This week, Arizona State University (ASU) found itself among a list of institutions under federal investigation for violating Title VI of the 1964 Civil Rights Act — a provision designed to prevent discrimination based on race, color, and national origin in federally funded programs. That should be non-controversial. And yet, what we are seeing in universities across the country is systemic discrimination disguised as social justice, perpetrated under the umbrella of Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion (DEI).
How do universities get away with this? Simple: they lean on the Marxist dialectic of “oppressor vs. oppressed” — or, in contemporary academic jargon, “privileged vs. marginalized.” This framework allows them to justify racial discrimination by claiming that “marginalized” groups need extra resources to correct past injustices. And here’s where it gets absurd: how do they determine who is an oppressor? By skin color, sex, and — if they can figure it out — religion.
ASU, for instance, requires employee training in DEI that explicitly teaches about the dangers of “whiteness” and “heteronormativity” — casting these as inherent oppressor categories. This training asserts as fact — not as one perspective among others — that America has always been a white supremacist nation. The administration presents this as unassailable truth, not open for debate. And they expect faculty and staff to accept it uncritically. I am currently suing ASU to stop this required DEI training, and instead of acknowledging its discriminatory nature, the university is defending it in court.
ASU explains its practices by referring to its charter which emphasizes “inclusion.” A state university should be inclusive. Yet, when we see what ASU programs mean by “inclusion,” it is the opposite of inclusion. It means including some, the oppressed and marginalized, more than others, the oppressors. And how do you determine who is who? Skin color, sex, and religion. ASU’s inclusive charter has become the Marxist dialectic that teaches students to hate the United States and Christianity.
This is not education; it is indoctrination. Yet, you will find such professors saying, “you cannot discriminate or be racist against white people because they are the oppressors.” One event told me that it is time for white men to be taken down a notch. And they want to teach this to your children and have you pay for their salaries.
<h3>The Ph.D. Project And ASU’s Title VI Violation</h3>
The specific program triggering the Title VI investigation at ASU and 39 other universities is The Ph.D. Project — an organization that offers networking and career opportunities for doctoral students, but excludes participants based on race. This is open racial discrimination, yet the project defends itself with the same Marxist reasoning: historic injustices require present-day racial preferences. As Ibram X. Kendi (who was paid and given an award to speak at ASU) said, fixing discrimination requires more discrimination.
But that defense is legally and morally bankrupt. The Department of Education’s statement on the matter is clear: “The Department is working to reorient civil rights enforcement to ensure all students are protected from illegal discrimination.”
Universities, which have long positioned themselves as guardians of civil rights, are now being called out for violating those very principles. The irony would be amusing if it weren’t so destructive.
<h3>ASU And The Title VI Anti-Semitism Investigation</h3>
But ASU isn’t just under investigation for racial discrimination — it is also one of 60 universities under federal investigation for anti-Semitism. This is particularly rich coming from the same academics who spent the last decade yelling that “Trump is Hitler.” And yet, the Department of Education itself now says:
“The Department is deeply disappointed that Jewish students studying on elite U.S. campuses continue to fear for their safety amid the relentless antisemitic eruptions that have severely disrupted campus life for more than a year. University leaders must do better.”
Professors support Hamas, leave their Jewish students open to harassment, and yet get on social media to denounce Elon Musk as the Nazi. They need to look in the mirror. Maybe the Department of Education will help them do so.
University administrators who implemented these discriminatory DEI programs should issue a public apology — not just to Jewish students but to all students who have suffered under their racially charged policies and to the public who pays for it all. If they fail to do so, it tells us one thing: they have not changed their minds. The most likely response will be bureaucratic rebranding — repackaging the same DEI policies under a new name and continuing as usual.
<h3>The Solution: Exposing The Intellectual Fraud Of DEI And The Oppressor/Oppressed Dialectic</h3>
The only way to stop this cycle is to intellectually dismantle the oppressor/oppressed dialectic in all its forms. The Marxist framework that underpins DEI must be shown for what it is: a pseudoscientific ideology that justifies discrimination while masquerading as justice. It sides with the enemies of the United States. Parents, students, and faculty must demand transparency and refuse compliance with discriminatory programs.
The Department of Education’s investigations are a step in the right direction, but they are not enough. It is time for universities like ASU to be held accountable — not just legally, but intellectually. Let’s require transparency in what professors teach in the classroom, especially from public universities. These are government employees and should be held responsible for their conduct like any other government employee. Perhaps a letter from DOGE: “reply to this email with five ways you countered DEI propaganda in your classroom this week.”
The woke university system has long relied on the veneer of moral authority. That illusion is collapsing. Under its “moral” watch, the grossest forms of discrimination have occurred. The ones who have cried the loudest are the most guilty. The question is: will we seize this moment to ensure real change, or will we allow these institutions to continue their cynical games under a new name?
* * *
Dr. Owen Anderson is a professor of Philosophy and Religious Studies at Arizona State University. He is an internationally known scholar, theologian, and a Gracie Jiu-Jitsu instructor. With a Ph.D. in Philosophy, he has authored numerous books, including “<a href="https://www.amazon.com/Twelve-Arguments-Showing-eternal-revelation/dp/057826384X/?_encoding=UTF8&amp;pd_rd_w=E8EGL&amp;content-id=amzn1.sym.bc3ba8d1-5076-4ab7-9ba8-a5c6211e002d&amp;pf_rd_p=bc3ba8d1-5076-4ab7-9ba8-a5c6211e002d&amp;pf_rd_r=133-8344803-2786917&amp;pd_rd_wg=jqvhK&amp;pd_rd_r=a47f545b-2e79-448f-9f6d-366fdd467528&amp;ref_=aufs_ap_sc_dsk" target="_blank" rel="noopener">The Twelve Arguments</a>” and “<a href="https://www.amazon.com/Declaration-Independence-God-Self-Evident-American/dp/1107088186" target="_blank" rel="noopener">The Declaration of Independence and God</a>.”
The views expressed in this piece are those of the author and do not necessarily represent those of The Daily Wire.

ASU campus Tempe AZ Sun Devil Football Stadium aerial view

As DOE Cracks Down On Campus Discrimination, Title VI Comes For Arizona State

American Universities

Arizona

Arizona State University

College

Department of Education

Diversity Equity and Inclusion (DEI)

