There is no end to the vacuity of white liberal fakery.
Charlotte Hays (the same person who blogs here?), writing in the Opinion Journal, tells of a new project financed by the Ford Foundation called “Difficult Dialogues.”
“The program, which was announced earlier this month, actually pays colleges to hold “conversations” on such subjects as race, sexual identification and religion. The talk does not come cheap. Twenty-seven institutions of higher learning have been awarded $100,000 each, and 16 others are receiving smaller grants of $10,000,” she writes.
According to the Ford Foundation (try not to laugh):
Difficult Dialogues was created in response to reports of growing intolerance and efforts to curb academic freedom at colleges and universities. The goal is to help institutions address this challenge through academic and campus programs that enrich learning, encourage new scholarship and engage students and faculty in constructive dialogue about contentious political, religious, racial and cultural issues.
One would be hard-pressed to think of anything more idiotic than giving money to colleges for “dialogues” on how racist America is. That’s what the classroom is for, isn’t it?
Difficult Dialogues is part of a broader, $12 million effort by the Ford Foundation to understand and combat anti-Semitism, Islamophobia and other forms of bigotry in the United States and Europe. It builds on the foundation’s history of supporting efforts by colleges and universities to foster more inclusive campus environments and to engage effectively with the growing racial, religious and ethnic diversity of their student bodies.
Red Alert! Red Alert!
Whenever you see words like Islamophobia, bigotry, and diversity, it means you’re about to get an earful of belligerent, anti-America, anti-conservative, anti-Christian, and anti-white ranting. I’m sorry to tell you this, but if you believe “Difficult Dialogues” is about anything else, you need to have your IQ checked.
Such programs are designed for white liberal elitists hiding out in mostly-white gated communities so they can sit around yapping with darkies (Too provocative. Welcome to 2006!) “African-Americans” and other hyphenated folks all day about “life and stuff.” Hilariously devoid of substance, such “dialogues” do nothing more than placate guilty whites so they can go home feeling good about themselves and their “tolerance” for anything other than the intellectual diversity of their own culture. Which happens to be the greatest in the world, by the way.
Bored hypocritical dilettantes. 
Update: “Courageous Conversations about Race”: Oh, brother! You know, these people don’t really want to have an honest conversation about race. I guarantee you that! (Thanks, Hube!)
{ 1 trackback }
{ 30 comments }
This is further evidence of higher education’s disconnect with reality. The fantasy that if you are able to talk openly about a social disease, such as racism, then your hands must be clean of it and you have no real obligation to society to do anything more than hold a “conversation” about it.
Give me a break!
La Shawn:
As a “Rich White Wale”, I am waiting for one of these “Ford Funded” professors to begin a conversation with me – and ask me why I feel that I am a victim of racism (Affirmative Action; anti catholic and anti White bias etc..) – as any serious dialog would demand. But I am not holding my breath. As a “Rich Wnite Male”, I would be expected to initiate the conversation, not answer the question.
I wouldn’t get too worked up over this. $100,000 is not much money for a single program at a single institution, especially when you consider the overhead that modern colleges and universities extract from any grant.
The dollar figure is not really the point, Grumpy, especially since Ford is a private, as opposed to a government organization. The foundation can do whatever it wants with its money. The point is the program’s existence and intent.
Too much revionists hostory too much eco-babble nonsnesne too much tree hugging to much new age indoctranation too much lies
Would the Ford Foundation fund a dialog on Ford?
Henry Ford turned 75 in 1938 and his personal friend, Adolph Hitler, awarded him the “Great Cross of the German Order of the Eagle”. This was in recognition of an anti-Semitic pamphlet Ford published in Berlin in 1921 entitled “The International Jew, a Worldwide Problem.”
Ford Werke A.G. was never nationalized by Nazi Germany (one of only afew industries that was not) and Ford’s son Edsel sat on its board of directors throughout the war. Ford reaped huge profits from the plant which made tracked vehicles for the Nazi military.
