Since I received my doctorate from the Ohio State University, I usually feel a tiny bit of unjustified pride when I hear that OSU is #1 in some area. However, I recently found out that OSU is #1 in that the school is the most unequal public university in America. The basis for this claim is that between 2010 and 2012 Gordon Gee, the president of OSU, was paid almost $6 million. At the same time, OSU raised tuition and fees to a degree that resulted in student debt increasing 23% more than the national average (which is itself rather bad).
Like many schools, OSU also pursued what I call the A&A Strategy: the majority of those hired by the school were Adjuncts and Administrators. To be specific, OSU hired 498 adjunct instructors and 670 administrators. 45 full-time, permanent faculty were hired.
While adjunct salaries vary, the typical adjunct makes $20,000-25,000 while the average professor makes about $84,000. University presidents make much, much more (the average is $478,896) and the number of presidents making $1 million or more a year is increasing. Such a president would make at least as much as 40 or more adjuncts (teaching 8 or more classes an academic year).
Given that the cost of higher education has increased dramatically, thus resulting in a corresponding increase in student debt, it is well worth considering the cause of this increase and what could be done to reduced costs without reducing the quality of education.
One seemingly obvious approach is to consider whether or not presidents are worth the money spent on them. For the million dollar pay to be fair, the president of a university would need to contribute the equivalent of these 40+ adjuncts in terms of value created. It could, of course, be argued that the public university presidents do just that—they bring in money from other rich people, provide prestige and engage in the politics needed to keep money flowing from the state. If so, a million dollar president is worth 40+ adjuncts. If not, it would seem that either the adjuncts should be paid more or the president paid less (or both) in order to ensure that money is not being wasted—and thus needlessly driving up the cost of education.
At this point, a rather obvious reply is that for big public universities, even a million dollar president is but a tiny part of the overall budget. As such, cutting the presidential salary would not result in a significant saving for the school or the students (assuming savings would be passed on to students). However, something is obviously driving up the cost of education—and it is rather clearly not faculty salary, since the majority of faculty at most public universities is composed of low paid adjuncts.
One major contribution to the increasing costs has been the increase in the size and cost of the administrative aspect of universities. A recent study found that the public universities that have the highest administrative pay spend half as much on scholarships as they do on administration. This creates a scenario in which students go into debt being taught by adjuncts while supporting a large and often well paid administration. This is not surprising given the example of OSU (hiring 543 instructors and 670 administrators).
It is, of course, easy enough to demonize administrators as useless parasites growing fat on the students, adjuncts and taxpayers. However, a university (like any organization) requires administration. Applications need to be processed, equipment needs to be purchased, programs need to be directed, forms from the state need to be completed, and the payroll has to be handled and so on. As such, there is a clear and legitimate need for administrators. However, this does not entail that all the administrators are needed or that all the high salaries are warranted. As such, one potential way to lower the cost of education is to reduce administrative positions and lower salaries. That is, to take a standard approach used in the business model so often beloved by certain administrators.
Since a public university is not a for-profit institution, the reason for the reduction should be to get the costs in line with the legitimate needs, rather than to make a profit. As such, the reductions could be more just (or merciful) than in the for-profit sector.
In terms of reducing personal, the focus should be on determining which positions are actually needed in terms of what they do in terms of advancing the core mission of the university (which should be education). In terms of reducing salary, the focus should be on determining the value generated by the person and the salary should match that. Since administrators seem exceptionally skilled at judging what faculty (especially adjuncts) should be paid, presumably there is a comparable skill for judging what administrators should be paid.
Interestingly enough, a great deal of the administrative work that directly relates to students and education is already handled by faculty. For example, on top of my paid duties as a professor, I have a stack of unpaid administrative duties that are apparently essential for me to do, yet not important enough to properly count as part of my workload. In this I am not unusual. Not surprisingly, many faculty wonder what some administrators actually do, given that so many administrative tasks are handled by faculty and staff. Presumably the extra administrative work done by faculty (usually effectively for free) is already helping schools save money, although perhaps more could be offloaded to faculty for additional savings.
One rather obvious problem is that the people who make the decisions about the administration positions and salaries are typically administrators. While some people are noble and honest enough to report on the true value of their position, self-interest clearly makes an objective assessment problematic. As such, it seems unlikely that the administration would want to act to reduce the administration merely to reduce the cost of education. This is, of course, not impossible—and some administrators would not doubt be quite willing to fire or cut the salaries of other administrators.
Since many state governments have been willing to engage in close management of state universities, one option is for these governments to impose a thorough examination of administrative costs and implement solutions to the high cost of education. Unfortunately, there are sometimes strong political ties between top administrators and the state government and there is the general worry that any cuts will be more political or ill-informed than rationally based.
Despite these challenges, it is clear that the administrative costs need to be addressed head on and that action must be taken—the alternative is ever increasing costs in return for less actual education.
It has also been suggested that the interest rates of student loans be lowered and that more grants be awarded to students. These are both good ideas—those who graduate from college generally have significantly better incomes and end up paying back what they received many times over in taxes and other contributions. However, providing students with more money from the taxpayers does not directly address the cost of education—it shifts it.
