One of the saddest features of American life is the pervasive bias that hides itself under a cloak of tolerance. Supposedly, American universities promote freedom of thought and speech, but they don’t. Here are a couple of articles that demonstrate just how obvious the bias has become.
Here is the first.
Liberal graduation speakers outnumber conservatives 12 to 1, study finds (washingtontimes.com)
WESTMINSTER, COLORADO – Students at Colorado Christian University spotted an endangered species in the world of higher education: a conservative graduation speaker.
Bestselling author Eric Metaxas delivered Saturday’s commencement address here at the 1stBank Center, making him one of the few political conservatives invited this year to speak to college graduates. According to a report released this week by Young America’s Foundation, liberal speakers outnumbered conservatives 12 to 1. (continued here)
Here is the second.
At top 45 colleges, no conservatives invited for commencement: report (foxnews.com)
Who’s delivering college commencement addresses this year? Not a conservative.
A report from Young America’s Foundation shows that, of the top 45 schools in the country, not a single institution invited a conservative. When the list is expanded to the top 100 colleges as ranked by US News & World Report, only three speakers are conservative whereas 38 are liberal, a 12:1 ratio.
“America’s top institutions continue to be abandoned as sites of higher education and turned into indoctrination centers,” YAF spokesman Spencer Brown said in a statement. “As if four years of being fed leftist pablum wasn’t enough, too many schools shove their students out the door with one last liberal lesson.” (continued here)
Why have our big named universities become so biased in their choice of speakers? Supposedly, government funding is neutral, but it is not. The name of the paymaster makes a difference, and the people who run those big universities know who is buttering their bread. So it is that big government, really just a godless socialist ideology, is popular with most of the folks who run our universities.
What is funny is that the people who run our universities will tell you that they are not ideological. No, there are just right. It is those right-wing Conservatives who are ideologues. Yet we all have an ideology, a set of beliefs that guide us. That includes the people who run our universities, and too many of these people hold beliefs that justifies intolerance, and that intolerance is part of what they are teaching the young men and women we have put into their care.
Instead of teaching our young people how to challenge what they believe, to examine their assumptions, our universities indoctrinate our children, too often stressing the importance of conforming with what they are taught is politically correct. That bodes ill for the future of our nation.
Citizen Tom 
Anon you claim. “Other “potentially traumatic” things include illegitimacy, sexual intercourse, sexually transmitted diseases, teenage pregnancy, divorce, drug (both legal and/or illegal) drug use.”
Sure, these things you mention are traumatic, however it is hard to explain and you will never understand until you have been in that stressful situation. I do hope you never have to find out, but it is a far different type of emotional event than your list of items.
You also claimed. “Also, you do not seem to understand the difference between indoctrination and guidance.”
Indoctrination has nothing to do with guidance, where have I said it did?
“Sure, these things you mention are traumatic, however it is hard to explain and you will never understand until you have been in that stressful situation. I do hope you never have to find out, but it is a far different type of emotional event than your list of items.
I’m not sure I understand the above. The vast majority of mass shooters are from broken homes. Are you saying that being the victim of a shooting is more impactful than a broken family? One is infinitesimally unlikely, the other highly likely and in large part a response to the direction our culture is headed (away from traditional Christian family values).
My father in law died a few days ago. He and his wife had been together since they were 16 years old. 52 years. When my husband was ten, his father left the family for about a week. His parents were going to get a divorce and his father had already found an apartment. My husband stopped eating and did nothing but cry the entire week. His father returned to his mother in large part due to his emotional distress. He told me a couple of days ago he thinks that’s the best thing his father ever did for him…come back home. If he hadn’t, he would have grown up to be an entirely different person. Now, my spouse has been shot at many times (none hit, thankfully) by some pretty advanced military kit. But that didn’t impact him as much, emotionally, as a father leaving during his childhood would have.
I do not disagree with much of what you say, however one thing I have to point out, and that is we all react very differently to the same experiences in our lives.
The fact is trauma does not come with one set of physical or psychological rules and outcomes, it will affect people in many different and sometimes weird ways.
I had a friend who became a psychological mess if he heard a car backfire, it would bring the fear and the memories of the violence back to him. I also know some young children who are today traumatised who are prone to bed wetting and various other behavioural problems due to being removed from their terrible mother and having their father jailed as a drug dealer.