More to the point, the plant used slave labor taken from France, Belgium and the Netherlands. It ultimately used enslaved Jews taken from the camps at Buchenwald.
Ford violated Article 52 of the Hague Convention and the Geneva Convention Governing Prisoners of War.
Hey, Ford Foundation, let’s discuss the foundation on which your “foundation” rests!
I remember hearing about that, Heliotrope. They only want the man’s money, not his history.
Dialogue, eh? Just wait until someone at one of these “teach-ins” has the nerve to say, “I don’t support affirmative action,” or “Jesse Jackson does not speak for all blacks,” or (take a deep breath – here is the granddaddy of them all) “Jesus Christ is the Son of God.” How long would it then take Difficult Dialogue to be transformed into Righteous Witch Hunt?
Jesus Christ is the Son of God
That’s a party pooper, Mwalimu!
Dialogue or diatribe? If both sides are talking and neither side listening, does it qualify as dialogue?
I question whether these dialogues would have any positive effect on any student at any campus.
And it ain’t just at colleges. School districts are treated to the similarly titled “Courageous Conversations” led by one Glenn Singleton. he’s been across the country dealing with districts I’m familiar with, and the crap is enough to piss off even the left (Crooked Timber blogger Harry Brighouse wrote an article some time ago lambasting the program).
The “conversations” are anything but — they’re one-way diatribes, and they’re certainly anything but “courageous.” “Cowardly” is more apt.
I hate to spoil this right wing party. But what’s wrong with dialog? If white Republicans would even try to start reaching out to Black people, they would not be this perception, (true or not) among blacks that they are just a bunch of bigots. At least the Ford foundation is trying to open up a dialog. Instead of prejudging what will happen at one of these sessions, why don’t you try to contribute to the dialog with your own views about issues of race in this country. Oh, that’s right, you are Conservatives, so there are no issues of race. We live in a color blind society and only your hard work and patriotism will help you achieve the American dream.
Wayne, for an “Esquire,” you’re really naive or just willfully obtuse. First of all, white Republicans shouldn’t have to “reach out” to blacks to prove anything to you or anybody else. Both parties should present the issues without reference to race. Idealistic, I know, but I’m a sucker for the ideal. And where have you been for the past 40 years? Liberalism is a very destructive ideology and particularly bad for the black community. White liberals have no real interest your black self, Wayne, despite their lip service. White conservatives may not, either, but at least they’re not hypocrites about it, preaching skin color “diversity” in everybody’s face like your beloved, backward-thinking, and poverty-pimpish Dems.
I have no need to prejudge the sessions, Wayne, because I know the type. I’ve attended them as a liberal and as a conservative. Just like all “diversity training” sessions, they discuss the evils of white America while downplaying the evils of black America and of every other race and ethnicity on the planet. I hate to break it to you, but there is nothing new under the sun.
And as long as we have eyes, we’ll never be colorblind, and I’m not naive enough to think we’ll ever achieve it. Take the sarcasm to someone else’s blog, OK?
By the way, if you have children, I certainly hope you’re not filling their little heads with all that “racism” jive and failing to teach them to work hard in life, despite perceived obstacles.
Wayne, Bill Clinton (the first black president) did a race dialog tour during his second term.
Is there more left to be done? Bill Clinton (tfbp) is crawling with free time and I would think that if the black “community” sent out a hue and cry for his soothing, pain-feeling moderating that he would grab his 40 pound Bible and come dialogging. He would even take some of that Ford money.
