Thomas Frank: What's the Matter with Liberals?

[WMS]

Re: the failings of American educational systems:

In my school, it was possible to get a good education...if you took the 'honors' or 'enriched' level classes, that is. (If you took the 'regular' level classes...eh.)

Know what the local liberals are doing here? They're eliminating all of the honors and enriched classes and forcing everyone into regular classes. They claim it's so that the rest of the students can benefit from the same level of education, or that all students will have the same level of education, or some dippy left-wing theory of the local lefty College of Education. What they will actually do, of course, is drag down everyone's level of education and make it so everyone is mediocre together.

You think it's bad now...

Those aren't liberals. You can stop your liberal bashing now.

Then who are they? It is the left-leaning members of the local school board who support this, and the local school unions who back this and the local College of Education are both very left-wing.

In your defense, the only member who comes out and says that this is idiotic is a moderate Democrat...

[○∙◄☻¥tπ[╪AV┼cVê└]

Re: the failings of American educational systems:

In my school, it was possible to get a good education...if you took the 'honors' or 'enriched' level classes, that is. (If you took the 'regular' level classes...eh.)

Know what the local liberals are doing here? They're eliminating all of the honors and enriched classes and forcing everyone into regular classes. They claim it's so that the rest of the students can benefit from the same level of education, or that all students will have the same level of education, or some dippy left-wing theory of the local lefty College of Education. What they will actually do, of course, is drag down everyone's level of education and make it so everyone is mediocre together.

You think it's bad now...

Those aren't liberals. You can stop your liberal bashing now.

Then who are they? It is the left-leaning members of the local school board who support this, and the local school unions who back this and the local College of Education are both very left-wing.

In your defense, the only member who comes out and says that this is idiotic is a moderate Democrat...

Well, I strongly support tracking, because I'm a meritocracy liberal.

[opebo]

Neither downplayed nor ignored.  Just misunderstood.  I blame the schools.  And they're largely run by "liberals" so yes, I guess I blame the "liberals"

You feed the schoolkids a diet of processed fatty foods and constant political correctness, and you end up with a generation of hapless overweight geeks who decide they want to become "feminists"  That's just reality, man.  And bitching about it won't solve the problem. 

I also think there's some duplicity.  Flyers makes a good point.  But keep in mind that both sides are guilty of this sort of aggrandizing.  But as I pointed out in the Krugman thread, and Dazzleman points out here, this is typical of "liberal logic", or to use Frank's own words, they simply "misunderstand" the problem.  And it's going to get worse before it gets better.  That's one view I have acquired from posting here and reading posts.  The posters are mostly from the under-30 crowd, so it's a nice window on the failings of the American educational systems.

So what is this 'political correctness' you speak of?  The unwillingess to consider the possibility that socio-economic class is the most predictive factor in a person's life?  How about the idea that non-rich individuals have little power to change their position in the social heirarhcy?  Those sound like the real taboo topics in our present poltical climate.

By contrast saying blacks are genetically inferior, or that gays are perverted and damned, is actually widely accepted.  I think you are about 30 years out of date on your definition of political correctness.

[Starbucks Union Thug HokeyPuck]

Thomas Frank is an excellent writer. Of course, he's biased, but for the most part his analyses are good.

He's not biased, he's right.  As liberal America almost always is. 

[WMS]

Re: the failings of American educational systems:

In my school, it was possible to get a good education...if you took the 'honors' or 'enriched' level classes, that is. (If you took the 'regular' level classes...eh.)

Know what the local liberals are doing here? They're eliminating all of the honors and enriched classes and forcing everyone into regular classes. They claim it's so that the rest of the students can benefit from the same level of education, or that all students will have the same level of education, or some dippy left-wing theory of the local lefty College of Education. What they will actually do, of course, is drag down everyone's level of education and make it so everyone is mediocre together.

You think it's bad now...

Those aren't liberals. You can stop your liberal bashing now.

Then who are they? It is the left-leaning members of the local school board who support this, and the local school unions who back this and the local College of Education are both very left-wing.

In your defense, the only member who comes out and says that this is idiotic is a moderate Democrat...

Well, I strongly support tracking, because I'm a meritocracy liberal.

Ah, got it. Well, not your type of liberal is being referred to then...

