Personally, I didn’t think it was that ambiguous. If you followed the link, just a glance and the title/headline of Mr Magness’ article should have been enough to inform that Mr Magness wasn’t buying what the Urban Institute was selling.

My apologies to Phillip.

Didn’t spot that ambiguity at the time, but I added wording to clarify that Magness’s piece is a critique of the Urban Institute study.

The claim that words are violence and that violence on campus is real is pure propaganda and/or delusion. A college campus is one of the safest places on earth for a minority person. Their lack of “comfort” there is no one’s fault. Claims that rigor and writing quality are white supremacy seek to destroy the whole point of a university. If you graduate writing badly who wants to hire you? These activists are active all right: actively harming those minorities they claim to be helping.

Actually, the article by Phillip W. Magness questions a claim of a rightward shift in academia made by someone else (David Austin Walsh for the Urban Institute.)

It’s not racist to say that Europeans took over North America. It would be racist to suggest that anyone might be grateful.

Re: Experimental agitprop theater at Yale

They said they believed that many students in Sky’s class have “not confronted the levels of hypocrisy and violence — like white feminism — that is propagated by her class.”

Some of the most hard-core rednecks use exactly the same form of bitter, well-coached, anti-human rhetoric. From Yalies, with a grammatical error, just like real rednecks.