Lashawn, you say you have no need to prejudge the sessions, but that’s exactly what you have done. And let me make myself clear. I do not have a need to have white republicans or democrats for that matter reach out to me. As someone who was born and raised in Jamaica, I am quite comfortable functioning in a totally black environment. I don’t look to the majority population for my religion, my social outlets, or my business dealings. If I choose, I can lead a totally white free existence. And FYI, I am an independent when it comes to my politics. I do not belong to any of the current political gangs so I think I can speak from a totally objective standpoint about your gang; the republicans, as well as the democrats. Unfortunately, you cant do the same because you are so tainted by right wing ideology and your talking points. But hey, I am not knocking your hustle if you truly believe that the conservative movement can take this country where it needs to go, good for you. You talk about poverty pimps, which allot of democrats such as AL Sharpton, and Jessie Jackson are. But there are pimps on the other side too. Idea pimps Such as Ward Connerly, Clarence Thomas, and Thomas Sowell are just doing there pimping on the other side of town with a different clientele. I don’t have any children but if I am fortunate enough to have them some day, I hope they wont be members of any gangs, and they will learn to think for themselves. Just like their father
My “hustle?” I’d hoped you didn’t mean that the way it sounded, but your “tainted by right wing ideology” remark confirms that you did mean it the way it sounded. I’ve got a news flash for you, Wayne. No human being is “totally objective.” It’s a fairy tale. We see the world subjectively, although we can, at times, make objective assessments of it. You call yourself “independent.” That’s a joke, and a trite one at that. You may not be a member of a political party, but an independent liberal, you are, just as I am an independent conservative.
I’ve got an idea. Since you don’t like my “hustle” or tainted “right wing ideology,” I strongly recommend you don’t participate in these comment threads anymore. In fact, I insist on it. I wouldn’t want you to become tainted, too.
- Admin
Wayne, Wayne, Wayne. La Shawn is 100% right in that she doesn’t need to attend such a “dialogue.” As I noted, these “dialogues” and “conversations” are anything BUT “difficult” or “courageous.” Well, maybe for the whites who attend since their views ain’t worth much at these meetings.
I’d respond to your comparison of Jackson and Sharpton to Sowell et. al., but to do so would just give credence to one of the most preposterous analogies I have ever read.
Sheesh.
I had a “courageous discussion on race” with a black friend a while back. We were shooting pool and hearing a radio sound bite of Ralph Neas droning on about the “ongoing racial crisis” in America.
We both, at almost the same instant, said, “What a moron.”
I then said, “It’s your shot.”
My buddy said, “9 ball, corner pocket.”
I love courageous discussions about race.
Heliotrope, two things come to mind here.
First, there is conflicting information about Ford’s WWII German plant. According to Snopes, “Professor Simon Reich of Pittsburgh University has concluded that the Ford Company in America had lost control of Ford in Germany during the war and so did not profit from its activities.” I hope that is the case. This is not to white-wash Henry Ford by any means. He was, to his infinite discredit, a virulent anti-semite. This won him the admiration of Adolph Hitler in the days prior to WWII, earning Ford the medal you mentioned. But Ford did renounce his anti-semitic writings, and when war broke out he destroyed his Nazi medal. In context, we need to remember that prior to WWII there were many prominent and loyal Americans who were suckered in by the Nazi rhetoric, good people who would come to their senses once the beast revealed itself.
Secondly, it’s sad to see how such a grand philanthropic foundation as the Ford Foundation has been turned into the primary funding arm of the leftist movement. But the Ford Foundation is a totally independent entity and is not controlled by Ford Motor Company nor by the Ford family.
Mea culpa. I drive a Ford pickup.
LOL
Hi LaShawn
Frequent reader, first comment. I’m wondering what you would consider to be a more useful or constructive dialogue about race. Or do you believe that all such “dialogues” are a waste of time. If you were planning to have people talk about race what you do differently and what would be your objective?
First of all, such “conversations” are unnecessary. We talk about skin color differences entirely too much in this country, and I blame that squarely on wrong-headed government policies. But if forced at gunpoint, I’d begin the discussion by emphasizing the greatness of America, despite its sometimes ugly history. Every nation on the planet has history it would prefer not to talk about. That would be the premise. I would not be interested in talking to America-haters or about how lousy America is.
