Multiple sources have confirmed that two professors at Arizona State University, Dr. Angela Lober and Jenny Irish, spent an hour discussing with students “dismantling capitalism and electing a female president to restore reproductive rights.” They also asserted that, as Lober claimed, “the United States hates women and everything the female body does.”
The program in question: “Jenny Irish’s HATCH: A Speculative Future for Reproductive Rights,” was offered by the university through ASU Events on the website. The event was described as a workshop where, “Professor Irish will give a reading from Hatch, after which she’ll be joined in conversation by Dr. Angela Lober, Clinical Associate Professor and Director of the Academy of Lactation Programs at the Edson College of Nursing and Health Innovation. Come ready with your own questions and comments about the future of reproductive health in the face of climate change, misinformation, and other problems facing our present and our future.”
Hatch is a collection of prose poems from English Professor Jenny Irish. ASU described Hatch as, “This apocalyptic vision engages with the most pressing concerns of this contemporary sociopolitical moment: reproductive rights, climate crises, and mass extinction; gender and racial bias in healthcare and technology; disinformation, conspiracy theories, and pseudoscience; and the possibilities and dangers of artificial intelligence.”
The event, co-hosted by the Lincoln Center for Applied Ethics, took a decidedly apocalyptic turn according to College Fix, with Irish warning of a dystopian future for the United States complete with “cannibalism,” and “forced breeding camps.”
“So much of our reality points toward those futures,” she told attendees. Lober added, “The balance between hope and despair is an everyday experience for me.” She explained, “A couple years ago I never thought Roe v. Wade would be overturned. How could we possibly do that?”
Irish also made an ardent defense of transgenderism and claimed an “all-out assault on the trans community and people’s ability to self-identify,” exists in the U.S. She added, “It is disgusting, immoral, and wrong.” Per the Arizona Sun Times, the professors took about 15 questions via Zoom and when asked about the well-published decline in global birth rates, Lober said it doesn’t “bother” her, claiming “we are overpopulated.”
Coordinator of the ASU event, Karina Fitzgerald, told College Fix, the goal of the event was to “encourage students that are following creative pursuits or other types of worldbuilding to simply explore other elements that they haven’t thought of before in their writing, or other ways to challenge themselves in creative processes.” She described the “element of worldbuilding” for creating “fictional stories” as “a good exercise for students to get in the practice of.”
However, ASU Professor of Philosophy, Religious Studies, and Theology Dr. Owen Anderson offered a different perspective in a comment to AZ Free News. He starkly criticized his colleagues’ openly political statements that move beyond the “fictional stories.”
Dr. Anderson wrote, “ASU professors are not to use university resources to tell students how to vote in an election. Not only that, professors are to be examples of clear thinking. Instead, these professors are using cheap scare tactics and logical fallacies to try and influence students. It is a misuse of their position and creates an unfair power dynamic for students. When will ASU hold such professors accountable?”
The Shapiro Professor of Public Interest Law at George Washington University, Dr. Jonathan Turley, while noting the professors “have every right to espouse these views and it is good for students to have a wide variety of viewpoints on campus,” took note of the “hyperbolic rhetoric,” renewing his objection that conservative, moderate, and libertarian faculty have been purged from academia.
Specifically, Turley pointed to the staunchly one-sided, anti-capitalist nature of the event’s rhetoric writing, “The ASU event captures a rising call for dismantling an economic system that helped drive industrial innovation and massive wealth creation. It has also left great wealth disparities. We have sought to address poverty with social programs that offer greater opportunity for those who have not been able to escape cycles of poverty. We have much work to be done. However, the anti-capitalist movement often offers few specifics on the alternatives, as at the ASU event.”
He concluded, “This is a debate that should be welcomed but not in this type of one-sided, jingoistic presentation. Imagine how much more substantive this panel would have been with an alternative viewpoint. Let’s have a discussion on the merits of capitalism and the record of alternative systems. That would offer educational and not merely emotive benefits to our academic community.”
Arizona Senate President Warren Petersen and House Speaker Ben Toma filed an amicus brief in support of a lawsuit against Arizona State University and the Arizona Board of Regents for “unlawfully mandating racist DEI training for faculty.” The lawsuit was brought by Dr. Owen Anderson and the Goldwater Institute. The Arizona Board of Regents brought a motion to dismiss the case, which Petersen and Toma are urging the court to reject.
In the text of the brief, Petersen and Toma establish first and foremost that the case brought by Goldwater and Dr. Anderson “is a civil rights case,” citing Arizona Revised Statutes “enacted in part to prohibit discriminatory state and local government practices, including conduct that could qualify as, or lead to, a discriminatory work environment and even liability for the State.”
Sharing the brief, the Arizona Republican Party wrote in a post to X, “We refuse to normalize discrimination in higher education, or anywhere in the state of Arizona.”
