Lewis Lapham, when not being a boorish pseudo-intellectual poseur has apparently developed magical powers over space and time and was able to witness the Republican National Convention a month before it actually took place.
Now that Mr. Lapham has developed such skills, perhaps he can work on learning why a series of trite ad hominems do not constitute being particular observant or wise – he seems to have trouble with this.
If you want to see a lab specimen of decadent liberalism, read one of Lapham’s essays in Harper’s (a long-established and once-important journal that, under his tutelage, has become a laughingstock). His diatribes don’t stand up to any serious analysis, but he relies for making his points on a “literary” style.
Literary or not, it’s awful: absurd metaphors, oh-so-clever linguistic monkeyshines, loopy invective. He doesn’t demonstrate anything or make a case for anything, just assumes that you, dear reader, are among the pure in heart like him so there’s no need to justify what he writes.
But he’s what most of our so-called intelligentsia seem to look up to these days: a superficial ability to manipulate words masking an inability to analyze evidence. The ’60s radical mentality has, indeed, made the long march through our cultural institutions.
The ‘60s radical mentality has, indeed, made the long march through our cultural institutions.
Yeah, surprise! While Republicans were pissing on ideas like a free press and widespread quality education for the past couple of decades, liberals were there making it happen. As a result, you guys got shut out in the cold.
Seriously I’d have a little more sympathy for Republican claims of “liberal media” and “liberal academics” if they hadn’t considered these institutions beneath contempt for so long.
Yes, look at how much the quality of education has improved as liberal Democrats have taken over the system…
Education, like nearly everything else, has gone down the tubes as the left has tried to federalize and control it.
Yes, look at how much the quality of education has improved as liberal Democrats have taken over the system…
You mean, how our colleges and universities are considered the best in the world, bar none?
At any rate, back on track, it is so hilarious that this leftist author has actually already penned his article covering the RNC. That is pretty pathetic and clearly shows that he writes with a predisposed bias.
apparently you fail to distinguish between our college and university system and the public school system that serves the kindergarten through secondary school ages.
The public K-12 system has not, to my knowledge, been repeatedly and pointedly accused of being the subject of “liberal infiltration”, nor are these schools generally considered “hotbets of liberal indoctrination”.
So, in other words, I wasn’t talking about them, and I don’t think Rick Darby was, either.
The problem is that the statement you rebutted was not from Rick Darby’s post, but from Jay Reding’s post!
…which was a response to mine, AT, where I made reference to that old Republican chestnut about “liberals in the colleges”, etc.
I wasn’t talking about K-12, because nobody accuses those of being iron-clad bastions of liberalism. Jay talking about K-12 was a non sequiter.
Seriously. Learn to read, or whatever.
However, I will say that even the K-12 school system has indeed been too heavily influenced by liberals and liberalism…
Do you think that its a symptom of “liberalism” in schools when the School Board says that biology teachers have to teach science and religion on an equal basis, for instance?
but the bottom line is that you still were responding to Jay’s statement, which did not in any way confine itself to the college and university system.
Right, but Rick Darby’s and my statements did. Before Jay’s statements.
It’s obvious that Rick and I were talking about the university system. Jay’s comment, if he was referring to K-12, was a non sequiter. And note that he wasn’t specific. His comments referred to the education system in general. I proved them false with a counterexample.
First, when you write about biology teachers having to teach science and religion on an equal basis, I presume you mean teaching evolution and creationism on an equal basis. You should be more precise in your use of language.
I was sufficiently precise. Evolution is science and creationism is religion. Your objection is an irrelevancy and does not in any way diminish my point – the existence of creationism in some schools is evidence that there is not a universal liberal slant to our schools.
Let’s try to stay on that topic…
Oh, so now you’re the topic police, too?
Yeah, that NEA sure is a conservative bunch…
Yeah, that NEA sure is a conservative bunch…
Feel free to explain how you derived the political stance of every American teacher from the political leanings of one labor union.