Pages

Monday, November 11, 2019

One Event - Two Views

Donald J. Trump Jr. and his girlfriend Kimberly Guilfoyle was on campus yesterday as part of a book tour. (Kimberly Guilfoyle is also Governor Newsom's ex-wife, but that a whole other story!)

Anyway, there are two different views of what occurred at the event available. The Daily Bruin emphasizes protesters on the left. The Guardian emphasizes protesters from the alt-right.

In the interest of being "fair and balanced," yours truly gives you both below. First, the Bruin:

Donald Trump Jr.’s book promotion attended by over 400, marked by protests

November 10, 2019, Daily Bruin, Bernard Mendez, Emily Macinnis, Tiffany Zha, Jintak Han

A campus visit from Donald Trump Jr. to promote his new book drew both crowds of supporters and protesters.

The event was hosted Sunday by the UCLA chapter of Turning Point USA, a conservative organization with chapters on college campuses across the country.

Trump, who came to promote his new book titled “Triggered: How the Left Thrives on Hate and Wants to Silence Us,” was joined on stage in Moore Hall by Charlie Kirk, the founder of Turning Point USA, and Kimberly Guilfoyle, an attorney, former Fox News host and Trump’s girlfriend. More than 400 attendees filled the hall.

Trump said during the event that he has faced discrimination for his conservative beliefs, which he said contradicts the principle of free speech.

“There are consequences for being a conservative, especially for being a vocal conservative,” he said. “There’s greater consequences, as we all see, for being a Trump-supporting conservative.”

He also spoke about visiting communist Czechoslovakia as a child, and criticized Senator Bernie Sanders’ support of democratic socialism.

“Waiting in a bread line is not as glamorous as Bernie would have you believe,” Trump said.

Dozens of protesters from Refuse Fascism, the Revolution Club UCLA, the Afrikan Student Union at UCLA and Young Democratic Socialists of America came to demonstrate outside the event. Refuse Fascism also later demonstrated on the Hill.

During the event, a woman wearing a hijab stood in the back of the venue with her fist raised and periodically chanted slogans. Guilfoyle suggested that the protester supported the recently killed Islamic State leader Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi without offering any evidence.

“Individuals in the back, there are student health services available,” Guilfoyle said. “Why would you cheer someone that murders and rapes women and children?”

Guilfoyle’s comment was met with laughter and cheers from the crowd. The protester entered into a shouting match with Guilfoyle before being drowned out by pro-Trump chants from the crowd – there were no other active protesters inside the event.

Michelle Ohanian, policy director of Bruin Republicans and a third-year history student, said she thinks protesters should attend the event to listen to what Trump has to say.

“The best thing I think a protester can do is first to reserve a seat, sit down, listen,” Ohanian said. “If you’re not exposing yourself to things that make you uncomfortable, I strongly believe that you are not challenging yourself.”

The question-and-answer session planned for after Trump’s speech was canceled because Trump said attendees could take what he said out of context. However at the beginning of the event, organizers said the session was cancelled due to time constraints.

Esteban Villegas, a third-year political science and philosophy student from California State Polytechnic University, Pomona, who attended the event, said he thinks the event contradicted itself for criticizing left-wing politicians who suppress free speech while not allowing a question-and-answer section.

Jacob Leventhal, a recent graduate of USC who attended the event, voted for the Democratic nominee Hillary Clinton in the 2016 presidential election. Leventhal said he was entertained by the liberal activists protesting against Trump.

“I just think it’s kind of funny when you see these people losing their minds over seemingly innocuous things,” Leventhal said.

Daniel Blecker, a first-year global studies student, said he attended the event because he was interested in seeing what it would be like to attend a pro-Trump event. He said he thought the event was overwhelming and terrifying.

“(Trump is) scared of being triggered by the questions people ask,” Blecker said. “He came here because he knows he can get a reaction.”

Source: http://dailybruin.com/2019/11/10/donald-trump-jr-s-book-promotion-attended-by-over-400-marked-by-protests/

===
Donald Trump Jr walks out of Triggered book launch after heckling – from supporters: Event at University of California is cut short amid anger at his refusal to take questions from the audience

Nov. 10-11, 2019, The Guardian, Andrew Gumbel

Donald Trump Jr ventured on to the University of California’s overwhelmingly liberal Los Angeles campus on Sunday, hoping to prove what he had just argued in his book – that a hate-filled American left was hell-bent on silencing him and anyone else who supported the Trump presidency.

But the appearance backfired when his own supporters, diehard Make America Great Again conservatives, raised their voices most loudly in protest and ended up drowning him out barely 20 minutes into an event scheduled to last two hours.

The audience was angry that Trump Jr and his girlfriend, Kimberly Guilfoyle, would not take questions. The loud shouts of “USA! USA!” that greeted Trump when he first appeared on the stage of a university lecture hall to promote his book Triggered: How The Left Thrives on Hate and Wants to Silence Us quickly morphed into even louder, openly hostile chants of “Q and A! Q and A!”

The 450-strong audience had just been told they would not be allowed to ask questions, “due to time constraints”.

