Assistant Professor Jonathan Anomaly
The Koch Brothers “Freedom Center” lecture against public education and in favor of privatization of education is set for Thursday, Sept. 21 at the University of Arizona in Tucson.
The dark-money Charles G. Koch foundation donated $1 million to the UofA to create the “Center for the Philosophy of Freedom,” which is a think tank designed to turn students into future lobbyists for the right-wing, anti-education foundation.
The lecture, entitled “Public Goods and Education,” will be delivered by libertarian professor Jonathan Anomaly in Social Sciences 332 from 12:30 to 1:45 pm on Sept. 21. Anomaly was imported in 2017 from Duke University, where he founded the Heterodox Academy website, set up to fight a perceived liberal bias in universities.
Because the lecture is political propaganda, it has caused concern among Tucson’s elected leaders. The Koch Brothers’ extreme right-wing agenda has sabotaged public education in the state and promoted school vouchers to funnel taxpayer money into for-profit private and religious schools.
In August, more than 111,000 Arizona parents and voters signed petitions circulated by Save Our Schools Arizona in opposition to a new state law creating school vouchers that undermine public schools. The measure to veto the law is set to be on a referendum ballot in November 2018.
The abstract of Assistant Professor Anomaly’s talk describes education as a “good,” like a box of cereal, which students “consume.” The lecture makes a bogus economic analysis of “markets for education,” as if it were a product to be bought and sold.
The lecture is a diatribe against unions and “bureaucrats with monopoly power.” It is a clear example of how dark money politics are subverting higher education in Arizona.
For example, Anomaly writes:
“The public supply of education often results in bad teaching, political indoctrination, and a system of certification and promotion that deters many smart people from wanting to become teachers.”
“The public goods argument does seem to justify some public financing of education, perhaps through a voucher program.”
“New nationwide standards for examining knowledge of American history were designed that showed a significant left-leaning (or “progressive”) bias.”
“Unions in many American states have made it difficult to fire teachers, and have lobbied against performance-based pay and in favor of requirements for teachers to go through extensive certifications that deter capable people from entering the profession.”
“Bureaucrats with monopoly power rarely have the relevant information or motivation to find the best ways to structure schools and reward innovative teachers and teaching methodologies.”
“Education steeped in political correctness creates negative externalities like emotional fragility.”
“At the level of primary and secondary school, teachers are typically given curricula devised by state bureaucrats rather than encouraged to design methods of teaching that best promote the interests of students.”
“State subsidies for some purposes, such as vouchers for primary and secondary school, may have real benefits by increasing choice.”
It is alarming to see that a public university is now being used for political purposes to undermine the essential public nature of the school itself.
This is the problem with the original blog post: it judges an academic article without offering any scholarly informed argument. In fact, it goes as far as calling an academic lecture “political propaganda” and a “diatribe”… before the event happens!
Now, for sure the claims made in the offered quotes need to be assessed. That means exploring the empirical evidence and then crafting an argument that can be persuasive or not. But for sure that requires academic work, including dialogue, debate, disagreement, and rigorous work. At the end, the claims may be supported or disproved. That sounds harder than just posting a set of unsubstantiated claims and judgments about the character of the writer and the alleged supporters of his work. It is. But is also intellectually honest and sound, something that cannot be said of this blog posts and most all of the replies.
“But is also intellectually honest and sound, something that cannot be said of this blog posts and most all of the replies.”
I applaud your desire for intellectual honesty, but I fear you will be disappointed here. The very process of blogging here is fast paced, in the here and now, and based largely on historical evidence/occurrence that can be researched quickly and hard fought opinion that may or may not be correct. Being one of the contrarians (read: troll) here, I am certain there will be many who disagree with me, but I think by the time you collect the evidence, analyze it and prepare to disseminate the information, the subject has long been forgotten. That doesn’t mean there aren’t any well though out and factually correct arguments that occur here…many postings are like that. But generally speaking this a rapidly moving discussion forum with quickly changing topics that requires people to cover a wide range of subjects.
It is rather fun. I think if you stay with it a while you will find you enjoy it despite the often missing scientific approach to facts. You should relax and give it a try…
You make a fair point Steve and I appreciate you sharing it. I guess my hope is that a balance emerges between fast-pace opinion based post and some more carefully crafted arguments. In this case I saw to much emotional ranting and not enough actual argumentation to refute or support the authors arguments. Anyway, thanks again and have a good night!
Let me try one last time to clear up the First Amendment issue for the “conservatives” around here.
Anomaly has every right to his opinion, and the government is prevented from suppressing him.