🚨ICYMI: DEI or "Diversity, Equity, & Inclusion" is simply discrimination under another name, and we won't tolerate your tax dollars supporting radical left ideology that provides preferential treatment for individuals based on race, skin color, or sex.
As reported by Goldwater, the crux of the complaint by Dr. Anderson is that Arizona State University is using taxpayer funds to mandate Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion training among the university’s faculty. And that Dr. Anderson’s refusal to participate in the inherently discriminatory training has left him open to discipline from his superiors.
“I shouldn’t be forced to take training and affirm ideas with which I disagree as a condition of employment,’” Dr. Anderson said. “This ‘training’ is simply racism under the guise of DEI. It goes against my conscience, and I want no part of it.”
Goldwater Staff Attorney Stacy Skankey noted, “Arizona state law prohibits mandatory training for state employees and use of taxpayer resources to teach doctrines that discriminate based on race, ethnicity, sex, and other characteristics.”
“But the ‘ASU Inclusive Communities’ training teaches discriminatory DEI concepts, including things like ‘how…white supremacy [is] normalized in society,’ how to ‘critique whiteness’; ‘white privilege’; ‘white fragility’; and the need for ‘transformative justice.’ Even ‘seemingly innocuous questions and comments’—like asking people where they’re from or commenting on their hair—can be deemed ‘racist.’”
Skankey and co-counsel Parker Jackson, representing Dr. Anderson, alleged in the complaint that the Arizona Board of Regents and ASU are “using public money to prepare and disseminate mandatory faculty and staff training for its employees that presents forms of blame or judgment on the basis of race, ethnicity or sex, in violation of state law.” They add that the University is “compelling the speech of public employees by requiring faculty and staff to take an examination following a training that presents forms of blame or judgment on the basis of race, ethnicity or sex, and answer with Arizona State University’s ‘correct’ answers, in violation of the Arizona Constitution.”
The training included slides containing these objectively racial and gender discriminatory statements and concepts:
“[A]cknowledging the history of white supremacy and the social conditions for it to exist as a structural phenomenon.”
“How is white supremacy normalized in society.”
“[G]iven the socio-historical legacy of racism, sexism, homophobia and other forms of structural inequality, perceptions of authority and control are not always granted to minoritized [sic] faculty.”
“White Fragility.”
“What is White Privilege, Really.”
“Explaining White privilege to a broke white person… .”
“7 Ways White People Can Combat Their Privilege.”
“Racism … can take the form of … and include seemingly innocuous questions or comments, such as asking people of color where they are from … .”
“Sexual identities are linked to power, and heterosexuality, the dominant sexual identity in American culture, is privileged by going largely unquestioned.”
A video segment of the training includes the statements via transcript:
“[I]t scares people to talk about white supremacy or to be called a white supremacist. But if we start thinking about it in terms of whiteness as something that is culturally neutral and we’re moving it from that neutral space into a critical space.”
“[W]e also have to open the space to critique whiteness.”
“[W]hite supremacy … referring to here is the period between the 1500’s and the 1800’s that encompasses both Spanish colonization and Euro American colonization. And what colonization did, was it really created this system of binary thinking. There were folks that were inherently good and folks that were inherently bad, and that led to the systems of superiority that were then written into the foundation documents of our nation.”
The original complaint summarizes: “The Inclusive Communities training provides discriminatory concepts including, but not limited to: white people are inherently racist and oppressive, whether consciously or unconsciously; heterosexuals are inherently sexist and oppressive, whether consciously or unconsciously; white people should receive adverse treatment solely or partly because of their race or ethnicity; white people bear responsibility for actions committed by other white people; land acknowledgement statements are a way of holding one race or ethnicity responsible for the actions committed by other members of the same race or ethnicity; transformative justice calls for an individual to bear responsibility for actions committed by other members of the same race, ethnic group or sex; and dominant identities (whites or heterosexuals) are treated morally or intellectually superior to other races, ethnic groups or sexes.”
Skankey explained, “ASU is essentially forcing its employees to agree to a certain type of speech, which violates the Arizona Constitution’s broad protections for free speech.”
Speaking with Fox & Friends in March, Dr. Anderson explained, “I was told I need to ‘decolonize my classroom.’”
In a statement responding to the lawsuit, an ASU spokesman told Fox producers, “The Goldwater Institute suit misleads the court and misrepresents both the content and requirements of this training to make an argument the represents a political perspective but is not based on the law. ASU’s commitment to providing a support and welcoming educational environment for students of all backgrounds will continue and the university will respond appropriately to the Institute’s tactic.”
The case is currently awaiting a response from the Arizona Board of Regents.
A new study released by the ASU Center for an Independent and Sustainable Democracy found that while Generation Z voters have become frustrated with the current state of American politics, there is still major motivation to participate in the 2024 election.
