Is the tide turning? The NYT criticizes the entitled students of Evergreen State

For some reason—and I may well be wrong—I think the demonization of biology professor Bret Weinstein at The Evergreen State College, the abject cowering of College President George Bridges in front of hordes of screaming students, and the absolutely unbelievable authoritarianism of those students as well as the non-science faculty—all represent a turning point in the U.S.

Sources tell me that Weinstein is receiving supportive vs. critical emails at a ratio of about 500 to 1, and that the support is coming from every point on the political spectrum. Conservative or progressive, people have had enough of entitled students—many of whom know little about what they’re protesting—demanding that everyone else shut up. If you haven’t seen the students demanding Weinstein’s resignation as a “racist”, and berating the pusillanimous President, telling both of them to “fuck off” (I have to admit, as a former teacher I find that pretty disrespectful, especially as the targets were calm)—then watch this short clip:

Weinstein has not only been forced to leave campus, but to leave his home, hiding out in an undisclosed location with his family and pets after getting threats. Yesterday,  Evergreen State was closed after a “direct threat to safety” was received. There’s no information about who made the threat or what it said, but I have my suspicions.

Remember that Evergreen has had diversity and equity initiatives for years, that Weinstein has a long history of progressive and anti-racist activism, and that all he did was write a calm email to Rashida Love, Director of First Peoples Multicultural Advising Services, refusing, as a white man, to leave campus on “the day of absence”, and asking for dialogue.

Since calling Weinstein a “racist” simply won’t stand up to five seconds of scrutiny, the students have changed their tune, pretending that they never asked white people to leave campus on the Day of Absence (a gross distortion), and altering their narrative from “Hey ho, Bret Weinstein has got to go!” to “Hey, ho, racist professors have got to go!” But they’re not fooling anyone, for we know who they mean.  The problem is that they mistakenly took on somebody strong enough to stand up to them, and rational enough to counter their guff.

The students and President of Evergreen State have now been reviled from many quarters. Only Regressive Leftists refuse to even mention the episode, for they know there’s nothing to be said in favor of the students’ behavior. Weinstein went on Tucker Carlson’s show on Fox News and was very calm, refusing to return the hostility he received from the students. Have a gander:

Of course Weinstein’s mere appearance on Fox News fueled the Regressives’ mantra that he is a racist, but now EvergreenGate is bleeding int0 other venues.

One sign that the tide is turning against college Regressive Leftists is that the mainstream liberal press is beginning to cover the student disruptions, including the one at Evergreen State and the reprehensible violence directed towards Charles Murray and his “host” at Middlebury College in Vermont. Witness the article in yesterday’s New York Times, “When the Left turns on its own“.

Here’s a bit from that piece, produced by staff writer Bari Weiss (my emphasis):

For expressing his view, Mr. Weinstein was confronted outside his classroom last week by a group of some 50 students insisting he was a racist. The video of that exchange — “You’re supporting white supremacy” is one of the more milquetoast quotes — must be seen to be believed. It will make anyone who believes in the liberalizing promise of higher education quickly lose heart. When a calm Mr. Weinstein tries to explain that his only agenda is “the truth,” the students chortle.

Following the protest, college police, ordered by Evergreen’s president to stand down, told Mr. Weinstein they couldn’t guarantee his safety on campus. In the end, Mr. Weinstein held his biology class in a public park. Meantime, photographs and names of his students were circulated online. “Fire Bret” graffiti showed up on campus buildings. What was that about safe spaces?

Watching the way George Bridges, the president of Evergreen, has handled this situation put me in mind of a line from Allan Bloom’s book “The Closing of the American Mind.” Mr. Bloom was writing about administrators’ reaction to student radicals in the 1960s, but he might as well be writing about Evergreen: “A few students discovered that pompous teachers who catechized them about academic freedom could, with a little shove, be made into dancing bears.”

At a town hall meeting, Mr. Bridges described the protestors as “courageous” and expressed his gratitude for “this catalyst to expedite the work to which we are jointly committed.” Of course, there was also pablum about how “free speech must be fostered and encouraged.” But if that’s what Mr. Bridges really believes, why isn’t he doing everything in his power to protect a professor who exercised it and condemn the mob that tried to stifle him?

. . . Shutting down conservatives has become de rigueur. But now anti-free-speech activists are increasingly turning their ire on free-thinking progressives. Liberals shouldn’t cede the responsibility to defend free speech on college campuses to conservatives. After all, without free speech, what’s liberalism about?

Weinstein doesn’t blame the students so much as the regressive faculty and administration, many of whom incited the students, and even supported their invective. In one video, you can see a professor or administrator telling President Bridges to ignore the invective of a student who said “Fuck you!”, claiming that the students was just being passionate. I’ve also heard that some of the students have demanded the removal of STEM courses from the curriculum. After all, science accepts the notion of objective truth, something anathema to the postmodernists sentiments that infect many of the “humanities” courses at Evergreen State.

What’s going on at Evergreen State, then, is not just fulminating Regressive Leftism, but a miniature version of the culture wars they dearly love to fight.

Finally, President Bridges should resign. He’s a hapless dupe and an invertebrate, a man without the semblance of a backbone.


  1. GBJames
    Posted June 2, 2017 at 10:17 am | Permalink


  2. Posted June 2, 2017 at 10:24 am | Permalink

    I hope you are correct that the Crtl-left has finally jumped the shark. But I’m not so sure. The rot goes straight through the academy. Weinstein blamed the regressive faculty and administration at Evergreen but they are at many other schools too.

    I do hope this is the beginning of the end.

  3. Rich Sanderson
    Posted June 2, 2017 at 10:25 am | Permalink

    There does seem to be more pushback….but by and large, I still get the feeling MSM either deliberately ignore this regressive cult invading academia, or are supportive of it. There is a lot more of this stuff going on than people are aware of.

    It is progressive liberals opposing this, and of course, the alt-right, who will jump into the empty space vacated by the left on these issues.

    PS Did you mean Charles Murray, not James Murray?

    • Posted June 2, 2017 at 10:55 am | Permalink

      Yes, will fix, thanks!

