Product Details

• Directors: Evan Coyne Maloney
• Format: NTSC
• Region: All Regions
• Studio: On The Fence Films LLC
• DVD Release Date: April 10, 2008
• Run Time: 89 minutes
• Average Customer Review: 4.2 out of 5 stars  See all reviews (32 customer reviews)
• ASIN: B0017OGOIA
• Amazon Best Sellers Rank: #71,670 in Movies & TV (See Top 100 in Movies & TV)

Editorial Reviews

Speech codes. Censorship. Enforced political conformity. Hostility to diversity of opinion. Sensitivity training. We usually associate such things totalitarian regimes, not with the American universities that nurtured the free speech movement.

"When we think of going to college, we think of intellectual freedom. We imagine four years of exploring ideas through energetic, ongoing, critical thinking and debate," Maloney said. "But the reality is very far from the ideal. What most of us don't know is that American college students check their First Amendment rights and individual freedom at the door."

Hailed by the New York Sun as one of "America's most promising" documentary filmmakers, Maloney has assembled a scorching indictment of higher education in America today, one that should make students, parents, trustees, lawmakers, and concerned citizens sit up and take notice. The London Telegraph has called the long-awaited feature-length film "as slick and incisive as anything by Michael Moore."

Note: This explicit version of the film contains several profanities.This product is manufactured on demand using DVD-R recordable media. Amazon.com's standard return policy will apply.

Most Helpful Customer Reviews

92 of 100 people found the following review helpful

5.0 out of 5 stars this film needed to be made April 17, 2008

By ShamayimBlue

Format:DVD

I was fortunate to get seats to a free screening of Indoctrinate U, a film both funny and shocking. Before watching the film I was aware of speech codes on college campuses and the intimidation of students and professors who express certain view points, but I wasn't quite prepared for some of the things I saw in Evan Maloney's film.

For instance, take two incidents from University of Tennessee. In one, five white fraternity boys dressed up as the Jackson Five for an off-campus Halloween party; when they returned to campus another student spotted them, took offense at their costumes, and reported them to administration. They, along with their entire fraternity, were punished with suspension. In another incident at the same school, a Sikh student wrote an opinion piece on increasing intellectual diversity in a committee that invites campus speakers; the committee would invite only people from the left of the political spectrum, and the student wanted to see more viewpoints expressed. A member of this committee wrote an email referring to the Sikh student as a "raghead", a terrorist, and saying that he should be shot in the face. Now... what do you think happened to the person who wrote this hateful, bigoted email that actually incites violence against another student? He was given a slap on the wrist, not allowed to attend a couple of campus events, but that was about it. So basically, white students dressing up as the Jackson five are suspended; a guy writing a racist, threatening email against a conservative Sikh student suffers no serious disciplinary reprisals....

Speech codes and codes of expression and conduct implemented to protect people against getting hurt, offended or suffering from low self-esteem not only go against the first amendment, they are often selectively applied (as seen in above example). And because these codes are so often poorly defined (so many things can fall under the category of offensive or hurtful), they can be used to silence people with undesirable viewpoints. Instead of a climate of healthy debate and free expression, you have a climate of intellectual and ideological repression on many campuses across the U.S. And this of course is ultimately terrible for the students, who aren't allowed opportunities to develop critical thinking skills. For example, students and professors who support the left-wing views that prevail on campuses will never have their opinions challenged, will never test their ideas in arguments and debates - as such, their thinking will only become closed off and lazy (as seen by their tendency to call anyone who disagrees with them a racist, fascist, bigot...). And students who want to challenge the dominant campus views will find it easier to remain silent and play along because of a fear of causing "offense" and facing disciplinary repercussions; they too miss out on chances to develop intellectually.

There are many examples in the film of this sort of bullying and intimidation of students and also professors. Maloney interviews black professors who, because they question or oppose affirmative action, are often shunned by peers and considered "not really black" (a sentiment that's blatantly racist). Then there's a psychology professor, well-liked by her students and having an excellent academic record, whose colleagues found out she was a Republican (not because she brought her politics into the classroom - in fact, she was one of the few professors who didn't - but because her colleagues learned that her husband, a local businessman, belonged to some Republican commerce committee). Her department began to harass her by having her office constantly moved around and by messing up her schedule, and they informed her that she would not have been hired had they known she was a Republican. She was removed as department chair, her family received threats, and a swastika was burned on her lawn.

In US campuses today you can face serious repercussions for perceived "thought crimes". There's Steve Hinkle, a Cal Poly student who posted flyers announcing an upcoming talk by a black conservative author, Mason Weaver; the flyer had the author's name, picture, and title of the book, 'It's OK to Leave the Plantation'. When Hinkle posted this in the school's multicultural center, some students found it offensive (because of the word 'plantation'), and this led to a series of disciplinary hearings for Hinkle, where he was asked to apologize, to see a psychologist, and was threatened with expulsion. Hinkle wisely refused to back down and instead took Cal Poly to court, where the school's case unsurprisingly collapsed. The school never apologized to Hinkle for jeopardizing his future and persecuting him.

