Purple Bruises: My Thoughts on Mob Rule at Williams College – John C. Drew

As one of the last conservatives to have ever taught at Williams College, I feel vindicated in reporting that this once prestigious school has now devolved into a form of mob rule. Based on the aggressive language used to intimidate students like Zach Wood, it looks to me like the college is now dominated by hard leftists who have more in common with Joseph Stalin than with FDR. Under this radical, threatening regime, we have seen a stunning failure to provide adequate security for anti-feminist speaker Susan Venker, the outright censorship of race realist John Derbyshire, and the inexplicable tolerance of anti-Semitic hate speech from Palestinian-American poet Remi Kanazi.

Trust me. I understand mob rule and the role of censorship. I’m a former Communist myself. I’m also well informed about the continuing dysfunction and lack of intellectual diversity at Williams College. As you may know, I was among the first young, white, professors at Williams College to pay a high price for for teaching politically incorrect ideas including how black poverty and inequality would be more efficiently resolved with the improved use of inexpensive condoms than with the wholesale adoption of a socialist economy. Then, as now, my ideas caused howls of indignation and immediate accusations of racism among supposedly liberal folks who–by tradition, at least–should have been more concerned about protecting my freedom of speech. As James Lewis writes at American Thinker:

“We can never forget that U.S. ‘liberals” of this generation are not liberals at all; they have fallen back into ruthless Leftism, just like the old days of Joe Stalin. This is the Left that threw Lawrence Summers out as president of Harvard for wondering out loud whether some boys are just better in math than girls. This is the Left that keeps imposing ever-harsher speech and behavior codes on college students, with white guys as the official scapegoats. This Left manipulates universities by mob threats. This is the Left that tried to physically attack General David Petraeus at NYU, so he had to run for it. This is the Left that deliberately stirs up race hatred, as in Ferguson and Baltimore. This is the Left that has made common cause with primitive jihadist regimes in Europe and the U.S.”

As one of only three Republicans teaching at Williams College in the 1980s, I was quickly marginalized for suggesting that white attitudes and U.S. capitalism inadequately explained why violent crimes are disproportionately committed by blacks. According to the Bureau of Justice Statistics, blacks were charged with 62% of all robberies, 57% of murders and 45% of assaults in the 75 largest U.S. counties in 2009, though they made up roughly 15% of the population there. It strikes me as nothing less than ideological blindness to insist that such extraordinary violence is the unfortunate result of peaceful white folks living ordinary lives in our nation’s rural and suburban areas.

In this context, I’m shocked by the sheer ignorance of Williams College’s president, Adam Falk. I don’t think there is a serious person who has studied John Derbyshire who would classify him as either idiotic, a lunatic, or a white supremacist. In my view, Falk’s flippant, juvenile comments on this website and elsewhere are uninformed, and display a profound level of misunderstanding about race realism, political culture studies and alt-right philosophy.

The simplest explanation for his mistreatment of John Derbyshire is that this is the sort of mistake that happens when physicists get involved in political and biological matters for which they have no training or relevant experience. While most faculty members are experts in our own fields, we tend to be hapless amateurs everywhere else.

There is, however, a more complex explanation that goes to the heart at why mob rule is the order of the day at Williams College. If there were more diversity of opinion, and freedom of thought, at Williams College, then someone could have informed Falk that censoring John Derbyshire was a big mistake and a setback for Williams College.

The reason there is no intellectual diversity at Williams College is because conservative, Republican thinkers have long since been pushed out of the full-time faculty. I should know. While I taught at Williams College, it was said that conservative students were passive and not very active. It was suggested that there was not much interest in conservative thought on the campus. Certainly not enough interest in conservative thought to spend time worrying about the intellectual diversity of the faculty in the political science department.

Nevertheless, in less than a year, the campus saw a veritable renaissance of conservative activities and thought as conservative students – with my support and active encouragement – established a conservative newspaper, a conservative radio show, and a conservative television show on the local cable access channel. We had qualified speakers at the Garfield Republican Club. The conservative students rallied around my office, which I decorated with a large American flag. We went out of our way to tick off the liberal/Communist professors by loudly greeting each other with hearty cries of “Merry Christmas.” Ironically, an independent study conducted of the political science department recommended changes be made to address the department’s lack of ideological diversity.

As far as I can tell, I am the last registered Republican to have ever taught in the political science department at Williams College. I am certainly the last to have ever espoused consistently conservative views from a sincere, heartfelt perspective. I am also, apparently, the first and only assistant professor who was denied the opportunity to continue along the tenure track pathway.

This itself is quite odd, since, in the 1980s, I was one of our nation’s top young scholars. Hired at Williams in 1986, I went on to win national recognition for my doctoral dissertation from the American Political Science Association (APSA). I completed my dissertation during my first year teaching at Williams College. The quality of this work was so great that it has now been published, in book form, almost exactly as I wrote it under the low-ceiling of my tiny, unheated office in Stetson Hall. My thesis was by published by Praeger, the extraordinary house that also published Alexander Solzhenitsyn’s One Day in the Life of Ivan Denisovich. Apparently, the study, which documented a lack of ideological diversity at Williams College, has had little impact then or since.

Even as the nation has drifted in a conservative direction — overwhelmingly electing conservatives to statehouses, governorships and Congress — Williams College has held tight to teaching a narrow band of truth and lies. It clings to an unrealistic and unsustainable hard left faith that intentions are more important than reality. Accordingly, it will be a long time until we see an end to mirco-aggression monitors who eagerly to hunt down the unwitting first-year student who is stupid enough to tell a joke, have some fun, or say something devastatingly obvious. We are in a dangerous time. The hard left mob feels justified in every possible abuse while truth remains as vulnerable as any freezing bunkmate of Ivan Denisovich.

134 thoughts on “Purple Bruises: My Thoughts on Mob Rule at Williams College – John C. Drew

  1. “In this context, I’m shocked by the sheer ignorance of Williams College’s president, Adam Falk. I don’t think there is a serious person who has studied John Derbyshire who would classify him as either idiotic, a lunatic, or a white supremacist. In my view, Falk’s flippant, juvenile comments on this website and elsewhere are uninformed, and display a profound level of misunderstanding about race realism, political culture studies and alt-right philosophy.”

    Professor Falk,

    Cut the boy some slack. After all, he is a mere feckless virtue signaling lower mid-six figure (with a free house and a free fully stocked liquor cabinet) careerist log-roller.

  2. This is the saddest most pathetic butthurt rant from an equally sad pathetic butthurt man. Go for a walk, wash you face, and please please get a life, because your unsolicited diary entries don’t belong on my timeline.


  3. Dr. Drew, have you ever been diagnosed with a personality disorder? I mean that in the most polite way possible.

    • Really? One of my favorite theories is that the self-hate inherent in leftist ideology cause Williams College to welcome more than its fair share of the dangerously mentally ill. While I taught there, I remember almost 2% of the faculty committed suicide.


      Frankly, I don’t see how you can avoid mental illness if you devote your life to the boring and ultimately repetitive task of teaching 18-21 year-olds, live in one of the crappiest places on Earth, and then swear allegiance to the dysfunctional values of the left.

      • If this is one of the crappiest places on Earth, why are you so sore about not being a professor here? Do you still put Williams College in your bio just to cling to a tiny crumb of prestige? Have you ever considered moving on with your life?

        And why do you continue to comment on current issues? Are you one of the funders of Uncomfortable Learning, by any chance? I think everyone would like to know if you had a direct financial role in the situation you are commenting on.

  4. The war on Christmas is a serious issue at Williams these days that isn’t talked about enough. I applaud the author’s bravery in bringing this issue back into the limelight.

    • I agree, this is a real issue. Nobody at Williams is allowed to observe their religion because the place is run by godless commies. Save me, John!

  5. A brief preface: I grew up keeping Kosher. I went to synagogue every Saturday. I went to Hebrew School twice a week after public school at my synagogue, studying Hebrew as well as Jewish history, law, and ethics. I was called to the torah as a Bar Mitzvah in August 2011. I continue to be involved with social justice work at my synagogue back home, and hope to raise my children with a strong sense of Jewish ethics. I am a Jew, and I am proud to be a Jew.

    I also oppose Israel’s illegal occupation of Palestinian lands, as well as their consistent refusal to abide by international law and brokered treaties. I find the treatment of Palestinians within Israel to be shameful and offensive, running contrary to every moral principle I learned in Hebrew school as a child.

    Can you actually point to anything Remi Kanazi said at Williams that is antisemitic? The link you supplied simply points to Kanazi sharing factual claims about the occupation— the “hundreds of Israeli checkpoints” figure comes from a UN report in 2011. The IDF now claims that there are only 13, but that number is contested by a variety of news organizations and advocacy groups. Fact-based criticism of the state of Israel and the illegal occupation it carries out is not antisemitism, but a moral call for human rights and respect for international law.

    I find it especially offensive that you make these false claims of antisemitism against Remi Kanazi—who, for the record, frequently works with the organization Jewish Voice for Peace—while supporting the presidential campaign of Donald Trump, a man who made a wildly antisemitic speech to the Republican Jewish Coalition in which he stated, “Stupidly, you want to give money… But you’re not going to support me because I don’t want your money,” later adding, “You want to control your own politicians.”

    Stop trying to use Jews to promote your own political agenda. If you really cared about antisemitism, confront the antisemitism rampant on the radical right. Question why Donald Trump feels comfortable using antisemitic tropes. Interrogate your beloved John Derbyshire on why he has “complicated and sometimes self-contradictory feelings about the Jews.” Until you’ve actually thought through what antisemitism looks like in America today, please do the Jewish community a favor and shut up.