    • Posted June 2, 2017 at 11:59 am | Permalink

      It’s not just the alt-right, who definitely seize the opportunity to abuse others in the name of opposing political correctness and exercising free speech, but anyone who cares about free speech and academic freedom

  4. Martin X
    Posted June 2, 2017 at 10:28 am | Permalink

    “invertebrate, a man without the semblance of a backbone.”

    Yes, there is a Congressional seat somewhere with this man’s name on it.

    • Mark Joseph
      Posted June 2, 2017 at 6:05 pm | Permalink

      Actually, several hundred of them. Unfortunately.

  5. Kevin
    Posted June 2, 2017 at 10:44 am | Permalink

    I see no tide turning. The experience I am having dealing with elementary school teachers and principals shows me we are in this for the long haul.

    No one’s feelings can get hurt. Everyone is a bully. Staring at a brown person wrongly is racism. And worse, our educational system is turning girls, who at age five to seven, had the confidence of eagles, into craven, confident-less, self-pitying shells of their former beings.

    American society is turning itself into a mega-cushion.

    • dabertini
      Posted June 2, 2017 at 11:24 am | Permalink

      “I see no tide turning. The experience I am having dealing with elementary school teachers and principals shows me we are in this for the long haul.”

      Care to divulge?

      • Kevin
        Posted June 2, 2017 at 12:02 pm | Permalink

        What I would consider normal un-nice behavior from a child is more likely to be considered wholly unacceptable from many parents, teachers, and school administrators. This leaves less room for the kid to learn, when all they receive is admonishment (not even proper discipline or dialogue).

        There is a lot of pampering, both parent-requested and teacher-purveyed. Children can deal with a lot more problems than we give them credit.

        I am really dismayed with how education is facilitating weaknesses in girls. Two aspects in particular, science and sports. Clearly there are some leaders who are unaffected, but the majority of girls appear to turn off their confidence both in the class and ‘in the arena’ so to speak.

        • dabertini
          Posted June 2, 2017 at 12:40 pm | Permalink

          Thanks for the reply. I have found that the message at school needs to be the same as the message at home. If the two worlds collide then the kid gets mixed messages and is at the very least confused. My experience as a high school, as well as elementary school student was positive. The female students were AT LEAST as capable as the males in all areas- sport and academics. Sorry to hear that you are experiencing these unnecessary challenges.

          • Posted June 2, 2017 at 1:02 pm | Permalink

            “the message at school needs to be the same as the message at home”

            See my other note.

            At my wife’s school, many kids don’t get parenting at home. The school is the parent. They socialize as well as teach the kids.

            Many kids have parents that are absent, or allow them to: Stay up late at night, not do homework, watch R-rated movies (or worse), play games like grand theft auto, don’t feed them, don’t dress them appropriately, don’t bathe them.

            And the teachers have just suck it up and replace/correct all these services/issues as best they can (nevermind that they are supposed to be teaching not acting as social workers).

            And when it doesn’t work out well? Well, it’s the teachers’ fault, don’t you know?

            The thing the successful schools with “urban” constituencies do? They are doing surrogate parenting. Keep that in mind any time you read/hear about such a school.

            • dabertini
              Posted June 2, 2017 at 2:08 pm | Permalink

              Yup, and that is my point.

        • Posted June 2, 2017 at 12:52 pm | Permalink

          My wife is an elementary school teacher in a large urban area in the US Midwest.

          Yes, the rules are: You pretty well can’t discipline a kid these days. They have to go to the buddy room (right up until they actually commit a crime). Can’t take away anything even extra choice time that it given as a reward for performance.

          You can’t touch them (literally).

          And there are some amazingly defiant, disruptive kids, even in early elementary grades, who can cheat a whole classroom of their education for hours.

          How they keep things together and manage to teach the kids that want to learn, I have no idea.

          In a (very highly rated) suburban district where my kids go/went to school, I was confronted when going to pick up my son from after school care by a completely out-of-control kid who was screaming, throwing things, pushing everything on table tops onto the floor, etc. The staff could do nothing except call the parents and clear the (large gym) room of all the other kids.

          As my son walked to me, the kids tried to shove a partition into him (luckily he missed). I instantly became papa silverback gorilla and shouted at him at the top of my lungs (which is very loud). This froze him until I left the premises. Little shit!

          • Posted June 2, 2017 at 12:55 pm | Permalink

            “the kid tried to shove” — obviously

          • Posted June 2, 2017 at 1:35 pm | Permalink

            I have no facts on this case, but that behavior is consistent with some kids with Aspergers’ syndrome.

            • Posted June 2, 2017 at 6:02 pm | Permalink

              Being beaten by the other kids is more consistent with Asperger’s syndrome.

          • Posted June 2, 2017 at 1:37 pm | Permalink

            You know, overall I think you’re right – things ARE different than when I was young (late 1960s – 70s). Overall.

            But throughout both of my sons schooling (one just graduating HS, the other 8th grade) it was rare that I witnessed anything like you describe. Once in a while I ran into some kids and families that fit the image. Maybe we were just lucky (Seattle public school system), but I have to say much of the commentary I see here and elsewhere on this subject -like the cartoon reproduced below- smacks of the age-old complaint about how kids today are rotten. A frame of reference every generation is familiar with.

            I heard it when I was young – how kids my age were disrespectful, weren’t doing school/work/life the right way, “why when I was young we never….”, etc, etc. It’s the “you rotten kids, get off my lawn!” attitude; one I’m beginning to better understand considering I am fast approaching the moldy-oldy stage of life.

            I guess I’m saying, yeah things are different and not necessarily for the better, but we olde folks need to keep a close eye on the “get off my lawn” kind of thinking.

            • darrelle
              Posted June 2, 2017 at 3:08 pm | Permalink

              Regarding kids behavior, I agree with you. Since having kids I’ve repeatedly had experiences that make me realize how different, in positive ways, my kids and their generation are compared to mine. Most of the stuff I see at school that pisses me off has to do with the adults at the schools, not the kids.

              In general the kids are better behaved, kinder, more supportive of each other, less cruel and more inclusive. There is still bad behavior of course, and some children that are consistent trouble makers. And despite the very serious problems I have with public school education in the US my kids are getting a good education. They are a little ahead of where I was at their age.

              My experience of these things, kids behavior and education, may be biased because my kids have been in the public school system’s gifted program from an early age, so they’ve had the best the system has to offer. But I also see these things elsewhere, for example among all the neighborhood kids.

