Any freshman who complains about these “anti-racism” lessons will become a target for destruction. It allows the faculty to identify any potential dissenter in the student body. There is another obvious purpose in making these “struggle sessions” mandatory for all freshman. The purpose of mandatory “anti-racism” training is to humiliate white people, to destroy their self-esteem by requiring them to confess their guilt of “racism” and denounce themselves as oppressors. Struggle sessions were often held at the workplace of the accused, but they were sometimes conducted in sports stadiums where large crowds would gather if the target was well-known. In general, the victim of a struggle session was forced to admit various crimes before a crowd of people who would verbally and physically abuse the victim until he or she confessed. The aim of a struggle session was to shape public opinion and humiliate, persecute, or execute political rivals and those deemed class enemies. What is that agenda?Ī struggle session was a form of public humiliation and torture that was used by the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) at various times in the Mao era, particularly years immediately before and after the establishment of the People’s Republic of China (PRC) and during the Cultural Revolution. Without any evidence of a general need for this “inner work,” then, we may assume that this indoctrination is intended to serve the political agenda of ASU’s faculty and administration. Unless Arizona schools are demonstrably failing in terms of teaching “anti-racism,” how does requiring this assignment in a freshman communications class constitute an academic necessity? What need is there for this?
So it may be assumed that these are reasonably intelligent young people who have completed a state-approved high school curriculum. Good night ?Īsk yourself what educational purpose is intended by requiring students to make a commitment to “doing the inner work of anti-racism”? We might suppose that Arizona State would never have admitted these students if their scholastic achievement was deficient.
REDDIT STRUGGLE SESSION SKIN
Imagine paying to go to school and be asked to atone for the sin of your skin color. yvtqiLLZDOĪlso my niece now follows me so you can say hi or give advice directly on this thread. How is this allowed in a communication class? This has gone too far. My niece sent me this assignment that she is required to do at She must explain how she is doing the "anti-racist" work because it's presumed she's racist. In other words, making this kind of indoctrination mandatory - and Introduction to Communications is a required class for all freshmen at Arizona State University - violates the constitutional rights of students. Maybe this isn’t what it looks like, but if you can’t make a grammar school kid say the Pledge of Allegiance during World War II, there’s no way a professor can mandate psychological therapy for his or her adult students. Telling students they have to do “inner work” on their beliefs as college classwork sounds a lot more like thought reform than education. Teaching about anti-racism in a state university Intro to Communications class is one thing. Robert Shibley, executive director of the Foundation for Individual Rights in Education (FIRE), calls attention to how “critical race theory” indoctrination is made mandatory at universities:
0 kommentar(er)
