Midnight in the KinderGarden of Eden
To see how this translates into policy, consider the very different attitudes a Modern Liberal and a Right-Thinking person hold towards the United Nations. Both start out, as small children, adoring the UN. The difference comes after kindergarten as both the Modern Liberal and the Right Thinker learn more things about the institution. Both come to know about how the “peace keepers” turned their backs so the Rwandans could be massacred. This leads the Right Thinker to lessen the esteem in which he holds the UN. This, however, only bolsters the Modern Liberal’s affection for the institution since massacres are things people learn about only after they’ve left kindergarten; what the modern liberal appreciates is that the “peace keepers” followed the rules of The Cult and didn’t hit anyone.
Similarly, both groups come to know about the United Nations’ tacit endorsement of Palestinian terrorism. The difference is that, while the Right Thinker sees these acts as abhorrent because terrorism is something the child learns about some time after he turns six, the Modern Liberal doesn’t really need to know about it (for he won’t factor it into his “thinking”). What he knows — and what increases the esteem in which he holds that organization — is that the rules in the kindergarten classroom include “everyone must be invited to the party.” When he see the father of modern terrorism, Yasser Arafat, being given a platform to spread his hateful ideology, it bolsters his adoration of the UN.
And when a Right-Thinking person learns that the UN has made the Sudanese the head of the “Human Rights Committee” while they’re committing genocide, he recognizes it as an outrage that will only lead to more human rights violations around the globe. The Modern Liberal sees the same thing and is thrilled by it. This is because genocide is something he learned about after his sixth birthday and therefore something he doesn’t really need to know. What he does need to know is that the UN was following the rules of the Cult of Indiscriminateness — one of the lessons taught in the kindergarten classroom: that “everyone must get a turn.” The Modern Liberal doesn’t care about genocide; he cares that it was Sudan’s turn.
Those born into the Modern Liberal era can truly believe that everything they ever really need to know they’ve known for longer than they can remember because, in the modern liberal era, there is simply no cost or consequence to them in being wrong. And, so long as there are grown-ups — the teachers and parents in their youth, the government in their latter years — this remains true throughout the entirety of their lives.
Get The KinderGarden of Eden: How The Modern Liberal Thinks here.
Related: Evan Sayet recently discussed The KinderGarden of Eden: How The Modern Liberal Thinks with PJM’s Ed Driscoll. Click here to listen.
Maybe things have changed since I was in kindergarden, but the only rule against not inviting people was if you wanted to pass out the invitations in front of the other kids. If you passed out the invitations outside of school, that was fine; you just couldn’t pass out the invitations in school unless you were inviting the entire class.
Myth Buster is referring to the increased collectivism that followed WW2. Corporatist liberals feared race riots, another depression, and lots of trouble from labor unions, so formulated their alternative to communism, with the politics of “consensus” or the mixed economy. In his AGE OF EXTREMES, the late communist historian laid out his rather Popular Front interpretation of that period and its inglorious end under Reagan and Thatcher. See http://clarespark.com/2012/12/08/hobsbawm-obama-israel/. Or if you prefer a similar (television) version of the Red line, watch Oliver Stone’s fanciful history of the United States on Showtime.
I’m only 23 years old. I was responding to the article based on my experience in kindergarden 18 years ago.
I think what you are saying is that once the filtering Perspective takes form in Kindergarten for those on the Left, it filters all the reality it is then confronted with in a way that doesn’t force any alteration. Which is precisely why education, K-12 and higher ed, specifically targets that Mindset. They know they can unconsciously influence future behavior by going after the values, attitudes, and beliefs that together filter reality.
That’s why Outcomes Based Education was created. Well, that and to minimize the kind of knowledge that would force a reexamination of the Worldview in unapproved ways. Along neural pathways a person puts together herself in the privacy of her own mind. Without merely adopting the desired Conceptual Framework (yes that is what it is called).
The kind of reexamination that alters Mindsets after childhood is getting harder and harder because most people fail to recognize just how much behavioral social engineering has been quietly going on. And it requires the kind of facts one gets from fluent regular reading of a variety of sources. And who does that in an age of Yahoo News?