Education

Woke Culture

For the first time in history, a sorority may elect a man to be the president of its national organization.
That sorority would be Kappa Kappa Gamma (KKG). The revelation came in a new <a href="https://www.iwf.org/wp-content/uploads/2024/01/levang-v-kappa-kappa-gamma-fraternity.pdf" target="_blank" rel="noopener">lawsuit</a> filed by longtime KKG alumnae over the sorority allowing and enforcing the membership of men who claim to be women.
“The Candidate has currently applied for, and is being considered for, a position in leadership to be voted on through an on-line election in April 2024,” read the lawsuit, filed Thursday. “This position could include being elected to Fraternity Council or even president of KKG. Most members remain unaware that the Candidate is a man.”
The man, Tracy Nadzieja, was elected as district director out of Arizona State University (ASU) in 2022. KKG accepted Nadzieja as an alumna initiate in 2020, becoming the sorority’s first male member.
Nadzieja is no stranger to firsts: he became Arizona’s first trans-identifying judicial officer in 2018 following his appointment to the Maricopa County Superior Court. While attending ASU for his undergraduate degree, Nadzieja was a member of the Sigma Pi fraternity.
Nadzieja is also a board member for one-n-ten, a Phoenix-based nonprofit focused on advancing LGBTQ ideologies in minors and youths. One-n-ten offered a peer support program to children undergoing <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/pediatric-gender-clinics-scrub-their-websites-amidst-criticism-of-gender-related-treatments" target="_blank" rel="noopener">gender transitions</a> at Phoenix Children’s Hospital.
In an <a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mRKDYj8sOxs" target="_blank" rel="noopener">interview</a> with Greek University, Nadzieja explained that he came out as transgender after 15 years of marriage, leaving behind a wife and children.
“I just have to face it and if that means that I get kicked out of my house, that my marriage is over, that I won’t have a relationship with my kids, I would rather have an authentic life despite losing everything that I had worked for for my whole life,” said Nadzieja.
<a href="https://onelink.to/dwapp" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer" aria-describedby="sk-tooltip-9096" data-saferedirecturl="https://www.google.com/url?q=https://onelink.to/dwapp&amp;source=gmail&amp;ust=1700760801843000&amp;usg=AOvVaw2PQrVSrJfhxNb4LcARqniG">CLICK HERE TO GET THE DAILYWIRE+ APP</a>
Thursday’s lawsuit further alleges that Nadzieja was “fast-tracked” to a KKG leadership position and assigned as an advisor at a university chapter, despite not having met the qualifications laid out by organization bylaws. The lawsuit also alleged that KKG Fraternity Council “deceptively misrepresented” Nadzieja as a woman qualified for a leadership position.
“Fraternity Council intentionally concealed this fact from members to ensure the Candidate was elected,” stated the lawsuit.
The Independent Women’s Law Center (IWLC), associated with the Independent Women’s Forum (IWF), filed the lawsuit on behalf of KKG alumnae Patsy Levang, Cheryl Tuck-Smith, Susan Jennings, Margo Knorr, Karen Pope, and Ann Witt.
Levang and Tuck-Smith were both KKG alumnae for well over 50 years prior to national leadership <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/sorority-terminates-membership-of-two-alumnae-after-they-supported-lawsuit-to-boot-trans-identifying-member" target="_blank" rel="noopener">expelling</a> them last November for daring to speak out against the admission of males. Levang was formerly KKG’s National Foundation President.
In IWLC’s press release announcing the lawsuit, Levang said she felt obligated to fight against KKG’s endangerment of young women.
“The current leadership in Kappa has deliberately engaged in a campaign to undermine the Bylaws of Kappa which harms not only these young women, but the entire organization,” said Levang. “I’m not surprised that they also disregarded the value of lifetime membership and my 56 years of dedication by sending me a removal letter.”
Tuck-Smith remarked that KKG had taken a sudden and harsh departure from its 150 years of promotion of women and high standards.
“It is incomprehensible that current leadership would discard that success by prioritizing men over women,” said Tuck-Smith. “Kappa must remain true to its existing mission, to support and promote women.”
Court documents refer to KKG as a women’s fraternity, since its founding predated the invention of the word “sorority” by several decades. The alumnae’s lawsuit accused KKG officials of violating the organization’s governing rules, engaging in fraudulent activity, violating free speech laws, committing defamation, and breaching contracts.
KKG bylaws, rules, and policies all declare that only women may have membership in the organization, while implementing strict prohibitions against the involvement of men.
IWLC counsel May Mailman said that KKG’s requirement of its members to accept men who identify as women was a violation of their bylaws and basic female freedoms.
“Kappa leadership continues to disrespect its members not only by denying them the single-sex organization they were promised, but by lashing out in hopes of silencing the truth,” said Mailman.
Last March, seven active KKG members <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/women-file-lawsuit-against-sorority-after-it-accepts-man-who-allegedly-watches-them-while-visibly-aroused" target="_blank" rel="noopener">sued</a> the fraternity after it allowed the <a href="https://www.uwbrandingiron.com/2022/10/12/kappa-kappa-gamma-first-to-accept-open-transgender-student-in-uw-history/" target="_blank" rel="noopener">admission</a> of a man in 2022, Artemis (formerly Dallin) Langford, who allegedly became physically aroused at the sight of female members going about their day-to-day inside their fraternity house. The lawsuit also accused Langford of asking the women questions about their intimate body parts and romantic attachments. Langford has denied these allegations.
KKG’s allowance of males in membership dates back to 2015, when national leadership issued a statement recognizing the membership of “individuals who identify as women.” IWLC alleged that this was KKG leadership’s way of “unilaterally and deceptively” clearing the path for opening up membership to men without informing its members.
Then, in 2018, the organization formally began allowing the admission of men when it issued its “Guide For Supporting Our LGBTQIA+ Members,” a guide which IWLC declared in Thursday’s lawsuit wasn’t reviewed, debated on, approved, or voted on by KKG members.
In August, a federal judge <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/lawsuit-against-man-who-joined-wyoming-sorority-dismissed-by-federal-judge" target="_blank" rel="noopener">dismissed</a> the lawsuit challenging Langford’s membership. The court refused to define the word “woman.” That case is now before the Tenth Circuit Court of Appeals; IWLC <a href="https://www.iwf.org/2024/01/24/independent-womens-law-center-files-final-brief-in-westenbroek-v-kappa-kappa-gamma/" target="_blank" rel="noopener">filed</a> its final brief in that case on Thursday.
Amid the national controversy over Langford’s membership, KKG featured Nadzieja in a <a href="https://www.facebook.com/watch?ref=search&amp;v=200967152930173&amp;external_log_id=2ef0c9f8-8c97-4704-8450-001bb17c066d&amp;q=kappa%2520district%2520director%2520transgender" target="_blank" rel="noopener">promotional video</a> last July encouraging young members to attend a leadership academy.
“It doesn’t make a difference what age you are, we all can learn and progress and advance as leaders and be able to take that back home,” said Nadzieja.

Transgender

Trans-Identifying Man May Become First Male President Of A National Sorority, Says Lawsuit

Lawsuit

U.S.

