Warning

 

Close

Confirm Action

Are you sure you wish to do this?

Confirm Cancel
Member Login
Site Notices
9/22/2017 12:11:25 AM
Arrow Left Previous Page
Page / 2
Posted: 11/8/2005 10:26:33 AM EDT
Transferring sucks, having to take 1st year shit over again despite having over 160 credit hours. Thanks asses, its the same damn class. Anyways...



My teacher has extolled the virtues of socialism on multiple occasions. Now on our next paper, we have to write about Ol’ hot Karl and his Krazy ideas. The big question is, should I slam the shit out of her and her “obviously never been to Europe to see the socialist bullshit in action” or do I get an A? To let you know the extend of her delusion, today she was telling us how socialized medicine and educational systems are the best in the world. Over there kids in the 4th grade are already learning Calculus, thats how much better their education is.

Blah… I think I’m just gonna give Karl a handjob and get the A. I’ll feel better about it knowing that when the zombies/chinese/looters come, she’ll be fucked. Oh well.

Link Posted: 11/8/2005 10:45:36 AM EDT
I say give Karl a knockdown, and if you get a bad grade and it is clear that the bad grade is NOT due to grammar, spelling, organization or facts, take it to the heads of the school.
Link Posted: 11/8/2005 10:47:50 AM EDT
What Greenhorn said.

Fuck Marx, and fuck socialism.
Link Posted: 11/8/2005 10:49:15 AM EDT
Stick it to the wo-man.
Link Posted: 11/8/2005 10:50:28 AM EDT
You don't want your name on some tripe paper like that.

Stand your ground.
Link Posted: 11/8/2005 10:53:36 AM EDT
[Last Edit: 11/8/2005 10:55:36 AM EDT by jcp84]
You could do a little bit of both.

While socialism probably would be ideal IN THEORY, write about how that just doesn't factor correctly into human nature and give examples.

For one, there's too many people littering this earth for it to work. I mean, yes, socialized medicine has good intentions, equal healthcare for everyone, but honestly, some people can just do better. Or worse.

People's health is not EVERYONE else's responsibility, and that's what socialism teaches - that the government and your fellow taxpaying neighbors will take care of you, no matter how much or how little you contribute to society yourself.

Bottom line is, be as objective as possible in your writing. Yes, write about his ideas, then show them in action. Maybe something favorable to her, and maybe something not so favorable. Don't add an opinion to it. If she gives you a crappy grade for exposing the truth, head straight over to the Dean.
Link Posted: 11/8/2005 10:54:19 AM EDT
I would hit the statistics of socialism in action.

How many deaths are attributable to the view that there can actually be such a thing as a benevolant dictatorship.

Then I would change up to the current events angle, starting with the mess socialism is causing in france:

Joel Kotkin (very respected tuy) has a good piece in the Wall Street Journal today on the later topic:

www.opinionjournal.com/editorial/feature.html?id=110007519

(login with "bugmenot@bugmenot.com")
Link Posted: 11/8/2005 10:55:13 AM EDT
What is the subject of your paper supposed to be? Is it an exercise in "understanding" Marx, or is it a "describe what you think of" Marx?
Link Posted: 11/8/2005 10:56:46 AM EDT
From a college student who plays the game:

Get the A. Write shit you dont believe in. Its so much better to get an A on a peper than a C- to make a point. For the same class last year i wrote a paper on Bowling for Columbine and how we need more gun control. Its what teh teacher wanted to hear, and writing a pro-RKBA paper wouldnt change my prof's mind anyways.

Play the game, get the A, graduate and be the most conservative capitalist person you can be. Thats my plan anyways. I tell my liberal prof's what they want to hear no more guns, but on the weekend Im out shooting AK's and AR's.
Link Posted: 11/8/2005 10:59:07 AM EDT
How about a slightly different tact. Everyone attacks the economic aspects of Marx, but what about the political? One of the biggest flaws in communism is that it centralizes all power in the hands of a "revolutionary vanguard" in order to create the socialist utopia. For some reason, Marx thinks that this central government will be benevolent. Argue that brutal dictators such as Joseph Stalin are an inevitable result of the communists centralization of power. You can pretty much adapt the arguments that John Locke and other enlightenment philosophers (and the Founding Fathers) made against monarchy and apply them to communism, which was really nothing more than monarchy on steroids. If you want to get real ambitious, make the argument that because communism seeks such a radical change of society, it is necessarily going to have to "break a lot of eggs" meaning that it will inevitably place people like Joseph Stalin (Lenin's enforcer) into positions from which they can obtain power.

