The Doctrine of Academic Freedom
Let’s give up on academic freedom in favor of justice
By SANDRA Y.L. KORN3 days ago
Share on facebook Share on twitter Share on email Share on print More Sharing Services
38
The Red Line
In July 1971, Harvard psychology professor Richard J. Herrnstein penned an article for Atlantic Monthly titled “I.Q.” in which he endorsed the theories of UC Berkeley psychologist Arthur Jensen, who had claimed that intelligence is almost entirely hereditary and varies by race. Herrnstein further argued that because intelligence was hereditary, social programs intended to establish a more egalitarian society were futile—he wrote that “social standing [is] based to some extent on inherited differences among people.”
When he returned to campus for fall semester 1971, Herrnstein was met by angry student activists. Harvard-Radcliffe Students for a Democratic Society protested his introductory psychology class with a bullhorn and leaflets. They tied up Herrnstein’s lectures with pointed questions about scientific racism. SDS even called for Harvard to fire Herrnstein, along with another of his colleagues, sociologist Christopher Jencks.
Herrnstein told The Crimson, “The attacks on me have not bothered me personally… What bothers me is this: Something has happened at Harvard this year that makes it hazardous for a professor to teach certain kinds of views.” This, Herrnstein seems not to have understood, was precisely the goal of the SDS activists—they wanted to make the “certain kinds of views” they deemed racist and classist unwelcome on Harvard’s campus.
Harvard’s deans were also unhappy. They expressed concerns about student activists’ “interference with the academic freedom and right to speak of a member of the Harvard faculty.” Did SDS activists at Harvard infringe on Herrnstein’s academic freedom? The answer might be that yes, they did—but that’s not the most important question to ask. Student and faculty obsession with the doctrine of “academic freedom” often seems to bump against something I think much more important: academic justice.
Comments below the fold:
corvelay • 4 minutes ago
How soon until the left is accused of “epistemic closure”?
• Reply•Share ›
Avatar
Bastiat_Fan • 5 minutes ago
Yet another “special snowflake” who apparently simply cannot be bothered with opinions that don’t support her extraordinarily WARPED view of the world. Good luck with that utterly useless degree, btw.
• Reply•Share ›
Avatar
Bastiat_Fan • 9 minutes ago
You do realize, Sandra, that this view makes you a fascist, right?
2 • Reply•Share ›
Avatar
Jeroniomus Bastiat_Fan • 7 minutes ago
Yes, but a kosher certified Talmudic fascist, so it’s A-OK.
Show 1 new reply 1 • Edit• Reply•Share ›
Avatar
Libtard • 2 days ago
Instead of summoning the thought police, the proper way to combat offensive research is to disprove it. That may take a bit more effort than just whining in The Crimson, but ultimately it is how we progress as a society.
Governments during Galileo’s time tried to suppress offensive research. For the sake of humanity, I’m quite glad they didn’t succeed.
350 • Reply•Share ›
Avatar
brando55 Libtard • a day ago
“Offensive” usually means true, but unpleasant. Hence her demand to silence people who can’t be refuted.
200 • Reply•Share ›
Avatar
dbrower brando55 • 18 hours ago
Disagree — “offensive” means unpleasant to someone; truth has little to do with the reaction on the part of the receiver. Offensive but true (Galileo) ought to oblige the offended to reconsider; Offensive and false ought to make the one uttering reconsider (pick your own example). Offensive with indeterminate truth is, well, annoying.
As a 1st amendment absolutist, I’m inclined to be an Academic Freedom absolutist as well. Including the right of the community to protest against views they find distasteful. The professor ought not get fired for speech, but it’s certainly fine to call him (or her) an ass.
13 2 • Reply•Share ›
Avatar
Kevin Bertsch dbrower • 11 hours ago
But she’s not advocating calling someone names – she’s advocating removing the person from the faculty. Do you think you might be forthright enough to take a position on that?
31 1 • Reply•Share ›
Avatar
Carl_Bankston dbrower • 10 hours ago
For the most part, I agree with you, but I can’t see how calling someone an “ass” could be anything but a vulgar ad hominem, not only irrelevant to questions of truth or falsity but turning debates away from whether or not an argument that individuals or groups find offensive is, in fact, true or false. I applaud your academic freedom absolutism and agree that protesters, as well as researchers and theorists, have the right to be wrong (as long as protesters don’t block the speech of others). But I don’t agree that protest is an appropriate or useful way to respond to ideas.
I support Ms. Korn’s right to write and publish this opinion piece, even though I think it is totally wrong and contrary to the most fundamental aims of a university. I am not going to call her names.
9 • Reply•Share ›
Avatar
Jeff Postman dbrower • 12 hours ago
“offensive with indeterminate truth is, well, annoying”
Beep boop, cannot determine truth quotient. Maybe you should stick to math-related activities friend.
9 1 • Reply•Share ›
Avatar
Cimon Alexander Libtard • a day ago
On the bright side, the author describes explicitly how academia implicitly behaves
123 • Reply•Share ›
Avatar
overweightmalefeminist Libtard • 11 hours ago
wow. just. wow. so much unearned privilege in one post, so much hate. using examples from history to violate someone’s truth-feelings is disgusting. the main purpose of ivy league universities is to be safe spaces for people’s emotional sensitivities, not a free-for-all argument zone where people get othered by your use of cis-gendered european history.
72 2 • Reply•Share ›
Avatar
Justice overweightmalefeminist • 9 hours ago
The Committee on Academic Justice hereby sentences you to five years of reading Judith Butler in perpetuity, via the Ludovico technique.
15 • Reply•Share ›
Avatar
Dictatortot overweightmalefeminist • 10 hours ago
Well played, mi compadre.
17 1 • Reply•Share ›
Avatar
Fathercoughlin Libtard • 7 hours ago
What if you cant “disprove” it,Boy Scout,because its TRUE?? Theres no such thing as offensive research. The reason these lefty warpigs take the Maoist view point is becasue theyw ant to stop the truth,thats what they fear.
9 • Reply•Share ›
Avatar
Chip Dipson Libtard • a day ago
That assumes a level of empiricism that can’t really apply to current social/political issues. The standards of offensiveness and social acceptance are constantly being constructed and deconstructed so I think you’re right that more action (protests, boycotts) will have more effect than blaming “academic freedom.”
2 2 • Reply•Share ›
Avatar
IBankerInterestedInMurders&Exe Libtard • 2 days ago
Except repressing Galileo was completely fine and not the government, but your conclusion is accurate.