At first, Trump and Guilfoyle tried to ignore the discontent, which originated with a fringe group of America Firsters who believe the Trump administration has been taken captive by a cabal of internationalists, free-traders, and apologists for mass immigration.

When the shouting would not subside, Trump Jr tried – and failed – to argue that taking questions from the floor risked creating soundbites that leftwing social media posters would abuse and distort. Nobody was buying that.

In minutes, the entire argument put forward by the president’s son – that he was willing to engage in dialogue but that it was the left that refused to tolerate free speech – crumbled.

“I’m willing to listen…” Trump began.

“Q and A! Q and A!” the audience yelled back.

“We’ll go into the lion’s den and talk …” Trump tried again.

“Then open the Q and A!” came the immediate response.

Guilfoyle, forced to shout to make herself heard, told students in the crowd: “You’re not making your parents proud by being rude and disruptive.”

She and Trump Jr left the stage moments later.

The fiasco pointed to a factional rift on the Trump-supporting conservative right that has been growing rapidly in recent weeks, particularly among “zoomers” – student-age activists. On one side are one of the sponsors of Trump Jr’s book tour, Turning Point USA, a campus conservative group with a track record of bringing provocative rightwing speakers to liberal universities.

On the other side are far-right activists – often referred to as white supremacists and neo-Nazis, although many of them reject such labels – who believe in slamming the door on all immigrants, not just those who cross the border without documents, and who want an end to America’s military and diplomatic engagement with the wider world.

A number of the loudest voices at Sunday’s event were supporters of Nick Fuentes, a 21-year-old activist with a podcast called America First that has taken particular aim at Turning Point USA and its 25-year-old founder, Charlie Kirk. In a number of his own recent campus appearances, Kirk has faced questions accusing him of being more interested in supporting Israel than in putting America first. He has responded by calling his detractors conspiracists and racists.

On Sunday, Kirk appeared alongside Trump Jr. and Guilfoyle but said nothing.

Two Fuentes supporters, delighted with the outcome of Trump Jr’s appearance, later told the Guardian the pro-Trump movement was being infected with “fake conservatism” and that the president himself was at the mercy of a cabal of deep state operatives who wouldn’t let him do many of the things he campaigned on.

The pair, who called themselves Joe and Orion Miles, said: “It was an absolute disaster for them. We wanted to ask questions about immigration and about Christianity, but they didn’t want to face those questions.”

Also, if Trump Jr was expecting “triggered” leftwingers to clamour for his silence, he did not get it. No more than 35 protesters showed up and, despite making a lot of noise with drums and whistles and shouts of “Trump-Pence Out Now!”, resisted taunts and insults from provocateurs in Make America Great Again hats from across a line of metal barriers.

Source: https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2019/nov/11/donald-trump-jr-walks-out-of-triggered-book-launch-after-heckling-from-supporters

UPDATE: The video below comes from an alt-right Twitter account:

Sunday, November 10, 2019

No More Waiting for Harvard Verdict - Addendum

In various posts, we have followed the Harvard admissions court case that will likely end up at the Supreme Court as a test of affirmative action in admissions.*

Although the case at the district court level ultimately endorsed the Harvard admissions process - and rejected the allegation that it was discriminatory against Asian Americans - a variety of embarrassing revelations about the overall process came out - particularly involving treatment of donors' children, "legacies," etc.

At around the same time as the case was being heard and decided, the pay-to-play admissions scandal aired, involving such schools as Harvard, USC, and UCLA. Some of these situations involved use of athletic admissions processes. In the Harvard case, fencing was involved. And the Harvard case involved Asian American students with "nearly perfect grades and SAT scores " whose father - so the allegation goes - nonetheless felt the need to make a financial arrangement through an intermediary with a Harvard admissions coach.

Although the fencing story was not part of the affirmative action case, it's hard to imagine that the tale will escape the notice of Supreme Court justices (assuming the Supreme Court eventually decides to hear the Harvard case). The Boston Globe, for example, carries a detailed story:

