Trump Executive Order Could Make HBCUs Ineligible for Nearly All Federal Funding

[ZiprHead]

https://www.hbcudigest.com/p/trump-executive-order-could-make

Last month, President Donald Trump issued an executive order prohibiting federal funds from being awarded to agencies or contractors promoting racial or sexual stereotyping. The objective is to reverse what the White House calls a growing culture of blaming white people for much of America's social tension and systemic racism in industry and governance.

The order outlines many items and guidelines for how it proposes to engage contractors and agencies on ending race blaming.

The definition is dangerously broad and clears the way for the government to hold businesses back from federal funding if they venture too far into reverse sociopolitical engineering of systems and cultures built by historical racism.

It could also allow for a nearly instant and horrific reversal of programs created to support historically Black colleges and universities.

Suppose Education Secretary Betsy DeVos decides or is forced to overhaul these programs based on the executive order's guidance. In that case, dozens of funding programs supporting education and workforce development programs targeting African Americans, Hispanics, Pacific Islanders, and other underrepresented racial groups are at risk.

Student federal aid for HBCU students, funding for Howard University, HBCU graduate program development, construction projects, high school-to-college bridge programming, science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) professional development, and agricultural extension would be in jeopardy; simply because HBCU faculty and students teach and learn curriculum on the ties between racism, capitalism, and governance.

If we think the threat isn't legitimate, consider that three predominantly white institutions have paused diversity programs on their campuses. If they are concerned that diversity programming could jeopardize their funding, what should historically Black and diverse institutions with matching culture and curricula have to fear?

 

[Harry Bosch]

https://www.hbcudigest.com/p/trump-executive-order-could-make

Suppose Education Secretary Betsy DeVos decides or is forced to overhaul these programs based on the executive order's guidance. In that case, dozens of funding programs supporting education and workforce development programs targeting African Americans, Hispanics, Pacific Islanders, and other underrepresented racial groups are at risk.

Student federal aid for HBCU students, funding for Howard University, HBCU graduate program development, construction projects, high school-to-college bridge programming, science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) professional development, and agricultural extension would be in jeopardy; simply because HBCU faculty and students teach and learn curriculum on the ties between racism, capitalism, and governance.

If we think the threat isn't legitimate, consider that three predominantly white institutions have paused diversity programs on their campuses. If they are concerned that diversity programming could jeopardize their funding, what should historically Black and diverse institutions with matching culture and curricula have to fear?

Trump knows how to rev up his base!

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

This asshole is running on racism and hatred, and his base are eating it up like 1930s Germany or 2000's Eastern Europe. It is shameless!

 

[laughing dog]

Trump is just proving he will do more for black people than Abraham Lincoln. Remember, he didn't say more of .

 

[Trausti]

So, um, critical race theory . . .

 

[Metaphor]

Here is part of the text of the executive order, which ZiprHead saw fit to leave out:

Sec. 5. Requirements for Federal Grants. The heads of all agencies shall review their respective grant programs and identify programs for which the agency may, as a condition of receiving such a grant, require the recipient to certify that it will not use Federal funds to promote the concepts that

(a) one race or sex is inherently superior to another race or sex;
(b) an individual, by virtue of his or her race or sex, is inherently racist, sexist, or oppressive, whether consciously or unconsciously;

(c) an individual should be discriminated against or receive adverse treatment solely or partly because of his or her race or sex;

(d) members of one race or sex cannot and should not attempt to treat others without respect to race or sex;
(e) an individual's moral character is necessarily determined by his or her race or sex;
(f) an individual, by virtue of his or her race or sex, bears responsibility for actions committed in the past by other members of the same race or sex;
(g) any individual should feel discomfort, guilt, anguish, or any other form of psychological distress on account of his or her race or sex; or

(h) meritocracy or traits such as a hard work ethic are racist or sexist, or were created by a particular race to oppress another race.
Within 60 days of the date of this order, the heads of agencies shall each submit a report to the Director of the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) that lists all grant programs so identified.

​

Which of these, (a) through (h), does ZiprHead, Harry, Jimmy, and laughing dog think need preserving?

 

[Elixir]

So, um, critical race theory . . .

Gee, I see white people in the "black" room. Wonder if there are any black people in the "white" room.
I know where my bet would be placed.

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

Trump is just proving he will do more for black people than Abraham Lincoln. Remember, he didn't say more of .

Odd, how the Republicans were the saviors of African Americans in the defeat of the rebellion, yet seem to be the same people that want to keep those confederate statues up. It is almost like it is a different party today.

 

[laughing dog]

Here is part of the text of the executive order, which ZiprHead saw fit to leave out:

Sec. 5. Requirements for Federal Grants. The heads of all agencies shall review their respective grant programs and identify programs for which the agency may, as a condition of receiving such a grant, require the recipient to certify that it will not use Federal funds to promote the concepts that

(a) one race or sex is inherently superior to another race or sex;
(b) an individual, by virtue of his or her race or sex, is inherently racist, sexist, or oppressive, whether consciously or unconsciously;

(c) an individual should be discriminated against or receive adverse treatment solely or partly because of his or her race or sex;

(d) members of one race or sex cannot and should not attempt to treat others without respect to race or sex;
(e) an individual's moral character is necessarily determined by his or her race or sex;
(f) an individual, by virtue of his or her race or sex, bears responsibility for actions committed in the past by other members of the same race or sex;
(g) any individual should feel discomfort, guilt, anguish, or any other form of psychological distress on account of his or her race or sex; or

(h) meritocracy or traits such as a hard work ethic are racist or sexist, or were created by a particular race to oppress another race.
Within 60 days of the date of this order, the heads of agencies shall each submit a report to the Director of the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) that lists all grant programs so identified.