I recommend this film to people of all political stripes (and race, and gender, and ethnic group, etc.) Whether you're a staunch Democrat or Republican, left or right-wing, the issues raised in Indoctrinate U are of great concern to anyone who wants universities to be places where ideas are freely exchanged, where debate is possible and students can develop and refine their viewpoints and hone their critical thinking skills. Everyone is hurt by this sort of ideological and intellectual conformity, even the students and the large numbers of professors who adhere to the dominant viewpoints on campuses. Parents and prospective or currently enrolled students should definitely take the time to watch, because even though the film's angle is to expose what's going on rather than provide examples on how to tackle and solve these issues, you see students and professors who do speak out and how they go about fighting intellectual repression.

In addition to the surprising and shocking content of the film, I have to say it's also a funny film too. Maloney is able to mix serious issues with humor, and it's no wonder that the film has been such a hit among audiences who've seen it so far, including university students; the film's tone never gets preachy. He interviews a number of students and professors from across the political spectrum and from campuses all around the US, and he also presents some visits he made to campus administrative offices. His questions about diversity and school policies are often met by agitation and calls to campus security, which is particularly funny as Maloney is unfailingly polite, soft-spoken and non-threatening (at one point a security guard shows up at the diversity office to find him reading a magazine in the waiting area). When administrators do speak to him, their replies are often circuitous and nonsensical, as with one man trying to avoid explaining how his office approved a flyer that compared a Kuwaiti student who wrote a pro-American essay to Hitler and a suicide bomber.

Maloney's film is important and necessary. I hope it raises awareness of what goes on across the US on college campuses and starts a discussion of how to fight for freedom of expression and healthy debate. Read more ›

45 of 49 people found the following review helpful

4.0 out of 5 stars 5+ for content, 3 for presentation April 22, 2008

By J. C Clark VINE™ VOICE

Format:DVD

I'll save the electrons and compose something shorter. I would have made this film differently. For me, the most powerful pieces are the true stories with a traditional narrative. Some small person unthinkingly does something to offend the powers-that-be, followed by Soviet style interrogation, threats and punishments. The Hinkle story, described in length above, moves from stupid to absurd so fast it is dizzying. It could make a film by itself. The Jackson 5 Halloween costumes also make you laugh and cry simultaneously. How could any school administration believe it has the authority to enforce "right thinking" among students in their free time? Once upon a time they hoped to control such things, but the absurdity and futility of it became evident over time. But now the busybodies who once enforced dress codes and chaperones now supervise attitudes about race, gender, and class. Terrifying. This is thought control indeed, exercised in precisely the place where today's teachers once rebelled violently against any such tendencies.

However, the editing annoyed me. The cuts from one person speaking one sentence to the next were frazzling. Let the guy speak! Instead I see student for one sentence, parent for one sentence, other parent, other sibling, student again, wham, wham, wham. Hard to develop an argument when you get one or two sentences max. And why all the students who had no particular story to tell, other than the generic "You have to be on the left, or else!" There were so many fascinating tales in here, briefly touched and then abandoned, that I was disappointed they were not developed further.

But yes, this is vital information that too many want to ignore. Sending your kid to college?... Find out what they will be taught and how they cannot question orthodoxy without imperiling their career. Griping about another open-handed begging spree by your state university system? Check out what they are doing with your money! The scenes where Evan looks for the Men's Studies building are hysterical. Much as we see in another current film, Expelled, the powers-that-be have labored mightily to exclude all alternative opinions, making their view the only one worthy of discussion. What was once discourse is now indoctrination.

DVD contains 2 deleted scenes that are both excellent and informative. I bet he had lots more stuff he could have included. Wish he had. Read more ›

23 of 29 people found the following review helpful

5.0 out of 5 stars Excellent independent documentary June 22, 2008

By M. A. Gordon

Format:DVD|Amazon Verified Purchase

Evan Coyne Maloney directed this documentary to explain in a humorous and sometimes shocking manner why many conservatives are calling for "intellectual diversity" on college campuses where liberals professors vastly outnumber conservative professors. Currently on college campuses, conservative professors are often harrassed until they resign. Meanwhile, conservative professors applying for teaching jobs are painfully aware that they must hide their views if they expect a job offer. The result is a dearth of conservative professors in the liberal arts and an explosion of conservative professors in think-tanks and private enterprise.

As practiced by many universities, diversity is used to stanch the free expression of ideas and speech. This documentary provides ample examples of innocuous statements by conservatives, which led to harrassment and intimidation by college administrators in contrast to the hate speech of some liberals, which were ignored by college administrators.

The movement to add "intellectual diversity" to the primitive tribal classifications of diversity as practiced by many colleges is the stated goal of the film's director and he does an admirable job proving his thesis. Unsurprisingly, he provides plenty of air time for professors who are radical liberals, mainstream Democrats, libertarians, and conservatives with the expectation that the viewer will draw a conclusion from seeing this profusion of intellectual viewpoints. I give the documentary 4.5 stars.