Do conservatives ever wonder WHY liberalism is prevalent in higher education?

[Billy000]

Yes it is, they have the same exact ideology and they have hi-jacked the word liberal (now going back to the word progressive) and they stand for the exact opposite of true liberalism. They are oppressors and not liberators.
The have also hi-jacked the party and now control the whole party.
This is why over 800,000 have left the party since 2011.

No, those two parties I mentioned in my last post do not exist anymore. It's convenient you left out the wiki article to modern liberalism. If you were to read that article - and i suggest you should - you will see that the socialist movement is NOT the same thing as modern liberalism.

Oh yes they are alive and well, just rebranded.
You think that they will call themselves socialists? They would never get elected if they did, and they know it.
Maxine Waters slipped one time and almost said socialist, she corrected herself.
You know that this was written by lefties.
Did you read wiki modern liberalism?
Right at the top is says

It has its roots in Theodore Roosevelt's New Nationalism, Woodrow Wilson's New Freedom, Franklin D. Roosevelt's New Deal, Harry S. Truman's Fair Deal, John F. Kennedy's New Frontier, and Lyndon B. Johnson's Great Society

They are the same Progressives as back then and the same as the socialist party now.

Try reading the article about the socialist movement. It makes no mention of having connection to modern day liberalism.

 

[peach174]

No, those two parties I mentioned in my last post do not exist anymore. It's convenient you left out the wiki article to modern liberalism. If you were to read that article - and i suggest you should - you will see that the socialist movement is NOT the same thing as modern liberalism.

Oh yes they are alive and well, just rebranded.
You think that they will call themselves socialists? They would never get elected if they did, and they know it.
Maxine Waters slipped one time and almost said socialist, she corrected herself.
You know that this was written by lefties.
Did you read wiki modern liberalism?
Right at the top is says

It has its roots in Theodore Roosevelt's New Nationalism, Woodrow Wilson's New Freedom, Franklin D. Roosevelt's New Deal, Harry S. Truman's Fair Deal, John F. Kennedy's New Frontier, and Lyndon B. Johnson's Great Society

They are the same Progressives as back then and the same as the socialist party now.

Try reading the article about the socialist movement. It makes no mention of having connection to modern day liberalism.

Modern Liberalism is just the same ideology, just rebranded.
Did you read where it says economic inequality - that's Marxism ideology
Equal society, limit extremes of wealth and poverty - that's Communism and Marxism ideology

Keynesian theory is not working either.
We still have high unemployment and very little growth.
High inflation is just a matter of time, because of the value of our dollar falling.
We are already seeing it, in the price of our goods and services.

Nothing they are doing is new.

 

[Wyatt earp]

No, those two parties I mentioned in my last post do not exist anymore. It's convenient you left out the wiki article to modern liberalism. If you were to read that article - and i suggest you should - you will see that the socialist movement is NOT the same thing as modern liberalism.

Oh yes they are alive and well, just rebranded.
You think that they will call themselves socialists? They would never get elected if they did, and they know it.
Maxine Waters slipped one time and almost said socialist, she corrected herself.
You know that this was written by lefties.
Did you read wiki modern liberalism?
Right at the top is says

It has its roots in Theodore Roosevelt's New Nationalism, Woodrow Wilson's New Freedom, Franklin D. Roosevelt's New Deal, Harry S. Truman's Fair Deal, John F. Kennedy's New Frontier, and Lyndon B. Johnson's Great Society

They are the same Progressives as back then and the same as the socialist party now.

Try reading the article about the socialist movement. It makes no mention of having connection to modern day liberalism.

IDK, dont have to read an article to know modern day liberalism wants to take us to the dogs. The rich feel good liberals it seems to me took over. they overhype stuff [like man made global warming] and just throw the poor liberals a bone and then fuck them in the ass with high taxes on smokes, gas, obama care when they are not looking

 

[Billy000]

Oh yes they are alive and well, just rebranded.
You think that they will call themselves socialists? They would never get elected if they did, and they know it.
Maxine Waters slipped one time and almost said socialist, she corrected herself.
You know that this was written by lefties.
Did you read wiki modern liberalism?
Right at the top is says

It has its roots in Theodore Roosevelt's New Nationalism, Woodrow Wilson's New Freedom, Franklin D. Roosevelt's New Deal, Harry S. Truman's Fair Deal, John F. Kennedy's New Frontier, and Lyndon B. Johnson's Great Society

They are the same Progressives as back then and the same as the socialist party now.

