KaskadskyjKozak

My elderly Japanese-American neighbor, who spent time in a relocation center with her parents, probably sees things differently. How ironic that FDR has now become such a liberal icon. I liked how he tried to stack the supreme court by inflating the number of justices ... with his nominees.

Note this, troll:

Oh, but that would be just "anedoctal evidence". I'm well aware of your rhetorical modus operandi. Get lost.

yes

I think it does work. Most people agree that history repeats itself with minor riffs. As such, the lessons that have been taught throughout history are still apt today. You argue against the value of the great thinkers if you cannot apply their thinking to modern issues. Academics, politicians, and artists apply ancient philosophy to modern problems all the time. And the radical right can't help but apply their interpretations of the Bible to everything they see... It is arrogant to do this...but that fact doesn't make it any less true that people do this. Culture is all about arrogance. Modern Americans are as arrogant as ancient Greeks, the Roman Empire or Nazi Germans. We live in a culture where we have been told that we are better than other people. The problem is not that we're told that, but that we believe it. Sure there is arrogance on the part of an academic because he or she believes that a given artist would have similar feelings as he or she does were the artist alive today. But there's also arrogance in the belief that Jesus Christ would support a war in Iraq. Education is about learning how to think outside the box. And as you've pointed out, there is even arrogance to the belief that we can do that. People who have spent their lives studying art, philosophy and history tend to be on the liberal side. My point is still apt. The people who have changed the world for the better throughout history have been liberals in their given societies. Academics who see this trend try very hard to think progressivly and to see outside the box. I'll state it again, I believe that academics want to be the kinds of liberals that they see as heros. Like it or not, this is likely why there is a liberal bent to the humanities in higher education. Jason When I read the writings of a great thinker I tend to marvel at the differences, the things that surprise me, the incongruencies w/r/t to modern culture - that which is utterly "foreign". I don't try to make the thinker/writer fit into a box that conforms to modern American characterizations. And this is more easily done by reading a work in the original - something fewer and fewer Americans are capable of. I also note that intellectuals tend to put blinders on when discussing their field of interest. How many historians do you think are radical left-wingers who utterly oppose the war in Iraq, and yet lionize and glorify those who lived in empires and regimes that enslaved, killed, and dominated thousands. Why is Bush an evil imperialist, but Alexander 'the Great', someone who 'enlightened' and 'Hellenized'? How many feminist intellectuals overlook the misogyny or male chauvinism of their favorite artist, philosopher, or writer, while rabidly attacking the slightest hint of an offensive statement by those whose political affiliation is counter to theirs.

As I said previously: heard, understood, acknowledged - and opposed.

I'm libertarian

I think it is a mistake to jump across cultures and centuries of history and apply modern American political standards. It just doesn't work. It's also a bit arrogant (ethno-culturo-politico-centric chauvinism of sorts).

Hmm, I'm ambivalent on this one. High school campuses are a different matter...

This exemplifies why I oppose big government. It should be the other way around - that is *illegal* for military recruiters to be allowed on public school campuses period. Tying this to NCLB really makes me

It seems to me that this is a good thing. If we are committed to a volunteer army, and can not raise enough support for our military campaigns, then we will have to scale them back.

Are you saying that schools get kickbacks from the military/US gov't for how many students enlist? If that is happening, I oppose that as well. I've never heard of it before. It should be illegal I never said they got kickbacks, but they can (and do) refer students to their services gratis. No judgement there, just establishing that a linkage exists.

I object to military recruiters on high school campuses as well. I did not think that that was the issue we were discussing. Abortion practictioners (and clinics) are referred to by high school counselors, and they do benefit monetarily from their practice.

You grant a child (under age 18) the right to make life and death decision in one case - a decision they can not fully understand - both morally and in terms of possible negative health affects. And this decision can be made without a parent's knowledge or advice. In the other you posit that 18-year old "children" are not capable of deciding whether to serve in the military - a possible life and death decision. They need their parent's wisdom and guidance. The military has only bad intentions; the abortion clinic has only the best of intentions. I just love liberal "logic".

"Why then do contemporary intellectuals feel entitled to the highest rewards their society has to offer and resentful when they do not receive this? Intellectuals feel they are the most valuable people, the ones with the highest merit, and that society should reward people in accordance with their value and merit. But a capitalist society does not satisfy the principle of distribution "to each according to his merit or value." Orwell put it best: some animals are more equal than others...

18 is the cutoff that society has determined makes a person an adult. Either you are old enough to make decisions for yourself and take responsibility - or you are not. Of course you support parental consent for abortions under age 18, I suppose? Maybe I am wrong, but I thought you had to be 18 to "sign-up". If you are underage, your parents have to sign the papers as well...

Because my graduate coursework had nothing to do with the humanities or soft-sciences. There were right and wrong answers that had nothing to do with politics. And I avoided social conversations geared towards the latter.

Since when is an 18-year-old a child? Give me a break.

In the past, not being applied "equally" meant getting out of having to serve completely. And you're dreaming if you think there is a way to force "equality" of fighting on the front lines. It's not "equal" as it is.

It's the egomaniacs who call attention to the bias and make it so unpalatable. If they went away, the bias would not matter much. I applied for a full-time teaching position at the UW and was not hired - not because of bias, but they preferred a candidate with a PhD to an MS. I taught two courses as a pre-doctoral instructor prior to that and enjoyed it greatly. Unfortunately there are not so many opportunities to teach when universities (i.e. *research* universities) focus more on research and an elite set of researchers, rather than those skilled in *teaching*. My experience as both an undergraduate and a graduate student was that college is more a place where you learn to teach yourself, rather than a place where you are "taught". This was especially true in engineering and the hard-sciences.

I wonder if FDR would have dropped the bomb?

Even if a draft is applied equally, strings will be pulled regarding where/in what capacity draftees are assigned. Not everyone serves a combat role on the front line.

when the US has had a draft, it has led to more loss of life and less restraint, IMO

yeah it works so well for Russia! Israel has mandatory military duty for all citizens - probably a better example than Rossiya.

Canadian Politicians