Conservative Havard Students Mock Ethnic and Gender Studies

by Latoya Peterson

Readers Fatima and Karla both pointed us toward an article that appeared in a student run, conservative paper run by Harvard University students. Sadly, this one doesn’t even pretend to be satirical. Patrick T. Brennan just lets the racism fly:

When the University agrees that its curriculum needs to change to address “the growing diversity of our campus” or any other imaginary concern of its students, it opens itself up to politically motivated efforts like ethnic studies. Tragically, worthwhile academic subjects like Egyptology have also been subsumed into the larger effort of emphasizing diversity and ascribing significance to the insignificant, as demonstrated by Professor Christopher P. Jones’s comments that “Egypt is a major African civilization,” and that “it is very important that Africa should be a part of what everyone thinks about the modern world.”

Egypt is a worthwhile subject not because it is an African civilization, but because it represents an incredibly sophisticated and important ancient civilization that happens to be African—let alone the fact that the Egyptians pharaohs, with the exception of 75 years of Nubian rule, were about as “African” as Ian Smith. Harvard should have an Egyptology department, or at least devote some of its resources to the study of a civilization which has had such profound influence on the world. It need not offer a course on African civilizations if there is none worthy of study. The progressive priorities of Harvard’s curriculum usually do not coincide, however, with the promotion of meaningful areas of study.

He also says:

Americans of color have undoubtedly done some things of note, but their “encounters” and “experiences” are not of paramount importance to a university education. The ethnic studies movement is motivated by an attempt to direct more attention to a topic that deserves no more attention than it already gets, and probably a good deal less. Other similarly useless departments, like Studies of Women, Gender, and Sexuality serve similar purposes—no one would deny that Macbeth’s wife is an interesting study in the construction of femininity, but such occasional instances of relevance do not justify an entire academic field.

The problem is that studying literature is not better than studying accounting if one is allowed, or even encouraged, to allot as much time to Latin American writers as to Latin ones. The standard work of ethics for nearly two millennia was Cicero’s De Officiis. The world has not changed enough in the past hundred years to justify its replacement with whatever pablum Michael Sandel wants to feed PBS viewers.

Share and Enjoy:
  • Facebook
  • Twitter
  • StumbleUpon
  • del.icio.us
  • Google Bookmarks
  • NewsVine
  • Current
  • email
  • Print

Trackbacks & Pings

  1. Linkage! | Reach Into Your Soul on 28 Mar 2010 at 10:06 pm

    [...] So… gender studies are useless, say some Harvard kids. [...]

  2. Open Thread: Hate Crime Against California State University Student Body President | Racialicious - the intersection of race and pop culture on 21 Apr 2010 at 12:01 pm

    [...] spend a lot of time documenting on campus racism here on Racialicious – everything from idiotic screeds in student-run magazines to various theme parties in the key of [...]

Comments

  1. Deaf Indian Muslim Anarchist wrote:

    wow.

    hey DUDE, you know, while we’re at it, why don’t we get rid of courses such as History of Medieval Europe? Because, like, while they’ve done some things of note, the fact remains that Europeans were unsignificant during the Dark Ages. We should focus on medieval Islamic civilizations because they’ve done SO MUCH MORE FOR THE WORLD THAN EUROPEANS EVER HAVE !!!

    As a Muslim, I demand that we remove all courses about Europeans, Christians, and Westerners from my college, because like, they did NOTHING for me or my people.

  2. Molly wrote:

    JFC. Well, the good news is, now this is permanently attached to this student’s name, thanks to the power of Google. Long may it stymie his attempts to find work in a bad economy.

  3. Raanne wrote:

    At least the author is getting a smack-down in the comments section. I haven’t seen anyone supporting him yet.

  4. Kathryn wrote:

    What an absolutely disgusting thing to think! Is this author under the assumption that when a white person is doing something, that is all that is going on in the world? And, considering that women are half the world’s population and sexuality is what keeps the human race going, how could the study of those be “useless”?

    Of course, this was written by someone named Patrick T. Brennan, a white male. His opinions are just the polished versions of the hate that people like Michael Savage spout.

  5. Jha wrote:

    …. LOLOLOLOL “it just so happens to be African!”

    It reminds me of the argument I had the other day with some dude who was like “Scheherazade is important not because she’s a woman who used her cleverness to prevent her husband from killing more women, but because she’s a great storyteller, who happens to be a woman! Seeing her through a feminist lens is off-base and biased!” And he was being completely honest.

  6. miss a. wrote:

    Another winning example of ethnocentrism cloaked in [pseudo-]intellectualism.

  7. lovepeaceohana wrote:

    “Americans of color have undoubtedly done some things of note, but their “encounters” and “experiences” are not of paramount importance to a university education.”

    I am stuck on this line. I literally – I have sat here with my jaw dropped for the past minute, and still am left only with a sense of screaming outrage. Fuck. This.

  8. ourname wrote:

    Wait, what? Egyptians aren’t Africans? What the hell are they? And does someone really believe that the Egyptians are the only African people who have anything worthwhile to study? Even iF we only limit ourselves to classical art (for instance) the Ife of modern NIgeria were making “realistic” stone portait sculptures at the same time Europeans were painting flat Byzantine paintings.
    People of color and women don’t “deserve” attention to their contributions and experiences? Is this because only white men’s experiences count? Where would US history even be without people of color or women? Does he really think the US was built magically by a bunch of white guys?
    ANd why aren’t Latin American authors aren’t as important as the “Latins” in literature? Why can’t Borges and Garcia co-exist with Cicero? Are only the classics worth studying? Why?

    I’m so confused. Is this what a Harvard education teaches you?

    Should I be glad then that I went to a big faceless state university?

  9. ObaaYaa wrote:

    See now that is 100%, unsieved pure organic white male privilege. He seriously just held nothing back. At least he was honest, so that we could look at all his rantings and break down his argument point by point. Hopefully he listens.

  10. Sulyp wrote:

    I had to go to the Salient to read the full thing and see the comments.

    I just… cannot.

    This isn’t some elaborate failure of an early April Fool’s joke, I take it.

    Like one commenter there said: He’ll probably just score an interview with Fox News tomorrow.

    There are way too many people in high places that actually believe what that author was saying to be the truth. That’s why it’s able to persist. It’s just sad that now there is a whole new generation of young adults to take up the same mantle. So these lies about non-white civilization’s contributions in the world will continue to be told and accepted.

  11. asdf wrote:

    I’m kind of desperately hoping that this is going to end up being some kind of social experiment to trick people into admitting their racism/sexism/ethnocentrism. I’d even rather believe he’s just a big ol’ liberal trying to get conservatives to “out” themselves as racists, etc. (there were a few comments agreeing with the guy; maybe that’s what he’s after?) Of course we know there are plenty of people who feel this way, but at least most of them know not to be so bald about it!!! How is it even possible to live in the kind of bubble where you’d think that publicly spewing this crap is even halfway acceptable? I don’t know, the extreme nature of the article has pushed my “skeptical” button, and I really, really hope I’m right. Ugh!!!

