I respect your position on the issue and your informed perspective. But in part I'd say that you are making my point for me. Charlie makes it sound like college campuses are THE source of (dis)information for a generation of young people without adequately providing other examples or sufficient context for their choices. As we both note,…
I respect your position on the issue and your informed perspective. But in part I'd say that you are making my point for me. Charlie makes it sound like college campuses are THE source of (dis)information for a generation of young people without adequately providing other examples or sufficient context for their choices. As we both note, they get their information in various ways, from various origins. College is just one of them, and the ongoing implication that radical faculty and administration are behind it simply isn't the case so much as the exception when one looks at the totality of the picture.
One certainly can debate whether young people adequately engage in critical thinking and reasoned drawing of conclusions. There is a discussion to be had there. But for my part at least I'm getting tired of the constant defending of our academic turf from people who aren't necessary qualified to attack it. I'd say more damage has been done over the years by right-wing talk radio hosts who have willingly carried water for some pretty bad actors and left the rest of us to live with the results and clean up the messes. But then perhaps I'm not engaging in sufficient critical thinking and have an agenda of my own on that. As always, these things are two-way streets if one insists on going down them.
I have a counterproposal, Charlie. Show us precise quotes where you take a pro-higher ed position on what is done right in that environment and by those instructors and administrators who are doing their work in good faith and very well so, and by the many student groups and movements that focus on doing good work for others and both giving back and paying forward, often quietly and without seeking to attract attention. The loudest voices aren't the only ones that should be reported, especially when they often are the smallest in size.
Since the roads leading to Rome on all this are your original posts, we're looking to you for balance in this area and to paint an accurate portrayal of the environment, not merely a subtle, becoming daily notice that there are some bad actors at a few specifics campuses, with the inference that if it is happening there, it is happening elsewhere too. Better still, bring the goods and show us evidence of widespread abuse of authority and a clear majority of students who are anti-democratic agitators and revolutionaries. I'm not seeing it, thus I call BS on the bigger picture point. It's not hard to read the anti-higher ed bias into your wording when it's been cultivated for so many years, in your books (Fail U.: The False Promise of Higher Education), WTMJ radio commentaries over time, and in these many pages. You've given us a body of work there to draw upon. So we do. It's fine to call out those bad actors where they exist. And, yes, they do, in some places and to some degree. No such environment is 100 percent pure. But let's not lose sight of the rule in calling attention to the exception. That's all I ask. The comments here clearly indicate that there are good points on both sides of the equation. So let's have that discussion instead. We could use your support when there is a positive message to share.
Nor is he responding to mine. Perhaps if I had enough time to comb through every column he has written, the transcripts (if they exist) of every radio broadcast in which he opined on the topic and made snarky overtures with sympathetic listeners, and all the passages in the cited book, among others. I don't. That doesn't negate the impressions received over time and a multitude of statements that take a broadly negative view of the topic. I'm not the only one here who is pointing that out. He might want to consider that input, from everyday readers. I suspect our time would be better spent actually addressing the topic than playing Gotcha games.
Do tell us exactly where it is "all the rage," because I'm in the Humanities environment and am hearing exactly nobody talking about it on any sort of a regular or sustained basis. Granted my own experience is not necessarily that of everyone else. But if it truly were such a heightened presence in so many departments and with so many faculty, administrators, and students, we'd likely have more precise and visible examples of its presence. If you have evidence that CRT is a guiding principle among more than a small, distinct minority of those people, please share it. I'd welcome the opportunity to see it. The rest of us are too busy just trying to keep up with our designated work load, which grows each year as we consistently are asked to do more with less.
Did you get millions to study your area like Ibrahim X? Have your ideas been spread to many schools via various “education experts?” Did you sell millions of books like Robin DiAngelo?
Yeah…CRT is just some back water idea…not popular at all.
Have you ever worked on a college campus and seen with your own eyes what goes on there? Or do you let others do your thinking for you?
