Do Schools Have Liberal Bias?

[The Xenopolis Confederation]

Yes, yes! Schools are terribly left-wing biased, and most of their focus is making students part of the liberal PC hivemind. That's why sensible, conservative students, who can discern hard fact from socialist propaganda, should leave schools asap and pursue education on their own, so to learn the unbiased truth and actually marketable skills.

I'm doing my part.
I'm a part time/substitute teacher who indoctrinates innocent kids with the liberal agenda every school day... those Soros checks sure come in handy

But nah. Fact over fiction, science over religion, logic and reason over conclusively disproven dogma like 'trickle down'.

Neither left-wing ideology nor right wing ideology is "fact" or "fiction." They're ideologies. Nor is one or the other inherently scientific or inherently religious. And trickle down economics is something no one actually believes.

[Kowani]

I'm doing my part.
I'm a part time/substitute teacher who indoctrinates innocent kids with the liberal agenda every school day... those Soros checks sure come in handy

But nah. Fact over fiction, science over religion, logic and reason over conclusively disproven dogma like 'trickle down'.

Neither left-wing ideology nor right wing ideology is "fact" or "fiction." They're ideologies. Nor is one or the other inherently scientific or inherently religious. And trickle down economics is something no one actually believes.

…How much do you know about American politics?

[Tombradyonia]

I'm doing my part.
I'm a part time/substitute teacher who indoctrinates innocent kids with the liberal agenda every school day... those Soros checks sure come in handy

But nah. Fact over fiction, science over religion, logic and reason over conclusively disproven dogma like 'trickle down'.

Neither left-wing ideology nor right wing ideology is "fact" or "fiction." They're ideologies. Nor is one or the other inherently scientific or inherently religious. And trickle down economics is something no one actually believes.

The Trump White House believes it.

https://www.newsweek.com/wealthy-tax-cu ... own-707226

The GOP tax plan isn't a handout to the wealthy—it's actually an investment in the richest Americans so they will trickle their savings down to the middle class.

That's at least how the White House spun the Republican proposal, as chief White House economic adviser Gary Cohn said the plan is actually designed to help the rich because the better they do, the better they can help the poor.

"I don't believe that we've set out to create a tax cut for the wealthy. If someone's getting a tax cut, I'm not upset that they're getting a tax cut. I'm really not upset," Cohn told CNBC's John Harwood Thursday. "We create wage inflation, which means the workers get paid more; the workers have more disposable income, the workers spend more. And we see the whole trickle-down through the economy, and that's good for the economy."

The "rising tide lifts all boats" idea remains a popular GOP theory, namely that a tax cut for the very rich creates indirect benefits for middle and lower-class Americans. The more money the very wealthy have, the more they spend, and spending creates jobs.

But it's not true.

The thing is, with the GOP, 'trickle down' is not just a policy idea, it's become an ideology in and of itself. No amount of evidence that it doesn't work (nor really ever has) will convince the true believers like Gary Cohn. In that sense its kind of like religion. Facts don't matter to the trickle-downers. Wealth trickles up, not down. Wealth is increasingly hoarded.
The last 40 years have seen stagnant wages for workers, skyrocketing paychecks for executives. Not just in the US either. All across the western world.

But as long as 'dem ebil libruls' keep saying it doesn't work, some conservatives will bitterly cling to it and ignore reality if need be.

[The Xenopolis Confederation]

Neither left-wing ideology nor right wing ideology is "fact" or "fiction." They're ideologies. Nor is one or the other inherently scientific or inherently religious. And trickle down economics is something no one actually believes.

…How much do you know about American politics?

A little bit. It's just republican economics is supply-side, not trickle down.

[The Xenopolis Confederation]

Neither left-wing ideology nor right wing ideology is "fact" or "fiction." They're ideologies. Nor is one or the other inherently scientific or inherently religious. And trickle down economics is something no one actually believes.

The Trump White House believes it.

https://www.newsweek.com/wealthy-tax-cu ... own-707226

The GOP tax plan isn't a handout to the wealthy—it's actually an investment in the richest Americans so they will trickle their savings down to the middle class.

That's at least how the White House spun the Republican proposal, as chief White House economic adviser Gary Cohn said the plan is actually designed to help the rich because the better they do, the better they can help the poor.