The local community, however, has a First Amendment right as well, and they are well within their rights to say “beat it, creep, go spread your hate and lies elsewhere”.
And anyone want to learn more about Mr. Anomaly is welcome to seek him out. His speech has not been suppressed.
But there is no Constitutional right to speak where you’re not wanted, there is no right to forcing your speech on anyone, and Free Speech does not immune anyone from consequences.
Free Speech is a two sided Right, it does not go one way.
Also. could the “conservatives” just say “Nazi’s and eugenics are bad”, please?
“Also. could the “conservatives” just say “Nazi’s and eugenics are bad”, please?”
That is not a problem: Nazi’s and eugenics are bad. I always thought that went without saying, but if needs to be said, then it can easily be said without any problem. Why the fuss?
“The local community, however, has a First Amendment right as well, and they are well within their rights to say “beat it, creep, go spread your hate and lies elsewhere”.”
That depend entirely on what you mean by “the local community”. If you mean the local government or governmental agency (whch should include public schools and universities), then it is not okay for them to deny a speaker the right of free speech. On the other hand, if it is a private institution it can do as it pleases because constitutionally related censorship only applies to government censorship.
“…there is no right to forcing your speech on anyone, and Free Speech does not immune anyone from consequences.”
That is very true. The right to free speech does not guarantee your right to an audience, nor does it guarantee you an appreciative audience, nor does it immunize you from the ramifications of what you say. It only guarantees your right to be free of government censorship in saying it.
There is nothing hateful about any of his quotes on education as quoted in this post.
In fact, there is a certain elegance to them.
However, a lot of you are going to look like haters if it turns out that minorities can move at a 100 points a year and you trapped them in a system moving at 25 points a year.
They are also disseminating a badly written textbook for high school AP courses that award college credit for placement into the UA Freedom Center program. Ethics, Economy & Entrepreneurship by Cathleen Johnson, Robert Lusch, and David Schmidtz.
SEPTEMBER 2016 Reviewed here > https://thebaffler.com/latest/the-handmaiden-of-entrepreneurship
We do not yet know if the school boards involved had/have any hand in permitting this curriculum.
Malcolm X said by any means necessary. liberal elitists say when they go low we go high so high in the air we can’t be seen or so high in the ir like the woman hit by the nazi’s car in charlottesville. not tom we don’t have to go killing them after all as loathsome as they are they are still ameriKKKans. I don’t want to punch them out unless they want to fight. I have suggested non-violent attics on this post that we should try first as the colonists did until the british marched onto lexington green. as colonel parker said on april 19, 1775 “don’t fire unless fired upon ;but if they mean to have war let it begin here.” strategy is what the goal is. tactics are how the goal will be achieved. I am a left tactician who thinks liberal whining is not a very effective tactic.
This quotation is a virtual gold mine of irony: “The public supply of education often results in bad teaching, political indoctrination, and a system of certification and promotion that deters many smart people from wanting to become teachers.” This, from the mouth of someone clearly engaging in political indoctrination. And there are many established, distinguished scholars who will tell you exactly what deters smart people from becoming teachers: start with low salaries. Then add having to buy your own school supplies. And throw in a community that blames teachers first. So, let’s account for all the variables at play, shall we?
Interesting. So arguments that you disagree with are “political indoctrination”? When the greatest liberal of the 20th century, John Stuart Mill, worried that a public monopoly on education might produce bad results, are his elegantly expressed worries a form of “indoctrination”?
When poor parents are forced by the state to send their kids to failing schools but rich parents can afford to choose other options, that strikes me as unfair. Maybe I’m just a good old-fashioned bleeding heart liberal, but that’s one aspect of the argument of the paper.
white racists on jurys find white cops innocent of murdering unarmed blacken and even children like tamer rice. we should find all black people not guilty thru jury nullification in retaliation. the good government elitist liberal will say I can’t do that much safer to be a punching bag for republicans!
I’m just going to leave this right here– the SBS lecturer’s thoughts on eugenics.
http://quillette.com/2016/10/06/why-sex-really-matters/
I wish I hadn’t read that. I keep thinking that the GOP has reached peak evil and I keep being wrong.
Please, Kavanagh and Huppenthal and the rest, please learn about Jonathan Anomaly.
Do you really support his person? Let’s hear your thoughts.
This goes to prove my point, that the Koch brothers and those they fund have a sick world view, and it’s rare that we get to see that sickness in print.
Bit of a “hit and run” in that you suggest that Professor Anomaly said some dark things in his article. It is mostly a historical look at genetics and eugenics with a little future policy speculation thrown in. He condemns the past abuses and current authoritarian proposals for eugenics use and seems to support more readily available testing so couples know what they are getting into (no pun intended) with sex.