The survey, published by Noble Predictive Insights, polled Arizona registered voters from 20-30 years old and showed that 66% of them say they will “definitely” participate in the 2024 election but are wildly dissatisfied with the political parties as they exist today. 80% said they feel that the major political parties are “out of touch” with their generation and that there should be more choices on the ballot.
According to the poll, several conclusions stood out. Notably, the cohort predominantly identifies as independent with 49% of them eschewing membership in either major party.
The pollsters added, “they are profoundly frustrated with the political world that has been handed down to them. Only 20 percent of this group feels that the current political system works for their generation and 80 percent feel that both the Democratic and Republican parties are out of touch with people their age. Well over half feel that all politicians are corrupt.”
Thom Reilly, professor and co-director for ASU CISD explained, “Arizona’s Gen Z voters are sending a clear message that they are dissatisfied with the political status quo. They’re rejecting traditional party affiliations in favor of a more independent stance. Still, they haven’t given up on the democratic process. They are looking for alternatives and believe in their power to affect change through voting.”
Our recent survey of 1315 registered Gen Z voters: 2 out of 3 in Arizona say they will vote in November; 4 in 5 say the 2 major parties don’t represent them ; 49% are registered as independent ; top issues: economics , abortion, fair and secure elections https://t.co/ecsdYzVIKl
The poll indicated that by far the most pressing concerns of the Generation Z voters are economically and resource driven with the cost of living, affordable housing, and the protection of the water supply as most important, followed by healthcare, free and fair elections, jobs, and abortion.
Co-director Jacqueline Salit added, “Understanding these priorities is crucial for any candidate or party hoping to engage with Gen Z voters. These young Arizonans are deeply concerned about their economic futures, but they’re also engaged with broader social issues like healthcare access, election integrity, and reproductive rights.”
Clean Elections Executive Director Tom Collins told ASU News, “Understanding how Gen Z voters see our electoral system is particularly important for outreach to build and sustain democratic principles.”
Conversely, lowest on the agenda for Generation Z voters according to the survey are the potential ban of Tiktok, the U.S. role in the Russo-Ukrainian war, student loan debt, and LGBTQ+ rights.
Noble Predictive Insights found that the broad issue revealed by the poll is political disengagement in addition to a general dissatisfaction with the existing political status quo. Mike Noble, NPI Founder & CEO noted, “Young voters are giving us a clear message: ‘Show me that you care about what I care about.’ The data from this survey can act as a roadmap for political campaigns and civic organizations to motivate young voters.”
He added, ”What we’re seeing is a generation that’s rejecting political labels and traditional party loyalties. They’re independent-minded, issue-focused, and deeply committed to their principles. Any candidate or party that hopes to succeed with these voters will need to speak to their unique concerns and values and engage with them on the digital platforms where they’re getting and communicating information and opinions.”
A year-long study by the Arizona State University Center for American Institutions examining the Department of Defense (DOD) has identified and soundly condemned what the authors refer to as the “Vast DEI Bureaucracy” that has pervaded the everyday operations of the Pentagon and the varied service academies of the U.S. Uniformed Services. Damningly, the report found that the DOD has spent millions in taxpayer dollars creating a culture of “race and sex-based scapegoating and stereotyping.” The study in and of itself is a brutal excoriation of the military under the Biden Administration and “calls for an immediate end to the Pentagon’s multimillion-dollar DEI bureaucracy.”
The study, “The National Commission on Civic Education in the Military,” was compiled by Commissioners Lt. Col. (ret.) Matthew Lohmeier, Karrin Taylor Robson, and John Cauthen, along with a team of ASU researchers who over the past year evaluated, “the history, evolution, and implementation of diversity and equity programs across all branches of the military and military academies.” The final report is titled, “Civic Education in the Military: Are Servicemembers More Prepared for Micro-Aggression or Macro-Aggression?”
Professor Donald Critchlow, Director of the Center for American Institutions, explained the findings in a release provided to AZ Free News, “Our research reviewed DEI policy in the military starting in the nineteen seventies to the modern day and concluded there are far more effective ways to promote unity and respect among military ranks than by spending millions annually to divide servicemembers by their gender or race.”
Critchlow added, “Just as private companies have abandoned the toxic advice of DEI consultants and programs, military leaders should end social engineering based on critical race theory and restore approaches that promote character and merit.”
The report opens with an Executive Introduction in which Critchlow definitively states, “Given its importance, the U.S. Armed Forces should not be a laboratory for social experimentation, especially one based on Critical Race Theory, a contentious and abstract social theory. Yet, as this Commission Report on Civic Education in the Military shows in great detail, Critical Race Theory is promoted within Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion (DEI) training throughout the military from the Pentagon through the ranks and in our service academies.”
