Progressive Stacking at Binghamton University Sociology Department

In 2022, Binghamton University sociology professor Ana Candela’s taught a course in introductory sociology. A quarter of the grade was based on class participation. Her syllabus stated that during class discussions she will be implementing ‘progressive stacking (PS). Devised as a technique to give ‘marginalized groups’ a greater chance to speak, PS mandates that white male students are called on last. White male students, PS practitioners explain, “embody forms of power” and “take up too much space in the environment”. PS is therefore a salutary social justice measure to “disrupt established power structures”.

Progressive stacking is commonly used by progressive faculty and ‘in anti-racist circles’. According to Professor Candela, “all good professors are already implementing a progressive stacking model in their classrooms, even if they aren’t mentioning it aloud.”

Progressive stacking first gained widespread attention after a University of Pennsylvania professor posted on her personal X account that she will always “call on black women students first, other POC get second–tier priority. White women come next. And, if I have to, white men.”

Professor Candela, who routinely equates capitalism to slavery during lectures, explains that PS is a necessary response to the “broader set of problems that plague students and faculty of color, women and LGBTQ folks within the university”. Classroom discussions are dominated by white men. Other students feel marginalized, and discussions are constrained. In Candela’s class white men who were excluded from class participation were encouraged to use online discussion boards.

Professor Candela implemented the progressive stacking in an introductory sociology class where a quarter of the grade depended on class participation.

Student Files Title 9 Complaint and University Response

After reading the syllabus, Sean Harrigan, an undergraduate economics major enrolled in the course, filed a Title 9 complaint alleging gender discrimination. He was concerned his participation grade would suffer. The complaint caused an uproar on campus, and was picked up by the national media.

Harrigan responded to the controversy in an op-ed in the campus paper: “every group of people in America must deal with obstacles, and they have some privileges, yes, some more than others, but we are all in it together, and we must stand up and solve each other’s problems united.” He acknowledged that Candela had good intentions and invited anyone on campus to a ‘cordial debate’.

The Binghamton administration reviewed the matter and concluded that Candela violated the Faculty-Staff Handbook guidelines on effective teaching. They never told her to change her syllabus and she never faced disciplinary action. Candela was “counseled” by the university due to the syllabus’ failure to comply with the Faculty-Staff Handbook.

Nevertheless, Candela was enraged that the administration did not issue a full statement of support.

Sociology Department Statement

In a Letter of Protest, the sociology department sided with Candela and was emphatic that she did nothing wrong.

The letter contended that Professor Candela merely applied policies favoring underprivileged groups in the allocation of resources to the classroom setting. She was merely preventing white men from “receiving the usual favors and privileges that have allowed them to monopolize class discussions in other courses”. Her colleague Bill Martin added that we all should celebrate Dr. Candela and “endorse her ability to foster a more equitable classroom”.

Martin started a petition to “celebrate and endorse” Candela and her “equitable teaching methods”. The petition accumulated 995 signatures. Professor Gladys Jiminez Munoz signed it “because the classroom is the space for us to challenge students to examine social inequalities in a concrete way.” In response to the media attention, sociologist Walden Bello noted that “Fox News is doing all it can to fan the counterrevolution against the movement to transform institutions that have been historically distorted and disfigured by white supremacist power and ideology.”

The sociologists were furious that the administration didn’t do more to defend Candela. By throwing their weight behind this student's complaints, campus leadership, they allege is weakening and dismantling affirmative action and caving in to pressure from conservative students. To the radical faculty, it is ‘patently obvious’ that the episode was concocted by rightwing media and the GOP to target educational institutions with “woke courses” teaching "critical race theory".

Support from Sociology Teaching Assistants and Sociology Graduate Student Union

The sociology teaching assistants weighed in with their unwavering support for Professor Candela. It is an empirically verified phenomenon, they maintain, that “certain demographics speak more than others". Progressive stacking is a necessary corrective to provide equality within the micropolitics of the classroom. The sociology graduate student union added their support and affirmed that PS does no harm to those students “who are privileged due to their race, gender and ability status”. The progressive stacking policy “furthers social justice and equity on campus and in the classroom”.

Support from Campus

Support poured in from faculty and students outside the sociology department. Rallies were organized and the sociology department sponsored an Anti-Racist Town Hall. To many the pushback against progressive stacking was the ‘breaking point for so many Black, Indigenous and People of Color students and faculty”. Standing in solidarity, the Women’s Student Union released a statement explaining that the “complaint from this student illustrates the disconnect many white people have when it comes to race when their white privilege is challenged”. They should not mistake their ‘experiences of discomfort’ for true discrimination.

Similarly, the Latin American and Caribbean Area Studies program commented that by not supporting Candela’s discriminatory policies, the administration left Candela as well as faculty, staff, and students vulnerable to sexist, racist, and political attacks.

Despite Sean Harrigan’s conciliatory tone, he was subject to incessant personal attacks. The graduate student union was outraged that Harrigan “used his privilege and connections” to shame and endanger Candela by “using extreme right wing media as part of a nationwide right wing campaign”.

The campus newspaper editorialized that “sociology courses are the exact place where progressive policies like Candela’s are needed to curb legacies of white supremacy and entitlement”.

Jargon of Trauma and Safety Obsessions

The responses and attacks on Harrigan, especially from students, drew on the woke jargon of trauma with its safety obsessions and therapeutic mentality discourse. As Professor Parenti observes, wokeness is hegemonic, authoritarian, profoundly anti-intellectual, and draws a sharp distinction between politically clean and unclean, friend and enemy.

Puffed up with wokeness, the Binghamton protesters contend that the ending of PS “has lasting implications for employees who have to return to the classroom and are forced to continue to work in hostile and unsafe work environments. and students who are “subjected to racist hate speech and threats of harm”. The Binghamton administration response shows how the university will always “center the feelings of the right wing”, and choose to protect their white students rather than their own faculty. The university’s response attacked Candela’s academic freedom and “created an unsafe work environment”.

Woke Online Mob

Those courageous enough to sympathize with Harrigan faced vicious personal attacks online. While acknowledging that the intent of progressive stacking is to create an inclusive environment, one student civilly expressed his view that PS is counter to Title 9 which prohibits sex discrimination and applies to students of all genders. Another student agreed that professors should intervene in discussions to make sure everyone is heard, but questioned whether this needs to be based on race and gender. A third criticized the PS policy and politely requested an honest debate.

These timid responses were enough to enflame the woke mob. The personal and vitriolic responses included:

• “Stop victimizing yourself. You’re not the victim!

• “Your ranting is reflective of your violent ignorance of racism in the classroom”

• “What are you doing in your classes to ensure you aren’t taking up your privileged space rewarded to you as a white person, space stolen from non-men and non-white people”

• “We are not looking to be ‘liked’ by racist and misogynistic white men”

Conclusion

The experience of its use at Binghamton is a stark testimonial to how sociology is corrupted by destructive DEI ideologies that support division in society. This is obvious to the general public. The dynamics within the university include indoctrinated students, a deformed faculty, broad self-censorship and fear of social ostracism.

Although the political climate has shifted and the prevalence of malignancies like professional stacking have decreased, much damage has been done. Young people are still being indoctrinated with this nonsense. Convinced that by attacking white privilege, they are ‘fighting for justice’, they exemplify Thomas Sowell’s dictum that “the quest for cosmic justice” invariably causes greater injustice