Slashdot Mirror


In America, Most Republicans Think Colleges Are Bad for the Country (chronicle.com)

An anonymous reader quotes the Chronicle of Higher Education: A majority of Republicans and right-leaning independents think higher education has a negative effect on the country, according to a new study released by the Pew Research Center on Monday. The same study has found a consistent increase in distrust of colleges and universities since 2010, when negative perceptions among Republicans was measured at 32 percent. That number now stands at 58 percent. By comparison, 72 percent of Democrats or left-leaning Independents in the study said colleges and universities have a positive impact on the United States... In the Pew Research Center's study, distrust of colleges was strongest in the highest income bracket and the oldest age group, with approval levels of just 31 percent among respondents whose family income exceeds $75,000 a year and 27 percent among those older than 65.

996 comments

  1. Evergreen State by Rockoon · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Proof by example.

    --
    "His name was James Damore."
    1. Re:Evergreen State by elrous0 · · Score: 5, Informative

      And I wish Evergreen were just a completely fringe case. But sadly, even many mainstream universities in red states are now indoctrinating students and stifling any dissent. Even reddest of red states, Tennessee, had to pass a law (against the opposition of its own public university administrations) just to guarantee students basic free speech rights.

      --
      SJW: Someone who has run out of real oppression, and has to fake it.
    2. Re:Evergreen State by Grishnakh · · Score: 3, Insightful

      One example isn't proof of anything. By that dumb logic, I could point to LIberty University as "proof" that colleges are all ultra-conservative hellholes, but obviously they're not. One example is only good for disproving something, like this assertion I just made here is obviously disproved by Evergreen State.

    3. Re:Evergreen State by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Except mainstream colleges across America and Europe aren't increasingly adopting Liberty College's ideology.

    4. Re:Evergreen State by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Slashdot, I'm finally not coming here anymore to read the ads. The anti-education nutjobs are just too much.

    5. Re:Evergreen State by nip1024 · · Score: 0

      Don't confuse anti-US College with anti-education. The republicans simply don't believe the US colleges teach. Much like the public school systems have been failing our children, the universities in the US have gone bat-shit crazy with the liberal arts. Instead of teaching, they are indoctrinating naive young adults into a moronic social Marxist ideology: safe spaces, trigger warnings, deplatforming everyone they don't like, extreme anti-white cis male sentiment being taught in classrooms. It's not just a single instance, Missou, Yale, Evergreen and in Canada you have the BS going on with Toronto University and Jordan Peterson.

      College has never been the only way to become educated. It was just the best/easiest. They no longer are.

      Why build up $40k in student loans, earning a degree in XYZ Studies, to find out that you are still only qualified to work at Starbucks.

    6. Re: Evergreen State by Bartles · · Score: 0, Flamebait

      Oh, we're not crying. We're just recognizing the obvious. The next step is to start with defunding. Left wing indoctrination camps should not have access to public funding.

    7. Re: Evergreen State by FudRucker · · Score: 1, Troll

      yup, exactly, colleges are meant for education, not brainwashing the young with progressive liberal commie propaganda

      --
      Politics is Treachery, Religion is Brainwashing
    8. Re:Evergreen State by Daemonik · · Score: 5, Insightful

      First of all, our schools have been "failing" our students because moronic Republicans on the education boards insist on "teaching the controversy" of their invisible sky man over evolution, and insisting that there has been no debate over climate change. Then throw in the numerous tax cuts that under fund the schools while they try to smooth talk us into believing that charter schools will be more than ponzi schemes to milk even more wealth out of the system. I'm seriously waiting for the conservative push to teach the Flat Earth "controversy".

      Your biased lecture against colleges neglect that there are quite a number of alternative conservative colleges which are still quite happy to indoctrinate students and teach women that they are lesser beings to be raped and tossed aside as whores if they dare to question their role in the conservative lifestyle.

      The truth is that conservatives hate education. Educated people ask questions and conservatism doesn't like to be questioned. It's an article of faith, like religion, and questions highlight the many conflicting inconsistencies that patch it together. Plus kids go to college, get a degree and then look back at the rural economic wasteland their conservative parents have surrounded themselves with and immediately go live somewhere they can get a job, typically the big scary liberal city.

    9. Re: Evergreen State by WindBourne · · Score: 1

      Reads like a good bill. While I back Universities, the fact is that are bad at squelching free speech like it was the 60s again. Only difference is that now includes both left and right, while before it was just the right.

      --
      I prefer the "u" in honour as it seems to be missing these days.
    10. Re: Evergreen State by WindBourne · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Yeah, only right wing fascist indoctrination camps should be funded. Sheesh.

      --
      I prefer the "u" in honour as it seems to be missing these days.
    11. Re: Evergreen State by Bartles · · Score: 1, Insightful

      You can call it progressive or commie, but please do not bastardize the word liberal so terribly. There is nothing liberal about them.

    12. Re: Evergreen State by Bartles · · Score: 1

      Please provide an example of one of these.

    13. Re: Evergreen State by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      I love your snowflake tears lol. So afraid of education, lol.

    14. Re: Evergreen State by chadenright · · Score: 1

      I can't comment on the lib arts program, but having just graduated a CS program at CSUB, I can say that many of the teachers were from China and Russia, even in the crunchier departments like CS and physics. I suspect it is cheaper to hire communist professors who got their degree in the second world, and while many of these people are very competent in their chosen fields, they often have ideals that are at odds with what mainstream America would consider "normal".

      Rather assign political commissars to make sure the classes are sufficiently American enough, I suggest the schools should simply shell out the extra 10k/year or whatever it is to hire Americans rather than H1B's.

    15. Re: Evergreen State by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Church

    16. Re: Evergreen State by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      you mean like LIberty or Grand Canyon or Colorado Christian or... or.... or....

    17. Re:Evergreen State by Nikkos · · Score: 3, Insightful

      moronic Republicans on the education boards insist on "teaching the controversy" of their invisible sky man over evolution

      Yes, because adding one small thing regarding the evolution debate just kills all other subjects in school. If you think _THAT_ is the dealbreaker you're just as clueless as the rest.

      I'm conservative, and I'm all for evolution, and I don't have anything against the invisible sky-man. I'll even think less of schools that don't teach evolution.

      But that doesn't mean that the rest of the curriculum - history, math, english/language - is going to be shit. What's shit is schools that hold kids back so that the idiot glue-eaters can 'catch up'. My father was a 5th-grade teacher for 30+ years. By the time he retired, he was teaching stuff in his class that was 3rd-grade material when he started. He had countless kids that could barely read or handle basic mat - the teachers in the earlier grades would simply pass the kids with high because they didn't want to deal with parents. And of course the administration didn't care, nor did the school board - that is until standardized testing exposed how terrible the teachers were.

      Do you know what happened then? The teachers started stealing the tests before the exams and had special 'study' sessions. Again the administration looked the other way - the better testing scores looked good, and the union made any type of punishment impossible anyway. My father couldn't get out of their fast enough.

      The unions and the touchy-feely 'everyone gets a trophy' and 'everyone is special' crowd have completely fucked up our education system, not the republicans.

    18. Re:Evergreen State by Nikkos · · Score: 3, Insightful

      fixes: marks, math, and there.

      Dad didn't teach language and typing.

    19. Re:Evergreen State by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Sure do wish I had mod points... someone please mod that message up!

    20. Re:Evergreen State by allcoolnameswheretak · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Don't confuse anti-US College with anti-education

      Really? Have you ever learned about the Age of Enlightenment? It's that era that went hand in hand with the scientific revolution and took the western world out of the dark ages of medieval thinking, for good. It's also the reason why the west has been steering human progress for the last 300 years. The dark ages on the other hand where dominated by religious thought, superstition and fraught with prejudice towards critical thinking. Religious fanatics would rather burn progressive thinkers like Galileo Galilei on the stake rather than listen to reason.

      I'm sorry, but the conservative right in the US with the denial of climate change supported by the *vast* majority of scientist, their antipathy towards the theory of evolution and efforts to teach creationism in schools, their tactics of spreading fear and uncertainty among the populace to legitimatize their crackdowns on civil rights and their boosting in defense spending, even though in reality terrorism is a marginal threat. All of this looks like steps of a counter-enlightenment movement, a return to the dark ages to me.

    21. Re:Evergreen State by brianerst · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Except, of course, that Liberty University has a long history of having leading figures on the left come and speak to its student body. Ted Kennedy was a frequent speaker, and last year, students were required to go to a Bernie Sanders speech.

      The students were respectful and listened, even though they disagreed with Sanders on most points.

      I wouldn't go to or send my child to Liberty U, but the differences between a Liberty University and a Berkeley or Evergreen or Yale or Middlebury are pretty stark. Liberty U expects a respectful audience and gets one, the others have let the inmates run the asylum.

    22. Re: Evergreen State by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Evergreen is a state school financed by public funds.
      The other schools you mentioned are private schools financed by private funds.

      But then you knew that already. Have a great day! MAGA!

    23. Re:Evergreen State by TsuruchiBrian · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Colleges are also how we end up with electrical engineers and doctors. It's too bad that what happened at evergreen state was so insanely terrible that it is not outweighed by the good colleges in general do for our country.

      Sure I can get an MRI and have a super computer in my pocket, but I'd trade it all to stop some leftist students from disrupting operations on a leftist college campus, where they where taught their leftist ideology by the leftist faculty.

    24. Re: Evergreen State by cryptizard · · Score: 2

      It's not about salary. There are lots of candidates that would kill for those tenure-track positions. Your Chinese and Russian professors must have had better research qualifications.

    25. Re:Evergreen State by Mashiki · · Score: 0

      The truth is that conservatives hate education. Educated people ask questions and conservatism doesn't like to be questioned.

      Then going by your reasoning, progressives don't hate education. They despise it to the point that they believe that it only exists to indoctrinate people with irrational points of view. So, with that want to point out all those conservative colleges pushing "safe spaces" attacking(sometimes violently) people for different points of view?

      You're gonna have a hard time finding that because that's happening in schools that have heavy progressive leaderships and professors. Because the universities like yale, mizzou, berkeley? They're all famous as progressive institutions. But it sure looks like the students in those places don't want their view points challenged to the point that they're willing to try and burn down school buildings. That is if they're not already rioting. Which also explains why so many of those schools would rather push no-platforming(taking away a persons ability to speak because "reasons." Or screaming "cultural appropriation" because someone wore dreadlocks(oh the horror).

      You should get your head out of your ass, progressive education has become a literal cancer on the western campus. There's a good reason why republicans dislike the modern campus and I agree, most of them are literal shitholes that get you nothing but $400k/debt and a piece of paper that will ensure you can work at the local starbucks. Get a trade, not only will you earn better money, it'll be better for you in most cases.

      --
      Om, nomnomnom...
    26. Re: Evergreen State by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Please provide an example of one of these.

      Liberty U ?

    27. Re:Evergreen State by mlookaba · · Score: 1

      I'm adjunct faculty for a University in the Midwest

      The school newspaper is a sorry propaganda rag. No stories are printed unless they include racism, white privilege, LGBTQZ or some other pet project. It's fine to let students have their own view, but the (lower division) students that I see appear to be shaped more by this agenda than they are shaping it.

    28. Re:Evergreen State by ShanghaiBill · · Score: 5, Informative

      I love how you snowflakes cry.

      A "snowflake" is someone who whines about their own sense of entitlement, not someone who speaks up for the rights of others.

      Suppression of free speech on college campuses is a serious issue. Liberal advocates of restrictions should learn from history. In the past, policies designed to suppress the right were later turned against the left. McCarthyism was based on laws originally intended to suppress the far right, rather than "commies". Judicial activism was originally a tool of Liberals, but is now increasingly used against them.

    29. Re:Evergreen State by Kohath · · Score: 0, Troll

      Colleges are also how we end up with electrical engineers and doctors.

      If education were less hostile, then those opportunities wouldn't be almost exclusively for foreign students only.

    30. Re:Evergreen State by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      College has never been the only way to become educated. It was just the best/easiest. They no longer are.

      So there is a better/easier way to learn how to do PCR or study molecular biology or work in a lab ?

      For some degrees you might be right ... but for others the infrastructure required makes learning outside of that environment less than feasable.

      You can complain about higher ed - but when it comes to the hard sciences our university system has been, and still is, looked to as the gold standard when compared to the rest of the world.

      Dismantling higher ed will cost us dearly.

    31. Re: Evergreen State by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Not in the least necessary. I was in a classics department where two qualified US job candidates, one of them from Harvard, were passed over for a useless lump from Italy who just happened to have gone to the same uni as one of the other profs in the department. A third European flat out told me that no American was getting that job: the Europeans woukd look out for felliw Europeans and make sure they got the job. The Russians and Chinese do the same thing: they'd rather bring over more of their own, even with lesser qualifications and fewer publications, than hire an American.

    32. Re: Evergreen State by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      No. There are Americans with excellent qualifications. But there are a lot of issues, with any job having the proper connections and being able to fit in helps. But for Americans in particular there is the notion of 'The who can't, teach'. Meaning being an educator is a dead last choice.

    33. Re:Evergreen State by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Blaming the unions is the easy way out.

      Every group has about the same blend of idiot and *ssh*les.
      Dems, Reps, pro union peole , anti union people, blah blah blah.
      Look at what's available, make the best of it, and try to fix what's broken.

      The "throw it all away and start over" works occasionally but if you've been through enough corporate reorgs you realise >90% of the time that's just trying to score points by highlighting somebody else's failures.

    34. Re:Evergreen State by slameradamis · · Score: 2

      "Invisible Sky Man"... right, because humanity having never gone further than our own moon can definitively state that no such entity could possibly exist within the expanse of the universe? I have no problem with Atheist believing that there is no God and I also do not go out of their way to mock them for their beliefs just because they defer from my own. Whether you agree with someone's beliefs or not, unless you know EVERYTHING about the entire universe you would be wiser to respect others for their own beliefs and not mock them. That being said... speaking as a Christian myself, I certainly do have issues with members of my own community demanding teaching creation in schools along side of evolution in a science class. Do I believe that "God" created the universe? Sure... but I am not going to try to pretend to try to understand or explain how he did it based off of a couple of chapters in the Bible and throw that up against modern day science in an education environment. What is essential to my faith is the belief that God created the universe, not how he did it...

      Moving on, your statement "Educated people ask questions and conservatism doesn't like to be questioned" would seem to fly in the face of what we have seen in the media where it has been liberal and progressives that have worked themselves into a frenzy trying to shut down opposing conservative views. Let your idea win on it's own merits, not because you shut down opposing viewpoints. To be fair, I think there are extremist on both sides of the aisle that try to shut down dissenting view points but as a whole, the progressive liberal movement seems to have taken this to a new level at the University college level. Our public Universities should be about the free and open exchange of ideas regardless of whether we agree with them or not. If you want to go to an echo chamber for your education that reinforces your particular ideology that is great, there are private schools where you can pay your hard earned money to have your views reinforced. What conservatives are tired of is tax payer funding going towards indoctrination into leftist ideology at their expense.

      Also, having lived in "rural" country with small town values and now living in the "Scary Liberal City" of the Bay Area, I can tell you I infinitely prefer the small town values of the country over the big city values. To each their own is what I say and I'm more than happy to keep city lovers stay in the city for what they consider to be a "superior" way of life. Just stop moving out into the suburbs where prime farmland is constantly being turned into suburbia by people trying to leave the expensive city that they have to work two jobs just to afford a shoebox of an apartment.

      Your entire thread seems to be about mocking others that don't belief what you belief or haven't experienced or prefer your lifestyle to others. You have demonstrated that you are intolerant of different ideas and incapable of respecting others that hold them.

    35. Re:Evergreen State by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Get a trade, not only will you earn better money, it'll be better for you in most cases

      way to move forward ...

    36. Re:Evergreen State by CaptainDork · · Score: 1

      So you just self-identified as a member of the under-educated group, right?

      --
      It little behooves the best of us to comment on the rest of us.
    37. Re: Evergreen State by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Interesting

      Interesting how you talk about free speech but cheer those who want to deny professors the right to teach what science tells them is best. People entering colleges are adults. They can choose not to accept the ideas that are taught to them but denying them the right to hear perspectives outside of mainstream US ideas is censorship. Forcing schools to teach what is already commonly accepted ideology pushed by the government is what indoctrination is. You right wingers are nothing but hypocrites who fear people being introduced to ideas that challenge your ideas. The backlash you are facing from colleges is exactly the opposite of what you are claiming it is. Groups aren't blocking free speech they are demanding a safe space away from the US propaganda, nationalist supremacy bullshit and other idiotic things that lead people to believe a billionaire con-man somehow speaks for the working class. Stop being a joke. You know what the real fear is.

    38. Re: Evergreen State by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Reality sucks when you are on the wrong side of it.
      You are a modern day flat earth.

    39. Re: Evergreen State by LeftCoastThinker · · Score: 0, Troll

      Well, right now it is 100% left wing progressive fascist indoctrination camps, and variation on that theme, the only difference is degrees. Every patriotic American should be against these bastardized versions of what college was supposed to be, especially on the taxpayer dime. If you can't recognize the fact that colleges (and more specifically college professors) are out of control rabid, fascist leftists, you are part of the problem.

      How about eliminating the antiquated concept of tenure entirely and require professors to perform just like every other profession. Their job is to teach the course in a professional and accurate manner, there should be a requirement to focus on the content and keep your shitty political views to yourself unless you are teaching a poli sci class, and even then you must bring in both view points faithfully, since it is a roughly even split in the country, it should be taught with balance, and grading against conservatives solely against their point of view should be grounds for discipline or dismissal.

      The bottom line is that not all colleges are the same degree of out of control, but conservatives are done paying for the liberal indoctrination camps. The fascist progressives (who btw, are by far the largest fascist group in the US in modern history) have overreached and they are in the process of violently collapsing.

      --
      If you disagree, please post your argument. (-1, Overrated) isn't your personal censorship tool for views you don't like
    40. Re:Evergreen State by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      WTF are you talking about? Not a single one of the things you mentioned is taught in any CS class. Did you have a tie-died hippie instructing your data structures class or something?

      "And here we have to rebalance the tree, and not merely to improve average performance. Take nodes away from this productive hard-working right sub-tree and transfer them to the lazy left sub-tree. Notice how fair and just it looks, now. And ask any unbiased economics instructor an he'll tell you that it minimizes search time, too."

    41. Re: Evergreen State by Highdude702 · · Score: 1

      Boy you sure do stretch that "adult" word pretty thin.

    42. Re:Evergreen State by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      What a load of crap. A small number of students were the problem there, combined with an incompetent college president that failed to manage the situation.

      Chances are really good that those students came to college brainwashed like that.

    43. Re:Evergreen State by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Catholics (largest Christian denomination in the US) teach evolution. Many of its schools are top ranked.

    44. Re:Evergreen State by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Most of the Enlightened thinkers were far more religious and conservative than any of the "conservative right" today.

    45. Re:Evergreen State by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It sounds like your father and his institution, near the end, might have had the wrong incentives. If it had become about having the most students pass the standardized test instead of educating, I'm not so sure they were really chasing let-everyone-have-a-trophy. Are you sure they didn't simply need the money? And might it be because local taxpayers didn't value education, so everything depended on fed tax dollars which had weird strings attached?

      This is how it's going to be, until people value education. It should look like ridiculous goals are being chased, because glue-eaters who pass are worth just as many federal dollars as kids who try. It will remain like this, until people stop thinking of truth and knowledge as unimportant things. It's up to us to wean our schools off of the funds from those DC perverts and that won't happen until you stop voting against education in your local elections and bonds. If you keep voting Republican at the local level, you're going to keep voting for something that looks exactly like everyone-must-win. Because every student must pass that test instead of the institution sorting and finding students that care.

    46. Re:Evergreen State by CaptainDork · · Score: 1

      I agree with you and would like to append another important parameter: money.

      Higher education has been corporatized and has attracted the loan shark industry.

      Capitalism has evolved, predictably, to be the dominant predator on the planet.

      Smart people know the difference between bullshit and wild honey.

      Under-educated people have few personal resources at hand for making critical, informed decisions.

      They look to their role models to fill in that void.

      Sadly, asshats like Rick Perry, the pussy grabber, and Ben Carson (the pyramids stored grain) and Fox News are their go-to sources of information.

      Right now, the American leaders have the needle pegged full right.

      I predict that the trend is permanent.

      Ahead of us is isolationism, paranoia, tariffs, and the sinking of America on the world stage.

      What once was a source of pride is a whole country that looks like Detroit.

      --
      It little behooves the best of us to comment on the rest of us.
    47. Re:Evergreen State by Voyager529 · · Score: 3, Insightful

      See, this is why we can't have nice things: getting past the headlines to see the spectrum that truly exists takes effort.

      Get past "earth was created in 6,000 years and fossils exist to test us because god hates fags" flavor of creationism, and you'll find far more nuanced interpretations. Some believe that "days" in the Genesis account mean lengthy eras of time. Others believe that the earth was created halfway through its lifecycle (Adam and Eve were unlikely to be created as infants, after all). Others believe something along the lines that God is simply the initial cause of the Big Bang, with God opting to have a much less influential role in the course of the development of life. Are people with a more sensible view of creationism building massive arks and trying to change textbooks? Generally not. More to the point, they're more apt to learn more about the information regarding what is observed, rather than turning it into a political battle.

      On the topic of climate change, again, we've got a spectrum that doesn't get headlines because the folks insisting the climate isn't changing have that market cornered. Get past it, and the questions are more sensible: Is the primary way to stave it off really to increase taxes? Is it sensible to make certain things unaffordable to the most cost sensitive people in order to save the planet? If the manufacturing of a hybrid is more environmentally unfriendly than an ICE car, is it really helpful to fervently pitch their manufacture and purchase? Same for solar panels - if their production is very toxic to the environment, are we doing any long-term favors just because China is willing to make them affordably at the expense of their environmental state? Obviously, these questions and many more are present on the topic, and some do have viable answers, but the problem is the lack of any middle ground - say "maybe we should see if it's possible to have more environmentally friendly solar panels before giving tax incentives for them", and you're a corporatist republican who doesn't care about the environment. Say, "perhaps it would make sense to use the more resource intensive panels for larger buildings so that the air conditioners will at least be mostly solar powered and their impact will be negated quicker", and you're a tree hugging Al Gore groupie who cares more about mother earth than the children who live in it.

      Is it possible for there to be a return to the dark ages? Anything is possible. Is the best way to fight it by forcing both sides further to the extremes and engage in a battle of attrition? I think not.

    48. Re: Evergreen State by Carewolf · · Score: 0

      I you serious or being sarcastic? I can't tell anymore, there people retarded enough on the US right wing to say stuff like that with a straight face you know.

    49. Re: Evergreen State by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You sound totally sane.....

    50. Re: Evergreen State by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Tax haven, political soap box, social networking "right thinkers" together, dating pool, community influence; churches are very university-like.

    51. Re:Evergreen State by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If you're serious about climate change, you'd recommend tariffing Chinese goods.

    52. Re:Evergreen State by TsuruchiBrian · · Score: 1

      That's weird. I got an engineering degree at a reputable university, and I don't remember being the only non-foreign student.

    53. Re: Evergreen State by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      There is NOTHING left-wing nor progressive about the censorship, "triggering" and destruction of vocabulary and concepts that's going on on college campuses. There's nothing really conservative about it either. It's pure fascism disguised as "left" the same way the third reich was "socialist".

      Things like "gender studies" are nothing but strawman training camps designed from the ground up to stifle free-speech and liberty of opinion under a thin gauze of protecting it. Nobody is protecting anything of value when they demand others reject reality and accept delusions such as "the man in front of you is actually a woman and also a cat spirit". But it's very useful in training people to accept all sorts of other fairy-tales, and to rabidly defend anyone playing the victim from the truth.

      It's just that the goalposts spent the last 50 years being moved so far that several organizations and media conglomerates have convinced a major portion of the population that an authoritarian, intrusive system of government and social organization built on a metadata panopticon is somehow left-of-center.

    54. Re:Evergreen State by Kohath · · Score: 1

      You didn't say Electrical Engineering though, did you? And you didn't say foreign students weren't the vast majority in engineering classes either.

    55. Re: Evergreen State by SlashDread · · Score: 0, Troll

      National Socialism.

      They were fascists, who put commies AND socialists in camps and murdered then, all your re-labeling and fake history nonetheless.

      Im sortof tired of the old switcheroo meme of trying to make "left is teh hitler oh noes!".

    56. Re:Evergreen State by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      stop some leftist students from disrupting operations on a leftist college campus, where they where taught their leftist ideology by the leftist faculty.

      You mean stopping the Canadian liberal ideology and the European centrist thoughts, to keep only Le Pen and May not-quite-right-enough philosophy, don't you?

      Because we know Orwellian double-speak when we hear it: "leftist" is double-plus good term for what non-USian think. And we've always been at war with Eurasia. Critical thinking is why enemies of the State stop America from being Great.

    57. Re: Evergreen State by dougdonovan · · Score: 1

      i just hold a bsit via univ of phx 4 yrs, 75k, not bad for a white boy out of wy.

    58. Re:Evergreen State by Black+Lifes+Matter · · Score: 1

      You sir are sincerely twisted and demented. A college education would have straightened you out. I am not so sure white privilege is actually privilege

    59. Re: Evergreen State by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      yup, exactly, colleges are meant for education, not brainwashing the young with progressive liberal commie propaganda

      "Liberal professors outnumber conservatives nearly 12 to 1, study finds"

      * http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2016/oct/6/liberal-professors-outnumber-conservatives-12-1/

      Nothing new:

      Sociologist Paul Lazarsfeld and Wagner Thielens, were the first scholars to conduct a systematic survey of the politics of American university professors. The research was commissioned by an arm of the Ford Foundation in 1955 as a response to McCarthyism, and focused solely on social scientists. Lazarsfeld found that just 16% of the social scientists he surveyed self-identified as Republicans, while 47% self-identified as Democrats. 67% said they were "more liberal" than the average person in the community where they worked.[1][2]:25-27

      * https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Liberal_bias_in_academia

    60. Re:Evergreen State by laird · · Score: 3, Interesting

      True. But keep in mind that teachers are required by law ("no child left behind") to teach to the test; if they don't, they get pay cuts and then fired, and entire schools can be shut down. When Texas started this strategy under Bush Jr., it led directly to corrupting the school systems, because they were forced to do so to save their schools. So, for example, they spent all class time cramming for the material on the test, and taking practice tests, which helps test scores but hurts actual education. Then as the bar was raised and penalties started really hitting, teachers "corrected" tests before submitting the scores, or transferred "bad" students to another school (on paper) the day before the test, so their scores wouldn't hurt the school. But it created (fake) rising test scores, so it was a "success" for the politicians.

      Then Bush Jr did the same thing to the whole country, with the same dismal results.

      This had nothing to do with parents or unions - generally, both parent and unions opposed the disaster of "no child left behind" and oppose "teaching to the test". But they didn't have the leverage to stop it, since it was pushed by the GOPs national and state political leaders, then enforced by the school administrators, who care a lot about their budgets.

    61. Re: Evergreen State by cryptizard · · Score: 1

      there is the notion of 'The who can't, teach'. Meaning being an educator is a dead last choice.

      For primary and secondary education, sure, but at a university level that is not at all true.

    62. Re: Evergreen State by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Bullshit.

    63. Re:Evergreen State by Black+Lifes+Matter · · Score: 1

      Answer me this one question;

      Why are you so adamantly opposed to college education where you can learn things?

    64. Re: Evergreen State by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It's the legal definition of 'adult', but you're probably too high to grasp that. Dude.

    65. Re:Evergreen State by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I don't believe in the invisible sky man. Haven't since I was around 4 years old.

      But don't link this superstitious belief to taking a side over global warming. Two completely different things. I do not buy into all the climate change hysteria and alarmism. You may assume I am a denier with my head in the sand but that is exactly what I believe about the alarmists. There is PLENTY of evidence that can support either side of the argument.

    66. Re:Evergreen State by Black+Lifes+Matter · · Score: 1

      QED. It is impossible to have a conversation with a Republican. How sad.

    67. Re:Evergreen State by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
    68. Re:Evergreen State by nedlohs · · Score: 1

      Perception matters more than reality when the question is "what do most X think about Y".

      Since the media loves conflict (since that attracts the eyeballs that attract the advertisers) and especially political conflict they are going to show the political conflict at colleges - and that is mostly liberals ranting about the evil white racist sexists who apparently run the world explicitly to propagate their racism and sexism. Naturally, republicans will be turned off by that.

      They don't show the masses of students who aren't studying gender politics and who are instead learning science or economics or medicine and keeping to themselves about politics.

      Thus it appears that colleges are seething hives of leftist hatred, rather than places of education. Unsurprisingly Republicans think seething hives of leftist hatred are bad for the country.

    69. Re: Evergreen State by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The problem with your post is that you create a paint all people that do not agree with you as "Liberal progressives" then proceed to call them NAZIs and fascists.

      While decrying that this group that does not respect the rule of law, you suggest Kathy Gifford should be thrown in jail for political speech you do not like.

      You clearly do not understand the rule of law or the point of the constitution and likely have no true understanding of any of the issues at hand.

      It is easy to demonize others, but one wonders if you put nearly as much effort into understanding things as you have put into spewing crap.

    70. Re: Evergreen State by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      A controversial summer reading list at Spanish Fort High School in Alabama, has become a focus of national media attention because of its right-wing bent.

      Examples include:
      "Liberalism is a Mental Disorder: Savage Solutions," by Michael Savage (plus 4 other Michael Savage books);
      '"End the Fed," by Ron Paul;
      "Guilty: Liberal "Victims" and their Assault on America," by Ann Coulter;
      "Abortion and the Conscience of a Nation," by former President Ronald Reagan; and
      "48 Liberal Lies About American History (That You Probably Learned in School)," by Larry Schweikart.

      The list was part of a complaint has been filed with the Baldwin County School system alleging a culture of bias and discrimination.

    71. Re: Evergreen State by acrimonious+howard · · Score: 4, Informative
      I'm trying to extrapolate some coherent point from this post. It's difficult, but seems like some common ... thoughts ... should be addressed:

      The liberals were the fascists in the Nazi party (Nazi meaning new socialist)

      Where the heck does this come from?? Every single iota of non-biased information I've ever seen points to the opposite. Eg Wikipedia:

      the Nazi Party was a far-right political party in Germany

      You ... are a "climate denier". Notice that none of these ad homonym attacks...

      If you deny the scientifically-accepted theory of climate change, then you're a climate denier. It's not ad homonym. (face-palm). It's not ad hominem to accuse someone of a position that they hold.

    72. Re: Evergreen State by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      This is some sad self posting shit. Do you really have nothing better to do with your life?

    73. Re: Evergreen State by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Tired of being called out on your violent, evil, oppressive bullshit?

      Too bad.

    74. Re: Evergreen State by Ichijo · · Score: 2

      It's funny how leftists are called fascists when historically fascism has been closely associated with dirigism (heavy government influence over the means of production) and just ask a conservative if businesses ought to be allowed to build as little parking as they want. "No because then they might not build enough and so people will start using liberal forms of transportation like buses, bikes, and walking!"

      --
      Any sufficiently unpopular but cohesive argument is indistinguishable from trolling.
    75. Re: Evergreen State by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Private school. No violent shitbags attacking teachers. No comparison, you fucking imbecile.

    76. Re:Evergreen State by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      > Don't confuse anti-US College with anti-education

      > Really? Have you ever learned about the Age of Enlightenment?

      Again, you're baking intentionally misrepresented ideas into your own unrelated anxieties.
      Institution (in implementation) can be formed to countermand their intended core goals.
      You haven't touched on the issue you specifically chose to highlight. It's likely you've been unable to do self-reflection for some time. Certainly beyond the span of the last rant.

      SMH

    77. Re: Evergreen State by WindBourne · · Score: 0

      Liberty university;
      The GOP;
      USAF is now under a massive attack from the far right esp. at the academy.
      Sadly, Plenty of places for far right facism education.

      --
      I prefer the "u" in honour as it seems to be missing these days.
    78. Re: Evergreen State by WindBourne · · Score: 4, Informative
      how the fuck did you get modded up at all, with your rewriting of history and not a single thing to back it up?
      This is why we get so much fake news from you far righties.

      Constantly, historians, have shown that NAZI facism was far right. In fact, it is by definition, consider to be a far right action.:

      fascism
      faSHizm/
      noun
      an authoritarian and nationalistic right-wing system of government and social organization. synonyms: authoritarianism, totalitarianism, dictatorship, despotism, autocracy; More (in general use) extreme right-wing, authoritarian, or intolerant views or practice.

      Here are more links:
      Fascism /fæzm/ is a form of radical authoritarian nationalism,[1][2] characterized by dictatorial power, forcible suppression of opposition, and control of industry and commerce,[3] that came to prominence in early 20th-century Europe. The first fascist movements emerged in Italy during World War I, before it spread to other European countries. Opposed to liberalism, Marxism, and anarchism, fascism is usually placed on the far-right within the traditional left–right spectrum.[4][5]
      Then we have the implication of your posting that NAZIs were left-wing, which is as far from the truth as your calling W or trump liberals.
      National Socialism (German: Nationalsozialismus), more commonly known as Nazism (/ntszm, næ-/[1]), is the ideology and set of practices associated with the 20th-century German Nazi Party, Nazi Germany, and other far-right groups. Usually characterised as a form of fascism that incorporates scientific racism and antisemitism, Nazism's development was influenced by German nationalism, Pan-Germanism, the Völkisch movement and the anti-communist Freikorps paramilitary groups that emerged during the Weimar Republic after Germany's defeat in World War I.
      Nazis were strongly opposed to the far left, but added minor elements of it, to appease ppl. The real fist in the nazis was PURE RIGHT WING, just like Trump today is. NAZIs HATED the far left which is why they invaded USSR as soon as they thought they could. Perhaps the ONLY element of the left that they accepted was the lefts love of science. Sadly, the NAZIs perverted science, just like today's GOP does

      Here is how the ORIGINAL socialist party was perveted in under a year, by hitler and his far right cronies.
      The small number of party members were quickly won over to Hitler's political beliefs. He organized their biggest meeting yet of 2,000 people, for February 24, 1920 in the Staatliches Hofbräuhaus in München. Further in an attempt to make the party more broadly appealing to larger segments of the population, the DAP was renamed the National Socialist German Workers' Party (NSDAP) on February 24.[12][13] Such was the significance of Hitler's particular move in publicity that Karl Harrer resigned from the party in disagreement.[14] The new name was borrowed from a different Austrian party active at the time (Deutsche Nationalsozialistische Arbeiterpartei, German National Socialist Workers' Party), although Hitler earlier suggested the party to be renamed the "Social Revolutionary Party"; it was Rudolf Jung who persuaded Hitler to follow the NSDAP naming.[15]

      That is history. What you are writing is nothing more than a total re-writing of history in hopes that the idiots will follow your line of thinking .

      --
      I prefer the "u" in honour as it seems to be missing these days.
    79. Re:Evergreen State by TsuruchiBrian · · Score: 1

      I just used it as an example of a subject that is very useful and non-political. I did not get a degree in electrical engineering, but I took a lot of electrical engineering classes that were pre-requisites for my own major (computer science + engineering), and I also minored in electrical engineering so I took more than most people from my major, but less than an electrical engineering major.

      Some points I'd like to make are:

      1. I don't really have time to deeply research the full picture on the composition of the student body, but just in general, 70% is not a vast majority. It's just a majority.

      2. Even if it is true that 70% of electrical engineering students are foreign, it doesn't mean that non-foreign students are excluded. I have seen no evidence that there is not an equality of opportunity for non-foreign student. In fact it's probably the opposite given the discount typically given to state residents at public universities.

      3. Foreign students understandably tend to focus on subjects that transcend cultures.

      4. Many foreign students become Americans.

      5. There were lots of foreign students in my classes, and they were in general very intelligent and good people. I don't think diversity should be the priority, but I do think it is a good thing.

    80. Re: Evergreen State by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      we should get rid of all churches

    81. Re:Evergreen State by Kohath · · Score: 1

      If colleges were more welcoming to diverse views, then more native students would have more opportunity. And if more native students had more opportunity, then you'd see fewer people concluding that "colleges are bad for the country". That was the point.

      People wonder why they should vote to fund universities when their sons feel unwelcome there. People think they should benefit more directly rather than indirectly because some international students sometimes eventually become citizens.

    82. Re:Evergreen State by skam240 · · Score: 1

      You sound very compelling here until I remember that there are plenty of New Earthers and outright climate change deniers among the American Right. What you describe is the Republican party moderates but unfortunately they don't have the power in the party that they used to.

      --
      I ignore Anonymous Coward posts. If you want to discuss something, that's awesome. Log in.
    83. Re: Evergreen State by Applehu+Akbar · · Score: 1

      yup, exactly, colleges are meant for education, not brainwashing the young with progressive liberal commie propaganda

      Even the Communists at least believed in human perfectibility and application of reason to solving problems. Today's leftists, when they're not promoting primitive apocalyptic religions, don't believe that man has a future at all.

    84. Re: Evergreen State by Gorobei · · Score: 1

      The liberals were the fascists in the Nazi party (Nazi meaning new socialist), they supported the fascists in Communist regimes around the world who for the last 70 years have murdered hundreds of millions of innocents, and the liberals are the fascists today, who cannot tolerate any other viewpoints or questioning of their theories (socialism/communism/atheisim/progressiveism/multiculturalism/diversity/evolution/AGW/...) and the list goes on. .

      Word salad of people who don't live in your trailer park kills 200,000,000+ people since 1947? I somehow missed that.

    85. Re: Evergreen State by Applehu+Akbar · · Score: 1

      When my generation made its mark as college protesters, we generally opposed dirigism by the school administration, however that played into the issues we were concerned with. As Laura Kipnis points out in her recent expose of college culture "Unwanted Advances" today's protesters use the administration to suppress viewpoints and speakers they prefer not to hear.

    86. Re:Evergreen State by Applehu+Akbar · · Score: 1

      Why are you so adamantly opposed to college education where you can learn things?

      When liberal arts schools start offering this kind of curriculum once again, we will support it.

    87. Re: Evergreen State by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      What are the hoping for with this article, that we are all going to go "No Trump, No KKK.."?

      Yes, the education system in the US has been completely usurped by the left, colleges and universities churn out leftist zombies who then join "Antifa" where they develop the guts for the first time to raise their puny little fists at traditional and conservative America.

      What do you want to hear? There will be civil war, you will be put to death for your communist ideals. It's inevitable seeing how the left does not back down but keeps upping the ante. You must understand that Trump voters know about a million times better how to use a gun than some safe space pussy.

    88. Re:Evergreen State by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      But you must realize that, in the US, Catholics are not considered "Christians." They are Catholics, and suspect because their "boss" is in Rome and not subject to US jurisdiction. Just one step removed from those other people that we currently don't like. Never mind that note about "render to Caesar..., render to God..." which Catholics in general are pretty good at interpreting despite statements made by some of their more Conservative "leaders" - every religion has fundamentalists who selectively read the scriptures for their benefit and the control of others.

    89. Re:Evergreen State by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      And in other countries Americans are the international grad students.

    90. Re: Evergreen State by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      "Sane professors outnumber insane ones 400 to 1"
      Would that cause any outrage?
      Yes, exaggerated for illustration, but there are lots of indications that nowadays most Republicans are outliers that are significantly less likely to be supported by educated people that want to improve things.
      Indications of that could be gotten by comparing policies and behaviours with those of parties in other places of the world, looking at the current state of the party itself and its inability to negotiate and agree even within itself (for their own common good so to say).
      But (identification as) Republican vs. Democrat seems to long have become a matter of identity signalling or something like that, not actual political alignment. Which is not surprising, as having only 2 relevant parties is completely insufficient to usably represent a population of 300 millions, instead it leads to polarization and death of sensible debate.
      Compare with e.g.
      Germany: 80 million people and around 6 significant parties.
      Sweden: 10 million and around 8 significant parties (though admittedly mostly organized in 2 blocks)
      UK: 65 million and 12 parties in parliament, even disregarding those with very few seats or being regional-only at least 3 are considered significant enough to usually be reported on.
      The UK example showing that it's not even the voting system along that can be blamed for this situation in the US.

    91. Re: Evergreen State by jedidiah · · Score: 1

      > For primary and secondary education, sure, but at a university level that is not at all true.

      It certainly is for a great many people. The percentage of losers is just smaller in (STEM) higher education.

      --
      A Pirate and a Puritan look the same on a balance sheet.
    92. Re: Evergreen State by jedidiah · · Score: 1

      > Church

      Those are funded voluntarily by individuals, not the state.

      Are you willing to include Mosques as well or does your fundie outrage have a blind spot?

      --
      A Pirate and a Puritan look the same on a balance sheet.
    93. Re: Evergreen State by humptheElephant · · Score: 1

      Not brainwashing, just teaching people how to use their brain and challenge unproven ideas.

    94. Re:Evergreen State by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      There is not much data, but you have to be very careful what is measured there.
      It is not undergraduate, so it is likely people that are in the US just to complete the last part of there studies. That is generally not required (and at least in Europe actually counter-productive) to getting a job and inventing all these useful things.
      It also is not the same as "engineering classes" in general, and it is rather a case of US universities being very successful at SELLING their education to foreigners.
      This does not generate competition really, since these students do in general add far more resources than they use, so actually make it easier to provide good quality education to US students (though there are some potential issues around pricing effects and immigration, but at least it doesn't affect the undergraduate level that much).

    95. Re: Evergreen State by humptheElephant · · Score: 1

      I guess you haven't read about the USA involvement in Central America, in Iran, In Chile, etc under "Consevative" regimes. Iraq also comes to mind. I also might add, Democrats haven't been exactly quiet either.

    96. Re: Evergreen State by jedidiah · · Score: 1

      > Interesting how you talk about free speech but cheer those who want to deny professors the right to teach what science tells them is best.

      You're delusional. Nobody here is advocating that. At most, some of us are just want academic freedom applied to the students too. Even then, nobody that teaches science needs to be protected from their students. Professors in the STEM disciplines simply aren't such moronic wimps. They can fend for themselves and have done so for a very long time.

      Fundies don't need state sanction to get their panties in a bunch and actual science professors have never had any problem dealing with them.

      You are trying to make something out of a total non issue.

      --
      A Pirate and a Puritan look the same on a balance sheet.
    97. Re:Evergreen State by Kohath · · Score: 1

      Yeah, international grad students are good. But colleges should be more welcoming to (less of a hostile environment for) domestic students.

    98. Re:Evergreen State by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I could point to LIberty University as "proof" that colleges are all ultra-conservative hellholes

      Unless Liberty University has actually asked staff and students to segregate themselves by race, it hasn't done anything as bad as Evergreen State.

      The worst I can find from Liberty University is that their President, at one point, suggested that concealed-carry handguns would have helped to stop "those Muslims" who carried out a particular terrorist attack. If you really stretch, perhaps you can suggest that this constitutes religious discrimination ... but in that case, if he had said "those men", it would have constituted sexual discrimination, and I don't believe anyone would get all het up about that.

    99. Re:Evergreen State by Kohath · · Score: 1

      But we have to protect the government system that doesn't educate kids ... or else kids won't be able to get an education.

    100. Re: Evergreen State by Brockmire · · Score: 1

      I agree completely. I had a few really good teachers and a few that should be fired. If the shittiest of shit teachers were replaced with even average ones, there would be a huge improvement. Disclosure: both parents were teachers, have 3 sisters who are teachers. My sisters say it's the parents that's hard to deal with. They either care too much or too little. Snowflake kids and Snowflake parents.

    101. Re: Evergreen State by chadenright · · Score: 1

      I had at least one professor, and possibly two, in the CS department who definitely seemed to think that teaching was the sort of job one held until one could find a real job.

    102. Re:Evergreen State by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The reason THAT is a potential dealbreaker is because if you start out on a foundation of rejecting science, logic and reasoning you are building the education on sand.
      It is better than nothing, and some people may be able to grow the critical thinking skills and understanding of scientific process necessary by themselves, but you are incredibly hampering them by setting such an abysmal example.
      And by bringing God (and more precisely, a very specific, basically US-only version, with views so radical even the catholic church got rid of them centuries(?) ago) into school you lay the groundworks for festering intolerance and discrimination.
      Maybe none of that is necessarily a critical problem, but your argument seems like saying to a guy in a wheelchair "those stairs aren't really the problem, we need to get your feet fixed!". Totally true yet total nonsense at the same time.

    103. Re: Evergreen State by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Maybe you can pass some kind of law, to round up all the people that disagree with your progressive ideals and put them into death camps.

      The right supports free speech, the left wants censorship, as did Hitler.

    104. Re:Evergreen State by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      Why are you so adamantly opposed to college education where you can learn things?

      He is a Boko Haram supporter.

    105. Re:Evergreen State by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Liberty University invited Bernie Sanders, an atheist socialist, to be a speaker. He was welcomed, treated politely the entire time, and left without a single protest or riot. The student body even applauded him, although they disagreed with parts of his speech.

      In other words, your assertion about Liberty is completely wrong, but it DOES highlight exactly how bad Evergreen State is in comparison, and how ignorant those defending Evergreen are.

    106. Re: Evergreen State by Darinbob · · Score: 2

      Generally, it's irrelevant. Politics should not be involved in education, so trying to figure out the demographics is counterproductive. Most college professors I knew never espoused any political ideology other than science (and sadly, science seems to bring out the politics of some).

      What we don't need is the Fox News solution, which seems to be what's happening. Ie, some people get a gut feeling that news is secretly indoctrinating everyone to be liberal and in response they create an organization to overtly be indoctrinating fringe conservative views by replacing news with editorials. If they do that at colleges by replacing classes with overtly conservating indoctrination then it will be a very bad day (science 101: why evolution is a lie; science 102: why climate change is a commie plot; intro to white studies: how the confederacy will rise again).

      Stop treating politics like it's just a fucking sports game people! Your team is not always right and the other team is not always wrong. Stop making it about the struggle between two extremist ideologies for control of the penant.

    107. Re: Evergreen State by Darinbob · · Score: 1

      Republicans are not outliers though. However the wing of the party that's managed to wrest control are the outliers. Most Republicans are still sane and moderate. The problem is that they get accused of being Democrats by the fringes. That's why the tea party Republicans were more angry with Boehner and Cantor than with any Democratic congress members. Right now the Republican party is dissolving itself, but before you go cheering, the Democratic party is set to do the same thing and for many of the same reasons.

      The strangeness of the US election system means that we're stuck with essentially only two parties that will always be about evenly split down the middle. When half the country is Republican then they cannot be "outliers". The system means that the elections are controlled by the primaries, where the fringes compete against each other to see who is the craziest, so that in the general election you get crazy incumbent versus crazy opposition from the other party, all the campaigning is about appealing to the donors rather than appealing to the citizens.

      We need 8 parties, so that the fringes can be pushed off to their own sandbox and the sane parties can find like minded alliances without necessary pledging undying loyalty to them. But we'll never have that with a winner-take-all system.

    108. Re: Evergreen State by Darinbob · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Well, it's the Breitbart era of news, just make up stories that appeal to the base, because only the hated elites would be so distrusting as to actually think about the news and look up the facts. Misdirection is alive and well.

      But anyway... Does this make the ultra conservative neo Nazis the new-new-socialists and thus actually socialists? Or two the two "new"s cancel out the socialist part? Or maybe they were conservative all along ans the "socialist" is just misdirection...

      The whole reason for the switcheroo is the lack of thinking. The world is comples and people want a black and white view of it that's easy to understand after having a few too many drinks at the bar. That means Hitler was the evilest guy ever, and the Nazis were the most evil group ever, and because liberals are evil (because the radio said so), liberals must really be Nazis. It makes sense when you drink instead of think.

    109. Re: Evergreen State by Patent+Lover · · Score: 1

      So you're telling me that Donald Trump is a progressive liberal fascist?

    110. Re: Evergreen State by Jesus+H+Rolle · · Score: 5, Informative

      ... [churches] are funded voluntarily by individuals, not the state.

      In the US, churches have been supported by the state for about a century now. Their tax exemption means I am forced by law to pay their bills.

    111. Re: Evergreen State by Darinbob · · Score: 1

      The Nazis had a very vague ideology other than blaming others for the problems and and advocating getting rid of them to fix the problems. Other fascist groups of the time had a more coherent viewpoint that made it easier to pin a right wing label on them.

      When governments get too authoritarian the whole left/right wing labels don't fit so well. The politics can shift on a whim as necessary to keep the authority in power.

    112. Re: Evergreen State by serviscope_minor · · Score: 1

      1. Liberal progressives in the media and left wing political leaders can tone down the BS rhetoric and support the rule of law. Police are allowed to do their job and the people breaking the law are confined and punished.

      Your country incarcerates people at over 5 times the rate of China. It'd say that it's therefore demonstrably not a problem that police are hindered from punishing lawbreakers.

      If you question any of [... evolution ...]

      I'll just leave that there followed by:

      Those who are ignorant of history (and reality) are doomed to repeat it.

      Touche, my man, touche.

      --
      SJW n. One who posts facts.
    113. Re: Evergreen State by prefec2 · · Score: 1

      The Nazis named the party as national socialist party, but as you know a label does not mean it describes the contents correctly. Furthermore, they put communists and social democrats in concentration camps and did a lot of big business with corporations in Germany. There was nothing socialistic in their agenda. They even classified people in a wide range of different levels of value.

    114. Re:Evergreen State by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Republicans don't value education which conflicts with their worldview. At this point all higher education seems to do just that. They're want to live in the dark ages when religion ruled the land, LGBT people lived in silence, and people of color had no rights and knew "their place". At this point the US Republican party is a far right, xenophobic, prosperity gospel Christian mess. Our moderate conservatives are called Democrats. There may be leftest voices in the Democratic party but the center-right gets the final word in the end.

    115. Re: Evergreen State by cryptizard · · Score: 1

      You probably didn't go to a good school then.

    116. Re: Evergreen State by cryptizard · · Score: 1

      You have no idea how hard it is to get a tenure track position at a decent university or you wouldn't be posting nonsense like this.

    117. Re: Evergreen State by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I thought about this one as well, but in America we have the separation of church and state. We also have a core value that's stuck with us since the Boston Tea Party: "No taxation without representation". Now what happens if we tax churches? We have to represent them. From the government's perspective, church money is dirty money. We don't want churches and governments tangling, so we must avoid taxing them directly.

      It sucks, because then church-goers will throw all their money together and use it to leverage change in their communities. They have an unfair advantage. But the alternative is getting the state to represent their interests, which I and many other Americans cannot abide.

    118. Re: Evergreen State by ArmoredDragon · · Score: 1

      Interesting how you talk about free speech but cheer those who want to deny professors the right to teach what science tells them is best. People entering colleges are adults. They can choose not to accept the ideas that are taught to them but denying them the right to hear perspectives outside of mainstream US ideas is censorship.

      That's interesting because we have so called "liberal" students from Evergreen State saying, and I quote, "fuck free speech".

      https://youtu.be/2cMYfxOFBBM?t...

    119. Re: Evergreen State by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Whatever. I kind of like the gassing the commies and socialists part. Who do I have to vote for to get that?

    120. Re:Evergreen State by AbrasiveCat · · Score: 1

      Proof by example.

      Are we talking The Evergreen State College in Olympia that was established while Gov Dan was in office to be an alternate progressive college? Are we complaining that it is what it was set up to be?

    121. Re:Evergreen State by turkeyfish · · Score: 1

      Clearly, we need to close down all US schools and universities to help Russia, China and others in exchange for perks for the 1%.

    122. Re: Evergreen State by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Aaaaand that post proves why you don't smoke crack ladies and gentlemen!

    123. Re: Evergreen State by WindBourne · · Score: 1

      actually, the nazis starting with Hitler were VERY adamant about what they supported and did not. They did not change positions at all, though they added stances. Hitler was NEVER a left winger, and never supported the BS that you and others claim.
      And as the GOP/Republican party has proven, names mean NOTHING.What matters is WHO controls. Any great republican would look at W and Trump and basically say that both should have been removed from the party, as well as America since they were/are disasters and had nothing in common with the Republican ideals.

