Bettina Love at Virginia Tech – a Different Context

by James C. Sherlock

A bad penny keeps on turning up.

This appearance is however critically different in context from Ms. Love’s appearance at the University of Virginia School of Education.

The Tech online get together is for faculty, and I have no problem with that. It represents legitimate academic inquiry.

Presumably the audience will question Love on her recommendations for resegregation of the schools and a radically unique curriculum for black students. That should engender a lively debate that I will pay to see.

The UVa School of Education appearance was as a keynote speaker for K-12 teachers, which represents an endorsement.

There are currently no comments highlighted.

17 responses to “Bettina Love at Virginia Tech – a Different Context

  1. Is she being paid to speak at VT? If so, is it from Tech’s operating budget or from some of the endowment monies?

  2. “resegregation of the schools”

    I’m afraid I have some bad news: https://richmond.com/news/local/education/vcu-study-school-segregation-worsening-in-virginia/article_a80039ec-2b54-5178-91c2-6812ff3b2307.html

    So, since segregation is bad, what affirmative actions should be taken to fix this problem? Are we all finally at the point we can admit that Milliken was a bad decision?

    • Provide the children better instruction, which means first discipline in the classroom, support of parents that want their children to learn and then an entirely different instruction model that respects the students as learners who can and will succeed in school and in life. It works. See my column Joyful Learning about Success Academy in NYC.

      No government action required but to get out of the way by changing Virginia’s charter school laws.

      • Success Academy is something like 90+% Black and Latino, making way for more of that enhances not diminishes segregation.

        You don’t actually care about integration, stop pretending otherwise.

        • I don’t particularly care about integration one way or the other. What I care about is the education of children to lead successful lives.

          Success Academy and others have shown that minority children can succeed in school in some of the most impoverished neighborhoods in the nation.

          If you think minority students have to be bused to schools with white children make that happen, your position has been demonstrated to be incorrect.

          • “If you think minority students have to be bused to schools with white children make that happen, your position has been demonstrated to be incorrect.”

            I believe your views are in line with Clarence Thomas, whom I greatly admire and rose from very difficult circumstances himself.

          • Reed Fawell 3rd

            “If you think minority students have to be bused to schools with white children make that happen, your position has been demonstrated to be incorrect.”

            Yes, indeed, absolutely correct beyond doubt. See Sowell, but also Clarence Thomas in great book Clarence Thomas and the Lost Constitution” by Myron Magnet, wherein Thomas also explains from first hand experience the enormous harm inflicted on students by the hideous practice of preferences.

  3. Jim Sherlock, I fear you might overestimate the wisdom and ethics of today’s faculty and administrators at Virginia Tech, and underestimate the harm they do daily to their students.

    For example, consider this exchange taken from Bacon’s Rebellion April 6, 2018 post titled Want Proof of the Decline of Western Civilization, and slightly edited here?

    Reed Fawell 3rd | April 7, 2018
    The reaction to the singing of this song by the Virginia Tech women’s lacrosse team tells us far more about the state of our society than the college girls singing the song.

    How is the singing of this song or any song far “more wrong” than doing a “slut walk”? Or doing a “Hook-UP”? Or doing an abortion? Why all the fuss about women students singing a popular rapper’s song to celebrate their lacrosse Victory, a song sung by the rapper at Va. Tech who was invited to Va. Tech for the express purpose of singing that song to those students?

    Why is the speaking or singing of certain words by one identity group rather than another identity group so much more offensive than taking real actions with real consequences by certain groups or certain individuals? Why is a happy celebration by white girls hurtful, while rappers getting paid large sums of money to sing these same songs to those same girls not hurtful, and indeed celebrated instead?

    What is going on here? We reap what we sow.

    ARE THESE GIRLS TO BE PUNISHED? AND IF SO, WHY?

    AND IF PUNISHED, AT WHO’S PERIL? AND WHY?

    Why might some think this is about Donald Trump? Or has anything whatsoever to do with Donald Trump? Or those who voted for Donald Trump? Are these Virginia Tech women lacrosse players who sang this song more likely to be Donald Trump Voters? Did he make them do it? Are Donald Trump voters more likely to come to their defense. Are Never Trump people more likely to verbally attack these girls in social media? And on campus? And elsewhere protest and riot? What does one’s skin color have to do with their right to sing a popular song?