10 • Reply•Share ›
Avatar
Solar IBankerInterestedInMurders&Exe • a day ago
Like most ibankers you are dumber than a bag of hammers. The Catholic Church operated as a pseudo-federal government for Christian governments in Europe during the middle ages, and exercised a great deal of control over them. And even if you were right about it not being the government, locking people up because they disagree with is unacceptable.
57 • Reply•Share ›
Avatar
Jay Bee • 2 days ago
I am the political corrector! You WILL be TAKEN to the Freedom Farm! Do not resist! Resistance is RACIST!
188 • Reply•Share ›
Avatar
Empty Rosenberg • 2 days ago
‘If our university community opposes racism, sexism, and heterosexism, why should we put up with research that counters our goals simply in the name of “academic freedom”?’
Yep, that’s a quote.
180 • Reply•Share ›
Avatar
Jeff Postman Empty Rosenberg • a day ago
I noticed certain overtones of sarcasm in your post and I’ve taken the liberty of reporting this to the office of trans-enthno-gendered sensitivity. As a heterosexual male I know what it’s like to face heterosexism day in and day out; please check your privilege and respect my lived experience.
104 • Reply•Share ›
Avatar
Alexandra1973 Empty Rosenberg • a day ago
In short, “we want to keep our heads in the sand.”
28 • Reply•Share ›
Avatar
William miller Empty Rosenberg • 2 hours ago
Wow. I was really wishing it wasn’t
• Reply•Share ›
Avatar
Alex • 2 days ago
People like you are a cancer to a free society.
151 • Reply•Share ›
Avatar
disqus_yeZNegncsV Alex • a day ago
And to a society already repressed.
20 • Reply•Share ›
Avatar
I Went to a State School • a day ago
Nice to see that Harvard is churning out little thought police fascists.
141 • Reply•Share ›
Avatar
Standards, please? • 3 days ago
You’ve either got to be trolling or haven’t thought about what you’re saying for more than 5 nanoseconds.
140 • Reply•Share ›
Avatar
jerry Standards, please? • a day ago
you know who also told people to think about things? hitler
51 • Reply•Share ›
Avatar
Bee Standards, please? • 2 days ago
na na na na a diva is a female version of a hustla; of a hustla
9 • Reply•Share ›
Avatar
Nephanor of Fraal • a day ago
Do you want to know how to REALLY take down Herrnstein’s research paper? This is a multi-step process, so listen carefully. First, go back to school and get a degree in a hard science, probably genetics, since it is the most relevant to his paper. You know, that area commonly called STEM fields where there are woefully so few women in it. Perhaps your example of taking a degree in the field will inspire more young women to take it, more than just rallying and writing articles that there needs to be more women in it, but not actively setting an example. Next, spend years researching, and I mean hard scientific research, not anecdotal evidence research, refuting the results of his paper. Have it peer reviewed, you know, in case you came to the wrong conclusion at some point, a process which he had to do for his paper. Then when all this is done and you can prove his conclusion is false with a scientific paper, you can be hailed as a hero.
The sad truth is, you are forgetting that higher education is a place for learning. Learning sometimes means having to admit that things you may have believed are wrong. It also means that you have to realize you aren’t all knowing. You go to school to learn, and you should feel physically safe. However, if you feel intellectually safe at a college/university, you really are wasting your time and money. A good education challenges you to think outside your preconceived notions, it forces you to look at things from a different angle. It makes you think critically and fairly. I know it’s a sad and painful truth, all of us who have a solid education know this. But sadly, many people choose courses these days which don’t actually make you learn, or educate you, they indoctrinate you. They tell you all the things you believe are true, that the world really is as you think it is, and then they give you some target to focus on. This is something many religions and cults do as well. It is sad because in the end, it won’t get you a good job, and you will end up just a burden to tax payers.
The thing is, science and nature have a lot in common, beyond the fact that science is a study of nature. It may BE true that intelligence is hereditary. And there are two things about science and nature that make this all the more true: They don’t care about feelings or beliefs. They go on hard facts, evidence and what works. Gravity doesn’t care how you feel about being pulled to the ground. And nature doesn’t care if it is sexist, racist or anything else that makes you question your beliefs. Those are just words we made up as humans to express things we do based on things that we do. Nature doesn’t follow our rules, we follow it’s rules. And if you don’t like that it may be telling you that you are wrong, you are going to have to deal with that. Silencing the person telling it won’t make it any less true.
136 • Reply•Share ›
Avatar
stalva Nephanor of Fraal • a day ago
Research, numbers, disagreement from peers. You are asking way too much from a gender studies major.
116 • Reply•Share ›
Avatar
Flounder stalva • 18 hours ago
A what? You mean like those sex studies Dr Masters did years ago? I have no idea what a degree in gender and sexuality concentrator is that this young female scholar possesses. Gender applies to language
• Reply•Share ›
Avatar
Peter .B.P. Flounder • 11 hours ago
Master’s sex studies had substance and relevance. WGS generally do not.
5 • Reply•Share ›
Avatar
pbar Peter .B.P. • 35 minutes ago
Sounds too much like work.
• Reply•Share ›
Avatar
William miller Nephanor of Fraal • 2 hours ago
Bravo! Well played
• Reply•Share ›
Avatar
Guest • 2 days ago
A university is precisely the place where one should be confronted with viewpoints different than their own. Rather than drowning out other views why not come back with your own factual refutations? The lack of honest intellectual inquiry and critical analysis in this nations top universities is disappointingly apparent.
“Cannot truth defend itself in its confrontation with error?”
128 • Reply•Share ›
Avatar
guest • 3 days ago
I guess the crimson isn’t interested in any criticism of this article, since they’re actively deleting comments posted here.
121 • Reply•Share ›
Avatar
therewolf guest • 2 days ago
They’re just trying to build a just comment section.
191 • Reply•Share ›
Avatar
IBankerInterestedInMurders&Exe therewolf • 2 days ago
Wellplayed.jpg
21 • Reply•Share ›
Avatar
JohnEngelman guest • 9 hours ago
They deleted my quote from Charles Murray.
6 • Reply•Share ›
Avatar
ugh • 2 days ago
Jesus Christ. Is everything that comes out of the WGS department full of s***, then? Not just the papers and lingo, but the students, too?
100 • Reply•Share ›
Avatar
Gary Pageau • a day ago
Was this cross-posted on “The Onion?”