FYI, the key to getting good grades when writing conservative arguments for a lib. prof is to cite, cite, cite. You need to have good sources like Aristotle or Locke or another universally recognized intelligent person to back you up. She'll still think your wrong, but she's not going to flunk you for agreeing with an acknowledged great mind.
Link Posted: 11/8/2005 11:02:05 AM EDT

Originally Posted By jcp84:
You could do a little bit of both.

While socialism probably would be ideal IN THEORY,




no
Link Posted: 11/8/2005 11:07:01 AM EDT

Originally Posted By Kalahnikid:
From a college student who plays the game:

Get the A. Write shit you dont believe in. Its so much better to get an A on a peper than a C- to make a point. For the same class last year i wrote a paper on Bowling for Columbine and how we need more gun control. Its what teh teacher wanted to hear, and writing a pro-RKBA paper wouldnt change my prof's mind anyways.

Play the game, get the A, graduate and be the most conservative capitalist person you can be. Thats my plan anyways. I tell my liberal prof's what they want to hear no more guns, but on the weekend Im out shooting AK's and AR's.



Who needs assault rifles. We can have our hunting bolt guns. Let's compromise here. We're all reasonable men.

<­BR>


No.
Link Posted: 11/8/2005 11:07:50 AM EDT

Originally Posted By Red_Beard:

Originally Posted By jcp84:
You could do a little bit of both.

While socialism probably would be ideal IN THEORY,




no



+1
Link Posted: 11/8/2005 11:09:50 AM EDT
I had some very liberal profs at GT in the humanities areas.

I had to write papers like that, but I presented a well thought out argument againts gun control and things of the like and I got As

note on the back of my paper

"While I dont agree with your stance, there are no flaws in your logic nor in your argument, good job and keep up the good work."

Got an A
Link Posted: 11/8/2005 11:14:58 AM EDT

Originally Posted By adair_usmc:

Originally Posted By Red_Beard:

Originally Posted By jcp84:
You could do a little bit of both.

While socialism probably would be ideal IN THEORY,




no



+1



Sorry... what I mean is it has "good intentions" to some - those who want equality. While sure, equality sounds nice, there's only so much we can do to make people "equal." Establishing a "classless society" wouldn't be one of them. So it sounds alright in theory. In practice it's a whole other story.
Link Posted: 11/8/2005 11:18:55 AM EDT
[Last Edit: 11/8/2005 11:24:07 AM EDT by bfieldburt]

Originally Posted By Greenhorn:
I say give Karl a knockdown, and if you get a bad grade and it is clear that the bad grade is NOT due to grammar, spelling, organization or facts, take it to the heads of the school.



+1 million.

So, you sell your standards for an A?

My standards have no price.

Feed her Marx's ass and grow some balls.
------------------
ADD: Trying to please teachers is not the way to get good grades. Most students are trying to please the teacher. I got great grades in college. How did I do it? I wrote what I thought was true...did research, and wrote well. That made my papers stand out from all the brown nosers' papers.

So, your plan would cause you to compromise your standards; you be the same as every other weak-willed student, and you wouldn't get an A anyway.

Think about it.
Link Posted: 11/8/2005 11:34:34 AM EDT
Theories always seem better than the actual work in process. The main reason socialism and communism can't work is that no one can plan for every need to keep a society going. That means planning for EVERYTHING, including how many Q-tips, toothpicks and paper cups people are going to use daily. That is the beauty of capitalism; no one has to plan anything. The market responds to the peoples needs as the needs arise. While not perfect, there will always be winners and losers, a free market economy is so much better than the socialist alternative. With socialism and or communism, society ends up paying for 1 billion widgets that no one needs while waiting for an essential commodity that no one could foresee people wanting. There is also no incentive for people to do anything. Why put in any extra effort if the slacker next to you gets paid exactly the same as you? Look at the “real” unemployment numbers for most of Europe, we’re talking higher that 1930’s Great Depression numbers.
Link Posted: 11/8/2005 11:58:54 AM EDT

Originally Posted By jcp84:

Originally Posted By adair_usmc:

Originally Posted By Red_Beard:

Originally Posted By jcp84:
You could do a little bit of both.

While socialism probably would be ideal IN THEORY,




no



+1



Sorry... what I mean is it has "good intentions" to some - those who want equality. While sure, equality sounds nice, there's only so much we can do to make people "equal." Establishing a "classless society" wouldn't be one of them. So it sounds alright in theory. In practice it's a whole other story.



It doesn't even sound right in theory because the theory is that taking money from me and giving it to someone else, against my will, is good.

