'Habemus Papam':OU-DEI's Benevolent Joseph II
Divisions of Ideological Enforcement: Installment I
On September 17, 2021, The University of Oklahoma will inaugurate its fifteenth President. But unlike the inaugurations of previous Presidents, the formal installation of Joseph Harroz, comes with the State of Oklahoma’s seal of approval for the Woke Pontiff’s discriminatory secular religion - the deceptively named antiRacism - enforced by his CRT derived Division of Ideological Enforcement (DEI).
[R]eligion can be defined as a comprehensive belief system that addresses the fundamental questions of human existence, such as the meaning of life and death, man’s role in the universe, and the nature of good and evil, and that gives rise to duties of conscience. –Ben Clements, Cornell Law Review, 1989.
Quoted from - A First-Amendment Case for Freedom from the Woke Religion, by Dr. James Lindsay.
AntiRacism, as defined by it’s creator and chief televangelist, Ibram X. Kendi, lives almost exclusively in the amorphous realm of public policy; in the ill-defined space of cultural governance historically occupied by the Judeo-Christian/Enlightenment values that are often referred to by practicing antiRacists as “whiteness.”
This is the same chasm of government influence that late twentieth-century and early twenty-first century liberals have been battling to clear for the last 70 years, by asserting separation of church and state. Well, the progenitors of the bygone, bleeding-heart far-left of yore, are now trying to refill that cultural depth with a religious commitment to Critical Race Theory ideology, policy, and practice.
“The religion of the woke people is narrow, puritanical, and righteous. Those who don’t conform to its catechism — the heretics — are quickly expelled or “cancelled.” As with other fundamentalist faiths, the new religion appeals not to reason, but to emotions. The proof of one’s faith is shown by the repetition of mindless slogans and by passionate demonstrations of commitment. Strangely — or perhaps not so strangely — the woke people do not worship a Supreme Being. They look not to God, but to the State for the answers to life’s problems. The promised land is not in heaven, but here on earth. And it can be achieved once the woke people take the reins of government.”
- from Leftist ‘wokeness’ is a new religion, and it’s coming to convert you, by William Kilpatrick
This mysterious space between the law and the people is Public Policy. It is in this often misunderstood area of governance that we find how a discrimination based, secular religion has been allowed to illegally exist and persist mostly unchecked, even in a red state like Oklahoma.
For the average person, public policy is understood to be a direct outgrowth of laws passed by elected representatives, that are then signed and enforced by state or nationwide elected chief executives. But as we recently observed in Oklahoma Superintendent of Education Joy Hofmeister’s, handling of the rules meant to enforce the Oklahoma Education Civil Rights Act (HB 1775), Oklahoma has a wide and dark divide between its laws as passed, and how those laws are enforced in public policy. Hofmeister, who made no secret of her disdain for 1775, withdrew the rules as written due to a clerical error, and is in no hurry to fix the issue. This situation perfectly distills the dangerous divide between the law as intended, and the interpretation and enforcement of the law in public policy.
“Policy is the informal side of government, the real statement of what government actually does. But policy should be tolerated, not embraced, and even so, tolerated only as long as it knows its place: as the servant of the formal rule of law.”
Law vs. Public Policy: A Critical Exploration by Theodore J. Lowi, Cornell Journal of Law and Public Policy, 2003
Public policy, even in red state Oklahoma, is almost exclusively the domain of bureaucracies, and DEI is only able to persist because of its status as an uncheckable member of this naturally despotic government apparatus. Therefore, the only person on the planet with the direct power necessary to fully rein in woke discrimination at OU, is the President of OU. But luckily for the religiously devoted woke minority, OU’s President also happen’s to be an office that cannot be checked directly by the will of the voters.
Recently, Jonathan Small, President of the Oklahoma Council for Public Affairs, penned an article to address a mystery voiced by law professor and New York Post columnist Glenn Reynolds: “I don’t understand how a state as red as Oklahoma can have such an obsessively woke state university with so few repercussions.”