100 • Reply•Share ›
Avatar
Robert King • a day ago
I think that what you are saying is dangerous and oppressive and therefore must be banned.
87 • Reply•Share ›
Avatar
s_c_f Robert King • 11 hours ago
Thanks to academic justice, I can declare that you are in the right. It is just that the author is banned.
10 • Reply•Share ›
Avatar
Robert King s_c_f • 9 hours ago
Well, I don’t agree with your banning. I think your banning should be banned
10 • Reply•Share ›
Avatar
s_c_f Robert King • 4 hours ago
We shall ban your banning of my banning of the Israeli banning.
Take that!
• Reply•Share ›
Avatar
pbar s_c_f • 2 hours ago
Your disagreement with each other constitutes hate speech. You are both banned…and you are fired, also.
2 • Reply•Share ›
Avatar
Eliot2014 • 2 days ago
“If our university community opposes evolutionism, why should we put up with research that counters creationism simply in the name of “academic freedom?”
- Bob Jones University (not a real quote)
87 • Reply•Share ›
Avatar
Darkshaddo Eliot2014 • 21 hours ago
Weak analogy. Creationism isn’t inherently racist or bigoted.
1 3 • Reply•Share ›
Avatar
Chris Andrew Darkshaddo • 20 hours ago
Racism and bigotry are the only inherently wrong beliefs?
27 • Reply•Share ›
Avatar
Roger U Darkshaddo • 6 hours ago
Whether something is racist or bigoted is up to the offended to decide from what I can tell.
3 • Reply•Share ›
Avatar
bear grylls • 2 days ago
You know this article kind of goes against progress.It is in fact anti-progressive.To suppress scientific inquiry is what religion is always accused of.Look what they did to James Watson.
83 • Reply•Share ›
Avatar
Cimon Alexander bear grylls • a day ago
Or Helmuth Nyborg
15 • Reply•Share ›
Avatar
Ciaran bear grylls • 8 hours ago
The author’s brand of feminism is intrisically anti-scientific, anti-rational, and anti-intellectual. I appreciate the author’s candor in stating it so clearly:
“why should we put up with research that counters our goals simply in the name of “academic freedom”?”
STEM Fanatic • a day ago
This is all I needed to see to discredit the entire article:
” is a joint history of science and studies of women, gender and sexuality concentrator in Eliot House “
This useless gibberish should not be taught in universities.
75 • Reply•Share ›
Avatar
Darkshaddo STEM Fanatic • 21 hours ago
So you’re opposed to academic freedom?
3 • Reply•Share ›
Avatar
Peter .B.P. Darkshaddo • 11 hours ago
>So you’re opposed to academic freedom?
Handwaving and pretentious blabbering without substance or root in genuine enquiry has no more place in academia than Cretinism has (unless of course it falls under the /study/ of intellectual dysfunction and the existence of degenerate social structures (in this case inside academia itself), in which case there is plenty of opportunities to ‘deconstruct’ both WGS/feminism and much of the sociological output of the French Academy over the past 60 years).
12 • Reply•Share ›
Avatar
goat10000 • a day ago
The Soviet Union tried this. It doesn’t end well.
73 • Reply•Share ›
Avatar
Antonio Lorusso goat10000 • a day ago
Speaking of which, there are Soviet apologists in US academia who I’m sure will never ever have to concern themselves about being troubled by these advocates of “academic justice”.
30 1 • Reply•Share ›
Avatar
CedeEgoWithin Antonio Lorusso • a day ago
Ironically, only now that Russia is back under Christian leadership does the Anglophone intelligentsia (controlled disproportionately by people like Ms. Korn) feel comfortable using strong moral language against it.
25 • Reply•Share ›
Avatar
microaggressor CedeEgoWithin • a day ago
Sheesh, the antisemitism around here is like six billion holocausts all over again.
7 1 • Reply•Share ›
Avatar
Jacob Shekelberg microaggressor • 4 hours ago
More like six trillion
2 • Reply•Share ›
Avatar
Lex Corvus • a day ago
There’s something grimly admirable about an article that manages to be its own parody.
64 • Reply•Share ›
Avatar
Zara Lia Lex Corvus • 21 hours ago
Easily the best comment in this thread.
5 • Reply•Share ›
Avatar
William miller Zara Lia • an hour ago
Amen
• Reply•Share ›
Avatar
Guest • 2 days ago
Ah, if only the Thought Police existed. How much more comfortable and just the world would be!
61 • Reply•Share ›
Avatar
Yup Guest • a day ago
They’d be Harvard-educated; that’s for sure.
22 • Reply•Share ›
Avatar
paddybrown • a day ago
Translation: “Why should I have to put up with people who don’t agree with me when I already know I’m right?” Political narcissism.
60 • Reply•Share ›
Avatar
Poorly thought out • 2 days ago
“Academic freedom obscures what should be a political argument…” But calling it an argument presupposes academic freedom. Same with “academic justice.” That presupposes a free debate on what constitutes that justice.
58 • Reply•Share ›
Avatar
Ciaran Poorly thought out • 8 hours ago
The left exploits liberties in order to destroy them.
8 • Reply•Share ›
Avatar
Superman • a day ago
Sandra Korn’s profile says she is from Basking Ridge, NJ. Wikipedia tells us that only 1.4% of Basking Ridge’s residents are black. Keep this in mind while Sandra Korn lectures us about our racism.
83 1 • Reply•Share ›
Avatar
Carney3 Superman • a day ago
It has always been so. Totally white Sweden’s Gunnar Myrdal wrote “The American Dilemma” ascribing disproportionate black underperformance and misbehavior to white racism – if we eliminated that we’d get totally equal outcomes. Then heavily white Minnesota produced Hubert Humphrey. The border states (with significant black populations) were not so enthusiastic about government forced racial egalitarianism but distanced themselves from the tougher line of Dixie (which had heavy black populations including local majorities). South Africa, with at first a roughly one-third white minority declining to one-eighth, took a tougher line still, but acted embarrassed by Rhodesians who were only 1% of their country’s population.
Each group of whites tried to tell whites from whiter areas that the latter did not know blacks as well, did not have as lengthy, widespread, representative, and intimate association with blacks that would dispel egalitarian myths. Tried but were not listened to.
27 • Reply•Share ›
Avatar
Roger U Carney3 • 6 hours ago
The most racist places are the places with the most races.
Coincidence?
