Why do so many people hate "students"?

[ComradeMan]

Not that I wasn't aware of this before- but still, in the light of the events of the last week or so. Why is there so much hatred towards students? I notice this comes from so-called "working class" people a lot. Students this and students that, lazy, don't want to work, middle-class, bourgeois, good-for-nothings, etc etc.

El Che was a student, Marx was a student in fact the only non-student I can think of who comes to mind is Stalin and the miserable failure that was Pol Pot. I think anti-intellectualism also runs the risk of being branded reactionary.

Any thoughts? Is this the same where you live?

[Jazzratt]

Quite a lot of us missed the oppurtunity to be students so a lot of it can be down to jealousy and regret I suppose.

[Comrade1]

Not that I wasn't aware of this before- but still, in the light of the events of the last week or so. Why is there so much hatred towards students? I notice this comes from so-called "working class" people a lot. Students this and students that, lazy, don't want to work, middle-class, bourgeois, good-for-nothings, etc etc.

El Che was a student, Marx was a student in fact the only non-student I can think of who comes to mind is Stalin and the miserable failure that was Pol Pot. I think anti-intellectualism also runs the risk of being branded reactionary.

Any thoughts? Is this the same where you live?
What do you mean by student? People in Middle school and High School? Or grown adult who would rather read all day then do work?

[Revolution starts with U]

Who says reading isn't work? Everybody plays there part.
A world without knowledge and discovery is a world I do not want to live in.

[ComradeMan]

What do you mean by student? People in Middle school and High School? Or grown adult who would rather read all day then do work?

I think you have already shown what I meant in your answer....

[Comrade1]

Who says reading isn't work? Everybody plays there part.
A world without knowledge and discovery is a world I do not want to live in.
Very True, but I was just trying to figure out what type of "student" he was talking about

[Comrade1]

I think you have already shown what I meant in your answer....
Well in that case, they propably as someone stated before, might also want the oppurtunity to be a student because they were unable earlier in their lifetime

[Bud Struggle]

I really could care less how people spend their lives...whatever they do, work, read, play professional backgammon--that's their business. I won't bother them in their lives and I don't want to be bothered by them in my life.

I wish them well.

[ComradeMan]

Well in that case, they propably as someone stated before, might also want the oppurtunity to be a student because they were unable earlier in their lifetime

I notice that there seems to be more to it than that, inverted snobbery, and hostility beyond envy. Pretty damn reactionary...

[Jazzratt]

Or grown adult who would rather read all day then do work? To be honest I'd rather read all day than work. Working is generally a load of unedifying bullshit so some dickhead at the top of the pile can give you a miniscule cut of what they gain from your toil. If it wasn't essential to living an adult life I think I'd tell 'em to stuff it and then read a good book if I'm honest.

[Who?]

I honestly feel like a lot of people are clinging to the old stereotype that students are the sons and daughters of the wealthy without a care in the world who will sooner or later abandon communism/radical politics once they graduate so they can get a nice job, nice house, etc.

However this stereotype is no longer relevant and those who maintain that the stereotype is still true often fail to acknowledge those students who go thousands of dollars in debt to receive an education and continue to fight the good fight regardless of their future occupation. Basically they fail to acknowledge reality.

[Lt. Ferret]

a lot of it is a good ole fashioned anti-intellectualism. but a lot of it is because students are being exposed to "new" ideas and "blossoming" on shit that most people are already aware of or dont care about. plus theyre obnoxious and naive even if i agree with a lot of their stances.

i was a college revolutionary. in all the stupidest ways.

[Milk Sheikh]

To be honest I'd rather read all day than work. Working is generally a load of unedifying bullshit so some dickhead at the top of the pile can give you a miniscule cut of what they gain from your toil. If it wasn't essential to living an adult life I think I'd tell 'em to stuff it and then read a good book if I'm honest.

I am inclined to agree. As far as I am concerned, reading Shakespeare is as sacred as praying.

[#FF0000]

I notice that there seems to be more to it than that, inverted snobbery, and hostility beyond envy. Pretty damn reactionary...

Yeah see I actually agree with you but goddamn stop using reactionary for everything.


I honestly feel like a lot of people are clinging to the old stereotype that students are the sons and daughters of the wealthy without a care in the world who will sooner or later abandon communism/radical politics once they graduate so they can get a nice job, a nice house, etc.

However this stereotype no longer relevant and those whole maintain that the stereotype is still true fail to acknowledge those students who go thousands of dollars into debt to receive an education and continue to fight the good fight regardless of their future occupation. Basically they fail to acknowledge reality.


I think this is why~

EDIT: I think lately, though, most of the "anti-student" stuff is coming from the right, generally. Especially in light of the response of students in England and Greece to austerity, tuition hikes and budget cuts.

[minarchist]

I honestly feel like a lot of people are clinging to the old stereotype that students are the sons and daughters of the wealthy without a care in the world who will sooner or later abandon communism/radical politics once they graduate so they can get a nice job, nice house, etc.

However this stereotype is no longer relevant and those whole maintain that the stereotype is still true often fail to acknowledge those students who go thousands of dollars into debt to receive an education and continue to fight the good fight regardless of their future occupation. Basically they fail to acknowledge reality.

Communists are supposed to take a vow of poverty? You can't at least live comfortably enough until your day comes? Why not even earn lots of money and give it away to set an example for the world? Why not take the money and create a community that communists can sustain and live together in, without being bothered by capitalism? Wouldn't that be better, and set a positive example of communism for the public, or should communists do nothing or just barely scrape by and be miserable?

I don't understand if that's what you're saying, but I have been wondering about this...

[Who?]

Communists are supposed to take a vow of poverty? You can't at least live comfortably enough until your day comes? Why not even earn lots of money and give it away to set an example for the world? Why not take the money and create a community that communists can sustain and live together in, without being bothered by capitalism? Wouldn't that be better, and set a positive example of communism for the public, or should communists do nothing or just barely scrape by and be miserable?

I don't understand if that's what you're saying, but I have been wondering about this...

I never said that communists are supposed to take a vow of poverty, I was saying that some people cling to the stereotype that students will eventually drop their political views to further integrate themselves into capitalist society.

I have nothing against wealthy communists.

[Pretty Flaco]

I wasn't aware there was any anti-intellectualism among the modern left.

The only anti-student attitudes I see in the USA are from the right. Usually it's something along the lines of, "Oh, students are protesting about cuts! Look at how whiny they are, they can't work for their education! I had to work for one!"
The right usually tries to cut down the creditability of students/younger people around here.

[minarchist]

I never said that communists are supposed to take a vow of poverty, I was saying that some people cling to the stereotype that students will eventually drop their political views to further integrate themselves into capitalist society.

I have nothing against wealthy communists.

Gotcha, and I understand.

I've been wondering lately why like-minded communists don't try to form self-sustained communities where they can live under their own system and try to draw people to the movement. That could be an effective way of getting the working-class, the poor, the miserable and sick and tired to learn about and embrace communism. And it could be a chance to capture the public's attention if it can work, and show them it's a good thing.

Hey... I shouldn't be giving you guys any ideas! :glare: LOL!

[#FF0000]

I've been wondering lately why like-minded communists don't try to form self-sustained communities where they can live under their own system and try to draw people to the movement. That could be an effective way of getting the working-class, the poor, the miserable and sick and tired to learn about and embrace communism. And it could be a chance to capture the public's attention if it can work, and show them it's a good thing.

Yeah, no. This kind of comes up a lot and it's really just a dumb an ineffective idea. What you're basically doing by doing this is going off and cloistering yourself from the world and hoping people will see and say "Oh hey what a neat thing. Everyone should do this!"

That doesn't happen. People don't care or think you're a cult or something.

What communists ought to do is get involved directly where the class struggle's happening.

Though I don't agree with this person's politics, I have this blog entry saved, and I think they do a good job of explaining why this self-sustained community thing is a bad idea...

Here. (http://ravenresist.wordpress.com/2007/11/28/you-can-run-but-you-cant-hide/)

I am writing this piece mostly in frustration over a growing ideological tendency that I am encountering frequently. It is not one incident that has prompted me to write this, but the general drive of large sections of the political left towards this erroneous dead-end.

In the political left-wing, dead-end ideologies and Utopian rubbish are cheap and plentiful (anything to keep tangible revolutionary models at bay). The particular ideological tendency/movement that I’m speaking of does not have a name, but it centers around a common theme of “escaping” from, or “walking away” from , capitalism. For lack of a better term, I’ll refer to this tendency as ” Social-Escapism“.

I hear it everywhere; it is on the campuses, it is in the lyrics of socialist music, and recently it has infiltrated my own organization and work. This widespread theory keeps popping up, stating that class-war, that a revolution, is “not necessary”; capitalism “doesn’t need to be overthrown”. The answer, according to these ideologues, is simply “walking away” from capitalism; choosing “not to participate” in capitalism, via commune living, sustenance farming, forming a movement that is “so large in numbers, that the capitalists won’t even be able to take up arms against it”. These deluded petty-bourgeoisie believe that you can “ween yourself off of capitalism”.

See, this is an incredibly dangerous tendency. I’m not saying it is dangerous because I’m afraid of it; that isn’t the case. I’m saying it is dangerous, because it leads otherwise well- informed, politicallly active comrades away from class-struggle, and into the rural areas to grow beets and carrots; away from revolution, and into the abyss of this social-escapism.

Speaking for myself, I have only voiced support for commune living on one occasion, in my early political development; even then, I believed that the commune was simply a tool of organization, a way to get all of the political forces together, rather than as an alternative to capitalism. Utopian commune-dwelling has never appealed to me, possibly because of my up-bringing around the local Hudderites of Alberta, and other failed Utopian experiments.

Anyways, to get back on topic, I would like to propose a scenario to try and counter these notions of social-escapism. In this particular analysis, I’m focusing on the situation of our Victorian/British Columbian social-escapists in particular.

Okay, let’s say that some of these social-escapists did band together, and do what they are keen on doing: going out to the rural areas, getting some land with dwellings, and starting to grow their own food. Perhaps they also raised their own bees for honey, (an idea from a Victorian social-escapist) and possibly livestock. As for electricity, solar panels for all! A form of anarchist councilism somehow prevailed as the organizational/legislative model, and the people are blissful.

This is the vision. Now, here are the stumbling blocks of reality, to pop the bubble.

First of all, under a system of capitalism, it is not possible for an individual, or even for a collective of individuals, to purchase a single plot of land in perpetuity. Even if this group of Utopians “owned the land” that they were cultivating and living on, they would still have to pay property taxes .

Now, this insight throws a giant stick into the spokes of this Utopian theory by itself. The taxation levied by the capitalist government on these social-escapists, you would think, should be enough to jar them back to reality, a reminder that they have not “severed” themselves from capitalism, no matter how rural their surroundings.

Although property taxes can be quite low (especially for uncultivated land,), this introduces a new variable into the lives of those who are trying to avoid “participating” in the capitalist system : expenses.

Now, these expenses give rise to a necesity for currency, in order to continue the upkeep and operation of the commune and farmlands. Now, the social-escapists may deal with this problem in many ways. In the event that some (or all) of their membership have to resume wage labour employment to raise funds, well then I think that their whole attempt at ”waling away” from capitalism becomes moot. If this does become the case, the commune dwellers are as dependent on selling their wage labour as ever, and still firmly tied to the capitalist world and system.

More likely, as I have been told by social-escapist ideologues, the commune dwellers would sell part of the fruits of their labour. For the sake of argument, lets say that these fruits would include vegetables, honey, unique crafts, fresh bakery products…

Now we see, in reaction to the taxes levied by the capitalist system, the rise of another fatal error on the commune: commodity production. All of the sudden, rather than selling their surplus at their own leisure and discretion, the social-escapists start to produce products and designate entire sections of their garden produce as commodities, to be sold for profit (supposedly to help keep the commune going.).

So, now the commune-dwellers sell some of their fruits, perhaps at local farmers markets and whatnot. Now they have acquired a limited income for the commune.

Well, with income comes income tax; More taxes. Once again, the capitalist class (whom the social-escapists didn’t think it was necessary to defeat,) levies taxes from the commune dwellers.

More taxes become more expenses. More expenses lead to the commune-dwellers being forced to sell more of their produce (which was formerly geared towards the needs of the commune,) to continue the upkeep of the commune. Perhaps to accomplish this, the commune dwellers purchase advanced machinery to help increase the harvest (which turns out to be yet another expense, especially when fuel and insurance are concerned.).The commune dwellers are forced to expand gardens, and produce more home-made products( the materials needed to produce these, may bring another expense), solely for the purpose of commodity production. They also are forced to find more outlets to sell their wares. Ah, the increase in commodity production, and the beginning of their expansion into as many markets as possible. More and more, the commune acquires symptoms of capitalism, from the ground up.

Of course, it is also reasonable to assume that the commune would have a vehicle of some sort, almost definately gas powered. Even though social-escapists are typically life-stylists, who prefer bicycles (and other emision free modes of conveyance,) , bicycles are impractical for long range travel (remember,they are living in a rural area), for transportation of goods, and especially impractical in the winter, in most of the northern hemisphere. Because of these factors, they are most likely to have a vehicle to start with, or the commune will purchase one when the necessity of commodity production forces them to adopt one (The very act of purchasing a vehicle may place more weight on the budget of the commune.).

Vehicle ownership leads to (you guessed it,)…Expenses! Fuel, repairs, and of course Insurance! The commune dwellers will require a street-legal vehicle to use (even if they only have one,), so they will accept all of the costs that go with it. More costs, more expenses. The strain on the commune may force a member to have to take a job, in which case it is quite clear that they have not escaped capitalism. At this point, they also need to do things for the capitalist authorities, like possess a valid driver license ( How can any person claim to not be reliant on the system ,when you are subject to it’s rules and regulations?).

I know from experience, it is very difficult to feed a whole family on only what you produce, let alone a group of people, big or small. Now, by this point in time, the commune is producing largely for profit, trying to juggle the needs of the membership, with the demands for currency. During this time, the availability of food becomes more and more scarce, as it has to be sold to pay for upkeep;this leaves commune members hungry. How are they going to feed their members? Well, I guess they could buy groceries… another expense!

Take into consideration also that people get sick. What are these social-escapists going to do if one of their number gets sick or injured, especially seriously so? Herbal teas and home remedies only go so far; if you have appendicitis, you need surgery. Now, assuming that everyone on the commune has the possibility to get sick or injured, that would mean that every person would require a health care card, which is yet another monthly expense! If they didn’t live in a country that had socialized-medicine, it would be even worse, because they would have to pay even more for an HMO or insurance. More expenses, more demands for currency ( health-care for upwards of ten people can really add up,), and yet another bond forged to the very world and social system that they are trying to “ween themselves off of”.

In actuality, the sheer weight of the contradictions and financial demands on the commune would have forced the social-escapists to either become wage-slaves (and defeat the whole purpose of the commune), or devote the overwhelming majority of their productive forces to commodity production, for profit.

Now, even if hypothetically they are able to maintain a level of commodity production, in exchange for currency, and cover their operating costs, by that time capitalism has triumphed. The goal of the commune has shifted overwhelming from self sustenance to profit, and the commune members are not only completely subject to all of the rules and regulations of the capitalist state, but they are tax-paying citizens of it. What began as a self-sustaining commune has become a commercial farm; the social-escapists, in the eyes of the capitalist state that they reside in, are simply farmers, economically indistinguishable from other farmers enthralled by the system.

Now, keep in mind that this is a very austere estimate; I didn’t factor in any miscellaneous expenses, or ”habits” that the commune members may nurse, all of which lead to miscellaneous demands upon the commune for currency. My estimate assumes that the social-escapists do not smoke, drink, or engage in any other form of leisure that would require repeat purchases of commodities ( a cigarette habit alone consumes ten dollars a day from most smokers. If the commune has ten smokers out of the whole, that’s one hundred dollars a day. That’s a lot of potatoes that they have to sell!).Even assuming that these social-escapists live a minimalistic, utilitarian lifestyle, they are still doomed.

In the event that the social escapists abandon the law-abiding road, they may prolong their existance in a valiant “robin hood” style, but they are still doomed. Whether they evade taxes, poach wild-life, squat on property, grow illegal crops like Marijuana (for profit and/or personal use), or engage in any other type of illegal activity, they guarantee that their commune will be stamped out by force, and that their membership will be arrested. Even if they initially manage to evade notice of the illegal activities committed by their commune, it makes little difference; the longer that they continue the existance of the commune (and these illegal activities along with it,), the more certain the reality that they will be caught, and eventually the day will come when capitalist police forces will ”remind” these Utopians who is really in charge; capitalists don’t fuck around when it comes to tax evasion. Anyways, even being a bandit upon the system is still a form of reliance and dependency.

Well, there you have it; from the best of intentions to probable dissolution within less than a decade. the commune is doomed to failure (not a single one of these communal social-experiments attempted in the past have survived.).

See, the most important point to expose about the flawed nature of this social-escapism is that it actually doesn’t aim to “escape” capitalism; it aims to co-exist with it. Perhaps this is the fundamental flaw of the whole notion.

See, it is not true escapism, as escape from global capitalism would require nothing less than a space faring vehicle ( and given that there are no known inhabitable planets other than earth in this system, you would actually still be dependant on earth for the import of vital commodities.). What the social-escapists aim to do is occupy a plot of land/geographical area (which is already claimed by capitalists,), and try and survive there, without being bothered by any of the forces of capitalism. For their part, the self stated ambition of the social-escapists is not to make any effort to defeat capitalism, so therefore the true aspiration of the social-escapists is hermit-like co-existence of their own socio-economic system with that of the global capitalism.