    • If you can’t figure out that Remi Kanazi is antisemitic, then I feel sorry for you. In truth, I know that your primary motivation in defending him is most likely partisan. After all, if you really cared about antisemitism you would be doing more to confront the antisemitism rampant among blacks and latinos right here in the U.S.


      As a political scientist, I’m probably more sensitive than you to the fact that the so-called Palestinians fought for the wrong team during WWII. Some still name their children after Adolf Hitler. Please let this uncomfortable learning sink into your brain and then let me know what you really think. As you may know, my Armenian relatives were among those most recently harmed in a genocide lead by Islamic adherents. I have plenty more thoughts on this issue.

      • I believe the question was: “Can you actually point to anything Remi Kanazi said at Williams that is antisemitic?” I, for one, would like to hear the answer to this question.

        It’s really uncalled-for to accuse a Jewish person of not caring about antisemitism, especially when they have just made a long and well-researched post encouraging you to care more about antisemitism instead of just manipulating the word to your liking. I am a little morbidly curious about your actual thoughts on antisemitism.

        Are you reading anyone’s comments before replying to them?

      • I should point out that it is trivial and misleading to ask me to “point to anything Remi Kanazi said at Williams that is antisemitic?” Under Adam Falk’s standards, Kanazi should have been banned for his long-standing history as a purveyor of hateful antisemitism.

        As Naomi Friedman points out in a recent blog post at Ephblog, Remi Kanazi denies “…Jewish right to self-determination. Kanazi poeticizes about segregated bus (no such thing), hundreds of Israeli checkpoints (there are 13), and other fabrications in order to falsely associate Jewish society with apartheid. And Kanazi dreams of day when “Zionists” will cower.”

        At the very least, no one would ever catch John Derbyshire in an outright lie designed to demonize another group. Lying, however, appears to be okay, and even encouraged, at Williams College as long as those lies promote a hard left agenda.

        • Okay, so now I gotta respond to this one. I’ll broaden the query: point to something that Remi Kanazi has said that was antisemitic.

          The segregated bus was very much a thing, though it was called off a few hours into implementation.
          Source: http://www.bbc.com/news/world-middle-east-32807783

          I already responded to the checkpoints claim in my original comment; I’m not going to repeat myself.

          As for “dream[ing] of the day when Zionists will cower”, I do think that is a somewhat reasonable poetic reaction to the occupation and subjugation of the Palestinian people. It’s very much relevant that Zionism is a political ideology, not a religion.

          • I guess you don’t get out into the real world very much. For most of us, it is perfectly obvious that anti-Zionism is antisemitism.

            See, http://www.nationalreview.com/corner/384039/why-anti-zionism-modern-anti-semitism-benjamin-weinthal

            Kanazi, who spoke at Williams College with Adam Falk’s approval, is among the most vile of the antisemits who have spoken at Williams College. There is a big gap 13 checkpoints and “hundreds of check points.”

            From my perspective, anyone claiming that there are more than 13 is lying and displaying the sort of antisemitism that should be condemned by all of us.

          • John (I can’t reply directly–I guess the comment section only allows a certain amount of nested replies),

            I’ll repeat myself since you once again did not read my comment: Kanazi wrote about there being hundreds of checkpoints in 2007, when the UN confirmed that there were over 500 roadblocks and checkpoints in the West Bank (http://www.ochaopt.org/documents/closureupdateoctober2007.pdf). I am inclined to treat the UN as a somewhat more reliable source than the IDF. If you look at this and other official documents you will see that “hundreds of checkpoints” was not a lie, even if there are much fewer right now.

            I believe you have said that you are Christian. Why is a Christian telling two Jewish anti-Zionists that anti-Zionism = antisemitism, therefore implying that we are antisemitic liars? Sit the fuck down.

        • How does any of your evidence from Friedman’s blog point to antisemitism? Remember that anti-Zionism doesn’t count.

          Just to clear up the facts, Kanazi wrote about there being hundreds of checkpoints in 2007, when the UN confirmed that there were over 500 roadblocks and checkpoints in the West Bank (http://www.ochaopt.org/documents/closureupdateoctober2007.pdf). That’s still totally irrelevant to antisemitism. Instead of quoting Ephblog, maybe you could cite some actual evidence that Kanazi is a “purveyor of hateful antisemitism”, if any exists.

          Anyway, I’m becoming increasingly curious as to what you think the “hard left agenda” is. Please enlighten us.

      • Dr. Drew-

        I actually tried very hard to figure out if Remi Kanazi is antisemitic. I found nothing that rose above the level of “OMG he opposes the opposition and doesn’t like Zionists!” If you want to drop in a link to something actually damning, I’m happy to read it. I await your evidence.

        I’m also rather tickled that you can infer what I care about from one short comment and an anonymized username. I am quite guilty of being on the left, but you would be very wrong to assume I give a free pass to antisemitism in any form. I fully recognize that there is antisemitism present in the black and Latinx communities; I also recognize that there is a good deal of racism present in the American Jewish community. However, the presence of antisemitism in black and Latinx communities in the United States does not change the fact that you have championed two men (Donald Trump and John Derbyshire) who have made antisemitic statements.

        I am also aware that some Palestinians (I don’t know why you refer to them as “so-called” beyond Islamophobia) supported the Axis in WWII. During WWII, Palestine was controlled by the British, a situation that many (unsurprisingly) were not a fan of. Some saw a Nazi victory as their best chance to remove the UK from Mandatory Palestine—a conviction, I might add, shared by several Jewish Zionist groups as well. I am well aware that some Palestinians are antisemitic; I am also well aware that some Jews are Islamophobic—take, for example, the man at my synagogue who stood up during Yom Kippur services one year and shouted “The Palestinians are Amaleks and should be exterminated.” You can find extremists on all sides who say and do truly horrifying things; however, that does not change international law. Israel has reneged on numerous treaties and expanded settlements. Israel has turned Gaza City into a gigantic prison. The IDF has shown a reckless disregard for civilian lives (which, in fairness is shared by Hamas). I do not support the Netanyahu regime, I do not support Hamas. I condemn the murder of civilians by any military. However, the international law is clear: Israel must end the occupation and allow the right of return for Palestinians.

        A brief historical note: the Armenian Genocide (which was horrific, as all genocides are) was carried out in the Second Constitutional Era of the Ottoman Empire, when, following the Young Turk Revolution of 1908, the Ottoman Empire was controlled by secularists. And while we’re blaming entire religions for actions perpetrated by extremists, here’s a fun list of things that you, as a Christian, would share blame for under your logic:
        -The Holocaust
        -The Spanish Inquisition
        -The Crusades
        -The Bosnian Genocide
        -The Pogroms (which, coincidentally, brought my ancestors to the United States)
        -The Thirty Years War
        -The Ku Klux Klan
        -The deaths of the scientists Hypatia of Alexandria, Giordano Bruno, Michael Servetus…
        Can we agree that blaming all members of one religion for the actions of a few extremists is utterly ridiculous?

        • As I was saying, you are obviously a partisan who is in denial about the dangers posed by Islam. Here are some good questions for you:

          1. What exactly have you done to fight the overwhelming antisemitism alarmingly apparent in the black and Latinx communities?

          2. How is it in my interest to help anyone who is an adherent of Islam given that the Qur’an teaches a perverted image of God which is hostile to Jews and Christians?

          3. Why should I trust the adherents of Islam to be safe neighbors when the experience of my own family shows that they were quick to murder a ton of my relatives out of their anti-Christian hatred? Please remember there were multiple Armenian genocides…not just one.

          4. Realistically, aren’t the number of deaths associated with Christianity minuscule compared to the deaths associated with Islam? See, https://themuslimissue.wordpress.com/2013/06/19/muslims-have-killed-over-590-million-non-muslims-since-the-birth-of-mohammed/

          5. Islamic adherents like the folks in ISIS are carefully following the rules established in the Qur’an. Why is it in my interest to snuff out the Jewish nation of Israel which is my steadfast ally in stopping Islam?

          6. When, if ever, has a Williams College professor challenged your views and asked you to back up your arguments by thoroughly evaluating the most compelling counter arguments to your plainly bizarre and frankly dangerous perspective?

          • Oh boy, now it all comes out. Brace yourselves for the onslaught of random Islamophobia, folks.

            I hope that at some point you reevaluate “your plainly bizarre and frankly dangerous perspective”, because what the actual fuck.

          • I’m heading to sleep because I have a 9 AM Differential Geometry class (not all of us are washed out professors with nothing to do but complain about how much Williams sucks for not hiring us), but I just wanted to point out that the site you linked to describes the Spanish Inquisition as “a brutal but quintessentially heroic act.” I don’t really understand how the expulsion and torture of Jews, coupled with burning gay men and women at the stake, is “quintessentially heroic,” but I guess I am just a dirty commie liberal who hates America, freedom, and truth.

          • Jewish at Williams

            You gave up quick. I think we both know why. You are not used to being confronted on your unrealistic, out-of-touch assumptions and your painful lack of knowledge about the real world.

            You live in a bubble where you think you know something simply because you repeat the nonsense spoon fed to you by your feckless, intolerant left-wing faculty members.

            What’s the article suggests is that it was heroic for the inquisition to force Muslims out of Europe.

            From your perspective, I suppose we should all stand back and let adherent Muslims introduce FGM, anti-blasphemy laws, and the execution of gays. I suppose you think we should welcome to our multicultural world even those who announce they want us to convert or die.