Where will tomorrow’s epiphanies come from?
You must be my long-lost blood-brother, Evan, because from what I read here and from other excerpts of your new book (which I have not yet purchased, alas for both you and me) it would seem that you have encapsulated much of my own thought on this subject. (far more eloquently, however) You are dead on target. “Fire for effect” as the artillery-man would say. Your point about America post WW II circa say, 1945-1965 is absolutely vital to an sociocultural (AND psychological) understanding of how our politics has evolved to this point to include its underlying philosophical ethos. So very true also is Sowell’s (a true first-rate thinker and in my Pantheon of admired thinkers/writers) observation about the “verbally nimble.” There is an older, well-worn one-word description of this trait: “Glibness.” Or as one woman I once dated said to me looking into my eyes in one of our more reflective tender moments: “Are you really smart or are you just glib?” (At which point I instantly knew I was going to have to drop her like a hot potato as she was FAR too perceptive for my own good! lol) But the point her question raised is central to the dilemma we “on the right” face–and it is an exquisitely existential one. How does one swim against the current of history and culture at a time when the left so glibly controls the narrative (via the educational system, media and Hollywood &TV) in our time? The late philosopher Eric Voegelin once posed the question as to whether a society could simultaneously advance in the material sense via science while retrogressing politically and culturally. He answered his own question by saying “yes, but not forever.” Here Lincoln is also a guide insofar as “A House divided against itself cannot stand” seems the inevitable outcome of the contradictory societal process we find ourselves in and which Voegelin described. You have well described the cultural and psychic mind-set of the “left” in general and it’s “intellectual” base in particular. How to counter the 24/7/365 omni-directional cultural drumbeat is , however, another question entirely.
The constant cultural barrage from the left is like air pollution–a natural by-product of our times. Someone once used the pollution analogy in The Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists when discussing the huge costs and difficulties involved in arms-control. He stated that he had theoretically designed a machine that would cleanse the earth’s atmosphere of all pollutants, but that it would take all the ergs of energy produced my every machine on earth, both large and small for 24 hours, to run it. “Just think,” he wrote, “of the incalculable cost to run such a machine, not to mention the cost of manufacturing and assembling it, plus all the millions of man-hours to plan, design and build it–yet it (the pollution) all gets up there for free!”
We have a long slog ahead of us, Evan, but yours is a necessary insight..
The late philosopher Eric Voegelin once posed the question as to whether a society could simultaneously advance in the material sense via science while retrogressing politically and culturally. He answered his own question by saying “yes, but not forever.”
We got in this predicament through laziness and inattentiveness, through our own ignorance of how public institutions and public education were being relentlessly infiltrated over decades.
Liberal thought is now insanely entrenched in our culture. In one-on-one conversations with Obama voters, I’ve noted that presenting them with facts only makes them more intransigent.
A certain defensiveness when it comes to challenges to the Body of Belief
It’s going to be a slow re-build, assuming we’re not so far gone as to be beyond salvage.
I would further answer Voegelin’s question as “only for a very short time”. Because when the politics and culture become corrupted, it is inevitable that coruption of science will soon follow, and a corrupt science is a non-productive science. The global warming fraud is the most glaring example, but pseudo-science is woven through all of our lives now, and most of today’s population lack that ability to distinguish it from actual science. (Or worse… they dismiss actual science while clinging desperately to pseudo-science.)
We have been coasting on previous discoveries for about two decades now, and most of that effort has been the result of engineering taking place abroad. Other than in the entertainment field, America is producing no scientific or technological advances of note. Scientifically, the period of astounding advance that began with the late 19th century has now ended.
I’ll see your global warming crackpottery from the Left and raise you creationism and/or young Earth “science” on the Right.
A plague on both your irrational houses.
That is a useless comparison. “Young Earth” believers on the right are very rare. However, global warming belief on the left is essentially universal. Not only that, there is no transnational movement to coercively manage our economic activity based on young earth beliefs.
