Dammit…
Harvard University’s student newspaper published the survey results on Tuesday of nearly 500 members of the faculty. Of those who responded, 38% identified as “very liberal” while 41% identified as “liberal.” Another 19% said they were “moderate,” and only 1.5% of the respondents said they were “conservative” or “very conservative.”
Full article, HERE from the Washington Examiner.
I know we bitch a lot about the left taking over education in the US and get blown off a lot, but I really DO believe the left/communists HAVE taken over education in the US, from kindergarten to college.
Part of that, I believe started in the 60s with Vietnam. The honorable guys took one for the country and went into the military either when drafted or to other services to NOT go in the Army. The others used everything in their and their parent’s power to stay out of the military, including running to Canada. By and large, they stayed in school and grew up protesting Vietnam and the American way.
And drove education further and further from what ‘we’ grew up with… History, both state and national, civics, actual math courses, etc…
It is worth remembering what Khrushchev said 60 years ago, I remember seeing this as a child…“Your children’s children will live under communism. You Americans are so gullible. No, you won’t accept communism outright; but, we will keep feeding you small doses of socialism until you will finally wake up and find you already have Communism. We will not have to fight you. We will so weaken your economy, until you will fall like overripe fruit into our hands. The democracy will cease to exist when you take away from those who are willing to work and give to those who would not.”
It was September 29, 1959, when Nikita Khrushchev delivered his prediction for America at the United Nations. Remember the television coverage of him banging his shoe on the podium? At that time, just the word “communism” was feared throughout our nation. Remember this. Socialism leads to Communism How do you create a Socialist State? There are eight levels of control:
1) Healthcare – Control healthcare and you control the people
2) Poverty – Increase the poverty level as high as possible, poor people are easier to control and will not fight back if you are providing everything for them.
3) Debt – Increase the debt to an unsustainable level. That way you are able to increase taxes, and this will produce more poverty.
4) Gun Control – Remove the ability to defend themselves from the government . That way you are able to create a police state.
5) Welfare – Take control of every aspect (food, housing, income) of their lives because that will make them fully dependent on the government.
6) Education – Take control of what people read, listen to and take control of what children learn in school.
8) Class Warfare – Divide the people into the wealthy and the poor. Eliminate the middle class. This will cause more discontent and it will be easier to tax the rich with the support of the poor.
We ended the draft, elimination the ‘free” education so many are currently in need of.
Boot camp.
The communist takeover of the school systems is much older than the Vietnam war. Gramsci and the Frankfurt School took over Columbia U. and Chicago U in the 1930’s. (Dewey had his influence even earlier.) They founded the concept of the teacher’s university and teacher accreditation. They invented “critical theory” and propagated political correctness.
Back in 1981 during 1st semester of college, one of my college professors claimed he witnessed drugs being smuggled inside body bags being brought back from Vietnam. A few of us raised our hands to ‘find out more’, but he became extremely defensive to the 1st person who was called, so I shut my mouth. At the time, I thought it wasn’t worth a threat to my grade.
Now, I wonder if I didn’t make a mistake. Remaining silent only encourages them.
I remember Nikita well. He also said, “We will bury you.”
Those of us who worked with B-52’s during that era can say “we would have buried his FAT ASS, as well” !!!!!!
Ed- Agreed!!!
McC- I wasn’t aware of that, thanks!
jrg- Concur. And when confronted they get VERY concerned that anyone would question them… Sigh
Jim- Yes he did.
ironic that when I was a freshman in college, we were required to read “Teaching as a Subversive Activity”. While it had some radical proposals, the main gist was that you have to teach people how to think for themselves and question dogma – anything else is just regurgitation of already known facts. While I think already known facts (history, if you will) are necessary for background, the idea of critical thinking being ‘radical’ is laughable. And while the book was lauded for being radical, today’s radical leftists are anything but critical thinkers and instead exhibit a hive/collective mindset.
Old Woody- Yep, and we’d have taken out his subs too… Almost did take one out.
Tom- Interesting…
The 60’s were the beginning of results put into effect by the Soviets in the 30’s and 40’s, and especially the 50’s.
No. I am not a conspiracy theorist.