<a href="https://www.dailywire.com/topic/arizona-state-university" target="_blank" rel="noopener">Arizona State University</a> canceled an event that the school was set to host on Friday featuring Rep. Rashida Tlaib (D-MI), which comes after she openly expressed support for the elimination of the state of Israel.
The Arizona Republic <a href="https://www.azcentral.com/story/news/politics/arizona/2023/11/17/arizona-state-university-cancels-event-featuring-rep-rashida-tlaib/71621004007/" target="_blank" rel="noopener">reported</a> that the event, dubbed &#8220;Palestine is an American Issue,&#8221; was set to be hosted by the far-Left group Students for Justice in Palestine (SJP), according to a bipartisan group of Arizona state lawmakers.
The event was canceled after the lawmakers <a href="https://www.azleg.gov/press/house/56LEG/1R/231116CARBONE.pdf" target="_blank" rel="noopener">signed</a> a letter titled, &#8220;Congresswoman Tlaib’s Extremist, Antisemitic Views Are Not Welcome in the State of Arizona.&#8221;
&#8220;The State of Arizona is a safe place for Jews, both on and off campus, and the antisemitic rants regurgitated by SJP and others are not representative of Arizona values,&#8221; the lawmakers said. &#8220;Students supporting Israel have been verbally and physically assaulted on campus in recent days, requiring police escort during SJP rallies.&#8221;
The lawmakers noted Tlaib&#8217;s repeated anti-Semitic remarks and her &#8220;support [for] the destruction of the state of Israel.&#8221;
&#8220;She has a history of espousing such a view both before and following the deadly October 7 terrorist attacks against Israel that were perpetrated by the pro-Palestinian Hamas terrorist organization,&#8221; they said. &#8220;We believe that such extremist, antisemitic views should be condemned, and they are not welcome in the state of Arizona.&#8221;
The lawmakers said that the extremist SJP, which private universities and the state of Florida have taken action against, should be focused on a toddler with ties to the state who was kidnapped by Hamas.
&#8220;We ask that Arizonans say a prayer for Abigail Edan and her family,&#8221; they said. &#8220;Abigail is a three-year-old girl with ties to Arizona and was taken hostage by Hamas terrorists in Gaza after they murdered her parents. Rather than honor Congresswoman Tlaib for a speaking engagement, SJP should be calling for Abigail’s immediate safe release in time for her fourth birthday next week.&#8221;
<a href="https://onelink.to/dwapp">CLICK HERE TO GET THE DAILY WIRE APP</a>
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-width="500" data-dnt="true">
UPDATE: Arizona State University has cancelled the event featuring antisemite Rashida Tlaib this evening. <a href="https://t.co/WF2Cia1wQK">https://t.co/WF2Cia1wQK</a>
&mdash; StopAntisemitism (@StopAntisemites) <a href="https://twitter.com/StopAntisemites/status/1725617226802188360?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">November 17, 2023</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
Tlaib was <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/u-s-house-votes-to-censure-democrat-rashida-tlaib-for-supporting-genocide-of-israel#" target="_blank" rel="noopener">censured</a> by the U.S. House of Representatives last week for her support of genocide against the state of Israel.
In a 234-188 vote, 22 Democrats joined 212 Republicans in voting for the censure while four Republicans voted against it. A total of four members voted present while six did not vote.
The resolution to censure Tlaib slammed her for “promoting false narratives regarding the October 7, 2023, Hamas attack on Israel and for calling for the destruction of the state of Israel.”
The resolution correctly noted that Israel has existed on its lands for thousands of years and that the U.S. played a “critical role in returning Israel to those lands in 1948 immediately following the Holocaust in recognition of its right to exist and as an indelible signal of our solidarity with the Jewish people.”
Tlaib “defended the brutal rapes, murders, be-headings, and kidnapping—including of Americans—by Hamas as justified ‘resistance’ to the ‘apartheid state,'&#8221; the resolution said, adding that she “knowingly spread the false narrative that Israel intentionally bombed the Al-Ahli Arab Hospital on October 17 after United States intelligence, Israeli intelligence, and President Biden assessed with high confidence that Israel did not cause the explosion.”
The resolution continued:
<blockquote>Whereas, on November 3, 2023, Representative Tlaib published on social media a video containing the phrase “from the river to the sea,” which is widely recognized as a genocidal call to violence to destroy the state of Israel and its people to replace it with a Palestinian state extending from the Jordan River to the Mediterranean Sea;
Whereas Representative Tlaib doubled down on this call to violence by falsely describing “from the river to the sea” as “an aspirational call for freedom, human rights, and peaceful coexistence” despite it clearly entailing Israel’s destruction and denial of its fundamental right to exist; and
Whereas Representative Tlaib has repeatedly displayed conduct entirely unbecoming of a Member of the House of Representatives by calling for the destruction of the state of Israel and dangerously promoting false narratives regarding a brutal, large-scale terrorist attack against civilian targets inside the sovereign territory of a major non-NATO ally while hundreds of Israeli and American hostages remain in terrorist captivity: Now, therefore, be it
Resolved, That Representative Rashida Tlaib be censured.</blockquote>
The Democrats who voted to censure Tlaib include Reps. Steve Cohen (TN), Jim Costa (CA), Angie Craig (MN), Don Davis (NC), Lois Frankel (FL), Jared Golden (ME), Daniel Goldman (NY), Josh Gottheimer (NJ), Greg Landsman (OH), Susie Lee (NV), Kathy Manning (NC), Jared Moskowitz (FL), Wiley Nickel (NC), Chris Pappas (NH), Marie Perez (WA), Pat Ryan (NY), Brad Schneider (IL), Kim Schrier (WA), Darren Soto (FL), Richie Torres (NY), Debbie Wasserman Schultz (FL), and Frederica Wilson (FL).
The Republicans who voted against the censure included Reps. Ken Buck (CO), John Duarte (CA), Thomas Massie (KY), and Tom McClintock (CA).

Oversight of Prudential Regulators

Arizona State Cancels Event With Democrat Rashida Tlaib After She Called For Genocide Of Israel: Report

Anti-Semitism

Congress

Rashida Tlaib

The teaching of U.S. history in public high schools has received much attention in recent years. But what about the teaching of U.S. history at our colleges and universities? 
A <a href="https://cai.asu.edu/americanhistory" target="_blank" rel="noopener">newly released commission report</a> from the Center for American Institutions at Arizona State University presents a bleak picture. The imbalanced design of many introductory U.S. history courses guides impressionable students toward the conclusion that America is a failed experiment, leaving many college students with a starkly negative, narrow, and incomplete view of our country’s character and past.
Introductory courses in U.S. history – typically taught in two sections, the first half to 1877, and the second half since 1877 – play an outsized role in our university systems and have downstream effects on K-12 education. Many institutions require that non-history majors, as well as future K-12 teachers, enroll in the U.S. survey to fulfill General Education requirements. The requirement is perfectly understandable. To become informed citizens in our constitutional, democratic republic, graduates ought to have a well-rounded, basic knowledge of the history of our country. For some students, especially foreign nationals, the U.S. survey will be their first and last exposure to a comprehensive history of the United States.
These facts make the <a href="https://cai.asu.edu/" target="_blank" rel="noopener">Center for American Institutions</a> commission all the more concerning. The commission on the Teaching of American History included former Wisconsin Governor Scott Walker, former Oklahoma Governor Mary Fallin, and former Speaker of the House Newt Gingrich. Academic researchers for the commission examined syllabi for introductory U.S. history courses at the nation’s top-ranked colleges and universities. The research revealed that foundational topics and themes in U.S. history are frequently absent. Many of the courses were taught through a <a href="https://www.historians.org/research-and-publications/perspectives-on-history/september-2022/is-history-history-identity-politics-and-teleologies-of-the-present" target="_blank" rel="noopener">presentist perspective</a>, examining and interpreting history through the lens of contemporary politics, issues, and concerns. Absent from many of these courses were complexity, nuance, debate, and global context. Instead, many of the courses elevated an overly simplistic assessment of the past, devoid of much of the richness and complexity that characterized each historical period. It would be wrong and misguided if this were pursued in order to paint a false and extravagantly rosy picture of United States history. But in this case, it paints a false and extravagantly negative picture of United States history.
The first half of the U.S. survey, to 1877, covers the colonial period through the Civil War and Reconstruction. One syllabus for the first half of the survey announced that upon completion of the course, students will “grasp how inequality was woven into the nation’s very constitutions.” Another announced that upon completion of the course, students will “see how race and racism is snarled in every part of U.S. history.” Another course at a prestigious state university devoted the first three weeks of the U.S. survey to “ecological imperialism” and “cultural imperialism.” 
“We will spend considerable time learning about major themes that trouble the present-day,” an instructor at the university announced in the syllabus, “including the expropriation of Native American lands; the entwined histories of race, slavery, and freedom; the creation and recreation of gendered economic, political, social relations; and the rise of capitalism.”
The second half of the survey, U.S. history since 1877, is by far the more ideological and biased of the two. Many of the syllabi examined for this study were nakedly political. Most syllabi intensively focused on identity topics of race, gender, sexuality, queer theory, and militant social protest. The predominant takeaway for students in many of these classes was American history as a history of exclusion, chiefly organized around identity.
Neglected topics included basic political history, including various presidential administrations, pivotal elections, and party development. Legal history was generally excluded, as was military history and diplomatic history. Conservatism, of course, was almost universally framed in a negative context. Primary readings from conservative thinkers were rarely assigned.
Absent, also, was any indication that the United States had made real and significant progress on civil rights and race relations in the 20th century. Moreover, there was rarely any indication that the average standard of living, for all people, increased substantially across the twentieth century (better housing, health, education, and technology); instead, students were often fed an anti-market, anti-consumerist narrative about the corrupting effects of capitalism. Social, economic, and technological advancements received virtually no mention; instead, post-World War II America was often portrayed as a period – not of prosperity and expanding freedom – but of greed, decline, sexism, homophobia, and racism.
Many courses ended the semester on a sour note: the “Decline of America” and the “End of the American Empire” were common themes in course syllabi. Students exiting such a course would naturally conclude that the American experiment had failed, that it was never successful, and that drastic, revolutionary activism in the present time might therefore be warranted. Appropriately, the supplemental readings in many of these courses often championed political and social justice activism.
One syllabus, for example, announced that students will learn about the “diversity of American experiences with specific emphasis on race, ethnicity, class, gender, and sexual orientation.” The final weeks of the course included the following topics: “Women’s Lib and Second Wave Feminism,” “Native Americans and Red Power,” “Gay Liberation and LGBTQ Activism,” “Chicano Activism and Latino Movements,” “Environmentalism and Green Movements,” “The Triumph of the Right,” and “From Witch-hunts and Communist-hunts to Terrorist-hunts.” 
Another syllabus at a separate university devoted an entire week to, “Final Frontiers: The Cultural War, LGBTQ Rights, and the Fight against Ablelism.”
Besides sacrificing truth for fiction, the extraordinary bias of our introductory U.S. history courses contributes to the erosion of our civic culture. It undermines the noble effort to create a common, shared vision for America’s future. It distorts our shared past, exacerbates divisions within our society, and discourages a fuller understanding of the entirety of U.S. history.
So what do we do? The report includes several noteworthy suggestions.
First, state legislatures should require educational transparency. Academic units at all public universities should be required to make syllabi publicly available and accessible so that we know what our tax dollars are being used to teach. Most syllabi, at most universities, are not available to the public.
But also we desperately need intellectual diversity. One <a href="https://econjwatch.org/File+download/944/LangbertQuainKleinSept2016.pdf?mimetype=pdf" target="_blank" rel="noopener">recent study</a> of the nation’s top 40 colleges and universities, for example, found that among History faculty, there are 33.5 Democrats for every single Republican. That is obviously unacceptable and flagrantly unrepresentative of the public and student body. Upper administrations and deans should insist on faculty searches that are not so narrowly tailored that they rule out candidates who are not ideologically aligned with the orthodox political persuasion. Certainly, at a minimum, DEI statements should be immediately abolished as ideological litmus tests.
Finally, a multi-disciplinary approach – including interdisciplinary degree programs with more expansive curricula – could encourage dialogue across the disciplines and potentially foster greater intellectual diversity among the faculty.
The United States of America is a great experiment in freedom, constitutional government, and well-ordered liberty. But the experiment is fragile. To preserve and maintain it – to secure the blessings of liberty to ourselves and our posterity – we must have robust, vibrant American institutions, including institutions of higher education. Let’s reform the teaching of U.S. history at our colleges and universities.
<a href="https://cai.asu.edu/people">Jonathan Barth</a> is Associate Professor of History at Arizona State University. He specializes in the history of money and banking, in the early modern period, with corollary interests in politics, empire, culture, and ideas.
The views expressed in this piece are those of the author and do not necessarily represent those of The Daily Wire.

