The goons in ivory towers continue their transformation of publicly-funded American universities into factories of leftist indoctrination. Schools of “social work” are particularly adept at forcing an “idealogical orthodoxy” on unwitting students — an orthodoxy that reads like a handbook on neo-communist leftism and Marxism. Check out George Will’s column, Indoctrination in the Ivory Tower which exposes the propagandists and their tactics. Why do we continue to subsidize this brainwashing?
In 1943, the Supreme Court, affirming the right of Jehovah’s Witnesses children to refuse to pledge allegiance to the U.S. flag in schools, declared: “No official, high or petty, can prescribe what shall be orthodox in politics, nationalism, religion or other matters of opinion, or force citizens to confess by word or act their faith therein.” Today that principle is routinely traduced, coast to coast, by officials who are petty in several senses.
They are teachers at public universities, in schools of social work. A study prepared by the National Association of Scholars, a group that combats political correctness on campuses, reviews social work education programs at 10 major public universities and comes to this conclusion: Such programs mandate an ideological orthodoxy to which students must subscribe concerning “social justice” and “oppression.” …
Schools’ mission statements, student manuals and course descriptions are clotted with the vocabulary of “progressive” cant — “diversity,” “inclusion,” “classism,” “ethnocentrism,” “racism,” “sexism,” “heterosexism,” “ageism,” “white privilege,” “ableism,” “contextualizes subjects,” “cultural imperialism,” “social identities and positionalities,” “biopsychosocial” problems, “a just share of society’s resources” and on and on. What goes on under the cover of this miasma of jargon? Just what the American Association of University Professors warned against in its 1915 “Declaration of Principles” — teachers “indoctrinating” students.
Will then cites several examples of students who have been punished for not engaging in the group-think or political advocacy mandated by propagandists who teach so-called “social work” classes in publicly funded universities. Will concludes,
In the month since the NAS released its study, none of the schools covered by it has contested its findings. Because there might as well be signs on the doors of many schools of social work proclaiming “conservatives need not apply,” two questions arise: Why are such schools of indoctrination permitted in institutions of higher education? And why are people of all political persuasions taxed to finance this propaganda?
Actually, “conservatives need not apply” is becoming the mantra of academia in general and is certainly not limited to “social work.”