Welcome, new readers! If you liked my resignation letter, I have other posts on discrimination at America’s colleges and universities here and here. Next week, I’m going to have more posts on higher education and taxes. They’re incendiary but undeniable.
In addition to writing about class bigotry, I address other forms of discrimination on this blog. Wondering about the upsurge in racism and right-wing paramilitary activity? It’s not just that some people harbor fear of a black president. It’s also because conservatives spent years trying to blame racial minorities for the financial crash. You can read about that here.
As for myself, it’s been a hectic few days: exciting but worrying. As I told a friend the other day, financial ruin is a definite possibility. I never was in charge of a business myself. But I gather that potential employers often frown on it when you write a letter to the boss of your old firm like the one I sent Chancellor Wrighton. I’m single and never made much money. I don’t have any family money (and the very thought of such a thing just made me laugh). In the short term, I’m getting by on what little I have saved and my expected severance pay from Wash. U.
I’m hoping I can raise enough money through donations to concentrate on writing the sort of posts you see linked above. I am working on a book and also a bunch of other posts and articles on social class and the law, religious fundamentalism, racism, bigotry against working-class women, and, yes, higher education.
The institutions that are supposed to bring us honest reporting and commentary are too elitist and corrupt to do so. Direct funding by readers is the only real way forward. Even if you can only give 5 or 10 bucks, I’d be grateful for that. The “Donate” button is at upper right. (If you work at Wash. U. and you donate, I won’t tell on you.)
If you’re on the fence about donating, here’s something to consider. In 2004, The Chronicle of Higher Education took a poll and found that 75% of Americans opposed college-admissions preferences for legacies, children of alumni. In practical terms, legacies are children of rich alumni, most of whom are white. (You can read more about that poll and the issue of legacies in general here.) In other news from 2004, George W. Bush, the poster boy for legacy preferences, stated that he thought such preferences should be abolished.
Why do legacy preferences still exist, when even George W. Bush wouldn’t defend them 11 years ago? Why are they so rarely discussed? Leading liberal publications will occasionally allow an op-ed piece criticizing the policy (like the one by Richard Kahlenberg that I linked above). But liberal media-makers should have declared war on legacy preferences ages ago. Why haven’t they? Maybe we can get a hint of the answer if we look at the backgrounds of leading journalists, as I did in the case of New York Times columnists here.
You won’t find me shying away from the issues that media should be covering but won’t. I like to take the direct approach. Also, I’m not afraid to risk paying a big price for telling the truth. I think I demonstrated that on Wednesday.
Thanks for reading. Please stick around and tell your friends.
PS: I don’t allow comments, for reasons I discuss in my FAQ page, but you can reach me at:
I’m also on Twitter: @ChrisPepus