Degree courses focused on the “undertakings of white people” have made universities racist, according to a review by a Russell Group university that has pledged to make reparations in response. The Telegraph has the story.
The University of Nottingham and Nottingham Trent undertook a joint review of their connections to the slave trade, and set out how these have created a legacy of “racism” at the institutions.
They pledged to make slavery reparations as a result of their review, which found that the universities’ “racially unbalanced curriculum” ignores the “equally significant efforts of people of African descent”. The report does not state in which specific subjects this parity of achievement has been ignored.
Its authors, a group of Nottingham academics, concluded that “these are issues that require urgent and sustained attention”.
Under the pledge made following the review, the universities are set to devise a plan for reparative justice to atone for links to slavery and mitigate “enduring detrimental legacies”.
No definitive plans have yet been made to address the issues raised in the report.
The report was overseen by a steering group that included six people appointed by the two universities who “identify as black”. Authors credited their “biological proximity to the historical atrocity of slavery” with raising awareness of “ongoing emotional pain” throughout the project.
The report into the connections between Nottingham universities and the slave trade stated that key benefactors, the 6th and 7th Dukes of Portland, benefited from slavery despite both having been born after abolition.
Descendants of family members who may have directly owned slaves benefited from the social and “cultural capital” that came with wealth initially generated through forced labour, according to the report.
Such cultural capital, the report states, may include the aristocratic cultural conventions of “reading classical European literature” and “travelling to historic landmarks”. …
In August, the Telegraph revealed that the University of Nottingham had removed the term “Anglo-Saxon” from university module titles as part of efforts to refute “nationalist narratives”.
Worth reading in full.
To join in with the discussion please make a donation to The Daily Sceptic.
Profanity and abuse will be removed and may lead to a permanent ban.
I wouldn’t be too blasé saying “Gov inevitably lost..”, but it does increase my confidence in the judges! Also reported on GBN recently.
Call me paranoid but my guess is the judges’ motivation is to expose evil Tory incompetence and corruption rather than getting to the real truth about covid.
“unredacted”….. Highly unlikely.
BREAKING.. the Daily Sceptic has received the first glimpse of Johnson’s papers.. verdict.. clear as mud..
Squeaky bum time for Gove, Cummings and Sunak me-thinks.
I wish I could believe that, but the whole premise of the inquiry is that there was a pandemic, so the focus will be on poor execution of the stupid, evil rubbish they made up pretending it was to do with public health. The basic lie will not be exposed in our lifetime because there are too many vested interests who were all in on it in some way or another. In fact, name a powerful institution in the rich world that wasn’t an enthusiastic supporter of the covid scam.
Yes TOF.. name one indeed.. I certainly can’t..
We were lied to about the efficacy and safety of the jabs just like we were lied to about the severity of the pretend ”pandemic”. The maniacal obsession with getting everybody jabbed, using whatever means necessary ( not just the PsyOp, remember the crazy examples of bribery from all around the world? Remember when they did that for previous years’ flu vaccines? Nope, me neither! ) looks even more sinister now doesn’t it? That’s why I’ve personally done a 180 and now think no world leaders and no people with real influence took the damn things at all. They’d have just had placebos, I’m convinced of it. Because they *knew* the whole thing was a hoax and the death jabs were both unnecessary and highly risky, in a dangerously ‘mass global human experiment using novel technology’ kind of way.
”Drug regulators and public health agencies have saturated the airways with claims that serious harms following COVID-19 vaccination are “rare.”
But there has been very little scrutiny of that claim by the media, and I couldn’t find an instance where international agencies actually quantified what they meant by the term “rare” or provided a scientific source.
The best evidence so far has been a study published in one of vaccinology’s most prestigious journals, where independent researchers reanalyzed the original trial data for the mRNA vaccines.
The authors, Joseph Fraiman et al., found that serious adverse events (SAE)—i.e., adverse events that require hospitalization—were elevated in the vaccine arm by an alarming rate—1 additional SAE for every 556 people vaccinated with Pfizer’s mRNA vaccine.
According to a scale used by drug regulators, SAEs occurring at a rate of 1 in 556 are categorized as “uncommon” but are far more common than what the public has been told.
In response to the criticism, Fraiman, an emergency doctor and lead author on the reanalysis said, “To be honest, I’m not that surprised that agencies have not determined the rate of SAEs. Once these agencies approve a drug, there’s no incentive for them to monitor harms.”
He said it’s hypocritical for health agencies to tell people that serious harms of the COVID-19 vaccines are rare when they haven’t even determined the SAE rate themselves.
“It’s very dangerous not to be honest with the public,” said Fraiman, who recently called for the mRNA vaccines to be suspended.
“These noble lies may get people vaccinated in the short term, but you’re creating decades or generations of distrust when it’s revealed that they have been misleading the public.”
https://www.theepochtimes.com/sorry-but-serious-harms-from-the-vaccine-are-not-rare_5373840.html
We still have the core question: why? To me the elephant in the room is that only the (gullible) people of the collective west were given deadly mRNA, while China’s sphere of influence were given what I assume were basically placebos. This seems incredibly significant to me. If the shots are a bioweapon, which I think they are, and the mRNA tech is owned by China, which Naomi Wolf and others have shown, what does that suggest? To me it suggests that world war 3 is a biological war…
Anyone else having probs with the site being slow or not loading tonight? I posted something over an hour ago and it’s disappeared into the ether. Oh well…just some friendly neighbourhood gremlins perhaps…
From Peter McCullough’s Telegram;
”After high volumes of downloads overnight @TheLancet censored our paper. They don’t want the truth to get out on autopsies in C19 deaths. Why not let people read it and make their own conclusions?”
No wonder the shady buggers censored it. Look at the authors and you’ll see at least six names of doctors/experts who have been outspoken and opposing the narrative from the start. You can still access it here;
https://www.zenodo.org/record/8120771
All a pantomime for those that believe any of this stuff still matters.
The fact is that during the “deadliest virus the world has ever seen” members of the govt, opposition, civil service and expert class were swanning around drinking and screwing while they told the rest of us it was too dangerous to sit in a cold church 20 feet from someone else. If you can’t work out what that means then you need to listen to a little more “London Calling”.
Described brilliantly AMAT..
Never mind, the waste of yet more taxpayers’ money is par for the course of all governments.
Nothing like this happens by accident. I suspect they want to paint the picture of the chaotic response to Covid by our elected government so that they can push the line that we need to hand over our sovereignty to unelected technocrats at the WHO.