Academia: Cesspool of Demosocialist political indoctrination

So, an A+B+C approach has merit, but when applied to politics it's too limited. And too easy to negate by twisting the meanings.
Click to expand...
Their politics is down and dirty.

You've got to remember that one strength liberal politics is its ability to mobilize the mob (think of this as the mob in the classic sense as per Tiberius Gracchus instead the modern criminal sense) to achieve a redistribution of wealth and power from us to them. They mobilize by persuesion, emotion and misinformation; they achieve their power change by creating chaos then promising protection from it. (So in this sense they are more like organized crime.)
 
No dispute with that...
And usually the mobs find out that they too have been used. But by then they lack the means to do much about it, having spent their bolt whilst they were being manipulated by those with the capacity for such thinking.
Interesting you mentioned a Roman example, insofar as the same games seem to be currently in vogue.
Even to the point of a government using 'family values' to distract from more important issues of power. That little trick came courtesy of Octavian.
And the historical allusions are why academic thought can be dangerous to civil liberties, or to preserve them. There are so many examples of the applications of power, which can be used against those who aren't aware that these have been used before.
In some ways, that is where this generation is weak, insofar as being subject to manipulation. Simply because our schools tend to avoid any serious level of learning about history, politics, or even the use of lit. and art. And accordingly, that removes any potential for people to know how that type of information can be used, for and agaisnt their interests.
And actually, Ruskin understood this more than a century back, WEB Dubois knew this a hundred years ago, as later did King and others...the way to keep people down is to deny them access to refined knowledge of lit, politics, philosophy and etc. Their intentions were all different, but all knew reform was impossible without allowing access to the great ideas.
But from the view of an entrenched system...the more people who's learning is limited to something which can be scan-troned, the better.
 
There are so many examples of the applications of power, which can be used against those who aren't aware that these have been used before.
Click to expand...
We all recollect that George Patton was a history buff and that interest gave him the upper hand in the battles for Africa and Sicily. We forget that President Grant was as well, though his failure to study political history as thoroughly as military history led to problems when he took office.

In some ways, that is where this generation is weak, insofar as being subject to manipulation. Simply because our schools tend to avoid any serious level of learning about history, politics, or even the use of lit.
Click to expand...

[tinfoil hat]
I've given this significant thought. It seems too much to be a coincident nor monumental stupidity.

1. Children are started in preschool at the age where premature attempts to teach reading lead to an increased incidence of dyslexia and learning disability for the bottom third of the class. Coincidentally funds are diverted from advanced and gifted programs to provide special education for children who are labeled learning disabled.

3. Children are set in front of televisions for 4-8 hours per day. This gives insufficient time for sleep and for aerobic exercise. Coincidentally it assures that 5-10% will be labeled ADHD and placed on stimulents.

4. The most effective methods of learning (age integrated primary classrooms with grades 1-3 together and grades 4-6 together, phonics and rote learning of basic spelling, foreign language and math skills) are considered outmoded. Coincidentally the emphasis is focussed on early childhood indoctrination of tolerence, self esteem and social skills.

5.High school foreign languages, history, literature, home economics, sciences and technical skills are deemphasized. Coincidentally rote learning becomes the focus of attention. (Developmentally this is backward. Little children learn better by rote and older kids are able to learn concepts.) Worse, high school becomes a showplace for team sports activity which involves 95% of the student body sitting on its collective behind watching 5% run back and forth. See number 3.

6. Colleges become remedial learning centers, wasting even more of the money which should be used in teaching the best and brightest. I'm terribly sorry if this offends anyone but I really don't want my doctor or dentist reading at a fourth grade level.

7. THEN we get to the Ward Churchills of the world and surprise! Nobody notices!

[/tinfoil hat]


You've read WEB Dubois? I've got his The Souls of Black Folk sitting on top of my computer right now! Great writer!
 
Meek and Mild,
I wonder what sources you have for #1? It doesn't sound sound to me. Not saying you got it wrong, I'm just doubting it and would like to see for myself.

#2 is missing (did you learn to count in today's schools? :rolleyes: :) ).

#'s 3, 4, and 5 sound very plausible to me and I do not doubt those statments.

Since I am a partial product of today's university and I have had to take remedial classes, I egree wath nombur sex.

#7, who is Ward Churchill?
 
