City Journal Winter 2016

Current Issue:

Winter 2016
Table of Contents
Tablet Editions
Click to visit City Journal California

Readers’ Comments

Heather Mac Donald
Multiculti U. « Back to Story

View Comments (70)

Add New Comment:

To send your message, please enter the words you see in the distorted image below, in order and separated by a space, and click "Submit." If you cannot read the words below, please click here to receive a new challenge.

Comments will appear online. Please do not submit comments containing advertising or obscene language. Comments containing certain content, such as URLs, may not appear online until they have been reviewed by a moderator.

Showing 70 Comment(s) Subscribe by RSS
This university systems is perpetrating fraud on its students. Most of the administrators should prosecuted for this fraud. Ms. Mac Donald is one of the premier writers in our country as City Journal is one of our premier websites.
Hey, does City Journal tell whites in California to go to less diverse Oregon which is doing better recently. A lot of low skilled and medium skilled manufacturing has recently left for Oregon. No, conservatives like MS Heatherr tell whites to go to Texas where you have the same diversity courses in Austin since Texas has just as many different minorities and Dems control the big cities there like Austin, Houston and Dallas. By the way Southern Oregon where lots of folks are retiring is getting these jobs since people finished high school more in Oregon than California or Texas and Southern Oregon is not like Portland.
One of the topics discussed by Ms. MacDonald:

"The university was embarking on the nation’s largest-ever survey of “campus climate,” at a cost of $662,000 (enough to cover four years of tuition for more than a dozen undergraduates)."

This survey appeared to have gone AWOL. It has been closed for more than a year. One of the Office of the President administrators most involved in the survey and the various climate councils quietly resigned or was let go.

The website now states "Reports and findings are pending for each location and will be published here in spring 2014."

Whatever results there might be, this was a colossal waste of money, a theft by administrators of funds that should have been spent on legitimate campus and student needs.
If the UC system truly wanted to make its campuses "welcoming, comfortable and safe" it would jettison its insane diversity policies. Whether you're a member of a chosen minority or not, these contradictory strictures muffle free inquiry and hamper learning by making everyone walk on eggshells. "Welcoming, comfortable and safe" sounds like the desired atmosphere in a nursery school. What's wrong with a young adult feeling apprehensive when faced with a new experience as monumental as attending a university? Doesn't it build character to successfully navigate the shoals of that experience?
Even those of us (retired California university professors)wholly sympathetic to MacDonald's argument cringe at her embarrassing rhetoric.

It's a substantively solid critique riddled with the likes of: "The office [of the President] is the main engine of UC's socialist redistribution mechanism" --and other such instances of puerile polemics. "UC One" deserves better.
Thank you for such a thorough article. I recently had an argument that if UC would hive off all the pointless 'programs' and 'majors' that have developed over the years, it would be in fine financial condition. This article gives detail to that claim where I could only refer to vague categories.

I cannot see a scenario that unwinds this quickly. With the advent of Janet Napalitano it will only grow worse. Until the taxpayers revolt, it will not change but the more articles like this shed light on it, the more likely the grassroots emerge to demand both elimination to stupid and wasteful programs and re-installation of all of the Classics and real history of our country.
All in accord with the grand design. The Cultural Marxists who sprang forth from the Frankfurt School of Social Research back in the 1920s have done their missionary work well. Their end objective - the complete evisceration and destruction of "The Main Adversary" - is nearly accomplished. And the icing on the cake? They even have one of their own in the White House.
I literally had to skim the last few paragraphs of this story because my eyes were crossing...great article, very well researched, it wasn't the writing, it was the content. Just reading about all of this nonsense makes my head hurt, I don't know how anyone makes a living implementing and managing these types of programs, what a colossal waste of time and money. I went to a pretty liberal college (UT Austin), and there was never any of this insanity, these people are crazier than hoot owls.
Heather MacDonald is one of those rare people that really should run for a high political office... unlike no-nothing hacks like Lizzy Warren.

