The Most Superficial Ritual Yet: Land Acknowledgment as Secular Liturgy

Will they lose federal money?

Now it was time for our tradition.

Their faces turned upward toward the screen in eager anticipation. An air of solemnity fell over the room. What sacred truth was about to be spoken?

Would it be a recitation of the Apostle’s Creed?
Or perhaps the Shema?
Maybe we’d hear the Four Noble Truths, or even the Shahada?

No. None of those.

It was time for the now-hallowed rite of the Native American Land Acknowledgment.

The statement began by affirming something that’s already true and uncontroversial: ASU welcomes students from all backgrounds. But it didn’t stop there. It proclaimed—with full institutional endorsement—that ASU sits on the ancestral lands of various tribes, a statement meant to carry moral weight without asking anyone to actually do anything. Any one of them can sell their house and return to the money to the tribe of their choice; it won’t happen.

And then, as the reading ended, the room erupted in unison:
“THANK YOU!”

There it was. The moment of catharsis.
Their deep need for virtue signaling had been met. Consciences were cleared. No reparations needed. No inconvenient self-examination required. They were, once again, on the right side of history—or at least the latest socially acceptable version of it.

Now, you might object:
“Wait—they didn’t do anything. They just sat through a reading.”

Exactly.
That’s how it works.

This is secular liturgy for the privileged professor. It’s a ritual designed to look like repentance without the bother of transformation. It has no cost, no burden, no consequence. It is the most superficial religious rite they’ve come up with yet—but I’m confident they can outdo themselves. A race to the bottom, after all, rewards the most creatively hollow.

And here’s the kicker: it may now be in violation of federal law.

If a university meeting publicly privileges certain identities or perspectives—especially when race is a central category—it raises serious concerns about discrimination. I’ve brought this to the attention of the director and dean and was told the director can do whatever they want. Really? Is that true?

I’ll be following up with the government to see if ASU’s School of Humanities, Arts, and Cultural Studies in New College is at risk of financial consequences for continuing to politicize their faculty meetings and favor some students and groups over others based on race.

This isn't inclusion. It’s a new orthodoxy—complete with rituals, high priests, and heretics (why you lookin’ at me?).

And just like every bad religion, it demands nothing but external performance while calling it moral excellence.