Our guest speaker today, class, is a Jew-hating terrorist

by Jeff Jacoby

IN AN ONLINE program next week, the College of Ethnic Studies at San Francisco State University will host “A Conversation With Leila Khaled,” an event it is promoting as a “historic” encounter with a prominent “Palestinian feminist, militant, and leader.” One of the program’s two moderators, Professor Rabab Abdulhadi of the college’s Race and Resistance Studies Department, extols Khaled for her “steadfastness” and “resilience,” and hails her “stubborn commitment to an indivisible sense of justice.” In an enthusiastic Facebook post, the professor describes Khaled as “a huge inspiration” and a “feminist icon,” and declares that she “wanted to grow up to become another Leila Khaled.”

Leila Khaled is a terrorist.

For decades, Khaled has been a leader of the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine, or PFLP, which is designated as a terror organization by the United States, Canada, and the European Union. In August 1969, she was one of the hijackers of TWA Flight 840, which was en route from Rome to Tel Aviv before being diverted at gunpoint to Damascus. A year later, Khaled took part in an attempted hijacking of El Al Flight 219 from Amsterdam to New York City. A horrific mass murder was averted when the grenade Khaled carried aboard the plane failed to detonate and the hijackers were overpowered by Israeli sky marshals. The plane landed in London, where Khaled was arrested by British authorities. She was later released in an exchange for hostages seized in another PFLP hijacking.

She has spent the years since then avidly promoting “armed struggle,” spreading antisemitic conspiracy theories, and encouraging BDS, the campaign to attack Israel through boycotts, disinvestment, and sanctions.

Antisemitism in modern times frequently takes the form of incendiary anti-Zionism, with Israel scurrilously likened to Nazi Germany and accused of grotesque crimes against humanity. Khaled regularly traffics in such poisonous libels. “You can’t compare the actions of the Nazis to the actions of the Zionists in Gaza,” she told a Belgian audience in 2017. “The Nazis were judged in Nuremberg but not a single one of the Zionists has yet been brought to justice.”

Convicted hijacker, would-be killer, hater of Jews: This is the “feminist icon” and “huge inspiration” for whom San Francisco State is providing a Zoom platform next week. Its advertisement for the event features an illustration based on a famous photograph of Khaled as a 21-year-old, smiling broadly as she brandishes an AK-47.

As a matter of academic freedom and the First Amendment, the university has every right to glorify a terrorist. The school’s president, Lynn Mahoney, characterizes the program as an example of how college provides opportunities “to hear divergent ideas, viewpoints, and accounts of life experiences.” As a marketplace of ideas, she told a critic, “SF State supports the rights of all individuals to express their viewpoints.”

But can anyone imagine San Francisco State — or any university — inviting Dzhokhar Tsarnaev, the Boston Marathon terrorist, to be the featured speaker at a campus program? Would Mahoney like to see her university host a “conversation” with Dylann Roof, the white supremacist terrorist who gunned down nine black churchgoers in a South Carolina church? Or with Terry Nichols, an accomplice in the 1995 Oklahoma City bombing? Or Khalid Sheikh Mohammed? Or Derek Chauvin?

“The right of all individuals to express their viewpoints” is an estimable principle, but it does not impose an obligation on any institution to promote every opinion. Khaled’s appearance at San Francisco State doesn’t illustrate a courageous commitment by the school to air the unpopular views of terrorists and haters. It illustrates the admiration to be found on the hard left for one specific kind of terrorist and hater: the kind who targets Jews and demonizes Israel. Khaled is being celebrated for her violent career, not reluctantly tolerated out of deference to First Amendment principles.

Far from protecting the right of all to be heard, San Francisco State has repeatedly failed to protect free speech rights. For example, when the mayor of Jerusalem was invited by a campus group to deliver a speech, university officials allowed screaming protesters to mob the room and prevent him from speaking. Conversely, when the College Republicans chapter organized an anti-terrorism rally at which students stepped on makeshift Hezbollah and Hamas flags, the university launched disciplinary proceedings, which ended only when a federal district judge ruled that the school’s speech code was unconstitutional.