Some states, such as my adopted state of Florida, have endeavored to keep costs lower by refusing to increase tuition. While this seems reasonable, one obvious problem is that keeping tuition low without addressing the causes of increased costs does not actually solve the problem—what usually ends up happening is that the university has to cut expenses in response and these cuts tend to be in areas that actually serve the core mission of the university. For example, the university president’s high salary, guaranteed bonuses and perks are not cut—instead faculty are not hired and class sizes are increased. While the tuition does not increase, it does so at the cost of the quality of education. Unless, of course, the guaranteed bonuses of the president are key to education quality.
As such, the primary focus should be on lowering costs in a way that does not sacrifice the quality of education rather than simply lowering costs.
When you consider this is what the end product of the academic world, I suspect professors and such are way over paid:
http://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2014/05/serious-crazy-towson-u-wins-national-debate-contest-by-repeating-n-word-and-babbling-nonsense-video/
Academics fear the open market because they might get paid what they are actually worth. Oughtta crosspost this on Democrats at Work.
“Education” Is NOT What ZOG Really Wants, After All
Yes WTP: ZOG wants OBEDIENCE and submissive, willing subjects–NOT citizens w. rights who are served by the gov. So u get this deliberate dumbing-down, as we see, chimping, chattering negroids upheld as ideals and leaders. US Sup. ct. just ruled (http://www.thenewspaper.com/news/43/4392.asp) a car can be searched on basis of “anonymous tip”–a horrific police-state, the people treated evermore like Palestinians.
At an institution where I often work, a community college, the school library used to be open till 10 p.m., a few yrs ago, then it went to 9, now it closes at 8 pm. I notice the school did other things, like clamping down on the number of classes which could be dropped by students.
And Prof. Mikey Mike is blissfully oblivious to everything–typical Platonist, living within his wonderworld of ethics-as-end-in-itself and baseless abstractions. Such is CYCLIC “Decline of the West,” by Oswald Spengler.
Mike Musing In His Typically Un-Informed Academic Wonderworld
Once again, education, like just about everything else, should be PRIVATE and privately-funded–this is the only way we get quality, meaningful education. Thus there will be some institutions, most (deliberately) exclusive, which will require high costs and tuition, etc., but some, even many, to be sure, will be oriented to more average people–which was the way it used to be, once upon a time in the free-market (which “freedom” is always the ideal, seldom the fact, unfortunately).
But u Mike, want thought-control and government-programming/training of the students, this consistent w. ur anti-rationalist “ethical” dictatorship. Hence u’re gonna get what u lobby and vote for–why be surprised?–and u’re not over-joyed w. what u get?
And decisions of ur gov.-directed programming/training will always and necessarily take a “political” character which will most often be secretive, hidden, and incomprehensible to most folks, even u urself, a cog-in-the-machine as u obviously consider urself.
Further, the “teachers” and other hirelings of gov. edjumacation will evermore reflect the irrationalist, “political”-type of mentality–as we see in ur case w. all ur contempt for reason, freedom, and free market, racial and cultural loyalty of the people, not to mention ur dedication and willingness to lie to the people on pretext of Plato’s and Strauss’s “noble” lie–like “climate-change,” as we see. After all, and gee whiz, but u can’t prove such “climate-change” isn’t happening, can u? Ho ho ho ho
Mike: brace urself, buddy–as ur whole, entire system, not only “educational,” is falling evermore rapidly round and about ur very ears. US Dollar is collapsing, and the people will all become evermore impoverished, as is already taking place, if u could ever look up and about urself to see the truth and facts.
It’s rather funny to see and read u babbling and prattling as u do in ur smug and un-informed manner, so utterly dis-connected fm reality as u are. Sad thing is ZOG is trying to mask the economic collapse in guise of war which they’re desperately trying to gin-up as in Ukraine (and other places) presently.
In this one-minute vid, Jim Rogers explains US Dollar collapse is actually being accelerated by actions of US acting the bully putting sanctions on such as Russia–utterly stupid, IF US was really trying to preserve Dollar as reserve currency. Of course, ZOG masterminds want to destroy the Dollar, and are doing so steadily, these latest moves against Ukraine and Russia mere parts of the overall strategy: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6g0ARH6EpgI
This way, when Dollar collapses definitively, ZOG blames Russia–neat eh? Ho ho ho ho ho
What you get for your college education:
“I hate giving classes,” Zizek said, citing office hours and grading papers as his two biggest peeves.
“I did teach a class here [at the University of Cincinnati] and all of the grading was pure bluff,” he continues. “I even told students at the New School for example… if you don’t give me any of your shitty papers, you get an A. If you give me a paper I may read it and not like it and you can get a lower grade.” He received no papers that semester.
http://www.critical-theory.com/professor-of-the-year-if-you-dont-give-me-any-of-your-shitty-papers-you-get-an-a/
Maybe it’s just an Ohio thing. I doubt that.