I'd vote for MacDonald in a NY minute heartbeat.
I see that UC is getting a new president. "Big Sis" Napolitano will help kill UC. She will pile on more and more diversity until there will be no more real educational classes. What a school!
Not to worry, the headline today is that "Big Sis" who was so masterful at Homeland Security is the next Chancellor. To use a phrase from the Sixties, this is "one toke over the line."
I was in graduate school at UCLA during the height of the diversity mania. Wrote this blog about it: 'Race', class, and gender.
Worth mentioning in this context is something that in my institution is termed "opportunity hire". The administration accumulates salary "savings" due to normal attrition, and rather than release the money to the department which lost staff, or even a department that is understaffed, instead allocates the positions to *any* dept. that proposes a "diversity hire". The predictable result is a flow of positions from understaffed, in-demand fields such as science, business, and engineering, to overstaffed departments in the "soft sciences" that then need to campaign for more sensitivity-training course requirement on undergraduates to give their staff courses to teach.
The Diversity Industrial Complex is a liberal left disgrace. It treats people as members of groups as opposed to individuals. I'm sick and tired of forms that ask what race or ethnicity that I identify with. Guess what, I identify with the Human Race. What matters to me is what is on the inside of a person, not their skin color or ethnicity. The liberal ideology has repudiated Martin Luther King's ideal of judging people based on the content of their character instead of the color of their skin.
Edward Crenshaw July 04, 2013 at 5:02 AM
"...a profoundly unserious institution dedicated to the all-consuming crusade against phantom racism and sexism that goes by the name of diversity. Ms. MacDonald at her very best, and ain't it the truth!
I worked at UCSB for four years as a staff engineer in its nanofabrication cleanroom until I was threatened, assaulted, mobbed and then terminated after internally exposing regular and knowing violations of Federal hiring laws. They conducted illegal interviews, illegal background checks, illegal performance reviews and they actively discriminated against better-qualified American Citizens to hire foreigners for staff and student intern jobs. I was later smeared by UCSB and caught UCSB sabotaging my imminent hire with Yale.

UCSB is an unaccountable Zionist-controlled mafia organization whose main function is to propagandize mediocrity into grandiosity. 9-11 was a Zionist job and UCSB participated.

Billions of dollars flow through that university and yet very rarely does the university receive any negative press. Like UCSB, I suspect all UC campuses are surrounded by compliant obedient satellite media outlets serving UC Mafia interests.

When I publicly accused UCSB Mafia of crimes and incited a strike demanding 9/11 TRUTH, I was arrested at UCSB insistence on the bogus public charge that I threatened to bomb UCSB. The prosecution's evidence folder showed, however, that I had been arrested for "threatening" to accuse and incite a strike but I "threatened" nothing. I did accuse and I did incite; both legal. I spent ten days in jail as a political dissident even though the cops admitted publicly that I hadn't broken any law and I spent twelve days in a mental hospital before the three shrinks that extensively evaluated me concluded I had no mental illness, no personality disorder and required no meds. Then they dragged the trial date out for nearly a year before finally simply unaccountably dismissing the bogus charge a week before the trial because they knew they would lose and be exposed in court as unaccountable criminal thugs.

I'm currently unemployed and have been for 7.5 years although I had a job delivering bread for bakery for six weeks until they did the Google background check and saw the smearing UCSB disinfo. (plenty about my arrest; nothing about dismissal of charge)

UC is a disgrace and has attempted to kill me. I've thought long and often about doing some very ugly things in response to their unaccountable criminal behavior. I hate them and I hate anyone that supports them. I encourage all UC faculty, staff and students to quit, resign or disenroll.
Michael Greenberg June 23, 2013 at 7:58 AM
Students are merely the conduits for taxpayers dollars (student loans) to tenured faculty.
One of the most ludicrous examples of Phantom Racism Moral Panic Disorder was this spring's orgy of "self-examination" and "teachable moments" at Oberlin following appearance of a few graffiti scrawls and a Bigfoot Klansman. And there is one plus to all this expensive nonsense (that campus was shut down for day, with unintended result that consciousness was raised about pitfalls of hysterical overreaction): It's very, very comical.
Most people, including Ms McDonald, like to beat up on the university administrators because they are the most visible entity responsible for the state of the affairs, or why shouldn't they be?