Try reading the article about the socialist movement. It makes no mention of having connection to modern day liberalism.

Modern Liberalism is just the same ideology, just rebranded.
Did you read where it says economic inequality - that's Marxism ideology
Equal society, limit extremes of wealth and poverty - that's Communism and Marxism ideology

Keynesian theory is not working either.
We still have high unemployment and very little growth.
High inflation is just a matter of time, because of the value of our dollar falling.
We are already seeing it, in the price of our goods and services.

Nothing they are doing is new.

If it really was re branded, the article on the socialist movement would mention modern liberalism it doesnt. That is just your own perception. While they both may favor certain government influence, they are still fundamentally different. VAGUELY similar. I will at least give you that.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

Do conservatives ever wonder WHY liberalism is prevalent in higher education?

Or why liberalism is prevalent overall, for that matter.

But to answer the question: no.

Almost twice as many people self identify as conservative over liberal. One would think that anyone that self identifies as liberal and claims to be intelligent would know that.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

I've seen this said many times in this forum. Are you suggesting that any sort of teacher is incompetent?

I was taught that particular trope by multiple teachers when I went to school, are you saying they were liars?

Are you actually dumb enough to believe that it is supposed to be a serious statement?

I know my high school physics teacher was 100% serious when he said it. He had an engineering degree, was quite proud of the various things he accomplished during his career at Raytheon, and became a teacher after he retired because he was tired of people coming out of high school not being able to handle basic science.

Not that you can either, but you do have an arts degree in fake science.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

Lessee...my existentialism teacher was a Czech freedomfighter captured by the NAZIs. Escaped fled to England. Came back continued to kill NAZIs. Got caught in a bombing raid and survived in a cellar for days.

My political science teacher flew bombing missions over Germany with the 8th Army Air force...the unit with the highest rate of combatdeaths in the entire Allied effort

Nah, those college profs don't know nothing about real life, do they?

ENVY is prime motivator for the punk tripe most of you nobodies are posting, I suspect.

Not sure why you think talking about what happened 50 years ago has anything to do with today, but it does prove how desperate you are to pretend that you have something to say. Since every single one of those people are dead now all you have managed to actually prove is how old you are.

 

[Wyatt earp]

Try reading the article about the socialist movement. It makes no mention of having connection to modern day liberalism.

Modern Liberalism is just the same ideology, just rebranded.
Did you read where it says economic inequality - that's Marxism ideology
Equal society, limit extremes of wealth and poverty - that's Communism and Marxism ideology

Keynesian theory is not working either.
We still have high unemployment and very little growth.
High inflation is just a matter of time, because of the value of our dollar falling.
We are already seeing it, in the price of our goods and services.

Nothing they are doing is new.

If it really was re branded, the article on the socialist movement would mention modern liberalism it doesnt. That is just your own perception. While they both may favor certain government influence, they are still fundamentally different. VAGUELY similar. I will at least give you that.

how are they different? everything I read about liberals and there posts on the internet goes towards socialism ie....the "peg bunndy" type sit around and watch oprah or judge judy collecting a pay check while the "al" type works at a shoe store supporting them?

 

[Quantum Windbag]

One problem I find. is that conservatives often have their own history, their own thinking methods, their own sciences, and many other beliefs that differ from from what is taught in most schools. These boards are full of these beliefs. I also think conservatives believe that science, history, biology and those subjects are really decided by political parties and ideology, and not by some type of scientific method.
If conservatives win an election they expect schools to now teach students their beliefs, their sciences, their history, and sadly education just goes on and they cannot understand why no change.

Is this subject really that far over your head? The question is why educators are more liberal than the general population. The fact that conservatives have views that "differ from what is taught in most schools" is, by definition, obvious. Only people who feel that their beliefs are morally superior (i.e., good vs. evil) to those with whom they disagree view this as a "problem."

I think you are confused by the premise of my question, which is understandable. I probably wasn't clear enough about it. While I do believe that educators in higher education are liberal, I do not think they have a liberal bias in their curriculum; at least not in general. Some political science professors will make their views known to the classroom, but that is the only bias you will see. But even those professors respect the value of objectivity in their research. Most of them anyway.