          • John, they obviously didn’t “give up”–they went to sleep because it was after 2am.

            I still don’t know why you think that Williams is full of left-wing faculty; I’ve had to look very hard to find sufficiently left-wing profs.

            No one here is advocating religious fundamentalism.

          • My dearest and most beloved Dr. Drew,

            Nah, I actually had a 9 AM class. Differential Geometry with Professor Garrity. Great class, but rather difficult, so I have to be awake to understand it. You can read more about it here: http://catalog.williams.edu/catalog.php?&strm=1163&subj=MATH&cn=326&sctn=01&crsid=011671.

            I’d also like to point out that you STILL haven’t provided me any evidence that Remi Kanazi is antisemitic. I assume you will eventually roll out the argument that “His name is KaNAZI! He clearly likes Hitler!” My response to that inevitable argument is simply lol.

            Now, to your ridiculous questions:

            1. I confront antisemitism by calling it out on the rare occasion that a black/Latinx friend makes an antisemitic comment or supports an antisemitic group. I also advocate for efforts in the Jewish community to build solidarity with the black and latinx communities through shared advocacy.
            Briefly, I’d like to point out the ickiness/borderline antisemitism of a 50 year old Christian telling a 19 year old Jew that he is using antisemitism as a political tool and doesn’t genuinely care about the issue. Perhaps, just maybe, my experience living as a Jew in America for the last two decades gives me some insight into what antisemitism looks like in the United States that you don’t have. Ponder that one over for a bit.

            2. By arguing that the Qur’an gives a “perverted image of God,” you are arguing that there is an empirically perfect view of God, an argument I reject. As for hostility to Jews, I’d argue that medieval Christianity was just as, if not more, hostile towards Jews. Ever heard of blood libel?

            3. Why should I trust the adherents of Christianity to be safe neighbors when the experience of my own family shows that they were quick to murder a ton of my relatives out of their anti-Jewish hatred? Please remember there were multiple attempts to kill off the Jews… not just the Holocaust. The obvious answer here is that you cannot make generalizations about the beliefs of an entire group from the actions of extremists.

            4. This would be comical if people didn’t actually believe it. If you can blame the Arab slave trade on Islam, you can also blame the transatlantic slave trade on Christianity. How many muslims were killed in the Crusades? How many Christians died in the 30 Years War, which was ostensibly about Protestantism versus Catholicism? And, once again, it is ridiculous to generalize the actions of extremists to the beliefs of a large religion.

            5. The vast, vast, vast majority of mainstream muslims do NOT consider Daesh to be Islamic. I don’t consider the Westboro Baptist Church to be “carefully following the rules of Christianity.” Why should all muslims share in the blame for the actions of a few? Also, I’m not calling for you to “snuff out” the Jewish State, I’m saying the occupation and abuse of Palestinians is unethical and illegal, and I don’t like religious states in general.

            6. I’d say last Thursday afternoon in my philosophy class, when the professor asked me to back up my argument that the philosophy of science Thomas Kuhn laid out in “The Structure of Scientific Revolutions” could be strengthened by incorporating the falsification principles of Karl Popper. Contrary to whatever backwards notions you have, Williams students are constantly asked for evidence to back up their views, and do consider counterarguments.

          • Jewish At Williams

            Don’t worry. I was a fool when I was 19 too. Here’s what you are missing and not being taught at Williams College:

            1. Where You Should Be Fighting: The levels of antisemitism, as measured in polls, for blacks and Latinos is in the range of 30%. Antisemitism is rare among whites and Asians. If you were sincere about combating antisemitism you would be up in arms about that statistic. This, however, would take a level of courage and independence that I don’t think you are capable of right now.

            2. Read the Qu’ran: You don’t understand Islam or Christianity. I’m willing to bet you’ve never even read the Qu’ran. If I was still teaching at Williams College, it would be required reading in any political science class. See, http://www.thereligionofpeace.com/pages/quran/violence.aspx. In contrast, the violence in the Bible is descriptive, not prescriptive.

            3. Holocaust: Historically, Christianity is the enemy of totalitarianism. This was true during the Cold War and in Nazi Germany. The holocaust was actually the result of the atheist philosophy promoted by social Darwinism. Liberals at Williams College are actually closer to the philosophy of Adolf Hitler than Christians now or then. Modern liberals are generally anti-Christian atheists who are — like Hitler — pursuing a secular utopia.

            Atheist liberals, in fact, are still quite dangerous…especially to unborn babies. See, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abortion_statistics_in_the_United_States

            4. Religion of Peace? You need to reread that article. Islamic adherents are inherently more dangerous and violent than non-Islamic adherents. One of the few things that is good about Islam is its tendency for its own adherents to torture, maim and kill each other. Thank God for that.

            5. ISIS and the Qu’ran: Trust youself. Read the Qu’ran and then compare its teachings to what ISIS does on a day-to-day basis. You’ll be surprised. It explains why they toss gays off roofs. They are simply implementing the Qu’ran as it is written. There is no such thing as moderate Islam. There are only people who really follow it and those who only claim they follow it. Both, unfortunately, are quite dangerous — even if it is for different reasons.

            6. Theory of Scientific Revolutions: As you may know, I was honored by the American Political Science Association, in part, because I created a new paradigm for make sense of a 50 year old controversy in the political science literature regarding what causes welfare programs.

            I was the first to call attention to how the enforcement of child labor laws precisely explained the timing, location, and content of child welfare programs in the U.S. I still remember how the most important professors at Cornell University universally rejected my ideas — at first.

            I suppose I know more about the theory of scientific revolutions than any of your philosophy professors. Again, to lead a scientific revolution, you need to display a certain level of courage and outspokenness. Unfortunately for you, you are not being taught that lesson by the mindless, leftist conformists at Williams College.

          • Oh, I didn’t realize that you did work related to welfare. Are you friends with Charles Murray by any chance?

      • Nu, the most offensive thing about Remi Kanazi is his utter lack of literary talent; a precocious sprinkling of hashtags through a choppily formatted political rant does not a poem make.

      • You provided a right-wing opinion piece from a news organization owned by a libertarian billionaire. Please try harder.

        • I admire your guts for posting under your own name. You might be surprised at how many media outlets favored by the left are owned by liberal billionaires. As a young Bernie supporter, I suspect you understand this.

          FYI: The facts are the facts.

          If blacks and Latinos had IQs equal to Asians, then it would be a lot more plausible to suggest that widespread black and Latino dysfunction and school failure in those communities was entirely due to racism.

          It strikes me as sad and even pathetic that you would try to suggest, on your Facebook page, that it is better to attack innocent whites as racists rather than open your mind to new ideas that reflect our growing understanding of genetics.

  6. Well, well, well haven’t the hornets mobilized against the threats to their sinecures burrowed in the octagonal cells of their paper nest?

  7. Williams College has been dying for a long time now, in large measure, because of a pathetic lack of intellectual diversity.

    For my take on the left-wing sickness that turned Williams College into a boring, stale warehouse of leftist ideology, please check out the following articles.


    I expect the trustees of the college and its major donors will eventually wake up and demand some changes. Censorship is incompatible with the mission of a healthy liberal arts college.

    • Okay John, we both know that “diversity” is a bullshit liberal concept that I’m sure you, as a conservative, are only pretending to value. I’ll repeat my point since you didn’t address it at all in your reply to my initial comment (did you even read it?). From skimming other articles in which you claim to be a former Marxist-Leninist, I know that you’ve at least done some research into leftist ideology. From your time here you know that Williams produces a scant amount of leftist ideology, and you know the gaping chasm of difference between the liberalism of Williams College and any leftist ideology. There is no problem with you critiquing the rampant liberalism on campus, but no one is fooled by your boring and unspecific claim that this is some kind of “left-wing sickness”.

    • No one is being censored. If you think that right-wing opinions not making snuff in an academic setting is censorship, I don’t know what to say. Those of us who are actually living, studying, and working at Williams are trying to make a vibrant, diverse community of serious intellectuals; sometimes this means leaving behind ideas that belong in history. Again, we’re healthy, and trying to make progress (apart from the hate speech being foisted on this campus by UL) towards justice.

      And we’re managing it without you here.

      • — Abel

        Trust me. You are not getting a sophisticated education if Adam Falk censors experts like John Derbyshire. Frankly, Derbyshire is not alone.

        There are many folks out there, many far more educated and accomplished than you or your feckless faculty members, who are excited about how race realism and alt-right philosophy helps explain reality better than the outmoded Marxist inspired drivel you are limited to hearing at Williams College.

        What is frightening about your perspective is that it is actually an expression of leftist totalitarianism. If some ideas should be censored at Williams College, why not censor them all together? If you are willing to censor people all together, then why not just have them killed?

  8. I would revise that:
    The comb has hexagonal shape, the nests themselves are usually pretty undefined as far as any standard shape is concerned.

  9. John,

    If you are really a former Communist then you know that Williams College is not and never has been “hard left”. You know better than to lump liberals in with the Left. You know better than to proudly compare yourself with literal fascist Alexander Solzhenitsyn. Why are you spouting this nonsensical reactionary rhetoric? Who do you think you’re going to fool?

    I doubt that you were ever one of the nation’s top young scholars. If what you write about Obama is true, then he’s betrayed his ideals as much as you have, but at least he made a successful career out of it! It’s painfully obvious that you’re yet another failed academic and pseudo-intellectual eking out a living from the conservative blogosphere. I think that’s really sad.

    Thank you for giving me a good laugh, and I hope that you find some peace one day. Maybe you should retire.