    Why is this a “teachable moment” for the girls? And for no one else?

    Are not these girls celebrating by song a progressive anthem? So why punish them for that?

    As Jim Bacon suggests, here is the real teachable moment, here is the really frightening event:
    “Then came the crowning blow, the condemnation of their peers. The Virginia Tech Student Government adopted a resolution condemning the use of the racial slur, describing it as “one of many episodes of discrimination and animosity toward marginalized groups that have occurred on the campus of Virginia Tech in recent months.”

    According to the Campus Reform website, the resolution stated:
    Examples of such discriminatory incidents include… a guest lecture by Dr. Charles Murray, a white-nationalist known for inaccurate theories linking race and intelligence; a Steven Crowder speaking event in which promotional materials contained homophobic language; and the invitation of Charlie Kirk, a controversial right-wing speaker whose rallies have attracted the support of white nationalists and ended in violence such as the February 2nd event at Colorado State University, to speak on campus April 30th. Asserting that “such discriminatory incidents contribute to members of marginalized communities feeling unsafe on the campus of Virginia Tech,” the resolution goes on to “completely and wholeheartedly” condemn the Women’s Lacrosse team out of a desire to “stand in solidarity with our fellow students.”

    Apparently, this is the sort of education that students at Virginia Tech are getting from their professors. What kind of educational malpractice produces such toxic drivel as this resolution from of “the best and the brightest” students at Virginia Tech, its student leaders. This result is simply astounding.

    Meanwhile, serious well documented reports by celebrated professors at Virginia Tech that detail with great authority the corruption of scientific research at Virginia Tech gets hidden and buried from public view.

    What is the real question here?

    Why should not the President of Virginia Tech answer for this? And absent that, be fired?

    Where is the Virginia Tech Board in all of this horror?

    Is no one responsible for educational and research malpractice in Virginia? No one, except the kids, particular white kids, including girl lacrosse players. That is how it appears. In fact, that is what is going on at Virginia Tech right now.

    The greater the claims of educational excellence in Virginia by Virginia’s leaders of higher institutions of learning, the greater their chronic failure to produce it. The evidence of this corruption and failure is overwhelming.

    Meanwhile, those responsible, the Administrators and boards, run away and hide or blame it on students, including girls on a lacrosse team celebrating victory on a bus returning from a ball game.

    Who are the moral midgets here? Who are the ones that should answer for all this mess after all the money parents and taxpayers pay to educate their kids.

    For more information as to what is going on consider what is taught a Virginia Tech:
    “Marcuse argued that, because of the radical repressiveness of Western society, a tolerance for all viewpoints actually contributed to social oppression. A pervasive network of assumptions and biases implicitly privileges the viewpoint of the powerful, so that seemingly “equal” presentations of opposite opinions actually end up benefiting the viewpoint of the powerful… Because of social programming, the inhabitants of a given society automatically favor certain values. The ideological playing field’s lack of levelness means that seemingly equal presentations of ideas are not really equal.

    In the light of this situation, Marcuse made a rather cunning inversion (one that has been aped countless times since by cultural organs across the United States): The fact that society is so radically unequal means that we should be intolerant and repressive in the name of tolerance and liberty. He rejected what he termed “indiscriminate tolerance” — a tolerance that accepts all viewpoints — in favor of “liberating tolerance” or “discriminating tolerance.” Unlike many of his disciples, Marcuse was frank about what this intolerance would mean: “Liberating tolerance, then, would mean intolerance against movements from the Right and toleration of movements from the Left.” (Quote taken from National Review June, 2015 article Herbert Marcuse and New Intolerance.) This is a brilliant article on some of what is behind what these kids are being taught and how it results in conduct such as Jim describes in his post. Recall back in the Stone Age, Tipper Gore warned about this sort of music, and how she got shut down by the glitterati who of course knew better? Now white girl students are being shut up by the same leftist faculty for singing what Tipper was shup up for criticizing!

