The Volokh Conspiracy
Mostly law professors | Sometimes contrarian | Often libertarian | Always independent
George Mason University President Announces Anti-Racism Will Be "Important Component" of Reaccreditation
Can Scalia Law School and the Economics Department declare independence from GMU?
Today, the President of George Mason University sent a community-wide email. Here is an excerpt:
I am pleased to announced that Mason's Reaffirmation Leadership Team, with input from the Mason community, has chosen Transformative Education through Equity and Justice: Anti- Racist Community Engagement as the university's next quality enhancement plan (QEP) proposal. The QEP, which is an important component of our upcoming reaffirmation of accreditation by the Southern Association of Colleges and Schools Commission on Colleges (SACSCOC), specifically focuses on improving student learning/student success….The five-year QEP will be rooted in Mason's mission, driven by our institutional assessments, and connected to our Anti-Racism and Inclusive Excellence initiative. Information and progress updates are located on the QEP website. Because the success of our QEP hinges on the engagement of the entire Mason community—faculty, students, staff, and administrators—I hope you will all contribute as involved partners as we move forward.
Earlier this summer, GMU announced a Task Force on Anti-Racism. The President announced, "I want George Mason University to emerge from this exercise as a local, regional, and national beacon for the advancement of anti-racism, reconciliation, and healing."
Perhaps the President is merely spewing bromides. But if he is serious about these initiatives (and I have every reason to think he is), anti-racism will become a central component of every aspect of the University: hiring, promotion, tenure, pedagogy, scholarship etc. Many of these efforts would violate the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment, as well as federal nondiscrimination law. Indeed, Scalia Law School's recent statement in favor of free speech is anti-anti-racist.
Can Scalia Law School (my alma matter) continue to exist within this regime? At some point, Scalia Law School should consider declaring its independence. The Economics Department could join the seccession movement. For decades, these top-ranked programs have been dragged down by the main campus. And since the Scalia naming, there have been increasing tensions with the central administration. Separation could allow both institutions to flourish. The Law School and the Economics Department could pursue academic excellence. And the rest of the University can pursue the Great Awokening. Perhaps amicable terms could be worked out. The Law School and Econ Department could get the Arlington campus. The rest of the University stays in Fairfax. This conscious decoupling may be Pareto Optimal. (Someone will have to explain that concept to the central administration). The new breakaway institution could be called James Buchanan University, after the famous Mason Nobel Laureate. (No, not the President). Or, the Law School can keep George Mason, so the main campus can drop that racist name. Yes, you know at some point there will be a movement to change the name. (My prediction, simply call it GMU University, where GMU does not stand for anything. I suspect the same will happen at GW).
The previous paragraph was written mostly in jest. Mostly.
Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of Reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Comments may only be edited within 5 minutes of posting. Report abuses.
Please
to post comments
GMU
Gone Mad University?
" . . . advancement of anti-racism, reconciliation, and healing."
From what I read of "anti-racism", it is not compatible with reconciliation or with healing.
Or anti-racism, for that matter.
Genetically Modified University?
Anti-racism is code for “If you don’t agree with me 100%, you’re a racist and have no rights at all.”
What the fuck is anti-racism anyways? It seems to be focused exclusively on censorship, on policing of speech and thought, and on punishing heresy.
"Anti-racism" is the alleged moral principle that it is the absolute duty of our institutions to ensure life outcomes for minorities equal to or better than those of whites, regardless of individual behavior and denying the very existence of individual responsibility and merit.
Any school at any grade level which adopts it will doom itself, because by adopting it, the school will drive away any student who could expect to succeed in a merit system. Its degrees will then become worthless or worse than worthless.
This is already happening to most institutions of higher education in the western world. Of course, the tax-funded ones will likely continue to exist in order to exist, long after they serve no purpose except to pay salaries.
https://www.city-journal.org/how-to-be-an-antiracist
They smell money in the water ever since Jack Dorsey gave $10M to BU (https://www.nbcboston.com/news/local/twitter-ceo-jack-dorsey-donates-10m-to-bu-center-for-antiracist-research/2181060/).
At the end of the day, that is just about the only thing that many universities care about.
Except that Trump came damn near to taxing their endowments and either he or the next Populist President will eventually do it....
That will happen as soon as the Democrats levy the same high taxes on Hollywood and sports stars as they want to on CEOs.
So, it won't happen.
Except that Trump came damn near to taxing their endowments and either he or the next Populist President will eventually do it….
I'd like to see a link on that. I remember the Democrats were complaining about endowments and how Harvard was more like a Hedgefund with a University attached rather than a University with an Endowment.
Right wingers and seceding over anti-racism- name a more iconic duo.
That racism is a core result and tool of anti-racism.
"Right wingers and seceding over anti-racism- name a more iconic duo."
Left wingers and woke-ing so hard that they out-racist their KKK ancestors- name a more iconic duo.
And does anyone seriously think we should continue government backed loans to universities and huge corporate welfare payments?