NEWS: Diversity, Equity, Inclusion Are Necessities in U.S. Military. https://t.co/7WEWrveNcc
A sampling of the most egregious findings includes:
“DEI themes dominate the training and education that members of the armed forces receive about their country. As ‘white supremacy’ and racism have become a central focus of DEI trainings, white supremacist racism is assumed to be the core problem of the nation and of the military.”
“DEI training focuses on rooting out ‘white supremacy’ even though there is little or no evidence that there is a problem of white supremacy in the military. The massive hunt during the stand-down in 2020 located roughly 100 out of a force of 2.1 million.”
“Spending on DEI programming is increasing. The DOD’s allocation for DEI projects jumped from $68 million in fiscal year 2022 to $86.5 million in fiscal year 2023. The Pentagon is requesting $114.7 million for fiscal year 2024.”
West Point Military Academy offers a minor in “Diversity and Inclusion Studies,” with courses such as “Social Inequality,” “The Politics of Race, Gender, and Sexuality,” and “Power and Difference.” In the course description, the report reveals the courses as “an introduction to the theoretical concepts of post-modernism. This will include a focus on Feminist Theory, Critical Race Theory, and Queer Theory.”
U.S. Navy training asserts that servicemembers who reject implicit racial bias are “potential problems” saying, “Participants who refuse to acknowledge how bias has affected their lives or the lives of others may invalidate the experience of those with marginalized identities in the room and cause them harm,” and instructs sailors to “Prioritize a continuing conversation, rather than attempting to shut the conversation down. One suggestion is to acknowledge the bias-denier’s comments and ask for other perspectives from the rest of the group.” A procedure which could be compared to a classic Maoist “struggle session.”
The Army released directives Wednesday prohibiting soldiers from defined extremist activities and guiding commanders on how to handle cases. https://t.co/5JKIPQchKU
As reported by Task and Purpose, an Army directive has been aimed at rooting out “extremism” which includes “requirements set in the 2021 NDAA for service IGs to work with the Deputy Inspector General for Diversity and Inclusion and Extremism in the Military ‘to establish policies, processes, tracking mechanisms and reporting requirements for allegations of supremacist, extremist, and criminal gang activity in the Army,’” citing a statement from Sean Mackintosh of the Army Inspector General Agency.
As Lohmeier, a former Space Force commander who was removed from duty in 2021 after drawing public scrutiny to DEI training, summarized, “It’s no surprise that young people are turning away from military service in record numbers. As this comprehensive report illuminates, DEI indoctrination has become a core component of military training that begins for officers even at the service academies.” He continued, “How can we be prepared to confront our adversaries if our warfighters aren’t laser focused on the mission but instead are divided and distracted by ideology?”
The report makes several recommendations on how the DOD can remediate the situation and begin to undo the damage. It calls upon the Pentagon to:
“Immediately end the DEI bureaucracy or pursue alternative avenues to affect positive change despite existing policies.”
“Return to the military’s outstanding tradition of merit-based selections and promotions and nondiscriminatory equal opportunity.”
“Make the syllabi for all humanities and social sciences courses taught at our military service academies publicly available.”
“Provide educational training materials to enhance personnel understanding of American philosophy, politics, government, and the Constitution.”
A speaker at Arizona State University’s George Floyd-themed art exhibit claimed Floyd died for “each and every last one of us.”
“Had not George Floyd died, we wouldn’t be here,” said Eliza Wesley, Minneapolis resident and “gatekeeper” of the Square. “God chose him. He was a chosen vessel.”
Wesley said she “almost had an emotional breakdown” on her way to the exhibit in response to Floyd’s death, the four year anniversary of which is on May 25.
The art exhibit, titled “Twin Flames: The George Floyd Uprising from Minneapolis to Phoenix,” features Black Lives Matter 2020 protest posters and an image of Floyd wearing a crown of thorns.
One of the displays draws parallels to religious figures, with George Floyd wearing a crown of thorns. Why does the left continue to lift up and idolize a man we know was a convicted criminal?@TPUSApic.twitter.com/Qfr0cZVgnl
The exhibit opened Feb. 3 and will remain at the ASU Art Museum until July 28. According to the website, the exhibit showcases “the thousands of offerings laid by mourners and protesters at George Floyd Square.”
“This exhibition recognizes that creative and artistic expressions of pain and hope exist beyond the walls of museums, in all forms and a myriad of cultural expressions, and that George Floyd Square is a public space that can teach us how to mobilize as we mourn victims of police violence and imagine a more just world,” ASU’s description of the exhibition reads.
Frontlines Turning Point USA shared the video of Wesley’s speech on X. The exhibit “features shocking imagery and narratives that elevate Floyd to a near-mythical status,” Frontlines wrote.
EXCLUSIVE: At the opening of a George Floyd-themed art exhibit at ASU, the “Gatekeeper of George Floyd Square” in Minneapolis makes a bold claim: George Floyd died for “each and every last one of us.”