The reality is very different: most of university processes including compliance to diversity mantra are enforced by nameless/faceless committees consisting of faculty representatives. This is called dual governance system. Under this system, any action of consequence, appointment in the university, promotion within the university, new programs initiated, etc -- all are controlled by one or more councils of the Academic Senate (AS). While AS exists in every university, in the UC system they are powerful and enormously activists, imagine Berzerkeley's loonie visions being enforced by individuals with unlimited power and no accountability. Under this regime, one senate committee can require -- and it does -- that all biographical records for promotion explicitly list individuals contribution to diversity, else kiss goodbye to that promotion; another body can require -- and it does -- that all students be taught diversity-certified courses. Most administrators are wise not to cross paths with AS councils even when they border on absurdity, for it is shortest path to roadblocks even in routine matters.

It is a senate body that produced the report demanding Diversity Advisors, another demanding Diversity Vice Chancellor etc etc: the entire apparatus is built not by UC President or any chancellor or vice chancellor, they merely comply to keep the AS hoodlums satisfied...

May be now you know the rest of the story. Please research your subject well before jumping to conclusions about out of control administration. They deserve flogging as well, but not on this issue.
Also, Asians comprise over 30% of the world's population. How can anyone consider them a minority?
Unfortunately, this is the story of most government bureaucracies. You leave your common sense and sense of decency at the front door.
I recently began reading the online version of The Chronicle, which is essentially the trade journal for academia. I can only say it is an education in itself, providing a window into the strange world of higher education, much of it a mirror image of UC Two and the idiocy that seems to prevail there.

I congratulate the author for a worthy essay that sheds light on this politically correct silliness.
What's wrong with our universities that they are such hotbeds of racial strife and discrimination? If they were not would such an elaborate diversity structure be needed?
One could write a similar article about the California State University System. It may not be as prestigious as UC, but the bureaucrats who run CSU do all they can to keep up with every academic and diversity fad that takes hold in Berkeley.
The situation on the UC campuses sounds a lot like "Animal Farm" in which the pigs got control of the farm's wealth but produced nothing of value on their own.

Mac Donald doesn't say whether her salary figures are total cost or only pay. It should be kept in mind that an employee paid $X dollars actually costs the employer more than $X, and the difference isn't small. It can run as high as an additional $X [for a total of $2X]when you add in benefits, taxes, supervision, and facilities.
Twinkbait, can't you elaborate?
Can I claim victim hood for being left out of the victim groups?
Heather Campbell May 14, 2013 at 6:12 PM
In this opinion piece MacDonald makes a lot of claims. I don't know whether all are true, but I do know that the following one is UNtrue:

"No UC administrator would dare to invoke Schrags list of mostly white, mostly male thinkers as an essential element of a UC education; no UC campus has sought to ensure that its undergraduates get any exposure to even one of Schrags seminal thinkers (with the possible exception of Toni Morrison), much less to Americas founding ideas or history"

Revelle College of UC San Diego still requires and views as an essential education a humanities sequence that introduces all Revelle undergraduate students to a large number of the great thinkers (and sources) listed in the quote referenced. When I attended UCSD's Revelle '78-'82 that was true, and as my nephew attends it today, it is still true.

I hope that MacDonald checked her other facts better than she checked this one, and I note that finding a handful of specific students who support her views provides no statistical evidence in a system that has more than 200,000 students.
The author says, "The university could further save on faculty costs by encouraging students to take introductory courses at a community college..." This is actually what the Clark Kerr 1960 Master Plan clearly stated as it's objective. Someplace along the line the diversity God kicked the Kerr plan to the curb.

