Twenty-First Century Universities: Civilization's Suicide Pill

A February 2014 edition of The Michigan Daily reported in a front-page story about a “$3 million donation to create virtual curriculum for Fall 2015.” The story appeared under the headline “Grant expands Islamic studies” and featured quotes from Professor Pauline Jones Luong.

The article prompts certain questions: are similar grants found for the study of Judaism, Hinduism, Buddhism, or Christianity? Or lesser-known religions such as Jainism or Sikhism?

From the article, one has no evidence to conclude anything specific about the Islamic Studies program, but in the larger context of the contemporary university, there is reason to wonder if it will promote Islam rather than present Islam. There is reason to wonder if it will shy away from concepts like Hadd and Hudud.

The larger context which motivates these questions is the contemporary university’s subversiveness. Western Civilization has historically valued political liberty; modern universities tend to stifle any diversity of political thought, even as they claim to champion diversity of race, religion, or gender.

European culture has fostered individual freedom; contemporary universities have worked to dampen freedom of speech, freedom of the press, and other metrics of personal liberty.

It is reasonable to ask, then, whether the modern university will present Islam in a manner which complements the university’s general attack on Western Civilization. There is certainly a great deal within Islam which does not promote individual political liberty or personal freedom. Historically, Muslim-majority nations have been hesitant to adopt free speech, or to adopt a form of government composed of freely-elected representatives.

Among those Muslim-majority nations which have instituted some form of free election, the ideological implications of Islam’s social and political vision prevent a lively debate about issues which touch the Islamic worldview.

Will the contemporary university teach about Islam in a way which helps students to appreciate the unprecedented degree of freedom which Western Civilization has given? Or will that freedom, and the dangers which threaten it, be ignored?

The Abuser-in-Chief: Bill Clinton Guilty and Impeached

In the United States, it rarely happens that Congress impeaches a president. It has happened only twice, so far, in the nearly 250 years that the nation has existed. In 1868, President Andrew Johnson was impeached.

Over a century later, Bill Clinton would be impeached.

Naturally, impeachments are both political and partisan. Because Bill Clinton was a Democrat, his party defended him. As historian Andrew McCarthy writes, “Democrats, prominently including women’s-rights advocates, closed ranks around Bill Clinton.”

Clinton had committed several crimes, which began to be exposed as investigators started to examine charges filed against him in connection with complaints brought forth in civil lawsuits. McCarthy writes:

According to the victim’s credible accusation, Clinton had raped Juanita Broaddrick in 1978.

This crime is shocking enough, but even more so when the reader considers that Clinton held an elected office when he committed the offense:

Clinton, at the time, was the 32-year-old attorney general of Arkansas.

As this crime was being investigated, others came to light. Bill Clinton had a habitual pattern of sexual assault. Officials eventually compiled a long list of victims.

Unlike other cases in which allegations of impropriety are made against some government official, in Clinton’s case, these were no mere allegations. The results of court proceedings confirm that Clinton acted criminally.

His sexual assault against Ms. Broaddrick came to light during the investigation of Clinton’s obstruction of a sexual-harassment suit filed against him by another woman, Paula Jones. She alleged that, while governor of Arkansas, Clinton had exposed himself to her, demanding oral sex. She declined and fled from the room.

The court worked to find justice for the victims. Clinton, in an effort end the proceedings, negotiated an agreement. He hoped to avoid further attention from judges.

President Clinton eventually paid $850,000 to settle the matter out of court.

But despite ending the civil suit with an out-of-court settlement, Clinton was still held responsible by the justice system for his crimes. Further victims, Leslie Millwee and Kathleen Willey, presented testimony.

When asked by investigators about his activities, Clinton lied. He lied after having taken an oath to present honest statements. He lied to court officials. That is a serious crime.

The president was later held in contempt of court by a federal judge for providing perjurious testimony. That testimony was about Monica Lewinsky. It was also through Ms. Jones’s case that we discovered that Clinton, while the 50-year-old president of the United States, had arranged Oval Office sexual liaisons with the then-22-year-old White House intern.

Because he was found guilty of perjury, Bill Clinton’s law license was taken from him. His is no longer allowed to appear as a lawyer in court, or to sign any documents as a lawyer.