At Harvard, an admissions scandal that unfolded out in the open

By Evan Allen, Boston Globe, November 10, 2019

The two coaches plotted over text messages with winking-face emojis, hatching a clean and simple scheme. The middleman was so confident — so delighted at his good fortune — that he allegedly bragged about it publicly. One million dollars to get a kid into Harvard! Can you believe it?
The money changed hands right out in the open: a series of donations, a land deal, a real estate purchase. Behind the scenes, they were frank about finances and favors, calling each other “brother,” “boss,” and “genius.”
The country has been transfixed by Operation Varsity Blues, a sprawling college admissions scandal winding its way through federal court in Boston in which mega-rich parents and Hollywood celebrities paid a California college consultant to fake resumes and test scores and get their children admitted into top schools.
This is the story of a different kind of college recruitment scam — one born in the rarefied world of elite fencing, where the gulf between the rich and the rest yawns wide, and where some wealthy parents step through a not-so-secret side door to the Ivy League. It, too, is the subject of a federal probe that could draw Harvard more deeply into the admissions scandal’s glare.
The lives of three powerful men intersected at the threshold of that side door. Peter Brand, the university’s fencing coach in the twilight of his career, planning for retirement but dreaming of a windfall. Alexandre Ryjik, the Soviet-trained head of the “World’s Largest Fencing School” who came from nothing and loved the high life in America. And Jie “Jack” Zhao, the Chinese millionaire who would do anything to see his two beloved sons succeed.
The Globe began reporting on the extraordinary financial maneuvers by Brand, Ryjik, and Zhao in the spring, starting with Zhao’s purchase of the Harvard coach’s Needham home at an inflated price — at a time when his younger son was seeking admission to Harvard. Then there were the fencing coaches’ charities, fattened with Zhao’s cash, and the quiet Virginia land deal.
The stories pitched Harvard into the roiling national conversation over the role money and corruption play in college acceptances, and thrust the low-profile sport of fencing into an ugly spotlight. Harvard opened an investigation and fired Brand; the US attorney’s office for Massachusetts convened a federal grand jury.
Harvard has stressed that its admissions policies are strenuous, and recruitment is no guarantee of admission — a 40-person committee makes the final decision on applicants, even athletes. “Harvard Athletics is committed to upholding the integrity of our athletics program,” the athletic director said in a statement when Brand was fired.
Brand, Ryjik, and Zhao have steadfastly denied wrongdoing. All three declined to answer specific questions for this story. Brand did not comment at all; Ryjik’s attorney said he was proud of coaching the Zhao boys and never “engaged in any improprieties.” Zhao offered to fly to Boston in October to sit down with a reporter and “explain the whole thing,” but then decided against it. Instead, he issued a statement through his attorney saying he’d long been a generous supporter of fencing, and that his sons — both of whom graduated high school as accomplished fencers with nearly perfect grades and SAT scores — had gotten to Harvard on their own.
But a new trove of documents, and interviews with people who watched everything unfold in real time, reveal, for the first time, the inside story of the alleged scheme, right down to the wild boasts that appear, at least now, to have been true.

A love of fencing

Like any parent, Jack Zhao wanted the best for his two sons. He secured them every advantage.
He sent them to Washington, D.C.’s St Albans School, a private all-boys institution overlooking the US Capitol — where tuition this year runs as high as $67,000. He took them on international trips with their friends, and to galas where they rubbed elbows with celebrities. When his two “nerdy boys” found a love for fencing, he paid for them to train with the best.
After all, Zhao — bespectacled and ambitious and deeply proud of his Chinese roots — had truly made it in America, and why shouldn’t his children? He had arrived from Beijing in 1985 to attend the University of Cincinnati, and gone on to cofound iTalk Global Communications Inc., a telecommunications business that he and his partners sold their majority stake in for $80 million in 2012. He continued as CEO, and positioned himself as a champion of Chinese culture, partnering with sports stars like basketball hero Yao Ming. “Sports can truly help us enter mainstream American society,” Zhao proclaimed at one event.
Fencing, Zhao told a crowd at an event celebrating Olympic fencing champion Sheng Li in 2012, was another front in the Chinese fight for life and future in a foreign land.
In Virginia, his sons wielded sabers.
They were in exclusive company. There are somewhere around 7,000 high school fencers in America, compared with almost a million high school basketball players. Basketball courts dot landscapes of towns and cities rich and poor across America, and the barriers to entry are low: sneakers, a ball, gym shorts. Fencing pistes — the long, narrow mats where athletes lunge back and forth in electrical vests that pick up the too-fast-for-the-naked-eye touches of their elegant blades — can be found mostly in private clubs. Many fencers who want to climb high enough in the rankings for colleges to take notice travel to tournaments all over the world.
The sport evolved into its modern form after the French courtiers of Louis XIV began carrying light, short swords to suit their silk stockings and brocaded jackets, and in many ways today, it remains a sport of the aristocracy and conspicuous wealth.
Jack Zhao’s largesse didn’t raise alarms because it blended right in.

An elite coach

The banners of Harvard, Penn, Yale, and Dartmouth fluttered auspiciously from the ceiling of the Virginia Academy of Fencing, where Zhao began taking his older boy, then about 8 or 9 years old, around 2003 or 2004. The academy is hunkered down in a sprawling, low-slung brick building on a suburban street in Springfield, Va.
It was run by Alexandre Ryjik, a big and boisterous saber coach who often touted the Master of Sport in Fencing of the USSR he said he earned at 17.
At first, Ryjik didn’t think Zhao’s older son would amount to much as an athlete, Zhao said. But then the boy started winning, and Zhao started paying for Ryjik’s business class flights to fencing tournaments in Poland, Hungary, Germany. Ryjik trained both Zhao’s sons.
By the late 2000s, Ryjik was flush with cash from training fees and talking a lot about Zhao, said his estranged wife, Kathleen Ryjik, whom he started dating around 2007. The couple is currently in the midst of an acrimonious divorce.
“He would say very often that Jack Zhao was very important to him,” said Kathleen Ryjik. “He just talked about Jack Zhao being the money behind everything [he] wanted to do for the rest of his life.”
When they first met, she said, Alexandre Ryjik was rough around the edges. He was loud and politically incorrect. He told her he’d come to America at 19 after growing up poor in Soviet Russia, where success depended on who you knew and how you used them.
With the Virginia Academy of Fencing, which he founded in 1991, he had found success. And with Jack Zhao paying him handsomely to train his boys, he had money to burn. Kathleen Ryjik, who loved style and design, helped him pick out new clothes and accessories.
“Once he knew what Gucci shoes were, he wouldn’t wear anything else,” she said. “He has a Rolex, he has a Range Rover. Everything he has is status, status, status.”
In 2009, Alexandre Ryjik, buoyant with dreams of blessings to come, did two things that would surface a decade later in a darker light.
He started a charity called the National Fencing Foundation, which was dedicated to helping at-risk children fence and running a fencing tournament and, for the first few years at least, chugged along quietly and took in very little money.
And he began bragging publicly about a deal he said Zhao had made him, according to two people who heard his claims separately, and spoke on condition of anonymity for fear of reprisal. One of the people documented their concerns about the boasts in a computer file that was shared with the Globe. Ryjik and Zhao both denied impropriety.
Rumors of the deal started to spread in the small suburban fencing community.
“Can you believe it?” Ryjik allegedly asked one of the two people, fairly bursting with the good news. “Zhao said he will pay me $1 million to get his kid into Harvard.”