      --
      I prefer the "u" in honour as it seems to be missing these days.
    124. Re: Evergreen State by Raenex · · Score: 2

      the Nazi Party was a far-right political party in Germany

      Nazi stands for "national socialism". Calling socialism "far right" is a bit ridiculous, don't you think? On the other hand, being nationalist and authoritarian may be considered "far right". And then you have Stalin, Mao, Pol Pot, etc., and they killed millions in the name of communism. So left/right labels don't apply neatly to groups/people.

      What we're seeing now is the rise of the new "authoritarian left", with their neo-Marxist embrace of "class struggle" tied to identity politics and grievance culture.

    125. Re: Evergreen State by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      How about Everest College?

    126. Re: Evergreen State by Darinbob · · Score: 1

      I never said Hitler was on the left. That would be an ignorant position to take, presumably based on following Breitbart or Infowars rather than actual history.

      And I agree, most Republicans I know in person really hate Trump. The ones I know who love Trump are those who I'd describe as party fanboys or cheerleaders who taking their talking points from mailing lists. Ie, they love Trump because he beat Hillary, which means their team won.

    127. Re: Evergreen State by HornWumpus · · Score: 1

      What % of 'profs' are on tenure track these days.

      (Non-tenure track associate instructor/post doc RA) is exactly the sort of job you hold until you find a real one. Even at a top tier school.

      Of course that changes outside tech. A * studies PhD qualifies you to teach * studies, nothing else. They even forget practical things they knew in highschool.

      --
      John McAfee 'It was like that time I hired that Bangkok prostitute; to do my taxes, while I fucked my accountant'
    128. Re: Evergreen State by rholtzjr · · Score: 1

      Economically, yes he was.

    129. Re: Evergreen State by HornWumpus · · Score: 1

      Mussolini was also an avowed socialist. Those that quote his 'corporation' speech neglect to mention that the only corporations in fascist Italy were extensions of the government (e.g. Dutch East India Company). Privately owned corporations didn't exist.

      Franco was mostly an authoritarian, completely average, pre vatican 2, Catholic.

      --
      John McAfee 'It was like that time I hired that Bangkok prostitute; to do my taxes, while I fucked my accountant'
    130. Re: Evergreen State by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Your clearly not from New England or Texas.

    131. Re: Evergreen State by HornWumpus · · Score: 1

      They mostly just drafted the social democrats. As to the Stalinists, they 'needed shooting' just as much as the Nazis. Getting them to shoot each other was a good outcome. Like Sunni/Shia today.

      The NAZIs expropriated entire industries. As with many socialists/communists of the day 'capitalist' was often code for 'Jewish', particularly with respect to banking.

      --
      John McAfee 'It was like that time I hired that Bangkok prostitute; to do my taxes, while I fucked my accountant'
    132. Re: Evergreen State by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      The entire human political struggle is the individual vs the state. In broad strokes, from Left to Right:

      Totalitarianism > Communism > Socialism > Progressivism > [center] > Conservativism > Objectivism > Libertarianism > anarchy

      That's "total government and no individuals" to "all individuals and no government".

      In Europe, the furthest Right they ever get is Progressive. So when the communists smear the socialists they call them "rightwing" because to them, THEY ARE rightwing.

      Fascism is a variant of socialism and communism. It MEANS SOMETHING. It's not just a "catch-all" or "shorthand" for whatever you hate, or find oppressive. Just because the communists in europe call the socialists rightwing, doesn't mean you can call the Tea Party or the Libertarians, socialists or fascists. There is no such thing as a libertarian fascist. All fascists have always been socialists or communists or progressives, as fascism requires a strong centralized government - something all the leftwing ideologies aspire to, and NONE of the rightwing ones, do.

      The Nazis were ardent socialists (hence the term "National socialism"). They believed in free health care and guaranteed jobs. They confiscated inherited wealth and spent vast sums on public education. They purged the church from public policy, promoted a new form of pagan spirituality, and inserted the authority of the state into every nook and cranny of daily life. The Nazis declared war on smoking, supported abortion, euthanasia, and gun control. They loathed the free market, provided generous pensions for the elderly, and maintained a strict racial quota system in their universities-where campus speech codes were all the rage. The Nazis led the world in organic farming and alternative medicine. Hitler was a strict vegetarian, and Himmler was an animal rights activist. You equate the fascists with "jack-booted thugs", forgetting what it was that the thugs were there to enforce in the first place: national socialism.

      And then, there's this:

      "We are socialists, we are enemies of today's capitalistic economic system for the exploitation of the economically weak, with its unfair salaries, with its unseemly evaluation of a human being according to wealth and property instead of responsibility and performance, and we are all determined to destroy this system under all conditions." --Adolf Hitler, Quoted in John Toland, "Adolf Hitler", p224.

      Yeah, that sounds totally like the American Right. *Totally*

    133. Re: Evergreen State by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It's not ad homonym. (face-palm). It's not ad hominem to accuse someone of a position that they hold.

      Of course it is an ad hominem. Leftist think they're clever by embedding their fallacies in a single term, thinking that people will be as dumb as to be deceived by such a simple device, in which case dishonest, or they themselves can't parse and analyze the word, in which case the person using it is stupid.

      Whether you're dishonest or stupid, I can't say. But using a term that states your opponent is by definition wrong, and is simply "denying" the supposedly established fact (established by virtue of implication of the word itself), is both clearly fallacious and blatant intellectual dishonesty.

    134. Re: Evergreen State by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      How do communist computer science and physics differ from the capitalist version?

      Yes I thought so.

    135. Re: Evergreen State by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Fascism cannot come from the right, because it rejects the philosophy of the right. You cannot have a small fascist government, you cannot have a fascist government that plays it loose with the economy.

    136. Re:Evergreen State by HornWumpus · · Score: 1

      The only problem with 'teaching to the test' is if it's a crappy test.

      Do you also object to 'teaching to the medical boards'? To the EIT/PE test? To the Bar Exam? Airline Transport Pilot (ATP, they people that fly commercial jets)?

      Public school teachers just don't want metrics that work, so they attack the test instead of trying to improve it.

      --
      John McAfee 'It was like that time I hired that Bangkok prostitute; to do my taxes, while I fucked my accountant'
    137. Re:Evergreen State by HornWumpus · · Score: 1

      Only by a few nutjob denominations.

      Most people will even humor Mormons when they claim to be Christian.

      --
      John McAfee 'It was like that time I hired that Bangkok prostitute; to do my taxes, while I fucked my accountant'
    138. Re:Evergreen State by HornWumpus · · Score: 1

      American Engineering students want to get to work and start earning money.

      Based on many of the Masters and PhDs I've worked with, I learned more on the job then they did in school in the same time.

      I worked with a man who wrote his master's thesis on SQL query optimization. The boss had me 'look at' some of his code with an eye toward performance. He had _six_ outer joins to 'Company' in the primary query...didn't know how to read a query plan, didn't know how to fire a query async, just pitiful. I clarified the code and took 200 seconds down to 15.

      --
      John McAfee 'It was like that time I hired that Bangkok prostitute; to do my taxes, while I fucked my accountant'
    139. Re:Evergreen State by HornWumpus · · Score: 1

      Engineering students don't have TIME for such nonsense. Snowflakes won't make it in the real world of engineering anyhow.

      Bridges either fall down or they don't. Diversity doesn't enter into it. 'Physics' is not socially constructed, just the units of measure.

      You won't find many right wingers hating on engineering/medical/law (some for law, but they do deserve some) school. You're putting too much on a clickbait headline.

      --
      John McAfee 'It was like that time I hired that Bangkok prostitute; to do my taxes, while I fucked my accountant'
    140. Re:Evergreen State by HornWumpus · · Score: 1

      Not complaining, contemplating that it was all a bad idea and it's time to defund.

      --
      John McAfee 'It was like that time I hired that Bangkok prostitute; to do my taxes, while I fucked my accountant'
    141. Re:Evergreen State by Narcocide · · Score: 1

      There's no way he's actually even really a US citizen. Though, I do believe he desperately wishes he could be a Republican I doubt he even owns a MAGA hat that's not in a shitty low-res jpeg.

    142. Re: Evergreen State by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      A tax haven is not a place to where people go. If it were, I would be selling time shares for it.

    143. Re: Evergreen State by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yea and the official name of North Korea is the Democratic People's Republic of Korea. Just because the word Nazi stands for National Socialism doesn't correlate it to what most would consider socialism except when you look at it through their heavily titled lens. They were taking "their country" back (national) from the "hated rich Jews" and redistributing that wealth (socialism). That doesn't really correlate to modern left leaning political ideas though.

    144. Re:Evergreen State by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      i maybe addressing the wrong point here but the problem i have with liberty university is what they teach! "creation science" is an oxymoron to any scientist but this is "taught" at liberty university. all the guests they invite are not going to get them past the hurdle of having learnt crapshit for science.

    145. Re: Evergreen State by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      They've bastardized the words liberal, progressive, nazi, fascist, and bigot to the point where they just mean 'people who disagree with me.'

    146. Re:Evergreen State by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      1. Yes, creationism is the last hurrah for the religious right.
      2. we spend more dollars per student than any other country in the world. The problem isn't a lack of funds, it's the curriculum. It focuses on political indoctrination over learning how to think.
      3. Questioning feminism, or any of the modern social justice pantheon, is not the same thing as hatred of women or anyone else. You present a false dilemma. The irony is strong here considering the left's embracing of muslims as a protected caste.
      4. No, conservatives hate indoctrination.
      5. somehow I don't think you've lived in a city. They're noisy, smell bad, and expensive.

    147. Re: Evergreen State by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I can learn what college is trying to teach me with gay porn on my phone and a towel all in one afternoon on sitting on the toilet. I already have a good foundation in cultural marxism de Horkheimer et. al. anyway, I know when to scream victim and that it's always somebody else's fault when I fail.

      No it's really simple. You will not get the job if I have a European applicant, nowadays preferably from Russia or Belarus, because their highschool diploma trumps your masters in social justice. It's not about your skin color, it's the fact we prefer people who have completed high school in Europe or have otherwise acquired such a high school diploma. We can't discriminate against your disability, your race and religious convictions, but we can discriminate against your high school diploma.

      You will not get the job if your degree is from many US, Mexican or Canadian colleges. South America, Colombia and Brazil are exempt. In fact you might have a greater chance to be hired if you can show you did something better with your time than protest our president. And again we can discriminate against your college and university and make the determination we do not want you working for us.

      You will not get the job if you can't write something decent about America in a 500 word essay part of your job interview. We can discriminate against your lack of loyalty and decency.

      You will not get the job, you will lose it if we find out you have participated in political protests against the President and his policies. All it takes is someone seeing you on youtube and pointing it out to their manager. Your political stance is not protected, and if it is anti-american tgen we don't welcome you.

      We are working on a standardized modularized body of exams to test applicants in lieu of college degrees in the stem disciplines important to us. In future, if you qualify and we are interested, we will invite you to sit multiple exams over the course of 2-3 weekends depending in requesting department and position with us. We reimburse applicants up to $1200 for their time sitting the exam as well as for the extra study time for the exam (you will need it). There has also been talk about cash bonuses and extra prizes for those who do particularly well. We are not trying to waste your time or ours here. Lastly, we also provide the same delicious food, snacks and beverages we have on all our campuses. You will find we also take a lot of care hiring our cooks ;-)

    148. Re:Evergreen State by theArtificial · · Score: 1

      Religious fanatics would rather burn progressive thinkers like Galileo Galilei on the stake rather than listen to reason.

      Galileo didn't really get into trouble for his books, or his scientific convictions, it was his arrogant duplicity. It's true he was called before the Roman Inquisition and charged with the heretical teaching that the earth moves around the sun or otherwise. And he was forced to recant. But he was neither imprisoned nor tortured; he was sentenced to a comfortable house arrest during which he died at age 78.

      Long before he became Pope Urban VIII (1623 to 1644), while still a cardinal, Maffeo Barberini knew and liked Galileo. In 1623 when he published Assayer, Galileo dedicated the book to Barberini (the Barberini family crest appeared on the title page of the book), and the new pope was said to have been delighted by the many nasty insults it directed against various Jesuit scholars. Assayer was mainly an attack on Orazio Grassi, a Jesuit mathematician, who had published a study that (correctly) treated comets as small heavenly bodies; Galileo ridiculed this claim, arguing wrongly that comets were but reflections on vapors arising from the earth. In any event, Assayer, prompted Pope Urban VIII to write an adulatory poem on the glory of astronomy. So, what went wrong?

      It is important to put the Galielo affair in historical context. At this time the Reformation stood defiant in northern Europe, the Thirty Year's War raged, and the Catholic Counter-Reformation was in full bloom. Partly in response to Protestant charges that the Catholic Church was not faithful to the Bible, the limits of acceptable theology were being narrowed, and this led to increasing Church interference in scholarly and scientific discussions. However, Urban VIII and other leading officials were not ready to clamp down on scientists, but instead proposed ways to avoid any conflicts between science and theology by separating their domains. Thus, Friar Marin Mersenne advised his network of leading scientific correspondents to defend their studies on grounds that God was free to place the earth anywhere he liked, and it was the duty of scientists to find out where he had put it. More cautious early scientists adopted the tactic of identifying scientific conclusions as hypothetical or mathematical, hence being without direct theological implications. And that was what the pope asked Galileo to do - to acknowledge in his publications that "definitive conclusions could not be reached in the natural sciences. God in his omnipotence could produce a natural phenomenon in any number of ways and it therefore was presumptuous for any philosopher to claim that he had determined a unique solution.

      That seemed an easy evasion. And, given Galileo's propensity to claim false credit for inventions made by others, such as the telescope, and to have conducted empirical research he probably did not really perform, such as dropping weights from the Leaning Tower of Pisa, it would not seem to have stretched his ethical standards to have gone along with the pope. But to defy the pope in a rather offensive way was quite consistent with Galileo's ego.

      In 1632, Galileo published his awaited Dialogue Concerning the Two Chief World Systems. Although the ostensible purpose of the books was to present and explanation of tidal phenomena, the two systems involved were Ptolemy's, in which the sun circles the earth, and Copernicus's wherein the earth circles the sun. The dialog involves three speakers, two of them philosophers and the third a layman. It is the layman, Simplicio, who presents the traditional views in support of Ptolemy - the resemblance of the name to "simpleton" was obvious to all. This allowed Galileo to exploit the traditional "straw man" technique to ridicule his opponents. Although Galileo did include the disclaimer suggested by the pope, he put it in the mouth of Simplicio, thereby disowning it.

      The book caused an immense stir and, understandably, the pope felt

      --
      Man blir trött av att gå och göra ingenting.
    149. Re: Evergreen State by Raenex · · Score: 1

      Except they really were socialist. It wasn't just taking from the Jews, the state exercised great control over the economy, welfare system, and social programs.

    150. Re:Evergreen State by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      you should look up that bit about Galileo is not actually accurate. From a historical perspective. He didn't get his book banned because the Church ws anti-science (they were meeting up later that year to discuss the new theory); it was his insulting a member of the clergy (ridiculing him).

      It was more of a case of lese majesty, than it was anti-science.

      Just to correct a common fallacy (taught, surprise, by "pro-science" schools).

      Pot, call kettle black much?

    151. Re:Evergreen State by TsuruchiBrian · · Score: 1

      There are no "views" (at least from students) in engineering. It's professors helping students understand the most important knowledge and best practices for a particular field.

      The fields were students get to have "diverse views" are classes that are almost entirely non-foreign students. No one comes to America to learn political correctness.

      People wonder why they should vote to fund universities when their sons feel unwelcome there. People think they should benefit more directly rather than indirectly because some international students sometimes eventually become citizens.

      Foreign students pay full tuition. Tax money is used to provide the in state resident discounts. Regardless of how you feel about foreign students, they are paying for their education. It is the non-foreign students getting the entitlements you seem to be complaining about.

      If your sons (and daughters) work towards real degrees, they will feel perfectly welcome.

    152. Re:Evergreen State by Kohath · · Score: 1

      There are no "views" (at least from students) in engineering.

      People have views. They're not robots. You should start thinking of them as people. Then you might start to understand what "feel unwelcome" might mean.

      Foreign students pay full tuition.

      That's one big reason universities prefer them to domestic students.

      Regardless of how you feel about foreign students, they are paying for their education. It is the non-foreign students getting the entitlements you seem to be complaining about.

      Foreign students are great. It's not about the money. It's about the hostile environment.

      If your sons (and daughters) work towards real degrees, they will feel perfectly welcome.

      So you're denying what others have experienced?

    153. Re: Evergreen State by Attila+Dimedici · · Score: 1

      The Nazi Party was not considered far right until Hitler attacked the Soviet Union. Up until that point, they were members in good standing in the progressive movement.

      --
      The truth is that all men having power ought to be mistrusted. James Madison
    154. Re: Evergreen State by Bing+Tsher+E · · Score: 1

      Your country incarcerates people at over 5 times the rate of China.

      Everybody who lives in a one-party state is pretty much incarcerated.

      Yes, it's more complex than that.

    155. Re: Evergreen State by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Parts of Mein Kampf sound like they could be written by Bernie Sanders:

      "As things stand today, the trade unions in my opinion cannot be dispensed with. On the contrary, they are among the most important institutions of the nation's economic life. Their significance lies not only in the social and political field, but even more in the general field of national politics. A people whose broad masses, through a sound trade-union movement, obtain the satisfaction of their living requirements and at the same time an education, will be tremendously strengthened in its power of resistance in the struggle for existence."

    156. Re: Evergreen State by Bing+Tsher+E · · Score: 1

      USAF is now under a massive attack from the far right esp. at the academy.

      Wow. I bet they have air support to defend themselves, though.

      Or do you mean that citizens of the US are engaged in advocacy?

    157. Re: Evergreen State by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The only loan sharks left in higher education is the Federal government with loans that you can't get rid of through bankruptcy...

    158. Re: Evergreen State by dbIII · · Score: 1

      I had at least one professor, and possibly two, in the CS department who definitely seemed to think that teaching was the sort of job one held until one could find a real job.

      Two? What does their title even mean? Meanwhile in other places without title creep there is only one person in a department who gets to be called professor. In those other places there will also be many people that go in and out of academia - it's normal and a very positive thing. Some people even do both part time.

    159. Re: Evergreen State by dbIII · · Score: 1

      and in response they create an organization to overtly be indoctrinating fringe conservative views by replacing news with editorials

      WTF? It was Rupert Murdoch seeing a potential market and doing a TV version of his UK tabloids. No need for a weird conspiracy, just one greedy amoral control freak.

    160. Re: Evergreen State by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Hah you are Chinese and went to school in China (or Indian and went to IIT)?

    161. Re:Evergreen State by TsuruchiBrian · · Score: 1

      People have views. They're not robots. You should start thinking of them as people. Then you might start to understand what "feel unwelcome" might mean.

      Yeah people have diverse cultural and political views. They are irrelevant to math/science/engineering. You are not paying tuition to a college of engineering to teach the professors how you feel about engineering. You are paying them to teach you the skills they already have.

      I don't go to my dentist and complain that he/she is treating me like a robot because he/she doesn't want to learn about my views on gender dynamics, even though I may have a very nuanced position. I am paying my dentist to fix my teeth. If I become friends with my dentist or there is a dentist in my book club where we are reading/discussing a book about gender dynamics, then it becomes an appropriate context for such a conversation with someone who happens to be a dentist.

      It never occurred to me to lecture the professor on my views on Turing's Halting problem, because I didn't have any views on something I am paying someone else to teach me in the first place. If I managed to quickly develop a naive point of view on it during the lecture that differed from the professor's, I would ask a question in a way that nobody in the room would interpret as challenging the professor's as being equally valid as his/hers, but rather as an opportunity for the professor to clarify his/her instruction to help me (and others) better understand what the professor is trying to convey to us. Very rarely a professor will learn something from a student, and that's great, but learning basically happens in one direction.

      That's one big reason universities prefer them to domestic students.

      It's also a reason that foreign stiudents are not causing non-foreign students to be excluded. Tax money may only be able to fund so many subsidized tuitions. The money received by foreign students is enough to pay for their education (i.e. they are not utilizing an entitlement).

      Foreign students are great. It's not about the money. It's about the hostile environment.

      Foreign students are great. I have some very good friends that I met at my university that where from France and Germany. Your fellow students are the people you end up spending a lot of time with and become your friends. That's why/when diversity is important.

      So you're denying what others have experienced?

      I was being polite in assuming your hypothetical son or daughter would be well adjusted enough to feel comfortable in an environment individuals may disagree with in social context, but where you are free to associate with whoever you want and the institutions are there to help you learn skills in academic contexts (i.e. sort of like real life).

      You can try to earn a bullshit degree at some nutjob-liberal or conservative biblical college that will try to inculcate you into a specific world view. I am not claiming that your progeny will feel welcome at those sorts of places (though they might). I am claiming that those are not places where you work toward what I was calling a real degree.

    162. Re: Evergreen State by NG-Buddhist · · Score: 1

      And yet here you are, choosing to post anonymously yet claiming others are afraid.

    163. Re: Evergreen State by dbIII · · Score: 1

      W and Trump and basically say that both should have been removed from the party, as well as America since they were/are disasters and had nothing in common with the Republican ideals.

      Spot on. What part of "small government" describes the Homeland Security Department and it's massive welfare projects for substandard wannabe cops the TSA.

    164. Re:Evergreen State by dbIII · · Score: 1
      IMHO, looking from the outside, appointing "school administrators" who had never taught was where the fuckup happened. They have not made that mistake in other countries that are not exhibiting such a dramatic decline in outcomes.
      The insane "a good manager can manage anything" phrase always looked to me to be nothing but an excuse to get friends or family into a management job that required domain knowledge to be competent.
      Hence the focus on management metrics instead of outcomes.

      The unions

      The people who make the rules are not in a union. Try thinking about the issue instead of channeling Talk Radio on that bit. I know it's ingrained into many and not really your fault, but the unions just do not have the power to influence the issue even if by some perversity they wanted to make things worse for their members.

    165. Re:Evergreen State by Cederic · · Score: 1

      unless you know EVERYTHING about the entire universe you would be wiser to respect others for their own beliefs and not mock them.

      I'm perfectly comfortable mocking adults that still let their invisible imaginary friend dictate their lives.

      Hear voices in your head? Treated medically or (elsewhere in the world) killed. So why the fuck do you think you should get a free ride when you cant even hear the voices?

    166. Re: Evergreen State by prefec2 · · Score: 1

      Nazis did not expropriated entire industries, they stole from Jews regardless their occupation. For example, they did not nationalize banking. Instead they pushed Jews out of banks and other banks profited from that. Therefore, it did not cover the whole industry, but it covered all Jews. Furthermore, capitalism is usually associated with people, like Adam Smith, and is a Christian protestant invention. The idea of Jews being evil is a fascist view. While it is true that Stalin also hated Jews, he also stomped on socialistic values. The Russian had a very national socialism. However, do not mix Soviet Russia with Germany.

      You also claim that they primarily imprisoned social democrats. They first fought communists/socialists and unions on the street. When in power they first imprisoned communists, unionists and then they tried to grab full power which work with the help of the conservatives. Then they imprisoned social democrats. At the time the voted for Hitlers "enabling act" the communists were all in prison. So only the social democrats voted against the act.

    167. Re:Evergreen State by dbIII · · Score: 1

      Ahead of us is isolationism, paranoia, tariffs, and the sinking of America on the world stage.

      So more of the same :(

    168. Re:Evergreen State by dbIII · · Score: 1

      Religious fanatics would rather burn progressive thinkers like Galileo Galilei

      People keep on bringing that up as an example when it was really about politics and free speech.
      The real problem he had was due to publicly calling the Pope an idiot in print and getting a wide circulation. The idea he had been discussing had been out for decades and had been read by many of the clergy.

    169. Re:Evergreen State by dbIII · · Score: 1

      Colleges are also how we end up with electrical engineers and doctors

      Oh, we can just import them as indentured servants just like was done during that "engineer shortage" where for some reason local recent graduates couldn't get jobs.

    170. Re:Evergreen State by dbIII · · Score: 1

      You won't find many right wingers hating on engineering/medical/law (some for law, but they do deserve some) school.

      In the 1980s I was on the receiving end of that hate. It was real. Fill a government with used car salesmen, a crooked cop, failed farmers who never bothered to learn how to farm from their parents and real estate agents to get shit like that.

    171. Re:Evergreen State by serviscope_minor · · Score: 1

      Do you also object to 'teaching to the medical boards'? To the EIT/PE test? To the Bar Exam? Airline Transport Pilot (ATP, they people that fly commercial jets)?

      Well, that depends on if those tests are a remotely meaningful measure of usefulness.

      Public school teachers just don't want metrics that work, so they attack the test instead of trying to improve it.

      I love your tactic: first make sure you know othing about the area (easy in your case), then isult everyone in it off the back of your own ignorance.

      --
      SJW n. One who posts facts.
    172. Re: Evergreen State by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      There's nothing Communist either about those running dogs.

    173. Re: Evergreen State by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Idiot.

      As an American currently living in one-party state ruled by a Communist party, I have far more personal freedom here than I did back in the States. All of my American expat friends agree.

      Remember, in today's America you have all the rights you can afford to sue for in Federal kangaroo court. For most working people that means you have no rights whatsoever.

    174. Re: Evergreen State by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Are you cool with getting rid of tax exemption for all "non-profits"?

    175. Re:Evergreen State by RicktheBrick · · Score: 1

      Christian does not want to learn things if those things disprove their most cherished beliefs. The stories of Adam and Eve and Noah are the basis of Christianity. Science is making it harder to believe in them. So the question is "Which one to throw out either science or religion?" Christian are deciding science.

    176. Re: Evergreen State by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Wow, such bs in such a short post.
      Your gender studies professor must be soooooooo proud!

    177. Re: Evergreen State by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      My scientific definition relies on the fact the liberal left "adults" act more like spoiled brats than full fledged members if society. That, and their brains aren't fully developed until age 25.

    178. Re: Evergreen State by Rockoon · · Score: 1

      Where the heck does this come from?? Every single iota of non-biased information I've ever seen points to the opposite. Eg Wikipedia:

      You don't lead the "National Socialist Workers Party" for multiple decades without the left.

      What it became and who was responsible are two different things.

      --
      "His name was James Damore."
    179. Re: Evergreen State by Jesus+H+Rolle · · Score: 2

      I thought about this one as well, but in America we have the separation of church and state. We also have a core value that's stuck with us since the Boston Tea Party: "No taxation without representation". Now what happens if we tax churches? We have to represent them.

      The Founders did not anticipate churches incorporating and expecting to be supported by the public. Churches already have representation through their members. And somewhere out there, the next Mohammed "Moroni" McVeigh is getting indoctrinated in a church "charter" school, and I'm helping to pay for it against my will. The State now has many official religions, which flies in the face of the intent of the Establishment Clause.

    180. Re: Evergreen State by Rockoon · · Score: 1

      but as you know a label does not mean it describes the contents correctly.

      The label is advertising. The label flags the base of support for the party. If you get to lead the "National Socialist Workers Party" its because you got Socialists to put you in that position. Hitler was a creation of the left.

      --
      "His name was James Damore."
    181. Re: Evergreen State by Jesus+H+Rolle · · Score: 2

      Are you cool with getting rid of tax exemption for all "non-profits"?

      "All" is a strong word. If a non-profit acts in the public interest, there's an argument for exempting it from taxes. Food banks, homeless shelters, and the like are plainly done for the good of humanity. When it builds giant restricted-access granite buildings to baptize dead people, why do I have to subsidize it?

    182. Re: Evergreen State by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Seventy percent of university instructors are now contingent faculty: adjuncts, non-tenure-track, and grad students. Only 30% are traditional, tenured or tenure-track faculty. As one of the lucky who found a job as an adjunct (my fellow grad students became secondary school teachers or real estate agents), I know how littoe adjuncts make. With a PhD and three years' worth of excellent evaluations teaching 500+ srudents every year and being one of the most profitable (cost vs number served) employees of my university, I am lucky to be making $40K.

      My students graduating with a humanities BA average better than that. My colleagues from grad school who became schoolteachers are making more than that.

      There's no incentive for an American to teach at a university. There are no tenure-track jobs left, and anything besides tenure-track doesn't pay enough to match even a public schoolteacher's salary. Academia is disincentivized. Don't be surprised if only the commies and thise with an ideological axe to grind are willing to work there.

    183. Re:Evergreen State by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      So why aren't the people who run the the school not simply fired for clear violations of the state law?

      They are employees of a state institution and are therefore required by law to operate in accordance with the state legal code. Also, state law is required to not infringe the US Constitution.

      Therefore, all staff and faculty that permit restrictions of free speech are in violation of their contacts at least and could be committing a Federal offense if the court determines that they are acting for the state in their official duties (That would almost certainly apply to the Uni President and the deans.)

      So the students should form a class and file a class action suit against the school and the state and several key individuals. Given that the Uni and the State have extremely deep pockets, there are a lot of lawyers in the world that would take that case on spec.

    184. Re: Evergreen State by UsuallyReasonable · · Score: 1

      Food banks, homeless shelters, and the like are plainly done for the good of humanity.

      Quiz question - which societal entity does the most of that?

    185. Re: Evergreen State by OneAhead · · Score: 2

      I suspect it is cheaper to hire communist professors who got their degree in the second world, and while many of these people are very competent in their chosen fields, they often have ideals that are at odds with what mainstream America would consider "normal".

      I call BS. Russia and China have stopped being communist, or even socialist, a long time ago; big money is ruling them just like any other place. I've been active in academia in the US for quite a while. My general experience is that first- and second-generation immigrants from "second world" countries tend to be more naive about "the American dream" than professors born in the US from US-born parents, who are typically staunchly leftist (of course, exceptions exist both ways). In fact, the latter are about as leftist as those from western Europe, where "social democracy" still means something (albeit much less so that, say, 15 years ago). They usually base their arguments on comparisons of the fucked-up US system with more sensible systems in other countries - the sort of thing "Joe Sixpack" is kept ignorant about. Can you really blame them for being well-traveled and having experienced first-hand how badly US free-market-indoctrination is a lie?

      Besides, I also call BS because professors in "the crunchier departments like CS and physics" rarely express their political views in class. It doesn't fit with the topic, it risks alienating students whom you want to learn something about your actual field of study, and it generally just doesn't make a professional impression. So politics is limited to some joke / quip to keep students awake once per semester or so. Which hardly can be called "indoctrination".

      Disclaimer: if you consider support for evolution, AGW, vaccination,... as "communist" (or even "political"), then sure, you'll have science professors teaching a "communist/political" agenda. But that's just them trying to do their jobs. For example, modern molecular biology is so deeply interwoven with evolution that you can't possibly be a successful graduate in that field and a young-earth creationist at the same time...

    186. Re:Evergreen State by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Wow. You typed two long paragraphs to point out there are differences between loons? Who cares. Once the path of reason is abandoned no variation of thought coming from that abandonment will appeal to reason. It is the loons that are polarizing things on these issues. Abandoning fact and reason then trying to connive others into entertaining this madness is the height of abuse and arrogance. Once someone says things are because of God then the debate has ended and it has become a sermon.

    187. Re:Evergreen State by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      See, this is why we can't have nice things: getting past the headlines to see the spectrum that truly exists takes effort.

      Get past "earth was created in 6,000 years and fossils exist to test us because god hates fags" flavor of creationism, and you'll find far more nuanced interpretations.

      And those "nuanced" folks are the ones causing trouble by seeking to have textbooks written to conform to the creationist mentality? Are they opposing the creationists? What are they doing?

      Oh wait, they're actually getting on board the persecution bandwagon.

      On the topic of climate change, again, we've got a spectrum that doesn't get headlines because the folks insisting the climate isn't changing have that market cornered.

      Not only that, and you overlook this yourself, they co-opt all the questions you ask, and then create a litany of lies and deceptions based upon them. And nobody on the Right does anything to clean house.

      Is it possible for there to be a return to the dark ages? Anything is possible. Is the best way to fight it by forcing both sides further to the extremes and engage in a battle of attrition? I think not.

      They aren't being forced. They're making the choice. Embracing it.

      They elected the Birther-in-chief. Because he sang the right tune for them. Sorry, but they can make fun of Al Gore misstating temperatures, but at least he'd show some chagrin over it, Trump would redouble his efforts with his alternative facts.

      You tell me a better way to fight it, but your equivocating bullshit that is ignoring the elephant in the room isn't convincing.

    188. Re: Evergreen State by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Except they're not publicly funded dumbass.

    189. Re: Evergreen State by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      What bills? Their charity work? Yes, please download their charity work to the taxpayer. I would love to see that. Churches are doing what the US government isn't doing because it's spending on the military. How much value are you getting from trillion dollar wars in Iraq?

    190. Re: Evergreen State by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Seems to have served Newton well. Then again, he wrote more more books about Jesus than he did about physics so maybe you don't consider him a scientist.

    191. Re: Evergreen State by prefec2 · · Score: 1

      Really guys I am from Germany. I do not know where you get your history lessons from. The NSDAP was a fascist party. They were not founded by communists or socialists. They were founded in 1920. Their key points were: "Abolition of the Versailles treaty"," withdrawal of the German citizenship of Jews" and "strengthening of the Volksgemeinschaft" (engl. the German people's body, in the meaning of all Germans are just one thing with a leader at the top who knows best). The party program also propagated the union of all German, which included the fusion with Austria and the annexation of neighboring territories. They were forbidden in 1923 after they tried to gain power. Hitler was send to prison were he wrote his famous piece of rubbish called "Mein Kampf" (My Fight/Struggle). No one in Germany, beside Mrs. Erika Steinbach (who would like to have territory back from Poland), would EVER suggest that the Nazis are from the left.

    192. Re: Evergreen State by omnichad · · Score: 1

      That's not how taxes work. The individual members pay taxes. The church pays its own bills. The church has no "profit" to be taxed, and excess money is usually used for charity work.

    193. Re: Evergreen State by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Believing in a created universe is not so hard to understand. Take a look into the Big Bang Theory. You may be surprised to learn a Catholic priest first put it forward. He was a priest but also a physicist. Father Lemaitre. Newton was also a theist. I think I'll stick with Sir Issac. *tips fedora*

    194. Re: Evergreen State by memnock · · Score: 1

      I agree with most of your comment, but I differ with you on your last sentence. I work in the natural resources department at a state university. I don't know many faculty in other departments very well, but my dept. puts me in the agricultural college of the school. Plant and soil sciences, ag economics, ag and bioengineering, etc. There are a lot of bible thumping faculty and staff in the college, even though they are a lot of natural scientists. I don't know how they reconcile things in their mind, but they do somehow. A lot of them are published in well-regarded peer-reviewed journals and on boards for such and such.

    195. Re:Evergreen State by HornWumpus · · Score: 1

      Fuck you too.

      --
      John McAfee 'It was like that time I hired that Bangkok prostitute; to do my taxes, while I fucked my accountant'
    196. Re:Evergreen State by serviscope_minor · · Score: 1

      Fuck you too.

      Truly, that is a devastating argument.

      --
      SJW n. One who posts facts.
    197. Re: Evergreen State by Bing+Tsher+E · · Score: 1

      As an American, perhaps you do.

    198. Re:Evergreen State by memnock · · Score: 1

      I work at a uni in the heartland and none of the school newspaper's articles run unless they are cheerleading sports or bashing liberal agenda.

    199. Re:Evergreen State by chstwnd · · Score: 1

      Please don't feed the troll. Look at his previous postings. Look at his username, for God's sake. He's trying to foment hatred towards conservatives by being utterly vile. I am VERY conservative (as are 99% of my friends and family) and would never espouse such drivel.

    200. Re:Evergreen State by Kohath · · Score: 1

      They are irrelevant to math/science/engineering.

      I'm not sure the idea is getting through. Some people might not want to sign up for 5 or 6 years of being treated badly every day by jerks.

      Maybe you think that makes them insufficiently analytical or wimpy or whatever. But if you do, then you're intentionally excluding them from opportunities.

      It takes a minimum level of humanity and/or empathy to understand. If you don't understand, but you want to, maybe ask someone around you to try to explain it to you.

    201. Re: Evergreen State by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      There is a great deal of irony in someone preaching that college is a waste of time and then complaining that there are not enough"americans" as proffesors. By which I think he means USA born regardless of citizenship status.

      While republicans preach that colleges are no good the percentage of forign students goes up. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Foreign_born_scientists_and_engineers_in_the_United_States

      Do you think if they thought college was a good idea they would send their kids and some of those kids would grow up to become professors?

    202. Re:Evergreen State by vandamme · · Score: 1

      Me too, but that was 1970. Lately I've been to a couple campuses, and .... holy cow. Things have changed. Don't 'Muricans study EE any more, or are they all Women's Studies and Basket Weaving?

    203. Re:Evergreen State by CaptainDork · · Score: 1

      Yeah.

      I'm 71 years old and an eye witness.

      To Make America Great Again, we have to tap into the CEO and shareholder desire for asymptotic revenue stream at nanosecond growth rate and use that accumulation of wealth and give back to those at the source.

      When money flows in one direction, we have something like Rome:

      Even as Rome was under attack from outside forces, it was also crumbling from within thanks to a severe financial crisis. Constant wars and overspending had significantly lightened imperial coffers, and oppressive taxation and inflation had widened the gap between rich and poor. In the hope of avoiding the taxman, many members of the wealthy classes had even fled to the countryside and set up independent fiefdoms. At the same time, the empire was rocked by a labor deficit. Rome’s economy depended on slaves to till its fields and work as craftsmen, and its military might had traditionally provided a fresh influx of conquered peoples to put to work. But when expansion ground to a halt in the second century, Rome’s supply of slaves and other war treasures began to dry up. A further blow came in the fifth century, when the Vandals claimed North Africa and began disrupting the empire’s trade by prowling the Mediterranean as pirates. With its economy faltering and its commercial and agricultural production in decline, the Empire began to lose its grip on Europe.

      --
      It little behooves the best of us to comment on the rest of us.
    204. Re: Evergreen State by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You guys had all that and you let it go to become the nation of pussies you are now? Sad!

    205. Re: Evergreen State by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Sorry dude, gotta call BS on that one. Christians do not base their faith on the persons you have proposed. (Adam, Eve, Moses, Noah). As the name of the religion states, Christians are followers of Jesus CHRIST. Nothing in the doctrine of Christ says that education is bad for people.

    206. Re: Evergreen State by Cinnamon+Beige · · Score: 1

      there is the notion of 'The who can't, teach'. Meaning being an educator is a dead last choice.

      For primary and secondary education, sure, but at a university level that is not at all true.

      It can also depend a lot on what your goals are--for example, if you want to improve the understanding of statistics (and reduce the abuse of them) in your particular field, you're pretty much going to be stuck trying to move the ocean by hand with an unlined sieve unless you teach.

    207. Re: Evergreen State by Cinnamon+Beige · · Score: 1

      I'm trying to extrapolate some coherent point from this post. It's difficult, but seems like some common ... thoughts ... should be addressed:

      The liberals were the fascists in the Nazi party (Nazi meaning new socialist)

      Where the heck does this come from?? Every single iota of non-biased information I've ever seen points to the opposite. Eg Wikipedia:

      "National Socialist" is the opposite of "New Socialist"? Okay, I'm going to fetch popcorn. (For the record, I'd say that they are more proof that the horseshoe theory has a point--the far fringes of the traditional left/right spectrum are, if you ignore the jargon, more alike than different. And the argument of "That can't be wrong they still fight" is hilarious, because people will fight over very minor differences and stupid things in general.)

    208. Re:Evergreen State by algoa456 · · Score: 0

      I love how you snowflakes cry.

      How embarrassing - you don't have the foggiest idea that snowflakes are the Starbucks drinking hipsters and students at universities having a meltdown and shouting "Hitler, Hitler" re Trump and SJWs having hysterics on campus when someone dares utter a remark they disapprove of. You know that students at Harvard went into paroxysms of panic about Halloween costumes do you? They thought said costumes were racist and culturally appropriated. Where have you been? Playing games in mom's basement too long I suspect.

    209. Re: Evergreen State by jpaine619 · · Score: 1

      You sound like a statist. Or... a small child.. "But.. But.. why don't they have to pay too!?!?"

      I have no love of religion, but I have no problem with the government staying out of it completely, even to the point of not being permitted to tax it.

      There is no power the government does not abuse, and the power to tax is also the power to destroy.

      I have seen far too much good done by small religious organizations. Like unions, religions tend to do good when small. Once they get to a certain size.. Well.. But that's the nature of it, and the religions need be kept in check by members. NOT the government.

      Repeat after me, THE GOVERNMENT DOES NOTHING GOOD OR EFFICIENTLY.

      Saying that you are paying for someone because they don't pay taxes is a false argument. Bring me proof that the church places a burden on society and then we'll talk.. But in the meantime, the members of said church usually pay their taxes. If they don't, that's a separate problem. But generally, the church itself, not the members, is tax exempt.

    210. Re: Evergreen State by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "Yeah, only right wing fascist indoctrination camps should be funded. Sheesh."

      Considering campus culture has become a bed of communist totalitarian ideology; some balance needs to return. To many forget which political party embraced fascism, embraced eugenics, embraced the KKK, then embraced communism, all in the name of getting and keeping political power. Don't forget to check your history when checking your privilege.

    211. Re: Evergreen State by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      you know that google 'redefined' fascism to make a previously non-left/right concept into a demonization of the right. It happened within the last year if I'm not mistaken.

      So you might want to not quote rabid SJW media that clearly sided with supporting Clinton to the hilt during the last election as an example of an authority.

      Just saying. I trust google less than the following sources I am going to provide:

      http://dailycaller.com/2017/02/04/google-redefines-the-word-fascism-to-smear-conservatives-protect-liberal-rioters/

      http://www.truthrevolt.org/news/google-redefines-fascism-smear-conservatives

      https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G5Rp36V-i3E

      https://www.reddit.com/r/conspiracy/comments/698d8q/google_redefines_the_word_fascism/

      https://milo.yiannopoulos.net/2017/05/google-fascism/

      http://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2017/05/fake-news-google-attempts-redefine-fascism-liken-conservatives-nazis/

      http://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2017/02/google_redefines_fascism_as_right_wing_movement.html

      http://thefederalistpapers.org/us/google-redefines-the-word-fascism-to-smear-conservatives

      I would quote a left wing source, but not a single one was found during my google search. This should alarm you on multiple levels, because one might think that what google is redefining today in favour of your personally held bias can be used against you in the future. National Socialism does have a left wing component, and I'm glad that you can at least admit that, but relying on googles redefinition of the word in 2017 to force it to the 'right' is pretty silly.

      I would advise you to think deeply about this. It's a problem for everyone, and really underscores the elites using divide and conquer politics to keep deep divisions in the United States.

      I personally cleave to the phrase 'E Pluribus Unum' when I think about the USA, and I would advise all Americans to go back to it, and call out the elites when they sow division and discord for their own gain.

    212. Re:Evergreen State by TsuruchiBrian · · Score: 2

      I'm not sure the idea is getting through. Some people might not want to sign up for 5 or 6 years of being treated badly every day by jerks.

      No it's probably not getting through. We've got Fox News spreading propaganda to convince people that all colleges brainwash people with elitist liberal values, thereby keeping them dumb, poor, and watching Fox News.

      Maybe you think that makes them insufficiently analytical or wimpy or whatever.

      I think it makes them stupid. The kids have an excuse (i.e. they are kids brainwashed by their parents). The parents have less of an excuse, (i.e. brainwashed by Fox News).

      But if you do, then you're intentionally excluding them from opportunities.

      I'm not excluding them from anything. Stupid people exclude themselves from opportunities. Isn't self reliance supposed to be a conservative virtue? Besides, the foreign kids seem to do just fine. Maybe they are not as coddled. They literally have all the same (actually more) opportunities, but don't achieve the same outcome. That's called equality of opportunity. If you want equality of outcome, you need to become one of those extreme leftists first.

      It takes a minimum level of humanity and/or empathy to understand.

      I understand. And I do have empathy. I am just realistic that in a free society you can't force people not to watch/believe propaganda nor become more educated. I can try to help, and some manage to do it, but many won't. I also just find it very ironic that the right wing people calling everyone else snowflakes are the biggest snowflakes of all. It is also ironic that the "liberals" don't really believe in freedom, and think it's ok to punch nazis. There are idiots everywhere.

      If you don't understand, but you want to, maybe ask someone around you to try to explain it to you.

      I understand just fine. I can think critically. I'm lucky. I was fortunate enough to go to a good university.

    213. Re:Evergreen State by TsuruchiBrian · · Score: 1

      I'm not really sure what you would hope to achieve by this, but sure we could do that, we can do anything we want, depending on what our goals are. I suspect I probably have different goals than you.

    214. Re: Evergreen State by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You must not know anything about Jews, then. Judaism values working hard for 6 days, resting for 1 day, benefiting from your work, and being charitable to others according to what you can do. In America that would align more with Republicans than with Democrats. Judaism does not say it's ok to take money from people by force and redistribute to others, it does not suggest free national health care and universal basic income.

      The left is a diverse group, it even includes rich people like Clintons, so yeah it may have some Jews too but that doesn't mean Jews are to blame for your left problems.

      Bias and prejudice aren't the way to solve the tough problems that motivate the people on the left. They seem to be reacting to that so maybe you are the one to blame for them trying to brainwash your kids.

    215. Re: Evergreen State by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Don't bother, GP is clearly an anti-Christian bigot; A Christaphobe, I suppose.

    216. Re: Evergreen State by Jarwulf · · Score: 1

      colleges have a lot more government revenue streams than churches

    217. Re:Evergreen State by Kohath · · Score: 1

      I understand. And I do have empathy.

      Telling people they're stupid for not wanting to live and work in a hostile environment 24/7 for 5-6 years demonstrates otherwise.

    218. Re:Evergreen State by pipingguy · · Score: 1

      "climate change supported by the *vast* majority of government-funded and academic scientist(s)...

      There - now it tells the whole story.

    219. Re:Evergreen State by yuriklastalov · · Score: 1

      Where have you been? Playing games in mom's basement too long I suspect.

      Doubt it. If he had, he'd have likely been aware of the shit storm that was GamerGate.

    220. Re: Evergreen State by ale2011 · · Score: 1

      The liberals were the fascists in the Nazi party (Nazi meaning new socialist)

      Where the heck does this come from?? Every single iota of non-biased information I've ever seen points to the opposite. Eg Wikipedia:

      the Nazi Party was a far-right political party in Germany

      Hmm... the original post is not there any more. It probably was a good example of "self-righteousness".

      However, it is true that the Nazi Party was named Nationalsozialistische Deutsche Arbeiterpartei (NSDAP, literally "National Socialist German Workers' Party").

      Likewise, the term liberal can be used to mean the rightish economic thinking associated with laissez-faire economic liberalism, which is considered opposed to socialism.

      It would be interesting to know if that kind of political-terminology kidnapping always goes left to right (as in the previous two examples) or there are also right-to-left cases. Let me add that the expulsion of the professors from the universities in nazi Germany certifies that they too didn't think universities had a positive impact on the way things were going in their country. I suspect that the resulting ignorance favors such kind of linguistic overturns...

    221. Re:Evergreen State by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Is it possible for there to be a return to the dark ages?

      When exactly did we exit the Christian Dark Ages then? What year precisely?

    222. Re: Evergreen State by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I realize churches get by on using public infrastructure for church uses, but since when has someone not being taxed mean you are paying their bills. All employees have to pay income tax, any business being paid by the church for construction or other reasons is taxed. Non profits in this country do a whole lot of good world wide. I think our system works out for the betterment of humanity overall. The main flaw I see is tax exemption for pastor's housing. This at the minimum needs to be means tested so you don't end up with "pastors" with 10.5 million dollar mansions just to avoid taxes.

    223. Re:Evergreen State by Mashiki · · Score: 1

      way to move forward ...

      Trades are always in demand, there's a need of 5 million skilled trades now. Everything from welders and pipefitters to engines(all kinds) to CNC operators. On top of that, a trade doesn't always mean "get dirty" either. I'm sure you're one of those self-entitled gen-y kids that think their degree in feminist dance therapy and gender studies entitles them to make $250k/year.

      --
      Om, nomnomnom...
    224. Re: Evergreen State by OneAhead · · Score: 1

      Um, have you considered actually reading the posts you reply to and comment on? And while you're at it, proofreading your own posts may also help to avoid making the impression that you're either a child, under influence, or mentally ill.

    225. Re:Evergreen State by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Oh there we go. He's listening to Jordan Peterson. That's where the rhetoric comes from got it. The guy's a crackpot, let's be honest.

    226. Re: Evergreen State by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Fascism does not equal socialism. Socialism from "National Socialism" is meant to be a redefinition of socialism. That redefinition is now called fascism which doesn't resemble socialism at all and are indeed on opposite sides of the left/right spectrum.

      When quoting Hitler its important to distinguish propaganda from true intentions. No where in your quoted statement did Hitler express his true intentions for government (something he almost never did publicly) which was actually to draw all power under his control because according to him, he was the only one who could solve Germany's problems (if that sounds familiar then you might start understanding liberal fears in Trump rhetoric and begin to see the true authoritarian that Trump is).

      To put it bluntly you're argument fell for Hitler's propaganda just like the 1930's people of Germany! I suggest you do more research on night of the long knives to see a direct example of Hitler's true intentions...unchecked universal power keeping "jack boot goose steppers" like Rohm from getting in the way of his carefully crafted utopian propaganda message.

      If you really want to know what Fascism is all about I suggest you go to the true source...Mussolini...how did he come into power...by overthrowing an existing Socialist government. What was his first act...burning the socialist free press and every socialist building in Milan. In short, fascism by real world application is authoritarianism not socialism.

    227. Re:Evergreen State by TsuruchiBrian · · Score: 1

      Telling people they're stupid for not wanting to live and work in a hostile environment 24/7 for 5-6 years demonstrates otherwise.

      At no point did I say they were stupid for not wanting to live and work in a hostile environment. I said they are stupid for believing Fox News and their stupid Fox News watching parents. Not wanting to live and work in a hostile environment is perfectly reasonable. But as I stated, it's not actually hostile, and I am trying to dispel that particular falsehood that is causing people to stay stupid.

      Also, having empathy and pretending people aren't stupid are not the same thing. Having empathy means caring about those people and wanting them not to be stupid (which I very much do). It's not like they deserve to be stupid. I don't deserve to be smart. Who ends up stupid and smart is largely a function of luck. I don't have any ill-will towards stupid people, in fact it's the opposite. We all start out stupid.

      I do have more of a willingness to hold people like Sean Hannity responsible for their actions. I don't think Sean Hannity is stupid. I think he is a bad person. He might not call his own viewers stupid. In fact he probably calls them smart for watching him. But he does not have empathy for them. He is working to keep them stupid, and a big part of that is making them believe that there is nothing to be learned at establishments of higher learning, and using examples like the incident at evergreen state to suggest that every college except Liberty university is like that.

      If I were a less empathetic person I might be tempted to say "Good, keep those idiots from coming to and ruining our colleges with their stupidity." But I'm not saying that. I am saying that those people need to be helped. I think the first step is convincing them, that universities are indeed places that make you smarter (evergreen state, and Liberty university notwithstanding), and that they shouldn't be scared out of going to them.

      I was stupid before I went to college. I was stupid after I graduated college (but I was smartER). Life is more fulfilling when you have an open mind and are willing to grow intellectually. Don't let the fear mongers scare you out of growing. Don't let someone calling you stupid prevent you from becoming smart.

      Go to college. More specifically, go to a real college. Get a real degree. Try not to let the idiots on the right or the left derail you, but even if they do, you can learn from that experience as well.

    228. Re: Evergreen State by rvw14 · · Score: 1

      I do not know where you get your history lessons from.

