Wolf,

As a teacher I believe the purpose of my teaching is to teach my students to think by themselves by giving them the skills to do so. I am not a teacher that presents one side of the story, in fact I am teaching things I dont agree with just because they are mainstream and I believe my students should have an overall picture. But my teaching methods are not a topic for this thread. Even though I must say that teaching the so called Truth in some fields it is quite hard because it is hard to determine what truth is, most people claim to have it, and it is usually different. Academic work today is impregnated with ideology when it should be intellectually honest.

The fact that my friends agree with me means nothing, just that they agree with me. I mentioned this fact so as to say that some Americans do not agree with the war in the same way that you do. You all are Americans and the fact that you think differently may illustrate the point that depending who you are talking to, you will get a different story. Just so that you know, I think that I never claimed to be bright and assume that I am more right than anybody just because I am in academia. These people I told you about are not all academics and very far from being pseudo-intellectuals.

Jonsoniana

Fernando,

I have read your previous threads and have found them interesting and extremely thoughtful.
I have no problem being named an extremist (right, after all there is no left extremist...ha.ha). I think the only person that would be outraged by being labelled thusly is one who is not intellectually honest about his views.
Thanks for all your thoughtful post that have shown that some people from other countries can understand our position. We don't always do the correct things here in the U.S. I think that the kidnapping of Noriega was pretty high-handed of us. We sure wouldn't want another country invading us and removing our leader. But how could we respect a president here who wasn't interested in our sovereignty and security?
I have been to Spain lately and was really disappointed in the changes to the city because of security measures. What was once a fairly open place has really been buttoned down though I doubt that anyone unfamiliar with Madrid in the late seventies would realize how much. Perhaps the U.S. can't put the genie back in the bottle, but this current administration is doing their best from keeping it from getting any worse.

Fascinating article in the New York Times about what is occurring, or, rather not occurring at college and university campuses. If you wish to read the entire article here is the LINK in keeping with our host, MM, wishes, I am only sharing the first few paragraphs:

Also, at Columbia University, the The Columbia Daily Spectator the student newspaper , a random recent poll of 172 students showed the following (once again I am sharing only a few paragraphs, click above for the full story):
Matthew Continetti an undergraduate at Columbia University., writes a guest editorial at National Review Online about the Nicholas DeGenova affair at Columbia University: I have read the information provided on this thread about this last case on DeGenova. Frankly, DeGenova's comments are beyond the scope of academic freedom. The beginning of the concept of academic freedom , started with the Galileo Affair, where the Catholic church, literally silenced a scientist from sharing his scientific findings with other scientists (it had to do with Galileo's treatise about Mars, of all things, and that the earth was not the center of the universe!) Since then this tradition has allowed academicians to provide theories and knowledge that may be seen as controversial to some entities. In the past century, academic freedom, kept professors from being fired for having different political positions than the mass culture.

However, in the case of DeGenova, he was not in his anthropology class, his political position was not threatened, so I fail to see this as an academic freedom issue.

The next question is is it an individual's freedom of speech to say to a group of people, including members of the media, that "He also wished that U.S. troops encounter "a million Mogadishus" during the course of the war against Saddam Hussein's regime."

The dichotomy of this statement baffles me. This was a university teach-in, and for the most part the participants promoted the peace movement, which logically and rationally should be the antithesis of what DeGennaro wished on our servicemen. No wonder that half the students at Columbia, which as was noted above, is a bastion of liberal education, are pro-war.

DeGenaro acted in every way opposite of what we professors and instructors have strived to be, rational and objective. His actions add fuel to those who call those of us in academia: "Ivory Tower Idiots"

What should he do? He should do the decent thing, apologize to the university, to the students, and to the nation, in particular to those brave soldiers that died in Mogadishu, and to the parents of those soldiers that have died in this war. That's what a decent person would do. Then he should resign.

What will the university do? Hard to say. However, recently the president of a notable university here in Florida resigned because he said a racial slur about a member of the Board of Regents. He was given a choice resign or get fired. Academic freedom and freedom of speech carry with them the equal burden of common sense and responsibility, even in academia.

Booklady,

Exactly the point I've been trying to make, about our "educators." They have absolutely no right trying to instill their values, or their perceptions, on students. Their function is to teach history, and the concepts of government, based on all sides of an issue, not on their own point of view. I'm afraid that isn't happening, when the old 60s radicals who were taught by the theorists of the 60s are now emerging in front of classes.

The outcry we're beginning to hear from students, and those who support our institutions of learning has to grow. We have to take these people to task, and make them face up to their responsibility, or be thrown out on their ears. It's not their place to "formulate the opinons" of young minds, and no matter what their political views are, they are stealing from the students with their lack of concern for truth.

The idea that a Professor can stand back and call it "censorship" when they are brought to task for what they're doing is absurd. It's censorship when they refuse to divulge the whole truth, and allow the students to choose their personal course of belief from all the facts. These educators, who scream that their rights are violated, are no different than the Muslim Clerics who take young people in, and turn them into tomorrow's assassins, and terrorists. They are creating their own "nest of radicals" in their own way.

It's time we take back what belongs to us. The educational system. It isn't their personal "playground" for bending minds.

Wolf

Booklady,

You're certainly bring a breath of fresh air to this dialog. Perhaps there's hope for our youth yet. After all "hope springs eternal." In lieu of this, Wolf, maybe our educators aren't doing too bad of a job training our youth if they are so capable of discerning the truth.
In an earlier post you urged our educators to teach students the truth. I know this was just a slip, since an obviously reasoning person such as yourself realizes that no one can teach truth. All our educators can do is provide the tools for their students to discern the truth.
I can only hope that one day they will realize the fallacy of the last vestiges of socialist thinking here in the U.S., perhaps abandoning the welfare-state and making us even freer than the rest of the world is.
Please don't take this last statement as a personal affront. I know in your previous postings that you consider yourself a liberal and for socialization of services for some Americans. You express your ideas much more thoughtfully than I will ever be able to and I admire this ability. But please consider how well our capitalistic system has provided for the unfortunate members of our society as opposed to how other less capitalistic governments provide them to their own citizenry. And then please consider that it is in persuit of basic needs that we have such a strong and productive country.

You are kidding, right?

Nope. I'd rather be poor (although that will never happen) in the U.S. than wealthy elsewhere.

gazpacho,

You're right, it was a poor choice of words. What I was referring to was that all sides of an issue must be presented through factual information that is available related to the issue. Glossing over specifics of an issue because they don't agree with a person's own POV isn't acceptable.

I appreciate your mentioning this point. I didn't intend to make it sound like there could only be one POV.

Wolf

Gazpacho:
Now, please, let`s give up kidding. Do you mean what you say?
Have you ever heard about public healthcare in, say, Holland? Do you know what kind of opportunities do minorities and poor people have in Scandinavian countries, Finland, Iceland and all that?
Have you ever heard how WEALTHY, THRIVING AND CULTIVATED Singapore is?
Did you tune on your TV set in 1992, during the L.A. riots? or later, when Cincinatty was set ablaze? Or later, in Seattle...? forget it
It is great to love one`s country. But being realistic is ok, too. America has its own problems, that`s all.
And nope, I know THIS is not paradise, either. But I would never try to convince anyone that I live in Wonderland...

Carmenm writes: I have news for you, querida, according to Mr. Carrin, you are a fictional character, you don't exist, he invented you! So maybe you do live in Wonderland.

Mr. Carrin, for the sake of the other posters who have not read this thread and found out about your little game, don't you think you should use your own name, to avoid confusion?