Colleges to avoid, part II

Mike Adams
|
Posted: Oct 19, 2005 12:05 AM

After my first “Colleges to avoid” column, numerous readers wrote asking whether I would also recommend colleges to attend. The answer is an unequivocal “yes.” I can’t promise that each column in this series will add a recommendation (the “avoid” list will surely grow at a faster rate). But the first recommendation is rather obvious. It is Hillsdale College located in Hillsdale, Michigan. Don’t take my advice or the advice of scores of my readers and friends. Just log on to www.hillsdale.edu and you should be quickly convinced.

But that’s enough good news. Now, we can get back to the task of exposing those multi-cultural bastions of tolerance, which promise to make life miserable for any right-thinking student.

Towards that end, I want you to imagine that you are a conservative student who wants to attend a conservative conference in Washington, D.C. The conference will not require you to use up all of your allotted absences for the semester but, nonetheless, your liberal professor says that she will flunk you if you attend the conference. And then she keeps her promise.

Or imagine that you are seeking funding for speakers and events for your College Republican chapter. Then you are told that you can’t get funding - despite the fact that you are paying a mandatory student activity fee that will be used to fund other student groups.

Imagine further that the school classifies student groups as either “social,” “cultural,” or “political” in nature. The school enforces a rule that allows funding for all groups except for those classified as “political.”

Then imagine that the “Pride Alliance” group, which is allowed to protest in favor of gay marriage and other political causes, is classified as a “social” group. So they get funding.

And, to make matters worse, the Arab Student Association, which is allowed to protest U.S. Policy towards Israel, is classified as a “cultural” group. So they get funding.

And, of course, the College Republican group – a group involved in political activities not so popular with the denizens of diversity - is classified as a “political” group. So they don’t get any funding.

So, at this open-minded university, the College Republicans pay for the political activities of the other groups while they must go unfunded. And then they scramble for private money, just to ensure that their views are represented after the university has squandered all the money on causes with which conservatives disagree.

Some call this diversity. I call it taxation without representation.

Imagine further that you are a graduate student and you are ordered to take down an American flag that hangs above your desk in the teaching assistants’ office. You are told that the flag might “offend” foreign students.

Or imagine that you are a conservative speaker who has traveled hundreds of miles to give a lecture. After arriving, you see university employees all around the student center, each wearing a t-shirt affirming her commitment to fight against racial stereotypes. Then, just before you are to speak, officials decide to move you to another room in order to give psychological counseling to a small group of future homosexuals who are preparing to “come out of the closet.”

Of course, the large room where you were going to speak is now occupied by about three people. And, needless to say, you are sent to a small room, which is unable to accommodate the much-larger-than-three crowd that has come to hear you speak. In fact, people are lined up in the halls trying to listen from outside a room filled with people who are sitting on the floor. The room is too small - in fact, it is almost like a closet. But it gets worse.

As the conservative student group is trying to direct traffic from the future-homosexual counseling room (the room number that was used in advertisements promoting the conservative speaker) one of its members suddenly gets a great idea: Why not put a sign up to direct traffic to the newly assigned room that is too remote to be found easily and too small to accommodate the crowd?

But the university won’t cooperate. Some lower-level administrator says that a sign giving the new room number and showing an arrow pointing to the general direction of the new room cannot be displayed. The sign, which also has a picture of the speaker just below his name, is deemed “offensive” by the university sensitivity squad. So, naturally, some people can’t find the room where the speech is being held, which, of course, was the goal of the brave soldiers in this titanic struggle against campus stereotyping.

Shortly after his rude reception at this once-great university, the speaker decides to write a column about a very sexually explicit questionnaire that was given shortly after his visit. The questionnaire was given to a group of students during the university’s “Coming out week.” But it is so laden with explicit questions about bizarre sexual practices that it is rejected for publication by his editors. It is simply too pornographic to be edited. After the explicit words are deleted, there is nothing left of the article.

Unfortunately, you do not have to imagine that such a place exists. It exists in reality. The name of the school is Georgia Institute of Technology, in Atlanta, GA.

Parents thinking of sending their children to Georgia Tech should visit the university website or stop by the campus to get a sense of how far the university has fallen in recent years. If they do the former, this link provides a good starting place: http://www.gtcow.gatech.edu/

Next week, we will add to our list of colleges to avoid. Fortunately, we will also add another recommendation.