              I hear people say things like, “look at these kids these days, and they are our future leaders!,” as if that is something to despair about. Not me. I’m just fine with that.

          • darrelle
            Posted June 2, 2017 at 2:39 pm | Permalink

            “You can’t touch them (literally).”

            This is also applied to the students, at least in the public schools my children have attended. And it isn’t intended to apply only to preventing negative physical contact associated with bullying or fighting. For example the rules are specific that holding hands and hugging are not allowed.

            These rules don’t apply only to possibly (okay, very likely) horny junior high and high school kids. At the school my twins attended for K through 5th grade these rules were constantly being reiterated. My children were cautioned, or rebuked, more than once for breaking these rules. Why shouldn’t 2nd grade girl-friends be allowed to hold hands? That’s bad in some way? No. What’s twisted is making and enforcing a rule against a benign, normal and positive behavior.

            I can’t adequately express how fucked up I think this is. Shit, on more than one occasion my wife and I have received a concerned look from a teacher or other school administrator while giving our kids a hug when picking them up or dropping them off from school. Once while doing so I was told by another child that “you’re not supposed to do that.” Another time a young girl wistfully asked my wife if she could get a hug too. On one occasion an administrator asked my wife if everything was okay simply because she gave our then 7 year old son a hug goodbye. WTF? You don’t hug your kids? I feel sorry for your kids.

            • Posted June 2, 2017 at 4:21 pm | Permalink

              I’ve read a report about a high school student punished for hugging a friend who had just returned to school after losing a parent.

              • BJ
                Posted June 2, 2017 at 5:09 pm | Permalink

                Yup, it was a boy who hugged a girl, so it was sexual harassment, apparently.

                Same thing happened to a third-grader a couple of years ago. If I remember correctly, they even called the cops.

        • BJ
          Posted June 2, 2017 at 4:31 pm | Permalink

          I always said that the modern victim narrative of new feminism would hurt young girls, not help them. When you grow up thinking you’re a victim your whole life, you never learn any lessons from your mistakes (because they’re not yours, but rather the fault of a system that is designed to keep you down), always think you’re weak and in danger, and constantly wracked with anxiety. This is not at all helpful to self-esteem. The “girl power” version was much better, but today, everything (not just feminism, but all of the radical left) is about being a victim.

        • Filippo
          Posted June 2, 2017 at 6:58 pm | Permalink

          ” . . . normal un-nice behavior from a child . . . .”

          I’d be interested in specifically what your standard of “normal un-nice” is and how you arrived at it.

          From twelve years of full-time substitute teaching, I’ve had my fill of “un-nice” behavior. At the K-5 level my substantial experience is that the vast majority of it issues from male children. I tell them that if they want to touch or bother someone, touch or bother themelves – leave your classmate ALONE! Bloody interruptions, can’t keep their mouths shut. It’s wearisome and enervating to the teacher. (They admit that they wouldn’t do it if their mother was sitting there watching them.) Of course that is not near as much fun, eh?

          Other students have good manners. Obviously SOMEONE has taught them well. From my experience and observation through the six K-5 years teachers (many of them parents of children), beholden to their “in loco parentis” legal responsibility and duty, make a monumental effort to teach and reinforce good manners. It seems pretty straight-forward to me.

          (At the middle school level, especially 7th and 8th grade, girls start to take up the misbehavioral slack. I used to do a lot of middle school math and science; not anymore. Well, 6th grade is generally OK; they retain some of their 5th grade-ness, though at that grade level not a few put on middle school “airs.”)

          I haven’t checked in the last few years, but, the last I heard approx. 50% of elementary school teachers leave the field by the five-year point. Reasons for leaving, per media reports, include the “white noise” language of “lack of support from administration.” I’m quite well satisfied that a great pct. of that translates as teachers having had their fill of student misbehavior, and they’re bound and determined, as the Old Timer might put it, to “git shed” of it.

          Omniscient self-regarding Romneyesque MBA/JD management consultant types need to grace us with their presence and show us the errors of our ways.

    • Zach
      Posted June 2, 2017 at 11:58 am | Permalink

      I see no tide turning. The experience I am having dealing with elementary school teachers and principals shows me we are in this for the long haul.

      This is a topic that often flies under the radar—the effects that postmodern ideology has had on teaching/pedagogy programs over the past couple decades.

      I’m not sure whether this is because they’re not as bad as in other areas, or whether we just don’t hear about them as much.

      • Posted June 2, 2017 at 1:08 pm | Permalink

        This is largely due to:

        1. Laws and regulations

        2. Parents who think their kid can do no wrong and expect the world to adapt to the kid’s bad behavior.

        This comic says it all:

        • Posted June 2, 2017 at 1:41 pm | Permalink

          There was a pretty good article in New York Magazine recently about one of the main reasons for this state of affairs.

          • Zach
            Posted June 2, 2017 at 2:40 pm | Permalink

            Yes, the self-esteem craze seems to be the flip side of the postmodern fetishization of victimhood.

            Or there could be something more mundane going on. The modern hyper-preciousness of children may be a result of the simple fact that people are having less of them.

            I recall some comedian joking about how back in the day, when people had 5 kids, they were less worried about one of them getting broken because all their eggs weren’t in one basket (I forget the exact verbage of the joke).

            Either way, I sympathize with teachers nowadays. I was quite a handful as a kid (not a bully, but prone to violent tantrums throughout elementary school). I can only imagine how much harder dealing with kids like me today is. Conversely, it might be easier—I’d just get expelled.

  6. Posted June 2, 2017 at 10:56 am | Permalink

    Amen to all. Thankfully at my station in life, I have virtually zip interaction with regressive leftism. My friends and colleagues remain ‘true’ progressives, and the students at the university where I occasionally teach remain respectful and hard-working. My concern is for our children and grandchildren.

  7. Historian
    Posted June 2, 2017 at 11:03 am | Permalink

    “Weinstein doesn’t blame the students so much as the regressive faculty and administration, many of whom incited the students, and even supported their invective.”