      I am guessing from Evergreen State?

    229. Re: Evergreen State by rvw14 · · Score: 1

      I have seen far too much good done by small religious organizations. Like unions, religions tend to do good when small. Once they get to a certain size.. Well.. But that's the nature of it, and the religions need be kept in check by members. NOT the government.

      I agree with you. As with everything, the more power an organization has, the greater the corruption. There are many examples of religious organizations that when they start, they do great things. Pretty soon they become so large that maintaining the institution becomes the primary goal, even to the extent they hide wrongdoing by individual members to not damage the "brand".

    230. Re:Evergreen State by dbIII · · Score: 1

      Maybe there should be a sarcasm tag.
      I was trying to point out the current madness aligns with an earlier damaging policy, most likely driven by some of the same players who unfortunately do not care that Colleges are also how we end up with electrical engineers and doctors.
      Destructive and as stupid as sawing off the branch being sat on - definitely - but short term gain for a few is enough to drive it if it is unopposed.

    231. Re:Evergreen State by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If you truly believe in something, fight and die for it.

      Anything else is a wish and/or convenience.

    232. Re:Evergreen State by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      >The unions and the touchy-feely 'everyone gets a trophy' and 'everyone is special' crowd have completely fucked up our education system, not the republicans.

      Good fucking god.

      You're describing blatant government corruption from teachers, union people, the county, and the state, and yet you want to blame unions and the parents?

      The parents can't really give a shit. The unions can be broken, you know that. But the state education 'officials' need to be voted out, so that people who actually give a shit and will fucking fire bad people can be put in.

      Or maybe the whole system sucks because nobody cares. Sounds like the Republican 'small government' platform to me.

    233. Re:Evergreen State by HornWumpus · · Score: 1

      I felt a little hate in the same era and place. But it was almost all from lefties.

      Every engineering major at my school was advised to change their major to 'undecided' while they took the required basic English class. The professor _hated_ engineering students. You had to hide textbooks from hard classes or his TAs would figure it out, the advisors knew all about it (but some student didn't believe them, got to take the class twice).

      Once the Engineering dean collected the data (engineering student average grades vs. engineering, declared undecided, students average grades), they got the hater moved somewhere he couldn't make so much mischief, he had tenure or would have been flat fired (he deserved to be fired).

      --
      John McAfee 'It was like that time I hired that Bangkok prostitute; to do my taxes, while I fucked my accountant'
    234. Re: Evergreen State by HornWumpus · · Score: 1

      The Nazi's 'expropriated' all industrys owned by foreigners and jews, period. Others stepped into line out of fear, effectively giving the government control.

      IBM still gets heat for the actions of a division they didn't own at the time. Ford Germany too, despite the fact that Ford himself was at least kind of a Nazi, they just took the plants.

      My grandfather was an active SD in Germany and a retired infantry captain from WWI. He was drafted as a buck private at age 50 and eventually sent to the Russian front, as was typical. Didn't live through it.

      --
      John McAfee 'It was like that time I hired that Bangkok prostitute; to do my taxes, while I fucked my accountant'
    235. Re: Evergreen State by Gussington · · Score: 1

      If a non-profit acts in the public interest, there's an argument for exempting it from taxes. Food banks, homeless shelters, and the like are plainly done for the good of humanity. When it builds giant restricted-access granite buildings to baptize dead people, why do I have to subsidize it?

      And molest children. Don't forget the child molestation bit..

    236. Re:Evergreen State by Gussington · · Score: 1

      and you'll find far more nuanced interpretations. Some believe that "days" in the Genesis account mean lengthy eras of time...

      Who cares. All information is treated equally, ie it is worthless until proven otherwise. The bible has provided zero use so sits in the same pile as the Hungry Caterpillar for scientific value. Regardless of how you interpret the Hungry Caterpillar it will always remain a child's fable.

    237. Re: Evergreen State by LeftCoastThinker · · Score: 1

      The Nazis put anyone who didn't do exactly as they were told in concentration camps. It doesn't mean that they didn't get their power by spouting the socialist progressive fascist line. What they did to consolidate their power is irrelevant to our discussion, how they came to power in a free society should be on everyone's mind right now with all the little fascist brown-shirts in the media and colleges lying, rioting and assaulting people to suppress truth and freedom of speech. History repeats.

      --
      If you disagree, please post your argument. (-1, Overrated) isn't your personal censorship tool for views you don't like
    238. Re:Evergreen State by TsuruchiBrian · · Score: 1

      I didn't refer the the ideology as "liberal", because being anti-freedom of speech is not liberal.

    239. Re: Evergreen State by LeftCoastThinker · · Score: 1

      Incarceration rates are irrelevant. What is relevant is if the people incarcerated are there justly because they broke laws that protect the rights of others (not the ability of the state to oppress it's people). The reality is more along the lines of: China executes a lot more people than the US, and doesn't generally spend too much at catching thieves, rapists and murderers, so they often get away, and when they are caught, they get executed because incarceration is expensive.

      In the US, we have a justice system designed to catch and punish anyone who breaks the law, and we only rarely execute even the most heinous of criminals compared to the rest of the world or 70 years in our own past history (and no, the EU is not the rest of the world, they are about 15% of the world).

      My heart is heavy that any adult individual living in a presumably free society is incapable of grasping such a simple concept... It shows just how effective the brainwashing at universities is that such a simple logical chain of thought evades you.

      --
      If you disagree, please post your argument. (-1, Overrated) isn't your personal censorship tool for views you don't like
    240. Re: Evergreen State by LeftCoastThinker · · Score: 1

      America is not perfect, but in the place that you currently reside, the state can decide tomorrow to take all your possessions away and throw you in jail or execute you and not only cant you do anything about it, but what they are doing is perfectly legal in that place. A gilded cage is still a cage, you just happen to be too stupid to see it.

      --
      If you disagree, please post your argument. (-1, Overrated) isn't your personal censorship tool for views you don't like
    241. Re: Evergreen State by LeftCoastThinker · · Score: 1

      Please feel free to list which freedoms Trump has taken away. Which amendments he has violated. He has reafirmed his protection of the 2nd amendment, and the first amendment freedom of religion. He has appointed a constructionist to the supreme court, meaning that your rights as defined by the words written in the constitution will be guaranteed for years to come...

      OTOH, the violator in chief was Barak Hussain Obama:

      Infringed on the 2nd ammendmet by trying to make some ammo illegal using the BATF, tried to get more gun grabbing regulations, lied about buying guns at gun shows, attacked guns and legal gun ownership every mass shooting event during his tenure. Allowed guns to be illegally sold to Mexican drug cartels with no plan or method of tracking the guns for the sole purpose of creating a false flag crisis in southern border states to facilitate further gun regulations and/or confiscation.

      Allowed freedom of religion to be infringed by gay rights activists (1st amendment) by not upholding DOMA and not bitch slapping Oregon state for persecuting Christian bakery owners who refused to participate in Gay weddings. Forced Little Sisters of the Poor to provide contraceptive coverage against their religious beliefs and charter... I could go on

      This is just off the top of my head, a more extensive list and explanation can be found here: http://www.washingtonexaminer....

      --
      If you disagree, please post your argument. (-1, Overrated) isn't your personal censorship tool for views you don't like
    242. Re: Evergreen State by LeftCoastThinker · · Score: 1

      The US is not perfect, nor is the world. Those places were a disaster and often a war zone before the US got involved. Results have not always been ideal, but OTOH that is just the reality of the world. Show me any other country that has done more good for the world. Show me any other country that has failed less in trying to do good around the world. Our intentions have always been to protect the innocent and try to foster freedom. Iraq is the way it is today because Islam is incompatible with freedom and justice. They are savages with a worldview stuck at 600AD.

      We took out an evil dictator (Saddam) who was threatening the west and attempting to acquire nuclear weapons (we exported over 200 TONS of yellow cake uranium after the Iraq war, along with the equipment used to refine it to weapons grade). When we left Iraq, we left them with their own military, a democratically elected government and their freedom. The fact that it collapsed speaks to their shortcomings, not our own. In the future, with any Muslim majority country, if they attack us, we should just bomb them to oblivion and go home, since they are not capable of living under freedom anyway and they only respect force.

      --
      If you disagree, please post your argument. (-1, Overrated) isn't your personal censorship tool for views you don't like
    243. Re: Evergreen State by LeftCoastThinker · · Score: 1

      You might want to crack a history book now and then, you might learn something. Being a bigoted elitist doesn't make you right, it just makes you ignorant and obnoxious as evidenced by your ad homonym with zero facts to back it up.

      --
      If you disagree, please post your argument. (-1, Overrated) isn't your personal censorship tool for views you don't like
    244. Re:Evergreen State by laird · · Score: 1

      Teaching to a test is fine for training courses to pass a certification (for example) where the goal is a specific, narrow competence. And there are trade schools that provide that kind of education. But the goal of high school general education is to produce citizens who are educated sufficiently to function in a Democracy, while the actual test only measures a tiny subset of a general education (math and reading), so in the world we live in "teaching to the test" destroys everything else that a well-rounded citizen should be exposed to, such as history, a foreign language, logic, art, theatre, music, ... the things that make life worth living!

  2. There's an obvious reason by SmaryJerry · · Score: 3, Insightful

    It's because colleges are the most left leaning places in America. I'd bet more American flags are burned at American colleges than in Russia and all middle eastern countries combined. It's not that republicans hate education.

    1. Re:There's an obvious reason by amiga3D · · Score: 0

      I don't hate education but a lot of what goes on in US colleges isn't education, it's brainwashing. I doubt Republicans consider engineering, math, biology, English and such as bad. It's the left wing propaganda doled out by Professors that hate America that we don't care for.

    2. Re:There's an obvious reason by mean+pun · · Score: 1

      It's because colleges are the most left leaning places in America. I'd bet more American flags are burned at American colleges than in Russia and all middle eastern countries combined. It's not that republicans hate education.

      Flag burning is more important than getting an education? Boggle. Besides, how many flags are burned per year?

    3. Re:There's an obvious reason by RotateLeftByte · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Higher Education has a long history of being rather left leaning. It is well known that most who are on the left when they are at University become less left wing as they grow older.

      When I was at University in London in the mid 1970's we had many very left leaning factions. There were groups of Communists, Marxists, Marxist-Lennists, Maoists, Trotskyists, Broad Left and a few more. One of the Marxists is now a local politician for a right of centre party. That was something he would not have considered happening when he was in his early 20's.
      University is the first time for most people where they are free to develop their own opinions. Being different from their parents/family is a natural stance to take.

      I would not worry about it. 99% of them will grow out of it.
      The French have a perfect way of describing it. 'Vive la Difference'.

      --
      I'd rather be riding my '63 Triumph T120.
    4. Re:There's an obvious reason by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It's too bad you likely don't have a decent amount of money to wire into escrow. I'd gladly take you up on that bet.

    5. Re: There's an obvious reason by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      I must have missed that class when I went to my huge public research university.

    6. Re:There's an obvious reason by beelsebob · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Actually, I expect it is all that Engineering, math, biology etc that they regard as bad. Damn filthy heathens talking about evolution, and some such. What's in the bible is good enough for me, and it can damn well be good enough for everyone else in the country if I have to ram it down their throats.

    7. Re:There's an obvious reason by DogDude · · Score: 1

      What's brainwashing, exactly? History?

      --
      I don't respond to AC's.
    8. Re:There's an obvious reason by gweihir · · Score: 1

      I do too. Would be consistent wit observable facts, like the current choice of president.

      --
      Most ACs are not even worth the keystrokes to insult them. Be generically insulted by this and ignored otherwise.
    9. Re:There's an obvious reason by OzPeter · · Score: 4, Funny

      It's because colleges are the most left leaning places in America. I'd bet more American flags are burned at American colleges than in Russia and all middle eastern countries combined. It's not that republicans hate education.

      Flag burning was ruled by the supreme court to be protected under the First Amendment.
      Why do you hate the constitution?

      --
      I am Slashdot. Are you Slashdot as well?
    10. Re:There's an obvious reason by beelsebob · · Score: 5, Informative

      Right, and that's why we have:

        - States trying to ban people marrying the person they love because it disagrees with the Bible.
        -States trying to force women to carry babies to term even when it'll kill them, because the Bible apparently says they have to.
        - States erecting public monuments to christianity, despite constitutional requirements that they don't.
        - States trying to force people to be taught non-science in science classes because it disagrees with the Bible.
        - States trying to give tax payer funding to churches and calling them schools
        - ...

      Don't give me that bullshit about no one trying to ram ideology down throats other than the left. The religious right has been trying to ram the bible down everyone's throats for decades.

    11. Re:There's an obvious reason by Pig+Hogger · · Score: 1

      It's not that republicans hate education.

      Oh yes, they do. Education makes people citizens, people who evaluate situation and ask themselves questions about what they are thrown at.

      By contrast, republicans have nothing to do with citizens. They want consumers; that is, docile, gullible people who will not question the stuff they are advertised so they buy it, making republicans richer. And, in addition, since they do not question marketing, they will not question the “wisdom” of their bosses, and thus will readily accept what they throw at them, be it illegal or unethical business practices, decreasing work conditions and renumeration, bank bailouts, wars abroad, and environmental vandalism, all in the name of making the rich richer.

    12. Re:There's an obvious reason by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Professors study history going back to ancient times, much more so than the average voter, and they are expert at their own areas which might be economics, physics, biolog, etc. They have context for judgements, it's not just a matter of watching politicians and (biased) commentators perform on TV and then deciding who to believe. For example, most professors ignore Bill O'Reilly, who a substantial fraction of the voting public find to be very persuasive.

    13. Re:There's an obvious reason by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Because the biggest problem facing America is the unrelenting flag burning. What a fucking red herring.

      Trump supporters are dumber than cattle

    14. Re:There's an obvious reason by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Brainwashing is when you force every incoming student to take a mandatory "sensitivity" class teaching them that all whites are racist by virtue of being born white.

    15. Re:There's an obvious reason by Grishnakh · · Score: 4, Insightful

      I doubt Republicans consider engineering, math, biology, English and such as bad.

      That's incorrect; it depends which Republicans you're talking to. If you mean the old-style Barry Goldwater fiscal conservatives, you're correct. If you mean religious conservatives, like the ones who voted for Ted Cruz or Mike Huckabee, you're wrong: they see biology classes as evil because they teach evolution. With the Trump supporters, it's probably a mixed bag. But there is a very, very large fraction of Republican voters who don't believe in evolution, so science classes are a sore point for them. Even worse, it looks like some Republicans are turning to flat Earth-ism.

    16. Re: There's an obvious reason by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2

      I must have missed that class when I went to my huge public research university.

      Take a closer look on the back of the fifty dollar bill. There is an american flag on the right and left. Every college class is a flag burning class.

    17. Re: There's an obvious reason by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Burning a flag is a strong statement. Sure it's protected , that doesn't mean it's socially acceptable to do that at a kids birthday party.

      Burning a flag because you hate America and want to turn it into some communist or muslim dystopia is different than burning the flag in protest because the government has acted in a way that is unconstitutional or in some other way did something that was morally or ethically objectionable or is contrary to American founding values.

      So you can love the constitution and burn a flag, and you can be a "democratic" socialist communist fascist or whatever and burn a flag. Not the same.

    18. Re:There's an obvious reason by amiga3D · · Score: 1, Interesting

      I believe the Bible, but then I live in a secular world. I don't worry too much about the craziness in it because I know I'm here for a few years and then it's time for eternity. I disagree with a lot of what happens in society but I let God worry about that, it's his job. He tells me to live for him and if I do that I'm going to be okay. While I think abortion is murder, it's sadly legal so I don't burn down clinics or shoot abortionists. I do not, however, ever vote for an abortionist candidate. I believe God created the Universe but I studied and learned about evolution is school. God said to live in the world but don't be "of" the world. Sometimes I get angry when people lie about conservative Christians but hey, only God is perfect.

    19. Re: There's an obvious reason by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Women's studies isn't a biology course, it's Sociology.

      And if you want an example of hating scientific facts, go talk to a so-called transgender person about biology. "I'm not emotionally comfortable with my perfectly normal body, so the obvious fix is to hack up my body and pretend I don't have a mental illness. And then we'll scream racism and misogyny until the textbooks get changed to agree with us."

    20. Re:There's an obvious reason by apoc.famine · · Score: 5, Insightful

      A large part of the issue stems from STEM threatening religious beliefs, directly or indirectly. While climate change, evolution, and the origin of life and the universe are the common hot-button issues, where religion might directly contradict science, the entire process of questioning understanding, checking for facts, and drawing logical conclusions is antithetical to belief. With a sizable percentage of republicans relying on a base where religion is a very prominent core of their being, it's not surprising that they would be against something that threatens it.
       
      As a whole, the education has the potential to give people the tools to question belief, but more critically, question authority. Given the extreme shift to authoritarian positions by the current crop of republicans, I can definitely see how education can be a threat.

      --
      Velociraptor = Distiraptor / Timeraptor
    21. Re:There's an obvious reason by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      > It's not that republicans hate education.

      In fact, this is just it.

      It's why they've also been attacking the public schools for decades.

      It's why they appoint uneducated people to run education.

      Etc.

      They just can't deal with the fact that education leads people to figure out that they are full of shit.

    22. Re:There's an obvious reason by PopeRatzo · · Score: 5, Informative

      I doubt Republicans consider engineering, math, biology, English and such as bad.

      Sadly, there's plenty that do. I'm currently living in Texas, and I can take you to meet several of them right now. Here's a Republican elected official over in Arizona.

      http://tucson.com/news/local/e...

      “It got hijacked by Washington, by the federal government,” said Melvin, a candidate for governor, and “as a conservative Reagan Republican I’m suspect about the U.S. Department of Education in general, but also any standards that are coming out of that department.”

      Melvin’s comments led Sen. David Bradley, D-Tucson, to ask him whether he’s actually read the Common Core standards, which have been adopted by 45 states.

      “I’ve been exposed to them,” Melvin responded.

      Pressed by Bradley for specifics, Melvin said he understands “some of the reading material is borderline pornographic.” And he said the program uses “fuzzy math,” substituting letters for numbers in some examples.

      --
      You are welcome on my lawn.
    23. Re:There's an obvious reason by NEDHead · · Score: 1

      Perhaps if you replace 'left-leaning' and 'liberal' with 'progressive' in these kinds of discussions the perception will change.

    24. Re: There's an obvious reason by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Which god ?

      There's literally millions to choose from.

      Ra ? Zues ? Baal ?

      Just curious.

    25. Re:There's an obvious reason by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      One cell is not a person. By that logic any cell in your body is a (potential) person.

    26. Re: There's an obvious reason by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Thats called Original Sin.

    27. Re:There's an obvious reason by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Thus, by your logic, it is now OK to physically assault others for the heinous crime of thinking different? We must have racial/sexual/belief diversity but only a single set of beliefs and core values are allowed - no diversity of opinion can be tolerated!

    28. Re: There's an obvious reason by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Hate to break it to ya, Sparky, but it's FAR more likely they're burning it to protest the Christian Conservative theology this party seems so keen on setting up versus some fictional sharia law haven or Bernie/Lenin ticket paradise.

      Bonus keks for "democratic socialist communist fascist or whatever". Buzzword Bingo really drives home your point.

    29. Re:There's an obvious reason by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It's a LOT smaller segment than you think. Your own predjudices show it. For example, my alma mater, Seattle Pacific University, is quite conservative. It's part-and-parcel of the Free Methodist church. It has a great electrical engineering program (very applied science based), biology (which teaches evolution as the leading theory - which is correct), and lots of other great science programs.

      I posit you're just using your own prejudices and beliefs to condemn that which you think is wrong - with no real experience. Too bad so many on the Left require group-think and cannot stand or tolerate open debate and voicing of different opinions - you might learn something!

    30. Re:There's an obvious reason by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I love that you can't handle academia.

    31. Re: There's an obvious reason by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You're just wierd.

    32. Re:There's an obvious reason by 0100010001010011 · · Score: 5, Funny

      I'd bet more American flags are burned

      I bet more American flags are burned by veterans and Boy Scouts than at all colleges combined.

    33. Re:There's an obvious reason by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I've been to several US colleges. Never heard of anything like that.

    34. Re:There's an obvious reason by dunkelfalke · · Score: 5, Insightful

      You are also hypocrites - you have zero problems with killing humans. It is only the unborn that are, for some reason, sacred.

      --
      "It's such a fine line between stupid and clever" -- David St. Hubbins, Spinal Tap
    35. Re:There's an obvious reason by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The right to freedom of association is in the Constitution as well, but that right is now conditional upon you choosing the rightpeople to associate - or disassociate with... I can burn a flag, but heaven forbid I shout n!gger or kike or sand jockey , because that's hate speech and it is not free.

    36. Re:There's an obvious reason by admiralh · · Score: 1

      The fact that we allow American flags to be burnt shows that we have freedom.

      How many Russian flags do you believe are burnt in Russia? Chinese flags in China? Saudi flags in Saudi Arabia?

      --
      Hopelessly pedantic since 1963.
    37. Re: There's an obvious reason by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      let me get this straight - a member of a society should only concern themselves with what affects their person and nothing else?

    38. Re:There's an obvious reason by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Educated people tend to be less afraid of exploring ideas and thus less afraid of new ideas. That's liberalism in a nutshell. If conservitards weren't afraid of education GENERALLY they'd probably go much further and be deeper people. But they don't.

    39. Re:There's an obvious reason by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      having attended a relatively liberal university in california, i have never heard anything like this in class. i keep hearing this sort of argument made, but it seems starkly at odds with what one experiences when receiving a higher education.

    40. Re:There's an obvious reason by nine-times · · Score: 5, Insightful

      I disagree somewhat with both you and the person you're responding to. I don't think it's explicitly the engineering or math that is upsetting them, and I don't think it's "brainwashing". The real problem is that, when you get a broad education and actually learn about the world we live in, modern Republican ideology is revealed to be complete insanity.

      Evolution and global warming are real. Government isn't inherently evil. You can't always increase tax revenue by cutting taxes. The American "founding fathers" were not trying to create a "Christian nation". The Constitution does not work the way Republicans say it does. Muslims do have the right to practice their religion. There's no "historical proof" that Jesus was a real guy who was really the Messiah. The Bible doesn't say, "Poor people are just lazy. Fuck'em."

      So these ignorant morons send their kids to college, and their kids come back saying, "Ummm... Yeah, so... that part of the Bible that says you should kill gay people...? That's roughly the same part of the Bible that says you can't eat bacon. So since you're not completely adhering to the rules in the Bible, maybe it's ok to not-kill gay people?"

      And now they're upset. Their kids are using big words, and talking like murdering gay people isn't cool. The only conclusion their tiny minds can reach is that college is evil, and brainwashing their kids against "good ol'fashioned 'Merican values!" At some point, we might just need to find a way to stop listening to those people.

    41. Re:There's an obvious reason by dasunt · · Score: 1

      Don't forget some economics. It's not like Supply Side has strong support in mainstream economics.

    42. Re: There's an obvious reason by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I hope you'll eventually understand that the classical Gender is largely defined by hormones and upbringing.

      If someone's body produces a lot more estrogen - even if the body is male - they'll behave a lot more like stereotypical women.

      Often, this isn't something they can control.

    43. Re:There's an obvious reason by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      critical thought, values of the enlightenment like humanism have a long history of being 'left-leaning'..

    44. Re:There's an obvious reason by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      While I think abortion is murder, it's sadly legal so I don't burn down clinics or shoot abortionists.

      Except that your adjacent wackos do those things, and if you're going to condemn all of academia for the bullshit liberals pull, guess what? You're on the hook for violence against abortion providers. You also don't get to pretend Pastor Kidfucker isn't relevant if you're going to measure universities by student protestors.

    45. Re:There's an obvious reason by MoarSauce123 · · Score: 1

      That survey states otherwise. Maybe the Rep fans are only jealous that their intellect is insufficient to make it through college.

    46. Re: There's an obvious reason by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Lol! That should have gotten modded 5 funny. (Hint for those that didn't get the joke: college = expensive = burning the big bills with the flags)

    47. Re:There's an obvious reason by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      well, you are part of the problem, an ignorant, single-issue voter ("I do not, however, ever vote for an abortionist candidate.") who "believes the bible" (really? ALL of it?) and creationism.

      it's 2017, dude.. it's perfectly ok to accept jesus christ as a myth. accept the bible for what it is.. a collection of folk stories no different to us in our time than the stories of zeus and poseidon to the ancient romans.

    48. Re:There's an obvious reason by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Actually, I expect it is all that Engineering, math, biology etc that they regard as bad.

      No it's people like this. People like this don't work in the stem fields.

    49. Re: There's an obvious reason by Bartles · · Score: 1, Insightful

      Your straw man conception of modern Republican ideology was written by vox and think progress. It's not anywhere close to reality.

    50. Re: There's an obvious reason by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      We're talking about universities, here. The ideology is all one way.

    51. Re: There's an obvious reason by Bartles · · Score: 1

      Lol. Right. The fed just happens to use interlending interest rates as the main mechanism for regulating the economy.

    52. Re:There's an obvious reason by thegarbz · · Score: 2

      The religious right has been trying to ram the bible down everyone's throats for decades.

      You mispelt millennia. This practice predates left and right and even democracy.

    53. Re:There's an obvious reason by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      I doubt they consider brainwashing students into believing that curtailing people's rights so as not to offend the utterly delusional and such as bad. It's math, biology, logic and critical thinking still being doled out by some Professors that they don't care for.

    54. Re: There's an obvious reason by OzPeter · · Score: 1

      So you can love the constitution and burn a flag, and you can be a "democratic" socialist communist fascist or whatever and burn a flag. Not the same.

      So you hate equality and freedom as well?

      --
      I am Slashdot. Are you Slashdot as well?
    55. Re:There's an obvious reason by RightwingNutjob · · Score: 1

      Life is sacred, yes. But thinking consenting adults are fully capable of flushing it all down the toilet to the point where they, and not anyone else, sign their own death warrant. The unborn are not capable of such things.

    56. Re: There's an obvious reason by Bartles · · Score: 0

      No, Democrats want consumers. Republicans want producers. Makers vs takers.

    57. Re:There's an obvious reason by tgrigsby · · Score: 1

      Please provide an example of a college that endorses violence.

      I'll wait...

      --
      *** *** You're just jealous 'cause the voices talk to me... ***
    58. Re:There's an obvious reason by Notabadguy · · Score: 1

      Evolution and global warming are real. Government isn't inherently evil. You can't always increase tax revenue by cutting taxes. The American "founding fathers" were not trying to create a "Christian nation". The Constitution does not work the way Republicans say it does. Muslims do have the right to practice their religion. There's no "historical proof" that Jesus was a real guy who was really the Messiah. The Bible doesn't say, "Poor people are just lazy. Fuck'em."

      See - you went to college and learned how to set up a straw-man argument so that you can knock it down and proclaim your intellectual superiority. There are billions of dollars of student debt floating out there because the teeming masses of impressionable youth went to school and learned useless tripe like that.

      That's why conservatives think colleges are bad. There are no meaningful standards. You can go to NYU and take a class on the Musical Inspiration of Madonna. You can go to Brown University and take a class on "Being Bored." You can go to UPenn and take a class called "How To Waste Time On The Internet."

      And how many womens studies majors are there? Native American Studies? Black History Studies? Animal Science? Not Veterinarian work, but a more nebulous study field.

      Agendas are bad - all of them. Black, white, republican, democrat - special interest groups who would benefit their own at the expense of others. Very few colleges are still about higher learning, and faculty don't have the intestinal fortitude to enforce discipline or standards.

    59. Re:There's an obvious reason by RightwingNutjob · · Score: 5, Interesting

      I went back in for the grad school thing and as a condition of registration, I had to take a sensitivity test where to pass, I had to assert on the multiple-choice quiz at the end that 40% of women on college campuses are victims of rape. And that accused don't have rights because I had a moral duty to "believe the victim."

      See what happened? If you challenge the believability of that number ("Look to your left, look to your right, one of you is being raped right now!"), you confess to not "believing." Lovely game, no?

      This was ten months ago, and not at some backwater no-name liberal arts school, either.

    60. Re:There's an obvious reason by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Years ago, when I went to school, there were no such classes. I've still come to understand white privilege.
      Being white doesn't make anyone inherently racist, but growing up in the United States can, and often does,
      deploy racism in subtle and deep ways. It's a part of the history of the country. I can see how I judge/misjudge
      people based on a number of socially programmed attributes. In spite of my desire to be otherwise, I can see
      that I have a negative prejudice towards black people. i can see myself thinking women are incapable of things
      just because they are women. It's ridiculous. Both are throw-backs to another era, one that we are, as a society,
      continuing to grow beyond. unfortunately, that growth is not nearly fast enough for most of us to see on the ground.

    61. Re:There's an obvious reason by RightwingNutjob · · Score: 2

      Professors are often the most solipsistic individuals you'll have the misfortune of encountering. Their 'expertise' is often irrelevant to the topic under discussion, but if you take it from them, studying ancient Carthaginian poetry qualifies you to pontificate on all sorts of things. And it goes without saying that most academic economists could be practicing voodoo for all the predictive power their theories have.

    62. Re:There's an obvious reason by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      God said to live in the world but don't be "of" the world. Sometimes I get angry when people lie about conservative Christians but hey, only God is perfect.

      I don't believe god exists at all, and I still get angry when people lie about conservative Christians. It's becoming so common that people who (to my view) believe in an imaginary friend, look like the reasonable ones.

    63. Re:There's an obvious reason by amiga3D · · Score: 1, Flamebait

      If one believes that life starts at conception, then abortion is murder. While I can see why you wouldn't believe in creationism as that takes a leap of faith, I really don't get why you can't understand opposition to something as brutal as the slaughter of the innocent.

    64. Re:There's an obvious reason by chadenright · · Score: 1

      It's not just the unborn, it's children in general. Much as people love to hate on Jesus, one of his revolutionary concepts was that children are sacred ("What you do to the least of these, you do to me"); prior to that, children were generally considered disposable because half of them weren't going to make it to adulthood anyhow.

    65. Re:There's an obvious reason by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You mean those religious schools in certain parts of the world, which Hollywood says are growing new generations of evil, God loving terrorists even as we speak?

    66. Re:There's an obvious reason by amiga3D · · Score: 1

      The attacks on abortion clinics and providers are rare nowadays. In fact, most peope who get abortions actually claim that they are Christians which makes me sad.

    67. Re:There's an obvious reason by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      And God said a bunch of self-serving, specious bullshit and, lo, it was good.

    68. Re: There's an obvious reason by chadenright · · Score: 1

      That's only true if you think Jesus was white and God was a he. Spoiler alert: Jesus probably looked just like a Muslim imam.

    69. Re: There's an obvious reason by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      And I have a huge problem with those that chose to fly a tattered flag that should have been retired years ago and properly disposed of (AKA Burned).. Such disrespect to our flag shouldn't be tolerated. BTW in my book the individual that burns the flag in protest is showing one hell of a lot more respect than the guy that can't be bothered to fly a properly maintained flag. At least the protester understands what the flag represents.

    70. Re: There's an obvious reason by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      So they're being paid for in cash now?

    71. Re:There's an obvious reason by tgrigsby · · Score: 5, Insightful

      I grew up being taught about the Bible as well, but then I grew up, learned critical thinking skills, and realized there is no proof for any god. Since man is the only animal smart enough to understand that it will die someday, the fear of death is a convenient tool by which to control people and gain power. And while people do some really good things to impress their gods, kids also do some really good things to impress Santa, but they grow out of that one day and do those good things, hopefully, just because they are good people. I regularly do good things just because I'm a good person, not because I feel the need to impress a mythical figure.

      As such, my life is now ruled by logic, not by the moral standards of people who lived in very different times and who turned to dust thousands of years ago. Since science is built on logic, I trust science, my knowledge of history, and my own moral compass as my guides.

      The Republican Party's power is based largely on the manufactured consensus of the fearful, ignorant, and with the addition of the religious right, the superstitious, so it's plain to see why colleges and universities pose a huge threat to their power base, and it clearly explains the impetus for Fox "News" and other right wing propaganda sites to tear at the foundation of our educational institutions by describing them as generating "lefties", "communists", "Marxists", and other buzz words that gin up conservative hatred and fear.

      --
      *** *** You're just jealous 'cause the voices talk to me... ***
    72. Re:There's an obvious reason by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      A flag that has become unfit for display due to tearing, fading, holes or other issues, must be disposed in a dignified manner. The prefered manner for disposal of a flag is by burning it, in this way it is not possible for a flag to end up in a landfill.

    73. Re:There's an obvious reason by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      It may look like brainwashing, but it's not. Some long-held beliefs turn out to be wrong when inspected with logic and science. In order to change those beliefs, you have to keep disproving them, and that can look preachy. Nobody likes to be told they're wrong. History is full of people who have died at the hands of people who were wrong, for the sole reason of telling them the truth.

    74. Re:There's an obvious reason by mrbester · · Score: 1

      Nor are children. Yet there isn't a problem with bombing them "accidentally" in the name of an Abrahamic death cult invisible sky wizard to teach those who follow the same Abrahamic death cult invisible sky wizard that their name for him is wrong, as is their skin colour.

      Then there's the underlying distrust of the *other* lot who have yet another name for him, but since the Teutonic Incident during the last century you don't overtly display your hatred of them, particularly when borrowing money from them to buy ordnance.

      --
      "Wait. Something's happening. It's opening up! My God, it's full of apricots!"
    75. Re:There's an obvious reason by MoarSauce123 · · Score: 2

      Would you be happier if profs doled out right-wing nationalistic propaganda? Anyhow, I have yet to find any unbiased indication that profs hate America and indoctrinate and brainwash students with any kind of political propaganda. When I got my masters I only came across one who tried and he clearly was a right-winger (hated gays and lesbians, was in favor of mandatory military service, hated foreigners, hated any kind of government handout unless it was big tax breaks to corps and rich people, etc.). Most others simply did their job and did it well. That one prof was an exception and I don't think he meant anything by it.

    76. Re:There's an obvious reason by dunkelfalke · · Score: 1, Informative

      Bullshit. Children stopped being disposable in the early 20th century. Before that Christians were perfectly fine with using them as chattel or as cheap labour.

      --
      "It's such a fine line between stupid and clever" -- David St. Hubbins, Spinal Tap
    77. Re:There's an obvious reason by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      And yet it (ramming religious orthodoxy down our throats) continues to this day. Presumably, after going through the 18th to 20th centuries, we institute a democratic-representational form of government to secure our rights to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. Not to enforce religious orthodox.

    78. Re: There's an obvious reason by MoarSauce123 · · Score: 1

      Seems to be the case for the billionaires club that is our current federal government. They clearly are only concerned with what applies to them...and therefore cut heating aid, meals on wheels funding, health care for anyone (although they eff that up constantly).

    79. Re: There's an obvious reason by chadenright · · Score: 1

      Most mental illnesses ARE caused by someone's body producing a chemical imbalance. Take depression, for example. Nobody's going to argue that being suicidally depressed is normal behavior, and rather than give otherwise healthy people drugs to kill themselves with, we give them drugs to treat their depression by restoring the chemical balance in their brain.

      The whole point of gender norms is that they are essential for the long-term health of the society to which they apply; it's ok if a small percent of people diverge from them, but as that percentage grows the host society starts to suffer for it.

    80. Re: There's an obvious reason by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I work at a private college and visit local public colleges periodically. It isn't flags that's being burned on campus.

    81. Re:There's an obvious reason by tgrigsby · · Score: 0

      I can't imagine why this has a score of zero. AC is absolutely correct. Flag burning is a red herring, and Trump supporters are either rich and know exactly what they are getting or, more commonly, pathetically stupid.

      Hey, it's kind of chilly in here.... I better put another flag on the fire...

      --
      *** *** You're just jealous 'cause the voices talk to me... ***
    82. Re:There's an obvious reason by Kohath · · Score: 1

      trying to ban people marrying the person

      Gay marriage is legal. Why can't we have peace now?

      force women to carry babies

      Abortion is legal (since 45 years ago). Why can't we have peace now?

      erecting public monuments

      Monuments are inert. They don't move or talk or collect a salary. Why can't we have peace?

      people to be taught non-science in science classes

      Students routinely ignore whatever lessons. Why can't we have peace now?

      States trying to give tax payer funding to churches and calling them schools

      Anywhere that lessons are taught is a school. Choose to attend the one you like. Ask about educational choice and everyone is for it, except the for left and the people on the incumbent schools' payroll.

      Why can't we have peace?

      Because you want a society perpetually at war with itself. And this shit is just today's excuse.

    83. Re:There's an obvious reason by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Progressive is even worse! Progress is the complete opposite of going back to the good ol' days.

    84. Re:There's an obvious reason by Mashiki · · Score: 1

      Openly or by their actions? Because you can look at the case of when Milo Yiannopoulos spoke at several universities, it came out that when those protesters stormed the stage or hall police were told by the campus or police chief not to do anything. There's a few more examples of universities doing things like this.

      You can also find plenty of professors at many universities that support violence against whites(which the new trendy shit), and engage in overt racism against whites as well.

      --
      Om, nomnomnom...
    85. Re: There's an obvious reason by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      In most other Western countries, nobody would care about someone burning the national flag, except perhaps about the environmental impact.

    86. Re:There's an obvious reason by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Hey, moron, Supreme Court != Constitution. The Supreme Court also said that slaves are property (Dred Scott) and that corporations are people (Citizens United). All it takes are five political appointees to corrupt and distort constitutional intent.

    87. Re:There's an obvious reason by Grishnakh · · Score: 2

      I do not, however, ever vote for an abortionist candidate.

      So because of this, you vote for candidates who actively harm society and people in that society because of their regressive policies (e.g. tax cuts for the rich, dismantling social safety nets, etc.). Good job. You're part of the problem.

    88. Re:There's an obvious reason by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      LMFTFY

      ++ States trying to force women to carry babies to term even when it'll kill them, because the Bible apparently says they have to.
      -- The State playing demographics games by setting up abortion clinics in primarily black communities. Also, People who are not medical professionals writing stories about medical problems.

      ++ States trying to force people to be taught non-science in science classes because it disagrees with the Bible.
      ++ States trying to give tax payer funding to churches and calling them schools
      - Paying property taxes so some teachers union can teach my kids whatever they think is right and telling me I'm not educated enough to teach my own kids. People who think this way not going to Saudi Arabia, telling them they can't teach their kids about Allah in schools because it's wrong, and seeing how they react.

      ++States erecting public monuments to christianity, despite constitutional requirements that they don't.
      -- The reason that seperation is there is to keep one religous sect from outlawing or harassing the other. It isn't there to prevent people from getting up in a big group, voting with how they spend their money, and then spending what are really small amounts of money here (where's my 100ft tall Jesus Statues?) on appropriate wall etchings, paintings and displays. The vast majority of this country is still Christian.

      ++States trying to ban people marrying the person they love because it disagrees with the Bible.
      --Heterosexual Couples who receive a substantial tax break for getting married and having kids wondering why LGBTQ's are asking for the same tax breaks. The execution of Divorces creating a massive demographics issue because men decide it's less risky in life just to simply not procreate, and now, LGBTQ's muddying the waters, all of which has created a situation where, by pew research and GAO Studies, about 30% the population today has decided never to have kids in their lifetimes and that statistic increasing about a percentage point a year. Heterosexual men looking at this entire situation, looking at government filling in the tax income by inviting Mexicans and Arabs who believe in Islam here in large numbers, realizing these people are going to literally persecute and kill LGBTQ's, then Realizing the best thing for everyone is to get the state out of marriage entirely so they can procreate in peace and to kick out all of the foreigners.

      Please, Please, Please go take a course in news literacy.

    89. Re:There's an obvious reason by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Boy that's some fancy quote chopping going on there. In a sentence on the specific issues Melvin has, consisting of 32 words, 10 of them are actual words spoken by Melvin. The rest are the reporter's words. Not saying the guy isn't an idiot, he might be for all I know (I'm not in AZ). But whenever I see that much quote chopping and editing in an article, I'm immediately suspicious that some one is being made to say something very different from what they actually said.

    90. Re:There's an obvious reason by chipschap · · Score: 1

      I recently took a university-level French class which was mostly quite good, but the prof spent a whole class period making sure everyone knew all the LBGT terminology in French. Now, nothing wrong with that per se, knowing more things is always good, but it seemed a little odd until you realized that the prof was ultra-liberal, ultra-feminist, and viewed such knowledge as essential. She went as far as to toss out one male student who disagreed (rather politely, in fact).

    91. Re:There's an obvious reason by chipschap · · Score: 1

      The religious right has been trying to ram the bible down everyone's throats for decades.

      True enough and it just proves that there are crazies on both sides. But it's ironic how in the 60s the right tried to suppress free speech of the left and now it's turned around completely.

    92. Re:There's an obvious reason by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Two wrongs don't make a right, libtard.

      Please point out which wrong beelsebob is supposedly supporting. All I see is someone arguing that both sides are ramming ideologies down people's throats, with approval of neither.

    93. Re:There's an obvious reason by chipschap · · Score: 1

      I can see that I have a negative prejudice towards black people. i can see myself thinking women are incapable of things just because they are women..

      I hope you are really enjoying your feelings of guilt and that you have finally come to understand that because you are a white male, you are inherently trash (at best).

    94. Re:There's an obvious reason by fahrbot-bot · · Score: 1

      Life is sacred, yes. But thinking consenting adults are fully capable of flushing it all down the toilet to the point where they, and not anyone else, sign their own death warrant. The unborn are not capable of such things.

      "Thinking, consenting adults" including the mentally ill? From the April 2017 article, Does the death penalty target people who are mentally ill? We checked. (and others):

      People who are executed have a far higher rate of mental illness than does the general public.

      When John H. Blume studied death row volunteers from 1976 through 2003, he found that 88 percent had a mental illness or substance abuse disorder. Our numbers were slightly lower, but similar.

      Graph showing percent of population w/mental illness (broken down and total, total below):

      • xxxx - 4% general population w/serious
      • xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx - 18% general population w/any
      • xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx - 43% executed.
      --
      It must have been something you assimilated. . . .
    95. Re:There's an obvious reason by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      This is all leftist rambles. Leftists are always wrong and awlays will be. Don't be a leftist. BE A MAN!

    96. Re:There's an obvious reason by fahrbot-bot · · Score: 1

      It's because colleges are the most left leaning places in America. I'd bet more American flags are burned at American colleges than in Russia and all middle eastern countries combined. It's not that republicans hate education.

      Flag burning is more important than getting an education? Boggle. Besides, how many flags are burned per year?

      Hard to say as burning is one method of properly disposing of a U.S. Flag. From How to Properly Retire an American Flag (and others):

      The U.S. Flag code states that, “the flag, when it is in such condition that it is no longer a fitting emblem for display, should be destroyed in a dignified way, preferably by burning.”

      --
      It must have been something you assimilated. . . .
    97. Re:There's an obvious reason by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I really don't get why you can't understand opposition to something as brutal as the slaughter of the innocent.

      They're not "innocents", they're mostly poor and African-American. They are a drain on society and have no right to burden everyone else. Their birthrates must be driven down. This is basic Eugenics-101. The dreams and goals of the KKK are still alive & well in the Democratic Party and the political Left in the US. A quick look at the makeup of prison populations, abortion recipients, and who makes it out of poverty at lower average rates tells the truth of the matter.

    98. Re:There's an obvious reason by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      trying to ban people marrying the person

      Gay marriage is legal. Why can't we have peace now?

      I don't know, why don't you ask the people trying to reverse that?

      force women to carry babies

      Abortion is legal (since 45 years ago). Why can't we have peace now?

      I don't know, why don't you ask the people trying to reverse that?

      erecting public monuments

      Monuments are inert. They don't move or talk or collect a salary. Why can't we have peace?

      I wasn't aware that monuments were free to erect and maintain. If it's privately funded, and the state doesn't pick favorites when it comes to approving or denying a private group from erecting their religious monument, fine. But the moment the state starts picking favorites, or paying for it with taxes, then it becomes a problem.

      people to be taught non-science in science classes

      Students routinely ignore whatever lessons. Why can't we have peace now?

      This has got to be the most asinine argument I have ever read. "It doesn't matter what we teach the students because they're just going to ignore it anyway".

      States trying to give tax payer funding to churches and calling them schools

      Anywhere that lessons are taught is a school. Choose to attend the one you like. Ask about educational choice and everyone is for it, except the for left and the people on the incumbent schools' payroll.

      I don't know enough about this to offer a reply. I just didn't want you to think I was deliberately ignoring it.

      Why can't we have peace?

      Because you want a society perpetually at war with itself. And this shit is just today's excuse.

      Right, right, it's all our fault. Your side is completely blameless and are just sitting back doing nothing while we keep trying to force our ideals onto you.

      Goit.

    99. Re:There's an obvious reason by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The attacks on abortion clinics and providers are rare nowadays.

      Arguendo, so what? Liberals (and presumed liberals like, say, university professors) are still answering for what Jane Fonda did before a lot of us were *born*. I had to look her up to see whether or not she is even still alive (She is). You aren't nearly out of the societal blast radius for this crap unless your faith is being held to a different standard than everyone else.

    100. Re:There's an obvious reason by thinkwaitfast · · Score: 1
      The Rape of the Mind: The Psychology of Thought Control, Menticide, and Brainwashing by the Dutch psychiatrist Joost Meerloo.

      Meerloo specialized in the area of thought control techniques used by totalitarian regimes.

    101. Re:There's an obvious reason by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      they do make it through college, normally paid for by daddy..(as in how the fuck could trump pass any fucking thing..)

    102. Re:There's an obvious reason by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I don't hate the Constitution, but I do hate the poor pitiful souls that do the burning. It's one of those things where just because you have the right, doesn't necessarily mean you should exercise it in that fashion. I may not stop you when you're burning or stomping on my country's flag because it is your right, but at the same time I am doing a damn fine job of resisting the urge to stomp your face for it.

    103. Re:There's an obvious reason by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      ...under specific circumstances and with a specific protocol. Not just because my panties are twisted that morning, or because my professor gave me that deserved failing grade even though I thought I farted rainbows and unicorns.

    104. Re:There's an obvious reason by buss_error · · Score: 1

      While I think abortion is murder

      Not to defend abortion, but I will simply point out Judges allows for the payment of blood price for causing an abortion. As for killing someone, Judges calls for stoning. This tells me that abortion caused when not wanted is wrong, and murder is always wrong.

      I believe God created the Universe

      I think of it like this: The Bible cites what man thinks God did. Science seeks to explain what happened and how, by observing God's work and explaining it without resorting to articals of faith that require a belief in God. In other words, science tries to understand God's work without requiring a faith. Will that work? Sometimes, not always.

      Some leap to defend the Faith in science, but science does not depend on faith. It depends on what can be observed, measured, and repeated. I think God is OK with that. What parent wants their child to be eternally unable to stand on their own?

      The key here is that we are not to judge according to God. "Vengeance is mine, says the Lord. I will repay." I'm content to let Him do the needful, while I pray for mercy. Only fools pray for justice.

      --
      Necessity is the plea for every infringement of human freedom. It is the argument of tyrants; it is the creed of slaves.
    105. Re:There's an obvious reason by Kohath · · Score: 1

      You keep trying to justify war. What's the plan for peace? Exterminate the other side? If not that, then what?

      And if you can't answer, why shouldn't the other side continue fighting for their right to exist and not be oppressed as second-class citizens?

    106. Re:There's an obvious reason by thinkwaitfast · · Score: 2

      I made it all the way through multiple science degrees and the gay/abortion/ozone hole (global warming of back in the day)/evolution/whatever controversies never appeared once in 7 years. It was so much better being able to concentrate on the science and math.

    107. Re: There's an obvious reason by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      actually he's pretty spot on, which is why you're so triggered.

    108. Re:There's an obvious reason by laird · · Score: 1

      Yes, on compliance training you have to pass a test demonstrating that you learned (some of) what you were taught. Based on your representations, I think you may have been so opposed to the idea of sensitivity training that you heard things that they didn't say. For example "the accused don't have rights" doesn't make any sense. And there are estimates of the percentage of sexual assault of college students as high as 40%, though the estimates vary wildly because sexual assault is under-reported in the US, both by the victims (who don't want to deal with making the issue public) and by the college (who generally avoid reporting anything that makes the college look bad).

    109. Re:There's an obvious reason by laird · · Score: 1

      80% of the US population is Christian, so the majority of people who do anything in the US are Christians. Specific to abortion, most of them are members of churches that don't believe that abortion is murder - that's mainly Catholics and some flavors of fundamentalists. Most churches teach that abortions are unfortunate and to be avoided, but are a personal decision that should take many factors into account. And that's certainly what most Christians, and most Americans, believe.

    110. Re:There's an obvious reason by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Please, please if you're educated, we have to stop with the name-calling.
      You misspelled conservative/fundamentalist.
      Even a severely handicapped person can sense when they're being looked down on, and it just incites a defense reaction.

      So what I'm saying is... let's say I call you an idiot. Do you then say, uh, yeah I must be an idiot and here are the reasons why? or is there a defense reaction where you're instantly trying to come up with reasons why you aren't an idiot?

    111. Re:There's an obvious reason by laird · · Score: 2

      In my experience, and my kids', most teachers avoid raising political issues because it's a distraction from the subject being taught. There are some subjects where facts being taught may make some students uncomfortable. For example, I recall in one 'history of religion' course several students were quite irate when the class covered creation myths, showing how elements from the earliest cultures were retained or changed in later cultures' creation myths - they "knew" that the bible was true, so the idea that previous cultures had some of the same myths hundreds or thousands of years earlier, from which the Bible stories borrowed, was quite upsetting to them. But since we know that there were Babylonians, Greeks, etc., and those people recorded their myths on artifacts that pre-date the Bible (Torah...) the class certainly should have covered the material. If you've been taught incorrect things, learning the truth is _good_.

    112. Re:There's an obvious reason by mean+pun · · Score: 1

      That's a pretty good entry for pedant of the week, but that was obviously not what this discussion was about.

    113. Re:There's an obvious reason by RightwingNutjob · · Score: 3, Insightful

      You're quite right. Nowhere did it say explicitly that the accused don't have rights. What it did say is that I ought not act like the burden of proof lies on the accuser. From which I reasoned that they don't want me pointing out that accused have rights, the most fundamental one of which is that the burden of proof lies on the accuser, and not the accused. Not much of a logical leap, is it now?

    114. Re:There's an obvious reason by laird · · Score: 1

      So you advocate what - a government mandated single curriculum for all students?

    115. Re:There's an obvious reason by RightwingNutjob · · Score: 1

      Thinking consenting adults are capable of understanding that bad things happen to good people, including women and children who are held hostage by the sorts of people who love their children by strapping bombs to them.

      If you see it as capricious violence just because their skin color is "wrong" (your words), then that says more about you than it says about anything or anyone else.

    116. Re:There's an obvious reason by RightwingNutjob · · Score: 1

      If you set the bar so high that fewer and fewer people clear it, then I could see how you can believe all sorts of the things that you believe. I don't set it that high*. It's not too much to expect people to abide by basic moral laws.

      *Have fun with that.

    117. Re:There's an obvious reason by RightwingNutjob · · Score: 1

      Everybody's a victim. I know. We're all just leaves on the winds of fate and no one is responsible for anything.

    118. Re:There's an obvious reason by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      So these ignorant morons send their kids to college...and now they're upset. Their kids are using big words... The only conclusion their tiny minds can reach is that college is evil...At some point, we might just need to find a way to stop listening to those people.

      I understand what you say about Christians, I feel exactly the same way about the damn Muslims.

    119. Re: There's an obvious reason by mean+pun · · Score: 1

      The right has a problem with the left dedicating classes to burning the flag you dense twat.

      I'm not even going to bother asking for evidence. All I can say is that if you really believe that such classes exist I am wondering how you can possibly function in real life. Seriously.