  12. Deaf Indian Muslim Anarchist wrote:

    ourname– yeah I know. But the thing is, many people consider “African” as a race (Black) while others argue that “African” simply refers to people from the African continent, which can include all skin colors.

    I am NOT an expert on Egyptology and dont know much about the ancient Egyptian civilization, but I know that people have argued over whether or not Egyptian pharoahs were racially Black (Black African) or if they were White or Brown…. it would be nice if someone here can shed more light on this controversy.

    Zaki Hawass, one of the most famous archaeologists and the foremost expert on Egyptology (his bio: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zahi_Hawass) have constantly railed against suggestions that ancient Egyptians were African Black.

  13. Lady Instructor wrote:

    No African civilizations worthy of note, huh? Carthage, Kush, Ethiopia – no? Not ringing any bells? Well, that probably means they don’t matter.

    Thinking about major world events and human societies outside the ethnocentric and insulting concept of a “civilization”? Only people in highly stratified societies are civilized, I guess. So they don’t matter either.

  14. J wrote:

    Dammit. First you post an article that takes me an embarassingly long time to read as satire, and now you post something that is begging to be read as satire but somehow… isn’t?

    This is almost impressive in how many centuries he is reaching back in terms of colonial tropes. It seriously reads like something published by a British colonial minister in the 18th century.

  15. Celeste wrote:

    @DIMA: FWIW a program I watched on one of the female pharoahs said she was mixed race.

    @Molly: I 2nd that emotion.

    I agree with lovepeace, the “encounters” and “experiences” line was the absolute low point of the piece. Encounters? Like the yeti or aliens or abomniable snow man? Is he referring to when whites “encounter” POC’s and then go one their merry white way? Mind blowing

  16. Mickey wrote:

    This does not surprise me. The status quo in this country is white supremacy and we are all taught in schools of America that anything and everything great about this country was made possible by whites. Is it no surprise that people STILL question why there is a Black History Month celebration in schools?

    Jane Elliott does these exercises on racism and discrimination (I’ve seen her on Oprah a couple of times) and she had spoken about how in schools we are taught only the contributions of white people and the contributions of POC are never, or hardly ever, discussed. You can also see her blue eyed/brown eyed exercise on adults on Youtube.

  17. kutsuwamushi wrote:

    It need not offer a course on African civilizations if there is none worthy of study.

    … wow.

    The “reasoning” here is wonderfully stupid: I have never heard of any important African civilizations, so therefore they must not exist and we don’t need to educate anyone about them.”

    The standard work of ethics for nearly two millennia was Cicero’s De Officiis.

    And it really shines through here. The standard work of ethics for whom, my white, Western male friend?

    I am sure that people who actually study Egyptology can clue this man in on how a lot of the exciting work on Egypt these days has to do with Egypt’s relationships with other civilizations, including those on the African continent.

  18. kia, jd wrote:

    Having majored in African and African American Studies in college, I’ve heard this a million times. The worst is when it comes from friends or family who just don’t get it. We spent a chunk of time within the AFAM dept talking about how the discipline came to be and how to defend it. Shame. So I’m not surprised. I used to write for my college paper and was bashed by our campus’ conservative journal when I wrote about affirmative action. Free speech is great but I feel like these publications make it their business to spit rhetoric and tear down anything they don’t understand.

  19. 9jah wrote:

    First of there’s a problem when a school says its changing its curriculum to address the “growing diversity” of its campus (assuming this is the rationale given) because this suggests the subjects aren’t worthy of being understood by everyone on their own merits. Its kinda like how i’ve always thought black history month should really be for white folks.

    I honestly can’t take this guy seriously. He just sounds profoundly ignorant. I would ask him one basic q: how do you know whether African civilizations merit study if you know nothing about African civilizations in the first place?

    Re Egypt – Egypt was likely not 100% black african or close to it. Many a peoples passed through and occupied it. That said, it did have a significant and relevant black population and at one point was “run by” blacks.

  20. Lauren O wrote:

    When I found out my (extremely conservative, racist, white) grandfather quit his teaching job at UC Davis when they instituted racial and gender studies departments, I told myself that at least those views were dying out with his generation. This is one of those reminders that, while those views may be fading in popularity, they’re still very much alive, even at places where students are supposed to be among the most intelligent in the country.

  21. Montclair Mommy wrote:

    Wow. My slapping hand is feeling a little itchy…

    Regarding the question of whether Egyptians were “African” or “Black African” or all of the above — I think that’s an interesting question but it sounds like he’s trying to distance his perception of Africa with anything “civilized” in his view. It makes me think of a PBS documentary called “Race: the Power of Illusion” . It sets forth the science about how race is not based on genetics and how similar we are, genetically, to people in other countries, continents, etc. Most people have heard that two people of different ‘races’ are no more genetically different that two people within the same ‘race’. Socially, it DOES matter…but genetically…not so much. So I think whether ancient Egyptian Africans consider themselves “Black African” or not would depend entirely on a) their societal definition of “Black” b) the individuals and how they relate themselves to those around them. I don’t know how that could be analyzed from our point of view as 21st century people. I guess maybe a historian or someone familiar with Egyptian social norms now and in the past could address it based on what they know of the racial history of those times…but I don’t think we should base it primarily on color or our perceptions of what is and is not “Black” and/or “African.”

  22. Digital Coyote wrote:

    @DIMA:

    I’m not really surprised by Zahi Hawass. He doesn’t like it when people disagree with him and is very dismissive of any theories/discoveries he didn’t approve of or find himself. Maybe it’s because of how much of his life he’s dedicated to study. Maybe it’s something that goes along with the title “Secretary General of Egypt’s Supreme Council of Antiquities”: he has a vested interest in maintaining a particular narrative for the country.

    The population of Egypt at the time was likely a lot more diverse than it is now, especially after Ottoman and Arab occupation. That said, he’d have to be stone cold ignorant to make a blanket statement about Egyptian ethnicity in light of its black rulers (http://ngm.nationalgeographic.com/2008/02/black-pharaohs/robert-draper-text.html) and everyone else that’s tromped through there. They might not have all been what we call “black” now, but I don’t think Egypt was an ancient Utah (in terms of the level of homogeneity) either.

  23. Montclair Mommy wrote:

    Re: the above. I mean to say that the way that DIMA posed the question above about Black/Egyptian/African is interesting…the way he wrote about Egypt made me want to puke.

  24. jen* wrote:

    I was incredulous as I read this post, but couldn’t stop grinning as I read the comments here. I have to believe that if this guy is for real, he’s in the minority. Otherwise, I’ll lose hope.