You believe psychology is science, which indicates how much weight we should assign to all of your opinions.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

you see higher education does not reward the fact adverse.



That is why you cant seem to learn how to teach anyone anything

Sure it does.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

Perhaps its because liberalism represents intellectual ideas? Perhaps something can be said why political scientists tend to be liberal.

Perhaps because liberals hate doing actual work, and thus, spend all their time brainwashing children to be just as lazy as they in their attempt to make society a place where you can become comfortable in your poverty? Indeed, liberals are the people of ideas. Of course, they are only considered ideas here because they haven’t been done in the U.S. before. Cuba, USSR, China, North Korea, Cambodia, Vietnam, but not the U.S. . In any case, liberal’s place their ideology in group think as did Marx. Conservatives don’t care how you think or what you do so as long as you don’t bother them. Thus education is a great place for liberals to get what Marx said, everyone marching in the same direction.

When are people like you going to understand that there is a fundamental difference between liberalism and socialism. As a liberal, I completely reject the ideas of socialism and communism. You really need to educate yourself on this matter. If you do not understand these definitions, then you are incapable of making informed opinions.

When are you going to understand that most liberals are the ones that are confused about that difference?

 

[peach174]

Try reading the article about the socialist movement. It makes no mention of having connection to modern day liberalism.

Modern Liberalism is just the same ideology, just rebranded.
Did you read where it says economic inequality - that's Marxism ideology
Equal society, limit extremes of wealth and poverty - that's Communism and Marxism ideology

Keynesian theory is not working either.
We still have high unemployment and very little growth.
High inflation is just a matter of time, because of the value of our dollar falling.
We are already seeing it, in the price of our goods and services.

Nothing they are doing is new.

If it really was re branded, the article on the socialist movement would mention modern liberalism it doesnt. That is just your own perception. While they both may favor certain government influence, they are still fundamentally different. VAGUELY similar. I will at least give you that.

It's right from the wiki page of modern liberalism
Modern liberalism in the United States - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Modern Liberalism is for economic inequality, limited extremes of wealth and poverty
Keynesian theory.
None of it is new, is just a mixture of socialism, Marxism and communism.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

Try reading the article about the socialist movement. It makes no mention of having connection to modern day liberalism.

Modern Liberalism is just the same ideology, just rebranded.
Did you read where it says economic inequality - that's Marxism ideology
Equal society, limit extremes of wealth and poverty - that's Communism and Marxism ideology

Keynesian theory is not working either.
We still have high unemployment and very little growth.
High inflation is just a matter of time, because of the value of our dollar falling.
We are already seeing it, in the price of our goods and services.

Nothing they are doing is new.

If it really was re branded, the article on the socialist movement would mention modern liberalism it doesnt. That is just your own perception. While they both may favor certain government influence, they are still fundamentally different. VAGUELY similar. I will at least give you that.

Would it? Do articles on communism always mention modern day China, or are they limited in scope to cover the things the author feels are pertinent to the point he is making?

 

[Billy000]

Modern Liberalism is just the same ideology, just rebranded.
Did you read where it says economic inequality - that's Marxism ideology
Equal society, limit extremes of wealth and poverty - that's Communism and Marxism ideology

Keynesian theory is not working either.
We still have high unemployment and very little growth.
High inflation is just a matter of time, because of the value of our dollar falling.
We are already seeing it, in the price of our goods and services.

Nothing they are doing is new.

If it really was re branded, the article on the socialist movement would mention modern liberalism it doesnt. That is just your own perception. While they both may favor certain government influence, they are still fundamentally different. VAGUELY similar. I will at least give you that.

It's right from the wiki page of modern liberalism
Modern liberalism in the United States - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Modern Liberalism is for economic inequality, limited extremes of wealth and poverty
Keynesian theory.
None of it is new, is just a mixture of socialism, Marxism and communism.

What you don't seem to understand is that liberalism does not reject capitalism. Limiting extremes of poverty and wealth is not the same as eliminating extremes of poverty and wealth.

 

[Billy000]

I was taught that particular trope by multiple teachers when I went to school, are you saying they were liars?

Are you actually dumb enough to believe that it is supposed to be a serious statement?