I think you owe it to Professor Anomaly to specifically cite why you attacked him so he can defend himself or retract the dark shadow you have cast over his reputation.
This post was in response to Pamela Powers Hannley’s post above.
Good to know you’re pro-abortion.
Because that’s what he’s advocating.
I am not pro-abortion but I do not believe that those who are should be banished from universities. How unprogressive of me. By the way, aren’t any of the liberals who read BfA going to defend academic freedom? Have they turned into witch hunting progressives or are they afraid that they too will be persecuted by the progressives?
You are defending eugenics.
Not wanting to banish someone who discusses the pros and cons of an issue is not defending the issue. Do you really believe that or are you just throwing mud against the wall?
Besides, why would I want to associate myself with a movement whose early days was spearheaded by Planned Parenthood’s founder Margaret Sanger, whose current organization is a tool for eugenics, in some cases.
The speaker’s writing is a pro vs. con for eugenics, heavy on dog whistle racism with overtones of Master Race rhetoric.
He is advocating for eliminating “undesirables”.
You are a defender of the Koch’s, and the Koch’s are funding this person.
You can throw in all the standard Margret Sanger talking points you want, but the deflection is not working.
You are defending eugenics.
If you haven’t put any thought into why eugenics is evil, let me help.
Do you want to stop procreation by Muslims? Jews? Catholics? Mexicans? Blacks? Gays?
In the post, Anomaly says that society would be much better off without certain types of people. Who gets to choose?
You seem to be saying that this is a free speech issue, and that liberals are being anti-free speech, it is not.
Being anti-eugenics should be a bipartisan issue.
Good to know where conservatives stand.
I just re-read the piece to be sure I didn’t misunderstand something, and it’s all dog whistle racism and advocating for eliminating of “undesirables”.
I understand the USA has a bad history with eugenics, but no one is talking about that nasty shit except Nazis these days.
You really need to do some soul searching if you don’t think that article was straight up anti-Jesus anti-birth hate.
You expose yourself.
Read it again and take a course in critical thinking and reading. Here is what he says about “undesirables” and eugenics:
“One proposal previous eugenicists have made is to pay people with undesirable qualities — such as extremely low intelligence, or poor impulse control — not to reproduce. William Shockley went as far as to say that the state should pay people not to have children along a graduated scale in proportion to how many points below the mean IQ (100) they fall.[4] This proposal has serious problems that likely doom it to failure. Make no mistake, intelligence is a crucially important trait for living a successful life, but it is far from the only trait that matters. Qualities like compassion, empathy, and creativity are important for human flourishing, and for treating other people with respect. Policies like these, moreover, might lead to the manipulation of IQ test results by corrupt bureaucrats. Finally, IQ scores are at least partly affected by environmental factors in ways that are not well understood as of yet, a point that should not be overlooked (even if these effects are often exaggerated by blank slate enthusiasts).”
He argues AGAINST using eugenics to limit the birth of so called, “undesirables.” As an academic, he first explains what proponents wanted to do and then he argues against it, in a eloquent manner.
How about you go back and reread the last two paragraphs were he says eugenics has a bright future.
And why have a pro-con on something we should all agree on as being full tilt evil?
Regarding your earlier post about Planned Parenthood, here’s a timely and fun read:
http://www.rawstory.com/2017/09/these-are-the-8-scapegoats-that-republicans-trot-out-when-things-dont-go-their-way/
Number Two on the List Will Shock You!
Make that the last three paragraphs. The guy is pro-eugenics.
And so it seems are you.
So an article that explicitly denounces racism is “dog whistle racism”? Fascinating. When Astronomers denounce astrology, are they secretly promoting its use?
When someone gets tested for the gene that causes Tay Sachs before having a child, and decides to have children with someone who does not have the allele so that their child will not be born with Tay Sachs, is this an objectionable choice? Almost everyone in Brooklyn now takes this test. Why? Because they’d prefer to have children who thrive rather than suffer.
I’m for giving people the right to use this test. I guess that makes me a bad person. Look up the words “liberal eugenics” and re-read the paper. What I argue could not be more carefully worded or well thought out. Right down to the last sentence, which is “sometimes the best policy is not to have one.”
Speaking for myself, I strenuously object to this quote, among others from his crock o’ sh!t: “…part of the reason people differ from each other on measures of personality, intelligence, and temperament is because they are genetically different from one another. Because people vary genetically, our choices about who to have children with are immensely important, both for our children, and for those who will share the planet with them.” Anomaly should be run outta town.
