by AndrewMc | 3/21/2010 06:27:00 PM
I hope people are watching history being made.


C-SPAN






Labels: , ,

 
by AndrewMc | 3/19/2010 09:00:00 AM
This rambling is a short one.

Today (Friday) is the seventh anniversary of the invasion of Iraq. It's hard to believe that it's been seven years since we began a war that saw us greeted as liberators by the Iraqi people, and in which we were, thankfully, able to safely remove the weapons of mass destruction that Saddam Hussein had been amassing to use against his neighbors and against us (here, here). It's a shame that Hussein chose the path he did, and several months earlier had thrown weapons inspectors out of Iraq, rendering them incapable of tracking Hussein's programs.

All nations agreed that war was imminent, and that action was needed (here, here, here, here).

And the war came.

Today, the peaceful democracy that is Iraq has helped pave the way for democracy across the region.

And, all of this was accomplished for the relatively small price of under $2 billion dollars.


Take a few moments to remember what happens when your government engages in a systematic campaign of everything ranging from subtle misdirections to outright lies. And when people don't stand up to that government on those issues, the result is an illegal war.




Labels: , ,

 
by AndrewMc | 3/17/2010 06:00:00 AM
As many of you have no doubt seen, the Texas State Board of "Education" has re-worked the state standards to bring them more in line with a far-right agenda that seeks to re-write history, subsuming it to the political expediency of programming a generation of school children.

From the New York Times:

After three days of turbulent meetings, the Texas Board of Education on Friday approved a social studies curriculum that will put a conservative stamp on history and economics textbooks, stressing the superiority of American capitalism, questioning the Founding Fathers’ commitment to a purely secular government and presenting Republican political philosophies in a more positive light.

The vote was 10 to 5 along party lines, with all the Republicans on the board voting for it.


A great deal of alarm has been raised over these developments, but I think there may be hope for a positive outcome.




First, some of the issues. It has been clear for a number of years that in Texas education takes a back seat to neo-conservative evangelical political indoctrination. The state Board of Education has for years been re-writing the standards a little bit at a time in an effort to weed out what conservatives on the board see as the pernicious influence of liberalism.

Over time this has resulted in the removal or devaluing of the contributions of such figures as Cesar Chavez and others in the labor movement. Civil Rights has taken a back seat to cheerleading the United States' role in the Cold War. And Joseph McCarthy has reemerged as an American hero.

From the Washington Post:

A far-right faction of the Texas State Board of Education succeeded Friday in injecting conservative ideals into social studies, history and economics lessons that will be taught to millions of students for the next decade.

Teachers in Texas will be required to cover the Judeo-Christian influences of the nation's Founding Fathers, but not highlight the philosophical rationale for the separation of church and state. Curriculum standards also will describe the U.S. government as a "constitutional republic," rather than "democratic," and students will be required to study the decline in value of the U.S. dollar, including the abandonment of the gold standard.



More interesting, from my own perspective, Thomas Jefferson will be removed as one of the people studied in order to understand the Enlightenment. Now I know we tend to study Jefferson in a rather bland way, as the person who wrote the Declaration of Independence, the Virginia Resolutions, the 3rd president, etc. But he is a key Enlightenment thinker, and the Declaration of Independence is important as a summation of a number of key Enlightenment principles.

Not the least of these is "we hold these truths to be self-evident." It would be hard to find a more concise summation of Enlightenment principles in a widely distributed public document. It almost perfectly captures the spirit of the Enlightenment.

According to the New York Times article, "Jefferson is not well liked among conservatives on the board because he coined the term 'separation between church and state'.” He was also a Deist, which is problematic if you're trying to make the case that the Founders intended to establish a Christian nation. Sure, many of the Founders were Deists, but TJ was certainly one of the more vocal Deists.


So, what to make of all this ignorance? Bloggers have gone 'round and 'round, with much sputtering. And I agree with news and bloggers at HNN weighing in with resounding criticism.

But let me offer a positive spin. It's not news that the current economy has hit states quite hard, and that education budgets in all states are taking a hit. If anything good is to come from the Texas Board of Education's revision to the standards, it's that now may be the time for states to jettison traditional textbooks in favor of online sources, DIY texts, and other electronic materials. Some are much cheaper, some are free, and some electronic materials could certainly be linked to district-level grant initiatives that might bring both technology and educational materials into the classroom.

So, now is the time. Are you outraged by what's going on in Texas? Do you see that this is going to have a broad effect on how school districts in your states purchase textbooks? Then start helping out. Help your district or state assemble an online textbook that speaks to your state standards and/or the national standards and can be had cheaper than a traditional textbook. Don't let Texas dictate what your schools teach.

In many ways, this is a teachable moment. Seize it.


Labels: , , ,

 
by AndrewMc | 3/05/2010 11:59:00 AM
As usual, Frank Rich nails is.

No one knows what history will make of the present — least of all journalists, who can at best write history’s sloppy first draft. But if I were to place an incautious bet on which political event will prove the most significant of February 2010, I wouldn’t choose the kabuki health care summit that generated all the ink and 24/7 cable chatter in Washington. I’d put my money instead on the murder-suicide of Andrew Joseph Stack III, the tax protester who flew a plane into an office building housing Internal Revenue Service employees in Austin, Tex., on Feb. 18. It was a flare with the dark afterlife of an omen.

The modern conservative movement has gone completely batshit crazy, and makes no apologies for it.

Follow me . . .



Rove says this about the questions surrounding the complete lack of any weapons of mass destruction in Iraq, and therefore the lack of any justification for the war:

"When the pattern of the Democratic attacks became apparent in July 2003, we should have countered in a forceful and overwhelming way," he writes. "We should have seen this for what it was: a poison-tipped dagger aimed at the heart of the Bush presidency."


Hey, Karl? No. It wasn't a "pattern of Democratic attacks." It was a growing recognition that the administration had gotten us into a war on false pretenses, therefore needlessly sacrificing the blood and treasure of the nation. At best it was a horrible mistake. At worst it was criminal in nature. My only regret is that instead of throwing you and your cronies in jail, it seems as if the judgment will be left to subsequent generations.

