← Autodidact Archive · Original Dissent · Buddy
Thread ID: 12085 | Posts: 3 | Started: 2004-01-30
2004-01-30 21:30 | User Profile
When I was in college, my experiences with liberal professors were similar to those that this author describes. I don't think my professors were as bad as this guy's, but maybe I just wasn't paying close enough attention. Anyway, the article is pretty good. I'd be interested to know if anyone else had similar experiences or if this sort of thing is unusual. The Title is: "Lies My Teachers TOld Me"
This is a link to the article:
[url]http://www.politicallyright.com/article123.htm[/url]
This is a quote:
"Just over a year ago, I received a degree in history from the largest state college in Massachusetts. Having enrolled as a history major with the hope of acquiring a well-rounded historical perspective, I assumed that my professors would encourage my disinterested ambition. I was wrong.
With just a few exceptions, my professors were leftists who infused their lectures with political opinion and assigned reading material that reinforced their leftwing views. For information that would help me develop a balanced perspective on history, particularly the history of the West, I was forced to look beyond the confines of my formal education."
2004-01-31 02:46 | User Profile
I had two different experiences of college, for two years after high school I didn't quite know how to respond to the BS from professors. I opted out of college for the military(Air Force) and was disabused of the notion that a college degree means very much by the torrent of stupid military officers that I worked under; guys who would spout out phrases like "there is no I in team." (There were some exceptions of course.) A college degree just doesn't mean as much as it used to.
When I returned to finish my degree, being a little older, it almost seemed pathetic how cliche and unprofessional some professors were. It was almost too easy to shoot them down. Just like this article says, professors would complain about the "legacy" of racism in the US. I asked one professor how one could call the US racist when we have integrated more people from a wider variety of backgrounds in a shorter amount of time than any other human society in history. He gave me a deer in the headlights look for a moment; I know he hadn't thought of it that way, but he recovered and said the resistance to integration was unique to America. As politely as I could, I told him history disagreed with him. (Hell, we couldn't succesfully integrate the various tribes of Africa.)
One site I highly recomend is Richard Mitchell's THE UNDERGROUND GRAMMARIAN at: [url]http://www.sourcetext.com/grammarian/index.html[/url]
Mitchell was a professor who dedicated his work to exposing the pretentious and misleading uses of language in the academic world. You'll love the way he rips apart the clumsy grammar of some of these "esteemed" self-appointed elites. I took my signature quote from his site. Here's the introduction to his newsletter:
[I]Clear language engenders clear thought, and clear thought is the most important benefit of education. We are neither peddlers nor politicians that we should prosper by that use of language which carries the least meaning. We cannot honorably accept the wages, confidence, or licensure of the citizens who employ us as we darken counsel by words without understanding. And so, to the whole college community, to students, to teachers, and to administrators of every degree, The Underground Grammarian gives warning! Rape of the mother tongue will be punished![/I]
2004-01-31 07:03 | User Profile
[QUOTE]The Title is: "Lies My Teachers TOld Me"[/QUOTE]
The author is just another neocon. I give credit to neocons for not hating early America as the leftists do and they get credit for not being as friendly with socialism as the leftists are. But, this guy tells his own lies.
Lie Number Five: The Palestinians Are ââ¬ÅVictimsââ¬Â Of Israel:
When a professor unleashes this lie in class, he is doing so with the hope that most of his students do not have a grasp on the complex history of the Middle East. In response to this lie, you may want to begin by asking your professor why the Palestinians walked away from the peace table in 2000 and kicked off an intifada, after the Israelis agreed to 95% of their demands. Chances are, your professor will not be able to answer this question.
If this 95% was a sincere deal, why was it pulled off the table? Why doesn't Isreal let the offer stand?
First, there never was such a deal in the first place, at least nothing in writing. And, the offer was for nothing close to 95%. All the major Jewish settlements were to be left intact and Isreal would own the roads connecting them, thus isolating Palistinian populations. And, just like Isreal has refused to uphold Bush's roadmap to peace, there was no assurance that Israel would stick to the agreement.
If Israel illegally occupies the land, if they recognize that the land is not theirs (as appears to be the case) they should just give it back else Israel is doing nothing less than holding the land hostage, even in their perspective.