Posted on 02/18/2014 5:33:32 AM PST by Kaslin
What is a leftist supposed to do when history doesnt perfectly fit their ideological narrative? Well If youre in charge of creating textbooks for college students, you just write your own version of historical events. And while youre at it, throw in a few editorial comments cleverly disguised as facts. Apparently, the end result should look something like the textbook that a University of South Carolina student was required to read. In a nutshell, it explained that Ronald Reagan was a sexist, that Conservatives hate people, and that the rich like to exploit the lower classes because they dont want to rake their own yards Or something.
CampusReform.org reported the story of Orwellian indoctrination on the Universitys campus (I know, I know Nobodys surprised). According to Campus Reform:
The mandated reading includes sections such as Conservative Extremes in the 1980s and Early 1990s, which claims Reagan ascribed to women primarily domestic functions and failed to appoint many women to significant positions of power during his presidency.
Conservative Extremes? Is that what we call it when a President gets elected with 489 electoral votes? Oh, and for the record, Reagan appointed over 1,400 women to positions of power; including Sandra Day OConnor (first female Supreme Court Justice), and Jeane Kirkpatrick (First female US Rep. appointed to the United Nations) But I guess neither one of those are significant positions of power. (I mean, really, who cares about the first female Supreme Court Justice? Right?)
But, it gets worse. The textbook then makes an attempt to define conservatism. I guess we should be thankful they didnt put a picture of Ted Nugent wearing a tin-foil hat holding an AR-15. (Nothing against the Nuge Im a huge fan.) The definition was, however, pretty cartoonish:
Conservatives usually oppose change and thrive on tradition. Conservatives tend to take a basically pessimistic view of human nature. People are conceived of as being corrupt, self-centered, lazy and incapable of true charity.
Pessimistic? Well Im beginning to get that way, if this text is typical of university enlightenment. Its true: socialism is a morale buster for free-market advocates. So Yeah. Euro socialist entitlement programs bum me out a little.
As for the rest of the texts definition Well, lets address this piecemeal:
Corrupt? Is there really an argument that corruption exists? To argue that corruption is a minimal risk in any institution is bordering on ignorance of incomprehensible proportions. Conservatives dont believe everyone is corrupt But then again, it doesnt take everyone in the IRS to target the political opponents of the President. The simple fact is, there will always be a degree of corruption. Conservative philosophy hinges on minimizing governments influence over daily life so corruption (to any degree) is incapable of infringing on the rights of average citizens. (After all, its a lot harder to misuse government resources when there are less resources to misuse.)
Self-Centered? So
Did the authors of this text book read the footnotes of Ayn Rands Atlas Shrugged and scrape together a cartoonish definition of objectivism for their well-documented indoctrination educational material? I guess I wasnt ever made aware that all my neighbors were looking out for my family. I kinda thought people went to work and saved so they could provide their own families with comfort and opportunity
Lazy? Well Only when sloth is subsidized. Its kinda tough to argue that anyone would turn down more money for less work Especially when youre being promised more of other peoples money. But lazy still seems like a strong word. Especially when a robust economy (in the minds of Conservatives) depend upon masses of motivated hard working middle-class folks trying to climb their way to success.
By far, the most insulting few words in this passage had to be the supposedly conservative beliefe that people are incapable of true charity. The truth is, Conservatives believe intensely in the charitable nature of average Americans. In fact, it is the fundamental decency of human nature that propels the faith in Laissez Faire economics. Private charity, raised through the goodwill of individuals, has traditionally proven to be far more effective than cumbersome bureaucratic wealth redistribution. In fact, government charity is non-existent; it is a confiscation scheme orchestrated to reallocate private property to key political constituencies. True private charity is a gesture of benevolence, among members of a community, without the coercive and invasive nature of government force.
Oh And by the way, this is why wealth creation is a good thing. You know all those rich people that are demonized by the left? Yeah Theyre the ones who have the monetary capital to contribute to good causes.
Which brings us to the final stage of the textbooks Orwellian trifecta Heck, theyve already re-written Reagans Presidency, redefined Conservatism, whats one more factual edit? (Karl Marx may deserve co-author credit for the following passage.)
The wealthy find that having a social class of poor people is useful. First, poor people can do the dirty work for rich people that the latter dont want to do Second, having a poor social class emphasizes that the wealthy are higher in the social-structure . . . and allows them to look down on classes below them.
Yeah Poor people are useful. Of course, so are rich people (AKA: employers). The insinuation that the rich enjoy being rich so they can look down on the other classes may be plagiarized from Marxs Capital The Euro-socialist trash pushed through these handful of sentences should be sickening for Americans who have grown up in a nation with unparalleled income mobility. While the leftists and progressives concentrate on class structure, conservatives focus on the ability to move upward on the socioeconomic ladder.
Who likes class structure? Leftists. Only by demonizing the rich, can the Bill de Blasios of the world create a political class. And what exactly is the alternative to a world with classes? (Oh, how did the Soviet model turn out? From what I remember, it wasnt such a big hit.) The rich like the poor because they can employ them And the poor generally have the rich to thank for employment. You want to start a business? You better hope a rich guy decides to invest, directly or indirectly, in your start-up. Youre going to have a tough time raising capital from the impoverished.
The Ministry of Truth is hard at work on the University of South Carolina campus. Remember when half the country called themselves Conservative? Remember when Reagan was elected in a landslide? Remember when textbooks were used as a tool to educate instead of indoctrinate? Remember when Orwells 1984 was considered far-fetched science fiction? Maybe the textbook was right
Maybe I really dont like change.
They got Reagan mixed up with Carter.
Obviously
Ping!
We have the same book being used here in TX!
