Today’s blacklisted American: Vassar’s college newspaper retracts story because it quoted “too many whites”
The new dark age of silencing: The Miscellany News, the college newspaper at Vassar College, recently retracted an article not because it contained any errors of fact (which it did not) but because the article had simply interviewed too many white students in its reporting.
The article had been written to describe the controversy surrounding the school’s decision to have Jeh Johnson, Secretary of Homeland Security during the Obama administration, speak at the school, and his decision to withdraw because of the uproar from students demanding he be blacklisted. From the newspaper’s retraction announcement:
We would like to use this statement to both emphasize our values of diversity and inclusion, and delve deeply into our editorial process and the resulting article in question, especially since we understand that many people in the Vassar community are unaware of the article’s removal. … In this article, we attempted to include a variety of quotes from students describing why there was protest to the announcement of him as speaker in the first place, and the students’ reaction to his withdrawal.
In prioritizing urgency over thoroughness, we made misguided and insensitive oversights with whom we were representing in the article and failed to provide in-depth reporting of the issue at large. The majority of our quotations came from white students and therefore we reduced the positions of students of color to a singular, tokenized perspective. After this was brought to our attention, the paper decided to remove the article online in an attempt to prevent further harm among the communities we misrepresented. [emphasis mine]
Notice the utter idiocy and outright bigotry of this action. First, the paper’s editors say it has values of inclusion, yet that value specifically demands that whites be treated as a lower form of life. Second, these editors claim that by merely interviewing a small number of blacks it has somehow “harmed” minorities at the school. Who has been harmed? How? The worst I can see is that some thin-skinned bigoted black activists on Twitter were offended that any whites were given the chance to voice their opinions. If these racists were harmed, then I say great! Harm them more!
Third, if you read the full statement from the newspaper, they expand upon their racist view of whites and American culture.
Journalism, including college journalism, has historically been a white-centric, often elitist field, and The Miscellany News is not immune to the consequences of these structures. The publication of the article and its subsequent removal reminds us of the systemic issues our members are implicated in, as well as the privilege and lack of diversity that we have allowed to persist for generations across our boards. None of our explanations for the failures of an individual article can mitigate the problem of past coverage on issues related to people of color, nor address in full depth the issue of representation within our board.
In other words, everyone ever involved in all of journalism, especially whites, were bigots, and thus must be wiped from history. Moreover, all future reporting must be shaped to express this view, and to favor minorities above all else. Get to the back of the bus, you evil whites!
Finally, note that at no time do the editors admit to any factual flaw in the article. In fact, it appears the article was entirely accurate, even if it did tout the blacklisting of Johnson in its writing. Thus, the editors retracted an article not because it was wrong but because it didn’t toady enough to leftist values. It wasn’t as good a propaganda tool as intended. It needed to be more blatantly biased, bigoted, and dishonest.
Woe for the future, as it appears it is the students at Vassar imposing these dishonest standards. They represent the future, and the future they want is one that is oppressive, unfair, racist, and evil.
Readers!
Please consider supporting my work here at Behind the Black. Your support allows me the freedom and ability to analyze objectively the ongoing renaissance in space, as well as the cultural changes -- for good or ill -- that are happening across America. Fourteen years ago I wrote that SLS and Orion were a bad ideas, a waste of money, would be years behind schedule, and better replaced by commercial private enterprise. Only now does it appear that Washington might finally recognize this reality.
In 2020 when the world panicked over COVID I wrote that the panic was unnecessary, that the virus was apparently simply a variation of the flu, that masks were not simply pointless but if worn incorrectly were a health threat, that the lockdowns were a disaster and did nothing to stop the spread of COVID. Only in the past year have some of our so-called experts in the health field have begun to recognize these facts.
Your help allows me to do this kind of intelligent analysis. I take no advertising or sponsors, so my reporting isn't influenced by donations by established space or drug companies. Instead, I rely entirely on donations and subscriptions from my readers, which gives me the freedom to write what I think, unencumbered by outside influences.