Now, this is a large part of where the theory falls flat, as historically speaking , at no point in history has capitalism ever co-existed with a separate economic system. Capitalism brought about the defeat of feudalism in the advanced colonial countries (the American revolution ,the French revolution, etc), swept away tribalism in colonial nations, and fiercely sabotaged all past experiments in the building of socialism. By their very nature, with their lust for new markets to expand to, as well as new sources of capital and resources to exploit, capitalism can never co-exist, side-by-side with any other system, and from it’s place of global dominance, it will allow no up-starts. If there is only one lesson to heed from the revisionist Soviet premier Nikita Kruschev, it is the fallacy of his attempts at “peaceful co-existence”, which majorly contributed to the ruin and defeat of socialist countries/organizations everywhere.

In addition to this naive and erroneous desire to co-exist, and be left in seclusion as social hermits of this earth, among all left-wing political tendencies, this social-escapism is a current that is the bringer of revolutionary defeatism: ” We will never win against capitalism, things will never change; fuck it. Get the kids, an axe, and some camping supplies, we are going to live in the woods.”

Now, don’t misinterpret what I’m saying. I am not suggesting that the commune system is inherently reactionary and doomed to failure (peoples communes actually functioned quite well in the PR China, as part of their grand efforts to build socialism and self-sufficiency.); what I am saying is, quite simply, you can not “escape”, “walk away from”, “ween yourself off”, nor co-exist with the likes of capitalism.

The only way to end the tyranny of this capitalist system is to cast it down from it’s perch, and the only way to that is, and always has been, by awakening the masses to assume political power in their own interest. Utopian escapism and naive, hermit individualism will only lead in circles, back on your knees to the very system you boasted of “escaping”.

[Robert]

Who says reading isn't work?jazzratt, evidently:


To be honest I'd rather read all day than work.and that other brilliant guy here, what's his name ....

Oh yeah, me!:)

But really, there are working lawyers who read statutes and police reports and case opinions to give advice to their clients, doctors who read lab test results to give diagnoses and prescribe medicines, air conditioning repair men who read tech manuals to keep me cool, and chefs who read orders turned in by waiters, but in all those cases it's serious business because their livelihoods and their clients' well being depend on it.

Students who read are getting ready to have jobs. Mostly. But just getting ready. And usually someone else is pulling the freight (paying the bills).

[Devrim]

I think that a lot of it comes down to the fact that in the past students were almost universally drawn from the ranks of the children of the privileged. When I was a teenager nobody in my family had ever been to university. Nobody in my year at school (about 300 kids) went to university, nor were they expected to do so.

In recent years there has been a massive expansion of the education system allowing many working class kids the possibility to go to university. However, many social attitudes are set in youth, and it is quite unsurprising that the children of the post-war decades see students as 'middle class wankers'.

Devrim

[Devrim]

El Che was a student, Marx was a student in fact the only non-student I can think of who comes to mind is Stalin and the miserable failure that was Pol Pot.

Stalin was actually a student at an orthodox seminary, and Pol Pot, who came from a pretty privalleged background, studied in Paris.

Che pretty much fits the bill for what people of my generation would think of as a 'middle class wanker'.

Devrim

[#FF0000]

In recent years there has been a massive expansion of the education system allowing many working class kids the possibility to go to university. However, many social attitudes are set in youth, and it is quite unsurprising that the children of the post-war decades see students as 'middle class wankers'.

Yeah, old stereotypes have a tendency to stick around like that.

Speaking of, most people I know who are "students" are poor and older than me, which is kind of interesting.

[La Comédie Noire]

Since you need education past high school to get a good working class job these days it's kinda hard to call students petit bourgeois.

[TheCultofAbeLincoln]

What, you guys never met a 19 year old who goes to college and becomes a self proclaimed expert? (On everything.) There is a certain vibe that college kids put off that I cannot fucking stand. It's hard to put a finger on it, but a lot of it probably has to do with my own jealousy towards their position (though I do not whenn they have to go back home with a load of debt and a worthless degree).

I would like to add that I know quite a few college students who both work to support themselves and those who live off a trust fund. That annoying vibe is definitely more prevelant in the latter. That feeling of "self centerdness" and naivete towards, well, adulthood in some cases.

Students have an important role to play that cuts through many different societies. As a whole, I would greatly prefer young people who are socially active than just drinking and watching football games.

[9]

In recent years there has been a massive expansion of the education system allowing many working class kids the possibility to go to university.


to be honest, I think this may be much less true in the US than it is in much of Europe, though I'm not 100% sure. 'syndicat' made an interesting post on the subject a few months ago (originally posted here (http://www.revleft.com/vb/showpost.php?p=1734823&postcount=77)):



Originally Posted by syndicat
About three fourths of the students at the 146 most selective private colleges and PhD granting public universities in the USA are from the elite classes, with average family income at $120,000. The percentage of low income students who graduate with four year or higher degrees from any college in USA is 6 percent...the same as it was in 1970. The proportion of working class students at major PhD-granting public universities in the USA has declined since the '70s.which certainly isn't to suggest that there aren't working class university students in the US; obviously there are. however, I definitely don't think they're a majority. I could be wrong, though.

[La Comédie Noire]

I posted this in another thread.


I've also noticed a falling or stationary social mobility. Students who were going to 4 year colleges are leaving for the trade and community colleges because working class jobs such as nursing or electrical engineering offer better security.

I'm going to community college probably for nursing although I haven't declared a major yet. What I've noticed is I'm seeing people from my old high school who went off to four year colleges coming to my community college because they can't afford it or the degree they are going to get would be worthless.

[apawllo]

It's undoubtedly the case that the US education system has expanded in recent years. As mentioned, there are now community colleges, technical schools, etc. And there's a clear class division there indeed. It should also be noted that while lower income students reach college, drop out rates are much higher, only serving to feed into the massive business that higher education has become.

[9]

It's undoubtedly the case that the US education system has expanded in recent years.
do you have anything to support this, though? you say "undoubtedly", and yet personally, I have doubts. you may of course be right, but it certainly isn't self-evident.


As mentioned, there are now community colleges, technical schools, etc.community colleges and technical schools aren't particularly new, though, are they?


And there's a clear class division there indeed.no doubt. in my experience, though, most people who talk trash about students are pretty clearly referring to university students.


It should also be noted that while lower income students reach college...many (most?) of them don't, though.

[#FF0000]

community colleges and technical schools aren't particularly new, though, are they?

I don't think they were as common as they are today. Since the 70's onwards, I think, there has been a big boom in community colleges with people heading there so they can get a cheap degree for a steady job.

[black magick hustla]

i dont hate students btw. i hate campus activism. its very different.

i guess it depends the school? i go to a huge state university and my best friends come from the ghetto or rural working class background. i think there are a lot of kids who are really in debt

[synthesis]

In the U.S., I think it's hard to overestimate the impact of the G.I. Bill (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/G.I._Bill) on the accessibility of tertiary education. It seems to me that it played a fairly significant role in the transition from this:


in the past students were almost universally drawn from the ranks of the children of the privileged.

To this:


i go to a huge state university and my best friends come from the ghetto or rural working class background.

I don't know if other countries had similar programs after WWII, but I'd be curious to see if there's any correlation between the extensiveness of the programs then and the accessibility of education now.

[apawllo]

do you have anything to support this, though? you say "undoubtedly", and yet personally, I have doubts. you may of course be right, but it certainly isn't self-evident.
Not only that, but projections that it will continue to do so for the foreseeable future.

http://nces.ed.gov/fastfacts/display.asp?id=98


community colleges and technical schools aren't particularly new, though, are they?
I suppose I should have said they've become more prevalent than they once were.


no doubt. in my experience, though, most people who talk trash about students are pretty clearly referring to university students.
Right. That was my point. Some people already pointed to the fact that it can cause some jealousy.


many (most?) of them don't, though.
I'm not sure if that's the case, and I don't have any statistics to say one way or another. More of those in poverty do in fact attend higher education than do not, so I would guess that more of the working class does than doesn't as well. Again, that's just a guess though. According to this study, in the US 60% in poverty attend some form of higher education, of those 11% graduate, for what it's worth.

http://diverseeducation.com/article/13866/

[ComradeMan]

i dont hate students btw. i hate campus activism. its very different.


Why do you hate campus activism? What do you mean by it?

[Bilan]

Because people are shit, and think all students are self-righteous, wealthy twats.

[Revolution starts with U]

Why do you hate campus activism? What do you mean by it?

Ya, I don't really get that either. Campus activism can be broken into two camps (effectively); one I support, and another I abhor.
Some campus activists get in the way and try to tear down the shackles of the system. The only problem I would have with these is that sometimes the most vocal are also the most naive.
And then there's the "we're gona change the world by gathering in a field and complaining" crowd. I can't stand these people, and they do more to hurt revolutionary struggle than any good they have ever done.
Woodstock sucked, and accomplished nothing. Get over it hippies.

[black magick hustla]

Why do you hate campus activism? What do you mean by it?

it is extremely insular and forms its own ghettoes. it is "academicist", i.e. folks are all about smart people with phds talking smack rather than a genuine engagement of theory coming out of working class militants. it is infected with identity politics and people who are all about protecting heritage and culture. it degenerates into a whole lifestyle where activists form a cultural ghetto rather than befriending and engaging average folks who are not as "enlightened". it is extremely self righteous and snobby.

[Quail]

I think it is just based on the stereotype of students coming from priveliged families. Certainly there are students whose parents pay their fees and living costs, but there are an awful lot who are living off loans and some who have to get a job to support themselves. Doing a full time uni course and working part time clearly isn't easy. I'm not sure what the situation is like in the states, but in the UK I know a fair few working class people who are at university, including myself.

[balaclava]

Any thoughts? Is this the same where you live?

I’m not sure where you live and although I feel quite confident that the system is different in different countries I am not sure what the difference is, thus I can only speak of the UK system (which bizarrely is different for different countries within the UK!)

I don’t believe ‘people’ hate students. In fact most of the people I know are parents of students which would mean hating their own. I think most people believe (rightly or wrongly) that the current student ‘riots’ aren’t your everyday student but mainly anarchists, children and the odd idiot student who enjoys the occasion.

I think the current situation has been caused by years of political posturing which has led the youth to believe that they should be allowed free university education to study what they like and they take that as an invitation to a 3 year party. On the other side, Universities are in the business of making money and they will meet demand. This, in my opinion, has led to a plethora of degree course resulting in qualifications to do nothing – tourism, media studies, womens’ rights. Again it’s a failure of democracy in that politicians do what will get them votes rather than what is best for the country. I would like to see the government identify the areas we need graduates (engineering, medicine, science etc.,) and provide that for free and anyone wanting to do tourism etc., should pay the full costs.

[ComradeMan]

I would like to see the government identify the areas we need graduates (engineering, medicine, science etc.,) and provide that for free and anyone wanting to do tourism etc., should pay the full costs.

Why should the government have that right? Why must it be in state control?

I thought universities were about being educated not vocational colleges for capitalism per se.

Higher education should be free and equal for all however I do believe it is a privilege that you should earn and not a right as such inasmuch as people should be at university on the basis of academic merit and that alone.

[Quail]

I think the current situation has been caused by years of political posturing which has led the youth to believe that they should be allowed free university education to study what they like and they take that as an invitation to a 3 year party. On the other side, Universities are in the business of making money and they will meet demand. This, in my opinion, has led to a plethora of degree course resulting in qualifications to do nothing – tourism, media studies, womens’ rights. Again it’s a failure of democracy in that politicians do what will get them votes rather than what is best for the country. I would like to see the government identify the areas we need graduates (engineering, medicine, science etc.,) and provide that for free and anyone wanting to do tourism etc., should pay the full costs.
I think that what is needed is a complete change in the approach to education. As it is, universities are basically factories churning out new workers. Most courses are basically designed to mould people into good workers. Whatever happened to education for education's sake? People should be free to learn if they want to learn, for self-improvement.

[ÑóẊîöʼn]

it is extremely insular and forms its own ghettoes. it is "academicist", i.e. folks are all about smart people with phds talking smack rather than a genuine engagement of theory coming out of working class militants. it is infected with identity politics and people who are all about protecting heritage and culture. it degenerates into a whole lifestyle where activists form a cultural ghetto rather than befriending and engaging average folks who are not as "enlightened". it is extremely self righteous and snobby.

The thing is, most students don't go on to become ivory-tower academics - they go on to become workers like the rest of us, often not much better remunerated than those of us who didn't go. Political activity during university cannot fail to have left some kind of mark.

[Bud Struggle]

Why should the government have that right? Why must it be in state control?

I thought universities were about being educated not vocational colleges for capitalism per se.

But shouldn't society (through its elected representitives) try to funnel people into the areas that help society the most. You CAN study anything--but if you study medicine instead of basket weaving you will be thanked by society with free education.



Higher education should be free and equal for all however I do believe it is a privilege that you should earn and not a right as such inasmuch as people should be at university on the basis of academic merit and that alone.

I agree there if you don't do well there is no need for society to fund anyone's lazyness. I kind of think that's the way the system is here in America. My daughter is looking at colleges these days and it seem that for the most part--if you get in and do the work and do it well finances are not an issue. For the most part the colleges pick up the tab.

[Bud Struggle]

I think that what is needed is a complete change in the approach to education. As it is, universities are basically factories churning out new workers. Most courses are basically designed to mould people into good workers. Whatever happened to education for education's sake? People should be free to learn if they want to learn, for self-improvement.

If you learn things that improves society (like being an engineer or doctor) society should pay. If you do things just to improve yourself--you should pay.

If seems a fair way to operate.

[Dimentio]

Gotcha, and I understand.

I've been wondering lately why like-minded communists don't try to form self-sustained communities where they can live under their own system and try to draw people to the movement. That could be an effective way of getting the working-class, the poor, the miserable and sick and tired to learn about and embrace communism. And it could be a chance to capture the public's attention if it can work, and show them it's a good thing.

Hey... I shouldn't be giving you guys any ideas! :glare: LOL!

Tried. There are numerous such communities in the USA, Britain and Ireland up until this day.

[balaclava]

Why should the government have that right? Why must it be in state control?

I thought universities were about being educated not vocational colleges for capitalism per se.

Higher education should be free and equal for all however I do believe it is a privilege that you should earn and not a right as such inasmuch as people should be at university on the basis of academic merit and that alone.


The government should have the 'right' to decide because the government has control of the money and the mandate to choose where to spend it.

Equality, rights, privileges – does the taxpayer not also has rights? (In the UK and probably most other countries) the content of compulsory education is decreed by the state (presumably based upon some fundamental standards). University education is a choice i.e. the individual chooses to study whatever they choose. I as a taxpayer can see the need to teach undergraduates certain skills that we as a community need for the benefit of us all and as such I believe the taxpayer should pay for that education and places on those courses should be allocated to freely and equally to whoever is the best able regardless of background. After that, if a rich person, poor person or anyone wants to spend 3 years studying some esoteric and worthless subject then they should pay for it themselves.

See below and example (but not complete list) of the subjects I don’t want my government funding:
David Beckham studies
Parapsychology
Ufology
The Phallus
Surfing Studies
Queer Musicology
Star Trek
Drama
Fashion
CyberFeminism

[balaclava]

Most courses are basically designed to mould people into good workers.

I'd argue with that. I'd argue that most courses produce students qualified and able to do nothing of value to their own money earning potential or for the community at large.

[Skooma Addict]

What do you guys think of frats and sororities?

[Quail]

I'd argue with that. I'd argue that most courses produce students qualified and able to do nothing of value to their own money earning potential or for the community at large.
I don't think that's true. Any degree requires a variety of skills to complete, even if it's in a subject you consider "useless".


If you learn things that improves society (like being an engineer or doctor) society should pay. If you do things just to improve yourself--you should pay.

If seems a fair way to operate.
Surely society would benefit from people being able to study and learn whatever they wanted? Everyone would get a fair opportunity to contribute to our knowledge and research. There's nothing fair about people who need to get a job to support their family at 16 being unable to continue their education and being unable to enjoy learning.
A big problem with education is that from very early on, it isn't about knowledge or learning at all. It's about moulding young people into good workers who won't challenge the status quo.

[#FF0000]

If you learn things that improves society (like being an engineer or doctor) society should pay. If you do things just to improve yourself--you should pay.

If seems a fair way to operate.

I think society benefits from having free education in any subject available to people. Not to mention the cost of education is peanuts compares to other wholly unnecessary and harmful things (i.e. the bloated American Defense budget).


See below and example (but not complete list) of the subjects I don’t want my government funding:
David Beckham studies
Parapsychology
Ufology
The Phallus
Surfing Studies
Queer Musicology
Star Trek
Drama
Fashion
CyberFeminism


Kids taking David Beckham studies aren't bankrupting anybody, guy.

And what's wrong with Drama, Fashion, Queer Musicology, The Phallus and Cyber-feminism? Only issue I have is that programs like "The Phallus" seem more suited for a course rather than an entire degree program.

And the Surfing Studies degree you mentioned is offered in Australia. I don't think there's anything wrong with that considering the context.

[#FF0000]

What do you guys think of frats and sororities

I don't like them.