Link Posted: 11/8/2005 11:59:35 AM EDT

Originally Posted By Sodie:
Theories always seem better than the actual work in process. The main reason socialism and communism can't work is that no one can plan for every need to keep a society going.




Yeah, that, and the fact that it's founded on stealing.

Link Posted: 11/8/2005 12:04:31 PM EDT
Harpo was my favorite.

Oops. I meant, "tag."
Link Posted: 11/8/2005 12:07:26 PM EDT

Originally Posted By jcp84:
While socialism probably would be ideal IN THEORY, write about how that just doesn't factor correctly into human nature and give examples.



It's not correct to position socialism as "good in theory" but "bad in practice". Socialism is bad in practice because the theory is evil.

- CD
Link Posted: 11/8/2005 12:09:06 PM EDT
Play the game, get the diploma, then change the world.
Link Posted: 11/8/2005 12:11:51 PM EDT

Originally Posted By outofstep:

Blah… I think I’m just gonna give Karl a handjob and get the A. I’ll feel better about it knowing that when the zombies/chinese/looters come, she’ll be fucked. Oh well.




Slam it, but support the hell out of everything criticism. If she gives you a bad grade anyhow, you're on much better ground to contest her grading / file a formal complaint depending on your school's policies.

It depends on how much time you have for the paper, but I'd suggest skimming the writings of Ludwig von Mises and others of the Austrian school of economics, mises.org

Also look at The Road to Serfdom by F.A. Hayek. Hayek makes a strong argument that the Fascist government of Nazi Germany was the end result of the implementation of socialism in Germany. mises.org also has a good summary of The Road to Serfdom here:
TRTS
Link Posted: 11/8/2005 12:12:01 PM EDT
In college in the early 1980's I had a prof tell the class that he was a Marxist-second thing he told us, after his name. I argued with him in class (respectfully) and every assignment or exam question i got I answered honestly (which I'm sure was arbitrary to his views). Still got a B (which is about what I earned).
Tell the douchebag off. back it up with facts, numbers, examples. And if you get a bad grade, raise a ton of shit about it. You shouldn't be persecuted for your beliefs-an F being an academic gulag-and you should stand up against this socialist pig.

ps socialism is the shittiest, vile, and evil system, hypothetically or not.
Link Posted: 11/8/2005 12:21:58 PM EDT
Use your angst against the socialist types for when SHTF, just write a paper to appease the bitch.
Link Posted: 11/8/2005 12:22:35 PM EDT
Make sure you include the following quotes in you paper:

"Communism would only work in Heaven, where they don't need it, and in Hell, where they've already got it."
--Ronald Reagan

“Wonderful theory. Wrong species”
--Edward O. Wilson, the world's foremost expert on ants, commenting on Marxism.

"So much of left-wing thought is a kind of playing with fire by people who don’t even know that fire is hot."
--George Orwell

Other resources you might use:

Reagan in 1964, "The Speech":

"I am going to talk of controversial things. I make no apology for this.

It's time we asked ourselves if we still know the freedoms intended for us by the Founding Fathers. James Madison said, "We base all our experiments on the capacity of mankind for self government."

This idea, that government was beholden to the people, that it had no other source of power is still the newest, most unique idea in all the long history of man's relation to man. This is the issue of this election: Whether we believe in our capacity for self-government or whether we abandon the American Revolution and confess that a little intellectual elite in a far-distant capital can plan our lives for us better than we can plan them ourselves.

You and I are told we must choose between a left or right, but I suggest there is no such thing as a left or right. There is only an up or down. Up to man's age-old dream-the maximum of individual freedom consistent with order or down to the ant heap of totalitarianism. Regardless of their sincerity, their humanitarian motives, those who would sacrifice freedom for security have embarked on this downward path. Plutarch warned, "The real destroyer of the liberties of the people is he who spreads among them bounties, donations and benefits."

The Founding Fathers knew a government can't control the economy without controlling people. And they knew when a government sets out to do that, it must use force and coercion to achieve its purpose. So we have come to a time for choosing.

Public servants say, always with the best of intentions, "What greater service we could render if only we had a little more money and a little more power." But the truth is that outside of its legitimate function, government does nothing as well or as economically as the private sector. Yet any time you and I question the schemes of the do-gooders, we're denounced as being opposed to their humanitarian goals. It seems impossible to legitimately debate their solutions with the assumption that all of us share the desire to help the less fortunate. They tell us we're always "against," never "for" anything.

We are for a provision that destitution should not follow unemployment by reason of old age, and to that end we have accepted Social Security as a step toward meeting the problem. However, we are against those entrusted with this program when they practice deception regarding its fiscal shortcomings, when they charge that any criticism of the program means that we want to end payments.... We are for aiding our allies by sharing our material blessings with nations which share our fundamental beliefs, but we are against doling out money government to government, creating bureaucracy, if not socialism, all over the world.