1 • Reply•Share ›
Avatar
Levin • a day ago
“Sandra Y.L. Korn ’14, a Crimson editorial writer, is a joint
history of science and studies of women, gender and sexuality
concentrator in Eliot House.”
i.e. 2016, “Would you like fries with that order?”
52 • Reply•Share ›
Avatar
otisrneedleman Levin • 2 hours ago
If that much. She’ll be grateful to get a job cleaning toilets.
2 • Reply•Share ›
Avatar
William miller Levin • 2 hours ago
No, “Would you like fries with that you sexist, racist, homophobe?”
1 • Reply•Share ›
Avatar
Alasdair MacIntyre • 2 days ago
Whose Justice? Which Rationality?
52 • Reply•Share ›
Avatar
Ciaran Alasdair MacIntyre • 8 hours ago
Hers, you fool!
5 • Reply•Share ›
Avatar
Christopher David Williams • a day ago
“[W]hy should we put up with research that counters our goals?” – Sandra Y.L. Korn
Don’t let those nasty facts get in the way of your tumblr activism.
44 • Reply•Share ›
Avatar
zjohn Christopher David Williams • a day ago
Somewhere in a galaxy far far away, Yoda is frowning in despair on our little Darth Korn in-training here. She doesn’t see the little tyrant festering in her soul.
15 • Reply•Share ›
Avatar
DaveDodo007 • a day ago
Does Korn realize that 1984 was a warning and not a manual?
41 • Reply•Share ›
Avatar
Reverend Bacon DaveDodo007 • a day ago
Reminds me of the old Twilight Zone episode, “To Serve Man.” These aliens land on earth, and they have this book called “To Serve Man.” In time, they promise, all its secrets will be revealed. But at the end, we find out: it’s a cookbook.
5 • Reply•Share ›
Avatar
zjohn DaveDodo007 • a day ago
+10000
3 • Reply•Share ›
Avatar
CedeEgoWithin • 2 days ago
Calm down guys. This is a very clever troll piece that exploits the inflamed feelings over the Race/IQ question to make a satirical point about the proposed academic boycott of Israel. The author and I don’t agree about anything, probably, but I give her credit for ingenuity here.
If only the palestinians could match this level of sophistication in dealing with the media.
41 • Reply•Share ›
Avatar
IBankerInterestedInMurders&Exe CedeEgoWithin • 2 days ago
Has anyone actually read Herrnstein & Murray’s Bell Curve? I did. Found it to be very good.
45 • Reply•Share ›
Avatar
CedeEgoWithin IBankerInterestedInMurders&Exe • 2 days ago
The book was OK. None of the controversial stuff was original research. Google “human biodiversity” and you’ll see how far we’ve come in our understanding of the differences between human “populations,” as they’re now euphemistically called by those who want grant money.
There’s even a new term—”liberal creationism” The notion that evolution is real, and that different selective pressures have thus resulted in different allele frequencies amongst human population groups that exhibit themselves in all sorts of ways,(different bone structures, susceptibility to particular diseases, skin tone, organ tissue, etc.) but that the evolutionary process, in deference to what would later become the sacrosanct principles of racial egalitarianism, miraculously left the brain (just another organ) untouched.
Liberal creationism says natural selection didn’t operate anywhere higher than the neckline.
And this, of course, enables the powers that be (most of whom who look curiously similar to the author of this article) to continue to blame white people for social ills that have lamentable but otherwise rather innocent explanations.
64 • Reply•Share ›
Avatar
Brian CedeEgoWithin • 10 hours ago
Liberal creationism says natural selection didn’t operate anywhere higher than the neckline.
===
They will admit that brain evolution occurred in humans, since we’re smarter than pre-homo sapiens ancestors…their purported miracle is that brain evolution _ceased 70,000 years ago_ at the time of the African diaspora. Because social justice.
8 1 • Reply•Share ›
Avatar
Empty Rosenberg CedeEgoWithin • 2 days ago
It’s better suited for the Onion, of course, but she gave herself away when she suggested that the ADL be put on the Harvard research review board.
24 • Reply•Share ›
Avatar
blofeld42 • a day ago
Does the author know there are books in the Harvard libraries that are not helpful in battling racism, sexism, and heterosexism, and that sometimes even offer support for these ideas? If the Harvard community opposes these things, why should it put up with books in the library that further oppression? Perhaps a bonfire on the square is in order, in which these volumes are committed to the flames.
The era of extreme STEM intellectualism is now at an end. The breakthrough of the diversity revolution has again cleared the way on the path…The future diverse man (or woman, or LBGT) will not just be a man of books, but a man of character. It is to this end that we want to educate you. As a young person, to already have the courage to face the pitiless glare, to overcome knowledge, and to regain respect for ignorance – this is the task of this young generation. And thus you do well in this midnight hour to commit to the flames the evil spirit of the past. This is a strong, great and symbolic deed – a deed which should document the following for the world to know – Here the intellectual foundation of the diversity revolution is sinking to the ground, but from this wreckage the phoenix of a new spirit will triumphantly rise.
OK, I lifted that last paragraph from a Joe Goebbels speech on the eve of the great book burning, with a light rewrite.
39 • Reply•Share ›
Avatar
Fraga123 • a day ago
I hope your dad reads this tripe and stops paying your tuition.
57 1 • Reply•Share ›
Avatar
zjohn Fraga123 • a day ago
Best post of the thread!!!!
11 • Reply•Share ›
Avatar
gerardharbison • a day ago
Ms. Korn should be driven from the campus! That would be ‘justice’, albeit of the poetic variety.
37 • Reply•Share ›
Avatar
Ciaran gerardharbison • 8 hours ago
Exactly! To paraphrase the author, “why should we put up with research opinion columns that counters our goals simply in the name of “academic freedom”? No challenge to academic freedom should go uncensured!
4 • Reply•Share ›
Avatar
Arafat • 2 days ago
While I find it highly questionable that “not a single Israeli academic
institution has petitioned their government to protect the Palestinian right to
education,” perhaps that is because they are too busy giving those
students an education (including building the very Palestinian universities
that didn’t exist until the start of the dreaded “Occupation”).
And the accusation that Palestinians students are “forced to remain
silent or face persecution” would be news indeed to that Tel Aviv
University graduate student Omar Barhouti who has not only benefited from being enrolled in a world class Israeli university (a subject he would rather not
discuss or have discussed) but is also free to travel the globe as leader of
the BDS “movement” calling for the very school he attends to be
shunned.