The courts fined Clinton $90,000.00 for his perjury in the Paula Jones case, and $25,000 for the Monica Lewinsky case.

But President Clinton paid the highest price for his crimes when he was impeached by Congress. Only two presidents have been impeached in the 250-year-history of the United States (so far). Clinton’s legacy has been permanently marked: history books for centuries into the future will note his impeachment.

Oddly, although his crimes were against women, some of strongest supporters were women: Hillary Clinton, Elizabeth Warren, Nancy Pelosi, Gloria Steinem, Joy Behar, and others. These women spoke publicly, defending Bill Clinton.

There is no doubt that Bill Clinton is guilty of sexual assault. There are questions about why women would defend such a man.

African-American Leaders Praise Eisenhower

On August 9, 1955, the Washington Post ran a headline proclaiming that President “Ike” Eisenhower had made “far advances in” the “field of civil rights.” The article underneath cited achievements which his administration had made on behalf Black citizens.

Eisenhower had been in office for over two years by the time this story appeared. The story was prompted by a report issued by Val J. Washington, a politically successful and influential African-American. Washington was

director of minorities for the Republican National Committee. Washington had sent him a copy of a report praising the record of the present Administration on racial issues and saying the Eisenhower approach on civil rights had been “one of action - not words.”

During the 1952 election, Eisenhower had explained the goals he would pursue as president: he would desegregate and integrate the military, the federal government, and the District of Columbia, including schools and public accommodations.

Despite fierce resistance from Democratic Party leaders like Lyndon Johnson and John F. Kennedy, Ike accomplished those objectives. In addition, he appointed Blacks to important federal posts.

It was during Eisenhower’s administration that, for the first time ever, an African-American was part of a presidential cabinet meeting.

Val Washington had written an assessment of Ike’s achievements during those first two years:

The report, which said the Republican Party has fulfilled its 1952 campaign promises on civil rights, and the President’s acknowledgement, were made public by the Republican National Committee.

As part of the report, Washington had identified fourteen promises made by Eisenhower regarding civil rights issues during the 1952 campaign.

He said with the recent appointment of E. Frederic Morrow, a Negro, to a post in the executive office of the President, the 14-point program of campaign promises to minorities has been fulfilled.

Morrow was the first Black appointed to an executive-level post inside the White House. Morrow’s work was at such a high level that he oversaw Nelson Rockefeller. In 1955, it was truly a novel idea that an African-American would be in a supervisory position over a member of the wealthy and influential Rockefeller family. But that’s the way Ike thought it should be.

The report not only summarized what Eisenhower had accomplished, but hinted at what lay ahead:

The report laid stress on the ending of segregation in the Nation’s Capital, elimination of “bias and Jim Crow” in Federal departments and agencies, appointment of Negroes to important Federal positions, strengthening of the civil rights section in the Justice Department which prosecutes violations of civil rights law, and enforcement of the non-discriminatory clauses of the Taft-Hartley Act.

When Ike took office, he found that there were a number of civil rights regulations which already existed, but which had not been enforced. In addition to the Taft-Hartley Act, there were laws banning segregation in the District of Columbia, and Executive Order 9981. He simply began implementing regulations which were already on the books.

Moving forward, Eisenhower would carry out the changes required by the famous Brown vs. Board of Education decision, also in 1955. This would ultimately result in the tumultuous confrontation in which Ike used federal troops. Orval Faubus and the Democratic Party were blocking Central High School in Little Rock, Arkansas. Ike obtained admission into the school for nine students, the famous “Little Rock Nine,” by using soldiers to protect the students and secure their entrance into the school.

Fearlessly, Eisenhower pushed the Civil Rights Act of 1957, and the Civil Rights Act of 1960, through Congress, against angry hostility from Senators Lyndon Johnson and John F. Kennedy.

Although civil rights leaders were praising Ike’s work in 1955, they were overjoyed to see that he would advance even farther in the cause of civil rights in the subsequent years.

The Quiet Civil Rights Hero: Eisenhower Acts Instead of Speaking

In early 1952, General “Ike” Eisenhower was wondering whether or not he should become a candidate for the presidency of the United States. He had a number of characteristics which would make him a good candidate, and a good president: he was popular with the public, he had leadership experience both in the military and in politics, both in wartime and in peacetime.