    Yes. See this defense of the protestors by one Peter Bohmer, a faculty member at Evergreen State. He doesn’t want Weinsten fired because, according to Bohmer, he is no more racist than the rest of the faculty (which Bohmer seems to imply is a lot). Bohmer downplays the disruptions at the school. His only interest seems to be solidarity with the protestors. I have no idea as to the extent of racism on this campus, but I do know that people such as Bohmer should consider whether the tactics he seemingly endorses are not, in fact, counterproductive.

    The site of this posting is called Counterpunch. My impression that most of the articles are by old-time leftists whose criticism of American society is mostly based on economics. So, Bohmer’s article is a little out of the norm since it deals with culture. As a liberal, I find most of the posts at this site pathetic. They represent a far left criticism of capitalism that goes back around 100 years. While some of the criticisms are valid, the posters offer no solutions and must wonder why that despite their labors, the country has ended up with Trump. As a liberal, I find these people a minor annoyance in the effort to make real progress in this country in terms of the travails of the working class and the oppressed. But, since these people have little or no power in this country, except perhaps on some campuses, I concentrate my energies on combating the far right, which now controls this country and is bringing ruination in almost every way imaginable.

    • Randall Schenck
      Posted June 2, 2017 at 11:23 am | Permalink

      I think in many ways you are right. This disease seems to be mainly a plague on college campuses and does not have much shelf life out in the working world. I do hope it goes away and can only do so with strong correction by school administration. There are many important and necessary things that need to be addressed in the country and these kids are in no shape mentally to do it. Our history seems to have been shoved into the cracks and the country is so screwed up nobody knows what to do. Politically we need to focus on inequality and money in politics that runs this country but who has the guts?

    • Posted June 2, 2017 at 12:09 pm | Permalink

      I read some articles from Counterpunch from time to time – they don’t have a consistent position other than perhaps vaguely “left” or “contrarian”.

  8. dabertini
    Posted June 2, 2017 at 11:21 am | Permalink

    What puzzles me is that Professor Weinstein was always polite and well-meaning when he wrote the letter and confronted the students. There was nothing but warmth and understanding from him, yet he was treated with vitriol and threats. The students who are threatening the professor need to be charged with inciting violence. The rest need to go back to elementary school and learn how to behave as students.

    • Filippo
      Posted June 2, 2017 at 6:07 pm | Permalink

      They need to bring some kindergartners on campus to conduct some refresher training in good manners.

  9. Tom
    Posted June 2, 2017 at 11:27 am | Permalink

    Idon’t know if this will be of any help to understand what is going on in some colleges etc. but here goes.
    In the 1980’s in Britain we had the miners strike.
    A friend of mine who was a policeman on picket duty said that for hours the duty was civilised and peaceful, however when word was received that a pack of TV news hounds was arriving the picket line showed more aggression and the police responded likewise. Obviously this what we saw on our news coverage. Then when the TV crews left the picketing and the police went back to their usual behaviour.
    Now, I appreciate that news teams are not present in most colleges but Cell Phone with very good cameras are and disruptions can be filmed, put on the net or sold.
    So my point is that some of these “demos” are partly stunts
    and in some cases these get out of hand which attracts more attention and possibly more money.
    I am probably just being cynical.

    • DrBrydon
      Posted June 2, 2017 at 11:51 am | Permalink

      I had not realized until yesterday when I read Weinstein’s piece in The Wall Street Journal (thanks, Jerry!), that the actual confrontation took place a month after the actual day of absence. My question is what triggered the protests then? Someone put the word out that Weinstein wasn’t playing the game.

  10. BJ
    Posted June 2, 2017 at 11:30 am | Permalink

    Good for the NYT, but I don’t see a tide-turning yet. They did it on a weekday, in a print newspaper, and I haven’t seen a single word about this on TV news, where most people see news. Still, I am seeing more regular (non-media) pushback from true liberals, which is heartening.

    • Posted June 2, 2017 at 11:33 am | Permalink

      In case it isn’t clear, if you want to read it – it’s on line too, not just in print.

      • BJ
        Posted June 2, 2017 at 4:28 pm | Permalink

        No, I know, but my ultimate point is that they published it on a Thursday, in what is still a newspaper, and most people don’t get their news from places like NYT, even online. Moreover, I haven’t heard a peep on the big left-leaning channels. The only channel that I know to have covered it is Fox News.

        • Diane G.
          Posted June 3, 2017 at 2:39 am | Permalink

          Uh, where else do you expect the NYT to publish? 😉

          • BJ
            Posted June 3, 2017 at 7:45 am | Permalink

            I don’t understand your question. I said I don’t see a tide turn in the media just because the NYT published a single op-ed on a Thursday. I didn’t say I expect the NYT specifically to publish it anywhere else. I don’t understand the point you’re trying to make here. Sorry.

            • Craw
              Posted June 3, 2017 at 1:44 pm | Permalink

              BJ, You were addressing the tide turning notion by pointing out it was ONLY in a newspaper, not really mass media like TV. Diane G thought to rebut you by noting the the NYT is a newspaper, so where else but in a newspaper could the NYT act.

              • Diane G.
                Posted June 3, 2017 at 11:12 pm | Permalink

                Thx, Craw. 😉

  11. DrBrydon
    Posted June 2, 2017 at 11:58 am | Permalink

    It fine if you think that these attitudes disappear when the students see how the world really works. However, what about the time (and money) wasted on educational programs that appear to have no practical outcome except to de-socialize the students? The students themselves are being bilked.

    On another note, if all values are subjective, and rooted in personal experience, as the pomos claim, then how can one take offense at or criticize anyone as being racist? Doesn’t that presume an ojective standard of justice?

    • Denise
      Posted June 2, 2017 at 8:31 pm | Permalink

      Only if you believe in logic.

  12. pck
    Posted June 2, 2017 at 12:27 pm | Permalink

    How can any self respecting, halfway intelligent person let themselves get paraded around on Fox News for the entertainment of an even more abhorrent, pathologically outraged crowd? All he’s doing here is feeding the right’s anti-education agenda, as if these people gave a single damn about the actual issues. As if his job and funding weren’t among the first to disappear if the insane Fox News audience had their way!

    Is this really the support he wants in this fight?

    • Paul Schoeckel
      Posted June 2, 2017 at 1:10 pm | Permalink

      Perhaps it’s the only support he was offered. I haven’t seen anyone else stepping up, that’s disheartening.

