NoIndoctrination.org - View Listing

[Help NoIndoctrination.org - Donate Now Through Network For Good]

Warning: Postings are only opinions. (See Terms of Service)

Note: Although the postings appear to be anonymous, NoIndoctrination.org knows the posters' names. We communicate with the posters before putting their comments online. We also research each posting and ask for corroborating material when appropriate.

Record for NoIndoctrination.org entry #85.

University of California, Riverside (UCR)

Dec. 4, 2002

http://www.ucr.edu

Course: ETST 001: Introduction to the Study of Race and Ethnicity

Course Catalog Description: Lecture, three hours; discussion, one hour. ETST 001 will introduce students to major concepts and controversial issues in the study of race and ethnicity and shall provide a general overview of topics to be covered in more specialized Ethnic Studies courses.

Professor: Dr. Richard Lowy

Required? Yes, for my major or minor

Lecture Bias: Excessive

Comments: In an attempt to justify the uneven socio-economic conditions of African Americans in the United States today, the professor blamed the conditions on overt racism everyday by white people all across the nation. The professor essentially defined racism as an opinion or attitude of a white individual toward an individual of color. I then asked him, “Does this mean that an individual of color in America can not be racist?” He responded, telling me that was correct. Based on the oppression that African Americans experienced in America, they could not be racist. The professor was so excessive on this perspective that some of the black students in the class actually told me that he made them uncomfortable. White racism was absolutely the theme of every lecture. Since the professor believed only white people could be racist, naturally the whole course was about white racism. At one point in lecture the professor came across as outright religiously persecuting. He was talking about how Christians were engaging in systematic racist works. He talked about how they were associated with Neo-Nazis and KKK. As a Christian I found this shocking and personally offensive. However after reading the texts I realized that he was referring to extremist groups in the Christian Right, like the Christian Identity and Christian Reconstructionists. When I confronted him after class on the difference between these two groups he was apologetic for the confusion but it didn’t remedy the fact that he had already given his misleading lecture to the entire class. I still feel that not differentiating in this case was part of his personal agenda and a direct violation of the UC’s statement of Academic Freedom, restricting teachers from using their course “as a platform for propaganda." He also poked fun at the intelligence of George Bush and compared him to a monkey in appearance. I found this to be rather conflicting with his self-proclaimed goal of open intellectual debate. He also went on to make fun of Bush’s “primitive” belief in moral absolutism, a value I believe in very strongly. To deliver this personal belief to a classroom of still shaping young minds is also a violation of the UC’s statements of Academic Freedom, "To convert, or to make converts, is alien and hostile to this dispassionate duty.”

Discussion Bias: Objectionable

Comments: The discussion was objectionable because the TA also supported the professor’s assertions about how only white people can be racist. She told us that people of color could be prejudiced toward whites or other people of color. However they were not in a position to be racist. It was really unusual, as if they were redefining these words for their course. None of the teachers actually discouraged classroom participation or argumentation on this matter. However to make the point that black people can not be racist in a course that had disproportionately large black enrollment, prevented most disagreeing students from being eristic.

Readings Bias: Objectionable

Comments: Here is a list of the primary texts for the course. They were both left wing extremist and offered little variety of opinions or balance to the course. 1) Chip Berlet & Matthew N. Lyons, Right-Wing Populism in America: Too Close for Comfort. New York: The Guildford Press, 2000; 2) Joe R. Feagin, Racist America: Roots, Current Realities, and Future Reparations. New York: Routledge, 2000

General Comments: N/A

Rebuttal

When a course posting goes online, NoIndoctrination.org sends a notice to the professor inviting him/her to contest any specifics. (See Rebuttals.) If we receive a rebuttal, it will be posted here.