He was also reliable advocate for civil rights.

But he was not yet certain that he wanted to be president.

On March 24, 1952, Herbert Brownell met with Eisenhower. Brownell had experience organizing political campaigns. The two men quickly found common ground: both agreed that a president should be “to eliminate discrimination against black citizens in every area,” as Brownell phrased it.

Brownell, and other leaders, persuaded Ike be a candidate.

Later that year, Ike accepted the nomination to be the Republican Party’s candidate for the presidency. His running mate was Richard Nixon. Like Ike, Nixon was in favor of integration and desegregation.

The opposition, the Democratic Party’s ticket, included staunch segregationist John Sparkman.

On the question of civil rights, there was a clear difference between the two tickets. Nonetheless, this was not an attention-getting concern in the campaign.

In the 1952 election, central matters were the Korean War, the global threats posed by the USSR and by communist China, and scandals about corrupt officials inside the federal government. There were also concerns about education and the economy.

Despite the fact that civil rights weren’t getting much attention in the media, Eisenhower explained to Brownell that, as president, he would take action to secure freedoms for African-Americans. This was not widely reported or discussed during the election, as historian David Nichols writes:

Civil rights would not be a major issue in the 1952 presidential election. A cluster of cases - subsequently known as Brown v. Board of Education - challenging Plessy v. Ferguson was scheduled for review by the Supreme Court, but no ruling was imminent. Eisenhower’s commitment to Brownell in invoke federal authority against discrimination was not a political strategy aimed at garnering votes; it was, as he stated years later, “a matter of justice.”

After winning the 1952 election by a solid margin - including a large percentage both of Black voters and of female voters - Eisenhower set to work on his civil rights agenda. He method was to act rather than to speak.

Ike appointed Herbert Brownell to be Attorney General. Brownell was Ike’s teammate in many of the civil rights advancements made during the 1950s.

Eisenhower didn’t give major speeches on the topic, didn’t release official statements about it, and didn’t discuss it at press conferences. But silently, behind the scenes, he accomplished significant milestones.

During his presidency, he desegregated the military, the federal government, and the entire District of Columbia. He generated, and gained congressional approval for, two civil rights bills. He implemented the actions implied in the Brown v. Board of Education decision.

Famously, when Democrat Orval Faubus, governor of Arkansas, prevented African-American students from attending Little Rock Central High School, Eisenhower sent soldiers to protect the “Little Rock Nine” and assure their admission into the high school.

Although each of these events was a noteworthy step in the struggle for civil rights, Ike remained quiet. He gave no in-depth interviews about the matter.

The decade of the 1950s was a watershed moment in United States history. By the end of the decade, major civil rights objectives had been achieved: an inevitable movement toward the desegregation and integration of schools was in motion; Blacks were gaining equal access to public accommodations (buses, lunch counters, etc.); the percentage of African-Americans who voted was increasing.

The president who brought about this dramatic change worked behind the scenes, not seeking attention. It was Eisenhower’s actions, not his words, that changed the world.

Eisenhower Works for Desegregation and Integration: A Lifelong Commitment to Civil Rights

Before and during his years in the White House, President Eisenhower worked for racial desegregation and integration. In late 1944 and early 1945, during the Battle of the Bulge, Eisenhower deliberately defied the policies of Franklin Roosevelt’s War Department by ordering Black and White soldiers to fight side-by-side as equals.

After WW2 ended, Eisenhower spoke to Congress in April 1948, as historian William Hitchcock writes:

Soon after he left the army, while testifying before the Senate Armed Services Committee on universal military service, Eisenhower was invited to give his views on racial segregation in the military. His response was quite lengthy. The army, he opined, “is just one of the mirrors that holds up to our faces the United States of America … There is race prejudice in this country.”

Ike’s statements to Congress moved President Truman to issue the famous Executive Order 9981 in July 1948. Truman’s order hoped to desegregate the armed forces. Sadly, the Democrats - Truman’s own party - prevented his order from being implemented.