This is type of hypocrisy (one which applies to the author of this piece
much more than those she criticizes) that is not just personal but
institutional within a BDS “movement” which devotes limitless time
and energy into demonizing Israelis (including Israeli academics) but cannot
seem to find a moment to help those Palestinians they claim to care for so
much.
While flotillas may float to Gaza to provide non-existent humanitarian aid
to the segment of Palestinian population most likely to pull a trigger or
launch a rocket, has this writer (or any of her BDS allies) sent so much as a
single textbook over to the West Bank to support student learning there (or
recommended the study of math, science or divinity vs. hatred of the Israeli
“other”)?
The fact that Ms. Korn expresses expresses her views with sincerity does
not make the fact that BDS is the propaganda arm of a war movement (rather than the inheritor to Gandhi and King) any less true. For as her studies would
attest, most of history’s greatest evils were perpetrated by those who
sincerely believed in their own outstanding virtue and the unquestionable
justice of the cause they fought (and killed) for.
see more
34 • Reply•Share ›
Avatar
This comment is awaiting moderation. Show comment.
This comment is awaiting moderation.
Avatar
Arafat Ariel Sharon • 2 days ago
Oy! Here comes the Pallywood fantasists again.
If Israel wanted to cause maximum damage believe me they would, but Jewish values get in the way of them behaving as Muslims do in places like Sudan, Somalia, Pakistan, Syria, Iraq, Saudi Arabia, Mali, Mauritania and elsewhere.
38 2 • Reply•Share ›
Avatar
This comment was deleted.
Avatar
This comment is awaiting moderation. Show comment.
This comment is awaiting moderation.
Avatar
This comment was deleted.
Avatar
Arafat Ariel Sharon • 2 days ago
In Europe of the 1930’s the graffiti on the walls and the
cry of the anti-Semites was “Jews – Go to Palestine!” Last week the walls were filled with graffiti that read “Jews, Get out of Palestine!” The Europeans have demonstrated once again not only how short their memories are but how endemic anti-Semitism is in their culture.
19 5 • Reply•Share ›
Avatar
CedeEgoWithin Arafat • 2 days ago
Arafat,
I must say I do admire your enthusiasm and dedication. I’ve seen you on a number of comments threads and you’ve become something of an institution. If you’re an Israeli citizen, your tireless loyalty should be taken as an example for patriots everywhere; if you’re an American citizen, you might ask yourself honestly whether you have exhibited half the dedication to advancing American interests as you have in promoting (very ably) Zionism.
Allow me to suggest that much of the anti-Israel feeling in Europe has less to do with any interest in the fate of Palestinians per se, but rather with an understandable indignation at the fact that the Jewish diaspora has consistently supported a double standard according to which “Israel is for the Jews, but European countries are for everyone!”
Perhaps if Israelis and particularly the Jewish diaspora would be more friendly to the notion of European nations’ right to self-determination, the Europeans would reciprocate in kind. Otherwise, you’re just fighting each other with double-standards and nobody wins.
Just a thought.
15 6 • Reply•Share ›
Avatar
Arafat CedeEgoWithin • 2 days ago
CedeEgoWithin,
Thank you for your kind words.
You could be correct about Europe but I happen to believe Europe’s very long history of anti-Semitism speaks for itself.
Meanwhile – and most certainly without Jewish support – Europe is opening up the gates to Muslim immigration suggesting your theory really is incorrect.
In any case thank you very much for your comment.
14 1 • Reply•Share ›
−
Avatar
Vilfredo Pareto Arafat • a day ago
Europe also have a very long story of jews involved in anti-Germanism.
“I think there’s a resurgence of antisemitism because at this point in time Europe has not yet learned how to be multicultural, and I think we’re gonne be part of the throes of that transformation, which must take place. Europe has not yet learned how to be multicultural. Europe is not going to be the monolithic societies that they once were in the last century. Jews are going to be at the center of that. It’s a huge transformation for Europe to make. They are now going into a multicultural mode, and Jews will be resented because of our leading role. But without that leading role, and without that transformation, Europe will not survive.”
-Barbara Lerner Spectre-
—-
This is straight from the horses mouth. If you dont know who Barbara is i can tell you she is a US-born Jewess who is most noted for waging a racial campaign against Swedish people in particular and European people in general through the promotion of Cultural Marxism and demographic genocide. She is a hardline Zionist and supports Jewish-racial chauvinism in occupied-Palestine, and is head of Paideia – The European Institute for Jewish Studies in Sweden, an hate-organisation involved in promoting Jewish ideology and supremascism. Through an organisation called One Sweden, which she heads, she promotes multiculturalism (cultural Marxism) against Europeans in our own homeland.
see more
18 1 • Reply•Share ›
Avatar
Ron Coleman CedeEgoWithin • 13 hours ago
What’s a recent example of the “Jewish diaspora” proclaiming “Israel is for the Jews, but European countries are for everyone!”
I must have missed that meeting.
Ron Coleman CedeEgoWithin • 13 hours ago
What’s a recent example of the “Jewish diaspora” proclaiming “Israel is for the Jews, but European countries are for everyone!”
I must have missed that meeting.
2 2 • Reply•Share ›
Avatar
Brian Ron Coleman • 10 hours ago
Perhaps you’ve heard of an obscure gentleman named Mark Zuckerberg, and his stance on immigration?
6 1 • Reply•Share ›
Avatar
Ron Coleman Brian • 6 hours ago
I recall he expressed a view about immigration reform in the US. But no, where did he say anything about European immigration, or anything like “Israel is for the Jews”?
2 2 • Reply•Share ›
Avatar
Reverend Bacon • a day ago
The author is too young to remember the ban on stem cell research, which came from some other political faction’s belief in their idea of “justice.” I opposed such a ban, but at least their arguments were based on the idea that the research methods were unethical, and not on wanting to preserve ignorance so that no one gets their feelings hurt. The compromise they reached- getting stem cells without using aborted fetuses- allowed scientific progress to be made. They weren’t against the scientific progress per se. And nor is PETA or most other antivivisectionist groups.
Also, her superficial concept of the word “oppression” needs some help. Clearly, she opposes genetic research, which to date has found dramatic differences among races. Yes, they have found certain alleles which correlate strongly with intelligence; for this, such research is to be banished from her world, as was any statistical analysis, unbiased as it was, done by Professor Herrnstein and his colleagues. But, doctors (real doctors, not PhD’s) have found other yields from this research to be invaluable for treating people of different races. Treatments that are indicated for one group may not be indicated for another. One could argue that suppressing that research would actually cause more oppression than would allowing it.
