Evergreen State Faculty Vote to Ban Word ‘Covenant’ Due to ‘Cultural Genocide’


#1

Evergreen State Faculty Vote to Ban Word ‘Covenant’ Due to ‘Cultural Genocide’

Tom Ciccotta 4 Dec 2018 Breitbart News

The faculty at Evergreen State College has voted to ban the word “covenant,” which allegedly has ties to “cultural genocide.”

The Evergreen State College faculty has voted to ban the word “covenant” as the college struggles to enroll students. The decision is a reflection of the backwards priorities at Evergreen State College, which desperately needs to reverse its course to prevent the 50-year-old college from facing a potential shutdown.

No campus protest in recent memory has caught the media’s attention quite like the spring 2017 protests at Evergreen State College. The saga, which centered around progressive biology Professor Bret Weinstein’s refusal to participate in an illiberal “diversity” activism event, involved student protesters roaming campus with baseball bats, an intentional disarming of campus police, and the university president being held hostage by students.

In notes from the faculty meeting in which the word was banned, the faculty argues that “covenant” represents the cultural genocide of Native Nations. . . .

What can I say?

Absolutely bizarre thinking by “Evergreen”.


#2

Evergreen was just in the kooky–idea–news in a big way last year too.


#3

Look deeper. Did Evergreen State really ban the word “covenant?” Did they issue a wide-ranging edict that the word should not be used on campus? No. They did not.

What they did was, in the normal process of periodic updating of the faculty handbook and other official documents, they decided to replace the word with equivalent terms like “community agreement.” That’s all. It is no big deal.

If you want to learn more about the negative connotations of “covenant” for Native Americans, just look up “Covenant Chain.” It is a connotation that any Native American aware of his history will know quite well.


#4

It’s still pretty strange. I, for one, had never heard of the use of the term “covenant” in the context of agreements with the eastern Indians. I had heard of “Ark of the Covenant”. I had heard of “the old Covenant” and “the new Covenant”. I have seen the word thousands of times in contracts. “Wherefore the parties covenant and agree as follows…”

I think somebody worked pretty hard to find a way to feign sensitivity in order to assert his moral superiority.


#5

I feel this way therefore everyone must change to how I feel (at this particular moment).

I think these people must be starting to isolate themselves from the greater community. If I was on the teaching faculty i’d be using the word more often - ‘Democrat’s covenant with voters’ for example.

Or i’d be walking away wondering when the men in white cots would be visiting the campus.

Honestly this religion is a public menace.

We have rosaries, crosses and holy pictures to remind us of tenets of our religion.

The liberals police the language of others to remind them of theirs.


#6

just look up “Covenant Chain.”

Do you think they should ban the word “chain” too?


#7

Huh??? And be haunted by an angry Aretha Franklin???

I don’t think so.


#8

If 99% of the people have to look up why a word is offensive, removing it is stupid thing to do.

That said, a private school that no one has heard up save for the silly things it does is free to do however many stupid things they want.


#9

If replacing a word by an equivalent word is simple and no problem, then doing so is no big deal, except that Breitbart likes to make it a big deal to push their ideological agenda.


#10

I see it as Breitbart highlighting Everbroke’s foolish ideological agenda, but to each his own.


#11

They are definitely wasting limited bandwidth virtue signalling

I would suspect Native Americans are more upset with the word “treaty” but even that shouldn’t negate the value and use of the word.

The English speaking world didn’t ban “treaty” after WW1 because it’s a ridiculous response to the issue.


#12

What limited bandwidth? It was a small meeting of college officials discussing editing of official documents, which has to be done from time to time anyway.

How is the word “covenant” any more valuable than the suitable synonyms in a faculty handbook? Is it even the best word to use to describe what they are describing? I don’t see how any value was lost by switching to alternatives.

That’s because the English speaking world did not lose WW1.


#13

LeafByNiggle . . .

It is no big deal.

That’s fine if you want to think that Leaf.

But I think it IS a big deal.

Karl Keating once talked about this principle not with campus manuals, but with politics.

He warned pro-abort Senators always begin somewhere lower down the food chain (my term).

He said, therefore, you do not vote for pro-abort politicians even for “dog-catcher”.

Likewise in principle these toxic ideas start on on “innocent”, “no-big-deal” manual edits.

Later on these ideas grow out of control and metastasize.

Before you know it, people who think like this, and are allowed to push that view upon others, will be doing something really nutty.

Like attempting to ban people from campus (even for a day) based upon their skin color!

  • A “You are not allowed to be here because of your skin color!” paradigm.

Whoops. That has already occurred at Evergreen.

For other readers . . . .

These are toxic, bigoted, totalitarian ideas and I think most people will recognize them as such.

Do not be lulled to sleep by the smaller magnitude of the enforcement of this. Remain vigilant.


#14

I don’t think any country felt like a winner when that conflict ended.
The total number of military and civilian casualties in World War I was about 40 million


#15

Evergreen is a public school.

Oh man if what they’re doing is wasting bandwidth imagine how much bandwidth is being wasted by the media outlets promoting this story and us by discussing it further


#16

Thanks for the clarification; good to know they accept public funding to waste people’s time.


#17

I think the U.S. did, by and large, even though even the relatively low U.S. loss of life (compared to the others) was significant. Romania got Transylvania out of it. Poland got the corridor. Italy got the Trieste region. Japan got Germany’s colonies in China and a stepping-stone to conquer most of the country. Finland, Ukraine, and the Baltic states got a short-lived independence. Britain and France gained territory, but I very much doubt they thought it was worth it.


#18

This topic was automatically closed 14 days after the last reply. New replies are no longer allowed.


DISCLAIMER: The views and opinions expressed in these forums do not necessarily reflect those of Catholic Answers. For official apologetics resources please visit www.catholic.com.