Commenters get it

Lincolnite Dwayne Ball’s Thursday letter to the editor at the Journal Star accused my Sunday cartoon of reaching “a new low” thanks to what he describes as a “personal,” “mean-spirited” and “ad hominem” attack. He claims that the information Marc Schniederjans withheld is well-known and could easily be compiled.

The problem is, Ball and other defenders of Schniederjans seem to imply that Schniederjans was simply withholding the names of the faculty members who were hired without searches, and that this information he referred to is some kind of indisputable fact. But that’s not what Schniederjans said. He said “…the University of Nebraska, in effort to get as many minorities as they possibly can, have hired people that didn’t cut it.”

He also said the University uses opportunity money “to bribe department chairs,” and he suggested recruiters should “…get off their butts and start working and hire some people who are really high-quality African Americans,” which is not subtle in its implication that the University is hiring people who are low-quality African Americans. He added that the “basic idea in recruiting people is to find people who certainly meet the minimum requirements … it has been my observation on this campus that that is not the case.”

The details of which faculty members are unqualified for their jobs is what Schniederjans wouldn’t disclose, and that assertion was hardly accepted as fact by the Academic Senate. Throughout the debate, several professors openly disagreed with Schniederjans’ assertion, saying that their departments “always sought to hire the best person” and “in no case have we not hired the best person.” One member of the audience told Schniederjans that if he has evidence of bribery occurring, he needs to bring it forward or stop using such inflammatory statements (Schniederjans admitted he classifies opportunity money as “bribery;” the questioner slammed Schniederjans for having such a poor understanding of opportunity hires). So for Schniederjans’ defenders to act as if his undisclosed information is widely available, easily discoverable and indisputable is simply untrue.

And therein lies the point of the cartoon. To pretend that withholding the names of the unqualified hires is somehow gracious or considerate is absurd when the act of withholding said names casts a net of suspicion over every minority or opportunity hire at the University, and several visitors at the Journal Star caught that.

“…In this case, its Schneiderjans who claims there are known minority and women professors at UNL who are unqualified, hired via some affirmative action program. Without knowing who he’s talking about, exactly how does UNL refute this claim beyond saying its false (which they’ve done)? But if he were actually to name the people he claims are unqualified, everyone would be able to view their qualifications and judge them for themselves. And perhaps we might discover those “unqualified” professors are in fact highly qualified, and an asset to the school! But we’ll never know, because while Schneiderjans waves his list of known to be unqualified (but perhaps totally mythical) staff, but refuses to actually name them, no one can know just how he determined they were unqualified. If they even exist, perhaps they’re just people he doesn’t like, or whose politics are different than his own?…”

“…The professor doesn’t want to name names so he slimes every minority hire by inferring that any of them could have been hired without a search.”

“…If you make a statement you ought to at least be stand up enough to name names and offer proof of your claim. Failure to do so is below contempt and an attempt to smear good people because of their color or gender…”

The story covering the debate includes a comment from someone who may or may not be a UNL professor.

“…I am an Asian male. Right now, I am feeling weird. Was I a minority hire at UNL? Not sure … Reading the article, I felt very insulted. Probably, it’s time to move on. Probably, I should go to places where Asian males are not considered minorities. Sad to leave this somewhat boring yet peaceful town, but I don’t want to be treated as a minority hire. In addition, I sincerely believe I am a better teacher and scholar in my department…”

Schniederjans has successfully furthered a mentality that views every non-white hire with suspicion in his quest for so-called “equality.” The obvious irony is that Schniederjans’ defenders have criticized the cartoon as a scurrilous attack.

I highly recommend listening to the debate. While this post is about what Schniederjans said, Sen. Danielle Nantkes makes some great points. “Just to be clear, no matter how many times the opposition says it, that doesn’t mean it’s true,” she said. “It is already illegal under state and federal law to hire anyone based on their gender or race alone.”

The audio is courtesy of the Journal Star.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>