Berkeley's latest loyalty oath means dumber faculty

Editor's note: The powers that be at WND.com have told Michael Ackley he may submit an occasional column. His columns often include satire and parody – but not in this case.

Way back in the 20th century, my eventual alma mater, the University of California, Berkeley, was swamped by a controversy over a "loyalty" oath.

The oath for employees, adopted by the university's Board of Regents in 1950, expanded the Golden State's constitutional oath, adding the provision that prospective employees had to swear they were not members of any organization advocating "the overthrow of the Government by force or violence. …"

Oh, my goodness! Some professors were in a tizzy, asserting that somehow pledging not to advocate violent revolution infringed on academic freedom. There was quite a tussle that ended when the state Supreme Court killed the offending oath.

California's current "oath of allegiance" isn't too different in effect from that of 1950, but nobody complains about it, the professors having won their point more than half a century ago.

But Cal has its own, new loyalty oath. If you want a teaching job – or advancement to tenure – you must demonstrate fealty to the doctrines of diversity, equity, inclusion and belonging. This commitment is more important than your intelligence, the scholarly papers you have published and the quality of your research.

If you aren't on board with this, your chances of getting a job at Cal are precisely zero.

And here is the worst of it: Your academic brilliance won't matter if you can't demonstrate an active commitment to diversity, equity, inclusion and belonging.

Cal faculty selection committees are advised: "There can … be a tendency to rationalize an anemic record in advancing equity and inclusion if the candidate's research is stellar." [Bear in mind: Cal is a research institution.]

Selection committees are warned to look out for "excuses" like saying a candidate will "begin engaging" at Berkeley, "where it matters."

The campus's bureaucratic guidance declares, "We are looking for candidates who have already developed a commitment to advancing equity and inclusion and have a consequential track record in this area."

Thus a "stellar" scholar must be aced out by a candidate whose low IQ is matched by his intellectual output, but who has genuflected at the altar of diversity et cetera.

Commitment will be assessed in a number of ways, but perhaps the most important will be the candidate's required "Statement on Contributions to Diversity, Equity, Inclusion, and Belonging."

Job seekers are advised that "strong statements tend to be substantial in length," while weak statements "tend to be brief in length (sic)." (The bureaucratic mind is suspicious of any writing that is concise and cogent. So, write long.)

We could include herein the university's definitions of "diversity, equity, inclusion and belonging," but they are just anti-intellectual boiler plate. You can look them up if you must see them. (Cal has a plethora of diversity et cetera articles. You might start, if you must, with https://diversity.berkeley.edu.)

It is important to point out that within its many pages devoted to this nonsense, Cal openly touts "affirmative action," the use of which is outlawed in California for public contracting, hiring and promotion.

Still, Cal says it practices this craft, just to "maintain eligibility for some federal funding." It adds piously that it may not "set aside positions for individuals from specific groups."

This must entail so many winks and eye rolls, that the entire bureaucracy is afflicted with facial tic disorder. Diversity et cetera is a major element in the university's end run around a law twice affirmed by a vote of the people. Thus the "world's greatest public university" may claim the lead in subordinating academic brilliance to a nebulous and anti-intellectual affirmative-action subterfuge.

Personally, I'm all for diversity, as long as it mirrors the values articulated in the Declaration of Independence, the United States Constitution, and demonstrated in our history of upward evolution in human rights. That would be an acceptable loyalty oath for the meritocracy our state and nation deserve.

(A digression: "Belonging" is a recent addition to the DEI&B belief system. The religion of diversity et cetera started just with "diversity," but it has added new worship words over the years. Currently, there are but four such words, but eventually it will be like the Church of Non-Standard Sexual Practices, which began with "lesbian" and "gay," but now recognizes so many variations that it has added a "plus" sign to allow for further expansion. Cal's "Gender Recognition and Lived Name Policy" says there are "at least three equally recognized gender options … woman, man and nonbinary." The key words here are "at least," which provide room for future variants.)

Content created by the WND News Center is available for re-publication without charge to any eligible news publisher that can provide a large audience. For licensing opportunities of our original content, please contact licensing@wndnewscenter.org.

SUPPORT TRUTHFUL JOURNALISM. MAKE A DONATION TO THE NONPROFIT WND NEWS CENTER. THANK YOU!

The post Berkeley's latest loyalty oath means dumber faculty appeared first on WND.