Your claim, “and in large part a response to the direction our culture is headed (away from traditional Christian family values).”
Traditional Christian family values do not guarantee any such stability to a family or a repair for human psychological conditions and in some cases it has contributed to the problems. The diversity of humans is what Christians and indeed all religions should understand. We are not all the same, there are massive cultural, social and political differences even within communities.
Atheists can be as moralistic and in some cases more moralistic than Christians, Muslims are generally moral people even though they have many radical extremists within their communities. The Christian families have the same inherent problems that are as undeniable as any atheist or other religious families have to endure.
There is no magic solution and one hat does not fit all and it never has throughout our entire history, and it never will because you cannot find a moment in history that peace was always been maintained between tribes, religions, politics, communities, countries and even the alliances of many countries.
When people think fathers don’t matter, they are being quite stupid. The father has to be a real rat for that to be true.
Great piece, Leftist Extremists aren’t suitable leaders.
Thank you.
I try to be as judicious about the way I use language. I don’t think the expression “Leftist Extremists” means much (=> https://citizentom.com/2018/05/10/of-twisted-words-left-wing-and-right-wing/). So I don’t use the expression.
Who is not a suitable leader? Well, I think we would agree is that what matters the most is the character of the person. Can we trust them? Do they respect the rights of others?
I think our government has to much involvement in our education system. The evident bias shows that power is being abused, which is what we would expect no matter who is in charge of it. As a man wiser than I once said, “power corrupts”.
Whether they are extremists or not, a bunch of people who vote Democrat run our universities, and they avoid hiring Republicans. They don’t seem to have any use for Conservatives. Even though our universities receive lots of government funding, it may not be illegal for them to consider the politics of the people they hire (not certain about that), but it is clearly an abuse of power.
@sklyjd,/tom
Education involves the seeking of facts and learning about what is the truth, and what is not. … You can be indoctrinated into a political party, a cult, or a belief system.
If we discern the above explanations, it appears to me, the truth is what needs to be taught at an early age.
Questions
Is teaching a youth, to love and treat your neighbor same as you would yourself, a falsehood?
Are teaching youth, “thou shalt not kill, steal, or to honor their parents, etc. falsehoods?
Confusion?
Seems to me there are misconceptions about the differences in teaching facts and truth to youth, vs indoctrinating youth to believe teaching religious beliefs are falsehoods, cults, political beliefs.
Regards and good will blogging.
.
“One of the saddest features of American life is the pervasive bias that hides itself under a cloak of tolerance.”
This is something I agree with, universities should not employ political extremist administrators and if they promote political idealism in any fashion it must always be balanced.
“Instead of teaching our young people how to challenge what they believe, to examine their assumptions, our universities indoctrinate our children, too often stressing the importance of conforming with what they are taught is politically correct. That bodes ill for the future of our nation.”
Granted, but the one thing these students do possess is maturity. Most of them should by the age of 18 plus have a good idea of how to apply a logical and a sensible approach to what is being drummed into their heads and have the ability to apply pressure to the controlling powers of what speakers they would like to hear.
This is why I take issue with religious indoctrination of younger children. We have immature children from nappy stage to early teenage years being indoctrinated just as you have stated by “stressing the importance of conforming with what they are taught”. Do you now understand how damaging indoctrination can be for the young child being unable to examine their assumptions and decide their own futures?
@sklyjd
Instead of repeating myself or trying to restate what insanitybytes2 said quite well, I will point you to a couple of comments.
=> https://citizentom.com/2018/05/21/what-ideological-beliefs-do-you-want-your-children-to-learn/comment-page-1/#comment-80988
=> https://citizentom.com/2018/05/21/what-ideological-beliefs-do-you-want-your-children-to-learn/comment-page-1/#comment-80980
When everyone is indoctrinated in the same beliefs and the news media has almost almost universally the same biases, that creates creates a real problem. Hence, I think parents should be in charge, not you or me.
“I think parents should be in charge, not you or me.”
Agree totally, however good parents would not even consider indoctrinating their children with religious or political ideologies.
18 school shooting so far this year in the USA. This is what the real concern should be, education in a safe environment, first of all.