      And if you're just letting your underbelly speak, perhaps you should meditate a bit on the word 'integrity'. Is it really ok to tell big whopping lies just because it blunts the effect of something you don't like? Yes, I know that the current resident does this all the time, and look where it brought him, but is it really something that is sustainable? The Pravda and Bagdad Bob have become historical, but for all the wrong reasons.

    120. Re:There's an obvious reason by SlashDread · · Score: 1

      Its also well known that 99% of statistics are made up.

    121. Re:There's an obvious reason by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The left has been deionised in the US for decades to the point that many of the views or policies considered leftist, in the rest of the world they are considered right-wing of centre right at best
      It worked, the working class vote against their best interest and anything or anyone related to unions, dense of the rights of people or the environment, fair treatment of provisioner or against torture carry a tag with negative connotations
      meanwhile corporatist confessional neofascism dress itself as libertarianism or right leaning liberalism (depending or their audience)
      People doesn't do nothing or doesn't care enough to put their lives on the line for the kind of freedom and justice understood by Jefferson .So with so many leftie making universities for decades, how is it that America is in the current political and social shape.? it seems to me that the conservatives would benefit more by leaving universities to carry on as they are

    122. Re:There's an obvious reason by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The fact that we allow American flags to be burnt shows that we have freedom.

      Except you don't. Burn an American flag on campus, and you'll be cheered on. Burn the gay rainbow flag and you'll probably be lynched.

    123. Re: There's an obvious reason by SuricouRaven · · Score: 1

      I read a few strongly republican-leaning websites, often explicitly Christian, and that is actually pretty accurate. I occasionally see them run columns describing how to prepare your soon-to-be-adult child for college, to make sure their faith is strong enough to survive the onslaught of education. They also advertise several books on the subject, with titles like "The Christian's College Survival Guide: Maintaining Spiritual Strength in a Natural World."

      The phrase 'armor of God' often appears. The main thrust of the advice isn't actually to avoid education - it's to avoid all those nasty secular students, and build up a group of devout Christian friends who can support each other. Along with the obvious - no sex, no alcohol, no parties, no smoking, no late nights, no clubbing, no rock music, no fun in general.

      The general impression one would get from those sites is that college is composed of liberal professors determined to beat any religion and patriotism out of their students, and run by a load of fanatical social justice warriors who will cry 'rape' if you so much as make eye contact and expel you on the spot if you address them by the wrong gender pronoun.

    124. Re: There's an obvious reason by SuricouRaven · · Score: 1

      There's a picture.
      https://i.ytimg.com/vi/XhLtvYh...
      The BBC commissioned some historians specialised in the period to come up with the most plausible Jesus they could based on the period, ethnic background, social class, dress and grooming styles of the culture, climate, and so on. That's their best guess.

      The most interesting part, to me, isn't that picture. It's that people have known for a very long time that Jesus would have looked something like that - and yet every crucifix, every church window, every silly little tract and poster still depicts Jesus as a tall, very European white man with flowing hair. The people responsible for this must known full well that this image is wrong - but they also must know just as well that a short man with olive-brown skin is not going to win any converts or get worshippers through the door.

    125. Re:There's an obvious reason by whoever57 · · Score: 2

      So, in your mind, people who disagree with you should just give up on their ideas and fall into line with your beliefs?

      The world doesn't work that way, idiot.

      --
      The real "Libtards" are the Libertarians!
    126. Re:There's an obvious reason by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      And your adjacent wackos decide to take justice into their own hands as well (Senate baseball shooting). Wackos don't need sides, they are already unhinged in the first place. If that were the case, the shooter must have attended Berkely where the new ideology is intolerance to others who do not think like they do.

    127. Re:There's an obvious reason by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Bummer... There goes my PHD (recieved in 1990) which used statisitical methods all the time.

    128. Re:There's an obvious reason by dunkelfalke · · Score: 1

      Pray tell me, what exactly was the responsibility of thousands of Iraqis whom Americans bombed to death? And don't tell me they weren't killed by Christians because most of Americans are. Even Wehrmacht had "Gott mit uns" on their belt buckles and they have murdered millions of innocents.

      --
      "It's such a fine line between stupid and clever" -- David St. Hubbins, Spinal Tap
    129. Re:There's an obvious reason by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yep. Disgust with how most colleges have become, which I share, can coexist with a respect for education... which I also share.

    130. Re:There's an obvious reason by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That's great and all, but if that logic somehow lead you to voting for Bush, then you elected and supported a war-monger who unilaterally invaded and occupied a nation on a lie and got ~300,000 civilians killed. Most not directly by our own troops, but by sectarian violence unleashed by his bad policies and lack of a plan.

      There's worse monsters in the world, but you've somehow got a whole fuckton of blood on your hands. You should be questioning how that happened.

    131. Re:There's an obvious reason by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Do educated people use the phrase "conservitard" more often?

      If so, then I think colleges do have some explaining to do.

    132. Re:There's an obvious reason by dnorman · · Score: 1

      [citation needed]

      was there an epidemic of flag burning? I blinked.

      --


      It is pitch dark. You are likely to be eaten by a grue.
    133. Re:There's an obvious reason by RightwingNutjob · · Score: 1

      In your world, is it possible for anyone who's a Christian or an American or just white to do anything right? I'm not asking because I'm a Christian, in fact I'm not, but because I don't know if you can be reasoned with.

      In the hope that you can be, my answer to your question is that some were wearing Sadam's uniform, some were his supporters, and many were innocent victims whom he was holding hostage over the thirty-some years he was in power. Killing them was immoral, letting Sadam stay in power and making more victims was also immoral. Similar to how bombing Assad's side is immoral and so is staying out while he gases his own people.

    134. Re:There's an obvious reason by Troy+Roberts · · Score: 1

      Though flag burning may be personally offensive, it is the right of any American. It is the essence of free political speech that is guaranteed by the constitution.

    135. Re:There's an obvious reason by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I went back in for the grad school thing and as a condition of registration, I had to take a sensitivity test where to pass, I had to assert on the multiple-choice quiz at the end that 40% of women on college campuses are victims of rape. And that accused don't have rights because I had a moral duty to "believe the victim."

      For a certain definition of rape, for a certain definition of victim, and so on. As I've gotten older and more experienced, the more I see how important manipulating language is. It's about the closest thing to brainwashing that exists in reality. If you redefine assault, redefine gender, redefine freedom, redefine rights, and so on ad nauseam, you can redefine people's core beliefs away.

    136. Re:There's an obvious reason by dunkelfalke · · Score: 1

      And now you are posing yourself as a victim of racism.

      --
      "It's such a fine line between stupid and clever" -- David St. Hubbins, Spinal Tap
    137. Re:There's an obvious reason by Kohath · · Score: 1

      Peace means peace. Live and let live. Not "give up ... ideas", but rather tolerate others' ideas. Not "fall in line", but coexist.

      None of you seem to ever want peace.

    138. Re:There's an obvious reason by bugs2squash · · Score: 1

      I'm not sure these people are republicans or democrats, so much as easily-swayed people who are susceptable to the war on the meaning of words that has probably always gone on.

      This mixes with a peculiar form of "sour grapes" from people who may not have had a chance to get into a university (and that somehow feel they don't benefit from there being doctors, engineers and politicians that did) to make a fertile environment for an irresponsible opportunist to swing a wrecking ball against what truly makes the country great

      It's time that responsible politicians called out this cheap attempt to stir outrage to win votes to the detriment of the country. If there is an argument to be made that universities and free thought benefit humanity, I hold the politicians that are too lazy to make that case as much to blame as the cynics that tear us down.

      --
      Nullius in verba
    139. Re:There's an obvious reason by RightwingNutjob · · Score: 1

      If that's what you see, that's your problem. I guess you can't be reasoned with.

    140. Re:There's an obvious reason by mrbester · · Score: 1

      It's capricious violence because their god is wrong, even though it's the same one. That they also aren't white is considered icing on the cake.

      --
      "Wait. Something's happening. It's opening up! My God, it's full of apricots!"
    141. Re:There's an obvious reason by RightwingNutjob · · Score: 1

      And your evidence for those being the primary motivation and the icing on the cake are...what exactly? Ugly thoughts you conjure up and put into other people's heads and ugly words you say and put into other people's mouths don't count.

    142. Re:There's an obvious reason by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I went back in for the grad school thing and as a condition of registration, I...

      I find it interesting that you aren't naming the college or the department. I don't entirely disbelieve you, but I bet that the test wasn't a limit on you getting into the department and that if we knew exactly where you are talking about we would be able to prove it.

      If this is true then name names. Don't be a coward.

    143. Re:There's an obvious reason by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yes. Thank you for putting this so well. This anti-college/education perception that Republican's have will not serve this country well. Considering how valued education, especially university education, is for so many other countries around the world, demonizing higher education will only allow the entire world to run rough-shod over us. And to me, the frightening part of this is so many citizens here are cheering the demise of the U.S. because of some mistaken belief that education is some sort of "leftist, commie plot." Sad.

    144. Re:There's an obvious reason by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Anybody learning how to actually think will be "left"-leaning initially. After they've learned how to think, they may decide to shift "right." Or they may not, depending on the situation. Those who are and were always "right" have never really learned how to think.

      Recompilation of Marilyn Liddicoat's (let's see if anybody recognizes the name) comment: "When you're under 30, you've not business being anything but a Democrat, and when you're over 40, you've no business being anything but a Republican." One might wish to add a little nuance to that, but it certainly made sense in her time and district.

    145. Re: There's an obvious reason by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Ha. And Democrats want highly capable voters that will trade their votes for welfare and subsidies? Give me a break.

    146. Re:There's an obvious reason by skam240 · · Score: 1

      I bet the American right persecutes more minorities and gays than in Russia and all middle eastern countries combined

      There you go, just as factual as your claim.

      --
      I ignore Anonymous Coward posts. If you want to discuss something, that's awesome. Log in.
    147. Re: There's an obvious reason by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That doesn't even make sense. You can't have consumers or producers without the other one.
      You can't have producers with no "takers" to purchase or takers without anyone to produce.

      For each producer you must have more consumers, so by favouring the producers,
      you are simply taking money from the many and giving it to the few.

    148. Re:There's an obvious reason by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      No one using the term, [group]tard is open to new ideas.

    149. Re:There's an obvious reason by whoever57 · · Score: 1

      You can't "tolerate other's ideas", when those others are telling you how to live your life.

      --
      The real "Libtards" are the Libertarians!
    150. Re:There's an obvious reason by RightwingNutjob · · Score: 1

      Unknown unknowns, AC. They're real, they cause good people to make poor decisions, and they only become obvious decades after. The lesson I draw from history is not that we shouldn't have invaded Iraq, but that we should have had a plan to occupy it from the get-go, not the piecemeal appease-underreact-overreact-neglect mess that we're about halfway through the second cycle on now.

    151. Re:There's an obvious reason by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Red states have the highest number of minors tried as adults, so it's not like you wait until they're adults to start hating on them.

    152. Re:There's an obvious reason by RightwingNutjob · · Score: 1

      Says the guy posting as AC. Sorry, but I am going to keep my identifying information to a minimum. To answer your question, it's not a condition of admission, it's a condition of officially registering for a class to have it count on your transcript. It is a condition of progress through the graduate program. It's not specific to any department, it's school-wide as I understood it.

    153. Re: There's an obvious reason by RightwingNutjob · · Score: 1

      If you knew anything about Christianity, or Judiasm, or Islam, AC, then you'd be meaning this as a joke. But in case you're generally ignorant of western theology, the answer is the One True God. If you subscribe to the Bahai Faith, you'd be open to the argument that some of those literal millions are different manifestations of the same One True God. If you don't, then you'd believe they're mere idols invented by superstitious minds to explain things they can't otherwise understand. Depending on your particular brand of religion, you might be subject to that accusation yourself, or you might be on the "divine clockmaker" end of the spectrum.

    154. Re:There's an obvious reason by Kohath · · Score: 1

      Sure you can. Just don't listen.

    155. Re:There's an obvious reason by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      " Since man is the only animal smart enough to understand that it will die someday"

      Want to call a "citation needed" on this one. I am aware of no evidence that suggests one way or the other if animals are aware of their own inevitable mortality. Honestly I'm not even sure most of humanity is.

    156. Re:There's an obvious reason by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It's a massive overstatement to declare your life is "ruled by logic". Hopefully it is significantly influenced by logic, and that's plenty.

    157. Re:There's an obvious reason by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Red states have the highest number of minors tried as adults, so it's not like you treat them as sacred these days either.

    158. Re:There's an obvious reason by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      US Republicans obviously don't believe governments are inherently evil, otherwise they would not be such staunch supporters and participants in government. Sure, they want deregulation of parts of the economy, but they certainly relish the existence of government, as in: Strict laws and their enforcement; upholding of private property rights; a large and well-equipped military (in the US - a huge and world-encompassing military); and so on.

      Actually, the view of government as inherently "evil", is held at least by Anarchists, by Primitivists, by certain religious groups - each based on very different arguments. It's certainly a position worthy of healthy academic debate, if not more than that.

    159. Re:There's an obvious reason by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You mean, the US government signs their death warrants, and those people who share this view of yours readily execute it.

    160. Re:There's an obvious reason by fahrbot-bot · · Score: 1

      *Have fun with that.

      Don't have to; your username says everything we need to know.

      --
      It must have been something you assimilated. . . .
    161. Re: There's an obvious reason by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      No, Democrats want consumers. Republicans want producers. Makers vs takers.

      Typical right wing confusion between makers and owners...

    162. Re:There's an obvious reason by careysub · · Score: 1

      The Republican Party's power is based largely on the manufactured consensus of the fearful, ignorant...

      And there is a lot of solid evidence that this not an exaggeration. Five Thirty EIght did a nice analysis of Trump voting areas by education level, and the results are striking - Trump swept the most poorly educated half of America. It may not be fair to say that the stupidest Americans elected Trump, but it is true that most ignorant Americans did.

      In all future economies we will have going forward if you want a job you better have a good education. High education jobs are far from universally safe from the Cybernetic Revolution, but the education will be necessary to seize the new opportunities that arise.

      So we have the situation that even as the jobs drain away from the working class, the right wing is turning against higher education which is the best tool known to escape from hardship.

      What do they expect will keep them absolute destitution if there simply aren't enough decent paying jobs to go around? There is the idea of the Universal Basic Income - but such a socialistic policy of just giving hand-outs to takers (as they themselves would say) is everything their political party is opposed to.

      --
      Starships were meant to fly, Hands up and touch the sky - Nicky Minaj
    163. Re:There's an obvious reason by careysub · · Score: 1

      Pressed by Bradley for specifics, Melvin said he understands “some of the reading material is borderline pornographic.” And he said the program uses “fuzzy math,” substituting letters for numbers in some examples.

      Yeah, all those "x's" intemingling with numbers. It's X-rated math that's what it is! Pornography!

      --
      Starships were meant to fly, Hands up and touch the sky - Nicky Minaj
    164. Re:There's an obvious reason by RightwingNutjob · · Score: 1

      Be honest, do you think you've won the argument because you've a word game?

    165. Re:There's an obvious reason by RightwingNutjob · · Score: 1

      *won a word game

    166. Re:There's an obvious reason by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Oh so you won't mind if I take one of your cells made a clone and treat that clone as slave labor since they aren't a person.

    167. Re:There's an obvious reason by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      No, it's transgendered people feeling sad about toilets.

    168. Re:There's an obvious reason by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      And it goes without saying that most academic economists could be practicing voodoo for all the predictive power their theories have.

      Source? (I don't inherently trust nor mistrust academic economists — but I'd like to assume that you have a reason for your distrust, and would like to see your sources.)

    169. Re: There's an obvious reason by Brockmire · · Score: 1

      Worst rebuttals ever. Typical shit replies. You're all smug with your response, but it just reinforced the points.

    170. Re:There's an obvious reason by Dutchmaan · · Score: 1

      Well shit! I guess I better read your literature on how I'm brainwashed... and be sure to tell me what to think in the end!

    171. Re:There's an obvious reason by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Too bad it doesn't happen more often by the snowflakes on the right, too. I hate seeing the neglected and tattered flags flying in the yards of all of the "patriots" around here.

    172. Re:There's an obvious reason by fahrbot-bot · · Score: 1

      Be honest, do you think you've won the argument because you've a word game?

      No, but rather because you've already decided that you know more than anyone else - as you said, *you* don't set the bar that high - and, therefore, can believe anything you want and justify any behavior you want to fit your beliefs and let you sleep at night. Sure, I, you, we (all) expect people to abide by basic moral laws, but some people have problems and they're, apparently, being disproportionately executed -- according to people you actually know more about this than you (or I), except you ignore all that in favor of your beliefs. You said, "Life is sacred, yes. But ...", and there's your problem -- it either is or it isn't. You want to justify it both ways depending on what's in line with your detailed beliefs. The professor in my college biomedical ethics class would have a field day playing Devil's Advocate with you -- if you were inclined to actually learn anything beyond your beliefs.

      All in all, pretty typical of Right Wing Nut Jobs, and the Right in general.

      --
      It must have been something you assimilated. . . .
    173. Re: There's an obvious reason by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Exactly, unborn 'children' cannot chose. That is why we chose for them. When 'children' are unwanted for a whole shit load of reasons, it is best they are never born.

      And that is assuming the bunch of cells the size of a peanut are children in the first place.

    174. Re: There's an obvious reason by Brockmire · · Score: 1

      I like your ideas and I wish to subscribe to your newsletter.

    175. Re:There's an obvious reason by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      They are not using "Big words", they are being stupid and racist.

      https://www.youtube.com/watch?...

      https://www.youtube.com/watch?...

    176. Re: There's an obvious reason by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      And they prefer everyone carry a gun and use it so that it actually never gets to that point.

    177. Re:There's an obvious reason by chadenright · · Score: 1

      Going to have to call bullshit on your bullshit. Here's a wiki article for you: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...

      I should also note that using them as servants and cheap labour was a step -up- from their previous status (especially as they started gaining legal protections throughout the 18th century).

      Here's another article that goes into more depth: http://www.thefinertimes.com/M...

      And during the early first century, which is the relevant point for my comment, children were considered infants until about 7 years of age, in large part due to high mortality up to that age. After that, they were betrothed, and at 12 likely to be either married off or apprenticed -- basically as soon as they hit puberty. (Modern children actually hit puberty earlier due to a combination of better diet and exposure to chemicals).

      And here's a scholarly treatise for you: http://www.academia.edu/100468...

      Finally, just because some figure thinks up a significant idea, that doesn't mean that idea will be adopted right away...or ever.

      Enjoy!

    178. Re: There's an obvious reason by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Ya so sacred that the catholic church abused them for God knows how long (and did nothing mind you).

    179. Re: There's an obvious reason by Brockmire · · Score: 1

      Then you are a pick and chooser. You ignore most of the fucked up things of the Bible, but not all.

    180. Re: There's an obvious reason by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      How so? I'm not trolling. I just don't see how that's a particularly unfair characterization of the party.

    181. Re: There's an obvious reason by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      He does address a real issue though, not about how before right wingers said gay killings was OK, but about a questioning of faith in general. A lot of older conservative people don't like College because it's where a lot of people lose their faith. I'd reckon just as many stop believing in god as switch political parties.

    182. Re:There's an obvious reason by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The more obvious reason is that educated people tend to have better reasoning skills and are more difficult to herd via blind patriotism, religion or other forms of fear-based politicking... and since the GOP is entirely reliant on these methods (since they have to convince people to vote against their own economic interests), they don't want people to be educated.

    183. Re:There's an obvious reason by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Actually the Boy Scouts of America burn the most US flags per year.

    184. Re: There's an obvious reason by Brockmire · · Score: 1

      My problem is that we can't agree what facts are. Are you a Genesis believer with Adam and Eve starting things off, or believe in a book where from the very start, is pure fiction? Why is a book that completely makes shit up the basis for a faith based religion? It's like watching gullible suckers being told 1+1=3. Up until the last 100 years or so, the majority of believers actually believed literal Genesis to be true. It's only recently (1950's) where the stance changed to it being a story with a day being hundreds of millions of years... So the Bible is the "word of God" right up until it's proven false, then it's just lessons and stories to have faith in.

    185. Re: There's an obvious reason by quantaman · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Your straw man conception of modern Republican ideology was written by vox and think progress. It's not anywhere close to reality.

      Have you been paying attention the last 8 years?

      They've been in complete denial of the scientific consensus of climate change, explaining away scientific consensus with outlandish claims of mass international conspiracies.

      They're convinced of massive widescale voter fraud without any evidence, I don't even mean Trump's crazy millions, even the endless claims of thousands of illegal voters never amount anything more than a couple people confused non-citizens.

      Large portions of the party were convinced that Barak Obama was an illegal alien.

      They spent 8 years of campaigning again a Republican healthcare bill (ie, Obamacare), and after getting in power they're now realizing they've made a series of completely contradictory promises, came up with an absolutely awful bill, and are still trying to ram it through. What do they even expect to accomplish if they do pass it? Do they think people won't notice when the individual health care market explodes?

      This is not the action of a rational party.

      I won't dispute for a second that intelligent rational conservatism exists, but the GOP is not it.

      --
      I stole this Sig
    186. Re: There's an obvious reason by Brockmire · · Score: 1

      No. Having a high concentration of stupid is not good for anyone.

    187. Re:There's an obvious reason by quantaman · · Score: 1

      Boy that's some fancy quote chopping going on there. In a sentence on the specific issues Melvin has, consisting of 32 words, 10 of them are actual words spoken by Melvin. The rest are the reporter's words. Not saying the guy isn't an idiot, he might be for all I know (I'm not in AZ). But whenever I see that much quote chopping and editing in an article, I'm immediately suspicious that some one is being made to say something very different from what they actually said.

      Possible, but reputable reporters typically don't do that.

      More likely the quote chopping was required to a) distill a larger conversation (that no one wants to read in it's entirely) into a series of quotes that give an accurate overview, and b) the guy is an idiot and some editing is required to make the statements readable (just read Trump's speeches, he can't really communicate without the benefit of body language, inflection, and pacing).

      --
      I stole this Sig
    188. Re:There's an obvious reason by whoever57 · · Score: 1

      Sure you can. Just don't listen.

      And when those others are trying to get laws passed to restrict how you can live your life? What then?

      Or when existing laws already restrict you from living your life the way you want to? What then?

      Conflict is part of the human experience. Calling for "Peace" such that people stop arguing over ideas is simply code for "you should just accept my ideas".

      --
      The real "Libtards" are the Libertarians!
    189. Re:There's an obvious reason by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Openly or by their actions? Because you can look at the case of when Milo Yiannopoulos spoke at several universities, it came out that when those protesters stormed the stage or hall police were told by the campus or police chief not to do anything. There's a few more examples of universities doing things like this.

      Sure Mashiki, the right-wing victim brigade went all hard-core on that one, until they suddenly learned what Yiannopoulos had said, which made him persona non grata, now he's totally forgotten, and no, nobody else could pretend to stoke up the phony fires of false persecution either.

      They even made a movie about it.

      You can also find plenty of professors at many universities that support violence against whites(which the new trendy shit), and engage in overt racism against whites as well.

      Sure Masiki, and you can also find plenty of professors at many universities that support violence against blacks (always a trendy shit), and engage in overt racism as well. Not to mention the ones that let sex abuse happen.

      You let me know when you plan to move out of your glass house, ok?

    190. Re:There's an obvious reason by quantaman · · Score: 1

      I disagree somewhat with both you and the person you're responding to. I don't think it's explicitly the engineering or math that is upsetting them, and I don't think it's "brainwashing". The real problem is that, when you get a broad education and actually learn about the world we live in, modern Republican ideology is revealed to be complete insanity.

      I think that misses the underlying causes.

      Both Leftism and Conservatism are fundamentally about identity, which is social. People don't care about economics they way they do social issues, economics only determines how much money you have, but social policies determine which tribe is winning.

      Conservatism is fundamentally about creating a peaceful safe community, that's why they tend to be more supportive of law enforcement, more outwardly patriotic, and less tolerant of diversity, they want a strong unified community. The idea of Conservatism is people should be be free to do whatever they want, and the way to ensure that is a strong community that ensures that people only want things that are good for the community.

      Leftism champions individual liberty so that you're free to truly express yourself, that means that law enforcement should only be used as a last resort, group identities are viewed with suspicion, and people should only be part of the communities they want.

      Universities are about learning and research, and those work best when people are free to experiment and push intellectual boundaries, ie leftism. That's why Universities will always have a tendency to lean left.

      --
      I stole this Sig
    191. Re:There's an obvious reason by Namarrgon · · Score: 1

      "It only takes 20 years for a liberal to become a conservative without changing a single idea."
          -- Robert Anton Wilson, 1980

      --
      Why would anyone engrave "Elbereth"?
    192. Re:There's an obvious reason by Kohath · · Score: 1

      And now you're making up hypotheticals and redefining words. Because endless war is the only real thing you have to offer.

      Does anyone want anything different? If someone does, they have to learn to oppose people like you.

    193. Re:There's an obvious reason by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      None of those countries attaches much value to their flag. To them it's just a piece of cloth.

      America is, pretty much, unique in fetishising its flag to the point of passing laws about what you can or can't do with it.

    194. Re:There's an obvious reason by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Evidence? The unprovoked war in Iraq is a pretty big recent example. Though I'd have said money was a bigger motivation for the perpetrators than religion or skin colour, those certainly helped sell the idea to the public.

    195. Re:There's an obvious reason by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      No need to grant that much. His whole stated worldview is a formal False Dichotomy fallacy of "religion versus logic".

      He's full fail already.

    196. Re:There's an obvious reason by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      - States trying to ban people marrying the person they love because it disagrees with the Bible.

      For thousands of years, the definition of marriage in both common and understood law was a union between a man and a woman. When social engineers attempted to twist that, and redefine marriage, some states reacted by codifying the widely accepted definition into law. Actually has nothing to do with the Bible.

      -States trying to force women to carry babies to term even when it'll kill them, because the Bible apparently says they have to.

      Extreme Strawman. The number of abortions carried out to save the mother's life is statistically insignificant. Equally small are the numbers of pregnancies that result from Rape. The VAST majority of abortions are completed as a convenient form of birth control. Legally, killing a pregnant mother is a double homicide in many jurisdictions. Why is killing the unborn child alone not a single homicide? Abortion ends a defenseless human life for convenience. That's called Murder.

      - States erecting public monuments to christianity, despite constitutional requirements that they don't.

      There exists no such constitutional requirement at the federal level, nor in most states. I suggest you research what "Separation of Church and State" means, and from whence it is derived (hint, it's not the Constitution)

      - States trying to force people to be taught non-science in science classes because it disagrees with the Bible.

      There are many secular concepts taught in science classes that are non-scientific. Most science is not at odds with the Bible, nor vice versa. In fact, many early biblical instructions to the Israelites have known scientific purposes.

      - States trying to give tax payer funding to churches and calling them schools

      You lost me here. I'm guessing you don't actually know the legal difference between a church, a Christian or private school, or how taxes relate to either.

      I'm left wondering how this inaccurate rant got modded 'informative'. Of course, just like all my posts, this one likely won't get modded up simply because I refuse to create a slashdot account, and that's more important to moderators than the content of my post.

    197. Re: There's an obvious reason by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Lol. Yeah, it's STEM programs conservatives dislike. Lol.

      Not all these classes that normalize oppression and hate to the point where people are convinced entire classes of people are incapable a being racist/sexist/whatever.

    198. Re: There's an obvious reason by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I would posit to you that in America, both left and right parties are authoritarian.

      It's the one thing they can agree on.

    199. Re:There's an obvious reason by HornWumpus · · Score: 1

      Every phone has a camera. Where are the videos of hateful right wing profs to balance the videos of hateful left wing profs?

      --
      John McAfee 'It was like that time I hired that Bangkok prostitute; to do my taxes, while I fucked my accountant'
    200. Re:There's an obvious reason by HornWumpus · · Score: 1

      Some people just 'need killing'.

      Personally I'm all for legal 75th trimester abortions. _Either_ parent just calls the school counselor and the brat doesn't come home.

      --
      John McAfee 'It was like that time I hired that Bangkok prostitute; to do my taxes, while I fucked my accountant'
    201. Re:There's an obvious reason by HornWumpus · · Score: 1

      No future loans to students in majors where none of them can get a job.

      --
      John McAfee 'It was like that time I hired that Bangkok prostitute; to do my taxes, while I fucked my accountant'
    202. Re:There's an obvious reason by HornWumpus · · Score: 1

      There are no credible studies that put it at 40%. Those conflate 'unwanted approaches' with 'sexual assault'.

      --
      John McAfee 'It was like that time I hired that Bangkok prostitute; to do my taxes, while I fucked my accountant'
    203. Re:There's an obvious reason by HornWumpus · · Score: 1

      I'll name one: Sacramento State requires _every_ student to take a 'liberal indoctrination', full semester waste of time, course. Of course they don't call it that.

      --
      John McAfee 'It was like that time I hired that Bangkok prostitute; to do my taxes, while I fucked my accountant'
    204. Re: There's an obvious reason by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      what the fuck does that even mean? what do these "makers" make with no education? diddly squat chum buckets? rather than throwing marketing slogans out let's agree that we are what we are today (a digital economy for the most part) thanks to our colleges. You can point the very republican startup founders and you won't see a single one of them diss education. So let's cut the crap and focus on the real issue.

    205. Re: There's an obvious reason by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I think you are missing the source of the smug.

      You are the one with the hate on, we are the ones pointing it out and hoping you get professional help.

      Enjoy Trump 2020.

    206. Re:There's an obvious reason by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      exactly! and worse still he uses the fruits of technology that directly contradicts his beliefs and pretends its fine. Where do the fossil fuels come from in a 6000 year old planet? does the earth revolve around the sun? you cannot "explain away" absolute contradictions in your belief and hold onto a few of them to absolution. learning does *not* work this way.

    207. Re:There's an obvious reason by RightwingNutjob · · Score: 1

      There are no such things as platonic ideals, dear interlocutor, neither in life nor in mathematical logic. Belief systems are riddled with exceptions because of messiness of complex situations doesn't land them cleanly on one side of the dividing line between good and evil. "...yes. But..." is the only possible consequence of that.

    208. Re:There's an obvious reason by RightwingNutjob · · Score: 1

      Example: Janet Yellen (not an academic in the strictest sense, but hey...) insisting that 2% inflation is the optimal number. Milton Friedman (an academic in the strictest sense) insisting zero is the correct number. A consistent set of laws cannot yield two different answers to the same exact question. I might agree with Friedman over Yellen, but I do so because of my own judgement of the merits of if zero inflation and not anything I'd call macroeconomic theory.

    209. Re:There's an obvious reason by RightwingNutjob · · Score: 1

      Correct. But the distinction was deliberately blurred in that training material.

    210. Re:There's an obvious reason by RightwingNutjob · · Score: 1

      Were you here? Your spelling of 'color' suggests you weren't. I was. And that's not how it went down.

    211. Re:There's an obvious reason by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      STEM doesn't threaten religious beliefs. People who don't like religion say it does, but they're just guessing. They actually have no idea.

    212. Re: There's an obvious reason by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Every phone has a camera.

      Provably false. You really shouldn't make hyperbolic claims, it discredits you even when they're irrelevant.

      Where are the videos of hateful right wing profs to balance the videos of hateful left wing profs?

      Oh? You think pretending the problem doesn't exist because you deny seeing it? That isn't helping you either, MashupWumpus, since you could easily have found out about the recent example from Tennessee if you had wanted.

      Of course, when it comes to videos, you still have the Shirley Sherrod/James O'Keefe problem, so that's another burden for you to bear.

    213. Re: There's an obvious reason by dasunt · · Score: 1

      By "supply side", I'm referring to Say's law. It tends to be rejected by mainstream economists.

    214. Re:There's an obvious reason by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It is only in the US that people care about flags. In pretty much every other country it's a piece of cloth that hangs on a pole. Almost no one cares about them and no one would even consider taking the effort to burn one. So no.

    215. Re: There's an obvious reason by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Why is that a bad thing again? I like my first amendment; DO YOU?

    216. Re: There's an obvious reason by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      No. It's just a piece of fabric. Take your nationalism somewhere else.

    217. Re:There's an obvious reason by NG-Buddhist · · Score: 1

      Life starting at conception is an opinion, not a fact.

    218. Re: There's an obvious reason by quenda · · Score: 1

      The standard images of Jesus just come from the first paintings, done by early Greek-speaking Christians in the eastern Mediterranean, who made him in their own image.
      The icons likely more resemble St Paul and the gospel authors than Jesus himself. It is not a modern-day anti-Jewish conspiracy.

    219. Re:There's an obvious reason by NG-Buddhist · · Score: 1

      I was there. I was also there when the Towers fell. You really want to make the argument that religion didn't directly play into the Iraq War?

    220. Re:There's an obvious reason by NG-Buddhist · · Score: 1

      The lesson you should have drawn from history is that going into an unstable region and creating further instability does not bring about positive outcomes, ever. It doesn't take a sage to see that every war the US has inserted itself into since WWII has been ultimately unnecessary for the safety, health, and security of the nation.

    221. Re:There's an obvious reason by NG-Buddhist · · Score: 1

      This is a lovely circlejerk of anonymous commentary. Good to know you'll call people out without first putting yourself out there. Stand tall.

    222. Re:There's an obvious reason by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I don't know why everyone seems to think that they hold some kind of unassailable moral high ground. You think 'your side' is so pure and never harms society or people? Take a good look at yourself. As you put it: "You're part of the problem."

    223. Re:There's an obvious reason by serviscope_minor · · Score: 1

      Much as people love to hate on Jesus

      Do they? It's mostly his followers people seem to have a problem with. It would help of the most zealous of Jesus followers actually paid the first bit of attention to what he actually said.

      --
      SJW n. One who posts facts.
    224. Re:There's an obvious reason by serviscope_minor · · Score: 2

      You can go to Brown University and take a class on "Being Bored."

      No you can't. You can go there and take a class in the English course about expressions of boredome in literature:

      https://www.brown.edu/academic...

      I can't see why you'd disapprove of that unless you think that people should study subjects you don't really know much about only in the particular ways you approve of. then again you do identify as Republica, so that kinda makes sense.

      Native American Studies?

      You won. They lost. Everyone should get over it. No need to study anythig about them any more.

      Sarcasm by the way.

      --
      SJW n. One who posts facts.
    225. Re:There's an obvious reason by Waccoon · · Score: 1

      ...you have zero problems with killing humans.

      Could you elaborate on this ridiculous level of hyperbole? I'm not religious, but I get the impression Christians consider abortion wrong because they believe a zygote to be a human being, not because murder is okay for everyone except the unborn.

    226. Re:There's an obvious reason by serviscope_minor · · Score: 1

      Sounds like a tall story to me.

      So, I call bullshit.

      Though I'm not gona accuse you of lying. I think you probably believe that that is what you saw. However, I think think you're so desperate to warp everything university related round so it matches your conception of how evil lefties are that you firmly believe that's what you saw.

      But I'm not goig to believe you until you provide evidence because your word has little credibility in these matters.

      --
      SJW n. One who posts facts.
    227. Re:There's an obvious reason by serviscope_minor · · Score: 1

      I do not, however, ever vote for an abortionist candidate.

      Do you ever vote for a candidate who supports the death penalty?

      --
      SJW n. One who posts facts.
    228. Re:There's an obvious reason by Repentinus · · Score: 1

      It is perfectly possible to believe the victim and treat them with due sensitivity while not treating the alleged assailant any differently until they have been found guilty by a jury of their peers in a court of law. Even if the alleged assailant is cleared, there is no reason to disbelieve the victim: the recollection and interpretation of events can vary wildly from one person to next, and it is possible to feel violated even if the other person's conduct was legal and they truly had no way of knowing that you did not consent any more.

      By way of example, consider a couple who always engage in intercourse doggy style. They are not into making noise: she just likes to quietly smile, he likes to tell her cute things, and they have always abided by the principles of enthusiastic consent. This has been their routine for a while, so he is not concerned about her being quiet. The time comes when he thinks up a new comment, but instead of the comment making her smile more, it causes her to freeze up: it has triggered memories of past traumatic experience and she feels scared, in danger, maybe about to die, and totally unable to communicate. She definitely does not want to have intercourse any more. He knows none of it: to him, she appears as she always has during their romps, and for all he knows, she is quietly smiling. At some point they finish and he realizes that something is wrong. What happens depends on the strength of their bond, but she would not be wrong if she lost all trust in him and considered herself to have been raped. However, considering their usual lack of communication, his conduct would not have been unreasonable, and there would clearly have been no intent on his part to assault her. A jury would be unlikely to convict him and there would be little reason to treat him as a dangerous monster, yet you could still believe she has been raped, fully empathize with her, and understand if she never wanted to see him again.

      (Yes, the above is an example of bad communication between a couple, but believe it or not, most people are bad at communication.)

    229. Re:There's an obvious reason by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I'd bet more American flags are burned at American colleges than in Russia and all middle eastern countries combined.

      Excuses for hatred often come from beliefs that have no or limited basis in reality.

    230. Re:There's an obvious reason by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I should hope so. As established by convention, the proper way to dispose of a US flag removed from service is to burn it. You don't toss it in the trash. I should also hope the US military burns more flags than Russia etc. Public flag burning as protest in the US does more than express dissatisfaction. It also exposes ignorant gits when they talk about banning the act.

    231. Re:There's an obvious reason by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      - States trying to ban people marrying the person they love because it disagrees with the Bible.

      For thousands of years, the definition of marriage in both common and understood law was a union between a man and a woman.

      Yes, and Homosexuals were often punished and abused, treated as anathema, even ill. As well as racial minorities, religious minorities, and more.

      When social engineers attempted to twist that, and redefine marriage, some states reacted by codifying the widely accepted definition into law.

      When society got to the point where homosexuality, like interracial marriages, could no longer be scorned and condemned, and could come up in the open, then the people who were homosexual, wanted the benefits of marriag which were conferred by the state, and asserted a legal right to it, which eventually courts recognized as a valid argument, and thus states began having to comply.

      But good on you, calling it twisting, treating their actions as inappropriate, or what?

      Actually has nothing to do with the Bible.

      You'd have better luck making that argument if they didn't declare it to be a Biblical effort in their law-making and court documents. Roy Moore wasn't the only one either.

      Just because it destroys your argument, doesn't mean you get to ignore it. Anthony Kennedy didn't.

      -States trying to force women to carry babies to term even when it'll kill them, because the Bible apparently says they have to.

      Extreme Strawman.

      Real problem, the right keeps putting laws together that leave out the most obvious concerns. Not that their TRAP laws are any better on their own, but you'd think they'd learn.

      The number of abortions carried out to save the mother's life is statistically insignificant.

      And yet a life lost is still a life lost. You're just making it even more questionable why they go out of their way to even deny the occasional necessity of abortions to save a life.

      Equally small are the numbers of pregnancies that result from Rape.

      And yet they're ignored too. Or the right goes out of the way to make it difficult to address. Actually, they have problems with the whole prosecution of Rape in general. Remember that fellow who said that the body has ways to shut the whole thing down?

      The VAST majority of abortions are completed as a convenient form of birth control.

      Oh noes, the horrors! Why we should just do something known to be effective, like make birth control conveniently available. Oh wait, no, who's resisting that?

      Legally, killing a pregnant mother is a double homicide in many jurisdictions.

      Yes, they decided to implement laws for their own social engineering.

      Why is killing the unborn child alone not a single homicide?

      Because then we end up prosecuting miscarriages as criminal events.

      Abortion ends a defenseless human life for convenience. That's called Murder.

      Nope, not by law. Sorry, but you lost Roe v. Wade.

      - States erecting public monuments to christianity, despite constitutional requirements that they don't.

      There exists no such constitutional requirement at the federal level, nor in most states. I suggest you research what "Separation of Church and State" means, and from whence it is derived (hint, it's not the Constitution)

      I suggest you research from where the Constitution derived the principles found in the Bill of Rights. Hint: They put things in the Constitution for a reason.

      - States trying to force people to be taught non-science in science classes because it disagrees with the Bible.

      There

    232. Re:There's an obvious reason by ElGuapo2872 · · Score: 1

      I work at a fairly typical middle of the road state run university and we had our HR department basically tell us that if we suspect a crime has been committed, dont go to the police. Go to them instead because they have some investigative powers and dont have to (I am paraphrasing) worry about due process and rights of the accused. They justified it by saying that sure they can wreck your life, make your degree worthless, and take away what you have spent decades working for, but they didnt have the power to put you in prison. It was a chilling seminar and even a number of my very liberal coworkers were horrified. Only loosely related, I had a student who had just recently started working at our facility tell me point blank "There are too many old white guys here" and "we need to get rid of some." Now couple that attitude with a kangaroo court and an ends justifies the mean attitude and you will see why a lot of people do not see the current university structure as a good thing.

    233. Re:There's an obvious reason by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The french got blown up, shot and run over.

      They don't describe it that way anymore.

    234. Re:There's an obvious reason by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "but then I grew up, learned critical thinking skills..."

      Here is exactly the problem. You are a minority, and a very small minority at that.

      I have three kids in school, one each in elementary, middle and high school. The ONLY critical thinking skills they've learned are what I taught them. They had "critical thinking" exercises in school. At least, that's what they called the word search puzzles that were assigned as homework. I'm not kidding.

      The older generation didn't go to the same kind of schools kids these days do. That's why they think differently. The schools of the 1940s, 50s and early 60s were rougher, more like crucibles than comfy nests.

      My kids can run logic circles around their peers and don't mind doing it. I've always required them to do three things outside of school.
      1. Learn a musical instrument. It teaches them patience, dedication and attention to details.
      2. Play a sport. For fitness, team building and how to be competitive, including how to lose gracefully.
      3. Join the debate club. How to argue through a structure of valid points (a disagreement is not an argument) and how to think logically.
      Oh, there's a 4th thing too. Every evening we make a home cooked meal, from scratch, and we eat together and talk about the day, without any phones or TV.
      We are all atheists, but we also talk about the good and bad points of religious beliefs and religion's role in a society.

      It makes all the difference. My kids see school not as a learning environment. They see it as a game to be played. The teenager has even started to "train" some of her teachers. I admit, it makes me a little nervous about what they'll do in the real world.

      And don't forget, every generalization is a fallacy (paradox!) Sen. Al Franken is part of the older generation too...

      We just need to make more people like you, my kids and Al Franken, and we can't trust the schools to do it. It's a parenting job.

    235. Re:There's an obvious reason by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It's way more than just STEM.

      Rick Perry, speaking at a US Chamber of Commerce meeting --
            "I really don't see why high schools should have to teach college
      level courses like calculus, economics, physics, chemistry or biology.
      Not all children go to college anyway. Texas has plenty of on the job
      training programs that teach skills and trades. Oil field workers need
      to know how to operate machines that extract oil. They don't need
      calculus to do their job. "

      He went on to say:

        "I want to make private schools more accessible to Republican
      Christian families that cannot afford to pay high tuition and for
      those who cannot home school their children. " And "I have no problem
      if curriculum specialists and teachers decide to replace language arts
      and literature with bible study."

      There you go.

    236. Re:There's an obvious reason by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Abraham Lincoln said "The fastest way to repeal a bad law is to enforce it strictly"

      The bible is a funny thing. Rape is only bad for women. If a man rapes an unmarried woman, she becomes his property. (this was supposed to be a punishment for the man since he's now responsible for her.)

      Children, especially girls, can be sold as slaves.

      Debts must be forgiven every seven years.

      You can be put to death for working -- even just picking up sticks -- on Sunday.

      I could go on. Let's enforce the whole goddamn bible STRICTLY and see how long it lasts.

    237. Re:There's an obvious reason by RightwingNutjob · · Score: 1

      Yes, I do. If the hijackers had been trained and sent by a fundamentalist Catholic sect operating out of a Catholic theocracy on the other side of the world, we would have gone to war with them and pre-emptive war with those we perceived to be their fellow travellers just the same.

    238. Re:There's an obvious reason by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I forgot to mention, I take parenting very seriously. It takes a shitload of time to drive my kids around to all these things, to buy their equipment, to help them through the rough spots, etc. It's like having a second full time job, and yes, I have a regular full time job too, and so does their mother. We feel that we're making an investment by raising our kids this way. It's do-able.

      People ask us how do we do it. The answer is simple. We don't spend four hours parked in front of a TV every night. Add it up. TV is the biggest time-thief in your life.

      We have a TV, and we have netflix. but TV is like candy or dessert. It's the treat, not the meal, and only taken in strict moderation. Just imagine what this country might have been in Adams, Franklin and Jefferson had spent their youths watching "current pop drama" instead of reading Locke, Smith and Plato, among others.

      Brains need good intellectual nourishment and challenges to develop properly. So parents out there, just buckle down and do it. THAT is how we'll truly make America great again.

    239. Re:There's an obvious reason by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      So these ignorant morons send their kids to college.. and now they're upset. Their kids are using big words, and talking like murdering gay people isn't cool. The only conclusion their tiny minds can reach is that college is evil... we might just need to find a way to stop listening to those people.

      I understand exactly what you saying there about Christians, I feel the same way about the Muslims.

    240. Re:There's an obvious reason by ebvwfbw · · Score: 1

      Conservitard isn't even a word. It doesn't even make sense. Libtard on the other hand is a word and makes perfect sense. Conservatives are conservatives because that's what works. Has worked for hundreds of years. Liberals on the other hand are liberals because they want to change stuff and don't care about history. Those that do change it to get away from their history. In short, they lie about it. The left lies about their racist past, they lie about their broken policies, they've even killed millions. Nazi is a leftist, can't say nazi without saying socialist. Yet they lie and try to make people thing fascists/nazis are on the right. Right of communism, not on the right.

      I'm sure the AC is a libtard. He probably needs a good spanking from his parents.

    241. Re: There's an obvious reason by SuricouRaven · · Score: 1

      It's not a conspiracy - that would imply coordination. It's just a lot of church leaders who, at some point, realise the image of Jesus they have always known is inaccurate - and decided that they should keep it that way.

    242. Re:There's an obvious reason by RightwingNutjob · · Score: 1

      No, in fact I couldn't believe she was raped. I could certainly believe that she believes she had been raped, but there's belief and then there's something approximating objective reality. This whole sensitivity training believe the victim baloney yet another deliberate effort to blur that line and make a power grab away from the rule of law and for the rule of emotions and passions.

    243. Re:There's an obvious reason by RightwingNutjob · · Score: 1

      The question you should be asking before you bestow your lessons upon us all is whether that "further instability" is caused by our intervention or not. Five years ago I might have agreed with you. What's happened across parts of the Arab world we never set foot in during that time has caused my opinion to evolve on the subject. They're plenty good at making messes for themselves over there. Our power to subract from that is limited, yes. But our power to add to it is also limited. The question is whether we believe we need to get something done that won't happen on its own. Revenge in Afghanistan. Pre-emption in Iraq.

    244. Re: There's an obvious reason by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      >They've been in complete denial of the scientific consensus of climate change

      I see you forgot about global warming. Thats pretty convenient, because the climate always changes, so tell me again about this science of climate change and runaway warming as we enter the grand solar minimum, and galactic cosmic rays cause atmospheric compression events which result in deluges of precipitation, the likes of which haven't been seen in damn near a hundred years.

      Skiing in august in California for instance.

      Oh year, that drought that climate experts said was going to last 'forever' is also over, and the oroville dam almost collapsed because they were betting on the 'climate change orthodoxy' which makes you into a 'denier' if you disagree. Looks like the orthodoxy was dead wrong about California.

      Also, winter wheat crops were devastated this year. Something like 25-35% losses.

      As we go further into the grand solar minimum the climate is going to change drastically, but not in any way like has been predicted.

      Science isn't done on a 'denier'/'believer' basis, and the left if it really does love science will stop using terms like that.

    245. Re:There's an obvious reason by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Which is why we need to be on guard for authoritarians that come from both sides of the horseshoe.

      The religious right and the marxist left are both cancer.

      Right now the marxist left is the problem, so we need to focus on them, and the corporate elites that benefit when either of the authoritarian sides of the horseshoe are dominant.

    246. Re: There's an obvious reason by quantaman · · Score: 1

      >They've been in complete denial of the scientific consensus of climate change

      I see you forgot about global warming.

      So climate change is wrong because scientists used to use a different term to communicate it to the public??

      Thats pretty convenient, because the climate always changes, so tell me again about this science of climate change and runaway warming as we enter the grand solar minimum, and galactic cosmic rays cause atmospheric compression events which result in deluges of precipitation, the likes of which haven't been seen in damn near a hundred years.

      You have a google machine, I'm not going to even bother to debunk this.

      Skiing in august in California for instance.

      Oh year, that drought that climate experts said was going to last 'forever' is also over, and the oroville dam almost collapsed because they were betting on the 'climate change orthodoxy' which makes you into a 'denier' if you disagree. Looks like the orthodoxy was dead wrong about California.

      Also, winter wheat crops were devastated this year. Something like 25-35% losses.

      As we go further into the grand solar minimum the climate is going to change drastically, but not in any way like has been predicted.

      Short term regional predictions are irrelevant to the validity of climate change.

      Science isn't done on a 'denier'/'believer' basis, and the left if it really does love science will stop using terms like that.

      No it isn't, because the deniers aren't doing science.

      --
      I stole this Sig
    247. Re: There's an obvious reason by kelanos · · Score: 0

      >outlandish conspiracies

      see when you have a cattle-beast talking like this, you know it's not really paying attention to what it's saying, it's just scooping hyperbolic phrases out of its "brain" to support the ideology it was programmed to defend

      You're should work for fruit farms making scarecrows, you are incredible at straw-manning

      calling other people crazy is not really what you want to be doing right now.
      >intelligent rational
      >only things I agree with

      you're subhuman. we are going to kill all of you animals

    248. Re:There's an obvious reason by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      We have a saying in my country that the best way to become atheist is to study theology in the university. Ironically that is the normal way to receive the qualification for becoming a priest as well.

    249. Re:There's an obvious reason by pipingguy · · Score: 1

      "global warming (is) real"

      For now it is, since the Earth is coming out of an ice age anyway. But the left's whole let's-reinvent-the-world-economy-to-fix-it nonsense has waaay too much Mott and Bailey manipulation going on for most of it to be anything more than a money and power grab. Sorry to question your belief system.

    250. Re:There's an obvious reason by PoopJuggler · · Score: 1

      It's not that republicans hate education

      Trump's education cuts would suggest otherwise...

    251. Re:There's an obvious reason by nine-times · · Score: 1

      What you're saying is true enough, but I don't think it's the "underlying cause". The underlying cause is deep and longstanding propaganda and manipulation. The Republican party decided decades ago that they'd gain power by stoking the flames of angry ignorant impotence among rural racists. Now they're reaping what they've sowed.

    252. Re:There's an obvious reason by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Since when do you care about credible numbers?

    253. Re: There's an obvious reason by nine-times · · Score: 1

      Do you even know what a stream-man argument is?

      It's not a straw man simply because I make a position sound stupid and small-minded and bigoted, and you don't like that characterization. I have to be misrepresenting the position. I have to be making a counter-argument that assumes someone is taking a position which they are not taking.

      I don't pay any attention to Vox or Think Progress. This position can be gleaned by listening to the President's speeches and watching a little Fox and Friends.

    254. Re:There's an obvious reason by nine-times · · Score: 1

      Maybe you should go to college and learn what a straw-man argument is. It's not, "You made me feel stupid and I don't like it."

    255. Re:There's an obvious reason by Stephan+Schulz · · Score: 1

      If one believes that life starts at conception, then abortion is murder. While I can see why you wouldn't believe in creationism as that takes a leap of faith, I really don't get why you can't understand opposition to something as brutal as the slaughter of the innocent.

      Are you aware of the fact that about half of all pregnancies spontaneously abort without any intervention in the first few weeks, often without anybody noticing either the pregnancy or its end? If "life starts at conception", god has designed a pretty awful system for keeping life alive.

