Actually, I do not believe that critical thinking skills and resistance to group think have ever been the forte of public education in the United States. I absolutely believe that students are encouraged, in most cases, to not critically analyze and question the truisms given to them by society/parents/teachers until they reach college, if they reach college (and then it must be in a limited manner dictated by the godlings we call Professors).
If anything, I would suggest that many magnet programs in schools (for example, the Liberal Arts program at South, the IB programs at Henry and Southwest, and some of the Open programs) do indeed encourage individual critical thought and analysis. But for the non-magnet programs (what I consider the Minnesota version of tracking due to the demographics of the "comprehensive programs")I absolutely believe the general rule is to regurgitate and get by rather than question and comprehend. I did a study abroad at the University of Puerto Rico in 1999-2000. I was absolutely stunned by the ways in which the students at the University challenged every notion, idea, and assertion that came out of the mouths of their professors. This is a behavior that would not be tolerated by many of the professors I had at the University of Minnesota. But, it is a behavior that I would absolutely support (and it was a behavior that I actually participated in...much to the disappointment of many of my of professors that tended to have holier than thou attitudes and high rent condos on the upper levels of the Ivory Tower). On to another topic slightly touched on by Alan. I want us to also think about the impact of the image of our national parties on local images and even on our state parties and platforms. I have read (not recently, but in the past) the DFL party platform, the Democratic Party platform, the Minnesota Republican Platform and the national Republican Party platform. After reading these documents (and listening to their public advocates), I indeed came away the belief that "compassionate Republican" is indeed an oxymoron. From my experiences with the Republican Party line, I have come to the conclusion that most Republicans are "evil", but there are some exceptions. The converse is true in that I believe most Democrats are good, but there are some bad ones in the bunch. Is this necessarily true? No. But, for example, when one party does all it can to dismantle affirmative action programs, prevent the establishment of equal legal rights for gay, lesbian, bisexual, and transgender individuals, and dismantle the social welfare networks that give low-income US citizens a chance at life while, at the same time, providing record-breaking corporate welfare benefits and bailouts, I tend to think of that party as a little on the "uncompassionate" side. Now, the trick is letting folks know that all Republicans aren't equateable with the Religious Right Fundamentalist Fanatics that we see on C-SPAN. But the repsonsiblity for changing the image of the Republican Party (and the Democratic party...because honey...while I am a DFLer...it's harder and harder not to switch over to the Greens sometimes), lay with the party rank and file. Conservative hasn't always meant intolerant. And "liberal" hasn't always meant tolerant. -Brandon Lacy -Powderhorn Park -Ward 9 (by about 15 feet!) -----Original Message----- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Alan Shilepsky Sent: Friday, April 19, 2002 9:49 AM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: [Mpls] Reads One Book Initiative Chris Steller suggests 1984 by George Orwell. I'd say Animal Farm, by the same author. It is faster to read, less intricate, and less explicitly horrifying (who can forget Room 101). But it demonstrates all the hypocrisy, rationalizations, cruelty, manipulative propaganda and unfairness of the authoritarian state, or farm. And its a starter on Russian/Soviet history in the 1910-1940 era. My parents innoculated me against fascism by recommending "It Can't Happen Here" (by Sinclair Lewis!). I don't recall if they recommended Animal Farm or 1984, but maybe those were part of the school curriculum. Later I found on my own Darkness at Noon and the God That Failed. Back then clear thinking was encouraged--we even read in high school Language in Thought and Action by S I Hayakawa, who years later became a US Senator for California. Like Orwell's essay Politics and the English Language, Hayakawa criticized propaganda and its various tools for hiding meaning. Do we innoculate our kids against group think and sloppy think anymore? Can you really question conventional wisdom without consequences. I suppose then you had to be careful about saying anything nice about communism or socialism, but here in Minneapolis have our own sacred cows now too. (deep environmentalism, anti-capitalism, moral equivalence of all cultures and religions (inc. Aztec?), anti-Republicanism). Re the last, I recall a James Ford Bell lecture last year at the U where the speaker, Thomas Cahill, ended his talk by saying the term "compassionate Republican" was an oxymoron. The crowd mostly applauded this prejudicial, intolerant and incorrect statement. But hey, that is group-think received conventional wisdom. Alan Shilepsky Downtown _______________________________________ Minneapolis Issues Forum - A Civil City Civic Discussion - Mn E-Democracy Post messages to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subscribe, Unsubscribe, Digest option, and more: http://e-democracy.org/mpls _______________________________________ Minneapolis Issues Forum - A Civil City Civic Discussion - Mn E-Democracy Post messages to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subscribe, Unsubscribe, Digest option, and more: http://e-democracy.org/mpls