[Chris]

Society doesn't benefit from someone studying Star Trek or the Beatles' effect on society for years on end. In any way at all. The only courses that should be free are courses that are neccessary for a job that provides services necessary for society as a whole (engineering, medicine, etc) and not frivolous courses. From my experience, most people "anti-student" are thinking mostly of people who study such things (or so-called eternal students who never actually gets a job). In Norway, education has been very much open to the working class for relatively long time though, so I think there are less "anti-student" sentiments than in other places in the world. Although, my father never got the opportunity to study and neither did any of my grandparents so relatively long time is still pretty short.

In my opinion frivolous courses should be something that is provided to every worker who wants it. Ie, youth shouldn't spend years of their time on courses just for their own enjoyment but such studies should be available to people already in work. That way people can still have the oppurtunity to learn, while not being a burden on the rest of society while learning such things.

[#FF0000]

Society doesn't benefit from someone studying Star Trek or the Beatles' effect on society for years on end.

Who is doing this?

[Quail]

Who is doing this?
I've probably spent more time "studying" Star Trek than doing maths this semester :lol:

But surely that would just be like a themed media studies course, which would teach people to watch films etc critically?

[Chris]

Who is doing this?

Well, now that I checked it was Bob Dylan and not the Beatles. The University of Oslo has a course on Bob Dylan's effect on society.

[#FF0000]

Well, now that I checked it was Bob Dylan and not the Beatles. The University of Oslo has a course on Bob Dylan's effect on society.

Well, I meant how many kids are actually going off to study Bob Dylan or the Beatles or whoever for years and years?

I'm going to venture not many.

And, for degree programs like David Beckham Studies or Bob Dylan or Ufology, what are the requirements? Are they programs where you just have to take a few credits worth of classes or are they big 60 credit programs?

[hatzel]

The University of Oslo has a course on Bob Dylan's effect on society.

And what's wrong with that?

[ÑóẊîöʼn]

David Beckham studies

Do any degree programs like this actually exist, or are you simply regurgitating tabloid populist crap about universities "dumbing down"?


Parapsychology
Ufology

Both of these have a place in a university. You don't need to believe in that shit to study it.


The Phallus

Phallic symbology is/was important to many cultures, although I agree it's probably better off as a single course.


Surfing Studies

Surfing is a legitimate physical activity, why single it out? Unless you want all sports-related university programs to be defunded, in which case you're an idiot.


Queer Musicology

Minority groups often make cultural contributions greater than their numbers suggest, so how is it not a legitimate field of study?


Star Trek

A hugely influential, nay iconic, pop culture phenomenon that has been going on for decades now? Why the hell not?


Drama
Fashion

You're an idiot.


CyberFeminism

Like The Phallus, could probably be slotted into a more general program.

Honestly, While I as an avid fan of the hard sciences enjoy the occasional sneer at arty-farty Humanities types, universities are strangled of decent funding as is, and the situation would not be improved by knuckle-dragging troglodytes such as yourself voting off certain areas of study simply because of your prejudices.

[#FF0000]

I've probably spent more time "studying" Star Trek than doing maths this semester :lol:

But surely that would just be like a themed media studies course, which would teach people to watch films etc critically?

Exactly. In courses like these, I don't think the focus is on what they're watching. I think the classes are about exploring a field using Star Trek, the Beatles, UFOs, whatever, as a reference point.

[Chris]

And what's wrong with that?
When the course is provided free of charge (students here only pay for housing and food and such)? Then it really is no wonder that some workers here are somewhat anti-intellectuals. Courses like that should not, in my opinion, be provided free of charge to students. I think that education for education's sake is a luxury (by that, courses that is not necessary for some kind of future job), and thus something that should be provided by the one taking that kind of education.

[hatzel]

Well, society might need sociologists...you never know...

[Chris]

Well, society might need sociologists...you never know...
Yes, but it gets out of hand when there are more people taking an education in sociology than medicine. Especially when my country has a shortage of doctors, nurses and other health personnel.

[#FF0000]

Yes, but it gets out of hand when there are more people taking an education in sociology than medicine. Especially when my country has a shortage of doctors, nurses and other health personnel.

Well yeah but you can't force people to become doctors by making them pay to do anything else. People go to school for things that 1) They are interested in and 2) will provide a useful perspective or useful skills for them. If people don't want to be doctors there isn't much you can do. Making people pay to take classes outside of Medicine isn't going to cut it, because it isn't going to make people want to be doctors.

EDIT: There are probably other ways to push people into Medicine, though, that aren't harmful to the education system overall.

[hatzel]

There are probably other ways to push people into Medicine, though, that aren't harmful to the education system overall.

Two words: shotgun degrees...

[Quail]

When the course is provided free of charge (students here only pay for housing and food and such)? Then it really is no wonder that some workers here are somewhat anti-intellectuals. Courses like that should not, in my opinion, be provided free of charge to students. I think that education for education's sake is a luxury (by that, courses that is not necessary for some kind of future job), and thus something that should be provided by the one taking that kind of education.
It seems as though you've drank in all of the indocrination. This is exactly what the capitalists think. Educate the masses so they can be good workers.

[#FF0000]

Eh, I think that's a little far. I see where Chris is coming from. "Oh shit we need doctors".

It's just that you really can't just make people study medicine like that.

[ÑóẊîöʼn]

It seems as though you've drank in all of the indocrination. This is exactly what the capitalists think. Educate the masses so they can be good workers.

Bang on. Universities should be more than just places that crank out skilled workers, which seems to be a common, but in my opinion false, conception of their purpose. Society should have a place where research and critical study occurs in an environment with as little interference as possible.

[Bud Struggle]

Bang on. Universities should be more than just places that crank out skilled workers, which seems to be a common, but in my opinion false, conception of their purpose. Society should have a place where research and critical study occurs in an environment with as little interference as possible.

And that is EXACTLY what universities are. Or at lest the better universities. My daughter went to a session at Darthmouth and there was nothing said about being "useful." It was all about opportunities. And those places are for people that would do well in higher end schools.And further more--if you can't pay, it's free.

Now Community Colleges are different--they are vocational or semi vocational--but the people that go there NEED that kind of training.

The system you are wishing for already exists.

[ComradeMan]

Correct me if I am wrong but I thought it wasn't just about learning about the subject but applying intelligence and an academic approach to a subject. I've met some pretty stupid educated people too who had the so-called "traditional" subjects as degrees- it just meant they had memorised facts and could spew them out on exam day but they had no way of interpreting them nor applying any kind of logic.

Just suppose that one of these so-called frivolous degrees such as surfing studies may also take in hydrodynamics and the development of materials to improve hydrodynamics- this could in turn lead to discoveries and new technologies too. It's far too easy to write things off as frivolous just because no one is going to make money out of them.

[#FF0000]

And that is EXACTLY what universities are. Or at lest the better universities. My daughter went to a session at Darthmouth and there was nothing said about being "useful." It was all about opportunities. And those places are for people that would do well in higher end schools.And further more--if you can't pay, it's free.

Now Community Colleges are different--they are vocational or semi vocational--but the people that go there NEED that kind of training.

The system you are wishing for already exists.

Yup that definitely exists with universities in America.

Now if only we had halfway decent primary and secondary education around here.

[Bud Struggle]

Now if only we had halfway decent primary and secondary education around here.

Not to sit and debate you--but again my daughter goes to a public HS and it's fantastic. EXCELLENT opportunities for those who want them. She's in an International Baccalaureate and is uniform through out the world.

Schools like this are all over the place--people just don't take advantage of them.

It's pretty interesting that almost 2/3 of her class are either Chinese, Indian, Korean or Japanese. The rest whites and I think three Blacks. People literally move here from other countries to send their kids to an America HS and people that live down the street don't take advantage of the programs the school has to offer.

[#FF0000]

Oh, I don't think it's people not taking advantage of things. I think that the problem is being lucky enough to be able to go to one of the better high schools. If you're in an inner city, especially along the Rust Belt, you're pretty much out of luck. You're going to go to a school that was designed and built like a prison to take classes on how to work at Wal*Mart and there isn't much you can do.

My high school was good. The music program was excellent with groups that are p. well known and respected on the, er, high school marching band circuit.

But we'll see how much longer that lasts. Out of the two high schools in the district, mine was the "Black" school with all the immigrants and ethnic minorities. Our test scores are just as bad as the other high school in the district, which is lily white and is mediocre all around otherwise. Guess which one gets the cuts!

But I'm ranting.

Public High Schools in America aren't all miserable, but a lot of them could be a whole lot better.

And No Child Left Behind is basically a plot to destroy the entire public school system.

I'm ranting.

[Bud Struggle]

I'm thinking back to when I was in college--I went to school in Washington DC and there were always really important government people just HANGING AROUND my university. (Not that I took any advantage of it.) They used to give talks and lectures and explanations and just hang around the cafeteria and in the bars around the campus.

But that stuff was there. I'm sure that kind of thing goes on in most better universities-- different places so different people, different specialties, but there are a lot more advantages to the college system in the United States than you'd imagine.

[apawllo]

Not to sit and debate you--but again my daughter goes to a public HS and it's fantastic. EXCELLENT opportunities for those who want them. She's in an International Baccalaureate and is uniform through out the world.

Schools like this are all over the place--people just don't take advantage of them.

It's pretty interesting that almost 2/3 of her class are either Chinese, Indian, Korean or Japanese. The rest whites and I think three Blacks. People literally move here from other countries to send their kids to an America HS and people that live down the street don't take advantage of the programs the school has to offer.

Not to assume too much, but the racial makeup leads me to believe that the school is likely in a higher income area than some could potentially afford. Most immigrants from the above areas aren't typically here to serve as trades people. And, the few blacks who are fortunate enough to escape redlining and send their children to such a school are just that...extremely fortunate.


And that is EXACTLY what universities are. Or at lest the better universities. My daughter went to a session at Darthmouth and there was nothing said about being "useful." It was all about opportunities. And those places are for people that would do well in higher end schools.And further more--if you can't pay, it's free.

Now Community Colleges are different--they are vocational or semi vocational--but the people that go there NEED that kind of training.

The system you are wishing for already exists.

There's nothing free about Dartmouth. I mean, it's good that you sent your daughter there for a seminar, but what is the class distribution among students at Ivy League schools I wonder? Because I've never met anyone who attended one. Something like 65% of my graduating class ended up in community college. If they took AP classes all through school and wound up with a GPA over 4.0 while taking extra curriculars they more than likely ended up at Ohio State, OU or Miami University on scholarship. 1 or 2 were offered full rides to Notre Dame. Not that these are bad schools, but let's be honest here; the class mobility really isn't there. For someone in my community to be able to afford to go to Dartmouth would be next to impossible.


I'm thinking back to when I was in college--I went to school in Washington DC and there were always really important government people just HANGING AROUND my university. (Not that I took any advantage of it.) They used to give talks and lectures and explanations and just hang around the cafeteria and in the bars around the campus.

But that stuff was there. I'm sure that kind of thing goes on in most better universities-- different places so different people, different specialties, but there are a lot more advantages to the college system in the United States than you'd imagine.

The college system is undoubtedly great for those who reap the benefits, but who exactly are those? The clear evidence shows that those who have money tend to obtain degrees and therefore keep the money. Obviously it's more complex than this, but as far as the topic of education is concerned, that's about how deep we need to look to see the problem at hand. It's not about motivation or taking advantage of opportunities (maybe for some it is); by and large, it's about not having the money to afford those very opportunities.

[balaclava]

I've read lots of posts suggesting reasons why students should be allowed to study nebulous subjects but I'm still waiting for someone to explain why the taxpayer should pay for it when society doesn't need people with those qualifications?

[ComradeMan]

I've read lots of posts suggesting reasons why students should be allowed to study nebulous subjects but I'm still waiting for someone to explain why the taxpayer should pay for it when society doesn't need people with those qualifications?

Does Society need pensioners? Does Society need florists? Does Society need hedge fund managers? :lol: Does Society need a lot of people..... dangerous argument you are taking here....

Does Society need you?

[#FF0000]

I've read lots of posts suggesting reasons why students should be allowed to study nebulous subjects but I'm still waiting for someone to explain why the taxpayer should pay for it when society doesn't need people with those qualifications?

Because it isn't that expensive and a society gains more from having free and easily accessible education than it does from having a society where education is only seen as valuable where it bolsters earning power.

[balaclava]

Does Society need pensioners? Does Society need florists? Does Society need hedge fund managers? :lol: Does Society need a lot of people..... dangerous argument you are taking here....

Does Society need you?


Hmmm - not impressed with your argument. I'll let the pensioners go as obvious . . . the others I don't need to pay for (apart from me who is, of course, essential).

[ComradeMan]

Hmmm - not impressed with your argument. I'll let the pensioners go as obvious . . . the others I don't need to pay for (apart from me who is, of course, essential).

What about all the people who have paid for you? Where did the public healthcare, free education and services you benefit come from?

I suppose you follow Thatcher's line that "Society" does not exist.

BTW- if you are of a certain age and university educated you probably had it free of charge at the benefit of other people's money but now when it's your money at stake you don't want to know.

* University education was paid for by "grants" until the early 1990s in the UK.

[Bud Struggle]

Not to assume too much, but the racial makeup leads me to believe that the school is likely in a higher income area than some could potentially afford. Most immigrants from the above areas aren't typically here to serve as trades people. And, the few blacks who are fortunate enough to escape redlining and send their children to such a school are just that...extremely fortunate. Here's the beauty of a well put together school system. Here where I live now in Florida--it's don by county and all the schools are county wide schools. There is local zoning--but with in inclusion of magnet programs and special studies programs (like the IB) kids come from all over to attend these schools no matter what neighborhood they are in. My daughter's school is 45 mins away in the heart of "downtown." The school is 33% Black--exactly the same as every other school in the county.


There's nothing free about Dartmouth. I mean, it's good that you sent your daughter there for a seminar, but what is the class distribution among students at Ivy League schools I wonder? Because I've never met anyone who attended one. Something like 65% of my graduating class ended up in community college. If they took AP classes all through school and wound up with a GPA over 4.0 while taking extra curriculars they more than likely ended up at Ohio State, OU or Miami University on scholarship. 1 or 2 were offered full rides to Notre Dame. Not that these are bad schools, but let's be honest here; the class mobility really isn't there. For someone in my community to be able to afford to go to Dartmouth would be next to impossible. Here's how it works. The school is free to anyone making under $75,000 a year. Anything else is on a prorated as need basis. No one ever leaves the school because of finances. Ever.
The kids that get in are assured they will be paid for if they can't pay for themselves.

I personally went to a "downtown" Caltholic HS in a lower middle class New England factory town. and we had our Yales and MITs and Notre Dames. I went to Georgetown (I didn't get into Yale.) Looking at the make up of my daughter's school--it's roughly the same. I will say. On the other hand my daughter's graduating class is about 750, mine was 200. Maybe there's a difference there.

Community colleges are for kids that don't do that well in HS--annd don't have the intellectual means to compete in higher rated schools. There is nothing wrong with that.


The college system is undoubtedly great for those who reap the benefits, but who exactly are those? The clear evidence shows that those who have money tend to obtain degrees and therefore keep the money. Obviously it's more complex than this, but as far as the topic of education is concerned, that's about how deep we need to look to see the problem at hand. It's not about motivation or taking advantage of opportunities (maybe for some it is); by and large, it's about not having the money to afford those very opportunities.

I seriously disagree with you. I honestly can say IT'S NOT ABOUT MONEY. The higher rated schools are color, race and money blind. You get in--you go. I'm looking at schools with my daughter at this time and EVERY school we talk to makes a very stron point about that. Now, do lower income kids, black kids take advantage of the opportunities offered them? That is another story. But it's not like the system doesn't try to do a good job.

Actually I'm very impressed by it as I am by (at least) Florida's educational system.

[#FF0000]

Community colleges are for kids that don't do that well in HS--annd don't have the intellectual means to compete in higher rated schools. There is nothing wrong with that.

Nit picking, but a lot of students just go to community college to get general studies credits out of the way and then go on to a four-year college for their major.

[Bud Struggle]

Nit picking, but a lot of students just go to community college to get general studies credits out of the way and then go on to a four-year college for their major.

Fine. You are right. That is out of the area of my experise just now.

[balaclava]

What about all the people who have paid for you? Where did the public healthcare, free education and services you benefit come from?

I suppose you follow Thatcher's line that "Society" does not exist.

BTW- if you are of a certain age and university educated you probably had it free of charge at the benefit of other people's money but now when it's your money at stake you don't want to know.

* University education was paid for by "grants" until the early 1990s in the UK.

Entirely so. . when I went to university I got a grant i.e. I got paid money to go to university but that was in a time when there were limited places, in limited subjects and those limited places were allocated to the selected few (selected on ability).

Now taking it to the other extreme and you bring in the question of age – do you suggest that anyone of any age should be allowed to study any subject at the taxpayers expense simply because that’s what they want to do? Of course when this thread started we had a picture in our heads of the student being that young person starting out in life finding themselves and searching for their future. Now of course we know that the whole landscape has altered, further education is open (and quite rightly so) to anybody of any age but whose costs should be born by the taxpayer – anybody and everybody’s? Hence I make my case – the taxpayer pays for what society needs, if society doesn’t need it doesn’t pay.

[#FF0000]

But tuition being cheap and accessible has not led to a million pensioners hanging out on campus for years on end chasing doctorates on David Beckham, so what does it matter if people of any age are eligible?


Of course when this thread started we had a picture in our heads of the student being that young person starting out in life finding themselves and searching for their future.

Ehhh not quite so. I said myself that a lot of students are older than me (20) and are people between jobs looking for training to get into something more stable.

I think Balaclava has me on ignore.