We need true tax reform that will at least make a start toward I restoring for our children the American Dream that wealth is denied to no one, that each individual has the right to fly as high as his strength and ability will take him.... But we can not have such reform while our tax policy is engineered by people who view the tax as a means of achieving changes in our social structure.... Have we the courage and the will to face up to the immorality and discrimination of the progressive tax, and demand a return to traditional proportionate taxation? . . . Today in our country the tax collector's share is 37 cents of every dollar earned. Freedom has never been so fragile, so close to slipping from our grasp.

Are you willing to spend time studying the issues, making yourself aware, and then conveying that information to family and friends? Will you resist the temptation to get a government handout for your community? Realize that the doctor's fight against socialized medicine is your fight. We can't socialize the doctors without socializing the patients. Recognize that government invasion of public power is eventually an assault upon your own business. If some among you fear taking a stand because you are afraid of reprisals from customers, clients, or even government, recognize that you are just feeding the crocodile hoping he'll eat you last. If all of this seems like a great deal of trouble, think what's at stake. We are faced with the most evil enemy mankind has known in his long climb from the swamp to the stars. There can be no security anywhere in the free world if there is no fiscal and economic stability within the United States. Those who ask us to trade our freedom for the soup kitchen of the welfare state are architects of a policy of accommodation.

They say the world has become too complex for simple answers. They are wrong. There are no easy answers, but there are simple answers. We must have the courage to do what we know is morally right. Winston Churchill said that "the destiny of man is not measured by material computation. When great forces are on the move in the world, we learn we are spirits-not animals." And he said, "There is something going on in time and space, and beyond time and space, which, whether we like it or not, spells duty."
You and I have a rendezvous with destiny. We will preserve for our children this, the last best hope of man on earth, or we will sentence them to take the first step into a thousand years of darkness. If we fail, at least let our children and our children's children say of us we justified our brief moment here. We did all that could be done."

--Ronald Reagan, 1964


From W. Cleon Skousen's famous tract detailing Communist Party goals in 1963:

1. U.S. acceptance of coexistence as the only alternative to atomic war.

2. U.S. willingness to capitulate in preference to engaging in atomic war.

3. Develop the illusion that total disarmament [by] the United States would be a demonstration of moral strength.

4. Permit free trade between all nations regardless of Communist affiliation and regardless of whether or not items could be used for war.

5. Extension of long-term loans to Russia and Soviet satellites.

6. Provide American aid to all nations regardless of Communist domination.

7. Grant recognition of Red China. Admission of Red China to the U.N.

8. Set up East and West Germany as separate states in spite of Khrushchev's promise in 1955 to settle the German question by free elections under supervision of the U.N.

9. Prolong the conferences to ban atomic tests because the United States has agreed to suspend tests as long as negotiations are in progress.

10. Allow all Soviet satellites individual representation in the U.N.

11. Promote the U.N. as the only hope for mankind. If its charter is rewritten, demand that it be set up as a one-world government with its own independent armed forces. (Some Communist leaders believe the world can be taken over as easily by the U.N. as by Moscow. Sometimes these two centers compete with each other as they are now doing in the Congo.)

12. Resist any attempt to outlaw the Communist Party.

13. Do away with all loyalty oaths.

14. Continue giving Russia access to the U.S. Patent Office.

15. Capture one or both of the political parties in the United States.

16. Use technical decisions of the courts to weaken basic American institutions by claiming their activities violate civil rights.

17. Get control of the schools. Use them as transmission belts for socialism and current Communist propaganda. Soften the curriculum. Get control of teachers' associations. Put the party line in textbooks.

18. Gain control of all student newspapers.

19. Use student riots to foment public protests against programs or organizations which are under Communist attack.

20. Infiltrate the press. Get control of book-review assignments, editorial writing, policy-making positions.

21. Gain control of key positions in radio, TV, and motion pictures.

22. Continue discrediting American culture by degrading all forms of artistic expression. An American Communist cell was told to "eliminate all good sculpture from parks and buildings, substitute shapeless, awkward and meaningless forms."

23. Control art critics and directors of art museums. "Our plan is to promote ugliness, repulsive, meaningless art."

24. Eliminate all laws governing obscenity by calling them "censorship" and a violation of free speech and free press.

25. Break down cultural standards of morality by promoting pornography and obscenity in books, magazines, motion pictures, radio, and TV.