    • If you really think I’m making up the fact that Williams College is an extremely hostile environment for conservatives, why don’t you look up the voter registration information on your Williams College professors.

      Meanwhile, I think attacking me in a personal manner is beneath you.

      If you exercise some common sense, you’ll realize that I earn more money — and raise more money — than a low paid Williams College professor. I also live a lot further from the snow and a lot closer to the beach.

      • Did I ever claim that Williams College is not a hostile environment for conservatives? Of course it’s somewhat hostile to conservatives. How is that relevant?

        Look, I hate an ad hominem as much as the next person, but I’m sure you are aware that you aren’t making a real argument in the first place. So I wanted to point out the obvious reason why you write this drivel, which has everything to do with your career, so I can’t avoid getting “personal”. It’s certainly not beneath me, or anyone, to “attack” someone whose entire career is just begging to be ridiculed. What makes you think that I’m judging your success by how much money you earn? Rather, I’m judging it on your complete lack of intellectual and political influence, and I almost feel bad for you. That is not an “attack”, just me noticing reality.

        • How can I say this kindly? You and I both know you haven’t take much time to research me, my influence or the significance of my story for understanding what’s sick about our nation and Williams College.

          At the risk of sounding mean, I should point out that Williams College has about 12,000 followers on Twitter. https://twitter.com/WilliamsCollege

          I have over 75,000. https://twitter.com/Augustine25

          Here a radio interview I did back in 2010 that might be of interest to you if you are sincerely interested in reality. https://youtu.be/IgOy71oa3hw

          • Why would I take more than a few minutes to research you, beyond reading your hilarious story about Obama (which I really wish were true but seems highly dubious). Why would I listen to an entire interview of you if I wanted to learn something about *reality*?

            Why are you so desperate to prove that you’re better than Williams College? And how is number of Twitter followers in any way a good measure of this? I think you might be “more interested in getting attention than having a serious discussion”.

  10. Aww, I think I hurt John’s feelings because he stopped replying to me. :(

    If he changes his mind, I still have 4 big unanswered questions for him:

    1. Are you a funder of Uncomfortable Learning?
    2. What is the difference between liberalism and leftism? Where is Williams College on a scale of John Locke to Mao Zedong?
    3. What is the hard left agenda?
    4. What is your problem with Islam? It seems to go beyond a problem with fundamentalist “political Islam”–why?

  11. Sophia, just an fyi. Saying something like “Aww, I think I hurt ___ feelings…” screams just as much “I need self-validation” as you accused John of doing. I agree with your philosophical standpoint, but please try not to fall into hypocrisy as an argument drags out.

    • Since you need me to explain my rhetorical choices… I’m obviously writing in this tone to provoke him into answering my questions, which I would really like to know the answer to.

      Just out of curiosity, what do you think our shared philosophical standpoint is?

      • Writing it off as a rhetorical choice doesn’t make it any less hypocritical. And, considering you’re using passive-aggressive statements again (e.g. “since you *need* me” and “I’m *obviously*”) in this context despite the fact that you’re not trying to “provoke” me into doing anything makes me question whether I can buy that explanation.

        To answer your question: I agree that Williams is not the most forgiving place to be a conservative, but at the same time it isn’t extreme left as John claims it to be. I also agree that John has failed to provide any substantive proof to his claims other than his own musings and his own claims to intellectuality.

          • My point proven. Ironic that a person who bleeds insecurity is quick to call out others for insecurity.

          • Oh no! I’m not allowed to be sarcastic! That must imply that I have a deep, gnawing insecurity as intense as this mediocre old white man’s. That must be it. No, it can’t be because you’re hella annoying.

  12. Sophia,

    I’m having a hard time not laughing at your pretentiousness. As I understand it, you are most well-known for being an actress. You once played the role of Twist, the lovesick robot who self-destructed to keep herself from exploding and destroying the universe. Last year, you played the role of Caliban in a Williams College production of The Tempest. Ticket price of $3. Other than that, you served as a “back” model in an art project.

    (When I was your age, in contrast, I was writing my honors thesis on Marxist economics, making documentary films, working a part-time job, organizing anti-apartheid rallies, winning a full scholarship to Cornell University and dating the girl who went on to inspire Barack Obama to “go for greatness.” See, http://www.americanthinker.com/articles/2012/07/my_white_girlfriend_inspired_obamas_big_dark_regina_in_dreams_from_my_father.html)

    Trust me, I have hung out with enough actresses and Hollywood types over the years to immediately recognize that you are more interested in getting attention than having a serious discussion.

    As a white, Africana Studies major, I would be much more impressed if you showed us what you know on the topic of black under-achievement in the U.S. What, if anything, are they teaching you in Africana Studies which allows you to undermine my assertion that white racism has virtually nothing to do with black dysfunction in the U.S. or elsewhere in the world? Really, show us what you’ve got after four years of study at Williams College.

    • I applaud you Dr. Drew for bringing some well-needed sanity to conversations regarding intellectual diversity. You may consider penning a series of even more inspirational articles where you recite the resumes of all 2000 Williams undergrads one by one and individually examine how they have failed to truly capitalize on their youth. I think that such a column could be the illuminating beacon of light that this desolate community so desperately needs.

    • Sources for the “assertion that white racism has virtually nothing to do with black dysfunction in the U.S.” please? Actually curious if you have anything specifically related to housing discrimination in US cities (HOLC, FHA, etc.), and would be interested if you do.

      • Morty Smith:

        So what? My Armenian family endured housing discrimination while living in Glendale, CA. Nevertheless, I have an uncle who is a multi-millionaire, a niece who graduated from Harvard and a brother who retired as a NASA engineer. In my experience, the IQ of your parents is a better predictor of your success than the way your ancestors were treated by local-level housing laws.

        • Oh please! He didn’t ask about your family’s achievements, he asked for sources. Sources. Have you heard of this thing called “sources”? Or has nobody ever “challenged your views and asked you to back up your arguments”?

        • And what do you think impacts the IQ of one’s parents? Did your *Caucasian* parents face educational limitations? If you don’t buy this just look up the educational opportunities available to poor districts in cities, which are almost guaranteed to have a higher % of Latino/AA residents. Were there social pressures that bombarded you from birth that suggested the best paths for you to take growing up are sports, music, crime? Again, just watch any movie from Hollywood over the past 30 years (go back before then and you’ll probably even get overt racism) – AAs are virtually always painted in a negative light and/or pigeonholed into stereotypical roles. What about Caucasians? They get to be whatever role they want, but the one constant? 99.9% of heroes/protagonists are white, with the exception being movies released in the past 5 years or so. Plenty of studies show that social influences can seriously affect the goals and aspirations of a growing child.

        • Hmm

          Don’t be ridiculous. Use your common sense. I didn’t see any Armenians in starring roles at the movies either.

          If your logic is correct, then how do you explain the superior achievements of Asian Americans compared to African Americans? Chinese students are doing better than African American students and and some of these Chinese parents survived Mao’s murderous regime. Most Indians are darker than Obama, but they are doing well in the U.S. too.

          IQ is a simple, plausible and elegant solution that explains the success of Asian and Indians without needing to smear or degrade whites (and typically only whites) for their supposed racism.

          FYI: If you do not think there is racial discrimination among Africans, then you have never visited Kenya.

          Trust me, I faced more discrimination as a young white scholar than any young black scholar. I had the whole U.S. government and the Supreme Court placing me at a disadvantage compared to young black scholars. I grew up poor, but no one gave a damn about treating me fairly or letting me to compete on a level playing field.

          I’ve never gotten over the abuse I suffered at the hands of the left. One of my most important messages is that the hatred and anger caused by affirmative action never goes away…

          • Hahaha how did I know you were going to bring up Asian Americans. Perfect. I’m Chinese American, actually, so I can safely say I know a lot more about the social pressures on Asian Americans than you do. I grew up in the South/Midwest (also poor, family income of ~$40k at the time) and faced plenty of racial discrimination from my peers. That’s besides the point but two cases I want to point out: I was generally picked last for team sports in P.E. because my peers thought of me as “unathletic/uncoordinated”, and I was often called a “nerd” (before that term became something to be proud of) and pressured to help others with assignments. Do you really think that type of social pressure did not play a role in my current standing in life? (I’m quite successful academically but have nothing to show athletically outside of the dreaded “participation” awards).

            And yes, my parents survived Mao’s regime. There’s something fundamentally wrong with your comparison there. Chinese culture has long valued educational achievement. China in the Ming dynasty was one of the first societies to implement social mobility through educational achievement (the imperial exams). As such, for over 600 years now, Chinese families have valued hard work in academics (this is not to mention also strong familial values in Chinese culture thanks to Confucius). Mao’s regime only served to fortify these values for the “lost generation” who had to go through that period. My parents both lost their opportunity to achieve academically, so instead they pushed those aspirations on to me (as with most other Chinese Americans I know).

            In contrast, African Americans never had a chance to develop their own cultural values. Slavery defined AA culture from the beginning. The forced separation of families in slave culture laid the roots for poor familial values that we still see the repercussions of today. On top of that, American society continues to stereotype AAs in a way that these values don’t really change. So please, do some more research before you haphazardly throw around poor comparisons.

            Also, I have zero sympathy for a white male who decries affirmative action as an Asian American male. I think it’s a perfectly fine system (although it would be better now to slowly transition it to socioeconomic class). I was at more of a disadvantage than you, but I still achieved my goals because instead of wasting my time saying “Woe is me!” I worked hard to make up for that difference.

          • Hmm

            You aren’t being very realistic. African achievement is way below Asian achievement even if you the U.S. out of the picture.