Analogy fail.
No, Spikey.
Warmism (at least the anthropogenic variety) is a religion on the Left.
You must absolutely, positively subscribe to its tenets or you cannot fully belong to The Cult.
Warmists remain warmists despite the exposed perfidy and lies of East Anglia (and other) “scientists”, caught with their pants down in email exchanges.
Warmists remain warmists despite a cooling trend now 16 years long. That’s why one of the prominent climate scientists (Phil Jones) advised his cronies to “hide the decline”. (damn facts were getting in the way of the agenda)
Creationism on the extreme right is far more a niche set of beliefs. It’s rather hard to hold up in light of the fossil record.
Anyway, a belief in Creationism on the right isn’t de rigueur like Warmism is on the left.
I hope this helps, tho’ I doubt it will disabuse you of your lazy generalization.
It’s Penn state climate scientist Michael Mann of “hide the decline” infamy
Mann threatened to sue over this video.
Poor baby.
“Creationism on the extreme right is far more a niche set of beliefs. It’s rather hard to hold up in light of the fossil record.”
I’m afraid you must be talking about things you have not researched. When/if you do, you will find that indeed the fossil record supports a young Earth. In fact most scientist have pretty much decided that the fossil record is of no use in trying to arrive at any age that would offer millions of yrs, let alone billions.
Obvious and utter bullsh!t.
I prefer the term “Global Warmians”. It sounds less secular, as it requires Pentecostal type faith to believe in global warming.
Another major difference with the “young earthers” –(a rather disparging term for someone espousing religious beliefs) is that THEY aren’t insisting upon the alteration of every form of energy, which costs milions; THEY are not promoting bankrupt solar energy companies to fianance unions, nor are THEY using the UN to control everything through corrupt financal efforts and “regulations.”
Somehow, THEY have the capacity to allow others to disagree with them — clearly, something they learned after kindergarten.
You are SOOOO right. Scientific data THESE days has to be “politically correct”,for if it isn’t,researchers can lose their funding, their jobs AND their reputations, and finding a publisher of their non-PC findings can be close to impossible,since lawsuits can be brought for “offensiveness” to certain groups of people. Rush Limbaugh once told about a woman scientist who said that if she ever,in her research,found something to be true that was contrary to her feminist views, she would NOT share her findings with others.So scientists are not only censored by each other and by the publishers of scientific journals, but some even censor THEMSELVES to avoid publishing the results of experimentation that they personally disapprove of.EVERYTHING has been corrupted by the Left,it seems,and it will take an immense effort to roll back the tide.
cindo, I have a quote for you. Author unknown.
“The left uses science like a drunk uses a lamp post, for support rather than illumination.”
Great post!
“And where did Lincoln get the “divided house” analogy? The Bible, of course!
Mark 3:25: “And if a house be divided against itself, that house cannot stand.”
Matthew 12:25: “And Jesus knew their thoughts, and said unto them, Every kingdom divided against itself is brought to desolation; and every city or house divided against itself shall not stand.” (Wow: this is said as a command!)
Luke 11:17: “But he, knowing their thoughts, said unto them, Every kingdom divided against itself is brought to desolation; and a house divided against a house falleth.”
As the West has turned its back on God, we’ve become irresponsible “adult toddlers”. Woe are we . . . Kyrie eleison.
We used to not pay a lot of attention to kids until they got closer to puberty. The kindergarten rules were there just to make them less of a pain in the ass.
In high school and college, we taught them critical thinking, logic, and to question norms and assumptions. Now high school and colleges just reinforce the kindergarten rules.
I love the line, “This, however, only bolsters the Modern Liberal’s affection for the institution since massacres are things people learn about only after they’ve left kindergarten; what the modern liberal appreciates is that the “peace keepers” followed the rules of The Cult and didn’t hit anyone.”
However, to give Obama his due, he still hits hard with the drones. Boots on the ground are a messier and messier proposition everywhere. Have we used them not enough, or too much since WWII?