The alarming resurgence of anti-Jewish bigotry in the United States is reflected in the growing number of antisemitic acts on college campuses. That trend is raising red flags now, but it showed up early at San Francisco State. In an essay that went viral in 2002, faculty member Laurie Zoloth wrote of how the university was evolving into “a venue for hate speech and antisemitism” and of “how isolating, how terrifying” it was becoming “to live as a Jew on this campus.” Now, 18 years later, the university prepares to feature a notorious terrorist who doesn’t want Jews to live in the Middle East, either. Anyone not consumed by anti-Jewish bigotry should be appalled, but Leila Khaled ought to feel right at home.

SOURCE

Critical Race Theory Indoctrination in Our Schools

Progressive re-education arrives at Virginia schools.

There is certainly nothing wrong with reviewing the current educational curricula of primary and secondary schools to ensure a comprehensive and accurate presentation of African American history. However, this should not mean turning the imperfect but continuing progress of America throughout its history to achieve its founding ideals of life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness into some sort of fictional dystopia. Yet anti-American critical race theory indoctrination of impressionable students is spreading from college campuses to elementary and secondary schools. Critical race theory posits that America’s institutions are rotten to the core because of their supposedly systemic racist foundations.

The Virginia Board of Education is meeting this week to discuss the recommendations set forth in a report commissioned by Virginia’s Democratic Governor Ralph Northam of blackface fame. The report recommends revamping Virginia’s school curriculum, all the way down to elementary school, to incorporate a narrative of white oppression of African Americans as well as of American Indians. It is entitled “Final Report of the Virginia Commission on African American History Education in the Commonwealth.”

The Commission used as one of its resources the avowedly anti-white book White Fragility: Why It’s So Hard for White People to Talk About Racism written by Robin DiAngelo, who believes that racism is “embedded in the foundation of U.S. society.” She has attacked the “current structures of capitalism and domination” and what she has called “unearned white privilege.”

Another resource the Virginia Commission used was How to Be an Antiracist, by Ibram X. Kendi. Kendi believes that “Capitalism is essentially racist” and “racism is essentially capitalist.” He has proposed an amendment to the U.S. Constitution to “fix the original sin of racism.” It “would make unconstitutional racial inequity over a certain threshold, as well as racist ideas by public officials (with ‘racist ideas’ and ‘public official’ clearly defined).” It would also “establish and permanently fund the Department of Anti-racism.”

Yet another resource used by the Virginia commission was Glenn Singleton’s Courageous Conversation About Race: A Field Guide for Achieving Equity in Schools. Singleton is a strong advocate of critical race theory who wants his Pacific Educational Group’s program of instruction to raise classroom teachers’ awareness of the “ubiquity of white privilege and racism.”

In addition, the Virginia Commission on African American History Education named DiAngelo, Kendi and Singleton as three of its “scholars and partners for collaboration.”

The Commission also partnered with the historically challenged 1619 Project, which views slavery as the animating force behind all of America’s history up to the present day. As the editor of the New York Times Magazine, Jake Silverstein, explained, “The goal of The 1619 Project is to reframe American history by considering what it would mean to regard 1619 as our nation’s birth year. Doing so requires us to place the consequences of slavery and the contributions of black Americans at the very center of the story we tell ourselves about who we are as a country.”

With inputs from these sorts of social justice warriors who believe the United States is an inherently racist country, the Commission Report, in Bacon’s Rebellion writer James Sherlock’s words, is “critical race theory brought to life.”

The Commission Report’s executive summary claims that Virginia’s standards for content in Virginia schools are “tainted with a master narrative that marginalized or erased the presence of non-Europeans from the American landscape.”

In the section of the Commission Report describing its vision, the authors wrote: “The Commission embraced culturally responsive pedagogy because it recognizes the importance of students’ cultural references in all aspects of learning and does not just reinforce the values of the dominant culture.”

The Commission Report views American history primarily through the lens of “systemic racism,” which it implicitly links with “imperialism,” “colonialism,” and the “economic motivation” behind capitalism.

The Commission Report recommends that African American history be taught in all classrooms 180 days a year – identity politics at its finest. Starting in Grade One, the Commission Report urges adding only Juneteenth to the existing list of three officially recognized holidays – Martin Luther King Day, President’s Day, and Independence Day.

The only other minority group’s history that the Commission Report recommends be revised involves “indigenous” native Americans. Starting in Grade One, for example, the Commission wants the reference to Pocahontas in the current curriculum omitted. Instead, the Commission recommends that first grade students learn “how the relationship between diseases and weapons of the English settlers impacted the Virginia Indians.”