      From a theological perspective, with original sin there are no "innocents". And from a humanistic/scientific perspective, life itself (even human life, if you think every cell is human) is something we kill every time we scrub our hands, or pick our nose, or scratch an itch. Much of the dust in your house is dead skin cells your body dropped off. Life definitely plays second fiddle to mind, in my mind.

      And from a practical perspective, it looks as if good and cheap access to contraceptives and sex ed are a lot better at reducing the rate of abortions than legal restraints. So is offering financial aid and career support for pregnant women. So if you really want to reduce the number of abortions, it's better to offer additional choices, not to restrict choices.

      --

      Stephan

    256. Re: There's an obvious reason by Bartles · · Score: 1

      Exactly. You made up a Boogeyman that doesn't really exist so you could oppose it on moral grounds to try to make yourself look good.

    257. Re: There's an obvious reason by nine-times · · Score: 1

      You still haven't presented any kind of counter-argument, or even a description of how my post includes a straw-man. I have to conclude that you don't actually understand the concept of a "straw man".

    258. Re: There's an obvious reason by Bartles · · Score: 1

      When did I ever say you made a straw man argument? Although, I guess you happen to be making one now.

    259. Re: There's an obvious reason by nine-times · · Score: 1

      Your straw man conception...

      and

      You made up a Boogeyman that doesn't really exist...

    260. Re:There's an obvious reason by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      substituting letters for numbers in some examples.

      That's a technique used by the groups adhering to the teachings of Al-Jebra! Do you want your kid learning terrorist math?

    261. Re: There's an obvious reason by Bartles · · Score: 1

      Are you intellectually honest enough to understand there is a difference between a straw man and a straw man argument?

    262. Re:There's an obvious reason by david_thornley · · Score: 1

      You're in favor of the flag of your country getting all ratty and torn?

      --
      "When you have eliminated the unacceptable, whatever is left, however improbable, must be the truthiness" - Holmes
    263. Re:There's an obvious reason by david_thornley · · Score: 1

      Your first two examples are of topics where the Democrat position is currently the law, and which Republicans are trying to change and subvert. Why can't we have peace now? It isn't my side that's trying to change the law.

      Monuments are inert, but people putting up monuments aren't. What is taught in school is significant, and adding nonsense is wrong and should not be excused. Why can't you admit the obvious truth? Do you think changing the subject and dismissing legitimate concerns contributes to peace?

      --
      "When you have eliminated the unacceptable, whatever is left, however improbable, must be the truthiness" - Holmes
    264. Re:There's an obvious reason by david_thornley · · Score: 1

      Which University in particular do you wish to cite as an example, and where can we find documentation of the instructions to police? Which of these plenty of professors would you like to name?

      --
      "When you have eliminated the unacceptable, whatever is left, however improbable, must be the truthiness" - Holmes
    265. Re:There's an obvious reason by david_thornley · · Score: 1

      From what I've read, infanticide as a standard practice ended a few centuries ago, much closer to the present day than to Jesus's time.

      --
      "When you have eliminated the unacceptable, whatever is left, however improbable, must be the truthiness" - Holmes
    266. Re:There's an obvious reason by david_thornley · · Score: 1

      Would you care to claim the school? I haven't seen anything like that.

      When I went back to grad school, the only official statement was that, in the case of a teacher/TA and student having a sexual relationship, they would believe the student in the case of a complaint of sexual harassment.

      --
      "When you have eliminated the unacceptable, whatever is left, however improbable, must be the truthiness" - Holmes
    267. Re: There's an obvious reason by nine-times · · Score: 1

      You'll have to point me to someplace that describes the distinction you're aiming for here. I'm honestly not sure what you're getting at.

    268. Re:There's an obvious reason by Gussington · · Score: 1

      Higher Education has a long history of being rather left leaning. It is well known that most who are on the left when they are at University become less left wing as they grow older.

      True, but it's probably less to do with college and more to do with coming of age. When you reach your late teens you suddenly realise old people have everything and you have nothing, and that's not fair! Equality for all!
      Then you get old and accumulate wealth over your life and realise that you earned it and it not fair someone else should take it off you.
      I lean further right every year I get older, but I still value higher education as a foundation of any civilised society.

  3. wtf by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    wtf wtf wtf

  4. SJW/Antifa backlash by elrous0 · · Score: 5, Insightful

    This sudden decline in opinion isn't the result of some new strain of anti-intellectualism, as some Democrats will no doubt suggest, but rather the perception that modern universities have become hotbeds of SJW, "Antifa," and anti-capitalist ideology. That's why the disapproval numbers are particularly high among those with higher incomes (who HATE anti-capitalists).

    Even I'm more distrustful of modern universities than I used to be just a few years ago. And I used to be a professor.

    --
    SJW: Someone who has run out of real oppression, and has to fake it.
    1. Re:SJW/Antifa backlash by markdavis · · Score: 4, Informative

      +1

      Universities have become a haven of political correctness, speech-banning, and catering to every special flower at the expense of critical thinking, diversity, and learning. It doesn't help that the costs have gone through the roof and the average graduate (those who actually do graduate) are often less educated than high-school students of many years ago.

      If you want to understand why most Conservatives are so upset about the state of Universities/Colleges, just check out some PragerU videos on the topic:

      https://www.youtube.com/watch?...
      https://www.youtube.com/watch?...
      https://www.youtube.com/watch?...
      https://www.youtube.com/watch?...
      https://www.youtube.com/watch?...
      https://www.youtube.com/watch?...
      https://www.youtube.com/watch?...
      https://www.youtube.com/watch?...
      https://www.youtube.com/watch?...
      https://www.youtube.com/watch?...

      I certainly don't agree with everything Prager U puts out, but they have lots of very good points that are well illustrated, well supported, and educational.

    2. Re:SJW/Antifa backlash by JoshuaZ · · Score: 4, Informative

      So, I'm currently a faculty member of a major university. Prior to my most recent position I was at Birmingham Southern College (a small school in Alabama) and before that I was at the University of Maine. It is pretty clear that left-wing student protests and threats of student protest are having a real chilling effect on what schools do and what sort of speakers they invite; there's also a clear chilling effect from the right, albeit smaller. However, none of this is impacting regular education much at all. The vast majority of classes are not impacted; it is a serious mistake to think that because we have a problem with some student groups trying to push for control and censorship now that somehow there's a problem with colleges and universities as a whole. Colleges remain the primary and best way to get serious education on almost any topic; as technology and science become more advanced and more relevant to serious issues we face as a society, the importance of colleges and universities if anything has grown. Universities also remain the hotbeds of basic research, a vital aspect of a long-term healthy economy.

      It is unfortunate that people are using the genuine but minor problem of student activism as an excuse to have a generally anti-intellectual position against colleges as a whole. Moreover, if one is concerned about the influence of such groups, the last thing one should want to do is to give up the colleges and universities to them wholesale. If they become purely "liberal" or "left-wing" institutions, we all lose.

    3. Re:SJW/Antifa backlash by AmiMoJo · · Score: 2, Insightful

      SJWs are just the latest imaginary enemy for people to blame. The subject of endless clickbait articles and ranting videos/radio shows. Everything would be great if it wasn't for the damn SJWs / immigrants / commies. Naturally, the bastards target your kids and try to convert them.

      Universities and colleges have always been left leaning, as have the young in general, and always full of radicals.

      Populism has always been right leaning, often pretty far right, and anti-intellectual. In fact anti-intellectualism is fundamental to populism, because anyone who really understands the problems will tell you that the solutions are more complex than the populist is claiming.

      --
      const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
      SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
    4. Re:SJW/Antifa backlash by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      The enemy stops being imaginary when he starts setting fires and attacking people in the streets.

    5. Re:SJW/Antifa backlash by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Populism is decidedly not a left/right issue. Look at Venezuela, left in ruins by a socialist populist.

    6. Re:SJW/Antifa backlash by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Colleges and faculties have become morally and financially corrupted. They have also become antiquated. We don't need to go to a central building any longer, to read a sparse number of books. This is no longer Napoleon's time. We need new education using the fast superior technology we have today, and bypass these structures of self-serving power.

    7. Re: SJW/Antifa backlash by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It would be nice if there could be a place to send the kids to get an education that forbids political activity on campus, and let the kids focus on learnimg technical material there.

      They can practice political activism on any street corner, so I'd like them to stay away from the one where I pay thousands of dollars to send my kids to learn.

    8. Re:SJW/Antifa backlash by doctorvo · · Score: 1

      If they become purely "liberal" or "left-wing" institutions, we all lose.

      We have already lost

      It is unfortunate that people are using the genuine but minor problem of student activism as an excuse to have a generally anti-intellectual position against colleges as a whole.

      What "anti-intellectual position"? People are expressing their dislike of universities that teach values and ideologies that fundamentally differ from their own. And they dislike having to pay for it.

    9. Re:SJW/Antifa backlash by dunkelfalke · · Score: 3, Insightful

      A sudden decline? In the 1960ies republicans happily set the bloody national guard on students who built a park on a patch of unused land. It is not a new strain of anti-intellectualism, it is a very old one because stupid people generally distrust intelligent people, and studies have shown again and again that lower iq and weak education correlate strongly with conservative views and strong religious beliefs.

      --
      "It's such a fine line between stupid and clever" -- David St. Hubbins, Spinal Tap
    10. Re: SJW/Antifa backlash by fazig · · Score: 1

      Yeah, it would be nice. But where do we draw the lines? Ban the 'soft' sciences that can't rely on hard evidence? It's not just that because so many hard sciences get politicized these days.
      Biology is often cited here because it teaches evolution. Biochemistry teaches about vaccines and so forth. Then there you have zoology, climate, weather and geoscience, which may confront people with politicized topics like fossil fuels, climate change, the rain forests, the rate of extinction in animals. Physics teaches about theoretical models like the age of the universe, our solar system, our planet, the big bang. Ideally kids learn about these things, how to acquire data, how to interpret it and ultimately how to draw their own conclusions from it. What if that conclusion corresponds with the political opinions of others, agrees with some but disagrees with others?

    11. Re:SJW/Antifa backlash by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      And yet higher education is now more criminally overpriced than even healthcare, especially for the services rendered. Liberal indoctrination is just one of many reasons these days to give up on the university racket.

      Knowledge, especially in science and technology, is now more widespread and accessible than ever before, which makes the idea of walled garden education farms more antiquated than ever. Yet academia is still pushing the idea that every burger flipper should need a 4 year degree and 100k in student debt.

      Even gender studies degrees, useless as they are, don't really require bonafide university classes, when all you need for that field is a blog and twitter/tumblr account.

      The sooner employers get over the notion of requiring a BS for *everything*, the sooner university's will be forced to slash their tuitions and start offering actual useful services, rather than Mad Lib Studies degrees to every scrub who can score a government backed student loan. At that point, if it ever happens, can you talk about universities being a "vital aspect of a long-term healthy economy". Currently they are nothing but a massive leach.

    12. Re: SJW/Antifa backlash by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Whoever you are, you sound sane and moderate. I hope you do well in your career, and I hope you get tenure etc. I asked my father about McCarthy, and he said it affected virtually no one - your post makes me think that all we're hearing about are the extremes...

    13. Re:SJW/Antifa backlash by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      No the problem is we have an Alt left and an Alt right when most people are in the middle.

    14. Re:SJW/Antifa backlash by Kohath · · Score: 2, Interesting

      It's not a minor problem. If a "hostile work environment" isn't something we tolerate, why are you shrugging off a hostile school environment?

    15. Re:SJW/Antifa backlash by Golgafrinchan · · Score: 3, Insightful

      I'd never heard of Prager U until I read this post. I began searching for more info about it, and after a few minutes I ran into the Twitter page of Dennis Prager, the creator of Prager U. Yesterday, he tweeted:

      "The news media in the West pose a far greater danger to Western civilization than Russia does."

      After reading that, it kind of makes it hard for me to take seriously anything else he says or produces.

      --
      My userid is prime!
    16. Re:SJW/Antifa backlash by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Spare us your stories from 50 years ago.

    17. Re:SJW/Antifa backlash by Kohath · · Score: 1

      And I used to be a professor.

      Congrats on escaping ahead of the inquisition.

    18. Re:SJW/Antifa backlash by markdavis · · Score: 4, Insightful

      >"After reading that, it kind of makes it hard for me to take seriously anything else he says or produces."

      That is unfortunate. So you didn't view any of the videos published by many bright and informed people because of your snap judgement from a single statement that might be read out of context, by one person? That is not the way to learn, but the way to censor your own exploration. It is exactly what we are talking about in colleges! You might not agree with something, but turning away from anything that challenges your beliefs isn't healthy.

    19. Re:SJW/Antifa backlash by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      begging your pardon, but is there something wrong with a place being a 'hotbed' of anti-fascism..?
      have we become comfortable with the idea of fascism as a valid ideology for a person to adhere to in america?

    20. Re:SJW/Antifa backlash by Tablizer · · Score: 1

      If that were the case, then right-leaning universities, such as Liberty and BYU should be seeing vast increases in attendance and demand. I see no evidence of a rush that way, do you? Therefore, it seems to be a general anti-learning bent.

    21. Re: SJW/Antifa backlash by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I asked my father about McCarthy, and he said it affected virtually no one

      somehow I end up being among the "virtually no one" every time. I suspect a lot of grizzled hackers on /. have the same experience. You need to stand up for principles that affect few people. We didn't establish these old values to help you order Dominoes Pizza and watch NFL football quietly in the privacy of your house more easily. We established them to defend people like MLK. tl;dr fuck your lazy, dismissive entitlement in all forms it arises.

    22. Re:SJW/Antifa backlash by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

      I mean, he's kind of right. The news media in the west elected Donald Trump as president. No I don't mean the individual employees voted for him, I mean they gave him 24/7 wall to wall coverage over every tiny thing he did. They know how to stop a candidate from getting attention and votes, just don't cover them. It's what they did to Ron Paul, it's what they did to Bernie Sanders. But Trump played them like a fiddle. Every move he made, from the biggest most obnoxious catch phrases to his tiniest farts were on full 24/7 news coverage. Combine that with their love affair with Hillary Clinton (and the fact that the DNC was once again snatching defeat from the jaws of victory, see also John Kerry), and you have DJT for president, bought and paid for by CNN and Fox and MSNBC and everyone else. Trump couldn't have spent enough money to get that sort of coverage, and the western news media gave it to him for free.

    23. Re:SJW/Antifa backlash by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      watched it, and it is the most bulshit I have ever watched..

      usual right wing bollocks ..for fucks sake use your fucking brain..stop watching shit

    24. Re:SJW/Antifa backlash by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Activism is fine and we'll tolerate it, as long as it's not counter to our perceptions and beliefs. China leads by example here and you would be well to instate more secret prisons inside your country, not just outside. Along with the student loan debts, the profits from these prisons would be equitable overall as well.

    25. Re:SJW/Antifa backlash by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      In spite of the name, "Antifas" are about no more anti-fascist than The Democratic People's Republic of Korea is democratic or a republic. In case you've missed videos of them in action, Antifas aren't fighting the brownshirts, they ARE the brownshirts.

    26. Re:SJW/Antifa backlash by elrous0 · · Score: 1

      No, most people would prefer to send their kids to schools that are neither left-wing indoctrination camps, nor right-wing indoctrination camps. I have no more desire to send my kids to a school where they're taught Jebus made the dinosaurs than I do to see them send to a school where they're taught that white males and capitalists are responsible for all evil in the world.

      --
      SJW: Someone who has run out of real oppression, and has to fake it.
    27. Re:SJW/Antifa backlash by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Cool story bro. Show me causation or fuck off shit for brains.

    28. Re:SJW/Antifa backlash by laird · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Perhaps read "none of this is impacting regular education much at all. The vast majority of classes are not impacted;" Students protesting an offensive speaker at an auditorium doesn't "create a hostile work environment" for anyone except the speaker that's pissed off the students.

    29. Re:SJW/Antifa backlash by dunkelfalke · · Score: 1

      Stupid people believe in stupid things, here's your causation.

      --
      "It's such a fine line between stupid and clever" -- David St. Hubbins, Spinal Tap
    30. Re:SJW/Antifa backlash by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I actually gave one of these a shot before I downvoted you.

      How the Liberal University Hurts the Liberal Student

      Colleges are liberal.

      They vote democrat.

      Book plug.

      Colleges are liberal.

      Gah, finally, at 3:10 / 4:37, they finally get to the point and ask the question

      ok, "according to his research" pft. Anyway: students retain their political view. Go in liberal, stay liberal. Go in conservative, stay conservative. ok. ...And that somehow hurts... liberal students? ooooooh, "They rarely ever have their views challenged"

      That's it. He has a 4 minute video with a bunch of graphics for JUST THAT SENTENCE.

      He has nothing else to say. My god what a waste of time.

    31. Re:SJW/Antifa backlash by Tablizer · · Score: 1

      Are you saying there's no middle-ground schools?

    32. Re:SJW/Antifa backlash by Kohath · · Score: 1

      Yeah, and companies can still do business when female employees are sexually harassed there. But a hostile work environment is still not tolerated.

    33. Re: SJW/Antifa backlash by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It is imaginary. Your car isn't getting lit up. Random mobs of overprivileged white 19 year olds are not coming to take your Bible and guns away. Lefty protests have been going on at colleges in the USA since before the Vietnam War.. but now they get air time on the hysterical news.

    34. Re:SJW/Antifa backlash by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It's not that it challenges beliefs or is disagreed with. It's that it's a stupid statement that only a stupid person would ever possibly say unless they were joking.

      Saying objectively wrong, stupid things makes a very bad first impression. It's possible that the tweeter has something smart to say, but you're far more likely to find something smart by just picking any other person in the world at random. Think about it: read anyone else's tweets and it's so far more likely that they're going to teach you something, compared to an extremely stupid person, that you really ought to do it.

      Judging books by their covers is a useful performance heuristic, especially when there are so many good books out there. Pick one that isn't covered in shit, where the first page doesn't tell you that flouridation is a commie plot to sap and impurify our precious bodily fluids.

      There are enough non-stupid things to disagree about, among non-stupid people. It's a big world with lots of challenges. No need to win the special olympics.

    35. Re:SJW/Antifa backlash by skam240 · · Score: 1

      So college's are bad because professors require proper sources for people's citations?

      Sorry but we all live with a scarcity of time. I wouldn't waste my precious time watching videos on any topic by a flat earther and I wouldn't waste my time watching videos by an organization headed by some one who makes the preposterous claim that western media is more dangerous than the Russians.

      --
      I ignore Anonymous Coward posts. If you want to discuss something, that's awesome. Log in.
    36. Re:SJW/Antifa backlash by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Too bad sometimes they're right, though. #Rotherham

    37. Re:SJW/Antifa backlash by skam240 · · Score: 1

      The far right is anti-intellectual because the values and ideologies that they disagree with aren't based on scientific evidence. There are a lot of school boards in this country that seek to undermine the scientific theory of evolution and/or introduce doubt into the age of the earth.

      --
      I ignore Anonymous Coward posts. If you want to discuss something, that's awesome. Log in.
    38. Re:SJW/Antifa backlash by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Funny, as the main reason you think the Russians are dangerous is because of the western media.

    39. Re:SJW/Antifa backlash by markdavis · · Score: 1

      >"So college's are bad because professors require proper sources for people's citations?"

      Had you watched the videos, you would see that most of them have sources cited, with studies and facts obtained from many well known and respected places. But, again, it is easier for you to just dismiss without knowing.

      Trying to gain insight and knowledge from a TWEET is generally unproductive. Please show me tweets from anywhere that contain footnotes, sources, and references. Twitter provides the equivalent of soundbites, it is not meant to be educational.

    40. Re:SJW/Antifa backlash by doctorvo · · Score: 2

      There are a lot of school boards in this country that seek to undermine the scientific theory of evolution and/or introduce doubt into the age of the earth.

      These parents "don't seek to undermine" anything; they are Christians who don't care about evolution and want their kids to be raised Christian as well. Evolution is as meaningless to their daily lives as relativity or quantum mechanics. You don't insist that every high school kid is taught relativity, so why do you insist that every high school kid is taught evolution or palentology? In addition, Europeans manage to teach both Christian theology and biology side-by-side in schools, so it's not like it's some radical American concept. Second, you're conflating Christian conservatives and "the far right". "The far right" refers primarily to fascists, and fascists historically loved science and technology and wanted to send everybody to free government-run schools and universities; their major political message was one of economic unfairness, racial injustice, and the evils caused by rich people. Bernie Sanders is arguably ideologically closer to "the far right" than Christian conservatives are.

    41. Re:SJW/Antifa backlash by skam240 · · Score: 1

      I was refering to your videos coming from a highly questionable source, not anything having to do with the videos in general.

      Also, that tweet is pretty damn clear. I would say there is zero ambiguity there.

      --
      I ignore Anonymous Coward posts. If you want to discuss something, that's awesome. Log in.
    42. Re:SJW/Antifa backlash by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I was actually forced to attend a Dennis Prager event, in an Ethics class for my undergraduate studies, within the last few years. The man is obviously gifted, although I strongly disagree with a lot of his views. It irked me that a supposedly liberal college invited him to speak, and he still just railed on liberal colleges, and liberal everything. On one hand the college is giving him the mic so he can say how evil and brainwashing College is. I checked his blog recently just to get out of my "bubble", and man is he ever going through some mental gymnastics to justify everything the GOP and trump does. He's a hack, in that sense. Even Krauthammer is distancing himself from Trump. Dennis Prager masquerades as a thinking man, but he is a party man through and through.

    43. Re:SJW/Antifa backlash by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Of course they are trying to undermining something. They have a belief system that is not at all based on scientific evidence and they are pushing these beliefs to be taught in schools thus undermining actual scientific theory. The statement "it's just a theory" is often parroted by the far right in this country. If we let them teach creationism in science class then why not teach any other nonsense a person can make up?

      You'll also have to provide a citation for " Europeans manage to teach both Christian theology and biology side-by-side in schools" as I don't believe it. France and the UK most certainly do not teach religion in biology classes and I cant imagine Germany does aside from maybe in Bavaria.

      Finally, you have no concept of what the word fascist means. Fascist are left wing economically and right wing socially and you can be damn sure they didn't become the monster of history because of their economic policies. American Liberals are Left wing on both.

      https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...

    44. Re:SJW/Antifa backlash by skam240 · · Score: 1

      Don't know why that was posted anonymously.....

      --
      I ignore Anonymous Coward posts. If you want to discuss something, that's awesome. Log in.
    45. Re:SJW/Antifa backlash by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Circular. Higher IQ correlates with greater university attendance, universities are consistently anti-religious and liberal (profit in catering to "out of parents' house, time to party" and "daddy issues", no?), thus the propaganda determines the typical student stance.

      When you get to a rational argument, what is -true- rather than what is popular, let me know.

      Until then, rather than being concerned about broad and vague uncited "correlations", I'll continue to listen to true geniuses.

      "O, Almighty God, I am thinking Thy thoughts after Thee!"
        --Johannes Kepler

    46. Re: SJW/Antifa backlash by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      English, Biology, Biochemistry, and so forth all have uses. Biology programs produce biologist. English programs produce writers.

      Why does a Chicano Studies program produce? Protesters I assume. The same goes for every other ethnic and gender studies program.

      A bunch of nutjobs are hiding out in higher education (one of my professors was a kill-em-all Stalinist hiding in a non-serious major). I'm all for getting rid of these people. In public universities, it should be no problem with the State legislatures to shut down these programs. For private, I'd say the federal government should stop allowing grants or student spending at these institutions.

    47. Re:SJW/Antifa backlash by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      What if the students never heard of the Public Speaker until he makes an appearance and the students are acting in a violently provocative way to cause harm?

      https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3R6dzZdceT4

    48. Re:SJW/Antifa backlash by Raenex · · Score: 1

      Also, that tweet is pretty damn clear. I would say there is zero ambiguity there.

      The tweet lacks context. The mainstream media, like higher education, leans heavily to the left. They've been hysterical and completely one-side of their coverage of Trump and other political issues. It's like Fox News being a reliable opposition to Obama, but flip the script, and it's the entirety of the mainstream media being in opposition to Trump and pushing leftist narratives. This is not healthy for the country.

    49. Re:SJW/Antifa backlash by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      >"After reading that, it kind of makes it hard for me to take seriously anything else he says or produces."

      That is unfortunate. So you didn't view any of the videos published by many bright and informed people because of your snap judgement from a single statement that might be read out of context, by one person? That is not the way to learn, but the way to censor your own exploration. It is exactly what we are talking about in colleges! You might not agree with something, but turning away from anything that challenges your beliefs isn't healthy.

      the first video has a video in the suggested list call "War on Boys" featuring the "Factual Feminist"

      that's just a bunch of propaganda nonsense. Call me when you get some peer reviewed videos based on actual facts and not lies and deception.

    50. Re:SJW/Antifa backlash by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That video suggests "BoysRead.com" for tips on books boys will like

      http://imgur.com/a/ahlU1

      What on earth is Daniel X and why is it literally in every category on this page. "Realistic Kids in Realistic Situations", "Dragons", "Classics that hold up".

      Nah.. fun fact about conservative media, it spins a great yarn but it crumbles when you actually poke at it.

    51. Re:SJW/Antifa backlash by skam240 · · Score: 1

      You'll just have to deal with my opinion that the tweet categorises this guy as of an extremist political ideology and thus not worth my time. I don't have patience for the extremes of the Right or the Left and this guys tweet makes it a hundred percent clear to me that he enjoys his conspiracy theories.

      --
      I ignore Anonymous Coward posts. If you want to discuss something, that's awesome. Log in.
    52. Re:SJW/Antifa backlash by Raenex · · Score: 1

      And you'll just have to deal with my opinion that your hand-waving dismissal shows your own extremist bias and makes you not worth my time.

    53. Re:SJW/Antifa backlash by skam240 · · Score: 1

      Nope, I wont. I'm done with this conversation

      --
      I ignore Anonymous Coward posts. If you want to discuss something, that's awesome. Log in.
    54. Re:SJW/Antifa backlash by sexconker · · Score: 1

      "The news media in the West pose a far greater danger to Western civilization than Russia does."

      That's a true statement.

    55. Re:SJW/Antifa backlash by sexconker · · Score: 1

      We can't bust heads like we used to. But we have our ways. One trick is to tell stories that don't go anywhere. Like the time I caught the ferry to Shelbyville. I needed a new heel for my shoe. So I decided to go to Morganville, which is what they called Shelbyville in those days. So I tied an onion to my belt, which was the style at the time. Now, to take the ferry cost a nickel, and in those days, nickels had pictures of bumblebees on themem. "Gimme five bees for a quarter," you'd say. Now where were we... oh yeah. The important thing was that I had an onion on my belt, which was the style at the time. I didn't have any white onions, because of the war. The only thing you could get was those big yellow ones...

    56. Re:SJW/Antifa backlash by Repentinus · · Score: 1

      There is a major difference between sexual harassment and student activism: you have no constitutional right to sexually harass other people; on the grounds of a public university open to the public, students do have the First Amendment right to assemble and speak.

    57. Re:SJW/Antifa backlash by Kohath · · Score: 1

      That's very lawyerly. The people polled must not be lawyers, like you. Perhaps they have concerns that aren't legalistic.

    58. Re: SJW/Antifa backlash by doctorvo · · Score: 1

      Of course they are trying to undermining something. They have a belief system that is not at all based on scientific evidence

      You have no idea what "belief system" these parents have. Just because they don't want something taught in school doesn't mean they reject scientific truth. For example, many parents don't want sex education in school, not because they don't want their children to learn about sex, but because they want to impart their values as part of the teaching. Likewise, the teaching of evolution in our public school system has a sordid history thanks to progressives, who used it to justify segregation, racism, eugenics, and forced sterilizations, and parents may well prefer to teach it themselves instead of having some politically distorted version of it taught.

      You also start from the incorrect premise that everything taught in school needs to be true. That simply isn't so. We teach many things that aren't strictly speaking true, but that are "good enough" for people to get by in their daily life. Evolutionary theory is such an ethical can of worms that it is justifiable to say "hey, let's just teach the kids a harmless creation myth, and those who go on to study biology can learn the scientific theory in college".

      and they are pushing these beliefs to be taught in schools thus undermining actual scientific theory.

      Conservative Christians aren't "pushing these beliefs" on anybody; all they want is their own kids to be taught in the way they want. It's teachers, Democrats, and progressives that are trying to push content (sex education, gender studies, evolution, etc.) on families that don't want it. If you don't like creationist parents in your school, support school vouchers and they'll go away.

      You'll also have to provide a citation for " Europeans manage to teach both Christian theology and biology side-by-side in schools" as I don't believe it. France and the UK most certainly do not teach religion in biology classes and I cant imagine Germany does aside from maybe in Bavaria.

      Something you can find on Wikipedia shouldn't require a "citation".

      Finally, you have no concept of what the word fascist means.

      I assure you that I have an excellent idea of what the word "fascist" means, given that fascists nearly killed my parents and turned them into refugees.

      Fascist are left wing economically and right wing socially and you can be damn sure they didn't become the monster of history because of their economic policies.

      You're right: they didn't become the monsters of history because of their economic policies, they became the monsters of history because they lacked tolerance, acceptance of diversity, and respect for personal liberty. They believed that government had a right and obligation to instill a common, rational world-view and purpose into all members of society, by force if necessary. Kind of what you believe.

      It was the combination of their hare brained economic beliefs with their disregard for individual liberties that turned Nazis into the monsters that they were.

    59. Re:SJW/Antifa backlash by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      tell that to the conservative students at evergreen and mizzou

      oh wait, they aren't going there anymore, look at the rapid and precipitous declines in applications if you doubt.

    60. Re: SJW/Antifa backlash by skam240 · · Score: 2

      You've just flown you ideological blindness flag high and proud blaming progressives for educational faults that were most commonly found in our most conservative region, the South. By the end i just had a huge smile on my face and was shaking my head as you equated me wanting only science to be taught in science classes with Nazism. You really are just desperately lashing out at this point. Your link that you put up so condescending doesnt even back up your claim. I read through about a dozen European countries and while many certainly do teach religion in school, it's seems to be usually in seperate classes. This is because, once again, religion isnt science.

      Science should be what is taught in science classes. We dont teach students alternate fantasy histories in their history classes and we should do the same for science. If parents want not-science to be taught in science class then there are likely plenty of private schools for them out there but they shouldnt expect public assistance for an education that fits their every desire. Meanwhile the general public shouldnt have the quality of their public education diluted by a single faith's belief system that they may not even believe in. Teaching creationism in a science class is a true indocturation of religious beliefs on young minds because it establishes a link between creationism (a completely unscientific process) and science thus creating the illusion that it scientifically stands on equal footing with evolution

      But hey, I'm not even saying religion cant be part of a public education. I think everyone should take a comparative religion class in their lifetime (I have, it was great) and Junior or Senior years of high school sound like good times to do something like that.

      --
      I ignore Anonymous Coward posts. If you want to discuss something, that's awesome. Log in.
    61. Re:SJW/Antifa backlash by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I have listened to plenty of Dennis Prager on the AM radio to get a better understanding of all politics. I'm done with that though because there was really nothing useful from it. There is a LOT of polemics against and contempt for "liberals" coming from pretty much the whole lot of these radio shows. It is funny how all these guys spout anti-college stuff and then read a 5 minute ad for some BS herbal supplement.

    62. Re:SJW/Antifa backlash by david_thornley · · Score: 1

      Watching videos is time-consuming, and it looks less like working than surfing text websites does. If there's a point there, make it in text, and refer to the videos.

      --
      "When you have eliminated the unacceptable, whatever is left, however improbable, must be the truthiness" - Holmes
    63. Re:SJW/Antifa backlash by david_thornley · · Score: 1

      In the 1960ies republicans happily set the bloody national guard on students who built a park on a patch of unused land.

      Actually, that was a bipartisan sort of thing. There was a bipartisan consensus in favor of the establishment and the Vietnam War.

      --
      "When you have eliminated the unacceptable, whatever is left, however improbable, must be the truthiness" - Holmes
    64. Re:SJW/Antifa backlash by Mike+Van+Pelt · · Score: 1

      It is my considered opinion that the "monotone media" actively wanted Donald Trump to be the Republican nominee, because they wanted Hillary to win, and thought that Trump didn't stand a chance of winning.

      See NBC News sitting on that "Grab The Cat" tape all through the primaries, when it might have done some good, so they could trot it out as an October Surprise.

      I'm pretty astonished that Trump won, too. I thought he was the only one of the Republican nominees that couldn't beat Hillary.

    65. Re:SJW/Antifa backlash by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      and catering to every special flower at the expense of critical thinking

      Just an anecdote, but I graduated from a particularly liberal University of California. I took literature classes there.

      Each literature class required bi-weekly meetings with the TA to discuss the literature at hand.

      I only had one TA who disagreed with a student's interpretation of a work. All other TAs gave crap stock responses like "thank you for contributing", a hallow "...I see", or other BS.

      Again, just an anecdote, but that always stuck with me.

    66. Re:SJW/Antifa backlash by markdavis · · Score: 1

      >" Watching videos is time-consuming, and it looks less like working than surfing text websites does. If there's a point there, make it in text, and refer to the videos."

      Generally I agree with you. But I did make a quick summary two sentences at the start of the posting. The videos were just my sources and examples. Not watching loses some of the entertainment value (both plus or minus, depending on your positions) :)

    67. Re:SJW/Antifa backlash by markdavis · · Score: 1

      Talk shows generally have less logical and formulated information.... and are often more of a debate or responses to questions (often which are loaded). Sometimes they are useful, but I prefer well-thought-out positions on individual topics (from whatever sources and on whatever positions).

    68. Re:SJW/Antifa backlash by david_thornley · · Score: 1

      You made two sweeping statements that are, in my experience, false (except for the tuition going through the roof - that I can confirm). A little support of your statements other than videos would have been more helpful. I recognize that I'm not going to learn much except from people who disagree with me, but I've found that many of them make the same old arguments, and I have to decide how to allocate limited resources.

      --
      "When you have eliminated the unacceptable, whatever is left, however improbable, must be the truthiness" - Holmes
    69. Re:SJW/Antifa backlash by Gussington · · Score: 1

      So you didn't view any of the videos published by many bright and informed people because of your snap judgement from a single statement that might be read out of context, by one person?

      Yep because that's how credibility works...

  5. Those places used by the left to indoctonate by mmiscool · · Score: 0, Troll

    The left has infected every aspect of the education system and has caused serious harm. They have indoctrinated several generations of our youth to the detriment of our country. They should all be ashamed of themselves.

    1. Re:Those places used by the left to indoctonate by DogDude · · Score: 1

      "Indoctrinated"? In what sense?

      --
      I don't respond to AC's.
    2. Re:Those places used by the left to indoctonate by beelsebob · · Score: 5, Insightful

      "Anyone who disagrees with me must have been indoctrinated. It couldn't possibly be that by becoming better educated these people see clearly the bullshit that the GOP has become."

    3. Re:Those places used by the left to indoctonate by MightyMartian · · Score: 3, Insightful

      In the sense that education inevitably seems to reduce conservatism

      --
      The world's burning. Moped Jesus spotted on I50. Details at 11.
    4. Re:Those places used by the left to indoctonate by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I'm a lefty and I'm ashamed because I like shit in my shoes. It's squishy!

    5. Re:Those places used by the left to indoctonate by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "Anyone who disagrees with me must have been indoctrinated. It couldn't possibly be that by becoming better educated these people see clearly the bullshit that the GOP has become."

      Nice straw man. If you went to college you should know that using straw man arguments is intellectually dishonest. Some of us actually went to college and experienced first hand the indoctrination.

    6. Re:Those places used by the left to indoctonate by Bengie · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Indoctrinating critical thinking. In most of my classes, right or wrong, if you could make a good argument you got nearly full credit. A good Devil's advocate was always rewarded.

    7. Re:Those places used by the left to indoctonate by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      This. When I went to college, I thought liberal people went to college.

      There I learned that education creates liberal thinking.

      To put it another way, the smarter you get...the more liberal you think.

      That should tell you something, if you're still conservative.

    8. Re:Those places used by the left to indoctonate by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Wait, isn't the "right" the cult of the self? the "One group is better and more valuable than other?" you know, the ones that had been making the society? and how the right is not ashamed of infussing its social apaty and "close the door for others behind me"? becuase those politicians did had education, but do not anyone else getting one.
      The attack on education from these kind of people had been coming from a long time and is not only to keep mindless tools without soul, is because they recognize that educated people can identify and point their faults and stupidity, they want to be the only ones that can see and that means making people mindless tools without soul; Politicians will exploit everything in the book to make you love them: emotional blackmail, economic warfare, appeal to personal fears, hopes and dreams, etc. and since education can help people understand themselves, overcome prejudices and be more critical they will attack it more and more (specially history, which is repeatedly attacked by some buffon "scholars" like David Barton who is always trying to reinterpret history as a tool for his own friends).

      Think about why a society is made, why do people decides to coexist with different people and not live in a remote place alone.

      Another thing: Left? ... Right? That never was a thing, it always been up and down.

    9. Re:Those places used by the left to indoctonate by DogDude · · Score: 1

      I don't think you have your cause and effect correct. There's correlation, definitely. I would posit that being educated and learning to think reduces conservatism. Plenty of people go through a conservative phase in their teens. It's a simplistic way of thinking. Once you learn to reason a bit better, and think a bit deeper, people tend to grow out of those ideas. The problem is that a lot of people never do go past that simplistic world view. I don't think "indoctrination" has anything to do with it.

      --
      I don't respond to AC's.
    10. Re: Those places used by the left to indoctonate by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Party politics is stupid, almost by definition it can't result in best in outcome for the country.

      However, crying that indoctrination is whatever someone doesn't agree with is disingenuous. Organizations indoctrinate their members into a way of thinking and behaving that benefits the organization.

      What is being said here is that socialists and communists who are part of democratic party are attempting to indoctrinate all students they can reach - these students are not members of their party and may not be aware of the indoctrination that is being done to them. The students are going to school to learn science or engineering or medicine or art or literature or music or mathematics... very fee are going to learn politics yet it's being forced on all of them, not just politics but a specific viewpoint. That is wrong.

    11. Re:Those places used by the left to indoctonate by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      This. When I went to college, I thought liberal people went to college.

      There I proceeded to fail to learn anything.

      To put it another way, the dumber you get...the more liberal you think.

      That should tell you something, if you're still conservative.

      Fixed that for you.

    12. Re:Those places used by the left to indoctonate by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "Anyone who disagrees with me must have been indoctrinated. It couldn't possibly be that by becoming better educated these people see clearly the bullshit that the Democratics has become."

      The left isn't the educated.

    13. Re:Those places used by the left to indoctonate by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It's the other way around, actually.

      Young people tend to be more liberal and radical in their views. As you get older and wiser you realize that some conservatism is necessary.

      In sweden the youth liberal party just declared that necrpfilia should be legal since there is no victim. I suspect not a single older liberal would share that view.

    14. Re:Those places used by the left to indoctonate by mark-t · · Score: 1

      That's not really a strawman... it's actually a form of ad-hominem called "poisoning the well".

    15. Re:Those places used by the left to indoctonate by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Just because people get "educated" to be special snowflakes doesn't make their education anything worth lording over others.

      All it does is lead these politically radical and arrogant people who think they know it all and everyone who doesn't bend to their will is some dumb caveman. Abusing science to hide your cult-like bias is not a good thing.

    16. Re:Those places used by the left to indoctonate by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Just because people get "educated" to be special snowflakes doesn't make their education anything worth lording over others.

      Exactly right. Just because you're educated doesn't mean you're not an asshole.

    17. Re:Those places used by the left to indoctonate by MightyMartian · · Score: 1

      That's a frequent claim, but honestly I see little evidence of it, at least as far as political conservatism. Liberals seem to remain Liberals, conservatives seem to remain conservatives. Some things certainly become more conservative as we get older, like musical or culinary tastes, but that's only in relation to changes in taste in the wider society.

      I don't know a lot of liberals who change their views on health care or the status of homosexuals and the like. Those core values seem largely set by the time we're in our 20s and I think it becomes much much harder to alter those core philosophical views.

      When I was young, in my late teens and early 20s I was actually fairly conservative; I rejected gay rights, believed in private health care, had a pretty simple view of the notion of the expansiveness of rights, but by the time I was in my late 20s I'd largely flipped; had no problem with building on traditional liberties, and in general didn't view the government as somehow fundamentally evil, and so forth.

      --
      The world's burning. Moped Jesus spotted on I50. Details at 11.
    18. Re:Those places used by the left to indoctonate by beelsebob · · Score: 2

      Right - it's just coincidence that the less educated side of US politics is the side that's trying to take away every safety net in the entire country, and generally acting like assholes to anyone who isn't them.

    19. Re: Those places used by the left to indoctonate by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Fuck you, fish tits.

    20. Re:Those places used by the left to indoctonate by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Right - it' just a coincidence you fuckers always fail to realize your side is actually the party of high school drop outs, and ignore the fact that you have the most uneducated voters in the nation. Sure, you also have people with masters degrees. But don't forget about Tyrone and Pablo.

    21. Re:Those places used by the left to indoctonate by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I don't mean to insult you, but people who say the young are liberal and get conservative with age would probably just say you were a late bloomer having your adolescent phase through your early 20s and having your awakening period in your later 20s!

      I look at it like this: the young seem "liberal" when they are awakening and having all their New Ideas and frustrated with the unfair and inertia-bound world around them. The older folks seem "conservative" when it is someone else claiming to have New Ideas and these conflict with the Old Ideas that these folk have been laying into themselves like bricks in a foundation. The older folks also come to appreciate the inertia of the world as it sometimes seems to be the only thing providing them any safety, keeping everything from spinning out of their control.

    22. Re:Those places used by the left to indoctonate by MightyMartian · · Score: 0

      I still don't buy this. There are no lack of aging liberals. This is just a meme invented as a way to assert the advantage of conservatism. Beyond that for every conservative I've met, I've met a social reactionary masquerading as a conservative.

      --
      The world's burning. Moped Jesus spotted on I50. Details at 11.
    23. Re:Those places used by the left to indoctonate by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "Anyone who disagrees with me must have been indoctrinated."

      This part is a straw man argument. Its not what was originally given as an argument and was rephrased to make the original appear weaker.

    24. Re:Those places used by the left to indoctonate by mark-t · · Score: 1

      "Anyone who disagrees with me must have been indoctrinated."

      This part is a straw man argument.

      Uh... no. That part is definitely called "poisoning the well", a type of logical fallacy where you discount the credibility of people who may be able to present a logical argument against you by pre-emptively priming the listener(s) with adverse information about such opponents before they can actually express their argument. A strawman where the arguer attempts to suggest that some because some particular preposition (that is usually a distorted form of the dissenter's argument, but may also be completely fabricated) is false, and in particular their opponent did *NOT* actually say, that this somehow will extend to discrediting their opponent's actual view. The problem with it lies in the flawed assumption that the view that they are talking about was ever one that was actually held by the dissenter.

      Suggesting that "anyone who disagrees with them must have been indoctrinated" does not do that... while it does present irrelevant information that the opponent did not say, it does not try to show how this information is actually false. Instead it simply directly attempts to the discredit a dissenter by pre-emptively calling into question the integrity of any argument they might try to make, specifically by announcing (unproven) information which could cause the view to be perceived as something less than rational and unbiased to other listeners.

      Poisoning the well is actually just considered a special type of ad-hominem attack.

    25. Re: Those places used by the left to indoctonate by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The right has infected every aspect of government, social media, and media in general.

      You were saying wat stoopid

    26. Re:Those places used by the left to indoctonate by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      no, i am a scientist who gets paid on the public dime and i can tell you maybe 1/2 or more the money is wasted in scientific research. maybe it has nothing to do with "better educated" and everything to do with "my salary depends on more taxation" for "the social good"

    27. Re: Those places used by the left to indoctonate by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Fuck you, fish tits!

    28. Re:Those places used by the left to indoctonate by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It is because they know in their hearts that the Sky Fairy will look after all the worries of all those poor people out there. They're just confused that the rest of us don't think the same way.

  6. Keep the populace uneducated by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    Keep em dumb, and they won't question what you're doing

    1. Re: Keep the populace uneducated by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Brought to you by feminism, we don't care about facts, only our feelings matter!

    2. Re: Keep the populace uneducated by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Are successful revolts lead by the undereducated or by the highly educated?

    3. Re: Keep the populace uneducated by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Remember, science is sexist! We must make sure that all science first respects the opinions of any and all minorities. THEN we can concern ourselves with if it is accurate science or not...

  7. curious by nnet · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Because the last thing american leaders want is an educated electorate.

    1. Re:curious by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Dey dun make dem smurt n dat bad for Murica!

    2. Re:curious by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Are colleges:
      - needed? yes
      - providing education? yes
      - trustworthy? allegedly, no

    3. Re:curious by rholtzjr · · Score: 2, Insightful

      WRONG! We need less sheeple. We need MORE independent thought which is the true nature of a higher education.

    4. Re:curious by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "I love the poorly educated" - Trump

    5. Re:curious by doctorvo · · Score: 1

      We need MORE independent thought which is the true nature of a higher education.

      It's sadly less and less the "true nature" of the higher education we have.

    6. Re:curious by swillden · · Score: 1

      WRONG! We need less sheeple. We need MORE independent thought which is the true nature of a higher education.

      That's exactly the point of the post you responded to. WE need more educated and independent thinkers. But our "LEADERS" want less-educated and less-independent thinkers who they can more easily manipulate.

      --
      Note to ACs: I usually delete AC replies without reading them. If you want to talk to me, log in.
    7. Re:curious by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Like what would be dispensed in Trump University, for example ?

    8. Re:curious by rholtzjr · · Score: 2

      I see the flaw in your logic. You are making the assumption that just because they are "educated" they are gaining the ability to illicit independent thought. This is the crux of the article and its conclusion as well (which I disagree with). This is the biggest issue with our basic public education system as well. We no longer teach, we just make them memorize everything and then never really teach them how or why and a lot of times when to use the information provided. In other words, we do not reinforce the concept of "just because you can do something does not necessarily mean you should". That is what has been lost in modern US education systems.

    9. Re:curious by rholtzjr · · Score: 1

      Considering that you posted AC you deserve the typical response. STFU TROLL.

      And No, Trump University was NEVER an accredited institution. Thus it was a business and not a real institution of higher learning.

    10. Re:curious by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      What do you mean by "independent"? My smart-ass nature wants to ask "is that anything like going rogue?", but my serious question is what I did ask.
      Scientists build up theories based on evidence and math models, so they arrived at religiously and politically incorrect theories like evolution, relativity, and global warming. All of them are challenged quite often by various groups who want to silence the teaching or to stop research in those subjects and want something else taught (e.g. "teach the controversy").

    11. Re:curious by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      True. How can you trust evolution if you don't really understand what exactly it is?

      I work at a college. We were offered financial support by a religious organization on the condition that a Biology teacher who taught evolution was fired.

    12. Re:curious by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It is NOT the education that republicans, or anyone, disagree with. It is the fact that collages indoctrinate students on liberal ideas that have negative effect on the country.

      The Democrats depend on uneducated electorate to get votes, and Democrats are in control of the education system. Ever wonder why the education is so bad in this country and never seems to be fixed? Democrats. This is why Democrats are so opposed to charter schools, because they give kids better education and Democrats don't want that.

      Hopefully with the Democrat party and Democrat media imploding, Republicans can get control of the education system and finally improve it like they are with the economy which is finally improving at a good rate.

    13. Re:curious by swillden · · Score: 1

      I see the flaw in your logic. You are making the assumption that just because they are "educated" they are gaining the ability to illicit independent thought.

      s/illicit/elicit/. I don't normally bother with spelling corrections, but the difference in meaning is huge.

      This is the biggest issue with our basic public education system as well. We no longer teach, we just make them memorize everything and then never really teach them how or why and a lot of times when to use the information provided.

      Uh huh. You haven't paid much attention to the evolution of education in the US, I see. What you describe is exactly what was done in the early through mid 20th century. It's actually gradually evolving away from rote learning (which is good).

      In any case, we're not talking about public education, we're talking about higher education. Entirely different kettle of fish. If your university focused on rote memorization, then you got seriously shortchanged... and your education was not typical of US higher education, not even in community colleges.

      --
      Note to ACs: I usually delete AC replies without reading them. If you want to talk to me, log in.
    14. Re:curious by rholtzjr · · Score: 1

      You are correct. I saw illicit after the post and went "oh crap"

    15. Re:curious by rholtzjr · · Score: 1

      Now back to your rebuttal.

      Uh huh. You haven't paid much attention to the evolution of education in the US, I see. What you describe is exactly what was done in the early through mid 20th century. It's actually gradually evolving away from rote learning (which is good).

      Not so sure about the time frame on that one. Watched nieces and nephews go through school and actually helped them with their math and science. They were still teaching it the same way they taught me back in my days (latter part of 20th century). With one exception, they really emphasized the aptitude tests they perform though out the school year. So most high schools just taught them how to take the test instead of teaching them things they needed to know.

      In any case, we're not talking about public education, we're talking about higher education. Entirely different kettle of fish. If your university focused on rote memorization, then you got seriously shortchanged... and your education was not typical of US higher education, not even in community colleges.

      Yea, I guess that would depend upon the institution that one attends. Some do provide different teaching methods. Which I believe that is what is in question with the article. Some believe they are not achieving the desire result of the "independent thought" and are just regurgitating what their professors are telling them. I have also had some professors try and influence some subject matter.

  8. Get back to tech news please by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

    When did slashdot die? If you must post baloney, bring back Jon Katz. At least he was the king of this kind of tripe. There are actually real tech storeis out there beyond your usual lazy "rivers on mars", "amazing batteries", and "tesla cars".

    1. Re: Get back to tech news please by that+this+is+not+und · · Score: 4, Informative

      Slashdot didn't die. Malda just sold it. It's been skidding along ever since. And that was a long time ago now.

    2. Re: Get back to tech news please by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I think we need more Kardashian stories.

    3. Re: Get back to tech news please by chispito · · Score: 1

      There are actually real tech storeis out there beyond your usual lazy "rivers on mars", "amazing batteries", and "tesla cars".

      Lazy rivers on Mars? Sign me up.

      --
      The Daddy casts sleep on the Baby. The Baby resists!
    4. Re: Get back to tech news please by rholtzjr · · Score: 1

      A correct response to that is "Kardash.... WHO?"

    5. Re: Get back to tech news please by BeerCat · · Score: 1

      A correct response to that is "Kardash.... WHO?"

      A more geeky correct response would be "Weren't the Kardashians in Star Trek?"

      --
      "She's furniture with a pulse"
  9. Not a suprise by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

    Theocracies dont like education to break their control of society

  10. Maybe... by Zurkeyon3733 · · Score: 0

    If they stopped cranking out majors in liberal arts, gender studies, and political correctness... That might change. LoL

    1. Re: Maybe... by that+this+is+not+und · · Score: 1

      Every pupil they process through has to be stamped with one 'brand' or another. They are trying to make up for a lack of quality with high volume.

      If you had gotten your undergrad degree and instead of moving on in the world, never left campus, continuing on in post-grad and then nestling into the hive permanently, you would think like that, too.

      They are stamping widgets for good pay. The carnys processing the marks.

    2. Re: Maybe... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      My STEM degree only required 8 credits in "liberal arts", and that was mythology and anthropology. Are cucks like you really that much of a baby on taking liberal arts classes?

    3. Re:Maybe... by Baron_Yam · · Score: 1

      University is about learning and exposure to ideas. Not all of them need be immediately practical.

      However, when people start taking those faculties and their impassioned young fools of a student body too seriously, you have a problem.

      For instance, allowing political groups of any sort to disrupt university activities, or actually giving them power to control what happens and even what is said on campus? That should be the instant death of the institution's credibility. Suppression of alternate viewpoints is anaethema to the whole concept of such places.

    4. Re:Maybe... by Zurkeyon3733 · · Score: 1

      Tell that to ANTIFA and other SJW groups...