I love giving classes. Office hours provide a chance to interact with students. Grading papers is not fun, but I have an obligation to read every word and provide as fair and objective assessment (with feedback) as I can.
Every class I teach, the grading is no bluff. I tell my students that if they turn in a crappy paper, it will get a crappy grade. If they turn in a good paper, it will get a good grade. Plagiarized papers result in…unfortunate consequences. If you give me a paper, I might dislike it-but if it is well written and well argued, it will get an appropriate grade. I might agree with your view, but if your paper is awful, it will get an appropriate grade.
I show up to every class, read every word of every paper, and give all that I’ve got. I might not have a lot on a bad day, perhaps due to having spent hours in committee meetings and grinding admin work-but my students get it all.
So, why think that he defines what students get for their college education rather than professors like me? While I do not know all professors, those I do know are far more like me than they are like that guy. If what he said is actually true, he should be fired for cause.
Because such a thing would not exist out in the real world. Such could only exist in a protected environment like academia. The closest one gets to such contempt for the customer would be someone like the Soup Nazi or whatever the real guy was. Though the end product, the soup, was itself AFAIK very good. And in regard to TSN, people bought his product for themselves with the money they earned themselves. In such absurd environments as public academia, the money comes mostly from the tax payer.
Many college professors and classes are not worth the money. See other classes I picked below at random with the minimal of searching. I know from my own experience and from that of coworkers, relatives, friends, that much of what is taught in colleges is a waste. Either not valuable itself or of negative value in that the direction given is/was exactly opposite of what the world requires. We spend way too much on useless classes and have allowed a very anti-thinking, anti-diverse university environment to take over our learning culture. See the Duke 66 for example. That’s not a backwater school and yet to hear those faculty members speak, it gives education a bad name. See what goes on in the non-STEM environments at places like Berkley, Dartmouth, etc. Even many private institutions have gone sour, but at least they’ve done as much with private funds. Though many of the loans and “research” supporting those private institutions comes from taxpayers.
Is the sample collected by you, your friends, etc. large enough and representative enough to support your claim regarding the worth of professors and classes across the entire United States? That is, is your research rigorous or a collection of anecdotal evidence?
Roughly, what percentage is “many” as you use the term? 25%, half, 75%?
It is, I will certainly agree, easy to find awful professors and awful classes. The same is true of any profession-as Google will show. But, is the percentage of awful professors and classes unusually high relative to other comparable professions (that is, professional fields that require advanced degrees)? That is, are universities especially bad or just what we would expect given the usual factors associated with humans and professions (laziness, corruption, incompetence, cronyism, etc.)?
This is not to say that awful professionals are okay-just that if universities are on par with other institutions, then they should not merit special condemnation.
Is the sample of “I love giving classes. Office hours provide a chance to interact with students. ” large enough to support your claim? I’d say my sample size is considerably larger and more diverse, crossing many universities and several STEM disciplines. It’s constantly the mote and the beam here. By your own admission “It is, I will certainly agree, easy to find awful professors and awful classes.”
You ask for a percentage, outside of actual math, physics, chemistry, biology, i.e. things that have solid answers, and excluding English composition-style classes, much of the rest was a waste of time. I would put 80% of the rest in the “useless” or “worse than useless” category. Much of game theory, management, economics, literature and music would belong there. That is not to dismiss things such as literature and music as themselves useless nor worthy of study, but they don’t deserve to be funded by the state. They are personal fulfillment matters. You yourself made an observation in a post stating something to the effect that art was completely subjective. I would disagree with the degree, but when you look at the crap that passes for art anymore, and much of it churned out by university “graduates” in art, disagreement becomes quite awkward.
” is the percentage of awful professors and classes unusually high relative to other comparable professions (that is, professional fields that require advanced degrees)? ” I would say yes it is. If it doesn’t produce in the real world, it will wither away and die. Not that such won’t eventually happen to awful professors and classes, but thanks to being subsidized by those from whom the funds were taken involuntarily, the withering death is spread out much longer and much more money is wasted. I believe you’re seeing this yourself now, you just don’t recognize or acknowledge it is happening.
Then there’s stuff like this at OSU:
Course Objectives: Develop an appreciation of sport as a spectacle, social event, recreational pursuit, business, and entertainment. Develop the ability to identify issues that affect the sport and spectator behavior.
http://mansfield.osu.edu/HTML/courses/view.cfm?id=486
I’m sure others which could be eliminated. Perhaps we could use an Academics at “Work” thread.
It seems THE Ohio State University is full of useless crap…
Course Objectives: While Bram Stoker’s Dracula (1897) is not the first vampire story in English — John Polidori’s “The Vampyre” (1819) and Sheridan Le Fanu’s Carmilla (1872) predate it — it has exerted an unparalleled influence on vampire films and television shows. This course explores that influence as well as various theoretical explanations for the continuing appeal of vampire stories in popular culture.
http://mansfield.osu.edu/HTML/courses/view.cfm?id=161&term=s
“Dracula” Is More Than Mere Horror-Show Fun, Never Doubt
WTP: I read Stoker’s “Dracula” (1897)–this is worthwhile literature as it much characterizes the sort of civilization which had become British and European of late 19th cent. Stoker’s book describes the culture as moving AWAY fm the traditional Christian and locally -oriented to much the sort of predatory -type business climate we see today in way of criminal corporations.