But, hey, thanks for spelling the name of my political party correctly. It's more than I can say for most Republicans.




There's a movement afoot to repeal the 17th amendment. No, seriously.

Here's the logical from bizarro-land, where history stops in 1789:

Until 1913, when the 17th Amendment was ratified, the citizens of the states elected U.S. senators indirectly: Voters elected the state legislators, and they in turn selected U.S. senators. From 1913 onward, voters have directly elected U.S. senators in statewide elections.

This change has led to a number of negative results, including

-Vastly increased federal power and vastly decreased state, local, and personal authority due to the state governments losing their representation in the federal government;

-The domination of Senate elections (and legislation) by forces outside of the particular states wherein elections are being held, e.g., out-of-state donations, political party operatives, and campaign consultants; and

-A decline of the influence of individual voters and small, local associations of voters over who is selected to be a senator from their state.





Two weeks ago I wrote about Don McLeroy, the Texas State Board of Education rep who was singlehandedly, and gleefully, re-writing history. On Tuesday he lost the primary to get reelected. A sliver of sanity from the Lone Star state.





Head 'em up, and move 'em out.




On the one hand, if it's a private institution, they have the right to think, teach, and run their college in any way they want:

Erskine is part of the Associate Reformed Presbyterian Church, which describes itself as conservative and evangelical -- well to the right, on political and social issues, of other Presbyterian churches. The ARP (as members call it) is also small, with only 250 churches, so a requirement that all faculty or students at its only college be church members wouldn't yield enough people qualified to enroll or teach. The college has required all faculty members to be Christians, and students of all faiths have been welcome -- with only a minority of students and faculty members coming from the ARP.

This week, however, church leaders will gather to discuss a special report they commissioned about Erskine, which has been well regarded academically for its liberal arts programs, but which critics fear has strayed from its founding faith. The report has not been finalized or formally released, but some faculty members have seen it, as have some outside the college. The report is seemingly most critical of the church leaders themselves, saying that they have been "negligent" in overseeing the college. But the reasons given for why this negligence is faulted have many faculty members scared.


On the other hand, why on earth would they jeopardize faculty retention?





Man, I'd love to believe this is true.




No wonder I feel like I'm not getting enough sleep.






Labels: ,

 
by AndrewMc | 3/03/2010 06:00:00 AM
In the past few weeks there have been a number of incidents on campuses and in classrooms around the nation that touch on the thorny issue of freedom of speech.

This isn't a new issue—Universities and courts have been grappling with this since the campus protest movements of the 1960s.

But it seems that the problem has come into fresh relief recently. Below the fold I'll bring you a few cases of contested speech, some of which have developed into court cases, others of which I'm just pulling out in order to highlight.

I'll be interested to see what you think.




To my mind, college campuses, and to a lesser but still important degree the secondary classrooms, are a touchy place in which to contest the issue of freedom of speech. Especially on campuses, there should be even more leniency when it comes to freedom of speech.

A college campus exists as a cauldron of ideas. It is a place where ideas and issues should be debated without fear of recrimination or persecution. A campus is a place where extra care should be given to allow people to voice crazy, wild, profound, useless and useful ideas, and where counter debate can go on.

Here's the first of the free speech issues. My own opinion is that the speech here is protected. What do you say?

Every few minutes during a talk last week at the University of California at Irvine, the same thing happened. A student would get up, shout something critical of Israel, be applauded by some in the audience, and be led away by police.

The speaker -- Michael Oren, Israel's ambassador to the United States -- was repeatedly forced to stop his talk. He pleaded for the right to continue, and continued. University administrators lectured the students and asked them to let Oren speak. In the end, 11 students were arrested and they may also face charges of violating university rules.

Those who interrupted Oren, not surprisingly, are strong critics of Israel who believe that they must draw attention to the Palestinian cause. But an argument put forward by some national Muslim leaders in the last week has sent the discussion in a new direction. Those groups maintain that interrupting a campus speech -- even repeatedly -- should be seen as a protected form of speech.



OK, how about here?

MIAMI — A South Florida teenager who sued her former principal after she was suspended for creating a Facebook page criticizing a teacher can proceed with her lawsuit, a federal judge has ruled.

The student, Katherine Evans, is seeking to have her suspension expunged from her disciplinary record. School officials suspended her for three days, saying she had been “cyberbullying” the teacher, Sarah Phelps. Ms. Evans is also seeking a “nominal fee” for what she argues was a violation of her First Amendment rights, her lawyers said, and payment of her legal fees.



Is this protected speech?

It also seems to me that school officials are quick to overreact to almost any perceived threat. But the schools' intrusions into students lives seems to go far beyond the need to maintain discipline while providing an education.

Consider these two cases, where school administrators confess to using school-donated laptops to spy on children in their homes. The justification is that the school purchase the laptops, and the kids are supposed to be doing homework. OK, I understand that we want to kids to do the assigned work. But spying on them through a remote camera in their own homes? Without their knowledge?





I'm wondering about the path down which this nation has wandered with regards to free speech and privacy. It probably pre-dates 9/11, but since then we have casually accepted governmental intrusion into even the most mundane aspects of our lives. And far from any kind of outrage, what we see is a broad tolerance. Even justification.

There's a bit of outcry over the school administrators' spying on minors, and the ACLU is involved. But in newspapers and news shows this trend has gotten very little attention.

Are we more generally tolerant of government subversion of freedom of speech and privacy? I think there's something to be said for the idea that the United States is trending towards a police state. Or at least towards one in which police tactics are tolerated and seen as OK.

Consider the recent 9th Circuit Court court decision, which essentially invented new law by allowing police to enter your home without any warrant.

Or the practice on the part of New York police officers of stopping anyone they can in order to get their names into a criminal database.



What on earth is going on here?

Labels: , ,

 
by AndrewMc | 2/26/2010 11:01:00 AM
Hahahahahahahaha.

Welcome to Friday. Today is the birthday of the Grand Canyon National Park in Arizona, and the subway in New York City.

Follow me.



I've used this space a few times to highlight the ongoing media debate about the value of a college degree. In fact, hardly a week goes by without one article or another questioning whether or not a college degree has value.