Mel: that is an amazingly foolish thing to assert. You are a left wing creationist. When behavioral genetics finds a result you don’t like, you denounce science as evil, and say someone who cites the genetics literature should be “run out of time.”
Epic fail.
*town
Hmmm….
Why aren’t you condemning the master himself? Darwin went a lot further than anomaly goes – Darwin’s title of his epic was “The survival of the favored races in the struggle for life.” Didn’t know that did you? Can look it up in a few seconds.
In his correspondence with Hoechler in Germany, Darwin specifically stated that the Germans were the “favored race.”
Darwin also targeted Jews and Blacks as races to be wiped out by the favored race.
People aren’t familiar with the third of Darwin’s theories due to intellectual corruption in our universities. They were hugely complicit in the Eugenics movement, publishing hundreds of research articles edging closer and closer to ethically justifying the Holocaust.
Darwin’s third theory was that physical competition and sexual selection results in the development of races within a species – then, the stronger races wipe out in the weaker races in a genetic cleansing.
His analysis was a little problematic, Blacks represent 12% of the world’s population yet took 40% of the track and field gold medals. I think they can genetically hold their own.
Jews represent .2% of the world’s population yet they have won 34% of all Noble prizes – I think they can hold their own too.
And, Anomaly doesn’t hold a candle against another liberal favorite – Richard Dawkins the hugely influential atheist who believes that “religous faith is evil.” Hmm.. FSNT, what would Jesus do?
And, how about Sanger, the racist, white supremacist, founder of Planned Parenthood who specifically undertook the mission of wiping out African Americans? She wrote about it, in a cruelly racist fashion.
Anomaly wants to license parents – bad idea for a lot of reasons but perfectly in line with an atheist following Dawkins line of thought. He thinks that the Motor Vehicle Department can do a better job than Darwin and Hoechler of selecting desirable genetic traits. Won’t end well.
I think I will wait to see what he has to say about schools. So far, the “freedom schools” have been completely unimpressive but so is the larger university culture.
Darwin died in 1882. I live in 2017.
You are arguing for eugenics.
Try reading my post.
I did read your post. It’s mostly nonsense.
Darwin died in 1882, 135 years ago.
Margaret Sanger died in 1966. Fifty-one years ago.
It’s 2017. Sorry, forgot to say “spoiler alert”. My bad.
There is no “atheist” line. There are a few small groups who fight for separation of church and state, because the Founders never wanted America to be a theocracy.
99% of atheists are unaffiliated with each other. There is no “party line”.
But nice attempt at deflecting with three of conservatives favorite bogeymen. However, none of that is relevant to Anomaly’s writing.
Natural selection is not done with a plan in mind to eliminate poor people and minorities or people with special needs, which Anomaly is advocating. Natural selection is unplanned. Or maybe you want to think God plans it, that’s still not the same thing.
Unless you think you’re God.
Anomaly is pushing a Libertarian/Objectivist viewpoint and funded with Koch brother money. He may well be an atheist, but that is not pertinent to his writing.
The hard core Ayn Rand people believe you’re either a CEO or you’re a parasite. It’s a nonsensical philosophy that appeals to mostly young white men. It makes them feel good to think they’re special.
While Jesus taught that we’re to care for one another, people like Anomaly push the opposite agenda.
You really need to learn to form a coherent, relevant argument. I have a job and things to do and can’t keep bailing you out, FalconZero.
Also, just say you’re against eugenics, please? Why is that so hard?
When you argue “Anomaly wants to license parents” you are (mostly) wrong: I cited many bright people, including Francis Crick, who have tentatively proposed doing so. But if you read to the end of the article, my co-author and I very carefully say that we think this probably wouldn’t work well because of corruptible bureaucrats who would have to design and enforce the licensing test, and because we prefer to achieve any outcome by means that restrict liberty least. Here’s the article, for anyone interested:
http://quillette.com/2016/10/06/why-sex-really-matters/
And here is the paper on which it is based:
https://philpapers.org/archive/ANODEF.pdf
I do enjoy a good debate. Not so much a pointless slander.
ayn rand because of smoking couldn’t get insurance and had to get on medicare while she attacked its very existence. but enough liberal whining on my part. now as lenin said what is to be done. stalin did know how to deal with libertarian conservatives. while I disagree with the economic system they devised they did toughen liberals up. or as dr king said to the white power structure you deal with me or you deal with Malcom X! there is no down side for conservatives for the evil things they do, antifa is at least trying unlike liberal whiners who are now denouncing them like clintonista corporate stooge nancy pelosi. when called for jury duty I have already said I will find not guilty anyone who brings a conservative like kavenaugh to justice as an act of self defense and protecting others.