[○∙◄☻¥tπ[╪AV┼cVê└]

Re: the failings of American educational systems:

In my school, it was possible to get a good education...if you took the 'honors' or 'enriched' level classes, that is. (If you took the 'regular' level classes...eh.)

Know what the local liberals are doing here? They're eliminating all of the honors and enriched classes and forcing everyone into regular classes. They claim it's so that the rest of the students can benefit from the same level of education, or that all students will have the same level of education, or some dippy left-wing theory of the local lefty College of Education. What they will actually do, of course, is drag down everyone's level of education and make it so everyone is mediocre together.

You think it's bad now...

Those aren't liberals. You can stop your liberal bashing now.

Then who are they? It is the left-leaning members of the local school board who support this, and the local school unions who back this and the local College of Education are both very left-wing.

In your defense, the only member who comes out and says that this is idiotic is a moderate Democrat...

Well, I strongly support tracking, because I'm a meritocracy liberal.

Ah, got it. Well, not your type of liberal is being referred to then...

If you're against meritocracy, you're not a liberal. If you're for a meritocracy you'd better be

1. For affordable education high quality education for students who are doing well, this includes college
2. For a large estate tax
3. Against inside connections/deals/trading/no-bid contracts

[angus]

So what is this 'political correctness' you speak of? 

the four-post conversation immediately preceding yours is a fine example.  of course, the most salient feature of that conversation is that they made some assumptions about each other that turned out to be false, which is not uncommon in our Label-driven thinking, and it's worthy of dicussion as well, but the brief conversation also gives a pretty good example of the political incorrectness of tracking.  Like WMS and Jfern, I also think tracking is a fine idea, by the way.  jfern and WMS and I probably agree on other things as well, but polictical correctness, lack of critical thinking, and, of course, complementary labels (not unlike Pepsi and Cocacola) get in the way.

also, yes, I do think there are things that are fashionable to say, and things that are unfashionable to say, and it has nothing whatsoever to do with accuracy.  this is unfortunate.  I consider Krugman, like myself, Howard Dean, StatesRights (the poster), and a handful of others willing to buck that trend.  And as you can see, the Politically Incorrect come from all points of the Compass.  I only bash "liberals" because it's fun.  And I only use the quotation marks to make sure you understand that by "liberal" I don't mean Liberal (e.g., PDF or Free-Market types, not unlike me and, in many instances yourself), but rather what some of those tests call "American Liberal" which is hardly Liberal in the Jeffersonian (or German or Scandanavian) sense.

[angus]

Thomas Frank is an excellent writer. Of course, he's biased, but for the most part his analyses are good.

He's not biased, he's right.  As liberal America almost always is. 

LOL, that is one of the stupidest things I've heard on this forum to date. I suggest you stop believing your own propaganda. Open your mind a little bit, and stop being such an ignorant fool.

Bob is developing nicely as a slightly more irreverent version of Carlhayden, the Least Democrat Democrat.

[opebo]

  Like WMS and Jfern, I also think tracking is a fine idea, by the way.  jfern and WMS and I probably agree on other things as well, but polictical correctness, lack of critical thinking...

I'm not sure what 'tracking' is honestly, but if I had to guess I would say it is pigeonholing children into educational tracks very early in life.  I abhor this idea - the obvious result would be to close any hope of class mobility (though education is mostly a false hope).  Every little lower class child would be sent to mechanic's courses or taught how to obey orders and cook food or mop the floor, while the little upper-middle-class children (probably at a different public school) would be prepared for college.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

My point was that the predominant 'political correctness' of 2005 is  conservative and religious, not liberal or secular. 

[angus]

My point was that the predominant 'political correctness' of 2005 is  conservative and religious, not liberal or secular. 

My god man!  That statement, in and of itself, is about as politically correct a thing as I can imagine.  (of  course what is PC in some circles such as the ones you like, may be anathematic in others, and vice-versa, but that's all part of the idiocy of political correctness in the first place.  part, of course, but not all.)

[opebo]

My point was that the predominant 'political correctness' of 2005 is  conservative and religious, not liberal or secular. 

My god man!  That statement, in and of itself, is about as politically correct a thing as I can imagine.  (of  course what is PC in some circles such as the ones you like, may be anathematic in others, and vice-versa, but that's all part of the idiocy of political correctness in the first place.  part, of course, but not all.)

I don't see how identifying your opponents political philosophy, and recognizing its ascendancy, is 'politically correct'.  It is merely observing reality!