@sklyjd
Frankly, I doubt we would agree upon the definition of a good parent. That’s why I keep telling you to be a “good” parent to your children and let other people try to do the same for their children. Don’t be a busybody.
18 school shootings? Even Snopes does not support that.
https://www.snopes.com/news/2018/02/16/how-many-school-shootings-in-2018/
A good parent does not indoctrinate their child, there is no two ways about it. It is forced ideological belief onto children’s developing brains, no different from communist regimes.
The figure I had was from Wikipedia where they detailed each one. Ok you may not consider some of them very serious such as accidental or where no injuries occur, however I would bet that every time a gun goes off in a school, intentionally or not, and whether anyone is injured or not, it’s potentially traumatic for students, teachers, and parents.
@sklyjd
You are trying to win the debate by exaggerating the problem and demonizing your opponent. That’s demagoguery.
Consider the meaning of the word “indoctrinate”. There are two meanings.
The first definition is just teaching the basics of a doctrine. The second involves an additional step, instilling enthusiasm for a doctrine or belief.
Neither meaning for “indoctrinate” akin to brainwashing, which would actually be wrong. Yet that is the way you are trying to use the word “indoctrinate”, which is silly. You don’t believe anything which you preach with enthusiasm? 🙄
To preach your Gospel of protecting children from their Christian parents, what do you use for ammo? Effectively you exaggerate the problem of school shootings to the point where you are making stuff up. 18 school shooting this year? Hogwash! Peddling that sort of irresponsible tripe is scarier than what your are preaching against.
Your Merriam Webster dictionary goes out of its way to gloss over the meanings of the English language for the benefit of Christians, butchering the English language is one thing but now arranging the meanings of words to suit an ideology. How uncultured can you get?
The real meanings are from proper English dictionaries such as:
Cambridge Dictionary, indoctrination is to often repeat an idea or belief to someone in order to persuade them to accept it.
Oxford Dictionary, indoctrination is the process of teaching a person or group to accept a set of beliefs uncritically. Examples are: ‘I would never subject children to religious indoctrination’ ‘he denounces political indoctrination in the classroom’ ‘methods that were approved for indoctrination in divinity’
Google dictionary, Indoctrination is the process of teaching a person or group to accept a set of beliefs uncritically. Examples are: “I would never subject children to religious indoctrination” “methods that were approved for indoctrination in divinity”
“Neither meaning for “indoctrinate” akin to brainwashing, which would actually be wrong.”
Cambridge Dictionary, brainwash, to make someone believe something by repeatedly telling them that it is true and preventing any other information from reaching them.
Not much difference is there? In fact I would say this would be the case where many parents home school their children and do not allow them to mix with non-Christian people.
“Effectively you exaggerate the problem of school shootings to the point where you are making stuff up.” Hogwash! Peddling that sort of irresponsible tripe is scarier than what your are preaching against.”
Why do you not go to the source I mentioned before claiming “Hogwash and I make stuff up” I think you have exposed your ignorance here.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_school_shootings_in_the_United_States
This site gives a heap of information from many years of shootings, so scroll down to the bottom where the number of shootings this year has actually been updated to 21. Of course, I expect you will reject most of the shootings as not serious enough because nobody died or was injured, but you will find it acceptable to discharge a firearm within school grounds and scare the shit out of children, or you will claim it is all fabricated lies.
@sklyjd
Stubborn! When people think of a school shooting (Note the word school is being used as an adjective.), they have something more in mind than a shooting that just happens to take place at a school.
Are you familiar with the word hyperbole? Look it up. “Hyperbole” is in the dictionary too. When they are trying to persuade people, some people use lots of hyperbole. Since hyperbole can misrepresent the facts, I try to avoid it.
Some people, like yourself, want to equate indoctrination with brainwashing. That’s stupid! Brainwashing is what the communists did to our POWs. By comparison, I think those guys would have considered mere indoctrination in communism a pleasure.
What indoctrination involves is persistent and earnest instruction. If I were an elementary schoolteacher, it would be my obligation to persistently and earnestly inculcate the value of knowing how to read into my students. As a teacher, my first job is making my students understand the value of what they are learning. That makes all good teaching a form of indoctrination.