Reflecting on his career in the military, Eisenhower saw that segregation was not helpful. He’d integrated the soldiers at the Battle of the Bulge because he knew that it was the right thing to do: it formed the most effective fighting force and gave the Allies a chance to win.

He spoke about the segregation that was in place when he first joined the army four decades earlier, calling it “extreme” and unnecessary.

Embracing the ideas of desegregation and integration, Eisenhower believed, were signs of maturity.

As president, only two weeks after his inauguration, Ike accomplished an end to segregation in the federal government, in the armed services, and in entire area of Washington, D.C.

Eventually, Eisenhower hoped, “the human race may finally grow up,” and such concerns would disappear.

Eisenhower’s support for civil rights was reliable and immovable, but also unemotional, unsentimental, and dispassionate. He saw equal civil rights as simple justice.

His most significant actions on behalf of civil rights were accompanied by his understated and calm words. When he ordered federal soldiers to Little Rock to override the Arkansas State Police, he did not give a fiery rousing speech on the matter. He simply did it.

Eisenhower saw segregation, and the laws which supported it, as symptoms rather than causes. They were the effects of a deeper problem in society. Segregation grew organically out of certain attitudes and beliefs, as William Hitchcock writes:

These comments reveal a man who believed that racial segregation in both the army and the nation had an organic quality. It was unpleasant and probably wrong.

In the 1952 presidential election, Eisenhower ran as the Republican candidate against a segregationist ticket put forth by the Democrat Party.

The difference was clear to the voters in general, and very clear to African-American voters in particular.

In his first press conference as a candidate, held in Abilene on June 5, 1952, he declared his “unalterable support of fairness and equality among all types of American citizens.”

Pollsters were stunned by large number of Blacks who voted for Eisenhower. During his first four years in office, he earned their confidence, which played a role in his re-election in 1956.

Clinton’s Wars: Bill and Hillary Use Military Force

President Bill Clinton was in office from January 1993 to January 2001. During those years, he requested and authorized many military operations. Both President Clinton and his wife Hillary often spoke publicly of her role: she not only advised him, but often made decisions with him.

The foreign policy and military policy of those years, then, is the product of both Bill and Hillary.

When discussing military activities, it is important to note that officially planned and authorized operations are given names in all capital letters.

The two major regions for Clinton’s military operations were the Balkans and southwest Asia. In these places, Clinton used drones extensively, both for reconnaissance and for attack.

Shortly before Clinton took office, the country of Yugoslavia had disintegrated into six or seven smaller nations: Slovenia, Bosnia-Herzegovina, Macedonia, Montenegro, Croatia, Serbia, and Kosovo. These nations were often at war with each other, and often experiencing civil war within themselves.

For a variety of reasons, President Bill Clinton made extensive use of the United States military, supporting one side or another in these conflicts.

Operations DENY FLIGHT (12 April 1993 - 20 December 1995) and DELIBERATE FORCE (30 August 1995 - 20 September 1995) were conducted over the countries which composed the former Yugoslavia. The latter operation alone dropped more than 1,026 bombs, primarily on Serbia.

An operation variously named ALLIED FORCE or NOBLE ANVIL (24 March 1999 to 10 June 1999) directed several thousand bombs and missiles against regions within the area of the former Yugoslavia.

The Balkans received much of Clinton’s attention. Other major operations in the territories of the former Yugoslavia included ABLE SENTRY (1993), QUICK LIFT (1995), NOMAD VIGIL (1995) and NOMAD ENDEAVOR (1997), PHOENIX MOAT and JOINT ENDEAVOR (1995), DECISIVE EDGE (1996), JOINT GUARD and DELIBERATE GUARD (1996), SILVER WAKE (1997), DETERMINED FALCON (1998), DELIBERATE FORGE (1998), BALKON CALM (1998), EAGLE EYE (1998), SUSTAIN HOPE or SHINING HOPE (1999), JOINT GUARDIAN (1999), and JOINT FORCE (1999).

In southwest Asia, Clinton’s main focus was on Iraq. Concerned about the dictator Saddam Hussein’s manufacturing of weapons of mass destruction, President Bill Clinton ordered numerous bombings in an effort to destroy the factories and laboratories which were producing biological and chemical weapons (including poison gas).