Harvard connection 

To hold up his end of the deal, Ryjik would need the help of a friend: legendary Harvard fencing coach Peter Brand, who had arrived at the university in 1999 and propelled its beleaguered team from the bottom of the Ivy League rankings to the top, sending fencers to the Olympics and earning a cascade of “coach of the year” accolades. Brand coached Ryjik’s own son, who started at Harvard in 2011.
Brand, who was raised on an Israeli kibbutz and immigrated to America at 13 years old, inspired fierce devotion among his athletes. He prized fencers with team spirit over raw athleticism in his aggressive recruitment efforts, and taught his fencers to be both quick and thoughtful, studying their opponents before matches to analyze weak spots. Some who saw him in action described him as a sort of father figure who used fencing to teach life lessons.
“It’s extremely difficult to get people who are academically viable and who are also excellent fencers,” Brand told the Globe in 2006. “But the most important thing is character.”
Once, Brand had declared being named the head coach at Harvard one of the highlights of his life — as dear to him as the day he got married and the birth of his sons. But by 2009, with his 60s looming, Brand’s wife was fretting about his pay level at the university, according to e-mails the couple exchanged over her work e-mail address at the city of Cambridge, which the Globe obtained by public records request. By 2010, the couple was discussing his retirement. By early 2012, he was looking at part-time jobs to complement his pension.
But Brand didn’t leave. Jack Zhao’s oldest boy was about to head into his junior year at St. Albans. Soon, he would be applying to college.

A trove of texts

The texts, which appear to be authentic messages between Peter Brand and Alexandre Ryjik, begin at 8:17 p.m. on May 1, 2012.
“Jack doesn’t need to take me anywhere and his boys don’t have to be great fencers. All I need is a good incentive to recruit them,” writes the sender, identified as “Piter Brand” in the screenshot. “You can tell him that.”
Perhaps unbeknownst to Brand, Ryjik was storing screenshots of their communication on his computer. The messages, sprinkled with typos, span a period from May to July 2012, and form a contemporary record.
“Is there space for . . . your favorite Chinese supporter?” Ryjik asked Brand at one point.
“Of course as long as Zao cones through with the financial support ;)” Brand replied. When Ryjik suggested they continue the discussion over dinner, Brand texted:
“He is my no 1 recruit as long as my future us secured”
Brand, Ryjik, and Zhao all declined to respond to questions about the messages.
The texts might have vanished into the ether. But six years after they were written, Ryjik’s wife, Kathleen, discovered them while searching through his computer. She read with rising alarm — and sudden clarity. She knew how they did it.
When Alexandre Ryjik started his charity, the National Fencing Foundation, his wife had thrown herself into helping him with it, and by 2010, was serving as director, according to tax documents.
But she’d left that position in disgust, she said, after Ryjik revealed to her the true purpose of the foundation — and it was not helping poor children. Kathleen Ryjik said she doesn’t remember his exact words, but she remembers that he was so shockingly explicit about what he was doing that she didn’t believe him at first.
The foundation, she says he explained, was just a way for rich parents to pay him to get their children into Ivy League schools without raising eyebrows.
Horrified, she broke up with Ryjik and quit the foundation. When the couple got back together a few months later, she said, Alexandre Ryjik promised her that nothing untoward was going on.
She had wanted to believe him. Then she came across the text messages. They told a different story. She took pictures of them.
She e-mailed Alexandre Ryjik in November 2018 to tell him she had found evidence he was involved in a scheme “involving millions of dollars, Harvard University, Jack Zhao, and . . . Peter Brant, [sic] to allow fencers to be accepted into the school.”
It was only after the Globe ran its first story in April, and Alexandre Ryjik incorrectly identified his estranged wife as the newspaper’s source, that Kathleen Ryjik contacted a reporter.

