Why Every Proff I ever had was a leftist
Capitalism tends to provide an objective set of standards for determining "worth". Good products are easily distinguished from bad ones, good ideas in a free society after time defeat bad ones IE nationalizing industry was seen as lucrative from the 40's to the 70's and now it is seen as economically destructive. A free (capitalist) society is built upon the the premis of the"competition of ideas". Good ideas and methods are contantly replacing innefficient practices and beliefs. In a Capitalist society those with the most influance tend to be those that are most productive thus the cliche "money talks." Production is open to everyone and is not dependent on just one single trait (you can make money based on creativity, work ethic, brains, technical understanding, connections... the list is endless as long as you have one of them then you are free to capitalize on this trait in a free society.)
Academic leftism isn't based on the economic evidence of wealth redistrobution, or philosophical truths rather Liberals prefer leftism de-facto because of their hatered of capitalism (their love of Socialism isn't based upon Marx's theories of suplus and capital-- few have even studied marx -- Thanks D'Souza for writing Illiberal education). Liberals believe that the largest share of wealth in a society should be controlled by its most intelligent citizens-- namely proffessors, artists,bureacrats, the over educated, planners and regulators-- themselves!
Liberal Elites cringe to see an unkept redneck Albertan with sagging jeans and a sweat stained T-Shirt pulling out his wallet packed with hundreds. They see it as unjust that someone so uncouth could aquire so much capital. Think about this. The same Socilaist that champions the causes of the worker has disdain for him once he acquires wealth.Leftism exploits the disenfranchised in its conquest for control The unproductive sycophant preaching Marx for $100 000 is trying to acheive power through the only way he has been trained-- by the manipulation of society.
posted by angryroughneck @ 4:04 PM
4 comments
4 Comments:
Leftists want control over other people's money and lives, it's a nasty streak present in every leftist.
They want the 'workers to be free' - free to be told what to do by them and when to do it. The workers in all the collapsed 'socialist paradises' in the former Eastern bloc countries had zero power until the rot of socialism became too obvious for anyone to ignore.
Sounds like leftists really want to be capitalists.
What are you talking about?
It's clear that you failed to learn two important things that university has taught most of us:
a) how to spell
b) to back up assertions with evidence rather than just angry rhetoric
If you were truly a capitalist you would likely note that people PAY to learn about Marx...and Mill and Locke (and the other good guys too!)
Sure, it's subsidized by the state but it doesn't have to be this way and I for one see intrinsic value in learning about political philosophy and it just so happens that Marxists are often very good teachers. So yes...I have forked over some money to learn this stuff and I think I am likely better for it.
People choose to be there...even if professors have some kind of "conquest for control" students who attend university are educated enough to make up their own minds.
This post was entirely ignorant of that fact.
The point wasn't that Marxists are inherently bad at teaching (although what they do teach is done with an agenda-- but this is there own choice). Rather it was about the fact that a large majority of teachers are leftists and that their motivation isn't scientiffic but rather spurned on by their hatred of capitalism.
You are free to study, pay for whatever type of education you want.
My philosophy degree was limited and biased in its scope which limited its usefulness in regards to equating theory with reality.
1. study the contradictions in Sartre's "Existensialism and Communism" I was taught to look the other way.
2. Kant preached to me that the senses couldn't be trusted. They were composed of incomplete knowledge.
3. Rousseau taught us that men were foresaken to be free.
The U of A had two pro freedom philosophers in their entire philosophy faculty when i attended. This is not enough. As a youngman my knowledge was incomplete and I was looking for guidance and nor indoctrination.
I will do an old repost on the subject...
I apologize for the spelling. usually i just pull over at a hotel frantically type a few words and keep travelling. The nesessitty of speed hurts the polish aspect.
Post a Comment
<< Home