Liberal Academia and My Struggle for Survival

David E. Firester is currently a Ph.D. Student at the Graduate Center, CUNY. His areas of interest include insurgency/counterinsurgency, the intelligence community (in which he has previously served) and the Arab-Israeli conflict.


Photo - college student in a classroomWhen Stephen Hawking decided to boycott Israel earlier this year based on the opinions of academics like Noam Chomsky I was astonished.  How can it be that one of the smartest people in the world can hold such a dumb view?  It turns out that this is quite common.  As I began to teach at Queens College (City University of New York), I have seen firsthand how this can be.

It has often been said that there is no cure for stupid, while ignorance is easily treated through education.  What happens when educators willfully steer their ships in an ignorant direction?  It seems that many academic ships are sailing in this direction.  I happened to board one myself recently.

I began teaching “Introduction to Political Science” (PoliSci 101) at Queens College as a Graduate Teaching Fellow this semester.  As I am new, I was given a “mentor” whose syllabus I essentially mirrored.  After a brief review of the content I got a sense of what textbooks are being used in the practice of college-level teaching.  I researched syllabi elsewhere to get some more ideas.  It seems that what is being assigned at Queens College is not all that different from what professors assign elsewhere.

When I looked a little deeper into the material I was assigning I began to notice what I could only say is institutionalized liberal bias.  As a Ph.D. student who has sat through some of the most virulent professorial liberal rants, I knew it was quite common.  (In the past I had attended numerous schools, mostly in New York; they include State University of New York Orange, the City University of New York that included study at Brooklyn College, Hunter College, City College and the Graduate Center).  I swore that my pedagogical style would be centered on the presentation of opposing viewpoints and not descend into the sort of demagoguery that thrives on sycophant head bobbing.

In reviewing some of the chapters of the “textbook” I was requiring students to read I saw a clear socialist trend.  When I think of a textbook a few adjectives come to mind.  It should be a technical guide on concepts.  It should be dispassionate and devoid of fiery ideology.  Well, that isn’t quite how it works.

The “textbook” pushed the agenda of the “Occupy Wall Street” movement, denigrated any conservative viewpoints, assaulted libertarianism, and promoted only Democratic presidents and liberal/progressive interests.  I decided that since the ship was listing to the left I would give it a shove toward the center by assigning two chapters of Mark R. Levin’s book, Liberty and Tyranny: A Conservative Manifesto.

That didn’t go over too well.  The department chair called for a submission of all syllabi, which I promptly complied with.  I guess this is the first time they were seeing some conservative heresy being assigned.  I found it odd that shortly thereafter I was informed by my “mentor” that I would be observed in the classroom.  Routine observations do occur.  However, I was informed that they don’t generally take the form that mine had.  It was quite interesting that he chose the specific day that I would be reviewing Levin’s material with the students.

Following the observation, I had a brief discussion with my reviewer/mentor.  He seemed to make some useful critical remarks, which I immediately recognized as helpful.  Then he spoke about Levin’s book (I had sent him two chapters in advance of the observation).  He didn’t like that I used a “polemical radio personality” to teach.  I told him that Levin is an accomplished constitutional attorney and former Chief of Staff to Attorney General Edwin Meese.  He sort of nodded and the conversation ended.

A few days later I got the written version of my observation report.  The same matters discussed were now on paper.  I was told that the observation process requires that I must seek a full-time professor to be a rapporteur.  That person’s job is to simply note my comments in a neutral fashion and convey them to the chairperson.  I was told that I should see a particular professor, whom I decided not to see. I was then told that the department chair would suffice.  So, I went into her office and exchanged polite greetings with her.  As I began to tell her that I needed a rapporteur she took out a scratch pad and started to take notes, while barking at me that I have a “big issue” in assigning Levin and that she agrees with my observer’s remarks.  I was dumbfounded.

When a person goes to court they don’t expect that the judge will be play the roles of stenographer and prosecutor.  She told me that I needed to get that material out of the syllabus.  I tried to defend my usage of the material as being consonant with what I would think the school values: the presentation of facts from various perspectives.  She laughed and said that since Levin’s book was not a textbook it did not qualify as being on an equal footing as the (leftist) textbook.  As much as it pains me to say so, she is right.  Textbooks don’t seem to present arguments that folks like Levin are making.

When I told her that I merely assigned Levin to provide a counterpoint to the biased arguments being made in a so-called textbook that was “peer-reviewed” she suggested that perhaps I couldn’t find an alternative because the viewpoint is not legitimate.  Then I got to thinking, if one’s peers are all liberals and academics tend to be the same then the jury is rigged.  One cannot expect to be published in a peer-reviewed textbook when what they have to say is so unpopular among those who publish.

This is what people mean when they describe academia as a cesspool of liberal ideologues.   Over the years, I had come to see the students and professors (in New York City) as overwhelmingly liberally biased.  What I now can see is how such a bias is sustained by willfully suppressing any material that conflicts with the agenda.  As I have also been informed, the concept of “academic freedom” applies to professors with tenure.  I am not a member of such a privileged class.  Hence, I have no academic freedom.  One can safely conclude that since I (and my students) am not academically free, a liberal autocracy is the system that I must bow before.

I am left to understand that my place in this system is akin to that of an insurgent.  I am therefore compelled to brand myself as a “Conservative Insurgent.”  The difference is, however, that I will never seek to indoctrinate the students (as the liberal incumbents do).  I only desire to grant conservatism a voice amongst the cacophony of liberalism.

Freedom Center pamphlets now available on Kindle: Click here.

  • DogmaelJones1

    I sympathize with Mr. Firester, but still, I’m glad I never went to college. I still have all my marbles upstairs. That is, I have an independent mind not corrupted by our leftist academia. I’ve written eighteen novels, and four volumes of nonfiction. Guess I’m just knuckle-dragging moron, according to the doyens of Critical Theory.

    • rubber stamp

      Joseph Brodsky comes to mind. He did great without college education, too

    • Iceman1958

      I guess you don’t have a choice but to write or work at McDonald’s.

    • bluffcreek1967

      Thank God you didn’t go to college. Truth is, you’re an intelligent man who didn’t feel the need to go the college route which is just fine because college isn’t for everyone anyways. You probably spared yourself a lifetime of confusion and prevented your mind from being poisoned by Leftist dogma. The fact that you accomplished much with your writing without the drudgery of college only proves you had a good mind to begin with.

      For me, I love education, but I hate school (or in this case, college)!

      “The College Racket,” http://www.ambrosekane.com

    • Wolfthatknowsall

      You’re not a moron, knucle-dragging or otherwise.. I met enough to know …

  • David of Edinburgh

    This comes as no surprise. The Social Science department at Open University is widely infected with the leftist/postmodernist virus. Mercifully I was a mature student and spotted this infection quite quickly and engaged with it much to the annoyance of at least one churlish tutor. Having read of my displeasure at the indoctrinaire content of the course a concerned tutor asked me to send examples from the text books. He was gathering evidence of bias and seeking to redress it. By the way, I note the use of ‘chair’ rather than chairman in this article, which suggests that some of the ‘politically correct’ infection has taken hold of your lexicon at least.