$1 million donation

A million dollars came through in February 2013, in the form of a donation from Zhao to Ryjik’s charity, the National Fencing Foundation — just as Ryjik had been heard boasting. Three months later, Peter Brand and his wife incorporated their own charity, the Peter Brand Foundation, in Delaware, records show.
Zhao, according to his attorney, Bill Weinreb, made the gift after coming into money from the sale of his company, and it was meant to benefit US fencing, not Ryjik personally. Weinreb said Zhao never gave any money to Brand, or knew of plans to do so.
In October 2013, Brand got an e-mail from Harvard about “likely letters,” the notification the school sends to athletes who are being recruited to a spot on Harvard sports teams.
“Today the Admissions Committee did vote likelies for both [Zhao’s older son] and [another student],” the e-mail read. “Their admissions officers will call them tonight with the good news!”
Brand forwarded it to his wife.
“Good news indeed :)” he wrote.
Harvard does not reserve slots for recruited athletes, but a coach’s blessing helps.
Two months after that, Zhao sent an e-mail to Ryjik, which Ryjik forwarded to Kathleen Ryjik, who shared it later with the Globe.
“Hi Boss,” Zhao wrote. “It is official now. I just want to thank you for what you did, really appreciate.”
Attached was his older son’s acceptance letter to Harvard University.
Zhao’s attorney said the thank you to Ryjik was for “helping his oldest son become a Division I level talent and recommending him to Harvard. It was not a thank you for anything else.”
In fall 2014, the elder Zhao boy came to Cambridge, and Ryjik’s foundation cut Brand’s foundation a check for $100,000.

Another son

Jack Zhao still had his younger son to think about.
Like his older brother, the younger Zhao boy was a good student and a good fencer. The boys’ mother had gone to Harvard. And sometime between 2015 and 2016, according to school records, the Zhao family joined Harvard’s “1913 Society” — families that give a life income gift or planned provision to the school. On the basis of his pedigree alone, Harvard would have given the boy preference.
But in the world of elite fencing, there are lots of good students with the right families, and parents and coaches openly brag about the legal lengths they go to — private lessons, international travel, relocation — to get young fencers into the Ivy League. How much was enough?
In 2015, Zhao’s financial connection to Ryjik deepened. Zhao’s company bought Freedom Enterprises, a limited liability company that Ryjik and his first wife ran that owned the property where they operated their fencing academy. He has declined to disclose the price, but county records show the building and land were worth about $6.2 million at the time.
And then, in 2016, Zhao made a purchase that, three years later, would thrust them all into the sights of the Globe and federal prosecutors.
He bought Peter Brand’s house, a tired little Colonial in Needham, for about $400,000 over the assessed value. In April, Zhao defended this move, saying Brand was a dear friend with a bad commute, and he wanted to help. Brand and his wife moved into a $1.3 million Cambridge condo with a private roof deck.
In 2017, Zhao’s younger son started at Harvard, on the fencing team with his brother.
Federal prosecutors and the FBI declined to comment.
“We do not confirm or deny investigations,” said Christina DiIorio-Sterling, a spokeswoman for US Attorney Andrew E. Lelling.
Zhao, Ryjik, and Brand all declined to answer questions about whether they had been subpoenaed.
In the wake of Brand’s firing for violating the university’s conflict of interest policy, Harvard said it would train its athletic personnel to avoid entanglements in the future. The Zhao boys, the university said, were both fencers, and both qualified to be there.
Zhao’s older son graduated from Harvard in 2018. His younger son remains on the fencing team’s roster.
====
Source: https://www.bostonglobe.com/metro/2019/11/10/saber-edge/VQUod6h3w7qwSydHtHc5xL/story.html

===
*http://uclafacultyassociation.blogspot.com/2019/10/no-more-waiting-for-harvard-verdict.html

Saturday, November 9, 2019

Supreme Court Case Next Week

From EdSource: The University of California will take its fight to protect immigrant students all the way to the U.S. Supreme Court next week.

The court hearing is the final match over Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals, or DACA, which currently provides temporary protection from deportation and permission to work for about 660,000 people who came to the U.S. as children, according to the most recent data from U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services. Just over 200,000 DACA recipients live in California, by far the largest number of any state, according to the Migration Policy Institute.

After the Trump administration announced a decision to end the protection in 2017, the University of California and several other plaintiffs sued to keep it in place. Several lower courts have upheld UC’s lawsuit and it was eventually appealed to the Supreme Court. The case will be heard on Nov. 12, with a final decision expected by June 2020.

“What I hope the court understands is that behind the legal arguments are 700,000 lives who will be affected, in a damaging and frankly unnecessary way,” said UC president Janet Napolitano. “So what the Supreme Court does has a real human impact.”

Napolitano authorized DACA in 2012 while serving as secretary of homeland security in the Obama administration...