26. Present homosexuality, degeneracy and promiscuity as "normal, natural, healthy."

27. Infiltrate the churches and replace revealed religion with "social" religion. Discredit the Bible and emphasize the need for intellectual maturity, which does not need a "religious crutch."

28. Eliminate prayer or any phase of religious expression in the schools on the ground that it violates the principle of "separation of church and state."

29. Discredit the American Constitution by calling it inadequate, old-fashioned, out of step with modern needs, a hindrance to cooperation between nations on a worldwide basis.

30. Discredit the American Founding Fathers. Present them as selfish aristocrats who had no concern for the "common man."

31. Belittle all forms of American culture and discourage the teaching of American history on the ground that it was only a minor part of the "big picture." Give more emphasis to Russian history since the Communists took over.

32. Support any socialist movement to give centralized control over any part of the culture--education, social agencies, welfare programs, mental health clinics, etc.

33. Eliminate all laws or procedures which interfere with the operation of the Communist apparatus.

34. Eliminate the House Committee on Un-American Activities.

35. Discredit and eventually dismantle the FBI.

36. Infiltrate and gain control of more unions.

37. Infiltrate and gain control of big business.

38. Transfer some of the powers of arrest from the police to social agencies. Treat all behavioral problems as psychiatric disorders which no one but psychiatrists can understand [or treat].

39. Dominate the psychiatric profession and use mental health laws as a means of gaining coercive control over those who oppose Communist goals.

40. Discredit the family as an institution. Encourage promiscuity and easy divorce.

41. Emphasize the need to raise children away from the negative influence of parents. Attribute prejudices, mental blocks and retarding of children to suppressive influence of parents.

42. Create the impression that violence and insurrection are legitimate aspects of the American tradition; that students and special-interest groups should rise up and use ["]united force["] to solve economic, political or social problems.

43. Overthrow all colonial governments before native populations are ready for self-government.

44. Internationalize the Panama Canal.

45. Repeal the Connally reservation so the United States cannot prevent the World Court from seizing jurisdiction [over domestic problems. Give the World Court jurisdiction] over nations and individuals alike.



Link Posted: 11/8/2005 1:18:58 PM EDT
Don't be a boot licker.

Amazingly enough ALL classes are easy if you do the work required of you. If you normally write A quality papers then you will get an A probably. If you write crappy, don't complain if its a bad grade.

Papers are grades on organization and grammar. Rarely do teachers look at your opinion on them.

Write what you want. You'll write it better than if your stuck writing in something you don't believe. How can you make it sound logical if you don't believe it to be logical?
Link Posted: 11/8/2005 1:21:38 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 11/8/2005 1:22:05 PM EDT by N1Rampage]

Originally Posted By LonePathfinder:
If you normally write A quality papers then you will get an A probably.

Papers are grades on organization and grammar. Rarely do teachers look at your opinion on them.






Sure... just keep saying that to yourself...
Link Posted: 11/8/2005 7:34:23 PM EDT

Originally Posted By outofstep:
Transferring sucks, having to take 1st year shit over again despite having over 160 credit hours. Thanks asses, its the same damn class. Anyways...



My teacher has extolled the virtues of socialism on multiple occasions. Now on our next paper, we have to write about Ol’ hot Karl and his Krazy ideas. The big question is, should I slam the shit out of her and her “obviously never been to Europe to see the socialist bullshit in action” or do I get an A? To let you know the extend of her delusion, today she was telling us how socialized medicine and educational systems are the best in the world. Over there kids in the 4th grade are already learning Calculus, thats how much better their education is.

Blah… I think I’m just gonna give Karl a handjob and get the A. I’ll feel better about it knowing that when the zombies/chinese/looters come, she’ll be fucked. Oh well.




Slightly Off Topic, if you ever have to right about a Communist Regime and how they committed acts of Genocide. A good book is: The Black Book of Communism

Also good is: Heaven on Earth: The Rise and Fall of Socialism

And of course the Soviet Dissident: Natan Sharansky's Book The case for Democracy

is Good.

If you like a Novel: The Gulag Archipelago by Alexander Solzhenitsen
One Day in the Life of Ivan Dennisovitch
Cancer Ward

all are Indictments of State Socialism (Communism).


Link Posted: 11/8/2005 7:40:26 PM EDT
Pick your battles.

You are obviously not going to convert your professor, and GPA does mean something if you decide to carry your education past a 4-year degree...
Link Posted: 11/10/2005 5:47:02 PM EDT

Originally Posted By Kalahnikid:
From a college student who plays the game:

Get the A. Write shit you dont believe in. Its so much better to get an A on a peper than a C- to make a point. For the same class last year i wrote a paper on Bowling for Columbine and how we need more gun control. Its what teh teacher wanted to hear, and writing a pro-RKBA paper wouldnt change my prof's mind anyways.