[ComradeMan]

Entirely so. . when I went to university I got a grant i.e. I got paid money to go to university but that was in a time when there were limited places, in limited subjects and those limited places were allocated to the selected few (selected on ability).

Right- so when you went to university you got a grant from taxpayers' money and now you don't think people should have the right to benefit from what you did.

You also seem to miss the point that the whole policy of the capitalisation and marketing of education has created the very problem that you are now wishing to punish the younger generation for.

Does society need government ministers telling them to tighten their belts when they were found out with their fingers in the public money to pay their own expenses?

Does society need to spend billions saving private banks- account holders were not really even at risk anyway?

Does society need to spend billions on a war that most of the society did not appear to want?

Oh, and we must trust that noble institution of government that lied to the public about that last point too (allegedly).

I'm sorry but your arguments sound morally bankrupt, hypocritical and selfish.

[William Howe]

I suppose it's jealousy, since many people consider dilligent students to be 'nerdy', or 'geeks', or the like, because they themselves don't feel that they possess the same mental capacity.

[ÑóẊîöʼn]

Entirely so. . when I went to university I got a grant i.e. I got paid money to go to university but that was in a time when there were limited places, in limited subjects and those limited places were allocated to the selected few (selected on ability).

So your position is basically "Fuck you, I've got mine" while pulling the ladder up behind you? Nice to know that Liberturdian hypocritical selfishness isn't limited to the US of A. :rolleyes:



Now taking it to the other extreme and you bring in the question of age – do you suggest that anyone of any age should be allowed to study any subject at the taxpayers expense simply because that’s what they want to do? Of course when this thread started we had a picture in our heads of the student being that young person starting out in life finding themselves and searching for their future. Now of course we know that the whole landscape has altered, further education is open (and quite rightly so) to anybody of any age but whose costs should be born by the taxpayer – anybody and everybody’s? Hence I make my case – the taxpayer pays for what society needs, if society doesn’t need it doesn’t pay.

It's already been pointed out to you that your judgement of what is "useful" or not is entirely worthless and based on nothing but petty prejudice. You whine on and on about taxes like a proper Little Englander, Taxpayers' Alliance mouthpiece, but like the others you seem to forget that students, as well as people who disagree with you, also pay their taxes.

Another thing to consider is that "benefit to society" is not always directly measurable. Literary theory may not get hospitals built or the roads repaired, but our culture would be duller without it!

We're certainly not short of the resources needed to send everyone who wants to go to university - how many university places could we fund if we scrapped the Trident replacement or stopped invading countries halfway around the world at the behest of our US masters? If it's waste you want to cut, I suggest you start there.

[ComradeMan]

Actually I'm very impressed by it as I am by (at least) Florida's educational system.

They're just trying to keep up with their southern neighbour on that little island 90 miles south.... ;)

[La Comédie Noire]

There are some great professors at community college. Infact a community college professor turned me on to James Joyce. I've read Ulysses a few times now thanks to him and the best part? I didn't have to pay 50,000 a year in tuition to do it.:)

I also had a Sociology professor from Greece who was around during the over throw of the military dictatorship. His stories were far more valuable to me than some big name.

[apawllo]

Here's the beauty of a well put together school system. Here where I live now in Florida--it's don by county and all the schools are county wide schools. There is local zoning--but with in inclusion of magnet programs and special studies programs (like the IB) kids come from all over to attend these schools no matter what neighborhood they are in. My daughter's school is 45 mins away in the heart of "downtown." The school is 33% Black--exactly the same as every other school in the county.

Here's how it works. The school is free to anyone making under $75,000 a year. Anything else is on a prorated as need basis. No one ever leaves the school because of finances. Ever.
The kids that get in are assured they will be paid for if they can't pay for themselves.

So, since there are "three blacks" as previously mentioned, and the school is "33% black" am I correct in assuming that there are 9 children at this school? And since "2/3 of her class are Indian, Chinese, Korean, and Japanese" I'd guess that would mean your daughter falls into one of your above ethnic categories? But wait, whites have been mentioned as well. What part do they make up again? Quite a quandary we find ourselves in. No latinos either though, eh? No Cubans, Puerto Ricans, Mexicans, etc? Quite rare for a low income area in Florida, no? Ah well, I'll take your word for it.



I personally went to a "downtown" Caltholic HS in a lower middle class New England factory town. and we had our Yales and MITs and Notre Dames. I went to Georgetown (I didn't get into Yale.) Looking at the make up of my daughter's school--it's roughly the same. I will say. On the other hand my daughter's graduating class is about 750, mine was 200. Maybe there's a difference there.

Community colleges are for kids that don't do that well in HS--annd don't have the intellectual means to compete in higher rated schools. There is nothing wrong with that.

That's an absurd statement for multiple reasons. Many kids with close to 4.0 GPAs wind up in CC, which I'd think most working class folks would be aware of. Anyway why exactly is it that some kids don't have the intellectual means to compete? What is intellectual capital derived from, and why is it essentially inherited in some cases? Could it possibly be that we live in a classist society and educational opportunities are essentially passed down from one generation to the next?


I seriously disagree with you. I honestly can say IT'S NOT ABOUT MONEY. The higher rated schools are color, race and money blind. You get in--you go. I'm looking at schools with my daughter at this time and EVERY school we talk to makes a very stron point about that. Now, do lower income kids, black kids take advantage of the opportunities offered them? That is another story. But it's not like the system doesn't try to do a good job.

Actually I'm very impressed by it as I am by (at least) Florida's educational system.

Well if they tell you they don't want money, it must be true. You realize that no one attends an academic institution for free right? Even if your daughter's on a full scholarship, they're still getting the money...even if you never see it. Of course they're telling you what you want to hear; giving you the business man's pitch. That's exactly what higher education institutions are; businesses.

That's not to say of course that they don't provide a valuable service. But I disagree with you when you say that it's being done correctly. If your refutation of the statistics I posted earlier (60% of those in poverty attend higher education, and only 11% of those who do obtain degrees) is that those individuals are simply not taking advantage of opportunities given to them, you might ask yourself why the upper and upper middle class is instead...

[TheCultofAbeLincoln]

Woodstock sucked, and accomplished nothing. Get over it hippies.

You should expand your taste in music a bit if you think woodstock sucked, in my opinion.

[∞]

Gotcha, and I understand.

I've been wondering lately why like-minded communists don't try to form self-sustained communities where they can live under their own system and try to draw people to the movement. That could be an effective way of getting the working-class, the poor, the miserable and sick and tired to learn about and embrace communism. And it could be a chance to capture the public's attention if it can work, and show them it's a good thing.

Hey... I shouldn't be giving you guys any ideas! :glare: LOL!

Oh! I have an idea...no, I already thought of that.

[Revolution starts with U]

You should expand your taste in music a bit if you think woodstock sucked, in my opinion.
Don't get me wrong, that is, imo, one of the greatest eras in american music. I love the music of woodstock, and listen to much of it daily.
But Woodstock accomplished absolutely dick and symbolizes everything that was wrong with the hippy culture.
It symbolizes this belief that by standing in a field, banging a drum, smoking a joint, and complaining about things is going to "change the wooorld mahn, like uh.. ya."
There's this place a few towns over from me called the Quarry (Nelson Ledges Quarry Park) where a lot of these starry eyed, pseudo revolutionaries congregate. Not a fuckng one of them has attended a protest or rally. But they're revolutionary man, for real. :cursing:
Fuck hippies

[∞]

Also school requires little to no intelligence, its primarily based on work ethic.
College on the other hand...

[Sosa]

Community colleges are for kids that don't do that well in HS--annd don't have the intellectual means to compete in higher rated schools. There is nothing wrong with that.

You're wrong. my first semester was at a 4 year institution, after that semester I decided to drop out from that school and do my generals at a community college because it would save me almost $20,000 in tuition. And I'm a 4.0 student. I found my situation to actually be quite common with other students like myself.

[Nicholas Popov]

This animal aggression (fear and envy) for a higher intelligence, which the subject is unable to predict. Stalin pathologically hated Trotsky, a former journalist who was a gifted and could have to present their own ideas. This abilities was not available to Stalin himself, who in Trotsky saw threat to own status as a messiah . For the same reason the tyrant has destroyed all creative elite of Russia.
With this shortcoming a dictator was forced to patiently listen to the opinions of experts and claimed a general summary as one's own brilliant plan. Stalin's well-known phrase::"And what comrade Zhjukov will tell?". Criminal Stalin was a parasite on another's intellect. After the war the "messiah" has removed away Moscow a dangerous winner and rival.
Hitler, Pol Pot and religious fanatics had feel a 'historical hatred' to books and 'an intelligent interlayer' also.
From the point of view of the manual worker, the brain worker doesn't creates material values which you can touch. And it means that the person of brainwork is the loafer. It is an inferiority complex of the gatekeeper and the charwoman.

http://www.revleft.com/vb/customavatars/avatar26240_4.gif (http://www.revleft.com/vb/member.php?u=26240) Menocchio (http://www.revleft.com/vb/member.php?u=26240) http://www.revleft.com/vb/revleft/statusicon/user_offline.gif
Lunatico-Communist

:laugh: "Ideas do not create aynthing. People do. People with concrete, most often class based, interests." http://www.revleft.com/vb/capitalism-and-communism-t145148/index.html

[Realism]

I think the main reason is that College kids always tend to think that they have the world figured out at their age. I don't look down upon student's but I do take into account many things.

First of all, for some odd reason, it has become a "popular" to be rebellious and destructive. Many of the people involved only know things to the extent of what their professors have taught them and sit around reading "The Communist Manifesto", which I digress really isn't the best thing to be reading.

Second of all, College kids seem to think that they can make a difference by protesting. Those days are over.

"Nobody can be so amusingly arrogant as a young man who has just discovered an old idea and thinks it is his own."
-Sydney Harris

[Rottenfruit]

Not that I wasn't aware of this before- but still, in the light of the events of the last week or so. Why is there so much hatred towards students? I notice this comes from so-called "working class" people a lot. Students this and students that, lazy, don't want to work, middle-class, bourgeois, good-for-nothings, etc etc.

El Che was a student, Marx was a student in fact the only non-student I can think of who comes to mind is Stalin and the miserable failure that was Pol Pot. I think anti-intellectualism also runs the risk of being branded reactionary.

Any thoughts? Is this the same where you live?
Well often it´s because they are "know it all better then you" smuchks and yes im a student :D but ive seen this view in many students

[Bud Struggle]

So, since there are "three blacks" as previously mentioned, and the school is "33% black" am I correct in assuming that there are 9 children at this school? And since "2/3 of her class are Indian, Chinese, Korean, and Japanese" I'd guess that would mean your daughter falls into one of your above ethnic categories? But wait, whites have been mentioned as well. What part do they make up again? Quite a quandary we find ourselves in. No latinos either though, eh? No Cubans, Puerto Ricans, Mexicans, etc? Quite rare for a low income area in Florida, no? Ah well, I'll take your word for it. Maybe I wasn't clear. The International Baccalaureate is a program WITHIN the actual school. Not the entire school. Also, lots of kids stat the program but not many complete it--and I'm talking about the demogaphic of the senior year.

http://www.ibo.org/general/who.cfm


That's an absurd statement for multiple reasons. Many kids with close to 4.0 GPAs wind up in CC, which I'd think most working class folks would be aware of. Anyway why exactly is it that some kids don't have the intellectual means to compete? What is intellectual capital derived from, and why is it essentially inherited in some cases? Could it possibly be that we live in a classist society and educational opportunities are essentially passed down from one generation to the next? No. Some people are smarter than other people. It is just the way it works. My father was an immigrant and worked in a factory and I must admit I never had any problem moving up in the world. None. Also, any kid that doesn't take all the AP courses offered is foolish.


Well if they tell you they don't want money, it must be true. You realize that no one attends an academic institution for free right? Even if your daughter's on a full scholarship, they're still getting the money...even if you never see it. Of course they're telling you what you want to hear; giving you the business man's pitch. That's exactly what higher education institutions are; businesses. I really don' care about the pitch--I'll pay my daughter's way. If you don't believe what they say--fine. But there are a lot of smart, poor kids in really quality schools aroun the country.


That's not to say of course that they don't provide a valuable service. But I disagree with you when you say that it's being done correctly. If your refutation of the statistics I posted earlier (60% of those in poverty attend higher education, and only 11% of those who do obtain degrees) is that those individuals are simply not taking advantage of opportunities given to them, you might ask yourself why the upper and upper middle class is instead...
I think that's pretty easy--support from home. And I don't mean financial support. It takes a LOT of work on the part of parents to give a kid a successful HS career and even more to give a kid a good college career. Even the slightest kink in the program will put kids at a disadvantage and the competition is fearce. It take lots of coaching, driving, and committment from parents and kids. Kids from broken homes as far as I see are at the highest disadvantage.

[Sosa]

I think the main reason is that College kids always tend to think that they have the world figured out at their age. I don't look down upon student's but I do take into account many things.

First of all, for some odd reason, it has become a "popular" to be rebellious and destructive. Many of the people involved only know things to the extent of what their professors have taught them and sit around reading "The Communist Manifesto", which I digress really isn't the best thing to be reading.

Second of all, College kids seem to think that they can make a difference by protesting. Those days are over.

"Nobody can be so amusingly arrogant as a young man who has just discovered an old idea and thinks it is his own."
-Sydney Harris

For me it's the opposite, I find my fellow students' apathy to be disappointing. I wish they would read books like communist manifesto but too many don't care about the current political climate. But thats just my experience

[Quail]

For me it's the opposite, I find my fellow students' apathy to be disappointing. I wish they would read books like communist manifesto but too many don't care about the current political climate. But thats just my experience
Yeah, the students at my university are kind of like this. I can't understand how people can be apathetic about things like cuts because they're going to affect everyone.

[ComradeMan]

I can't understand apathetic people full stop.

I don't know.... what about if all the students in the UK or at least 75% just dropped out, refused to go and then signed on the UK benefit system instead?

The system would be on its knees.

It wouldn't work here because the system doesn't really give you benefits unless you have been working. But still, instead of higher fees.... how about no fucking fees at all? Let's see the accountants sort that one out when the professors and lecturers flee the bankrupted universities.:cool:

[black magick hustla]

I think that's pretty easy--support from home. And I don't mean financial support. It takes a LOT of work on the part of parents to give a kid a successful HS career and even more to give a kid a good college career. Even the slightest kink in the program will put kids at a disadvantage and the competition is fearce. It take lots of coaching, driving, and committment from parents and kids. Kids from broken homes as far as I see are at the highest disadvantage.

It is true that if you come from a disadvantaged home and manage to strap up somehow american schools will pay for your shit etc.

however that shit has very little to do with smarts (even if it had to do with smarts i digress because everybody that wants to go to uni should get a chance). if you live in a neighborhood were fuckers shoot each other and your best friend is addicted to crack the grades needed for university wont be there. upper class families breed their children for success, they pay for expensive ass shit like music lessons, tutors, etcetera. furthermore if you aint exceptional you will end up with a shitton of debt so a working class kid might need to work at the same time as he goes to school etc. the whole dream of "smart breed" is meaningless and the smart people most of the time were carefully coached by their lawyer daddy and trophy wife-mom

[Bud Struggle]

^^^I definitely agree...all good points.

[REVLEFT'S BIEGGST MATSER TROL]

It is quite a common tactic for the right to attempt to divide the working class into camps based on small differences in their wealth and status.

Given that students have a history of being from the wealthy and privileged, and are the ones currently leading the resistance to government attacks on working people, it should not be surprising that such arguments have surfaced. Before the student thing exploded, I imagine the capitalists were thinking that the public sector unions would be the focal point of the resistance - hence, if you can recall, the attacks on them, as having low productivity, and better security than private sector employees.



To be honest it makes my blood boil to think of.

[Kaze no Kae]

Yeah, no. This kind of comes up a lot and it's really just a dumb an ineffective idea. What you're basically doing by doing this is going off and cloistering yourself from the world and hoping people will see and say "Oh hey what a neat thing. Everyone should do this!"

That doesn't happen. People don't care or think you're a cult or something.
I agree but that said, it's a positive thing to introduce elements of collective living into capitalist society without cloistering yourself off from the world, such as housing co-operatives, or workers seizing their workplaces (or unemployed people forming workers' cooperatives, if they get a chance), or even just introducing greater democracy into hobby groups. Even unions and revolutionary organisations are microcosms of socialism, if done right (ie, democratic, non-sectarian, pluralist and grassroots-led).


But really, there are working lawyers who read statutes and police reports and case opinions to give advice to their clients, doctors who read lab test results to give diagnoses and prescribe medicines, air conditioning repair men who read tech manuals to keep me cool, and chefs who read orders turned in by waiters, but in all those cases it's serious business because their livelihoods and their clients' well being depend on it.

Students who read are getting ready to have jobs. Mostly. But just getting ready. And usually someone else is pulling the freight (paying the bills).
That doctor had to spend a few years reading in order to know what lab tests to do in the first place. And how is that different, other than being longer-term, from the air conditioning repair man who has to stop and read the manual instead of just going straight to the machine and hoping he flukes it, either?

[milk]

I also find it bemusing that middle class students or graduates tend to be ignorant of the strong autodidactic tradition among working class people, in the UK at least. I'm an unskilled manual worker, left school with no qualifications, and look at the way I've continually pwned comrademan at this site for example. Of course I failed at school, and work the job I am doing now, because I am unintelligent. It had nothing all to do with problems relating to class and poverty.