Most of that discussion, as I've said in the past, implies that the value of a college degree is in the monetary reward of whatever job a student gets after they graduate. Personally, I feel that this completely ignores the point of a college education.

The point is to prepare people to be active and engaged citizens of this republic. For that, students need to have a liberal arts education with a core curriculum that exposes them to a broad range of ideas and allows them to discuss and debate those ideas in an open and unfiltered manner.

It also requires that they grow and mature as people during their college education.

That's why this trend is not good:

First:
Dozens of public high schools in eight states will introduce a program next year allowing 10th graders who pass a battery of tests to get a diploma two years early and immediately enroll in community college.


And then:
In an era when college students commonly take longer than four years to get a bachelor's degree, some U.S. schools are looking anew at an old idea: slicing a year off their undergraduate programs to save families time and money.


This is "education as assembly line." Get students through as quickly as possible so they can get a job. It completely ignores the role of higher education as a facilitator of an educated citizenry. It's education on the cheap, with the main goal being to save time and money, and to bring out a product [a diploma] quickly and efficiently.

Education isn't supposed to be quick and efficient.




Majoring in sex, drugs, rock 'n roll.




I'm going to be the pilot on the next shuttle mission. Then I'm going to get a job as a programmer at Apple. After that, I think I'll take command of the 101st Airborne division. To wrap up a busy career, I think maybe I'll conduct cancer research at Scripps Hospital. Maybe I'll get my friend Bob Sacamano to help. No problem.




I have several students who self-identify as Tea-Partiers. My surprise is that I don't have more. In fact, the only good thing about the general apathy of of my students is that it means that the College Republicans don't do very much.

I realize that Teabaggers need to have a populace that is as uneducated as possible. Well, let me go back for a second. Tea Partiers themselves seem to be pretty well educated. But those are the self-styled leaders of the party. What they need is for voters to be as uneducated as possible. How else will they get them to swallow all the crap that comes out of the mouths of people like Mark Williams.

So, their non-stop meddling is bad enough. But this is more worrisome.

As if the recession had not given community college advocates enough to worry about, some fear that the anti-tax sentiment stirred by Tea Party activists could endanger their federal, state and local funding.

One Tea Party group in New Jersey is questioning Warren County Community College's plans to open a satellite campus, meant to accommodate the institution's burgeoning enrollment in outlying areas and free up space on its main campus. As required by New Jersey law, half of the $7.3 million bond to buy and renovate a commercial building for the new campus would be paid from an existing pool of state funds. The remainder, officials say, would be paid for by leasing additional space in the renovated building to interested tenants.






This seems like a "duh?" moment, but I guess I shouldn't be surprised when it happens.

A Montgomery County teacher has agreed to apologize to a 13-year-old student whom he reprimanded and sent to the office for twice refusing to stand during the Pledge of Allegiance, said a lawyer who represents the student.





It's about time.





We're reading Rick Perlstein's "Who Owns the Sixties" in class this week, so this piece at Salon is especially timely. I'm intrigued by the idea of the Teabaggers as "countercultural," especially given the unceasing argument that America is essentially a conservative nation. Me, I'd go with labeling them "disaffected loonies." But that's me.

Still, there's something to be said for the idea that

Street theater. Communes. Manifestoes. Denunciations of "the system." The counterculture is back. Only this time it's on the right.

Political factions that are out of power have a choice. They can form a counter-establishment or a counterculture. A counter-establishment (a term that Sidney Blumenthal used to describe the neoconservatives in the 1970s) seeks to return to power by reassuring voters that it is sober and responsible. A counter-establishment publishes policy papers and holds conferences and its members endure their exile in think tanks and universities.

In contrast, a counterculture refuses to acknowledge the legitimacy of the rules of the game that it has lost. Instead of moving toward the center, the counterculture heads for the fringes. Like a cult, it creates its own parallel reality, seceding from a corrupt and wicked society into morally and politically pure enclaves.





The words "disaffected loonies" doesn't even begin to cover this.

THE .50 CALIBER Bushmaster bolt action rifle is a serious weapon. The model that Pvt. 1st Class Lee Pray is saving up for has a 2,500-yard range and comes with a Mark IV scope and an easy-load magazine. When the 25-year-old drove me to a mall in Watertown, New York, near the Fort Drum Army base, he brought me to see it in its glass case—he visits it periodically, like a kid coveting something at the toy store. It'll take plenty of military paychecks to cover the $5,600 price tag, but he considers the Bushmaster essential in his preparations to take on the US government when it declares martial law.

His belief that that day is imminent has led Pray to a group called Oa/th Kee/pers, one of the fastest-growing "patriot" organizations on the right.


Here's the main clue that these people are way more "anti-Obama" than they are concerned with defending the Constitution:

Most of the men's gripes revolve around policies that began under President Bush but didn't scare them so much at the time. "Too many conservatives relied on Bush's character and didn't pay attention," founder Rho/des told me. "Only now, with Obama, do they worry and see what has been done. I trusted Bush to only go after the terrorists. But what do you think can happen down the road when they say, 'I think you are a threat to the nation?'"



This is the typical behavior of people who support dictators: Absolute power is OK when my allies exercise it.

The test for handing power to someone, anyone, is "would I be OK if my political opponents had the same power?" If the answer is "no" then you don't do it. It's simple.




I love the idea of this:

It is a grand vision: a global college with no tuition, accessible to anyone with an Internet connection.

When the higher education entrepreneur Shai Reshef laid out his ambitious plan to build a free university that would use modern technology to spread the promise of a college degree to all corners of the earth, he got an enthusiastic reaction from some high-profile institutions. The United Nations has backed the venture. So has Yale Law School’s Information Society Project. Reshef and his lieutenants also like to mention the many letters of support and offers to pitch in from professors worldwide.


It gets right to the very ideal of a liberal education: it should be open to all. But the hard reality is that a liberal education is subject to the market. Universities raise tuition, loans are hard to get, and states generally have little interest in funding higher education in a meaningful way. Too bad.