            What the Communists did to your parents in China was far worse than anything endured by the parents of your African American peers.

            You should not be punished by affirmative action for something that had nothing to do with you.

            As they say, why should an Asian be disadvantaged compared to a Hispanic because of what a white person’s ancestor did to a black person’s ancestor?

          • Perhaps you’re not being realistic. Human development is HEAVILY influenced by social and family influences early on. I strongly believe that these simple differences between the values placed on family and academic achievement result in a huge gap in academic achievement. How else would you explain the stark lack of Asian Americans in professional American sports?

            As for your point on punishment. In an egalitarian society, yes, we shouldn’t be punished. But we can’t change history, nor can we bring back the dead. There’s no way to punish the individuals who did do the wrongdoing ~150+ years ago. As it stands, society creates an unequal playing field. Therefore, those of us who have an advantage should be given a handicap, simple as that. If you’re good enough you can still do well despite the handicap.

          • Hmm

            The damage done my affirmative action is more subtle than you suppose. It is not that you can’t get a job, it is more that you don’t end up getting the best job. That tends to go the the less qualified female or minority candidate. This means that you end up at a lesser school, in a less desirable geographic area, with a greater workload.

            I ended up at Williams College, in large measure, because the large research universities preferred to high minority graduate students.

            From my perspective, Williams College was a drag because I didn’t get to work with graduate students or sit on dissertation committees any more. It was cool to say, of course, it was the best liberal arts school in the nation. In reality, however, it was disappointing to end up at a place like because it was not a full-fledged research university.

            I was quite depressed when I ended up in Williamstown. It was an awful, dangerous, isolated place to live. I hated the snow and ice.

            I’m a lot happier now that I have graduate students in my life. For example, after Williams College, I worked with graduate school students at Hope International University and enjoyed that for many years. I also still sit on dissertation committees. I even coach folks who have stalled out on their Ph.D.s on how to get back moving forward. This is some of the work that I enjoy doing the most.

            In a just world, we would expect the racial distribution of students and faculty to reflect the natural racial distribution of IQ scores.

            I have never bought the idea that hanging out with a lower IQ affirmative action student somehow improves my educational experience. There is no evidence, by the way, that diversity leads to positive outcomes in business or society. In fact, all the evidence seems to go in the other direction.

            We have a very sick educational system right now. I’m glad to do what I can to confront it without fear of losing my home, my business, or my health insurance.

    • An insecure, washed-up 50-something tries desperately to insult a 21-year-old he’s never even met! Talk about an ad hominem! Sorry that you peaked 3+ decades ago. (It’s actually hilarious how far off-base your guesses about me are but that’s irrelevant.)

      There is no such thing as an Africana Studies major, and I’ve only taken two classes in the department. To get a more nuanced understanding of racism you might want to go back and read Fanon like Obama supposedly suggested.

      Are you going to answer any of my questions? Please, let’s have a serious discussion–unless you are too uncomfortable.

    • Wade ’14

      You’re a real winner too. :-)

      Your claim to fame at Williams College was dressing up as a trash bag, teaching the other kids how to DJ at the college radio station and showing off your hairy legs while dressed up as Cruella Devil. See, http://williamsalternative.com/2015/03/a-statement-from-a-nobody-wade-phenicie/

      I’ll let you know when I need advice from a fellow who is on the cutting edge of on-line marketing.

      FYI: When I was your age, I was about 1/2 through my graduate school education and schooling a future president on the futility of a Communist revolution.

      • It truly is a shame that the rich traditions of freedom of speech have crumbled under the administration of Pres. Falk. I can’t help but recall the gaping hole in my education where none of my professors made comments about my hairy legs. Oh, if only I could have been alive in the glory days of Williams! How spectacular those days of academic freedom must have been! Rallying around the American flag! Warm hearty smiles, proudly spreading Christmas cheer to all within earshot! Unfortunately, I never had the pleasure in college of being called hairy by a single professor. It saddens me that my professors felt far too censored at a supposedly top-tier academic institution to make such valuable insights about one of their students. This is an unfortunate symptom of the leftist blight that is destroying the entire higher education system of our nation.

  13. what he’s saying is true, I would just say it’s an error in judgement to be posting this caustically in a semi public forum. I saw exacty the same things as he did and was equally mad. Just leave Williams behind and don’t let it haunt you. Let it engineer its own suicide. I know very few young alums who would donate to Williams after “if you’re not with us you’re against us” the “hate crime” and so on. Just let them burn out and rip off spoiled people.

  14. Ahh John. C,

    I think you chose the wrong career. You would have made a very successful comedian. Doing a little reading of your other articles has convinced me.

    And thanks Williams Alternative, for doing your part in keeping the gag reel going.

  15. One more time, since you seem to be up and commenting again:

    1. Are you a funder of Uncomfortable Learning?
    2. What is the difference between liberalism and leftism? Where is Williams College on a scale of John Locke to Mao Zedong?
    3. What is the hard left agenda?
    4. What is your problem with Islam? It seems to go beyond a problem with fundamentalist “political Islam”–why?
    [Bonus: What is a back model? Bonus 2: Why are you stalking me on the internet?]

  16. Just when I thought I couldn’t respect you any less, you go and try to prove your success and precociousness by relating how when you were in your early twenties some forty-odd years ago you dated a woman who had some tangential impact on A DIFFERENT person whose fame you will never be able to attain (and who likely doesn’t remember your name and/or face), also some forty years ago. I bet she feels honored that she still is able to serve as a token name (actually, you didn’t even give her a name, just “the girl”) dropped in your (kind of pitiful) list of claims to fame (so you’re telling my you started your phd in your early twenties? Real trailblazer, I’ve never seen one of those before, can I get an autograph?). Way to go, you’re a real hero, for conservatives and liberals alike everywhere. Oh and while we’re boasting about degrees of separation, my dad once met Johnny Depp’s dad, that’s like, pretty cool, I’m only four degrees away from like, Winona Ryder.

  17. Sophia W ’16/Twist/Caliban

    As I’ve said, you appear to be a young actress who has little of substance to contribute to this discussion.

    If I was mean, I’d start discussing your chances of making it in Hollywood based on your photos.

    Meanwhile, regarding your work as a “back” model, please check out http://ariellepina.com/UNARMED

    You are #11.

    • No John, you missed the point, that was a bonus question! It is in extremely poor taste to post a semi-nude photograph of me in lieu of answering any of my questions. You’re lucky that I really don’t care–I’m not concerned with what a man my parents’ age thinks of my appearance, nor do I have any intention of ever setting foot in Hollywood.

      Instead of speculating about me and further embarrassing yourself, please answer the real questions, firstly: are you or are you not a funder of Uncomfortable Learning?

      • Secondly, the entire reason that I commented on your essay in the first place is that I would like to have a serious discussion about your conflation of liberalism with the Left, which made me think that you are wildly incompetent in your own field of political science. Instead of even trying to engage with this critique, all you have done is whine about being attacked and proceed to throw a slew of ad hominems at me in the hopes that nobody will notice that I have been asking a real question.

    • Trash. You are utter trash. Does your wife know you’re picking on college girls and looking at pictures of their bare backs? Or maybe you are sad and alone, which is why you fixate so much on your college days and how you were dating a woman that supposedly connected you to Obama.

    • Funny how you link to Sophia’s modeling work and not to her work in astrophysics, in Neil deGrasse Tyson’s department no less, where she published a paper at the age of 16.

      Funny how you don’t mention that her presentation of that research was written up in Rotunda, the magazine of the American Museum of Natural History

      Funny how you seize on her participation in theatre, but don’t bother to mention she represents the Class of 2016 on the Williams College Council.

      Are you interested in actually learning about Sophia, or are you interested in trying to attack her with misogyny and body shaming?

  18. Nothing like an internet stalker harassing students to support your argument, right John? The problem here is not supposed mob-rule on campus, it’s your attitude.

  19. John C. Drew is one of the funders of Uncomfortable Learning: true or probably true?

    John C. Drew is “more interested in getting attention than having a serious discussion”: true or definitely true?

  20. Students, I applaud your efforts, but you are wasting your time. As some of you have correctly surmised, John Drew is mentally ill — I know because I dated someone who was a cousin of someone he went to college with and they told me so!!

    In all seriousness, he is a lonely, pathetic, disturbed, deluded, racist, homophobic, angry individual who has never gotten over the fact that he was quite rightly denied tenure at Williams,. (And by the way, no other college or university outside of places like the University of Phoenix wanted him either, it’s not just Williams). Look at his publishing record — he’s published ZERO, zilch, nada, NOTHING of consequence, and certainly nothing in any sort of academic journal, since the book that he wrote while still in grad school many, many decades ago. He believes that publishing one well-received piece of academic literature is sufficient to deserve lifetime tenure at the institution of his choice. But that’s not how the world works. John was either too lazy or too incompetent to publish anything else, something which is in no way, shape or form the fault of Williams College.

    You don’t get tenure at Williams or places like that unless you actually, you know, publish. John Drew was a failure in academia, not just at Williams, but in his subsequent career. And instead of — dare I say — looking in the mirror to face up to that failure, he scapegoats a non-existent liberal conspiracy for his lack of success as an academic, and spends many hours per day attacking Williams students and faculty on the Internet as an avenue for his bitterness at the world.

