Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
The point is it was claimed that Marx is the reason for public education when that clearly isn't the case. A little reading would've helped you understand why I made that comment.
Stop changing what I said to make a silly and pointless comment fit. I said falling under Marxist ideals. And in 1848, the date the Communist Manifesto was published, there was no universal public education where all citizens ,regardless of class, would be educated. It was contemporaneous.
Part of the course. You will be required to forge a community connection in an occupy movement.
You will learn how NOT to get caught on camera crapping on a police car.
Male students will learn how to rape women and not get caught.
You will learn how easy it is to sell drugs in a crowd.
You will learn how to construct a tent, even though it is prohibited.
You will learn how to form a phony 501 c 3 and keep all the money for yourself.
You will learn how to beg for food and toilet facilites.
You will learn how it feels to not take a shower for two weeks.
You will experience getting pepper sprayed with eyes burning.
You will get first hand experience of being arrested, hands behind your back with plastic ties. Thrown in a van to a booking facility, being fingerprinted, photo taken, thrown in a holding cell with a dozen other people who haven't showered for two weeks.
You will make a call to your Dad, 'The $4000 you gave me for the MARXIST' course didn't work as planned. I need another $4000 for a lawyer'.
LOL!
STOP
You're getting all these young, radical Marxist Wannabe's all worked up and salivating!
Stop changing what I said to make a silly and pointless comment fit.
Well stop making silly pointless comments than.
Quote:
I said falling under Marxist ideals. And in 1848, the date the Communist Manifesto was published, there was no universal public education where all citizens ,regardless of class, would be educated.
The United States paid for public education for its citizens and that was part of the purchasing agreements for buying territories west of the 13 colonies since so much of that money went to fund education. I don't see what is hard for you to understand here.
The United States paid for public education for its citizens and that was part of the purchasing agreements for buying territories west of the 13 colonies since so much of that money went to fund education. I don't see what is hard for you to understand here.
What does this have to do with the fact that it is a plank in the Communist Manifesto? What is so hard to understand about that, especially as the US is so often depicted as a Libertarian mecca.
Quote:
Your own link backs up what I'm saying.
1827
Massachusetts passes a law making all grades of public school open to all pupils free of charge.
Oh I see. The first school opens in the whole country 20 years before the Manifesto was published. I guess that means it was universal and not part of a national debate
Quote:
Marx didn't come up with a brand new idea here all he does was advocate for it.
Never said it was his idea. I simply listed the plank of the Communist Manifesto as I said. I would say go and waste someone else's time , but then I see with another poster you have already originated this idea. Still falls under my opinion of you.
What does this have to do with the fact that it is a plank in the Communist Manifesto?
Because the idea is not original to him which marxist claim.
Quote:
What is so hard to understand about that, especially as the US is so often depicted as a Libertarian mecca.
Seeing as how libertarianism is the closest thing to classical liberalism that isn't such a bad thing.
Although the Libertarian Party takes it to far.
Quote:
Oh I see. The first school opens in the whole country 20 years before the Manifesto was published. I guess that means it was universal and not part of a national debate
It means the idea didn't originate with him and crediting with it is not accurate. What is hard to grasp about that.
Quote:
Never said it was his idea. I simply listed the plank of the Communist Manifesto as I said. I would say go and waste someone else's time , but then I see with another poster you have already originated this idea. Still falls under my opinion of you.
You implied it was his idea that is why you got the response you did.
Of course, you are a group think type of person, instead of challenging these loser Marxist professors, you were probably kissing their asses,
Reading was a fundamental aspect of undergraduate studies and being able to read comprehensively is critical to academic success. I am sadden to see that you never figured that out as exemplified by your pluralization of professors since I previously stated we had only one "Marxist" professor, and only for a short period of time, so it would have been one ass not asses.
Quote:
fascinated with their BS propaganda, probably asking them if you could polish their apples, you spent all this money to become nothing more than a little Marxist puppet, a group think drone!
Marxist target college kids because a lot of them come fresh out of high school lacking a lot of real world experience and are easy to manipulate.
CW, this isn't 1936, much less 1980 when Roger Kiren was purged from the School of Industrial and Labor Relations. And while yes I was a veteran and thus older when I went to school I didn't detect much in the way of intellectual susceptibility to so-called Marxist indoctrination amongst the younger members of the student body the vast majority of whom were thoroughly immunized against any thought that Marxism was a relevant political ideology. Real world experience, unless one grew up in the Komsomol, could possibly erase years of American secondary education that indoctrinated its students with the horrors of Stalinist, or Maoist ideology.
Now I have a question for you. Since your main objection seems to the fear of a lack of critical arguments about Marxism, in this case the Trotskyite variant, do you also believe that professors should not teach about the evils of capitalism? After all we don't want to have just a one sided argument, now do we? Or are you not concerned about the indoctrination of students to the unqualified wonderfulness of free market capitalism as I was taught by the likes of Chicago School economics professor Robert Smith?
Quote:
My objection is that its propaganda being funded by tax dollars and a course not worthy of higher education because it's not going to have students question what they are learning.
This are just your presumption. As for what has value and what does not when it comes to higher learning, that is a valuation best determined by the academic market doesn't it? If only ten students enroll in one of these courses then the expense is a pittance, if their are thousands (my psych class had 1800) then the market justifies the price. However, academic freedom, which I strongly believe in should be allowed to flourish regardless of subject matter, my only concern would be to what academic standards are these course being held to. That is a far more important question than the subject matter itself.
Quote:
The problem with this as I already pointed out is that if you take the course wanting to "challenge the professors and marx" you are most likely going to fail the course since its not about learning it's about indoctrination.
And this is based upon what? My experience was that if you going to challenge most professors you better show up with your game face on regardless of the subject or ideology of the prof. Academics live in a rarified and egocentric world and very few enjoy being challenged on their core perspectives.
Reading was a fundamental aspect of undergraduate studies and being able to read comprehensively is critical to academic success. I am sadden to see that you never figured that out as exemplified by your pluralization of professors since I previously stated we had only one "Marxist" professor, and only for a short period of time, so it would have been one ass not asses.
How does one respond to a nearly psychotic rant?
Well said. The scary thing is is that the person screaming the loudest about the dangers of indoctrination is the one who is soooo clearly indoctrinated. Sad.
Minor differences? OMG, I can't respond. That's the stupidest thing I've ever read. Minor differences.
Fundamental differences.
Socialism is completely opposed to corporatism.
Fascism doesn't just embrace corporatism, it's fundamental to the entire philosophy.
Socialism shuns nationalism.
Fascism is built on nationalism.
These differences are fundamental. They are about the entire reasoning for why the systems do what they do, the reasons they do what they do. That's definitive differences, not minor differences.
Good post, but arguing with cwa1984 is a waste of time. They make blatant strawman accusations and have been posting the same inaccuracies the whole thread. Obvious troll.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
A little reading would've helped you understand why I made that comment.
STOP 