    Actually, this rapper song is a brilliant work of art, one that does great public service. It educates us about our culture, including what is being taught, acted out, and inculcated into our youth, at our colleges and universities today. What else would you expect from the hook-up culture? Or a culture wherein you are taught that there is no truth, or right or wrong, and you are either perfectly precious because you got into a certain school, or that alternatively you’re incorrigibly racist & corrupt if you are white, and/or a victim if black. And, alternatively taught that where you came from, and who and your parents and kin are, is evil. And that the Devils are your parents paying the bills for this toxic ideology that Va. Tech faculty teaches their kids.

    Regarding the above National Review article: Please take particular note of the quote: “dissent from the sexual ethics du jour (and the mandarins of the new intolerance have used sexuality as a cultural battering ram) is viewed not as an alternative account of how we should direct our erotic energies but instead as atavistic bigotry.”

    It’s amazing, Lit Dickey’s dazzling intellectual leap and Lit Dickey’s profound mastery of the Rap Art. Note how Lit Dickey weaponizes the sexual energy of our children at Virginia Tech and how Virginia Tech Professors have used that sexual energy of their girl students as “battering rams” to explode the sexual mores and culture of their parents. This Freaky Friday video as so weaponized by our Virginia Tech Professors working in league with Lit Dickey, is a tour de force of depraved art and instruction worthy of Charles Mason’s Helter Skelter.

    Again, quoting for context from the National Review article on Herbert Marcuse, a leading intellectual guru at our modern universities:
    “Following Marcuse’s lead, our current PC politics is simultaneously collectivist and personal. It is collectivist insofar as belonging to certain collective identity groups grants one ethical privileges denied to others. But PC politics is also personal in that the new intolerance exacts a tremendous personal price from dissenters. It is not enough to argue with ideas: Those who espouse heretical ideas must be destroyed; they must lose their jobs, their reputations, and their places in the public square. The notion of “shaming” to the point of personal destruction seems a principal modus operandi of PC politics.
    As a corollary to its collectivist emphasis, PC politics also attempts to eliminate the space for ethical debate through fetishizing the idea of identity. One of the major innovations of current advocates of “discriminating tolerance” is the attempt to classify alternative ethical approaches as exercises in animus rather than good-faith attempts to find the truth and to live well. Thus, dissent from the sexual ethics du jour (and the mandarins of the new intolerance have used sexuality as a cultural battering ram) is viewed not as an alternative account of how we should direct our erotic energies but instead as atavistic bigotry. Classifying as bigotry the teachings of, say, the Catholic Church places them beyond the realm of respectable argument. However, trying to silence debate with the cry of “Shut up, you despicable bigot” does not stop with the Catholic Church, owners of small businesses, or the Republican party — as some on the Left are now finding to their chagrin.

    In recent months, leftist writers have expressed increasing worry that the mobs of intolerance could target members of the Left. In January, Jonathan Chait wrote a major story for New York magazine warning about the excesses of PC culture. While many on the Left attacked Chait for daring to utter these thoughts (and perhaps thereby illustrated the accuracy of his concerns), others agreed with him about the intellectual dangers of the new rage. Edward Schlosser’s recent viral essay “I’m a Liberal Professor, and My Liberal Students Terrify Me” describes (how) the new intolerance suppresses the free exchange of ideas on college campuses.” (END QUOTE)

    Matters go downhill from there as our children are cast out into the ignorant darkness of an American modern university as they simultaneously flip out of the obit of responsible parental adult control and into the hands of Virginia Tech. There they revert to the terrible tantrums of their former infantile states under equally incompetent and neurotic tin horn despot Professors who fall into incoherent gibberish in the presence of a real scholars of consequence. And so, clueless, they collapse into the waiting arms of the likes of Chris Brown, Kendal Jenner, and Lil Dickey.

    Meanwhile Virginia Tech’s president and board run away and hide, disclaiming all responsibility as if Alfred E. Neuman.

    Recall the 2012 election year. That is when Democrats were scared to death that the 2010 mid-term elections had shown that they were losing the support of younger women, and they were afraid it would repeat in 2012 presidential election year. And that Obama would lose.