There are far more problems in her essay than these. I’m not sure it’s worth enumerating them. If 4 years of Harvard didn’t teach her anything about the history of other sophists who thought the way she did, I can’t do it in a simple online posting.
31 • Reply•Share ›
Avatar
DavidBernstein • a day ago
I think your article promotes unjust ideas, namely suppression of unpopular speech, so I think in the name of academic justice, the Crimson should be prohibited from publishing your column.
29 • Reply•Share ›
Avatar
PlumberofNazareth DavidBernstein • a day ago
DESTROY DISSENT
8 • Reply•Share ›
Avatar
zjohn DavidBernstein • a day ago
Bravo!!
5 • Reply•Share ›
Avatar
Grad Student • a day ago
Essence of Sandra Korn’s “argument” = Burn the Witches
28 • Reply•Share ›
Avatar
Peter .B.P. Grad Student • 11 hours ago
Nah, Witch-burning is inherently patriachal.
3 • Reply•Share ›
Avatar
Practicing Laywer • a day ago
First they came for the researchers, but I did not speak up, for I was not a researcher.
25 • Reply•Share ›
Avatar
Brigadon Practicing Laywer • a day ago
Well misquoted 
1 • Reply•Share ›
Avatar
MattBracken • 11 hours ago
Spoken like a true-believing little commissar. When she graduates, she can get a job at the FCC censoring the news as one of Obama’s new “media researchers.”
24 • Reply•Share ›
Avatar
Mike Davis MattBracken • 10 hours ago
Matt,
Academic freedom is only important when they agree with what is being said. Otherwise information should be disrupted in every way possible to silence those that one might disagree with.
3 • Reply•Share ›
Avatar
pbar MattBracken • 5 hours ago
Your attitude has been NOTED, comrade. It has been NOTED.
2 • Reply•Share ›
Avatar
woz • a day ago
Combine this sick thinking with the newly-promoted concept of “micro-agression” and you have totalitarian power that the Gestapo and its vast army of snitches could only dream about.
24 • Reply•Share ›
Avatar
Denver Goddess woz • a day ago
Those who have micro-spines whine about micro-aggression. Three words for them any freshman psychology student would know: Hostile attributional bias.
11 • Reply•Share ›
Avatar
Albertine Disparue • a day ago
“Let’s give up on academic freedom in favor of justice.”
But first let’s follow Sandra’s example and give up our brains.
23 • Reply•Share ›
Avatar
Yale Cohn • a day ago
2014, when feelings officially trumped objective facts.
23 • Reply•Share ›
Avatar
Carney3 • a day ago
I would note the crucial question “but is it true?” does not come up (this from an institution whose motto is “Veritas”). Not even considered. The papers’ conclusions on genetic racial differences in average IQ (by the way, white average is 100, black average is 85) are referred to as if they are self-evidently outrageous and to be rejected. Such behavior was once taught as the logical fallacy of begging the question. But I guess logic is another white male construct.
Tell me again in a smug dismissive way about the Right’s “War on Science” please.
23 • Reply•Share ›
Avatar
CedeEgoWithin • a day ago
Dear Sandra Y.L. Korn,
Allow me to suggest a rather simple way to distinguish academic justice from unacceptable expressions of academic freedom—- a litmus test of sorts, namely, does the author’s position conform to the Basic Axiom of Justice:
“Africa for the Africans, Asia for the Asians, White Countries for Everybody!!”
23 • Reply•Share ›
Avatar
Josh Hankins • a day ago
This is what passes as actual journalism at Harvard? This person is ONLY saying, ” if we don’t agree with you, you shut up.” That is insanity. That is not anything near what academics are suppose to be. There is a reason for tenure for professors. As a conservative, I am sure(and I’ve heard plenty) there are way more outrageous things I hear from professors than a liberal does. I take it in stride. Liberals,on the other hand, cannot stand one dissenting voice, hence their obsession with Fox News.
21 • Reply•Share ›
Avatar
Ciaran Josh Hankins • 7 hours ago
Actually she says a lot more. Her message is “If we don’t agree with you, you are unjust and have no right to speak, and all your ideas can be summarily rejected.”
4 • Reply•Share ›
Avatar
Zeev W • a day ago
Makes a perfect sense! But first let’s change Harvard’s motto from Veritas to Iustitia so everyone is clear Harvard is not about truth anymore. You wouldn’t want to mislead anyone, would you, Ms. Korn?
21 • Reply•Share ›
Avatar
Cimon Alexander • a day ago
You laugh now, but in 30 years all progressives will think this way. That’s the way their “progress” works.
We can only hope that their authority crumbles as they grow more ridiculous
21 • Reply•Share ›
Avatar
Contemplationist • a day ago
So Sandra Korn has admitted from the den of leftist scum and villainy i.e. The Crimson, that the leftist conception of ‘justice’ is explicitly against freedom, especially the free exchange of ideas. Thanks for confirming the conclusions of us right-wing extremists.
21 • Reply•Share ›
Avatar
Solar • 2 days ago
>considers herself a liberal
>is opposed to academic freedom
Orthodoxy is unconsciousness.
20 • Reply•Share ›
Avatar
Todd DuBois • a day ago
So the idea here is the universities of America should collectively proactively censor all thought considered to be backing ideas that are believed to be wicked, which the author apparently believes will work out just fine since it is impossible for the judges of what is incorrect and wicked to ever be wrong. All academia need do is declare tautologies on the questions of the day, and its work is done. How convenient this would be!
It is difficult to decide whether this article is defined more by arrogance or childishness. This is shallow to the point of being completely and utterly disgraceful.
19 • Reply•Share ›
Avatar
brett • 18 hours ago
remember folks, its conservatives that are close-minded. heaven forbid these loonies hear an opinion they dont argree with
18 • Reply•Share ›
Avatar
Zara Lia • 20 hours ago
There’s a shocking amount of micro-aggression in this article. I’m feeling very macro-assaulted.
18 • Reply•Share ›
Avatar
Max Zara Lia • 12 hours ago
That really is a phrase which needs to be turned back on them at every opportunity. We ALL want equal opportunity, don’t we?
2 • Reply•Share ›
Avatar
MichaelStamper • a day ago
Obliterating intellectual freedom in the name of “justice”? Ayn Rand couldn’t have created a more loathsome stereotype. As time passes, the villains of Atlas Shrugged grow tame and civilized when compared to their present-day descendants.