The concerns identified in this article is a sign of the states changing demographics, and also of its declining commitment to higher education. Nancy Shulock, director of the Sacramento State University Institute for Higher Education Leadership & Policy, in 2004 said, In 1960 our public colleges and universities served a small and homogeneous portion of the young adult population. Todays public colleges and universities must serve a large and diverse population of students whose demographic characteristics and attendance patterns are profoundly different than in 1960.
"By contrast, at California State Universityalso public but less prestigious than UCthe faculty may teach four lecture courses a semester and are paid about half as much as at UC."

In other ways, CSU has its own problems. In 2008 the system had more administrators than professors.
Once again the push for this diversity starts in Washington, DC. If you want to be shocked then look at the funding agencies. The rest of the country follows suit. Cal Berkeley is the dominant campus in the UC system and sets the precedent for this correctness, followed by UCLA, followed by UC San Diego and then the rest follow. This is true of diversity czars, teaching and promotion requirements related to diversity and the outrageous manipulation of admission standards in clear violation of the state law.

May be you can challenge the state to enforce its laws? But that would not happen since the lawmakers are in it together. So, taking a potshot at UC or its president may make an identifiable and attractive target, this surely is misplaced.

Certainly, the minorities are least interested in being a subject of this institutional insult. Look carefully and you will find that the diversity apparatus has been instituted and run by white females and males, looking to achieve political advantages. In fact, each of these campuses is run by a klatch of half-dozen to dozen powerful individuals with diversity credentials. They control everything from selection of administrators, to academic senate's powerful committee on committees and committee on academic personnel. There is no committee that can function without paying homage to diversity and certainly no dean or administrator selected who will not adhere to the line.

This has been true for a long time, and not just at UC. Look up any of the half dozen dean searches in progress around the nation and look at the questions the candidates are being asked. Interview any of the dozen head-hunters who conduct these searches, they will tell you what is well known in the industry.

Unfortunately, your article scratches only the surface and makes targets of the people who have been unwittingly put there to serve these interests as a face of diversity. Like the African-American VC for diversity at UC San Diego, they are the face of the conspirators you never get to meet or see them in press. They sit in the selection committees, tenure-promotion committees and dictate rules that are simply mind-boggling...

Bottomline: good article, wrong target, impotent rage.
The systematic destruction of American higher education in the pursuit of ideology (and lucrative sinecures) has been going on for decades, so nothing in this article comes as a surprise. Still, reading it has been severely depressing.

California may have led the way in sacrificing education on the altar of "diversity," but the same mindset prevails throughout the country.

Such a perverse, ultimately unproductive arrangement can never "earn its keep" and must be sustained with taxpayer dollars, which in once-wealthy California are fast disappearing. And such a system will never be "fixed": too many politically powerful people like it just the way it is.

California's net worth recently reached negative $127 billion. For 20 years, its productive citizens have been fleeing as almost as many immigrants seeking unskilled manual labor (and social programs) pour in.

The nation's "higher education bubble" is inevitably going to burst as more and more people decide against mortgaging their futures for useless degrees. (Americans owe more on their DoE loans than they owe on their credit cards. Most of those DoE loans will eventually have to be written off.)

California's educational mess is probably the most extreme and its budget the least sustainable. I suspect the bubble will burst there first.
I could barely get halfway this excellent report on the decline of a once great institution. I was sick to my stomach. Unfortunately, I cannot see a remedy anywhere on the horizon.
This is really very simple. The California Legislature is heavily Hispanic. They have told the UC quite openly that if they dont admit Hispanic students in proportion to their share of the state population, funding for the UC will be cut.
Admission based on merit is a thing of the past we now have a racial spoils system.
Actually this new system might be a refreshing change. The US is practically the only nation that ever believed in a meritocracy. Every other nation routinely promotes the interests of ethnic nationals belonging to the majority and kicks the crap out of any minoritys. You can see why that might be if you allow a minority group to rise into a position of political power they will use it to benefit their own group. That is what we are seeing now in Washington DC. In time the majority will become dispossessed in their own land and dependent on the beneficence of people who have come to hate them for a whole range of imagined insults. There IS such a thing as a melting pot but the ability of the melting pot to create a unified whole out of disparate parts is very limited we have been exceeding the capacity of the melting pot for several decades.
Right now the ONLY ethnic group that is NOT given racial preference are White Male US Nationals. I remember about ten years ago being a Graduate Student in the Sciences at one of the UC campuses receiving a mailer from a Non-Governmental-Organization in Washington DC that was seeking to ensure ethnic diversity amongst Graduate Students. Rather than binning the circular I wrote them back pointing out that of the twenty graduate students in my Department only ONE (1) was NOT Asian, and that that one individual (myself), was mixed-race. I urged them to do what they could to ensure greater diversity amongst the graduate student body by urging the administration to strengthen recruitment efforts amongst the ethnic Caucasian community. Unsurprisingly I failed to receive a response.
answer4everything May 13, 2013 at 10:32 AM
As I've often pointed out, diversity is not a goal. it is a reality.