Marxist propaganda. Target audience: Useful idiots.
Mitch Daniels will take care of that. Send the book to Indiana.
Do you want one or two scoops of mush for your head?
Party ownership of the print media
made it easy to manipulate public opinion,
and the film and radio carried the process further.
....... The Ministry of Truth, Winston's place of work, contained, it was said, three thousand rooms above ground level, and corresponding ramifications below. The Ministry of Truth concerned itself with Lies. Party ownership of the print media made it easy to manipulate public opinion, and the film and radio carried the process further. The primary job of the Ministry of Truth was to supply the citizens of Oceania with newspapers, films, textbooks, telescreen programmes, plays, novels - with every conceivable kind of information, instruction, or entertainment, from a statue to a slogan, from a lyric poem to a biological treatise, and from a child's spelling-book to a Newspeak dictionary. Winston worked in the RECORDS DEPARTMENT (a single branch of the Ministry of Truth) editing and writing for The Times. He dictated into a machine called a speakwrite. Winston would receive articles or news-items which for one reason or another it was thought necessary to alter, or, in Newspeak, rectify. If, for example, the Ministry of Plenty forecast a surplus, and in reality the result was grossly less, Winston's job was to change previous versions so the old version would agree with the new one. This process of continuous alteration was applied not only to newspapers, but to books, periodicals, pamphlets, posters, leaflets, films, sound-tracks, cartoons, photographs - to every kind of literature or documentation which might conceivably hold any political or ideological significance. When his day's work started, Winston pulled the speakwrite towards him, blew the dust from its mouthpiece, and put on his spectacles. He dialed 'back numbers' on the telescreen and called for the appropriate issues of The Times, which slid out of the pneumatic tube after only a few minutes' delay. The messages he had received referred to articles or news-items which for one reason or another it was thought necessary to rectify. In the walls of the cubicle there were three orifices. To the right of the speakwrite, a small pneumatic tube for written messages; to the left, a larger one for newspapers; and on the side wall, within easy reach of Winston's arm, a large oblong slit protected by a wire grating. This last was for the disposal of waste paper. Similar slits existed in thousands or tens of thousands throughout the building, not only in every room but at short intervals in every corridor. For some reason they were nicknamed memory holes. When one knew that any document was due for destruction, or even when one saw a scrap of waste paper lying about, it was an automatic action to lift the flap of the nearest memory hole and drop it in, whereupon it would be whirled away on a current of warm air to the enormous furnaces which were hidden somewhere in the recesses of the building. As soon as Winston had dealt with each of the messages, he clipped his speakwritten corrections to the appropriate copy of The Times and pushed them into the pneumatic tube. Then, with a movement which was as nearly as possible unconscious, he crumpled up the original message and any notes that he himself had made, and dropped them into the memory hole to be devoured by the flames. What happened in the unseen labyrinth to which the tubes led, he did not know in detail, but he did know in general terms. As soon as all the corrections which happened to be necessary in any particular number of The Times had been assembled and collated, that number would be reprinted, the original copy destroyed, and the corrected copy placed on the files in its stead. In the cubicle next to him the little woman with sandy hair toiled day in day out, simply at tracking down and deleting from the Press the names of people who had been vaporized and were therefore considered never to have existed. And this hall, with its fifty workers or thereabouts, was only one-sub-section, a single cell, as it were, in the huge complexity of the Records Department. Beyond, above, below, were other swarms of workers engaged in an unimaginable multitude of jobs. There were huge printing-shops and their sub editors, their typography experts, and their elaborately equipped studios for the faking of photographs. There was the tele-programmes section with its engineers, its producers and its teams of actors specially chosen for their skill in imitating voices; clerks whose job was simply to draw up lists of books and periodicals which were due for recall; vast repositories where the corrected documents were stored; and the hidden furnaces where the original copies were destroyed. And somewhere or other, quite anonymous, there were the directing brains who co-ordinated the whole effort and laid down the lines of policy which made it necessary that this fragment of the past should be preserved, that one falsified, and the other rubbed out of existence. |
Why?
Are any of your taxes supporting the use of it?
I don’t know that the text book is being used in the town in which I live. I don’t have any grandchildren in school here.
I am near Austin, which is of course a blue dot on red state-—but I’ve met very few liberals in my town.
I have no idea if any of my taxes are supporting the use of this textbook. If they are, do you know of a way I can get my money refunded?
Seems to me that it’s the family’s responsibility to be aware of what their kids are being taught and if they don’t like it, to do something about it. They can also correct any disinformation their children are being taught if they take enough interest in their kids to find out.
Textbooks always like to point out that prior to Columbus everyone believed the world was flat. That is total BS and can be proven. However, that will be stated countless times in courses across the board when demonstrating an example of logic for the liberal.
What is being done about this?
Is anyone DEMANDING that the people responsible be fired and never again placed in a position of power in the school system?
Has the book been removed from the class?
How did this book get approved in the first place?
It not OK to just @itch and moan about this stuff. Concrete actions have to be taken. Here is what usually happens- this kind of BS is discovered, people throw a fit, there MAY be a lame apology, the book MAY be withdrawn (temporarily). People forget and soon the book becomes widely used.
Listen to Reagan’s speeches about America - those aren’t pessimistic (unless you are a statist-loving schmuck).
What is the book???
Poll needs freeping:
Should kindergarten attendance be mandatory?
Scroll down right side of page.
It ain't about money: but lies. Do whatever it takes to STOP lies from being pumped into children's heads: whether they be from your loins or of others.
It ain't about money: but lies. Do whatever it takes to STOP lies from being pumped into children's heads: whether they be from your loins or of others.
Of COURSE!!!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HnY-Ft7F9eo
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.