I'm not sure how many people have saw this great documentary dealing with higher education and politics, so here are the links.
Part 1 - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wJuQQcXKLWM
Part 2 - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_PMTr...eature=related
Part 3 - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t7RSi...eature=related
Part 4 - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0it5J...eature=related
Part 5 - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eAud5...eature=related
Part 6 - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KywZk...eature=related
Part 7 - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aAESc...eature=related
Part 8 - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=b8PED...eature=related
Part 9 - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GI5D-...eature=related
Part 10 - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NNfnO...eature=related
Don't worry, not illegal.
Enjoy!
Indoctrinate U
Discussion in 'Political Debate & Discussion' started by christianyouth, Jun 18, 2009.
-
-
Revmitchell Well-Known MemberSite Supporter
Thanks for posting this
-
Sure, I just got done watching this for the second time this morning. It's alarming to see, and I think most Democrats would be against this beat-those-who-disagree, communistic resembling, group think, attitude.
Here is a brief interview of the film maker with Sean Hannity.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OM6mIMij5IY&feature=related -
Well someone was in partisan mode, because this thread got a one star rating. I was hoping we could use these clips as a launching pad to discuss some of these issues. I was alarmed after watching this, especially in regards to the bit on affirmative action and how it remains one of these 'unquestionable' issues for many, and as someone who's name is on the Internet stating blatantly conservative views, this is alarming.
It's just disturbing that people are not allowed to dissent, not allowed to discuss without fear of being branded a bigot, fundamentalist, extremist, racist, or homophobe. An example in the movie was about a university professor who was head of the psychology department at some university in California. Well, during the California election her husband became involved as an advocate for Republicanism. She was approached by colleagues and asked if she agreed with her husbands views, and informed that she never would have been hired if she was a Republican. Shortly after discovering she was a Republican, she lost her position as head of the Psychology department and began being persecuted in all sorts of ways by her colleagues. They moved her office, changed her schedule, basically did anything they could do to force her to quit. Finally she sought legal recourse, and I don't remember exactly what happened, but I think it went to the federal level.
That type of bludgeon-your-opponent mindset is a really scary thing to see at academia, the supposed free-market place of ideas.
I post on a weight lifting forum that averages many thousands of posts a day, and one of the larger sections is the religion and politics section. A lot of people on the forum are college students who are conservatives, and it's amazing to hear some of the stories of the ideologues teaching classes.
One student was taking a class in world affairs, and the issue of gun control was brought up. The teacher, being an academic and thus an obedient little colonial of Europe, said how Switzerland has the lowest crime rate and the police don't even carry guns. Implication : guns don't solve crime!
Well thankfully this kid posted on the forum and made this comment to someone when we were debating gun control issues. Within a few seconds there were many people on there who pointed out that a convenient fact was left out of the profs. little point : Switzerland has the highest gun ownership rates in the world.
I mean, that's obviously an anecdotal story that I can't be positive that happened, but given the state of academia today, I wouldn't say it's too far.
And what's sad is this mind control, this infusing kids with conclusions without premises, is really taking effect. My peers will rail against gender roles, they will rail against religious exclusivity, they will rail against everything that it's in fashion to rail against, but when I ask them to elaborate, it's clear this is just some inherited idea they have. The best example of this is when people rail against gender roles.
So I ask them, (these being libs of course), if our closest ancestors have gender roles and behavioral/physiological differences among the genders, and there has always been distinctions between the masculine/feminine in every society(at least that I've studied), what evidence do you have to say that we as homosapiens in the 21st century are somehow different? People get PISSED. And it's not because I'm asking them to prove a negative, I just want them to explain to me why they think the genders are equal and when they think about it, they realize they don't know, but something inside them is triggered and they become aggressive. Aggressive like I never saw. Maybe it's because I'm a muscular, white male, a walking reminder of the physiological/temperamental differences between males and females of our species, maybe it's because they are convinced that anyone who believes in gender roles hates humanity, I don't know. But I know that when they ask me these questions about my beliefs, I never become a crazed partisan.
These are just some of my observations, hopefully we can have a good discussion on this. I'm not an ideologue, and over the past year I've learned that many issues are not as clear as I once thought they were, and so I'm willing to extend this to my political view. But I know that this mind-control that's going on at universities, this conditioning people to respond to 'code words' like Pavel's dog's responded to the bell, is not safe. If they can get them to mindlessly respond to the word 'bigot', maybe they can get them to respond in the same way to 'Christian'.
I can't say how political discourse is at Christian universities, but I know that we have at least two Christian academics on here who probably have good insights into this issue(Martin and Rhetorician), and hopefully they will talk about their views and experiences.
Watch the documentary! It's pretty short and the director/interviewer is a real gentleman.
United in Christ,
- Andy -
-
Aaron, lol, true. But I still think there is a difference between the Democratic voter and the representatives, as decisions like sb777 demonstrate. Sb777 : a schoolboard decision in CA decided that students who identified themselves as female, or male, could have access to the same locker rooms and rest rooms as the real females and males. This is a pretty bizarre decision. It's sick, the fact that guys now can legally shower in the girls locker room in gym class if he tells the school social worker that he feels he's a woman. I bet you'd be hard pressed to find 1/30 democrats who are in favor of this decision(on another forum I posted about this and there were a lot of democrats saying this is retarded).
I don't think most Democratic voters want the US to imitate a secular Europe, but the leftist ideologues try to push us there every opportunity(hate speech laws, anti-homeschooling bills, etc). -
bumped
Let's discuss higher education and politics. It would be interested to hear the opinion of some of the Democrats on this board, in regards to the documentary. Did they think it was accurate? Does it make political bias in academia seem more pervasive than it really is?
Anyone have any experiences of political persecution in academia?
Thanks! -
I wouldn't call it a "great" documentary. The production values appear to be something a student would put together on a computer as a one-man project. Kind of a "poor man's Michael Moore" only from the right. I also quickly tired of seeing the same stock clip of three guys walking across a campus in the old film multiple times during the first 3-4 minutes. I only saw the one person's name in the opening credits, who I assume also did the voice over narration.
Production quality aside, I watched the first installment, but have no desire to spend the time needed to watch the rest. However, rather than a "fair and balanced" (sorry FNC) dialogue, this comes off as a biased piece with an axe to grind. That puts the side of the debate being espoused by the producer in doubt. If the opening salvo had included some pro and con arguments from both sides, I might be more willing to watch the remainder. This will appeal to those who agree with the premise, the "amen corner" if you will. But it adds very little to advancing any open debate, something the producer bemoans about universities at the beginning. -
-
I did just go take a quick look at part of the 4th installment. It should be warned that one interviewee used the phrase "...shoot them right in the f****ing face." I thought links to pages that contained obscenities were verbotten. -
I'm just sayin' :smilewinkgrin:.... -
MP, thanks for the comments.
-
MP doesn't like the documentary because it tells the truth about what is happening on our college campuses across the United States.
-
Revmitchell Well-Known MemberSite Supporter
However, your refusal to watch it puts your view in doubt. -
Again, did you watch all of "An Inconvenient Truth"? How about "Bowling for Columbine", or "Roger and Me", or maybe "Fahrenheit 9/11"? Did you sit through Bill Maher's "Religulous"? Does that make your agenda doubtful? Use some logic here, Mitch. -
-
Revmitchell Well-Known MemberSite Supporter
-
Revmitchell Well-Known MemberSite Supporter
-
Revmitchell Well-Known MemberSite Supporter