Brainwashing children would be a severe form child abuse.
Do some people indoctrinate the gullible in horribly flawed ideologies? Yes, but the problem is what is taught, not the method. What you are trying to do is conflate the method with an ideology you don’t like. That’s dishonest.
“some people use lots of hyperbole. Since hyperbole can misrepresent the facts,”
Well, it would be only hyperbole to you. These shootings are factual and obviously you do not understand or have not bothered to care how uncontrolled gunshots in such a place as a school or shopping centre can become a lot more than hyperbole for many people, especially children when so many shootings have taken place in recent times. My own experiences of being shot at as a soldier and not knowing where the snipper is located is ingrained psychologically and believe me I do not use hyperbole when I tell you it is very scary and unnerving to say the least. Take a look at these shooting statistics.
http://www.gunviolencearchive.org/
“Some people, like yourself, want to equate indoctrination with brainwashing. That’s stupid! Brainwashing is what the communists did to our POWs. By comparison, I think those guys would have considered mere indoctrination in communism a pleasure.”
Granted, this type of brainwashing of adult soldiers installed the fear of pain and death and that would have some advantages for changing minds than more non-violent methods. Many communist regimes however only used non-violent methods on children when they were at their most vulnerable years.
“If I were an elementary schoolteacher, it would be my obligation to persistently and earnestly inculcate the value of knowing how to read into my students.”
Teaching children to read is not indoctrination of an ideological belief of adults, you need to know the difference, it is about learning fundamental skills and even if it is referred to as an indoctrination process, reading and writing are what we all need to learn in this modern technical world that will enable us to educate ourselves further and communicate with others. Do you disagree with that?
“What you are trying to do is conflate the method with an ideology you don’t like. That’s dishonest.”
This is a comment I would expect, however let me tell you that any indoctrination of children and the key word is “children” with any adult’s ideological beliefs be it religion, politics or radical lifestyles has to be wrong. Most adults can choose to believe what they want, whereas children cannot.
@sklyjd
If you insist upon using meaningless hyperbole, I can’t stop you. I can point to your defective reasoning, but I cannot make your reasoning my own.
Does teaching a child to read involve indoctrination ideological belief of adults? Of course, it does. Is the Bible the revelation of God? Are the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution ideological in their nature? When a teacher tells children why it is important to learn to read, she has to tell them what they will be able to read. And little children are eager to grow up.
To provide us a start in life, we all have to be taught something. That’s why parents, not politicians, should decide what their children should learn and who teaches them.
Are we stuck with the beliefs we acquire as children? No. If nothing else, the history of Christianity makes it clear that we can be converted from one belief to another. There is even hope for you.
“Does teaching a child to read involve indoctrination ideological belief of adults? Of course, it does.”
You cannot or will not understand what ideological belief is, or the difference between an indoctrination and education.
Education involves the seeking of facts, and learning about what is the truth, and what is not. Indoctrination is aimed at influencing people to believe in facts, without being able to back up these newfound facts with anything but opinion.
http://www.differencebetween.net/miscellaneous/difference-between-education-and-indoctrination/
Ideology from Cambridge dictionary is based on or relating to a particular set of ideas or beliefs. A set of beliefs or principles, especially one on which a political system, party, or organization is based.
“When a teacher tells children why it is important to learn to read, she has to tell them what they will be able to read.”
You are a conspiracist. Most teachers in most schools take their job seriously and are professionals and therefore would not coerce children to read books and works that are of their personal beliefs and not acceptable by the curriculum with an intent to indoctrinate them.
“There is even hope for you.”
Not in any religious or political systems, I make my way as an atheist and not affiliated to any particular political ideals apart from those that are positive for human wellbeing and survival.
@sklyjd
You are running around terrified parents will teach their children their religious beliefs, and you are calling me a conspiracist? That is funny!
What you are trying to do is impose your personal ideas upon others. So you have this highfalutin idea of what an education should be. That’s “nice”, but to impose it you have to implement a solution that does far more harm than your imaginary problem.
You are not rational neither are you making sense, is it because I destroyed your ideological perception of indoctrination and school shootings?