True story (not that I make any of them up -- I don't need to). Today when I walked into class, the first student I saw was wearing a hoodie with something written on the front. It was not "Liberate Palestine." It was not "CRT Forever." It was ... "Celibacy Rocks." Yeah, really. That's where they are at more than CRT where I work. What else they wear, and talk about, is usually the Green Bay Packers, and how they suck without Aaron Rodgers and what a diva act he had become. If you can find CRT in there somewhere, let us know. That's in addition to the chalk writing on the sidewalks, offering free food at a Christian mission near campus and urging people to go to Homecoming activities. Sorry, no CRT there either. The point is that they have their own agenda and really don't give a sh.. what their professors think or say or do. And most professors who want to keep their paychecks coming at a state school know to steer clear of such things when it is too easily exploited by those who oppose them and, as noted, not what the students want to hear in the first place. We have much more in common with the Brady Bunch than with Berkeley. Are there some individual exceptions? Sure. Like anywhere else, some people have trouble putting their personal passions aside. But are they a clear majority or minority presence? Figure that out for yourself. It's not hard to do if you keep an open mind. On my campus, if you are looking for CRT evidence, you will have a long search ahead of you. Plan to budget extra time for that.
I don't disagree that it's a complex issue and that there are 2 sides to be considered here, but it is very concerning how quickly/easily people supporting the Palestinians seem to be able to jump over the atrocities in order to get in the lane they wanted to be in the first place. Jews = Bad
Honestly...it's a very similar mindset to the MAGAs...where they already have the answer in their head and there's just nothing that's going to dissuade them that their side is right and righteous. Let's go back and talk about Hillary Clinton instead of talking about Trump...because the Clinton's are bad people justifying everything Trump does.
Where's the outrage from them for Hamas holding innocent civilians hostage, etc? Again....that's very MAGA like...in that the only important atrocities occur at the hands of their perceived enemies.
I know this response is very high level and broad brush, but it reflects how I'm seeing things.
I respect your position on the issue and your informed perspective. But in part I'd say that you are making my point for me. Charlie makes it sound like college campuses are THE source of (dis)information for a generation of young people without adequately providing other examples or sufficient context for their choices. As we both note, they get their information in various ways, from various origins. College is just one of them, and the ongoing implication that radical faculty and administration are behind it simply isn't the case so much as the exception when one looks at the totality of the picture.
One certainly can debate whether young people adequately engage in critical thinking and reasoned drawing of conclusions. There is a discussion to be had there. But for my part at least I'm getting tired of the constant defending of our academic turf from people who aren't necessary qualified to attack it. I'd say more damage has been done over the years by right-wing talk radio hosts who have willingly carried water for some pretty bad actors and left the rest of us to live with the results and clean up the messes. But then perhaps I'm not engaging in sufficient critical thinking and have an agenda of my own on that. As always, these things are two-way streets if one insists on going down them.
Where do I do this? Pls provide precise quote.
I have a counterproposal, Charlie. Show us precise quotes where you take a pro-higher ed position on what is done right in that environment and by those instructors and administrators who are doing their work in good faith and very well so, and by the many student groups and movements that focus on doing good work for others and both giving back and paying forward, often quietly and without seeking to attract attention. The loudest voices aren't the only ones that should be reported, especially when they often are the smallest in size.
Since the roads leading to Rome on all this are your original posts, we're looking to you for balance in this area and to paint an accurate portrayal of the environment, not merely a subtle, becoming daily notice that there are some bad actors at a few specifics campuses, with the inference that if it is happening there, it is happening elsewhere too. Better still, bring the goods and show us evidence of widespread abuse of authority and a clear majority of students who are anti-democratic agitators and revolutionaries. I'm not seeing it, thus I call BS on the bigger picture point. It's not hard to read the anti-higher ed bias into your wording when it's been cultivated for so many years, in your books (Fail U.: The False Promise of Higher Education), WTMJ radio commentaries over time, and in these many pages. You've given us a body of work there to draw upon. So we do. It's fine to call out those bad actors where they exist. And, yes, they do, in some places and to some degree. No such environment is 100 percent pure. But let's not lose sight of the rule in calling attention to the exception. That's all I ask. The comments here clearly indicate that there are good points on both sides of the equation. So let's have that discussion instead. We could use your support when there is a positive message to share.