"I don't believe that we've set out to create a tax cut for the wealthy. If someone's getting a tax cut, I'm not upset that they're getting a tax cut. I'm really not upset," Cohn told CNBC's John Harwood Thursday. "We create wage inflation, which means the workers get paid more; the workers have more disposable income, the workers spend more. And we see the whole trickle-down through the economy, and that's good for the economy."

The "rising tide lifts all boats" idea remains a popular GOP theory, namely that a tax cut for the very rich creates indirect benefits for middle and lower-class Americans. The more money the very wealthy have, the more they spend, and spending creates jobs.

But it's not true.

The thing is, with the GOP, 'trickle down' is not just a policy idea, it's become an ideology in and of itself. No amount of evidence that it doesn't work (nor really ever has) will convince the true believers like Gary Cohn. In that sense its kind of like religion. Facts don't matter to the trickle-downers. Wealth trickles up, not down. Wealth is increasingly hoarded.
The last 40 years have seen stagnant wages for workers, skyrocketing paychecks for executives. Not just in the US either. All across the western world. This diseased Reagan/Thatcher idea simply refuses to die.

Did the GOP explicitly call it "trickle down?" If so, I stand corrected.

[Kowani]

…How much do you know about American politics?

A little bit. It's just republican economics is supply-side, not trickle down.

It started out supply side. In the days of Reagan.

[Tombradyonia]

The Trump White House believes it.

https://www.newsweek.com/wealthy-tax-cu ... own-707226



The thing is, with the GOP, 'trickle down' is not just a policy idea, it's become an ideology in and of itself. No amount of evidence that it doesn't work (nor really ever has) will convince the true believers like Gary Cohn. In that sense its kind of like religion. Facts don't matter to the trickle-downers. Wealth trickles up, not down. Wealth is increasingly hoarded.
The last 40 years have seen stagnant wages for workers, skyrocketing paychecks for executives. Not just in the US either. All across the western world. This diseased Reagan/Thatcher idea simply refuses to die.

Did the GOP explicitly call it "trickle down?" If so, I stand corrected.

From the article I linked to:

And we see the whole trickle-down through the economy, and that's good for the economy.

[Tobleste]

Also, in an American context, facts have a left wing bias so any organisation that's concerned with facts (e.g. schools, think-tanks, media) and does it's job properly will be accused of being biased.

Facts don't have a political bias, or a political ideology. Facts are purely descriptive.=, political ideology necessarily has a prescriptive element.

True but I've found the American right to be uniquely prone to dismissing facts that conflict with their world view. If they interpreted them a certain way, then that would be normal but they just ignore it. Climate change is one example. Rather than interpreting the evidence in a conservative light (as European conservatives would), they ignore it. They do the same with tax cuts, Obama's citizenship and Trumps various scandals. They just make sh!t up. Any reputable organisation would object to this which is why mainstream organisations are so often called biased by American right wingers.

[Tobleste]

This is perhaps the most idiotic one liner ever created.

I find it perplexing how you can pretty much go about flaming people and calling them idiots on this forum, so long as you do it indirectly.

I don't mind that so much as he didn't bother explaining why I'm wrong. He does that a lot; just says "that's stupid" and moves on like that's it. It's why I don't reply to him anymore.

[Duvniask]

The Trump White House believes it.

https://www.newsweek.com/wealthy-tax-cu ... own-707226



The thing is, with the GOP, 'trickle down' is not just a policy idea, it's become an ideology in and of itself. No amount of evidence that it doesn't work (nor really ever has) will convince the true believers like Gary Cohn. In that sense its kind of like religion. Facts don't matter to the trickle-downers. Wealth trickles up, not down. Wealth is increasingly hoarded.
The last 40 years have seen stagnant wages for workers, skyrocketing paychecks for executives. Not just in the US either. All across the western world. This diseased Reagan/Thatcher idea simply refuses to die.

Did the GOP explicitly call it "trickle down?" If so, I stand corrected.

I hear this argument sometimes. It makes no sense. Whether or not they call it "trickle-down economics" has no bearing on whether or not that is what they support.

It's like expecting a fascist to explicitly come out in favor of the term totalitarian dictatorship; sure they might, but they usually don't tell you that up front.

[Valrifell]

I'm doing my part.
I'm a part time/substitute teacher who indoctrinates innocent kids with the liberal agenda every school day... those Soros checks sure come in handy

But nah. Fact over fiction, science over religion, logic and reason over conclusively disproven dogma like 'trickle down'.