[WMS]

Re: the failings of American educational systems:

In my school, it was possible to get a good education...if you took the 'honors' or 'enriched' level classes, that is. (If you took the 'regular' level classes...eh.)

Know what the local liberals are doing here? They're eliminating all of the honors and enriched classes and forcing everyone into regular classes. They claim it's so that the rest of the students can benefit from the same level of education, or that all students will have the same level of education, or some dippy left-wing theory of the local lefty College of Education. What they will actually do, of course, is drag down everyone's level of education and make it so everyone is mediocre together.

You think it's bad now...

Those aren't liberals. You can stop your liberal bashing now.

Then who are they? It is the left-leaning members of the local school board who support this, and the local school unions who back this and the local College of Education are both very left-wing.

In your defense, the only member who comes out and says that this is idiotic is a moderate Democrat...

Well, I strongly support tracking, because I'm a meritocracy liberal.

Ah, got it. Well, not your type of liberal is being referred to then...

If you're against meritocracy, you're not a liberal. If you're for a meritocracy you'd better be

1. For affordable education high quality education for students who are doing well, this includes college
2. For a large estate tax
3. Against inside connections/deals/trading/no-bid contracts

Perhaps my local Democrats are defective...
As for your points:
1. Pretty much agree - access to education (but no affirmitive action based on race/gender/etc. please; although some by economic need is OK) is one of my more 'liberal' points, since keeping people uneducated doesn't do anyone any good.
2. Partial agreement - while I don't support getting rid of it altogether, I would significantly raise the floor under which you don't get taxed so the genuine 'family businesses' don't have to be sold off instead of inherited.
3. Pretty much agree with these.

Wow, we've become an angus case study.

[○∙◄☻¥tπ[╪AV┼cVê└]

  Like WMS and Jfern, I also think tracking is a fine idea, by the way.  jfern and WMS and I probably agree on other things as well, but polictical correctness, lack of critical thinking...

I'm not sure what 'tracking' is honestly, but if I had to guess I would say it is pigeonholing children into educational tracks very early in life.  I abhor this idea - the obvious result would be to close any hope of class mobility (though education is mostly a false hope).  Every little lower class child would be sent to mechanic's courses or taught how to obey orders and cook food or mop the floor, while the little upper-middle-class children (probably at a different public school) would be prepared for college.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

My point was that the predominant 'political correctness' of 2005 is  conservative and religious, not liberal or secular. 

Tracking shouldn't be determining everything about a child's future in life when they're 5. Tracking is allowing smarter students to take more advanced courses.

[Beet]

Re: the failings of American educational systems:

In my school, it was possible to get a good education...if you took the 'honors' or 'enriched' level classes, that is. (If you took the 'regular' level classes...eh.)

Know what the local liberals are doing here? They're eliminating all of the honors and enriched classes and forcing everyone into regular classes. They claim it's so that the rest of the students can benefit from the same level of education, or that all students will have the same level of education, or some dippy left-wing theory of the local lefty College of Education. What they will actually do, of course, is drag down everyone's level of education and make it so everyone is mediocre together.

You think it's bad now...

Those aren't liberals. You can stop your liberal bashing now.

Then who are they? It is the left-leaning members of the local school board who support this, and the local school unions who back this and the local College of Education are both very left-wing.

In your defense, the only member who comes out and says that this is idiotic is a moderate Democrat...

Well, I strongly support tracking, because I'm a meritocracy liberal.

Ah, got it. Well, not your type of liberal is being referred to then...

My school was very liberal from an extremel liberal area and it was highly divided between honors/advanced versus regular classes. The main complaint was not so much that there was a differentiation there, but that the differentiation was not nearly what it could have been. For example, the main difference in quality of the courses was not their content, but the character of one's peers. This also suggests that the proposals of who you call the liberals at your school would be intrinsically impossible, and that the problem comes at a more basic level.

[angus]

My point was that the predominant 'political correctness' of 2005 is  conservative and religious, not liberal or secular. 

My god man!  That statement, in and of itself, is about as politically correct a thing as I can imagine.  (of  course what is PC in some circles such as the ones you like, may be anathematic in others, and vice-versa, but that's all part of the idiocy of political correctness in the first place.  part, of course, but not all.)