The Commission Report recommendations for changes to Virginia school course content in the higher grades get progressively worse.

For a course entitled “United States History to 1865,” the Commission Report recommends adding the following to the section on the Constitutional Convention: “The Three-fifths Compromise perpetuated slavery in the United States.” The report fails to balance this statement with one pointing out that the Constitution set a deadline for ending the importation of new slaves into the United States.

The authors of the Commission Report want to portray the founding fathers as bad white men using the Constitution to perpetuate slavery and little else. The truth is that without a compromise there would have been no United States in the first place and the South could have formed its own independent country with slavery remaining intact far longer than it did. The founding fathers were able to incorporate in the Constitution the deadline for ending slave trade into the United States. They also included an amendment process that would prove crucial over time in abolishing slavery and enacting other critical protections for African Americans and other minority groups.

Some of the Commission Report edits give the impression that slavery was a Western European/American invention rather than acknowledging that slavery had already existed legally within Africa itself for many years prior to its introduction to the Virginia colonies. Some Africans treated other Africans as their property for use in enslaved labor or as chattel for sale. Many of the Africans who were transported to the Americas were originally enslaved by Africans in Africa. It is misleading for the Commission Report to claim that for nearly two thousand years enslaved Africans were forcibly brought to the American colonies via the Middle Passage, or to leave out the enslaved condition of some Africans in Africa before they were brought to America.

The Commission Report recommends adding to a course entitled “United States History: 1865 to the Present” a project that would involve creating “a timeline that illustrates the role of Jim Crow (segregation) laws in the 20th century and how those laws restricted the rights, economic decision-making, and choices of African Americans.” OK, but shouldn’t such a timeline also include the dates that Jim Crow laws were eliminated by court orders and by federal civil rights legislation guaranteeing the right to vote and non-discrimination in housing, public accommodations and employment?

The Commission also recommends revising Virginia’s Teacher Evaluation Regulations and Virginia’s Uniform Performance standards for School Leaders “to include cultural proficiency efficacy.” One can only imagine the critical race theory brainwashing that will be included in the Cultural Competency Professional Development and African American history programs that Virginia educators will be required to enroll in if the Commission gets its way.

Virginia is far from alone in embracing historical revisionism to placate the social justice crowd. The 1619 Project is infiltrating our schools despite its significant historical errors noted by real historians. According to an article published by the Education Next Institute, “Schools or school districts in Chicago; Newark, N.J.; Buffalo, N.Y., and Washington, D.C. all announced 1619 Project-related events.” The Pulitzer Center is promoting its Reading Guide to the 1619 Project for all grades around the country. It includes a lesson plan entitled Exploring “The Idea of America” by Nikole Hannah-Jones, the principal New York Times staffer behind the 1619 Project. The lesson plan poses such loaded questions as “What examples of hypocrisy in the founding of the U.S. does Hannah-Jones supply? What evidence can you see for how ‘some might argue that this nation was founded not as a democracy but as a slavocracy’?”

We are also seeing critical race theory seeping into religious school curriculums. For example, a Minnesota reform synagogue’s religious school program for grades 3-5 recommends that the children read and be prepared to discuss a book entitled One Crazy Summer by Rita Williams-Garcia in order to “explore the topic of Racism in America through an age-appropriate novel.”

Far from promoting racial harmony, this book idealizes the violent Black Panther Party of the 1960’s and glorifies a mother who abandoned her children to work for the cause of black power. Not surprisingly, the New York Times gave One Crazy Summer a good review.

The book is about three young sisters in the 1960’s who head out to Oakland to stay with their runaway mother after four years. The mother decided to send the girls to a nearby Black Panther Party summer camp. The book conveniently leaves out the truth about the 1960’s version of the Black Panthers – a black Maoist revolutionary group whose members killed and wounded a number of police officers and committed other crimes. Instead, the novel uses the group’s name but turns its members at the camp into a fictional bunch of caring, lovable individuals. For good measure, the girls’ mother, who has no interest in taking care of her kids, is arrested by the police for writing poems about black power. Children are taught at an early age – in a religious school no less – that police are racist villains.

Any teacher who uses anti-American leftist propaganda of the kind described in this article in his or her classroom is guilty of educator malpractice.