Antifa is getting a whipping in the right wing media because the right wing media supports a certain kind of corporate fascism.
Here’s an example of someone who is not a member of Anitfa expressing their concerns about a Nazi marching around the streets.
I’m not sure how I feel about this. I am against violence, but America fought a war to beat Nazi’s, hundreds of thousands of American’s died, millions of Russians, French, English, all gave the ultimate sacrifice to end Nazi evil, and for some reason, the GOP, Trump, Breitbart, Fox News and the rest are okay with Nazi’s being given equal time.
We’ve been taught all our lives, in school, movies, the news, even church, that Nazi’s are evil.
What do you do when one comes marching down the street spouting hate and racism?
For the record, I’m engaging the Captain on this, I am not supporting violence. I am admitting to being torn.
I’m also surprised that there are any Nazi’s in the USA, and that the President of the Electoral College thinks some of them are good people.
Correction, it turns out that reports of the Nazi wandering around Seattle harassing black people spread across Antifa social media.
Antifa went and hunted down the Nazi. And like most of the Nazi’s we’ve seen lately, the mom’s basement dwelling “we’re willing to die for blood and soil” types he has a glass jaw.
I’m still torn, but I’ve heard a few old timers mention that America used to hunt and kill Nazis.
I’m still torn, Captain.
Fascism was derived from Marxist thinking about the nature of economics. That a central government could achieve economies of scale unavailable to the splintered free market.
That MVD could do a better job at producing computers than IBM or Apple because they would have the whole market to themselves.
That it could produce them cheaper by not providing profits to owners.
The thug communists of Antifa can’t anti-fascist, they are the essence of fascism.
You have completely made up a new fact free definition for fascism.
And you drifted, what does Apple and IBM have to do with Antifa?
Anitfa has been around since before WW2. They fight fascists. That’s all they do.
You can argue that Nazi’s have free speech rights, and they do, but the 1A doesn’t immunize you from consequences.
If you run around town like the guy in the video did throwing things at people and screaming hate you may get some resistance.
Fighting Nazi’s used to be something we all agreed on, just say Nazi’s are bad please.
My point is simple Antifa is far more fascist than the people it opposes – it fought the fascists because the fascists weren’t pure enough to declare themselves totally for communism.
Go look up the definition for fascism. Communism completely has all the characteristics of the definition. Why? Because fascism was derived from Marx’s ideas.
Remember, Marx advocated for communism because his analysis showed it would create a much higher level of prosperity than capitalism- I kid you not.
Millions of people died and billions of lives were and are stunted because of some analytic errors by a single European fat guy.
”…and for some reason, the GOP, Trump, Breitbart, Fox News and the rest are okay with Nazi’s being given equal time.”
I don’t speak for the right, Tom, and I couldn’t care less whether the American Nazi’s have their moment of speech. What concerns me personally is this persistent desire of the left to have the right to block speech with which they do not agree. I find the Nazi crapola disgusting, as do you. But you also hate what the right has to say, giving it no more credence than you do the Nazis. If you were able to, you would ban people on the right from having their say just as quickly as you would deny it to the Nazis.
And THAT is why I feel the Nazis should have the right to free speech, just as I think you should. If we ever lose the right to speak freely, then we lose the country. Just because someone has the right to speak freely does not guarantee them an audience or for someone to agree with them. We choose for ourselves what is right and what is wrong, and that is how it should be.
“…I will find not guilty anyone who brings a conservative like kavenaugh to justice as an act of self defense and protecting others.”
I was disappointed when I read this blurb from you, Captain. That is almost word for word what Hitler wrote in “Mein Kampf” about Jews and the effect he said they had on German culture and society. Anytime you decide to use the power of the State to single out people you don’t like for persecution, you sow the seeds of ultimate destruction for your nation. Eventually, that spotlight of bigotry and hatred will be turned on you and no one will speak up to protect you. Bad juju, cencored!
What a batch of spew by FSNT. Old man Koch was just an oilman till he worked in the Soviet Union and befriended many communists in the course of his work on refineries. He didn’t have an ideological bone in his body.
Then, on came the purges and he watched many of these friends not only purged from the communist party but shot in the dead of night.
The communist archives show margin notes by Stalin “not enough” in response to plans to murder tens of thousands.
That’s your hero.
Old man Koch was later given a communist handler who laid out in detail their plans for infiltrating the United States.
If the Koch family is anti-communist it is only because they saw it up close and personal.