Actual KGB records after the fall proved that the USSR bought whole departments and whole fields, like jouralism and social services. Especially in ‘International Relations.’
The KGB was behind many student organizations, and behind the events that set up the Kent State shootings.
And, of course, to go off to conspiracy land, well, what did Lee Harvey Oswald do in the Soviet Union.
And what did Bernie Sanders do? Who did he talk to? What bureaus did he deal with?
The kicker is that the traitors on the Soviet payroll were never prosecuted. Why not?
Those who would have done the prosecuting were fellow-travelers.
The Sword and Shield of the Party wrought well…
Look at what the PRC is doing right now.
These days it isn’t exactly very well hidden.
They didn’t bother to hide it the first time. Look up Alger Hiss and see who spoke up as character witnesses for him.
If you want to take over a nation in a leisurely manner, start with the schools – the lower grades and work up. Next start race and class warfare. Giving away free shit paid for by others helps, too.
Totalitarians always use the schools as the first line in the propaganda war.
The Left started with the churches. After conquering the divinity schools went so well, they went after the parochial schools in a combined, well thought out and practiced campaign.
> 38% identified as “very liberal” while 41% identified as “liberal.”
Is anyone surprised? Beuller?
Their admission testing – which nowadays can include essays, documentation of hobbies and recreation, etc. – rigidly selects for liberalism. In quite a few cases, strong enough liberal cred is all you need for admission, such as David Hogg not only being admitted to Harvard, but given a pass on classes so he could travel North America as an anti-gun flack.
Yeah. Like minds. I don’t even need to comment.
But I will, just so everyone knows WE ARE NOT ALONE.
The only number on that list they haven’t done is finish disarming us…..something they are working extraordinarily hard to accomplish. Once they succeed it’s off to the boxcars for most of us. And make no mistake about it….that is exactly what they intend….we aren’t useful to them and we pose a risk to their hold on power. So they WILL eliminate most noncompliant conservatives.
California and Virginia showed their goals and intentions. Everything else is merely tactics.
These days, you would be stupid to get a graduate degree, unless you knew the school, had calculated how long you could fly under the radar, and had enough options available that you could afford to walk away.
As an American conservative, one would be very stupid to pursue a doctorate with intention of becoming faculty. Between the scarcity of positions and the current level of witch hunt hysteria. There are downsides to leaving the faculty positions to internationals, but academia is less tyrannical than where they come from, and they don’t have the same blindspots as the domestic left.
All- Excellent points, and Bob, I agree, I wouldn’t go back if they gave me a ‘free’ education… sigh
Posted from my iPhone.
Yeah, but in your field, you could get as much or more credential effect from simply working, especially given your previous experience and the sorts of jobs you might consider pursuing.
If someone is smart enough to be worth much as a scholar, they are smart enough to look at faculty hiring, and figure out the level of job opportunities for that research interest. And have other possibilities in mind for career, and supporting that interest.
Beyond limited tenure track positions, my gut is telling me that the university system has enough poorly met customer needs that it is very vulnerable to disruption. The faculty career path is a lot of investment for the sake of tenure.
I’d add that I am very skeptical of ‘elite’ schools. Does the Harvard undergraduate engineering program produce a lot of folks who have a good yeoman technical career? Or does it produce MBA track folks who get jobs through the network, and never do any good technical or business work?
Also, are huge swaths of the humanities ruled by consensus that is hot garbage?
You get good degree programs when you have faculty who have divergent views about fundamental issues, and don’t all get stuck in the same group think. How good can the undergraduates be if they are not exposed to a true diversity of faculty? How can they form their own conclusions on scholarship in the field if they only see a narrow perspective?
Harvard’s engineering school is called MIT.
Ah. I do have specific concerns about MIT. Not objections to specific MIT graduates or faculty mind you.
I have heard that the MIT faculty have an organizational culture of seeking to produce graduates who want to change the world.
I think that is a wrong goal to optimize for.
I’m amazed that there ARE any conservative profs at Harvard.
The Left destroys everything it touches, not least the education of our children. This is a scandal and it’s been allowed by the nation’s indifference or worse.
Then there’s Harvard. Satan’s Vatican.