    • DrBrydon
      Posted June 2, 2017 at 1:21 pm | Permalink

      What’s the definition of a conservative? A liberal that’s been mugged?

      • Ken Kukec
        Posted June 2, 2017 at 3:03 pm | Permalink

        And a liberal is a conservative who’s found themself under investigation.

    • Ken Kukec
      Posted June 2, 2017 at 3:26 pm | Permalink

      That’s all that’s left of Fox News’s once-potent shtick — straining at the motes in the eye of leftism while ignoring the manifest misdeeds of the yooge orange beam rotting away in the White House. And that snotty, entitled, moldering preppy Tucker Carlson is among the worst of the lot.

      The whole network is collapsing in an orgy of low ratings, alternative facts, and institutional sexism. They’ve hitched their wagon to Donald Trump and appear intent on following him over the cliff. They better all be able to swim for Vladivostok.

      • Diane G.
        Posted June 3, 2017 at 2:43 am | Permalink

        That was so nice I read it twice. 😉

        Srsly, wonderful writing!

        • Ken Kukec
          Posted June 3, 2017 at 4:11 pm | Permalink

          My friends & family say: “Please don’t encourage him.” 🙂

    • Posted June 2, 2017 at 4:33 pm | Permalink

      Methinks that it is the ballooning administration and the aggressive students who have an anti-education agenda.

      You may have a real educational institution, or you may have safe spaces, trigger warnings, microaggression watch, diversity officers, sensitivity training, bias response teams, gates of hell opening when someone puts on a sombrero, and hordes of young bullies mislabeled as “students”. Meanwhile, the teachers who must serve as role models for students are reduced to poorly paid adjuncts on temporary contracts who are to teach with their tails between their legs.

      All of the above is done by the leftists who dominate academia. If right-wingers want to dismantle the academia altogether, they will at least clear space for a new beginning.

    • BJ
      Posted June 2, 2017 at 5:11 pm | Permalink

      If they’re the only ones who are willing to put his story on TV (where millions of Americans get their news exclusively), then I would do the same thing.

      • pck
        Posted June 2, 2017 at 5:30 pm | Permalink

        He’s letting himself become instrumentalized for a much more heinous purpose than social justice. We shouldn’t forget that the real serious enemies of a progessive society aren’t a couple of college kids that have been made insane by the internet.

        • Denise
          Posted June 2, 2017 at 8:30 pm | Permalink

          The right makes use of these stories whether Weinstein goes on Fox or not. This kind of stuff definitely helped Donald Trump get elected. The academic lunatic fringe has become the face of liberalism to many people. If we don’t want these people speaking for us then we have to stand up to them.

        • BJ
          Posted June 2, 2017 at 8:35 pm | Permalink

          Yeah, just a couple of college kids. You’ve clearly seen the videos. And all the other articles over the years as this issue of speech on campus being shut down by leftist radicals continues to escalate.

          You can fight more than one battle at once. Boohoo if Fox is “using” him for other reasons. He got the story on TV. If it’s so important to you that this not be coming from right-wing channels, maybe you should be worried about why the left-leaning ones refuse to report on any of it, ever, over the course of several years now.

          • Diane G.
            Posted June 3, 2017 at 2:48 am | Permalink

            The NYT doesn’t refuse to cover it. Oh, that’s right, you dropped your subscription…

            Maybe you get all your news on TV but there still seems to be a market for the NYT, WaPo, Wall Street Journal, etc. People who really care about news read, not listen.

            • BJ
              Posted June 3, 2017 at 7:50 am | Permalink

              No, I didn’t say I get all my news from TV (I only watch TV news specifically to see what they are talking and not talking about). My claim was that millions do, and you have not addressed this. And the NYT has refused to cover this wave for years. A single op-ed on a Thursday (I think the majority of people who are subscribed to the paper have the weekend and Tuesdays subscription) is not suddenly sufficient coverage of this issue.

              It’s nice that you say people who really care about news read, not listen, but not everyone has your life (and I read my news, thank you. I’m right here on this site. It’s one of many places I read my news). But you have not addressed any of my points at all.

              • Diane G.
                Posted June 3, 2017 at 11:19 pm | Permalink

                Not sure, but I imagine the NYT’s (& WaPo’s WSJ’s, etc.) readership is largely online these days. At least judging from some of the hefty comment threads!

                I do get the Sunday hard copy of the NYT but still read most of even that issue online.

                I think you’ve stated your points clearly, more than once. I see nothing to address, sorry.

            • Ken Kukec
              Posted June 3, 2017 at 7:54 am | Permalink

              Yeah, The Atlantic, for one, has covered this thoroughly. Conor Friedersdorf has written frequently on the topic. Here’s his latest in that series.

              • BJ
                Posted June 3, 2017 at 8:07 am | Permalink

                The Atlantic I will absolutely give credit. They (well, Conor) have been doing a great job covering it. They are the only slightly left (and they really can only be considered very slightly left — I would say they try to stay in the center over the last few years, sort of carving out a niche for themselves) publication to do so, as far as I know.

                And again, no left-leaning TV news outlet has made a peep about this incident or others.

              • Diane G.
                Posted June 4, 2017 at 12:29 am | Permalink

                Such a depressing article. I’ve often wished my kids hadn’t ended up in the social media era; at least they were nearly or already college age when it really took off.

        • Jim Smith
          Posted June 2, 2017 at 10:48 pm | Permalink

          No he isn’t idiot. He told his story. Sorry it wasn’t in media that you give your consent to. But your media won’t cover it. And Fox will use your lameass comment to show their viewers what idiots exist on the left. Therefore you comment will be ‘instrumentalized’ (lol!).
          And I give a rat’s ass.

          • Posted June 4, 2017 at 5:49 am | Permalink

            Sorry, Mr. Smith, but you have called pck an idiot, and your comment is intermperate. If you don’t apologize for that remark immediately, and behave yourself henceforth, you are banned. Did you read the posting guidelines (“Da Roolz”) before you came over here like a bull in a china shop.

            I give a rat’s ass whether incivility is promulgated on this board, and you are doing it. Shape up or leave.