For what it is worth to you, I think, because after all the drone strikes, the enemy keeps coming in more and more numbers, the boots haven’t been employed enough [see Libya, Egypt, Syria, etc.]. The revolution comes, is successful, and the new regime is as bad or worse than the previous regime.
A few questions: Has the nature of the enemy changed at all? Can the boots continue as mere cadre to the next wave of enemy betrayers? How long can this go on?
Back when adults were in charge, war was waged as a last resort – and the casualties on both sides were reluctantly accepted. Now, we wage war like a six-year-old with a video game. Push a button for a drone to blow up the bad guy. Because there is nobody on the ground to see it, we don’t have to worry about the collateral death and destruction.
I’m not so sure about the last resort theory, Troop. It seems to me the Spanish American and 1st World War were started almost because leaders in governments were just looking for something exciting to do. Perhaps this is over-simplifying history on my part.
Always have faith and trust in your teacher, you are ignorant and they know much more than you. = The science is settled on global warming.
Always take what you are taught with a grain of salt. In your ignorance, you may not realize your teacher is more ignorant than you.
Of course there are those who, by personal experience, saw what nonsense those “kindergarten rules” were and how hypocritical those who claimed to follow them were. I’m sure that those of us who grew up in the 1970′s at least had a kid or two in each class who was ostracized. Perhaps they had an attitude or were a spazz, but often if was for no definable reason. Simply put, they were the ones who the opposite of the kindergarten rules quoted from the book applied to. Then again, maybe this didn’t kick in then, but a few grades later, but eventually it happened.
Perhaps if more people were observant they’d see just what a lot of rot all that stuff is. Indeed it was often the ones who played by those rules best who were actually the most cruel, using the rules to gain and enforce their popularity, social bullies if you will.
Whew. Thanks. I always thought I was just so totally screwed up for thinking the way I do. All the so-called liberals told me so. Now I see it’s because I never attented kindergarten.
Evan, there is also a fact of developmental psychology, and I recite the details from fuzzy memory, but children of a young age (I think *under* kindergarten age but you might check), as they learn language, learn an axis of concern before they learn which pole is which. So, they learn the axis of SIZE, and they learn terms that belong to the axis like BIG and LITTLE but only *later* learn which means what! So if you show them something of an extreme size they have about a 50/50 chance of picking the right description, and may insist a giant truck is LITTLE, or complain about a BIG ladybug crawling on the table.
I’ve always thought this is what is in play in situations like the Sudanese head of the Human Rights Commission, the *axis* of human rights is in play and so that’s a good thing, but just what is being done is too confusing to the immature mind.
Obama’s budget maneuvers are another: he’s doing *something*, so even if he’s making it worse, many are confused and will be enthusiastic, and not have the mental acuity to know that there might be bad changes as well as good changes.
(and in fact that is a classic and pocket description of liberals and conservatives, conservatives worry about what might be lost and avoid bad changes, liberals think only of what could be gained and insist on changing things and then seeing how they work (empiricism and Pelosi-ism)).
All the more the movie Idiocracy is relevant.
Use it or lose it.
The more the average citizen is protected from external threats by the State, the less the citizen will use its brain. After a few generations, the State – which is composed of “more equal” citizens – will become more and more stupid.
Hey a good term for the Modern Liberal is ‘Eloi’. A child like people that play and laugh in the Sun without responsibility or labor.
As for the people that actually have to make things work; they could be called ‘Morlocks’. HG Wells gives a pretty good description of how Eloi behave and the reason that they can behave that way is because of Morlock support.
I know this sounds like a stretch; but we are running a War that rarely gets mentioned. The Eloi are always shocked when they notice the the Morlocks did a drone strike. And in the long run the Eloi became food for the Morlocks.
Only because the Morlocks moved underground. The question is though: were they forced underground by a utopian elite who didn’t want to gaze upon the work that went into supporting their world (as in Metropolis) or did they simply move away from the early Eloi because they were so annoying and demanding of free stuff?
What I found interesting though is that the Morlocks also provided the Eloi with food. If they could grow food, why bother with the Eloi at all? Certainly real cattle or the like would be cheaper and faster to raise. But then this was a novel and probably a cautionary tale.