Neither left-wing ideology nor right wing ideology is "fact" or "fiction." They're ideologies. Nor is one or the other inherently scientific or inherently religious. And trickle down economics is something no one actually believes.

Right-wing ideologues in the states tend to deny observable scientific facts like climate change or evolution (both of which have sparked intense debate that should never have existed) and often consider the teaching of either "left-wing propaganda"

Anti-intellectualism and science illiteracy is a thing that usually ignores political identity, but for some reason it's clung a lot more to the modern Republican Party. The GOP also will tend to downplay the arts in favor of more "marketable" skills, all while broadly defunding public education and being in favor of charter schools.

It really doesn't take a whole lot of brain calories to figure out why most teachers would be more reliable to vote Democratic.

[Arkhane]

A majority of the first professors post-war we're hippies and peace-keeper stoners and protesters who had no marketable skills other than to teach their ideology onto the next generation. They raised more liberal leaning students, a majority of which also couldn't find a job other than teaching their ideology and they slowly outnumbered those pesky, essentialist, conservative professors. Even outdone them in being moral alarmists too.

All this social justice, politically correct, marxist, communist, selective Science denial (Believe in climate change but deny basic biology and gender) have been a staple of the curriculum for decades. And like all fads and trends, it has been embraced for it's simplistic, superficial and easy to digest concepts such as:

There are many poor people, there are few rich people therefore it's unfair and rich people caused it!

Or

There are more white people than people of color (colored), therefore it's unfair and white people caused it!

And.

There are more straight people than LGBT people therefore it's unfair and straight people caused it!

Really, all of their philosophy and ideology can be crunched down into this minority vs majority permutation. And it's easier to understand and accept that than, say, being forced to pore through those boring underlying variables, causes and effects and realizing how complex society can be.

So to get back to that, yes, schools, especially colleges have liberal bias, the crazy, fundie and zealous conservative professors have been replaced with the crazy, fundie and zealous liberal ones.

[Hakons]

It depends on the school, in aggregate they have a liberal bias, but not every school does. My university has mostly left wing professors, staff, and students, but my high school had mostly right wing professors, staff, and students. So far neither viewpoints have created much explicit bias in my education. It's not that hard to not let biased teachers influence you. What IS a bit scary is what Education schools are like, especially for primary education. Those are formative years for children, so teachers that have clear bias then are pretty dangerous.

[Tombradyonia]

So to get back to that, yes, schools, especially colleges have liberal bias, the crazy, fundie and zealous conservative professors have been replaced with the crazy, fundie and zealous liberal ones.

Which is why the right wing pushes for more private schools so they can indoctrinate children with the evangelical agenda and replace actual science with bullshit from the bible (the notorious fiction book with hundreds of plot holes, inconsistencies and contradictions). I don't think anything has ever pissed more conservatives/evangelicals off than evolution. There's more evidence for evolution every single day that we live. And there's still zero evidence for 'creation' yet the right wants to basically make it mandatory to have at the very least the creation story taught besides evolution as an alternate theory. Mike Pence actually made the case for that once when he was in Congress.

Teaching creation as equal with evolution is like teaching the stork theory of human reproduction (a nice story we tend to tell young kiddos) as equal with the sex theory of human reproduction. One is baseless bullshit, and the other a proven scientific theory. Now who was it that said "facts don't care about someone's feelings"?

[Chan Island]

Because the right tries to push creationism, trickle down economics and the idea that more guns somehow leads to less shootings.

And cut education spending when in power.

[Risottia]

And trickle down economics is something no one actually believes.

Except when it's voting time. Then "tax discount for the rich because that makes everyone richer" becomes Gospel.

[Necroghastia]

A majority of the first professors post-war we're hippies and peace-keeper stoners and protesters who had no marketable skills other than to teach their ideology onto the next generation. They raised more liberal leaning students, a majority of which also couldn't find a job other than teaching their ideology and they slowly outnumbered those pesky, essentialist, conservative professors. Even outdone them in being moral alarmists too.

All this social justice, politically correct, marxist, communist, selective Science denial (Believe in climate change but deny basic biology and gender) have been a staple of the curriculum for decades. And like all fads and trends, it has been embraced for it's simplistic, superficial and easy to digest concepts such as:

There are many poor people, there are few rich people therefore it's unfair and rich people caused it!

Or

There are more white people than people of color (colored), therefore it's unfair and white people caused it!