Paradoxically, they have built an empire on commune style roots. Everyone in the company is evaluated by underlings- its an upside down organization, the bosses don’t rule supreme.
They are one of the few organizations in America to have “banned the box” they don’t consider prior criminal convictions at all in hiring decisions.
The posting above is also a batch of spew. Since Arizona adopted school choice in 1993, murders by juveniles have dropped from 70 to 7 (2012) even as our school population rose from 360,000 to 1.1 million.
In 2015, the most recent NAEP, our African American 8th graders rose to number one in the nation in math, our Hispanics to 11th and our whites to 6th. On the last posting at the National Center for Education Statistics, Arizona led the nation in the increase in the number of high school graduates.
While the rest of the states were tanking in response to “Race to the Top”, Arizona led in gains from 2011 4th grade to 2015 8th grade combined math and reading gains.
Nothing but good things have happened to our school kids since school choices.
District education is not public education – district education was designed during a white supremacist period of our history to deny access to Catholics and to poor and minority students outside the district.
That’s the other banner you all salute.
Comes natural to you doesn’t it?
Old man Koch is one of the founding members of the John Birch Society. So there’s your hero.
No progressives worship Stalin, you huge ass. Where do you get this garbage?
Progressives in America were waxing poetic about Russian communism all the way to the end, covering up for Stalin (and later Pol Pot) and winking at each other about being “fellow travelers”.
The FBI agent who infiltrated the weathermen described their discussions of murdering 15 million Americans when they took over.
Stalin was absolutely a progressives hero.
It’s 2017, FalconNada, show me a progressive who supports Stalin.
In 2017, how many progressives are supporting the WU? (Hint, there’s been no WU since 1977, that’s 40 years ago).
And how many actual commies are there in the US in 2017? Last I heard the “party” had about 5000 members.
Five thousand out of three hundred and twenty million Americans.
So there are 5,000 commies and 319,995,000 Americans who are not commies. That’s not very many commies.
FYI, 319,995,000 is more than 5,000. There’s a calculator on your computer, go ahead and check my math.
When children have imaginary friends it’s cute up to a point, but when a grown up has imaginary enemies, it’s time for a psych evaluation.
We need to ban this lecture. It Is being used to demonize a group of people in the State, and to tell citizens and union members they are being oppressed. This lecture meets your standard of a program that separates people. Of course it is a pile of flaming hypocrisy also but that is the point of it.
Well said.
If more people understood what the Koch’s stand for they wouldn’t be so quick to support them.
Here’s a fun read about cheating, lying, and treason, committed by the Koch’s.
http://www.salon.com/2014/10/01/8_disturbing_ways_the_kochs_have_amassed_their_fortune_partner/
The Koch’s scream “Free Markets!” at the top of their lungs to cover up the truly evil work they do.
Ducey and most of AZ’s politicians are complicit.
African Americans, Hispanics and children of poverty are absolutely being oppressed by the district education cult.
The typical African-American in Arizona will make 12th grade unable to read even 80 words per minute and not being able to say 17 when you say 9 plus 8.
And, our African American students rank number one in the nation in math!!!!!!!
That’s oppression. It’s not much better for Hispanics.
You all are the oppressive class, enslaving minorities and students of poverty for the financial benefit of the ruling culture. A culture that only works systematically well for a small percentage of white kids.
It’s enough to make a sane person puke.
Fighting for equal funding for schools in lower income districts is not racism.
Fighting for school lunch programs that actually feed real food is not racism.
The public school system educated hundreds of millions of Americans just fine until Conservatives went after it in an attempt to squash the Teacher’s Union.
Cherry picking facts is not what sane people do, it’s what liars do.
Take your hand off off of your SockPuppet and go do your chores.
Demeaning public education by calling it a “cult” shows you’re just nuts, crazy with libertarian fervor, and to hell with what the public wants….decent public schools. Don’t lecture us about Stalin, he’s dead. Open your eyes to what your philosophy has done to Arizona schools….they’re not getting better with vouchers, they’re declining.
A federal judge did not buy this nonsense from you either. I guess you are the only sane one around.
“A federal judge did not buy this nonsense from you either.”
Frances, I respect you enough to know that you realize finding a single liberal federal judge to say that is not difficult. It happens all the time. This is a big enough issue that it will be appealed and it is very likely to be overturned back and forth a couple of times before it goes to the Supreme Court. And I do think the Supreme Court will hear it because it is a common issue across the country and it needs a single abswer for everyone.
