Recently a Philadelphia law firm employed me as an expert witness relating to a welding matter. In the course of the case development, opposing council employed a MIT professor, whose incredible arrogance presented itself in a personal attack on my integrity because I am not an academic. First he attempted to denigrate my credentials, claiming they were fictitious, this failed miserably when all my CV sited credentials and assertions were verified by the listed sources. Upon failure of this he tried to intimate that I was a racist because I had been a speaker at an American Nationalist Conference recently. When, I flatly stated that this had nothing to do with the cause, and the conference organizer threatened to sue, he shut up. The substance of the assault gave me cause to pause and reflect on the matter.

I have never liked academicians and their sophist arrogant claims of omnipotence of intellect, and as sole arbiters of learning. Most are stuffed shirts without any practical experience, who if forced to occupy themselves with employment in the real world would promptly be on the social welfare relief rolls. Having lived for 19 years in New Haven CT I am more than qualified to make such a statement, New Haven being the home of not only Yale and Southern CT University, but also a score of miscellaneous colleges.

Through the creation of tenure academicians have succeeded in efficiently removing themselves from all accountability of their actions. After six years of instruction an assistant professor on approval of the entire faculty, is granted tenure. Thus for the first six years any academician becomes acclimated to the established doctrines of his chosen field, which if he contradicts, will result in not only expulsion but denial of tenure, ending his career. Only tenured professors in the field are allowed to vote on the candidate, thus established dogma is virtually guaranteed. This system warrants the conventional status quo, as well as keeping any new or radical or differing concepts from their natural and beneficial exposure to light. The system acts well within established corporate structure by suppressing new concepts, inventions, and philosophies thus protecting not only the academicians and their institutions of higher learning, but also the corporations, which often fund much of their research, as well as governmental regulating authorities like the FDA. New and creative inventions in the cure of pandemic diseases for example are thus thwarted from use, publication, and even serious consideration by the establishments. It then naturally follows that these tenured professors are remunerated far beyond reason, and work as little as two hours per day, pay due to federal educational policies, as fostered by them, is assessed for the most part from taxpayers. The average tenured professor earns well, over $ 200,000. per year, plus a huge benefit package.

One method used to increase academic income is through research grants. These funds are for the most part not used in research at all. Professor X gets a grant to study glaucoma; the amount given is $300,000. First he hires a full time assistant, paid by the grant money to do nothing but search for and when found fill out more applications for more grants on similar topics. Second professor X writes a paper in which he asserts that eye temperature may in some way be related to glaucoma. After publication he determines that rabbits for example have similar eyes to humans and that he will travel around the world measuring the temperature of rabbits eyes. He thus spends the next four months together with his wife traveling around the world to other edifices of higher education measures some temperatures of rabbit's eyes, and having a grand old time of it, and then comes home. Professor X then writes another but inconclusive paper in which he states that funds have run out but that he is close to a diminutive prognostication on the temperature of rabbits eyes, and the possible relationship of it to glaucoma, and if only some more funds were provided he could surely get to the bottom of it all. With any luck all the applications made by his assistant have by this time resulted in yet another grant. It's sort of a perpetual motion exercise, obviously leading to all sorts of benefits and income.

The reader must understand that this process is embedded in every discipline at every university and college. What's even worse is that almost to a man these academicians are politically from the far left, being either communists or socialists. Furthermore 99% of all this research produces nothing. Through this they use a well functioning process called "Cultural Marxism", "Political Correctness" by some to silence all possible opposition. This insidious course of action follows a pattern seen only in dictatorial political operations and coming to us from Uncle Joe's Soviet empire, in firstly ridiculing the opponents credentials, and or research, and secondly if that did not work slandering the opponents character.

It is certainly no secret that articles and papers published by these academic practitioners wind up published, if at all, in some obscure periodical with a circulation less than 500 and having the relevance of toilet paper. Most of their doctoral thesis are bound at Kinko's and produced in lots of ten. They have nothing whatever to do with the advancement to the science in question and are produced solely to attain peer review of the academic community as a means for pyramiding more and ever increasing grants of cash. Having ghost written more than one PhD I am more than familiar with the process. The possibility of any of these academically produced prognostications having any effect on society or the topic covered by it is minuscule at best.

Just this week I had the opportunity to read several CV's from British Ph.D.'s, and can tell you they were entertaining at best. No one of the four I read had done anything of any note, save one who had written a book about children. All listed numerous papers they had produced over the last ten years, frankly I write about four columns a month which are published by numerous periodicals, papers, and web sites, hundreds of articles since 1990 and I don't even list one of them on my CV. All of these people however were academicians and thus all their writings were paid for up front by one or another think-tank like the Tavistock Institute, a British organization that is so flush with cash that they do not seek any funds from anywhere. These four had no patent of any sort between them, no invention of any type, no new theories, just re-hashing of work done by others of the same ilk. What a total waste of time and effort!