I know my high school physics teacher was 100% serious when he said it. He had an engineering degree, was quite proud of the various things he accomplished during his career at Raytheon, and became a teacher after he retired because he was tired of people coming out of high school not being able to handle basic science.

Not that you can either, but you do have an arts degree in fake science.

There you go again with this fake science non sense. Do i have to remind you of the bonehead contradiction you made yesterday?

Seriously give it a rest. You're going to blow a fuse. If you have any fuses left anyway.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

If it really was re branded, the article on the socialist movement would mention modern liberalism it doesnt. That is just your own perception. While they both may favor certain government influence, they are still fundamentally different. VAGUELY similar. I will at least give you that.

It's right from the wiki page of modern liberalism
Modern liberalism in the United States - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Modern Liberalism is for economic inequality, limited extremes of wealth and poverty
Keynesian theory.
None of it is new, is just a mixture of socialism, Marxism and communism.

What you don't seem to understand is that liberalism does not reject capitalism. Limiting extremes of poverty and wealth is not the same as eliminating extremes of poverty and wealth.

What you have to understand is that modern liberalism embraces socialism.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

Are you actually dumb enough to believe that it is supposed to be a serious statement?

I know my high school physics teacher was 100% serious when he said it. He had an engineering degree, was quite proud of the various things he accomplished during his career at Raytheon, and became a teacher after he retired because he was tired of people coming out of high school not being able to handle basic science.

Not that you can either, but you do have an arts degree in fake science.

There you go again with this fake science non sense. Do i have to remind you of the bonehead contradiction you made yesterday?

Seriously give it a rest. You're going to blow a fuse. If you have any fuses left anyway.

Feel free, I enjoy it when people who believe in fake science point out their contradictions.

 

[Billy000]

I know my high school physics teacher was 100% serious when he said it. He had an engineering degree, was quite proud of the various things he accomplished during his career at Raytheon, and became a teacher after he retired because he was tired of people coming out of high school not being able to handle basic science.

Not that you can either, but you do have an arts degree in fake science.

There you go again with this fake science non sense. Do i have to remind you of the bonehead contradiction you made yesterday?

Seriously give it a rest. You're going to blow a fuse. If you have any fuses left anyway.

Feel free, I enjoy it when people who believe in fake science point out their contradictions.

Why do you torture yourself? You know what i am talking about.

You: "It's already been proven that there is no causal link between the two..."

Hm gee. You support the finding of a study from a supposedly fake science.

Idiot.

 

[peach174]

If it really was re branded, the article on the socialist movement would mention modern liberalism it doesnt. That is just your own perception. While they both may favor certain government influence, they are still fundamentally different. VAGUELY similar. I will at least give you that.

It's right from the wiki page of modern liberalism
Modern liberalism in the United States - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Modern Liberalism is for economic inequality, limited extremes of wealth and poverty
Keynesian theory.
None of it is new, is just a mixture of socialism, Marxism and communism.

What you don't seem to understand is that liberalism does not reject capitalism. Limiting extremes of poverty and wealth is not the same as eliminating extremes of poverty and wealth.

Where did I say that liberalism rejects capitalism?
No Government can eliminate extremes of poverty and wealth.
The more that government tries to do that, all it does in make the poor, poorer as well as the middle class. Then it becomes miserable for all.
Then when everyone is miserable, they rise up to overthrow the government and that always ends up in total tyranny.
If you know history, it happens over and over again with the same exact results.

 

[Billy000]

It's right from the wiki page of modern liberalism
Modern liberalism in the United States - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Modern Liberalism is for economic inequality, limited extremes of wealth and poverty
Keynesian theory.
None of it is new, is just a mixture of socialism, Marxism and communism.

What you don't seem to understand is that liberalism does not reject capitalism. Limiting extremes of poverty and wealth is not the same as eliminating extremes of poverty and wealth.

Where did I say that liberalism rejects capitalism?
No Government can eliminate extremes of poverty and wealth.
The more that government tries to do that, all it does in make the poor, poorer as well as the middle class. Then it becomes miserable for all.
Then when everyone is miserable, they rise up to overthrow the government and that always ends up in total tyranny.
If you know history, it happens over and over again with the same exact results.

Marxism, socialism, and communism have nothing to do with a free market system.