Before I continue (and in the interest of full disclosure), let me say that I have great respect for Jonathan Small, and the work done by OCPA as an organization. I can personally attest to the fact that this extremely knowledgeable group of conservative policy wonks, truly see the dangers that CRT poses to Oklahoma and the Country. Not only that, I am a proud graduate of the OCPA Fears Fellowship, and OCPA has even allowed me the use of their platform to voice my concerns about CRT/DEI/Antiracism at OU, in not just one but two articles; the latter of which is directed at this specific issue.
IN DEFENSE OF ‘A SHRINE TO FREEDOM’
OKLAHOMA HIGHER EDUCATION REFORM: LESSONS FROM IDAHO
But, it is because of this warm and respectful relationship that I feel the added responsibility to express some disappointment that the venerable OCPA President seemed to avoid the original question: how has the puritanical woke religion been allowed to exist and persist at OU?
Quoting Jonathan Small, President of OCPA:
“I don’t understand how a state as red as Oklahoma can have such an obsessively woke state university with so few repercussions,” law professor and New York Post columnist Glenn Reynolds recently marveled. He’s not alone. I don’t understand it, either. Nor do many Oklahoma taxpayers I’ve talked to. The question is whether OU’s regents will choose to right the ship or whether they will continue to preside over the university’s evisceration.”
The article continues to give shocking examples that illustrate the dangers of woke ideology at OU, as well as suggesting some meaningful actions that the Oklahoma legislature could pass to help reign it in:
“With budgetary transparency, Oklahoma legislators and taxpayers could scrutinize the university’s operations and identify even more ideological activism. Oklahomans and their elected representatives should not continue to tolerate an obsessively woke state university with so few repercussions.”, wrote Small.
Small’s recommendation that the OK legislature pass laws giving that body budgetary oversight in OK Higher Ed., is one that I support, as I wrote in my most recent article for OCPA. Such a measure would go far to check the expansion of state-sanctioned DEI discrimination at OU. But I fear that it stops far short of being able to dislodge it. This is because it is unclear what bureaucratic arm would actually wield this monetary check, not to mention which individual would wield that arm. As with Joy Hofmeister and the 1775 rules, I fear that this approach alone ignores the divide between the law as written and the unseen administrative and bureaucratic powers that will enforce it. When it comes to discriminatory DEI policy at OU, the question of “how” this secular religion has been allowed to thrive in Red State Oklahoma, leads directly to one person: Joseph Harroz.
As Jonathan Small noted:
“Harroz is now the OU president and he is an enthusiastic booster of the woke tidal wave on campus. “The absolute most important thing to me,” he says, “is that we get it right around diversity and inclusion.” He says it is OU’s “top priority.” Top priority? Not quality education for all students?”
When I first read this, I was silently cheering in anticipation that Small would arrive at what I see as the logical conclusion - a public call to hold Harroz himself accountable for his divisive agenda - but Small stopped short of this conclusion.
As a relative outsider, I have noticed that this failure to launch seems a regular occurring phenomena among Oklahoma’s in-the-know, conservative political class. Every time I bring up the idea of marshaling public opinion and energies against the DEI agenda by addressing President Harroz directly (say, by starting a petition demanding the Governor and Regents remove him and Defund DEI), I get the same look, tone, and diversions meant to convey sincere concern and caution - even from those most committed to ending Oklahoma’s journey down the illiberal road of state-mandated, religious wokism, like my friends at OCPA.
But, why?
In Oklahoma, there is no more powerful or influential political force than the Higher Education Lobby. The President of OU, the Board of Regents, and the bureaucracies they produce - like DEI - sit atop and within the murky emptiness of bureaucracy, while wielding great and virtually unchecked powers of persuasion and coercion inherent in public policy. Nearly all of the individuals that makeup these bodies are - at least to some extent - direct stakeholders in the financial success and social reputation of the University. And when it comes to the social reputation of institutions post-George Floyd, wokism is money in the bank.