Multiculturalism is another vehicle of academia. Based on the false premise that a mutt is superior to a thoroughbred it leaves me speechless. Do we as animal breeders support a concept of crossbreeding Puncheons with Arabians to get better racehorses? Do we breed German Shepherds with Scotties to produce better guard dogs? Does any animal including the human one purposely choose a physically or mentally defective mate? That is exactly what Multiculturalism is about. What it attempts to instill in man is that the world is some sort of global shopping center in which humans are all equal socially, culturally, and intellectually and are all customers there in. This suits the academic crowd in that it meets their socialist/communist goals. It lowers the common denominator for all peoples to the lowest ones on the scale, and works hand in glove with the anti-Western Culture scenario. All this stems from the Illuminist inspired concepts as espoused in the French revolution and the miss-translated Fraternite', Liberte', E'galite. It is not Fraternity, Liberty, Equality, and the last word in fact is Egalitarian. This word is difficult to translate because it conveys the communist concept of equalization of ownership and wealth, under state sponsorship, in other words communism. The concept of Multiculturalism allows its practitioners a wide variety of perversions and unnatural behaviors. Through it the practitioners of homosexuality become simply an other "alternate lifestyle". Society is able to accept, then reject, and then change, any number of perversions that become its norms at that particular moment. Such behavior has dire consequences as we clearly see in the present AIDS epidemic. The pandemic has been multiculturally politicized, whereby it has become socially unacceptable to point out that AIDS is primarily a homosexual disease.

The false concept of equality as expressed in academic circles in which the belief that we are all equal socially, sexually, racially, and intellectually comes from the purposeful miss-interpretation of American Constitution and the words of our founding fathers. The said "equality before the law", as a concept is paramount in a democratic society, none of them ever once proposed the ridiculous equality concepts as fostered by the Diane Feinstein's of this world. One can only say that the equality of the sexes as espoused by the radical feminists is several steps beyond stupid. These ideas all stemming from academic circles include such fallacious things as "Glass Ceiling", "African Studies" Feminist Studies" and other strange twists of our Western Culture. Last week I met an undergraduate student from FSU she was studying a book, "Africa and Africans" I asked her why, she responded, "it is a required core course for graduation in my field which is nursing". She told me that her professor was from Ghana and he taught her class that Ghanaian culture had much influenced Christianity. When I explained to her Christians first visited that Ghana in the 14th century when Christianity was already over 1400 years old, and that the part of Africa in which Ghana is located never attained the Bronze Age, nor had a written language or even a number system or came to use the wheel, she was dumbfounded.

The attack on our most basic right, that of "Freedom of Speech" is under the direst assault in our higher learning institutions. Through the use of the aforementioned methods professors and instructors eliminate honest class discussion by Cultural Marxist means. Any opposition to the communist concepts touted by academia results in failure, or worse expulsion from the scene. When my youngest son was in undergraduate school majoring in Information Science he was forced to take a course (required for matriculation) in sociology. To begin with sociology like psychology, are soft sciences, by that I not only imply but also clearly state that they are hogwash. My son had been working for two years to pay for his own education and was absolutely furious when upon reading the text determined that its author was a communist. He brought the book to me and I confirmed that the ten tenants of the Illuminist theory as plagiarized by Marx were all present. When I confronted the dean of the school my son was offered another professor's course in sociology and the communist professor is in all probability tenured and still spouting her communist crap from the podium.

The elimination of Western Civilization in higher education, and the replacement of it by fallacious subjects like Feminism, African Studies, and American Indian Studies belie the basic speciousness of the present Sophists, who claim that all cultures have equal value. Comment on that issue would be superfluous, since even a four year old knows better. While a reasonable argument of the value of Chinese, Japanese, Arabic and Indian culture is valid; the fact of Western Civilizations preeminence is clearly demonstrated in the fact that every single culture in the present world is assimilating Western customs, political philosophies, and culture. If these Sophists are in fact correct, and I am wrong, then please pray tell us who are the: Schopenhauer's, Beethoven's, Goethe's, Plato's, Mozart's, Edison's, Bach's, Mencken's, and Curie's of these other touted by them great societies?

Page URL: http://www.kriegbooks.com/academic_shennanigans.html
Host Web site: http://www.kriegbooks.com/