The campus diversity push is a sham. They don't give a rat's patootie about real diversity. All they care about is diversity if skin color, gender and who you boink. But I guarantee that as far as thinking goes, they are about as diverse as a box of toothpicks.
I earned an MA and PhD awarded by the UC system. Since then I have been panhandled often for being a somewhat visible alumnus in my field of work worldwide. At each begging letter I have written back with an updated list of the significant six-figure salaries of administrators on that campus, suggesting that I with my somewhat smaller income was and will remain unwilling to support them with a donation, but that perhaps Dean So-and-So might. I choose the verb, panhandled, rather than solicited, because their entitlement mentality is an offence to logic, fairness and even common courtesy. They have become among the new aristocrats of our era seeking their subsidized rent from the serfdom over which they presume to lord. This serf has slipped his bonds.
I had to stop reading the article. It is so difficult to imagine so many mentally ill people in positions of authority and responsibility on the public payroll.
No culture has survived for long periods of time because it became "diverse".
Andrey Osiatynski May 13, 2013 at 9:29 AM
Heather's article is documenting application of expanded version of Parkinson's law: Bureaucratic dysfunctionalities (including alarming waste of resources and cancerous growth of bizarrely stupid -- ideological superstructure) will continue to expand until it exhausts the societal resources available -- or until it kills the societal host-organism it parasites on.
In the relatively wealthy societies like California/US this process can continue for quite a while. But example of Byzantium shows that it can not go forever.
As usual, Heather MacDonald hits the nail on the head. Political correctness and its handmaiden, multiculturalism, are turning us into a nation of mindless Orwellian donkeys.

This is by design, as disciples of Saul Alinsky and Cloward-Piven strategy well understand: Sow the seeds of discord to lay the foundations for the coming Utopia.

The rest of the university cast are simply useful idiots conniving at their own destruction. Alas, they will take us with them when the edifice ultimately collapses.

You know one thing that is a major barrier to the disadvantaged? High tuitions.

These schools want diversity Czars and apparently those cost about $250,000 per year. So, they have to raise tuition. You know what is going to happen to people from non-privileged backgrounds? They will take on very burdensome debt or they will go to different schools. Either choice is going to limit their future options. How many can afford to go to grad school to compete for academic jobs if they already have $100k debt from their undergrad education? Or, if they had to go to a school without research opportunities or facilities, they won't have the experience they need for certain positions, such as academic faculty jobs.

This is a different sort of "glass ceiling" in that the candidates never even get to apply because they've been diverted to an entirely different pipeline.

It's worth noting that the children of academics often get free educations or major tuition discounts, so professors and administrates are never really going to feel the costs of tuition increases. They are the only class of people totally insulated from the costs of their own greed.

B. Samuel Davis May 13, 2013 at 7:08 AM
There is something Kafkaesque is all of this. Or China during the cutlrual revolution.

I was going to do a lengthy comment on this but it is too depressing, teribly depressing. One would think that those who run universities are smart enough not to do stupid things. Wrong.

And, Ms. MacDonald, let's face it - if the state government was in the hands of Republicans or rather conservatives with some sense of responsibility over how money is spent, these people would probably/perhaps not have the nerve to do what they are doing.