    This is a man who is absolutely obsessed with Williams. It’s hilarious indeed that he spends literally hours and hours and hours a day (hours that successful people devote to far more productive endeavors) bitching about a place that he feels is so unworthy. It’s kind of like a jilted boyfriend sending his ex thousands upon thousands of texts to prove that he is over her. Well, John is not over Williams, he has a longtime unrequited crush and this is how he exhibits it. He even went so far as to post ad nauseum lies (including horrible racist and homophobic rants) about Williams on College Confidential, a website for HIGH SCHOOL students considering college, until after a few weeks he was banned from that site — something which I’m sure he will find a way to blame on his two bogeymen, Barack Obama and Williams College.

    In fact, I doubt there is ANYTHING bad that has EVER happened to John Drew that he has ever blamed on his own doing (personal responsibility is a totally foreign concept to him, like most of the other Trump supporters he identifies with — nothing is EVER their fault, why should it be when you can just scapegoat Obama, and immigrants, and minorities). John in particularly loves to scapegoat two things from his distant past, Williams foremost among them. He is unable to write a coherent argument on anything, so he based all of his arguments on unverifiable anecdotes from his own life, which of course are colored by his extreme biases. That more than anything demonstrates of the shallowness of his intellect.

    He has no credibility when discussing Williams because he is a sad failure who has never accepted the simple fact that he couldn’t cut it in academia due to his inability to publish anything after the work he did in graduate school. End of story. Don’t even sweat his repetitive, angry rants, which apparently he devotes about 4-5 hours per day to since, you know, he doesn’t have a life. He’s already been banned from one Internet site due to his obsession with Williams. I’m guessing it won’t be the last that he tries to monopolize when other people are too busy to respond because they have interests outside of Internet trolling.

  21. – Old Timer

    Please… It is annoying to be smeared by someone who doesn’t have the manhood to use his own name. I raise millions of dollars every year to help hundreds of people have a better life. It is far more interesting work than teaching undergraduates or estimating how many prime numbers exist at the far end of the number line.

    It must annoy you to no end that my personal story calls to attention the long-standing lack of intellectual diversity at Williams College and helps others make sense of why Adam Falk decided to censor John Derbyshire. It isn’t my fault that there are no longer any registered Republicans teaching at Williams College.

    FYI: I wasn’t denied tenure, I wasn’t allowed to compete for tenure, despite the extraordinary quality of my scholarship, my teaching, and my energizing impact on conservatives students at Williams College.

    My personal story is simply an interesting focal point that allows the general public to make sense of the dysfunction, leftist bias, and thought control taking place at Williams and at other schools around the nation.

    If my personal story — published in places like Campus Reform or The College Fix — inspires young conservatives to fight harder for freedom of speech and freedom of expression, then I’m happy to make it public. See, http://www.thecollegefix.com/post/24821/

    The cause of freedom is well-worth the time involved in protecting it. By the way, young people and parents searching for a school should know the truth about Williams College before they apply to attend it.

    • Lol. If you knew anything about math, you’d know that Euclid proved 2000 years ago that there are an infinite number of primes. Try harder.

      • Obviously, I know that. I’m just making fun of Prof. Steve Miller’s field of research. It focuses on estimating the number of primes between two impossibly large segments of the number line. Like I said, that is not a respectable job for a grown man…

        • i never thought about it before, but i do agree that it would be pretty rad to see prof miller try out a really manly job like being a monster truck driver or a lumberjack

        • What has Professor Miller done to cross you, other than being far more intelligent than you could ever dream of being?

      • Steve Miller turned into a total pussy when it came to defending freedom of speech and freedom of expression at Williams College. He is the faculty adviser for the Phi Beta Kappa chapter on campus, the chapter is supposed to be defending the rights of folks like John Derbyshire to speak on campus. Despite Steve’s vigorous defense of speech during the Venker incident, he has clammed up regarding Derbyshire. Miller is a total phony, a coward, and a weakling. If he resigns as the faculty adviser for Phi Beta Kappa, then that would be the honorable things to do. In the meantime, I think it is my duty to remind people that virtually all of his work — targeted to undergraduates — is co-authored or edited volumes. He seems like a follower, not a leader, to me.

      • Frankly, the leftists running the political science department in 1989 didn’t have the guts to let me compete for tenure. They knew I would have had much better grounds for a lawsuit alleging racial discrimination against them if they ran me though the tenure review process and rejected me.

        Taking me off the tenure track was a move that caught me by surprise and made it harder to me to sue.

        As I have said, no one ever complained about my teaching, the inspirational role I played for conservative students, my contributions to ideological diversity, my honesty or integrity. The only feedback I got is that I wrote a lousy thesis. That charge, in the end, was shown to be an out and out lie.

        • From the January 17, 1989 edition of the Williams Record, article entitled “John Drew: Considers options off tenure track”:

          “I’m quite aware that my failure to stay on the track was entirely under my control. If I had wanted to work harder on my thesis and turn it into a
          book, I have no doubt I would have been reappointed.” – John Drew

          From later on in the same article:

          “Despite holding political beliefs that were opposed to those of many professors here, Drew said he never felt he was treated unfairly. ‘I really feel that the reasons I was not appointed were completely and entirely my own fault.'”

          Here’s the link to the full article, for those who are curious: https://ia802705.us.archive.org/zipview.php?zip=/14/items/thewilliamsrecord_vol101b_103a/thewilliamsrecord_vol101b_103a_pdf.zip&file=thewilliamsrecord_vol101b_103a_pdf/thewilliamsrecord_vol101b_103a_0284.pdf

          So, who is telling the truth? 1989 John Drew or 2016 John Drew?

          • I loved reading that article it brought back a lot of memories. The main thing that it supports is my long-standing contention that the only reason I was dropped from the tenure track was the supposed low quality of my thesis.

            That has always hurt my feelings and angered me to no end.

            I would view my comments then as reflecting the view of someone who was beaten down and in shock. Someone who was entirely alone on campus and did not yet know that the American Political Science Association thought his thesis was the best in the nation in his field or that this thesis would a few years later be published in a book almost word-for-word as he wrote it.

            To be sure, I have been consistent that I quickly lost interest in research or teaching while I was at Williams College and that I was going to be pursuing a career in other fields beyond political science. Look at my life, I did exactly what I said I would do…

            My supposed low quality of my thesis, however, was a poor reason for justifying getting rid of me.

  22. A couple more issues that haven’t been addressed yet:
    -The speaker cancelled in the fall was Suzanne Venker, not Susan Venker. Read your own damn hyperlinks.
    -Adam Falk almost certainly did not comment on the Williams Alternative as afalk. He definitely has better things to do.
    -You may have had a pretty good thesis, but it doesn’t amount to a paradigm shift under Kuhn because, as you would know if you’d actually READ any Kuhn, political science is a pre-paradigmatic field and thus doesn’t have paradigm shifts.
    -You’re like Donald Trump in that you are a mediocre racist misogynistic antisemitic white man who seems to think that he’s the greatest thing since cheddar cheese.
    -Please stop it with the ridiculous arguments from authority. We all know you have a PhD.
    “Kids must be educated to disrespect authority or else democracy is a farce.”-Abbie Hoffman.
    -You are creepy as hell for looking up nude pictures of Sophia to prove the point that… she’s a woman?

  23. Jewish at Williams

    You’re what? 19. We both know that you are going through more nude pictures in 48 hours than I will notice over the rest of my life. Fortunately for you, your brain is still developing and you will eventually settle down and become a mature adult. I the meantime, if you really want to project Jews, then you need to read the Qu’ran.

  24. So no response to my charges of intellectual laziness? No evidence of Remi Kanazi is an actual antisemite beyond “but antizionism!” No answers on whether you fund Uncomfortable Learning? Just insinuations that I’m a porn addict (because my sexual activities are somehow relevant?) and poorly spelled islamophobia? Maybe you should stop thinking so much about your failures at Williams. To once again quote Abbie Hoffman, “Nostalgia is a form of depression both for a society and an individual.”

  25. BTW, for any Williams Alternative admins reading, this whole shitshow of a comment thread is a really great argument for why comment moderation should be a thing. I doubt that 50 year old creeps tracking down semi-nude photographs of other commenters and calling Williams professors “pussies” is the kind of content you want to curate.

  26. (1) Drew’s using Twitter followers as a metric of relevance / intellectual seriousness is one of his most hilariously stupid (and oft-repeated) argument tactics. Kim Kardashian has over 40 million Twitter followers. By that metric, her thoughts are more impressive than Drew’s, by a multiple of millions (OK, just that once, Drew may actually be on to something).

    (2) With each hour he spends here, or Ephblog, or College Confidential, or elsewhere — and it’s clear he spends many hours per day, not just writing nonsensical easily-rebuttable garbage, but also creepily stalking college students’ photos and such — Drew just proves what a total loser he is. Fortunately, Williams students, faculty, and administrators are all too busy, too important, and actually have lives outside of stalking kids on the Internet, which assures that Drew, who has nothing better to do than repeatedly posting the same stupid garbage all over the Internet, will always get the last word — because he’s too lame to have a life of his own, and has to live vicariously through bloviating on the Internet about how brilliant and wonderful he is and how many Twitter followers he has (which, again, is over 40 million fewer than Kim Kardashian — so congrats!).

  27. John,

    I would like to be on your side here, as I think the college would benefit from hearing more conservative voices, both on faculty and among the student body. However, I can’t find myself wishing that *anybody* but you had been the one to express this. We don’t need some creepy, bitter former professor who spends hours of his time commenting on a website about a school he claims is terrible and cyber-stalks people who disagree with him (which is why I’m not using my real name — I don’t need you to try to dig through my past, Mr. PhD) to back us up. I would have wholeheartedly voiced agreement with many of your points, but after reading through these comments, I’m less willing to do so purely out of a desire not to associate myself with the likes of you.