  • Bubbaland

    Your efforts are noble, however, you needed to do one of two things: wait to you get tenure, or bait and switch. That is use a politically correct syllabus for your meeting and then change the syllabus once the course starts and add Levin. Alternatively, find employment outside the northeast corridor. One positive about teaching in south is the paucity of moonbats.
    Good luck.

    • Wolfthatknowsall

      My method was to keep my opinions to myself until I gained tenure. After that, I “came out” as a conservative, and my sections filled up so quickly that there was a waiting list. There is a hunger for an alternative worldview in our colleges and universities. We should feed it …

      • defcon 4

        What a depressing revelation (i.e. that you had to engage in Orwellian doublethink for years on end).

        • Wolfthatknowsall

          While the Leftists were speaking, I did a lot of sitting, smiling, and thinking.

          I think that the closest I ever came to revealing what was within was during a meeting … I was invited to it, as a professor … that had to do with pushing the progressive agenda among our students. After one obnoxious statement, someone asked my opinion (as usual, I was being silent).

          I said, “My job is to teach young people philosophy, sir. I’m not much interested in propaganda.”

          • rubber stamp

            and it shouldn’t have been that way from get go. Pardon me, but why Lefty can be openly Lefty before tenure kicks in and you couldn’t? That notion alone must be dealt with very forcefully.

          • Wolfthatknowsall

            I agree completely with that statement. My first encounter with the academic left came in my freshman year, taken at a community college. The instructor came in, slammed his books down, looked at us and said, “I’m a Eastern liberal, and no one will speak up against what I say … if you wish to pass, that is.”

            In my Junior year, I was surprised to get a B for the semester, since I had aced all the exams, the term paper, and the final. I asked the professor about it, and she said, “I don’t like your politics.”

            I replied, “We’ve never discussed politics.”

            She responded, “I’ve heard rumors.”

            Since she was the departmental chairman, I would need her blessing to get a graduate assistantship. I didn’t make waves, after that.

            In the university that I taught in, the best thing I can say about the Philosophy staff was that they were unrepentant Marxists … every one of them. To get tenure, I had to hide.

          • rubber stamp

            unbelievable story. I can only hope you would have enough courage to tell this story on your lectures. Let students hear this as well. Give hope to all those “closeters” out there. These people thought they were Marxist, but their actions were straight from the Nazi’s play book.

          • Wolfthatknowsall

            Marxist – Nazi. What’s the difference?

          • rubber stamp

            1. Marxism – One Party State. State own means of production, all belongs to collective. Covert discrimination of particular races. Aggressive punishment or reaction to a political Decent.
            2. Nazi – One Party State. Allows private sector to exist but follow strict directives by the State at it’s demand. Open discrimination or even annihilation of particular races. Aggressive punishment towards political decent.
            In other words – Liberalism matches Nazi style of governance more than Marxist.

          • undercurrent71

            Indeed, I have sat silently for endless hours over 5 years earning my B.S. in sociology. . .it has been mentally, psychologically, intellectually and emotionally exhausting and almost unbearable to the point where I doubt I can endure 2 more years to earn a M.A. in teaching . . .a field of study which will certainly be almost as liberally slanted as sociology. I guess I will have to, though. I have been forced to write what they wanted to hear in essays and reflection papers. . After all, I realize my prospects for finding employment are already jeapordized by my being a white anglo-saxon male (a crime, according to white-privilege dogma). I simply cannot afford to take B’s instead of A’s because I dared to disagree. . . .I need that GPA. .the cards are stacked against me enough as it is. . . .Remember. . .the majority of the privileged in this country are indeed white. . . but the majority of whites are not numbered among the privileged. . .They mix a small truth with a gargantuan lie. . .and foist it on the ignorant youth.

          • Wolfthatknowsall

            Thanks for the reply, and the truth which lies within it. I believe … wholeheartedly … that the main reason I rose in academia was because I am one-half Comanche. That made me a “minority”. I never wanted minority status, and though I look “white”, at first glance, after a while, you can see the characteristic traits of native Americans, in my face.

            I remember taking Speech, as an undergraduate. While handing out assignments for our persuasive speech, I was assigned to speak against nuclear weapons. I knew what the instructor wanted to hear, and so I said it … something like this:

            “I will not be a part of a system that crucifies humanity on a nuclear cross. I will NOT!” … long pause, then I look up and say, “What about you?”

            The whole class came out of their seats in applause. Afterwards, one of my friends who knew me better said, “Hypocrite.” He was right, of course. But I got that “A”!

            I liked the last paragraph in your comment, and will remember it.

          • rubber stamp

            I wish you had this meeting on VIDEO. You’d become a national hero, a celebrity.

          • Wolfthatknowsall

            Unfortunately, they didn’t have YouTube, back then! But thank you! …

          • rubber stamp

            It would be interesting to hear your recollection of what they were actually saying at that meeting. It’s is important to know their true colors behind closed doors.

          • Wolfthatknowsall

            Actually, it was to be an approved list of reading materials for our philosophy students, and the “right” language to use when recommending these readings. It was a long time ago, so just about everything said escapes me, today.

            The statement I responded to was something like, “We are servants of the State, and we have a responsibility to lead our students toward progressive views.” That’s no word-for-word, but it’s fairly close.

    • David Firester

      You make a good point, but I felt that I would stand my ground on the principle of academic integrity. I want the students to know what they can expect from a syllabus and in order to do that I needed to be honest. The administration saw Levin after the semester began, as they called for syllabi a few weeks into it. I did leave a little wiggle room with a couple of TBA readings.

    • undercurrent71

      LOL!! . . . .the Northeast corridor. . . I appreciate the well-meaning behind your advice. . . but I am just finishing up my B.S. in sociology in SOUTHWEST NEW MEXICO.. .. .trust me, my friend. . . curriculum is just as rabidly liberal and overthrown by Marxist leftists down here! The whole country is gone, sir. . . .the whole country is gone.

  • Jason

    It’s so pervasive throughout the world. Here in Australia the high school syllabus is so biased, it does not even mention the arrival of the British in 1788 except to say that it was bad for the natives. Are there any conservative, or politically neutral universities in the states? It seems that the only way to compete is to set up opposing systems. You said there was no textbook for conservative thought. This is true, because conservatives have tended to shun education as an occupation. This has been at our peril, and only the establishment of conservative and politically neutral universities will right the scales.

    • Richard Fontaine

      Hillsdale College in Michigan is an excellent constitutionally focused college. As the sixty year old father of four college graduates, I have spent a lot of time fretting about the massive liberal bias in all of academia. The more impressive the college or university in the general populations mind the more likely you are wasting your money.