​

Which of these, (a) through (h), does ZiprHead, Harry, Jimmy, and laughing dog think need preserving?

No real university or college that values academic freedom monitors course content but they do accept Federal grants. This language allows the Federal grantor to require universities to monitor the content of their courses and violate the freedom of thought that is vital to a vibrate academia. This EO is really an attempt to stifle academic freedom and thought via intimidation of risk averse higher education administrations. And, it is incredibly stupid. For example, it could be interpreted (probably not by a fragile white snowflake/racist fuck) that a course about Nazis violates (a), (c), (d), (e), (f) and (g).

It is just another dog treat for the fragile white snowflakes/racist fucks who back Trump.

 

[Trausti]

So, um, critical race theory . . .

Gee, I see white people in the "black" room. Wonder if there are any black people in the "white" room.
I know where my bet would be placed.

Your bet would be wrong. But we see Elixir is pro separation of the races. There’s a name for that.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

Here is part of the text of the executive order, which ZiprHead saw fit to leave out:

Sec. 5. Requirements for Federal Grants. The heads of all agencies shall review their respective grant programs and identify programs for which the agency may, as a condition of receiving such a grant, require the recipient to certify that it will not use Federal funds to promote the concepts that

(a) one race or sex is inherently superior to another race or sex;
(b) an individual, by virtue of his or her race or sex, is inherently racist, sexist, or oppressive, whether consciously or unconsciously;

(c) an individual should be discriminated against or receive adverse treatment solely or partly because of his or her race or sex;

(d) members of one race or sex cannot and should not attempt to treat others without respect to race or sex;
(e) an individual's moral character is necessarily determined by his or her race or sex;
(f) an individual, by virtue of his or her race or sex, bears responsibility for actions committed in the past by other members of the same race or sex;
(g) any individual should feel discomfort, guilt, anguish, or any other form of psychological distress on account of his or her race or sex; or

(h) meritocracy or traits such as a hard work ethic are racist or sexist, or were created by a particular race to oppress another race.
Within 60 days of the date of this order, the heads of agencies shall each submit a report to the Director of the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) that lists all grant programs so identified.

​

Which of these, (a) through (h), does ZiprHead, Harry, Jimmy, and laughing dog think need preserving?

No real university or college that values academic freedom monitors course content but they do accept Federal grants. This language allows the Federal grantor to require universities to monitor the content of their courses and violate the freedom of thought that is vital to a vibrate academia. This EO is really an attempt to stifle academic freedom and thought via intimidation of risk averse higher education administrations. And, it is incredibly stupid. For example, it could be interpreted (probably not by a fragile white snowflake/racist fuck) that a course about Nazis violates (a), (c), (d), (e), (f) and (g).

It is just another dog treat for the fragile white snowflakes/racist fucks who back Trump.

Being racist white fucks doesn't make them a race.

 

[Metaphor]

Here is part of the text of the executive order, which ZiprHead saw fit to leave out:

Sec. 5. Requirements for Federal Grants. The heads of all agencies shall review their respective grant programs and identify programs for which the agency may, as a condition of receiving such a grant, require the recipient to certify that it will not use Federal funds to promote the concepts that

(a) one race or sex is inherently superior to another race or sex;
(b) an individual, by virtue of his or her race or sex, is inherently racist, sexist, or oppressive, whether consciously or unconsciously;

(c) an individual should be discriminated against or receive adverse treatment solely or partly because of his or her race or sex;

(d) members of one race or sex cannot and should not attempt to treat others without respect to race or sex;
(e) an individual's moral character is necessarily determined by his or her race or sex;
(f) an individual, by virtue of his or her race or sex, bears responsibility for actions committed in the past by other members of the same race or sex;
(g) any individual should feel discomfort, guilt, anguish, or any other form of psychological distress on account of his or her race or sex; or

(h) meritocracy or traits such as a hard work ethic are racist or sexist, or were created by a particular race to oppress another race.
Within 60 days of the date of this order, the heads of agencies shall each submit a report to the Director of the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) that lists all grant programs so identified.

​

Which of these, (a) through (h), does ZiprHead, Harry, Jimmy, and laughing dog think need preserving?

No real university or college that values academic freedom monitors course content but they do accept Federal grants. This language allows the Federal grantor to require universities to monitor the content of their courses and violate the freedom of thought that is vital to a vibrate academia. This EO is really an attempt to stifle academic freedom and thought via intimidation of risk averse higher education administrations. And, it is incredibly stupid. For example, it could be interpreted (probably not by a fragile white snowflake/racist fuck) that a course about Nazis violates (a), (c), (d), (e), (f) and (g).