Next, after acknowledging that America is the greatest and most free nation in the world, which is the reason why we’d have so many different cultures and sub-cultures represented in the “conversation” with the freedom to converse in the first place, I’d acknowledge the positive things people of other cultures and religions have contributed to this country. The whole conservation would be a sham, however, if we didn’t eventually get to negative aspects of “multiculturalism” and why I think it’s a destructive, divisive, and unnecessary ideology.
Then on to the ubiquitous white/black issue. We’d openly discuss the stereotypes each race has about the other and the truth of some of those stereotypes (criminality, perceived racism, etc.). We’d have an honest dialogue about why blacks are perceived a certain way, and we’d do the same with whites. Despite all that, what common ground do we have? We’re Americans with all the rights of citizenship guaranteed in the Constitution, etc.
The “dialogue†would be vast, deep, and no-holds-barred, but the one ground rule established would be no “dead white male†bashing without an equally voracious bash of males of other races. In other words, if the world is a mess, we all have a share in the blame.
I doubt such a “conversation†would ever take place among liberals, but since I don’t hang out with liberals much anymore, I could be mistaken.
You are cute when you are angry.
There is no such thing as “racial differences.” Therefore, a dialog is just so much hot air. All the fuss that hides behind the skirts of “race” is actually group-speak about cultural turf.
I offer the following excerpt about the “biology of race” to help explain why a “conversation of race” is bogus.
From Dr. Dennis O’Neil Behavioral Sciences Department, Palomar College, San Marcos, California:
“In the final analysis, it is important to keep in mind that all humans around the world today are biologically quite similar despite our superficial differences. In fact, we are 99.9% genetically identical. Most of the differences between us are due to our unique individual traits and being male or female. When we are compared to many other kinds of animals, it is remarkable how little variation exists within our own species. There is 2-3 times more genetic variation among chimpanzees, 8-10 times more among orangutans, and thousands of times more in many insect species. Most physical anthropologists would agree that human variation is not now sufficient to warrant defining separate biological races, varieties, or sub-species. However, it very likely was in our prehistoric past.
In order to better understand the true patterns of human variation, physical anthropologists have gathered detailed data about genetically inherited traits. Most of this work has been done with blood typing, but DNA sequence comparisons are now providing an even more detailed understanding of our human biological diversity.Â
The more we study the precise details of human variation, the more we understand how complex are the patterns. They cannot be easily summarized or understood. Yet, this hard-earned scientific knowledge is generally ignored in most countries because of more demanding social and political concerns. As a result, discrimination based on presumed “racial” groups still continues. It is important to keep in mind that this “racial” classification often has more to do with cultural and historical distinctions than it does with biology. In a very real sense, “race” is a distinction that is created by culture not biology.”
Thanks Heliotrope for keeping it real. It’s amazing how strongly people hold to the idea of biologically distinct “races” of people, one of the most damaging lies ever invented by human beings to justify exploiting and oppressing other human beings. All of the discussion that goes on about race is really talking about the disastrous consequences of the belief that there actually are “races” and that some of those “races” are superior or inferior to others.
My buddy won the 9-ball contest, 3 games straight, thereby proving that black men are inherently superior to white men in that realm.
Hey, don’t laugh. It makes about as much sense as most of the other racial stereotypes out there.
Woah, woah! I do not believe it serves any useful function to try to pretend that race doesn’t exist, or even that it pertains merely to melanin content. Remember, “Red and Yellow, Black and White, they are precious in His sight”.
I’m merely subscribing to the philosophy of the late, great Bible preacher and multi-year all-pro defensive lineman Reggie White, who once celebrated in a sermon the glories of race as a sign of the virtuosity of God’s creation.
Mark, the problem with “race” is that it can not be defined scientifically. Therefore, when one of Hitler’s ideal Aryan types claims to be “black”, we are left with the lame “proof” of what we see and feel. Or we go to the same process of family trees Hitler used to find out how much Gypsy or Jewish “blood” coursed through the victim’s veins.