University of Washington Suzzallo Library

New Report Uncovers The Sad State Of History Classes At American Universities

American History

News

Newt Gingrich

Scott Walker

Slavery

Universities

Readers of The Daily Wire will be pleased to learn that not every university professor supports suppressing the speech of those who challenge political orthodoxy on campus. A letter from some of our colleagues at Arizona State University, addressed to one of the college deans, has widely circulated internally in recent days, condemning an upcoming campus event on February 8 featuring Dennis Prager with additional remarks from Charlie Kirk. We emphatically disagree with the sentiments contained in that letter.
One of the many things that distinguishes ASU from other top universities is our administration’s embrace of intellectual diversity. ASU President Michael Crow has been especially vocal on this issue, <a href="https://president.asu.edu/statements/statement-from-asu-president-michael-m-crow-on-free-speech-civil-discourse-and-student" target="_blank" rel="noopener">urging</a> that “we can and should learn from perspectives different from our own.” In 2018, under President Crow’s leadership, ASU <a href="https://provost.asu.edu/adoption-chicago-statement-freedom-expression" target="_blank" rel="noopener">formally adopted</a> the Chicago Statement of Freedom of Expression, which states that “it is not the proper role of the University to attempt to shield individuals from ideas and opinions they find unwelcome, disagreeable, or even deeply offensive.” “[W]ithout a vibrant commitment to free and open inquiry,” the statement concludes, “a university ceases to be a university.”
President Crow’s commitment to intellectual diversity at ASU has been longstanding, including last year’s establishment of the Center for American Institutions, whose mission is fostering and renewing the nation’s political, economic, and social institutions, including religion and the family. Our speaker series in 2023 includes Katie Pavlich, Matt Walsh, Rosalind Ross (writer and director of &#8220;Father Stu&#8221;), Dr. Peter McCullough, Thomas Edsall, and Kimberley Strassel. Last year, we hosted Douglas Murray, James A. Lindsay, and Bret Weinstein.
Moreover, six years ago, President Crow launched the School of Civic and Economic Thought and Leadership, which allowed for the appointment of faculty committed to a curriculum focused on the founding principles of American democracy and constitutionalism. He supported also the establishment of the T.W. Lewis Center for Personal Development, which is hosting the event now in question.
Though some ASU faculty have objected to these programs, students and Arizonans welcome hearing diverse views at a public university supported by their tuition fees and tax dollars. University students should rigorously and openly examine a variety of viewpoints. Yet <a href="https://www.nas.org/blogs/article/partisan-registration-and-contributions-of-faculty-in-flagship-colleges" target="_blank" rel="noopener">study</a> after <a href="https://econjwatch.org/File+download/944/LangbertQuainKleinSept2016.pdf?mimetype=pdf" target="_blank" rel="noopener">study</a> shows that the political and ideological affiliation of faculty nationwide does not bear even a close resemblance to those of the American public writ large. 
Faculty letters like the one condemning Dennis Prager and Charlie Kirk reinforce campus conformity and function as a not-so-subtle way to intimidate and silence would-be dissenters among the faculty and student body. Many choose to <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2022/03/07/opinion/campus-speech-cancel-culture.html" target="_blank" rel="noopener">self-censor</a> out of fear of ostracization and even retribution. This is extraordinarily destructive to the free and open exchange of ideas.
The letter wildly describes Prager and Kirk as “two white nationalist provocateurs.” “Dennis Prager and Charlie Kirk are purveyors of hate who have publicly attacked women, people of color, the LGBTQ community, as well as the institutions of our democracy, including our public institutions of higher education,” the letter reads. “By platforming and legitimating their extreme anti-intellectual and anti-democratic views, [the college] will not be furthering the cause of democratic exchange at ASU, but undermining it in ways that could further marginalize the most vulnerable members of our community.”
In addition, while the letter states that students should “encounter a broad diversity of voices and viewpoints,” it is clear that among the ideas that are not to be tolerated are many mainline conservative or centrist viewpoints, including opinions supported by a majority of Americans.
The letter implies that any of the following views would render one unfit for speaking at a university:
<ul>
<li style="font-weight: 400;" aria-level="1">Dissenting from radical gender ideology</li>
<li style="font-weight: 400;" aria-level="1">Questioning the official lockdown narrative during COVID</li>
<li style="font-weight: 400;" aria-level="1">Questioning the soundness and efficacy of Big Pharma research and shots</li>
<li style="font-weight: 400;" aria-level="1">Thinking that a mother and father in the home is ideal for a child</li>
<li style="font-weight: 400;" aria-level="1">Encouraging young people to get married and have children</li>
<li style="font-weight: 400;" aria-level="1">Objecting to the methods and solutions of the BLM organization</li>
<li style="font-weight: 400;" aria-level="1">Questioning the hyper-racialist ideology of “anti-racism”</li>
<li style="font-weight: 400;" aria-level="1">Questioning the handling of particular elections (unless the wrong candidate wins, then it’s ok)</li>
<li style="font-weight: 400;" aria-level="1">Objecting to the exploitation and sacralization of January 6</li>
<li style="font-weight: 400;" aria-level="1">Challenging the presumption that in order to be happy and successful you MUST go to college</li>
</ul>
Such views, according to the letter, are “bigoted,” “anti-intellectual,” and “extreme.” The irony, of course, is that the most anti-intellectual position one could take is to demand a captive mind and universal conformity to a rigid and suffocating set of dogmatic precepts, and then to throw a fit if someone dare utter a contrary view. One need not agree with all or most of what Prager and Kirk believe in order to defend their opportunity to speak at a public institution and the opportunity of others to hear what they have to say.
“If liberty means anything at all,” said George Orwell, “it means the right to tell people what they do not want to hear.”
We are proud to research, teach, and serve at a university that champions free speech and open inquiry on campus, and we encourage ASU faculty of all views to publicly affirm their commitment to these cherished principles.
Lastly, a common strategy of anti-intellectuals is to label their opponents as having a phobia rather than dealing with the truth or falsity of their beliefs. Public debate allows both sides to be exposed to the light of reason. Those who oppose having heterodox speakers at ASU should be willing to defend their position in public debate. Professor <a href="https://search.asu.edu/profile/843137" target="_blank" rel="noopener">Owen Anderson</a>, philosophy, is putting out an open challenge for public debate about the necessity of a variety of viewpoints and values in the university.
Jonathan Barth is an Associate Professor of History at Arizona State University and Associate Director of the Center for American Institutions. He&#8217;s the author of &#8220;The Currency of Empire: Money and Power in English America in the Seventeenth Century&#8221; (Cornell University Press, 2021). His History of Money lecture series, as well as other educational content, is freely available on <a id="m_6417704316512544768LPNoLPOWALinkPreview" title="https://www.youtube.com/@professorbarth" href="https://www.youtube.com/@professorbarth" target="_blank" rel="noopener" data-saferedirecturl="https://www.google.com/url?q=https://www.youtube.com/@professorbarth&amp;source=gmail&amp;ust=1675534614999000&amp;usg=AOvVaw3hn687eVdiR5edP2DQswtE">YouTube</a>.
Donald Critchlow is a Professor of History at Arizona State University and Director of the Center for American Institutions. He&#8217;s the author of twelve books, including &#8220;In Defense of Populism: Protest and American Democracy&#8221; (University of Pennsylvania Press, 2020) and &#8220;Republican Character: From Nixon to Reagan&#8221; (University of Pennsylvania Press, 2018).
Owen Anderson is a Professor of Philosophy and Religious Studies at Arizona State University. He has published books with Cambridge University Press about natural law, the American Founding, and the First Amendment. His other books include &#8220;The Clarity of God&#8217;s Existence.&#8221; He pastors the Historic Christian Church of Phoenix, a Reformed Church, and maintains an educational <a id="m_6417704316512544768LPNoLPOWALinkPreview_1" title="https://www.youtube.com/@DrOwenAnderson" href="https://www.youtube.com/@DrOwenAnderson" target="_blank" rel="noopener" data-saferedirecturl="https://www.google.com/url?q=https://www.youtube.com/@DrOwenAnderson&amp;source=gmail&amp;ust=1675534614999000&amp;usg=AOvVaw1byxiAWZvu5nbGiEtyJK_6">YouTube</a> channel.