You can support me either by giving a one-time contribution or a regular subscription. There are four ways of doing so:
1. Zelle: This is the only internet method that charges no fees. All you have to do is use the Zelle link at your internet bank and give my name and email address (zimmerman at nasw dot org). What you donate is what I get.
2. Patreon: Go to my website there and pick one of five monthly subscription amounts, or by making a one-time donation.
3. A Paypal Donation or subscription:
4. Donate by check, payable to Robert Zimmerman and mailed to
Behind The Black
c/o Robert Zimmerman
P.O.Box 1262
Cortaro, AZ 85652
You can also support me by buying one of my books, as noted in the boxes interspersed throughout the webpage or shown in the menu above.
The new dark age of silencing: The Miscellany News, the college newspaper at Vassar College, recently retracted an article not because it contained any errors of fact (which it did not) but because the article had simply interviewed too many white students in its reporting.
The article had been written to describe the controversy surrounding the school’s decision to have Jeh Johnson, Secretary of Homeland Security during the Obama administration, speak at the school, and his decision to withdraw because of the uproar from students demanding he be blacklisted. From the newspaper’s retraction announcement:
We would like to use this statement to both emphasize our values of diversity and inclusion, and delve deeply into our editorial process and the resulting article in question, especially since we understand that many people in the Vassar community are unaware of the article’s removal. … In this article, we attempted to include a variety of quotes from students describing why there was protest to the announcement of him as speaker in the first place, and the students’ reaction to his withdrawal.
In prioritizing urgency over thoroughness, we made misguided and insensitive oversights with whom we were representing in the article and failed to provide in-depth reporting of the issue at large. The majority of our quotations came from white students and therefore we reduced the positions of students of color to a singular, tokenized perspective. After this was brought to our attention, the paper decided to remove the article online in an attempt to prevent further harm among the communities we misrepresented. [emphasis mine]
Notice the utter idiocy and outright bigotry of this action. First, the paper’s editors say it has values of inclusion, yet that value specifically demands that whites be treated as a lower form of life. Second, these editors claim that by merely interviewing a small number of blacks it has somehow “harmed” minorities at the school. Who has been harmed? How? The worst I can see is that some thin-skinned bigoted black activists on Twitter were offended that any whites were given the chance to voice their opinions. If these racists were harmed, then I say great! Harm them more!
Third, if you read the full statement from the newspaper, they expand upon their racist view of whites and American culture.
Journalism, including college journalism, has historically been a white-centric, often elitist field, and The Miscellany News is not immune to the consequences of these structures. The publication of the article and its subsequent removal reminds us of the systemic issues our members are implicated in, as well as the privilege and lack of diversity that we have allowed to persist for generations across our boards. None of our explanations for the failures of an individual article can mitigate the problem of past coverage on issues related to people of color, nor address in full depth the issue of representation within our board.
In other words, everyone ever involved in all of journalism, especially whites, were bigots, and thus must be wiped from history. Moreover, all future reporting must be shaped to express this view, and to favor minorities above all else. Get to the back of the bus, you evil whites!
Finally, note that at no time do the editors admit to any factual flaw in the article. In fact, it appears the article was entirely accurate, even if it did tout the blacklisting of Johnson in its writing. Thus, the editors retracted an article not because it was wrong but because it didn’t toady enough to leftist values. It wasn’t as good a propaganda tool as intended. It needed to be more blatantly biased, bigoted, and dishonest.
Woe for the future, as it appears it is the students at Vassar imposing these dishonest standards. They represent the future, and the future they want is one that is oppressive, unfair, racist, and evil.
Readers!
Please consider supporting my work here at Behind the Black. Your support allows me the freedom and ability to analyze objectively the ongoing renaissance in space, as well as the cultural changes -- for good or ill -- that are happening across America. Fourteen years ago I wrote that SLS and Orion were a bad ideas, a waste of money, would be years behind schedule, and better replaced by commercial private enterprise. Only now does it appear that Washington might finally recognize this reality.
In 2020 when the world panicked over COVID I wrote that the panic was unnecessary, that the virus was apparently simply a variation of the flu, that masks were not simply pointless but if worn incorrectly were a health threat, that the lockdowns were a disaster and did nothing to stop the spread of COVID. Only in the past year have some of our so-called experts in the health field have begun to recognize these facts.
Your help allows me to do this kind of intelligent analysis. I take no advertising or sponsors, so my reporting isn't influenced by donations by established space or drug companies. Instead, I rely entirely on donations and subscriptions from my readers, which gives me the freedom to write what I think, unencumbered by outside influences.
You can support me either by giving a one-time contribution or a regular subscription. There are four ways of doing so:
1. Zelle: This is the only internet method that charges no fees. All you have to do is use the Zelle link at your internet bank and give my name and email address (zimmerman at nasw dot org). What you donate is what I get.
2. Patreon: Go to my website there and pick one of five monthly subscription amounts, or by making a one-time donation.
3. A Paypal Donation or subscription:
4. Donate by check, payable to Robert Zimmerman and mailed to
Behind The Black
c/o Robert Zimmerman
P.O.Box 1262
Cortaro, AZ 85652
You can also support me by buying one of my books, as noted in the boxes interspersed throughout the webpage or shown in the menu above.
From the retraction explanation:
I’m confused. When did underrepresentation of a community become misrepresentation of that community?
I can understand this point. Minority journalists want to be elitists, determining what communities to misrepresent, too. And if that means preventing a different point of view from speaking on campus, well, that is just them being inclusive.
Or, maybe I am wrong. Maybe minority student aren’t interested in being journalists, which could explain why journalism, including college journalism, has historically been white-centric. Or have these very same journalists been racist in choosing their fellow student journalists?
Two things that they value, but only up to a certain point. Don’t include anyone who is not in agreement, and do not be so diverse that such a person is included. Other than that, they tolerate everything but intolerance. Where intolerance is defined as anything that they disagree with, such as Jeh Johnson speaking on campus.
So, in this announcement where are the opinions of those who disagree with the withdrawal of the article? Apparently, the situation is even more complex than even these diligent student journalists realize.
Which suggests a lack of interest in the topic, but the student journalists will fix that by making a big stink out of how virtuous they are. And they are improving their virtue by being so virtuous. Being virtuous is preferred, is it not?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_dwz_Z62e0s (8 minutes)
The lack of heaven on earth must be due to insufficient virtue and perfection, thus by being more virtuous than thou, these journalists become holier than thou. Those who are insufficiently virtuous must be eliminated, either by banning their speech, like Jeh Johnson, or by other means, such as the guillotine.
So, are those virtuous student journalists still flawed. Yes, of course. However, they do not recognize it, because they are holier than we, because they are the inclusive, diverse ones.
That is a Vassar education for you.
Let’s Go Brandon!
Keep it up, keep telling people who you are, that is the medicine we need.
Nothing better.
Popped onto Vassar’s website, and the problem is obvious – so many whites!
White college President, white faculty members, white students.
If having a majority white commenters is oppression then anything less than a majority of the administration/faculty being from oppressed minorities is a continuation of oppression.
The students should demand that half the white staff step down and be replaced with Blacks and Native Americans (Maybe some Hispanics, Asians need not apply). After all, the school acknowledges it stole the land for the campus from Native Americans.
https://www.vassar.edu/land-acknowledgment
Then the grading matrix should be adjusted to insure the top 50% of students are from oppressed minorities. That should naturally reduce the white student population to less than a majority.
And the $1.4 billion endowment? – surely sourced from the proceeds of White oppression – it should be distributed to BLM and other anti-racist causes.
Then Vassar can truly be an institution of virtue!
C’mon President Bradley, step up by stepping down! (You don’t need that $500k/yr, maybe the College will pay out a pension in appreciation)
Mitch … and just like that, the value (as opposed to the cost) of a Vassar degree approaches the equivalent of Zimbabwe currency.
Jester Naybor:
While attending business school, the College was found to have some accounting irregularities. I made an appointment with the Dean, and said “You are reducing the value of my degree by the minute.” I did not appreciate having to go on the job market with a degree from a school known to not follow GAP.
This might be reverse psychology…if all the white kids were shrill Antifa kids-what better way to end the hecklers veto than to use their own BS. There was an Aussie Green group that self-disbanded over same.
AMERICA IN DECLINE: WHAT WOULD NOT BE IF………
(copy and share with a Democrat friend)
* “Former CIA Senior Operations Officer John Sipher Openly Brags About Swinging Election For Biden With Disinformation”
* “New York Times admits Hunter Biden laptop from hell real and not Russian disinformation”
* Unmonitored Drop boxes Revealed Over 733,000 Unaccounted for Ballots in Maricopa County’s 2020 Election
If the people of America were NOT scammed out of a presidential reelection as the evidence is clearly now indicating, what would America look like?
* The Southern border would not be being overrun with millions of illegal immigrants at the direct invitation of the
Federal government (D) in order to obviously bolster their voting base. (This will be the #1 reason that Joe Biden will be impeached in 2023.)
* The Afghanistan withdrawal would not have needlessly cost 13 soldiers their lives.
* We would not have abandoned $85 billion in high tech military hardware making the Afghanis one of the world’s biggest arms dealers.
* We would have not ever surrendered a military airfield that strategically threatened the Communist Chinese.
* We would have not EVER abandoned Americans behind enemy lines.
*Inflation would be at or near 1.5% and not near the 9% it is today.
* Gas prices would be in the $2.50 per gallon range not the $5.00 range.
* Food would not be 20 and 30% higher.
* America would be entirely energy self-sustaining and selling clean energy and technology to the world.
* Vladimir Putin would not have invaded Ukraine, killing their people and his and credibly threatening the world with nuclear destruction.
* We would not have racism, hatred and segregation being promoted by the Federal government.
* If the American people were not defrauded out of an honest election, we would have a president who was cognizant, capable, definitive and able to speak and lead without other people putting words in his mouth and having to constantly correct what he “really meant”. This is the highest and most dangerous cost to what has gone on within our country due to political schemes and ambitions to retain and acquire political power.
America has sacrificed strong leadership for a clearly incompetent and compromised political facade and extreme political party partisan politics, and this is very dangerous for all concerned. Political warfare of the first order.
As these realities set into your real lives, are you paying attention now America?
Why is America in decline, can you tell me now? Feel free to comment and share this.
https://ecp.yusercontent.com/mail?url=https%3A%2F%2F2vwlfu3ynqxb3npfhm3m8lde-wpengine.netdna-ssl.com%2Fwp-content%2Fuploads%2F2013%2F03%2FAmerica-in-Decline.jpg&t=1648650456&ymreqid=dc7face7-d905-7706-2f2c-5a00c0018500&sig=kUC1bWZL0sxpiEZr_Zy.sA–~D
They couldn’t find any articulate students of color so they had to diversify with whiteys. You know we like diversity, RIGHT.
Is it any WONDER why COMEDY IS DEAD??? When so many people act in such INSANE ways, HOW can you AMUSE THEM?? I do recall Jeh speaking RATIONALLY a time or two so I guess THAT disqualifies him amongst the LEFTISTS!! Someone needs to be keeping a REGISTER of these idiots and make sure they are not subjected to future harm by being EMPLOYED by WHITE PEOPLE or being FED by WHITE PEOPLE or being HEALED by WHITE PEOPLE or being PROTECTED by WHITE PEOPLE! This is the LEFT’s goal – to DIVIDE OUR NATION into “of color” and IDIOT WHITE PEOPLE vs us SANE WHITE PEOPLE!! We need to accommodate them when possible!!
An old saying which Joseph Campbell was fond of quoting: You can lead a whore to Vassar but you can’t make her think.
I think that was Sarah Lawrence.
Sarah Lawrence ‘sex cult’ funneled money to Democratic campaign:
https://nypost.com/2022/03/29/sarah-lawrence-sex-cult-funneled-money-to-dem-campaign-witness/?msclkid=35925f84b04111eca3b47269a9fdec9b
BLSinSC: Don’t take this the wrong way, but your comments would have much more impact, and be more readable, if you did not use CAPS so much. What you wrote here is quite good, but the number of words in CAPS actually robs it of its literary force.
I speak as a professional writer. Your words provide the impact. The CAPS are unnecessary. As are the extra question marks and explanation points.
bernard-
yowza–hilarious, almost spewed my cold beverage all over my keyboard.
“You can lead a horticulture but you can’t make her think.”
Dorothy Parker
20 Dorothy Parker Quotes
https://youtu.be/MLg5_j993NA
4:00
going tangential here,
(6 years of college did not go to waste!)
high-brow, early 20th century, literature Stuff–>
“The Ten-Year Lunch; Wits & Legends of the Algonquin Round Table”
https://youtu.be/_ObXzrP4wdc
55:36
“After World War I, Vanity Fair writers and Algonquin regulars Dorothy Parker, Robert Benchley, and Robert E. Sherwood began lunching at The Algonquin. In 1919, they gathered in the Rose Room with some literary friends to welcome back acerbic critic Alexander Woollcott from his service as a war correspondent. It proved so enjoyable that someone suggested it become a daily event…”
C.
“Why is America in decline, can you tell me now? Feel free to comment and share this.”
Nominal-ism perhaps ?
Although, I prefer to point to Adam. Having inherited his “it was she whom You gave to me” excuse.
Nihilism ?
Dick Dale & The Del Tones
“Misirlou”
[from the movie “A Swingin’ Affair” (1963)]
https://youtu.be/ZIU0RMV_II8
2:35
AA:
“it was she whom You gave to me”
An excellent prescient quote although some would call it and God misogynistic.
The human condition includes both man and woman, and neither one can exist without the other. Although the insane Left certainly propose exactly that. And possibly at some point that condition of existence will exist into the future for humanity “Improved” where gender is underminable and or irrelevant. (How vanilla, how boring, how gay. Not that there is anything wrong with that :)
But the reality of humanity TODAY is not that and we must find our way through this what can only be described as a political, cultural process mess. But as we all know out of the chaos comes order. We cannot go around and so we must go through it.
And what is it that will ensure or attempt to ensure, remember there are no guarantees, that we all move through this time in Americas history and survive?
The Constitution and what it structures. And that is what emerges from the objective although chaotic political cultural fog for me.
It all serves an evolutionary purpose.
The two conversations described in Strategy Over Morality and the nature of political power does not exist and is not valid say some here on BTB?
The evidence and validating of the term and what it proposes is manifest in this recent now begrudgingly verified story in the news that if it were properly and journalistically reported, just like if the Covid / “Vaccine” story was properly reported by the media who is without doubt invested in one side of the political equation our world and America would be very, very different today.
Absolute and blatant perversion and corruption of reality in the pursuit of political power and control at any cost.
CNN Admits Hunter Biden’s Laptop Is Authentic 532 Days After Initial Reporting
https://www.breitbart.com/the-media/2022/03/30/cnn-admits-hunter-bidens-laptop-is-authentic-532-days-after-initial-reporting/
The New York Times denying the validity of this consequential story for the entire world is understandable, we understand they have been corrupted for many years. But now even CNN an ideological champion of the Left and there agenda also has had to admit the stories validity? What the hell is going on!?
These “news” entities were ideologically tasked with a component of ensuring that T.J. Trump was removed from office at any and all costs through an unspoken but understood Liberal leftist agenda. And so it was accomplished. The evidence of the concerted efforts in the media, the many election systems around the country and within the several government agencies and politics that were existentially threatened by him grows and grows every day. Just in time for the midterm elections and a new cycle of chaos and confusion, which produces more clicks and eyeballs, how convenient. All without consequence.
Strategy Over Morality, The Two Conversations.
EXPLANATION: Strategy Over Morality describes a two-tiered “conversation” between a Public and their Empowered Leadership where the Public believes there is only a single, no tiered conversation occurring and that single conversation is assumed by the Public to relate to the Public’s morality and truth model perspective.
A model in which leadership or their empowered subordinates within government can subjectively justify to choose to formulate an interpretation of their core fiduciary responsibilities which becomes paramount over and above the public’s truth and morality model. Where plausible deniability can be claimed when “immoral” acts or modified “truth” strategies (lies) are employed or executed by leadership, their subordinates OR BY ARMS LENGTH LEADERSHIP PROXIES.
CONCLUSION: The public lives and operates under a subjective moral code or within a “Pedestrian Realm” perspective which they assume their leadership which exists within the “Political Realm” is constrained by. This is a subjective false perspective conclusion on the part of the public. Leadership at its existential core is not about morality, truth and honesty. Leadership is about the fundamental exercise of power and “its” survival. jgl.
Comments? Observations?
Prof. Jordan Peterson
“Adam Was Pathetic in ‘Adam & Eve'”
https://youtu.be/YuWiHEH-V0s
5:01
And here we have a prime example of just how pathetic “Adam” can be when driven by Eve.
https://nypost.com/2022/03/31/new-video-shows-jada-laughing-after-will-smith-slapped-chris-rock/?msclkid=da127e2fb10611ec83c90833286b45fc
Will Smith laughs at Rocks joke directed at his wife, his wife does not laugh and drives her husband to do something to make Rock pay a price (or Smith will pay a price later :).
And what does she do after the violence? She is pleased and laughs.
And so, Smith can bed her once again, she will not have to go elsewhere to find her satisfaction and leadership.
And pathetic is the correct word here.
Will Smith appears to be a child out of control of himself and his situation in life. Life is a female dog, and so is Will Smith apparently.
Jester Naybor wrote: “… and just like that, the value (as opposed to the cost) of a Vassar degree approaches the equivalent of Zimbabwe currency.”
Wait. Is Jester Naybor suggesting that choosing students, faculty, and staff based upon the color of their skin (race, ethnicity, etc.) rather than the content of their character (intelligence, interest in education, etc.) gives a lower quality education? Whoa. That concept blows my mind!
Would choosing the faculty and students of the college based upon content of character rather than color of skin give us a quality education? Could that be what Martin Luther King’s dream meant? (At the time, I thought it just meant that he had had pizza for dinner before going to sleep, perchance to dream.)
However, we have to be careful about that “content of character” thing. People who think that man can be made virtuous may also think that they are the ones of better character. After all, someone virtuous must necessarily have a better character, right? As the 8-minute Bill Whittle video I linked above said, those people don’t necessarily have the character that they think they do. They may attack the rich just for being rich, as the French did (“sir, meet madam guillotine”), or they may think that some people’s speech is wrong and must be suppressed, as the students of Vassar did. Isn’t it more virtuous to desire diversity, inclusivity, and equality?
As the student journalists of Vassar showed us, they do not see the true disease, suppression of others, but see only their pet symptom, their own oppressive behavior based upon color of skin. Rather than strive to be fair and equal to all, they strive to base all decisions upon skin color (rather than character), changing the direction-arrow of the oppression. Oppression remains, but there are feelings of greater virtue.
It is not virtuous to proclaim to desire diversity while banning the speech of someone different. Banning speech isn’t diversity, inclusivity, or equality.
Diversity, inclusiveness, and equity are contradictory concepts. You cannot have equity if you have diversity, because that means you have to include those who are not equal. You cannot create equality and maintain diversity. People cannot be at once the same and different.
We may all be created equal, but then we start to make decisions, such as to oppose free speech, see skin color rather than character, choose Vassar over my college, or study journalism instead of the far, far more virtuous career of engineering. This is why we do not and cannot have equal outcomes. My decisions and my outcome are different than those of the Vassar student journalists.