[milk]

Pol Pot, who came from a pretty privalleged background, studied in Paris.

Opportunities came his way, due to his privileged background but he was an unremarkable student, failed his school exams and went to a vocational college in the capital, to train as a carpenter. It was his impeccable family connections (to the royal court) that got him a prized scholarship to study radio engineering in Paris. He fell behind in that too, and eventually dropped out (after having funding cut for poor performance), preferring to concentrate more on political activity. But I guess the above is only significant if you see only academic qualifications as being an all-important measure of someone's intelligence or capabilities. I don't. And in a Cambodian context anyway, in a partially literate society, even among the elite, to be qualified in such a way was useful to many people when only attaching a traditional status value to it.

Hu Nim, on the other hand, came from a poorer peasant background, but by good fortune received schooling, excelled, eventually earning himself a doctorate.

[Decolonize The Left]

Not that I wasn't aware of this before- but still, in the light of the events of the last week or so. Why is there so much hatred towards students? I notice this comes from so-called "working class" people a lot. Students this and students that, lazy, don't want to work, middle-class, bourgeois, good-for-nothings, etc etc.

El Che was a student, Marx was a student in fact the only non-student I can think of who comes to mind is Stalin and the miserable failure that was Pol Pot. I think anti-intellectualism also runs the risk of being branded reactionary.

Any thoughts? Is this the same where you live?

I have no clue what you're talking about. Almost every working-class person I've ever met would want their child to go to school and become a 'student.'

Your willingness to make such ridiculous threads and put forth such awkward and reality-divorced thoughts make me question your purpose on this board.

- August

[milk]

The thing to remember about the protests here in the UK, is that the students aren't 'leading' as such. And what do we mean by students? Do we mean kids from poor comprehensives, adults learners at FE colleges (as I have been), those younger people at post-1992 universities, or those all the way up to Oxford and Cambridge (who could maybe fit the 'middle class wanker' epithet), who generally-speaking are on the same side. Prior to the major protests (which were great), there had already been local-led community protesting over proposed cuts elsewhere. When effects of the deep public spending cuts begin to bite in 2011, with more unemployment along with the VAT rise, it's gonna be bigger than just the students. The government has declared class war.

[milk]

I have no clue what you're talking about. Almost every working-class person I've ever met would want their child to go to school and become a 'student.'

Your willingness to make such ridiculous threads and put forth such awkward and reality-divorced thoughts make me question your purpose on this board.

- August

It's an erroneous view to take isn't it. The supposed anti-intellectualism of working class people. He talks about divisive attitudes, and he goes off and expresses one. Working class people were striving to learn even before universal educational provision had been conceded by past governments. Something that was not given through benevolence, but because it was demanded and fought for.

[ComradeMan]

In actual fact I was speaking about the attitudes I've heard on the ground given recent events and also my experience as a student. Further to which a British comrade told me about "student attacks" in the UK where students seem to get arbitrarily beaten up by lumpen types. In addition to this there were also a few comments made on the main board by some not so long ago that seemed to do none other than express contempt or bitterness towards students from a "workerish" kind of point of view.

[Palingenisis]

. I'm an unskilled manual worker, left school with no qualifications, and look at the way I've continually pwned comrademan at this site for example. .

I wont deny your knowledge or brightness but pawning comrademan isnt exactly that great an achievement.

[Palingenisis]

In actual fact I was speaking about the attitudes I've heard on the ground given recent events and also my experience as a student. Further to which a British comrade told me about "student attacks" in the UK where students seem to get arbitrarily beaten up by lumpen types. In addition to this there were also a few comments made on the main board by some not so long ago that seemed to do none other than express contempt or bitterness towards students from a "workerish" kind of point of view.

Not necessarily by lumpen types but often by ordinary working class types because students can be smug, arrogant and extremely patronizing and therefore bring it on themselves.

[ComradeMan]

Not necessarily by lumpen types but often by ordinary working class types because students can be smug, arrogant and extremely patronizing and therefore bring it on themselves.

QED.

Most people can be smug, arrogant and patronising, including "working class" people-....

They "bring it on themselves" :rolleyes:

[graffic]

Right-wingers don't like too many people going to university because they know most academics/professors are leftists and students are very likely to be radicalized at university.

The stereotypes of students being "lazy" and studying "worthless degrees" are often to discourage working class kids from going to university. I think a lot of anti-intellectual petit-bourgeoise types or nouveau riche, "rags to riches" etc have a chip on their shoulder, or a chip on both shoulders because they failed at school yet the system of capital served them well. For example billionare Richard Branson who left school at 16 recently told some Chinese businessmen that not enough young people in the UK are educated with "entrepreneurial skills" at university. He's saying there are not enough people like him whose sole aim through working is to recklessly and shamelessly create as much profit for themselves. He also forgets that the majority of "successful" businessmen have a degree and people like himself are a minority anyway.

Im general the "discussion" about university education is tedious because i agree with peoples criticisms of further education to an extent (theres no point perhaps studying a David Beckham degree) but reject most of the "solutions" (privatise education etc).

[Jazzratt]

To be honest I find the disdain for students on the left ("they're all middle class kiddies", "when they get degrees they'l all join the ranks of the ruling class" and similar toss) really quite insulting. I've not been to university and spent the years I would have been a student on the dole or doing shitwork. I don't find anything noble in that, it feels that a great amount of potential has been robbed from me and am making every attempt to actually get into education (given that I'll have to support myself through the now three times as expensive university system this is no easy task). To have some tosspot tell me I should be facing dole queues and call centres for the rest of my life in order to have "true leftist credentials" or something is just as bad as some right wing wanker telling me I shouldn't because it's ideas above my station.

[ComradeMan]

To be honest I find the disdain for students on the left ("they're all middle class kiddies", "when they get degrees they'l all join the ranks of the ruling class" and similar toss) really quite insulting. I've not been to university and spent the years I would have been a student on the dole or doing shitwork. I don't find anything noble in that, it feels that a great amount of potential has been robbed from me and am making every attempt to actually get into education (given that I'll have to support myself through the now three times as expensive university system this is no easy task). To have some tosspot tell me I should be facing dole queues and call centres for the rest of my life in order to have "true leftist credentials" or something is just as bad as some right wing wanker telling me I shouldn't because it's ideas above my station.

I agree. See comments above too. :rolleyes:

I never see why anyone would have a problem with someone seeking knowledge and this constant stereotyping of people's degrees of culture and educations as being somehow to be determined by a "class" etc is very counter-productive and stupid.

Ignorance is a weapon of mass destruction.

[Lt. Ferret]

I also find it bemusing that middle class students or graduates tend to be ignorant of the strong autodidactic tradition among working class people, in the UK at least. I'm an unskilled manual worker, left school with no qualifications, and look at the way I've continually pwned comrademan at this site for example. Of course I failed at school, and work the job I am doing now, because I am unintelligent. It had nothing all to do with problems relating to class and poverty.


Actually its because you're unintelligent. And a lazy sod. I grew up in a trailer park and put myself through college and graduated in four years while working.

[milk]

Actually its because you're unintelligent. And a lazy sod. I grew up in a trailer park and put myself through college and graduated in four years while working.

No, you didn't.

I lived in a cardboard box, or a hole in the ground etc ...

I'm quite secure in my own intelligence. Indeed it has been confirmed here more than once.

As for lazy, how is working a full-time job and providing for a young family lazy? I've been self-educating for many years by the way.

[ComradeMan]

No, you didn't.

I lived in a cardboard box, or a hole in the ground etc ...

I'm quite secure in my own intelligence. Indeed it has been confirmed here more than once.

As for lazy, how is working a full-time job and providing for a young family lazy? I've been self-educating for many years by the way.

Only a stupid person would talk about how intelligent they are.

"The fool doth think he is wise, but the wise man knows himself to be a fool."

By the way, intelligence isn't about knowing facts.

[milk]

By the way, intelligence isn't about knowing facts.

Nor is it about having a degree.

[ComradeMan]

Nor is it about having a degree.

Who said that?

[milk]

Lt. Prannet.

And who has said that intelligence is about merely knowing facts?

[ComradeMan]

Lt. Prannet.

And who has said that intelligence is about merely knowing facts?

The presumption that education and educational achievement are de facto signs of intelligence is open to debate.


I also find it bemusing that middle class students or graduates tend to be ignorant of the strong autodidactic tradition among working class people, in the UK at least. I'm an unskilled manual worker, left school with no qualifications, and look at the way I've continually pwned comrademan at this site for example. Of course I failed at school, and work the job I am doing now, because I am unintelligent. It had nothing all to do with problems relating to class and poverty.

Do you have a source for this tendency of "middle-class students"? It sounds like you are making a sweeping generalisation here...

This smells of British "class-ism" at its (inverted) worst.

I have to admit that I find it bemusing that you state you are secure in your intelligence (whatever that truly means) when judging from an outside point of view I would say the opposite. Someone who was truly secure in their intelligence would not constantly attack others accusing them of being stupid all the time nor constantly vaunt their own intelligence and talk about "pwning" people all the time- notably only you seem to say that. This in turn does make you sound rather like Shakespeare's "fool that doth think he is wise".

[milk]

This smells of British "class-ism" at its (inverted) worst.

I have to admit that I find it bemusing that you state you are secure in your intelligence (whatever that truly means) when judging from an outside point of view I would say the opposite. Someone who was truly secure in their intelligence would not constantly attack others accusing them of being stupid all the time nor constantly vaunt their own intelligence and talk about "pwning" people all the time- notably only you seem to say that.

Lt. Ferret said I am unintelligent and lazy. I am secure enough in my self to know that these two statements are false.

I haven't talked about 'pwning' people, except you, and when engaging with you on threads, you have been indeed both abusive and stupid. I'm secure enough in that, too.

[ComradeMan]

Lt. Ferret said I am unintelligent and lazy. I am secure enough in my self to know that these two statements are false.

I haven't talked about 'pwning' people, except you, and when engaging with you on threads, you have been indeed both abusive and stupid. I'm secure enough in that, too.


I haven't talked about 'pwning' people, except you,

So, I am not a person, am I?

Where have I been abusive? What stupidity--- please point it out?

By the way, where does your assertion about "middle-class students" come from? You seem to be creating class divisions in your own mind. The best way to create a classless society is to become class-blind in my opinion, but that's just my opinion I admit.

[milk]

By the way, where does your assertion about "middle-class students" come from? You seem to be creating class divisions in your own mind. The best way to create a classless society is to become class-blind in my opinion, but that's just my opinion I admit.

Quite:


Not that I wasn't aware of this before- but still, in the light of the events of the last week or so. Why is there so much hatred towards students? I notice this comes from so-called "working class" people a lot. Students this and students that, lazy, don't want to work, middle-class, bourgeois, good-for-nothings, etc etc.

[ComradeMan]

ComradeMan[/B] ;1979112] Not that I wasn't aware of this before- but still, in the light of the events of the last week or so. Why is there so much hatred towards students? I notice this comes from so-called "working class" people a lot. Students this and students that, lazy, don't want to work, middle-class, bourgeois, good-for-nothings, etc etc. :

Note the use of "quotes" and the phrase so-called.
Note the use of the word "notice".
Note the reference to quotes on this board from other members (in thread discussion).

And in the light of the more recent comment by me...

"You seem to be creating class divisions in your own mind"

It backs up the argument- people create class divisions in their own mind. As Jazzratt also pointed out too....

By stereotyping students as "middle-class" you could be seen to imply tacitly that education/higher-education is "middle-class"... combine this with your comments it seems you are implying that a "working class" person becomes "educated" in spite of being "working class"- a position which I find mildly offensive.

[Aeval]

I've only flicked through this thread so I hope I'm not repeating anyone, but I think one reason for the apparent hatred could be the way a lot of students (and it is a lot, I'm pretty sure I'm guilty of doing this in first year) descend on an area of town, developers buy up buildings and turn them into halls, and then the people who live there have to put up with literally hundreds and often thousands of pissed up people, many of whom are living alone for the first time and don't really think of all the people who live there with kids or who have to get up early for work, all concentrated into a very small area. Anyone who has seen Carnage (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carnage_UK) and has seen the destruction encouraging a culture of getting utterly twatted in huge groups can do (and I don't mean pissing on the war memorial, rather the fact that there are ambulances on every other street corner from about 6:30 and local, non-students end up having to avoid the city centre like the plague for fear of getting started on or thrown up on) - I kinda get why lots of people hate students, individually we might be intelligent and thoughtful but as a drunken mass we tend to act like bellends.

[BionicHearing]

Having been there and done that (student), and now being on the working class side, I would have to say that it is probably more jealousy and envy than anything else. It is truly sad that students aren't appreciated more. These very people that look down or talk negatively about you may need you very badly one day.... Irony :crying:

[danyboy27]

Lt. Ferret said I am unintelligent and lazy. I am secure enough in my self to know that these two statements are false.

I haven't talked about 'pwning' people, except you, and when engaging with you on threads, you have been indeed both abusive and stupid. I'm secure enough in that, too.

i think what ferret meant was; ''if you are so intelligent, who dont you use your intelligence to improve your life and living standard?''

that basicly why he said you are intelligent and lazy, it had nothing to do with having a diploma or not.

And somehow, he have a point, if you dont use the skill you know you posses to do something meaningful in life, you are either lazy or an idiot.

[ÑóẊîöʼn]

I've only flicked through this thread so I hope I'm not repeating anyone, but I think one reason for the apparent hatred could be the way a lot of students (and it is a lot, I'm pretty sure I'm guilty of doing this in first year) descend on an area of town, developers buy up buildings and turn them into halls, and then the people who live there have to put up with literally hundreds and often thousands of pissed up people, many of whom are living alone for the first time and don't really think of all the people who live there with kids or who have to get up early for work, all concentrated into a very small area. Anyone who has seen Carnage (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carnage_UK) and has seen the destruction encouraging a culture of getting utterly twatted in huge groups can do (and I don't mean pissing on the war memorial, rather the fact that there are ambulances on every other street corner from about 6:30 and local, non-students end up having to avoid the city centre like the plague for fear of getting started on or thrown up on) - I kinda get why lots of people hate students, individually we might be intelligent and thoughtful but as a drunken mass we tend to act like bellends.

That's not a problem limited to students or university towns. Considering that any fair-sized urban centre in the UK has its share of drunken revelry resulting in vomit on the streets, hospitalised drinkers and property damage, I'd say the problem really lies in the country's drinking/leisure culture, or at least among those who go out on a weekend to drink.

[Ele'ill]

Actually its because you're unintelligent. And a lazy sod. I grew up in a trailer park and put myself through college and graduated in four years while working.

I did this before I was even born.


I agree that some on the left have a warped perception of 'student' as they tend to picture in their minds young yuppie spawn with fancy cars and a trust fund.

[RGacky3]

And somehow, he have a point, if you dont use the skill you know you posses to do something meaningful in life, you are either lazy or an idiot.

Do you know how the richest people in the US got there? It has nothing to do with doing anything productive, meaningul, or intelligent.

I'd guess that Sarah Palin is richer than Noam Chomsky, and that the CEO of Leaman Brothers is richer than Steven Hawking.

I'm also guessing that millionares don't have a monopoly on having intelligent children.

I'm also guessing that anyone suggesting that intelligent is a major overall factor in wealth is a major idiot.


And a lazy sod. I grew up in a trailer park and put myself through college and graduated in four years while working.

BTW, arn't you in the army? Wheres your big money smart guy?


nor constantly vaunt their own intelligence

You do realize this is a political discussion forum right? I would hope people would vaunt there intelligence here, it would be nice to get some intelligent disucssion.

Look, if you have the ability to put yourself through further education as I and others have done, then by all means, if its gonna help your prospects, do it, but this idiotic idea that your more intelligent, or better than someone else because you did, and they did not (for whatever reason, more then likely they COULD not) is idiotic beyond belief.

THe type of people with that sort of self-elitism, are the same type of people that see a homeless person and the first thought is "he probably deservse to be homeless," or something like that, whereas a normal human with a functioning capacity for empathy and compassion would probably consider likely circumstances.

[danyboy27]

Do you know how the richest people in the US got there? It has nothing to do with doing anything productive, meaningul, or intelligent.

I'd guess that Sarah Palin is richer than Noam Chomsky, and that the CEO of Leaman Brothers is richer than Steven Hawking.

I'm also guessing that millionares don't have a monopoly on having intelligent children.

I'm also guessing that anyone suggesting that intelligent is a major overall factor in wealth is a major idiot.s.
where did i said that those who are in power or in possession of vast amount of wealth necessarly worked hard to get it?

i merely point out that those who are aware of their strenghts and dont even try to do something to use them or exploit them are lazy or idiots.

those who are unaware of what they are and those who are for various material conditions unable to exploit their potential are not to be blamed beccause they are a direct result of the system in general.

[RGacky3]

I quoted you, but it was'nt directed at you, its more along the lines of right wingers, its more that attitude.

[Lt. Ferret]

Actually Milk blamed his failing out of school and working some shit job on his upbringing and poverty and whatnot. I mentioned that I also came from poverty (which for some reason he outright rejected, not like its any skin off my dick) and went to college and got a degree, while working.

He then dismissed a college education as useless or unnecessary in judging intelligence. I would agree. It may not show youre intelligent but I feel it shows you aren't stupid.


Of course, Milk outright rejecting my class origins in what I can only assume is because he doesn't think someone from a trailer park could possibly go to college, or that someone from a trailer park is a completely unrealistic way to be raised, leads me to believe that yes, he is an unimpressive, unintelligent, lazy sod and quite the middle class child to boot.