      • frediano

        Unfortunately, those tiny little choke-points of inbred influence– the Ivies– have a disproportionate influence on the machinery of state. These ‘universities’ are the size of large high schools. Princeton puts out about 1000-1100 per class. A Columbia/Harvard guy is in the White House. He replaced a Yale guy, who replaces a Harvard guy, who replaced a Yale guy. Our POTUS has pillow talk with a former Princeton radical feminist who once invited a PLO terrorist to speak on campus. That POTUS last two USSC justices were cookie-cutter former Princeton radical feminists, and while you are at it, check the bios of the remaining USSC justices. The sketchy exec at the company with the no-bid several hundred million website contract was a classmate of our POTUS wife and another former Princeton radical feminist– and not just ‘classmate.’ They teamed up on the PLO invite.
        Is it really such a hot idea to have so much of the machinery of state over-run by the same little inbred easily over-run(as in Frankfurt School/Cultural Pessismism Project over-run)cottages?
        Google a map of Princeton U. Check out the tiny little rows of ‘dining clubs’ on Prospect Street. Plot the well worn paths from Prospect Street to Wall Street and K-Street. This place is -tiny-. Inbred. And for all its ‘celebration of diversity…in the nation’s service’ is by and large a mandrel of left wing instruction. (No, “Nanook of the North” is not fundamentally about the scourge of capitalism infesting mankind…) No, for every John Stossel that escapes un-reconstructed, there are a hundred Krugmans, van den Heuvals, and Blinders…
        Tiny. Inbred. Completely over-run. Its where capitalists have been sending their children for decades, in order for them to be lectured to by the highly subsidized that their parents were rat-bastard capitalists for being able to afford to send them there. The Ivies is where white liberal guilt is manufactured, foisted on the weak minded who are afraid to do anything other than cave in or be ‘socially’ stigmatized in front of their same cowering peers, afraid to stand up to some lefty professor apparatchik and call him out. The uninfected who make it through those places unscathed do so by rolling their eyes and gritting their teeth and smiling at all the clumsy heavy handed indoctrination that goes on there.
        No, this isn’t sour grapes. P.U., magna cum laude, ’77

  • Annray

    I teach Developmental Reading to students who aren’t quite ready for English 101 at a small Mid-Western college. The textbooks are filled with short selections that the students practice outlining, etc. Every selection is a little worse than the last. Whenever the Cold War is mentioned the author equates the US with Communist Russia as if both countries were equally at fault for the “tensions” between us. Even the vocabulary books I use with the students are not free from the author’s obvious liberal agenda. In one selection the author takes the reader through a brief history of political systems in the world culminating in Communist Russia. She ends with telling the students that Communism is on shaky ground right now and Capitalism is still thriving around the world even though workers are still fighting for fair treatment and safe work environments. Of course the obvious conclusion of course is that under Capitalism workers have to fight for their rights. The labor unions seem to be a favorite topic of hers. The thing that worries me is that many of our students are international students and so they’re getting a good (un)healthy dose of anti-Americanism as soon as they arrive in the country.

    • Wolfthatknowsall

      My subject was Philosophy. It’s impossible to teach, say, logic, without employing examples from the real world. For years, the text I was forced to use was Logic, by Hurley. It’s an excellent text on logic, and each chapter is filled with examples that the student must analyze. Unfortunately, the examples give a subjective positive view of the progressive viewpoint, and a negative view of anything conservative.

      The good students will learn about logic … informal, syllogistic, and symbolic … but they will also get little “lessons in life” from the Left.

  • Roadmaster

    When it was time for me to go to college (1967), I had no money and no scholarships available because of the unusually high number of exceptional students in my graduating class, plus the bias of my teachers. administrators and counselors whom I’m certain had pegged me as unsuitable candidate for “higher education.” After a good year in the work force, I got my draft notice and was “enrolled” in war college.

    Upon my “graduation” from Viet Nam University, I got together with a few old classmates and I was stunned! What had happened to my friends? It seemed to me they all had lobotomies, or at least the tops of their skulls opened and any crumb of common sense removed.

    Now almost 50 years later, most of these people are still Liberals, slavishly voting for Obama and drooling at the prospect of voting for Hillary. I’m thinking their ultra-conservative parents must be spinning inside their caskets.

  • rubber stamp

    ~ I’m so frustrated right now, please pardon my spelling typos.~

    Steps to crush Liberal cesspool in our Education system as follows:
    1. create an equivalent organization to ACLU for Conservative/Constitution causes and sue them to the oblivion. Liberals are by nature very fragile creatures, they only understand a firm hand.
    2. create a specific organization for Conservative/Right Leaning Educators with a strong lobbying in WA DC. Educators’ Organization would provide all legal protections to Conservative Professors in the USA. It would monitor and gather data on Taxpayers Funded universities and public schools ratio of Liberal bias. And confront them all with a threat of litigation. Organization must make effort to shut down any school that engages in leftist social engineering or left indoctrination. Gather samples of all textbooks in Liberal science to monitor bias. Lobby for Federal intervention laws in case of Political Discrimination cases on Campuses toward Professors and Students. Monitor employment policies at those schools.
    3. initiate grassroots movement among Students and centralize it in the hands of folks like David Horowitz and others of such status. Students could register and stay anonymous when complaining about Liberal Bias on Campuses, and when they will complain, Student Protection Office must react swiftly, aggressively, loudly, through the press, with full might. No negotiations, just a pure reaction with a big bang.

    • DK

      The ACLJ, American Center for Law and Justice, is such an organization.

      • rubber stamp

        DK – How many times a year do we hear about ACLJ from the MSM? …exactly. Are they effective?…. Which one is more aggressive: ACLU or ACLJ?

        • DB1954

          ACLJ has been remarkably successful from what I understand.

          • rubber stamp

            Brand recognition is not compared to ACLU.

          • DB1954

            The ACLU has been around since at least the 1920s. Moreover, consider the reality that 80% of the American media has been controlled if not owned by George Soros since 2008.

    • frodo

      Horowitz’s “Students for Academic Freedom” stands as a failed attempt at number 3. See also the persistent and rightful failure of his so-called Academic Bill of Rights.

      What kind of litigation do you imagine against scholars and teachers? What would your suit be?

      • rubber stamp

        Not against Scholars, but against Universities, Schools, that are funded by tax payers grants, etc. I was specific on that. Private schools should be left alone, it’s off limits.

        • frodo

          That’s a distinction without a difference, really. And, what would be the grounds for the suit?

          • rubber stamp

            Consumer Protection law – for starters. Students should be allowed to request refund for classes where bias took place. Even if they completed the class. under “False Avertisement” where Class Description did not match the studies those Students paid for.

          • frodo

            A case like that would be thrown out of court immediately–and rightly so. Bias would be impossible to prove and no one’s being promised viewpoint-free education. Faculty have an obligation not to preach a singular worldview (of whatever variety), but the kind of complaint you’re making here wouldn’t go anywhere in the courts.

          • DB1954

            Oh really? What if a state legislature created a state statute allowing such law suits? Bias isn’t impossible to prove anyway: introduce the course syllabus, and keep your expert witness ready to answer questions. I’d be happy to serve as an expert witness in US history, to tell the court what I think of a history syllabus.

            Faculty have an obligation not to preach a singular worldview? Really? Well, they do, and in any case, that’s the whole point of the lawsuit: to prove it.

