In 1966 I attended UC Santa Cruz in its second year of operation. There were two colleges: Cowell and Stephenson. I enrolled as a chem major without preference and they sent me to Stevenson, which was a liberal arts college directed toward social studies, named after Adlai. Thankfully I had to live at home in the mountains and commute to classes. I was therefore isolated from the social pressures that you describe. that would have come with dorm existence.
But what I want to make clear is that the process of creating progressive liberal radicals was happening at that time. It's nothing new. The mandatory three-quarter core course at Stevenson was as follows: Brand new high school graduates were tossed into a very technical linquistics class where almost no-one could get their feet on the sand below the roiling surf, metaphorically speaking. What in hell this was all about was a mystery to me; the notation was unintelligle, the theory bizarre, and it was a total waste of time trying to survive. It was the equivalent one of the first weeks of military basic training, intended to break you down no matter how prepared you thought you were.
Then, second quarter, we had the History of the American Dream. A not-so-subtle attack on typical American values, political system, and capitalism. We read a lot of stuff written by critics of our culture that left you questioning your upbringing and what you thought was right.
Then, in spring quarter, we had the History of the Russian Revolution. Ahh, behold the glorious rise of the Proletariat.
At the time I was green and "wet behind the ears". I didn't comprehend what the purpose of this strange first year really was. Much later, after completing my first law enforcement (semi-military) academy experience, I came to realize that those bastards had tried to indoctrinate me.
But it didn't take. I did the minimum I had to do in those classes to get through, and put my energies into chemistry, physics and linear algebra, and related subjects throughout my four years there. And the science and mathematics faculty were quite neutral and straightforward in their teaching. So, I got a decent education and have remained an essentially conservative character.
Thanks for listening, and keep up the good work; but, again, it's very important to realize that where we are today with regard to most institutions of higher education is a result of paths that were established by radical socialists in the university environments long before I got to UCSC in 1966.
I still think the Dems are losing control of the silent majority, and can't get it back. That's why their celebrity influencers are both-sidesing, blaming victims, or ignoring inconvenient events. They have no vision for America that most working people would find relatable; it's all boutique messaging tailored for favored cronies and welfare hustlers.
Sure, there are lots of radicalized young people out there, but how many of them will still feel so passionate about their cause when long prison sentences start being handed out like candy, as is starting to happen to Antifa members?
It's not conspiratorial the way academia drifts toward the hard left, it's a natural consequence of ivory-tower academics who are resentful of their salaries and social influence. That's why Louis Brandeis said sunlight is the best disinfectant. People naturally form these intellectual lacunas.
Although Stanford is worth a more thorough investigation. It's not only the home to much of the DEI insanity, but also to the Hoover Institution, which promotes conservative icons like Thomas Sowell and Victor Davis Hanson. I'm curious how they manage to ride two horses with one ass.
Chris,
In 1966 I attended UC Santa Cruz in its second year of operation. There were two colleges: Cowell and Stephenson. I enrolled as a chem major without preference and they sent me to Stevenson, which was a liberal arts college directed toward social studies, named after Adlai. Thankfully I had to live at home in the mountains and commute to classes. I was therefore isolated from the social pressures that you describe. that would have come with dorm existence.
But what I want to make clear is that the process of creating progressive liberal radicals was happening at that time. It's nothing new. The mandatory three-quarter core course at Stevenson was as follows: Brand new high school graduates were tossed into a very technical linquistics class where almost no-one could get their feet on the sand below the roiling surf, metaphorically speaking. What in hell this was all about was a mystery to me; the notation was unintelligle, the theory bizarre, and it was a total waste of time trying to survive. It was the equivalent one of the first weeks of military basic training, intended to break you down no matter how prepared you thought you were.
Then, second quarter, we had the History of the American Dream. A not-so-subtle attack on typical American values, political system, and capitalism. We read a lot of stuff written by critics of our culture that left you questioning your upbringing and what you thought was right.
Then, in spring quarter, we had the History of the Russian Revolution. Ahh, behold the glorious rise of the Proletariat.
At the time I was green and "wet behind the ears". I didn't comprehend what the purpose of this strange first year really was. Much later, after completing my first law enforcement (semi-military) academy experience, I came to realize that those bastards had tried to indoctrinate me.
But it didn't take. I did the minimum I had to do in those classes to get through, and put my energies into chemistry, physics and linear algebra, and related subjects throughout my four years there. And the science and mathematics faculty were quite neutral and straightforward in their teaching. So, I got a decent education and have remained an essentially conservative character.
Thanks for listening, and keep up the good work; but, again, it's very important to realize that where we are today with regard to most institutions of higher education is a result of paths that were established by radical socialists in the university environments long before I got to UCSC in 1966.
The professoriat are drawn to utopian ideology like horseflies to their natural habitat.
Another good piece!
I still think the Dems are losing control of the silent majority, and can't get it back. That's why their celebrity influencers are both-sidesing, blaming victims, or ignoring inconvenient events. They have no vision for America that most working people would find relatable; it's all boutique messaging tailored for favored cronies and welfare hustlers.
Sure, there are lots of radicalized young people out there, but how many of them will still feel so passionate about their cause when long prison sentences start being handed out like candy, as is starting to happen to Antifa members?
It's not conspiratorial the way academia drifts toward the hard left, it's a natural consequence of ivory-tower academics who are resentful of their salaries and social influence. That's why Louis Brandeis said sunlight is the best disinfectant. People naturally form these intellectual lacunas.
Although Stanford is worth a more thorough investigation. It's not only the home to much of the DEI insanity, but also to the Hoover Institution, which promotes conservative icons like Thomas Sowell and Victor Davis Hanson. I'm curious how they manage to ride two horses with one ass.