Charlie Kirk, Dennis Prager

Professors Stand Up For Free Speech As Liberal Colleagues Seek Boycott Of Dennis Prager And Charlie Kirk

Professors Stand Up For Free Speech As Liberal Colleagues Seek Boycott of Dennis Prager and Charlie Kirk

Cancel Culture

Charlie Kirk

Dennis Prager

Free Speech

Arizona State University’s theatre department hosted a performance of “The Color Cabaret,” which excluded white students, a potential violation of federal law preventing discrimination based on race.
It is highly unlikely the school will face any punishment since the excluded race is white. As The College Fix <a href="https://www.thecollegefix.com/white-students-excluded-from-arizona-state-theatre-performance/">reported</a>, the description for “The Color Cabaret” says that it is “an opportunity for BIPOC (Black, Indigenous and people of color) students in the School of Music, Dance and Theatre to create performances that speak to their own experience.”
“This performance also serves as a fundraiser for the BIPOC student scholarship fund, led by the ASU Music Theatre and Opera Student Organization,” the description also said. “Together we celebrate and highlight what makes us different.”
The State Press <a href="https://www.statepress.com/article/2022/02/the-color-cabaret-performance-asu-bipoc-students">reported</a> that the performance, “held Jan. 29 and 30, was made up entirely of students of color, and the songs performed told a story with heart, grace and a cultural flair representing the diverse community at ASU.”
The Fix noted that students directed the performance “under the direction of ASU Assistant Professor Nathan Myers,” and that it occurred at the university’s Evelyn Smith Music Theatre. The performing arts department also helped bring the show to life.
“Thanks to Brian DeMaris and our supportive faculty and staff, we have made it known to our entire community that diversity and equity are the pillars that carry this program,” a <a href="https://s3.documentcloud.org/documents/21195422/the-color-cabaret-2022-program.pdf">program</a> for the performance said. “Through hard discussions and active change, the MTO program has made it clear that all Black, indigenous, and People of Color, no matter the artistic background, are free and welcome to take up space here,” student director Jonice Bernard wrote.
This is important because the Civil Rights Act “prohibits discrimination on the basis of race, color, and national origin in programs and activities receiving federal financial assistance.”
The show has been performed since 2013, though it was held virtually last year. It reportedly excluded white students from participating, so the Fix asked the school if it could confirm such reporting and whether a university attorney reviewed the event to make sure it didn’t violate the Civil Rights Act.
ASU responded to the Fix by releasing an unsigned statement:
<blockquote>The Music Theater and Opera Student Organization (MTOSO) is one of hundreds of registered student organizations at ASU. Like every other registered student organization, MTOSO is responsible for planning and organizing its meetings and programming. And like every other registered student organization, MTSO has committed to operating in a manner that does not discriminate. Consistent with that commitment, the MTSO Color Cabaret was open to all Music Theater and Opera undergraduate, graduate, and vocal performance students.</blockquote>
While the statement said the event was open to all students, it did not explicitly say whether white students did, in fact, participate or were encouraged to do so along with students of color.
As the Fix <a href="https://www.thecollegefix.com/american-university-under-federal-investigation-for-black-affinity-course/">noted</a>, schools do sometimes get investigated for racial discrimination. American University is currently under investigation for offering a course only to black students.
The Daily Wire’s first original film, Shut In, has made its cinematic debut, being met with rave reviews. The Daily Wire is building an alternative to the leftist entertainment industry, one gripping movie at a time. Join us in this mission and stream Shut In today by becoming a Daily Wire <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/subscribe">member</a>.