If he had stayed in college and not worked some manual labor job, he would probably be doing a lot better in raising his family *like I'm interested in your sob story*

[Ele'ill]

Anecdotes don't replace facts. If you're arguing that poverty doesn't effect education you're wrong.

[milk]

i think what ferret meant was; ''if you are so intelligent, who dont you use your intelligence to improve your life and living standard?''

No, he said I am unintelligent.

[#FF0000]

Actually Milk blamed his failing out of school and working some shit job on his upbringing and poverty and whatnot. I mentioned that I also came from poverty (which for some reason he outright rejected, not like its any skin off my dick) and went to college and got a degree, while working.

I know a guy who ran a marathon with a sprained ankle. So what?

[Lt. Ferret]

I would say you're unintelligent for being a college drop out trying to support a family with a manual laborer's job when you obviously had the oppurtunity for college.

but hey making yourself a poverty statistic is way better.

[Lt. Ferret]

I know a guy who ran a marathon with a sprained ankle. So what?


so i dont want to hear shit out of people who have two perfectly good ankles sign up for a marathon then drop out saying its too hard.

[milk]

Of course, Milk outright rejecting my class origins in what I can only assume is because he doesn't think someone from a trailer park could possibly go to college

I didn't say that at all. I disagree with your assertion that only those who have a college education are intelligent. Your personal anecdotes are not the point by which the whole world turns either. And, you were the first to dismiss my background.

And what is wrong with manual work?

[Lt. Ferret]

Anecdotes don't replace facts. If you're arguing that poverty doesn't effect education you're wrong.

yeah poverty makes you hungrier to get an education and not use college as a 4 year pot smoking drugathon.

[Lt. Ferret]

I didn't say that at all. I disagree with your assertion that only those who have a college education are intelligent. Your personal anecdotes are not the point by which the whole world turns either. And, you were the first to dismiss my background.

And what is wrong with manual work?


in a post industrial society those who move resources around are more valuable than those who are emplacing or removing resources.

I did a lot of manual work, it sucked, and if i was raising a family i wouldnt be trying to sustain them on some unskilled manual labor.

then again my wife has a skill and we abort any children that wander into her womb so i guess its about priorities.

[milk]

I would say you're unintelligent for being a college drop out trying to support a family with a manual laborer's job when you obviously had the oppurtunity for college.

but hey making yourself a poverty statistic is way better.

At the time I didn't have the opportunity to go to college, or university as it's called here.

[#FF0000]

so i dont want to hear shit out of people who have two perfectly good ankles sign up for a marathon then drop out saying its too hard.

But marathons are hard you silly guy. That is the point I am making. Just because some people can run a marathon with a sprained ankle doesn't mean everyone can, and it certainly doesn't mean it's an easy feat for someone without a sprained ankle.

[#FF0000]

then again my wife has a skill and we abort any children that wander into her womb so i guess its about priorities.

Yeah. Everyone would be on track to make 50k a year and live in the suburbs if only they had the right priorities.

[milk]

yeah poverty makes you hungrier to get an education and not use college as a 4 year pot smoking drugathon.

I have learned a great deal through self-education, despite opportunities barred to me by poverty. But manual workers are too unintelligent to read books, so ...

[Lt. Ferret]

But marathons are hard you sill guy. That is the point I am making. Just because some people can run a marathon with a sprained ankle doesn't mean everyone can, and it certainly doesn't mean it's an easy feat for someone without a sprained ankle.


oh i know. and college wasnt easy or that fun *well, some of it was*. but you dont go to higher education facilities for ease or fun.

sure the frat guys had a great time while pursuing thier business degrees. the sorority girls got their MRS degree.

most people that go there are some stripe of middle class, including very working class people. there are quite a bit of ways and lots of help for anyone intelligent enough to go to college, even if theyre underpriviliged.

i just dont have a lot of empathy or sympathy for someone who wont put in the extra time or effort for something, just because other people have it easier.

When people in the Third World are dying from not being able to procure enough food, how am I supposed to look at someone in the Western World that thinks completing college is too hard because of their economic position?

[Lt. Ferret]

I have learned a great deal through self-education, despite opportunities barred to me by poverty. But manual workers are too unintelligent to read books, so ...


I never let my schooling get in the way of my education. - Mark Twain



and yeah i get it you shovel rocks or some shit for a living. cool story, bro. i once had a job digging ditches on the side of the road.

if your best asset is a strong back and a solid frame, dig ditches and move rocks. if your best asset is a quick and intelligent mind, you should be putting your skills to better use.

[Lt. Ferret]

Yeah. Everyone would be on track to make 50k a year and live in the suburbs if only they had the right priorities.


not everyone, but a lot more than now.

[#FF0000]

When people in the Third World are dying from not being able to procure enough food, how am I supposed to look at someone in the Western World that thinks completing college is too hard because of their economic position?

but the conditions that people in the third world live in doesn't mean that it can't be really hard to complete college because of one's economic condition. Having to choose between getting enough hours to pay for rent and food and having enough time to study or complete a big project is definitely a better situation to be in than being born in the Congo is, but it doesn't change the fact that some people are put in situations where it is really, really difficult to get through college.

I mean, even if you don't have to worry about paying for the schooling, you still have to worry about having food and a place to live, and that sucks up enough income as it is.

[milk]

I never let my schooling get in the way of my education. - Mark Twain



and yeah i get it you shovel rocks or some shit for a living. cool story, bro. i once had a job digging ditches on the side of the road.

if your best asset is a strong back and a solid frame, dig ditches and move rocks. if your best asset is a quick and intelligent mind, you should be putting your skills to better use.

"The idleness was invaluable" as Jack Common once said, referring to his time on the dole, giving him the time and energy to read and educate himself better than when he was working. There are priorities, though, after all. Education is hard work, whether in the class room or at home, or with friends. While also working a regular job.

[milk]

oh i know. and college wasnt easy or that fun *well, some of it was*. but you dont go to higher education facilities for ease or fun.

sure the frat guys had a great time while pursuing thier business degrees. the sorority girls got their MRS degree.

most people that go there are some stripe of middle class, including very working class people. there are quite a bit of ways and lots of help for anyone intelligent enough to go to college, even if theyre underpriviliged.

i just dont have a lot of empathy or sympathy for someone who wont put in the extra time or effort for something, just because other people have it easier.

When people in the Third World are dying from not being able to procure enough food, how am I supposed to look at someone in the Western World that thinks completing college is too hard because of their economic position?

Did you learn such simplistic binary argumentation while at college?

[Ele'ill]

yeah poverty makes you hungrier to get an education

No, it makes you distrust the (education system) that fucked you over the first time around.



i just dont have a lot of empathy or sympathy for someone who wont put in the extra time or effort for something, just because other people have it easier.


Perhaps it's because they've been beaten bloody by the system their entire life and their emotional coping mechanisms have broken down to the point where a relatively giant leap into something they've grown distasteful towards through being at the receiving end of lack of funding, lack of upkeep and a lack of general care towards the well being of the students- oh and extreme poverty outside of the education system has their priorities on something else that they've grown up doing for a living.

[Lt. Ferret]

but the conditions that people in the third world live in doesn't mean that it can't be really hard to complete college because of one's economic condition. Having to choose between getting enough hours to pay for rent and food and having enough time to study or complete a big project is definitely a better situation to be in than being born in the Congo is, but it doesn't change the fact that some people are put in situations where it is really, really difficult to get through college.

I mean, even if you don't have to worry about paying for the schooling, you still have to worry about having food and a place to live, and that sucks up enough income as it is.

the vast amount of students iv ever met didn't have college funds, they had a mix of their own work, school loans, and state and private grants. these are available to just about anyone.

eat ramen, have several roomates, carpool. i didnt have a car in college. i learned to walk everywhere. i had a crummy little apartment with 3 roomates and i didnt go out much.




"The idleness was invaluable" as Jack Common once said, referring to his time on the dole, giving him the time and energy to read and educate himself better than when he was working. There are priorities, though, after all. Education is hard work, whether in the class room or at home, or with friends. While also working a regular job.


It seems like you came in this thread more to brag about how youre super SMRT and didn't go to college than anything else. kudos.



Did you learn such simplistic binary argumentation while at college?

No I learned how to shot gun beer. :cool:


No, it makes you distrust the (education system) that fucked you over the first time around.




Perhaps it's because they've been beaten bloody by the system their entire life and their emotional coping mechanisms have broken down to the point where a relatively giant leap into something they've grown distasteful towards through being at the receiving end of lack of funding, lack of upkeep and a lack of general care towards the well being of the students- oh and extreme poverty outside of the education system has their priorities on something else that they've grown up doing for a living.


The education system didn't fuck me over. It fucked over lazy useless kids that had no desire to learn things on their own. I got my ratty history books each year, id go home and read the whole damn things on my own. I did math on my own. I read books out of the school library on my own. I prepped myself for college.

I know you're bitter and all and it reeks from every post you make, but boo hoo my high school experience was awkward, isnt a valid excuse for upper level education, or your lack thereof.

[#FF0000]

the vast amount of students iv ever met didn't have college funds, they had a mix of their own work, school loans, and state and private grants. these are available to just about anyone.

eat ramen, have several roomates, carpool. i didnt have a car in college. i learned to walk everywhere. i had a crummy little apartment with 3 roomates and i didnt go out much.
I don't think you're understanding that this isn't going to work for everyone.


The education system didn't fuck me over. It fucked over lazy useless kids that had no desire to learn things on their own.Just gonna chime in here and remind everyone that the way the education system is set up and the philosophy it's built around is totally fucking useless and fails all students pretty massively.

Not everyone has a halfway decent support system at home. Not everyone has food readily available at home. Not everyone has the good fortune to live in an area that isn't infested with violent crime. Not everyone has access to a decent school.

You don't know what you're talking about.

[Lt. Ferret]

Read books. take test. make good grades. go college. repeat until degree?


and a system isnt broken just because 100 percent of the population "cannot" partake in it.

and as far as anecdotes go my biggest influence as a teenager was a husband and wife duo of teachers at my school, one being a trade unionist and the other a communist. they helped me get to college.

most of this shit talking is done by kids who didnt want to read huck finn in english class.

[#FF0000]

and as far as anecdotes go my biggest influence as a teenager was a husband and wife duo of teachers at my school, one being a trade unionist and the other a communist. they helped me get to college.Every single thing you've said in this line of discussion here has been an anecdote.


most of this shit talking is done by kids who didnt want to read huck finn in english class. Hahaha come off it, guy. I was in the Honors classes and the Gifted program in my school. I did well (In some classes...) because I was a good test taker, and had parents that taught me that reading was baller as fuck and had food available for me. I recognize this and I have the common sense to understand that the way I was being taught might not have phased me, but it damn sure wasn't effective, and if people did worse than I did, it wasn't entirely because they were lazy.

I was lazy. I was in the bottom 25% of my class. But I still had my pick of where to go to college. Not everyone had that or got the treatment I did as someone in Gifted.

[Ele'ill]

The education system didn't fuck me over.

You joined the Army- I mean come on. :rolleyes:




It fucked over lazy useless kids that had no desire to learn things on their own.

You already said this and I posted how you're completely incorrect. I'll post it again.


Perhaps it's because they've been beaten bloody by the system their entire life and their emotional coping mechanisms have broken down to the point where a relatively giant leap into something they've grown distasteful towards through being at the receiving end of lack of funding, lack of upkeep and a lack of general care towards the well being of the students- oh and extreme poverty outside of the education system has their priorities on something else that they've grown up doing for a living.






I know you're bitter and all and it reeks from every post you make, but boo hoo my high school experience was awkward, isnt a valid excuse for upper level education, or your lack thereof.

Edit- Anecdotes are pretty cool to use, it's like lying.

[#FF0000]

I'm kind of dumbfounded that anyone can look at American schools today and think that the Education system is not fucking kids over. NCLB's bankrupting the poorest schools, decimating the teaching and administration staff, and sometimes shutting them down, sending these kids to other schools, leading to overcrowding and driving test scores down once again.

Meanwhile schools in the Rust Belt have gotten to the point that the operate more like halfway houses or prisons, but hey, at least they're offering practical classes that deal with useful shit like how to work at Wal*Mart.

[Lt. Ferret]

You joined the Army- I mean come on. :rolleyes:





You already said this and I posted how you're completely incorrect. I'll post it again.









Edit- Anecdotes are pretty cool to use, it's like lying.


dude you work at target folding clothes, im an army officer, if youre going to be patronizing try not to look like an idiot :lol:




and yeah, anecdotes, as opposed to highly generalized statements like THE KIDS ARE BEING FUCKED OVER BY THE EDUCATION SYSTEM.

okay.

cool.


and your entire argument being that public school is just so distressful that humans cannot function in an educational environment afterwards.


lol WUT THE FUCK.

[#FF0000]

dude you work at target folding clothes, im an army officer, if youre going to be patronizing try not to look like an idiotYou don't fold clothes at target, idiot. They have racks.

But no, it seems dumb that you can say "SHOULDA TRIED HARDER, NO MATTER HOW POOR" when you yourself joined the military because of your economic situation. Then again, I don't think you really see anything wrong with joining the army, for some reason.


and yeah, anecdotes, as opposed to highly generalized statements like THE KIDS ARE BEING FUCKED OVER BY THE EDUCATION SYSTEM.

Yeah but the latter can at least be backed up by fact. Anecdote on the other hand is useless to base an entire argument or opinion on.

[black magick hustla]

idk i generally dont patronize kids for joining the military for skool but you had to become a mercenary in the process of murdering brown people which is not exactly the best example of hard workin, deservin gent

[black magick hustla]

if only all the poor people of the world became cannon fodder......................,.................,,., ................. just gotta turn some brown people into craters and voila you are down the road of becomin a coke addled lawyer with a trophy wife

[black magick hustla]

btw i just saw your profile and you majored in polisci congrats for 4 years of bullshitting

[Os Cangaceiros]

Thanks maldoror...this thread was making me a very sad panda up until your posts.

[M42-AEK]

i haven't noticed this disdain towards students, in fact most of the people i've met in school have had more socialistic ideas. then again i go to community college, because it's cheaper for the same education, and all the people are young to middle aged working class people, not to mention i'm going for journalism:cool:

[ComradeMan]

This thread reads like C3PO arguing with Joe Pesci.... :lol: (Milk and Lieut. Ferret).

[Aeval]

That's not a problem limited to students or university towns. Considering that any fair-sized urban centre in the UK has its share of drunken revelry resulting in vomit on the streets, hospitalised drinkers and property damage, I'd say the problem really lies in the country's drinking/leisure culture, or at least among those who go out on a weekend to drink.

I know that there's a drinking culture in the UK that extends to the non-student population, what I was more referring to was the way student halls are set up and student accommodation is spread out - unless the university has a campus (which Sheffield does not) then it's all crammed into a handful of otherwise perfectly normal residential areas. The problem isn't people going out drinking per se, it's the fact that literally thousands of people all have to walk back through the same residential area, not just the city centre. Channelling that many wasted people up small roads (and remembering that unlike most people who work students often go out on week day nights) is obviously going to cause tension with local residents. Yes, non-students do throw up everywhere, get into fights, steal things from people's gardens and break shit, but it's highly unlikely that you're going to have a few thousand people living next door to you who all want to go out and get pissed up on a Wednesday night unless you happen to live in a student area.

[Lt. Ferret]

btw i just saw your profile and you majored in polisci congrats for 4 years of bullshitting


yeah its almost as useless as posting on a revolutionary leftist message board.

keep up with the tired bullshit cliches about cannon fodder and brown people and the system. you sound like an idiot.

[Lt. Ferret]

idk i generally dont patronize kids for joining the military for skool but you had to become a mercenary in the process of murdering brown people which is not exactly the best example of hard workin, deservin gent


also, love murdering brown people so much i married one. and im in air defense, which means my military capabilities are already soooo above those poor dumb brown people that they cant even field aircraft for me to shoot down.

im so smart and awesome and lethal that im actually godlike to these people and therefore have little reason to harm these ants.


feel better? ;)

[ComradeMan]

also, love murdering brown people so much i married one. and im in air defense, which means my military capabilities are already soooo above those poor dumb brown people that they cant even field aircraft for me to shoot down.

im so smart and awesome and lethal that im actually godlike to these people and therefore have little reason to harm these ants.


feel better? ;)

Top Gun..... :lol:

[Robert]

most of this shit talking is done by kids who didnt want to read huck finn in english class.

We ain't readin' no Huck Finn until the non-racist version comes out.
(http://savage-guilford.patch.com/articles/area-literati-decry-the-sanitizing-of-huck-finn-2)

[Ele'ill]

dude you work at target folding clothes, im an army officer, if youre going to be patronizing try not to look like an idiot :lol:

But you have a college education, and you joined the Army.

I don't have a complete college education.

I mean, fucking duh.





and yeah, anecdotes, as opposed to highly generalized statements like THE KIDS ARE BEING FUCKED OVER BY THE EDUCATION SYSTEM.

Yes, and it just so happens it's almost entirely the kids from poor backgrounds. But no no no, according to you poverty doesn't affect education- your theory makes entirely more sense (to fucking idiots) that all poor people are lazy, and that those middle class people doing ok that suddenly plummet into poverty suddenly become lazy (because it's the cool thing to do and because of peer pressure). :rolleyes:

I have an anecdote too- Since elementary school, poverty has affected my education.




and your entire argument being that public school is just so distressful that humans cannot function in an educational environment afterwards..