Meek and Mild, the conditions you listed, would scarcely need a foil hat.
These likely didn't occur as a deliberate act, but nonetheless are now a established condition. The vex will be the situation which arises from those conditions.
WEB Dubois, yes, I've read it. As an illustrative irony, my current copy was obtained by wafting through a series of books that the institution I work for, was throwing away. Rather than giving them to interested students, or placing them into the collections, dumpster time.
Saved some, for personal use, and to give to students. But, one of the vexes is that the reading level is generally such that few are able to read them. And fewer really understand, or are willing to do so, what real power is in these type of books.
That's been one of the baleful influences of overemphasizing 'self-esteem'...it preconditions some against ideas which may be greater than themselves.
And that manner of misplaced egotism, might be the most dangerous legacy left to us, by misplaced academic theories. Increasingly we are producing a society which holds there are no greater causes, nor better angels, than ourselves.
For example, it is very evident in much of our entertainment. This tends to be very violent, or intensely sensual in a very base manner. And in that regard, we may be even worse than the Roman's. Roman entertainment, for the mobs, was essentially appalling. But the brutality was counterbalanced (to a degree) by learning/entertainment which the Roman's believed would serve their state and society. Some of which, like the Virgil's little tome, was written specifically to that end. So, such as it was, they believed and expected some of their populace to know some Roman virtues. We have a technology which can excede the experience of the Roman Hippodrome, Theater, or Colosseum...and what do we do with it? Do we get the 'Oath of the Horatii' from Halo 2, Tupac, or Natural Born Killers?
Obviously I'm not condoning the brutalities of the Colosseum. But what will happen to a society which permits its very core to descend into the entirely base?. Even Rome, never attained that questionable status.
 
Novus, Ward Churchill is a CU prof who wrote an intellectually sophomoric essay comparing those who died on 9/11 to Nazi war criminals.
And it wasn't even well written or thought out...
 
I should have put a smiley face next to that part of my post to let people know that I was kidding. Althought I have not read it (and don't plan to) I have heard the news about him and saw him answer questions on Bill Maher's show a few weeks ago. But I will bet that if I ask 10 other undergrad students on campus who he is, then seven of them would not know a thing about him or his "they were all Eichmans" essay.
 
Novus, all due apologies on my part. Wasn't quite sure if you were kidding...
And the internet here is a bit problematic, so alas, I have to write quickly and forego smilies.
Alas I feel so deprived...
And I did read Churchill's ranting missive...it was depraved...
 
But I will bet that if I ask 10 other undergrad students on campus who he is, then seven of them would not know a thing about him or his "they were all Eichmans" essay.
Click to expand...
I think that TFL member dasmi's signature line describes why that is probably accurate quite well.
"We make men without chests and expect of them virtue and enterprise. We laugh at honour and are shocked to find traitors in our midst. We castrate and bid the geldings to be fruitful."
C.S. Lewis
Click to expand...
If civilization is to survive I think we will need to return to the practice of making the ignorant and dishonorable unwelcome in society. Celebrating them (as America does the author of my sig line below) certainly isn't getting us anywhere. The idea that we pay pigs like Churchill and Moore big $$$$ to lecture at our nation's colleges and universities is truly warped. It makes cesspool seem like too mild a word really.
 
A lot of things said and asked, so far. I will add my 2 cents very quick and dirty.

I assume the study finding 86% of college profs liberal was done at state schools. Obviously Church owned colleges will not be so liberal. Trust me, BYU is not liberal. But I have found a majority of profs and administrators liberal. No question about it.

I have to resent the comments about profs being unable to make it in the real world. A few are dolts who have no experience outside of academia, most others are quite accomplished. I teach at state college and I am not liberal nor am I untalented. Most of the profs I know and work with are good at what they do. They are not failures who get teaching jobs. It doesn't happen that way. Some of the "prestigious" schools prefer to hire pure theorists, but most colleges want faculty with experiences beyond the classroom. The old saying "Those who can't do... teach" is not only insulting but incorrect. I spent 35 years in the private sector before deciding to take a pay cut and enter the teaching profession. I did it because I enjoy the work and I enjoy helping young people. I feel like what I do actually makes a difference.

I have five college degrees. It seemed like a good idea at the time. :rolleyes:
 
Yes, Novus. Sadly I'm a victim of publik skule eddicashun, 24 years of it to be ezakt. But I deleted point 2 at the last minute and didn't change the other points. I started to make a point about the fallacy of dismantling a system of vocational education which had been in place for over 50 years purely because of socialist class warfare theories but I deleted it as tangential. I also deleted a point about liberal media and children's TV which was even further afield.

Concerning the induction of dyslexia in children, dyslexia is a disorder which afflicts about 5% of us. It is characterized by difficulty in distinguishing mirror lettors such as p versus q and mirror words such as was versus saw. It can be accomodated by a number of techniques some as simple as turning the book sideways.

The catch is the 5% rate is if children are introduced to reading at age 6. Left-right reading errors are much more common before age 6 so basically you can't really test for dyslexia at that age. But if you put children in preschool with reading tasks before they are ready you end up frustrating them and developing habitual learning errors which are sometimes very hard to stop.

Girls read better than boys at age 6 so there is some justification for the argument that boys should start school at age 7 or 8.

The ages of 4 to 6 are the best times to work on development of basic manual skills and perfection of verbal languages (including introductory foreign language). I wish I had an easy reference for you, but I don't.

Person: Some of my favorite people were folks who went back into academia after having worked in other fields. No one can fault that, nor can they fault the dedicated professional who really wants to make a difference...unless the professional is also dedicated to marxist revolutionary principles and the destrucition of our present society.
 