    5. Re: Maybe... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      ^ I'm an idiot who likes to strawman

  11. They are. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    They have become nothing less than indoctrination centers for children who cannot stand an opposing view and must as with any radical use whateven means to silence the opposing view.

  12. Well... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Can you blame them?

  13. The same Eisenhower Speech by that+this+is+not+und · · Score: 1

    In the same speech where he warned about the Military-Industrial complex, Eisenhower warned about the Scientific-Technological elite.

    1. Re:The same Eisenhower Speech by nnet · · Score: 1

      ike is dead. the electorate learned nothing.

  14. Mod Parent Up by Kunedog · · Score: 0, Troll

    Indeed. Maybe those with this opinion have seen the leftist nutjob ideologues taking over campuses and demanding administrative control, assaulting journalists ("I need some muscle over here"), setting fires and beating people for the crime of trying to attend a speaking event, and even trying to implement segregration, often while the faculty and administration either approve or cheer them on.

    And with the internet, the leftist media can't cover it up anymore.

    1. Re:Mod Parent Up by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Fascists are not "leftist" no matter what they or other people may call them. You gonna tell me the People's Democratic Republic is a democracy?

      They may be "to the left" of Dominionist Republicans, but that's still the extreme right.

    2. Re:Mod Parent Up by MoarSauce123 · · Score: 1

      What you complain about others do IS free speech....of course, without the violence. You cannot demand free speech for reptards and deny it to all those with a different view!

    3. Re:Mod Parent Up by MoarSauce123 · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Fascists have always been alt-right fundamental nationalists, much like those who diss higher education.

    4. Re:Mod Parent Up by nip1024 · · Score: 1, Insightful

      And ^this^ is why American education systems are failing. Kids don't know shit about history, don't know what fascism is, don't know what what liberalism even means. Thank you for proving our point.

    5. Re: Mod Parent Up by WindBourne · · Score: 1, Flamebait

      It appears as though u are one of those far right winger that did not go to school. Fascism by definition, is far right wing. Look it up in any dictionary and quit being such an ignorant idiot.

      --
      I prefer the "u" in honour as it seems to be missing these days.
    6. Re: Mod Parent Up by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      By that logic, the Republican party in the US is far left too.

    7. Re: Mod Parent Up by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Be fair, the right hasnt exactly gone for small government when they had the chance so let's use a smaller paintbrush with that term. Libertarians have, but the traditional GOP style of right has supported massive government programs at every level. While in full power, they haven't exactly been dismantling the megastate. Lefties as incarnated by the DNC are of the same cloth, but with a bent towards more totalitarian control through their thought police.

    8. Re:Mod Parent Up by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Fascists are not "leftist" no matter what they or other people may call them. You gonna tell me the People's Democratic Republic is a democracy?

      The left/right distinction doesn't make much sense with fascists, socialists, and communists: they all are violent thugs, but they also hate each other.

    9. Re:Mod Parent Up by Dutchmaan · · Score: 0

      And ^this^ is why American education systems are failing. Kids don't know shit about history, don't know what fascism is, don't know what what liberalism even means. Thank you for proving our point.

      ...and yet you talk about OTHERS indoctrinating... Why don't you be so kind as to indoctrinate... err... inform us... as to what fascism is and what liberalism means. The GOP isn't called the party of hypocrites for nothing...

    10. Re:Mod Parent Up by HornWumpus · · Score: 0, Troll

      Arguing with the willfully ignorant is a waste of time. So no.

      --
      John McAfee 'It was like that time I hired that Bangkok prostitute; to do my taxes, while I fucked my accountant'
    11. Re:Mod Parent Up by HornWumpus · · Score: 1

      They hate each other because they are fighting for the same ideological turf. It's just about who ends up in charge.

      --
      John McAfee 'It was like that time I hired that Bangkok prostitute; to do my taxes, while I fucked my accountant'
    12. Re: Mod Parent Up by Brockmire · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Uh, I associate environment protection and education with the left, not the right. You have a very loose definition of control. Which side likes to control your body? Oh, the right. Perhaps we need a 3D scale instead of a 2D scale.

    13. Re:Mod Parent Up by Dutchmaan · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Arguing with the willfully ignorant is a waste of time. So no.

      Got it.. i need to be *willfully* indoctrinated... didn't quite catch that nuance at first.

    14. Re: Mod Parent Up by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

      These arguments go on ad nauseum here and elsewhere on the internet.

      The problem begins with trying to conflate "left"/"right", "liberal"/"conservative", "progressive"/"reactionary", "democratic party"/"republican party", "big government"/"small government", "large budget"/"small budget", "welfare"/"police state", and so on as if they are all labels for the same two groups of people or perspectives.

      These concepts are not so clearly and consistently aligned, nor is any one of them the defining issue of our current political climate in the US. Only ideologues with a one-track mind can reduce our societal problems to one sound-bite like that. Unfortunately, pop culture and social media seems to send us further and further into this simplistic and superficial style of discourse and debate.

      When I wake up in one of those ideologue moods myself, I find that "progressive"/"reactionary" is the easiest one to fit to most of the debates I see these days in the US. But, when I snap out of my mood, I realize even these are the wrong labels. It's probably closer to "egalitarian"/"fuck you I got mine", and people from all corners of our populate fall into either camp depending on whether they are haves or have-nots for whatever resource and way of life is being questioned.

    15. Re: Mod Parent Up by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      It may be true that "the right" wants smaller government, but it's demonstrably untrue that the Republican Party does.

      You guys should consider forming a party that actually tries to implement that. Like a Tea Party, but for smart people.

    16. Re:Mod Parent Up by smugfunt · · Score: 1

      don't know what what liberalism even means

      'liberalism' has two meanings and they are practically opposites. Most Americans don't realise this so get quite confused.

    17. Re:Mod Parent Up by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "The right wants people to be empowered take care of themselves." - Such as the 'empower' of dying without health insurance, or the encumbrance of a minimum wage...

      You're so stupid you've convinced yourself that 16th century political labels apply verbatim in 2017. Lol.

      "Educated conservatives" don't exist anymore, they've completely uninvented themselves rather than reinvent themselves.

    18. Re:Mod Parent Up by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      Who does this sound like?

      We are enemies of today's capitalistic economic system for the exploitation of the economically weak, with its unfair salaries, with its unseemly evaluation of a human being according to wealth and property instead of responsibility and performance, and we are determined to destroy this system under all conditions.

      Maybe that sounds like some alt-right hick too, but it primarily sounds like Sanders, Warren, and other progressives. And that's no accient: the quote is from a leading European fascist, and US progressives and European fascists have always had a lot in common.

    19. Re:Mod Parent Up by StreamingEagle · · Score: 0

      Another lazy ad hominem attack. The right doesn't want smaller government? The right wants a more authoritarian government? You've got your left and right mixed up. ALL dictatorships are leftist, politically and economically. Privatization of any business = socialism. Leftist ideology = more government control and authority to tell people how to live their lives. I have a BS Eng and an MBA, which involved graduate economics coursework. You?

    20. Re:Mod Parent Up by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Fascism is a left side concept. Fascism is state control. Right side don't want to have a big enough government that can control.

    21. Re:Mod Parent Up by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Fucking HornWumpus. You're supposed to check which sock puppet account you're using when you reply. Asshat.

    22. Re:Mod Parent Up by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      My liberal college education at a liberal college taught me that fascism is radical socialism and progressive central control happening in a country that has a strong military.

      Where did you learn that fascism from the past century has always been from a right leaning political movement that did not exist a few years ago?

    23. Re:Mod Parent Up by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      You clearly went light on the History coursework.

    24. Re:Mod Parent Up by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Facists are often leftist. They're often to the right. It's an independent dimension.

      Any leftist that ever thought "I wish I could make them..." is a potential fascist.

    25. Re:Mod Parent Up by meglon · · Score: 0

      Which only shows you're a complete fucking idiot. Being intentionally stupider than shit is much worse than simply being ignorant. the "left" isn't a big government faction, as much as your peabrain wants to think so. I get it.... YOU think YOUR way is the only way, and everything else is bad... but that's because you have your head up your ass, and you feel the need to make yourself feel better by lying to yourself. That works, until you try lying to other people... who then point out you're a fucking idiot.

      You may have an education, but you're fucking stupid.

      --
      Fascism: An authoritarian and nationalistic right-wing system of government and social organization. See also: NAZI's
    26. Re: Mod Parent Up by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Admittedly, you made me (the casual mod) look. Nope, not true. -1

    27. Re: Mod Parent Up by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Fascism is an authoritative description.

      We have left fascists, like Stalin.

      We have right fascists, like Hitler.

      We also have fucking morons, like you.

    28. Re: Mod Parent Up by WindBourne · · Score: 1, Informative

      fascism
      faSHizm/
      noun
      an authoritarian and nationalistic right-wing system of government and social organization.
      synonyms:
      authoritarianism, totalitarianism, dictatorship, despotism, autocracy;


      Hmmm

      --
      I prefer the "u" in honour as it seems to be missing these days.
    29. Re:Mod Parent Up by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Fascism is a totalitarian right wing ideology which believes in united strength behind a single leader

      Liberalism is a regulation rejectiong right wing ideology which believes in individual responsiblity, independence and laissez faire economics.

    30. Re:Mod Parent Up by skam240 · · Score: 1

      No, you don't know what those things are. Cut and pasted from another post of mine

      You're confused, let me help you.

      Fascism is a combination of left wing economic policy (although not communism) and right wing social policy. The Nazi's got to be one of history's biggest villains not because of their left wing economic policies but because of their right wing social policies. Big patriotic rallies, not big on gays, not big on minorities; these are all attributes of the right.

      Furthermore, fascists were big on the rule of law and they certainly gave their police force a wide set of powers which the Right often complains about the Left in this country not doing.

      Now I'm not trying to say the Right in this country are Nazi's, I'm just pointing out that you got the meaning of some words wrong.

      --
      I ignore Anonymous Coward posts. If you want to discuss something, that's awesome. Log in.
    31. Re: Mod Parent Up by rholtzjr · · Score: 1

      I have a feeling that the definition of right/left is different in the US than in Europe. While left does have a tendency towards socialism more than the right, both seem to be towards capitalism on the economical standpoint. On the social standpoint they show the right seems to go more towards authoritarian than the left. This is what is baffling. How do you become MORE authoritarian when you want a SMALLER, LESS POWERFUL central government. That definition make zero sense.

    32. Re:Mod Parent Up by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Republitards and other right wing nut jobs want as many as possible to be either uneducated and ignorant (IE easier to control), or indoctrinated into more right wing nut jobs!

      Educated (and un-indoctrinated) people tend to think for themselves and see the truth, and are therefore harder to control!!

    33. Re:Mod Parent Up by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Fascists are not "leftist" no matter what they or other people may call them.

      Okay, let's talk specific points of policy. Here's one:

      • "We demand that the state be charged first with providing the opportunity for a livelihood and way of life for the citizens."

      That's as good a definition of socialism as you'll find anywhere ... and it's one of the points of the Program of the National Socialist German Workers Party - that is, the Nazis. They also demanded the nationalisation of industries, the abolition of "unearned" income (i.e. from investments, rather than one's own labour), and the institution of Germany's first (albeit limited) national health service.

      Those are all socialist, left-wing economic policies. The point they have in common is that they all require a big, controlling government to implement them - which is, regardless of any subtle distinctions you might draw between "left" and "right", what all authoritarians really want.

    34. Re: Mod Parent Up by jedidiah · · Score: 2

      Hitler was just as much as a leftist as Stalin. This fact is just terribly inconvenient to lazy liberals that want to use the terms Nazi or Fascist to smear Republicans.

      Some very notable Republicans (the Pauls) are very much for smaller government. There were sitting members of Congress (R) that objected to the various big business bailouts during the great Recession. Romney himself is a notable example as well.

      Certain Republican factions have allied with social conservatives and the term "conservative" itself implies being resistant to change including things labeled as "social progress".

      --
      A Pirate and a Puritan look the same on a balance sheet.
    35. Re:Mod Parent Up by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You forgot the more convincing ones:
      - empowered to decide if they want a child or not
      - empowered to decide whom they marry
      - empowered to smoke whatever they want
      - empowered to organize and fight for fair wages
      - empowered to live their lives without being constantly watched (whether online, by cameras or by police)

      I don't think Republicans (which are primarily conservative and only by accident/when it fills their pocket liberal) actually subscribe to any of these.
      And the last one (and unfortunately, one now often shared by all too many on the left, but still fewer) is the corner-stone of police state and facism, and why many people believe that facism is more typically right, as conservatives are usually easier to lure with false promises of security.

    36. Re:Mod Parent Up by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Traditional "right-side" (that means conservatives) are law-and-order and want strong police, military and surveillance to keep everyone safe. Which is perfect growing-grounds and perfectly aligned to facism.
      The no-big-government is mostly a Republican propaganda thing, to remove programs benefitting the general population in favour of e.g. military spending.
      Or do you see Republicans as the ones doing most to rein in all-out surveillance and police violence?
      Health care spending may be what you consider "big government" but what do you think is more useful to a facist leader: the government paying everyone's hospital bills or the government paying a huge military?
      That said, facism has little to do with left or right, which is more obvious in places with more than 2 politcal side.

    37. Re: Mod Parent Up by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "Fascism is right-wing!"
      "Why?"
      "Because we said so!"

      Funny thing is, Fascism - the Italian political movement headed by Mussolini - consider itself Left-wing. It was a stronger, more pure form of socialism Everything within the State, nothing outside the State; the People are the State and the State is the People.

      This "Fascism is Rightwing" argument originally came from the Soviets, who dubbed all opposition to them as fascists - and Russia still does today. It just got picked up by all the socialist and Communist sympathizers that congregate in universities.

    38. Re:Mod Parent Up by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Hmm, you claim your opinion is fact and live with a set of alternate definitions for basic words. I'd say you have already been "willfully" indoctrinated.

    39. Re:Mod Parent Up by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      who have the republicans tried to take free speech from? every time antifa(apparently the only left wing people who protest these days) throws a rally, they do so without much resistance from the right, and start throwing trashcans, setting fires, smashing windows, etc.

      when republicans organize a gathering, antifa mobs show up and start antagonizing and throwing molotovs and bashing skulls with CHAMPAGNE BOTTLES and BIKE LOCKS.

      I'm confused what you're trying to say about republicans demanding free speech and denying it to everyone else.

    40. Re:Mod Parent Up by Patent+Lover · · Score: 1

      Here's a real assault on a journalist: http://www.foxnews.com/politic... Leftist media? Wishful thinking.

    41. Re: Mod Parent Up by Darinbob · · Score: 1

      The key is not size of government, but the authoritianism of the government. You can have a very large government because it's composed of lots of secret police intent on restricting freedoms, or a very large government because it has a lot of bureaucrats attempting to keep everything running smoothly, or a very large government because it has a large military intent on defending against hostile neighbors. Only one of those is necessarily fascist. A gestapo member is not the ideological equivalent of Betsy from line 4 of the DMV.

    42. Re: Mod Parent Up by Darinbob · · Score: 1

      But the arguments seem to have increased recently. In the past you would never see those sorts of arguments except in mimeographed newsletters. Today these are becoming mainstream, especially when the head of the biggest conspiracy oriented fake news organization is the principal adviser to the president.

    43. Re: Mod Parent Up by WindBourne · · Score: 1

      wanting a smaller, less gov does not translate into actually happening.
      For example, the GOP have for decades said that they wanted a balanced budget.
      Yet, under every year of reagan, 3 years of poppa bush, every year of W, and now, Trump, the spending went UP, NOT DOWN.
      A great example is that ACA/OBAMAcare is to cost us 3/4 T over 10 years. Of course, O/dems funded this and it was doing fine until 2 insurance companies threw a fit about not being allowed to merge, combined with GOP taking over.
      BUT, the real constrast was in 2004, under W and a GOP-controlled CONgress, they passed medicare part D (or drugs), which because of the way that the GOP set it up, will cost 1T over 10 years. How much was funded? ZERO. NADA. ZIP. ZILCH.
      The GOP give tax breaks, do massive spending hikes and leave us with massive DEFICITS.
      OTOH, when CLinton got into office, the deficit went down every year because clinton cut spending every year. 2 of those were with dems in control.
      In his first year, O increased spending from 1T deficit (that W/GOP left) up to 1.4T. Then he brought the spending down EVERY YEAR, except his last year, where O and GOP CONtrolled CONgress acted like fucking drunk sailors (1 trillion deficit; assholes ).

      In addition, under the GOP, they really have done little of what the original republican party stood for. At this time, the current GOP has more in common with 1937 Germany, than they do with Lincoln, Teddy, Ike, etc.

      --
      I prefer the "u" in honour as it seems to be missing these days.
    44. Re: Mod Parent Up by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Why? Environmental protection (called "conservation" back then) got its big start with a Republican. Teddy Roosevelt and the Progressive movement. Who these days would probably be considered somewhere to the left of Bernie Sanders, but they *were* Republicans for the time they were in office (lost out as a 3rd party, though). For that matter, even Reagan these days would be barely Republican; remember, he signed the key environmental laws as governor in California like Nixon did as President.

    45. Re:Mod Parent Up by Dutchmaan · · Score: 1

      you claim your opinion is fact

      hmm.. I can't find "my opinion is fact" anywhere in my posts. Perhaps you could quote me..... or just tell me what I should be thinking.

    46. Re: Mod Parent Up by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Apparently not.

      Merriam-Webster:

      Definition of fascism

      1: often capitalized : a political philosophy, movement, or regime (such as that of the Fascisti) that exalts nation and often race above the individual and that stands for a centralized autocratic government headed by a dictatorial leader, severe economic and social regimentation, and forcible suppression of opposition

      2: a tendency toward or actual exercise of strong autocratic or dictatorial control

      All that can be implemented by left or right.

    47. Re: Mod Parent Up by HornWumpus · · Score: 1

      Power corrupts. You can't have a very large government without the power corrupting those in power. Any plan that involves temporarily putting lots of power into the hands of government while 'true communism' forms, will just stay at the strong government stage until it's knocked down by revolution or external forces.

      --
      John McAfee 'It was like that time I hired that Bangkok prostitute; to do my taxes, while I fucked my accountant'
    48. Re:Mod Parent Up by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The entire human political struggle is the individual vs the state. In broad strokes, from Left to Right:

      Totalitarianism > Communism > Socialism > Progressivism > [center] > Conservativism > Objectivism > Libertarianism > anarchy

      That's "total government and no individuals" to "all individuals and no government".

      In Europe, the furthest Right they ever get is Progressive. So when the communists smear the socialists they call them "rightwing" because to them, THEY ARE rightwing.

      Fascism is a variant of socialism and communism. It MEANS SOMETHING. It's not just a "catch-all" or "shorthand" for whatever you hate, or find oppressive. Just because the communists in europe call the socialists rightwing, doesn't mean you can call the Tea Party or the Libertarians, socialists or fascists. There is no such thing as a libertarian fascist. All fascists have always been socialists or communists or progressives, as fascism requires a strong centralized government - something all the leftwing ideologies aspire to, and NONE of the rightwing ones, do.

      The Nazis were ardent socialists (hence the term "National socialism"). They believed in free health care and guaranteed jobs. They confiscated inherited wealth and spent vast sums on public education. They purged the church from public policy, promoted a new form of pagan spirituality, and inserted the authority of the state into every nook and cranny of daily life. The Nazis declared war on smoking, supported abortion, euthanasia, and gun control. They loathed the free market, provided generous pensions for the elderly, and maintained a strict racial quota system in their universities-where campus speech codes were all the rage. The Nazis led the world in organic farming and alternative medicine. Hitler was a strict vegetarian, and Himmler was an animal rights activist. You equate the fascists with "jack-booted thugs", forgetting what it was that the thugs were there to enforce in the first place: national socialism.

      And then, there's this:

      "We are socialists, we are enemies of today's capitalistic economic system for the exploitation of the economically weak, with its unfair salaries, with its unseemly evaluation of a human being according to wealth and property instead of responsibility and performance, and we are all determined to destroy this system under all conditions." --Adolf Hitler, Quoted in John Toland, "Adolf Hitler", p224.

    49. Re: Mod Parent Up by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The actual definition does not put it on the spectrum (from M-W):
      a political philosophy, movement, or regime (such as that of the Fascisti) that exalts nation and often race above the individual and that stands for a centralized autocratic government headed by a dictatorial leader, severe economic and social regimentation, and forcible suppression of opposition
      This is not a conservative philosophy, it is a statist philosophy. Statism does not fall on the normal political spectrum of simply right and left, and neither does fascism.

    50. Re: Mod Parent Up by rholtzjr · · Score: 1

      You trusted Google? What the heck are you thinking?
      fascism
      noun fascism \fa-shi-zm also fa-si-\

      a political philosophy, movement, or regime (such as that of the Fascisti) that exalts nation and often race above the individual and that stands for a centralized autocratic government headed by a dictatorial leader, severe economic and social regimentation, and forcible suppression of opposition

    51. Re: Mod Parent Up by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Size also depends upon the size of the state. The US has a very large population, therefore it needs a larger government than smaller states.

    52. Re: Mod Parent Up by HornWumpus · · Score: 1

      Which is a good reason to keep as much as possible as local as possible.

      Doesn't change the basic fact. Power corrupts.

      --
      John McAfee 'It was like that time I hired that Bangkok prostitute; to do my taxes, while I fucked my accountant'
    53. Re: Mod Parent Up by Bing+Tsher+E · · Score: 1

      Actually, the Trump victory was a kick in the gut to social conservatives. They had their candidates in the primary. It was most definitely not Donald Trump.

      There were some good outcomes from the election.

      1. Social Conservatives deflated.
      2. Bush Dynasty terminated (we can hope)
      3. Clinton Dynasty terminated (we can hope, they keep mentioning Chelsea....)

      Trump is the Drano president. You don't want the bottle of Drano anywhere but in that cabinet under the sink. But it's a useful thing to have around.

    54. Re: Mod Parent Up by Bing+Tsher+E · · Score: 1

      Your concern about 'what the original republican party stood for' reeks of concern-troll. You have never been a Republican, you have never stood for anything they stood for. Your whole outlook seems very, very conventional. Go Edmund Muskie. Rah-rah Tip O'neil.

      *shrug*

    55. Re:Mod Parent Up by Bing+Tsher+E · · Score: 1

      Is there a place we can chip in to pay toward the $385 fine? I could donate a fiver.

    56. Re:Mod Parent Up by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Peddle your dumbfuckery elsewhere, no one is buying it.

    57. Re:Mod Parent Up by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Adhom!

    58. Re:Mod Parent Up by drsmithy · · Score: 1

      Your definition of "left" and "right" seem diametrically opposed to reality. Are you a Libertarian ?

    59. Re: Mod Parent Up by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Congrats, you found a definition that meets what you wanted it to mean. Here's another one I found quite quickly.

      http://www.dictionary.com/browse/fascism

      "a governmental system led by a dictator having complete power, forcibly suppressing opposition and criticism, regimenting all industry, commerce, etc., and emphasizing an aggressive nationalism and often racism."

      Mine also tends to be a more politically neutral and I will argue probably more correct than yours as Stalin was widely viewed as a fascist, yet he was also very much left wing.

    60. Re: Mod Parent Up by yuriklastalov · · Score: 1

      But but but local governments are among the most corrupt! We need a strong, decisive Federal government to keep the States in line! This plan couldn't possibly go wrong!

    61. Re: Mod Parent Up by david_thornley · · Score: 1

      No wonder you guys want to discourage college. It's the easiest way to get your crap history accepted.

      --
      "When you have eliminated the unacceptable, whatever is left, however improbable, must be the truthiness" - Holmes
    62. Re:Mod Parent Up by slashdotwannabe · · Score: 1

      You're a fucking moron. Fascism has nothing to do with "left" or "right". Stop telling people to learn history when you can't even be bothered to read a fucking dictionary.

      Fascism

      A governmental system led by a dictator having complete power, forcibly suppressing opposition and criticism, regimenting all industry, commerce, etc., and emphasizing an aggressive nationalism and often racism.

      --
      This comment is my opinion and does not represent an official position of Donald Trump or others I do not work for
  15. well of course by v1 · · Score: 1

    they don't have much use for college if they haven't managed to get their GED yet.

    --
    I work for the Department of Redundancy Department.
    1. Re: well of course by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I never managed to get a GED or go to college, but I did manage to sell my last company for $110M. You?

    2. Re: well of course by Stephan+Schulz · · Score: 1

      I never managed to get a GED or go to college, but I did manage to sell my last company for $110M. You?

      Went to university, got a masters degree, got a PhD, and sold my last company for $666M. As they say, education pays off. Or I'm bullshitting you.

      --

      Stephan

  16. In America, by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Republicans vote against their own best interest. So, no surprise here.

  17. Good for the country bad for the person by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    From my own experience in getting a practical STEM degree. 40% of the 4+ years you spend on a basic degree actually teach you something that is useful and pertinent to your field. Of that, 90% you can look up and learn for free online for no cost. Its good for the country as a whole because it shapes society in the direction that is wanted by the elites, it helps spread state sanctioned propaganda, and it helps the masses feel educated when they really know nothing about how the world operates.

  18. Worthless degrees by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Let's see: transectional gender studies, lesbian gay queer theory, negrology,, etc: all worthless degrees and a scam to extract money from the gullible.

    Joe Blow #1: "I have a degree in Chemical Engineering!"

    Joe Blow #2 "I have a degree in lesbian gay queer theory!"

    Do you see why a college degree is meaningless? Without context the mere fact that someone has a degree is meaningless. In the above example, Joe Blow #1 clearly has the advantage and a useful marketable skill. Joe Blow #2 wasted someone's money for a worthless piece of paper.

    In fact if Joe Blow #2 and used his four years of college money for at the Las Vegas gaming tables and randomly played without any skill whatsoever, reinvesting his winnings, he would have only lost maybe 10% of his money. He's still have 90% left over. Which is the better investment?

  19. Obligatory Asimov quote: by Pig+Hogger · · Score: 4, Informative

    There is a cult of ignorance in the United States, and there always has been. The strain of anti-intellectualism has been a constant thread winding its way through our political and cultural life, nurtured by the false notion that democracy means that "my ignorance is just as good as your knowledge."

    Isaac Asimov, 1980

    1. Re:Obligatory Asimov quote: by Kohath · · Score: 0

      But after you're done congratulating yourself, what's the point? Is finger-pointing your end goal?

      You live in a society with people who may not meet your standards [for whatever]. So?

      Should you:
      - Move to a compound and only let in The Good People?
      - Complain and basically be a prick to them?
      - Murder them all? Or opress them in some way short of murdering them?
      - Send them to reeducation camps?

      Please let us know what you and your intellect come up with.

    2. Re:Obligatory Asimov quote: by swillden · · Score: 5, Interesting

      There is a cult of ignorance in the United States, and there always has been. The strain of anti-intellectualism has been a constant thread winding its way through our political and cultural life, nurtured by the false notion that democracy means that "my ignorance is just as good as your knowledge."

      Isaac Asimov, 1980

      I think this is an old (older than the US as a nation) reaction to the pro-intellectuallism of the Northeastern states -- Yankeedom. The culture of this region has always been very pro-education, to the point that during the Puritan era social status was primarily determined by education level. The southern part of the country, of course, had constant economic and ideological conflict with the north. The north was aggressively egalitarian and prized communitarian notions of freedom and community self-government. The south was aristocratic and prized the individual liberty of the aristocrats. Social status in the south was based on wealth and heritage; education was largely irrelevant, though some sub-cultures in the south lionized classical education as a sign of and means to culture and gentility.

      I think anti-intellectualism arose primarily as a straightforward rejection by the south of all things northern. As history rolled on, this view became deeply embedded in the conservative culture, and was regularly reinforced by the fact that intellectuals always want to apply their knowledge and theories to change society, while conservatives obviously don't want change.

      --
      Note to ACs: I usually delete AC replies without reading them. If you want to talk to me, log in.
    3. Re:Obligatory Asimov quote: by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
    4. Re:Obligatory Asimov quote: by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Please let us know what you and your intellect come up with.

      The unintelligent will eventually starve and kill themselves with their own policies, you will sit back and let them?

    5. Re:Obligatory Asimov quote: by Kohath · · Score: 1

      The unintelligent will eventually starve and kill themselves with their own policies, you will sit back and let them?

      Pretending to know the future is neither intelligent nor wise.

    6. Re: Obligatory Asimov quote: by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      This. If there is one thing that sets apart the US from the rest of the Western world, it is the profound distrust of people who are smarter or better educated that characterises American society. It seems to be rooted in a fear of anything resembling the classes of English society in colonial times.

    7. Re:Obligatory Asimov quote: by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The unintelligent will eventually starve and kill themselves with their own policies, you will sit back and let them?

      Right..... the people that run the farms in areas of the country with the lowest crime rates will starve and kill themselves.

    8. Re:Obligatory Asimov quote: by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Asimov also said the smartest man he knew was he car mechanic, because Asimov recognized the difference between knowledge/education and credentialism.

    9. Re: Obligatory Asimov quote: by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Because "people who [proclaim themselves to be] smarter or better educated" are increasingly hateful bigots and elitists. Or if not that, then at least they seem oblivious to their fellow Americans' problems and concerns. Alienation is hardly a basis for trust.

    10. Re:Obligatory Asimov quote: by fish_in_the_c · · Score: 1

      I think much of the anti-intellectualism in the united states is a reaction to the 'intellectual elite' who claim there is no God and by virtue of the fact the are 'elite intellectuals' everyone else should accept they are right and there is no God. This started mostly after world war II with the uptake of the beatnik moment that became the hippie movement, that became... whatever the mess we have now is..

      --
      âoeTolerance applies only to persons, but never to truth. Intolerance applies only to truth, but never to persons.
    11. Re:Obligatory Asimov quote: by swillden · · Score: 1

      I think much of the anti-intellectualism in the united states is a reaction to the 'intellectual elite' who claim there is no God

      No. It's much older than that.

      --
      Note to ACs: I usually delete AC replies without reading them. If you want to talk to me, log in.
    12. Re:Obligatory Asimov quote: by bugs2squash · · Score: 1

      What makes you think that farmers are not intelligent - or even have degrees in agriculture ?

      --
      Nullius in verba
    13. Re:Obligatory Asimov quote: by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      And the North was the leading proponent of protectionism, which our esteemed President Trump is the current poster boy for.

      Making these broad statements about history in an us-vs-them issue is rather silly. The educated North was probably as big a proponent of eugenics as anyone else.

      (Although I have seem some people more enthusiastic toward Free Trade possible because the Antebellum South's economic plan was to export cotton and import finished goods. Suck it open borders advocates.)

    14. Re:Obligatory Asimov quote: by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If anti-itellectualism means rejecting post modernism and marxism, then I'm afraid if you have more than 5 brain cells, you will find that rejecting the academy makes more and more sense every single day.

      The USA hasn't had full blown communism yet, pray that it never does because the left slaughters their opponents wholesale.

  20. Disliked, but obligatory by shameless · · Score: 1

    Despite this shift in opinion, employers are still going to require a four-year college degree in order to get a job as an entry-level file clerk...

  21. Deeply held myths by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I think this points to a number of core myths in the American psyche. One myth is that the "American Dream" is available to anyone who works. Another is that class is wrong and that all people should be equal. In actuality we live in a plutocracy with very real class delineations and very real differences in opportunity. We just don't admit it.

    Part of the idea that everyone *must* be equal is the idea that to excel academically is suspect. We don't want to acknowledge either differences in opportunity or differences in aptitude. It's the only culture I know where people -- even the President -- are proud to be ignorant.

    With so many people having no realistic access to college, higher education represents a threat to the myth of equality. Also, the primary function of college is arguably to create connections to higher social classes, which then provide access to those classes. People don't go to Harvard because it's a good school. They go because it transports them into the ruling class, or keeps them there.

  22. "the country" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Where "the country" is a handful of lying jackasses who want all the money, and a public too uneducated to discern when they are being lied to.

  23. Idiot masses easily led by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Naturally Republicans hate colleges. After all, an ignorant voter is easier to mislead and more compliant. Heaven forbid the population should study and learn!

    To quote Henry Jones Senior:
    "It tells me that goose stepping morons like yourself should try reading books instead of burning them!"

  24. Spin it! by Dan+East · · Score: 3, Informative

    Wow, what a biased way to spin things and distort facts.

    A majority of Republicans and right-leaning independents think higher education has a negative effect on the country

    That is not the question the Pew Research survey asked, nor how they reported the results. The question was whether or not colleges and universities are having a positive or negative affect on the way things are going in the country. "Higher education" is far more general terminology than "colleges and universities", and by underhandedly substituting that term they make it sound like Republicans think that being educated or obtaining a higher education is bad for the country.

    But then, what else should we expect from The Chronicle of Higher Education but that kind of bias?

    --
    Better known as 318230.
    1. Re:Spin it! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I miss old slashdot... which wasn't even that good.

    2. Re:Spin it! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      What? Higher ed. Is precisely colleges and universities,there is very little else included in that terminology. Are you thinking of continuing education?

    3. Re:Spin it! by david_thornley · · Score: 1

      Would you care to tell us what this "higher education" is that doesn't come from colleges and universities?

      --
      "When you have eliminated the unacceptable, whatever is left, however improbable, must be the truthiness" - Holmes
  25. Hard vs soft science. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    This is about real science that is based on facts and evidence being drowned out by fake psudo science that insist everything is some sort of tyrannical hyerarchy run by white guys to oppress everyone else.

    Kick out the bullshit social sciences and most of this would go away.

    1. Re:Hard vs soft science. by serviscope_minor · · Score: 1

      Kick out the bullshit social sciences and most of this would go away.

      It's profoundly stupid to refuse to study something simply because it's hard to study. Doubly so if it sometimes says things you don't like.

      --
      SJW n. One who posts facts.
  26. Reading between the lines. by geekmux · · Score: 4, Interesting

    On one side of the isle, you have a group of representatives who appear hell-bent on maintaining an uneducated society in order to maximize the manipulative capability of a government to control the stupid and ignorant masses.

    On the other side of the isle, you have a group of representatives who appear hell-bent on feeding the Educational Industrial Complex with the goal of funding capitalism, regardless of the growing lack of return on that investment, or the personal impact of massive debt.

    As usual, one has to choose the lesser of two evils.

    1. Re:Reading between the lines. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      On one side of the isle, you have a group of representatives who appear hell-bent on maintaining an uneducated society in order to use the power of the government to benefit their sponsors.
      On the other side of the isle, you have a group of representatives who appear hell-bent on investing in development of individuals without having a plan to pay for the cost.

      FTFY

    2. Re:Reading between the lines. by doctorvo · · Score: 5, Insightful
      Your sarcasm is unwarranted and misses the point. In fact, it's much simpler: conservatives want higher education to teach conservative values and ideas, while leftists want higher education to teach leftist values and ideas. The leftists have pretty much taken over US academia, and as a result, conservatives want tax payers to pay less for teaching an ideology that they disagree with.

      And although dependence on big government programs is likely a nice political side effect for people who generally advocate such things, the primary reason for skyrocketing costs is the same as our public pension crisis: special interests lobby for more government spending for their causes, and traditionally, it's been hard for politiciains to say "no" to subsidizing education. If you subsidize something, prices generally go up.

    3. Re:Reading between the lines. by Digital+Avatar · · Score: 1

      I reject your reality and substitute my own: I'll just go to trade school and bypass the socialist indoctrination, thank you very much.

    4. Re:Reading between the lines. by swillden · · Score: 4, Interesting

      regardless of the growing lack of return on that investment

      You're nuts.

      Average lifetime salary of a person with a high school diploma: $1.3M
      Average lifetime salary of a person with some college: $1.6M
      Average lifetime salary of a person with a four-year degree: $2.3M
      Average lifetime salary of a person with a master's degree: $2.7M
      Average lifetime salary of a person with a doctorate: $3.3M
      Average lifetime salary of a person with a professional degree (MD, JD, etc.): $3.7M

      These are overall averages, but the variation based on field of study is large. STEM degrees are particularly lucrative, and the average STEM graduate with a four-year degree out-earns the average person with a master's or doctorate in the social sciences, education, etc.

      or the personal impact of massive debt.

      Debt is not required to get an education. There are plenty of inexpensive colleges and universities. With a little hard work it's not hard to get partial or full tuition waivers at the undergraduate level, and scholarships and stipends are the norm at the PhD level and in many Master's programs.

      Of course, this requires picking a school based on practical requirements and affordability (including cost of living... you may need to live at home and attend a local commuter school, for example), rather than the quality of the football program or the awesomeness of the party scene. And it requires working hard to maintain high grades (to get tuition waivers), rather than partying, etc.

      Personally, I got a BS in Math and CS and not only graduated without any debt at all (never borrowed a penny for school), but with some savings accumulated while in school. I went to a local university so I could live with my parents, joined the Air Force Reserves to get the GI Bill, kept my grades high to get and stay on an academic tuition waiver (my high school grades were too bad to qualify for a scholarship) and worked 20-25 hours per week throughout my education.

      In hindsight, I should have taken an education loan or two, because there was a GI Bill program that would have made payments on the loans... and there's nothing saying you need to actually spend the money on education. I should have borrowed the money and invested it, letting the military make the payments. I left money on the table.

      Of course, that was all some 25-30 years ago... but I have two sons who are doing much the same thing now. They didn't do the military thing, and don't (yet) have the tuition waivers, but they're working part time and able to pay for school themselves by living at home and attending an inexpensive university (same one I went to). One of my sons just got married and moved out, so his costs are increasing but his wife has a decent (for now) full-time job, so she's going to support them while he finishes his education, then he'll go to work and she'll go to school. It will be a lot of work, but they'll both have educations and no debt.

      Getting a higher education is very much worth it, and needn't come with a heavy debt burden. You just need to be smart about it.

      --
      Note to ACs: I usually delete AC replies without reading them. If you want to talk to me, log in.
    5. Re:Reading between the lines. by tgrigsby · · Score: 1

      Get down with your bad self. Some people don't need a college education to be successful and happy in life. But for those that seek that education, there should be no barriers, including and not limited to financial barriers.

      Hope you plan on doing a little reading up in your spare time on history and science, y'know, so you can keep up with the rest of us educated folks. Because pretending that critical thinking skills and information are the same as socialist indoctrination is not just sad, it's going to grow the portion of the population that is ignorant and easily mislead by GOP propaganda.

      --
      *** *** You're just jealous 'cause the voices talk to me... ***
    6. Re:Reading between the lines. by laird · · Score: 1

      Actually, the increase in the cost of education to students is driven by massive cutbacks in funding for education, causing schools to push costs onto the students. In the 70s, the public paid 75% of the cost of education, because having an educated population is good for everyone, and students paid 25%. Now, largely due to right-wing desire to pay lower taxes no natter what damage it does to the country, it's 25% public and 75% students, meaning that the cost of education to the student tripled (in constant dollars). That means that when you used to be able to pay for school by working part time, for example, or payable by a typical family's income, now that's impossible - other than the very wealthy, students have to go massively into debt taking out huge loans. That's highly profitable for the lenders (who make high interest rate returns on government guaranteed loans) but horrible for the students, who end up in massive debt for the rest of their lives.

    7. Re:Reading between the lines. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      >that was all some 25-30 years ago.

      What you ask is impossible nowadays.
      Any financial success stories about "how I got through college" before the year 2000 are just antiquated curiosities.

      And your own children prove it.
      Your children are just lucky to be born in a house nearby a cheap university, and that's not anything to do with their hard work.
      Your son is fortunate enough to be married to a woman that does want to support the household with a full-time job, not wanting to go to college simultaneously.
      I laugh about the no debt part, you're a great father but delusional.

    8. Re:Reading between the lines. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      This is the truth. It's not that Democrats respect higher education more than Republicans. Is just that, currently, higher education is a pawn being controlled by the Dems, used against the GOP, and so they propagandize for it while their opponents decry it. If, through historical accident, the GOP had power over higher education, they would be using it to rail against the dems, while the dems complained about higher education.

      Look at how Dems support science and GOP opposes it where it benefits them... like global warming... while their sympathies are reversed in other fields... like GMOs and vaccines. The Dems support ideas based on their political usefulness, not truth; and the GOP does the same.

      Listen to a Democrat talk about taxes and the economy... or gender definitions. It's as purely anti-rational as the worst Republican talking about creationism.

    9. Re:Reading between the lines. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Using the term "leftist" outs you as a right-wing moron.

    10. Re:Reading between the lines. by fish_in_the_c · · Score: 1

      the cost of education has also been driven up substantially by other factors.
      1) expectations of living conditions for student housing. the normal dorms in the 30 - 50's housed multiple people per room and had cold showers. There was no expectation of anything other then basic utilties in the rooms.

      2) Everyone was served the same meal from the cafitera there was no choice in what you ate or what you paid for it.

      3) professors were generally there doing research and funding themselves through research. When students wanted a class they pooled their money and paid the professor to teach it, so professors paid for themselves with research or the faculty didn't exists to have particular classes.

      4) there was no expectation the university would take care of you , if you failed and starved or were attacked and killed on campus that was too bad, you had to call the normal police department.

      5) Historically many university and college were at least partially staffed by religious who expected to get paid next to nothing and considered their work a calling from God.

      --
      âoeTolerance applies only to persons, but never to truth. Intolerance applies only to truth, but never to persons.
    11. Re:Reading between the lines. by doctorvo · · Score: 1

      Actually, the increase in the cost of education to students is driven by massive cutbacks in funding for education, causing schools to push costs onto the students

      You need to check your facts. Government per-student expenditures in the US are near an all-time high, and are higher than in almost all other developed nations.

      Now, largely due to right-wing desire to pay lower taxes no natter what damage it does to the country

      Per student university spending in the US is nearly twice as high in the US than in Germany, three times as high as in Italy. The US also has a larger percentage of kids completing college compared to places like Germany. Furthermore, those countries don't delude themselves into thinking that they can pay for education and healthcare by "taxing the rich", they tax the middle class heavily. You want free college in the US? Fine: cut education spending to European levels, cut college attendance to European levels, and raise the marginal income tax on the middle class to European levels (roughly 45% for people making PPP$50000 and over). Don't try to sell people this crap that high education costs and debt in the US are all the result of a vast right wing conspiracy and are fixable by taxing the rich. Of course, voters recognize what a lousy deal paying an extra $5000-$10000/year to the federal government actually is, which is why a large percentage reject people peddling your kinds of false promises and fake data.

    12. Re:Reading between the lines. by swillden · · Score: 1

      >that was all some 25-30 years ago.

      What you ask is impossible nowadays. Any financial success stories about "how I got through college" before the year 2000 are just antiquated curiosities.

      Bullshit. Costs have gone up some, yes, but essentially all of the options that were in place then are still available now.

      And your own children prove it. Your children are just lucky to be born in a house nearby a cheap university, and that's not anything to do with their hard work.

      There is almost no region of the country that isn't near a cheap community college. "Near" being "within reasonable commuting range".

      Your son is fortunate enough to be married to a woman that does want to support the household with a full-time job, not wanting to go to college simultaneously.

      She does want to go to college simultaneously, but choices have to be made, and this is the one they agreed upon.

      I laugh about the no debt part, you're a great father but delusional.

      Which no debt part? Mine? Or theirs? Both are absolutely true.

      --
      Note to ACs: I usually delete AC replies without reading them. If you want to talk to me, log in.
    13. Re:Reading between the lines. by Patent+Lover · · Score: 1

      So I'm curious. I majored in mechanical engineering. What's the agenda for a leftist mechanical engineer vs.a rightist? Does it change math and physics. Subsidizing makes prices go up? WTF are you talking about? Compare our subsidized gasoline prices vs. the rest of the world. Or steel prices from China. Or health care costs from any modern western nation.

    14. Re:Reading between the lines. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Bullshit. The $1MM difference in average lifetime salary is MORE than covered when factoring in the $200,000 in expenses and lost wages accrued by going to a 4-year college - future-value of money principles put that $200K over 35 years to be anywhere from $1-1.5MM in worth (depending on assumed rate of return). And that doesn't even factor in the interest payments.

    15. Re:Reading between the lines. by mesterha · · Score: 1

      You need to check your facts. Government per-student expenditures in the US are near an all-time high, and are higher than in almost all other developed nations.

      I think he was talking about college, and I read some articles that claimed the same thing. If true, it explains the increase in cost of state universities. The other factors often mentioned, while real, are not as significant. (Administration, facilities, ...) As for Europe, I'd be interested in reading evidence about their lower costs. Do you have any references?

      --

      Chris Mesterharm
    16. Re:Reading between the lines. by Raenex · · Score: 1

      Because pretending that critical thinking skills and information are the same as socialist indoctrination is not just sad, it's going to grow the portion of the population that is ignorant and easily mislead by GOP propaganda.

      You aren't aware (or maybe you are) of the extent that postmodernism and cultural marxism has infected the humanities, which in turn have infected the administration, which in turn have infected the faculty and other departments and classes. But then maybe you think critical thinking and information leads to "A feminist glaciology framework for global environmental change research".

    17. Re:Reading between the lines. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      but you're still in debt, and god forbid anything bad happens.

    18. Re:Reading between the lines. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      let me update you.

      > In hindsight, I should have taken an education loan or two, because there was a GI Bill program that would have made payments on the loans...

      this will get you nothing but prison.

    19. Re:Reading between the lines. by serviscope_minor · · Score: 2

      What's the agenda for a leftist mechanical engineer vs.a rightist?

      Question 4 (20 marks).

      (a) With reference to Marxism, explain how representation of a pin jointed frame as an eigensystem can be used to calculate the modes of oscillation. [5]

      (b) Using your answer to part (a), calculate the fundamental vibrational mode of the structure in Figure 2, and relate that to how the proletariat will crush the bourgois. [5]

      (c) A hero of the people is attaching a sign to the structure emblazoned with the words of "The Red Flag". Write out the words. [7]

      (d) Assume that the worker's use of power tools impart a 0.3 Hz driving force at point A in the direction shown. Calculate the damper required placed at point B to keep the maximum deflection to under 200mm. [3]

      --
      SJW n. One who posts facts.
    20. Re:Reading between the lines. by Actually,+I+do+RTFA · · Score: 1

      What's the agenda for a leftist mechanical engineer vs.a rightist? Does it change math and physics.

      Well, good Christians know that Pi is 3, not 3.14...

      --
      Your ad here. Ask me how!
    21. Re: Reading between the lines. by doctorvo · · Score: 1

      US per student spending is even higher for tertiary education. There are plenty of data sources for this; the OECD publishes a lot of this data. Much of it is also on Wikipedia. You can really look it up for yourself. I'm all for European-style public education, if we start by cutting academic/teacher salaries and benefits, and other per-student expenditures, to European levels.

    22. Re:Reading between the lines. by geekmux · · Score: 1

      Your sarcasm is unwarranted and misses the point. In fact, it's much simpler: conservatives want higher education to teach conservative values and ideas, while leftists want higher education to teach leftist values and ideas. The leftists have pretty much taken over US academia, and as a result, conservatives want tax payers to pay less for teaching an ideology that they disagree with.

      And although dependence on big government programs is likely a nice political side effect for people who generally advocate such things, the primary reason for skyrocketing costs is the same as our public pension crisis: special interests lobby for more government spending for their causes, and traditionally, it's been hard for politiciains to say "no" to subsidizing education. If you subsidize something, prices generally go up.

      Uh, the situation appears to be far from "subsidized" when the cost of higher education now approaches the personal debt level of a fucking mortgage. Could we cut grant programs to cut costs? Sure. By doing so would less people end up going to college? Yes, and that would probably be a good thing, It might force employers to stop with the secretary-needs-a-masters-degree bullshit job requirement. We also likely need to re-define what we call "education" as well to ensure it creates a viable workforce, not a generation full of social media philosophers still living with their parents who can't find employment.

      The other problem is the Educational Industrial Complex has become massively infected with Greed, and has created a lot of the same financial burdens and pain on citizens that other industries suffering from the same infection have. Education does not need to cost as much as it does, subsidy or not. Education is now on par with Medical when it comes to financial impact in ones lifetime. It's a fucking sad state of affairs to see that obscene Greed runs rampant, and Greed lobbies to ensure that it is never put in check. The chasm between the 0.001% and the 99.999% is not shrinking. Greed ensures the only goal billionaires have today is to become the worlds first trillionaires, no matter the impact to the rest of the planet.

      There are many diseases humans suffer from, but the disease of Greed will sadly be our demise.

    23. Re:Reading between the lines. by Stephan+Schulz · · Score: 1

      Your sarcasm is unwarranted and misses the point. In fact, it's much simpler: conservatives want higher education to teach conservative values and ideas, while leftists want higher education to teach leftist values and ideas.

      Evolution and climate change, to name two hot spots, are not "values and ideas", they are well-tested theories that yield useful results when we apply them to reality. Or, in other words, they are as close to factual as science will take us. I find it strangely depressing that US conservatives nowadays take the worst ideas of post-modernism as their new gospel...

      --

      Stephan

    24. Re:Reading between the lines. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      No, what? You should avoid saying things like this, it makes you sound quite gullible.

    25. Re:Reading between the lines. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Which island are you talking about?

    26. Re:Reading between the lines. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      But is the lesser of two evils the feeding of the "Military Industrial Complex?"

  27. Look at a survery by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Of how many college students are unable to pay off their student loans, and how many of them think they shouldn't be forced to. That might explain things.

  28. College: a hotbed of terrorist indoctrination. by swell · · Score: 1

    Sad!

    --
    ...omphaloskepsis often...
    1. Re:College: a hotbed of terrorist indoctrination. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I think you're downplaying its socialist, fascist, dare I say, communist, brainwashing. If you let your kid go there the terrorists win, and, think of the children.

  29. At this point, I'd have to agree. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Not college as a concept, just colleges as they are. We need to defund them to end this nonsense. College used to be about education, open-mindedness, and the cultivation of maturity, self-hood, and compassion for other-hood. In other words, a broader view and more actualized person. It is a straight up propaganda machine for extreme left-wing hyperbole at this point, and the saddest thing is these kids are being MANIPULATED. None of these older folks have their interests in mind, they are just pushing their agenda and view the naivite of youth as easy prey. I'd be pissed to high heaven if I were a college kid, being reduced to nothing more than programming, statistics, and a left hand on election day. College kids: you are being used, and you are handing yourself (and potentially your life) up on silver platter. I thought the tide was turning with Bernie Sanders, but nope, it's worse than ever. :/ You play right into their hands, and you don't have to.

    1. Re: At this point, I'd have to agree. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      PS - the headline is total linkbait. Not fake news, but not entirely illustrative, either. I suspect that's lazy thinking rather than malicious intent, but you can do better, poster.

    2. Re:At this point, I'd have to agree. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      " College used to be about education, open-mindedness, and the cultivation of maturity, self-hood, and compassion for other-hood"

      ...also about the correct use of the hyphen. "self-hood" would be the hood of a car that is somehow selfed? Huh? Maybe you wanted "selfhood"? I won't even try to understand where "other-hood", with or without a hyphen came from.

  30. The republicans are right. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I mean, look at the kind of people that win elections. What are these damn schools teaching? And besides, that underwater basket weaving degree won't get you a cashier job at Walmart.

  31. misleading statement by doctorvo · · Score: 1

    They don't believe that higher education in general has a bad effect on the country, they believe that the higher education we currently have has a bad effect on the country. The people who say that higher education has a bad effect on the US would likely be much happer with European-style higher education.

  32. 'Untrustworthy' doesn't begin to describe it... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The whole educational system, from elementary school all the way through College really should be considered very untrustworthy: For making education a chore and an source of personal shaming (mandatory attendance with penalties, assigning letter grades to children, age-separated classes, and a major lack of discipline within many schools), for attempting to make itself mandatory for access to all fields and displacing trade school (demanding students learn things they have no intention or desire to make use of), for pushing partisan politics (especially for pushing it on students who are only interested qualifying for a work in a preferred field), and for wasteing many years of children's time in the process (should be going out into the world gaining experience, interacting with mature adults [if there are any left], and taking responsibility for their own needs and actions, rather than idling dependants until well into adulthood).