Arizona State Theatre Performance Excluded White Students, School Claims They Could Have Participated

Race

Two black female students at Arizona State University filmed themselves verbally berating two white, male students who were studying in the school’s multicultural center and had a “Police Lives Matter” sticker on their computer. The two female students were investigated for their harassment and found responsible for “interfering with or disrupting university or university-sponsored activities.”
They were lightly punished; told to write a three-page paper “on how, next time, when [they] talk with white people about race and society [they] will be civil,” the Daily Caller <a href="https://dailycaller.com/2022/01/03/asu-students-racism-sexism-guilty-harassing-peers/">reported</a>.
This enraged the students, who immediately claimed they were “being persecuted” because they were &#8220;defending our multicultural center from racism and sexism.&#8221; The two students, undergraduate Mastaani Qureshi and graduate student Sarra Tekola, posted a video on Instagram claiming the investigation into them was “racially biased” and that they were “forced to confront these men,” who were quietly studying, because ASU faculty refused to tell the men to leave.
“Dear White People, A.K.A. ASU — You openly discriminated against us on Nov. 16 when you handed down your decision from your racially biased investigation,” Qureshi said, according to the Caller. “We’re being persecuted for defending our multicultural center from racism and sexism … ASU is a violent place.”
Tekola claimed that asking “students of color” to be more civil in what she called “white supremacy and neo-Nazism” is “actually violent.” The students also claimed they were subjected to “emotional and psychological violence” because, they say, they received “rape, death and lynching threats” on social media. They said ASU is “ignoring marginalized students.”
As The Daily Wire previously <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/activist-students-berate-white-students-over-police-lives-matter-sticker-youre-promoting-our-murders">reported</a>, the ASU students berated two fellow students over a sticker and a shirt while claiming to feel unsafe on campus.
In a viral video, two white male students can be seen sitting at a table — one wearing a “Did Not Vote For Biden” shirt and another with a “Police Lives Matter” sticker on his laptop. A female student approaches the young men and begins to accuse them of racism.
“You’re offensive. Police lives matter? This is our space. You’re making this space uncomfortable,” one female student asks in the video, which has more than 1 million views on social media.
The two black activist students tell the white students to leave, explaining: “You’re white. Do you understand what a multicultural space means? It means you’re not being centered.”
One of the white students then asks, “White’s not a culture?”
“White is NOT a culture! You think whiteness is a culture? This is the violence that ASU does and this is the type of people that they protect!” one of the activists yells. “This white man thinks he can take up our space … they think they can get away with this s**t!”
“This is the only place on campus that does not center you, and you are still trying to center yourself which is peak white cis male bulls**t.,” one of the activists yells.
“You are racist. Your sticker’s racist because police, that’s a job, you can choose to be a police. I didn’t choose to be black,” the student said at one point. “You can choose to be a cop. You can choose to kill people with a badge and you’re protecting that s–t, which means that you’re racist.”
“I’m not racist, I’m just studying,” one of the white students responded. “I pay the same f**king tuition as you. I’m working 60 hours a week while going to school because my parents don’t just give me money!”
The activists then take aim at the students’ “Police Lives Matter” sticker, claiming it is “affiliated with white nationalist.”
“These people kill people like me and like us, so you’re promoting our murderers,” the other activist claimed.
An Asian student comes to the defense of the white students, but the activists were undeterred. Eventually, the white students left the area, saying they would complain to a dean.
Campus Reform <a href="https://campusreform.org/article?id=18460">reported</a> that faculty members at ASU are trying to get the school to overturn the sanctions against the two black students and are urging other faculty members to sign a letter joining them, which gives the impression that those who do not sign will be ostracized.
One anonymous ASU employee told the outlet that &#8220;I vehemently object to the [School of Historical, Philosophical and Religious Studies] email list being used as a platform from which to advocate an agenda.” The employee added, “I am very concerned about the potential for SHPRS faculty and staff intimidation and/or retaliation against members who do not sign this &#8216;letter of defense.&#8217;”

Fingers Pointing Each Other

‘We’re Being Persecuted’: ASU Students Cry Racism, Sexism After Being Punished For Harassing White Students

Racial Discrimination

Officials at Arizona State University said that Kyle Rittenhouse was not currently enrolled at the university, though he was taking online classes, as activists called for his removal from the school. 
&#8220;Kyle Rittenhouse has not gone through the admissions process with Arizona State University and is not enrolled in the Edson College of Nursing and Health Innovation,” University officials said in the days after Rittenhouse’s trial in Kenosha, Wisconsin. Rittenhouse was tried and acquitted after shooting three men in self-defense during uprisings in Kenosha in August 2020.
“ASU can confirm that Mr. Rittenhouse enrolled as a non-degree seeking ASU Online student for the session that started Oct. 13, 2021, which allows students access to begin taking classes as they prepare to seek admission into a degree program at the university.&#8221;
The University released a second statement on Monday indicating that Rittenhouse was not enrolled as a student at ASU. 
&#8220;Kyle Rittenhouse has not gone through the ASU admissions process. Our records show that he is not currently enrolled in any classes at ASU,&#8221; the statement read.
Dave Hancock, a spokesman for the Rittenhouse family, told <a href="https://www.foxnews.com/us/arizona-state-university-kyle-rittenhouse-not-enrolled-student-demands">Fox News</a> Tuesday that Kyle&#8217;s professors advised him to temporarily withdraw from classes but that he is planning on enrolling again.
&#8220;Amid his most recent semester, Kyle’s professors at Arizona State University recommended a compassionate withdrawal of his online classes. Now that the trial is behind him, Kyle is eager to enroll in more classes. He is hopeful that attending Arizona State in person will soon be an option,&#8221; Hancock said. 
Rittenhouse said during his testimony at trial that he was enrolled at Arizona State, then said the same thing in an interview with Fox News’ Tucker Carlson. 
The University’s announcement comes after several left-wing student groups demanded Rittenhouse be removed from the University despite his acquittal. The Daily Wire <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/far-left-groups-organize-push-to-get-kyle-rittenhouse-kicked-out-of-arizona-state-university">reported</a>: 
<blockquote>The Arizona State University Students for Socialism, Students for Justice in Palestine, Multicultural Solidarity Coalition, and MECHA de ASU are holding an event dubbed, “RALLY AND PROTEST TO GET MURDERER KYLE RITTENHOUSE OFF OUR CAMPUS,” set to be held on campus on Wednesday, December 1st, at 3:30 p.m.</blockquote>
The allied groups demanded the following:
<ol>
<li>WITHDRAW KYLE RITTENHOUSE FROM ASU.</li>
<li>RELEASE A STATEMENT AGAINST WHITE SUPREMACY &amp; RACIST MURDERER KYLE RITTENHOUSE.</li>
<li>REAFFIRM SUPPORT FOR THE MULTICULTURAL CENTER ON CAMPUS AS A SPACE SAFE FROM WHITE SUPREMACY.</li>
<li>REDIRECT FUNDING FROM ASU PD TO SUPPORT MULTICULTURAL CENTER AND ESTABLISHMENT OF A CAARE [sic] CENTER ON CAMPUS.</li>
</ol>
“Even with a not-guilty verdict from a flawed ‘justice’ system – Kyle Rittenhouse is still guilty to his victims and the families of those victims,” the groups stated. “Join us to demand from ASU that these demands be met to protect students from a violent, blood-thirsty murderer.”
Rittenhouse was <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/breaking-kyle-rittenhouse-found-not-guilty">found not guilty</a> on five counts of homicide on November 19. Rittenhouse claimed he was working in Kenosha County during the riots of August 2020. On the night of August 25th, Rittenhouse, then 17, said he went out into the streets of Kenosha to administer first aid and protect local businesses against being vandalized. While guarding the car dealership, Rittenhouse was confronted and chased by protestors. He shot three men in self-defense, killing two and injuring a third, before turning himself into police.