DEFUND HIGHER EDUCATION NOW!
YES!!!!
If it forces you to interact with any black people aside from Clarence Thomas and Kevin Williamson. I’m all for it.
Clarence Thomas grew up in the Segregated South.
I think I have something to learn from him, even if I don't agree with his conclusions. Same thing with the Freedom Riders -- I wasn't there....
Kevin Williamson. That is a joke, correct?
The irony of them saying this and yet retaining the George Mason name is profound. Perhaps, in the name of anti-racism, in addition to educating students on George Mason's staunch defense of southern interests like slavery, they can also tell students that he and other southern colonies were against the Electoral College. And then watch heads explode....
They will never ever do anything that requires any material personal sacrifice.
Thats not how tyrants behave.
"The previous paragraph was written mostly in jest. Mostly."
Does that include the part where you apparently don't know the difference between secession and succession?
Now he's changed it, but still misspelled it "seccession."
It has one c, not two.
The economics department?! With woker than woke Tyler Cowen? The GMU Econ department probably drafted this statement and will be in charge of enforcement.
It's an economics department that doesn't actually do a lot of economics.
"Top-ranked?" I don't think so.
I think you meant secession plan.
Note: secession has one c in it. Just a heads up.
"Anti-racism" should be in quotes unless, of course, you actually think it's anti-racist, in which case there would be no objection, would there?
But if you believe it's simply an Orwellian euphemism, say so and think of a better term to describe it.
Right wing secession doesn't have a bright history (see 1861 - 1865).
Holy cow! I just won a free dinner coupon with my Bullshit Bingo card!
And let me hasten to add, which is itself an odd symptom of the times, I am not talking about anti-racism, just making fun of buzzwords like "transformative". Of course, let's face it, a "tweak-formative" change, the more likely actual result, carries much less gravitas punch.
If you bag on anti-racism without reading what it's advocates say it is, that says more about you than about anti-racism.
Easy enough to find issues with it once you know what it is, but many here don't seem like they want to bother.
Should we always listen to what the advocates of something say it is, or only when it's lefty lunatics?
Always.
You should have some idea what they're advocating, yeah.
"Everything’s objective till your sacred cow’s the one getting gored"
The most salient thing you've posted lately.
The pages of Reason are filled with examples of the advocates of "anti-racism" explaining what it is.
But that is missing a bigger point. This is a college, which is supposed to be about objective scholarship in the pursuit of truth, claiming that is will fundamentally follow a creed that is against the entire concept of objective pursuit of truth.
It is based on critical theory, which is not actually a theory, or a philosophy, or in any way scientific, but is in fact an ideology, one based on Marxist propaganda. It comes from the Frankfurt School, which is explicitly Marxist. If you investigate these things you will see that the purpose of this is explicitly, as in said by the people who created it, to indoctrinate in order to change society. It takes fallacious Marxist conceptions of history as axiomatic, and does not allow any dissent against them. It openly rejects basic freedoms that are supposed to be considered universal in American society, such as freedom of speech and freedom of association.
So, uh, yeah, a school should not be doing that. If you can't see that, you have a serious problem with basic reasoning, regardless of your political leanings
You're better than many of the knee-jerk bittermen here, but you do a lot of work to get at the provenance of anti-racism, which is a great way to ignore it's substance.
Plus, the idea that Marxism is axiomatic in anti-racism is untrue of any of the formulations I've read.
Also like this a creed that is against the entire concept of objective pursuit of truth.
...
openly rejects basic freedoms that are supposed to be considered universal in American society
Everything's objective till your sacred cow's the one getting gored, eh?
As I said you're better than some, but somehow I think reason may not be the place to go in looking for what anti-racism is.
I often disagree with Sarcastro. But I agree on this one. See my comment below.
"If you bag on anti-racism without reading what it’s advocates say it is, that says more about you than about anti-racism."
Apparently its advocates think it involves placing communications professors on leave for saying a Chinese word that sounds like the n-word. Can I bag on it now?
Artie, is this you?
The Great Awokening
Is that satire? It could be legit wokemess.
I don't think it's satire. But, maybe Poe's law, I dunno. The site doesn't obviously indicate that it is satire.
Another commie five year plan. Good one.
Professor Blackman,
I think it’s fair to say that racism has been a problem in the United States in the past, particularly in universities.
It seems to me you are attempting to draw an imference that simply because the university is launching what it calls an anti-racsim campaign, this will necessarily mean that your civil rights will be violated.
With respect, I don’t think my knees are going to jerk so readily. You can’t simply associate anti-racism rhetoric with reverse civil rights violations by sheer repetition and then expect me to salivate when you ring the bell.
You are going to have to come up with specific evidence that reverse civil rights violations are actually being planned to get me to get upset about your alleged predicament.
I don’t see any actual evidence that you’re actually in a predicament right now. The administration says racism has been a big problem. And?
Sorry.