Controversial: Naomi Schaefer Riley called the five PhD topics irrelevant and said nobody would read them
Any “grievance studies” major is “claptrap”,
and that’s putting it mildly.
Controversial: Naomi Schaefer Riley called the five PhD topics irrelevant and said nobody would read them
Truth’ll get ya in trouble more often than not in our PC society of today.
While I do believe in getting rid of the office of Secretary of Education, if there has to be one, I nominate Naomi.
Not guilty.
Whipped dog yelps the loudest.
Truth = Hurts
I have a hard-earned Ph.D. in a scientific discipline. To receive such a degree, one needs to make a real contribution to science. Typically, the results of such Ph.D. research are published as one or more peer-reviewed papers in scientific journals, which in turn are cited in later papers by others. The Ph.D. dissertation itself may also be cited.
As a a Ph.D., I RESENT pseudo-scholars in Victim Studies “disciplines”, and in deconstructionist/postmodern/Frankfort School versions of the humanities and social sciences, who get to put the same three letters—”Ph.D.” after their names. All these “disciplines” (which typically are at least in part based on Marxism) are WORTHLESS, if not poison!!!!
Fortunately, the vast majority of “Ph.D.” dissertations derived from these worthless, meaningless studies just gather dust in some university library. If any papers are published from them, they are in self-congratulatory “journals” that no one bothers to read.
Unfortunately, some Ph.D. graduates of these “disciplines” may get jobs in academia, where they can indoctrinate the young. Others may become political operatives, or even end up as czars in the obama Administration. Phooey to them!!!!
As long as the powers-that-be flinch every time someone dares to speak (or write) the truth and then gives in to the PC crowd by silencing that voice, we will continue down that long and winding road to perdition.
Kudos, Naomi, for having the courage to speak the truth and shame on you at the so-called Chronicle of Higher Education for having such a wide yellow streak down your collective backs.
If the proponents of Black Studies really had a probative case for the program as an academic discipline, they would debate or refute her article, instead of just demanding she be fired.
Maybe she shouldn't have called it claptrap. I would have said flapdoodle, or codswallop, or even taradiddle.
Was that why she was fired?
When I applied to graduate from Cleveland State University 35 years ago I was rejected because I hadn’t taken an “Urban Studies “ course. Was able to sign up for legendary pianist Bill Gidney’s “ History of Jazz” and due to a great tip from one of my friends, got an A in the course. Word was that if on your final essay exam you wrote that all of the great Jazz artists died of artistic frustration , you received an A. If you said they had died of a drug overdose then the best grade you could get was a C.
Strangely, I really enjoyed the class despite the fact I really don’t like jazz. Four or five guys playing their own song at the same time.
Liberals hate the truth like a vampire hates the sun.
‘If these young scholars are the future of the discipline, I think they can just as well leave their calendars at 1963 and let some legitimate scholars find solutions to the problems of blacks in America. Solutions that don’t begin and end with blame the white man.’
In today's world the truth doesn't set you free - it get you fired. Too bad - the black community could use a little honesty. Black studies? Yep, ‘left-wing victimization claptrap’.