          • rubber stamp

            in addition to what DB says… For Example: Class name – American Modern History, Description – the 20th century history of American foreign policy..etc.
            And then, Student shows in court a “VIDEO or SOUND” via Student’s cellphone, iPhone showing a professor saying “Republicans are monsters, they hate poor people, Democratic Party is behind American success abroad”
            —————–
            Question to Frodo – will that be enough evidence to take action against the School to refund the student the whole amount plus punitive damages, plus some extra $ for wasted time out of Student’s life, which can affect the student’s future earnings?

          • frodo

            In a word, no. There’s evidence for that faculty member to be criticized, to get poor teaching evaluations, and a bad performance review, but not for some kind of consumer protection suit.

          • rubber stamp

            That means what? ACLJ might want to do something about that, lobby Sates, ets.

          • frodo

            They’d get nowhere. There’s nothing actionable in anything you’re talking about and no law passed in a state would survive constitutional challenges (First Amendment?).

          • rubber stamp

            Yes it would. Lets not confuse First Amendment with a product in a form of Lectures with specific information a customer paid for. For example, if Frodo enrolls into course for “Real Estate license” and you get constant Liberal bias political conversations which are not part of the product (nor conservative) . You must have a right to demand a refund for bad product. Freedoms of Teacher were not violated, but his commerce practice was violated. Thus, no one goes to jail sir, only money punishment, as it should

          • DB1954

            Well said, rubber stamp. Moreover, I’m aware of consumer protections which were created by several states by statute. frodo insists that such statutes creating torts don’t exist; i.e., that all tort law is derived from common law. That’s patently false.

          • frodo

            Legal constraint on speech is legal constraint on speech. Come now.

            Your example is bogus–comparing a Real Estate licensing course which has a clear and immediate end to a Poli Sci 101 course that’s part of a student’s whole undergraduate degree is comparing apples and oranges.

          • rubber stamp

            Nobody said you are not allowed to say anything you want. Follow me carefully here – But You have a right to demand a Refund for Bad Product. Speech/Statements/Verbal can be part of Bad Product/Service.

          • frodo

            Except, of course, that a university education isn’t a product in the same way a car is (or even a course designed explicitly to produce a specific certification). The student isn’t a customer in same way car purchaser is.

            The premise here is wrong.

          • rubber stamp

            I’m glad we finally established our core differences on this. Clarity is important here. And I believe if you (or Student) pay for Services, that Service is a product in exchange for money.

          • frodo

            That’s an absurd position, but as you say, it’s clear.

          • rubber stamp

            I think the same of your position. Let’s agree to disagree.

          • frodo

            Your opinion of a syllabus doesn’t constitute evidence of bias. It’s only evidence of disagreement–which is a normal part of intellectual discourse but not a tort.

          • DB1954

            I never said it was a common law tort. State legislatures create tort actions by statute every day.

          • frodo

            No, I’m telling you that you can’t prove a harm. What’s the damage here, really? Some students had to hear things they didn’t like? How can that be actionable?

          • DB1954

            You’re not a laywer are you? You don’t even understand how such a lawsuit would come about, and like the typical ignorant leftist, you frame questions in order to mislead.
            So it does no damage to state university students that they’re learning politically biased history? Hmmm, that’s an interesting statement, especially coming from you, frodo. Anyway, do you think that courts of law in this country acknowledge no remedies for injuries to plaintiffs other than pecuniary damages? Do you know what an injunction is? Do you know what a subcommittee is? Have you ever heard of the ACLJ? Not only do state courts have the legal and constitutional authority to adjudicate matters involving public education and instruction, state legislatures have authority to order public schools and universities to teach a balanced view of history, that is to say, one that doesn’t present an entirely “progressive” (read: leftist) view of history. I could give you a list of books in US history that almost everyone could agree would provide students with a balanced view of US history. I can also testify from personal knowledge and experience that the typical U.S. history course in a state university today is FAR from anything even remotely balanced. Need I remind you that Howard Zinn got rich hawking his fictional stories as objective history, notwithstanding the reviews by some of the most respected American historians, including liberals like Arthur Schlesinger, Jr. and dozens of others. Harvard history professor Oscar Handlin, who in a scorching review of Zinn’s best selling book, A People’s History of the United States, called it among other disparaging names ” a fairy tale,” containing NO primary sources, but replete with extremely questionable secondary sources. In short, the most respected historians in this country said that book was a LIE, one long, hideous, outrageous, LIE followed by another. NO, Handlin did NOT agree with you that Zinn’s book was simply a collection of new “perspectives.” Handlin said that Zinn’s books were filled with LIES from beginning to end. and that bast[a]rd, Zinn made millions from sales to public schools. Thus at least two generations of American students learned to hate their country and its foundations. But YOU, you nitwit, you fool, you dolt, no, you see NO injury to American school children or college history students from stinking, lying scumbags and communists like Zinn. But go ahead, convince yourself that “progressives” all agree with you. You will go right on believing that neither courts nor legislatures can address the issue of LIES and anti-Americanism in the teaching of US history because it’s like, “just … like … another perspective, …. man.” Go back to your ganja stash and fire up another doober. Maybe you can convince yourself it’s 1968 again.

      • DB1954

        You’re right. We shouldn’t file lawsuits. We should simply refuse to send our children to college. Send your kid to trade school, let them work, earn money, marry and have a family, then if they can afford it, buy and read works by conservative authors. There are a few left.

        • rubber stamp

          The problem with your notion is that we do need highly educated Americans on the Right for them to become our voices in Politics, to become our Doctors, Teachers, Professors, Rocket scientists, Attorneys, and more importantly to become our Presidents. We need to fix higher Education problem – those institutions became Left wing indoctrination mills. lots of folks clamp their noses for 4 years just to pass through the school years. We need to create environment where they enjoy studying, without Liberal involuntary submission to their agendas.

          • frodo

            This simply tells me that when you complain about bias, it’s only because it’s not your bias that’s being taught.

          • defcon 4

            Gee, I don’t see that implicitly or explicitly anywhere in what he wrote. But don’t let reality intrude on your lieberal fairy tale.

          • frodo

            “left wing indoctrination mills”? “Liberal involuntary submission”? Come on, now.

          • frediano

            Yes, folks, don’t believe your own lying eyes and ears.

          • defcon 4

            I see your point, but where did he state he wanted to substitute one bias for another? Maybe his desire was for the truth to be taught rather than propaganda and lies?

          • frodo

            “we do need highly educated people on the Right”–one bias for another. Truth is something else.