Not that you shouldn't report on this insanity.
And we wonder why so many late 20's white males sit in Mom's basement playing video games.
Cut off all Federal aid to students and universities for one year. Reset all universities. Without gobs of cash floating around, they may cut some of the garbage out.
It isn't just at universities and it this bloat is not exclusive to diversity. Check your local school district and see how much the administrative payroll has expanded in a generation. Just how many deputy assistant vice-superintendents are necessary, and just how many assistant principals at any given school are enough?
Two comments. One, you've demonstrated beautifully that higher education may be moving beyond the "recruitment of the few and the pacification of the many" at the University of California. Two, "diversity" is what a society goes in for when it gives up on equality.
Ahem....UC stands for the University of Cincinnati.
The diversity obsession isn't limited to college campuses. It begins with the college recruiting process.

See Jacques Steinberg's, "The Gatekeepers: Inside the Admissions Process of a Premier College".
Kalifornia Kafir May 12, 2013 at 9:03 AM
Add this to the list of bizarreness. UC asked all of its faculty, staff and students to complete a "Campus Climate Survey" re: observances of discrimination (esp. toward ethnic minorities and LGBT community members) on its campuses.

Yet, in a letter to the CAS regarding their report A Crisis of Competence: The Corrupting Effects of Political Activism in the University of California, Yudof dismissed their evidence as anecdotal (Anecdotes do not provide evidence of a systemic problem.).

Yudof wants to identify a systemic problem of discrimination using a survey based on anecdotes, but CAS can't use anecdotes to identify instances of political activism on UC Campuses?

I now have serious whiplash. This hypocrisy is priceless.
Kalifornia Kafir May 12, 2013 at 9:03 AM
Add this to the list of bizarreness. UC asked all of its faculty, staff and students to complete a "Campus Climate Survey" re: observances of discrimination (esp. toward ethnic minorities and LGBT community members) on its campuses.

Yet, in a letter to the CAS regarding their report A Crisis of Competence: The Corrupting Effects of Political Activism in the University of California, Yudof dismissed their evidence as anecdotal (Anecdotes do not provide evidence of a systemic problem.).

Yudof wants to identify a systemic problem of discrimination using a survey based on anecdotes, but CAS can't use anecdotes to identify instances of political activism on UC Campuses?

I now have serious whiplash. This hypocrisy is priceless.
Reading this makes me so sorry that I am intellectually honest. Life would be so much easier if only I could finesse principle. Or maybe I would sell my soul, but just have not found a robust, well-populated auction for it. Maybe I should move to California?
As a third generation graduate of U. C. I was appalled to learn that USC now has higher test scores among its entering class than UCLA. My daughter chose to attend school in the Midwest where this craziness is not quite so deeply rooted.

I remember prof Alchien stating in class that the university was incredibly inefficient in its use of $, that the undergraduates were subsidizing a wretched bureaucracy that they got no benefit from and it would eventually be replaced by another model. Unless the federal gov't decides to allow liberal arts majors to default on student loans, I don't see how the current system can continue.
I graduated from Revelle college at UCSD in 1977. My son graduated in 2012 from Muir college at UCSD. As an alumni, I was asked to complete a survey on how to make the university better. Questions were leading... perceived status of degree, world changing leadership suggested projects, and some diversity issues of course. I ducked those and wrote in MY concerns. Insufficient room in required classes for majors, and, some of those classes being offered only once a year. This added over a year past 4 years for my son to graduate.With the tuition rates, the cost of an extra year or so is NOT insignificant. Also, the writing proficiency test is given the summer before freshmen enter. If they don't pass, they still enter, but take a pass/fail test offered by a Community College professor, then retake it. I believe that if failed, student is offered a deferment for up to 2 quarters and once the test is passed, then they can begin UC coursework.
My requirements for them to extract alumni dollars from me are:
1. Have a plan so that almost all students will graduate in 4 years.
2. Show how each course will help a graduate land a job.
3. California voters said that students were to enter without regard to race, make that happen. Because, ill prepared students end up taking easier majors and graduate without the skills required for hiring.
I didn't hear back from them. Haven't donated any money either.
great report - other than being a tax-paying American I have no personal interest in what goes on in California. But, I don't think the problem exits only in California. I think it will take much longer for any change to begin.
Among all the outrages the bloated salaries and benefits packages these "diversity czars" command are perhaps the most egregious. One of them sucks up the resources that could employ 2-3 people who actually teach.