SOURCE

4 Key Moments From Trump’s Speech on History, Critical Race Theory

President Donald Trump, in Constitution Day remarks, drew a direct connection between the riots and mayhem in the streets to what schools are teaching about America.

“Our mission is to defend the legacy of America’s founding, the virtue of America’s heroes, and the nobility of the American character,” the president said at the National Archives Museum Thursday for the White House Conference on American History. “We must clear away the twisted web of lies in our schools and classrooms, and teach our children the magnificent truth about our country.”

In his remarks, Trump announced actions to promote “patriotic education,” and unleashed an attack on several sacred cows of the left such as cancel culture, critical race theory, The New York Times’ 1619 Project, and the looting and arson occurring across the country.

Delivering the speech on the 233rd anniversary of the Constitution, Trump praised the historical document as being “the product of centuries of tradition, wisdom, and experience.”

“No political document has done more to advance the human condition or propel the engine of progress,” Trump said. “Yet, as we gather this afternoon, a radical movement is attempting to demolish this treasured and precious inheritance. We can’t let that happen.”

Here’s four key moments from the speech.

1. Policy Actions for ‘Patriotic Education’

The president announced two actions to promote more pro-American education in schools.

“Our youth will be taught to love America with all of their heart and soul,” Trump said. “We will save this cherished inheritance for our children, for their children, and for every generation to come.”

Trump announced the National Endowment for the Humanities is awarding a grant to support a pro-American curriculum in schools. He also announced that he will be signing an executive order establishing the 1776 Commission to promote patriotic education.

“It will encourage our educators to teach our children about the miracle of American history and make plans to honor the 250th anniversary of our founding,” the president said of the 1776 Commission.

This is an important point to draw attention to, said Lindsey Burke, director of the Center for Education Policy at The Heritage Foundation.

“The president is right to shine a spotlight on the negative effects of critical theory, taught throughout colleges, particularly colleges of education, and which makes its way down through K-12 schools,” Burke told The Daily Signal. “And the administration is right to point to the inaccuracies of the 1619 Project, which should continue to be noted. More parents will now be aware of this content—which paints a negative picture of America—making its way into their children’s schools. America is a truly exceptional nation, and that’s a message that children should hear.”

2. Cancel Culture and the ‘Left-Wing Mobs’

The president added that a “radical movement” is attempting to demolish this treasured American history.

“The left-wing mobs have torn down statues of our Founders, desecrated our memorials, and carried out a campaign of violence and anarchy,” Trump said. “Far-left demonstrators have chanted the words, ‘America was never great.’ The left has launched a vicious and violent assault on law enforcement—the universal symbol of the rule of law in America.”

Trump added that politicians, establishment media, and even large corporations have sided with those causing the mayhem.

“Whether it is the mob on the street or the cancel culture in the boardroom, the goal is the same: To silence dissent, to scare you out of speaking the truth and to bully Americans into abandoning their values, their heritage and their very way of life,” Trump said.

“We are here today to declare that we will never submit to tyranny,” the president added. “We will reclaim our history, and our country, for citizens of every race, color, religion, and creed.”

3. 1619 Project, Howard Zinn, and ‘Warped, Distorted’ History

During his speech, Trump drew a correlation between the riots and education.

“The left-wing rioting and mayhem are the direct result of decades of left-wing indoctrination in our schools,” Trump said. “It has gone on far too long. Our children are instructed from propaganda tracts, like those of Howard Zinn, that try to make students ashamed of their own history.”

Howard Zinn is a liberal historian whose work has focused almost entirely on the negative aspects of American history.

Trump continued:

The left has warped, distorted the American story with deception, falsehoods, and lies. There is no better example than The New York Times’ totally discredited 1619 Project. …

America’s founding set in motion the unstoppable chain of events that abolished slavery, secured civil rights, defeated communism and fascism, and built the most fair, equal, and prosperous nation in human history.

The Times’ 1619 Project contends the United States was founded on principle of advancing slavery. The claims of the project have been challenged by historians on the right and left.

The president said the narratives pushed by the left resemble anti-American propaganda pushed by the country’s adversaries.

4. Teaching Critical Race Theory Is ‘Child Abuse’

Trump talked about critical race theory as an example, which he called a Marxist doctrine that says even children are complicit in racism and society must be radically transformed.

Critical race theory is a theoretical framework that contends individuals are either oppressed or are oppressors based on their skin color.

