Illiberal Education: The Politics of Race and Sex on Campus

Rating:
Summary: Relevant and well argued
Review: D'Souza makes a strong case for the proposition that the modern American university, in the name of diversity and multiculturalism, has stifled debate and intimidated everyone into accepting new canons. These canons are race and gender based propositions that one must accept or risk being ostracized as sexist or racist. D'Souza argues that Western thought is self criticising (ie Marxism is a criticism of Western borgois culture) and that teaching method of the typical liberal curriculae was disputation, not indoctrination. The recent gender and ethnic studies programs, however, are based on indoctgrination. You do not dare to debate the ideas espoused in these courses. D'Souza also points out serious inequities in affirmative action programs such as Asian students being discriminated against at Berkley since their achievement was so high, they had a disproportionately large number of applicants qualified for admission. Therefore, white applicants and certainly minority applicants were favored over the Asians. Some claim the author is a right wing idealogue but, in fact, he makes a sound, well reasoned argument that many political liberals, who favor the traditional liberal education, could well embrace.

Rating:
Summary: Well worth reading
Review: I was hesitant about purchasing this book because I thought it was outdated, but I bought it anyway because I liked the other books I have read by D'Souza. This book is not outdated at all. The incidents and issues described in this book are still prevalent today.

D'Souza has a keen grasp of the issues concerning race in America, and he gets to the core. Race is not an easy subject to discuss. We constantly hear about race in America, but, ironically, it is seldom honestly discussed. Most commentators on TV discuss the subject gingerly, staying well within the bounds of political correctness. Most books dealing with race issues are written by white liberals steeped in white-guilt or they are written by black activists steeped in grievances. D'Souza, however, is steeped in history and clear-minded thought, and his books are refreshing to read. He really gets to the heart of the matter; he tackles the subject with candor.

If you are looking for an intellectually honest discussion of race in America, then this book as well "The End of Racism" are excellent choices.

Rating:
Summary: Case Studies of Intolerance on Campus
Review: Illiberal Education by Dinesh D'Souza presents an interesting collection of case studies of the politics of Race and Sex on Campus. The main theme of the work is that the Western tradition of liberal education is being undermined by efforts to meet the demands for group representation in curriculum, student bodies and faculty appointments. He points out that, whereas the traditional notion of the university saw it as a forum for an open exchange of ideas, the current reality is a venue in which the ultimate goal is not truth arrived at through study and exchange, but dictated by faculty radicals in accord with their own political beliefs.

To support his thesis, D'Souza provides a series of cases studies of incidents at leading universities across the U.S. He begins with an report of the admissions policy at Berkeley which, at the time of his writing, admitted students competitively within racial groups, each of which is entitled to a percentage of the student body. The result of this is different standards for admission by members of various ethnic groups. He then proceeds to review the demands for multiculturalism, which leads to the abandonment of traditional classics to make room for works of women and contributions from non-western traditions. In doing this works whose value have been tested over decades or centuries are supplanted by clearly inferior works only because they represent contributions by members of underrepresented groups.. In faculty selection, standards have been established to ensure that certain groups are represented in various numbers in the academic departments. This creates both intellectual and practical problems. Whereas liberal education teaches students to search for universal standards of judgment which transcend particularities of race, gender and culture, illiberal education teaches a provincialism in which every group is encouraged to have its own provincial world view, which restricts the ability find commonality among all mankind. The practical problem is that the quotas often call for numbers of minority professors exceeding the pool of qualified contenders.

D'Souza concludes this book with three modest proposals. He proposes a program of Non-Racial Affirmative Action, which would permit the admission students who appear to possess academic potential not reflected in their academic records, rather than basing standards on group membership. The second suggestion is for Choice Without Separatism. Under this proposal, organizations open only to members of ethnic groups not would encouraged, but those promoting ideas, which may be predominately of interest to members of particular ethnic groups would be encourage, but on a non-exclusive basis. The third proposal is for a curriculum searching for Equality and Classics. Rather than dismissing classical works on the basis that they represent a limited world view, they should be studied for the principals of equality which many contain and which often played a role in their selection as classics.

The weakness of Illiberal Education is that it often seems to be a merely collection of anecdotes which leave the reader wondering whether they really represent the reality of contemporary higher education or whether they merely reflect the most extreme aberrations. for many, including prospective college parents such as myself, this is an interesting study of disturbing trends in higher education.