Every business has a "carrying capacity" where those that produce revenue can support those that do not. Once the education bubble exceeds its carrying capacity there will be another enormous blowout in American society.

Somehow I can't feel too sorry for the soon to be newly unemployed bureaucrats who used to make $250K a year and will not be able to find a job because they have no real marketable skills.

I suppose there is always politics for those people! :P
It is simplicity itself:

Garbage In. Garbage Out.
Thanks for the great report Heather. Just want to add some anecdotal evidence on how bad it really is, not just at UC, but everywhere.

You write: "UC Two sets the hiring bar low enough to scoop in some female or minority candidates."

Not just a few. White men are simply not hired in many disciplines. A literature PhD student friend of mine at Stanford in the 80 said that NONE of the white men in ANY of the literature departments got a single tenure track job the entire time he was at Stanford. Every single one went to a woman or a minority, despite the men often being the one's who were doing the outstanding work.

This was the beginning of the era of trying to bring so-called balance to academia, which proceeds apace today. The anti-white-male discrimination was TOTAL, in any field where there were enough women and minorities to grab all the career spots.

My friend had to teach at a prep school. Now that women are moving into more fields, I expect that the same thing is happening there. Women and minorities will get EVERY job, so long as the field remains "male dominated" (that is, until there are more women than men). At which point all the young professors will be women and there won't be any men coming up in the schools either, because they have already learned that they won't be hired.

It's a criminal monstrosity, and a huge indictment of our society that we ever allowed it to happen.
The problem you have is Yudoff! he was here in MN ruining it and now has a bigger place to ruin. Get rid of him and all these jackels who dont contribute to society. Diversity my butt!
george t talbot May 10, 2013 at 3:36 AM
This is nothing new. In 1978, I applied for a position at a university that needed someone with a strong background in european and african affairs. I have a BA in Ed, MA, CAWEAS, PhD and doctoral research at the Sorboone and post-doc at Oxford. I received a letter from the dept. secretary advising me that the had decided to hire "Ms So and So, an aspiring MA candidate". Screw them, I went to medical school.
If you think the UC system's bad, you should peer under the covers of the Defense Industry.

From an insider, I can attest, it's much worse and that puts everyone in America at grave danger.
Where do all those graduates with soft degrees find employment? While correlation is not causation, I suggest that someone correlate the increasing number of soft degrees granted with the ballooning size of federal and state bureaucracies, including those in private business enterprises battered by regulations regarding "bias and inclusion."
David W. Nicholas May 09, 2013 at 11:59 AM
One factoid you left out of your section on the diversity czar at UC San Diego: they paid her a bonus to move from Chicago to San Diego, at the end of the summer. For the privilege of missing fall and *especially* winter in Chicago (and getting to spend them in San Diego, no less!) she should be paying *them*!
The "Diversity and Inclusion" folks have adapted the early Marxist construct that the Oppressed often don't realize they are oppressed and urgently need to have their consciousness raised. Hence the mandate to complete one of the ethnic studies or feminist courses. They've developed this theory in very elaborate form. Female students don't even realize when they've been raped! (supposedly). The oft-repeated claim that 1 in 4 coeds will be raped before they graduate would seem to be refuted by the extreme scarcity of campus rapes reported to campus security and/or local law enforcement. But the number comes from a survey with very nuanced wording that enabled the researchers to score a response as a "rape" even though the responder declined to term it that way. And of course racism is supposedly rampant on college campuses, even if persons of color like the ones you interviewed aren't aware of it. Obviously those fools need to wake up and realize how terribly they've been treated! Even the oppressors often don't realize how sexist and racist they are (that goes beyond early Marxist theory, I believe); these unconsciously biased people must have their perfidy pointed out to them. Meanwhile, as you said, the Berkeley I struggles on to teach Philosophy, Physics, Music, and so forth, though more than just a little beleaguered by Berkeley II fanatics.
Funny article. It reads pie-eyed drunk.