H.G. Wells was massively progressive, politically involved and everything. I am not surprised he demonized and monster-ized the producers and carers for the “innocent” Eloi – who, if you think about the story, could not possibly have started out innocent.
Thane, yes, if the Morlocks could feed the Eloi, why bother with using them as food? (though, like deer, I guess the population could explode etc. – they were a bit cattle-ish) It is a plot hole Wells never explains. Most people, when presented with those they fear and hate, will use monstrous behavior to justify their fear and hate. Perhaps that was what Wells was doing.
Wells, like a good modern progressive, believed that the decision making part of the average person’s life should be left to an enlightened, benevolent elite. Guess which group H.G. thought that he belonged.
Oh those intellectual progressives! Always thinking that the new regime has a spot for them right next to der Leader. Never occurs to them that the intellectual purges of the Stalin, Mao, and Pol Pot are the logical outcomes of statism and not an aberrations. As they say, “they’ll be the first against the wall when the revolution comes.” A revolution that they are actively promoting.
As for H.G. Wells, he wrote some good books, but his worldview sucked.
Seems that neither of you have read much Wells. The Morlocks were technological and aggressive, the Eloi weren’t. Neither were demonized. If you had bothered to read some of his other future science fiction, you would see it as just an evolutionary extrapolation of what he saw the effects of technology might be, with capitalists (what we would now call management) living in comfort, and the workers living rough lives, as always. Owning and running a coal mine is not the same as working as a coal miner, nor should it be. An understanding of late 19th century England is helpful, also.
I won’t claim to be a Wells scholar, but I have read a few of his novels. I’m not referring to his published works. I’m talking about his personal views. He was an adherent to social Darwinism and eugenics among some of his now un-PC views. One sentence from his Wiki biography sums up a lot of his ideas about leadership and governance.
He envisioned the state to be a planned society that would advance science, end nationalism, and allow people to progress by merit rather than birth. In 1932, he told Young Liberals at the University of Oxford that progressive leaders must become liberal fascists or enlightened Nazis in order to implement their ideas.
This is his worldview that I was referencing. Who do you think Wells would put on the “planning committees”? Obviously, intellectuals like himself, variations of the “philosopher kings”. He very much thought some people, maybe most, were incapable of making good decisions. Like children they needed a parental government and society to steer them in the right direction. Sound familiar? Except that today’s progressive is quickly moving past the idea of enlightening the masses to merely shepherding them in exchange for votes.
Morlock John, would you REALLY want to raise and eat liberals? I wouldn’t! All that work and smell and mess for all those years just for a stringy mouthful of flavorless, nutritionless “empty calories.”
Definitely not brain food.
I may start referring to leftists as Soylent Green.
I’m glad you mentioned Sandra Fluke in the same sentence with “being stupid”.
Her little demonstration and speechifying on behalf of paid contraception were among the most mind bogglingly stupid public exercises in the history of life on Earth.
(A video I saw of Mr. Sayet not too long after 911 really hit home with its truth and insight.)
Both come to know about how the “peace keepers” turned their backs so the Rwandans could be massacred.
Or raped girls in Africa. Or took sides in southern Lebanon and enabled Hezbollah.
The Cult (and its rules and requirements for membership) are everything within the Liberal Mind. Facts and information that run counter to the fixed body of belief (the accepted and acceptable “narratives”) are not allowed in.
How Liberals Argue
Dr. Lyle Rossiter writes about the modern liberal mind in the context of a mental disease.
Just what is the purpose of this article? To reinforce the insane notion that all liberals are dumb or childish in some way? Right back at you, you pompous ass.
Lol. You totally proved his point.
You beat me to it, Heather.
maybe you can explain it better than the author – please enlighten me (or dis-enlighten)
No, actually, he did a pretty good job of explaining it. I’m sorry you didn’t learn that kindergarten lesson about sitting down, shutting up, and LISTENING.
You are a lefty and thus definitionally an idiot. Consequently, you are incapable of enlightenment.