“Teaching this horrible doctrine to our children is a form of child abuse in the truest sense of those words,” Trump said. “For many years now, the radicals have mistaken Americans’ silence for weakness. They are wrong.”

“There is no more powerful force than a parent’s love for their children—and patriotic moms and dads are going to demand that their children are no longer fed hateful lies about this country,” Trump added. “American parents are not going to accept indoctrination in our schools, cancel culture at work, or the repression of traditional faith, culture, and values in the public square.”

Trump noted that he banned the promotion of critical race theory in the federal government through employee training programs that focus on “white privilege” or that the United States is an inherently racist country.

“Critical race theory, the 1619 Project, and the crusade against American history is toxic propaganda—an ideological poison that, if not removed, will dissolve the civic bonds that tie us together,” Trump said. “That is why I recently banned training in this prejudiced ideology from the federal government and banned it in the strongest matter possible.”

The president said such propaganda is a departure from the civil rights movement.

We embrace the vision of Martin Luther King, where children are not judged by the color of their skin, but by the content of their character. The left is attempting to destroy that beautiful vision and divide Americans by race in the service of political power.

By viewing every issue through the lens of race, they want to impose a new segregation, and we must not allow that to happen.

SOURCE

Betsy DeVos Calls Princeton’s Bluff: If You Really Are Racist, No More Federal Funding

Early this month, Princeton President Christopher Eisgruber went through the woke “anti-racist” rite of confession: he published a letter confessing the ongoing racism at his university under his leadership. Such confessions serve to prop up the ridiculous claim that any racial disparities are ipso facto proof of “institutional racism.” Claims like Eisgruber’s are less a confession of actual fact and more a rhetorical weapon to push Marxist critical race theory.

Yet the Department of Education (DOE) decided to call Princeton’s bluff. According to a letter obtained by The Washington Examiner, the DOE launched an investigation into the Ivy League university. Princeton, like other schools that receive federal funding, pledges to abide by certain federal laws in order to receive federal funding.

Since Eisgruber became president in 2013, Princeton has received more than $75 million in federal Title IV taxpayer funds and the school “has repeatedly represented and warranted to the U.S. Department of Education Princeton’s compliance with Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964,” the letter reads. “Title VI provides no person in the United States shall, on the ground of race, color, or national origin, be excluded from participation in, be denied the benefits of, or be subjected to discrimination under any program or activity receiving Federal financial assistance.”

“On September 2, 2020, you admitted Princeton’s educational program is and for decades has been racist,” the letter notes. “Among other things, you said ‘[r]acism and the damage it does to people of color persist at Princeton …’ and ‘[r]acist assumptions…remain embedded in structures of the University itself.’”

“Because of racism, you announced race-based ‘diversity’ measures for hiring, procurement, teaching, fellowship, and research funding,” the letter adds.

“Based on its admitted racism, the U.S. Department of Education is concerned Princeton’s nondiscrimination and equal opportunity assurances in its Program Participation Agreements from at least 2013 to the present may have been false,” the letter explains. “Finally, the Department is further concerned Princeton’s many nondiscrimination and equal opportunity claims to students, parents, and consumers in the market for education certificates may have been false, misleading, and actionable substantial misrepresentations in violation of” U.S. law.

Therefore, the DOE is opening an investigation into Princeton and may end up removing funds from the university — and demanding Princeton pay back taxpayer funds it should not have received. “Based on the facts, the Secretary of Education may consider measures against Princeton for false Program Participation Agreement nondiscrimination assurances, including an action to recover funds.”

Taken at face value, Eisgruber’s statement does justify a DOE investigation. The university president did indeed confess to propping up “anti-Black racism,” but he clearly did so as a rhetorical weapon. By confessing to institutional racism at Princeton, Eisgruber can then claim that American society as a whole is institutionally racist.

Referring to the perceived police abuse of force in the cases of George Floyd, Breonna Taylor, Ahmaud Arbery, Rayshard Brooks, and Jacob Blake, the Princeton president wrote, “This outrageous and awful violence has revealed yet again, and with searing intensity, the long, painful, and ongoing existence of anti-Black racism in America. Racial justice demands the scholarly and practical attention of this University.”

“We must ask how Princeton can address systemic racism in the world, and we must also ask how to address it within our own community,” Eisgruber wrote. “That is true even though, for at least the past fifty years, this University has committed itself to becoming more inclusive. At a University that, for most of its history, intentionally and systematically excluded people of color, women, Jews, and other minorities, Princetonians— from the oldest alumni to the newest undergraduates — now take pride in the diversity of our community.”