Full story at https://edsource.org/2019/university-of-california-heads-to-supreme-court-to-defend-protections-for-undocumented-immigrants/619634

Friday, November 8, 2019

Dickson & Goldberg Awards

Call for nominations for the 2019-2020 Dickson Emeritus Professorship Award and the Carole E. Goldberg Emeriti Service Award and an explanation of nominating procedures for both awards.
THE DICKSON EMERITUS PROFESSORSHIP AWARD
The Dickson Award was created by a gift endowment from the late Edward A. Dickson, a Regent of the University of California from 1913 to 1946. The award honors outstanding research, scholarly work, teaching, and/or educational service (e.g., service in professional, University, Academic Senate, emeriti, departmental or editorial posts, or committees) performed by an emeritus/emerita professor since retirement. Each of the UC campuses has received funds that will support one or more awards each year.
THE CAROLE E. GOLDBERG EMERITI SERVICE AWARD
The Goldberg Award was created in 2014 to recognize extraordinary service by an emeritus/emerita professor to the academic enterprise after retirement. The award honors outstanding service in professional, University, Academic Senate, emeriti, departmental or editorial posts, or committees performed at UCLA by an emeritus/emerita professor since retirement.
Nominating Procedures for Both Awards:
Departments are limited to one nomination each year for each award. Department chairs or their designees are asked to submit nominations. Individuals also may nominate colleagues for these awards, but must coordinate with the department chair to submit nominations.
For both awards, nominations must include a cover letter, a copy of the nominee’s curriculum vitae and two supporting letters from leaders in the field commenting specifically on the nominee’s achievements since retirement.
  • Dickson Award – nominators should concentrate on and highlight the nominee’s distinctive research, scholarly work, and/or educational service since retirement.
  • Goldberg Award – nominators should concentrate on and highlight the nominee’s distinguished service to UCLA since retirement.
Nominations are due by Friday, February 7, 2020. Click here to submit a nomination online.
The awardee(s) will be announced on or before Friday, April 17, 2020. The awards, consisting of cash prizes and certificates, will be presented at the spring dinner meeting of the UCLA Emeriti Association.
If you have any questions regarding the eligibility or nomination procedure, please contact Professor Emeritus Dick Weiss, weiss@chem.ucla.edu.

Thursday, November 7, 2019

More Labor News

Beyond the labor-related debate news (see the previous post), we also have this from the Bruin:

Academic researchers at the University of California reached a tentative agreement with the University on Thursday after five months of bargaining.
The tentative agreement between Academic Researchers United/United Automobile Workers Local 5810 and the UC has several provisions to increase academic researchers’ benefits and strengthen existing rights, according to a press release from the union.
The contract must be ratified by the majority of the voting members of ARU by Nov. 8 to go into effect. The union represents nearly 5,000 project scientists, specialists, professional researchers and coordinators of public programs at the UC.
The new contract seeks to increase compensation, improve job security and strengthen action against discrimination and harassment. Wages are expected to increase by 24% under the agreement, and researchers will be guaranteed longer appointments and protection from layoffs and unfair termination, according to the press release...
If passed, the agreement will last until Sept. 30, 2022.

Easy Come, Easy Go

From the Bruin: UCLA will no longer hold the sixth Democratic presidential primary debate.
The Democratic National Committee asked its media partners to move the debate, planned for Dec. 19, to another venue following concerns raised by organized labor in Los Angeles, said DNC spokesperson Mary Beth Cahill in an emailed statement.
UCLA has agreed to no longer host the debate.
“With regret, we have agreed to step aside as the site of the debate rather than become a potential distraction during this vitally important time in our country’s history,” said UCLA spokesperson Ricardo Vazquez in an emailed statement.
The debate was originally planned to be held in UCLA’s Royce Hall, with some tickets to be distributed to students, alumni and others affiliated with the Luskin School of Public Affairs...
The American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees Local 3299 called for a boycott of speakers across the University of California in April, while the union was disputing labor and wages with the University. The union chapter sent a letter to several Democratic candidates Tuesday, urging them to boycott speaking at all UC campuses while disputes continued...
It seems that the debate ship has sailed:

Wednesday, November 6, 2019

Panunzio

From an email received yesterday:
This is a call for nominations for the 2019-2020 Constantine Panunzio Distinguished Emeriti Award and an explanation of the nominating procedures. Created by a bequest from Professor Panunzio of UCLA, the award honors outstanding scholarly work or educational service (e.g. service in professional, University, Academic Senate, emeriti, departmental or editorial posts, or committees) performed since retirement by a University of California emeritus or emerita in the Humanities or Social Sciences.
Each campus may set up its own procedures for nomination and selection. Appropriate Deans on each campus, as well as the Provost or comparable officer, are asked to solicit nominations for this award from their constituent departments. Candidates may also self-nominate.  
The complete supporting dossier must include:
  • A cover letter outlining the nominee’s distinctive scholarly work and/or educational service since retirement,
  • A Curriculum Vitae, and
  • Supporting letters (2 minimum) from leaders in the field commenting specifically on the nominee’s achievements since retirement.
Below are some suggested guidelines and dates to facilitate this process: 
By Friday, December 6, 2019: Nominations submitted to the President of the campus’ Emeriti Association for review.

By Monday, January 6, 2020: Emeriti Association forwards recommendation(s) to campus Provost (or comparable officer) for review.

By Friday, January 24, 2020: Suggested deadline for completion of Provost’s review and approved nomination sent back to the Emeriti Association for coordination of the formal dossier (nomination package).