It is just another dog treat for the fragile white snowflakes/racist fucks who back Trump.

Tell me, does a course about Nazis promote Nazis?

I was taught about Nazis in high school, and for the life of me I can't remember my teacher endorsing the philosophy of the Nazi party.

 

[laughing dog]

No real university or college that values academic freedom monitors course content but they do accept Federal grants. This language allows the Federal grantor to require universities to monitor the content of their courses and violate the freedom of thought that is vital to a vibrate academia. This EO is really an attempt to stifle academic freedom and thought via intimidation of risk averse higher education administrations. And, it is incredibly stupid. For example, it could be interpreted (probably not by a fragile white snowflake/racist fuck) that a course about Nazis violates (a), (c), (d), (e), (f) and (g).

It is just another dog treat for the fragile white snowflakes/racist fucks who back Trump.

Tell me, does a course about Nazis promote Nazis?

I was taught about Nazis in high school, and for the life of me I can't remember my teacher endorsing the philosophy of the Nazi party.

Tell us what words in "It could be interpreted" you don't understand. Because if you understood them, you'd realize how moot your response is.

 

[Trausti]

No real university or college that values academic freedom monitors course content but they do accept Federal grants. This language allows the Federal grantor to require universities to monitor the content of their courses and violate the freedom of thought that is vital to a vibrate academia. This EO is really an attempt to stifle academic freedom and thought via intimidation of risk averse higher education administrations. And, it is incredibly stupid. For example, it could be interpreted (probably not by a fragile white snowflake/racist fuck) that a course about Nazis violates (a), (c), (d), (e), (f) and (g).

It is just another dog treat for the fragile white snowflakes/racist fucks who back Trump.

Tell me, does a course about Nazis promote Nazis?

I was taught about Nazis in high school, and for the life of me I can't remember my teacher endorsing the philosophy of the Nazi party.

The only difference between Nazism and Critical Race Theory is who you get to hate.

 

[laughing dog]

There is nothing inherent in Critical Race Theory that requires hating anyone. But it just that type of ignorant reaction that prompts an EO like this.

Whether one like Critical Race Theory or evolutionary theory or ____ theory, no civilized gov't should be interfering with academic freedom with such intimidation tactics.

 

[Metaphor]

No real university or college that values academic freedom monitors course content but they do accept Federal grants. This language allows the Federal grantor to require universities to monitor the content of their courses and violate the freedom of thought that is vital to a vibrate academia. This EO is really an attempt to stifle academic freedom and thought via intimidation of risk averse higher education administrations. And, it is incredibly stupid. For example, it could be interpreted (probably not by a fragile white snowflake/racist fuck) that a course about Nazis violates (a), (c), (d), (e), (f) and (g).

It is just another dog treat for the fragile white snowflakes/racist fucks who back Trump.

Tell me, does a course about Nazis promote Nazis?

I was taught about Nazis in high school, and for the life of me I can't remember my teacher endorsing the philosophy of the Nazi party.

Tell us what words in "It could be interpreted" you don't understand. Because if you understood them, you'd realize how moot your response is.

I don't understand how teaching about the history of Nazis could be interpreted to mean you are promoting Nazi ideology. It would be like being concerned that teaching about slavery promotes slavery.

 

[laughing dog]

Tell us what words in "It could be interpreted" you don't understand. Because if you understood them, you'd realize how moot your response is.

I don't understand how teaching about the history of Nazis could be interpreted to mean you are promoting Nazi ideology.

Tell me, do you always obsess about the bark on the trees in order to ignore the forest?

 

[Trausti]

Tell us what words in "It could be interpreted" you don't understand. Because if you understood them, you'd realize how moot your response is.

I don't understand how teaching about the history of Nazis could be interpreted to mean you are promoting Nazi ideology.

Tell me, do you always obsess about the bark on the trees in order to ignore the forest?

Well, if you taught about Nazism, people would see the similarity with Critical Race Theory. So there’s that.

 

[Metaphor]

Tell us what words in "It could be interpreted" you don't understand. Because if you understood them, you'd realize how moot your response is.

I don't understand how teaching about the history of Nazis could be interpreted to mean you are promoting Nazi ideology.

Tell me, do you always obsess about the bark on the trees in order to ignore the forest?

You're the one who suggested it.

Now, I think academics should be able to teach what they want. What I do not believe is that universities should be able to spend public money promoting their critical race ideologies, discriminating against people by race or sex including official administrative positions that assign blame or responsibility by race, or deliver compulsory orientation/"training" courses, for staff or students, that use critical race theory and are indeed guilty of promoting the things mentioned in the executive order.

 

[Keith&Co.]

Which of these, (a) through (h), does ZiprHead, Harry, Jimmy, and laughing dog think need preserving?

Trick question! All of them.
TALKING about these things, as concepts, is protected from government interference bg the Firstedt Amendment. Acting on them may or may not lead to legal entanglements, but talking, even promoting thge idea is protected.
Gosh, you would think the MAGAs had not spent the last four years INSISTING that they have every right to babble their own bile and racism as a matter of free god damned speech, huh?