          • frediano

            There have always been intellectual frontiers; the difference today is, there are increasingly only intellectual frontiers, and the price of admission is ever more specialized education. When there was still dirt simple geopolitical gradient in North America, intellectual frontier activity resulted in broad economic opportunities. (eg: Beth Steel employed 330,000… while $100B thrown at Facebook employs 3400.) The last star was sewn on the US flag right before JFK’s vision of a new growth paradigm(the one ended abruptly by a spiteful, petty Nixon, grousing at JFK’s legacy)
            Today, activity in those narrow intellectual frontiers does not result in broad economic opportunities, because they are not occurring in the context of dirt-simple geopolitical surface growth paradigm. We are paused at the edge of the latest Gulf. The last time this happened in mankind’s history was the Dark Ages. What brought mankind out of that period of stagnation was the Age of Exploration.
            What fundamentals have changed? Gradient still drives everything in this universe, and stasis is still death.
            And yet, the urge sputters on at Space-X, in spite of the petty, spiteful lawyer/clerks who once mistook the role of state plumber for state emperor…

    • Drakken

      Too late for all that nonsense, the whole system is rotten to the core, burn it down and start from scratch and put the military in charge.

      • rubber stamp

        that’s right ))) let’s go Egypt on them. Liberals are our equivalent to “Muslim Brotherhood” . ))))

        • defcon 4

          They collaborate w/islam0nazism at every turn.

      • defcon 4

        I don’t even know why I’m paying taxes anymore, because I’m tired or propping up a corrupt system of government.

      • frediano

        Release the Drakken!

  • Jeff Ludwig

    Best wishes to you sir. You have only touched the tip of the iceberg to use a cliche. Keep a low profile and get your Ph.D. at this point. Better to be safe than sorry. Forty years ago I ran into heavy weather at Harvard because I wrote a paper saying that John Dewey (1) didn’t care about the individual and (2) had a mystical attachment or made a religion of his “common faith” in democracy. The readers of that paper found my positions to be offensive. I became confused. You have the advantage of knowing exactly what is happening. Since you are at such an advanced point in your studies, no need to “blow it” now. Don’t write articles like this under your own name until you attain the Ph.D. Then go teach where there is less second hand smoke. You are involved in an ugly game that, sadly to say, is even uglier than you may realize. Blessings and shalom to you.

    • Race_Dissident

      True. I can only hope that the author’s published name is a nom de plume.

  • http://www.clarespark.com/ Clare Spark

    Once the giant demonstrations against the Viet Nam war appeared, it should have been obvious to conservatives that something big would happen in colleges. I wrote about the takeover of the New Left activist scholars here: http://clarespark.com/2013/05/06/the-new-left-activist-scholars/. The student strikes at Harvard and Columbia in 1968 and 1969 made it a sure thing. Where were you when that set of signals was apparent?

    • frediano

      Notice they were not strictly ‘anti-war’ protests; they were strictly anti-US-involvement in the war protests. As in, where was the ‘anti-war’ movement in Hanoi or Moscow, if that was an ‘anti-war’ movement?
      Was JFK talking out of his hat with the ‘pay any price to defend freedom’ speech? Vietnam was a shame; if it was acceptable to end the war in ’75 with a ‘never mind, America really didn’t mean it’ then it was acceptable to have never entered the conflict to begin with.
      So the question is, was it? Was what North Vietnam was doing to South Vietnam in the early 60s acceptable to JFK’s assertion of ‘paying any price to defend freedom’ in the world?
      Our own infestation of left wing sympathizers might bite their lip at the re-education camps in SV and Kampuchea after we cut and run. But it wasn’t our military that failed in Vietnam, it was the nation, and we’ve been paying the price ever since, in national decline.
      Embracing Marxism under the banner of economic freedom on America college campusus — in the context of freedom — was akin to embracing cancer in the context of instructing health. Marxism should have always been freely studied on America college campuses– just like cancer, with the hope for a someday cure.

      • frediano

        The ‘anti-war’ movement in Hanoi was Jane Fonda in short-shorts posing on an AA gun to boost the moral of the wrong troops.

  • http://youhavetobethistalltogoonthisride.blogspot.com/ keyboard jockey

    “she suggested that perhaps I couldn’t find an alternative because the viewpoint is not legitimate.”

    What has happened in academia has happened in other American institutions “calcification”. This is what happens when you don’t have diversity of the thought. They have turned their conformity into a hollow echo chamber, it’s so brittle and inflexible they won’t tolerate any deviation. Imagine the suppleness that could be returned to the academic body if they allowed other viewpoints to be presented?

    For example the Pope recently has decided to take the roman church in a new direction. Instead of Dogma over Spirit, he’s reversed the order now it’s Spirit over Dogma. The Catholic church’s dogma not unlike liberal ideological dogma has turned the institution into dead, brittle, hollowed out husk not serving the original purpose. The difference with the roman church and American academic institutions, the church has a go to guy to course correct.

    • Race_Dissident

      What’s more, Leftist academics view the Leftist academic hegemony as proof positive that conservatives don’t have ideas worthy of consideration. It is a tautology they would brand flagrantly discriminatory were the scenario reversed.

      • http://youhavetobethistalltogoonthisride.blogspot.com/ keyboard jockey

        I am reminded of what grows in a stagnant pool without any water source flowing through it……disease.

        Sometimes you can use pool shock “chlorine bleach” to clarify the pool. You can look for it under it’s brand name David E. Firester ;)

  • Richard Johnston

    I teach at a liberal arts college. Many years ago during my first year at the college a speaker–I think he was from England–seriously asserted there was little liberal influence in America. (Some stuff you just can’t make up.) I prefaced my disagreement with the acknowledgement that I was a conservative. A liberal colleague prefaced her own response to my remarks with “first of all I want to thank you for coming out of the closet.” This is the state of academia on so many college campuses. Intellectual diversity is to the typical college what World Series championships are to the Chicago Cubs. An effective coping mechanism for dealing with the silliness on so many campuses is to find humor in the blatant hypocrisy.

  • frodo

    You know, this would make more sense as a complaint if the author would name the textbook he finds so “socialist.” It’s a curious absence in a column otherwise full of detail.

    One other note: it’s not really reasonable to compare his meeting with the chair to court. Not the same thing–especially when he’s still a student. That said, this sounds like a weird kind of GTA arrangement.

    • frediano

      Why don’t we start with Samuleson: Econ 101, and the totalitarian assertion of something called ‘the’ economy. (Was a time that they were called ‘the economies.’) Or, the ‘science’ defining GDP as the political assertion GDP= P + G + Inv + Net(Imp-Exp), which should really be written as GDP= C1*P + C2*G + C3*Inv + C4*Net(Imp-Exp). It is a socialist political assumption that C1=C2(=C3=C4=1.0). By current evidence, it isn’t even clear that the sign of C1 and C2 are the same, much less the magnitudes.
      Regarding macro economics, is there any — I mean, any — modern evidence that the ‘macro economists’ trying to run some singulular mythical thing called ‘the’ economy have the first f’n clue?
      If the topic were ‘the weather’ than the folly of claiming to control ‘the’ national weather would be apparent– hotter or cooler today? Let’s let the folks in Alaska and Florida settle that death match struggle of national stupidity. But refer to the myth of ‘the’ economy, and the Peanut Gallery is bobbing its head. How is ‘the’ economy doing in suburban DC, relative to Detroit?

      Of what possible meaning — to anybody — is this totalitarian myth ‘the’ economy? It’s the economies, stupid.

      • frodo

        But, the column is about Poli Sci.

        As far as the bogus nature of most of what passes for “science” in economics, I’m with you. We tend to be told that there is such a thing as the economy and that it has a will of its own (like “the” market) and that human agency can’t really have any impact on it–this assumption makes no sense to me and seems totalitarian. I doubt though that you’d get much agreement that GDP is based in socialist assumptions.

        • frediano

          GDP is defined as P+G+Inv+ net(Imp-Exp) … the socialist assumption is that $1 of public debt fueled public spending is equivalent in to $1 of private spending and capital investment, etc., in measuring the growth of something called ‘the economy.’ (ie, C1=C2=+1.0) I doubt I’d get much agreement on that either, but that is because we are Math nation.
          If that were true, then when a secretary at Treasury prints 12 zeros on a piece of paper and walks it over to the FED, who ‘buys’ the bond with manufactured current accounts(like any properly functioning boiler feedwater valve/central bank so far)and then the Treasur showed up in ‘the economy’ and demanded 2T in value from some and gave it to others, injecting $2T in value proxies into ‘the economy’ that would chase after the new net value(the artistic value of a secretary having printed 12 zeros on a piece of paper), then when that funny money found high unemployment suppressing wages and prices and showed p instead as grossly inflated stock prices, we would say that something called ‘the economy’ had grown by $2T as a result of that action…even if the private economy was tanking as a result. But don’t worry, it stimulated nothing, so when it is time to clawback that $2T and payback that bond, these flat on their back economies will take it all in stride. As in, the perps are running for the hills as we speak.

          • objectivefactsmatter

            It should have worked. In theory.

          • frediano

            You mean, the funny money that sloshed into the equities marketplace and showed up as inflated stock prices should have resulted in increased economic expansion and circulation in the economies? Yes, that was the theory, and might have worked, if it didn’t happen in the context of what happened to the GM bondholders at the stroke of a pen. No, in this left wing environment, few risk takers are going to rush to prepay their own ransom. The socialists (including the financial industry that has courted cozy deals with the guns of state)has totally gamed the once capitalist risk management game; it is today all about risk shed onto unwilling others. A Solyndra or Curt Schilling Studio 38 might erupt now and then to roll the dice using OPM, with risk shed onto unwilling others, or a Ford might valiantly fight and carry the load a little longer while a GM gets propped up by unwilling stockholders, even as willing bondholders are wiped out, but none of that in any way is conducive to doing anything other than killing the engines of disciplined, managed risk that once drove our economies, plural. In theory, it might have worked, except for all the left wing theories failing in front of our eyes.

          • objectivefactsmatter

            I was actually being sarcastic. If I was serious I would have said something like if it had worked, it would have been due to reasons their stupid theories don’t account for. It’s obviously the greatest Ponzi scheme of human history. It still hasn’t been fully exposed for what it is because we have a nation populated mostly by economic illiterates.

          • frediano

            I know…that was Ping-Pong.

          • Drakken

            When this whole house of cards comes tumbling down it is going to get real interesting real quick, the real question to ask is, will our Republic survive our incompetence?

        • frediano

          When a private entity takes on debt, credit is consumed, and they wake up the next day with incentive to create new value, payoff debt, and reduce interest payments. When a public entity takes on debt…not a single person in the entire universe wakes up the next morning with any incentive to do anything. So how can public debt fueled spending be equivalent to private debt fueled spending in growing something called ‘the economy?’ C1=C2=+1? I doubt the signs are even the same.

        • frediano

          So, to the growing pile God, “S”ociety, The Common Good, the Consciousness of all Consciousness, the collective unconsciousness, and Rawl’s perfect state of unbias that only he can travel to in order to conduct political polls(don’t worry, he will travel back with the results on his Magic Carpet and read them to us)…we can now add ‘human agency’ to the carny slop that yet requires hucksters to divine what is best and to speak for ‘it.’

          • objectivefactsmatter

            “And yet, that same 25 yr old son has more actual business experience than Barack Obama and Karl Marx combined in their respective lifetimes. We need one of those painted plywood Yosemite Sams with his hand held out at 48″: “You must be at least this tall to RUN THE ECONOMY, Pardner!”

            Awesome.

          • Drakken

            Absolutely Priceless! That about sums it all up in a nutshell doesn’t it? God help us all.

        • Drakken

          For Pete’s sake and crying out loud! What effing part are you thick on? You libs live in this state of abject denial until it actually bites you on your fat arses! You libs are less than useless and it is one of the main reasons we need a bloody purge of whademia today. These kids coming out of college today are the most unprepared, idiotic, stupid with a sense of entitlement that leaves you gob smacked at their blatant in your face about it. If this continues, we are in deep sh**!

          • frodo

            Nice, content-free rant there!

    • Wolfthatknowsall

      Here’s a couple more:

      Logic by Hurley, the most widely-used logic textbook in America,
      The Irony of Democracy, by Dye and Zeigler, the most widely-used American national government text in America.

      These will keep you busy for at least a couple of years …

      • David Firester

        Thank you.

        • Wolfthatknowsall

          You’re welcome, sir.

    • David Firester

      William E. Hudson’s American Democracy in
      Peril (Congressional Quarterly Press, 7th Edition)

  • Chezwick

    Kudos for your courage….but don’t expect – after time served – for tenure to come as it otherwise would. You’re a pariah….you’ll be under a microscope for the duration.

    • David Firester

      Unfortunately you may be right.

  • musterion

    Gee what happened to “Academic Freedom”?

    Additionally, a great example of the game of “peer review”

    • Drakken

      We need an academic Purge, and put the military in charge.

      • defcon 4

        I think it’s either your solution or we end living in an islam0fascist state in fact, if not name.

  • Frederikahere

    I went to a liberal university in Calif in the late 1970′s to 80′s. Yes, I actually graduated with honors.
    The secret was to live in a state of bemusement. The more flauntingly, radical communist the profs were, the more my papers reflected the opposite, but profusely documented my sources and drove my point relentlessly. Some profs tried to berate me in front of the whole class or fail me. Shut them down each time, went to the provost when necessary.

    My point is, you don’t have to surrender to their nonsense. But you must be consistently and wisely committed not to. They don’t stop, why should you?

    • DB1954

      You don’t have to surrender, but in my experience, the libs will wear you out and wear your nerves to a frazzle. I endured the scornful looks and contemptuous remarks of fellow grad students for years. I left short of a doctorate. Sad that I had to give up my dream of teaching, but since I’ve been away from academia, I’m a whole lot happier.

      • Drakken

        I really enjoyed going to college after my time in the Green Machine and watching the lib profs have complete meltdowns, ahhh the good ole days. I even had one throw a lecture at me and when I started laughing she really went berserk.

        • DB1954

          Personally, I endured more scorn and contempt from lib-tard students than professors, but your experience indicates you have a level of courage I probably wouldn’t have been able to sustain. I wanted to enjoy learning, and dealing with vicious, angry, and conceited liberal boneheads just wasn’t fun anymore. OMG, the drama, the horror, the horror …

          • Drakken

            I learned far more when I was in the Green Machine than I ever learned in college or my Master’s Program. I actually looked forward to going to class just to get a rise and a reaction out of them, and I never failed to get it. It was a pure guilty pleasure to watch them go into mental gymnastics to explain something away and I always pressed them to explain their answers. The Dean and Prez knew me on a first name basis. I even dared the liberal profs to fail me or give me a bad grade, they never took me up on my offer for some reason.

  • Donald J DaCosta

    It is, in my view, the product of American academia, beginning in the anti-Vietnam war era, that now dominate at least half of the American electorate, a percentage that is likely growing as this liberal, progressive, socialist, communist ideological curriculum and its teaching profession advocates is more pronounced than ever. In 2012 Obama got 60% of young voters according to this: http://www.theatlanticwire.com/politics/2012/11/types-people-who-voted-obama/58794/
    If Academia continues to enforce its current ideological bias and chooses indoctrination over education this political tilt will only get worse.

  • defcon 4

    Stories like these provoke me to burn my diploma. Whatever happened to academic freedom? Then again, considering how free speech is being dismantled to protect islam from any and all criticism why shouldn’t academia reflect this?

    • frodo

      What’s your definition of academic freedom? I do not think it means what you think.

      • defcon 4

        How about the freedom to teach the truth about islam? Rather than the lies and propaganda currently being taught?

      • frediano

        Academic freedom means, instead of studying cancer in search of a cure, research universities should freely inject students with cancer cells, in the context of ‘health.’ I mean, in the context of freedom, liberal arts professors, instead of studying Marxism in search of a cure, should freely sell that slop in the context of ‘freedom.’

      • frediano

        Ironically, the definition of ‘academic freedom’ either does or does not include the freedom to define ‘academic freedom’ outside the permitted lines of PC.

        • DB1954

          Exactly right. Leftists rig the academic game. That’s because they insist that only they get to define the terms of the game. They make up all the questions and supply all the answers.

  • http://www.facebook.com/people/Paul-Marks/1266358046 Paul Marks

    Sorry – this system can not reformed (the decay has gone too far). It must be defunded – an end to government backed student loans (and all the other subsidies), Yes I know the higher education system would collapse – it has to collapse, the decay has gone too far. It must be allowed to collapse so that people can build something worthwhile in its place.

    • bluffcreek1967

      Exactly! I think you’ve hit the nail on the head. Like yourself, I cannot believe that it will ever be reformed. The decay runs too deep.

      http://www.ambrosekane.com

    • Drakken

      Purge it, and call it a day.

    • Wolfthatknowsall

      I agree wholeheartedly with your statement, Paul. The power of big money and progressive worldviews has almost completely destroyed the great universities of our nation, along with any notion of objectivity.

      However, the enormous amount of money that these schools have stockpiled would cancel out you idea, for decades (though it would eventually work). I earned my PhD from Princeton, and there’s enough money there to give complete scholarships to every student … at current student body levels … for at least 25 years.

  • Servo1969

    Liberals are absolutely none of the things they claim to believe in.

    • DB1954

      You noticed that too, huh?

  • ejames

    I’ve never read Levin’s books but I do hope they’re better than his radio shows. When I tried listening to him, I found that he often would just spout ad hominem attacks – particularly frequent use of the word “moron” – rather than provide insightful analysis. His remarks contain lots of long pauses, indicating he’s at a loss for substance. His voice itself isn’t mellifluous. His show’s introduction (“he’s here”) is hopelessly overwrought. And perhaps the best indicator of mediocrity is his nickname “the great one”. Rush Limbaugh he is not. Again, let’s hope that his books are better than his radio rants. But even if his books are good, Firester should have picked another, less polarizing author who leans right, of which there are plenty: Thomas Sowell. Charles Krauthammer. David Horowitz. Henry Hazlitt – someone from academia rather than talk radio. It would have been a politically wiser move.

    • DB1954

      Levin is a prickly guy. He doesn’t make a very good radio talk show host, but his books are first rate.

    • bluffcreek1967

      Actually, that’s an excellent point and I sort of thought the same thing. Levin is definitely a sharp guy, but he’s difficult to listen to at times. I would have went with Thomas Sowell or a less polarizing author.

      http://www.ambrosekane.com

    • lyndaaquarius

      Mark levin’s on air analyses are stunning,certainly the equal of Horowitz and Sowell. Each man has a huge intellect.New to many is Daniel Greenfield aka Sultan Knish.Brilliant thinker and writer. Quite young,too.

      • David Firester

        I am a big fan of Daniel Greenfield. Levin’s books are clear and cogent. He makes his arguments in a scholarly manner. It seems that they are devoid of emotion and that is why I chose him. His on-air rants can be emotionally charged, but they are typically supported by his academic prowess.

  • Ilya

    I’m sympathetic to the author’s position and have been in similar situations (teaching seminars for which the set material in my opinion skewed too much to the left). However, he made a poor choice in picking Levin. There are plenty of conservative and libertarian scholars with unassailable academic credentials – Milton Friedman, Thomas Sowell, FA Hayek, Niall Ferguson, Bernard Lewis, etc. He could have picked sources which would have been much harder to dismiss as polemical.

    • Jonathan Watson

      Ilya – I agree with you here. People who are both conservative AND regularly move and publish in academic circles become more difficult figures to target, particularly when liberal academicians use and cite their work.

    • David Firester

      I hear your criticism. They would probably view some of the others as equally polemical; Bernard Lewis for example is scorned by the left. Friedman will likely be on the next syllabus. Levin may be a “poor choice” in your eyes, but I felt that two of his chapters spoke directly to what was in the textbook. It was an appropriate match in terms of content, irrespective of his “polemical” stature.

  • ChangeHopeInAZ

    If I’ve said it once, I’ve said it 100 times…the liberal motto is “the end justifies the means” and all this article does is point to one of those ends. This is nothing more then thought control and it always amazes me when I read articles like this why this country has let our higher institutions of learning be dominated by the leftist thought. They have an excellent vehicle to further their “corrupt” political agenda that puts conservative thought at a distinct disadvantage all at the expense of taxpayers and the public consumer paying for this biased education.
    Unfortunately, I am afraid this advantage is so inbred that the whole system needs to be destroyed before a balance is returned to academic thought. Yes a balance! Not all conservative…and not all liberal as we have today but a balance. What a concept!

  • R D

    The Red Guard continued its march under the spell of Grasci and Robespierre through Media, Law, Entertainment and Academe until now.

  • mickeymat

    It is shocking that in an accredited institution of higher learning a class would have only a textbook for use in the course. I have never heard of such a thing. Supplementary reading is a core element of any history or literature course. Just choose Mark Levin’s book as a supplement and choose one by Bill Ayers as a second supplement. Then challenge the students through logical analytical discussion.

  • Jonathan Watson

    I think that Mr. Firester went looking for trouble and found it. Assigning Mark Levin is nearly the equivalent of waving a red flag in front of the liberal bull. Will the bull react negatively? Without a doubt. Assigning Levin was an imprudent move.