18 • Reply•Share ›
Avatar
Pete McCutchen • a day ago
According to Miss Korn, “When an academic community observes research promoting or justifying oppression, it should ensure that this research does not continue.” Applying her own standard, every professor who is an avowed Marxist or who uses a Marxist-influenced theoretical framework should be terminated immediately.
18 • Reply•Share ›
Avatar
Darren Westbrook • a day ago
Things would be so much simpler today if this policy had been enforced against Professor Galileo and Adjunct Professor Darwin.
17 • Reply•Share ›
Avatar
James Caruthers • a day ago
I bet there are a lot of books that justify or support oppression. We should burn them! Why should “freedom” prevent us from enforcing justice?
No one is ever “free” from the political responsibilities of publishing a book that goes against the party line! Burn the books now! Do it for social justice!
17 • Reply•Share ›
Avatar
Melissa • a day ago
Sorry, Sandra.
http://www.humanbiologicaldive…
But human biodiversity is very real.
Why do you want to censor the truth?
Why do you so despise the truth?
17 • Reply•Share ›
Avatar
Brigadon • a day ago
This is, without a doubt, one of the worst-researched, illegitimate, and poorly thought out ideas to come out of rapidly-becoming irrelevant ‘education community’ since ‘women’s studies’ became mandatory.
Are you truly trying to send academic credibility ever more rapidly to it’s grave? or are you simply unable to see that truth morally and ethically outweighs ‘comfort’ in every possible way?
Seriously, you should probably go back to trying to discredit Darwin and encourage bookburning. This sort of intellectual bigotry and thought policing violates the very spirit of intelligence.
17 • Reply•Share ›
Avatar
Dictatortot Brigadon • 10 hours ago
The horrible truth is, it’s probably not even close to the bottom of the barrel.
5 • Reply•Share ›
Avatar
NM156 • a day ago
Let’s just bulldoze the liberal arts department of every college and university in the United States instead. That way, we’ll dispense with mental illness posturing as thinking as demonstrated in this opinion piece.
15 • Reply•Share ›
Avatar
Grad Student • a day ago
OMG, I really don’t know what to say. This article is disgusting.
This Orwellian Thought Policing has gone way to far. It’s insane.
I hate to say it, but Sandra Korn should be permanently suspended from Harvard for writing what’s in essence probably the dumbest article ever to appear in the Crimson.
15 • Reply•Share ›
Avatar
nostopplzkthx Grad Student • a day ago
I disagree, she should not be suspended, because this is precisely what academic freedom protects.
She’s wrong, but she should be allowed to say it.
16 • Reply•Share ›
Avatar
zjohn nostopplzkthx • a day ago
In a about 10-15 years when Sandra grows up a little (and wises up A LOT), she’ll look back in shame at her attitude. Guaranteed.
6 • Reply•Share ›
Avatar
Grad Student Grad Student • a day ago
Correct: way too far
2 • Reply•Share ›
Avatar
Wow • 2 days ago
Not sure if trolling or just really stupid…
15 • Reply•Share ›
Avatar
Telemachus_1 • a day ago
After the revolution, all faculty, staff, graduates, and current students of Harvard University will be deported. This article is proof that your institution is sick and an affront to civilization.
None of you possess true power. Your best are autistic and lack humanity. The worst are profound psychopaths. No one will ever follow you to their grave, and they will not raise a finger to save you. They will in fact be relieved that you are removed from these lands.
Choose your side carefully.
14 • Reply•Share ›
Avatar
Freedom • a day ago
Universities were created so that serious people, open-minded adults, could gather and discuss ideas freely without being bothered by small-minded intolerant folks like Sandra Korn.
14 • Reply•Share ›
Avatar
zjohn Freedom • a day ago
+10000
2 • Reply•Share ›
Avatar
Pbar • 5 hours ago
I would like to thank Ms. Korn. She has done something for me that is beyond all praise. I was unable to attend an Ivy League school when young…some combination of too poor and too stupid, I guess…and I have regretted it all my life. But after reading this article, and seeing what I might have become had I gone to Harvard, I feel a great deal better.
13 • Reply•Share ›
Avatar
botti • 19 hours ago
***Let’s give up on academic freedom in favor of justice***
This is the creepiest, most Orwellian statement I’ve read in some time.
13 • Reply•Share ›
−
Avatar
Assistant Village idiot • a day ago
1. Any modifier to “justice” is always a cover for “injustice.”
2. Paragraph 6 is true. However, it is especially true of liberals/progressives, but somehow it is only brought out when they want to attack something that offends them. Does that seem overgeneralised and prejudicial to the reader? Then you should look at your last five written arguments and see: when you think you have a superior argument, you rely solely on that. Only when you cannot win the day do you fall back on the whole “it’s all about power/privilege/money/corporate interests/favorite bogey.” Go ahead, run the experiment.
I dare you.
13 • Reply•Share ›
Avatar
Daniel Schmuhl • a day ago
Apparently the church of PC dogma, Harvard University, isn”t PC enough for this zealot.
13 • Reply•Share ›
Avatar
Alex • a day ago
Ahhh yes, inserting a new codeword like, “justice,” in place of “academic freedom” will make our efforts to stifle dissent all better ….
13 • Reply•Share ›
PlumberofNazareth • a day ago
Well, this is…interesting. Maybe a little insane, but interesting nonetheless. At long last, there’s somebody actually coming out and saying what a sizable portion of academia really believes. The act of “Watsoning” is now openly promoted, supported, and institutionalized.
13 • Reply•Share ›
Avatar
dwpittelli PlumberofNazareth • a day ago
Not many faculty members would agree with this undergraduate columnist.
3 • Reply•Share ›
Avatar
Robert King • 9 hours ago
I think you are all being meanies. Mocking this article with your talk of academic freedoms and the dangers of arrogant totalitarianism. For shame! The author of this article seems like a nice lady and I think we should all do as she says. After all–that’s how the academy should work–by authority and fiat. Let’s face it–we (I mean, the people who matter) already know the answers to all the important stuff, don’t we? Everything else is just window dressing.
12 • Reply•Share ›
Avatar
James • 21 hours ago
I hope I’m not the only one who is genuinely frightened by the ideas expressed in this piece. You really can’t get more Orwellian than “justice” committees censoring research. This is cringeworthy material that I’m glad the Crimson published. The free world must be aware that such intolerance exists.