    So they began in 2011 to madly engineer “a scare and sweet talk the coed campaign” that was centered around twin memes. The SUGAR DADDY. Based on OBamaCare. And a concocted RAMPANT RAPE EPIDEMIC on America’s campus colleges. Hence, the 2011 Dear Colleague to the colleges and universities about sexual behavior on campus.

    So this scare and sweet talk the coed campaign was multifaceted. First, JULIA was invented. The yuppie sweet web designer college graduate girl who could work and have kids happily and securely without a husband or any man around at all, because she had her sugar daddy, Barack Obama. He would get her first a free public education, then free birth control, then free health and child care, so she could then DO IT ALL – enjoy a single life alone without a care in the world – start up her own tech company without bosses, have her own kids without husbands or fathers, all done with free stuff for her and her kids, just like a life at the beach. And then she could retire with Social Security & Medicare and so spend her golden years volunteering in a community garden, all thanks to Barack Obama.

    Julia was only the start of creating fictional people for young girls. After Julia, Sugar Daddy Barack created Julia’s little friend in Barack’s Garden of Eden. Here like a God, he created Pajama Boy for Julia. Wimpy, nerdy, a hot chocolate sipper, this sweet boy in his zip-up plaid PJs will never grow up to threaten anybody, least of all little girls, or big girls either. He’s too nice for that. “Hey Girl, I live with my parents. How’d you know I went to Oberlin.” And P-Jam boy got his Obamacare too at Christmas, so he could have a happy New Year too, living at home, sipping chocolate in his PJs’ with his computer screen and dinner made by mom.

    But all good marketers and flimflam artists know the every garden needs a snake to keep little boys’ and girls’ attention, to keep them in line. That way all boys and girls who never grow up MUST be protected from DRAGONS that eat little boys and the BIG BAD WOLF that otherwise will eats little Miss Riding Hoods.

    Thus Barack Obama and Grand Daddy old Joe Bidden created out of their own imaginations A RAMPANT RAPE EPIDEMIC. ONE OUT OF EVERY FOUR GIRLS IN COLLEGE WOULD GET RAPED unless sugar daddy Obama and uncle Joe swung into action against all the big bad white boys doing evil things to girls on campus, mostly in Fraternity houses. BOO!

    SO I GOT YOUR BACK, BARACK declares to the Coeds. ME TOO, Old Uncle Joe chimes in. Barack then told all the college presidents to watch out, not mess with him & Old Joe and their girls. I am not making this up. It happened in the Blue Room of the White House. That was in the Winter of 2014 in time for the mid-term elections in November of 2014. That is when UVA jumped aboard with a Jackie witch hunt.

    So now we got Virginia Tech in the 2108 working with Lit Dickey, conjuring up the Devils Incarnate, big bad wolves like Charles Murray.

    Go though that Freaky Friday Video again. This time look for the memes.
    What do I mean? What kind of meme?

    LOOK CAREFULLY for the “idea, behavior, or style that can easily spread from person to person within a culture—the action aimed at conveying a particular phenomenon, theme, or meaning represented by the meme. A meme acts as a unit for carrying cultural ideas, symbols or practices that help transmit from one mind to another through writing, speech, gestures, rituals, or song. Thus meme creators selling to kids try very hard to build cultural analogues to genes so those memes will on video self-replicate, mutate, and respond to selective pressures that impact kids with a powerful emotional and psychological wallop. (see Wikipedia)

    Build bad meme and foist them on your kids. This is what a lot of immoral professors and politicians in Virginia do to people too, including kids.

    So slow down Freaky Friday so you can watch it carefully, see and hear and feel it frame by frame, word by word, phrase by phase, move by move, and expression by expression. Do you see what you see?

    Do you see how this piece of performance art is brilliantly designed to appeal to the yearnings and desires, fears and insecurities, of young girls living within the swamp of post-modern culture and its miasma, most particularly the toxic mix to often found today at America’s modern university. Its potent and its highly destructive brew. A poison designed to work like a battering ram that explodes traditional American culture, and American values, habits, institutions, and communities. The goal here is destruction. And it is aimed at your children.

Leave a Reply