In all due respect, you didn’t answer his question.
Nor is he responding to mine. Perhaps if I had enough time to comb through every column he has written, the transcripts (if they exist) of every radio broadcast in which he opined on the topic and made snarky overtures with sympathetic listeners, and all the passages in the cited book, among others. I don't. That doesn't negate the impressions received over time and a multitude of statements that take a broadly negative view of the topic. I'm not the only one here who is pointing that out. He might want to consider that input, from everyday readers. I suspect our time would be better spent actually addressing the topic than playing Gotcha games.
Where do you think the whole "oppressed/oppressor" language comes from?
It comes straight from CRT. Which is all the rage in university humanities these days.
Do tell us exactly where it is "all the rage," because I'm in the Humanities environment and am hearing exactly nobody talking about it on any sort of a regular or sustained basis. Granted my own experience is not necessarily that of everyone else. But if it truly were such a heightened presence in so many departments and with so many faculty, administrators, and students, we'd likely have more precise and visible examples of its presence. If you have evidence that CRT is a guiding principle among more than a small, distinct minority of those people, please share it. I'd welcome the opportunity to see it. The rest of us are too busy just trying to keep up with our designated work load, which grows each year as we consistently are asked to do more with less.
Did you get millions to study your area like Ibrahim X? Have your ideas been spread to many schools via various “education experts?” Did you sell millions of books like Robin DiAngelo?
Yeah…CRT is just some back water idea…not popular at all.
Have you ever worked on a college campus and seen with your own eyes what goes on there? Or do you let others do your thinking for you?
True story (not that I make any of them up -- I don't need to). Today when I walked into class, the first student I saw was wearing a hoodie with something written on the front. It was not "Liberate Palestine." It was not "CRT Forever." It was ... "Celibacy Rocks." Yeah, really. That's where they are at more than CRT where I work. What else they wear, and talk about, is usually the Green Bay Packers, and how they suck without Aaron Rodgers and what a diva act he had become. If you can find CRT in there somewhere, let us know. That's in addition to the chalk writing on the sidewalks, offering free food at a Christian mission near campus and urging people to go to Homecoming activities. Sorry, no CRT there either. The point is that they have their own agenda and really don't give a sh.. what their professors think or say or do. And most professors who want to keep their paychecks coming at a state school know to steer clear of such things when it is too easily exploited by those who oppose them and, as noted, not what the students want to hear in the first place. We have much more in common with the Brady Bunch than with Berkeley. Are there some individual exceptions? Sure. Like anywhere else, some people have trouble putting their personal passions aside. But are they a clear majority or minority presence? Figure that out for yourself. It's not hard to do if you keep an open mind. On my campus, if you are looking for CRT evidence, you will have a long search ahead of you. Plan to budget extra time for that.
What school?
Let me know and I’m pretty sure I’ll be able to find more than a few profs who champion CRT ideas
Wow. So since someone wore a football jersey that means the politics isn’t real? Give me a break.
Here’s a tip:
When you say “but”…everything before it is meaningless.
So when you say, “Yes Hamas’s attack was terrible, but we have to understand [excuse] the Palestinians…”
Well…you really don’t mean the first part.
So now you're down to arguing over conjunctions to try to make your point?
Just. Move. On. Already.
Right after you admit you don’t like Israel and that you think the Palestinian cause is just; that their attack on Israel was justified.
You know you do…
I don't disagree that it's a complex issue and that there are 2 sides to be considered here, but it is very concerning how quickly/easily people supporting the Palestinians seem to be able to jump over the atrocities in order to get in the lane they wanted to be in the first place. Jews = Bad
Honestly...it's a very similar mindset to the MAGAs...where they already have the answer in their head and there's just nothing that's going to dissuade them that their side is right and righteous. Let's go back and talk about Hillary Clinton instead of talking about Trump...because the Clinton's are bad people justifying everything Trump does.
Where's the outrage from them for Hamas holding innocent civilians hostage, etc? Again....that's very MAGA like...in that the only important atrocities occur at the hands of their perceived enemies.
I know this response is very high level and broad brush, but it reflects how I'm seeing things.