One of the pt.s Stoker makes is regarding the take-over of the culture by alien influences, presumably like the Jew which Stoker himself didn’t outrightly name, but was quite implicit. Note also this sort of complaining about Jews was also much a motif in Germany and France too, among others, including even Russia.
Jew banking (as of the great Rothschild network, which still dominates) was clamping down inexorably. In Germany Jews dominated newspapers and the arts, and evermore nearly all the large businesses, also the doctor and lawyer professions–as was pt’d out by many including the great musical composer, Wagner.
The “modern” era, following the French Revolution, w. the emancipation of Jews, was truly a Jew takeover of Western civilization, that consolidation still on-going, as we see.
Stoker’s “Dracula” was a genuine artistic achievement, esp. for this sort of over-all cultural characterization he was able to express–it was horrible, but also depressing, and lamentable as it included for another example, the foreign immigrations to the large European cities–it didn’t only happen in America. The vampire theme was nearly a side issue for Stoker, but it unified the whole, large portrayal.
Stoker’s “Dracula” was thus significant in similar manner as Mary Shelly’s previous “Frankenstein” which pt’d to the scientific, medical, and technologic progress which had also emerged most dramatically in the public mind.
Otherwise, however, one must AGREE w. WTP’s observations for all the pure, useless, and irrelevant crap that’s in the college curriculum, including “black,” “women’s,” and other sort of “studies,” meant to encourage enmity and resentment among the people, this when so many can hardly read and write. BUT one must also note this DUMBING-DOWN is deliberate purpose of ZOG, without any doubt.
Observe, for another example, Mike’s utterly wrong-headed appraisal of arg.-fm-authority fallacy, used by Mike for his rationalization of “climate-change” lies–which fallacy Mike much justifies, as he says it’s okay if it follows fm genuine “experts.” What Mike utterly FAILS to note is that a proposition is NOT NOT NOT NOT true merely because someone says so (it DOESN’T matter how “qualified” they are)–it’s TRUE ONLY if it’s the actual reality, PERIOD.
And finally, as I noted, all this stupid thought-control and idiot edjumacation is coming crashing-down w. collapse of the currency, all in inexorable, CYCLIC “Decline of the West,” by Oswald Spengler.
Note Circumstances To Arg.-FM-Authority, Public Education, Spenglerian “Decline”
Observe, regarding arg.-fm-authority fallacy–it’s a fallacy to CONCLUDE to the truth of something based upon what someone says–it doesn’t matter whether that someone is the majority of the people or a particular expert or group of them. The fallacy regards the TRUTH of the/a proposition which can NEVER NEVER NEVER be merely matter of what someone or anyone says.
Note then TRUTH is much a matter of OBJECTIVE reality–which a Platonist (hence really a mystic) like Mike is very reluctant to admit.
Further, observe that an observation by someone could very well be INDUCTIVE evidence, though not necessarily conclusive.
Hence we see arg.-fm-authority fallaciousness can quite well a tricky thing indeed. For another pt. to be made about “climate-change” fraud and lies being so heavily pushed by ZOG is that it’s actually quite EASY to intimidate, extort, and compel gov.-funded academics and other professionals to take part in this great fraud being pushed on the people simply by virtue of the obvious fact their salaries DEPEND upon gov. favor–it’s all political–this is the OBVIOUS and great danger of the socialistic society, so easily ignored by Prof. Mike.
And it’s a bitter thing for us of the public to observe Prof. Mike going along w. this horrific fraud (“climate-change”), justified for Mike, no doubt, upon the “noble lie” principle, as earlier noted. For if Mike genuinely believes in “climate-change” lies, then he’s stupid (a)–which is hard for me to accept. (b) BUT If Mike KNOWS it’s all lies, yet goes along regardless, then the corruption is even worse and more egregious, and Mike is a gross coward as well as TRAITOR to the people whom he’s supposed to serve–yet understandably so since it’s his livelihood at stake. Such is the horror of gov.-funded and “public education.”
Finally, it’s worthwhile pt-ing out how inevitable public education really is, given the natural and inevitable corruptibility of humanity. For there’s no end of corruption once a society peaks and achieves “success,” “victory,” and “prosperity.” Not merely disaster, but absolute catastrophe in inevitable in the inexorable, CYCLIC Spenglerian “Decline of the West,” as we see.
I read it as well. In high school. It’s a good book. There are lots of good books. By all means it and variations are open for study. But please explain where the return on investment comes from for the taxpayer for having an entire class, expanded across a semester for three credit hours.dedicated to a tiny slice of fantasy literature? This is the sort of thing that belongs in private institutional study. Tens of thousands of dollars spent on this is a waste of both the tax payer’s money and the students’ time, not to mention the loans said students will be paying off, assuming they are able, over the years to pay for this treacle.