    It really does [beg] to be read as satire but somehow… isn’t, as J said.

  25. foreveryaction wrote:

    I’ll defend him.

    I majored in African-American studies, and rather than teach me the analytical tools of a discipline (historical analysis, literary analysis, statistical analysis) it focused on the color of the subject matter. I was wholly unprepared to write a rigorous thesis without first teaching myself literary analysis, appropriate to my literary subject-matter.

    I think that the framework proposed in the salient holds up just fine–as long as we don’t need a French Studies department, neither do we need Women and Gender studies.

    However, if what these studies are about is control over the nomenclature of the canon rather than the content or quality, then you can fight about the name all you want.

  26. insomniac wrote:

    Speechless. Absolutely speechless. So the whole of womankind and the whole of the non-white world have done absolutely nothing of note just because this pipsqueak litle student has never thought to look further than his own nose?

    That whole business about the Egyptian civilization is just like the whole ‘colour blind’ idea… not important to speak about race etc. Of course it is bloody important to recognise that these people were not white!

    @DIMA well said about the European dark ages! Comment 12: I am no expert in Ancient Egyptian history, just a keen reader. I think it’s hard to generalise about a civilization that lasted so many thousand years and say they were ‘all’ white or black, African or not African. I think Cleopatra’s family was majority Greek in origin (and their level of racial mixture is an ongoing debate). Can’t say for ealier Pharoahs. In Ancient Egyptian art, important people are often portrayed as paler skinned, but they do have full lips and full, plaited hair was aspired to (achieved through wigs). Egypt didn’t exist in isolation from the rest of Africa, it expanded and contracted over time, there was cultural interaction with the rest of Africa and with Persia and Europe…

    Seems like the western world often doesn’t see Egypt as “African”… “African” has to be black, and North Africa is often lumped in with the Arab world.

    As other commenters have pointed out, Egypt anyway is not the only civilization worthy of note on the African continent. They were just the ones closest to Europe! South of Egypt, there was a thriving Nubian civilization, there are the civilizations of Mali and Nigeria with their amazing art and scholarship…And does a people have to have a written language and stone buildings to be worthy of study anyway?!

  27. Latoya Peterson wrote:

    @foreveryaction –

    I majored in African-American studies, and rather than teach me the analytical tools of a discipline (historical analysis, literary analysis, statistical analysis) it focused on the color of the subject matter. I was wholly unprepared to write a rigorous thesis without first teaching myself literary analysis, appropriate to my literary subject-matter.

    So is that to be blamed on African-American studies, or the place that developed the curriculum where you studied?

  28. atlasien wrote:

    What I find most amusing about this dumbass worldview is the weird fetishistic worship of Greek and Roman classics. If you really go behind a surface sort of appreciation, these classics are actually profoundly destabilizing to the contemporary conservative white Christian-centered ideology.

    For example, according to Cicero’s worldview, Patrick Brennan’s probably-Irish ancestors would be regarded as mentally deficient, practically subhuman barbarians. What he would call “Ethiopians” were stereotyped as overly civilized.

    It’s like they’re looking at the past through rose-tinted, really dirty, really old, really cracked glasses. They’re stuck in a reactionary 19th-century interpretation of the classics.

  29. Umm....wut wrote:

    #1. It’s a shame that there are Harvard students who can’t read maps.

    #2. a copy of this word salad should be sent to the Harvar dean of admissions with the header “do your damn job”. Harvard turns away thousands of competant and qualified applicants for this nonsense?

  30. insomniac wrote:

    Something I forgot… I also take issue with the misuse of the word “ethnic” to mean “non-white”. Ethnicity refers to specific cultural attributes that every person has. Everybody has an ‘ethnic origin’ regardless of the colour of their skin. “Ethnic” should not be used as a way to box in and categorise as homogeneous people who aren’t white. It reinforces binary ways of looking at the world and just continues that idea that ‘white people don’t have culture so it’s ok for them to appropriate the cultures of others”.

    The name “ethnic studies” therefore doesn’t really mean anything. Do they mean @Black studies”? Should a focus on ethnic diversity not be part of each and every school of a University rather than a separate one?

  31. Max Reddick wrote:

    I have been disappointed with virulent racists, sexists, and homophobes as of late. Are they becoming so dull as to be unable to cleverly couch their prejudices in seemingly acceptable terms, or are they simply becoming bolder?

  32. Maria P. wrote:

    Back in the prehistoric age when one of my professors was a Harvard undergrad, he went to inform his adviser that he was switching his major to Sanskrit. The guy thought that was the funniest joke he’d heard all week, but stopped laughing when he realized the kid was serious. Why in the world would a nice white boy from an elite family would want to study some weird brown people language? Sure, related to Greek and whatnot, but it’s not /our/ civilization! Horror!

    And here we are still. Thankfully, it’s just a student shooting off his mouth this time. $50 says this journojoker thinks all Africans live in the darkest jungle and eat raw monkey toes for breakfast. And that the Sahara is an impenetrable wall separating quasi-Europeans from savages, conveniently forgetting, oh, I dunno, Kanem-Bornu, Aksum, the Mali and Ghana empires… Oops, almost forgot Africans don’t have any civilizations worth studying, much less a whole passel along one line.

    Bro, you’d better be trolling…

  33. JamaicanKat wrote:

    Sighs… HELLO….

    94% of present-day Egypt is “ethnic Egyptian”, not Arab–74 million people out of 81.3 million.

    http://people.tribe.net/chaz/blog/4bc77308-1d22-4a10-b31e-e96c9a2c2e6a

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2r5p8yoe_sk

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LJyjuqftfis&feature=related

    Just really…

  34. Deaf Indian Muslim Anarchist wrote:

    just to clarify, Zahi Hawass has been accused of being anti-Semitic as well. Due to that, I’m inclined to DISMISS his claims that the Egyptians weren’t African, whatever the hell that meant.

    just in case anyone got the wrong idea that I agreed with him…

  35. Deaf Indian Muslim Anarchist wrote:

    @ insomniac-

    i agree with your point about “ethnic” vs “non-white.” People need to understand that “white” groups such as the Irish, the Germans, the Poles, the French, are all ETHNICITIES.

  36. DivergentDana wrote:

    All that ish being said, he – and a ton of guys in his generation who think like him – probably won’t pursue a career in academia, and for that, we should all be glad.

  37. Juan wrote:

    Such horridly horrible academics. And if we’re to be rid of ethnic studies we’d have to throw out a lot of the curricula focusing on white folk too. Oops!

    *is not so secretly an admirer of DIMA for some reason* =p

    “”They might not have all been what we call “black” now, but I don’t think Egypt was an ancient Utah (in terms of the level of homogeneity) either.”"

    No kiddin’.