Kyle Rittenhouse Trial Continues In Kenosha, WI

Arizona State University Says Kyle Rittenhouse Took Online Classes But ‘Not Enrolled’ Amid Student Protests

Kyle Rittenhouse

Arizona State University students berated two fellow students over a sticker and a shirt while claiming to feel unsafe on campus.
In a viral video, two white male students can be seen sitting at a table &#8212; one wearing a “Did Not Vote For Biden” shirt and another with a “Police Lives Matter” sticker on his laptop. A female student approaches the young men and begins to accuse them of racism.
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet">
🚨 This insanity is happening on college campuses <a href="https://t.co/BrVxICZYqP">pic.twitter.com/BrVxICZYqP</a>
— Libs of Tik Tok (@libsoftiktok) <a href="https://twitter.com/libsoftiktok/status/1441202362073239553?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">September 24, 2021</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
&#8220;You&#8217;re offensive. Police lives matter? This is our space. You&#8217;re making this space uncomfortable,” one female student asks in the video, which has more than 1 million views on social media.
The two black activist students tell the white students to leave, explaining: “You&#8217;re white. Do you understand what a multicultural space means? It means you&#8217;re not being centered.”
One of the white students then asks, “White’s not a culture?”
“White is NOT a culture! You think whiteness is a culture? This is the violence that ASU does and this is the type of people that they protect!” one of the activists yells. “This white man thinks he can take up our space &#8230; they think they can get away with this s**t!”
“This is the only place on campus that does not center you, and you are still trying to center yourself which is peak white cis male bulls**t.,” one of the activists yells.
&#8220;You are racist. Your sticker’s racist because police, that&#8217;s a job, you can choose to be a police. I didn&#8217;t choose to be black,&#8221; the student said at one point. &#8220;You can choose to be a cop. You can choose to kill people with a badge and you&#8217;re protecting that s&#8211;t, which means that you&#8217;re racist.&#8221;
“I&#8217;m not racist, I&#8217;m just studying,” one of the white students responded. “I pay the same f**king tuition as you. I&#8217;m working 60 hours a week while going to school because my parents don&#8217;t just give me money!”
The activists then take aim at the students’ “Police Lives Matter” sticker, claiming it is “affiliated with white nationalist.”
“These people kill people like me and like us, so you&#8217;re promoting our murderers,” the other activist claimed.
An Asian student comes to the defense of the white students, but the activists were undeterred. Eventually, the white students left the area, saying they would complain to a dean.
On Friday, ASU <a href="https://newsroom.asu.edu/node/1589">responded</a> to the video, which its Twitter account described as “a disagreement between students on our campus.” ASU’s statement reads:
<blockquote>The Dean of Students Office is aware of the disagreement between a handful of students that was captured in a video circulated on social media. The Dean of Students Office will be discussing it with all involved. ASU is a community of more than 100,000 people from all 50 states and more than 150 countries. Differences of opinion are part of the university experience. The university expects respectful dialogue between students in all engagements.</blockquote>

An American flag symbolic of support for law enforcement

Activist Students Berate White Students Over ‘Police Lives Matter’ Sticker: ‘You’re Promoting Our Murders’

Police

Racism

A professor at Arizona State University penned an academic paper arguing that parents should have their “veto” powers revoked when consenting to their children’s gender transition. 
Philosophy professor Maura Priest wrote an academic paper in the Journal of Medical Ethics in response to a paper from Melbourne Law School researcher Lauren Notini. According to <a href="https://campusreform.org/article?id=17809">Campus Reform</a>, Notini argues that ongoing puberty suppression “is consistent with the proper goals of medicine to promote well-being, and therefore could ethically be offered to non-binary adults in principle.” 
Priest agrees with many of the premises of Notini’s writings, though the Arizona State professor takes the argument one step further, stating that the lived experiences of LGBT members should trump medical opinions. 
“If the medical community is to take LGBT testimony seriously (as they should) then it is no longer the job of physicians to do their own weighing of the costs and benefits of transition-related care,” Priest wrote. “Assuming the patient is informed and competent, then only the patient can make this assessment because only the patient has access to the true weight of transition-related benefits.”
“Heteronormativity has long fueled LGBT medical mistreatment. To avoid going back down that path, medicine must leave room for diverse and atypical health prioritisations [sic],” Priest continued. 
The Arizona State professor used this line of logic to assert that “guardian veto power” is an obstacle to “justice” because “such power means one trans child is denied the care that another receives.” 
“Taking LGBT patient testimony seriously also means that parents should lose veto power over most transition-related pediatric care,” Priest wrote. 
Priest’s academic paper also provides a hypothetical of a “non-binary patient” named Chicago who fully understands that puberty suppression has a “90% risk of osteoporosis.” Per Campus Reform reporting, “according to the Mayo Clinic, osteoporosis causes bones to become ‘so brittle that a fall or even stresses such a bending over or coughing can cause a fracture.’” 
The academic paper called prioritizing physical over psychological health “ethically dubious.” 
“Chicago contends that OPS’s identity-affirming benefits justifies the serious risk of osteoporosis,” Priest said. “This preference might seem unusual, but we must remember that both values and experience can impact suffering.”
Campus Reform student editor Ben Zeisloft, who is also an intern at The Daily Wire, provided Priest with a hypothetical situation regarding the extent to which a patient’s preference should be allowed to prevail over medical advice. Zeisloft asked, should a doctor &#8220;meet a patient’s request to quiet voices inside his head by drilling a hole in his cranium?&#8221;
Priest said that any doctor who affirms a request “would be acting negligently and unethically” as “putting psychological health on the same level as physical health does not mean that we should just blindly accept anything a patient would say.” 
“Hearing voices is a well-established symptom of schizophrenia, and it is well established that when persons are schizophrenic and experiencing symptoms they are NOT acting autonomously,” Priest responded. 
The professor also told Campus Reform that she believes it is appropriate for a person who strongly wants to cut off their arm or leg to do so. 
“[I take] a different stance on a situation in which a person experiences body integrity disorder, a long-recognized disorder in which a person strongly desires to have an arm or leg removed,” Priest said. “I think that when a patient is evaluated as otherwise psychologically capable that physicians do indeed act ethically by removing the limbs at the patient’s request.”