Stakeholder Capitalism And The Future Of American Democracy: with Vivek Ramaswamy CEO, Roivant Sciences Reihan Salam, President, Manhattan Institute
There is big money available for universities and other institutions willing to bend to, and participate in this woke brand of religious stakeholder capitalism. The evidence of this CCP inspired perversion of capitalism is plainly visible at wOKeU, if you know where to look for it. If you haven’t noticed the influx of big money donations coming to OU and many other DEI aligned universities, from large, DEI supporting corporations, you should start paying attention to it. Because this big money stakeholder capitalism is quickly replacing OU’s dependance on mass alumni support, leading to drastically diminished influence for average Joe Oklahoma.
Harroz himself even alluded to his responsibility to his stakeholders, right after taking the charge at OU:
From the OU Daily, June 9, 2019:
“A lot of people have mistaken the president’s job as being a classic CEO job, and it absolutely is not,” Harroz said. “There are executive functions, and there are functions that are much closer to being legislative functions, where you’re working in a shared governance model and you don’t answer to one group of shareholders. Harroz said the many shareholders he must serve as interim president include students, faculty, staff, alumni, the state itself and others. “You have these groups that you have to understand what their interests are, and you have to also understand that there’s still an obligation to lead,” Harroz said.
Within the safe space of OU’s unchecked and ever morphing bureaucratic structure, Joseph Harroz and his Division of Ideological Enforcement can covertly execute changes in the rules of engagement between your student and the university. These are changes that directly affect the lives of every person within OU’s many spheres of influence, and are often justified based solely on expert manipulations of the law through Critical Race Theory, made actionable through CRT inspired antiRacist policies, and enforced by OU’s Division of Ideological Enforcement. (DEI)
If you are paying attention to Oklahoma public schools, you can plainly see that you and your kids are surrounded by OU’s spheres of influence, and it is through these lenses of real life consequence that we can clearly see the source of Oklahoma’s discontent.
If not for Joseph Harroz and his deep commitment, OU would not be traveling down the graceless road of the woke religion. But thanks to a near universal reluctance to directly challenge the powerful and entrenched OU President, Oklahomans are forced to tolerate and accept the consequences of OU’s religious reformation.
With that in mind, here is my two part policy recommendation to remove the woke rot from Oklahoma Higher Education:
I call on the Board of Regents to remove Joseph Harroz as President of OU, effective immediately.
Defund DEI. Completely.
Doing this would not only immediately halt and remove the action arm of the Woke Crusade at OU, but would send an unmistakable message to woke college administrations all over the country:
Go Woke, Go Broke.
Its time to lead by example, Oklahoma. If Oklahomans truly wish to protect students, schools, governments, and institutions, from Pope Joseph II’s Church of antiRacism - a church rooted in state-sanctioned racism and discrimination - its citizens and organizers must find the courage and political will to confront its Woke Pontiff.
Because if they don’t, all Oklahomans - yes, even those Oklahomans who’s hands appear comfortably immovable from the wheels of power - will eventually find that all the money in the world will not help them and their children keep OU, Oklahoma, and the United States of America, from disappearing into the dark night of the Woke abyss.
J. Mark Ousley, UnWokable
This is the first installment of UnWokable’s New Series: Divisions of Ideological Enforcement. Subscribe to UnWokable today to keep up with this series.
Sources:
https://www.jamesgmartin.center/2021/09/oklahoma-university-thumbs-its-nose-at-oklahomans-with-so-few-repercussions/
https://scholarship.law.cornell.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1050&context=cjlpp
https://www.ocpathink.org/post/education-agency-botches-anti-racism-regulations
https://www.lifesitenews.com/opinion/leftist-wokeness-is-a-new-religion-and-its-coming-to-convert-you/
https://www.oudaily.com/news/interim-ou-president-joseph-harroz-discusses-personal-history-priorities-for/article_80141daa-8b00-11e9-abc7-fb1315c2d1ec.html
https://www.manhattan-institute.org/capitalism-era-of-social-advocacy