Stanford University made headlines a week ago when its IT Department’s new guidebook on policing the English language accidentally leaked to the New York Post. The guidebook had ten categories of naughty words that supposedly hurt the feelings of communists, so you’re not supposed to use those words anymore. It included hateful, bigoted terms like “American,” and “beating a dead horse.” You know, the sorts of words that make SJWs have to run for their fainting couches.
Fortunately, the public backlash was so severe that Stanford’s administrators are now backing down, claiming that they really didn’t mean it.
This latest language-policing project is – or was – known as the Elimination of Harmful Language Initiative (EHLI). They published a booklet and put the info online, which was what was leaked to the Post. The categories of banned words included “Culturally Appropriated,” “Gendered Language,” and of course, “Institutionalized Racism.”
According to the guide, “American” is an offensive term to snowflakes because, “[It] often refers to people from the United States only, thereby insinuating that the US is the most important country in the Americas.”
Uh… spoiler alert! Out of the 42 countries in the Americas, which one are the citizens of the other 41 countries always trying to sneak into illegally? America is the most important country in the Americas, for many obvious reasons that don’t need to be repeated here. But that’s not really the point of the SJWs who wrote this guide. The reason they want to ban the term “American” is that they hate America and they want to erase it, so their team can rule over the ashes.
The guide also called for replacing “Hispanic” with “Latinx,” a term that no Hispanic in history has ever used to describe themselves. “Grandfather” is also a no-no and is supposed to be somehow replaced with “legacy.” And “white paper” is supposed to be replaced with “position paper,” for an obvious reason.
At any rate, the backlash was immediate and intense when word about the language-policing guide got out.
Congresswoman Ashley Hinson (R-IA) asked, “If Stanford thinks the word American is harmful, what are they doing with American taxpayer dollars?”
Good question. And since Americans are the most generous people on earth, it’s a certainty that most of the Stanford Alumni Association’s donations come from the “Americans” that they despise so much.
Dr. Jay Bjattacharya, one of the most important and prominent medical voices in speaking out about the lunacy of the Covid policy and the dangers of the shots, is a professor at Stanford. He wasn’t impressed with the attempt to ban free speech either, noting, “I remember how proud I was when I became a naturalized American citizen. I’m still proud to be an American, and I don’t care that @Stanford disapproves of my using the term.”
The chief information officer at Stanford quickly walked back the guide in the face of so much intense backlash. Steve Gallagher noted that the list of naughty, banned words does not reflect university policy, nor does it contain mandates that students are not actually supposed to say those words. This seems disingenuous at best. The university published the list of words – both in print and online. It doesn’t matter what they say now, because every student has kind of gotten the point. You’re a bad person if you say “American” or “Hispanic” or “grandfather.”
Gallagher now says the university will be revising the guide. That’s not good enough. How about if the American students at the American university of Stanford, whose American parents are paying exorbitant sums in tuition and fees using American dollars, say whatever they want because Americans have freedom of speech?