Meek & Mild, your quite right about the general differential learning rates between young boys and girls. Due to that, some have advocated separate gender classes in the early grades to account for those differing rates of development. But the problem is, that in some PS subcultures, boys are viewed as minature secular anti-Christs. This has occurred to the point that some normal 'boys' behavior is being viewed as pathological (which incidentally includes boys sometime interest in firearms, bows, swords, aircraft and such). So as long as that attitude prevails, seperate sex classes could develop into a wierd gender segregation.
The dyslexia, mayhaps you are right insofar as it may be aggravated by improper applications of teaching theory. Some recent work has shown that dyslexia might be culturally set, especially the studies showing that in the US it is a phonetic condition, and in China (Mandirin) it is a visual interpretative condition. So, if the manner of dyslexia is culturally set, so might it's generation.
M. Hanson, quite true that we need to re-establish some level of moral example, and moral distinction in the schools. Problem is that, as a result of Sartre and others, the concept that morality is an individual condition, has become prevalent. Nothing wrong with that, if you're Budhha or St. Francis...big problem for the rest. And the rote diversity contingent will tend to ridicule the idea, as 'you can't judge other societies by your standards'.
Problem is with that, they've condemned us to no standards, and all the attendant troubles arising thereof. I'm not advocating that schools should be deriving moral codes from Christianity. Islam or etc exclusively...but they do need to realize that all the secular and religious moralities, which work...do tend to have conduct which is praised and damned. And anyway, the need for moral education, Aristotle knew it some 2000 + years back...but oopsie that's Eurocentric thinking peeking through...
 
Aristotle knew it some 2000 + years back...but oopsie that's Eurocentric thinking peeking through...
Click to expand...
DWEeM Dead White European Male.

How sinful of you to introduce the concepts of those most hateful of beings. Bad karma dude. :p
 
faraway, I think that is one of the reasons that oriental languages are written up and down instead of side to side. Remember the pontine center for lateral gaze? Actually I'm talking about relative rates of learning disabilities rather than absolutes. I know some families whose male members all have the problem, but others whose LD members were the ones who started reading too early.

This has occurred to the point that some normal 'boys' behavior is being viewed as pathological
Click to expand...
Why do you think Rush Limbaugh's label "feminazi" stung the radical feminists so much? It is hard to be insulted unless the insult has a grain of truth. ;)
 
So when a person gets an advanced education they become a liberal. So what's the problem? This fact has been well known for decades. Gee wiz,give a person the tool's to think for themselves and they become liberal! What is this country coming to? Maybe if more conservatives went to college your numbers would go up one or two percentage points. But, I doubt it.
 
Well the grant situation depends on the field, and the location of the school.
Easier to obtain in the sciences, and education than in other arenas. Much of these are directly or indirectly supported by guv'ment money.
Usually corporate grants tend to stay where the company has a presence, or some interest in PR.
Academic grants (in the sense of departmental type grants) hard to get and very, very competitive. That's why, it should be the grant offices venue...quite literally just finding and applying for these things, can be a full time job.
Research grants...another set of rules.
And the vex is, often the best writers at producing glorious smoke, mirrors, whistles, and dancing dogs, are often the successful grant writers. I've seen grant money used for drunken parties, which was quite successfully justified as 'faculty development'. Sometimes, alas, it seems to be how well the fantasy is phrased.
Have done some successful grant writing, but even when its applied for justified ends...the whole process makes one feel that it's been a conceptual visit to a stylish, but nonetheless tawdry house of ill repute.
 
The libs are very underrepresented in the "One and only answer" disciplines in college . If you are finding out the cutting speed of 4114 steel there is an answer . Nowhere is there a place for "Now , how does that make the steel feel?" "How would the steel react if no one noticed that it was being machined?" "If the machinist cut it too short would the steel have difficulty adapting to it's new size relative to the other pieces of steel?"You get the drift .
Click to expand...

LOL - same with computer science. However, if you walk into the arts/humanities section of campus you still see Kerry/Che/Mao posters and the air smells of weed. Additionally, the percentage of dreadlocks increases dramatically as does the prevalence of Apple computers.

"Pass the instructor, not the course" - I like that. I'll have to remember to think like that while taking Liberal Studies 373 this fall sem. :barf:

Some profs just feed you certain things, like having to watch the Al Jazeera documentary Control Room :barf: Then, if you don't have a certain reaction, such as ranting about US foreign policy, your prof assume you weren't paying attention and grade you accordingly.
 
I've seen grant money used for drunken parties, which was quite successfully justified as 'faculty development'.
Click to expand...
That wasn't part of the question, but I've seen some of those myself. I recall one particular x-ray crystallographer's girlfriend...never mind.

But you agree about form often trumping function in grantsmanship.

The second part of my musing is, gee I wonder about the fact that many nonprofit corporations (which coincidentally fund liberal arts and social sciences programs) are so radically leftist and those which fund sciences and technologies programs are so centrist or conservative.

70-101, I'm leading up to a rehashing of Sutton's Law but am not quite there yet unless you've already guessed.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top