Then again, you could try reading it before summarizing it to fit your narrative. In case you haven’t noticed though your side is exceedingly good at name calling, invective and mischaracterization. You’ve just won an election based on your ability to portray all conservatives as either evil plutocrats or those too stupid to realize that they are voting to enrich evil plutocrats.
I think I’m starting to understand – The conservatives (all of them of course) are SORE LOSERS. And these kindergarten lessons that liberals (all of them) learned were never actually learned by the conservatives (none of them). Thank you for wrapping it up with a nice bow. As a liberal I (and every other liberal) learned NOT to be a sore loser. Forgive my ignorance.
It’s hard to forgive ignorance.
Even pretend ignorance such as you sarcastically claim.
You can’t understand information that runs contrary to the fixed body of belief with which your brain was infused during its so called education, so your only alternatives are mockery and attempts to put down perceived adversaries, people you label “conservatives”.
So let’s see… leftist bursts in with childish name-calling, then pats himself on the back because he “won”. Thank you, Lonnie, for proving the author’s point.
did not…… (use sassy voice)
Sore losers? It’s only been 5 weeks since the election. Democrats are still bitching about the “stolen” election of 2000. Try a little introspection before you accuse others of what you do so well yourself.
know you are, but what am I?
You’re killing me.
No sense trying to inform you of anything. Your cup is full. Whether you learned it in kindergarten or not, you smugly suppose that you know everything you need to know. Your mind is closed. Remind me. Why do you call yourself a liberal? You really have proven the author correct but blithely, and typically, you are unable to see the joke. Isn’t there a place you can go where your poop doesn’t smell, everyone echoes your assumptions and conservatives get the welcome you’re receiving?
Why would anyone want to wallow in their own echo chamber? To me that would be intelectual laziness. I know what I think and what motivates me – my time here is for learning what conservatives think and what motivates them.
Since you did not read the article Let me recap in simple terms. Some people learn things beyond the indiscriminate stage (kindergarden) usually right thinkers. And some do not but continue to be non-discriminate thru out live. usually liberals
Don’t be a sore loser. Ah yes, I learned that in kindergarten as well. Later I learned that it only applied to games. In other endeavors, it is motivation for improvement. Lonnie, what other lessons about losing did you learn?
No, it’s more likely written to reinforce the idea,that many conservatives share,that liberalism is a mental disease,and we’ve seen lots of evidence of THAT lately. OWS people publicly pooing and peeing. Union thugs threatening and physically attacking people who happen to disagree with them. The EPA destroying entire industries and putting tens of thousands of people out of work to “save the environment” (I suppose that people starving to death would be seen as a positive,many environmentalists think there are too many people).Environmentalists wanting to SHOOT barred owls (or have them shot) because they threaten the SPOTTED owl.Naked homosexuals going into the office of a politician they disagree with to confront him. Their insistence on “preserving the environment”, or a piece of it,as if it were carrots from the garden,when the environment is continually transforming ITSELF, even when abandoned by people as a “protected wilderness area”, it doesn’t even preserve ITSELF, certainly PEOPLE cannot “preserve it in its current state forever”.The nutsy stuff that comes out of the mouths of Alan Colmes, Nancy Pelosi,VP Biden and Chris Matthews.The slobbering press, first being Obama’s publicists during his first presidential campaign, then eagerly burying Fast and Furious and Benghazi,where innocent people DIED, and the TRUTH about the economy and unemployment, during his second one,while many of the very same “watchdog press” were howling for Nixon’s head over the Watergate BURGLARY,which killed NOBODY. Sounds like a bunch of people needing professional counseling to ME.
Kind of ironic coming from someone playing with liberal sock puppets.
High school and college are kindergartens. Expensive ones and ones we’re learning we can no longer afford, but still being funded as we know. Student debt has risen under the Obama mandate of heaven. I meet a number of young men and women and soon realize that a conversation is nigh impossible. That doesn’t make me pity them any less.
I find conversation with O-voting family members wildly depressing. I fear for the continuation of the species.
