Texas A&M is having some issues

Just don't take the brown acid.

I used to be good friends with a girl that was friends/dating/screwing Wyatt at the time.

 

Good thing Aggies are nice people. They will forgive and try to be better going forward.

“An Aggie does not lie, cheat, or steal or tolerate those who do.”

(cough Dumbo cough).

The Regents and Chancellor John Sharp, a DINO, may not survive.

Hopefully Texas votes out Abbott in 2026.

 

The universities might be dominated by liberals, but I suspect that is because well educated, exceptional thinkers end up tending to be liberals. I spent eight years in college, getting a degree from Binghamton University and two degrees from UF. I cannot think of a single moment of indoctrination in any course I took. Maybe, the indoctrination was so subtle that it’s sitting somewhere in my subconscious. However, if you want to talk about indoctrination, all you have to do is take a good look at K through 12. In my days in K-12,indoctrination was by both omission and misrepresentations. I learned that the indigenous people of America were the bad guys and the white people that were committing genocide against them, moving them from their native lands, etc., were the good guys. I learned that the good old USA were the good guys in every conflict they’ve ever fought in. I didn’t learn that Japanese-Americans were interned in internment camps during World War II. I didn’t learn that the United States was turning away European Jews in the 1930s only to send them back to their deaths. I learned that the Americans fighting at the Alamo were heroes, and the Mexicans were the bad guys. I still to this day do not know exactly what happened between the United States and Mexico that allowed the US to expand its borders by taking control of California, Texas, New Mexico, maybe more. I probably should throw Florida into the mix. I didn’t learn about the horrors of slavery, although I knew there were slaves and Lincoln freed them, and we fought a Civil War over slavery. I didn’t learn there were slaves up in the mountains of New York, where I grew up. I learned that Christopher Columbus was a great hero. I didn’t learn about any of the bad stuff that he did. I am guessing that we could add all kinds of more stuff, but, the bottom line seems to me to be that there was a uniform indoctrination in K through 12 with the goal being to teach kids that the United States could do no wrong and was the greatest country on the face of the Earth. At least, in my opinion, we should have been taught the truth about these past events, so that we could have decided for ourselves about what was right and what was wrong. Today, in most Republican-controlled states, including in Florida, there seems to be an education goal of keeping kids in the dark about what really happened throughout our history. In other words, let’s go back to the good old days of how K through 12 were taught.

 

Too bad your New York education was so crappy. Mine from here in Florida was nothing like you described.

 

I am now a senior citizen. So, my K-12 schooling started sometime in the 50s and ran through the 60s. I am curious about what you learned with respect to the particular matters that I discussed in my post, because I was under the impression that what I was taught on the matters that I referred to in my post would have been what was taught throughout the country.

 

Actually he is doing a good job of rotting the tree from the inside out. I hope he stays there for a long time and keeps recruits out of Austin while still losing 6 games.

 

He had a tick.

 

Did your FL education not teach you about forming generalizations based on anecdotal evidence?

 

Was it drugs or lyme disease or both, perhaps?

 

Good thoughts. I wasn’t thinking specifically of indoctrination with my post, but it is a logical corollary to my point. I think that if we want to consider this angle, we will have some tough work ahead of us defining what is and what isn’t “indoctrination”. John Stuart Mill argued that all education systems will necessarily amount to indoctrination, and I think he has a point. What we teach must be inextricably linked to what we believe, and our beliefs are dependent upon many idiosyncratic factors, including culture, technology, and history. But students can only be in a class for a finite duration per week, so someone has to make the call on what we are to teach and not teach during these precious moments.

Since different people/groups have different viewpoints on what “really happened” in any given discipline, deciding who should set curricula is clearly a critical issue for us. It is my claim that the best answer to this problem is no one in particular. While I certainly don’t want Ron DeSantis alone deciding what our students should learn, I am really not much more inclined to entrust this task solely to Ibram X Kendi either. Both are going to give their particular subjective viewpoint on reality, and I think our best approach (of a bad lot) for achieving objectivity is to utilize a social system which includes many different viewpoints in order so each can be allowed to discover the biggest blind spots in the others. To this end, I think we want intellectual diversity included in our decision-making body, including liberals, libertarians, marxists, postmodernists, indigenous thinkers, critical race theorists, and also conservatives. The argument is somewhat laid out in this paper on social psychology from 2015:

Political diversity will improve social psychological science

 

Define drugs..

 

70s - early 80's in Florida were not that bad but the depth and the grisly details associated with American faults wasnt there. US was still the good guy but bad things sometimes happen approach. Just my experience.

 

That one I can help you with.
I visited Palo Alto National Battlefield near Brownsville Texas a couple summers ago. Breaks down like this, Texas and Mexico were at odds but there was no political will for President Polk to start a war. So, instead he set up a small force in a fort in a disputed area and basically dared the Mexican army to attack. They did but the US had a larger army pulled back that then entered the fight to defeat the Mexicans. President Polk then said "look, the Mexicans attacked us, this aggression will not stand man". So after a couple years, Mexico had a lot of irons in the fire and gave up and we got the SW part of the country including California. Up until the 1960's or 1970's there was still a disputed area in El Paso.

 

And a certain Congressman from Illinois was so outraged by the ploy to get the other guy to hit first that when he became President a few years later he duplicated the ploy by getting the Confederacy to hit first at Fort Sumter.

 

https://www.washingtonpost.com/hist...topher-columbus-his-men-could-not-annihilate/ I didn’t learn about the attached in K-12.

 

shouldn’t you be asking that to the poster I responded to?
But to answer yes my Florida education taught that. And?

 

I guess the lesson did not stick.

 

WTF are you talking about?

 

Your swipe at Tampa's education in NY

 

Oh please. He was openly bitching about it.