And.

There are more straight people than LGBT people therefore it's unfair and straight people caused it!

Really, all of their philosophy and ideology can be crunched down into this minority vs majority permutation. And it's easier to understand and accept that than, say, being forced to pore through those boring underlying variables, causes and effects and realizing how complex society can be.

So to get back to that, yes, schools, especially colleges have liberal bias, the crazy, fundie and zealous conservative professors have been replaced with the crazy, fundie and zealous liberal ones.

Wow. That is a lot of straw. And just incorrectness all around.

[Salandriagado]

Also, in an American context, facts have a left wing bias so any organisation that's concerned with facts (e.g. schools, think-tanks, media) and does it's job properly will be accused of being biased.

Facts don't have a political bias, or a political ideology. Facts are purely descriptive.=, political ideology necessarily has a prescriptive element.

The issue here is the the American right has declared a whole bunch of facts to be political issues, by denying them. When one side's political ideology is built upon lies, telling the truth is suddenly "biased".

[Highever]

A majority of the first professors post-war we're hippies and peace-keeper stoners and protesters who had no marketable skills other than to teach their ideology onto the next generation. They raised more liberal leaning students, a majority of which also couldn't find a job other than teaching their ideology and they slowly outnumbered those pesky, essentialist, conservative professors. Even outdone them in being moral alarmists too.

All this social justice, politically correct, marxist, communist, selective Science denial (Believe in climate change but deny basic biology and gender) have been a staple of the curriculum for decades. And like all fads and trends, it has been embraced for it's simplistic, superficial and easy to digest concepts such as:

There are many poor people, there are few rich people therefore it's unfair and rich people caused it!

Or

There are more white people than people of color (colored), therefore it's unfair and white people caused it!

And.

There are more straight people than LGBT people therefore it's unfair and straight people caused it!

Really, all of their philosophy and ideology can be crunched down into this minority vs majority permutation. And it's easier to understand and accept that than, say, being forced to pore through those boring underlying variables, causes and effects and realizing how complex society can be.

So to get back to that, yes, schools, especially colleges have liberal bias, the crazy, fundie and zealous conservative professors have been replaced with the crazy, fundie and zealous liberal ones.

Wow. That is a lot of straw. And just incorrectness all around.

Once again I can only assume that they have never once been to college because they seem to think that classes and different majors dont exist and that there is only one class and major where everyone sits in a giant room and gets forced to listen to propoganda all day.

[Necroghastia]

Okay, I just can't help myself. Or I just can't let this post slide without at least trying to meaningfully engage with it. Either or.

A majority of the first professors post-war we're hippies and peace-keeper stoners and protesters who had no marketable skills other than to teach their ideology onto the next generation. They raised more liberal leaning students, a majority of which also couldn't find a job other than teaching their ideology and they slowly outnumbered those pesky, essentialist, conservative professors. Even outdone them in being moral alarmists too.

sauce pls

All this social justice, politically correct, marxist, communist,

I don't think you have any idea what those mean, especially in how they relate to what you later say.

selective Science denial (Believe in climate change but deny basic biology and gender)

Please, do try and find an actual scientific source that denies "basic biology and gender." I'll wait.

have been a staple of the curriculum for decades.

sauce pls
And not just "these topics exists" but a source that states these topics are a "staple of the curriculum."

and like all fads and trends, it has been embraced for it's simplistic, superficial and easy to digest concepts such as:
There are many poor people, there are few rich people therefore it's unfair and rich people caused it!
Or
There are more white people than people of color (colored), therefore it's unfair and white people caused it!
And.
There are more straight people than LGBT people therefore it's unfair and straight people caused it!
Really, all of their philosophy and ideology can be crunched down into this minority vs majority permutation. And it's easier to understand and accept that than, say, being forced to pore through those boring underlying variables, causes and effects and realizing how complex society can be.

Fucking really? You're going to go on about "underlying variables, causes and effects and realizing how complex society can be" after constructing those titanic wicker men?

So to get back to that, yes, schools, especially colleges have liberal bias, the crazy, fundie and zealous conservative professors have been replaced with the crazy, fundie and zealous liberal ones.

Which you have yet to demonstrate exist in any meaningful amount.

[Greed and Death]

Presumably it comes from people who only entered college campuses to visit friends.

If taken superficially, then yes it is a strawman. Maybe I cant expect people to read more into it then that- fair enough.