And,
Questions about the so-called University of the People abounded: How do you build quality programs without charging tuition? How effective would the project’s peer-to-peer pedagogical model be in classrooms of students from vastly different cultural and educational traditions? Who would accredit such an operation at a time when the perceived value -- even necessity -- of a postsecondary education is ascendant in virtually every country? Reshef’s heart seems to be in the right place. But is his head?


I don't know that this thing will succeed. After all, many universities already provide free online classes to anyone with a computer.

We'll see.




In class today we are tasting a range of chocolate stouts. Young's was the first I ever had. It reminds me of liquid chocolate cake. Great flavor--it's deep and mellow.

It falls into the "Spice, Herb, or Vegetable Beer" category for the Beer Judge Certification Program. From a judging standpoint this category is wide-open, and it gives brewers a great deal of flexibility.

Have a good weekend.


Labels: ,

 
by AndrewMc | 2/19/2010 12:01:00 PM
Whew! It's been a while. Between the weird pressure of preparing for the new semester, and a new job (well, a new job within an old job), and a few other things, I've been absolutely slaughtered.

Lucky you; I'm back. And Friday Ramblings are, too. Follow me.





Conservatives will tell you there's no right to privacy. What about this?

According to the filings in Blake J Robbins v Lower Merion School District (PA) et al, the laptops issued to high-school students in the well-heeled Philly suburb have webcams that can be covertly activated by the schools' administrators, who have used this facility to spy on students and even their families. The issue came to light when the Robbins's child was disciplined for "improper behavior in his home" and the Vice Principal used a photo taken by the webcam as evidence. The suit is a class action, brought on behalf of all students issued with these machines.


That's just ridiculous. And I'm wondering who the Einstein was who sat down with the IT people and said "Oh, by the way, set the laptop up so I can look into the students' houses when I want to."

If true, that's about as stupid as it gets.




There was a time when the United States actually prosecuted people for this sort of thing.

Nowadays we apparently don't think it's a crime.





I'm sorry, but are you kidding me? Female genital mutilation in Iraq? The look on her face says it all.

Disgusting. Even more disgusting that it's occurring in a country we've occupied for all these years.





Here's something interesting, as reported at IHE and Huffington Post:

Someone is making a documentary that is apparently highly critical of the late Senator Edward Kennedy. It will be from the same producer—a man with close ties to prominent conservatives—who makes the series 24.

Some liberal historians are angry, and have begun a website to petition the History Channel not to air the program.

I understand their issue. If the History Channel airs the programs, it will be seen by millions of people, especially college students. We'll spend years, if not decades, trying to correct the misinformation out there. In some ways, the History Channel is becoming the first draft of history.

Funny thing is, while that website asks for signatures on a petition, and for monetary donations to the cause, I couldn't find anywhere that it actually links to the offending script in order to allow readers to decide for themselves whether or not the script is as offensive as they claim.

Those folks may be right, but there's no way I'm signing a petition or giving you money if I can't see what it is you're objecting to.




You know what I like about South Carolina? There's never any shortage of teh crazy.

South Carolina will no longer recognize U.S. currency as legal tender, if State Rep. Mike Pitts has his way.

Pitts, a fourth-term Republican from Laurens, introduced legislation earlier this month that would ban what he calls “the unconstitutional substitution of Federal Reserve Notes for silver and gold coin” in South Carolina.

If the bill were to become law, South Carolina would no longer accept or use anything other than silver and gold coins as a form of payment for any debt, meaning paper money would be out in the Palmetto State.


Shades of nullification, eh?






Want to know why history matters? Look no further than this article in the New York Times Magazine. It's frightening.

[Texas School Board member Don] McLeroy moved that Margaret Sanger, the birth-control pioneer, be included because she “and her followers promoted eugenics,” that language be inserted about Ronald Reagan’s “leadership in restoring national confidence” following Jimmy Carter’s presidency and that students be instructed to “describe the causes and key organizations and individuals of the conservative resurgence of the 1980s and 1990s, including Phyllis Schlafly, the Contract With America, the Heritage Foundation, the Moral Majority and the National Rifle Association.” The injection of partisan politics into education went so far that at one point another Republican board member burst out in seemingly embarrassed exasperation, “Guys, you’re rewriting history now!” Nevertheless, most of McLeroy’s proposed amendments passed by a show of hands.


The one thing that gives me some kind of cold, cold comfort is that state budgets are so bad right now that school boards may turn to more online sources, and away from publishers. The influence of the Texas School Board may simply hasten that, leaving Texas as even more of a backwoods, Neanderthal relic of pre-modern thinking.




Here's a nice piece on the history of slavery at Mammoth Cave.




Just as the punditocracy begins to whine that we're killing too many terrorists, and therefore ruining the war on terrorism . . . .

. . . . hold on. Seriously?! Am I really reading that Obama's version of the War on Terror(™) sucks because he's killing them? The only thing more screwy than that is that Democrats aren't on every single talk show saying "You're kidding, right? They don't want us to kill terrorists? Who's side are they on, anyway?"

OK, anyway. Where was I? Oh yeah.

Just as the punditocracy begins to whine that we're killing too many terrorists, and therefore ruining the war on terrorism, we hear of some major victories.

A top Taliban commander in Pakistan has been captured (which might have been lagniappe), as has another in Oman, and another in Pakistan.

This adds to many others killed in various kinds of strikes. And it seems to be working.




As if college being more expensive wasn't hard enough, now it's becoming harder to get a loan.




Well, if they can't get a loan to go, perhaps there are other incentives for the nation's increasingly-endangered male college students.

In all seriousness though, more people are paying attention to the increasing gender gap in colleges.




This is moderately funny.

NEW YORK (The Borowitz Report) – In the wake of his comments about the earthquake in Haiti, televangelist Pat Robertson has become a “public relations nightmare” and a “gynormous embarrassment to me, personally,” God said today.


Except that the "ironic interviews with god" genre has already been done so well, that even now it's a hard act to top.




OK, this is good news on the progressive front:

Washington, D.C. – Nancy Keenan, president of NARAL Pro-Choice America, praised an independent committee at the Department of Defense for adding emergency contraception (EC) to the list of medications made available to servicemembers overseas. Approximately 350,000 women serve in the military or depend on military facilities for their health care abroad.