By Friday, February 14, 2020: Deadline for final nomination from each campus due to Selection Committee. The Emeriti Association President should inform the campus’ Provost, Deans, and pertinent Department Chairs of the final nominee.
Before or on the February 14, 2020 deadline, submit nominations online at the following link: 
The selection committee will announce the awardee(s) on or before Friday, April 17, 2020.  The award, consisting of a cash prize and a certificate, will be presented on the campus of the recipient(s) at a program arranged by their respective campus.
If you have any questions regarding eligibility or the nomination procedure, please contact Professor Emeritus Dick Weiss,weiss@chem.ucla.edu. 

Note: There is more to the Panunzio story than the award. From his official obituary:

Constantine Maria Panunzio, Anthropology and Sociology: Los Angeles

1884-1964
Professor of Sociology

The patterns of men's lives are various, indeed. The structure of some lives is simple and orderly and comprehended at a glance. Other lives are confounded with many interweaving contours and hues of temperament and circumstance, so that a dominant and unique form is not readily perceptible. Into the latter category falls the life of Italian-born Constantine Maria Panunzio. In turn, a seaman in his teen-age years; a fugitive from his ship into an utterly strange land whose language he did not speak; a lumberjack; an itinerant farm laborer; a minister; a social worker; a college professor. Parallelling a turbulent external life was a troubled spiritual journey. Born into the Catholic faith, in early adulthood he became a Methodist minister with a pulpit, to return to Catholicism in middle life. Only a man of deep feeling and psychic-complexity could give exterior manifestations such as these.

Constantine Panunzio was born in the ancient little town of Molfetta, which is situated on the Adriatic, not far above the heel of Italy's boot, on October 25, 1884. The family tree boasted of a number of successful professional men and important civic leaders and his parents had planned for him accordingly. However, Constantine was interested not in studies but in the sea and at the age of fourteen he joined the crew of a merchant sailing vessel as a ship's boy. During the next four years he visited most of the major ports of the Mediterranean. His last sea voyage as a crewman was to North America; en route, the sailing vessel on which he served almost went to the bottom of the Atlantic in a storm. The treatment he received during this journey from the brutal captain was such that he asked for his release when the ship docked in Boston. The captain gave answer in the form of a well-placed kick--whereupon Constantine, then eighteen, skipped ship. This was in September, 1902.

The days of hunger, bewilderment, hopeless wandering and despair that followed, frequently with no roof over his head at night, are told in his beautifully written book, published twenty years later, The Soul of an Immigrant. The long calvary of brutal labor, exploitations, humiliations, disenchantments, that followed one another in dreary succession and which typified the lot of most unskilled immigrants at the time, need not be related here. Suffice it to say that these first experiences in America, The Land of Enchantment, contributed significantly to the molding of his personality and character. After many vicissitudes he was hired as a farm hand by a devout, Protestant, church-going family who gave him kindness and humane treatment and encouraged him to go on with his education. Who knows but that this segment of experience was a critical factor in determining Panunzio's professional activity in the early part of his adult life?

He eventually entered Kent's Hill Academy, a preparatory school in Maine, and finished the four year course in three, while working to defray his expenses. In the fall of 1907, he entered Wesleyan University, Connecticut, graduated with the A.B. in 1911 and the M.A. in 1912. He then enrolled in the Boston University School of Theology and earned the S.T.B. in 1914. He received final naturalization papers in the same year.

For a period of several years he served as pastor in several Methodist churches in Massachusetts and he was superintendent of Social Service House, Boston, from 1915-1917. His social service activities were interrupted by the first World War. From 1917 to 1918 he served as general organizer of the YMCA on the Italian front.

Upon his return to the United States after the war, he held a number of academic positions in sociology or social science, frequently interrupted by various administrative-social responsibilities, viz: superintendent of the immigrant labor division in the International Church Movement; lecturer on immigrant backgrounds at Hunter College; professor of social sciences at Willamette University; professor of social economics at Whittier College; professor of sociology at San Diego State Teachers College; investigator for the White House Conference on Child Protection and Guidance; director of The Neighborhood House and Sociological Laboratory. In 1925 he earned the Ph.D. degree at the Brookings Graduate School of Economics and Government.

Panunzio was appointed assistant professor of sociology at the University of California, Los Angeles, in 1931, and he remained at UCLA until he retired as professor of sociology in 1951.

His published works include three books and two research monographs. Among the former is his earliest publication, the popular The Soul of an Immigrant. The other two are sociological works, one of which was a text Major Social Institutions that achieved a considerable measure of success. His monographs are studies of the self-help cooperatives in California at the time of the depression. There are, in addition, some seventy articles, the majority of a popular or semi-popular nature and published in various types of media, and thirty book reviews. There is also a completed manuscript in two volumes entitled Population and the Crisis. His published writings are characterized by a lucidity of style, a poetic sense, and a literary flavor not too common in academic prose.

In 1931-33, Panunzio was president of the Pacific South-western Academy; in 1934-35, president of the Pacific Sociological Society. In 1939, he participated in the founding of the Mazzini Society, the well-known Italian group whose leading lights were Italian intellectuals who had left, or who had been expelled from, Italy because of fascism. Among its members was the historian Salvemini and the journalist Tarchiani who after the war was Italian ambassador to the United States. In 1940 he was designated by the New York World's Fair Committee as among the foreign-born who have made “outstanding contributions” to American culture. In 1961 he received the Wesleyan University Distinguished Alumnus award.

