• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Bloomberg: Universities becoming bastions of intolerance

Again, being a majority doesn't in and of itself prove anything.

At a certain point, a dominant majority is able to institute a groupthink which shuts down debate and causes key underlying assumptions and beliefs to go unchallenged. That is what is happening in many of our universities today. Diversity in everything but thought :).
 
If the left dropped their whole "you're intolerant" crap how much would they have left?
 
Actually majority decisions count for a great deal in democracies.

You didn't even read the link! How do you ever expect to become knowledgeable if you don't read? Is it a left wing requirement??

Only in an actual vote. Not much otherwise.

And it doesn't matter. Anyone with such a number is just plain silly.
 
At a certain point, a dominant majority is able to institute a groupthink which shuts down debate and causes key underlying assumptions and beliefs to go unchallenged. That is what is happening in many of our universities today. Diversity in everything but thought :).

Sometimes that happens, quite true. But sometimes it doesn't. In and of itself, a majority is useless. You have to actually do the work and prove something.
 
I know you think that's clever. You'd have to have the school denying difference of opinions. Evidence of hiring practices specifically designed to prevent hiring. An application question, like are you now or have you ever been a conservative. Evidence that not one professor, but that's majority of professors deny differing opinions or conservative thought in the classroom. Or that the school never, ever invites conservatives to the campus. Actual evidence of something actually being done.

This has been provided to you in the past only to have you dismiss it. Face it, you will never accept the truth.
 
Is this an attempt to soak a post with sarcasm and wit? Remember, if that is the case, tone and inflection is lost on the internet.

If you're serious....I started laughing at the "money" part. Most of academia easily fall in the upper class category.

"Upper class" (whatever that means) doesn't exert in any real political power in its own right. We don't have an aristocracy. Academics aren't a political class either.

Political power these days belongs to those who can raise enough money to pay an entire organization of professional networkers (a lobbying group) to represent them. The NRA is one such group. Since (depending on the issue's importance) a single vote from a single Congressmen on a single issue can go as high as $3,000,000-4,000,000 in terms of the amount of money it takes to "win them over" and lobbyists need to provide salaries to all of their employees, you can imagine that it takes more capital than academia altogether would be able to raise to have a lobbying group. It takes dozens, hundreds, or thousands of companies (or tens of millions of private citizens) to generate the kind of capital to have even mild representation of your interests written into the laws.
 
Last edited:
This has been provided to you in the past only to have you dismiss it. Face it, you will never accept the truth.

No it hasn't. You can find one professor at one place. I can find the opposite at another. We've done that. Your merely won't do the hard work and do an actual objective study.
 
No it hasn't. You can find one professor at one place. I can find the opposite at another. We've done that. Your merely won't do the hard work and do an actual objective study.

You've been provided with studies, you've been provided with examples, you've even been provided with liberal academics themselves all but admitting that this takes place, now you ME, j-mac, a truck driver working 70 hours a week to conduct my own study? This is why it is hard to take you seriously....
 
That is inaccurate. They had full access to the intelligence community's information and assessments. Nor did Rice lie, that is an inaccurate but feel-good charge laid by those who confuse their strong opposition to the Iraq war with the need to demonize their opposition.

No elected official outside of the administration's national security inside circle was privy to all of the information, esp. the information they didn't want outsiders to have.

That "smoking gun is a mushroom cloud" phrase is just one example of their attempts to mislead the public into that war. If you carefully parse their words, there were few outright lies. But in total, the administrations statements created a false impression of an imminent threat. The fact that they carefully avoided outright factual lies and used well-establish propaganda techniques indicates that they knew they were misrepresenting the reality of the situation.
 
Read the OP article.

What it sounds like to me is that the Internet has spilled out into real life.

People can act like that on the Internet, "shouting each other down", being rude, having no consequences, and not ever having to face a new view or admit they are wrong. They expound on their opinions without true give and take, they can ignore opposing views. They absorb what they want and unlike conversations in real life, do not have to address the opposing view.

That is the way protesting today seems to work. Now they can be bold in crowds, protected by Constitutional rights and other laws, and not consider the actual give and take of discourse. They feel they can beat their opponents over their heads with their views and there is no way to have a dialogue unless you resort to trying to be louder. Which only inflames, it doesnt communicate.
 
Read the OP article.

What it sounds like to me is that the Internet has spilled out into real life.

People can act like that on the Internet, "shouting each other down", being rude, having no consequences, and not ever having to face a new view or admit they are wrong. They expound on their opinions without true give and take, they can ignore opposing views. They absorb what they want and unlike conversations in real life, do not have to address the opposing view.

That is the way protesting today seems to work. Now they can be bold in crowds, protected by Constitutional rights and other laws, and not consider the actual give and take of discourse. They feel they can beat their opponents over their heads with their views and there is no way to have a dialogue unless you resort to trying to be louder. Which only inflames, it doesnt communicate.

No one outside a fanatical religion establishment is so self righteously confident in their opinions as the university leftists. It will take at least 10 years to un-teach them the crap they've been taught, and some never recover.
 
You've been provided with studies, you've been provided with examples, you've even been provided with liberal academics themselves all but admitting that this takes place, now you ME, j-mac, a truck driver working 70 hours a week to conduct my own study? This is why it is hard to take you seriously....

No, a survey about their beliefs, for example, doesn't prove they've doing anything wrong. And cherry picked examples, just as can be done with conservatives, doesn't prove anything. And no, I didn't expect you personally to do a study. I expect those throwing **** out to actually do something that proves something. Put the same critical eye on these that you would nonsense concerning conservatives and you'll see what mean.
 
No elected official outside of the administration's national security inside circle was privy to all of the information, esp. the information they didn't want outsiders to have.

That is incorrect. The Intelligence Committees of both Houses had full access.

That "smoking gun is a mushroom cloud" phrase is just one example of their attempts to mislead the public into that war. If you carefully parse their words, there were few outright lies. But in total, the administrations statements created a false impression of an imminent threat. The fact that they carefully avoided outright factual lies and used well-establish propaganda techniques indicates that they knew they were misrepresenting the reality of the situation.

That is also incorrect. They were wrong, but they honestly believed that Saddam Hussein had active production lines going. We did find uranium, we did find some chemical weapons, and we found more illegal missiles by counting the ones flying over our heads in the first two weeks than Hans Blix found in lo those many years. Some of that probably also got sent off to Syria, and now (joy of joys) Assad has it hidden somewhere for use after he gives up the publicly admitted parts of his own stockpiles.

Look. The Bush administration had an awful decision-making process (to the extent that it even had a process) when it came to the decision to go to Iraq. It definitely attempted to force an ideological bent on the information available. But they also honestly believed what they were saying, and the evidence did not contradict them. Even today, with hindsight, the best honest assessment you can come down to utilizing the information available to them at the time has a lower confidence rating.
 
While former Mayor Bloomberg was making a commencement address, I believe the points he made went beyond even Higher Education to the larger issue of a willingness to listen to diverse viewpoints (something that also seems increasingly infrequent when it comes to discussions of politics/policy and economics).

All of those communist professors need to step off campus and find out how the real world works. Better yet, they should just teach the Bible and Constitution because that's all a good American needs to know. Poisoning the minds of young Americans with science is only going to turn us into a 3rd world nation.
 
No, a survey about their beliefs, for example, doesn't prove they've doing anything wrong. And cherry picked examples, just as can be done with conservatives, doesn't prove anything. And no, I didn't expect you personally to do a study. I expect those throwing **** out to actually do something that proves something. Put the same critical eye on these that you would nonsense concerning conservatives and you'll see what mean.

We have done this dance before. And judging from your continued refusal to accept empirical studies and first hand accounts of liberal progressive indoctrination throughout our education system only serves to show the dishonesty of your position.
 
We have done this dance before. And judging from your continued refusal to accept empirical studies and first hand accounts of liberal progressive indoctrination throughout our education system only serves to show the dishonesty of your position.

Name one empirical study that actually focuses on actions. Not leanings. Not opinions.
 
Back
Top Bottom