I’ve been considering the concept that Democrat liberalism is institutionalized arrested development. However, I was stopping the clock at age 12 or 14. My theory had more to do with responsibility and looking outward instead of being the center of the universe.
Some of the hallmarks of this arrested development are:
Not providing for yourself and your family. Someone needs to pay for the “unfun” stuff, like food and rent. Trying to get away with things, like not working at work, instead of setting a higher personal expectation. Expecting to be treated differently than others for the same behavior. Envious of other’s achievements and protective of your own. I see these (as well as other) attitudes in my teen age children and the grown dependents of the Democrat nanny state equally.
To considering that the developmental arrest goes back to kindergarten, is something that hadn’t crossed my mind yet.
Back in my days of dealing with public employee unions our standard was six years old as in, “Would you believe this crap if it was coming from a six year old.” It was a pretty functional standard. Almost every complaint was a subjectivist fallacy, almost every statement an appeal to emotion, and “I feel strongly” was a compelling argument. Lefties are children, some are articulate children, but children nonetheless.
Lonnie’s Brain
Liberalism allows liberals to sound intelligent (among other liberals, and similarly uninformed people) without actually having to be intelligent. Liberalism has con men and sheep. The con men get the scam going. For example, a democrat apparatchik dreams up “the republican war on women” based on nothing other than a cold calculation to win an election. The sheep take to the streets to express their dismay at the misogynist Republicans. No logical thought on the part of the sheep is required, and the original premise was a lie anyway. Where are all the liberal women, sighing in relief that mitt Romney didn’t get the chance to destroy their healthcare by not forcing the taxpayer to pay for condoms and abortions, while forcing them to earn less than men, and reducing them to second class citizens? Well the election is over. The Marxist Muslim got another term. The war on women can recede into the background until the dems need it again. So if there REALLY was a war on women why aren’t women celebrating having dodged the bullet? The whole thing was of course a sham to get votes, nothing more.
Liberalism allows stupid people to sound intelligent to one another. But there is no “there” there. Vapid self-serving nonsense.
What I’m going to say here is absolutely true. In kindergarten, it was 1954. I got sick with Rheumatic fever and was taken out of school for about 2 weeks. When I returned someone had gone into my little locker, replaced all my crayons with stubs and left it a total mess. This was not the worst of it. The teacher, seeing the mess, the worn out stubs of crayons, announced to the whole class ‘See what Joe has done to his work locker and the crayons the school gave him. He is a bad boy who has to learn how to take care of what is given to him’.. of course I mildly protested that these were not my crayons, that I was out of school for 2 weeks (the rotten bitch knew this of course) and obviously someone else had trashed my locker. Of course the teacher continued with her lies. And so I knew then and ever since that people are rotten and will lie cheat and steal to get a leg up on you. And now for 58 years I have been right. People are not simply misguided, PEOPLE ARE ROTTEN.
Normal? Well, let me give you the Boner retort. ‘Nice rant, Joe, but wadda yuh goan do about it?’
Published on Aug 29, 2012 You think progressive regulation was the result of farsighted intellectuals striving to protect the public interest? Think again.
Murray Rothbard – Origins Of Progressive Regulation
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=62rI8OYFzGg
And the non-right thinkers lived happily ever after and they walked happily onto the plantation knowing each were getting their fair share of servitude….no more or less than everyone else.: a perfect world. sarc/off
From childish minds we get kindergarten ideas…some of those ideas remain through puberty and maturity and long after that. Here’s proof:
“We have to pass the bill so you can find out what is in it”. ~ Nancy Pelosi
Thats like saying, “You have to eat the poison to find out if it will kill you.”
Norm,that ought to be on a T shirt! THANKS! I needed a laugh!
For a decent description of how the takeover of education was engineered, read The Underground History of Education by John Taylor Gatto and his associated essays. Our “Failing” education system has been doing exactly what it was meant to do. Homeschool ya babies, folks.
How true Academia on both sides of the Atlantic have been churning out left wing brainwashed students for decades now. Is it any wonder the American electorate is now so stupid and half educated as it is, they are just catching up with what happened in Europe 20 years ago.