    The Egypt thing is always headdesking, as if somehow there was some mystical barrier that seperated them from the rest of Africa along with them somehow magically not being Black folk even when the people who ruled them at times or formed their society’s upper echelons were foreigners. I think that’s still the way it is today in fact.

    And if you study Egypt and the African civilizations surrouding them you’d likely find far more culturally shared similiarities between them than you would between Egypt and non-African civilizations they had contact with.

  38. Mickey wrote:

    When I was in college, I took a history class and the teacher (who happened to be white) stated that the Egyptians were of many shades, but none were white. A student then asked why were Egyptians always portrayed by white actors/actresses in movies. The teacher said that because Egypt is known to have been a highly civilized country, certain scholars decided that, “Well, they were rulers, smart, etc. so they must’ve been white.”

    I do also believe that Hollywood’s depiction of Egypt has greatly colored most Americans’ perception of it being a “white” country. As a comedian once said, Egypt is on the coast of Africa, it is not some small village in Sweden.

  39. Asha wrote:

    The “reasoning” here is wonderfully stupid: I have never heard of any important African civilizations, so therefore they must not exist and we don’t need to educate anyone about them.”

    This attitude is unfortunately so prevelant, across the globe. I once had to teach a 70-year old French-American woman about the Great Zimbabwe, and other African civilizations because, despite having lived in Morocco, she thought civilizations didn’t exist in Africa before the colonizers came along.

    Also, this reasoning doesn’t stop at civilizations, it extends into everyday life. I went to college outside of Boston, and I overheard a group of Harvard students having this conversation on the T one day:
    “Did you know there’s a blue line?”
    “Yeah”
    “Where does it go?”
    “The aquarium….the airport…”
    “Oh, we thought it went to the suburbs ’cause we’d never heard of it.”
    Undergrads who lived in a bubble before college, and will continue to live in a bubble after it… It’s too bad the privilege of going to a big name like Harvard doesn’t seem to open their minds to the rest of the world.

  40. Juan wrote:

    @Mickey

    I’m speculating here but I’m thinkin that the matter of Egyptians as anyskin but black began around the time of “Enlightenment” period, maybe more so around and after Napoleon’s campaigns that Egypt might’ve gain some sort of popularity among Europeans. Trinkets, the translating the Rosetta stone, the organizing of the field of Egyptology, looting/exploring tombs, eating mummies, etc. seemed to all began around that time.

  41. rk wrote:

    Why is everyone mad that Brennen wrote this article? Point out the stupidity of his thinking but do NOT get mad. I for one am sooo glad he wrote this article because from this day forth, this article will follow him wherever he goes. If he’s ever stupid enough to run for political office, you can bet this article will surface. And more likely than not, this kind of poorly researched article will pigeonhole him in his future writing career. (he’ll probably end up writing blogs or for the most right-wing of newspapers).

    And I’d like to ask the writer what he thinks about teaching ancient asian cultures. There’s no debate that asia’s civilizations rival that of the west in the past and today. I’d like to challenge his eurocentric point of view with facts and see him squirm.

    As for the “are egyptians africans” debate, I don’t know the population makeup of egypt of the past. But I DO know that if you suggest to a modern egyptian person that his/her country is African, they’ll be VERY offended.

  42. Madams wrote:

    What I really don’t get is the bit on Latin American authors. Their inclusion in a curriculum offends you? Really? Nobel Prize winning authors, clearly, are unimportant because…they’re from a region of the world you consider unimportant, or ugly? Some of the most important and influential authors of the 20th century are somehow useless to study? Really?

  43. Umm....wut wrote:

    As for the Egypt debate going on here, here are my thoughts. Prior to the arrival of colonialist Europeans, there were no blacks in Africa in a matter of speaking. No one identified themselves in that way and took it to mean what we know of as race. Race is an idea, and we would be reading history backwards to contend that even the darkest yoruba people could be assumed to self-identify as “black” in the precolonial era. My feeling is that race is an unnatural way of thinking about human beings. The bottom line is that mixing occurs when groups have contact and the Egyptians were no exception. Most scholars contend that they had a range of phenotypes not unlike contemporary black Americans (including those of us who can pass). Their civilization is accurately typed as African because they were in Africa. They were also a very unique civilization so the argument that they don’t “resemble” other African civilizations is very twisted (are structural grandeur and size the only marker of “civilization”?). Greece and Rome were far more atypical of Europe. I guess that means they aren’t European civilizations then.

    To that end, it is

  44. BlackPeopleHavePTSD wrote:

    Yes Egypt is nixed…brown…light skinned…ANYthing but Black. Nevermind that it was the Egyptian themselves that called Egypt Kemet (Black Land and NO it does not refer to the soil), that Herodotus said they looked like Ethiopians, that the Egyptians themselves said that they hailed from Punt. Nevermind the facts. They were ancient white space aliens from the Pleiades…descended from Ancient astronauts…ANYTHING but BLACK!

    Give me a break. Who are you going to believe? Some Eurocentric scholar millenium later with Piltdown man in his back pocket or someone closer to the date of the actual civilization? Funny how people dismiss all the ancient scholars when it comes to their racial views on Egypt but get a hardon for everything else these people write as gospel.
    Sorry, I’m not drinking the Kool-aid.

  45. octogalore wrote:

    Wow. I’m not familiar with the Salient, but Brennan has just done the idea of an alternative, conservative student publication a big disservice with this racist and sexist essay. There are legitimate conservative arguments about education — this isn’t one of them.

    The point of liberal arts is to allow a creative and diverse intellectual study. Many undergrad classes don’t lend themselves immediately to careers aside from being a professor, but that doesn’t mean they are “useless.” Art history and philosophy are other examples. So his criticizing studies involving race and gender smacks of bigotry.

    I think there is a point to be made that in many college classrooms, there is a particular set of political beliefs superimposed by the professor, and beliefs that differ are punished. Yale Professor Peter Schuck, a political independent, in “Meditations of a Militant Moderate,” makes this point.

    I also think students are not given adequate career counseling in college, so that the increased assortment of courses that do not prepare them for bill-paying jobs subseqently tend to adversely impact poorer students who cannot afford the freight (or don’t want to assume the large debt) for grad schools that are more career-directed. To the extent that those who major in ethnic or women’s studies tend to be POC and women, this is a concern to me. But it doesn’t mean those courses aren’t as legitimate as any other. Just that I wish placement offices and counselors did a better job at guiding students without the family resources and networks (per our earlier discussion about race, gender and wealth) make decisions to optimize (should they wish to do so) their chances at economic security.

  46. Baiskeli wrote:

    I’ve re-read this article multiple times and cannot decide whether its either badly executed satire (or brilliant satire) or an example of monumental stupidity and racism. I have to go cringe in the corner while my brain gently whimpers.

  47. Jess wrote:

    This is ignorant as all get out.

    As to the “Egypt” and “Africa” thing — I think we end up conflating a lot of things here.