Yes indeed: the principle is absolutely irrefutable–education should be privately funded, un-questionably. And I just wanted to defend the literary value of Stoker’s work. It actually makes NO diff. for value of any literature or study or whatever–it should be privately funded.
I have no issue, and in fact am in favor of public education in subjects through which people can be lifted out of poverty, not that poverty itself is a qualifier. These would be limited to STEM and similar productive subjects. Subjects like (ahem) Agricultural and Mechanical and such institutions were created to teach. Subjects which simply allow students to accumulate debt, backed by taxpayers, however “fulfilling” should not be forced down the students’ or the taxpayers’ throats.
Human Sin, Corruption Inevitable
Well WTP, u’re just violating ur own principle, and note this sort of corruption inevitably, inexorably spreads. If first u allow the premise for “STEM” (whatever that is) and “productive,” u’re setting it up for everything else which will follow sure as water is wet.
But then again, as I note, corruption is inevitable in the CYCLIC course and process of things. First people begin to insist upon fiat money and central banking and then everything else follows.
It’s funny thing for hist. of USA: before Civil War, the workingmen much backed Andrew Jackson and the Democrats for insisting upon “hard” money–nothing but gold/silver could/should be money. The workers knew and understood the criminal nature of the bankers who wanted to issue their un-backed “notes”–it was the great controversy of the ante-bellum period, Henry Clay and Dan Webster on the one hand, vs. the hero, Andrew Jackson on the other.
Interestingly, they all, Jackson, Webster, and Clay agreed–against John Calhoun of S. Carolina–upon the primacy of UNION over state secession and/or “nullification.” The mass-murderer, Lincoln, considered Henry Clay to be his great hero and mentor.
But then after the war, the workingmen and then even farmers (the “grange” movement) were at forefront of demanding “easy” money–all the way to William Jennings Bryan and then the US Federal Reserve Bank in 1913.
Academics at work.
San Francisco State University (SFSU) spent more than $7,000 to send two of its professors to the Middle East for a series of meetings with two convicted terrorists, according to funding documents obtained from a California Public Records Act.
SFSU professors Rabab Abdulhadi and Joanne Barker were awarded the money by the university for a trip to Jordan and the West Bank where they met with two notorious terrorists tied to Hamas and the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine (PFLP), both of which are designated as terrorist groups by the U.S. State Department.
http://freebeacon.com/national-security/calif-taxpayers-funded-professors-meeting-with-terrorists/
Lefty professors are irritating, WTP, but at the end of the day nobody cares what they think. I think the roots of progressivism lie in the death throes of Protestant Christianity.
Picture your typical kid. His parents are Republicans. He goes to university for a few years and is exposed to some radical ideas. By the time he is 30 he is voting Republican. At least he had some ensure to a different way of thinking.
Exposure
Oh, I disagree with that. It’s the culture that does it. Immersion in a culture where leftism is the norm, where extreme leftism goes unnoticed, and where even the softest of conservative ideas and speakers are shouted down and you get the society we have today. I’ve had people far more conservative than myself repeat leftist dogma that makes no rational sense but they learned it in school so they believe it until challenged to think. Specifically I’m thinking of “war is good for the economy”, but there’s much other similar nonsense, much of it in economics. The sixties really drove the culture to the edge with anti-American rhetoric, rife with conspiracy theories and the kind of lies on what we now call urban legends were built. Hillary came from a GOP family. By the time she was 30 she had stopped voting Republican. Protestant Christianity is your root for this? Really? I think you’re whistling past the graveyard here.
WTP’s “Principle”: Whatever Is Good For Jews
“[L]eftism is the norm”?–ho ho ho–so give us a definition (of “leftism”), eh?–ho ho ho–can’t/won’t do it, will u? Ho ho ho ho.
“[S]oftest of ‘conservative’ ideas and speakers”?–ho ho ho ho–what’s “conservative”? Let me guess: it includes supporting Israel, doesn’t it? Ho ho ho ho
Then u tell us: “I’ve had people far more conservative than myself repeat leftist dogma that makes no rational sense but they learned it in school so they believe it until challenged to think.” Ho ho ho ho (See above.)
And then u frown on “conspiracy theories” again–but tell us, WTP, is there any doubt JFK was killed by “conspiracy”?–only about 90% of Americans seem to think so. And did u know it’s now PROVEN MLK was killed by conspiracy?–see http://www.ratical.org/ratville/JFK/Unspeakable/MLKconExp.html.
Google “33 conspiracy theories that turned out to be true.” Ho ho ho ho
Then as I’ve already pt’d out, u renege upon ur own assertion regarding publically-funded “education.”
U’re “conservative” long as it is “good for Jews,” WTP; “leftism” is simply reduction to absurd, isn’t it?–as w. homosexuals, so that’s only reason u don’t go for it.
It’s not so crazy wtp. There is pretty much a straight line between the Prohibitionists of 100 years ago and today’s liberals.
