Friday, October 17, 2008

Daily effects of indoctrination IV, conclusion 

When one disagrees with someone else's opinion one can do so with a smile. On the board we've been discussing this week, we had a few examples of that. I thought this one was simultaneously egregious and kind.

Just this week on the campus' discussion list, one of our faculty had fished around the Times' comments section, where there are many anonymous posts. One included a disgusting reference to Senator Obama. From this, that faculty member concluded, it should be clear that "we need" our racial issues courses and "anti-racist initiatives". Of course there was no evidence the poster was a student on our campus. The assumption is that there must be racists among us on campus as well -- that the only path to salvation lies through the conscious effort of the anointed to correct them -- and that assumption leads naturally to every effort from three courses on diversity here at SCSU to more sinister indoctrinations in the dorms as happened at Delaware.

There is something dangerous and touching about this poster. �"Stop being so ignorant!" but "God [hearts] you!!" �Perhaps this person has good knowledge of affirmative action but disagrees with your viewpoint. �This argument of "if you knew what I knew you'd agree with me" is both wrong and arrogant. �But the smile and the love just doesn't let me dislike the artist. �(The person had a signature at bottom that I cropped off the picture, thus the lack of a bottom border on this.) �Sometimes the do-gooder is so nice, you can't get yourself to be mad at their condescencion. �Perhaps this is a character flaw of mine.

No smiling face hides the disdain in this poster, however.

Because you don't agree with my viewpoint,"I can see how you are the less qualified one." �Remember, this is from either a class or a club; there is little doubt that discussion of affirmative action has been part of the activity, and because the board is claimed by a department there is supervision by faculty. �Is the professor or advisor reading these posters? �Does s/he approve? �If this project was graded, how is the little bit extra venom in this one treated? �Positive or negative? �And, by the way, how does this person KNOW the counter-poster that started this all is a member of the dominant race? �It's on a par of assuming that every person of color�must�support Obama.

And with that, this series is over. �The rest of the series is here (see also the link above on the counter-poster):