Play the game, get the A, graduate and be the most conservative capitalist person you can be. Thats my plan anyways. I tell my liberal prof's what they want to hear no more guns, but on the weekend Im out shooting AK's and AR's.




That is fucking weak.
Link Posted: 11/30/2005 7:35:36 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 11/30/2005 7:38:43 PM EDT by outofstep]
Well, i played it middle ground. Also had to write a paper about Nietzsche for the pinko commie too.

My little way of showing my distaste was a bit subtle. I didn’t call the Nazis by their hyphenated name. I made sure to refer to them with their full name, National Socialists. In the Marx paper I also pointed out how popular collectivism was with the working class that was uneducated.

Oh well... Fuck transfering and having to do this shit again.
Link Posted: 11/30/2005 7:52:25 PM EDT
As a minor-league socialist scholar, I suggest you babble on about the early utopian socialists, throw J.S. Mill a few bones, talk about Marx in the abstract, and then demonize Lenin for subverting all that had come before him, splitting the Communist International, and besmirching the name of 'true' socialism ever since.

They love it when you tell the distinction between 'true' socialism which is still 100% workable (in theory) since it has 'never been tried' and because the Soviets 'got it all wrong'.
Link Posted: 11/30/2005 7:55:50 PM EDT
If you were a team member, I'd say you should write the best essay you can, not getting any brown stuff on your nose, and then post it in the team forum for review... but you could just post it in the GD for revising input and review to insure it was absolutely flawless, and when you didn't get at least a DECENT grade, you could go above her and show them what badass work you did.
Link Posted: 11/30/2005 8:11:18 PM EDT
Why is it so many educated people are professed leftists, socialists or communists? Haven't they noticed that frequently, when the revolution DOES come that their ilk are the first ones up against the wall?
Link Posted: 11/30/2005 9:32:01 PM EDT

Originally Posted By edb66:
Why is it so many educated people are professed leftists, socialists or communists? Haven't they noticed that frequently, when the revolution DOES come that their ilk are the first ones up against the wall?



They have never lived in the real world, or been to europe for that matter.
Link Posted: 11/30/2005 9:43:59 PM EDT
Did it last week, had to argue that the founding fathers intended capitalism to be our economic system not marxism.

Was the easiest paper I have ever written, got an A-, and that was from a very liberal proffesor who disagreed with me
Link Posted: 11/30/2005 9:56:45 PM EDT
Keep your argument simple, use good logic and research to support your point. You’ll get an “A.”

I have done this several times with commie professors.

Although keep in mind, if you ramble about or your paper has poorly constructed thinking… you will get slammed.
Link Posted: 12/1/2005 2:35:23 AM EDT

Originally Posted By edb66:
Why is it so many educated people are professed leftists, socialists or communists? Haven't they noticed that frequently, when the revolution DOES come that their ilk are the first ones up against the wall?



Pol Pot and his Khmer Rouge did exactly that in Cambodia in the 70's & 80's. The first ones put against the wall and shot were the "intellectuals". If you're going to argue that marxism is bad, do some research into Pol Pot, the Khmer Rouge and what they did to the people of Cambodia. Here's a teaser: www.gmu.edu/departments/economics/bcaplan/museum/cook.htm
Link Posted: 12/1/2005 2:42:23 AM EDT

Originally Posted By Kalahnikid:
From a college student who plays the game:

Get the A. Write shit you dont believe in. Its so much better to get an A on a peper than a C- to make a point. For the same class last year i wrote a paper on Bowling for Columbine and how we need more gun control. Its what teh teacher wanted to hear, and writing a pro-RKBA paper wouldnt change my prof's mind anyways.

Play the game, get the A, graduate and be the most conservative capitalist person you can be. Thats my plan anyways. I tell my liberal prof's what they want to hear no more guns, but on the weekend Im out shooting AK's and AR's.



How is it better?
Unless you are going on to post-grad education, no one will look at your grades - just your diploma.
Link Posted: 12/1/2005 2:45:11 AM EDT
Write a paper debating who was better, Groucho, Harpo, Zeppo, Chico or Gummo.
Link Posted: 12/1/2005 2:47:07 AM EDT

Originally Posted By BlammO:
Harpo was my favorite.



I am more of a "Groucho" man.
Link Posted: 12/1/2005 3:16:56 AM EDT
It might be a little hard to do, but try to show how the Bush administration could run the US better if communism was the form of government. Totalitarianism is fine as long as your guy is in charge. Let her see how 'nice' it would be if the other team was in charge. Bush, Cheney, Rumsfeld, along with Trent Lott, Gingrich, etc.