But I have to say, when this is the good news we're celebrating—that we'll graciously allow women to purchase contraception—we're probably losing the battle.




There's a difference between climate and weather.




The proliferation of free online courses is an interesting trend.






Beer of the week:


You haven't heard of Brew Dog beer? Not surprising. Their beers are mainly available in the UK, and even there are premium beers, and not widely available in the U.S. I've had their Paradox Imperial Stout and the Hardcore IPA.

I enjoyed both. But the article about their Sink the Bismark beer at Huffington Post really caught my eye.


Labels: ,

 
by AndrewMc | 2/09/2010 05:00:00 AM
Welcome to Tuesday. What ails ya?




Labels: ,

 
by AndrewMc | 1/18/2010 07:24:00 AM
Today is the day that the nation celebrates Martin Luther King Day. Expect to see a great number of "I Have A Dream" videos, remembrances, and musings.

The "I Have a Dream Speech" is a popular one for Americans. After all, it's safe. It expresses values with which we are comfortable--equality and fairness. [In fact, part of explaining "I Have a Dream" to schoolchildren today includes explaining the now-bizarre conditions under which it was given--segregation.]

In terms of "conservative themes," King's speech references the Declaration of Independence, the Constitution, and the Emancipation Proclamation. Its style follows, to some degree, a classic American genre--the jeremiad.

And so, people love it.

But . . .





. . . the "I Have a Dream" Speech is probably not the one for which I would memorialize MLK. In fact, "I Have a Dream" is pretty tame compared to where MLK had gone by the end of his life. When King was fighting against segregation, he was essentially fighting against something that the vast majority of non-Southern whites could see as weird. [I know, I know, I know that segregation was not just a "southern" thing--it was going on in other states. But the struggle was being played out in the south. And the south was seen by non-southerners as a backward, strange place.]

So, the fight against segregation, while incredibly difficult, was a fight against a regional problem--southern extremism.

But by 1968 MLK had begun what he called his "Poor People's Campaign," in which he was highlighting the multiracial nature of poverty in the Untied States. He began to travel across the United States, giving speeches on the nature of poverty in the United States, and on the fundamental unfairness of the American economy.

By this point, King had become quite radicalized. And here he wasn't challenging a problem confined to one part of the country.

Consider his words from the speech "A New Sense of Direction," in which he spoke to the SCLC about the next phase of the struggle, in order to prepare them for the "Poor People's Campaign." Here he talks about the causes of recent riots across the nation:

I find five basic causes of riots—the white backlash; pervasive discriminatory practices; unemployment; the war in Vietnam; and the urban problems of crime and extensive migration.


He goes on from there to explain these problems, but it should be noted that these aren't problems that can be written off as "regional" in nature. He's getting at system, national issues that struck at the heart of the American system in all forms--social, economic, racial.

To redress these issues he planned to call for massive action and change that bordered on the revolutionary:


Now this leads me to say that we must formulate a program and we must fashion the new tactics which do not count on government goodwill but instead serve to compel unwilling authorities to yield to the mandates of justice. We must demand, for instance, an emergency program to provide employment for everyone in need of a job, or, if a work program is impractical, a guaranteed annual income at levels that sustain life in decent circumstances. A second feature of our program must be the demolition of slums and rebuilding by the population that lives in them. Third, we must make a massive move toward self-determination and the shaping of our own destiny. In other words, we must get rid of the domestic colony which is the ghetto. Fourth, we must delve deeply into the political arena. Wherever possible we must elect well-qualified and committed Negro candidates, as we have in Cleveland, Gary, and in states all across the South. In Mississippi, Louisiana and Georgia we have, for the first time, Negroes in state legislatures. We've got to escalate this kind of program, and it is high time that we retire all the white racists who are in Congress. They can be retired if we vote in larger numbers.


How to do this? Mobilize willing groups of people. Who?


The largest group of young people is struggling to adapt itself to the prevailing values of our society. Without much enthusiasm they accept the system of government, the economic relationships of the property system, and the social stratifications our system engenders.

[...]

There is a second group of young people, presently small in number but dynamic and growing. They are the radicals. They range from moderate to extreme in the degree to which they want to alter the social system.

[...]

The young people in the third group are sometimes called hippies. They are struggling to disengage from society and to give expression to their rejection of it. They disavow responsibility to organize society.



In other words, MLK proposed to unite a large cross-current of American society in a struggle to essentially overturn the American system in order to redress fundamental issues of economic and social injustice. This was radical stuff.


Go to youtube, and try to find any speech by King that isn't "I Have a Dream," or his final speech. Nearly impossible. The King we want to remember is the King that secures our own conservative values.

The King I want to remember is the one who tries to move us forward to address more difficult concerns.


Labels: , ,

 
by AndrewMc | 1/04/2010 05:31:00 AM
Well, it's time once again for that glorious concoction called the "Annual Meeting."

If you're headed there, drop me a line and maybe we can get together for a beer/tea/margarita/water/whatever. E-mail me through the feedback form, or through facebook, or wherever.


Meantime, what are your thoughts on the AHA Annual meeting?





Labels: , ,

 
by AndrewMc | 12/29/2009 06:45:00 PM
We're fast approaching the end of the aughts. What are your highlights and lowlights?






Labels: ,

 
by AndrewMc | 12/07/2009 08:17:00 AM
Today is the day, of course, that Japan attacked the United States of America, leading to the official entry of the United States into World War II.

Around the country, Americans will mark the anniversary with flag-raisings, ceremonies, and various remembrances.



Franklin Roosevelt gave what might be the most famous speech in American history:


[transcript here]


But I wonder: Does this anniversary still hold the same sway that it did even ten years ago? I remember when I was young that Pearl Harbor Day was marked in schools with a big program where we studied the events of the day, listened to the speech, made flags, and participated in other remembrances. I don't see that so much any more.

Is this because of the passing of the WW2 generation? Or is there something else going on?


Labels: ,

 
by AndrewMc | 12/06/2009 08:56:00 AM
It is my sad duty to report the passing of one of our longtime contributors, John Russell, aka Bastoche. His longtime struggle with cancer ended Saturday morning after visits from close colleagues, friends, and students.