“Racism and the damage it does to people of color nevertheless persist at Princeton as in our society, sometimes by conscious intention but more often through unexamined assumptions and stereotypes, ignorance or insensitivity, and the systemic legacy of past decisions and policies. Race-based inequities in America’s health care, policing, education, and employment systems affect profoundly the lives of our staff, students, and faculty of color,” the president argued.

“Racist assumptions from the past also remain embedded in structures of the University itself,” he confessed. “For example, Princeton inherits from earlier generations at least nine departments and programs organized around European languages and culture, but only a single, relatively small program in African studies.”

Eisgruber seized on a supposed racial inequality in Princeton’s departments, overlooking the history of the Western heritage and the basic fact that so many aspects of modern human flourishing — science, free markets, limited government, and universities themselves — did develop in European societies. This is not to say institutions like Princeton should not study African, Asian, North and South American, and other cultures, as well. But Eisgruber engaged in needless self-flagellation, suggesting that studying Western heritage more than other cultures is somehow racist.

Yet this kind of thinking falls in line with the “anti-racist” movement. In his book Stamped From the Beginning, scholar Ibram X. Kendi explains the basic logic of “anti-racism”: People of all races are inherently equal, but some races have more money/prominence than others, therefore the society must be racist.

Kendi attacks two different groups of people: outright racists and “assimilationists.” He argues that most Americans still harbor racist ideas, and he claims that any explanation for racial disparities besides “structural racism” is inherently racist because it blames the victim.

America’s long and successful struggle to ban outright racial discrimination in the law does not matter to the “anti-racist” movement. It does not matter that black people tend to dominate sports like basketball and football due to their individual training and success. It does not matter that a wide variety of factors explains why police tend to regard young black men with more suspicion, most notably crime rates.

Black people are more likely to face stigma and they are more likely to be seen as representatives of the black community, rather than being seen as individuals. This is a double-edged sword: it means black people are unjustly regarded with suspicion but it also means that there is a bias in favor of black people in some schools, jobs, and professions.

Yet reformers have worked hard to excise racial discrimination from American law. Attorney General Bill Barr recently explained why he believes there is no such thing as “systemic racism.”

“To me the word ‘systemic’ means that it’s built into the institution and I don’t think that’s true,” the AG said. “I think our institutions have been reformed in the past 60 years, and if anything is built-in, it’s a bias to nondiscrimination and safeguards against [racism.]”

Eisgruber did not intend to confess to violating federal discrimination law. He meant to signal his virtue and convince people that America is institutionally racist in order to further his own political and ideological goals. That makes the Department of Education’s response brilliant — perhaps even hilarious.

Accusations and confessions of racism are serious, or at least, they used to be. Thanks to the logic of “anti-racism,” a completely colorblind policy — one that judges people not “by the color of their skin but by the content of their character,” in Martin Luther King Jr.’s words — would still be considered “racist” because the free actions of free individuals result in racially disproportionate outcomes.

Federal law rightly prohibits many kinds of racial discrimination, but it prohibits discrimination on an individual level. Federal law does not require schools like Princeton to admit exactly 73.09 percent white students, 16.42 Asian students, and 5.78 percent black students, so that the student body represents the population of Princeton, N.J. In fact, by these measures, Princeton University is “racist” in favor of black people (9 percent of the undergraduate population) and Asians (25 percent of undergraduates, even higher percentages in post-grad classes).

The “anti-racist” measurement is actually more racist. The government arguably has a role in preventing racial discrimination when it comes to opportunities, but it has no business ensuring exact racial representation in outcomes. That would be absurd.

If America adopts the “anti-racist” definition of “racism,” the government cannot prevent racial discrimination when it comes to opportunities and individuals. At that point, preventing racial discrimination must mean achieving proportionate outcomes.

This broader definition of racism justifies both brainwashing and an unguided, destructive revolution. Riots across America have arguably oppressed black people far more than the U.S. supposedly does. The riots have destroyed black lives, black livelihoods, and black monuments. At least 26 Americans have died in the riots, most of them black.

The Department of Education was right to call Princeton’s bluff here. Words have meaning, and the “anti-racist” revolution must be stopped.