Actually, it's a staple of our world geography class. We have tests that openly make fun of Muslims and portray them as violent, assembly line kamikazes. As in: List five ways the Islamic religion opposes peaceful relations between countries. How does the Koran openly advocate violence and intolerance toward non-Muslims? ect. On the other hand, she takes it upon herself to explain how Bible prophecy can be used to explain most of our history. And these are just a few examples. It wouldn't be so bad if it weren't an almost constant litany.

Do they do this on class time or their own time? If you have a political discussion w/ your teacher during lunch break and the teacher starts telling you why liberals and non-Christians are wrong, that's fine. If it's integrated some way into the instuction, that's a problem.

I actually have fairly liberal views on a lot of subjects (at least for where I live...surrounded by the "right wing Texans," of which my father is one)but I seem to be labeled conservative (not that that's bad) because I'm a Christian. Please, I'm not trying to turn this into another Christian vs. non post, I just wondered if anyone else has noticed this or can give a reason for it.
Also, I agree that our school systems need to teach more balanced views. It is just as offensive to me to have a teacher openly advocate Christianity, and well as Republicanism (which happened in my Social Studies class) as it is for one to champion any other political/religious standpoint. Of course, our town is small and Southern, and very prejudiced and not very diversified, so that may explain some of it. Also, a toast to conservakid and billybarrio...they make good points.

"Justiceconservatism, I made a distinction between libertarianism and conservatism in the sense of the religious right. Your talk about minimal government and whatnot sounds like you're on the libertarian right. Go to the political compass and see what you score. I really tend to think there are very few true conservatives, in the sense of being both economically right-wing and socially authoritarian. Most of the 'conservatives' I've dicussed politics with in detail seem like their views fit better with the Libertarian Party than with the GOP's current leadership. "

My point is that the Religious Right does not make up mainstream conservatism, rather Neo-Cons (moderate republicans), Paleo-Cons (more libertarian republicans) and other groups do. I don't know where you got the idea that US conservatism is authoritarian or statist, when its founders have overwhelmingly been against major government intervention in society. In fact, Conservatism only advocates traditional society, which in the US means non-state controlled capitalist economics and a moral but not unconstitutional society. I'm not a libertarian or US conservative at all either. I'm patriotic, state-capitalist, concerned about the inner city, for a new society built on old values (nationalism, morality, etc.), for the use of the Military against criminal organizations, and skeptical about our republic surviving (due to voter ignorance and apathy). Based on that it's safe to say I have authoritarian tendencies. However, I reject totalitarian ideologies due to their rampant corruption, intolerance towards free thought and disregard for human life. My political Compass ranking was:

My political compass: Total Score
Economic Left/Right: 2.38
Libertarian/Authoritarian: 7.38

This means I very far from Libertarians and Conservatives ideologically (in fact it puts me near Fascism). It also means I don't agree with so called "social liberals" or socialists. I'll post my answers here later.

"As for alan Combs or whoever it was you mentioned, I'm not familiar with him. Could you please give me some background information?"

He's one of the hosts on "Hannity and Combs" on Fox News. He's kind of a token liberal (parroting the Democrats' rhetoric).

quote:

---

Also, most studies done by accredited research universities have shown that the conservative media is far more biased than the liberal media. I have a link to one of those saved if you want it.

---

Yes but then they will say these universities are controlled by the "liberals." Anybody see a trend to the claims.

Hardly. NY Post is not real journalism. And NY Times ain't all that liberal. It did support the war. Real jorunalists, if they are biased, recognize such bias and allow editorials and whatnot from the opposite side. Does NYT allow conservatives to write in their paper? Yes. Does NYP do that for liberals? No. Also, most studies done by accredited research universities have shown that the conservative media is far more biased than the liberal media. I have a link to one of those saved if you want it.

As for the racially questionable thing, that's a stupid policy, not a liberal one. The ACLU, paragon of liberalism, would probably take action on your behalf if you contacted them. It tends to squabble w/ the NAACP a lot over what constitutes protected speech.

As for class discussions you mentioned, if there are 20 students, 99% can't be liberal. So first check your math, then realize that this is exactly how I often feel going to a conservative school. It's not censorship; it's everyone voicing their opinions with you in the minority.

HEY DJMAGNUSA! Wanna know what my school administration has done to me?

Try these:

- The admin took away my computer privileges for going to "racially-questionable websites"...namely the National Association for the Advancement of WHITE People! For research!

- My teacher, with the backing of the admin, refused to accept responses to New York Post articles instead of The New York Times (All the lies that're fit to print!). I wanted kids to read and respond to editorials in BOTH news sources. However New York Post editorials were seen as "fictitious journalism"

- Constant censorship by teachers. ("we understand you have an opinion...but it's wrong" has been said to me on 3 different occasions by 2 different teachers)

- Just yesterday, the guidance counselor remarked about the changes in my schedule. "we don't want you here anyway"...obviously a reference to my conservative morals.

- One teacher implemented a policy that each kid gets 1 minute to speak their minds at the beginning of class...all fine in theory. However when 20 kids take liberal stance on 99% of issues and I the only one on an opposing side, my views barely get time to be heard.


[B]My experiences prove this is a problem. Go to
ACCURACY IN ACADEMIA for more info, or read "Illiberal Education" by Dinesh D'Souza, or "Why The Left Hates America" By Daniel Flynn.

Libertarians believe in social and economic freedom. Non-libertarian conservatives believe in economic freedom but not social freedom. Not believing in social freedom is by definition authoritarian. I'm not saying extreme authoritarian like Hitler or General Pinochet, but mildly so. Just like most libertarians are mildly libertarian on the social scale and aren't anarchists.

American liberalism is based on belief in social freedom and economic regulation. Lack of economic freedom may not be good, but it's not authoritarian. Authoritarianism is a measure of personal freedoms. Liberalism is socially LIBERAL. That's where it gets its f*cking name. As for you Joey, you've lost all credibility based on previous posts of yours I've seen. Maybe by the time you're 13 (supposedly the required minimum to use this site), you'll understand why making hasty generalizations is a bad idea.

quote:

---

Is it an automatic road to communism?

---

Liberal is just another word for Communism.

In the States, that is. In England, it's completely different. In that country, being liberal means opposite of the Socialist/Communist control of everything.

Here, it means precisely what I just said: Communist.

Though, now people don't wanna be called "liberals." They want to be called "progressives," or "neo-liberals."

It's interesting to see how such name changes have taken effect.

You can't disquise Communism; the Ten Planks are easily identifiable (sorry if that's not spelled right, but I don't have my dictionary here) and if you hold on to a Communist view, then, sorry, you're Communist-leaning or just a bleeding-heart Communist.

Of course, you're allowed to hold those views. But don't pass off liberal as just something that's "empty."

It's not. It's a cover so people won't get all worked up and go Joe McCarthy on them.

quote:

---

US conservatism is founded on social authoritarianism. Except libertarianism, and libertarians hate being called conservatives.

---

Both untrue. Conservativism is not founded upon authoritarianism, not by a long shot. And vastly less so than liberalism. You do need to separate the puritanical Religious Right from the conservative ideology. Ideology is not the same as constituency. Conservativism is based on freedom - free society, free enterprise, etc. The RR does happen to be one of the larger consistuencies of the right, that's all.
Also, most libertarians I know (and I consider myself somewhat libertarian overall, albeit not nearly as much as I used to) identify fairly closely with conservatives. Just not with the RR.
Incidentally, the Political Compass websites is worthless. The score I got was pretty close to dead center/moderate. I should be flattered, I guess, and I am to some degree, but that's a sign of that site's worthlessness.

It's more accurate than any other quick measure of someone's views. If you can analyze my views and give me a position on a 2-dimensional scale by actual discussing every conceivably major issue with me, I applaud your diagnostic skills. I'm just trying to distinguish between actual conservatism and the small government libertarianism that seems to be more common asmong the so-called conservatives i know.

It's an online quiz for cryin' out loud.

Justiceconservatism, I made a distinction between libertarianism and conservatism in the sense of the religious right. Your talk about minimal government and whatnot sounds like you're on the libertarian right. Go to the political compass and see what you score. I really tend to think there are very few true conservatives, in the sense of being both economically right-wing and socially authoritarian. Most of the "conservatives" I've dicussed politics with in detail seem like their views fit better with the Libertarian Party than with the GOP's current leadership.

As for alan Combs or whoever it was you mentioned, I'm not familiar with him. Could you please give me some background information?