It is curious that Panunzio, a sociologist, perhaps did his greatest sociological work after he had retired. The then (1952) existing University pension system was grossly inadequate. The average income of emeriti was something like $108 per month; instead of being retired at a maximum of four-fifths of the terminal salaries, many found, upon retirement, that they were receiving barely one-fifth of their highest pay. In certain instances, the consequences were pathetic: to cite one example, a well-known full professor who had been an important figure in the early days of UCLA's development worked as a night watchman to supplement his $93-a-month pension. Non-academic employees who were enrolled under the state civil service pension system fared much better; whereas a full professor might draw $110, a plumber with an equivalent time record of service received something in the vicinity of $210 a month.

Panunzio, upon discovering his own plight--he was to receive $129 a month--went to work. He drew up a bill of particulars, setting forth the facts and statistics, and comparisons with benefits derived from the state's civil service pension system. It was a six-page document, signed by fifty emeriti; copies of the memorial were sent to the President of the University, the provosts and chancellors on the various campuses and to members of the Board of Regents. The document created a sensation. The reaction of certain members of the Board was particularly vivid. A special committee of The Regents was appointed to study the matter in 1953. Professor Panunzio met with this special Committee on Pensions and Retirements and recommended in the strongest terms that a University retirement system comparable in benefit structure to the California State Employees' Retirement be established to replace the then existing Retiring Annuities System. Shortly thereafter he was employed by The Regents as a consultant to the Special Committee and participated in most of its subsequent meetings.

In the months that followed he played a major role in drafting the provisions of the Standing Orders of The Regents establishing the new “Pension and Retiring Annuities System,” as of July 1, 1954. He was also instrumental in drafting the provisions of the “interim plan,” under which faculty members who had retired prior to 1953 received “Fellowship Stipends” supplementing their annuity payments. This interim measure was approved by The Regents in April, 1953. The Regents also created the Academic Retirement Office and Panunzio was its de facto Director until January, 1955. The function of the Office was to look after the interests of retired and about-to-be-retired faculty members. After the directorship of the Retirement Office had passed to Dr. D. G. Tyndall, Panunzio continued as consultant to the Chairman of its Governing Board (Regent Hansen) during 1955 on a full-time basis, and during 1956 in a part-time basis. During this time his advice and counsel were of great value to The Regents, especially in the development of the plan to provide supplemental retirement incomes to faculty members who had retired prior to 1953.

As a consequence of Panunzio's characteristic unwillingness to accept things-as-they-are, he set in motion a chain reaction which has resulted in a pension structure for the University of California faculty which is among the best. Prior to his dramatic efforts, committees had been in existence for years to study the problem; but nothing tangible had transpired. To quote one of The Regents most closely involved with the reconstructing of the University's pension system: “If any one man may be said to be the architect of this reform, it is Professor Panunzio.”

More than seventy years old, this restless man had not finished. Recognizing that the plight of the emeriti of the University of California was but a sample of what was happening to retired professors the country over--and not the worst sample--he sought and obtained grants from the Ford Foundation and the University of California in order to create a nation-wide registry of emeriti. Propelled by his enthusiasm and compelling energy, a National Committee on the Emeriti was formed in 1956; this is constituted of a group of some fifty interested individuals who take it upon themselves to promote the interests of college professors throughout the United States. Among other things, Panunzio organized an employment service for retired faculty members, wherewith the needs of colleges and universities and the talents and competencies of retired and interested academicians might be brought together. A publication, Emeriti for Employment, listing the names, addresses and experience of retired faculty members who wished to continue working has gone through a number of printings. There are several other facets to the activities of the National Committee on the Emeriti--i.e., Panunzio--but there is insufficient space to relate them here.

In the midst of these numerous activities and responsibilities, which he was reluctant to relinquish, Professor Panunzio died, August 6, 1964, after an incapacitating illness. Until the very end he bemoaned the fact that he knew of no one who was willing to carry on his work.

He is survived by his widow, Pierina, two sons, Constantine and Vincent, and a daughter, Angela.

Although a person of great social charm and given to human warmth and kindness, Panunzio could be a tenacious and unyielding opponent in matters which involved his convictions.

He was not a man to be awed by opposition, however great. This singleness of purpose, though it sometimes lost him potential friends and created strained relations with colleagues and administrators, made it possible for him to achieve goals which otherwise would have been out of reach.

Panunzio's lifework presents an unusual cycle: he started out in his youth and early manhood in social work and service; his middle and late life was spent in academic pursuits; in his old age he plunged back into the battle of social amelioration. Thus the wheel turned full circle.

Gordon H. Ball Harry Hoijer Lloyd N. Morrisett J. A. Gengerelli

Source: http://texts.cdlib.org/view?docId=hb658006rx&doc.view=frames&chunk.id=div00022&toc.depth=1&toc.id=
======
Two audio books by Panunzio below: