Frederick Engles Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Notsurewhattothink Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > CdcLt Wrote:
> >
> --------------------------------------------------
>
> > -----
> > > If it were an English (or Mathematics) prof I
> > > would guess they are referring to the ambuity
> > of
> > > the English language.
> > >
> > > Perhaps you should ask him if his shirt
> refers
> > to
> > > the political philosophy or a a group of
> > > inebrieted confused socialists.
> >
> >
> > Thank you for not criticizing my incredulity -
> and
> > I will certainly ask him about it....
> >
> > Just wanted to do a little background checking
> and
> > test the waters before bringing it up in
> class....
>
> So, you are what, a second semester freshman at
> Mason, and this is perhaps your second history
> class, and you're shocked at your instructor's
> seeming disregard for your sensibilities? Prepare
> to have your little minivan driving, GOP voting,
> white bread world rocked. His position is in no
> way affected by you or your parents complaints.
> Go that route and you'll receive a sympathetic
> note from the Dean that will explain academic
> freedom. The Dean will have been laughing (at
> you) while writing it.
>
> Feel free to discuss this in class with the
> professor. He relishes the opportunity, not only
> to teach, but to shatter your worldview. You, a
> high school graduate, will not fair well in a
> debate with someone having 10+ years of
> post-secondary education. The healthy attitude
> would be to explore history as he presents it, and
> let that challenge your own beliefs.
>
> If at the end, and with honest introspection, you
> find your beliefs intellectually sound and intact,
> then you can sincerely claim to have arrived at
> such and such a position through reason, and not
> by blind acceptance of the "wisdom" of your
> fathers. If, on the other hand, your bedrock
> beliefs are cracked wide, then you know they
> weren't so steady in the first place. In either
> case, you've learned something, which is why your
> are where you are.
>
> If nothing else, you'll probably learn how stupid
> it is to refer to the persons depicted as
> "communists". This word has been co-opted and
> grossly misused by the right in this country.
>
> The people on the t-shirt would have referred to
> themselves as Socialists, because in their systems
> government owns the means of production -- in a
> capitalist society, private individuals own it.
> Communism, as defined by Marx, was the end point
> of dialectic materialism, of history, in which all
> systems and all people have achieved perfection.
> Everyone owns the means of production. There is
> no government, people in a communist state act out
> of a sense of enlighted self-interest. Only a
> fool would refuse to live in such a utopia. How
> realistic is Marx's thinking on this? Well, it
> derived from Hegalism, something else you'll need
> to understand.
>
> Your sophmore year civics class at
> Madison/Oakton/Falls Church/McLean was poor
> preparation for this.
PS - Current communist government...Where are the lights?