hee haw
Posted on 07/08/2002 4:52:12 PM PDT by commieprof
Yes, that's very true. She would be shocked to hear the opinions of her and of her classes from students whom she'd be certain were on her side! The deluded are always the last to find out.
My dad gave me the same advice when I was in a history class taught by a particularly odious dogmatic professor. I could not drop the class. So dad's advice was to grit my teeth, regurgitate back to the prof what the prof said, and to forget about the whole class afterwards. I did, and it worked out for me rather well since I got an "A" in that class. It's easy to play the game, once you realize that it's nothing more than a game. My dad also taught me to think for myself, a legacy I carry on to this day many years later. I do my own history research now, and the insane comments of that prof from years ago are unimportant to me now.
Actually, coöps can work under certain circumstances. Indeed, even relatively pure communism can work in societies that are small enough that everyone knows everyone else, and where people inherently reward hard workers and shun slackers. Unfortunately, such societies are very fragile, and coöps can usually only survive if they both maintain a narrow focus and have a means of accountability (either direct, if they're small enough, or financial, if they're larger).
As we have seen recently with Enron et al, human nature leads to greed and criminality when power is bestowed, and therefore, in every case, the entity in charge of "equalizing outcomes" becomes corrupt. This corruption leads the ruling class to hoard and steal from the masses, as we saw in Soviet Russia, Cuba, and elsewhere.
Better that people should be free to do for themselves whatever they can and we leave the acquisition of material possessions to "survival of the fittest" or the natural order.
In this light, I believe those who wish to "save the world" are actually the destroyers.
FReegards...
Critical Studies in Mass Communication, Dec 1992 v9 n4 p311(14)
The limits of interpretation: ambivalence and the stereotype in 'Spenser: For Hire.' (Critical Demography) Dana L. Cloud.Author's Abstract: COPYRIGHT 1992 Speech Communication Association
A structural analysis of the racial oppositions in the television program Spenser: For Hire challenges the interpretivist media studies claim that popular culture texts are necessarily polysemic. The article argues that representations of racial difference, in particular, are not polysemic but are rather ambivalent within the structure of the racist stereotype. The character Hawk's oppositional stance and persona, though subject to contradictory critical evaluations, serve the needs of the dominant culture to depict blacks in stereotypical ways.
-----
Western Journal of Communication, Fall 1998 v62 i4 p387(3)
The rhetoric of : scapegoating, utopia, and the privatization of social responsibility. Dana L. Cloud.Author's Abstract: COPYRIGHT 1998 Western States Communications Association
This article performs an ideographic analysis of the bipartisan political deployment of the slogan during the 1992 Presidential election campaign. The analysis shows that talk functioned during that campaign to scapegoat Black men and poor Americans for social problems. However, the ideograph also is invested with a gendered utopian narrative that makes its scapegoating less apparent and more persuasive. Ultimately, in constructing the family as the site of all responsibility and change, the rhetoric of privatizes social responsibility for ending poverty and racism.
------
Critical Studies in Mass Communication, June 1996 v13 n2 p115(23)
Hegemony or concordance? The rhetoric of tokenism in "Oprah" Winfrey's rags-to-riches biography. Dana L. Cloud.Author's Abstract: COPYRIGHT 1996 Speech Communication Association
This article examines television and print biographies of television talk show host and producer Oprah Winfrey. Conventional biographical narratives construct a token "Oprah" persona whose life story resonates with and reinforces the ideology of the American Dream, implying the accessibility of this dream to black Americans despite the structural economic and political barriers posed in a racist society to achievement and survival. The article develops theories of tokenism, biography, autobiography, and hegemony to analyze both racial and gendered dimensions of tokenist biography. It describes tokenism as a rhetorical mechanism of liberal hegemony with regard to race and class. The essay challenges recent redefinitions of hegemony as happy "concordance" and suggests that critics cannot assume that black stars and texts automatically represent difference and resistance in popular culture.
Or do you dispute that every Socialist nation recognizes less rights (or none at all) of it's subjects than our Republic guarantees? Don't even try to weasel out of that question - you state empthatically that you do not wish to live anywhere else. Perhaps because you realize that only in the United States you have an expectation of privacy and the right to postulate your ridiculous drivel without fear of being imprisoned by a government censor? I suggest you truly think about that which you advocate - because if your wish came true neither of us would have the freedoms you say you cherish.
If you really had guts, you would debate David Horowitz at your school.
Please see my previous post re "corrupt ruling classes taking advantage of power" and apply it to this Kennedy anecdote.
I think Bob Johnson, a black man, profits from that. But maybe she wants the black men to be that way, the noble savage being saved by the Intellectual.
Oops, Noble Savage.
But the left has given up on the American people since we don't pay them homage. Better to find some distant other to fantasize about liberating/enslaving.
You obviously reject real world evidence every day which disproves your bankrupt Utopian "philosophy."
Why would we believe you'd embrace evidence presented to you by your students, over whom you hold complete power?
Regurgitating Marxist dogma doesn't seem to be a very good indicator of your ability to engage in "critical thinking."
America's been very, very good to you.
hee haw
That might inspire a reaction if it was posted by your better half...
The few that I have seen here in Massachusetts always lacked strong leadership, the group will not surrender power to a driven task-master. The few that I have seen seem to have faded away. In my mind, they are not stable. Imagine if you can a co-op competing with Bill Gates.
I thought that the good doctor might actually wish to hear from some members of the community she spends so much time and effort writing about. Between Marxism, feminism, abortion, and race-relations, the good doctor has some rich material for virtually every freeper here, and I'd hate to see anyone left out...
And FWIW, I think you may have nailed exactly why the good doctor might not want to spend much time contemplating the BET phenomenon ;)
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.