ASU Prof Wants Parents To Lose ‘Veto Power’ Over Children’s Gender Transition

Gender Identity

College athletics — specifically college football — has always been filled with individuals and programs attempting to skirt the rules. The worst lie in sports is that there are programs that “do it the right way.” 
All programs try and walk the fine line. Some are just better at it than others. 
On Wednesday, <a href="https://theathletic.com/2653784/2021/06/16/ncaa-investigating-arizona-state-football-over-allegations-of-recruiting-violations-during-dead-period/">The Athletic</a> reported that the NCAA is investigating Arizona State University for recruiting violations during the Covid-19 dead period, among other violations. 
The university confirmed to The Athletic in a statement that the school is under investigation by the NCAA. 
&#8220;ASU can confirm the NCAA is conducting an investigation regarding allegations related to our football program,&#8221; Arizona State vice president of media relations and strategic communications Katie Paquet <a href="https://theathletic.com/2653784/2021/06/16/ncaa-investigating-arizona-state-football-over-allegations-of-recruiting-violations-during-dead-period/">said</a>. &#8220;In accordance with NCAA bylaws, the university cannot provide further comment at this time.&#8221;
According to Yahoo Sports, the investigation began after an anonymous person sent in pages of screenshots, receipts, emails and pictures of numerous violations within the program. The pages are now in the possession of the NCAA. 
As the world shut down last March due to the pandemic, college athletics did as well. The NCAA paused all in-person recruiting for 15 months, forcing coaches to recruit electronically. The allegations claim the university flaunted these rules, secretly hosting recruits for on-campus visits. 
Pete Thamel of <a href="https://sports.yahoo.com/sources-ncaa-investigating-arizona-state-football-for-recruiting-violations-194707554.html">Yahoo Sports</a> reported that “at least 30 players visited campus over a span of months,  a practice so common coaches referenced &#8216;official visit weekends&#8217; in staff meetings, coaches bumped into recruits and families in a back stairwell and a routine developed of facility tours being given around 9 p.m. or 10 p.m. at night.&#8221; More from Yahoo Sports:
<blockquote>On one weekend in October, there were so many high school kids visiting that a staff member parked a 12-person van in the staff parking lot to tour around recruits. The visits spanned months, sources said, including some in October, the weekend of the UCLA game in December and through the spring game, which one source said “was like an official visit weekend.”
“It wasn’t a secret,” said a staff member with direct knowledge of the visits. “As far as knowing everyone who came into that [football] office, the number is too big and the names are too many. They would bring in parents, their moms and dads and friends. They’d get a facility tour like they were on an official visit. They’d show you the weight room and training room. They’d show you everything.”</blockquote>
The allegations of Covid-19 violations are particularly embarrassing for ASU, as the football team was only able to play four games during the 2020 season due to an outbreak within the team. Head coach Herman Edwards — along with a number of staff members and players — tested positive in November 2020, causing the cancelation of their game against Cal. 
&#8220;First, I want to say that Lia, the girls and I are fine and I will be back quicker than you can say &#8216;Forks Up!'&#8221; Edwards <a href="https://www.cbssports.com/college-football/news/arizona-state-coach-herm-edwards-tests-positive-for-covid-19-as-sun-devils-cancel-game-vs-cal/">said</a> in a statement at the time. &#8220;Second, even with the marvelous care our medical professionals have provided for myself, my staff and my team over the past few months the virus still found me.  So, I encourage all of you to take this virus seriously, to wear a mask, practice physical distancing and get tested whenever possible.&#8221;
Edwards&#8217;s level of involvement in the violations is unknown, as he is described as a “closer” when it comes to recruiting. His associate head coach — former NFL linebacker Antonio Pierce — is also ASU’s recruiting coordinator, and undoubtedly will be one of the focal points of the investigation. 
Joe Morgan is the Sports Reporter for The Daily Wire. Most recently, Morgan covered the Clippers, Lakers, and the NBA for Sporting News. Send your sports questions to sports@dailywire.com.

COLLEGE FOOTBALL: NOV 09 USC at Arizona State

NCAA Investigating ASU For Covid-19 Recruiting Violations

COVID

NCAA

An Arizona State University Associate Dean penned a 358-page book detailing how grading student’s writing is a form of racism and white supremacy. 
In a book titled “Labor-Based Grading Contracts: Building Equity and Inclusion in the Compassionate Writing Classroom,” professor Asao Inoue encourages teachers to ditch grading for a “labor-based” grading system wherein students earn grades based on their effort. The quality of a student’s writing would not help or hinder their course grade. 
“This book focuses on one kind of grading contract, one that calculates final course grades purely by the labor students complete, not by any judgments of the quality of their writing,” Inoue writes. “While the qualities of student writing is still at the center of the classroom and feedback, it has no bearing on the course grade.”
Near the beginning of the document, the author admits that the theory of “labor-based” grading is rooted in critical race theory. Critical race theory is the idea that America is rooted in racism as are the systems of modern American society.
Critical race theory contributed to Inoue’s idea that ranking things is a system rooted in racism. Because grading is a form of ranking, grading must also be a racist idea. In his book, Inoue dubbed grading and the education system writ large “racist” for their connections to ranking. 
“Ranking is a part of a much longer racist, and White supremacist, tradition in Western intellectual history,” Inoue writes. “Ranking has been deeply embedded in racist thinking, discourses, and logics, mainly because it has been deployed as a way to justify a number of racist, empirical, and colonial projects over the last four hundred years.”
The author claims that “education at all levels has been and still is a part of these racist projects” as well. 
The crux of the author’s argument is that grading calls for student uniformity and high-quality completed assignments, both of which are allegedly racist ideas. 
“Grading literacy performances by a single standard for so-called quality is racist and promotes white language supremacy,” the author writes. “Because all grading and assessment exist within systems that uphold singular, dominant standards that are racist, and White supremacist when used uniformly. This problem is present in any grading system that incorporates a standard, no matter who is judging, no matter the particulars of the standard.” 
According to the book, grading allegedly perpetuates “white language supremacy” in schools. Nearly every U.S. school requires children to speak and write in proper English during English and literacy classes. According to the author, holding students to that standard is racist. 
“The traditional purposes and methods used for grading writing turn out to be de facto racist and White supremacist,” Inoue writes. “Grading by a standard, thus, is how White language supremacy is perpetuated in schools.” 
Teachers who use regular grading systems and ask all of their students to use proper English in English class are also deemed racist to the author. The author does not dub them “bad people,” just people who directly contribute to society’s alleged “racist status quo.” 
“In our current society and educational systems, regardless of who you are, where you came from, or what your intentions or motives are as a teacher, if you use a single standard to grade students’ language performances, you are directly contributing to the racist status quo in schools and society,” Inoue writes.  
The book also touches on the “white racial habitus” which are societal norms that the author considers implicit in white people. Speaking proper English is considered a “white racial habitus.” According to the book, all things that are derived from the “white racial habitus” are inherently “white supremacist.” 
“All standards for good writing are deeply informed by a White racial habitus, which makes grading by such standards White supremacist,” Inoue writes.
The “white racial habitus” is also how teachers allegedly perpetuate “White language supremacy.” The author says that English is derived from white people, which means it’s inherently white and racist.  
“Because we live in a White-dominant society, and our dominant Englishes have historical White racial roots in White racial formations in the US, coming from White Racial habitus,” the book reads.  
At one point, Inoue goes as far as to call upholding grading systems a “slave-making mechanism.” “All the ways we judge language, even by well-intentioned teachers, are almost always racist and slave-making, almost always White supremacist,” Inoue said. 
The author justifies this claim with the example that white students get ahead in English class because they allegedly have an “unearned privilege” of speaking proper English. 
According to his <a href="http://asaobinoue.blogspot.com/p/about.html">blog</a>, Inoue identifies as a Japanese man because his father is of  Japanese descent, though he was born in Hawaii. His mother is white with links to Eastern Europe. He received both his bachelor’s and his master’s degrees from Oregon State University and his Ph.D. from Washington State University.  
In an anecdote, Inoue claims that he lived in an “explicitly racist world” because he got a B in an English class while getting A’s in other, more advanced, classes. He claims that his racial composition attributed to his average grade in a high school English class. 
“I lived in an explicitly racist world. The racism was very present to me,” Inoue wrote. “During my Freshman year of high school, I got an A in honors French and every other class I took, yet received a B (not a B+) in English, not honors English, regular English. How was this possible? What was I doing wrong? Apparently, nothing. It was me, my habitus. I knew this but didn’t want to admit, admit that my language and body were being judged together.”
The word “solution” is used just three times in the 358-paged book. The only solution appears to be getting rid of grading systems that judge students for their work and accepting the work of “raciolinguistically diverse students.”  
In the book, Inoue specifically addresses that “labor-based grading” is how professors and teachers can enact their “social justice agenda” into the classroom. 
Inoue directed The Daily Wire to his book for all questions and comments.

Arizona State Dean: Grading Writing Based On Quality Is ‘Racist,’ Promotes ‘White Language Supremacy’

White Supremacy

Menu