6,000 members. In the lesson plan, Trump was labeled a “racist and sexist man” and included only reports from left-wing sources such as Mother Jones. Teachers were instructed to tell students, “we will keep fighting” and “we must and will fight for justice against an unjust system and an unjust people.”

Izumi also cites the example of Yvette Felarca, a teacher at a middle school in Berkeley, Calif., who is the leader of By Any Means Necessary, which was described as a militant, radical group that uses violence to spread its message.

“Felarca reportedly shoved a man to the ground at a demonstration in Sacramento,” Izumi explains. “The brawl resulted in seven people being stabbed. Felarca told the Mercury News that the First Amendment should not protect speech with which she disagrees and that she labels ‘hate speech.'”

Izumi says that following these actions, parents were outraged and complained that her violent message should not have a place in the classroom. The book cites many more examples of how students were subjected to indoctrination in the classroom, including some who were asked to complete assignments with an anti-Trump bent or teachers who were very open about their liberal beliefs—including one who yelled “Die!” in front of students at a photo of President Trump.

Izumi says that parents should also be aware of school-related crime and the safety of their child when deciding what school to choose.

“There have been many instances of appalling crimes on school campuses, ranging from peer-to-peer bullying to classroom sexual assaults that make every parent shudder with fear for the safety of their own children,” Izumi writes.

For example, Lanny, a 9-year-old in Alabama, was attacked by a bully at her school and suffered a concussion, a bruised face, and two black eyes. Instead of accurately reporting the incident to the child’s mother, school officials said Lanny had fallen on accident. Lanny’s mother decided to homeschool her daughter following the incident because she doesn’t feel the school did enough to prevent bullying and did not even punish the bully.

“When I asked the principal what was being done about the bully, he said she would be suspended for two days,” Lanny’s mother said. “Then I found out they didn’t even do anything to her.”

In addition to safety, Izumi says there are religious biases that have been present in the classroom that parents should be concerned about.

“Just as parents do not like teachers and school officials to favor one political candidate over another, so parents oppose the promotion of one religious faith over another,” Izumi says. “Yet, in public schools across America, teaching, curricula, and policies seem intended to disfavor Christianity and favor other religious faiths.”

There have also been instances of sexualization in the classroom. Izumi explains that a school in Fremont, Calif., distributed a textbook for ninth-graders that taught teenagers about vibrators, oral sex, bondage, female sterilization procedures, and sexual techniques that went beyond the activities that cause birth.

“Not surprisingly, the textbook ignited outrage among parents in the school district, despite the socially liberal reputation of the San Francisco Bay Area,” Izumi explains. “Hundreds of people signed a petition to urge the Fremont school board to rescind its decision to use the textbook in ninth-grade health classes.”

Izumi says that all of these reasons are cause for parents to be concerned about what school their child is attending.

“A public school might have decent test scores, but if parents feel their children are being politically indoctrinated, are at risk of being victimized by other students or teachers, are being shortchanged because of mismanagement by school officials, or are having their basic value system overturned, then parents and their children should have the right and the tools to exit the public school system for educational alternatives that better meet their needs and preferences,” Izumi said.

The Left’s Mania

May 11, 2017

The Left’s Mania, Gingrich Productions, Newt Gingrich, May 10, 2017

The Left is getting trapped in its own mania.

Steadfast liberals in the media, academia, and Congress are so pathologically opposed to President Trump and the Republican majority – and so fiercely committed to rejecting the fact that the American people elected both, that they now willfully embrace vulgarity, insults, violence, and hysterical dishonesty.

Late night comedians are so dismayed that they have traded jokes for political assaults and opening monologues for lewd diatribes. Take for example Stephen Colbert’s unhinged rant against President Trump last week. His comments were as obscene as they were offensive, and went well past the line of political satire. Had a TV personality made a similar implication about President Obama or Secretary Clinton, he or she would have been promptly fired and blacklisted from the entertainment industry. Not surprisingly though, Colbert’s network, CBS, took no such action, further proving the media’s growing complicity toward this kind of behavior.

Meanwhile, on college campuses such as Middlebury College and UC-Berkeley, instead of learning to respect those with differing views, liberal students have resorted to violence and threats to silence those with whom they disagree. The academic institutions have largely let it happen – although Middlebury College has said it plans to discipline about half of the more than 70 students who rioted in order to keep Charles Murray, a libertarian social scientist, from speaking March 2, the college has been vague and indecisive about what the ultimate discipline might be. What message does this send to the student body? It implies that if you disagree with someone, it’s okay to shout them down and, if necessary, hurt them.