    You could certainly make a case that Egyptians are a distinctive group, but you’d better be specific about what time period you are talking about. The self-portraits of the ruling classes (you can see them at the Met on the sarcophagi) look Greek-ish, but that was after 300 years of rule by Ptolemaic kings and Queens.

    It looks rather different depending on which dynasty you want to address. The Coptics? The Ptolemies? The Pharaohs? Hittite rule? Shishak? That’s 5,000 years worth right there.

    It just shows that the term “African” — which can mean anyone from a Moroccan or Egyptian dude who looks at home in Italy to Djimon Hounsou or Jomo Kenyatta — is racialized or these folks. And it shows a deep ignorance of the rest of Africa. Hausa kingdom? Timbuktu? The Malians? Meroe?

    Are there problems with ethnic studies? Sure, just like any other humanities department. I can point to a lot of places where the rigor isn’t there, or you have poorly thought out curricula. I’ve run into a few.

    But that is a different problem than their existence as a field. Brennan is just being stupid.

    There is a bit of a classics fetish with some conservatives. I always thought it funny because a lot of them haven’t read them carefully. I mean, if you want to get into detail — Plato had quite the fondness for, um male friendship. And from a scientific point of view Aristotle was simply wrong, even by the standards of his own day. (We get a lot of it because the early Christians were largely Aristotelians, and they won out).

  48. octogalore wrote:

    Cosign Latoya at #27.

    If a particular college’s ethnic studies program didn’t adeqately teach analytical tools of analysis, the fault lies with the professor, not the underlying subject matter.

    I think there’s an issue of soft bigotry stemming from this. I saw this at MIT in a different context, where humanities classes and majors were considered “soft” or less rigorous, and noticed a different quality of professor hired for those classes.

    I think a similar thing happens with women’s or ethnic studies programs — obviously there are some major exceptions (eg Evelyn Brooks Higginbotham in both disciplines), but I’ve noticed often there are TA’s or profs with high public profiles but very little scholarship assigned.

    The thought seems to be that these courses are “alternative” and therefore rigorous standards don’t have to be maintained. That does a disservice to the students. But it’s not a flaw inherent in the disciplines themselves, just the human beings administering them.

  49. someonehelpthisdude wrote:

    Pure, unadulterated white racism.

  50. Al-Jabarti wrote:

    @ DIMA and others,
    First off all, it must be stated that Egypt has a race/color issue and therefore it has been denying its black ancestry and tries hard to pass for white. Since the French occupation, Egyptians have been exposed to racists Euro-centric ideas and unfortunately adopted them( the Ottoman upper class were mainly white and spoke Turkish while the underclass was black and spoke mainly Arabic). Growing up, I’ve watched Egyptian TV and movies (40’s to current), music videos, talk shows and read their papers, magazines and online sites on a regular basis and this theme is seen everywhere. When you look at the ethnic makeup of the country, the vast majority is black, but they rarely appear on TV. So hearing Zahi Hawass, who is an idiot and a liar, say they aren’t isn’t surprising. The ancient Egyptians started as a colony from Abyssinia. Last time I checked, the Abyssinians were black (and so were the ancient Arabs, however that’s changing as both are becoming lighter and whiter). There were even DNA studies that back this up, I’ll try and find it if I have the time.

    Ask any North African or West Asian that truly knows their history and they will readily admit that their Arabic, Berber, Egyptian ancestors were black. They will also state that their non-Arab/Berber/Egyptian ancestor was either a Turk, Central Asian, Albanian, Serb, Armenian, Greek, Italian, Spanish, Portuguese, French, English and/or Persian. As an Arab, I have many family members who are mixed and appear white. Yet we all state that most of out ancestors were black and only recently did they become white. We celebrate all our ancestors, however I know some that are ashamed to be descended from blacks and want to deny that heritage. This is the mindset of people like Zahi Hawass.

    By the way, to any Muslim readers of this blog (As’salaamu Alaikum), there’s no debate on the skin color of the Pharaohs and Moses (Musa). In the Qur’an and Ahadith, it states explicitly that Moses was black, (Jesus, or Isa and Mohamed were black as well according to the authentic ahadith).

    Sorry for the rant and hijacking the topic, I just felt that some background regarding the Egypt issue needed to be mentioned.

  51. lunanoire wrote:

    Though many will be loath to hire this author, he has a job cut out for him writing Texas history schoolbooks.

  52. G.K. wrote:

    Yeah, I read the article and comments, and I added my two cents in the comment section on that site, and I put the few who defended him on blast about all the BS that the article had—along with some links that they probably won’t bother to read. It’s sad that in THISAday and age, when there is no excuse for not being able to find information on things you don’t know about, that white folks STILL believe this bullshit that they and ONLY they made the world what it today—talk about living in your own little white privileged world–that article pissed me the hell off too!

  53. karak wrote:

    It’s like satire… only with someone who means it.

    My first reaction is to be befuddled and amused… my second is a slow growing horror as I realize not only did this person mean this, but other people do as well.

  54. Allaura wrote:

    I hope Baiskeli (#46) is right and it’s meant to be satire. That’s really the only way I would have any respect for Harvard.

    My college has a domestic diversity/ multiculturalism requirement, which draws from American Studies (a dept that uses both social science and humanities methodologies to examine race in America), Women’s and Gender Studies, and various Sociology, English, and Political Science classes.

    A lot of white students gripe about the requirement, as finding a class sometimes means schedule inconveniences. However, I have yet to meet anyone who leaves the class on the last day feeling like it was a waste of their time. Many students find that these departments resonate with their own experiences, either as a woman or person of color or as someone who was shown proof that the system benefitted them.

    Clearly, whoever wrote the Harvard article didn’t give any of the listed departments a chance, or simply did not want to see anything beyond what he did well regurgitating in prep school. Looks like a trust fund went to waste.

  55. Donald wrote:

    It is improbable for the majority of ancient Egyptians to be anything other than mixed race. Think about the level of interracial mixing that there is in the US after only 25 generations and compare that with the 150 or more generations of classical Egypt in a much smaller area which was a crossroads from trade and immigration.

    Race just didn’t have the meaning in the ancient world that it does today. An example is the recent DNA profiling of a Roman grave in York. It turns out that this rich woman was a black african yet the perception is that the Romans were white.

    The reason Roman and Greek classics are made so much of is that for centuries they were the *only* records of a more civilised world which were readable to academics in Europe. Latin and Ancient Greek were the requirement for academia well into the 20th Century. There’s a big problem in that established interpretations have accumulated over the centuries which don’t reflect the original texts. So most discussions are based on a 19th century view of a medieval translation of an ancient text. And many scholars are unaware of the different assumptions made at each stage.

  56. Abby wrote:

    http://verynoice.com/2010/03/a-special-edition-of-bitchgram-the-harvard-salient-are-you-serious/

    A response from the Harvard Voice, another student publication.

