Posted on 11/16/2004 12:12:11 PM PST by Republicanprofessor
Battling liberal analogies on Communism and Affirmative Action.
I've just had my first class discussion on Communism (as related to Humanities, but I got off the subject to discuss politics with my liberal class.) We had a good discussion and many realized the dangers of Communism.
But I got a few comments from students with which I could not argue very well. (As I said, this is not my subject of expertise.) So if any of you can come up with some good responses, let me know.
One student noted that she had been taught that Communism is fine in theory but that it hasn't found the ideal environment yet in which it could succeed. All the countries which tried it (Russia, China, etc.) were backward countries. She thought it might work in more working class countries. (To the credit of other students, they disagreed. And I countered this too, by saying that Communism depends on force to exist and that human nature resists being limited to being equal to others instead of striving to do better. But I'm interested in what you all have to say.)
And we drifted into Affirmative Action a bit, because I wanted to demonstrate the abuse of repeating lies over and over until they become the truth. (And I expect we may get some pubic hairs on the coke can lies again soon....) So I said that many believe Republicans are racist because it is repeated so often in the press. I noted that it may be because Republicans are against Affirmative Action and quotas.
So one student gave me this analogy from another teacher as an argument for Affirmative Action. Two boys are running. One is doing his very best at 8 sec. per 200 yards. The other needs to learn proper form but is doing his best at 8 1/2 secs. Which one gets the chance to be coached by the best? The one who has already reached his peak or the other who could improve much more after learning proper technique?
Now, I don't think that any of us ever peaks at total capacity, but beyond this, let me know what arguments you might come up with. It seems to be a narrow and silly analogy, but I need a definitive argument with which to knock it down.
Thanks.
Bingo.
And welcome, professor, to FR
One respondent here mentioned "Radical Son" by David Horowitz, and another quoted Whittaker Chambers comment in "Witness" about Communists separating their mind from God. Both "Radical Son" and "Witness" should be assigned reading for all college students.
At first glance and thought, Communism does sound okay because it would seem nobody does without what he/she needs. But it is a chimera and cannot work in any environment because of the nature of human beings. There will always be that ambition in some; laziness in others; lust for power in many; and under Cmmunism, those true believers make it their God, which ends up in oppression, cruelty, and want. The environment does not exist in whichCommunism can flourish.
vaudine
Ahh, so the allies from the west had nothing to do with kicking Germany's butt. A very interesting take on history, I must say.
Perhaps overly stretched supply lines, a nearly endless supply of fresh meat (Russian soldiers) for the grinder, insane leadership at the top (Hitler), the Russian winter, Russians defending their homeland from invasion, and the Normandy invasion had a bit to do with Germany's position in 1945.
IIRC, Russia was still living basically in a feudal society until Czar Nicholas in the first part of the 20th century recognized the need to modernize.
Given all that you have left out of the equation, it is your premise and your conclusion that are flawed.
"Two boys are running. One is doing his very best at 8 sec. per 200 yards. The other needs to learn proper form but is doing his best at 8 1/2 secs. Which one gets the chance to be coached by the best? The one who has already reached his peak or the other who could improve much more after learning proper technique?"
This assumes both are perfroming at peak and that coaching would help the slower runner. Wouldn't the fairest thing be to simply award them both the exact same time? Affirmative action would.
Question: What do you call the transition state between Socialism and Communism?
Answer: Alcoholism.
I don't believe ANY human can run 200 yds in 8 seconds. Did ya do the math? I get 51 mph.
This is an invalid comparison as it relates to the actual performance of the two boys rather than their race. Affirmative Action isn't based on performance it is based on race counting.
Communism works in a professional military, because the servicemembers know what they're getting into, they join voluntarily, and if they decide that they don't like it, they can get out when their enlistment ends. That is the only way that you can have people surrender their freedoms, without a backlash against the government or a total crumbling of the economy. Communism does not work outside military establishments.
Communism stifles the creativity and drive of the individual. There is a reason the United States is so productive. Millions of entrepreneurs risk their capital and work 60-80 hours a week to produce, expand their business, and make a good life for their family. Why would anyone work and sacrifice so much if the system took most of it away?
ping
That would depend on how close the next track meet is.
Good point. It is good to read the first chapter of "Utopia in power" by Heller and Nekrich, where they describe remarkable growth of Russia prior to WWI.
On paper is the only place Communism works. The USSR controlled one sixth of the land surface of the Earth, they didn’t lack resources. Communist counties are poor and backward because of Communism not in spite of it.
So one student gave me this analogy from another teacher as an argument for Affirmative Action. Two boys are running. One is doing his very best at 8 sec. per 200 yards. The other needs to learn proper form but is doing his best at 8 1/2 secs. Which one gets the chance to be coached by the best? The one who has already reached his peak or the other who could improve much more after learning proper technique?
That’s what’s great here in America. In a free, market driven economy it’s not a zero sum game, both boys can get the “best” coaching if they have potential. An old bromide that seems to apply here: If a horse wants to run, someone will ride her.
"All the countries which tried it (Russia, China, etc.) were backward countries. She thought it might work in more working class countries."
It appears to work in countries with successful industrial infra-structure that the communists can pilfer. Not even Hitler took over successful private firms, like Krupp, Mauser, Porsche, etc. That way the prosperity and jobs continue and the totalitarians take the credit.
Rand's novels were and are still the best in terms of providing a visual, emotionally intensive experience of the consequences of ideas. I think of them as the virtual reality simulator of the consequences of economic and philosophic theory. They have tremendous impact on most people who read them - specifically besides Atlas Shrugged, I'm thinking of The Fountainhead, Anthem, and We the Living.
Tell your students we already do have a strained form of communism w/in our classrooms [which matches your above statement]. It's called dumbing down our students.
Educators aim at the lowest common denominater, thereby punishing the students at the top of the heap and slowing 'em all down, lest the self-esteem of some students is harmed. Actually, a pure form of communism might even be an improvement to the present classroom structure: At least then, all students would (in theory) be treated equal instead of trying of bring some students down to the level of those at the bottom. :)
Bump - communism and why I never vote (D).
These like minds always think alike.
Regarding the 2 boys running.
Capitalism encourages everyone to run as fast as they can because you get rewarded for running faster. Communism may be more "fair" but most everyone runs slower due to lack of incentive.
Also capitalism will train the slower boy if they think he has potential. In the NBA this happens all the time as a high schooler is often drafted ahead of a more accomplished college player.
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.