TJB surely has something in way of insight–moralism, including Puritanism, has always been element of US culture, as in abolitionism preceding the US “Civil War,” then the Civil War itself, insane conquest of the South (“preserving the union”)–which then and now, indeed, Jews have taken full advantage of, USA so horrifically enslaved to ZOG/Israel, the leading pol. interest group being the Judeo-Christian (JC–see Whtt.org and TruthTellers.org for expo) hereticalists, these then leveraging, intimidating, and even dominating ALL the rest of the so-called “Christians,” the irony being that Christianity was originally specifically meant to being anti-Semitic, TRUTH (Christ) vs. Jew lies (Gosp. JOHN 14:6 and 8:44).
The Great Cultural-“Ethical” Charade Staged By “Learned Elders Of Zion”
And it’s interesting also about the “liberals,” led by Jews and esp. queers, who so absolutely HATE Christianity, the real, original, hence anti-Semitic thing–are they really “moralistic”?–for they’re un-questionably satanic, without any doubt. Yet there is indubitably that obsessive moralistic element present which is so often invoked–esp. in way of “social justice” cliché’.
So u have the Jew-led and -financed “leftists” and “liberals,” spear-headed by the queers, invoking this moralism on the one hand, opposed then by the Jew-led and -financed Judeo-Christians on the other, both of them vying for the attn. and leadership of the goyim.
And lots of folks observe this amazing charade of what’s evermore known and recognized as the “false left-right paradigm” pt’d out–ironically–by even such confirmed Jew-sympathizer as Alex Jones (InfoWars.com) and others like Ron Paul and Jesse Ventura who calls it “demo-crips” vs. “re-blood-licans,” ho o hoo.
Key to it all (the “false paradigm”) is the Jew financing, of course, fueled by that COUNTERFEIT scam, the US Federal Reserve Bank.
And this amazing, nearly total capture of gentile culture and consciousness is well analyzed by the famous “Protocols of Learned Elders of Zion”–see this neat vid by Dave Duke describing the process: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d-xjLa9xrOo.
And today’s conservatives. http://news.harvard.edu/gazette/story/2007/02/prohibition-politics-created-groundwork-for-modern-liberalism/
Jew Cannot Help Being Jew
Gosh WTP: why/how is it people might think u’re Jew?–ho ho ho hoho
Problem is Israel and Jews are in control of USA, this complex now known as ZOG.
And Hamas and PFLP are PATRIOT org.s who are fighting ZOG no less than many if not most of the Tea-Party, though ZOG, specifically Israel, in guise of “neo-cons,” is trying to infiltrate and take control of Tea-Party, Rand Paul being sad, tragic example.
So sending these “academics” is actually quite legitimate inquiry for educational purposes, I’d say–though I’d (unlike u) would stick w. the basic principle there should be NO public funds going for “education.”
Meanwhile, police are throwing flash bangs into the cribs of toddlers:
(WAOK) Atlanta – A 19-month-old toddler was critically injured after a police flash bang was tossed into his bed during a police raid at a Habersham County home on Wednesday.
“It’s my baby. He’s my only baby. He didn’t deserve any of this,” said Alecia Phonesavanh, the mother of the child.
“It landed in his playpen and exploded right in his face,” said Phonesavanh.
The child is now being treated at Grady hospital and has a 50 percent chance of survival.
“He’s in the burn unit. We got to see him and his whole face is ripped open. He has a big cut on his chest,” said Phonesavanh. “He’s only 19 months old, he didn’t do anything.”
The sheriff’s department said they had no idea there were children in the house.
http://atlanta.cbslocal.com/2014/05/30/toddler-critically-injured-during-police-raid/
“It’s my baby. He’s my only baby. He didn’t deserve any of this,” said Alecia Phonesavanh, the mother of the child.
Yeah, that’s right. But the mother put the child at risk. Far badder people were passing through that house or had designs on raiding that house than the police. She’s the one who put the child at risk. That said, flash bang/no knock raids for nonviolent crime is wrong for this very reason. But this is Atlanta. It’s their culture. If they want to do drugs and such, I suppose we should just let them devolve to their destiny. But don’t expect the rest of us to cry over it. If that baby was killed in a drive-by or by a home invader, no need for civilized society to concern itself. AMF.
OK, my bad. It’s not Atlanta proper but Habersham county NE of Gainesville. Still, same rules for redneck methheads apply.
Emphasis added:
In front of Aretha Franklin, Joseph Stiglitz, and President George H. W. Bush, all of whom also received honorary degrees, Bloomberg cited the fact that “96 percent of all campaign contributions from Ivy League faculty and employees went to Barack Obama” as a worrying statistic — “and I say that as someone who endorsed President Obama.” In a line not included in the published version, he added, “There was more disagreement among the old Soviet politburo than there is among Ivy League donors.”
Link for above
http://nymag.com/daily/intelligencer/2014/05/bloomberg-harvard-commencement-speech-censorship.html
They blinded me…with SCIENCE!