So to paraphrase a Koch philosophy, we are all here on earth just to: 1. Shop for the most accommodating federal judge, or 2. To contribute to market value. But since the rugged individualist derives value from the sky, and never uses the financial system, never uses the government legal system to protect his market, goods or property, never calls the cops, never goes to a government university, never calls the fire department, never travels on a government funded transportation system, never turns on his water tap, never flushes his toilet into a sewer system, never turns on electric lights, the Internet, or any other internal improvements, and never derives any value from anything his neighbors or government does, he is in good shape.
I disagree with Tom completely…this is not “well said”…it is unamerican. I realize that banning speech and writing that the left does not agree with is high on the list of things desired by them, but that is a two edged sword and it cuts both ways. If the right was banned today, it could easily be the left that is banned tomorrow. Free speech is esconced as the very first right written in the Constitution and that was no accident. If what you believe in cannot stand up to critical analysis and contrary points of view, then perhaps you should reconsider what it is you believe in. Something of substance with solid reasoning behind it can stand up to argument and discussion easily. If it is just you, personally, who can’t stand contrary voices, then perhaps you should rethink going out into the public forum. To actually believe that you have the answer is silly. To actually believe there is nothing to be gained by listening to other people is supreme arrogance.
Great article, Larry. As a side note, the next meeting of Progressive Democrats of America (PDA Tucson) focuses on “Un-Koching the University”. It is one week after this privatization lecture– Sept 28.
Also, Governor Ducey and the Republicans in the Arizona Legislature increased the Freedom School funding to $7 million this year.
What do SBS alumni think of this?
Big surprise, Ayn Rand was from Russia, which she left in the mid 1920’s. Russia had a GDP only 15% of that of the US. Russia had already heavily imbibed the ideas of Marx which made them much more vulnerable of a complete takeover.
Despite her statement that she was only influenced by one philosopher whose name I couldn’t pull up despite repeated replays, it turns out that she heavily studied Nietzsche who was all the rage (and still is) in the early 1900’s.
Nietzsche had this concept that each man should strive to be a Rockefeller, a Vanderbilt, a Gates, a Bezos – that is our ultimate expression – will to power he called it.
He viewed Christianity as a slave religion. She obviously bought that and evidently presumed that Christianity was the foundation for communism.
She is just echoing that sentiment and expressing concern at having seen the destruction caused by communism up close and personal.
We can see it today. Who would want to move to Russia? Stock market isn’t even rounding error on our stock market. There is no future there. Communism has trapped them even though they have supposedly moved beyond it.
Your cheap shots at her are just a result of her ability to galvanize a lot of counter pressure for all the communist thinking in the US.
How despicable! I cannot believe that a conservative point of view is being presented at the U of A and in Tucson no less! It is time that we cast aside the outdated notion of a classical “liberal” education, where students are exposed to and intellectually challenged by a variety of ideas, and move forward with the new “progressive” model of only left-wing, non-offensive, inclusive, non-GMO, gluten-free and fair trade ideas.
You often comment on the manners or civility of others, yet you don’t seem to have an issue with acting like a little shit yourself.
The Koch brothers are followers of Ayn Rand, who’s philosophy is the polar opposite of Jesus Christ. In fact, they believe you’re a taker and a loser if you are a Christian and do not deserve love if you give to charity.
Look up the famous 1959 Ayn Rand interview with Mike Wallace and learn about who you are throwing your support behind.
Do you agree that the poor are to be scorned and that charity is evil?
Also note that the Koch’s “think tanks” fund the giveaway of 400,000 copies of Ayn Rand’s works each year, to spread their philosophy of anti-Christian pro “do what thou will” to student in schools.
I understand that most of the Arizona GOP is on the Koch payroll in one way or another, I just think that you should be honest about your views on religion.
I will answer you when you take the vulgarities out of your comments.
As usual, the conservative extremist takes issue with the “vulgarity” while ignoring what brought it on. And no, no one here with two brain cells to rub together believes you’ll honestly rebut FSNT’s comment if he censors it just for you.
Chinatown?
Not Chinatown Jake. If it was in the movie it may have gotten imbedded in one of my few brain cells.
You could have phrased your initial comment so many other ways, instead you do what you accuse others of doing.
You got nothing. The Koch’s spread Ayn Rand’s philosophy. Ayn Rand believed a child murdered was just being all that he could be, and that if you follow the teachings of Jesus Christ you are not worthy of love.
You are either ignorant of what you support or you agree with those views.
It’s 2017, people swear John, and swearing is a lot less offensive than taking a mother from her children because you don’t like brown people.
The only difference between followers of Ayn Rand and a Satanist is the Satanists get to wear cool heavy metal looking outfits to their meetings.