What ideas are I imposing? The idea that indoctrination of children is wrong is not just my “highfalutin” idea, most psychiatrists and neuroscientists will tell you it is not wise and could be detrimental for the child.
I am not “terrified parents will teach their children their religious beliefs” I am concerned that intelligent children will be indoctrinated by their parents into the young Earth creationism doctrine where Adam and Eve are preached as real people, that dinosaurs lived with humans and the Earth is only 6000 years old and ruin what could be potential careers and futures of children particularly in scientific fields who could achieve big things. This, aside from being indoctrinated into the idea of being born a terrible sinner and made to feel guilty because Jesus was sacrificed to save them and if they do not devote themselves to God they will go to hell with Satan to burn forever and this of course will scare the crap out of young children.
@sklyjd
Nobody trust politicians, but you want politicians instead of parents to control the education of children. We have been trying that system, and it does not work too well. Even home schooling works better.
Unfortunately, lots of special interests like things the way they are. Just follow the money, and it is not difficult to understand why.
I think it fascinating how you say you are not terrified. Then you list the things that terrify you. Gosh! Little children will grow up not believing in what you call SCIENCE. They might even believe in God. Pathetic!
Check out the comments at => https://rudymartinka.com/2018/05/22/king-solomon-guns-cultures-schools-real-truth-clue/. I don’t see much point in repeating the same arguments here too.
” I would bet that every time a gun goes off in a school, intentionally or not, and whether anyone is injured or not, it’s potentially traumatic for students, teachers, and parents.”
This is very very similar to the canned response Everytown made when their statistics were called into question.
I must conclude that you were being purposefully misleading.
Yes, indeed, any time a gun goes off in school it is “potential traumatic”.
Other “potentially traumatic” things include illegitimacy, sexual intercourse, sexually transmitted diseases, teenage pregnancy, divorce, drug (both legal and/or illegal) drug use.
Also, you do not seem to understand the difference between indoctrination and guidance. For example, if/when I smack my toddler’s arm if he puts a fork near an outlet, I am not indoctrinating him. I am attempting to train him not to hurt himself.
Just to add, there’s also the drug use that is mandated by the state.
“Put your kid on this or else”. The “potential trauma” of this is very real, happening right now, and about the most impactful variable (aside from divorce and/or fatherlessness) in school shootings.
Teen suicide rates have gone up 70 percent in the past ten years.
Why should this come as a surprise to anyone?
About one in five college students identifies as conservative or far-right.
About two in five college students identifies as liberal or far-left.
That’s two to one leaning left, with another two in the middle of this.
So at the vast majority of colleges the leaning of the students is decidedly to the left.
If the students decided who is to give the commencement speech, guess who they will pick.
If the administration decides and wants to make the majority of students happy, guess who they will pick.
This has nothing to do with funding or political machinations, it is simply majority rule at work, the same mechanism you use to elect your congress.
Yeah! Sure! No surprise. 🙄
The indoctrination starts in kindergarten. Most American children attend public schools. Their teachers belong to teachers unions. These unions are solidly behind the Democratic Party and spend lots of money supporting it.
Around 10 percent of the delegates to the 2008 Democratic National Convention were members of the teachers’ union. If it were not for superdelegates that number would be even higher.
The whole idea of government-run schools is a political machination. There is no reason to put people nobody trusts, politicians, in charge of the education of our children.
Altruism is strong in children and those growing up. We teach them to know better.
“If a person is not a liberal when he is twenty, he has no heart; if he is not a conservative when he is forty, he has no head.” Attributed to various prominent politicians.
Yeah. I have heard that.
Children are use to having someone else spend their money on them. Since their parents are spending their own money on someone they love, that altruism makes sense.
Altruism with other people’s money is even stronger in demagogues. Since demagogues love themselves so much, when they spend other people’s money, they spend most of it poorly and steal the rest.
What keeps conservatives from becoming teachers? A grand conspiracy of people putting stones in their way or do conservatives simply think they can spend their time better and more gainful than educating the children of other people? Something else?
@marmoewp
What keeps conservatives from becoming teachers? That’s easy. Intolerance.
Look at what the typical Liberal Democrat thinks of Donal Trump or thought of George W. Bush.