    You’re a grown man. Just get a life and stop taking things so personally.


    Herbert A. Trampoline, Sr., D.D.S

    • I think your comments, which I believe to be insincere, represent a past era in terms of political discourse. Modern conservatives are changing public opinion and winning votes by being bold, sometimes rude, and always aggressive. This gives us a powerful advantages compared to the liberals who can barely talk without falling into the hypersensitive politically correct language that leaves the rest of us laughing at their self-imposed straitjackets. I am a grown man. You should think about becoming a grown man too.

      • You can be sincere and truthful and say what you mean without creepily searching up pictures of people who disagree with you and then posting them in the comments here. That’s what I’m objecting to. Those actions were nothing but wildly unjustified, ad-hominem attacks completely unbefitting to someone trying to pass himself off as the greatest political scientist of all time. That’s not something a considerate person does. That’s not something a good person does.

  28. -Old Timer

    Obviously, my skills have intimidated you enough to keep you from posting with your own name. I have quite easy shut down the immature folks who had little but personal insults to add to this discussion.

    Celebrities always have more Twitter followers than normal folks. I think it is reasonable, and even telling, to point out that I more Twitter followers at https://twitter.com/Augustine25 than Williams College itself. Here are some other telling results which can be compared with my 75,000 Twitter followers.

    https://twitter.com/ephsports has only 3,445 followers.
    https://twitter.com/LibrarEphs has only 86 followers.
    https://twitter.com/EphTweets has only 2,178

    What you may not appreciate is that having a large Twitter following allows me to raise the search rankings associated with key webpages by encouraging others to click on links that I provide for them. In the new world of social media, you can have a remarkable impact on public debate simply by influencing search rankings.

    As far as I can tell, my article above has elicited more comments, potentially more viewers, than any article previously posted on this site.

    FYI: I employ a staff of six. As a business owner, I have a lot more control over my time than folks who haven’t got the nerve (or IQ) needed to establish their own businesses. I’m pleased that cowards like you apparently don’t have much free time to devote to public service.

  29. Anonymous Coward, “Jewish at Williams”

    That you are a liar and a genocidal anti-Semite is clear. And yet, you presume to speak with some sort of moral authority.

    “… Jewish history, law, and ethics.” From your anti-Semitic rant, it is clear that that is not the case. Thus, I must conclude that you are either a complete liar, or a selective one. There are rabid Jewish anti-Semites who speak of “Jewish ethics” and such, who actually mean socialist or communist “ethics.” There is no lack of loud Jews who have gained influence through such ideological sleight of hand.

    “I continue to be involved with social justice work at my synagogue back home…”

    “Social justice work” is not a phrase from Judaism, but Marxism. The writer is a racial socialist, hiding behind Judaism. (Racial socialists support the genocide of the entire white race, including white Jews.) “Human rights” is another phrase beloved by racial socialists, formerly known as communists.

    “Donald Trump, a man who made a wildly antisemitic speech to the Republican Jewish Coalition…” That’s both simple slander and stupid, and the quote you cited was not at all anti-Semitic.

    “Question why Donald Trump feels comfortable using antisemitic tropes. Interrogate your beloved John Derbyshire on why he has ‘complicated and sometimes self-contradictory feelings about the Jews.’”

    Another libel on Trump, and a point-and-splutter attack on my colleague John Derbyshire. Why would the quoted statement be evidence of anti-Semitism on the latter’s part? Why did you not quote Derbyshire’s preceding statement that he is a “philo-Semite”? That Jews have “complicated and sometimes self-contradictory feelings about the Jews” is such a commonplace that there are Jewish jokes about it. Did you even bother to read the essay from which the quotation originated? The last question was rhetorical.

    “I also oppose Israel’s illegal occupation of Palestinian lands.” There are no “Palestinian lands,” and there are no “Palestinians.” “Palestinians” is a phrase that was coined 45-50 years ago, because “Palestine” was for eons the name that was replaced with Israel. When Arabs speak of “Palestine,” they are speaking in code of the land of Israel, which they seek to steal from the Jews, after they drive them into the sea, an intention which they have announced many times, over the years, often in Arabic.

    “…consistent refusal to abide by international law and brokered treaties.”

    “International law” is a fiction popular with racial socialists. As for “brokered treaties,” the Arab Moslems have violated every treaty they ever entered into with Israel, rendering them null and void.

    The areas which the anonymous coward calls “Palestinian lands,” are Israeli lands, which were won in the Six Day War in 1967, when Moslem countries united, once again, to annihilate the Jews of Israel. Israel should have driven the Arabs out of those lands and into other Arab lands generations ago.

    “Jewish Voice for Peace” is a genocidally anti-Semitic group. Like Anonymous Coward “Jewish at Williams” and Remi Kanazi, JVP supports the “BDS” movement, Boycott, Divestment, Sanctions, which is designed to so weaken the Jews of Israel, that Moslems within and without Israel can destroy it, and commit Holocaust II.

    Beginning during the War in Vietnam, those supporting genocide (often communists) have often hidden behind phony “peace movements.” That there are Jews—sanctimonious, pompous ones, at that—who support another Holocaust is one of the little known mysteries and outrages of the current age. “Jewish at Williams” is, thus, a Jewish Nazi at Williams.

    • Wow, we have ourselves another famous racist with enough time on his hands to write one of his notoriously asinine rants for us. How oddly flattering!

      (If anyone is wondering, John is not even an important enough bigot to have an entry on there. Poor guy.)

      Just to be clear, it’s really not okay to go around calling people “Jewish Nazis”. Y’all already know that though.

      • – Nicholas Stix

        It strikes me that the best way to stop Holocaust II is to have a one-state solution for Israel. Ultimately, we need to drive Islam out of the modern world. There is no place for a political ideology, pretending to be a religious movement, that bears such absolute hatred and threatens untold violence on the rest of us. It is a pity that places like Williams College are censor the facts about Marxism, Communism and Islam.

  30. I thought I’d close off my comments by providing links to two recent articles that discuss the plight of conservative professors on college and university campuses.

    The first is by Jon A. Shields who is an associate professor of government at Claremont McKenna College and Joshua M. Dunn, Sr. who is associate professor of political science at the University of Colorado—Colorado Spring. Together, they are the coauthors of “Passing on the Right: Conservative Professors in the Progressive University” which has recently been published by Oxford University Press. This is apparently the first ever book-length study on conservative scholars.


    This article provides a good overview of the survival strategies adopted by conservative scholars and the complaints they have regarding their treatment by the liberal/leftist academic establishment.

    For a countervailing perspective that suggests Shields and Dunn are the unfortunate victims of survivor bias, see David Henderson’s article here http://econlog.econlib.org/archives/2016/03/academic_conser.html

    For what it is worth, Joshua Dunn learned about my negative experience as a conservative professor at William College through recent articles in The College Fix http://www.thecollegefix.com/ and Campus Reform http://www.campusreform.org/

    I’m thankful that future conservative scholars and students will now have multiple opportunities to complain about their mistreatment due to the wonders of social media.

  31. I can’t help but notice that it is fashionable among the hard left at Williams College to suggest that the ideas advanced in Richard J. Herrnstein and Charles Murray’s book, The Bell Curve, have been debunked over the years. This is simply not true based on a careful reading of the book and a well-informed review of the literature.

    Murray has a compelling article in the public policy blog at American Enterprise Institute which is worth reading among those who are tempted to dismiss the courageous insight and useful predictions contained in The Bell Curve.


  32. After reading the tenor of Drew’s comments, I wouldn’t have given him tenure purely on temperament.

    “My skills have intimidated you.”

    “I am a grown man. You should think about becoming a grown man too.”

    “You’re what? 19. We both know that you are going through more nude pictures in 48 hours than I will notice over the rest of my life.”

    “Steve Miller turned into a total pussy when it came to defending freedom of speech and freedom of expression at Williams College. ”

    “Please. I’m like Donald Trump. If I get hit, I hit back.”

    “As I’ve said, you appear to be a young actress who has little of substance to contribute to this discussion.

    “If I was mean, I’d start discussing your chances of making it in Hollywood based on your photos.”

    “I’m having a hard time not laughing at your pretentiousness.”

    Thank you Williams for not letting him anywhere near my child–although his critical thinking skills would quickly smell a rat.

    If Williams needs more conservatives, they don’t need anyone who is apparently incapable of rational, dispassionate discourse.

    Incidentally, it’s very déclassé to append PhD to your name. Argumentum ad verecundium.

    • — Anonymously

      I guess you don’t get out into the real world much, do you? When I taught at Williams College I was one of its top ranked professors, tenured or not. Your kid would have left my classroom prepared to take on the world with a realistic and practical perspective. He would have enjoyed every minute of it.

  33. 1) Actually, John C. Drew you were clearly not one of the “top ranked professors” when you were here (It is so easy to say this stuff with absolutely no data to back it up) – remember there were others here at the same time who remember you, your sub-par scholarship (nothing of note since your dissertation), and your constant whining (so obvious you haven’t changed much!).
    2) There are still conservative professors here- a number of them. They are just far superior scholars than you both then and now. You are not/were not the last conservative professor here. I know it makes you feel better to believe you were not tenured because of your political beliefs. But the fact is your scholarship was simply not good enough and obviously still isn’t. If you don’t believe me, ask yourself why you didn’t get snapped up and tenured by another college or university?
    3) Now honestly, I think you need psychological help. Why else would you fixate on a position you held decades ago at a college that rejected decades ago? You simply can’t let it go. Williams just isn’t that in to you? Move on.