And surely you’re aware that Anton LaVey freely admitted that he plagiarized from Ayn Rand’s work for his Satanic Bible?
He admired her philosophy of selfishness.
And you know that Ayn Rand, hero to the Koch brother’s, admired the work of William Hickman.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Murder_of_Marion_Parker
Ayn Rand said Hickman was an example of her ideal “superman”. Not Superman like in the comics.
Good to know Fountain Hills is being rep’d by one of Satan’s sympathizers.
Anyone doing even a little research into the Koch’s and Ayn Rand will be shocked to learn that Fountain Hills is being rep’d by a Satanic sympathizer who believes the words of Jesus to be the words of a loser.
I should warn people that the crimes of William Hickman include dismemberment of children, and then sewing the parts back together to ransom the body to a girls father as “alive”, do not follow the link I posted if you have a sensitive constitution.
“Anyone doing even a little research into the Koch’s and Ayn Rand will be shocked to learn that Fountain Hills is being rep’d by a Satanic sympathizer who believes the words of Jesus to be the words of a loser.”
Tom, why do you go all extremist, ape crazy sometimes? You know that not a single word of what you wrote is true and yet you felt the need to say it. You and I have never gotten along on this blog, and it has made me say and do some rather stupid things, and you also have said and done stupid things. I received some wise words of counsel from someone I respect and I am not going to be that way anymore. I am not going to respond in kind. I don’t enjoy it and if I don’t enjoy it, why post? Despite Liza’s great wish, I don’t intend to go away, nor do I intend to be a troll any more. I do intend to be an honest voice, regardless of what that might mean, but my days of being an abrasive jerk are over. It just isn’t worth it.
I am hoping someone can do the same for you because no matter how much Liza and others applaud you doing it, when you post like that, you become nothing more than another troll…an abrasive jerk in a world where there is no shortage of them.
Ok, I’ll bite, what did I say that wasn’t true, and please show your work.
Good luck on your journey of discovery.
“…what did I say that wasn’t true…”
Okay, I’ll give it a try, but you have to be honest in assessing what I say.
Do you actually believe that John Kananaugh is a “Satanic sympathizer”? And do you honestly believe that he “believes the words of Jesus to be the words of a loser”? I don’t know John at all, but I am fiarly certain he is neither of those things, and I find it hard to believe that you actually think that, either. I think you posted pure bombast and were being extremely sarcastic in order to be hurtful. That is why I askedyou, “…why do you go all extremist, ape crazy sometimes?”
Ah-h-h, let me pause for a moment here. I just realized that the way I asked that question you thought I was talking about the entire message. I wasn’t doing that. I know that your research is top notch and if you say something definitely happened, then it did.
I was just asking about the last paragraph where you accused John of being a Satanic sympathizer and a Jesus hater (my word, not yours). I thought the last paragraph was over the top, not the entire message. As Roseann Roseannadanna used to say, “Never mind!” :o)
So your complaint is that I called Kavanagh a Satanist sympathizer?
Two things, one, there is no Satan, I’m a grownup, and two, if you align yourself with the Koch’s who worship Ayn Rand, and Ayn Rand’s philosophy matches satanists, you are playing in the same mud puddle as the satanists.
Do I think Kavanagh dresses up in scary red robes on the weekends and kills chickens? Probably not, but I don’t want to speak for the guy.
But I do wish more people had the intellectual curiosity to learn more about the people who are supporting our politicians, and who our politicians are in bed with.
The Koch’s are anti-Christian, anti-democracy, and anti-American, pretty much everything “conservatives” claim to be for, and they’re fooling “conservatives” to move their agenda along, and they own a lot of Arizona politicians.
And now I think I wish you luck on your new kinder, gentler trolling and go back to skipping your posts.
Best for all.
“And now I think I wish you luck on your new kinder, gentler trolling…”
Thank you very much for your kind wishes. It isn’t hard to do because it was how I wrote prior to my confrontations with you. You sort of brought out the worst in me, Tom, and it was dumb of us to poke and jab at each other the way we did. It did not contribute to any communication and it was extremely unseemly. Anyway, I am just going back to the way I wrote for the first few years here. But thank you again for your kind wishes.
“…and go back to skipping your posts.”
In all honesty, I am sorry to hear that. But given our history it is probably for the best. If you should change your mind, it would please me greatly, but I am sure you will do what is best for you.
I forgot to mention that Ayn Rand, hero to the Koch brothers, believed that powerful men were allowed to take what they wanted.
And so she believed rape was pretty good.
I really hope you’re just ignorant of the Koch brothers work and do not support their beliefs