Under mob control: Evergreen College

Bret Weinstein

Yesterday we started to discuss one of the latest outrageous campus episodes, this one at hippie-dippy Evergreen State College in Oregon. Bret Weinstein – a bio prof at Evergreen who describes himself as a leftist who supported Bernie Sanders’s candidacy for presidency – ended up in the crosshairs of enraged students for standing up to a demand that white students and faculty members stay off campus on a so-called “Day of Absence.” In Weinstein’s view, their demand represented “a show of force and an act of oppression” – language one might expect a platoon of spoiled, angry contemporary college kids, marinated in the ideology of oppression and power, to understand.

Evergreen State College

But nope. Weinstein’s refusal to be banished from campus for his skin color evoked a chorus of rage. In an article on the campaign against him, Inside Higher Ed quoted a Facebook posting in which one student called the prof out for “putting his job security ahead of the safety of the students (particularly those who are visibly of color, queer, trans, nonbinary, disabled, etc.) on our campus. And when I say safety, I am not referring to someone’s feelings getting hurt. I’m referring to the very real, very close neo-Nazi/white supremacist/alt-right/whatever-you-wanna-call-white-people-who-think-non-white-people-should-die presence in the Pacific Northwest.”

The local chief of police counseled Weinstein to stay off campus – not to comply with the student demands, but for his own safety. He did so. But this doesn’t mean he didn’t stand up to his tormenters. On May 26, Weinstein went on Tucker Carlson’s program on Fox News. Carlson introduced the interview by showing a video in which a group of rude, bullying, foul-mouthed student brats attempted to intimidate Weinstein by screaming hysterically about “white privilege,” calling him “useless,” and ordering him to “get the [expletive] out.”

Asked by Carlson to contextualize the video, Weinstein explained: “They imagine that I am racist and that I am teaching racism in the classroom.” He further recalled that after the encounter shown in the video, the police turned up – whereupon the students moved on to the office of Evergreen’s president, George Bridges, whom they “corralled” and from whom they “extracted” certain “concessions” including a promise that he, Bridges, would meet with them later in the day to discuss their so-called grievances.

George Bridges

“Why is he allowing a mob to threaten one of his professors?” Carlson asked about Bridges. Weinstein said it was worse than that: “Dr. Bridges is allowing this mob to effectively control the campus.” The mob had presented Bridges with a set of demands, and had told him that if the demands were not met in full “there would be violence.” Bridges, instead of standing up to the mob, had ordered the campus police to “stand down.” While wanting to restore order on campus, then, the campus police had been “hobbled” by Bridges’s insistence that they do nothing and had, in effect, been “barricaded in the campus police station” for the past several days.

Bridges later announced that he would go along with all of the student demands – of which there were many. He began a public statement by informing his audience, in accordance with the expectations of many college-based gender activists nowadays, of where exactly he falls on the supposedly broad and complex gender-pronoun spectrum: “I’m George Bridges, I use he/him pronouns,” he said. Pathetic.

More tomorrow.

George Ciccariello-Maher: joking about genocide

George Ciccariello-Maher

His name: George Ciccariello-Maher. Until recently, as we saw yesterday, he was climbing smoothly up the academic ladder, thanks to a canny habit of churning up precisely the right kind of politically correct hogwash – much, if not most, of it in praise of the Bolivarian Revolution in Venezuela.

Then, this past Christmas Eve, he sent out the following tweet: “All I Want for Christmas is White Genocide.”

That would likely have been enough to win him the attention he ended up receiving. But that was just part of it. On Christmas Day, he also took to Twitter to praise the “massacre of whites.” Just in case you wondered which massacre of whites he was referring to, he offered the following: “To clarify: when the whites were massacred during the Haitian Revolution, that was a good thing indeed.” (Just to clarify further, the number of whites slaughtered in that revolt was somewhere in the range of 4,000.) All this, moreover, came only a couple of weeks after Cicariello-Maher had issued this confession, also via the same social network: “Sorry, I’m not ‘alt-left,’ just an actual communist.”

A contemporary rendering of Toussiant L’Ouverture, leader of the Haitian Revolution

When challenged by one of his Twitter followers about his genocide tweet, Cicariello-Maher pretended he’d been kidding: “LOL I was hacked I swear.” But then the word spread. Others checked out his Twitter feed. The genocide tweet went viral. It got the criticism it deserved. He deleted it and blocked his account.

But it was too late. Reacting to the public outcry, his employers at Drexel University weighed in with a statement acknowledging faculty members’ “right…to freely express their thoughts and opinions in public debate,” but added that his comments were “utterly reprehensible, deeply disturbing, and [did] not in any way reflect the values of the University.” The press release added that Drexel was “taking this situation very seriously” and that it had already arranged a meeting with the good professor “to discuss this matter in detail.”

When contacted by Inside Higher Ed, Cicariello-Maher, not sounding remotely contrite, defended his tweet as a “satirical” commentary on “an imaginary concept, ‘white genocide.’” Climbing on his academic high horse, he sneered: “For those who haven’t bothered to do their research, ‘white genocide’ is an idea invented by white supremacists and used to denounce everything from interracial relationships to multicultural policies….It is a figment of the racist imagination, it should be mocked, and I’m glad to have mocked it.” (Presumably Inside Higher Ed didn’t ask him whether he also considers the massacre of whites during the Haitian Revolution imaginary.) Instead of being moved to apologize, he added insult to injury, attributing the widespread fury over his tweet to “white supremacists.” Because if you take offense at a tweet about white genocide you obviously must be a white supremacist.

Another one of his books

He also shot back at his employers, calling their statement “worrying” because, by calling his tweets “reprehensible,” they had effectively caved in “to the truly reprehensible movements and organizations that I was critiquing.” Drexel’s press release, he added, had sent “a chilling message” and set “a frightening precedent” by suggesting that “untenured and temporary faculty” were subject “to internal disciplinary scrutiny” and allowing outside “harassment” to dictate university policy. Of course, colleges like Drexel routinely demonize, censor, and punish faculty and students who diverge from the lockstep PC line; for the likes of Ciccariello-Maher, however, such official condemnation is only “chilling” and “frightening” when the targets are extreme leftists such as himself. “White supremacy is on the rise,” he warned, “and we must fight it by any means. In that fight, universities will need to choose whether they are on the side of free expression and academic debate, or on the side of the racist mob.”

Fortunately for Ciccariello-Maher, many of his fellow academic leftists were eager to stand up for him. We’ll get to that tomorrow.