We should have seen this coming years ago when the Republican Doctrine became consistently anti-science. Educated people reject a superstitious rigidly dogmatic world-view therefore Republicans have to reject education. It has been an evolutionary process (ahem!) as the social conservatives invited into the party via the "southern strategy" have gradually asserted themselves and come to dominate the selection process for Republican candidates.:
http://www.nytimes.com/2012/03/09/opini ... .html?_r=1
____________________________
Paul Krugman: Ignorance Is Strength
Why are Republicans turning against higher education"?
Ignorance Is Strength, Paul Krugman, Commentary, NY Times: One way in which Americans have always been exceptional has been in our support for education. ... But now one of our two major political parties has taken a hard right turn against education, or at least against education that working Americans can afford. ... And this comes at a time when American education is already in deep trouble.
About that hostility: Mr. Santorum made headlines by declaring that President Obama wants to expand college enrollment because colleges are “indoctrination mills” that destroy religious faith. But Mr. Romney’s response to a high school senior worried about college costs is arguably even more significant...
Here’s what the candidate told the student: “Don’t just go to one that has the highest price. Go to one that has a little lower price... And don’t expect the government to forgive the debt that you take on.” ...
Mr. Romney’s remarks were even more callous ... given what’s been happening lately to American higher education. ... Adjusted for inflation, state support for higher education has fallen 12 percent over the past five years, even as the number of students has continued to rise... The damage these changes will inflict ... should be obvious. So why are Republicans so eager to trash higher education?
It’s not hard to see what’s driving Mr. Santorum’s wing of the party. His specific claim that college attendance undermines faith is, it turns out, false. ... But what about people like Mr. Romney? Don’t they have a stake in America’s future economic success, which is endangered by the crusade against education? Maybe not as much as you think.
After all, over the past 30 years, there has been a stunning disconnect between huge income gains at the top and the struggles of ordinary workers. You can make the case that the self-interest of America’s elite is best served by making sure that this disconnect continues, which means keeping taxes on high incomes low at all costs, never mind the consequences in terms of poor infrastructure and an undertrained work force.
And if underfunding public education leaves many children of the less affluent shut out from upward mobility, well, did you really believe that stuff about creating equality of opportunity?
So whenever you hear Republicans say that they are the party of traditional values, bear in mind that they have actually made a radical break with America’s tradition of valuing education. And they have made this break because they believe that what you don’t know can’t hurt them.
________________________________
yrs,
rubato
In hindsight, it was inevitable.
Re: In hindsight, it was inevitable.
KRAFT DURCH FREUDE - STRENGTH THROUGH JOY
Your collective inability to acknowledge this obvious truth makes you all look like fools.
yrs,
rubato
-
MajGenl.Meade
- Posts: 21463
- Joined: Sun Apr 25, 2010 8:51 am
- Location: Groot Brakrivier
- Contact:
Re: In hindsight, it was inevitable.
I think the standing of American educated young persons when measured against the rest of the world is probably a reliabl indicator of how much "America's tradition of valuing education" is actually worth.
It's a major generalisation but in my thirty years in Ohio and putting three children through the system, it appeared to me that much of the higher education goal (of parents) was to park children for four or five years with a rather incompetent baby-sitter to protect them from having to earn a living, leave home and actually do something with their lives. OTOH the proud English tradition of sending no-one to university except a few has given the old country a legion of people with all the skills needed to clean up after the circus elephant - and we always need those, as my dad used to say.
Here in SA now, neither system is really followed. Matrics (from high school) are passed with 40% achievement - the government having discovered that more people achieve a certificate if you lower the bar closer to zero. And that increasing numbers of "learners" pass tests is the undeniable proof that the education minister and the school "educators" (pupils and teachers are verboten words) are doing a fine job.
The traditional publication by newspapers of the names of all matrics has come under attack because of the hurt feelings of those who scored 39% or less on their finals. But the newspapers have mixed feelings about it because the number of matrics has now become so large that entire forests in South America will be needed for the newsprint. One of the most popular subjects to "study" in university is "Tourism". Youngsters coming out of the townships and farms have been told that "Tourism" is a great degree to have - and it's an easy course which is attractive.
Apparently in the case of Mr Krugman all that higher education may as well be in tourism. Romney suggests taking cost into account; try to find a less expensive school. Romney warns that future governments may not be reliable in helping with college debt. Obviously the candidate is doing his best to sabotage colleges, prevent the poor from learning tourism and create a permanent underclass of elephant maintenance persons.
Meade
It's a major generalisation but in my thirty years in Ohio and putting three children through the system, it appeared to me that much of the higher education goal (of parents) was to park children for four or five years with a rather incompetent baby-sitter to protect them from having to earn a living, leave home and actually do something with their lives. OTOH the proud English tradition of sending no-one to university except a few has given the old country a legion of people with all the skills needed to clean up after the circus elephant - and we always need those, as my dad used to say.
Here in SA now, neither system is really followed. Matrics (from high school) are passed with 40% achievement - the government having discovered that more people achieve a certificate if you lower the bar closer to zero. And that increasing numbers of "learners" pass tests is the undeniable proof that the education minister and the school "educators" (pupils and teachers are verboten words) are doing a fine job.
The traditional publication by newspapers of the names of all matrics has come under attack because of the hurt feelings of those who scored 39% or less on their finals. But the newspapers have mixed feelings about it because the number of matrics has now become so large that entire forests in South America will be needed for the newsprint. One of the most popular subjects to "study" in university is "Tourism". Youngsters coming out of the townships and farms have been told that "Tourism" is a great degree to have - and it's an easy course which is attractive.
Apparently in the case of Mr Krugman all that higher education may as well be in tourism. Romney suggests taking cost into account; try to find a less expensive school. Romney warns that future governments may not be reliable in helping with college debt. Obviously the candidate is doing his best to sabotage colleges, prevent the poor from learning tourism and create a permanent underclass of elephant maintenance persons.
Meade
For Christianity, by identifying truth with faith, must teach-and, properly understood, does teach-that any interference with the truth is immoral. A Christian with faith has nothing to fear from the facts