At UC-Berkeley, administrators have simply given up policing the violent Left. CNN reported that during one protest, “masked agitators” caused $100,000 in damage to the campus. The mere threat of another riot – and the college’s inability or unwillingness to defend against it – kept Ann Coulter from speaking there last month.

Finally, faced with the reality of their dwindling influence, Democrats nationally have turned to fear-mongering and outrageous lies to undermine the efforts of the Republican majority.

Here are a few examples:

  • Elizabeth Warren on May 4 tweeted that the American Health Care Act “will devastate Americans’ healthcare. Families will go bankrupt. People will die.”
  • Bernie Sanders told CNN’s Anderson Cooper on May 4, “If the bill passed today in the House became law, thousands of Americans would die.”
  • Democratic National Committee Chairman Tom Perez said Republicans will be responsible for “every preventable death, every untreated illness and every bankruptcy” if AHCA is passed.
  • Democratic groups across the country have promoted the blatant lie that victims of rape, domestic abuse, and sexual assault could be denied health insurance under the law. Even the Washington Post had to stand up and correct this complete falsehood.
  • Some spread the untruth that Congress was unaffected by the AHCA and had some other tier of health care. This is demonstrably false.
  • There are some liberal groups even offering to send the ashes of the dead to Republicans in Congress. This is just morbid and deranged.

From the party of President Franklin Delano Roosevelt’s pledge that “the only thing we have to fear is fear itself,” the Left has descended to the politics of cremation and demagogic fear-mongering.

Let’s be clear: The Left is calling Republicans looking for a better health care plan murderers in order to distract from the complete failure of Obamacare. These extreme liberal over-reactions have even caused the New York Times to pause and fact-check their outlandish claims.

The Left is behaving like it has nothing to lose. The irony is its members’ actions are promoting ideas that are completely opposite to liberalism. Liberals are trapped in a pathology of anger and desperation that is leading them to silence dissenting opinion with vulgarity, threats, and violence; and obstruct real progress by spreading lies and propaganda. I discuss this pathology at length in my new book, Understanding Trump, which will be released June 13.

All Americans who care about maintaining the basic tenets of civil society today must stand up to the Left’s campaign of violence and intimidation.

Ingraham to Hannity: Let’s tour liberal college campuses

April 28, 2017

Ingraham to Hannity: Let’s tour liberal college campuses, Fox News via YouTube, April 27, 2017

 

If You want Real Change, Start with Education

March 9, 2017

If You want Real Change, Start with Education, Front Page MagazineBruce Thornton, March 9, 2017

(Is it still possible to “make education great again?” Oh well. Here’s a flash from the past from Andrew Klavan:

— DM)

 

It is easy to put a low priority on our how progressive ideology has corrupted higher education, and spend our time and energy on reforming the tax code or reining in the EPA. But remember the Jesuit maxim: “Give me the child until he is seven and I’ll give you the man.” Education today gets children at five, and in some cases continues to mold them until they’re 21. Changing the laws that empower bureaucratic ideologues to indoctrinate our children is the necessary first step to dismantling deep-state tyranny.

********************************

The first eight weeks of Trump’s administration have been filled with executive orders attacking the unconstitutional excesses of the Obama presidency. He’s also pledged to kill the regulatory Hydra, increase defense spending, reform the tax code, and restore America’s prestige. And all these changes and promises have been met with vicious attacks and outlandish charges from the media, and scorched-earth obstructionism from Congressional Dems.

All of which is as entertaining as an MMA blood-fest. But to effect real change, we need to get beneath the telegenic food-fight and transient click-bait, and start dynamiting the foundations of the deep state. And that means going after higher education, the one institution that more than any other shapes the young and indoctrinates them with progressive ideology.

But it’s not enough to go after the ideologically biased professoriate and administrators, or ridicule the pretentious “research” churned out by pseudo-disciplines in the humanities and social sciences. No doubt such critical exposure of the “higher nonsense” is important, for those bad ideas trickle down from the research universities to the state colleges, where most of the K-12 teachers get their teaching credentials. And most of those teachers inflict these political prejudices and false knowledge on the impressionable young, who by the time they reach college will already have been primed for even more pernicious indoctrination.