  33. Weird by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Universities are one of the few ways to make money that is 100% home-grown in the West.

  34. I'm not surprised by rsilvergun · · Score: 1

    There's been a non stop media campaign against the 'liberal elite'. It doesn't help that there's a bunch of not job feminists running community college humanities departments for that media to point to. Still, you've got a multi billion dollar media pushing an anti education agenda so they don't have to pay for your kid's college in the form of taxes. Plus there's those sweet high interest college loans. So yeah, college is gonna take a hit

    --
    Hi! I make Firefox Plug-ins. Check 'em out @ https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/youtube-mp3-podcaster/
  35. Re:There's an obvious reason - Trump University by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Funny

    I can't believe no one has proposed this reason yet: Trump University. Republican are embarassed.

  36. America will never become Idiocracy by Dawn+Keyhotie · · Score: 0, Troll

    Republicans: Challenge accepted.

    --
    "The only good windmill is a tilted windmill."
    1. Re:America will never become Idiocracy by Carewolf · · Score: 1

      Republicans: Challenge accepted.

      I think the phrase was: "Hold my martini"

    2. Re:America will never become Idiocracy by prefec2 · · Score: 1

      Oh you are almost there or even surpassed it. Idiocracy portraits a country where everyone has something to eat and something to do. There is no hunger. True they are all stupid, but hey, somehow it works. They even have general health care (as long as you have a bar code). Present day, US does not have that. Instead it randomly threatens allies and friends and enemies. Also it insults other people and countries.

  37. Some slash-perspective by Texmaize · · Score: 3, Insightful

    In general, the people reading slashdot are left leaning, like universities have become. You can not imagine how someone could hate/mistrust an institution that echoes all your thinking. What you may not realize is that universities have become corrupted and failed in their mission because now they ONLY propagate one ideology. Universities are supposed to be about truth and helping kids find what they believe. You can't actually do this if you are only presented with one viewpoint. This is what the modern universities do. Why this happened has to do with the philosophies that started with rise of industrialism. At the time, these were new and exciting and captured the imagination of many young faculty, who later became the majority. The dangerous part of these philosophies is that they broach no dissent. You are with or against. Think about what went down in Russia in the first part of the 20th century. It happened in our universities, here.

    Many of you probably think that there is no sound and deep conservative thought. You may be shocked to learn that there is plenty of great conservative thought that challenges many of your assumptions. Sadly, you have never been exposed to them. Think about college. You can probably fondly think remember a course with a dynamic professor who spoke of intriguing ideas about privilege and economic redistribution. Your other professors probably reinforced his points. Now, can you speak about the class where the counter points were given and argued just as passionately? Do you really think no such arguments exist? Did you ever really seek them out? Do you understand that the absence of this discussion is the anathema of true intellectual thought?

    You can see the shadows of these conservative ideas on these very forums. The party line says that all races, genders, places or origin etc. are exactly the same. Any deviation from this means that you and your organization is flawed and fundamentally corrupt run by corrupt people. But, lets face it, the IT/tech world is not a diverse place. In your own life, you know who is good and who is bad, and while it may have nothing to do with what group you belong, for the most part it turned out a certain way. You can see this argued on these forums. You do not call yourselves bad guys, but offer explanations for why it is this way. Yet, you are not so charitable about other people's industries or vocations. The world is full of ***isms, but they are just for others, right?

    The same ideology is laughably unable to deal with what goes on in professional sports franchises, which are not terribly diverse either. It is ignored because it gives a wrong answer.

    So the political right is now, correctly, identifying the universities not as places of learning and education, but as fallen organizations that peddle indoctrination. For a long time, these people were patient justifying to themselves that exposure to different thoughts were good. Arguably too late has the right figured out the real game.

    If you want a test to see if you have been intellectually corrupted, simply ask your self what is the last book that you have read from the conservative perspective? If the answer is a real long time ago, or why bother, then you are honestly not the person that you think you are. You are an intellectual but a zealot. You can thank the university for that.

    --
    "Liberalism is a very noble idea, currently controlled by some very bad people. Be sure you do not get the two confused.
    1. Re:Some slash-perspective by david_thornley · · Score: 1

      Um, in my observation there is no left-leaning majority on Slashdot. There's a lot of libertarians and a lot of people who are generally right-wing. I doubt there's a majority of one political philosophy.

      Also, in my experience, professors leave politics out of the classroom, and there are active (if small) conservative groups on campus. You're talking about a world I do not recognize.

      --
      "When you have eliminated the unacceptable, whatever is left, however improbable, must be the truthiness" - Holmes
  38. Total Misrepresentation by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    We think colleges and universities are staffed with too many ultra-leftist liberals who inject their twisted philosophies into the minds of impressionable youth, regardless of whether or not the subject matter of the class demands it. These "teachers" also promote and instill an environment of hostility and fear.

    We DO NOT think higher education is bad. LEARN THE DIFFERENCE!

    1. Re:Total Misrepresentation by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      We think colleges and universities are staffed with too many ultra-leftist liberals who inject their twisted philosophies into the minds of impressionable youth

      But injecting your twisted superstitious religious bullshit into the minds of impressionable youth is alright ?

      We DO NOT think higher education is bad. LEARN THE DIFFERENCE!

      And your definition of higher education is creationism, intelligent design, climate change denialism, and other bullshit. Oh yes, and electing a fucking discusting mentally unstable psychopath for president.

      You want to know why colleges and universities and staffed with liberals ? Because once you get out of your conservative shithole and open yourself to the world, learn science and rational thinking, learn new languages, have contact with people of other countries and cultures (both civilized and barbarian), read books, learn history, then you BECOME a liberal.

    2. Re:Total Misrepresentation by prefec2 · · Score: 1

      Liberal and left are two different things. You US-Americans have to learn the difference between liberalism (that is what liberals want) and socialism (that is what some left people want). Most left people in the EU want a social-market economy, which allows for capitalism where it is helpful and regulate it so all people can have a descend living. Anyway, why do you think so many scientists appear to you as left wing? Here is my explanation. In science you have to come up with an hypothesis, you have then provide a way to test it. If you are able to disprove it, it is false. If the test holds, your hypothesis is considered "not (yet) false". To build a theory, you need a set of hypotheses which do not contradict each other and are all testable and not false, or derived from other hypotheses which fulfill this requirement. Science also teaches us to question believes, because believes are subjective and cannot be used to understand the world objectively.

      Believe is something relevant in religion. As it subjective it can also hold absolute truth for the believer. However, this truth is subjective. Therefore, be not surprised when other people have other believes.

  39. agrre, to a level by hagnat · · Score: 1

    i agree that colleges are bad, but not because they are heaven for independent thinking like TFA mentions, but because to some degree you dont need them. We are told from a young age that we need higher education to be someone, to be successful, to be happy. But reality shows that we might not use what we learned in college for our job, that some university graduates eventually work in areas different than the one they graduated or in areas that require no graduation at all. We are neither successful, nor happy, not even someone of note. And this has created the current generation of depressed people who are still struggling to pay for their student debts, a debt they only got by studying something they dont use.

    We need to start valuing the common life again, that one can still be happy and successful while working at a diners, at petrol stations, as a farmer.

    But that would require a cultural shift that i believe most people wouldn't be inclined to.

    --
    "life is a joke, and someone is laughing at me"
  40. Pervasive vs. present by s.petry · · Score: 1, Insightful

    I was in college in the 80s, so a bit after you. We had groups like you mentioned, but we didn't have nearly 100% of our Professors teaching/preaching their leftist ideology during lectures. I am paying for my kid to go to college today so get to read assignments, lectures, and material. It's quite a different animal.

    When every single course is lecturing not so much the subject matter, but leftist ideology, we have problems with our education system. Biology courses are filled with anti-American rhetoric and promotion of 3rd wave feminism. Even Math and Physics lectures are filled with anti-American rhetoric.

    The ideology is not new, but the pervasiveness certainly is more recent and having impact. The normalization of punishing people who question the narratives is also more recent.

    --

    -The wise argue that there are few absolutes, the fool argues that there are no probabilities.

    1. Re:Pervasive vs. present by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      As a 50+ year old retired USAF veteran attending college (University of Wisconsin) on my GI bill I have yet to have attended any of these classes where the professor spouts "anti-American rhetoric and promotion of 3rd wave feminism". Yes, I know anecdote is not evidence, but still.

      Biology, philosophy, computer science, math and engineering classes so far.

      The UW is a renowned bastion of liberal thought but somehow I have managed to avoid the classes you claim are so prevalent.. Now some of the conversations with students at the Student Union are definitely of a liberal bent, but I find them refreshing and proof that today's youth is engaged, not just millennials staring at their phone screens.

    2. Re:Pervasive vs. present by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Let's consider that these professors don't appreciate the way the country is going, for whatever reason.
      They are speaking out against that. Is that the appropriate forum for such speech? Sometimes, certainly.
      Other times, it may be in direct rebuttal to inappropriate challenges brought by students. The entirety of
      the zealous politicizing of every single issue, by any side, is absolutely out of hand.

    3. Re:Pervasive vs. present by tgrigsby · · Score: 4, Interesting

      I have three kids in college right now and one that's graduated already.

      Yes, I regularly hyperventilate about how much it costs. I hyperventilate more about the weddings they describe and think I'm going to pay for (three girls).

      And none of them knows what the hell you're talking about. They don't typically hear left leaning ideology. They hear lectures on the course topics. And of those professors that do bring up politics in the classroom, and they are apparently a small percentage, it seems balanced between left wing and right wing.

      Don't let Fox "News" and Breitbart convince you that higher education is bad. Growing the uneducated portion of the population serves the GOP's need for an ignorant and fearful power base.

      --
      *** *** You're just jealous 'cause the voices talk to me... ***
    4. Re:Pervasive vs. present by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Please post a few examples of the crazy nonsense you're spewing. How are mitosis and feminism winding up in the same reading assignment? What "anti-American rhetoric" is being explored in the differential equations problem sets?

      Really, honestly, we'd love to know.

    5. Re:Pervasive vs. present by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      They're teaching education, not 'leftist ideology' as your paranoid, lying, dishonest self claims.

      There's no 'anti-american rhetoric, just facts being taught. I also see that you can't handle strong capable women standing up for themselves. The math and physics thing? You ARE paranoid. seek help and medication for your delusional self.

      There's also no 'normalization of punishing people who question the narratives'going on either...unless you're also whining about colleges not going for the whole 'intelligent design' crap that has no factual basis in reality and thus isn't taught.

      Try actually going to college instead of lying about them...THAT might change your outlook. But you seem to be allergic of education of any kind.

    6. Re:Pervasive vs. present by s.petry · · Score: 1

      Obviously anecdotes differ since I doubt our kids go to the same schools. That said, this isn't just a "Fox" thing, or even a MSNBC thing. There is ample evidence to back my anecdote as "normal" especially in CA's system. They are incredibly easy to find. I know that the Telegraph is a notoriously right wing site (sarcasm should be obvious), but here is one of literally thousands of articles that come up with a simple Google search. In addition to mandatory classes being forced on men, we have curriculum injecting ideology and leftism. A Marine biology course last semester spend 2 lectures talking about the 70 genders and was part of the finals. Not psychology, sociology, or a course where it may make more sense, but _marine_biology.

      If your kids don't experience the same, that's great for them. Lets not deny that it exists when example after example can be seen and found.

      --

      -The wise argue that there are few absolutes, the fool argues that there are no probabilities.

    7. Re:Pervasive vs. present by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Professors teaching/preaching their leftist ideology during lectures
      THINK OF THE CHILDREN!
      Sorry sir but you are full of shit and do not deserve or care for a better answer, a reasonable response would be a waste of my time, besides you are going to "preach" your "truth" every time you have a chance no matter how many times you were shown to be wrong

    8. Re:Pervasive vs. present by Namarrgon · · Score: 1

      Huh? That Telegraph article is an opinion piece from a guy who runs an advocacy organisation, and the only connection with colleges is a link to a Daily Mail article (ugh) about a single school in Oxford. It's no less an anecdote than the GP.

      If you're arguing that forced-leftism is wide-spread, maybe you should attempt to dig up actual statistics or even a peer-reviewed study? Citing "thousands of hits on Google" can be said about virtually anything.

      --
      Why would anyone engrave "Elbereth"?
    9. Re:Pervasive vs. present by Ogive17 · · Score: 1

      I went to university in the late 90s, early 00s... can't think of one instance in my 7 years (yeah, one major change and two transfers...) where politics was brought up except in the philosophy course I took my very first quarter as a freshman.

      Even in my economics courses, it was subject matter covered in the text books.

      Are universities more liberal? Absolutely. You have thousands of young people experiencing life and "freedom" for the first time, experimenting with sex, drugs, and alcohol. People grow up conservative because that is what their parents are. Removing that influence, I think most people would be far more liberal.

      --
      "Action without philosophy is a lethal weapon; philosophy without action is worthless."
    10. Re:Pervasive vs. present by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      same here. kid in college and doing science. friends are left leaning for the most part and there are a few right leaning sororities thrown in. professors sometimes joke about trump - but come on! the guy is a gift that keeps giving. he's comedy gold. and kid says professors ribbed on obama too. so it's not selective. I think when the alt right goes about screaming snowflakes, maybe they mean themselves. And no - I am not a leftist or progressive or a democrat for that matter. just.a.dad.

    11. Re:Pervasive vs. present by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Higher education isn't bad, but that doesn't mean that it is good either. Like everything there is a variety to it, some forms of higher education are better than others. But continue to call other people ignorant. I don't think it will serve you or them well.

    12. Re:Pervasive vs. present by s.petry · · Score: 1

      An opinion based on facts, one if which is laid out in the very first sentence. Reading is fundamental and all that. Those same politics, and much more are in US Colleges and Universities today. Which is why I said you can search for thousands of articles and reports on such.

      On Wednesday, the Daily Mail reported that a school in Oxford has become the first to introduce “Good Lad” workshops, in which boys are singled out for sessions that teach them about “the scale of sexual harassment and violence aimed at female students” and how they must stand up for women's rights.

      Of course you most likely won't read because cognitive dissonance is harmful and most people are cowards.

      --

      -The wise argue that there are few absolutes, the fool argues that there are no probabilities.

    13. Re:Pervasive vs. present by Namarrgon · · Score: 1

      Apart from how you just repeated yourself, again without showing any more than anecdotal evidence of "forced" classes being pervasive, I'm now curious as to why you seem to think there's something wrong with boys being taught about the scale of violence and harassment aimed at female students.

      --
      Why would anyone engrave "Elbereth"?
    14. Re:Pervasive vs. present by Comrade+Ogilvy · · Score: 1

      When every single course is lecturing not so much the subject matter, but leftist ideology, we have problems with our education system. Biology courses are filled with anti-American rhetoric and promotion of 3rd wave feminism. Even Math and Physics lectures are filled with anti-American rhetoric.

      THAT requires a citation.

    15. Re:Pervasive vs. present by Comrade+Ogilvy · · Score: 1

      It seems some people who some articles about how to intertwine social justice issues with math classes, which sounds a bit dodgy but there are a lot of dumb ideas that appear in published articles if you look hard enough. That has always been true. Those articles got bound up into a book.

      For you and me, we recognize there is a world of difference between a dodgy book that exists somewhere on this planet and what is actually required material in a college math course. For you and me, we recognize that flesh and blood tenured math professors are weird birds who care about math, math, math and are not going to bother teaching anything that appears outside of the textbook, a book that was written by some weird bird who cared about math, math, math, as well.

      But the very gullible who hang out, say, at the National Review are all up in arms about avocado toast and what they are guessing might be in a college math textbook they are too prissy to ever read.

  41. Oh no, teams and conspiracies! by Kohath · · Score: 1

    On one side....On the other side...

    Don't you get tired of constant, pointless Team A vs. Team B bullshit? None of that team nonsense is about helping the country or the people. Why not give up pretending it is?

    ... hell-bent on feeding the Educational Industrial Complex with the goal...

    Don't you get tired of peddling ultra-exaggerated conspiratorial narratives? Everyone knows this kind of crap is mostly false, even if there's a tiny bit of truth underneath the mountains of nonsense. Why not give up the dramatic storytelling and just be factual?

    1. Re:Oh no, teams and conspiracies! by tgrigsby · · Score: 1

      You're trying to use logic with a resident of BullShit Mountain. Good luck with that.

      --
      *** *** You're just jealous 'cause the voices talk to me... ***
    2. Re:Oh no, teams and conspiracies! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You're trying to use logic with a resident of BullShit Mountain. Good luck with that.

      Hmm, apparently you don't realize that Kohath is not just a resident of BullShit Mountain, he's also a major contributor to its towering height and rank odor.

      Either that, or you replied to the wrong post, hard to say.

    3. Re:Oh no, teams and conspiracies! by geekmux · · Score: 1

      On one side....On the other side...

      Don't you get tired of constant, pointless Team A vs. Team B bullshit? None of that team nonsense is about helping the country or the people. Why not give up pretending it is?

      That "nonsense" you speak if has been around for over 150 years now, regardless of whether it helps or not. We've tried to get a third party in there to try and un-fuck the corrupt two-party system we've had for too damn long. We've tried, and failed. The fact is Team A vs. Team B sure wasn't my idea any more than it was yours. But it's the political landscape that we STILL deal with today, and THAT is what is truly bullshit. And yeah, I'm tired; tired of pretending it will ever change.

      ... hell-bent on feeding the Educational Industrial Complex with the goal...

      Don't you get tired of peddling ultra-exaggerated conspiratorial narratives? Everyone knows this kind of crap is mostly false, even if there's a tiny bit of truth underneath the mountains of nonsense. Why not give up the dramatic storytelling and just be factual?

      A motive by government representatives to support the business of education is some kind of conspiracy in a capitalist economy? That's a laugh. One driving factor remains a constant in politics; Greed. As a result, what has become "ultra-exaggerated" is the obscene cost of higher education, which validates the moniker I've bestowed upon the industry that peddles education.

      And quite honestly, we should all learn to be a bit wiser and read between the lines when it comes to the motives of any Team, for that may be the only place where truth is buried. Recent leaks in history have certainly proven an ability to convert he craziest of conspiracies into facts. You want to discuss the facts? Yeah, good luck finding it. After all, the politicians lips were moving when they were speaking.

  42. To be fair by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Evil recognizes evil.

  43. The problem is.. by Texmaize · · Score: 1

    The problem with your pithy comment is that your two isles are bot descriptions of the left. Educational standards have dramatically fallen under the left-controlled education establishment. In fact, emphasis on rational thought is discouraged, and "feelings" have been given primacy. So, contrary to what you think, the left is largely responsible for the Kardashian culture.

    Either you misunderstand capitalism or you are in complete understanding of the statist-leftist view of it. I am not sure. The left does indeed want to control the educational-industrial complex, and it has caused diminishing returns. With the emphasis on being SJW over profit, companies have done worse. What, you all bitch about the high price of Apple products but don't link this to why?

    Ironically, former communist countries in Asia are the biggest practitioners of capitalism, and lets be honest, it is working out really well for them. The amount of money and opportunity being generated is incredible. Contrast this with Detroit. The ideology of Capitalism has many flaws, making money is not one of them

    --
    "Liberalism is a very noble idea, currently controlled by some very bad people. Be sure you do not get the two confused.
    1. Re:The problem is.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Capitalism doesn't have to be awful. It's practice in the United States has been for some time, however.

    2. Re:The problem is.. by Texmaize · · Score: 1

      Why how thoughtful! That is really profound! I mean, all those examples and explanations that you gave, are just stunning. You must be the wisest person.....

      In the group of morons that you hang out with.

      --
      "Liberalism is a very noble idea, currently controlled by some very bad people. Be sure you do not get the two confused.
  44. Yuri Bezmenov by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Yup - google "Yuri Bezmenov". The mid-80s vids on youtube explain a lot.

  45. On the other hand .... by prof_bart · · Score: 1

    ... the same study indicates that the majority of Democrats feel that banks and financial institution have a negative effect on the country. And at first glance, it kind of makes sense - look at the very real problems these institutions have. For example, their role in causing the 2008 meltdown. It is totally plausible to imagine them being much better. But then go and imagine a U.S. without banks and financial institutions at all. What would that be like? Unless a person is a pretty committed communist, they would agree that it would be decidedly not good! While there are some extremists on both sides, I think that in the case of both the Republicans and the Democrats in the study, people focus in on 'non-optimalities' of the respective institutions, and answer accordingly, rather than seeing the tremendous good that these institutions provide, even with their problems.

    1. Re:On the other hand .... by tgrigsby · · Score: 1

      It's a far leap between thinking that banking and investment firms have a detrimental effect on the country when poorly regulated, to thinking that banks and investment firms need to be dissolved. Your entire argument rests on an implied slippery slope argument and is therefore moot.

      Have a nice day.

      --
      *** *** You're just jealous 'cause the voices talk to me... ***
  46. More than a chill by Texmaize · · Score: 1

    In my experience as a professor of 10 years, most universities and colleges already are purely liberal. In fact, if you do not hide your conservatism, you are hunted. Your promotion and tenure can be greatly hindered. You can undergo inquisition from various PC police type boards and committees if you buck the party line at all.

    I do not think you go far enough in describing the chilling effect of leftist groups and compared to those of the right leaning groups. Can you perhaps share with me some story where you have seen or heard of a left leaning person unable to come to the campus because of threats of death and violence? Because, I can relate dozens to you. Do you know that Ann Coulter could not speak at Berkeley this year because of these threats and the inability to have a reasonable chance at her safety?

    Do you understand that in any way? At a fucking university, you can not have someone come express their thoughts without fear of death. Worse, the students were proud of this...Yeah man, we shut down free speech!

    I am not saying agree with Ann Coulter. I am saying things have deteriorated so far they can't even handle an idea from someone who disagrees? If you think that is a "chill" I am honestly concerned what you think a freeze would be.

    If you think the chill goes both ways, I give you this challenge. For one semester, espouse conservative principals to your class and coworkers every chance you get. This is routinely done with leftish thought. So, try it the other way. Then, report back what happens. Until you do this, you will never, ever truly appreciate the monstrosity the universities have become.

    --
    "Liberalism is a very noble idea, currently controlled by some very bad people. Be sure you do not get the two confused.
    1. Re:More than a chill by cryptizard · · Score: 1

      Good thing Ann Coulter is not a faculty member at any university. You seem to have completely missed the OPs point, that the day-to-day classes and majority of interactions students have at universities have not changed for decades.

    2. Re:More than a chill by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Sure, so long as conservatives keep their mouths shut in classes and in even general conversation while letting liberal dogma run wild, everything is just peachy.

      Also...decades? Nothing changes in that long? For good or ill? I think you are full of shit.

    3. Re:More than a chill by Stephan+Schulz · · Score: 1

      IDo you know that Ann Coulter could not speak at Berkeley this year because of these threats and the inability to have a reasonable chance at her safety? Do you understand that in any way? At a fucking university, you can not have someone come express their thoughts without fear of death. Worse, the students were proud of this...Yeah man, we shut down free speech!

      You presume facts not in evidence. Anne Coulter is an intellectual nincompoop. She is all opinion, with not a thought in evidence. And she enjoys free speech, with lots of channels for spouting her incoherent propaganda all around. Why on earth should a university offer her another platform? It's not going to increase her reach. Neither the material nor the speaker is fit for academic debate. All an invitation to speak at a proper university will do is to add to her prestige. I'm very much a free speech absolutist. I'm fine with everybody's opinion being heard. But nobody owes you, or Coulter, a platform. If the students, as part of the university, don't want her, expressing that opinion is their right.

      If you want debate, invite conservative thinkers, not mere noisemakers. Donald Kagan comes to mind, or Richard Epstein, or Niall Ferguson.

      --

      Stephan

  47. The politcal right vs education by sjbe · · Score: 3, Insightful

    It's because colleges are the most left leaning places in America. I'd bet more American flags are burned at American colleges than in Russia and all middle eastern countries combined.

    Possibly true but that's what free speech means. I do find it curious that the most educated parts of the population tend as a general group to lean left in their politics. I think that says something meaningful but I'll leave it to you to fill in the blank.

    It's not that republicans hate education.

    Some do, most don't. It is true that a LOT of blue collar republicans think people who go to college are "elitist" snobs. Many certainly do not place a high value on scientific education particularly the more virulently bible thumping amongst them. You know, the ones who think prayer in school is a good thing and that "evolution is just a theory". Those folks certainly do not value education very highly.

    I think the fact that they made an unqualified idiot like DeVos secretary of education speaks a lot to what republicans value.

    They also hate teachers as a collective group because they are staunchly democrat. More specifically teacher's unions fund democrats. That's a major reason why republicans are so eager to pass so called right to work bills - it hurts teacher's unions which as a body seldom support the political right. Has nothing to do with them hating education per-se but it does have a everything to do with them being willing to tear down big parts of the educational system in pursuit of power.

    1. Re:The politcal right vs education by walshy007 · · Score: 1

      I do find it curious that the most educated parts of the population tend as a general group to lean left in their politics.

      There are differences between education, intelligence and wisdom.

      It is easy for those who eternally stay in academia to avoid a reality that differs from their views, or ignore that there can be more factors than what are included in their favoured models that push the story they wish to tell.

      Education by itself just measures how much they can recall what they've been taught. It says nothing at all about their critical faculties or the epistemological basis of their favoured conjectures.

  48. A long and deep current in America by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Anti-intellectualism has always been a part of the American makeup, not a recent phenomenon of the right. Richard Hofstadter's Pulitzer-winning "Anti-Intellectualism in American Life" is the best history of this undercurrent.

  49. Reality by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    His straw man version of modern right-wing Republicans is one hell of a lot closer to reality than Fox New's and many right-wingers' straw man version of today's liberal and Democrats. Especially the version that states "I hate America" because I have liberal views.

  50. On another note by rsilvergun · · Score: 1

    most of the left's ideology can be summed up as "Don't do bad things to people" and "Take care of people". That's not an ideology. It's basic human decency.

    --
    Hi! I make Firefox Plug-ins. Check 'em out @ https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/youtube-mp3-podcaster/
    1. Re:On another note by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I mean, you can sum up the right's ideology that way too. In practice, people tend to be hypocrites and limit those rules to their particular "in group". Those "other people", you can do bad things to them and not care about them because they're "bad", or "deplorables" or "commies" or "bigots" or whatever.

    2. Re:On another note by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The problem is buried in the fine print. It is not simply 'Take care of people', but it is 'give us tons of your hard-earned cash and your freedom so that we can tell you how to take care of people the way we want'. Giving to your favorite charity is not enough. We must support every leftist cause with our taxpayer dollars.

    3. Re:On another note by fish_in_the_c · · Score: 1

      I wish.. most of the lefts ideology can be summed up as 'there is no God so stop acting like there is' and 'be utterly indifferent to people hurting themselves and others so long as it fits our world view'.

      --
      âoeTolerance applies only to persons, but never to truth. Intolerance applies only to truth, but never to persons.
  51. Generalization... by XSportSeeker · · Score: 3, Informative

    I'm not american so I don't have to worry about stuff like this, but let me tell you guys that this isn't a great signal and people should be extremely careful about ideas like those...
    Obviously, as with anything else, education is never perfect. People will pick and choose the worst examples to say how colleges and whatnot are awful.
    But that fact that there are indeed bad colleges and bad education does not mean that no education is the better alternative.
    I've heard this rhetoric of universities and college degrees being worthless here were I live before. It was among the justifications for electing a couple of presidents that never went through college and university plus a whole bunch of politicians taking representative seats.
    And I'm not saying that people who didn't go through college and university are always idiots, stupid, ignorants and bad administrators... nothing like that. Some of the brightest people I know don't have a degree, or ended up working in areas unrelated to their degrees.
    But what we've seen here was a weird and misguided glorification of ignorance. Picking exceptional cases like millionaires who flunked higher education to put it as the norm, people thinking it was better to vote for politicians that did not have a degree in anything, and a misguided idea that not having passed through college or university education meant that the candidate was "more honest", "closer to the people", "knew what poor people passed through" and stuff like that.

    The end result of all that is a country in deep recession with the worst corruption crisis in history, one ex-president arrested, another impeached, and one current that should be impeached, tons of politicians in jail, numerous example cases of extremely bad administrative decisions, and the general sense that the country is indeed run by ignorants, corrupt people and bad decisions.

    Sure people love to talk about the SJW epidemic, all the white knighting, all the young adults behaving like spoiled brats, political correctedness, plus a bunch of other stuff. It's easy to blame institutions for behaviours like those, but more often than not, it's an age thing.
    People get this skewed perception that bad things happen on campus while ignoring all the shit that happens outside of it.

    So there you go. Sure, college isn't perfect. A degree isn't an indication of morals, ethics and great behaviour. And there are plenty of people who do very well without going through college. But people better be careful about sweeping generalizations, because some lines of reasoning (or lack thereof) can end up very very badly.

    1. Re:Generalization... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Meanwhile in the US, the politicians, the press, government workers, teachers, and college staff have nothing but contempt for 40-60% of the population. These people kept us in recession an extra 4 years because they refused to trust us to make our own decisions.

      Now that we finally voted some of them out, they're forming masked gangs, rioting, burning, and attacking speakers at otherwise peaceful events. One of their gunmen recently tried to murder a group of congressmen at a baseball game.

  52. Reality has a liberal bias by rsilvergun · · Score: 5, Insightful

    it's an old joke, but it's not far from the truth. Right wing economics (Supply Side, or what is disparagingly called Trickle Down or Voodoo economics) doesn't work. It's been tried again and again in Red States (Kansas is the latest) and failed miserably. And sure, Communism doesn't work. But Democratic Socialism _does_.

    That said, it's not that they're 'growing out of it' but that they're becoming fearful. As you get older and you have something to lose you turn conservative. Not Right Wing. Conservative. You don't want change because you're terrified of losing what you have.

    Personally, I'd like to live in a world we're we're not all living in constant terror of dying in a gutter.

    --
    Hi! I make Firefox Plug-ins. Check 'em out @ https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/youtube-mp3-podcaster/
    1. Re:Reality has a liberal bias by RotateLeftByte · · Score: 1

      A good point. Sadly, to many in America mentioning something like 'Social Democracy' is like a red rag to a bull. They'll regard it as communist even though it is most certainly not.
      Far too few people in the USA have direct experience of anything other than their very warped two party system. As such they don't think that there is an alternative yet many other democracies work perfectly well with other systems. I politics, nothing is clear cut, simple or straightforward. That is probably why I could never become a Politician. Most of them are afraid of their own shadows in case it objects to their POV.

      --
      I'd rather be riding my '63 Triumph T120.
    2. Re:Reality has a liberal bias by caseih · · Score: 1

      Same with the words, "Liberal Democracy," which is the description of what most western democracies are, in the true sense. But a lot of people get hung up on the word, "Liberal" and have a fit. Which is ironic because "Liberal" is based on the same root word and concept as "Liberty:" free, as in freedom.

    3. Re:Reality has a liberal bias by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      ...Trickle^h^h^h^h^h^h^hTinkle Down...

      FTFY

    4. Re:Reality has a liberal bias by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The other kind of economics trickle up theory does not work either when there is no supply. Where it is currently being tried in California and they are radically short on cash and will have to raise taxes to cover it.

      But Democratic Socialism _does_
      Right up until the point where it runs out of money.

      Perhaps you learned economics from fools? You do not beat the market with regulation taxes and theft.. It will teach you. I have dozens of radically failed democratic failures. But I keep being told that it is not 'real' socialism. We like to call that a lie.

      If you think you have a way to make it work you are wrong. Millions have thought the same thing. You will fail. Organic proper growth works. Forced economics does not.

    5. Re:Reality has a liberal bias by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Democratic socialism would be the process where countries spend so much of their money on welfare for their people that their best and brightest emigrate to the United States, right?
      The US has less than 20% of the world's economy, and not even 5% of the world's population... but it supplies almost half of the world's R&D.
      Democratic Socialism is a leech.

    6. Re:Reality has a liberal bias by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Personally, I'd like to live in a world we're we're not all living in constant terror of dying in a gutter.

      Who do you want to pay for that? That's the question of the day, and what we generally can't agree on.

    7. Re:Reality has a liberal bias by Raenex · · Score: 1

      Right wing economics (Supply Side, or what is disparagingly called Trickle Down or Voodoo economics) doesn't work. It's been tried again and again in Red States (Kansas is the latest) and failed miserably. And sure, Communism doesn't work. But Democratic Socialism _does_.

      You're apparently blissfully unaware of Democratic states and cities that are going bust because they didn't practice financial discipline. The Democratic answer is to tax rich people and corporations more. They move, taking their wealth and jobs with them. It's been decades in the making, but the chickens are coming home to roost.

  53. I think it has more to do with a non stop media by rsilvergun · · Score: 1

    barrage than anti "SJW". There's a big media complex that would like it very much if you didn't ask questions like why are your taxes so high and a billionaire's so low or why can't your kids afford college or why are your wages stagnant for 30 years or why are there so many people here on work visas for jobs you could do.

    The SJW nonsense is just more of the Right Wing propaganda machine pushing a narrative that keeps the working class at each other's throats. It's been working like a charm for 30 years, and there's plenty of evidence of it. This article is just the latest bit of evidence. Hell, the need for evidence on the Left makes it harder for us to move on things like this. It's been obvious for 20 years that economic right wingers and oligarchs have been attacking education. But it took a study to make us start talking about it let alone doing anything.

    --
    Hi! I make Firefox Plug-ins. Check 'em out @ https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/youtube-mp3-podcaster/
    1. Re:I think it has more to do with a non stop media by elrous0 · · Score: 1

      This new SJW movement isn't uniting the working class, it's DIVIDING it. The last election should have indicated that clearly. The SJW's expressly DO NOT want the white working class on-board in their revolution. You're talking about the old leftist movement, the one that sought to unite workers. The new SJW leftist movement seeks to divide everyone along lines of race, gender, ethnicity, etc. and assign them relative value based on their perceived "victimhood." It's not "Workers Unite!" this time. It's more like "Minority and Women Workers Unite, Everyone Else Go To Hell!"

      --
      SJW: Someone who has run out of real oppression, and has to fake it.
    2. Re:I think it has more to do with a non stop media by spire3661 · · Score: 1

      And they are playing right into their enemy's hands. 'They' want us all pegged as individuals, and deny/allow things based on that profile. There will be no more 'public' things, just an endless series or permissions/denials based on the profile accessed through your phone.

      --
      Good-bye
    3. Re:I think it has more to do with a non stop media by serviscope_minor · · Score: 1

      Well, you pretty much proved the GP's point.

      first he said:

      >> The SJW nonsense is just more of the Right Wing propaganda machine pushing a narrative that keeps the working class at each other's throats

      And you launched into a frothing attack with:

      > This new SJW movement isn't uniting the working class, it's DIVIDING it.

      You are literally agreeing as angrily as you can. While attacking. Basically you see the letters ess jay double yew and your higher brain functions shut down and you completely flip out.

      That's just what your masters want.

      --
      SJW n. One who posts facts.
  54. Headline from the other side by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    "Most leftist think going into debt to banks and hedge funds for hundreds of thousands USD, all who have no individual risk, to get an education of questionable value is a good thing."

    If you want the right to get in line with your crazy education ideas, do away with all guaranteed student loans. The cost of education will normalize to the level that a student can take a part time job and still pay for school(this used to be the case) As it is the media has the left convinced that education is not a tool of the elite to keep the TV consuming masses in debt, and agreeing with the elite all the time.

    Colleges do not educate anymore. They indoctrinate. The students will be paying for this indoctrination until they are 40. Around witch time they will have an original thought and they will move conservative.

  55. Billions of dollars of student debt by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Insightful

    The billions of dollars of student debt is directly attributable to the Republican insistence on cutting taxes and support for state Universities.

    In 1975 states paid for approximately 75% of an education at a State University with the student contributing the other 25%, meaning the majority of students could pay for college with a summer job and working part-time during the school year, maybe with some help from family. Additional financial assistance was available for truly needy students. The taxpayer accepted their part of the social compact to provide a higher education to the youth and support the large Public Research and Land Grant universities. Universities that were established and funded by our founding fathers that valued higher education for all youth.

    Fast forward to today, the percentages are reversed 75% student/25% state funding with the gap made up by even public university students going into debt that will take decades to pay off. The conservative Republicans that insist on paying as little in taxes is short-changing today's youth and repudiating the vision of the founders as the the value of higher educations.

    1. Re:Billions of dollars of student debt by LinuxIsGarbage · · Score: 1

      The billions of dollars of student debt is directly attributable to the Republican insistence on cutting taxes and support for state Universities.

      In 1975 states paid for approximately 75% of an education at a State University with the student contributing the other 25%, meaning the majority of students could pay for college with a summer job and working part-time during the school year, maybe with some help from family. Additional financial assistance was available for truly needy students. The taxpayer accepted their part of the social compact to provide a higher education to the youth and support the large Public Research and Land Grant universities. Universities that were established and funded by our founding fathers that valued higher education for all youth.

      Fast forward to today, the percentages are reversed 75% student/25% state funding with the gap made up by even public university students going into debt that will take decades to pay off. The conservative Republicans that insist on paying as little in taxes is short-changing today's youth and repudiating the vision of the founders as the the value of higher educations.

      I wonder how much of the rising costs is actually due to the runaway costs of varsity athletic programs with high dollar coaches and stadiums.
      https://www.usatoday.com/story...

    2. Re:Billions of dollars of student debt by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Um, that's actually because Universities have raised tuition so high that it has dramatically outpaced support from government. There have been cuts to university funding in some states, usually close to 2 or 3%. But tuition goes up 10% or more in those same years - why?
      Because the Federal government and the student loan programs keep throwing money at universities for taking more warm bodies. With that much money sloshing around, of course the schools are going to grab more of it.

      If your assertion were correct, private Universities wouldn't have had to raise tuition, because they were never dependent on public funding. But private universities have raised tuition at rates HIGHER than public schools.
      It's not politics; it's just Greed by the Universities.

    3. Re:Billions of dollars of student debt by HornWumpus · · Score: 1

      IIRC the mean student loan at graduation is about $40k. If that takes decades to payoff, you picked the wrong major. You now serve as a warning to the next generation.

      --
      John McAfee 'It was like that time I hired that Bangkok prostitute; to do my taxes, while I fucked my accountant'
    4. Re:Billions of dollars of student debt by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      States like California has been under Democratic control for most of the recent years. Its tuition skyrocketed. Minnesota, I believe, has always had a Democratic governor and legislature. How about New York? Yet, education is not better funded in these states than it is elsewhere. Colorado, a long liberal state, provides about 4% of the budget for its state universities.

      Tuition in "blue states" is not lower than it is in red states. In fact, North Carolina, considered a bastion of redness and racism by the coasts, has some of the lowest tuition for its state schools. Georgia used to as well, although it's been a while since I looked.

      So this bit about "Evil Republicans cut all the funding" is nonsense. Evil Democrats have been doing it too. I remember it well, when I lived in Michigan, that Democratic governor Jennifer Granholm gave a speech in which she emphasized the importance of education and all that...and two sentences later announced cuts to education across the board.

      Truth is that University budgets increase significantly every year. I served on many university committees as a graduate student and these topics came out; I never got an answer as to why the costs kept going up so much. The Dean, however, joked that my school was a state-funded university in the 1970s, a state-supported university in the 1980s and 1990s, and then became a state-tolerated university in the 2000s. At this point, states are basically paying for naming rights rather than funding schools.

    5. Re:Billions of dollars of student debt by NG-Buddhist · · Score: 1

      Sure, but the point you're missing here is that the mean student loan at graduation shouldn't be anywhere NEAR $40,000. We have billions of dollars of student debt because we allowed education to be treated as a consumer good rather than a societal necessity. Explains a few things about the current state of affairs we find ourselves in.

    6. Re:Billions of dollars of student debt by serviscope_minor · · Score: 1

      So the pupose of universities is to take kids who have no real way of knowing better, then fuck them over so you can get your jollies? Er I mean fuck them over to serve as a warning to others.

      Okey dokey!

      --
      SJW n. One who posts facts.
    7. Re:Billions of dollars of student debt by HornWumpus · · Score: 1

      There is a sucker born every minute.

      The younger they are when they learn the better.

      Kids graduating high school should be smart enough to see bad examples and not do what they did. If they aren't they get a 40k$ millstone to remind them of their own stupidity.

      No read way of knowing better? Bullshit. _Every_ student that selects * studies as a major has been told it's a bad plan by someone (a fascist per the students). They do it anyhow, now they can _pay_ the rest of their lives...

      There are many ways to _screwup_ your life at 18. Knock up a mercenary skank, kill someone DUI, follow a 'jam band', 'enjoy cocaine', get caught committing a felony, go to an expensive college but learn nothing...the list goes on. At least at 'Evergreen' they get a nice 4 year party. They _aren't_ children.

      I get no pleasure from this, but unless they are left twisting in the wind for all to see, the next bunch will make the same mistake.

      Starbucks should require baristas to put their academic qualifications on their nametags, as specific as possible, including schools and costs.

      --
      John McAfee 'It was like that time I hired that Bangkok prostitute; to do my taxes, while I fucked my accountant'
    8. Re:Billions of dollars of student debt by HornWumpus · · Score: 1

      Many programs would be completely defunded if honestly considered as 'societal necessities', but market based systems let people make their own mistakes.

      I wouldn't shut down all * studies programs, only those that get any public money. Students that want to do something that stupid, _should_ pay full price. No loans either.

      When I was 18 I wanted to be a racecar driver.
      Q: Should the government have paid to sponsor my 6'2'' frame into a F-3 car I couldn't fit into?
      A: No because there is no shortage of race drivers without subsidies. No shortage of * studies majors, 1 is INXS for the world.

      --
      John McAfee 'It was like that time I hired that Bangkok prostitute; to do my taxes, while I fucked my accountant'
    9. Re:Billions of dollars of student debt by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It's clear you're just a Republican idiot. But in the regular world, people aren't always, people keep learning things long after high school, and even after university. Brains don't even fully develop until people are into their 20's.

    10. Re:Billions of dollars of student debt by HornWumpus · · Score: 1

      The learn real well, while pouring coffee to pay off their previous mistakes. Sucks to be them.

      --
      John McAfee 'It was like that time I hired that Bangkok prostitute; to do my taxes, while I fucked my accountant'
  56. Higher education should be optional and focused by iamacat · · Score: 1

    We already have kids in mandatory school for 12 years till the age of 18. We ought to provide them with some usable employment skills by then. Say people live till the age of 80 these days. If you start working at 22, pay off college debt by 30 and retire at 65, that's only 40% of life as a productive, independent adult. This is not sustainable from either social resources or personal freedom point of view. Today, many drop out from high school and those who graduate do the same jobs they would do without any education at all. We got to get this fixed!

    Second, if you get higher education, it should be optional and focused on your professional aspiration, be it coding, 3D printing, solar engineering or organic farming. Ideally we would focus on appreticeships that let students support themselves while earning more advanced skills. NASA and Lawrence labs can do the same for individuals with talents in pure science that can not be done in private sector.

    And if you want to discover yourself, party in fraternities or play football, please do - but on your own time/dime and without burdening anyone else with overhead of your personal interests. Or maybe NFL will pay you to play or whatever.

    1. Re:Higher education should be optional and focused by CanadianMacFan · · Score: 1

      School should not get you ready for employment. It should get you ready for life. There's a big difference of which the first is only a small part of the second. Besides it should be doing more than teaching you an employable skill. It should be introducing you to a wide variety of skills to allow the students to find their calling.

      Of course it's hard to do that when schools in the US are teaching students to pass tests in order to continue to get meagre funding which is spent on the next silver bullet tech idea. Pay more for better teachers that can actually inspire students. Cut the red tape that will allow the teachers the freedom to choose the best course of action for the students. And let the schools get rid of the bad teachers that are just doing their time. Great teachers are what children need to learn. It starts with them. Not iPads, computers, coding hours.

    2. Re:Higher education should be optional and focused by fish_in_the_c · · Score: 1

      no NO NO NO NO ... school should not get you ready for life. YOUR PARENTS are supposed to get you ready for life.
      If it is the schools responsibility to get you ready for life then it is the schools responsibility to teach you morality and that is something public schools are expressly forbidden to attempt in this country.

      --
      âoeTolerance applies only to persons, but never to truth. Intolerance applies only to truth, but never to persons.
    3. Re:Higher education should be optional and focused by CanadianMacFan · · Score: 1

      I never said it was to teach you morality. But there are things like how to manage your finances or cooking that have nothing to do with employment skills or morality that can be taught in schools that would greatly improve the lives of people once they leave the educational system. Or how about being a good consumer and recognizing when marketing is trying to scam you. Businesses won't like it but society will be better off for it.

      In an ideal world parents would teach their children these things. Of course in an ideal world the parents would know these things to teach their kids. Or the single parent wouldn't have to work two or three jobs just to be able to put a roof over the family's head and food on their plates so that they would have time to sit down with the child(ren) to teach him/her/them all of these things. But we don't live in an ideal world.

      My parents didn't know how to manage money and we were poor. We would have been a lot better off if spent within their means. The only reason I'm good with my finances is because I didn't want to live like I did growing up. School didn't give me the skills I needed. I had to teach myself. The same thing with nutrition and cooking.

      I wasn't saying to put religion in school (though an overview of what they are wouldn't hurt just to make people aware of them) or anything similar for that matter.

  57. Republican, not conservative by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    This attitude is way more of a Republican thing than a right-leaning or conservative thing. You might even say it's an excellent example of the enormous ideological chasm in between conservatives and Republicans, one of the things that makes them nearly completely incompatible.

  58. There's quite a range of opinions on the matter by boudie2 · · Score: 1

    The simplest reason I would suppose is that if one-third of the jobs are done by computers or robots in ten years time then certainly the persons who would have done those jobs don't need to go to college. They are already superfluous to a functioning economy. And your opinion doesn't matter. Nobody asked me if it was a good idea to start replacing people with machines. I can see how in the long term this will be problematic.

  59. Most conservatives are upset with college by rsilvergun · · Score: 1

    because your media tells you to be upset, and it's hard to stand up to that barrage of media. You're media's telling you that because they don't want to pay taxes for your kids college. They'd much rather you take out high interest loans that you pay back for 30 years.

    The anti-college thing has nothing to do with that. My kid's been in college for a year now and has no idea what political correctness is let alone a SJW. Her classes are almost entirely focused on her major save for the odd ball physics, English and a few math courses (she's in Nursing, e.g. medicine).

    This entire SJW nonsense is being blown out of proportion by people looking to separate studends & parents from the money. It's a scam and we're falling for it hook/line/sinker.

    --
    Hi! I make Firefox Plug-ins. Check 'em out @ https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/youtube-mp3-podcaster/
    1. Re:Most conservatives are upset with college by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The anti-college thing has nothing to do with that. My kid's been in college for a year now and has no idea what political correctness is let alone a SJW.

      I certainly hope that's not true. I was a die-hard Democrat in high school, but I hated political correctness already. That's BEFORE college. I would hope your kid knows about PC if she is already 17-18.

  60. Educational Industrial Complex? by rsilvergun · · Score: 1

    What the *bleep* are you talking about? The only folks I knew at my college (a big State U) making good money where the football coach and the dean. The dean was just doing OK. Few hundred grand a year and for that he brought in millions in grants and donations. The profs made shit and could walk any day to private sector for a _lot_ more money. Even the humanities guys could get jobs as HR drones making 2-3x as much.

    Now, if you're referring to the loan industry that sprung up when we slashed federal subsidies in the 90s (thanks Clinton) to make way for massive tax cuts for the rich (and itty bitty ones for the poor and middle class) than yeah, there's a complex there. The solution isn't to stop sending kids to school. It's to bloody damn well restore the funding and make the rich pay for their kids education. Get mad when you see them bringing H1-Bs in here because they can't find qualified Americans? Make them bloody well pay to train their workers and hire American.

    --
    Hi! I make Firefox Plug-ins. Check 'em out @ https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/youtube-mp3-podcaster/
  61. A badly done poll. by Chas · · Score: 1

    It's not so much that people think higher education is bad in and of itself.

    It's that the culture and cult-like indoctrination present on many campuses is a toxic witch's brew of deliberate distortion of fact, intolerance, bullying, sexism, racism, etc masquerading as a "tolerance" movement.

    Those who have infiltrated and perverted the higher education system in this country have managed to distort college from being a place of "diversity of thought and ideas" into "diversity of self-segregated communities".

    And yes, it's actually now possible to emerge from college more stupid and useless than when one went in.

    --


    Chas - The one, the only.
    THANK GOD!!!
  62. Galileo burnt on the stake by Latent+Heat · · Score: 1

    'Over? Did you say "over"? Nothing is over until we decide it is! Was it over when the Germans bombed Pearl Harbor? Hell no!'

    '[whispering] Germans?'

    'Forget it, he's rolling.'

  63. Re:Reflection doesn't work by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    >Too bad so many on the Left require group-think and cannot stand or tolerate open debate and voicing of different opinions - you might learn something!

    This is an annoying reflection. Left or liberal by definition does stand to tolerate open debate or differences in opinion. The problem is when they actually do listen but then turn around and give a different opinion and start a debate, suddenly the rightward conservative gets bent out of shape because they're hearing things they don't agree with! And then they get verbally or maybe even physically violent because they can't sway the other person to come around!

    As to why the conservatives feel they get drowned out, it's because these vocal conservatives literally say the same thing word for word and it's just plain TIRING to try to debate the issue of the day. Because it's largely no point, because then the next day fox news or conservative radio spits out its next message to all of its flock, and they again try to shout the issue at anyone, again often word-for-word. Since radio/TV/internet news is typically one-way communication, the conservative has nothing to come back with on these different opinions and cover their ears, get defensive and proceeds to shout uninformed BS, getting louder and louder and more threatening until they feel they've won the argument. Victorious, they then waits for the next day's programming instructions.

  64. Against bias, not against education by myid · · Score: 1

    Slashdotters are generally wary of Facebook and Microsoft - not because Slashdotters are against computers, but because of their desire for privacy.

    Conservatives are generally wary of modern-day colleges - not because they're against education, but because they read about colleges these days (with Evergreen, Mizzou and Berkeley the most extreme examples), and they see a strong bias against conservatives in most colleges.

    We're not against education, but against being forced to attend classes taught by teachers with an obvious bias against men, white people, and/or conservative people.

    1. Re:Against bias, not against education by fish_in_the_c · · Score: 1

      don't forget obvious bias against people who believe in God.

      --
      âoeTolerance applies only to persons, but never to truth. Intolerance applies only to truth, but never to persons.
  65. Re:There's an obvious reason (which is good) by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Which is good.
    Because left-view-enforcing faculty is going to tolerate differences and dissent.
    Unlike right-view-enforcing bible ass crammers.

  66. Right-wing disdain of objectivity and reason by DavidHumus · · Score: 1
    This is a sign of the success of things like the right-wing attacks on actual reporting of fact being derided as "fake news". People who see faith as having primacy over reason will shut their ears to things they don't like, regardless of how true it is. From the article, quoting David Hopkins, co-author of "Asymmetric Politics: Ideological Republicans and Group Interest Democrats":

    The conservative critique of the social sciences in the mid- and late-1900s, he said, has grown to include the hard sciences in the last 20 years, largely among subjects like stem-cell research, climate change, and evolution.

  67. How many even go to those speeches? by rbrander · · Score: 1

    I went to just the one political speech in college (70s). It was free. Germaine Greer, and I went because I'd heard her name before. Other than that, I was too damn busy with classes; what little spare time I had I wanted to keep for partying, my chief concern being that "I had no life" as opposed to the poor and oppressed,or the State Of The Nation, or whatever.

    So: if you want to comment on how forcing people to go watch TV or hit the web for political commentary is the same as "denying free speech" because the only thing that counts as free speech is being paid to give a speech, could you please first state the names of three college political speeches you've ever attended? Because if YOU don't go to them, then you can hardly say they are all that important a cultural moment.