The National Science Foundation (NSF) gave nearly $5 million to the University of Wisconsin-Madison to create scenarios based on America’s actions on climate change, including a utopian future where everyone rides a bike and courts forcibly take property from the wealthy.
The government has awarded $4,911,961 for the project, which is slated to run until March 2016 and for which the school has created a website suggesting different possibilities of what Yahara, a Wisconsin watershed, will be like in 2070.
http://freebeacon.com/issues/feds-paid-4-9-million-to-create-hypothetical-utopian-climate-change-future/
Not clear what you are objecting to, WTP. Thinking about the future, or just that one scenario?
Here is a different scenario:
So you have no problem with the Feds spending 5 MILLION DOLLARS on a web site that uses global warming scenarios to promote an idealist “collectivist” future? Did you really read what was there? As for your vid, no problem AFAIC so long as the dreaming was done on their own dime. By all means, develop these technologies and see if they’re viable. But don’t expect the rest of us to involuntarily cough up the dollars to support you.
So, WTP, in your ideal world, who would be supported to study the ecological consequences of various technologies?
Question: in your ideal world, would there still be lead in gasoline? How would the studies have been funded that showed lead in gas was bad for people?
These aren’t studies, this is a propaganda tool based on the very questionable and significantly exaggerated global warming scam. You’re playing with a strawman. There’s no hard science here, it’s imagineering in fantasy land. I don’t oppose funding investigation and research for the limited public health issues that truly are of concern. I’m not sure you grasp how we got into this big government mess in the first place.
WTP, I agree the “collectivist” vision in the video was actually rather chilling. But you will admit there are a lot of people out there who find this vision compelling.
It is our job to show why this scenario is more Hellish than heavenly.
Like it hasn’t been shown time and time again in dozens of countries across the world? Isn’t it an educator’s job to point this out? Why do so many people find this vision compelling in the first place?
Tell me you don’t find propaganda such as this funded with your tax dollars disturbing?
Even though most Yaharans had become more willing to undertake serious conservation measures, the willingness was not universal, especially when certain sacrifices were required. To create the preserve, Grandpa had to convince several wealthy residents to give up either some of their property or their control of it.
especially in the context of
A small group of elderly people also “occasionally complain” that the community “constrains individual privacy, but with the widespread embrace of space sharing and walkability, such complaints are considered deviant.”
Isn’t this what people voted for when they pulled the “D” lever in 2012?
And if they pull the “R” lever in 2014/16 we can fund promotion of church attendance and such with public funds? Promoting family values?
ZOGlings, “Left” & “Right”: Some Are Nervous; Some Continue Blithely To Fiddle As Rome Burns
Righto: pull the “R” lever and u get Jews (neo-cons); pull the “D” lever and u get more Jews, Jews providing 70% of national Dem campaign funding.
It’s ZOG dictatorship, suckas–that’s what’s playing at theater near u. WTP and TJB are just corp. suckalongs for ZOG, pretending to complain about slight details, deliberately avoiding the basic principle(s).
But as US Dollar continues to collapse, people will get evermore sick and tired of ur lying and prop., never doubt. Thus ZOG busily continues to gin-up a nice little war, not to mention false-flag terrorism to be blamed on Muzlims (and “domestic terrorists,” according to Sen. Harry Reid, ho ho ho), ready to impose martial-law, propped by their “Judeo-Christian” (on the “right”) and homosexual allies (on the “left”).
Ck out Obongo, the satanic faggot, blowing a kiss to his little buddy, Jay Carney, former Press Sec., an 11 sec. vid: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bWRi4–wlxI.
So u see, ZOGlings, we know–evermore of us–and the people too–what’s happening, what u’re planning, never doubt. U corp. suck-alongs & neo-cons on the “right,” and Prof. Mikey-mike on the “left” (pushing “climate-change” lies)–u’re the establishment–about to be washed-away in the great flood triggered by currency-collapse, on-going, in intermediate stage of coming, looming hyper-inflation.
Prof. Mike seems to be genuinely oblivious and contemptuously ignoring the reality (ck his latest posting, “fish-sticks”), whereas u corp. neo-cons are slightly more realistic, more nervous about things about to hit proverbial “fan.”
Now that u’ve seen Obongo’s touching faggot moment (ck the link given) and are perhaps open now to idea these satanic ZOG dictators are seriously INSANE, ck this: http://www.latimes.com/nation/la-na-obama-epa-rule-20140601-story.html#page=2
For never doubt these scum BELIEVE their own lies about “climate-change,” etc., and they’re hell-bent on pushing forward w. further measures for total dictatorship. Of course, these carbon-tax measures will only further drive-up prices, even killing people who won’t be able to afford heating.
In this story, VA officials were paid bonuses to (effectively) kill/murder the vets: http://www.cnn.com/2014/05/30/us/va-bonuses-qa/index.html#comment-1412862138.
Doubt ObongoCare death panels?–it’s already in action.
Scholar renounces his own book. Academics, unfaised, continue to incorporate it in their classes for its “emotional truth”.