No, that poverty is this distressful and thus affects education (among other things).

[Palingenisis]

keep up with the tired bullshit cliches about cannon fodder and brown people and the system. you sound like an idiot.

Some cliches are cliches because they are well true.

To be honest milk has shown a lot more intelligence on this board than you have. Also his job is more honourable than yours...I sure he could earn more for his kids if he signed up as a squaddie...But that would involve doing things not exactly of benefit to global humanity.

[Ele'ill]

also, love murdering brown people so much i married one.

Seeing how most of your posts regarding your wife are quite offensive... :rolleyes:

[black magick hustla]

yeah its almost as useless as posting on a revolutionary leftist message board.

keep up with the tired bullshit cliches about cannon fodder and brown people and the system. you sound like an idiot.

hey. some people jerk off, some people watch tv, some people play videogames, i troll internet forums.


keep up with the tired bullshit cliches about cannon fodder and brown people and the system. you sound like an idiot.
if we talked bout cliches i think yours is worse. ya know, strap up your boots work hard and reach the american dream! in your case being some loser officer with a bullshit major. i rather sound like a cliche and go into debt that make a living out of murder


also, love murdering brown people so much i married one. and im in air defense, which means my military capabilities are already soooo above those poor dumb brown people that they cant even field aircraft for me to shoot down.
idk maybe you are one of those degenerate white people. you know like those who marry submissive thais. white people have a long history of this

[Lt. Ferret]

thats a pretty racist assessment of inter-racial white/asian marriage.

[ComradeMan]

thats a pretty racist assessment of inter-racial white/asian marriage.

I thought that too....:crying:

While I'm on the subject- and seeing as we have wandered off the OP- what the fuck is it with all this racism at RevLeft lately with stereotyping and sweeping generalisations using terminology that is dubious to say the least and/or attacking people on the basis of their nationality?

[Bud Struggle]

thats a pretty racist assessment of inter-racial white/asian marriage.

Yea, me too. :(

[#FF0000]

I think y'all missed the point of the "submissive thai" thing.

[#FF0000]

Also maldoror needs to post in oi more.

[ComradeMan]

I think y'all missed the point of the "submissive thai" thing.

idk maybe you are one of those degenerate white people. you know like those who marry submissive thais. white people have a long history of this

Source and justification for sweeping statement with racial overtones?

Where is this long history?

I know plenty of people with East Asian wives/partners and they certainly aren't "submissive" at all and would be quite offended by that comment.

[#FF0000]

its a joke dummy

[ComradeMan]

its a joke dummy

It isn't funny, and jokes can be racist too. Shall people start posting racial humour here and say "it's only a joke"- usually the ready excuse when called out on things.:sneaky:

[#FF0000]

the fact that it is a sweeping generalization and a stereotype is the joke.

can someone explain this to him please

[ComradeMan]

the fact that it is a sweeping generalization and a stereotype is the joke.

can someone explain this to him please

Sorry, but your kite won't fly on this one.

[Ele'ill]

also, love murdering brown people so much i married one. and im in air defense, which means my military capabilities are already soooo above those poor dumb brown people that they cant even field aircraft for me to shoot down.

im so smart and awesome and lethal that im actually godlike to these people and therefore have little reason to harm these ants.


feel better? ;)


Was it not in response to this?

[Bud Struggle]

I think y'all missed the point of the "submissive thai" thing.

You weren't so easygoing when you were a mod and handing out infractions when you saw something like that you didn't like. :)

You don't joke about racism and bigorty around here. You just don't.

[ComradeMan]

You weren't so easygoing when you were a mod and handing out infractions when you saw something like that you didn't like. :)

You don't joke about racism and bigorty around here. You just don't.

Yeah like when there was that prick who called me a guido.

BTW- most jokes are based on stereotypes and generalisations... it doesn't make that right.

[Lt. Ferret]

Was it not in response to this?


which was in response to the flippant use of "brown people" by our uneducated manual worker friend who is a self-declared genius.

[Ele'ill]

which was in response to the flippant use of "brown people" by our uneducated manual worker friend who is a self-declared genius.

Who?

[Palingenisis]

Its funny in not a ha-ha way that actual prostitutes are looked down on more than mercenaries. While Im not pro-prostitution its a lot less harmful than Imperialist armies and even a lot less degrading.

[ComradeMan]

Its funny in not a ha-ha way that actual prostitutes are looked down on more than mercenaries. While Im not pro-prostitution its a lot less harmful than Imperialist armies and even a lot less degrading.

WTF is talking about prostitution or is your vision so limited the only thing that the word "Thai" brings to mind is the sordid happenings of Bangkok?

If not, well done for the non-sequitur.

[black magick hustla]

idk maybe you are one of those degenerate white people. you know like those who marry submissive thais. white people have a long history of this

Source and justification for sweeping statement with racial overtones?

Where is this long history?

I know plenty of people with East Asian wives/partners and they certainly aren't "submissive" at all and would be quite offended by that comment.

idk you arent american so maybe you didnt get admitedly ther bad taste joke. there is a tendency within older well off white people to go to thailand and get wives. and a lot of third world culture (i was born in the third world btw) women are taught to be much more submissive to men than in, for example, the US. a lot of white people like third world wives because they lower their heads and nod. in fact, same shit with like white hipsters and asian girfriends. i am very bad at tact but i think everybody agrees that regressive gender roles are the strongest in poor areas

[Lt. Ferret]

If our military was half as Imperialist as you claim it is, we'd have way cooler uniforms.

[Bud Struggle]

Brillant post!!!!!^^^^^:D

[Ele'ill]

If our military was half as Imperialist as you claim it is, we'd have way cooler uniforms.

Glad you're here with us. :rolleyes:

[danyboy27]

can we get back to the main subject? It was initially a thread about how studients are looked down by some leftist, and now we are talking about submissive thai women and army uniform..

[Robert]

In other words, you hate submissive Thai women and military uniforms?

[Lt. Ferret]

Glad you're here with us. :rolleyes:


you're reaching the quota for use of the rolling eyes emoticon.

[Palingenisis]

same shit with like white hipsters and asian girfriends. i am very bad at tact but i think everybody agrees that regressive gender roles are the strongest in poor areas

I know two very strong Asian women....But I have also over heard guys in the pub praising Asian women for being "womenly" and not "caught up with feminist crap". The whole mail order bride thing is horrible...Honestly I would prefer to work in a brothel than be one of them. Its Imperialism at its sickest.

[Lt. Ferret]

Again with the Imperialism.

[danyboy27]

I know two very strong Asian women....But I have also over heard guys in the pub praising Asian women for being "womenly" and not "caught up with feminist crap". The whole mail order bride thing is horrible...Honestly I would prefer to work in a brothel than be one of them. Its capitalism at its sickest.

i fixed it for you.

[Ele'ill]

you're reaching the quota for use of the rolling eyes emoticon.

You can't stop the rolleyes :rolleyes:

Edit- You're reaching the quota for stupid :lol:/\:lol:

Edit- Coming from your camp this is laughable

Students are looked down on because of their vigor to engage the world but their lack of knowledge and tools to do this. They may know a lot about their field of interest but they also have a lack of experience in their field of interest as an occupation. I'd imagine some of this changes once they're near graduated.

[Palingenisis]

If our military was half as Imperialist as you claim it is, we'd have way cooler uniforms.

http://humantrafficking.change.org/blog/view/wikileaks_reveals_us_tax_dollars_fund_child_sex_sl avery_in_afghanistan

Despite your crap uniforms the above makes you Imperialist.

[Lt. Ferret]

http://humantrafficking.change.org/blog/view/wikileaks_reveals_us_tax_dollars_fund_child_sex_sl avery_in_afghanistan

Despite your crap uniforms the above makes you Imperialist.


An illegal, by the standards of both Afghan and U.S. law, sex scandal is proof that I am an Imperialist?

If this was a case for Imperialism, they'd be high fiving each other after raping Afghan boys.

Julian Assange was politically tarred with rape allegations. If these allegations are true, it doesn't make Social Democracy an imperialist rape factory.

[#FF0000]

You weren't so easygoing when you were a mod and handing out infractions when you saw something like that you didn't like. :)

You don't joke about racism and bigorty around here. You just don't.

I wouldn't have given anybody an infraction for that comment, though.

[#FF0000]

An illegal, by the standards of both Afghan and U.S. law, sex scandal is proof that I am an Imperialist?

If this was a case for Imperialism, they'd be high fiving each other after raping Afghan boys.

Julian Assange was politically tarred with rape allegations. If these allegations are true, it doesn't make Social Democracy an imperialist rape factory.

I think the amount of military bases overseas and, you know, the wars waged over the interests of American businesses are pretty good evidence of imperialism.

Why do you say the U.S. isn't Imperialist?

[Palingenisis]

An illegal, by the standards of both Afghan and U.S. law, sex scandal is proof that I am an Imperialist?

If this was a case for Imperialism, they'd be high fiving each other after raping Afghan boys.

Julian Assange was politically tarred with rape allegations. If these allegations are true, it doesn't make Social Democracy an imperialist rape factory.

"Social Democracy" is just that as we all know to well here from the actions of the British Labour Party in Ireland (and not just in Ireland).

You are part and parcel of an Imperialist machine. Im sure people in the US army do high five each other over that sort of thing.

[Palingenisis]

An illegal, by the standards of both Afghan and U.S. law

There is legality and than there is reality.

The ruling class and their piggy wiggies rarely consider that legality applies to them.

[Robert]

The ruling class and their piggy wiggies

Pigs suck, man.

http://cache3.asset-cache.net/xc/72385998.jpg?v=1&c=IWSAsset&k=2&d=E41C9FE5C4AA0A146983647750ACF53C31106C3CF4D15674 88F85EE89722D046B01E70F2B3269972

[#FF0000]

Yeah I mean the U.S. has done things and have supported people who have done things that are not only illegal but incredibly cruel. See: Mujahadeen, Contras, Pinochet, Savimbi etc. etc.

[Lt. Ferret]

I think the amount of military bases overseas and, you know, the wars waged over the interests of American businesses are pretty good evidence of imperialism.

Why do you say the U.S. isn't Imperialist?


I am for scaling down most US bases overseas, but most "bases" are things like supply stations or coaling stations. Most American troops overseas were invited by the host governemnt, and spend their time defending that area, or doing humanitarian services.

If reactionary and violent governments (not anti-imperialist, as apologists like to paint them here) would tone down their rhetoric, as soon as they do the host nations ask us nicely to leave. The number and level of bases and troops in foreign nations fluctuates, but most foreign governments wnat them there. It's usually populists of the right and left who use american troops as political points to gain popularity.

[Lt. Ferret]

Yeah I mean the U.S. has done things and have supported people who have done things that are not only illegal but incredibly cruel. See: Mujahadeen, Contras, Pinochet, Savimbi etc. etc.


and i don't support that kind of shit. There was a Cold War and the USSR was supplying every revolutionary group they could find with weaponry. It's not like the USSR wasn't killing leaders and putting down rebellions against their military occupations either.

Besides, the same Mujahadeen that were cruel in the 80s are now anti-imperialist heroes in the 00s, but theyre still the same reactionary fundamentalist shit bags they always were.

[#FF0000]

and i don't support that kind of shit

Nope, but the folks you're armed to defend do. I don't know man, if I was a bodyguard for a mob boss, I'd probably have a moral problem with it.


There was a Cold War and the USSR was supplying every revolutionary group they could find with weaponry. It's not like the USSR wasn't killing leaders and putting down rebellions against their military occupations either.

Yeah imperialist countries tend to do this.


Besides, the same Mujahadeen that were cruel in the 80s are now anti-imperialist heroes in the 00s,

lol no


but theyre still the same reactionary fundamentalist shit bags they always were.

Yup.

[Lt. Ferret]

All states have armies. All geographical land on the earth is governed by a State.

All States have monopolies on violence, so unless we start preaching anarchism here, theres going to be a state and theres going to be a military and that state will almost never have a clean record, but I don't think its right or fair to paint everyone involved with that state with the same blood colored brush.

[#FF0000]

I am for scaling down most US bases overseas, but most "bases" are things like supply stations or coaling stations.Source please~


Most American troops overseas were invited by the host governemnt, and spend their time defending that area, or doing humanitarian services.Well, like where? Any in South America? Asia? The Middle East? Because, you know, the U.S. has been very active in many of these places when it comes to overthrowing unfriendly leaders.


If reactionary and violent governments (not anti-imperialist, as apologists like to paint them here) would tone down their rhetoric, as soon as they do the host nations ask us nicely to leave. The number and level of bases and troops in foreign nations fluctuates, but most foreign governments wnat them there. It's usually populists of the right and left who use american troops as political points to gain popularity. You mean like Iraq where the provisional government has been like "yo get out" for a couple years now?

EDIT: And even so, I don't think that means there's no such thing as Imperialism or that the U.S. isn't engaged in Imperialism; it just means they've got an Empire.

[Palingenisis]

The violence of the oppressed cannot be compared to the violence of the oppressor.

[#FF0000]

All States have monopolies on violence, so unless we start preaching anarchism here, theres going to be a state and theres going to be a military and that state will almost never have a clean record, but I don't think its right or fair to paint everyone involved with that state with the same blood colored brush.No army has a clean record and there's no such thing as a good army, just like there's no Mafia that has a clean record and there's no such thing as a good Mafia. Being a goon for capital or a crimeboss might not make someone a bad person, and someone might have some good ideas, but it's kind of dumb to complain about catching flak for being a goon either way.

[Lt. Ferret]

Source please~



Well, like where? Any in South America? Asia? The Middle East? Because, you know, the U.S. has been very active in many of these places when it comes to overthrowing unfriendly leaders.



You mean like Iraq where the provisional government has been like "yo get out" for a couple years now?


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:US_military_bases_in_the_world.svg

my attempts to post this in the thread failed so heres a link.

most countries that are not well known US military destinations have less than 1 thousand troops in them. Although a thousand may sound like a lot, most of the time this would entail that it's a company of men or a smaller element.

Our company of soldiers has about 120 people at max strength. Most countries hosting troops have a company or two of troops there, which have no ability to somehow puppeteer the host nation. If they even get their own area for military bases, thats impressive. Most of the time they use leased land, or the host nations military areas.

In Bulgaria they built four "bases" in a joint American-Bulgarian declaration. These are 2 air bases (an air base can be basically a landing strip), a logistics base (which can be basically a warehouse), and a shooting range (which can be basically a wide flat dirt area).

Israel has 120 US troops there, manning a radar station. That's about a company of men.

I found a naval base in Spain, that is pretty large in that I can't find a set number of soldiers there but it has 800 housing units, which is basiaclly a neighborhood.


ill write more, i gotta go though i have a ride.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_United_States_military_bases

[Palingenisis]

No the USA isnt based on the genocide of the First Nations and the slave labour of the Black Nation...And it has a happy, shiney, loving relationship with the rest of the world. Go USA!

[FreeEire]

Anywhere I've ever heard of US troops being present, often with permission of the host government, a large portion of the actual people don't agree with their presence.

Shannon Airport being a common example of "first world" countries which aren't exactly enamored at having US troops, illegal detainees for torture, and weaponry going through their local airport.

[Palingenisis]

Anywhere I've ever heard of US troops being present, often with permission of the host government, a large portion of the actual people don't agree with their presence.

Shannon Airport being a common example of "first world" countries which aren't exactly enamored at having US troops, illegal detainees for torture, and weaponry going through their local airport.

There are plenty of Irish piggy wiggies though.

Why cant Republicans accept that?

The 26 counties is an Imperialist nation.

[danyboy27]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:US_military_bases_in_the_world.svg

my attempts to post this in the thread failed so heres a link.

most countries that are not well known US military destinations have less than 1 thousand troops in them. Although a thousand may sound like a lot, most of the time this would entail that it's a company of men or a smaller element.

Our company of soldiers has about 120 people at max strength. Most countries hosting troops have a company or two of troops there, which have no ability to somehow puppeteer the host nation. If they even get their own area for military bases, thats impressive. Most of the time they use leased land, or the host nations military areas.

In Bulgaria they built four "bases" in a joint American-Bulgarian declaration. These are 2 air bases (an air base can be basically a landing strip), a logistics base (which can be basically a warehouse), and a shooting range (which can be basically a wide flat dirt area).

Israel has 120 US troops there, manning a radar station. That's about a company of men.

I found a naval base in Spain, that is pretty large in that I can't find a set number of soldiers there but it has 800 housing units, which is basiaclly a neighborhood.


ill write more, i gotta go though i have a ride.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_United_States_military_bases

Well feret, war today is something of logistics you know(obviously of course), and once you have a military base in a country, you gain the capability to exert a pressure on it in the near future and assist those in power to stay in control even if they are actually due to be overthrown.

It really dosnt matter if there are 100 or 5 active combat troop on it, once you got a foot in the place, you can pour has many equipment and troop necessary when the time will come.

And concerning you serving the american governement well, i dont think its a moral dilema for you or for most of the american soldier for that matter, the training you had took care of that long time ago.

It would be futile to bother you with all the ''moral'' implication of doing the bidding of the us governement.

But i will tell you this, capitalism make the american governement inherently unstable, an instability that thousand soldier paid from their lives for several decades already. Sooner or later you will have to ask yourself if you are willing to accept to loose men not beccause of the american governement, but beccause of this factor that render it unstable and put the lives of the men and women in uniform at risk on a daily basis.