        • Craw
          Posted June 2, 2017 at 11:03 pm | Permalink

          To me the enemies of a liberal society include those who won’t defend it when it is attacked. It is harder to think of a more direct attack than threats, censorship, and racial segregation. Bret Weinstein is defending liberal society, and so is Tucker Carlson. You are not.

          • BJ
            Posted June 3, 2017 at 7:52 am | Permalink

            Indeed. Worry about the supposedly liberal press that refuses to report on this stuff. Don’t want him going to Fox News? I’m sure Mr. Weinstein himself would much rather be interviewed by a different channel, too. Too bad none of the other channels have anything to say about any of this, ever.

          • Ken Kukec
            Posted June 3, 2017 at 4:21 pm | Permalink

            Tucker Carlson is a cheapjack hustler who was recently exposed for running a 501(c)(3) charitable tax dodge out of his crappy Daily Caller website.

            • Diane G.
              Posted June 4, 2017 at 1:03 am | Permalink

              Eeuw. And I’ll bet the whole time he was railing about how corrupt the Clinton Foundation was…

          • Diane G.
            Posted June 4, 2017 at 1:09 am | Permalink

            “Bret Weinstein is defending liberal society, and so is Tucker Carlson.”

            Bret Weinstein, yes. Carlson is more likely reveling in watching this fraction of the wing-nut left embarrass themselves and give his usual audience a surfeit of schadenfreude and self-satisfaction.

            That doesn’t preclude the chance that some of the listeners might actually garner some insight from what Weinstein has to say.

  13. Posted June 2, 2017 at 1:18 pm | Permalink

    My urge after watching the students’ protest video is to puke.
    Really disgusting people!

    • Craw
      Posted June 2, 2017 at 11:04 pm | Permalink

      Yes. We need to be honest. These are not just misguided fools. These are bad people.

  14. aljones909
    Posted June 2, 2017 at 1:30 pm | Permalink

    China during Mao’s cultural revolution

    ‘Ken Ling’, Red Guard, 1972:
    “On the Athletic field, I saw rows of teachers, about 40 or 50 in all, with black ink poured over their heads and faces… Hanging on their necks were placards with such words as ‘reactionary academic authority so-and-so’, class enemy so-and-so’ … They all wore dunce caps … Hanging from their necks were pails filled with rocks. I saw the principal, the pail round his neck was so heavy that the wire had cut deep into his neck and he was staggering. All were barefoot, hitting broken gongs … as they walked round the field and begged Mao Zedong to ‘pardon their crimes’ …
    Beatings and torture followed … eating nightsoil and insects; being subjected to electric shocks; forced to kneel in broken glass”

  15. Craw
    Posted June 2, 2017 at 1:56 pm | Permalink

    From your lips to God’s ear Dr Coyne. 🙂

    I wish I could be equally confident. But even on this site we still see “you shouldn’t assault people” answered with “he’s racist.”

    • Diane G.
      Posted June 3, 2017 at 2:50 am | Permalink

      We do? What have I missed?

      • BJ
        Posted June 3, 2017 at 7:53 am | Permalink

        There was a thread a few weeks ago. We had at least two defenders of punching people with certain views.

        • Diane G.
          Posted June 4, 2017 at 12:39 am | Permalink

          Sigh. It’s true, I’ve missed a lot lately. Thanks for the info.

  16. barn owl
    Posted June 2, 2017 at 3:12 pm | Permalink

    I’m not so sure that President Bridges is a hapless dupe. I think that he’s doing everything possible to hang onto a cushy salary at TEC. Prove me wrong though! Here in Texas, you can look up salaries of government employees (state, city, school district) through the Texas Tribune:

    I’m a state employee, so you can look up my salary (it’s not listed under Barn Owl, unfortunately). Of course the Texas Tribune website doesn’t tell the whole story (e.g. bonuses to football coaches, research faculty who also receive salary from the VA, etc.), but it’s a start.

    Does the state of Washington have something similar? If so, let’s look up President Bridges’ salary. And while we’re at it, how about the salaries of some of the other players in this execrable drama?

    • barn owl
      Posted June 2, 2017 at 3:14 pm | Permalink

      Warning: some may wish to take an anti-emetic before viewing the salaries of head coaches at UT and Texas A&M.

      • Diane G.
        Posted June 3, 2017 at 2:52 am | Permalink

        I’m from Michigan; I can handle it.


        • Ken Kukec
          Posted June 3, 2017 at 4:01 pm | Permalink

          Go Blue runs on mean green. 🙂

          • Diane G.
            Posted June 3, 2017 at 10:06 pm | Permalink

            Very tactful of you. 😀

      • Posted June 3, 2017 at 11:13 am | Permalink

        Just one of the perks of working for a state-sponsored religion.

    • barn owl
      Posted June 2, 2017 at 3:27 pm | Permalink

      The Olympian has a searchable database; the most recent update I found was in 2015:

      It indicates that the President of TEC (not Bridges at that time) had an annual salary in 2014 of $242,100. Not too shabby.

      • barn owl
        Posted June 2, 2017 at 3:30 pm | Permalink

        Sorry, that was the salary for 2015, not 2014.

  17. BJ
    Posted June 2, 2017 at 4:27 pm | Permalink

    From the NYT piece: “. . . Shutting down conservatives has become de rigueur. But now anti-free-speech activists are increasingly turning their ire on free-thinking progressives.”

    Anyone else think it’s convenient that they’ve decided this issue is important enough to report on now that it’s happening to people on the left more?

    • Diane G.
      Posted June 3, 2017 at 2:54 am | Permalink

      “Shutting down conservatives has become de rigueur…” reads to me as if the author disapproves of that as well.

      • BJ
        Posted June 3, 2017 at 7:54 am | Permalink

        They do, but you are again refusing to engage the actual point I made in my post.

        • Diane G.
          Posted June 4, 2017 at 12:52 am | Permalink

          BJ, you’ve made so many posts I’m no longer sure just which one you’re referring to. But since a lot of them said that you don’t feel traditional left-leaning media have been addressing the Ctrl-left campus idiocy enough, I’ll assume that’s the point you want addressed. I don’t see what there is to “engage in,” but, w/o doing my own research, I’ll accept that you’re right. Media are generally much more polarized these days because that’s what the public seems to want. For that reason, I find it hard to criticize them too much since they do need subscribers to survive. (And I do subscribe; even though a lot of the content is free online, now.)