In the United States, “Open Veins” has been widely taught on university campuses since the 1970s, in courses ranging from history and anthropology to economics and geography. But Mr. Galeano’s unexpected takedown of his own work has left scholars wondering how to deal with the book in class.
“If I were teaching this in a course,” said Merilee Grindle, president of the Latin American Studies Association and director of the David Rockefeller Center for Latin American Studies at Harvard, “I would take his comments, add them in and use them to generate a far more interesting discussion about how we see and interpret events at different points in time.” And that seems to be exactly what many professors plan to do.
Caroline S. Conzelman, a cultural anthropologist who teaches at the University of Colorado, Boulder, said her first thought was that she wouldn’t change how she used the book, “because it still captures the essence of the emotional memory of being colonized.” But now, she said: “I will have them read what he says about it. It’s good for students to see that writers can think critically about their own work and go back and revise what they meant.”
Link
http://www.nytimes.com/2014/05/24/books/eduardo-galeano-disavows-his-book-the-open-veins.html?_r=0
Another minor detail presented by a neo-con pretending it amounts to anything of significance.
Either higher education will give up its medieval privileges, begin to be accountable, and live in the modern world, or it will be reduced to a costly relic for a tiny elite.
An aging campus generation that has nearly wrecked the university should bow out and let more open-minded and innovative minds repair the damage that the old generation has wrought.
-Victor Davis Hanson
http://www.nationalreview.com/article/379556/americas-medieval-universities-victor-davis-hanson
Profiling.
If you made this stuff up, no one would believe it.
The incident between Doe and his accuser, both first-year students at Occidental, occurred during the early morning hours of Sunday, September 8, 2013. After being counseled by Occidental employees, Doe’s accuser filed sexual assault complaints with Occidental as well as the Los Angeles Police Department (LAPD) on September 16. Notable among those employees was Professor Danielle Dirks, who, according to the accuser, said that Doe “fit the profile of other rapists on campus in that he had a high GPA in high school, was his class valedictorian, was on [a sports] team, and was ‘from a good family.’”
http://www.thefire.org/sexual-assault-injustice-at-occidental-college-railroads-accused-student/
TJB: this crap is ho-hum par-for-the-course for ZOG assault against Christian civilization which has been on-going now for decades. Don’t forget Tawana Brawley incident: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tawana_Brawley_rape_allegations. And what about the Duke U. incident of 2006 when, in this case, the district attorney himself took part knowingly in exactly similar sort of fraud–just google search for Mike Nifong incident (a distinct, unique name).
Don’t forget, proper civilization is NON-TOLERANCE of Jews, just to begin.
ck this about feminism, a Jew product: http://voxday.blogspot.com/2014/06/feminism-is-for-psychos.html
Hmm…and if not-on-campus rapist profiles consist of those with low high school GPAs, non-graduates or those in the bottom 5%, were on a sports team (and perhaps the correlation goes up for those on the basketball or football teams), and came from a “bad family”, we can say, suspend their welfare or some such without an actual conviction for a crime.
This is the cultural BS that I’m talking about TJ. They can’t see their own logical flaws because they don’t get outside their self-reinforcing cocoons. Meanwhile they further incubate themselves from such criticism by projecting such onto conservatives and other critics of what has become of academe.
Is profiling increasing the cost of tuition?
If this student wins his case against Occidental, where do you suppose the money will come from? Even if he loses, what were the costs to the university? Legal fees, prestige, recruiting all hit the pocketbook at some point.
True-administrators do sometimes shoot the school in the head. The Duke Lacrosse incident cost Duke millions because of the school’s handling of the situation. The way that the administration “handled” Jerry Sandusky cost Penn State a great deal. But, such law suits themselves do not account for the sweeping and excessive increases in tuition across the country. After all, most schools do not have such large settlements.
But, these do impose needless costs on schools that could have been avoided by better judgment and ethical behavior on the part of those who are supposed to be in charge.
The article makes an excellent point. By the definition used for “sexual assault” by the college, each person sexually assaulted the other. So, if he is guilty by that standard, then so is she. But, if she is innocent, then so is he. Only acting against him would be inconsistent.
Suppose we accept that being drunk to degree X impairs a person so much that s/he cannot give consent. This would seem to indicate that a person who is drunk to degree X would also be so impaired that s/he would be incapable of understanding what s/he is doing and thus not responsible for his/her actions. Roughly put, if being drunk to degree X suppresses agency, then it should do so for both parties.
If it is claimed that a person who is drunk cannot give consent because she cannot understand the situation, etc. yet hold that a person who is equally drunk is fully accountable because he can understand the situation, then that seems to be rather inconsistent. Unless, of course, the cognitive abilities needed to give consent are lost before the other ability. It seems to say “she was too drunk to know what was going one, but though he was equally drunk, he understood what was going on.”
Obviously, if only one person is drunk then that is a different matter.
Schools should be aggressive about dealing with sexual assault-but they also need to act justly. Letting the guilty get away with assault is wrong, but punishing the innocent is at least as wrong.