So long as we ignorantly believe in and allow the bogus issue of differentiated “race” to persist, it is fair game to attribute strengths and deficiencies as characteristics due to race.
Most prejudice and bigotry stems from what we behold with our eyes. That phenomenon is entirely cultural and can be unlearned.
The desperate culture among an outrageously large number of black skinned Americans is an obscenity that must be destroyed. That culture is rife with drugs, single young teen mothers, males who do not get basic education and end up in prison at rates beyond imagination. They are stirred up by violence, malnourished from trash diets and encouraged by musical propaganda and hoop dreams.
Nothing in the bleak picture painted above is about race. It is tribalism most foul and about a culture of misery and failure.
To try to defend or explain it misses the point entirely. No force is aligned and organized to make these people this way and to keep them acting as they do.
The dialog is not about race, it is about culture and culture alone.
Close your eyes to the color of the skin, the texture of the hair, shape of the eyes, etc. Put the person behind a curtain. Now list his problems and his strengths. Would changing one physical characteristic make a positive difference? Of course not.
Since Reggie White and God got thrown into this discussion, may I offer that “yes, Jesus loves me……” Race divides us, culture brings us together. Especially the culture of love.
The race pimps depend on keeping the “race” issue in the forefront while burying the cultural depression of so many. You buy into their race-baiting and religious voodoo and medicineman tactics at your own peril.
Hitler was motivated by hatred and lust for power. There are those in this society who have much the same motivation, and to do this they have no problem with creating mischief among the races, among the social classes, between man and woman, etc.
Just because race cannot be defined scientifically doesnt mean it doesn’t exists (difine love, virtue, and honor scientifically). But please do not misunderstand, I was not attempting to bring “race” into anything in the same manner as the notorious race baiters/hustlers.
The problems in the Black community/culture… “desparate culture” as you aptly described it,.. can be solved in the same way as any other people: by kneeling and repentance and endevoring to follow God’s Law and His standards, which is the perfect Law of Liberty (II Timothy)
Again, please do not construe anything I may have said as inflammatory (for we both know the kind who does that)!
Mark! You used the word REPENT!!!
Redbeard, I’m with you on the Ford/Hitler saga. It is only with the hindsight of 40 – 60 years of future passed that we realize that some “bright” ideas are really bunk. Without factoring the prevailing values and morals of a time in question, it’s all too easy to miss the object lessons and risk repeating those fundamental mistakes.
To wit, Nazism, New Deal, Affirmative Action, Communism/Socialism all contained elements of discrimination, racism, eugenics, victimism, reparations, etc. And of course, all sounded good until actually put in practice.
The big question is whether or not, one realizes the error and “repents”:
Henry did. Hitler lost. (no direct correlation required)
Margaret Sanger didn’t. Jesse Jackson sold his soul into her scheme (foresight notwithstanding).
Anyhoo, time’s up. Just wanna give a shout out to LaShawn & friends… Let the New Year begin!!
Ciao
The Day Begins
Cold hearted orb that rules the night
Removes the colours from our sight
Red is gray and yellow, white
But we decide which is right
And which is an illusion
Pinprick holes in a colourless sky
Let insipid figures of light pass by
The mighty light of ten thousand suns
Challenges infinity and is soon gone
Night time, to some a brief interlude
To others the fear of solitude
Brave Helios, wake up your steeds
Bring the warmth the countryside needs
The Moody Blues, DAYS OF FUTURE PASSED
Mark, Amen and well stated.
The root issue is not neccesarily race. The agenda is rather implementing Hegelian Dialectics, which includes “dialoguing to consensus”, and the goal is Socialism. The Ford Foundation, the Carnegie Foundation, the Rockefeller Foundation, and others are committed to this goal.
Comments on this entry are closed.