    • 1. Quality: I saw my comparative teaching statistics while I was at Williams College. I’m sure they are still available somewhere. By those numbers I was clearly one of the best teachers at the school. (At my last lecture, I remember students were weeping in class.) The extraordinary quality of my research was validated by both the American Political Science Association and Praeger Publishers. No one can talk about the origins of the U.S. welfare state anymore without first mentioning me and my work. I quit the academic world and went into business starting in 1989.

      2. Name One Conservative At Williams College: Go ahead. Find me the name of at least one full-time faculty member at Williams College who is a registered Republican. I’d like to compare notes with them.

      3. Significance: New research is uncovering the plight of conservatives in the academic world. See, http://www.latimes.com/opinion/op-ed/la-oe-0320-shields-dunn-conservative-affirmative-action-20160320-story.html I’m friendly with both Jon Shields and Joshua Dunn, the authors of the new book “Passing on the Right: Conservative Professors in the Progressive University.” In their view, my story is a particularly egregious example of how elite liberal arts colleges discriminate against conservatives.

      4. Moving On: I like to think that one of the most important things about my story is that the people screwed over by affirmative action or victimized for their ideology never get over it. The people who commit this injustice like to think their victims get over it so that they don’t feel so guilty about what they have done to harm innocent young scholars. I like to think that I’m here to remind them that no sane person ever gets over being injured by racial or ideological discrimination.

  34. Again, more half-truths.
    Quality: 1) Simply not true. You ranked above the norm – above average. That does NOT make you one of the “best teachers at the school.” “You were a decent teacher in a field of decent teachers. There were some ranked lower than you and many ranked higher than you. 2) Your scholarship as an Assistant professor was well below the standards of Williams (and any other institution of its caliber). The validation you cite by the APS and a publisher were for the work you did as a graduate student. I will admit that your graduate work showed great promise and was valuable. But you did little to nothing as an Assistant Professor (a paper or two a year at a professional conference – especially when you simply rework your graduate work – does not make a scholar at any college and certainly not at Williams ). Instead, of taking an honest look at your limited productivity you blame it all on affirmative action. The simple truth is you didn’t work hard enough, you didn’t produce enough, and you simply weren’t good enough
    Conservative Professors at Williams and Significance: 1) Let me met your challenge with one of my own. I will provide you a list of full-time faculty registered as Republicans if you then promise that when presented with the list, you will make a public apology for your years of lying and whining about why you didn’t get tenure. Do we have a deal? 2) I am in the process or reading the Shields and Dunn work. I will get back to you on my thoughts of it. However, if they are simply taking YOUR word for the “particularly egregious example” without the benefit of data, then I will question their scholarship too. Your CV, at the time, spoke volumes – it still does. In fact, here’s another challenge. Post a copy of your CV and the materials you submitted for tenure and let’s see if anyone Shields and Dunn included believe that your post dissertation work deserved tenure. Again, no other college or university found your work compelling.
    Moving On: Wow! This response is absolutely laughable! You state that “…no sane person ever gets over being injured by racial or ideological discrimination” yet, you deny any blame of racial injury by anyone other than white men. Wow! More importantly, the statement is patently false. People who are injured – really injured by these issues (not making it up to sooth their sense of entitlement – “I was an award winning author” – “my dissertation was the best ever..” even tho’ I didn’t do anything of merit since then, I still should have been tenured because I’m that good), do learn to move on and lead healthy, productive lives.
    Most importantly, I stand by my earlier comments: You need therapy. You need to move on. Williams just isn’t into you.

    • Given your boring writing style and repetitiveness, I’m not surprised you are afraid to take intellectual responsibility for your work by attaching your name to it. From your wild unsupported comments, I don’t think you have displayed the candle power necessary to evaluate me, my overall career, or the way I was mistreated as a young conservative at Williams College.

      You also seem completely unaware of how badly I was treated. I was never even given a shot at trying for tenure. I’m the only faculty member at Williams, before or since, to have been taken off the tenure track path after only two and a half years into their Williams career.

      I finished my award winning, easily published, doctoral dissertation in 1987 at the end of my first year at Williams College. This was normal since the college often hired people who were in the process of completing their dissertations.

      A year an a half later I was taken off the tenure track, supposedly because of the low quality of that dissertation – no other explanation was given.

      Contrary to your undocumented claims, the papers I gave in 1988 were imaginative applications of my child labor and child welfare theory that created an improved understanding religion and the U.S. Progressive Era and then to applying my child labor and child welfare theory outside of the U.S. to countries in Europe.

      Starting in 1989, I spent my last six months at Williams preparing myself for a new career as a businessman or a consultant. I’m still a successful consultant today with an impressive list of clients and a track record of raising millions of dollars for charities.

      My story is of interest to Dunn and Shields, the authors of “Passing on the Right,” primarily because my story is an example of the especially poor treatment conservatives have experienced at the most elite liberal arts colleges. More significantly, however, it is interesting because it shows what can happen to a young conservative professor with excellent teaching and scholarship credentials who doesn’t give a damn about hiding his conservative beliefs.

      According to their book, if I was really interested in spending the rest of my life helping 18 year old kids become 21 year old kids, I should have kept my mouth shut and pretended to be an atheist, liberal Democrat.

      It wasn’t worth it to me to shut up and pretend for longer than it took me for me to ace my job interview at Williams College in 1986.

      Williams College is now a less prestigious institution today, a boring intellectual backwater, because of the way it has excluded conservatives professors — especially in its political science department. Sadly, it is now merely a cold and remote place with little relevance to our country’s intellectual life except, of course, for its ability to light-up conservative websites as a continuing example of what is plainly wrong about America.

  35. My response: HAHAHAHA. There it is…..! You are the only one who sees it that way. As soon as you are questioned, you resort to insults, delusions, and paranoia. Still. Same as when you briefly worked at Williams. Not only was your scholarship (albeit almost nonexistent while at Williams) questionable so was your mental health and ability to work with others. No other college or university was interested. Williams has done fine since you left. Can’t say the same for you. Seriously, you still need serious psychological help! I hope you get it. Finally, since as they say “you can’t argue with crazy,” I’m done. You have taken up too much of my time.

  36. No scholarship. None. Apparently his dissertation was published as a chapter in a larger collection, which would be fine as one piece of scholarship, but for someone who claims to be a great political scientist? Laughable. And it does not appear in any scholarly databases. He has never published an article. He has never published a book.

    Basically, he is most famous for reverse starfucking — attaching himself to Obama based on a barely passing relationship in the early 1980s. And he’s never to my knowledge been asked and so has never had to answer a simple question — what does Obama’s alleged Marxism in the early 1980s have to do with anything? Let’s say, for shits and giggles, that he WAS a Marxist. So was John Drew. So either we have the fruit from the poisoned vine or we don’t. If Obama, as a result of early Marxism thus is illegitimate because he once was a Marxist (despite not doing a thing to govern as a Marxist) then isn’t John Drew equally illegitimate?

    I just don’t get it. But let’s don’t interrupt the gravy train — John Drew (who, as I’ve been told, has a PhD) is only known because he writes about his encounter with Obama at Occidental. His PhD in Poli Sci is incidental, and was from the moment that Williams shit-canned him and no one else hired him. Actually, it was incidental before that — he’s never published any actual political science since at least the George HW Bush Administration.

    • Really? LOL My dissertation was published as nine chapters of an edited volume. There were only eleven chapters in the whole book.

      I didn’t have the luxury of being an academic working in low stress job, turning my thesis into a book during my sabbatical year. I did it on the fly, with minimal rewriting, the best way I could under the circumstances. Given the discrimination I faced as a brand new conservative academic, it is a wonder that my thesis was published at all.

      I have, of course, self-published four books in the field of fundraising. I have raised about $40 million in funding for various schools and charities based, almost entirely, on my skills as a political scientist and program evaluation specialist.

      On another note, there are tons of people who knew Barack Obama. I’m the only one who is relatively famous. What makes me different? I’m the one who proves that Obama is a liar. Specifically, that he has lied about his past for political gain. My take on young Obama has been verified by liberal and conservative authors. It was just reported again in Glenn Beck’s new book, Liars.

      Given the fact that people said going public about Obama’s past would end my career, my marriage, my business, and potentially my life, I think my wife and I deserve a little respect for having the courage to confront the lies being told by the most powerful person on Earth, a person who would not hesitate to use the tools of government to harass his political opponents.

      You are also overlooking the fact that my revelations about young Obama apparently sparked great interest in his past and resulted in the publication of a number of additional studies which conclusively tied Obama to Communists like Frank Marshall Davis. See, for example, Paul Kengor’s book, The Communist.

      Furthermore, my story was well received among members of the Tea Party Movement, the movement which helped reclaim both the House and the Senate from Democrat control. Undoubtedly, the accumulated evidence regarding Obama’s radicalism has kept him from fully implementing whatever collectivist plans he had in store for us while his radical past was a closely guarded secret.

      I wish my story would have impacted the 2012 election too. The Romney people, however, were afraid to use it. Trump, at least, is friendly to the conservative authors and websites – including Breitbart.com – who brought my story to national attention.

      As one of the top scholars of my generation and a former professor at Williams College, I think it is fair to say I took my prestige with me when I left. If you are interested in my current writing, check out some of my articles at my Pathway to Prosperity website. They might change your life. They might, in fact, inspire you to show the courage it takes to own your words and actions.

      See, http://pathwaytoprosperity.blogspot.com/

Leave a Comment