    Why not assign conservative authors (or at least, those with conservative content, even if they do not identify as such) who are / were know for being literary and intelligent? In introduction to Political Science, you could assign Federalist Papers, Anti-Federalist Papers, Burke on revolutions, Oakeshott, Voegelin, or if you wanted to push it, Strauss or Kirk.

    I wouldn’t assign Levin in my classes because he’s both too new and too basic for what I would expect in terms of student reading, and because he’s controversial.

    • DB1954

      I agree, sort of. But new conservatives do exist. Forrest McDonald, for example. He’s retired, but I mean relatively new, relative to Burke.

      • Jonathan Watson

        DB – surely.

  • cacslewisfan

    I think America will go the way of Neil Stevenson’s “Diamond Age” (if it doesn’t go full on communist): small enclaves of skilled like minded people living in heavily guarded, gated communities that act like corporations. Everyone else in government housing living off a trickle of government welfare. I think this is actually being optimistic.

    • frediano

      $100 Billion with a B in bored capital was recently thrown at the Facebook IPO …which employs about 3400 people. Beth Steel, at its peak, employed about 330,000 people.
      Facebook is a self subscribing marketing data collection platform, which collects marketing data in the service of selling boner medicine to Boomers.
      Beth Steel is why America and the world isn’t Germania today.
      I’d say we are closer to your vision than you think.

  • cacslewisfan

    My dad teaches an undergrad, survey Biology course at a local university. He says the quality of student is terrible and gets worse every year. They don’t know anything, are immune to learning anything, and almost never come to class. He has to choose the very easiest of multiple choice test questions. The test questions banks are terrible, too as they are full of Leftist political bias! Lest you think Biology faculty are made of better stuff than Liberal Arts. There was a huge problem with a female Bio professor. She should have lost her job, but instead was given pass. Female in science academia is the new Black. Our education system is totally rotten, and colleges are as full of students who shouldn’t be there as they are full of faculty who have no business teaching. I recommend Homeschool and Hillsdale.

  • Wolfthatknowsall

    To address Mr. Firester, directly, let me say the following …

    Please keep fighting the good fight, and don’t depend on pointless exercises such as lawsuits to protect you. Consider the following:

    Let’s say that you were an operatic tenor, had studied at Julliard, and decided to get into the chorus of the New York Metropolitan Opera. The chorusmaster takes one look at you, and decides that he doesn’t like you. You see the look in his eye while you’re singing your audition, and understand it. He says nothing to you as you leave.

    As soon as you get into the anteroom, people crowd around you excitedly, and tell you things like, “Great job!”, “Wonderful singing!”, or “You’re in, for sure!” You get hopeful, but you never get that call …

    You decide that he has discriminated against you, in some way, and decide to sue. But every lawyer you talk to tells you the same thing. It was an artistic decision, and had nothing to do with personal issues or discrimination.

    It is the same in academia. You will never be able prove that you haven’t been hired, or you’ve not been advanced, or have been fired, because you’re a conservative. The lawyers will tell you variations on, “It was an academic decision … those who made the decision had the interests of the institution and the students in mind.”

    Unless you didn’t get the job because the guy said, “I’m a Marxist, you’re a Republican, and I hate all Republicans”, which isn’t very likely.

    • David Firester

      Excellent point. I suppose that evidence that one has been treated differently than their peers is a start, however.

      • Wolfthatknowsall

        It is, indeed, a start.

  • Travis

    I’m so glad I didn’t go to University. I’m in my 30′s with no debt a fantastic high paying private sector job that I enjoy, I have pension plan and other top notch benefits. I live on my own, have a healthy investment portfolio, have travelled extensively and done a lot of the things I wanted to do in life. I laugh at idiots who have graduated University with a Liberal arts degree and are reduced to menial jobs of the kind I worked while i was in high school.

    Unfortunatly these idiots have declared war on my way of life.

  • student

    I studied math in college. That way I could check all the proofs and make sure that nobody was lying to me. I read history, politics, philosophy, religcion etc… on my own time. I have noticed when arguing my “unconventional” theories with people that they will suddenly get “tired” and “not feel like arguing about it anymore” when they run out of facts to back up their claims.

    • frediano

      Excellent. Because education is primarily taken, not given. It is at most well offered. Only instruction is given…

    • defcon 4

      I’m surprised it didn’t affect your grades, going against the grain setup by professors can do that.

  • Felina Flash

    Why would you want to teach in a place that hates what you stand for? You cannot win there. Better to go work in a more conservative organization and make sure that the more open minded student become aware of the dangers being cultivated in New York Universities. And prepare for the civil war that will eventually happen.

  • Pete_Brewster

    So I asked myself, if all that’s true, why is Firester at CUNY at all?

    Answer: An attempt at re-invention after his career as a police officer went south. Seems he enjoyed exposing himself to local schoolchildren, and when he was caught had to choose between resigning or going to prison.

    http://www.recordonline.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20100426/NEWS/100429717

    I don’t know if CUNY knew that before admitting him, nor if FPM knew it before printing this self-serving garbage. Well, neither one still has that excuse.

  • Drakken

    Give me any kid out of the mid west any day of the week and twice on Sunday over one of these posh useful idiots from an ivy league school.

  • Wolfthatknowsall

    I do know the difference (my statement was rhetorical). The outcome is much the same, however. I’m of the opinion that Obama’s administration … though populated with old commies and fellow-travelers … is rapidly approaching a Fascist form of government.

    Indeed, Obama’s impatience with the Constitution is proof of this …

    • rubber stamp

      …only that the difference between Liberals and Fascists is that Fascists were aware they were Fascists and Liberals think they are acting in the name of “greater good” (mostly for self…: righteousness, gratification and shoulder-patting)

      • DB1954

        Liberals often believe that they’re acting in the name of “the greater good,” and their beliefs in this regard are often “bona fide.” That said, what they regard as “the greater good,” is often that which is merely good for them in terms of keeping and expanding their own political power. In any case, it’s easy for liberal politicians: they can and do promise to deliver all the goodies which makes it easy for them to get votes in return. Conservatives end up being the ones who are made to look like stingy old guys who are merely protecting their own stash. Obama, however, is not a liberal. He does what he does, and he advocates what he advocates not just to garner votes–although he does–he is destroying free enterprise in America. He sees the dismantling of free enterprise as “good,” which is how he justifies the lies he tells, i.e., that he’s not really a Marxist. He well knows that he’s a Marxist. It’s just that he thinks Marx was right. One matter that many whites have never really understood about black Americans is that blacks have always believed in what might be called an urban myth. The myth, in a nutshell, is that ‘whitey’ has all the money, and that ‘whitey’ has so much money that if he were forced to share it with blacks, there would be wealth enough for all. If I had the time, I’d cite a few historians to back up my theory.

  • DB1954

    I think it’s important to make the distinctions in nomenclature. That said, Marxists are statists, fascists were statists, and Nazis were a form of fascism. What they all have in common is statism.