The real problem behind higher education?

What is required for people to find jobs with degrees in social advocacy?

Advocacy has long been part of graduate programs like law and social work, where students are trained to represent the interests of clients or other individuals. But now, advocacy and activism itself is being offered as a general course for students in place of education. Where protests were once defiant demonstrations held in the university yard, they are now a course of study in classrooms led by academic activists.

For example, Arizona State University offers a BA program entirely on “community advocacy and social policy” that focuses on “historically under-served individuals, families and communities.” Students “complete courses in two core areas: diversity and oppressed populations and social issues and interventions.”

Many schools offer “advocacy and social justice studies.” At the University of Massachusetts at Amherst, students are offered the opportunity to “study social justice with distinguished instructors from a wide range of academic departments, from Afro-American Studies to Women, Gender, Sexuality Studies.”

Camden County College offers a diversity and social justice degree based on the advocacy work of the Black Lives Matter movement and the COVID-19 pandemic, which “revealed the depth of social inequality and its life-or-death consequences.” Others offer “a certificate of proficiency in social justice and an A.S. degree in Human Services, Social Justice Advocacy.”

So this is an excerpt from Turley's article today where is pointing out that Universities are now just openly teaching social advocacy to their students by offering specific classes or even offering degrees in these various social agenda subjects. Turley ends the article by suggesting that the schools are not doing the students favors by allowing them to graduate with degrees in this sort of nonsense.

I have to provide the devil's advocate position that these schools are actually in cahoots with many woke corporations who were trying to incorporate more and more of this into their companies. The whole DEI has become a thing for many organizations and there is good money being offered for these positions (at least for those at the top of this food chain). Many of these woke companies have been quick to gobble up some young social activist into a role where they can show the rest of the woke people just exactly how woke they are. To find someone with a degree in social justice studies is right up their alley.

However, as the economy has struggled and tough choices has had to be made, the idea of these DEI positions have been questioned and in many cases the positions have been eliminated as unnecessary to the company's bottom line. After all, how much does a company "really" need an entire department dedicated to pushing social issues on employees and demanding that they follow the correct political path as they continue their employment? Is this really something we need to be addressing at a corporate level in some sort of proactive manner? Don't we already have regular human resources departments to handle the actual serious complaints about any discrimination or other issues that might come up due to race, creed, or color?

Let's not forget what has been happening with companies that go down the "woke" advertising route. Bud Light, Target, Disney, and plenty others are cratering in their market caps and seeing more red than an MMA canvas at the end of a fight night. Mainly because they chose to push woke on their clients.

So what happens if the vast majority of companies decide to reevaluate whether they actually need an entire department of social justice warriors out there explaining to all of their employees how racist and bigoted they are while teaching them how to be more woke?

Well then, these people will have very little skills to find different employment and will only push harder to "expose" racism and bigotry to keep their jobs. Much like the climate change scientist is more interested in pushing the concept of climate change than being an objective honest scientist, these social advocacy will need to do something similar to justify their positions. They will need to dig deeper into the personal lives of the employees, possibly even scouring social media and other such things "looking" for examples of what they are there to prevent. This will end up with someone voting for Trump being a bigot or racist or someone who is pro-life is part of a hate group. They will do what they have to do to try to justify their existence and show that they are needed. They will create social injustice even where none really exists, because they have to.

Personally I would like to believe that Turley is correct. Perhaps in five or ten years, all of these people will be obsolete and be looking for a new line of work. But in the meantime I find it almost impossible to believe that they will not attempt to push society harder to make every made up microaggression something that requires immediate and constant attention where the only people qualified to garner such attention are those woke people with woke degrees.