My jab wasn’t just aimed just at cultural/gender/ or any of the “SJW” studies, even though I don’t think it’s an unfair statement considering the political philosophy such people tend to endorse. My original response was to Greed and Death, who stated:

Yes having a master's degree and working as a barista does have a tendency to make one lean socialist. (Emphasis is mine)

Kowani then responded to what I said with:

Assuming everyone with a masters degree who got screwed over by capitalism has a gender studies degree? Yep, we’ve hit massive strawman levels. (again, emphasis is mine)

The first statement is not as obvious at the second, but from what I can extrapolate from these two sentences is that Greed and Death, Kowani and the other followers of cliche leftist thought believe that anyone, no matter the major should expect a high paying job (or a job in their field even) simply by virtue of them having obtained it, and the fact that someone with such a high level of “education” works as a struggling barista at Starbucks is proof that there is a flaw in the system- as if the world should prostate itself before anyone who holds a titular piece of paper “with masters in X” or some other accolade. Never in a million years, could it occur to these people that perhaps it isn’t everyone else’s fault that they can’t get employment. “Clearly” then it must be the nefarious doings of Enron, Steve Bannon, Nazis etc etc.

Did I just get called a leftist? Can someone who knows me explain to him the error of his ways ?

[Kowani]

Presumably it comes from people who only entered college campuses to visit friends.

If taken superficially, then yes it is a strawman. Maybe I cant expect people to read more into it then that- fair enough.

My jab wasn’t just aimed just at cultural/gender/ or any of the “SJW” studies, even though I don’t think it’s an unfair statement considering the political philosophy such people tend to endorse. My original response was to Greed and Death, who stated:

Yes having a master's degree and working as a barista does have a tendency to make one lean socialist. (Emphasis is mine)

Kowani then responded to what I said with:

Assuming everyone with a masters degree who got screwed over by capitalism has a gender studies degree? Yep, we’ve hit massive strawman levels. (again, emphasis is mine)

The first statement is not as obvious at the second, but from what I can extrapolate from these two sentences is that Greed and Death, Kowani and the other followers of cliche leftist thought believe that anyone, no matter the major should expect a high paying job (or a job in their field even) simply by virtue of them having obtained it, and the fact that someone with such a high level of “education” works as a struggling barista at Starbucks is proof that there is a flaw in the system- as if the world should prostate itself before anyone who holds a titular piece of paper “with masters in X” or some other accolade. Never in a million years, could it occur to these people that perhaps it isn’t everyone else’s fault that they can’t get employment. “Clearly” then it must be the nefarious doings of Enron, Steve Bannon, Nazis etc etc.

You…How the fuck did you leap that far?

[Imperial Esplanade]

Considering traditional, "conservative," ideology has been mostly dominating the public sphere of thought at both the societal and local (state) legislative-levels in the United States, anything that would be considered entertainment of any other schools of thought would, inherently, likely have a "liberal bias" compared to that of which is the status-quo. Most higher-ed schools are structured to encourage independent, alternative thinking compared to the traditional status-quo, so would it shouldn't be surprising that most of them also carry a general liberal-leaning bias as a subsequent result.

[Katganistan]

We did it, we learnt about why the USSR was bad, we even learnt about gulags, my history teacher criticised old communism because of the atheism part, but he often spoke well about "modern communism" and it's relationship with the conexions between cultures and it's "beneficts"

Our teacher decried communism and the havoc it wreaked. Same experience with the majority of my friends and their friends.

I teach literature, but along with Animal Farm we did a whole unit on the Russian Revolution (since the story is an allegory/political satire/beast fable about the evils of Communism). My students certainly were not fans of Stalin or communism afterward.

This was after they had complained "why do we always learn history in your class!"

[Fasma]

Our teacher decried communism and the havoc it wreaked. Same experience with the majority of my friends and their friends.

I teach literature, but along with Animal Farm we did a whole unit on the Russian Revolution (since the story is an allegory/political satire/beast fable about the evils of Communism). My students certainly were not fans of Stalin or communism afterward.

This was after they had complained "why do we always learn history in your class!"

I'm not American, but I've been in a fair number of educational programs, including gender studies (although I didn't complete it). I admit, there is some pretty progressive biases in that, but I never once saw anything that supported communism or even socialism. There was a greater focus on Nazi Germany rather than the USSR however.