  57. Meg wrote:

    Someone peed in his privileged porridge!

    This is the result of the failures of education that Harvard is halfheartedly beginning to address. College, however, is far to late to suggest to children that the world is much larger than their own experiences.

  58. wanderinglady wrote:

    Cosign with #45 and #48.

    Ahh, the nostalgia of some people for the “good ol’ days” when the history and accomplishments of white men were the only things that mattered to the Western world. How dare anyone else claim that their histories, stories, etc. are important!

    Now that it has become evident that the world doesn’t revolve around white men anymore, there are those who are backing themselves into a corner against the world. This is true whether it’s American Tea Partiers, Europeans against immigration or whiny Ivy Leaguers.

    I say that it’s good that this has come out. As the saying goes, light is the best disinfectant.

  59. CVT wrote:

    I can’t post full comments, but I already wrote on this, so . . .

  60. CVT wrote:

    This should cover it:
    http://choptensils.wordpress.com/2008/12/15/on-the-invention-of-racism-part-ii/

  61. Vernal Equinox wrote:

    Fun facts:

    1. While Egyptians is a part of Africa, they were (with a few exceptions) not “black” and are closely related to Arabic, Berber, and Ethiopian. In general African Studies has a problem with ignoring the non-Nile-Congo peoples of Africa, including Hottentots, Berbers, Ethiopians, Somalis, etc.

    2. The promoters of Afrocentric theory fails to acknowledge one of Egypt’s most significant contributions to Western Civilization: chattel slavery. You have to take the bad with the good.

  62. Wordzsalad wrote:

    Why is everyone assuming this dude is white?

  63. Brooklynperson wrote:

    Just in case the Salient doesn’t consider my comment to this man’s essay to conform to their guidelines, I’ll post it here:

    “I’m almost sorry that you feel so threatened by studying people who aren’t white, Northwestern European or male, Mr Brennan, seeing that it’s only relatively recently that the people from your ethnicity have “ascended” to the ranks of whiteness in the United States. Your ancestors are pretty much an afterthought in the history books as well, I suppose. Do you secretly believe, perhaps, that if you suck up to the establishment enough, the old boys will throw you a bone of power? Or something?

    You realize that you will never, ever, ever be considered a WASP. Never. And your only use to them will be to trumpet the white superiority line in public in a way they’d never dare. And why would they? They have you and Dinesh D’Souza and Pat Buchanan and other “close, but no cigar” types. They don’t have to get their hands dirty while they walk away with more privilege and money than you’ll ever know.

    Simp.”

    OK, that “Simp” part was mean, but who cares? People like Brennan are lapdogs for the Good Ol’ Boy Network, which isn’t just a phrase from the Preppy Handbook. When they spew this garbage out in public, or wherever, it’s not about people of colour or the history or literature of non-Europeans and non-males. It’s about Brennan and people like him trying to become WASPs.

    I see the same dynamic when I’ve observed D’Souza, Beck, Buchanan, Coulter, Rush and so on. They are so desperate to be considered one of the top old boys, and part of that tribe, when they aren’t and will never be, no matter what they say, no matter how they behave. Brennan’s just following that tradition. You’d think one of them would have caught on by now, if they’re supposed to be so smart.

  64. Mickey wrote:

    @ Jess,

    You are absolutely right about the ignorance of the rest of Africa. Most people see the rest of the continent as uncivilized, people running around half-naked Shaka Zulu-style, etc. The only other country that is viewed with respect other than Egypt is South Africa, and that’s mainly because it was under white rule for a while. Ican only wonder how people from Africa who come here respond when they notice the short-sighted and bigoted view of the rest of their continent.

  65. Erica wrote:

    What a throwback. I’d like to see him try to choose a physician based on his “educated man’s curriculum” criteria. Hmm, candidate 1 studied anatomy, molecular biology… candidate 2 studied the “Quadrivium of geometry, arithmetic, music, and astronomy.” #2 is clearly more educated! I’ll go to him for treatment, no use messing with this newfangled “anesthesia” or “germ theory of disease” nonsense.

    And I doubt Cicero would appreciate De Officiis (an essay which touches on subjects such as the importance of political rights for all, service to the community rather than one’s self, etc.) being used to prop up a fictitious system of artificial superiority instead of exploring the rich diversity of human experience.

  66. adiffereintMolly wrote:

    The young man who wrote this should have more appreciation for African culutes and diversity, but he does have a point.

    Egypt is Egypt, and should not be studied just because it is (and was) in Africa. Other cultures of Africa deserve study as well, because they existed and not just because they were in Africa, just like women’s achievements should be valued based on what was accomplished instead of that the accomplish-er was female.

    We can learn from everything around us and everything that happened before us, whether it is what to do or what not to do. People from every time period, every continent, both sexes (and anyone in between), every sexuality, every ethnicity and every religion offer things worth studying and should be valued on their choices, not because of the factors above.

  67. Bones wrote:

    @rk
    I think people are mad because Brennan regardless of his writing will be given a lucrative job after his studies at Harvard for two simple reasons…white male privilege and his Harvard education. No matter what he has written his skin colour and education overshadows his blatant racism (in thought) and will have someone willing to hire him. Look at James O’Keefe who had similar sentiments at Rutgers.

    In regards to the curriculum at these universities, it is certainly not challenging enough. I for one as a West African taking an African history course in college had to correct my professor half the time. Recently reading a guest post on Macon d’s blog, I realized that it true, the history of the “other” in this case Africa is often told from a eurocentric perspective.

  68. ObaaYaa wrote:

    @ Vernal Equinox

    Can you Elaborate a bit? Are you saying that Egypt introduced chattel slavery to Western Civilization? Are you saying chattel slavery did not exist in Western Civilizations until Egypt introduced them to it?
    I want to understand what you’re implying.

  69. Bones wrote:

    @Brooklynperson
    cosign 110%

    @Vernal
    Lest we forget, present day Eygpt has always had it’s borders right? Present day Eygpt is a modern concept. Why are we trippin all over ourselves to say they’re of Arab origin and light skinned. In some sense by claiming that they were not “Black Africans” that equates their civilization to being superior. Like there were Black Romans, there were Black Egyptians.

    @Mickey
    As a black West African there is certainly more respect for Eygptians…one I also sense on this blog. There were numerous empires and civilizations that thrived. The Ashanti Tribe in Ghana, Massai Tribe in Kenya, Zulus in South Africa, and many have their own cultures and greate civilizations but somehow, we (on this blog) are only able to talk about Egyptian culture because that’s the only African culture that was thought in school during world geography class.

  70. BillytheKidd wrote:

    @Vernal Equinox

    Well, genetically, phenoyypically, culturally and linguistically the Ancient Egyptians/Kemetians clustered with other East Africans and thus by today’s standards they would be “black African” and I do mean today’s standards because the race”black African” is a recent construct just as is “white European.”

