Rich Southern California University Teaches Nascent Social Workers Class Warfare and Law-Breaking
The University of Southern California ("USC"), an expensive private university in Los Angeles, used to rejoice in the nickname "University of Spoiled Children." I'm happy to report (my tone is dryly sarcastic as I write this) that the University is doing its best to ensure that the spoiled rich kids who walk through its luxuriously appointed halls don't forget that they are, in fact, predators who must be taught to relate to poor people on Marxist terms. At least, that's the case with the kids who are attending USC's graduate School of Social Work.
It turns out that being a social worker no longer involves simply ensuring that children in the most unstable communities or homes are safe; working to make sure that those same children can do well in school, so as to break free of the snare of poverty; and generally ensuring that poverty in America does not mean starvation, chronic homelessness, or physically abusive situations. (And yes, I know that this is a very abbreviated description of what social workers do, but it does provide a baseline.)
Nowadays, being a social worker means, among other things, learning how to protect illegal immigrants from facing the consequences of the laws they've broken. It also means being able to recognize the gradations of social, sexual, economic, genetic, gender, race, nationality, legal status, etc., differences amongst those don't rank amongst the evil, white, rich members of the 1%.
I'm not kidding.
Here is the agenda for the USC School of Social Work's mandatory "All School Day," which takes place next week:
All School Day: Do I Look Illegal?
USC School of Social Work
Thursday, February 16, 2012, 8:15am to 11:59pm
University Park Campus
Bovard Auditorium (ADM)
All School Day was initiated after Los Angeles’ 1992 civil unrest resulted in acts of lawbreaking compounded by existing racial tensions.
Since then, social work students, faculty and community leaders have gathered each year to celebrate diversity through an exchange of ideas and to learn how to better communicate across differences in race, gender, sexual orientation, religion, age, social class and disability. This year, we look at the implications of immigration reform on civil liberties and the social work profession. Several states have passed local immigration reform acts aimed at identifying, prosecuting and deporting illegal immigrants. The laws make the failure to carry immigration documents a crime, and give the police broad power to detain anyone suspected of being in the country illegally simply based on appearance. Critics of the legislation say it encourages racial profiling, while supporters say the law prohibits the use of race as the sole basis for investigating immigration status. The National Association of Social Workers strongly opposes such laws, which criminalize immigrants, endanger human rights and threaten the civil liberties of citizens and immigrants. The current political context of immigration makes the job of social workers much harder. We must present a united front to ensure equal protection from discrimination for all immigrants who come to live in the United States.To do nothing is to ignore the core of who we are and what our profession stands for.
- Gil Cedillo, California state assembly member
- Manuel Pastor, professor of American studies and ethnicity at USC Dana and David Dornsife College of Letters, Arts and Sciences
- Niels Frenzen, clinical professor of law at USC Gould School of Law
- Ange-Marie Hancock, associate professor of political science and gender studies at USC Dana and David Dornsife College of Letters, Arts and Sciences
- Angelica Salas, director of Coalition for Humane Immigrant Rights of Los Angeles
Incidentally, a year as full-time student at the USC School of Social Work will run you a little more that $42,000.
Is it any surprise that Barack Obama, who is the head of the American Diversity Racket, decided that, when he recognizes the troops who served in Iraq, he will invite to the White House only those who meet political correctness criteria, without any apparent regard for the actual merits of their time overseas?