          While I’ve been disillusioned with the NYT for some time now, I still value much of its journalism. (And the same goes for most most of its ilk.) To use one of the current cliches, there’s really no point in letting the perfect be the enemy of the good.

  18. Al
    Posted June 2, 2017 at 6:17 pm | Permalink

    The author of this piece is Bari Weiss who has been hired from the WSJ (along with a conservative columnist Bret Stephens) after the election as part of the NYT’s attempt to diversify its opinion writers (interestingly, they haven’t hired a pro-trump writer, only “nevertrump” conservatives). I don’t know her politics but I think it skews (center-)right. So you can’t credit the NYT’s liberal writers with this pointed criticism of regressive students. As before, one has to rely on conservatives to cover this important issue.

    • Diane G.
      Posted June 3, 2017 at 2:55 am | Permalink

      Sheesh, we can at least give some credit to the NYT for publishing it.

  19. Craw
    Posted June 2, 2017 at 10:27 pm | Permalink

    Here a prof at Evergreen berates and offers them a choice. I have tried to stop embedding with brackets.


  20. Matt Bowman
    Posted June 2, 2017 at 11:57 pm | Permalink

    I would not have kept my cool. I would have blown up. I think those students were threatening that woman at the beginning of the video, who I guess is a professor. Bridges is a coward. You get an idea of how he has learned to conform when you hear that professor council him that, “What matters is what they’re saying, not how they’re saying it.” And, that is while students are shouting f-bombs and screaming nearly right in his face. One of the highlights is when a student says, “We had civilizations way before you ever had… comin’ out your caves…okay?” This is coming from a college student and Evergreen is going to be giving this person a degree, possibly. Scary. By the way, that’s a story from the Nation of Islam. Right out of the Louis Farrakhan playbook. The white race was created by a scientist named Yakub. Everything was great until this black scientist created white devils. Well, that gives you a good sense of why some students might want to kill the STEM courses. At one point in the video, they demand that Bridges put his hands down and he complies. They yell at him, “Put your hands down!” He starts to respond again and points, and they respond, “Don’t point! You gotta put your hands down! You know you gotta put your hands down!” Another student stands near Bridges and the student slaps his hands by his sides, modeling for Bridges what to do. And, Bridges does it! Pathetic. Other students laugh. And, why not? Bridges is a joke. He needs to be fired, and quickly. Lastly, and I know I am treading on dangerous ground here, but I have to say it, the last woman who speaks about her ancestors being slaves should get a DNA kit and dig into her ancestry because she might have slavery in her background, but she might also have slave masters there too. I don’t know how much tuition is at Evergreen, but I know it isn’t worth it. Worst. College. Ever.

    • somer
      Posted June 3, 2017 at 3:09 am | Permalink

      Professional corporate back scratchers not senior educational administrators. Bridges and the whole Evergreen episode is beyond parody.

    • BJ
      Posted June 3, 2017 at 7:59 am | Permalink

      According to Weinstein, these “peaceful protesters” who are just speaking their minds have also made a list of all his current students, doxxed them, followed one through the woods, and showed up at multiple current Weinstein students’ homes.

      They also forced the President into a meeting with them, and when the President had to go use the bathroom, these very peaceful protesters refused to let him go without two protesters escorting him while he urinated. He was a hostage.

      Weinstein has also reported that he was told on Wednesday by campus police not to come to campus that day because protesters were searching car to car for “an individual,” and the campus police felt that it was him they were looking for and they couldn’t protect him. Why couldn’t they protect hiim? Because the President of the school literally told the campus police to completely “stand down,” so they had to lock themselves in their offices, as they answer to the administration. They were told by the President that they are basically banned from stopping these protesters harassing students and faculty in any way.

      • Diane G.
        Posted June 4, 2017 at 12:56 am | Permalink

        Chilling. At some point I think they need to skip the campus police and call in the municipal cops.

        • Filippo
          Posted June 4, 2017 at 12:19 pm | Permalink

          ” . . . call in the municipal cops.”

          Fine by me should they opt to wear riot gear so as to minimize (a la the professor, accompanying Charles Murray assaulted and injured by noble human primate students) the likelihood of having their hair pulled and necks wrenched.

          • Diane G.
            Posted June 5, 2017 at 4:13 am | Permalink

            Indeed. Last I heard, assault-and-battery was still a crime…

    • George Millo
      Posted June 3, 2017 at 10:09 am | Permalink

      It’s probably not irrelevant that Evergreen College has a 98.9% acceptance rate.

      • Posted June 3, 2017 at 11:20 am | Permalink

        97 percent of our graduates are working, in graduate or professional schools, or otherwise doing something personally meaningful one year after graduation.

        Sounds impressive, until you consider that last item.

  21. somer
    Posted June 3, 2017 at 2:59 am | Permalink

    I do hope the NYT article is not a token gesture of concern because this is really so appalling. Apart from Bret Weinstein, the faculty of this institution seem to be completely spineless. In this Statement dated June 2nd, 2017, about 25 faculty sign on to Maoist type declarations of support for the students actions committing themselves to amongst other things: “Demonstrate accountability by pursuing a disciplinary investigation against Bret Weinstein according to guidelines in the Social Contract and Faculty Handbook. Weinstein has endangered faculty, staff, and students, making them targets of white supremacist backlash by promulgating misinformation in public emails, on national television, in news outlets, and on social media.”

    Solidarity Statement by Evergreen Faculty

    • barn owl
      Posted June 3, 2017 at 5:21 am | Permalink


      One of the signatories is Naima Lowe, the person who is apparently holding a small dog hostage while berating her colleagues in the video that Craw linked.

      • BJ
        Posted June 3, 2017 at 8:05 am | Permalink

        “The statement is being circulated by Julie Russo, whose expertise is ‘media studies, gender & women’s studies, sexuality and queer studies,’ and Elizabeth Williamson, whose expertise is English literature and theater studies…”

        A professor from a pomo/critical theory department is leading the charge? This is my shocked face.

        Additionally, “More than 50 professors at the public college – nearly a quarter of faculty – have signed a statement as of Friday afternoon calling themselves angry and frustrated and concerned’ by the backlash against students and the university.”