    Btw, all this talk of conservatives, liberals, classics, Egyptology and standards of Academia makes me think if Bernals’ Black Athena.
    Anyone remember that?
    It caused a sh@tstorm when it came out.
    Btw, while Bernal was a Leftist, a conservative commentator named Richard Poe, who is of part Mexican descent I believe, wrote a great book call Black spark, White fire which explored the idea that the Egyptians were basically African and they had a profound influence Greek civilization.
    It cause a little storm as well. Google it to see how voracious the response was to the idea that “blacks” influenced the Crown Jewel of Western Civ.

  71. BillytheKidd wrote:

    Concerning this Brennan guy…
    His thesis is provokingly anti-science and anti-intellectual.
    Rather than simply celebrating and upholding the values and norms f a particular cultural-historical epoch,(which is what this fool is calling for. Identity politics at its best. Make it seem as if “my” culture is somehow neutral, objective and universal. He needs to read some Bourdieu) is it not the responsibility of the university to explore humanities collective history, culture, arts and sciences?
    Do biologist only study fauna in Europe and America?
    His very statements betray a disturbing narrow-mindedness and an inability for self-reflection.
    His ideology is so transparent to him its embarrassing.
    He’s exposed by his own words: His notion of “contribution” comes from a privileged Eurocentric perspective. He means in a nutshell: What have you people done for me lately. Which is why even in these ethnic studies programs, the relationships often explored are Europe and Other rather Other and Other. Or Africa and Asia. Or South America and Polynesia.
    As well, when he states that some cultures are worth studying while others are not he neglects to state the standards by which value is determined. How do we decide what is worthy? He doesn’t ask these questions cause the answer is presumed: Whatever “we” value of course.( And by “we” we know who)It begs the question. He has always-already assumed that one culture is worthy of study and thus he has stifled inquiry before we have even begun. This goes for his silly comments about literature as well.
    Its presumed that “European” civilization has contributed the most to the world.
    I’m not sure if that can be proven. The contributions that others have made to others(as well as Europe) is simply a priori excised. The purposes for such neglect are anything but apolitical

  72. BillytheKidd wrote:

    To be honest,
    We are only beginning to touch the surface regarding Islamic/Zoroastrian/Arab/Persian/African/Asian influences on so-called Western culture. (Another modern construct. The ancient Greeks and Romans didn’t necessarily identify with the ancestors of modern westerners)
    If most people awoke to the reality that the foundations of are so-called “civilization” owe more to the ancestors of our modern “enemies” than the other way round their heads would explode.
    Europe and the “West”( I hate this false notion) really can’t “claim” much of the “discoveries” we claim.

  73. Dreamy wrote:

    FWIW, I majored in African American Studies at Northwestern and it was an incredibly well-integrated interdisciplinary field of study that prepared me superbly to, you know– draw evidence for arguments, solve problems, create art, etc., from many and diverse fields of study and paths to knowledge. That kind of invaluable thing. Not to mention to integrate community involvement and uplift into academic pursuits.

    No, wait, I’m white, so it was completely useless.

  74. HWF wrote:

    @ Bones
    I agree with your post. It seems as though clearly identifying ancient Egyptians as non Black Africans is the truth and nothing else could possibly be right. Wouldn’t that be like me assuming most of the people commenting have only seen Egypt from TV? I don’t know what ethnicity they where. People who live in Africa are not a monolith. Why does everyone pretend to be so sure of something they have not seen?

  75. Maria P. wrote:

    @Bones-

    Heh at Black Romans. It’s a good thing this kid didn’t use the same textbook as me in high school Latin. We were shocked to see a black nobleman in one of the chapter illustrations, and our teacher just threw up his hands. “There were /all kinds/ of Romans! Look at the empire’s borders! The Romans weren’t as hung up on skin color as we are.” (Unless you were one of those naked blue savages from Darkest Brittania, I suppose. Then you probably weren’t welcome at the banquets.)

  76. Diverse wrote:

    It’s bad enough for critics to downgrade African-American studies, but it’s equally as bad to do it with Egyptology.No matter how much the critics want to hide the African influence in it, there is no way that they can do because the history always come back to Africa.

    The problem that I have with people like them is that they never tell the truth about it. I had a political Studies who told you what you should know instead of what you wanted to know. She talked about about the Declaration of Independence and the Bill of Rights. From what I’ve learned about it all these bills were not inclusive of all people. It was nothing that my professor made up, she researched and and pointed references for us to find it, but were taught that it was.

    We may be able to get everything about history, but if I take a history class, I want to learn the truth about it. For years I felt gypped because of it: why people look the way the look, how did we get here, why do we have a constitutional democracy etc, you get me, but just the things that made the US the country that it is. I just remembered getting confused with it all because it seemed that people went from point a to point c instead of points a,b, and c. Until I took her class, the points never seemed to connect. If these people want Egyptology taken away then those students aren’t being told the truth. I think that they are scared of a fact being brought up that they may not want to hear.

  77. Baiskeli wrote:

    @Mickey


    Ican only wonder how people from Africa who come here respond when they notice the short-sighted and bigoted view of the rest of their continent.

    I’m from Africa (Kenya). Some days I don’t know whether to laugh or cry. If I had a dime for every stupid question I’ve been asked I would be rich.

    You have streets?
    You have cities?
    Do you live in trees?

    I’ve gotten to the point where when someone here asks me where I’m from I pre-emptively start cringing for the stupidity to come.

  78. Baiskeli wrote:

    I think the thinking behind this knuckeheads ideas are the same ideas that drive people do deny that Egypt had any black people or influence and also to even claim that the Great Zimbabwe ruins must have been left over from a mysterious white civilization in modern day Zimbabwe

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Great_Zimbabwe_National_Monument

    As a corollary, I wonder how many Americans have even ever heard of Great Zimbabwe

  79. Ankhesen Mié wrote:

    Wow…I feel another case study for the books….

  80. Donald wrote:

    Can we stop confusing modern Egypt with ancient Egypt? Arabs didn’t arrive in Egypt until the Roman empire was falling apart and the Egypt of the pharoahs had gone centuries before that. Same with Ethiopia – arabs traded along the east coast of Africa for centuries so the racial mix today in both will be quite different from what it was 3-5,000 years ago. Just as the population of the Americas is completely different today from what it was 1,000 years ago.

    @Vernal Equinox

    Where do you get the idea that Egypt invented chattel slavery? It appears to have been part of every civilised society and most others prior to the 19th century. The Old Testament shows the ancient Jews had no problem with it except when they were the slaves. The alternative to taking slaves in those days was the massacre of entire populations.