He will be missed. His writings here included two long-time series--"Cowboy Nation" and "History and the Kagans: Paradise and Power."

As many know, it takes a great deal of commitment in order to post regularly to a blog. It takes even more to post a regular series. To publish a pair of them--the rough equivalent of a couple of journal articles in length--speaks to John's commitment to, and passion for, advocating for progressive causes and subjects.

Inasmuch as John was a committed progressive, he was also an extremely gifted writer. Nowhere was this on greater display than in his essay "Our Window of Opportunity," in which a flowing narrative served as the backdrop for a sharp, insightful examination of the meaning of the U.S. occupation of Iraq.

John also contributed to Daily Kos. He will be missed.

The announcement read as follows:

Dr. John Russell, Senior Professor in the English/Fine Arts/Modern Languages Department, passed away early this morning, after a long illness.

Friends may call at Dooley's Funeral Home, 218 North Avenue, W., Cranford, on Monday, December 7 from 2:00 - 4:00 pm, and from 7:00 - 9:00 pm.

The funeral service will be held on Tuesday, December 8 at 10:00 am, also at Dooley's, followed by internment at Fairview Cemetery, Westfield.

The family has asked that donations be made, in lieu of flowers, to the Cancer Research Institute, One Exchange Plaza, 55 Broadway, Suite 1802, New York, NY 10006, in the name of John Joseph Russell.

A valued and long serving member of the ENG/FIA/ML Dept., he will be missed by his colleagues, students and friends.

Prof. Robert Comeau
Coordinator of Credit English





Labels: , ,

 
by AndrewMc | 12/04/2009 12:01:00 PM
I have the feeling that the country is on the edge of historic health care reform that will fundamentally transform the nation, moving us forward in ways that we can't quite envision.

Either that, or we're in for Epic Fail.


Anyone else tired of the Obama/LBJ comparisons? Follow me.



The "Obama-as-LBJ" meme is getting an amazing amount of play in the press, although it started literally the day before the election. And continued right after.

But here's a truncated list:

NPR: LBJ Arm-Twisting? Not Really Obama's Style

"Noted Historian Doris Kearns Goodwin [who couldn't possibly have an LBJ-o-philiac horse in the race, right?]": Doris Kearns Goodwin Wants "More LBJ" From Obama When Dealing With Congress

Op-Ed News: "Obama's LBJ Moment"

The American Spectator: "Obama's LBJ Syndrome"

CNN: "Five Questions for Obama on Afghan War"

That doesn't even count the blogosphere, where LBJ-Obama comparisons grow like weeds in spring. It's amazing. And it's an awful comparison for a number of reasons. Heck, even the American Spectator made the point.

Let me say that I understand why reporters like it: it's easy. It takes very little effort to make the connection, because you don't need to do any research whatsoever. You can easily, and unthinkingly equate elements of major events in both administrations:

Afghanistan? Easy! It's just like Vietnam! Large war with native insurgency, no clear strategy for victory, corrupt local puppet government, growing cadre of anti-war groups.

Health Care Reform? Easy! Just like the Great Society programs! Trying to bring health care to more people who can't afford it.

Except it is, of course, not that easy. And I'm not sure that the situation is made any better by the historians advising him, many of whom came of age in the Vietnam anti-war movement during LBJ's presidency. And many of whom have authored books on LBJ, or served on his staff.

I'm gonna get in big trouble for saying this, I'm sure, but more than any other generation, people who grew up in the 1960s have a much greater tendency to see the world through the lens of their own experiences, and to see the 1960s as one of the seminal periods in American history. I disagree, but then again I'm a colonialist. [Obama as Hamilton? as Gibbon? as François Quesnay? Those would require some work, and a populace educated enough to move past their 8th-grade history texts.].

The oversimplification is maddening, disingenuous, and lends a relevance to a time period that may not, in fact, be all that important in this case. Does it hold lessons for us? Yes, of course. Should it be central to our understanding of Afghanistan and health care and financial reform, and all the other things we need to accomplish? I don't think so.

By linking Obama so closely with LBJ in the public mind, we might be creating a self-fulfilling prophecy.

Anyway, that's my ramble on the subject. Once again, I refer to a wonderful piece "Who Owns the Sixties," which appeared in the old magazine Lingua Franca, which highlights the struggle of historians, and by extension the United States, to get out from under the long shadow of that era.



I taught kindergarten for a while. If I was to teach anywhere but college, this would be it.



Faculty governance is important, even the little things. The number of arguments I've had with administrators here over what "faculty representation" means on a committee. "Faculty Representation" means "someone picked by the duly elected representative body of the faculty [ie. the Faculty Senate], not "someone handpicked by the administration" [ie. some tool who's going to agree with whatever the President wants. It may sound like a small issue, but if administrations want their initiatives to be taken seriously, there has to be true faculty representation.




This is a bit worrisome.




Sanity prevails at Hofstra.

After a comprehensive review, the Board of Trustees has, at my recommendation, voted unanimously to eliminate our intercollegiate football program in order to redirect those resources toward academic initiatives and need-based scholarships.


I love college football. But for some schools it's just not right.




Beer of the week? Yes, Samuel Adams. But no, not the regular Sam Adams Boston Lager in the blue-label bottle that, while good, is now just an ordinary beer.

Instead, I'm thinking of some of the more radical beers that they produce. The picture at left is of the Sam Adams Triple Bock, which came in a small 8 oz. bottle and was produced in the 1990s. This is a gigantic, robust beer with an absolutely astonishing taste. I still have about six or eight of these, and I have about one a year. It's like sipping brandy.

Or, go for a Millennium, a bottle of which sold for nearly $5000 at a charity auction [not to me, unfortunately]. Sam Adams brewed the Millennium for the Y2K celebrations, and only made 3000 bottles of it. You can still find them occasionally on eBay, where they go for about $1000. The style of beer insures that it will store and age for about 10 years. It's a 40-proof beer, so you'll only need one.

You could also try a Utopia, a 25% abv beer. They go for a few hundred a bottle, last I checked.