I don't see how identifying your opponents political philosophy, and recognizing its ascendancy, is 'politically correct'.  It is merely observing reality!

well, if you perceive an objective reality, but I suspect if we persue this line of reasoning you'll soon contradict yourself, since I don't imagine you do.  Anyway, well, by your own admission you're not exaggerating, so apparently you believe that tripe about "the ascendance of theocracy" and fascism.  Still, whether you choose to admit it or not, there's also a "liberal" political correctness.  Jeezus, I can't believe I'd ever have to type that last sentence in a serious explanation of anything.  some truths, we hold, to borrow a phrase from The Founders, "to be self-evident"  Remember, I'm the rare Sharpton Republican.  So I hedge just enough to observe bullshiit from both sides.  Yes, the thought-controlling Right has its own brand of PC, but surely you recognize that so does the thought-controlling Left.

[angus]

so you're a disaffected closet democrat?  that's cool.  I used to be.

[dazzleman]

so you're a disaffected closet democrat?  that's cool.  I used to be.

Dude, I like that....disaffected closet democrat.  That's what many in my family were before they decided there was no point in it, and switched to Republican.  Actually, what they were closeted about was the level of their disaffection with the party.

[WMS]

Re: the failings of American educational systems:

In my school, it was possible to get a good education...if you took the 'honors' or 'enriched' level classes, that is. (If you took the 'regular' level classes...eh.)

Know what the local liberals are doing here? They're eliminating all of the honors and enriched classes and forcing everyone into regular classes. They claim it's so that the rest of the students can benefit from the same level of education, or that all students will have the same level of education, or some dippy left-wing theory of the local lefty College of Education. What they will actually do, of course, is drag down everyone's level of education and make it so everyone is mediocre together.

You think it's bad now...

Those aren't liberals. You can stop your liberal bashing now.

Then who are they? It is the left-leaning members of the local school board who support this, and the local school unions who back this and the local College of Education are both very left-wing.

In your defense, the only member who comes out and says that this is idiotic is a moderate Democrat...

Well, I strongly support tracking, because I'm a meritocracy liberal.

Ah, got it. Well, not your type of liberal is being referred to then...

My school was very liberal from an extremel liberal area and it was highly divided between honors/advanced versus regular classes. The main complaint was not so much that there was a differentiation there, but that the differentiation was not nearly what it could have been. For example, the main difference in quality of the courses was not their content, but the character of one's peers. This also suggests that the proposals of who you call the liberals at your school would be intrinsically impossible, and that the problem comes at a more basic level.

I'll take 'Basic Idiocy' for $100.

Interesting. When I was in high school, there definitely was a difference in the content of the courses - I learned a good deal about how to write by taking the Honors English classes...and to blow my own horn, it got me a 5 on the English Advanced Placement Test. The 5's I got on the American History and European History AP Tests were helped somewhat but not as much by my classes. Ah, I enjoyed getting 6 free classes' worth of college credit out of that. Anyway, the quality of the classes was different, and it mattered.

[Beet]

Re: the failings of American educational systems:

In my school, it was possible to get a good education...if you took the 'honors' or 'enriched' level classes, that is. (If you took the 'regular' level classes...eh.)

Know what the local liberals are doing here? They're eliminating all of the honors and enriched classes and forcing everyone into regular classes. They claim it's so that the rest of the students can benefit from the same level of education, or that all students will have the same level of education, or some dippy left-wing theory of the local lefty College of Education. What they will actually do, of course, is drag down everyone's level of education and make it so everyone is mediocre together.

You think it's bad now...

Those aren't liberals. You can stop your liberal bashing now.

Then who are they? It is the left-leaning members of the local school board who support this, and the local school unions who back this and the local College of Education are both very left-wing.

In your defense, the only member who comes out and says that this is idiotic is a moderate Democrat...

Well, I strongly support tracking, because I'm a meritocracy liberal.

Ah, got it. Well, not your type of liberal is being referred to then...

My school was very liberal from an extremel liberal area and it was highly divided between honors/advanced versus regular classes. The main complaint was not so much that there was a differentiation there, but that the differentiation was not nearly what it could have been. For example, the main difference in quality of the courses was not their content, but the character of one's peers. This also suggests that the proposals of who you call the liberals at your school would be intrinsically impossible, and that the problem comes at a more basic level.

I'll take 'Basic Idiocy' for $100.