Take, for example, the silly notion of “microagressions.” This is the preposterous idea that systemic racism, sexism, etc. are so pervasive that people can subconsciously inflict injury on women, homosexuals, “people of color,” and all the other certified victims due special treatment like “safe spaces.” This wacky idea got started back in 2007 with a scientifically dubious paper called “Racial Microagressions in Everyday Life.” An even more influential bad idea, “Islamophobia,” traces its origins to Edward Said’s 1978 Orientalism, a “work of malignant charlatanry,” as Middle East scholar Robert Irwin described it, and one of the most-assigned books in social science and humanities courses. Like bacilli, such ideological prejudices disguised as scholarship have infected curricula from grade school to university, and from there sickened the whole culture. And they replicate themselves through the education industry’s monopoly on training, hiring, and tenuring of teachers.

Beyond this sort of research, however, lies the mother of all bad ideas, “diversity.” This pseudo-concept became part of national law in the 1978 Bakke vs. University of California case. In the Bakke decision, Justice Lewis Powell promulgated the idea that a vaguely defined “diversity” could justify racial discrimination in violation of Title VII of the 1964 Civil Rights Act’s ban on–– racial discrimination. How? Because “diversity” along with its alleged pedagogical benefits is a “compelling state interest.” Yet despite the continuing failure to specifically identity, define, or empirically substantiate this “state interest” or its benefits, the Supreme Court has continued to justify race-based policies by invoking “diversity.” Backed by the highest court in the land, promoting “diversity” now has become the dominant policy in nearly all colleges and universities. The result has been the institutionalizing of an illiberal identity politics that corrupts curricula, compromises liberal education’s traditional mission to promote “the free play of the mind on all subjects,” stifles free speech, and privileges politically selected “victims.”

Another example of how the deep state polices institutions to ensure their compliance with progressive ideology is the unconstitutional and unjust campus tribunals created to adjudicate claims of “sexual misconduct.” Robert L. Shibley, the executive director of the Foundation for Individual Rights in Education, has explained how the political corruption of Title IX of the Civil Rights Act has put the coercive, fiscal, and investigative power of the Department of Education behind ideologically based violations of the Constitution.

In 2011, the DOE’s Office of Civil Rights sent universities a “dear colleague” letter offering “guidance” about how schools should handle charges of sexual assault. As Shibley points out, the term “guidance” allows the agency to skirt the Administrative Procedure Act’s requirements that new agency regulations must notify those affected by the new rules and allow them time to comment. Thus the OCR in effect created two new laws, usurping the law-making powers of Congress. One allows both sides in a complaint to appeal the outcome of the proceedings, creating the possibility of double jeopardy if the accused is found guilty. Second, colleges have to use the “preponderance of evidence” standard, basically 50.01 percent certainty, when determining guilt, in contrast to the criminal justice system’s “beyond a reasonable doubt standard, a 98-99 percent certainty.

The result has been campus tribunals that violate the canons of justice and due process, leading to travesties of justice such as the falsely accused Duke lacrosse team, or the fake rape story published by Rolling Stone. In fact, the system is designed to be unfair. Administrators choose who presides over the hearing and who will be jurors––mostly other administrators with a vested interest in the outcome. Neither party has a right to counsel, cross-examination, or examination of the evidence, which can include even hearsay. As Shibley writes, “Such a system is not, by any stretch of the imagination, just, fair, or equitable.”

And huge difficulties face the unfortunate student found guilty who wants to sue, for his future in higher education could be compromised by allegations even if later proven false. Colleges and universities also have standing to sue, but either are ideologically committed to the politicizing of sexual encounters between adults, or fear the ever-present threat that the DOE can withhold federal money––$76 billion in 2013–– from colleges and universities that fall afoul of the agency’s diktats. Such leverage is so powerful that only one school, Oklahoma Wesleyan University, has filed suit against a Dear Colleague Letter.

The solution to this corruption of both the Constitution and the mission of liberal education is for Congress to pass legislation that reforms Title IX and corrects the over-vague and elastic language that gives the DOE scope for such bureaucratic tyranny. Yes, the DOE’s latest assault, the 2016 “Dear Colleague Letter” mandating that students can use whatever restroom fits their assumed sex identity, was suspended by Trump’s Executive order. But that’s a temporary fix that doesn’t get at the root of the problem, which goes beyond one federal agency. Congress must step up and reclaim its Constitutional right to make the laws. For just as appeasement begets appeasement, ignoring deep-state violations of the Constitution will create even more. The DOE’s tyranny permeates the federal bureaucracy, as we’ve seen under Obama with the politicizing of the IRS, the DOJ, and the intelligence community. That’s to be expected from a regulatory leviathan staffed by unaccountable partisan functionaries that every day encroaches on the Constitutional rights of American citizens and compromises their freedom.