        Will any professors actually stand up for him? No, of course not. They’re too scared, and I don’t blame them. But these other “colleagues” are disgusting human beings. Bret Weinstein seems like one of the kindest people one could ever meet.

    • BJ
      Posted June 3, 2017 at 8:01 am | Permalink

      Weintstein says the situation on campus is getting worse, not better. We’re not getting any reporting on it, but he says the protesters are continuing in escalating their behavior. They’ve stalked and harassed him and his students, and now he has colleagues saying he is the one making them unsafe. Amazing.

  22. Saul Sorrell-Till
    Posted June 3, 2017 at 8:11 am | Permalink

    This is the Stanford prison experiment, only it’s taking place in a university.

    • Diane G.
      Posted June 4, 2017 at 1:14 am | Permalink

      Last I heard, Stanford was still considered a university…

      (Sorry, couldn’t help myself! 😀 )

  23. Bob Barber
    Posted June 3, 2017 at 8:36 am | Permalink

    “…you can see a professor or administrator telling President Bridges to ignore the invective of a student who said “Fuck you!”, claiming that the students was just being passionate.” Shouting, “Fuck you!,” is not being passionate, it is the sound of a brain slamming shut. How long will it be before the students stop shouting and begin pulling plastic bags from their pockets and waving them in the face of those whom they want to shut out?

  24. Kurt Lewis Helf
    Posted June 3, 2017 at 9:31 am | Permalink

    To me the pushback suggests not so much a turning point as a demonstration that the “regressive left” mindset, as defined in other posts on this website and others, is not as widespread nor as big a problem as advertised. To be sure, we’ve seen and heard many anecdotes about the supposed power of the “regressive left”; Dave Rubin has apparently built his career on milking this notion for all it’s worth. However, as we all know, the plural of anecdote is not data. Where are the data to support the assertion that the “regressive left” mindset has lead to widespread censorship and decreased diversity of ideas in the academy?

    • BJ
      Posted June 3, 2017 at 9:52 am | Permalink

      How many people need to be deplatformed or have their talks disrupted before it meets your definition of “widespread”?

    • Posted June 3, 2017 at 11:45 am | Permalink

      Look at the FIRE list of deplatformings over the past five years or so (it’s on their site). Nearly every speaker censored or deplatformed was done so by the Left. And what do you mean by widespread? Number of universities or number of students? Because there are many universities involved in this, including my own–especially if you include disrupted talks.

      It’s the Left that’s doing this, not the Right.

      • Kurt Lewis Helf
        Posted June 4, 2017 at 2:13 pm | Permalink

        FIRE has an interesting database! From my perusal of their site it seems one flaw is that one cannot download their data. Anyhoo, FIRE’s records, which they maintain are not exhaustive, go back to 2000 and include 342 disinvitation incidents, in which a segment of the campus community demand an invited speaker not be allowed to speak, by the left and the right. So, in fact, both sides are guilty of censorious behavior. Thus, I reject your assertion that “…it is the Left that’s doing this, not the Right”. In absolute numbers there were indeed more disinvitation attempts by the left than the right, 209 versus 100, respectively. Thirty-three attempts were labeled “N/A”, which presumably means the segment did not identify politically. However, it appears that the right was more successful at disinviting speakers (56% disinvitation success) than the left (36% disinvitation success). I will note FIRE’s records indicate that last year there were 43 disinvitation attempts and that, according to the National Center for Education Statistics, there are 4,197 colleges in the U.S. That means last year approximately 1% of colleges in the U.S. had an attempt by a segment of the campus community to disinvite a speaker. These last data appear to support my contention that this is not a widespread problem among U.S. campuses. I’ve tried to be careful to present these data dispassionately so if anyone (especially you PCC!) perceives a hint of snarkiness it is unintentional.

    • Posted June 3, 2017 at 2:30 pm | Permalink

      Just take a random sampling across universities of course descriptions in humanities & social sciences.

      Evergreen is slightly unique in that it willfully injects po-mo nonsense, critical theory, and sundry regressive left dogma into every course offering*, hard sciences included.

      * With Weinstein’s classes apparently the sole exceptions.

    • Filippo
      Posted June 3, 2017 at 10:04 pm | Permalink

      Do you condemn or approve of the students’ behavior?

  25. Bruce Lyon
    Posted June 3, 2017 at 11:04 am | Permalink

    Like Jerry, as a teacher I find the students behavior and lack of basic respect appalling. If the tables were turned, and a prof ever treated students this way (telling them to FU) I suspect there would talk of firing the professor. After looking at the videos it also seems that there is more than just protest going on here—I see this as a display of power. Perhaps I am wrong but it seems that for some of the students, this is really about grabbing power and ordering/bossing around folks who would normally be in a position of power over them. We have had several student protests here at the University of California Santa Cruz and in my interactions with students during these protests it seems there are always a few that are doing it because the power goes to their head. They get rude and start ordering people around.

  26. Posted June 3, 2017 at 11:08 am | Permalink

    Bret Weinstein has a long dialogue/interview that he just did with Joe Rogan on his podcast. He goes into detail about what’s happening, the reasons why, and what can be done about it.

  27. Matthew North
    Posted June 4, 2017 at 11:09 am | Permalink

    Although I hardly ever visit his blog anymore, I was curious to see what PZ Myers was saying about the travesty that’s going on at Evergreen. I thought maybe he’d tie himself in knots defending the students so I did a search there, but there’s no mention of the controversy on his blog.

    Maybe he’ll give his take soon, but I think it’s telling he hasn’t commented on it yet. There’s no way he doesn’t know about it. He’ll comment on some obscure creationist, or give his two cents worth on Bill Maher or Kathy Griffin at the drop of a hat, but nothing on this.

    Sympathetic to the insane, regressive student’s ridiculous demands? Uncomfortable commenting, PZ ?

    • Diane G.
      Posted June 5, 2017 at 4:09 am | Permalink

      Thanks for doing this research so we don’t have to. 😉 Telling, indeed!

One Trackback/Pingback

  1. […] lose their job. That’s guaranteed. After all, there are plenty of people on the political left calling for professor Bret Weinstein to lose his job on charges of imaginary […]

%d bloggers like this: