Since the Academic Senate resolution condemns a "U.S. protectorate" in Iraq and opposes war in Iraq, I asked Professor Holczer if a U.S. protectorate is better than a Saddam Hussein regime. "I don't know, sir," he stated. "I don't know, sir ... it is clear that it's not a great idea to see a national library burning, a national museum destroyed." Apparently, preservation of artifacts in a totalitarian-run museum is more important than freeing human beings from tyranny.
The resolution also called for U.N. authority in post-war Iraq. Did Professor Holczer truly feel that the United Nations would do a good job rebuilding Iraq after the Kosovo fiasco? "Sir," he retorted, "did the U.S. did (sic) a good job in anything?" When I mentioned Germany and Japan, he stated that those situations were very different.
"I don't think the U.N. can solve everything, but we have nothing better," he insisted. He explained that the United Nations was not governed by self-interest of nations or a "few number of people, elected or selected or put into power without any control." The United States, on the other hand, doesn't know where to draw the line between "patriotism, nationalism and fascism." "When is the moment when we act out of patriotism and out of good will, and when is the moment when we impose our will on others?" he queried.
This "blame America first" attitude is bad enough. But do the personal opinions of the professors find their way into the classroom? "I really hope so," Professor Holczer said.
How arrogant. Because the professors have a captive audience and a
point of view they want to express, they should indoctrinate their students. As Professor Holczer stated, "That's exactly why the community of a university, an academic senate, cannot just be discarded as 200 taxi drivers. Because the taxi drivers don't educate your children." For an unbiased education, taxi drivers would be a better bet.
Great Moments in Human Rights: Mandated “Emotional Support” Animals in College Dorms | Daniel J. Mitchell