Ms. Jacoby doesn’t leave liberals out of her analysis, mentioning the New Left’s attacks on universities in the 1960s, the decision to consign African-American and women’s studies to an “academic ghetto” instead of integrating them into the core curriculum, ponderous musings on rock music and pop culture courses on everything from sitcoms to fat that trivialize college-level learning.
Could someone help me parse this? The pop culture musings are tripe but the women's and AA-studies aren't?
Saturday, February 16, 2008
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Posts
5 comments:
It is the rare Indiana farmer that would be surprised to reap dessicated weeds after sowing his seedcorn into the dunesands. But then Indiana farmers apparently fail to have the proper nuanced sophistication required for thinking otherwise.
The NewLeft, and its devolution into the various pomo tributaries that gargle through our barren universities today, was profoundly antagonistic to free and rigorous enquiry into the nature of things. And their "sleep of reason" has bred monsters that leaves the Best of the Left in slackjawed astonishment to rival any Cleetus. [the worst of them are quite content with the breeding of monsters].
To add more broken glass to this piss, the Religious Right [for the nonce, "The Huckamoroni"], being ever increasingly bound to the anti-reason Baptist/evangelistic version of Christianity, is as indifferent to "free and rigorous enquiry into the nature of things" as Pilgrim in his Progress was to the esteemed Isaacs; Barrow & Newton.
This is not the United States alone, it is the Western world as a whole. Caught in an historically swift and massive collapse which shows most fully and early in the collapse of education.
Although apparently he had his reasons which our reason did not know, it seems JJ was right to dismiss Huntington's Thesis. We are not in a Clash of Civilizations, we are in a Collapse of our Civilization... And something else, alien and led by principles contemptuous of our ancient principles, will make use of the carcass as it will.
Just my "Happy Thought of the Day"
As for happy thoughts, better that thoughts be right than happy.
You come close to what I was thinking about Huntington and allies but miss it as usual. You flatter me by seeing my point of view verified as much as you do by not quite showing your understanding of it.
Tsk tsk, JJ, or congratulations, as the case may be. I cannot tell if you just gave me the backhand of the compliment or the fronthand of the diss.
All I said about your disdain for the Clash of Civilization thesis was that you had your reasons which our reason did not know.
I then opined that Collapse of Civilization [ours] better fit the present than Hutchinson's "Clash of Civilization".
I'm not sure I actually read/heard your in depth argument against Hutchinson [you and AI referred to it...perhaps as something you had talked over while supping or imbibing...but I don't recall it being spelt out here on FCP]. Lively insults and colorful imprecations, yup. References to missives sent Hutchinson's way worthy of Your Working Boy, sure. But a spelling out of the reasons, no.
Even so, from what you just said may I infer that "Collapse of Civilization" did play a part in your reasons...plus some extra stuff which you judge me to have misunderstood a priori?
By the way, I think Hutchinson is generally sound in his "Clash of Civilizations" thesis. The creation of the European world, and most of its history, was precisely one of a battleground of warring civilizations. His error[s], were two:
First, in making too much of the differences between between,say, "England" and "Spain", and not underscoring how much akin they were when contrasted with such alien civilizations as that of Islam, or Imperial China.
For example, as you mentioned [I think], he tended to consider illegal hispanic immigration into this country as a danger comparable to that of Islamic immigration into Europe. Now, there are all sorts of problems, some very bad ones, with unregulated, illegal, immigration. But no one should seriously think that an influx of people whose mainstream fundamentally shares our traditional values is the same sort of problem as an influx of people who, in their daily and religious life, are commanded to make us share their values.
Second, you can only have a Clash if there are at least two sides clashing. This was true of most of the last 1400 years, but the only "clashing" our side is now doing is individual jostling and backstabbing for the honor of being annointed Dragoman to the New Caliphate.
Yes, there was a clash of civilizations back in the misty days before FCP, but I forget now what exactly JJ's point was, except for the fact he once wrote a long powwww! missive to Huntington, who, I seem to recall, promptly ignored it. Be that as it may, we could all use a refresher course in the topic -- if we are to pursue it -- since I for one feel a bit like that bumptious girl confused about the difference between Hungry and Turkey, France and Europe. What was all that epic fight about, again?
After reading this thread, you guys really ought to check out Hermann Broch.
Post a Comment