In an August 6th statement titled More than Diversity—A Call to Action from University of Chicago Faculty, professors associated with the University of Chicago’s Center for the Study of Race, Politics, and Culture (CSRPC) demand “critical reflection and concrete action” in response to the University’s alleged “history of white supremacy and racial hierarchy.”
The statement outlines five categories of demands: increased autonomy of the CSRPC, the creation of a Department of Critical Race Studies, changes to the structure of governance for the University’s Diversity and Inclusion Initiative, defunding the University of Chicago Police Department (UCPD), and the enactment of reparations at UChicago.
In the statement, the co-signers lament the UChicago’s lacking support of the CSRPC, as purportedly evidenced by the University’s failure to recruit a CSRPC director and its 50,000 dollar budget cut for next year. The statement’s faculty affiliates call for complete independence of the CSRPC and a minimum annual budget of two million dollars. Part of this budget would go toward “build[ing] a race core for undergraduates.”
Next, the statement’s faculty affiliates demand the creation of a Department of Critical Race Studies: “Previous University of Chicago Provosts have actively discouraged the formation of such a Department here. This absence is particularly egregious in a university that prides itself on continuously questioning and challenging knowledge formations and their institutional groundings.” According to the statement, a Department of Critical Race Studies should be created by an External Advisory Council of faculty at peer institutions, and members should be selected by faculty affiliates of the CSRPC.
Faculty members also call for the restructuring of leadership at the University, so that the role of Vice President for Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion is separate from the role of Vice President for Academic Leadership and Advancement. And they demand that “equity” be officially stated as an objective of the University, alongside Diversity and Inclusion.
Additionally, the statement’s co-signers affirm their support for the student-led UChicago United and #CareNotCops campaigns, which call on the University to disarm and defund UCPD. The co-signers call for the University to hold a public meeting between representatives of #CareNotCops and Provost Ka Yee C. Lee.
Finally, the statement demands an acknowledgment of the University’s “debt to the enslaved people” and the creation of a truth and justice committee to “determine appropriate reparations for the University’s connections to slavery, Jim Crow, and other ongoing forms of racial exploitation, exclusion, and discrimination.” According to the statement, this committee should be run by community organizers from Chicago’s South Side.
The statement’s co-signers include five former directors of the CSRPC, over fifty current faculty affiliates—of whom the most popular academic disciplines are English, Literature, History, and Media Studies—and a number of current UChicago students as well as professors at other universities. The co-signers claim that if their demands are not met, they will refuse to participate in new faculty searches and all Diversity and Inclusion related committees. They will also refuse to allow the University to use their accomplishments for its promotion.
Provost Ka Yee C. Lee responded to the letter, affirming a commitment to ensuring that “the Center for the Study of Race, Politics, and Culture, and related efforts of University faculty, have the support needed to ‘become an even more vital part of the University of Chicago community.’” However, there has been no public response to the other demands outlined in the original August 6th statement, and the degree to which the Provost and the statement’s co-signers have corresponded remains unclear.
“The statement outlines five categories of demands: increased autonomy of the CSRPC, the creation of a Department of Critical Race Studies.. defunding the University of Chicago Police Department (UCPD), and the enactment of reparations at UChicago.”
I respond:
These are not sensible, intelligent suggestions by reasonable protesters – they are terrorist demands. Terrorists make “demands” and if we the sensible, honorable U of Chicago students, faculty, administrators, alumni and Hyde Park Chicago community do not meet their “demands” then what happens? Will we be kidnapped, tortured, killed like the famous/infamous terrorists that brought down civilizations like the Pax Romana?
Here’s a short Monty Python video clip that uses humor to just “noticed” the ridiculous, anti civilization demands of open terrorists like the ones we have here on University of Chicago campus.
“What have the Romans ever done for us”?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2ozEZxOsanY
That was a very well written article Miss Emily Dow.
I think it would now help if someone here would tell us exactly who these U of Chicago Cult marxist terrorists are, what are their names, what are their positions, do they actually teach real subjects or are they full time Cult Marxist terrorist, eternal “students” who never become responsible grown ups?
I m fairly confident the University of Chicago alumni network is going to strongly oppose the dismantling of traditional education at our U of Chicago, so what needs to be done is to identify the terrorists and not let them hide in the dark of anonymity.
hello jay else, chicago has good hotdogs. one time i went to portillos and ate a mouthful of hot dog. i said to myself, wowee, that’s a good hot dog.
hello jay else, chicago has good hotdogs. one time i went to portillos and ate a mouthful of hot dog. i said to myself, wowee, that’s a good hot dog.
hello jay else, chicago has good hotdogs. one time i went to portillos and ate a mouthful of hot dog. i said to myself, wowee, that’s a good hot dog.
Are you joking? A judge who is openly against most of the major civil rights victories of the past half century gets criticized by civil rights advocates and your best objection is “but she is a woman. you can’t do that >:(” Look, guys, tokenism may work that way in the Republican party and some of the more uneducated elements of the Democratic party (yes, they do exist), but vaguely gesturing at imagined hypocrisy is a rhetorical tactic that only works on other Republicans/conservatives. Yeah you can feel good that “those dumb democrats can’t criticize women because they are required to never say anything possibly bad about them haha” but seriously, to any remotely skeptical viewer, you look childish and embarrassingly bankrupt of actual criticism. This is why flat earthers and conservatives aren’t taken seriously anymore in wider academia… “token woman can’t be bad >:(“
I am slightly confused about this article. As a democrat, I can confidently say that we support women in power. I believe you might be understanding the definition of feminism. As Miriam Webster states “fem·i·nism
/ˈfeməˌnizəm/ noun
the advocacy of women’s rights on the basis of the equality of the sexes.”
As you can see it says “equality of sexes” not favoring one over the other. If we look into the definition further, it means that gender should not matter. Yes, we do not approve of her. Leave gender out of the equation. The feminist act focuses on erasing gender from contributing to a decision. It is great that a woman was appointed to this position, and I love to see the advancements women have made in the federal system, but this does not eclipse the fact that she is a far right-leaning person. Regardless of all of this, it is unreasonable for you to expect that everyone from one political ideation will like a certain person.