Interesting. When I was in high school, there definitely was a difference in the content of the courses - I learned a good deal about how to write by taking the Honors English classes...and to blow my own horn, it got me a 5 on the English Advanced Placement Test. The 5's I got on the American History and European History AP Tests were helped somewhat but not as much by my classes. Ah, I enjoyed getting 6 free classes' worth of college credit out of that. Anyway, the quality of the classes was different, and it mattered.

That is interesting, I got a 5 on the AP Euro test from taking the class, but decided during registration to take the AP American history test and got a 5 on that as well. The AP classes are a little different because the teachers usually will try to tailor the course specifically around the test. But it's not necessary to take the course to take the test.

Basically, even with AP, I think the standards at public education are waaay too low. Yes there are people who behave like basic idiots but I believe most of that *is* due to the system they've been through, as well as general social expectations and mores. The question is, are people happier with low standards? Would raising standards "deprive" students of their childhood? No. J.S. Mill is an example of a deprived childhood. He was doing dissertation-level work by age 13. What I'm proposing is to cut out some of the fat at the K-9 level. In the long run most students would be grateful because we're not wasting such a huge part of their lives. Its better that they learn more when they are young and still have options than to figure things out later.

[WMS]

My school was very liberal from an extremel liberal area and it was highly divided between honors/advanced versus regular classes. The main complaint was not so much that there was a differentiation there, but that the differentiation was not nearly what it could have been. For example, the main difference in quality of the courses was not their content, but the character of one's peers. This also suggests that the proposals of who you call the liberals at your school would be intrinsically impossible, and that the problem comes at a more basic level.

I'll take 'Basic Idiocy' for $100.

Interesting. When I was in high school, there definitely was a difference in the content of the courses - I learned a good deal about how to write by taking the Honors English classes...and to blow my own horn, it got me a 5 on the English Advanced Placement Test. The 5's I got on the American History and European History AP Tests were helped somewhat but not as much by my classes. Ah, I enjoyed getting 6 free classes' worth of college credit out of that. Anyway, the quality of the classes was different, and it mattered.

That is interesting, I got a 5 on the AP Euro test from taking the class, but decided during registration to take the AP American history test and got a 5 on that as well. The AP classes are a little different because the teachers usually will try to tailor the course specifically around the test. But it's not necessary to take the course to take the test.

Basically, even with AP, I think the standards at public education are waaay too low. Yes there are people who behave like basic idiots but I believe most of that *is* due to the system they've been through, as well as general social expectations and mores. The question is, are people happier with low standards? Would raising standards "deprive" students of their childhood? No. J.S. Mill is an example of a deprived childhood. He was doing dissertation-level work by age 13. What I'm proposing is to cut out some of the fat at the K-9 level. In the long run most students would be grateful because we're not wasting such a huge part of their lives. Its better that they learn more when they are young and still have options than to figure things out later.

Agreed on the AP stuff. The classes I took certainly helped with the test, but weren't tailored around it. And congratulations, late.

I completely agree with you on raising school standards. The problem is caused by the 'self-esteem' and 'politically correct' loons who consider higher educational standards either cruel or bigoted. And then there's the Falwell nuts on top of them, and so on. And all the parents who don't consider education important. You get the picture.

[Secretary of State Liberal Hack]

Political discourse almost never changes, you could take this thread, change a few names, and nobody would be able to tell it's from 2005.

[Bootes Void]

They were talking about busing and the public school system which is honestly no different than what you hear out of SF.

[PSOL]

From “meritocracy liberal” to anti-Democratic Party Socialist, Jfern went through quite a large political transformation these past 15 years

[Benjamin Frank]

One thing has changed. Back then, it was liberal elitism to tax hard working Americans to pay welfare to people so that they wouldn't have to relocate to start over.

Now, it's coastal liberal elitism to tell people that rather than remaining in their economically depressed towns in the south or midwest that they need to relocate to start over.

[RINO Tom]

One thing has changed. Back then, it was liberal elitism to tax hard working Americans to pay welfare to people so that they wouldn't have to relocate to start over.

Now, it's coastal liberal elitism to tell people that rather than remaining in their economically depressed towns in the south or midwest that they need to relocate to start over.

So both sides are hilarious hypocrites with no intrinsic values?  Agreed.  If you wanted to help welfare recipients be able to stay, you should want to help those in declining towns be able to stay.  Period.