-- "The nuclear technology developed by UC scientists and their students secured Americas Cold War preeminence...."

-- "...responsibility for introductory freshman courses [has been] shunted off... to teaching assistants, who, by 1964, made up nearly half the Berkeley teaching corps."

Training people to teach is what graduate programs do for a living, together with training to do research. Lower division courses taught by senior professors have always had the small unit classes
led by multitudes of grad students.

One major objective for "diversity" programs is to match up failing students with tutors. These programs -- there are several -- are similar to the Veterans Administration program that supports our wounded warrior returnees.

I benefited from such a V.A. program many years ago as well as speech therapy. And I would be happy to see this student "Vanessa" in the article receive the same type of help that saved me.

Or perhaps all of the borderline acceptance cases should go to legacy applicants? Their parents pay more taxes, don't they? And their kids fight our wars, too. Or not. (Taxes ain't everything.)
It seems that Heather Mac Donald's articles on academia get longer and more detailed as the diversity industry grows larger and more Byzantine. Much of what she describes is going on at most universities and colleges nationwide.

Eric Hoffer is quoted as having said something to the effect that great causes begin as movements, turn into businesses and end up as rackets. The UC 2 described by Heather is what has happened to the great causes of the sixties.

Perhaps the best point of the article is the connection of the ultra-inflationary rise in tuition to the expansion of student aid. The burden of financing the expansion of college enrollments has fallen very heavily on students with only marginally greater financial resources than those receiving financial assistance. It is appalling to hear administrators making well into the six figures income bracket taking credit for the educational opportunities they are giving to the poor when these opportunities are financed by the substantial sacrifices that are extracted from the rest of the student body, many of whom can only afford college by working long hours and taking out tens of thousands of dollars in loans. Or in the case of public universities, the money coming out of the pockets of taxpayers.
The problem is this: Some well-meaning people decided that everyone should go to college. But a large number of otherwise capable people are just not college material. If you look at what goes on in the remedial programs, it is more or less a repeat of junior and senior high school. And why is that? Well, it's because "College Prep" is just about all most high schools offer these days: Vocational training is too expensive and the trade unions don't like it. Plus, a lot of parents think that their children are College Material when in fact they are not, and it is not in the best interest of high school administrators to admit it.

Obviously, you don't need a degree to be a Bill Gates or Steve Jobs. That should tell people something.
I appeciate the reseach that went into the essay, and the essay is well written.
I am not sure these universities will survive much longer, as tuition and other costs plus the lack of a serious degree or field of study offers much promise for living a life or getting a job.

The second tier disciplines, of which modern sociology must rank near the top,
are vitually worthless in a society that demands skills and exhibition of trained talent.

Indeed, Multiculture U can be said of exist on many campuses across America.
And perhaps in Europe. But the jig is up, or will be, when the multicultural indoctrinated students recognizes they have been had and can't get hired.

Or the ruin may come on campus itself when
the indoctrinated turn against their diversity queens and kings and sack the joint.

As a long time fan of City Journal, I simply have to ask what the illustrations in this article are meant to represent.

The second illustration especially seems to very crudely suggest that progress at UC literally hangs from the breasts of women simply because they are women. It is a rather specious and inflammatory caricature that doesn't suit a very detailed and interesting article.

I really suggest the illustrations be taken down or replaced.
as an ucla graduate degree alumnus I can state for most professors in the art and architecture department it was as close as many will ever get to the animal farm.
alum is used for pickling May 08, 2013 at 3:48 PM
And those of us not in academia or desperate for an obscenely expensive parchment and Progressive indoctrination for our college-aged kids will remain "blandly indifferent."

The university is a sucker's game in a socio-economically mobile, internet connected, youth empowered, and still fairly capitalistic culture.