  68. germany has a good trade schools system that by Joe_Dragon · · Score: 1

    Germany has a good trade schools system that works and does not dump people into collage with big loans.

    Back in the 80's you where able to work part time / summer jobs to mostly pay for collage. Now days the cost is very high and in some places like with CS you can have big skill gaps for IT jobs.

  69. so 4 years collage + 1-2 year in a tech / trade af by Joe_Dragon · · Score: 1

    so 4 years collage gen studies) + 1-2 year in a tech / trade after that?? is your idea who do work for sallie mae??? that makes big bank off of loans that can't be gotten rid with cheaper 11 or 7?

    How many people can start life at 25-28+ 150K or more in the hole working at an starting wage in there field? It's not like you make doctor wages in meany fields.

  70. Comment removed by account_deleted · · Score: 0

    Comment removed based on user account deletion

  71. Comment removed by account_deleted · · Score: 0

    Comment removed based on user account deletion

  72. How so?! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    > "Higher education" is far more general terminology than "colleges and universities",

    Higher education (n): education at universities or similar educational establishments, especially to degree level.

    Nop, higher education == colleges + universities. Even if you thought you had another definition, that is the common definition (and most likely the one respondents used)

  73. The real SJWs... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The real "SJWs" are the ones who are so sensitive to a handful of student activists (news flash: not everyone in their early 20s has the most nuarnced view of the world) that they reject the entire higher educational system. Because they oppose the social position of a few people and consider "safe spaces" and other censorious attitudes unjust, they go to war against an entire institution. In response to percieved social injustice, they call for war, because they oppose "social justice warriors."

  74. Like many other problems, only a problem in USA by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    All academia in the West is mostly liberal and has a great participation of politicis in it. It is a fundamental piece of western democracy, and it was in USA too, before corporate lobby hyjacked it.
    The main resistance in the Vietnam war was organized in universities. And it was a great thing that it did!
    No, it is a straw man that an inteligentzia rules over America, nothing further from the truth. The US government porcentual representation of educated population is nowhere as brutal as the representation of wealthy population.
    Somehow, the USA has become dumb enough to think that a university graduates are an elite even more so than the fortune 100. That's beyond stupid, bordering insane

  75. Debt bubble? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Was the survey specifically about the education offered or was it more broad?

    Because while higher education can valuable, the debt bubble it had created will have disastrous effects when it pops.

  76. Um, no by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    "Higher Education" pretty much equals "College and Universities". Throw in Community Colleges if you want.

  77. Here's what words mean by skam240 · · Score: 4, Insightful

    You're confused, let me help you.

    Fascism is a combination of left wing economic policy (although not communism) and right wing social policy. The Nazi's got to be one of history's biggest villains not because of their left wing economic policies but because of their right wing social policies. Big patriotic rallies, not big on gays, not big on minorities; these are all attributes of the right.

    Furthermore, fascists were big on the rule of law and they certainly gave their police force a wide set of powers.

    Now I'm not trying to say the Right in this country are Nazi's, I'm just pointing out that you got the meaning of some words wrong.

    --
    I ignore Anonymous Coward posts. If you want to discuss something, that's awesome. Log in.
    1. Re:Here's what words mean by epyT-R · · Score: 0

      1. Big government is a left wing position.
      2. The communist bloc was well known for its huge rallies and personality cults. The remnant countries from that era still are.
      3. It's not that they're not big on minorities. They're just not big on unchecked immigration.
      4. Rule of law is a good thing. It prevents preferential treatment (you know like via all your favorite -isms?). The real problem is bad law.

    2. Re:Here's what words mean by skam240 · · Score: 1

      Here you go

      https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...

      "1. Big government is a left wing position."
      I feel like this covers this: "left wing economic policy"

      "2. The communist bloc was well known for its huge rallies and personality cults. The remnant countries from that era still are."
      Oh, an ideological extreme. How insightful of you. Maybe consider the Western social democracies the entire West enjoys.

      "3. It's not that they're not big on minorities. They're just not big on unchecked immigration."
      You don't see racist banners flying high and proud at left wing rallies in this country and if you did they would be asked to leave the private event. Now I'm not saying the right is uniformly racist in this country by a long shot but xenophobia is certainly a Right wing thing with their problems with Muslims, gays, and the like.

      "4. Rule of law is a good thing. It prevents preferential treatment (you know like via all your favorite -isms?). The real problem is bad law."
      Um, okay.

      Anyways, the wikipedia entry should be good enough.

      --
      I ignore Anonymous Coward posts. If you want to discuss something, that's awesome. Log in.
    3. Re:Here's what words mean by Bing+Tsher+E · · Score: 1

      Anyways, the wikipedia entry should be good enough.

      640K should be good enough....

      Uh....

    4. Re:Here's what words mean by skam240 · · Score: 1

      Uh....

      --
      I ignore Anonymous Coward posts. If you want to discuss something, that's awesome. Log in.
    5. Re:Here's what words mean by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Fascism is not leftist economic policy. In fact the opposite. The original fascism was Italian. It's core tenet is that elements of society should be bound together like a bundle of sticks bound to form a fasces. Mussolini didn't just imagine this from nothing. The Bank of England was formed under government control in order to fund the Royal Navy. It was spectacularly successful. The East India Company was another notable example of government and business bound together to form a wildly successful venture. The British Empire was unavoidably in any politician's mind when contemplating a larger role for his country. So this very conservative economic idea was incorporated into fascism.

    6. Re:Here's what words mean by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The meaning of words change. Sorry we didn't consult you.

      TODAY the nazis are the guys running around dressed in masks and attacking people for having different ideas. (while shouting nazi at everybody)

      left wing.

    7. Re:Here's what words mean by jpaine619 · · Score: 1

      The problem both of you have is envisioning the political spectrum as if it is a horizontal line with a left and a right.

      That is not accurate. The political spectrum is far more accurately described as a "horseshoe" shape. With left and right being very close to one another (Think of it like an upside down U.. or right side up U I guess.. Doesn't really matter which direction it points...).

      While communism and fascism are at opposite ends of the political spectrum, their practices and policies are nearly identical. Communism would be at one tip of the inverted horseshoe (or U if you prefer) and fascism would be at the opposite tip)

      Both fascism and communism, in practice, place the government in charge of everything and both despise any sort of individualism. Everything is controlled by the state for the benefit of the state.

      Regardless of how fascism and communism are drawn on paper, in reality they both behave nearly identically..

    8. Re:Here's what words mean by Azaril · · Score: 1

      Try being a cossack in the Soviet Union and then tell me what the difference is.

    9. Re:Here's what words mean by david_thornley · · Score: 1

      Fascism, as practiced, tended to favor capitalism rather than socialism. I don't see "left wing economic policy" as being important in it.

      --
      "When you have eliminated the unacceptable, whatever is left, however improbable, must be the truthiness" - Holmes
    10. Re:Here's what words mean by skam240 · · Score: 2

      No, not to be rude but you're the one who isnt accurate here. Fascism is a hybrid system thus placing it opposite communism at the far extreme doesnt make sense as it did posses many left wing ideals, many of which are features in modern social democracies.

      https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...

      Nowadays most people associate them with the far right because no one cares about their economic policies and the like, what they care about are the social policies (which are indeed extreme far right) that resulted in their becoming one of history's greatest monsters (deservedly so of course). If you actually look at their economic policies and stuff outside of the context of social issues they most definitely run with some left wing ideals, although nothing extreme. Sure, communists and fascists had no use for each other but dont let that fool you into thinking fascism didnt have leftist elements.

      https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...

      --
      I ignore Anonymous Coward posts. If you want to discuss something, that's awesome. Log in.
    11. Re:Here's what words mean by epyT-R · · Score: 1

      I feel like this covers this: "left wing economic policy"

      and social policy too. For example, they've approached the bedroom micromanagement of the religious right a few decades ago (eg feminist anti-male propaganda, 'nomeansno', 'yesallwomen', 'manspreading' laws etc). The 'everything is a social construct' position regarding sex is also quite harmful as well.

      Oh, an ideological extreme. How insightful of you. Maybe consider the Western social democracies the entire West enjoys.

      You mean the ones that ignore problems caused by their supposedly more moderate ideological stances (eg Malmo Sweden, Germany etc)? How about the ones that end up levying almost 70% tax in places (income+VAT)? Perhaps it's the places who put people in jail for speaking words? The difference between them and the Soviets is largely a matter of degree, not of kind, esp in EU land.

      You don't see racist banners flying high and proud at left wing rallies in this country and if you did they would be asked to leave the private event. Now I'm not saying the right is uniformly racist in this country by a long shot but xenophobia is certainly a Right wing thing with their problems with Muslims, gays, and the like.

      So blacklivesmatter, antifa, and BAMN aren't racist? In more moderate circles, affirmative action policy forces institutions to discriminate (for and against) based on race and sex. This is based on the false assumption that equal opportunity can be measured and applied with equal outcome. In addiction left wing cultural bastions like college campuses routinely advocate for 'minority' safe spaces and encourage anti white/straight/male bigotry. Perhaps at one time you were right, but they've come full circle. They're also a lot more politically potent than the far right/nationalist/neo-nazi groups.

      Um, okay.

      Equality before the law is something the left has problems with. They prefer a caste system that judges individual circumstance by group metrics (ie race and sex) rather than the behavior of the individuals involved.

    12. Re:Here's what words mean by LeftCoastThinker · · Score: 1

      You have been lied to. What you describe is a redefinition lie created by the liberal fascists in academia. They twisted the true political spectrum to fit their agenda and confuse the reality of the villains in WW2. The original (true) political spectrum is arranged by power concentrated in the government and looks like this:

      Left wing: most/all the power concentrated in government: socialism, totalitarianism, fascism, communism, monarchy, oligarchy, etc. to varying degrees. Modern left wing progressives continually push further left in the true sense.

      Centrist: some power to centralized government, some power retained by individuals: Most conservatives and Republicans, most Democrats from 40 years ago and back from there (JFK, etc).

      Right wing: zero or minimal government with very little power or no power over individuals: Anarchists, Libertarians

      Please cite which policies (exactly) were uniquely right wing in the Nazi or Fascist Italian party. Nationalism, rule of law, and racism/anti-gay are not uniquely tied to any part of the political spectrum (take a look at Communist China, communist Russia, North Korea, etc.). Furthermore, nationalism and rule of law are not inherently bad, it just depends on how they are implemented and for most countries to survive long term, both must be present.

      --
      If you disagree, please post your argument. (-1, Overrated) isn't your personal censorship tool for views you don't like
    13. Re:Here's what words mean by LeftCoastThinker · · Score: 1

      1. Fascist in modern language is a word used to describe people who don't tolerate opposing view points (not the historical fascist party of Italy, whose Wikipedia article you cited). It gained modern use first in Italy when Mussolini consolidated industry under the control of the government, regardless of business owners wishes. That is the penultimate of big government (every boss is a government stooge, and you have to work for one in order to eat) with zero tolerance for other opinions.

      Nazi is more specific and is tied to racism as well as intolerance to alternative views.

      2. This is not an argument or evidence, I assume you cede the fact, but it makes you uncomfortable to be wrong?

      3. As part of the colloquial Right wing, I challenge you to find 5 pictures of blatantly racist banners at tea party events who were not ejected by the majority and/or later outed as left wing plants (if racism is rampant in the Right wing, it should be easy). Also, the right has no problem with the 1,000,000 plus LEGAL immigrants into the US EACH YEAR, so to say that we are xenophobic is just a flat lie. I hope you don't actually believe that, because it is just sad to be so deceived. We only want our laws to be enforced and the stream of illegal drugs, aliens and criminals to stop across our southern border.

      Furthermore, the Right wing had zero problem with Muslims until they started killing us. Then we used our superior mental faculties to decide that letting people into your country who want to kill you, rape your women and enslave your children is a bad thing (ask the Germans and French how mass Muslim immigration is working out for them). We don't personally dislike every Muslim, but we believe they should be under high scrutiny since they belong to a group with a subset that wants to murder us all based on their religious beliefs. If there is any question on the matter, they should be denied entry on a person by person basis. The fact that you are incapable of grasping this simple fact demonstrates some deep brainwashing indeed, and calls into question your basic survival instincts...

      4. You only have two options, rule of law or rule of man. If you live under rule of law, and the laws are just, you are in a good place. Everyone's rights are protected, and people who hurt others are punished. If you live under rule of man, (AKA Monarchy) whatever the king (or Pope) says goes. You could be going along just fine, and then the king is having a bad day and you juts happen to piss him off, and you get executed as an example not to piss of the king. Pretty shitty way to live.

      Wikipedia is never enough if you don't have a clue about reality to begin with, especially when Wikipedia is written by the same brainwashing academics who started the process when you went to college...

      --
      If you disagree, please post your argument. (-1, Overrated) isn't your personal censorship tool for views you don't like
    14. Re:Here's what words mean by LeftCoastThinker · · Score: 1

      You have been lied to. I applaud the creativity of the liar who came up with that idea to feed to you, but it is just a permutation of a redefinition lie created by the liberal fascists in academia. They twisted the true political spectrum to fit their agenda and confuse the reality of the villains in WW2. As you note, from your own rational thought, fascism and communism both behave nearly identically, which is why they are grouped together on the true, original political spectrum. The original (true) political spectrum is arranged by power concentrated in the government and looks like this:

      Left wing: most/all the power concentrated in government: socialism, totalitarianism, fascism, communism, monarchy, oligarchy, etc. to varying degrees. Modern left wing progressives continually push further left in the true sense.

      Centrist: some power to centralized government, some power retained by individuals: Most conservatives and Republicans, most Democrats from 40 years ago and back from there (JFK, etc).

      Right wing: zero or minimal government with very little power or no power over individuals: Anarchists, Libertarians

      --
      If you disagree, please post your argument. (-1, Overrated) isn't your personal censorship tool for views you don't like
    15. Re:Here's what words mean by LeftCoastThinker · · Score: 1

      You have been lied to. Wikipedia is perpetrating the lie; it is not infallible. What you describe/cite is a redefinition lie created by the liberal fascists in academia. They twisted the true political spectrum to fit their agenda and confuse the reality of the villains in WW2. The original (true) political spectrum is arranged by power concentrated in the government and looks like this:

      Left wing: most/all the power concentrated in government: socialism, totalitarianism, fascism, communism, monarchy, oligarchy, etc. to varying degrees. Modern left wing progressives continually push further left in the true sense.

      Centrist: some power to centralized government, some power retained by individuals: Most conservatives and Republicans, most Democrats from 40 years ago and back from there (JFK, etc).

      Right wing: zero or minimal government with very little power or no power over individuals: Anarchists, Libertarians

      If you pause for a moment and use your own rational thought, you will recognize the irrefutable logic of the original political spectrum, (as well as the reason why the communists/progressives wanted to redefine it.) It is hard to win an argument when you are a far left kook arguing for ideas that have lead to the deaths of hundreds of millions of people and caused WW2 - against a centrist moderate arguing for the status quo.

      --
      If you disagree, please post your argument. (-1, Overrated) isn't your personal censorship tool for views you don't like
    16. Re:Here's what words mean by skam240 · · Score: 1

      The Nazi's did not become the villains of history because of the size of their government or their economic policies (which were definitely a mix of state planning and free market). They became the villains of history because of their Right wing social policies. Nationalism, a focus on social order, individualism, and the like are all traits of the Right. A simple look at the Right in any modern liberal democracy of today will show these traits in abundance.

      There is no vast conspiracy of intellectuals here, it is you who is trying to redefine fascism.

      --
      I ignore Anonymous Coward posts. If you want to discuss something, that's awesome. Log in.
    17. Re:Here's what words mean by LeftCoastThinker · · Score: 1

      Nationalism is not a uniquely right wing trait (see Communist China/Russia/North Korea/etc.) furthermore, nationalism is a necessary, healthy thing unless the underpinning country is corrupt or evil. Sorry, nice try though.

      The Nazis were definitely not supporters of individualism (they would shoot you or throw you in a concentration camp if you didn't do what Hitler wanted and kiss his boots). Strike two.

      The Nazis were able to become villains because of the power concentrated in the government. If they had had a weak national government and a well armed Jewish minority, things would have turned out very differently. Strike three.

      Just because you believe or have been feed a line of BS doesn't make it so.

      --
      If you disagree, please post your argument. (-1, Overrated) isn't your personal censorship tool for views you don't like
    18. Re:Here's what words mean by skam240 · · Score: 1

      The Nazis were most certainly individualists. Their concept of the super man and their focus on the philosophies of Nietzsche clearly establish that.

      Also, blaming big government for the German governments ethnic cleansing is rediculous. Country's go every day without attempting ethnic cleansing. You might as well blame gravity for airplane crashes. Sure, planes would crash less if there was no gravity but planes dont really crash because of gravity, it's either pilot error or mechanical malfunction.

      Just because you want everything bad to come from the Left doesnt mean it does.

      --
      I ignore Anonymous Coward posts. If you want to discuss something, that's awesome. Log in.
    19. Re:Here's what words mean by LeftCoastThinker · · Score: 1

      Alternatively, just because you wish 100,000,000 people weren't murdered by the left in the last 100 years globally doesn't make it untrue. I don't want anything about the left or the right, other than to know history and know the truth, and I am trying to explain it to those like you who have been lied to and brainwashed by liberal academics and the media with ulterior motives.

      Nazi Germany was diametrically opposed to individualism, regardless of the propaganda you were fed, based on what they actually did: i.e. rounded up anyone who disagreed with them and put them in concentration camps. On the run up to Hitlers rise to power and the start of WW2, nearly all of the prisoners in concentration camps (some 27,000 people) were political prisoners/dissidents...

      Individualism definition: a social theory favoring freedom of action for individuals over collective or state control.

      From the Holocaust museum website:
      "Unlike Western liberals or nationalists, the Nazis did not find value in individuality. For the Nazis, individualism was an egotistic, culture-corroding, Jewish value that would tear apart the fabric of the communal nation. The Nazis insisted that the individual had value only in his or her membership in the collective racial community."

      No limited government country where most of the power is reserved to the individuals has ever lost their country to a dictator or had a holocaust. To put it simply, any government big enough to give you everything you need is big enough to take it all away. Does that mean that big government always leads to dictatorship? No. But historically, the socialist and communist countries have nearly always devolved into murderous dictatorships and murdered millions of their citizens brutally, while countries like the US with limited government have not. All it takes is one evil, charismatic leader in a country where government controls everything and you are living in a dictatorship.

      --
      If you disagree, please post your argument. (-1, Overrated) isn't your personal censorship tool for views you don't like
    20. Re:Here's what words mean by skam240 · · Score: 1

      You apperently arent familiar with Nietzsche, his philosophies, and their influence on the founding of Nazism. I'm also wonderfully entertained by your siting of a halocaust museum as a source but yet you absolutely wont accept the mainstream stance from our academic community that fascism is right wing. Apperently a sited source is only valid if it agrees with your world outlook.

      Finally, I have no problems acknowledging the sins of the far Left. Between Mao and Stalin alone the death toll is horrible and they're only the worst of the offenders.

      --
      I ignore Anonymous Coward posts. If you want to discuss something, that's awesome. Log in.
    21. Re:Here's what words mean by LeftCoastThinker · · Score: 1

      And you are apparently unfamiliar with judging a government based on it's actions and historical facts, not it's branding (60% of which was done 20 years later by socialist and communist professors looking for a way to draw moral equivalence between the atrocities on the left committed by the likes of Stalin and Mao and the utter lack of similar atrocities on the right).

      --
      If you disagree, please post your argument. (-1, Overrated) isn't your personal censorship tool for views you don't like
    22. Re:Here's what words mean by skam240 · · Score: 1

      I've said it before and I'll say it again for you. No one (aside for extreme ideologs) cares about the size of the Nazi's government or their economic policies. They have nothing to do with them being one of history's greatest villains. It's their extreme right wing social values of which there is ample historic evidence for that were the problem and I feel I've clearly outlined these issues above.

      --
      I ignore Anonymous Coward posts. If you want to discuss something, that's awesome. Log in.
  78. This is a crisis in US liberal arts schools by Applehu+Akbar · · Score: 1

    In every culture, the leading universities have been the institutions that transmit the core values of that culture to the next generation, as well as being repositories of the literature and arts that culture originated. Our own liberal arts schools already have a problem with enforced groupthink and suppression of free speech by bands of thugs. If they actually come to believe that the Western Civ they are supposed to be transmitting to our young is something evil, then they will have become as useless as they are overpriced.

  79. 1950s to now . . . by hduff · · Score: 1

    In the US of the 1950s, the GI Bill provided unheard of access to college and was instrumental in the growth of the middle class Through the early 1970s. "Going to college" became the mantra for success. Sixty years later, we have PhD.s selling coffee an participation in the skilled trades is looked down upon. Now that unions have less influence on entry to those trades, a college education seems less important to financial success in life . . . unless you like to server coffee.

    --
    "I believe in Karma. That means I can do bad things to people all day long and I assume they deserve it." : Dogbert
  80. Crippling student debt. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Well my two cents. While an education is good for the country. The present system is not. Aside from the low numbers that aren't getting jobs in their field, the high amount of student debt is crippling both people and the country. Unforgivable debt that'll chase a person into their grave. Even when the system is working right, it gets a lot wrong. Anyone doing any kind of risk/benefit analysis can clearly see the current system is a bad deal and shouldn't enter into it till it's fixed.

  81. This is NOT POLITICAL by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    It DOES NOT MATTER if the colleges are more left-leaning or right-leaning. A little political slanting is NOT WHAT'S CAUSING problems in our economy.

    People get SO caught up in these civil issues that they completely miss the big picture, on which I shall shine a spotlight here:

    1) In many fields we are churning out more graduates every year than there are jobs available in the entire country. This ridiculous oversupply of labor causes wages to fall off a cliff.

    2) The costs continue to soar, largely due to the huge amount of government-supplied loans available. The colleges do not need to compete on price, and the people who wind up bearing the burden are the students that wind up debt-ridden for their entire lives, mostly because they believed they had to accept all this debt in order to stand a chance in this economy.

    3) Education, no matter which side of the political spectrum, tends to raise people's self-esteem and expectations. This is creating widespread social upheaval in the form of depression and opting-out of family. You have to be blind to miss the headlines that have been floating around about this. People are falling into depression because they cannot land the high-paying intellectual jobs they have been told to dream about, and further they are refusing to marry and form families (both from the same debt-no-job problem, and also the too-good-for-everyone problem that is over represented among educated people). This, in turn, is creating an army of poverty-stricken single mothers (which creates further economic problems that roll forward into the next generation).

    We have an addiction to education, and it is causing terrible harm. But everyone just wants to keep believing that if they "follow their passion" everything will be great.

    It won't.

  82. Not so much by rsilvergun · · Score: 1

    The red menace has more or less died out. Trump's Russian ties are killing off what little is left. Folks overwhelmingly support Single Payer Healthcare & Subsidized/free college tuition. Heck, Trump got elected on a far left populist platform while his opponent ran a right of center one. Bernie Sanders is the most popular politician in America (though the 1%ers are putting big money behind a right wing democrat primary challenger).

    Folks are ready for Democratic Socialism, they just don't know how to get there.

    --
    Hi! I make Firefox Plug-ins. Check 'em out @ https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/youtube-mp3-podcaster/
  83. wimps by bussdriver · · Score: 1

    Americans are the biggest wimps and whine about everything too! I've lived here all my life and I've seen it 1st hand. People are more isolated from each other and feel like it's their right to not have to deal with ACTUAL diversity. It has been getting worse with time.

    Conservatives for the most part are more out of touch with reality than ever before and that is not to say the newer generations of literals are immune from the trend, they are not.

    Technology has been helping; but mostly helping strengthen bubbles and intolerance while boosting emotional resistance to thinking. Maybe it can be used in a good way but it seems that all our current technology has a net negative influence on society. Naturally, we will solve these tech created problems with more tech... like always. Someday we might even break even (but we'll be starting far behind where we've fallen already.)

    Conservatives will have trouble with any university because by nature they cling to the past and universities exist to create our futures. Old people become conservative because they dislike the changes as life passes them bye; it's a myth that they became wiser simply due to age. That general mindset doesn't belong in university.

    1. Re:wimps by myid · · Score: 1

      I agree that we should be open-minded to new ideas. If I went to college, my concern would not be that someone would introduce a new-fangled idea. My concern would be that I'd have a conversation like this:

      Liberal Person: We should have policy X.

      Me: I don't agree.

      Liberal Person: If you don't agree, then you're a racist and a nazi.

      Me: But ...

      Liberal Person: You have no right to speak. No free speech for nazis! No hate speech allowed!

      The person who doesn't want to listen to the other viewpoint, or allow the person with that viewpoint to speak, is the one who is closed-minded.

      Think about biology professor Bret Weinstein at Evergreen. He calmly and logically stated why he didn't want to participate in the day of absence of white people, and he got yelled at.

      According to the World Socialist Web Site (which is on Weinstein's side):

      At one point, he tries to respond to a question from the barrage of students asking, “Do you want to hear the answer or not?” The group of students shouts back, “No!” The students then assert that he has lost his right to speak, citing specifically his “white privilege.”

      Who was being closed-minded? Weinstein, or the students who didn't want to listen to him or let him talk?

      I don't think age necessarily makes a person conservative. There are several liberal people who aren't young any more. For example, California's Governor Jerry Brown, and Senator Feinstein are liberal. As far as I can tell, they are very intelligent, and their minds are perfectly sharp and clear.

  84. For what it's worth by Soft+Filter · · Score: 1

    Although I'm an independent, I come from a family of Republicans. All of us were expected to go to college. Some attended top universities, some have advanced degrees, etc. The value of higher education was never questioned. At least not until recently.

    The problem is that colleges are losing their practical value. A gender studies degree, for instance, is great if one aspires to be a store clerk, but it's unlikely to provide the skills one needs to get ahead in life. Even the trades are more lucrative and provide a better standard of living. It wasn't always like this.

    Unless my child plans to go into a STEM field, I will encourage them to explore other options. At the very least, a healthy young adult should be financially self-sufficient. Anything that detracts from their ability to pay their bills or self actualize, anything that keeps them slave to the state (think student loans for a major with low ROI), is simply unacceptable.

    I see similar sentiments among my Republican family members and conservatives in my social circles. They're not anti-intellectual. They just want education to be worth something. Say what you will, but a debt-laden degree in gender studies is not as valuable as an engineering degree, or even as valuable an entry-level trade school certificate.

    There has been a longstanding bias in favor of leftist ideology on college campuses. Much of that was tolerable by remembering that opinion is just that... opinion. At least we could agree on most of the facts. Strip away the practical fact-based value that even the most obscure college degrees used to to provide, however, and all you're left with is a bias that conservatives disagree with... and possibly a kid that won't "launch". Is it any wonder that they perceive this trend as bad for the country?

  85. Jon Haidt sums it all up perfectly. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Good luck trying to get anyone to watch an hour long sociology lecture.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?...

  86. Medival Times by prefec2 · · Score: 2

    In medival times in Europe, the Islamic world had its golden age. They advanced mathematics, astronomy etc. They were real science guys. Unfortunately, some Muslim cleric came up with the idea that manipulating numbers is from the devil. This idea became widespread and killed off science. That is why they retreated. Fortunately for us, Europe went through the Renaissance and developed 'enlightenment'.

    Nowadays people disregard science and people who advance science. In the US they even fight science. Looks like they want to deindustrialize the USA. This would not be an issue for the rest if the world, but the same Waco's have nuclear weapons.

  87. The American Cult of Ignorance by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    http://aphelis.net/wp-content/uploads/2012/04/ASIMOV_1980_Cult_of_Ignorance.pdf

  88. Surprised it took this long by rbrander · · Score: 1

    College-hating is an OLD sport for the American right wing, and less-so but present in Canada and the UK. Colleges were of course hotbeds of "radicalism" for the Boomers, the first generation to have more than a few percent of their number go to college. I put "radicalism" in quotes because Civil Rights for black people are now uncontroversial, as is the proposition that the Vietnam War and the Draft were bad ideas.
    It was also "radical", of course, to have the opinion that cannabis is a largely harmless intoxicant, unlikely to addict you or drive you insane. ("Reefer Madness" was already a joke-film to us, but our parents still believed that shit like gospel.)
    But it goes back way before the Civil Rights Act and the Voting Rights Act, of course. From the Wikipedia:

    "God and Man at Yale: The Superstitions of “Academic Freedom” is a 1951 book by William F. Buckley Jr., in the author, based on his undergraduate experiences at Yale University, criticized Yale and its faculty for forcing collectivist, Keynesian, and secularist ideology on its students. "

    1951 is ten years earlier still; somebody not born yet when it was published has been drawing (socialist) Social Security for a year already.

    So, please, any notion that this is because 0.1% of the 4700 colleges in the US have recently uninvited a few speakers, spare us. The malice towards higher education goes back to an era when the ones forbidden to speak at Universities were all from the left wing. (Read up on the UCLA "Speaker Ban", which was applied mainly to communiists - but also to former VPOTUS Henry Wallace, just because he was speaking in opposition to Cold War policies:
    http://www.jofreeman.com/sixti... )

    The Republican Party still hated colleges even when the only speakers they forbade were Communists, Anti-Militarists, and pro-socialists in general.

  89. Well obviously by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    because we have no farm workers left

  90. So many words and no information by prefec2 · · Score: 1

    Look Dan East you claim that the term "higher education" does comprise more than colleges and universities. Nice claim. Then give at least one example what you think is high education, like Bible schools or gangs in Chicago. As long as you cannot provide substantial examples, you are saying nothing.

  91. Stupid is what stupid does... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Stupid is what stupid does. Americans have turned into a bunch of loud-mouthed anti-intellectuals and they are doing exactly what is expected of stupid people. Destroy the environment, destroy the education system, destroy the Internet all in the name of stupid short-sighted politics. The US will never be great again, simply because they are clueless of what made the idea of United States great in the 1st place.

  92. Re: Higher education should be optional and focuse by iamacat · · Score: 1

    If schools have to teach finances and cooking, they better be done with this before 18 years of age. Not everyone will go to college and those who will not need money management skills even more. We have 12 years of free and mandatory schooling. Lets allocate the time wisely and let people at least start training for a career afterwards.

  93. New name for republicans? by Heebie · · Score: 1

    Are republicans calling themselves "colleges" now? That's the only way colleges would be bad for America.

  94. logic by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    republicans typically think colleges are liberal

    republicans rather follow a book (religion) than make up their own minds (free thinking)

    republicans believe in strong leadership. they want to be led and thus, have structure/discipline.

    republicans crave fairness, hence greed/selfishness are typically traits. Really fairness promotes greed/selfishness in a capitalist, adam smith society. Mainly cause opportunity creates a illusion of fairness.

  95. You do know why Galileo published right? by NotSoHeavyD3 · · Score: 1

    Because his old college buddy, the Pope, asked him to. BTW FWIW the 2 theories they were debating, Tychonic and Copernican, are mathematically equivalent (they literally make the same predictions) and Galileo was trying to prove Copernican right with a theory of the tides that at the time people realized didn't work. I could point out that the reason he got in trouble at all was the fact he published in Italian where he put in a crack about the omnipotence of god which apparently was taken a rebuke of catholic theology. (IE He didn't get in trouble over science and he didn't have the evidence anyway. He got in trouble when he started talking theology.) Yes for those that don't know you were pretty much taught a myth about what happened. (Just like I was taught other myths like the Minutemen won because they used guerilla tactics and used rifles instead of muskets.)

    --
    Did you know 80 to 90% of the moderators on slashdot wouldn't recognize a troll even if one dragged them under a bridge.
  96. I have started prepping. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    As I dont think America can survive Fox news.

  97. Great news! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I am overjoyed to hear that right wingers will self-select against getting college degrees, as this will drive them further into becoming a permanent, poor underclass due to their lack of education and thus inability to get good paying jobs. Way to go right-wing media, keep up the good work of lying to your adherents!

  98. I'm all for college by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Common Core All the Way Baby!

  99. That's a loaded way to put it.... by Evil+Kerek · · Score: 1

    Yeah, let's make the headline look like conservatives oppose higher education. Such BS. EVERYONE knows what kind of liberal indoctrination machine colleges have become. Professors regularly openly chastise conservatives students, bash conservative policies and in general push their liberal agenda. This is a fact. We all know it. Universities allow liberal groups to dictate to them,allow them to suppress free speech...the lists goes on.

    You're damn right I'm opposed to my child going to a liberal university and, yeah, I think the fact the colleges are no longer a bastion of free speech or a place to openly discuss points of view you don't agree with is HIGHLY dangerous.

    In never ceases to amaze me how liberals refuse to acknowledge what they are dong - suppressing speech they don't agree with. Period. End of story. You can color it anyway you like - but it's simply un-American. Toss the race card. Toss the hate card. Toss the violence card. The justification that ensues is mind boggling.

    Honestly, if you can't understand how dangerous it is to raise a generation that isn't willing to listen to other points of view without responding with safe spaces, speech suppression or violence, I really don't have much use for you.. I think Russia would be more to your liking - because make no mistake, that's where you are steering this country.

    1. Re:That's a loaded way to put it.... by serviscope_minor · · Score: 1

      You can color it anyway you like - but it's simply un-American.

      I take it then that what you are doing---that is cherry picking the most extreme examples from a very large pool, deciding that everyone you don't like is represented by those most extreme examples and the getting very angry about it---is the epitome of Americanness.

      That certainly explains the HUAC.

      --
      SJW n. One who posts facts.
    2. Re:That's a loaded way to put it.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yeah, let's make the headline look like conservatives oppose higher education. Such BS. EVERYONE knows what kind of liberal indoctrination machine colleges have become. Professors regularly openly chastise conservatives students, bash conservative policies and in general push their liberal agenda. This is a fact. We all know it. Universities allow liberal groups to dictate to them,allow them to suppress free speech...the lists goes on.

      Let's see, I think you just did a bang-up job of making a demonstration of how you oppose higher education. No, I don't know this, I know you believe this, but then I know you've been believing this for the better part of a century, if not more.

      You're damn right I'm opposed to my child going to a liberal university and, yeah, I think the fact the colleges are no longer a bastion of free speech or a place to openly discuss points of view you don't agree with is HIGHLY dangerous.

      Yes, yes, just a second after you got done claiming that you don't want your child exposed to a liberal university.

      In never ceases to amaze me how liberals refuse to acknowledge what they are dong - suppressing speech they don't agree with. Period. End of story. You can color it anyway you like - but it's simply un-American.

      And you won't discuss it, because it's utter and final on your part, with no adjustment or change, you've condemned them, and the judgment is absolute.

      Toss the race card. Toss the hate card. Toss the violence card. The justification that ensues is mind boggling.

      And you're tossing your own cards out, and showing your level of not at all perplexing justification.

      Honestly, if you can't understand how dangerous it is to raise a generation that isn't willing to listen to other points of view without responding with safe spaces, speech suppression or violence, I really don't have much use for you.. I think Russia would be more to your liking - because make no mistake, that's where you are steering this country.

      Sure man, you don't have use for other people, and you're not the one steering things in a bad direction yourself, you won't accept that maybe you don't understand others, that maybe you've declared an opposition so extreme that you won't listen to them, but want to drive them out, and it's the other side who is the problem.

      Is that a log in your eye, or are you just happy to see me?

      I'll be honest though, maybe you're just trolling, it's possible.

  100. Doesn't seem that way from where I stand? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Schools have been failing students primarily due to charging insanely high tuition, which is only justified by how much money they can get Federal government to hand out in student loans. Then, when they graduate with their degree, they find there's no way they can earn enough with it to pay back the debt they've racked up.

    This has gone on at many of the notoriously liberal colleges throughout America, so definitely not just a Republican/conservative thing.

    Quite frankly, the people insisting that "Creationism" be taught along-side evolution are a minority of loud-mouthed religious fanatics. The vast majority of people I know who identify as Republican are just fine with the theory of evolution, despite being Christians of one denomination or another. (You have to be of the Fundamentalist sort to be fixated on the biblical creation stories being purely literal.)

  101. so a loaded story, not news or real by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I went to college, and was too busy to "protest"
    I had actual work to do. I also worked a full time job.

    Colleges aren't bad, but they do allow morons in. The morons are the problem. The places have had to become a baby sitting service for stupid people. If a person is over 18, they should be leading a responsible adult life.

    Something tells me that these protesting idiots are not involved in any meaningful course of study and should not be there.

  102. Tell that to California by rsilvergun · · Score: 1

    and try harder with your trolling. You've got an entire multi-billion dollar media machine behind you to give you talking points. You can do much better. Me? All I've got is Bernie, Liz Warren and reality on my side.

    --
    Hi! I make Firefox Plug-ins. Check 'em out @ https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/youtube-mp3-podcaster/
    1. Re:Tell that to California by Raenex · · Score: 1

      All you've got is name calling and lame politicians on your side. I have reality on my side. There are huge, unfunded pension liabilities and an inability to practice fiscal discipline. Detroit was just a taste of things to come.

  103. Nazis, among other things, were liars by dbIII · · Score: 1

    Nazi stands for "national socialism".

    Brace yourself for a shock. Hitler lied.
    He wasn't the only one. Later on East Germany wasn't a "Democratic Republic" either.

    1. Re:Nazis, among other things, were liars by Raenex · · Score: 1

      Brace yourself for a shock. An anonymous coward made the same argument over 4 hours earlier than you, and I had already replied, refuting it over 2 hours before you made your redundant post.

    2. Re:Nazis, among other things, were liars by dbIII · · Score: 1

      Refuted?
      Really?
      Then why not cut and paste it if it really happened?
      Shouldn't you do that just to stop me pointing at you so that everyone can laugh at you?

    3. Re:Nazis, among other things, were liars by Raenex · · Score: 1

      Why should I spoonfeed an idiot that makes a redundant post and is too dumb or lazy to find the reply for themselves?

    4. Re:Nazis, among other things, were liars by dbIII · · Score: 1

      Perhaps because your "refutation" doesn't actually refute it and you may have a chance to look less foolish if you try again.
      If you are happy to be considered someone to laugh at then fair enough, don't "spoonfeed".

    5. Re:Nazis, among other things, were liars by Raenex · · Score: 1

      You've made 3 redundant posts based on your own stupidity and laziness. My reply to the anonymous coward that preceded you is not hidden in any way. At any time you could have replied to that reply instead of braying like a donkey. You can continue braying, but I will not continue replying.

    6. Re:Nazis, among other things, were liars by dbIII · · Score: 1

      Your reply to the AC "the state exercised great control over the economy, welfare system, and social programs", also applies to Kings, Tzars and dictators, as you should know, so is no refutation.
      So why pretend to be such an idiot? You can do better.

    7. Re: Nazis, among other things, were liars by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Actually, you're pretty consistent on your responses on this subject, it is terribly easy to provoke you, and even your tantrums are repetitive.

    8. Re: Nazis, among other things, were liars by dbIII · · Score: 1

      Yes - asking the same question several times to rub in that that the other party is not going to deliver an honest response to justify their lie is repetitive. It is very clever for you to have noticed that - have a gold star!

  104. Because ... by Martin+S. · · Score: 1

    Educated masses can see past the establishment narrative.

  105. Universities represent more than politics by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Honestly, I read the article and wanted to see real statistics in the findings. Causality has been blatantly ignored here.

    Does the political bias of the person polled justify their beliefs about the university? Or are their underlying socioeconomic conditions which justify their bias which also is the cause of their political bias?

    What I suggest is that a coal miner who has had their livelihood negatively impacted by engineers designing mining machines, environmental protection laws, etc... would see engineers and scientists as their adversaries. That same person would look to "business friendly" politicians who are willing to ignore environmental protection in order to produce more jobs on mining as their friend and therefore choose the team which allows them to do better.

    I don't believe this is an issue of left and right. I believe their are underlying factors that attract these voters to favor populist politics instead.

    Let's also consider that universities are somewhat dangerous in the sense that they are populated almost entirely by children. These children are expressing their new freedom from their parents by identifying themselves in very public ways. Often, they are rapidly gathering information which was not available or interesting earlier because they were forced to study general education selected for them. Their opinions were dictated to them and as they develop into adults, they are thinking freely and excited by the experiences open to them. They also have long periods of breaks and light work loads that permit them to protest, march on Washington, sit in Wall Street for a month, etc...

    As they develop and gather enough information, even the most liberal of them will adjust and start identifying that cause and effect is not a single step. They will learn that the cause was an effect as well. But during their most energetic and expressive point in life, they will unite and be heard.

    They are not wrong and I believe this is a very important learning phase for them and Ibhave learned much by seeing them protest and hearing what they have to say. I also often don't agree with them, but value their perspective, sadly those perspectives become popular and popular gains votes and populists implement popular politics to gain votes.

    But consider that most people only see the protests and hear the noise generated by the newly liberated children. They don't see what happens once these children settle down to study because then the students are too busy working to say "Wait!!! I learned something new!!!" Instead they build companies which employ millions and billions of people. They find ways to stop bleaching of coral reefs. They invent solar cells with high enough efficiency to charge EVs, etc...

    I won't call fake news here. But I will say that it was extremely poorly written and thought out. It was a big booming headline and a story which required more thought before splatting out there. I believe simply pondering the implications of the story enlightened me. But to be fair, whoever wrote the headline got what they wanted. Their flamed a war between "political experts" who are passionate enough about team red or team blue to hate the other team or live their own team enough that they will abuse each other.

    I don't chose a team. I'm on whatever team includes all of us, not just red or blue. Let's call it team biped... or maybe team carbon based organism. This story is not about politics. It's about socioeconomic demographics.

  106. When did this happen? by dbIII · · Score: 1

    The article could be correct, who knows, but when did a trashy business magazine become something to quote on a tech site? Factual reporting is not what they are know for, it's "business trends" and "feel" or "what is your business power animal".
    It's not just the fringe dwelling conspiracy theorists quoting it now, seems like everyone is linking to that thing that may as well be the National Enquirer.

  107. Re:Here's what "fascist economic policy" means by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Um, no. Fascism did not have a "left-wing economic policy. Left-wing economic policies deal with individuals in poverty and monetary crises. Fascism deals with the support of businesses for government ends. Way, way different.

    The best explanation I ever heard of the fascist economic ideology was: "When government and industry come together to create a better tomorrow, we call that fascism." IMO, that sums up both the fascist means and ends, from the point of view of an individual fascist supporter.

    (Personally, I find it disgusting because I know what they mean when they say "a better tomorrow", and it does not jive with my motivations. Sorry, ending rant.)

    There is much contention surrounding the opinion of whether fascism corresponds to any economic policy. Please don't suggest that this policy was left-leaning, or at least mark off your words as opinion, because presenting these ideas as fact is incorrect. Also, please don't confuse Nazi Germany and Fascist Italy.

  108. we're so fucked by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    "Distrust in higher education" means the ruling class wants to protect itself.
    The billionaires do not need any fucking education, or any smart and talented people to challenge them.
    Time for a reset.

  109. America by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Can not survive Faux news. We must put back the regulations that made you present the opposing point of view for all opinion news stories.

  110. Apples and Oranges by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I went to college in the 80s at state.

    Tuition was 1/5 of what it is now. Textbooks were much cheaper and min wage was $3.50/hour.

    You worked during your BS MAth CS program - 25-30 hours a week?

    Amazing! You must have had a very easy school.

    That's why my company doesn't recruit from state: only top schools.

    BS CS from state? IT support is looking for people.

  111. nothing wrong with college by mr+lex+luthor · · Score: 1

    the cost to attend is the problem. we should join other countries and figure out a cost effective way for everyone to attend college without carrying student loan debt burdens. I personally wouldn't mind paying more taxes in order to not have to pay student loans every month.

  112. Another Lie From the Left by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I am a political junkie on the right and I have never heard that colleges are bad. There are some great colleges and universities in America, and there are some terrible ones as well. However the concept of an 18 year old going off to college is an exciting rite of passage that is absolutely apolitical. So again another lie to keep the matrixed mind control going a little while longer...

  113. Don't get caught up in the Left-Right/Republican-D by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    This paradigm is old and worn out and about as old as the Good Cop-Bad Cop paradigm...Don't fall for it!!!

  114. Depends on how it's presented by Ol+Olsoc · · Score: 1
    I'm hardly a Republican, but there is a huge problem at Universities in the USA.

    Perhaps a result of third wave feminism, plus the desire for safe spaces where no other opinion is allowed, and the helicoptering parentage has turned Universities into what might best be described as a looney bin. This is coming from a person who spent a career there.

    This does not negate the value of an education, in fact, an education where you are prepared for a career, while being exposed to a multitude of opinions, and with critical thinking being exercised is an excellent thing, very critical IMO.

    But Universities have morphed into something else. In general, there are a lot more women now attending college then men.http://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2014/03/06/womens-college-enrollment-gains-leave-men-behind/

    This is not limited to America https://www.theguardian.com/ed.... The Guardian briefly and dangerously touches on the idea that it might be cultural.

    Dr Helen Smith gives a veiewpoint http://www.educationviews.org/...

    The that's racist-that's-sexist-that's prejudiced crowd has managed to get comedians JerrySeinfeld, Chris Rock and Larry the cable guy to agree on something, no small feat. But they won't play campuses because of the hostile environment of people who cannot abide by any opinion but their own.

    So while I don't ascribe to the Republicans personal vendetta against Universities, they are not incorrect. Universities have a huge problem. I would recommend anyone - male of female - looking for a college education to get it through an online institution, and avoid the cesspool that Universities have become. Which is a whacky tyranny of the left, which is as onerous as the whacky tyranny of the right.

    --
    The shepherds did so well protecting the flock that the sheep no longer believed that wolves existed.
  115. College mindset by volmtech · · Score: 1

    Academic gatekeepers are the bane of middle America. My wife is working to become a registered nurse. She is a wonderful LPN. Unfortunately she now needs to pass collage algebra to continue. How does being able to factor polynomials make a person a better nurse? My youngest daughter (a high school honor graduate) dropped out of the last semester of court stenographer school when she needed to pass an algebra test to continue.

    We are not a family of slack-jawed inbreds. My other daughter is a college English professor and a son is a corporate lawyer.

  116. Education is important, college is not by rhyous · · Score: 1

    I'm republican, I guess.

    Education is extremely important. Colleges are nothing more than a place to be educated. However, Colleges have huge problems:

    1. Too dependent on lecture. Lecture is one of the least effective methods of education.
    2. Extremely expensive.
    With today's technology a 3 credit hour class could be taught effectively with a visual, auditory, active learning experience created one time with very low cost, making learning basically free.
    3. Free speech is enforced, unless the religious participate in free speech, then free speech is stifled. Free speech doesn't exclude religious speech. Other than a few zealots who are anti-science (they are entitled to their points of view) both science and religion have a place and both should be taught. For example, evolution is an unproven theory. We teach it despite not have proof of it.
    4. Rape culture. Beer pong, fraternities, etc.
    5. Slow teaching, similar to #1, but the human brain can learn a lot fast. We have the technology. With better educational methods, we could learn as much in 1 year as we do in 4 years of college.
    6. Nearly complete departure from apprenticeships, one of the more effective and speedy forms of training. Thank goodness electricians are still apprenticeships. Could you imagine how bad colleges would bungle that skill?

    The good of colleges:
    1. Bringing those who wish to learn together.
    2. Sharing knowledge with others.
    3. Sharing opinions with others.
    4. Thesis and the search for new undiscovered knowledge.
    5. Sports - learn to accept winning and losing

  117. Stupid headline by Jarwulf · · Score: 1

    If you're just going to keep purposely characterizing your opponents positions?

  118. College or Trade Schools? by kenwd0elq · · Score: 1

    The idea that everyone should go to college is clearly wrong. Many people won't benefit from college, especially if they plan to major in booze, sex and parties.

    American education is severely broken in so many ways. Many people "graduate" from high school unable to read or do basic arithmetic. That needs to be fixed, ASAP. One good first step would be to abolish the NEA.

    In college, student loans should be available only for degree programs that might allow you to pay off your student loans. Nobody gets jobs in "Ethnic Studies" that pay 100K a year to enable you to pay off a $100K debt. Student loans should be dischargeable in bankruptcy, but the college itself should take half of the hit. That would give colleges a reason to be more cautious in granting student loans.

    There should be a lot more "trade" schools than there are. There's a severe shortage in people who can build things and fix things. Every high school should have "shop" classes available to anyone.

  119. So you have nothing? by dbIII · · Score: 1

    No reply to your "refutation" that applies equally to dictators and Tzars then? Your "but I will not continue replying" looks rather a lot as if you like to shout ridiculous things and not have to back them up - the act of a coward.

    1. Re:So you have nothing? by Raenex · · Score: 1

      I have a past history with you, and I know you're a waste of time. Despite that, if you wanted a serious argument, you had several chances. It was only after 3 redundant posts and after I told you I was done with your bullshit that you decided to put forth an argument. Too late. No more replies from me, period.

  120. Unbelievable by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I worked with a simpleton who couldn't even look up Wikipedia for accurate numbers. Or check out a Google query he himself told me to do!!

  121. You still have nothing? by dbIII · · Score: 1

    What a copout - how does "the state exercised great control over the economy, welfare system, and social programs" refute it?

    You are like a child ringing a doorbell and running away.

  122. OK two points by DarthVain · · Score: 1

    1) At 58% that is a bit misleading for anything but very low values for "Most"... (i.e. 8% above "half")

    2) Considering the amount of for profit colleges in the US, and all that entails, they are likely quite right in that it is very much a negative impact on the nation. Has nothing to do with politics or view points however and more to do with them ripping off taxpayers by gaming the loan system to the tune of trillions of dollars, while at the same time indebting the population with little or no educational benefit. Parasitical might be the best term to use.

  123. Education vs. indoctrination by billd10 · · Score: 0

    The problem is that universities no longer seek to educate students as much as indoctrinate them to think like they do. Years ago, universities were places to share ideas and discuss differing points of view, even ones that differed from those of the various professors. Sadly, that is no longer the case. Either you regurgitate the university's political doctrine or you get punished with bad grades.

  124. uhh... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Colleges or Higher Education, there is a distinct difference. I would never endorse sending someone to enroll in one of the public universities that are training grounds for Liberal propaganda and #Resist movement terrorists.

  125. Questionable Study by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I really have to question the validity of this study. I am a right leaning Republican with Libertarian views. I am sending my young son off to college and paying six figures for the privilege. The reality is that I do trust the principles on which colleges were designed. I am afraid that those principles (Freedom of speech, dialogue, and educating young students based on core principles) have been replaced by an ideology. This ideology is based on postmodern, communistic, utopian principles. Dialog has been suprressed. Professors (particularly in the humanities) are pushing a world view which does not work. What happened to the Milton Freedmans? But, in the end of the day, I will send my son there. Because I know he is smart enough to develop a rational, workable world view in spite of this. And yes, I don't believe that colleges are bad for the country in spite of this.

  126. Well then, do the experiment by Texmaize · · Score: 1

    As an old saying goes, fish do not know that they are wet. If you do not see the left bias in slashdot and on your campus, then you may be more left than you think. I do not mean this to imply any malice towards you. It is just that sometimes when you are so far in something, it is hard to know where you really are. You are the opposite of a troll and that should be commended.

    However, if you want to see what I am talking about, then please take the challenge that I mentioned earlier. You can start of slashdot. Make a second account if needed. Start posting from a conservative bias. Make your arguments thoughtful as you like. You can include logic and defend your arguments with links. Then, see what happens. You will quickly find you will be modded down. You will find people name calling you will be modded up. You will see that very seldom will anyone take the time to engage you in discussion, but posts with one liners saying you are wrong will be modded up.

    Please try this. You might be surprised and also find out how wet is in here.

    --
    "Liberalism is a very noble idea, currently controlled by some very bad people. Be sure you do not get the two confused.
  127. Liberal colleges by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I don't think it's college that's at issue but the liberalization and propaganda mills so many of them have become.