    @Mickey
    South Africa was not the only part of Africa ruled by ‘whites’ by which I presume you mean Europeans. The mess in Zimbabwe today is directly related to British rule and the manner of decolonalisation. I’m not sure quite why South Africa is different but I expect there are several factors such as its development round a trading port, a relatively high level of European immigration and the fact that the Zulus are also migrants from the same period.

  81. Grrrrl wrote:

    I suppose this is why I didn’t get into Harvard. My brain just doesn’t work the way a Harvard brain is supposed to function, if that piece is any indication.

    The author argues against ethnic studies in favor of “the classics,” but fails to realize that “the classics” themselves are, by their very nature, “ethnic studies.” Correct me if I’m wrong, but aren’t they the study of ancient Greco-Roman (and other Mediterranean) societies? Hello? That would be “ethnic” studies since the word “ethnic” has to do with the culture and ways of living practiced by a group of people with a common background and/or purpose.

    As if that weren’t bad enough, he then gives us this:

    “The necessary elements of an educated man’s curriculum have not changed much over two thousand years of Western education…”

    Which, wow. One of the most ridiculous things I’ve ever read. Does Brennan really think we’ve already learned all there is to know? Does he really mean to suggest that no knowledge can be enhanced or deepened by learning a different perspective or by looking at an issue from a different angle? That all we need to know about life and the world in which we live can be gleaned from studying the works of a couple of guys who lived in one small area of the world about 2000 years ago? Seriously? And he’s paying how much for his education? SUCKER!

  82. Sophia wrote:

    On the topic of Egypt – I am Egyptian, and I am both phenotypically black as well as self-identified as black. Many of my family members do not identify as black despite their phenotype (and many light-skinned Egyptians do).

    The entirety of North Africa was such an active trading route (from Ghana to Egypt) that it would be impossible to invalidate either phenotypical or self-identified blackness in the region.

    That being said, a large part of the typical Egyptian’s choice to identify as black is our LEGACY OF COLONIALISM! Yes, ladies and gentlemen, the British empire left with us a deep self-hatred and hierarchy of skin-lightness and race!

    So this douche’s argument doesn’t only ignore what historic racial precedent was set (unlikely as it is there even was one, as empire, clan, tribe, or region were the points of identification), it also assumes that race can be SEEN, race can be QUANTIFIED, and that everyone must agree on a term for themselves.

  83. Egyptgirl42 wrote:

    Ok, as an Egyptology grad-student, I have to call bullshit. The skeletal work done on ancient Egyptian remains shows that a large segment had “Negroid” features, particularly in the southern parts of Egypt. For ancient Egyptians, it was sharing an Egyptian culture that made one Egyptian, not race. Heck, it’s often impossible to tell if a person in a statue is actually Nubian. This dude is repeating the shit that early colonialist Egyptologists said in the 19th century, which NO ONE in the field today considers to be remotely true. Hate it when idiots misrepresent my field, especially for 19th century poppycock.

  84. Harvard Alum wrote:

    Thoughts:

    1. The Salient is generally terrible. They’re always publishing something racist or homophobic or classist or sexist. It’s like the only material they can find.

    2. I majored in Women, Gender and Sexuality at Harvard. I learned an incredible amount, worked hard, and probably read more European theorists than this guy ever did. I also read about the people he looks down on and trivializes: women, people of color, low-income people, trans folks, immigrants. I’ve never had trouble getting a job since graduation, and I’ll be a lawyer soon.

    3. 95% of Harvard isn’t like this. Don’t reward the bad eggs with more attention.

  85. Frank wrote:

    Seriously, who are these conservatives? How did they get into Harvard!!

  86. nicepebbles wrote:

    This kind of thing happened at the Univ I attended during my freshman year. I wrote a response putting the author or blast for saying the racist stuff he spewed in the student ‘zine. That was 13 years ago. *sigh*

    @ lovepeaceohana, #7: I’m right with you. I can’t believe anyone can say that with a straight face. I read that section to a white guy in my office and he was dumbfounded. He mentioned George Washington Carver. He believes GWC is the most underappreciated men in our history. He started listed off all the great things GWC did, stuff that people study in universities today.

    I don’t like to attack the speaker. I like to focus on the argument. It’s hard to do in this case because this Brennan is a world class idiot, which is too kind.

  87. Bryan wrote:

    A Classics major who doesn’t believe that non-Western civilisations have contributed anything of note to the study of mathematics should first explain to me why we use Arabic numerals as the basis of our mathematical system rather than Roman numerals.

    This was after he claims that the history of non-White people in America is not relevant enough to be a permanent fixture in American academia.

    I was going to say that I’m incredulous that such tripe could come from such an institution. However, given the top tier private universities status as the breeding grounds for the future ruling class, I am totally unsurprised that they are infested with every form of privilege imaginable.

  88. mike wrote:

    what is it with racism and privilege that go together so well?

  89. mike wrote:

    all i can say is that i’m glad these students don’t go to my school

  90. Johnathan wrote:

    “Now to talk to me about black studies as if it’s something that concerned [only] black people is an utter denial. This is the history of Western Civilization. I can’t see it otherwise. This is the history that black people and white people and all serious students of modern history and the history of the world have to know. To say it’s some kind of ethnic problem is a lot of nonsense.”-C.L.R James (1969)

  91. DB wrote:

    some thoughts…

    1. Mr. Brennan has a great career ahead of him in the Republican party. They need more young self-starter like him.

    2. I think there should be a White ethnic study department. White people needs to know about whites as an ethnic group and the power and privilege it held.

    3. I think the majority of white people of today have really “usurped” the classical Mediterranean culture. Most of the people we call white today were believed to be incredibly dumb and savage barbarians fit only to be slaves by the Romans and the Greeks, who consider themselves in the same class of people as the Egyptians and other Mediterranean civilizations. The Dark Ages were a sad period of history when the barbarians sacked the glory of the Roman culture and took over. The “whites” didn’t have any impact on history until the last 500 years other than being a land so poor that the Mongols didn’t even bother conquering it. I think if white people really study their own history, there will be less of this white supremacy BS in the world. Every white person should know which barbaric tribe their illiterate and uncultured ancestors belonged to. (Hey! My ancestors had no written language for over 2,000 years until the Romans enslaved them!) Unless you’re an actual Italian of the Roman pedigree or a real ethnic Greek, stop appropriating their culture.

  92. Rachel wrote:

    Obviously Brennan hasn’t noticed the vast amount of white “encounters” and “experiences” in EVERY OTHER CLASS HE TAKES.

    Also, a lot of historians say that Egyptian culture was whitified by…guess who? White historians. Because them colored folk couldn’t *possibly* have done anything worthwhile, historically. After all, didn’t we make them slaves? Isn’t that proof that they were incompetent and “not worthy of study?”

    I think Brennan might find it worthwhile to examine exactly *why* he thinks an entire continent is not worthy of study.