12 • Reply•Share ›
Avatar
Jeff Postman • a day ago
Not a bad satire, although I thought the “sexuality concentrator” jab against Eliot House was a little sexist.
12 • Reply•Share ›
Avatar
nostopplzkthx • a day ago
Its articles like these why I kinda hope I die before the age of 40 so I don’t suffer having to see a completely thought-free, everything must conform to political correctness world.
12 • Reply•Share ›
Avatar
nostopplzkthx nostopplzkthx • a day ago
Excuse me, “It’s”.
• Reply•Share ›
Avatar
disqus_yeZNegncsV • a day ago
How do you see yourself and your argument as any different from that of the Medieval church? Further, how can anyone predict what knowledge will be that which leads to all things good and light and what knowledge will be that which leads to all things in darkness? Answer: No one can predict such things and even IF they could, they couldn’t tell when light would descend into darkness and when darkness might ascent to light and by gawd, I’ll not cede that to you and someone who thinks so shallowly as you.
12 • Reply•Share ›
Avatar
Reverend Bacon disqus_yeZNegncsV • a day ago
They didn’t study History, at least not the kind of history written and created by Dead White Men. But such history is full of similar thinkers:
- The study of anatomy was forbidden for much the same reasons she gives: “why should we put up with research that is counter to our goals?”
- Heretics like Copernicus and Galileo believed that the sun, not the earth, was the center of our solar system. They did some research to prove this; such research was “counter to” the goals of the church.
In the old days, it was the Catholic Church. Now, it’s the Church of Political Correctness. Too bad that, in choosing to study a field with a paucity of critical thinkers, that she missed history’s most important lesson: those who forget it are condemned to repeat it.
11 • Reply•Share ›
Avatar
zjohn disqus_yeZNegncsV • a day ago
Because she’s a kid:
High on passion, naivete’ and stupidity and seriously lacking in wisdom and maturity.
3 • Reply•Share ›
Avatar
Dictatortot disqus_yeZNegncsV • 10 hours ago
The most obvious difference: men like Aquinas and Dominic were confident that faith and truth were reconcilable. Some of this confidence might have been misplaced, but they were frank that they sometimes APPEARED to clash, at least. When the facts proved tough to square with their theories & theologies, they–despite modern mythmakers–were far likelier to humbly admit their perplexity than to anathematize the unwelcome fact.
In other words: calling Ms. Korn as obscurantist as the mediaeval church is an insult to the latter.
2 • Reply•Share ›
Avatar
Justice • a day ago
Great. Until your views conflict with the notion of justice somebody else holds and then you are expelled from campus. Since justice is inherently an arbitrary concept, its employment as a parameter to define academic legitimacy can only bring about oppression.
12 • Reply•Share ›
Avatar
Aaron Clarey • 6 hours ago
So this is the “best and brightest” huh? Harvard, huh?
Frankly my dear, none of you have talent. Just connections. And your ignorance of basic freedoms belies it.
11 • Reply•Share ›
Avatar
Neo • 12 hours ago
After the publication of “The Bell Curve,” Charles Murray said in an interview that if there ever was incontrovertible proof that there were differences in the races or sexes, it would never see the light of day because the vested interests in proving otherwise would make sure it was suppressed.
Congratulations. You have joined an anti-science conspiracy.
11 • Reply•Share ›
Avatar
ThirteenthLetter • a day ago
Shameful. You can’t resist the urge to control and monitor others’ thoughts and expression. People like you are everything that’s wrong with intellectual life in America today. You need to immediately leave the university, find some distant retreat, and ponder where your life went so wrong that you would write an article that wouldn’t seem out of place in Brezhnev-era Pravda.
11 • Reply•Share ›
Avatar
James • a day ago
The illiberal elements of modern liberalism. On full display here.
11 • Reply•Share ›
Avatar
zjohn James • a day ago
exactly. Future authoritarians in progress, They all seem to start from what they see is a noble cause. Sigh.
6 • Reply•Share ›
Avatar
This comment was deleted.
Avatar
CedeEgoWithin brando55 • a day ago
How could you not trust that face?
• Reply•Share ›
Avatar
Ginger • a day ago
Yeah, because justice is so much easier to figure out than truth.
11 • Reply•Share ›
Avatar
Clarence Whorley • a day ago
Seems Sandra Korn wants to be the next Sandra Fluke
I bet she loves when the Pro-Palestinians protest in Central Square but if there were Pro-Israeli’s there she would want them removed for hate speach
11 • Reply•Share ›
Avatar
katewerk • a day ago
Burn her. That is all. – by order of Committee Of Academic Justice.
11 • Reply•Share ›
Avatar
bear grylls • 2 days ago
Used to be an old argument about building the first airplane.It was immoral as in “if God had wanted men to fly he would have given us wings.” So I guess if god had made us all equal we would not need affirmative action and enforced diversity.Is it possible that people who evolved in the cold northern climates of europe and north east asia could have evolved the same as people who evolved in sunny hot africa.
11 • Reply•Share ›
Avatar
greeneyedjinn • 8 hours ago
Well, judging from the overwhelming negative response to this editorial, I would say Ms. Korn has “offended” many readers. Perhaps she might be troubled if The Crimson told her the article would be retracted for its “offensiveness,” and never mind any silly things like her Freedom of Speech…
10 • Reply•Share ›
Avatar
Tom Smith • 9 hours ago
Would not bang. Seriously.
10 • Reply•Share ›
Avatar
Tuesday Is Soylent Green Day • 19 hours ago
Justice, Stalin style.
10 • Reply•Share ›
Avatar
botti Tuesday Is Soylent Green Day • 19 hours ago
Exactly – it reminds me of Lysenkiosm – purging geneticists whose work conflicted with the “new genetics”.
6 • Reply•Share ›
Avatar
Denver Goddess • a day ago
That’s it, gullible illiterates. Toss freedom because you don’t like the results of some scientific studies. Why not just ban anything that contradicts the Catholic Church, shall we? Just how far up your can is your brain? What is WRONG with you people?
You’re so illiterate you actually think a small group of “racists” is behind IQ research that shows inequality among human population groups? What ideological echo chamber have you been living in that gave you this conclusion? This is DECADES of international studies – hundreds of such studies that consistently show unequal IQ distribution among the world’s population.
But hey – we have these “political realities” to supposedly address.
Did you idiots ever stop to think one minute that these things you think are “political realities” may just have something to do with the unequal IQ distribution that you keep trying to censor and beat down as if that’ll make it go away?
You&rsq