See if she'd like them to make all of the decisions.

Point out that Nixon would have never resigned, because there wouldn't have been a need to bug another political party during an election. There wouldn't be any other political parties.
Link Posted: 12/1/2005 12:18:42 PM EDT
Hey Gareth, don't limit yourself to Cambodia, in quite a few countries once the "proletariat" took over power from the "bourguoisie" the next step was to eliminate the "pettit bourguoisie".
Link Posted: 12/1/2005 12:42:42 PM EDT

Originally Posted By edb66:
Hey Gareth, don't limit yourself to Cambodia, in quite a few countries once the "proletariat" took over power from the "bourguoisie" the next step was to eliminate the "pettit bourguoisie".



I'm aware of that, but Pol Pot and his "killing fields" are a particularly graphic example of Marxist ideology, and the fact that the "intellectuals" were particularly targeted, and the professor in question at the start of the thread probably thinks of themself as an "intellectual" can really drive the message home (ie: "if it happened here, I would be one of the people put against the wall").
Link Posted: 12/1/2005 12:45:28 PM EDT
I am a college student...

I have found that as long as you back up your argument, and you dont sound like you are just a "typical conservitive windbag", most proffesors will respect a differing opinion.

Maybe I am way to idealogical, but I would rather get a C and stand up for what I believe in, than get an A and cave in to what the system wants out of me.

"Its better to be hated for who you are than loved for who your not"

We need people who stand up for thier convictions. Where were those people in Germany in the 1940's?

Never cave in and just become one of the "sheeple"!!
Link Posted: 12/1/2005 3:15:13 PM EDT
I hear you and agree 100%
Link Posted: 12/1/2005 3:23:25 PM EDT

Originally Posted By Kalahnikid:
From a college student who plays the game:

Get the A. Write shit you dont believe in. Its so much better to get an A on a peper than a C- to make a point. For the same class last year i wrote a paper on Bowling for Columbine and how we need more gun control. Its what teh teacher wanted to hear, and writing a pro-RKBA paper wouldnt change my prof's mind anyways.

Play the game, get the A, graduate and be the most conservative capitalist person you can be. Thats my plan anyways. I tell my liberal prof's what they want to hear no more guns, but on the weekend Im out shooting AK's and AR's.



I disagree. Write what you believe and be ready to back it up with facts. If you write it well, and with factual information, she can not fail you - if she does then take it to the dean.

I had a professor in college who wanted us to right about a story called The Ones Who Walk Away from Omelas and compare it to the Lottery Rose. I said the people who walked away were just as bad as those who stoned the people in the other story. To do nothing is to allow the atrocities to continue to happen unchecked (sounds so familiar now!). She said I was wrong in front of the whole class. The ones who walked away were courageous, blah blah blah lib-speak. I stood my ground and backed up my opinion with fact in my final paper. I got an A. She disagreed, but the paper in and of itself was quality.
Link Posted: 12/1/2005 5:21:20 PM EDT

Originally Posted By Sodie:
Theories always seem better than the actual work in process. The main reason socialism and communism can't work is that no one can plan for every need to keep a society going. That means planning for EVERYTHING, including how many Q-tips, toothpicks and paper cups people are going to use daily. That is the beauty of capitalism; no one has to plan anything. The market responds to the peoples needs as the needs arise. While not perfect, there will always be winners and losers, a free market economy is so much better than the socialist alternative. With socialism and or communism, society ends up paying for 1 billion widgets that no one needs while waiting for an essential commodity that no one could foresee people wanting. There is also no incentive for people to do anything. Why put in any extra effort if the slacker next to you gets paid exactly the same as you? Look at the “real” unemployment numbers for most of Europe, we’re talking higher that 1930’s Great Depression numbers.



Forbes reports:

The October jobless rate for the entire European Union was unchanged at 8.5 percent compared to September, the EU statistical agency Eurostat said Thursday.

The 12 countries using the euro currency, known as the euro zone, also reported no change, with the rate staying at 8.3 percent.

"Eurostat estimates that in October 2005, 12.1 million men and women were unemployed in the euro zone and 18.4 million in the EU25," the agency said, referring to the 25 nations that make up the EU.

What was unemployment in the US in the 30's?

