By David Horowitz Note: To view Part 1 of this series, click here: Indoctrination U: Colorado. To view Part 2 of this series, click here: Indoctrination U: University of Texas. To view part 3 of this series, click here: Indoctrination in One Department at Arizona State.
Note: To view Part 1 of this series, click here: Indoctrination U: Colorado.
To view Part 2 of this series, click here: Indoctrination U: University of Texas.
To view part 3 of this series, click here: Indoctrination in One Department at Arizona State.
However, entire departments and academic programs at
Among the “Analyzing Arguments, Reasons and Values” courses is the following course from the Religious Studies Department:
REL 334 (AR) Liberation Theology and Social Change
A survey of Third World (particularly Latin American) liberation theology and its potential and actual impact on movements for human freedom in the North American context (e.g., those working on Black, Hispanic and Native American issues, feminism, gay liberation and economic justice). Analyzing Arguments, Reasons, and Values. Alternate years, Spring. Wallace
Liberation Theology is a doctrine that integrates Marxist ideology with the Christian faith. “Economic justice” is an ideological term for Marxist views that serve to morally condemn the free market system. “Gay liberation” is a political agenda, not an academic concept. Feminism is a political ideology. This is not an academic course examining liberation theology from a disinterested and scholarly perspective. It is a program of advocacy and indoctrination.
Another course offered to fulfill the “Analyzing Arguments, Reasons and Values” requirement for the undergraduate degree is offered by the American Ethnic Studies Department:
AES 351 (AR) Indigenous Peoples, Human Rights and the Environment
This course explicitly states its intention to recruit students to its political agendas. An academic course would not assume that non-indigenous individuals, i.e.,
A third required course is offered by the Interdisciplinary Studies Department:
IDS 327 (AR; W) The American Story and the Legacy of Vietnam
The professors listed for this course are Catherine Collins and Lane C. McGaughy. Catherine Collins is a Professor of Rhetoric and Media Studies. Lane McGaughy is a Professor of Religion and Religious Studies. Both lack any apparent qualification to teach an academic course involving such complex and controversial geo-political issues as the war in
According to its catalogue description, the course presumes that “power rather than argument or persuasion has become the normal means for achieving national and personal ends” and uses the Vietnam War, a controversial episode from the recent past, as its historical text. In other words, the presumption of the course is a political thesis – and a rather extreme one – that
The General Education Requirement can also be fulfilled with an “Understanding Society Component.” Here is one of the courses that students may take to fulfill the requirement, offered by the American Ethnic Studies Department:
AES 114 (
[Cross-listed with SOC 114]
This is not an academic inquiry into race relations but a course designed to indoctrinate students in a leftwing ideology of race. The course description specifies the focus of the course as “the increasing importance of institutionalized racism in contemporary American society.” This is a preposterous idea to begin with. The claim that there is “institutionalized racism” in
1. American Ethnic Studies
The American Ethnic Studies Department is itself an ideological program. The following declaration appears in the catalogue mission statement of the American Ethnic Studies Department:
In particular, members of our program are committed to the discovery and exploration of how complex social relations of race, ethnicity, culture, and indigeneity [sic], in conjunction with other social systems and structures, can give rise to unjust social relations, limit human endeavor, and normalize privilege and oppression. The primary focus of our program is on traditionally underrepresented communities in the American social imaginary [sic]. Our coursework and scholarship seek to confront issues of social change and social injustice by the careful analysis of practices that frequently do not receive sustained critical assessment.
In other words this is not an academic department dedicated to the disinterested pursuit of knowledge about ethnic groups, but a department with an official and explicitly expressed ideology that the
2. Women’s Studies
The Women’s Studies Department at
The Women’s Studies minor is an interdisciplinary program focusing on feminist scholarship about women, gender and gender inequality. In addition to Women’s Studies core courses in the Interdisciplinary Studies Area, the minor also includes disciplinary courses that critique and revise traditional androcentric approaches within academic disciplines. All Women’s Studies classes encourage students to think systematically and critically about their experiences as gendered social beings and to confront the challenges of a society increasingly committed to gender equality ... Feminist scholarship … explores the important but often hidden ways that gender and gender inequality have shaped, and been shaped by, our cultural, social, and personal worlds.”
This is not a program of scholarly inquiry. It is a program to amass a dossier of evidence and argument with which to indict “androcentric” – male-oriented – “approaches within academic disciplines.” In other words, it is a political program. Moreover, it is a political program designed to link up with other radical political programs in regard to race and class. To quote the Department’s self-description: “In recent years, scholars in the field have increasingly recognized that gender and gender inequality cannot be understood in abstraction from other axes of social identity and power, especially those of race, class, sexual orientation, and nation. 
This is not a department devoted to scholarly inquiry but to developing an agenda to change the world. And the official departmental description emphasizes precisely this point: “All Women's and Gender Studies classes encourage students to think systematically and critically about gender and to confront the challenges of moving toward a more equitable world.” Moving toward a more equitable world is a political program, and a program couched in the ideological jargon of the political left. It is not academic; it is not appropriate for an educational institution, let alone a taxpayer-funded one.
The Women’s Studies Department at
Copyright 2003-2005 : DiscoverTheNetwork.org