Rating:
Summary: WE NEED MORE BOOKS LIKE THIS
Review: In Illiberal Education, D'Souza describes the American University campus around the period of the late 80's to the early 90's. The work is a bit out of date although most of it still holds true. The first third covers affirmative action in college admissions, and the problems it creates. A second section looks at what is taught, particularly in English and the humanities. The final portion tells about campus life and how the left has largely stiffled debate and learning in many areas. A few proposals are made at the end.

So much of what D'Souza says is clearly true that it amazes me anyone could attack this book as so many have. I expected at first to read the musings of a right-wing fanatic, but found the book to be, if anything, too soft on the left. The author is best on two aspects of the problem. He points out that academic rejection of traditional standards as racist and sexist ultimately doom all standards. If a traditional piece is meaningful only in the mind of the reader, than what learning is to be had by reading it! D'Souza also explains why rigorous anti-racist policies have not improved race relations. They do not better campus life for minorities but only anger whites, who feel themselves unjustly accused.

I felt the book's only weakness was in the first section, on affirmative action. As schools use a variety of factors in admission, high test scores cannot be a gaurentee for getting in. It then stands that, at the University at least, affirmative action cannot and should not be banned. The bans could always be evaded and might have a detrimental effect overall. Affirmative action programs based on class or income are also a bit trickier to implement than many realize.

In closing, I should say that the book's lessons are best applied to society in general. Fads may come and go in academia and do relatively little harm. The damage done when these ideas filter out into society at large may well be permanent

Rating:
Summary: Dinesh D'Souza gets caught in lie after lie
Review: This is yet another right wing book which has been shown to be a pack of lies.

Example: in this book he makes a statement that gives the impression that Chaucer, Shakespeare, Milton have been driven out of the curriculum at Duke. He happened to once be at a debate with a professor from Duke, and lo and behold, we find that Duke still taught those authors, and with great enthusiasm.

Dinesh D'Souza, why did you lie to us?

My theory: With conservatives, the truth and facts are not on their side. Hence people like Dinesh D'Souza need to make up facts. Lack of veracity is the conservative method. What do conservatives have against the truth? The answer is not here.

Dinesh D'Souza, shame on you for lying.

Rating:
Summary: A fine study of Political Correctness in Academia
Review: Written a decade ago, Dinesh D'Souza's essay remains...in my estimate... a thought-provoking exploration of Political Correctness as it continues to prevail in some of the bastions of American Higher Education. The curriculum agenda of renowned universities of the Northeast and California is examined in particular. These schools established trends in determining an academic "orthodoxy" radically redefining the essentials of Liberal Arts core subjects and criteria applied to hire (and fire) professors assigned to teach them. Though opponents denounce D'Souza's anecdotal style and conservative sensibility, the evidence of massive assault on so-called Western thought taught by "anti-Canon" ideologues is manifest. "Hey! Hey!...Ho, Ho! WESTERN CIV. now must go!" was the slogan of Stanford University students several years ago celebrating abolition of the requirement that undergraduates receive exposure to Great Books in THE SURVEY course. That TIME...over 2000 years...and eminence of distinguished scholars from Erasmus and Thomas More to Mortimer Adler had validated "greatness" was not only rejected with disdain but asserted to prove THE CANON is racist and misogynistic. Readers of any political-educational pursuasion would find much of Dinesh D'Souza's essay engaging. Its tone, for the most part, is understated. The irony of who it will offend ...and how... will speak for itself. The Academic PC police are alive and well in US academia today. Their influence is effective in secondary (and even elementary!) schools in battles on the efficacy of bilingual education, self-esteem grading policies and, of course, The Classics. (HUCKLEBERRY FINN, long-regarded as yet the most distinguished American novel written, has been often banned as racist). Granted, when D'Souza wrote ILLIBERAL EDUCATION ten years ago he was not...nor claimed to be...an eminent writer or scholar. However: " OUT of the MOUTH of BABES..." Re-reading 1 9 8 4 with its Orwellian concepts of "Double-Think", "Newspeak" and Thought-Police might give "cause for pause". As well as perhaps a reading of Noble prize winner, Czeslaw Milosz classic examination of the totalitarian mentality, THE CAPTIVE MIND. A serious reader might even ponder some of the writings of Martin Heiddeger where the roots of DECONSTRUCTIONIST philosophy (and even PC "reading theories" by Post-Modernists like Professor Stanley Fish) can be traced. ILLIBERAL EDUCATION: The Politics of Sex and Race on Campus, may not be a great book. It certainly does not deal with a "great" subject. But it is a well-written informative tract; a fine study in the undisputed reality and effects of POLITICAL CORRECTNESS in America's academia and education system...