Socrates: I must disagree with you. American Conservatism is not socially authoritarian inherently. It may attack certain behaviors or outlaw certain activities within the bounds of the constitution, but it does as a rule routinely advocate actual government social engineering or punitive laws stressing obedience to authority in society that are central to almost all authoritarian or totalitarian movements. Obviously there may be conservative sub-groups stressing that sort of action (i.e. the religious right, McCarthyists, some Neo-Conservatives, etc.) but due to the kind of minimal government interference that is the foundation of traditional Conservatism in the United States they are not the mainstream. I agree with you however that the traditional right-left model is becoming increasingly limited, especially when dealing with certain individuals or political philosophies.

On the subject on Fox News: I'd hardly use that network as "proof" of some kind of conservative indoctrination. Also, what about Alan Combs?

US conservatism is founded on social authoritarianism. Except libertarianism, and libertarians hate being called conservatives. Go to www.politicalcompass.org for more information (or is that site automatically wrong because it's not run by Americans)? Social authoritarian philosophy mandates trying to eliminate alternative ideas, while social liberalism means one must tolerate them (communists then, in their suppression of social freedoms, are not liberals at all, but economically left social authoritarians). This is why the conservative Fox News has no liberals at all, while CNN, long the bastion of media liberalism, has Robert Novak and Tucker Carlson, among others. If political views are divided into 4 quadrants on an economic and a social scale, people in each of the two authoritarian quadrants are paranoid about the other 3 quadrants, while members of the libertarian sections qould give everyone their rights.

Nor do I get it. Wish people could just argue the points, but most folks are too lazy for that.

QUOTE]your profile says New York. If your from New York City, i wanna know what school cause I'm goin! Well your profile says "suburban", which is understandable, upstate.

-I live in New York City. Arguably one of the most liberal cities in the country. (NYC and probably san francisco)

-I go to a public school.

-I go to a liberal arts school...

I AM (for the most part) CONSERVATIVE!!!

The amount of public humiliation i've suffered is far worse than being called "left of communist", in a joking manner. Fascist, neo-nazi, adolf hitler. I've been called them all.

It's amazing the lengths which (in my case) an anti-conservative administration will go to for censorhip of what they don't agree with. Liberals say "Censorship is Wrong!!!" Yeah, for them and everyone else....who agrees with them.

All I'm asking for is balance. Teaching in an unbiased manner is PIVOTOL to the success of our students and their developing opinions.

--------------------
a great organization promoting equal political teaching practices:
[/QUOTE]



I'm just curious as to what your current school is practicing that does not promote "equal" political teaching practices. The reason I ask is obviously I don’t have the ability to experience what your school is doing so I would like to hear what these actions are, other wise I will consider your words rhetoric. What has the school administration done to censor you, what disciplinary steps have they taken etc... Also I checked out your site and I hardly call it a site to promote “equal” political teaching in school, it has certain areas I agree with, but these are very minute, while the rest seems to me like the typical Conservative talk, just like you would say some of my sites sound like the typical liberal talk.

I think I already said...I like this conservakid!

nygrl87 wrote:

quote:

---

it ain't easy being a liberal.

---

your profile says New York. If your from New York City, i wanna know what school cause I'm goin! Well your profile says "suburban", which is understandable, upstate.

-I live in New York City. Arguably one of the most liberal cities in the country. (NYC and probably san francisco)

-I go to a public school.

-I go to a liberal arts school...

I AM (for the most part) CONSERVATIVE!!!

The amount of public humiliation i've suffered is far worse than being called "left of communist", in a joking manner. Fascist, neo-nazi, adolf hitler. I've been called them all.

It's amazing the lengths which (in my case) an anti-conservative administration will go to for censorhip of what they don't agree with. Liberals say "Censorship is Wrong!!!" Yeah, for them and everyone else....who agrees with them.

All I'm asking for is balance. Teaching in an unbiased manner is PIVOTOL to the success of our students and their developing opinions.

--------------------
a great organization promoting equal political teaching practices:

Accuracy in Academia

"Christians are Satanists in a different form.. except Satanists are better."

Gemini, what is your problem? Don't you have any tolerance for people other than yourself? Just because some Christians probably gave you hell for being an atheist, doesn't mean you can make bigoted blanket statements like that. I could go around saying that all Muslims are terrorists after all because a fanatical group of them attacked my city, but that wouldn't be fair or polite.