Clinton was also hoping to reduce or stop Hussein’s genocidal killing of the Kurds. Kurds are an ethnic minority in northern Iraq. Likewise, Clinton hoped to slow the Baath Party’s human rights violations. ‘Baath’ was the name of Hussein’s political party; it routinely tortured, blackmailed, extorted, and murdered Iraqi citizens.

The military uses the term ‘SW Asia’ for what the news media call the ‘Near East’ or ‘Middle East’ - operations there included INTRINSIC ACTION (1993), VIGILANT WARRIOR and VIGILANT SENTINEL (1993), QUICK TRANSIT (1997), NORTHERN WATCH (1997), PHOENIX SCORPION (1997), and DESERT THUNDER (1998).

A one-day operation named DESERT STRIKE (03 September 1996) sent 44 missiles in Iraq.

In operation DESERT FOX (16 December 1998 to 19 December 1998), over 600 missiles and bombs were directed against Iran’s weapons of mass destruction (WMD).

The missions listed above, along with others not mentioned here, involved thousands of soldiers and aircraft. Thousands of sorties were flown, and thousands of bombs and missiles used in Yugoslavia and Iraq. A ‘sortie’ is a mission for a military aircraft.

President Bill Clinton requested and authorized missions in other parts of the world, as well. But his main attention was directed toward the two regions discussed above.

Naturally, there has been extensive political debate about these uses of the United States military forces. Were these missions in the best interests of the United States? Presidents are expected to take military action when the nation’s interests can be served that way.

Clinton’s predecessor in the White House, President George H.W. Bush, used the military less than Clinton did. Clinton’s successor, President George W. Bush, used the military to the same extent, or perhaps more, than Clinton did.

Eisenhower Chooses Everett J. Morrow and Val J. Washington as Top-Level White House Advisors

The U.S. presidential elections of 1952 and 1956 occurred in the midst of what has become known as the ‘civil rights movement.’ The Supreme Court handed down its Brown vs. Board of Education decision in May 1954, and the Montgomery bus boycott began in December 1956.

In 1952, the Democratic Party nominated John Sparkman, an avowed segregationist, to its national ticket. Sparkman was the candidate for vice president; the Democratic candidate for president was Adlai Stevenson. The Republican party nominated Dwight Eisenhower and Richard Nixon, who favored integration and desegregation. Black voters were faced with a clear choice.

African-American groups took observable actions: the National Council of Negro Democrats endorsed Eisenhower for president. The Stevenson-Sparkman ticket was shocking to Black voters. Historians at the University of Virginia’s Miller Center write that not only was Eisenhower popular because he was a WW2 hero and projected a friendly and likeable personality, but also that

Eisenhower also cut into Stevenson’s margins in many Democratic constituencies, including African Americans, who voted in larger proportion for the President than for any Republican candidate since Herbert Hoover.

Once in office, Ike moved forward: he appointed Everett Frederic Morrow to an executive office. No Black leader had held a job at a level this high before. On July 10, 1955, the Detroit Free Press ran an AP wire story about Morrow, under the headline “White House Picks Negro for Top Spot,” stating that

He will be administrative officer of the White House “Special Projects Group” which comprises advisers to the President on foreign, economic, disarmament and other problems.

Historian Steve Neal writes that Eisenhower also “established the United States Commission on Civil Rights.” In both 1957 and in 1960, Ike moved the first two civil rights bills of the twentieth century through Congress, against opposition from Democrats like Lyndon Johnson and John Sparkman. Democratic Senator Robert Byrd also opposed the civil rights bills, and opposed desegregation and integration in any form, yet Hillary Clinton called him a “friend and mentor.” Steve Neal writes:

Eisenhower enforced the Court’s decision in sending federal troops into Little Rock, and he went on to establish a civil rights division in the Justice Department in 1957 that committed the federal government to defend the rights of minorities and provided momentum to the civil rights movement.

Eisenhower appointed another African-American, Valores James Washington, to be a top-level advisor in the White House. Given his cumbersome name, he usually asked people to refer to him as Val J. Washington, and he had also worked as one of Eisenhower’s strategists during the 1952 election. He also held various offices within the Republican Party.