The Great Depression began in 1929 when the entire world suffered an enormous drop in output and an unprecedented rise in unemployment. World economic output continued to decline until 1932 when it clinked bottom at 50% of its 1929 level. Unemployment soared, in the United States it peaked at 24.9% in 1933. It remained above 20% for two more years, reluctantly declining to 14.3% by 1937. It then leapt back to 19% before its long-term decline. Since most households had only one income earner the equivalent modern unemployment rates would likely be much higher. Real economic output (real GDP) fell by 29% from 1929 to 1933 and the US stock market lost 89.5% of its value.

Link Posted: 12/1/2005 5:37:43 PM EDT

Originally Posted By BushMeister:

Reagan in 1964, "The Speech":

"I am going to talk of controversial things. I make no apology for this.

It's time we asked ourselves if we still know the freedoms intended for us by the Founding Fathers. James Madison said, "We base all our experiments on the capacity of mankind for self government."

This idea, that government was beholden to the people, that it had no other source of power is still the newest, most unique idea in all the long history of man's relation to man. This is the issue of this election: Whether we believe in our capacity for self-government or whether we abandon the American Revolution and confess that a little intellectual elite in a far-distant capital can plan our lives for us better than we can plan them ourselves.

You and I are told we must choose between a left or right, but I suggest there is no such thing as a left or right. There is only an up or down. Up to man's age-old dream-the maximum of individual freedom consistent with order or down to the ant heap of totalitarianism. Regardless of their sincerity, their humanitarian motives, those who would sacrifice freedom for security have embarked on this downward path. Plutarch warned, "The real destroyer of the liberties of the people is he who spreads among them bounties, donations and benefits."

The Founding Fathers knew a government can't control the economy without controlling people. And they knew when a government sets out to do that, it must use force and coercion to achieve its purpose. So we have come to a time for choosing.

Public servants say, always with the best of intentions, "What greater service we could render if only we had a little more money and a little more power." But the truth is that outside of its legitimate function, government does nothing as well or as economically as the private sector. Yet any time you and I question the schemes of the do-gooders, we're denounced as being opposed to their humanitarian goals. It seems impossible to legitimately debate their solutions with the assumption that all of us share the desire to help the less fortunate. They tell us we're always "against," never "for" anything.

We are for a provision that destitution should not follow unemployment by reason of old age, and to that end we have accepted Social Security as a step toward meeting the problem. However, we are against those entrusted with this program when they practice deception regarding its fiscal shortcomings, when they charge that any criticism of the program means that we want to end payments.... We are for aiding our allies by sharing our material blessings with nations which share our fundamental beliefs, but we are against doling out money government to government, creating bureaucracy, if not socialism, all over the world.

We need true tax reform that will at least make a start toward I restoring for our children the American Dream that wealth is denied to no one, that each individual has the right to fly as high as his strength and ability will take him.... But we can not have such reform while our tax policy is engineered by people who view the tax as a means of achieving changes in our social structure.... Have we the courage and the will to face up to the immorality and discrimination of the progressive tax, and demand a return to traditional proportionate taxation? . . . Today in our country the tax collector's share is 37 cents of every dollar earned. Freedom has never been so fragile, so close to slipping from our grasp.

Are you willing to spend time studying the issues, making yourself aware, and then conveying that information to family and friends? Will you resist the temptation to get a government handout for your community? Realize that the doctor's fight against socialized medicine is your fight. We can't socialize the doctors without socializing the patients. Recognize that government invasion of public power is eventually an assault upon your own business. If some among you fear taking a stand because you are afraid of reprisals from customers, clients, or even government, recognize that you are just feeding the crocodile hoping he'll eat you last. If all of this seems like a great deal of trouble, think what's at stake. We are faced with the most evil enemy mankind has known in his long climb from the swamp to the stars. There can be no security anywhere in the free world if there is no fiscal and economic stability within the United States. Those who ask us to trade our freedom for the soup kitchen of the welfare state are architects of a policy of accommodation.

They say the world has become too complex for simple answers. They are wrong. There are no easy answers, but there are simple answers. We must have the courage to do what we know is morally right. Winston Churchill said that "the destiny of man is not measured by material computation. When great forces are on the move in the world, we learn we are spirits-not animals." And he said, "There is something going on in time and space, and beyond time and space, which, whether we like it or not, spells duty."
You and I have a rendezvous with destiny. We will preserve for our children this, the last best hope of man on earth, or we will sentence them to take the first step into a thousand years of darkness. If we fail, at least let our children and our children's children say of us we justified our brief moment here. We did all that could be done."

--Ronald Reagan, 1964




If only they could clone him.
Link Posted: 12/1/2005 5:54:56 PM EDT
They say Karl was such an angry nutjob because he had chronic boils on his ass and could never sit down!
Arrow Left Previous Page
Page / 2
Top Top