The scourge of Islamophile, antisemitic, big government, nanny state, wealth destroying Socialism will never be eradicated until Academia is purged of this ‘fifth column’ of Nation destroyers in our Schools and Colleges.
Some facts: Jobs for high-paying technical jobs are either going to numerate immigrants educated in American schools, or are going unfilled, or are moving overseas where high school students routinely take a year or two of calculus. So of course our unions are rioting because the government has failed to provide them with an education that would give entree to high-paying jobs. That IS what they were rioting over, isn’t it??? I would be rioting too if my education barely introduced me to algebra, no? how could I feed my family?
The 47% ‘Benefit Junkies’ who pay NOTHING AT ALL and the top 2% pay 40% of all the Income Tax only a Left Wing moonbat MORON could possibly believe that it is the”Rich’ who are not paying their ‘Fair share’.
Hmmm, I recall writing a trenchant post, which, given my 37 years of teaching English, tried to cut to the chase on some these matters, but it seems to have gotten lost. Pity.
D-White. The Ping Pong Tongue finally bounced one down the anterior orifice.
Look closely at the offerings from the posterior orifice in a few hours and maybe you’ll find the results of your hard work along with some recycled corn.
Pity –
37 years of schoolin’ and they put you on the day shift…
Yes it is a pity, because the world is missing my pointing out the irony of how the fact that touchy-feely English teachers will not be teaching literature, but rather shop manuals is evoking red state rage. That’s the extent of the corn I have for you, anterior-wise, but at least it contains one of the kernals. Others had to do with rigor and actually getting students to read what is assigned, but you have heard them before, and, no doubt, pondered them in your heart.
Correction…correction! Dwight E.
“His house is in the village though
He will not see me stopping here
To watch his woods fill up with snow.”
Betcha didn’t know that that poem is actually about Santa Claus.
You’re right, D.E. It never entered my mind. I thought it was about this poet, pretending to be a farmer, kind of talking to himself. I didn’t have good English teachers like you am.
Doe re mi mi mi:
“Once I laughed when I heard you saying
That I’d be playing Solitaire
Uneasy in my easy chair
It never entered my mind
And once you told me I was mistaken
That I’d awaken with the sun
And order orange juice for one
It never entered my mind
You had what I lack myself
Now I even have to scratch my back myself
Once you warned me that if you scorned me
I’d say a lonely prayer again
And wish that you were there again
To get into my hair again
It never entered my mind
Once you warned me that if you scorned me
I’d say a lonely prayer again
And wish that you were there again
To get into my hair again
It never entered my mind”
Well, I don’t like it when I misspell a word, either. Kernel, kernel, kernel, kernel, kernel. Maybe that will help.
As students read nonfiction (or fiction), they should be exposed to differing points of view, just as the literature should be “diverse” in the authentic sense. Not all works are equal in either quality of importance. The inaugural address of Jefferson Davis, is not interchangeable with Lincoln’s. MLK’s Letter from a Birmingham Jail is often taught. Do you have any problems with that? Orwell’s Essays, including “Politics and the English Language” were about the most “conservative” things which I taught.
Dwight, are you responding to me or to tans? The word I am more familiar with is one of those badly spelled English (from French I guess) words, Colonel, pronounced by its more frequent users as kernel.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_Army_officer_rank_insignia
I was responding to tans, who did not have a “reply” under his post when I responded, but by the time my post appeared, it did. Have you ever read Orwell’s “Politics and the English Language”? It is a classic.
Thanks for the recommendation, Dwight. I’ll get it. So far I’ve only read excerpts.
Don’t like it when an individual who purports to have taught English for 37 years can’t spell “kernel”.
I think I’ve had grammar/spelling issues with you before, D-White.
As for that whole renovated curriculum thing that I read about quickly (as quickly as possible), those lucky public school students are not only going to be exposed to less great literature BUT are going to have to read some of Barack’s very own, personal executive orders.
Useful Idiots in the shaping.