It is easy to put a low priority on our how progressive ideology has corrupted higher education, and spend our time and energy on reforming the tax code or reining in the EPA. But remember the Jesuit maxim: “Give me the child until he is seven and I’ll give you the man.” Education today gets children at five, and in some cases continues to mold them until they’re 21. Changing the laws that empower bureaucratic ideologues to indoctrinate our children is the necessary first step to dismantling deep-state tyranny.

Anti-Free Speech Riot at NYU: Crazier than Berkeley?

February 4, 2017

Anti-Free Speech Riot at NYU: Crazier than Berkeley? Power LineJohn Hinderaker, February 4, 2017

This woman says that the job of the police is to beat up people with whom she disagrees. And she thinks the other side–the ones trying to give, and listen to, a speech–are “neo-Nazis.” That is modern liberalism in a nutshell.

An update to the Unz post says that the woman in the video “is possibly Rebecca Goyette, an artist who specializes in lobster-related pornography and video enactments of Donald Trump being castrated.” Based on a Google Images search, I would say the woman in the video is either Ms. Goyette or her double.

********************

On Thursday evening, Gavin McInnes, a comic, commentator and co-founder of Vice Media, attempted to give a speech at New York University, at the invitation of the NYU Republican group. A crowd of anti-free speech rioters battled police officers and ultimately succeeded in shutting down McInnes’s speech. Steve Sailer comments:

Unlike the Berkeley Police Department with Milo, the New York Police Department made sure Gavin McInness could actually deliver at least part of his talk at New York University at the invitation of the NYU Republicans. Gavin did get pepper-sprayed by anti-free speech activists, and eventually he got shut down after about 20 minutes by screamers.

***

The NYPD standing up for Gavin’s civil rights caused one protester to memorably enunciate to the line of cops protecting the dissidents the high principles and deep commitment to objective rationality that are at the heart of today’s anti-free speech movement.

nyu-riot-professor-video-crazy-1024x538

You have to see this to believe it, but trust me, you won’t be able to watch to the end:

The Blaze helpfully provides a transcript of the alleged professor’s rant:

Who’s protecting NYU from this bulls**t? Why are you here? You’re not here to protect these students from Nazis. No, you’re not! This is completely f***ed up. And these students had to f***ing face them on their own. You should be ashamed of yourselves! You should be standing up to those Nazis! You should be protecting students from hate! This is hate! These are f***ing assholes … you are a joke. You’re grown boys! You’re grown boys … and I’m disgusted! I’m a professor! How dare you! How dare you f***ing assholes protect neo-Nazis? F*** you! F*** you! F*** you! These are kids who are trying to learn about humanity! They’re trying to learn about human rights and against racism and xenophobia and LGBTQ rights, and you’re letting these f***ing neo-Nazis near here! You should kick their ass! You should! You should be ashamed of yourselves! You should! F*** that s**t. F*** that s**t. It’s not up to these students to kick the ass of a neo-Nazi! They don’t have to raise their fist! They were taught to be peaceful! F*** you! F*** you. I’m a professor. God f***ing damn it … you’re here to protect neo-Nazis! So f*** you! God f***ing damn it! Those kids should not have to take fists up to neo-Nazis, and you’re putting them in that situation! Go to hell. F*** you NYPD!

This woman says that the job of the police is to beat up people with whom she disagrees. And she thinks the other side–the ones trying to give, and listen to, a speech–are “neo-Nazis.” That is modern liberalism in a nutshell.

An update to the Unz post says that the woman in the video “is possibly Rebecca Goyette, an artist who specializes in lobster-related pornography and video enactments of Donald Trump being castrated.” Based on a Google Images search, I would say the woman in the video is either Ms. Goyette or her double.

Rebecca Goyette is indeed a professor, although not at NYU. I would post pictures of her “work,” only this is a family site. Among other things, she doesn’t just hate Donald Trump, she hates the United States. I think her biggest beef against the U.S. is that she isn’t able to jail the people she dislikes.

It’s just another day in the life of the American left. I am so, so glad I voted for Donald Trump!