Closer to a normal price range is the Sam Adams Chocolate Bock, which sells in many liquor and grocery stores. It's got a very rich flavor. For a beer that I'd agree is only "decent" it is a bit pricey.

Or, simply go for one of the many, many "normal" beers they make.





Labels: ,

 
by AndrewMc | 12/01/2009 11:28:00 AM
From last Tuesday through Sunday early morning I was without any internet access whatsoever. It wasn't planned--I stayed in a house that didn't have it, and I could neither pull in any wireless from nearby, nor did I have time to go to a local wi-fi spot.

I know some people find this liberating, but in the middle of the peak of grading season, I don't. I would rather have gone without indoor plumbing. How's that for a pampered western-elite perspective on what's important?

What's on your mind?





Labels: ,

 
by AndrewMc | 11/22/2009 08:00:00 AM
Not much content here, but I thought that this video of the first Thanksgiving--as told by children--was pretty good. As they say, "out of the mouths of babes."


Enjoy!








Labels: , ,

 
by AndrewMc | 11/20/2009 12:01:00 PM
It's Friday. Ramble on!



Whew. What a week. Follow me on below . . .



A decades-long shift in university governance away from faculty toward administrators means that faculty have a much weaker voice than ever. With budget cuts and shrinking lines, it is critically important for university faculty to organize, organize, organize.

Along those lines:

Last year, Willamette University took a step toward reducing tensions surrounding the budget. As we planned for the current year, we faced the high degree of uncertainty that the financial crisis has forced on many universities. We dealt with this situation by shifting from planning a fixed budget to planning a flexible one. The process required to design this more elaborate plan resulted in unusually deep discussion between faculty members and administrators about which high-priority items needed to be included in the “base” budget and which could be deferred pending receipt of the revenue that might be generated by higher enrollment. Contingency plans were thus devised and discussed before we incorporated them into the budget.


This is a good idea, and one that I hope spreads to other institutions. Faculty have a wealth of experience in a variety of disciplines. Use it.






On the "let's ruin education" front:

Note:

In the past decade or so, the practice of faculty governance has become increasingly vexed by the proliferation of special interest research and teaching centers sponsored by outside benefactors who expect to be involved in the content and management of programs they pay for. University administrations, strapped for resources and hungry for fame, have found it difficult to turn down any offer of support for teaching and research, even if it comes with ideological mandates.



It spans disciplines:

In the new audit, the inspector general [for the Department of Health and Human Services] reviewed data from the federal government's 2006 fiscal year and found universities almost always trust scientists to judge whether their stock holdings or payments from outside medical companies pose any conflict of interest.


At my own school we have the "BB&T Professor for the Study of Capitalism." The money for it came from a bank, and one of the conditions is that the professor assign Ayn Rand in his classes. That seems crazy to me, but I'm told that "we need the money."


Meanwhile, out in the "heartland," the University of Nebraska is setting the stage for allowing a political agenda to interfere with the educational process in their own system:

In an unusual pushback against President Obama’s expansion of federal financing of human embryonic stem cell research, the University of Nebraska is considering restricting its stem cell experiments to cell lines approved by President George W. Bush.


That sound you hear, and the smell you notice, is the slow decay of American higher education.





Each year the AHA publishes the latest misery in job numbers, and cautions (explicitly or implicitly) that there are too many PhDs out there competing for jobs. OK, OK, sometimes the news is cautiously optimistic, but the job market is very difficult.

The University of California system just approved a 32% tuition increase. I understand that California has its own unique set of problems, but these things are happening everywhere, and the tuition increases are coming on top of layoffs.

As we head into the interview season in San Diego, we should keep asking ourselves if doctoral programs are doing the right thing by continuing to crank out new PhDs each year. Numbers might have been decent last year, but the recession virtually guarantees that in the next few years the job numbers are going to be awful. Universities will be lucky if all they do is not hire for a few years. Many will be cutting faculty, not just letting lines expire.





I don't use Twitter, but I like the concept, and think it's kind of cool. In fact we're talking about setting up a system here on my campus where the various television monitors around campus [which are used for announcements of various kinds] would display a wiffiti screen that would be full of tweets. Students could then respond to an issues-oriented question by tweeting their answers in, which would then be displayed around campus. The idea is to get students civicly engaged.

Still, I'm not sure it's great for discourse--it's more like modern graffiti, I think. But just so you know, they're passing high-tech notes about you while you're talking.

But then again, some people encourage it.

Cole W. Camplese, director of education-technology services at Pennsylvania State University at University Park, prefers to teach in classrooms with two screens — one to project his slides, and another to project a Twitter stream of notes from students. He knows he is inviting distraction — after all, he’s essentially asking students to pass notes during class. But he argues that the additional layer of communication will make for richer class discussions.


I'm not sure that's such a great idea, but whatever. The person is an IT guy who doesn't regularly teach. So this seems experimental, at best.





Beer of the week? Anchor Steam. First brewed in California in the 1880s, "steam" beer (also known as "California Common") is a patented style, although the process is pretty easy.

There are two main types of yeast for brewing: lager yeast (Saccharomyces uvarum) and ale yeast (Saccharomyces cerevisiae). Lager yeast ferments at a low temperature--under 55 degrees Fahrenheit--and at the bottom of the tank. Ale yeast ferments at warmer temperatures--usually between 55 and 75--and at the top of the tank. If the beer is allowed to ferment at higher temperatures, the yeast will produce fusel alcohol in addition to the normal ethyl alcohol. Fusel alcohol is good for some things, but not to drink. It gives beer a solvent-like flavor that is awful.

Steam beer was developed in California, and uses a lager yeast but ferments the sugars at temperatures normally reserved for ale yeasts. In most cases this would give the beer a strong, hot, spicy, solvent flavor. The folks at anchor use a patented strain of yeast, and carefully control the flavor profile with specialty malts and hops.

The result is a strongly-flavored beer that has characteristics of both ale and lager. Yummy.

Why the name "steam?" Nobody's sure, even the people at Anchor.



Labels: ,

 
by AndrewMc | 11/13/2009 12:01:00 PM
It's Friday the 13th! If you are paraskevidekatriaphobic, you're slowing economic recovery. So, get back to work you loafer.