I think a strong reflection is needed within the military about this factor, and how eventually its gonna force you to turn against your own citizens to allow the continuity of a system that put at risk those you have sworn to protect.

[#FF0000]

Nevermind that imperialism isn't an entirely military thing. ^

[Lt. Ferret]

Well feret, war today is something of logistics you know(obviously of course), and once you have a military base in a country, you gain the capability to exert a pressure on it in the near future and assist those in power to stay in control even if they are actually due to be overthrown.

It really dosnt matter if there are 100 or 5 active combat troop on it, once you got a foot in the place, you can pour has many equipment and troop necessary when the time will come.

And concerning you serving the american governement well, i dont think its a moral dilema for you or for most of the american soldier for that matter, the training you had took care of that long time ago.

It would be futile to bother you with all the ''moral'' implication of doing the bidding of the us governement.

But i will tell you this, capitalism make the american governement inherently unstable, an instability that thousand soldier paid from their lives for several decades already. Sooner or later you will have to ask yourself if you are willing to accept to loose men not beccause of the american governement, but beccause of this factor that render it unstable and put the lives of the men and women in uniform at risk on a daily basis.

I think a strong reflection is needed within the military about this factor, and how eventually its gonna force you to turn against your own citizens to allow the continuity of a system that put at risk those you have sworn to protect.


Most, if not all of these countries have size limitations with the US. The US cannot pour a million troops into guantanamo bay or in Spain. And, like you said, logistics plays a huge role. they cannot build up a million troops or even 100,000 without a massive amount of logistics, and the host nation can simply turn off the faucet.

i firmly believe one of the reasons we went into iraq was because we had jammed 160,000 soldiers in kuwait and keeping them there for any period of time with no military purpose was completely unsustainable.


capitalism makes the government unstable? which of the two major ideological enemies of the 20th century collapsed internally and had massive riots and social upheaval? it wasn't the capitalist nation.

and the US Military will not turn its arms against american people, especially not in any revolutionary or despotic sense. i firmly believe that.


and since everyone here probably pays taxes and isnt living off the grid in a communist guerrila camp, i cannot take you seriously when you tell me im a bigger tool of the government than you are.

[#FF0000]

capitalism makes the government unstable? which of the two major ideological enemies of the 20th century collapsed internally and had massive riots and social upheaval? it wasn't the capitalist nation.

Dohoho that's debatable.


and the US Military will not turn its arms against american people, especially not in any revolutionary or despotic sense. i firmly believe that. Well, the Civil War? The Battle of Blair Mountain (Okay, the Army wasn't sent it but it was threatened and Billy Mitchell had bombers doing aerial surveillance)?

Still, I think I agree that the military won't go pulling anything like that anymore, even if they might have in the past. Most countries wouldn't, and I don't think they have to anymore with the police force having the weapons and training they're getting now.


and since everyone here probably pays taxes and isnt living off the grid in a communist guerrila camp, i cannot take you seriously when you tell me im a bigger tool of the government than you are.Really? You don't think a soldier is a bigger tool for the government than a civilian? And what in the world could anybody do by living off in the woods somewhere?

If a communist is living a regular life, he's a sell out or a hypocrite. If they're living in some compound in the woods under self-imposed poverty, they're fanatics. If they're in academia or make a decent amount of money, they're ivory tower/out of touch/idealists/over-educated. If they're regular working class people, they're jealous.

We can't really win. :mellow:

[RGacky3]

they cannot build up a million troops or even 100,000 without a massive amount of logistics, and the host nation can simply turn off the faucet.


Can they really? THere are dozens of smaller third world countries that would disagree with you.


i firmly believe one of the reasons we went into iraq was because we had jammed 160,000 soldiers in kuwait and keeping them there for any period of time with no military purpose was completely unsustainable.


Really? So it was just boredom? Millions of lives, billions upon billions of dollars, was because those soldiers needed something to do? You "firmly" believe that? You know what they could have done .... Not been there.


capitalism makes the government unstable? which of the two major ideological enemies of the 20th century collapsed internally and had massive riots and social upheaval? it wasn't the capitalist nation.


It was'nt the socialist one either, it was the State Capitalist one.

Either way its not like the US government actually works, it might exist, but it does'nt work, thanks to capitalism.


and the US Military will not turn its arms against american people, especially not in any revolutionary or despotic sense. i firmly believe that.


Read some history, its happened.


and since everyone here probably pays taxes and isnt living off the grid in a communist guerrila camp, i cannot take you seriously when you tell me im a bigger tool of the government than you are.

Well, you are signed up to kill and die for it .... So you kind of are.

BTW, one large aspect of military issues, in fact one of the largest, that you always need to include in a discussion of that, is lockheed martin, i.e. the military-industrial complex.

[#FF0000]

Really? So it was just boredom? Millions of lives, billions upon billions of dollars, was because those soldiers needed something to do? You "firmly" believe that? You know what they could have done .... Not been there.

I really wouldn't be surprised if it was a factor.


Read some history, its happened.

Where?

[Lt. Ferret]

i didnt say boredom. i said putting 160,000 troops in an area that requires massive amounts of logistics and transportation resources was unsustainable. it wasnt boredom. it was more of not sitting around for years while saddam tap danced around this invasion threat, like he was doing.



also (i dont feel like building up a huge area of quotations this morning) yeah i do think if youre a communist or an anarchist who rails and complains all day about capitalism and imperialism, while paying taxes, playing on your iphone, and watching the latest hollywood movie, you either need to shit or get off the pot.

i dont know how many guerrillas in vietnam or nepal were supporting capitalism or imperialism, i dont know how many soviet rebels in russia were acting the way communists do now.

just because youre bitter that your job sucks or you note on an academic level the inequalities of social or economic systems, being smug and annoying about it doesnt do anything .

and thats all i ever see the far left doing anymore.

[Ele'ill]

also (i dont feel like building up a huge area of quotations this morning) yeah i do think if youre a communist or an anarchist who rails and complains all day about capitalism and imperialism, while paying taxes, playing on your iphone, and watching the latest hollywood movie, you either need to shit or get off the pot.

You should be more specific than that because there's a huge difference between blowing a paycheck at Gap and paying taxes. I partially agree with you but only in regards to avoiding certain things that leaves myself in a reasonable position to still engage in activism.




just because youre bitter that your job sucks or you note on an academic level the inequalities of social or economic systems, being smug and annoying about it doesnt do anything .

Yeah, assholes are annoying. So what?





and thats all i ever see the far left doing anymore.

What have you seen and where?

[Lt. Ferret]

12 years of activism in houston, oklahoma, georgia, havent been in california long enough to tell you, but i read reports and stories, i never see anything worth seeing.

at least in Nepal the Maoists got some shit done but they work and suffer and overcome on a level i dont think anyone in the West is prepared to do.

[#FF0000]

i'm still struggling to think of how in the world living in the woods in a compoud or something is going to help the class struggle in the U.S. or western europe.

[Lt. Ferret]

Well it sure would be a bigger blow to capitalism than continually buying things the capitalists put out.

[#FF0000]

Well it sure would be a bigger blow to capitalism than continually buying things the capitalists put out.

yeah see I don't think that's true.

tbh I don't think there's a whole lot communists can really do presently.

[Lt. Ferret]

i dont think so either, honestly.

[danyboy27]

Most, if not all of these countries have size limitations with the US. The US cannot pour a million troops into guantanamo bay or in Spain. And, like you said, logistics plays a huge role. they cannot build up a million troops or even 100,000 without a massive amount of logistics, and the host nation can simply turn off the faucet.
.
you dont need that much troops in a country to exert pressure on it. With the technological progress of today, a group of 5000 foot soldier backed up by air support would be more than enough to stop the the overthrow of spain for exemple.



i firmly believe one of the reasons we went into iraq was because we had jammed 160,000 soldiers in kuwait and keeping them there for any period of time with no military purpose was completely unsustainable.
.
see? that what i was talking about when i mentionned the inherent instability created by capitalism. It was more economicly viable to send all those people to their death and geopardize the security of the american governement than spend million in re-localization.




capitalism makes the government unstable? which of the two major ideological enemies of the 20th century collapsed internally and had massive riots and social upheaval? it wasn't the capitalist nation.

it was a state capitalist nation, and they lost against a ''free market'' capitalist nation. Bottom line, russian and the us today are more unstable than they where in the past.

America now rely on foreign power to manifacture their good, giving free leverage to their competitor, the social services are now only a shadow of what they where in the 50s, and the political system have been hacked by extremely wealthy individual who collectivize the lost and privatize the gain.

this era of stability you are talking about lasted for america only a fews decades(under the capitalist system).

look at me and tell me with a straight face that such system could last another century without falling appart in continuous turnmoil and civil war.




and the US Military will not turn its arms against american people, especially not in any revolutionary or despotic sense. i firmly believe that.

Some people above in the hierarchic level might differ on the subject.
The canadian army turned against its own people in the 70s, arresting thousand of civilians, breaking socialist organisation, and it was a democracy. My mother had a cousin in the army and during the crisis said if he was asked to shoot her, he would, beccause order are orders.



and since everyone here probably pays taxes and isnt living off the grid in a communist guerrila camp, i cannot take you seriously when you tell me im a bigger tool of the government than you are.

Nobody can force me to fight oversea, and nobody control me by a system of chain of command. I can quit my job anytime and look for another or live in the dole, you dont have that luxury, you signed a contract that bind you for the military for x years.

the least you can do is to think about the repercussion the economic system in wich you live in will have on your future and those who work with you.

[TC]

To be honest I find the disdain for students on the left ("they're all middle class kiddies", "when they get degrees they'l all join the ranks of the ruling class" and similar toss) really quite insulting. I've not been to university and spent the years I would have been a student on the dole or doing shitwork. I don't find anything noble in that, it feels that a great amount of potential has been robbed from me and am making every attempt to actually get into education (given that I'll have to support myself through the now three times as expensive university system this is no easy task). To have some tosspot tell me I should be facing dole queues and call centres for the rest of my life in order to have "true leftist credentials" or something is just as bad as some right wing wanker telling me I shouldn't because it's ideas above my station.


A really excellent and insightful post.

In any case, I think education has both personal and social value.

The personal value comes from the fact that many experience learning, studying and researching amongst those doing the same in a structured but minimally restricted environment to be a personally enriching and fulfilling experience. There is a personal enjoyment, for many people, in growing in one's appreciation of the world through the discipline/s of their choice.

There is also social value in that education can enable contributions one can make that they would be unable to make absent an education. This may be obvious in the skills of a doctor or an engineer or it may be more complex in the insights into society and the human condition that a philosopher or sociologist may have after having studied and thought about and argued about all of the literature and various schools of thought over the full range of their disciplines (and not the truly narrow range you are typically exposed to in an activist party's study group, or that you'd just come across on your own on the internet).

Self-study is great but it is not - except in unusual circumstances - a substitute for studying in an [excellent] institution that guides and facilitates your development and critical method and gives you a sounding board to test your ideas. There is a tendency for example in only studying primary texts of traditional great thinkers to be - just by virtue of being a single individual - under analytic and critical or under appreciative - without having the same exposure to the vast bodies of secondary literature and subsequent analysis. You don't for example appreciate Marx in the same way if you read him in isolation as if you read Marx with a lecturer/professor/tutor/study group that can introduce you subsequent analysis from one tradition, a second lecturer/professor/tutor that can introduce you to analysis on Marx from another tradition, and so on - and without keeping up with contemporary academic analysis and developments on Marx's thought.

Studying at a university gives you the time to devote to this and the structure to devote all your time to it - its extremely difficult when you have other things competing for your time. It also gives you institutional access to lecturers, journal database subscriptions, libraries, and so on which you could not obtain otherwise (unless you're rich enough to buy personal subscriptions to every journal in your field and supported by someone to spend 8-14 hours a day reading, thinking and writing). Perhaps most importantly, universities let you talk to experts in a field about your ideas and oblige experts to read your writing and help you develop your thoughts.

Of course not all or perhaps not even most university students (at least undergrads) get that much out of university - many just treat it as a way of staying in school or getting a qualification to improve their credibility on the job market or even to avoid hard work - and many departments in many universities are not focused on effectively developing their students intellectually but only in stuffing them full of route learning, or getting them through their courses. The type of personal and social benefits I described are really only possible with self-initiative - they don't arise simply from showing up to class, turning in assignments and doing the minimum, and lecturers/professors don't go out of their way typically to get you to do more than that - they instead require devotion, dedication, and discipline. However difficult this is in a university it is an extraordinarily difficult thing to do (unless very wealthy and idle or otherwise externally supported) outside of universities to the same level one would achieve with institutional support.

[Bud Struggle]

Good post^^^

But what also matters is the quality of the university that one attends. That are different. The better schools challenge and stimulate the not so good ones, instruct. Not in every case, but for the most part. My brother, Jud Struggle, a retired banker) teaches finance in two colleges: a good regional college and is an adjunct in a first rate Ivyesque school--from what he tells me it's a world of difference. The Ivy kids chop him apart if he isn't on his game--so he teaches to that game. The "nice" college is just that. He teaches and the kids learn.

Go for the better schools.

[Sosa]

Good post^^^

But what also matters is the quality of the university that one attends. That are different. The better schools challenge and stimulate the not so good ones, instruct. Not in every case, but for the most part. My brother, Jud Struggle, a retired banker) teaches finance in two colleges: a good regional college and is an adjunct in a first rate Ivyesque school--from what he tells me it's a world of difference. The Ivy kids chop him apart if he isn't on his game--so he teaches to that game. The "nice" college is just that. He teaches and the kids learn.

Go for the better schools.

I think it also rests on the professor. The most challenging instructor I had was during my first two years at a community college. He was a PhD professor who had taught at a university before. He was tough and challenged the students in his class. He was the type of professor you either love or hate. You don't get many of those at a community college but they're out there. I go to a much larger university now and have not yet had a professor as challenging as him.

[ComradeMan]

I think it also rests on the professor. The most challenging instructor I had was during my first two years at a community college. He was a PhD professor who had taught at a very prestigious university before. He was tough and challenged the students on his class. He was the type of professor you either love or hate. You don't get many of those at a community college but there out there. I go to a much larger university now and have not yet had a professor as challenging as him.

That's a good point, going back a bit- the best teacher I remember was my Latin and Classical History teacher. He was a scary guy at first but he was a genius, he spoke about six languages fluently and spoke Latin like it were a living language. The guy also taught maths as he had several degrees!!! He was very strict and challenging but he was a good teacher!!!

[Quail]

I think it also rests on the professor. The most challenging instructor I had was during my first two years at a community college. He was a PhD professor who had taught at a university before. He was tough and challenged the students in his class. He was the type of professor you either love or hate. You don't get many of those at a community college but they're out there. I go to a much larger university now and have not yet had a professor as challenging as him.
I completely agree with this.

Also, I always mention this, but there was a study where teachers were given a bottom set group, but told they were a middle or higher set. Because the teachers expected more of them, they pushed them harder and the kids did better. I think that if teachers really believe in pushing kids to fulfil their potential, they're going to bring out the best in them.

[Bud Struggle]

I completely agree with this.

Also, I always mention this, but there was a study where teachers were given a bottom set group, but told they were a middle or higher set. Because the teachers expected more of them, they pushed them harder and the kids did better. I think that if teachers really believe in pushing kids to fulfil their potential, they're going to bring out the best in them.


I would say that was a hit or miss plan. There are good people everywhere, but you'd find a better consistancy at the better schools. And further--the better teachers teach to the ability of the students and the better students are found at the better schools.

[Robert]

jazzratt said:


some right wing wanker telling me I shouldn't because it's ideas above my station.

To the Americans here, have you EVER heard a "right wing wanker" tell a kid he has no chance at a good job or education because if his "station"? I really am starting to suspect that the UK has a real class system that Americans cannot understand.

Hell, my experience is that U.S. managers and owners tend to keep an eye out for young energetic talent and they don't care where what race or sex he is or if he went to college or what family he was born in to. They don't want to crush kids like that, they want to promote them. Admittedly it's to help the company, not the kid, but still ....

[#FF0000]

jazzratt said:
To the Americans here, have you EVER heard a "right wing wanker" tell a kid he has no chance at a good job or education because if his "station"? I really am starting to suspect that the UK has a real class system that Americans cannot understand.

Hell, my experience is that U.S. managers and owners tend to keep an eye out for young energetic talent and they don't care where what race or sex he is or if he went to college or what family he was born in to. They don't want to crush kids like that, they want to promote them. Admittedly it's to help the company, not the kid, but still ....

I don't know about that. I mean you're right they do look at that but I think it's hard to deny that if someone "looks poor", they aren't really going to take them as seriously as a professor or something. I mean if I had a debate with David Horowitz at the bus stop in my worn flannel and dirty blue jeans while this guy's wearing a suit or something, who's going to be taken more seriously?

And it goes for more than just class, too. I know ya'll probably don't want to hear this but I'm pretty sure there've been studies that showed people don't think an idea sounds as good if it comes from a black person or a woman. I'll have to find that in a bit, though.

[Bud Struggle]

jazzratt said:



To the Americans here, have you EVER heard a "right wing wanker" tell a kid he has no chance at a good job or education because if his "station"? I really am starting to suspect that the UK has a real class system that Americans cannot understand.

You know I just spent a couple of posts telling these Proletarians to go to college and go to the best one they can get into and I'm as right wing wanker as you can get.

You have to believe that most of these Commies are either making up conversations with imaginary Capitalists or they are hearing voices in their head.

[Edit] Let me say What I said would be true in America. I have no real knowledge of the British class system.