Friday, February 04, 2005
Horror, but no wits
Berkeley vs. David Horowitz, the sequel! Except Berkeley didn't show up this time. Ho hum. It really cramps my style when protesters don't protest every little thing. Read Hov's critique for the substantial reasons why Horowitz wasn't all that impressive. Continue reading here if you want to hear some cheap shots about an event I didn't attend.
“How many people in this room have been taught there are social or economic hierarchies in their class?” he asked. “You are being taught straight out Marxist, communist ideology in this university, and it’s taught as though it’s science.”
Wait... like... rich people and poor people? I guess I've been really brainwashed, because that doesn't seem that much of a stretch to me.
“He did have some valid points,” said UC Berkeley freshman Jennifer Quan. “In Berkeley, it is true that a lot of professors do make (negative remarks) about Bush ... that shouldn’t be in the classroom.”
Okay, in Quan's defense, there's an ellipsis, so maybe she said "no negative remarks about Bush unrelated to the class in question." But if that isn't what fills in the blank... uh... I guess this just solidifies BCR's rep for not being very... deep in their thinking.
"Academic Freedom is Slavery." Funny. I used to think that taking people against their will and making them do what you tell them was slavery.
Moving on to another article on the same topic on the same day in the same paper:
When UC Berkeley released data last week revealing that freshmen are becoming more and more liberal, the voices of conservatives seemed to be slipping out of the mainstream.
Really? What do the liberals have, if we don't give them conservatism to dislike? Even if everyone was liberal, conservatives would still be mainstream, just like evil is.
Anyway, they go on to quote Litwack. Ugh. When you assign some books that don't share your opinion, I might be inclined to agree that no "one point of view could govern my class."
. . .
|
. . .
|