I'll be at an eCitizenship initiative this week, so this "rambling" will be pretty light.


Still, follow me . . .




The White House chef is a history major, University of Chicago, 2004.






On the market?






It looks like the final version of "Race to the Top" will be slightly improved [sub required, new window] from what had originally been proposed.






More schools ought to place academics over athletics. And not just for financial survival.





Whither the food fight [sub required, new window]?





NSSE has always struck me as not far removed from water witching. Researchers seem to agree.






A quick follow-up to my earlier rambling about the "Yes Men." In this older interview they explain their prank on the Chamber of Commerce.

They showed up as soon as these defections started happening. We planned this about a week and a half ago. The Chamber's absurd stance is really what inspired us, of course. The US is the one thing that's holding up the talks in Copenhagen and we have to send Obama to Copenhagen with a climate bill; even though the Kerry-Boxer one isn't great, it's something. And the chamber is opposing climate change legislation and the whole rest of the world is saying we need to do something. Even a lot of big companies are saying we need to do something. The chamber, representing the biggest and stodgiest and most powerful corporations in America is just saying, "Nah, let's let the whole planet go to rot." We just wanted to show what it would look like if they didn't take that absurd stance. And none of the reporters in the room were really surprised.


Now there's the inevitable followup asking if this has all jumped the shark.





History grads have known for quite a while that the swamped job market has meant that teaching at a 2-year college has gotten more competitive, and now pretty much requires a PhD. Even so, the profession has tended to look down on historians at 2-year institutions. That's unfortunate.

Now it turns out that getting into them is becoming even more competitive for students [subscription required]. I notice that this is mostly about New York which, like California, has a 2-year system that is more of a "junior college" system than a refuge for high school underachievers, new immigrants, and people killing time (as was the one where I taught).





Free speech isn't free speech if it's not for everyone, even if I don't agree with it. But what about freedom of the <student> press?





Professors are on strike, and are threatening a no-confidence vote. Do those kinds of votes matter anymore?






The beer of the week? Well, I'm in Detroit this week. First, this place is in bad shape. Bad shape. The recession in Detroit, which I've read about, is much worse in plain sight. It's amazing.

But this is a working-class town. Deeply blue collar. Some of the beer reflects this, but others are more upscale. I had an Arcadia beer the other day. Now, this is a Battle Creek company, not Detroit, but it's close.

I had the Angler's Ale. It was horrible. In fact when the waitress asked how it was I said "garbage." From a slick mouthfeel that might have been an over-soaped glass, to a harsh aftertaste, I absolutely did not like this beer. Generally, the reviews seem to agree.

Other of their beer looks interesting, and I may try a bottled version. But for now, I won't be having this on tap again any time soon.


Labels: ,

 
by AndrewMc | 11/12/2009 02:02:00 PM
I'm at a conference on "eCitizenship" this week.

This three-year initiative is a partnership of AASCU and the Center for the Study of Citizenship at Wayne State University. Still in the beginning phases, the participating thirty-four institutions in this initiative will work together to study how emerging technologies, particularly social networks, support and facilitate civic and political engagement. The main goal of the initiative to provide insights into and strategies for engaging undergraduates in the use of social networks and technology tools for civic purposes. Those strategies can then be broadly employed to prepare undergraduates for lives of engagement and participation.


Fascinating stuff, and it's going to take a while to process it. Meantime, the tweets have been coming in here. Hopefully the video streaming will be archived here.

I've been particularly impressed by a few things.





There are a lot of men and women of different ages and colors. And they're all using so-called social media in some form or another. Some, like me, use it a great deal. From near-constant Facebooking and instant messaging, to blogging, to using Blackboard's content management system, other things, I am online a lot. Others are on social media sites very rarely, and mostly use e-mail and the "old" Web.

So this is a mix of stuff where I'm thinking "wow, I didn't know about that site" (Diigo, Mashable, &c), "I didn't know about that theoretical stuff on how to teach this stuff," and also round table discussions about the role of electronic media in fostering civic engagement.

Other stuff is incredibly mundane--right now someone is showing the crowd how to block personal information from Facebook friends, another is going to talk about Second Life.

But I'm learning a great deal about how this stuff might translate into the classroom and learning a lot about how people see this working, or not working, in our democracy.

I'm also seeing a great deal of wide-eyed cheerleading for things that aren't always there. For example, speaker after speaker has touted the use of Facebook as a way to promote civic engagement. And each one of them has pointed out that Facebook currently has 300 million or so users. OK, that's true. But in reality, nobody reaches all 300 million users, and most people are only going to reach a very small subset of that group.

Another problem arises within that. Take a moment and look at your friend list on Facebook, or the people who follow you on your Twitter feed if you have that. I'm betting that most of your Facebook friends are people who think mostly like you do. There's an application in Facebook to aggregate that data, actually. If you use it, check especially the percentage of your friends who share your political views.

Once again, much of this is about potential. But more so this is about new technology for an old media.

That is, in its way, a blog is something like an old colonial-era broadside but with better distribution. Many people published broadsides and left blank pages at the end for people to leave comments. I wonder, as a percentage of the population actually reached, where something like the Huffington Post would stand with regard to Common Sense. HuffPo probably reaches more, but it certainly is less topically focused.

Speaking of HuffPo, José Vargas has been the featured speaker here. He's a super-high energy guy with some really interesting ideas about blogging, "citizen journalism," and the way that blogs can shape, or be shaped, by public input. His talk was interesting and I hope will be on the streaming archives linked above.

Far more interesting with him was a small group discussion about the meaning of "citizen journalism," and how this is either good or bad for the way that people get news. Talking with him has been great, and I hope that he can get the HuffPo folks to start and education section on their site. It would be helpful.

In all, it's been an interesting few days. I don't usually enjoy this kind of all-day seminar stuff. Usually it's not all that educational. This one has been different and has brought out some very promising stuff.


Labels: , , ,

 
by AndrewMc | 11/10/2009 05:10:00 AM
What's on your mind? Me, I'm thinking about the middle-semester crush of grading, meetings, conferences, and &c.





Labels: ,