I can’t imagine this report gaining any traction. Too many academics have too much invested in the political activism they practice and teach. This report finds that activism has been injected into universities in violation of the rules the schools have which prohibit it.
In today’s United States the left has shown us that rules and laws that they disagree with may be simply ignored in the quest to communize the country.
A Report Prepared for the Regents of the University of California
By the California Association of Scholars,
A Division of the National Association of Scholars
Why Is It Wrong to Use the University for Political Purposes?
In recent years, study after study has found that a college education no longer does what it should do and once did.1 Whether these studies look directly at the capabilities of graduates, or instead at what employers find their capabilities to be, the result is the same: far too many college graduates have not learned to write effectively, they can not read and comprehend any reasonably complex book, they have not learned to reason, and their basic knowledge of the history and institutions of the society in which they live is lamentably poor. “An astounding proportion of students are progressing through higher education today without measurable gains in general skills” is the anguished conclusion of a respected national study, entitled appropriately Academically Adrift.2 Further, students now spend on average little time studying outside the classroom, and the demands made of them by their faculty teachers have been correspondingly reduced.
This report is concerned with the corruption of the University of California by activist politics, a condition which, as we shall show, sharply lowers the quality of academic teaching, analysis, and research, and results in exactly the troubling deficiencies that are being found in the studies to which we have referred.4 We shall show that this is an inevitable consequence of any substantial influence of radical politics in academia, because its characteristic interests and modes of thought are the very antithesis of those that should prevail in academic life.”