Can you imagine Conservative history professor going for job interview? Once the Liberals interviewing him got an inkling of his politics, he would not stand a chance. It is not illegal to discriminate based upon political affiliation.
If parents want to pass their own values onto their children, commonsense dictates that they have to control the money. Parents have to decide who teaches their children so they that can control what their children are taught.
Reality is more complex than you seem to give it credit for.
https://www.insidehighered.com/news/2017/02/27/research-confirms-professors-lean-left-questions-assumptions-about-what-means
TLDR: While academia does have a strong liberal bias, this does not prevent conservatives from prospering, should they wish to pursue that path. Looks like conservatives prefer going into business over academia, rather than being forced out of the research and teaching profession because of their political views.
@marmoewp
If I thought the world simple, I too would have Utopian visions. As it is, reality is probably more complex than either of us can imagine. I like the way Shakespeare put it.
Seriously, it takes a lot of simplification to think the government can run our education system without showing favoritism towards certain groups and beliefs. Because we think the world simple, we tend to be awfully judgmental.
When I say academia biased towards Liberal Democrats, am I claiming Conservatives are better people. No. I just wish Liberal Democrats would stop pretending they are better than Conservatives.
Look at the reaction to the election of Donald Trump and Republican majorities in the House and Senate. When neither side trusts the other, is it not obvious that the power of government has grown too great? Yet blinded be ideology Liberal Democrats wast still more socialism. 😕
Well said,Tom. I really wanted to teach my kids how to think critically for themselves and often how to think outside the box, too. It’s kind of the precise opposite of indoctrination. In truth, I sometimes wish I had indoctrinated them just a tad more, but it’s all good. 🙂
What isn’t good at all is watching them struggle up against what has become very blatant,very intense liberal indoctrination on all fronts, work, play, college, social media, the news. People approval is so important when you’re young and if everyone is telling you “this is how you better think and feel” it carries with it a certain kind of authority. The thing is,you can’t be happy while also buried under layers of deception. There are of course some conservative deceptions too, even deceptions within faith, so my lamentations are not exclusively about politics and liberal bias.
One of my kids bless her heart, noticed a trend where everybody is now posting a picture of having put a red porch light out to signify “this house is a gun free zone.” So than to show everyone how much you care about gun safety you than take a picture with your red porch light, type your address on it and post to social media and twitter. Honestly, one just doesn’t know whether to laugh or cry! It almost sounds like grand conservative prank, but it isn’t at all, it’s a real thing. “I’m unarmed, here’s my address, watch for the red porch light.” Ai yi yi.
I guess someone forgot what “red light district” use to mean. -eg-
Yep! Good point!
😆
so now I am wonder, which is that they are “advertising”:
Free property or *cough* service.
g,d,&r
@insanitybytes22
Red porch light? Had not heard of that one, but I don’t make much use of Facebook. My children make some use of it, but I don’t see that much (out of town), and they are having their children.
All we can do is laugh about red porch lights. My guess is the stupidity will soon become evident.
You are right about the uphill battle, but it was the same in ancient Rome. If we do as you so often say we should, rely on our Savior, he will give us the strength to persevere.
One advantage we have right now is that the Liberal Democrats grew overconfident during the Obama administration. Stories that will make godless big government quite unpopular are slowly coming out.
We must scream, howl, and demand a full accounting. Even the RINOs, not just the Liberal Democrats will object to revealing everything. However, unless they can clearly show they are covering up for the sake Americans who spied on foreign powers, nothing needs to be hidden. We don’t need to protect Americans who betrayed their oaths to support and defend our Constitution. We need to put them in jail.
Here, here! I’m standing and shouting
I attended two university graduations this month, and neither had a commencement speaker. Just brief greetings from the administration, some random music, and the distribution of diplomas. I’m not sure if this was an effort to avoid controversy, or merely a way to shorten the ceremony. J.
Interesting. Does reduce the controversy.
Always thought listening to a good speaker was half the reason for the ceremony, but it can be lots of trouble to find one, particularly one that is acceptable to snowflakes.
In the age of mass media, we don’t have to go to as much trouble to hear a good speech. I wonder if the politically correct will eventually opt provide their graduates a list of prerecorded messages and reduce the graduation “ceremony” to celebration parties separated by race, gender preference, creed and political preference.