MFA in Exercising Creative Resistance

Not if people do not respect it. Russian constitution guarantees freedom of speech too, you know.
Speaking of MFAs, what do you think about Pussy Riot case?

I believe the Nicean Creed is correct. So clear "yes" on the first two, and, to my understanding, "no" on the third one.
I take this moment to commemorate the recent repose of the great servant of the Lord, His Betitute, Major Archbishop Emeritus Lyubomyr (Husar). We can all learn from him, Catholic, Orthodox, or Protestant.

 

I can answer those three questions, but so can you. You are well aware that student loans are government sponsored. Also, you are well aware that ROI is not always measured in monetary terms. As for being in their "right minds," of course they are. Lots of people do things you (or I) wouldn't do, that doesn't make them crazy. You already know all these things. I'm not sure why you feel the need to put down people simply because they have different values.

 

It's funny: there was a time conservatives claimed to stand for freedom. Now they advocate censorship.

 

I'm not seeing the left seriously discussing whether studies at say Liberty should get their financial aid cut off, or academics need to be "stopped" for writing wrong kinds of papers. And Trump supporters raising these themes on this very forum are not "alt-right" and do not see their views as radical in any way. So sorry, this looks like false equivalency again. Kind of like "Clinton just as bad as Trump" (this one is common on crazier left fringes actually).

 

It's interesting certainly, but I liked it a lot more back in the 1970s when it was the California Institute of Asian Studies and was only California approved at the time. I think that it was better academically in those days. It was certainly more exciting. There was a feeling that they were exploring the outer limits of spirituality. Lots of interesting people worked there such as Alan Watts.

That intellectual tone was probably due to the influence of Frederick Spiegelberg, an internationally recognized academic of the old 19th century German variety (he was a student of Rudolph Otto and Paul Tillich at Tubingen). Spiegelberg became professor of religious studies at Stanford and gradually drifted into an interest in comparative religion and Vedanta. After he retired from Stanford he moved to the American Academy of Asian Studies, the Cultural Integration Fellowship and the California Institute of Asian Studies, the assorted ancestors of CIIS.

(BTW, Spiegelberg was also one of the founders of Esalen, along with Michael Murphy, one of his students.)

Today, despite having become RA, CIIS has drifted away from its old intellectual roots and the sense of intellectual excitement that it once exuded. Today it's more interesting as a 60's time-warp than as a doctoral level research institution. I think that its gradual devolution is sad.

Or a lot flaky.

I think that originated in CIAS' early association with Sri Aurobindo and his Integral Yoga, but today it doesn't mean much of anything.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sri_Aurobindo

 

You're kidding, right? That was a joke that fell flat, correct?

The modern left are the most intolerant, hateful, spiteful, and censorship-driven group of people I've ever seen in my entire life.

Don't think so?

https://heatst.com/culture-wars/evergreen-state-faculty-turn-on-bret-weinstein-say-he-endangered-students/

https://www.nytimes.com/2017/04/26/us/ann-coulter-berkeley-speech.html?_r=0

https://www.usnews.com/opinion/civil-wars/articles/2017-02-03/berkeley-protesters-show-free-speech-only-extends-to-liberals-on-campus

Those were off the top of my head.

Can you name one instance....just one....where conservatives have attempted to stop anyone from the left from speaking, never mind using violence to accomplish that goal?

 

Kizmet, there is no such feeling, thought, plan or action to "put people down." Can you please provide an actual example of that?

 

Bruce, your answer is spot-on.

It can be extremely difficult to cogently respond to outlandish comments that have no basis in American reality (such as the one you cogently responded to).

 

Sure. You are just asking questions whether a HE institution you don't like receives federal funds legitimately. Gotcha. Nevermind that this kind of thing represses speech far more than a few black-clad morons (who I wish would spend some time in jail to stop this nonsense) forcing poor pedophile promoter Milo to postpone his lousy stand-up routine and start a major Facebook shitstorm instead, getting more exposure in the process.

I could answer Bruce's links by listing coverage of just one ostensibly Right hate group (Westbro Baptist Church, anyone?), but what's the point?

 

You could, but you can't be bothered. Lame, and one of the oldest debate dodges, ever. I expected a lot better from you.

The lunatics of the WBC have been denounced by every mainstream conservative group you can care to think of. They are not conservative, they're mentally ill.

And, even if I accept your notion that the WBC is a conservative group (which I don't, because they're not), what have they ever done to silence speech they don't agree with? As reprehensible as they are, they're also the epitome of free speech.

So....one example?

 

And yet a handful of Berkeley basement-dwelling career anarchists represent the Left, and somehow reflect on boring centrist grandma Clinton. I appreciate your No True Scotsman, but two can play this game.
How about your boy Milo mobbing Leslie Jones on Twitter over a silly summer action movie? Fringe is as fringe does, on both flanks.

 

Well, it seems pretty clear that you started this thread for the sole purpose of criticizing a university that would create such a degree program as well as putting down anyone who might enroll in it.

 

I strongly agree. But I do oppose the government putting purely political conditions on eligibility for government funding.

Of course, there's the issue of Constitutional rights and adherence to the law. If universities set up programs to organize and promote lawbreaking, then those responsible should be charged as criminal conspirators in whatever lawbreaking occurs. If police departments refuse to enforce the law, then they should be placed under federal supervision. If the right is denied the opportunity to exercise the same Constitutional rights that the left demands and insists upon, then Justice Department lawsuits should be filed and arrests made if necessary.

 

Clearly, violent crime is through the roof due to all these trendy MFA graduates.

BTW, I really want your take on the Pussy Riot case. Pretty please.

 

Beyond that, I guess I'd just want to point out that schools have been teaching courses on Civil Disobedience and Gandhian Thought for quite a long time now so the only thing that's particularly new about this is transforming these well known political philosophies into some sort of creative performance. You can almost imagine a big bunch of people dressing up in some sort of flamboyant costumes, boarding a ship and throwing the cargo into the ocean. You know, as a form of protest against something like unfair taxes. It might almost seem like a party.

 

How about something a little closer to North America?

5,000 Canadians March in Support of Trump, Against Liberal Trudeau Administration

 

Easy. Breibart story claims that motion M-103 makes criticism of Islam a criminal offense in Canada, when it does nothing of the sort, so it's a classic example of so called "fake news". I'm baffled as to why 5000 Canadians would march to protest condemning "condemn Islamophobia and all forms of systemic racism and religious discrimination"; I guess they are partially motivated by faulty news sources like Breibart. Nevertheless, the marchers have their freedom of expression, and apparently Canada properly recognized it and allowed it's exercise. Moving along, nothing to see here.

Also, the story undermines your preferred narrative. Liberal Party of Canada is to the left of U. S. Democrats. Far from being a bunch of radicals, it's the mainstreamiest of the mainstream parties here; an epitome of the "establishment" (complete with the resulting problems like nepotism, see Trudeua Jr, and entitlement). "Multiculturalism" is an official policy and national symbol most Canadians are proud of. Yet the country does not look like a communist hellhole. How come?

In contrast, Russian court sentences members of Pussy Riot collective (a radical feminist group one can loosely describe as a "punk rock band") to 2 years in prison in rather harsh conditions, for a performance/provocation that damaged no property and injured no one (and contrary to reports, did not disrupt a religious service). There is fear that current administration admires tactics of their buddy Vlad and despots like him. Discuss.

 

It's a piece of trivia not relevant for anything.

Yes, there are strands of Marxism suspicious of free speech and human rights in general. These people are the enemy; to add a personal emotional punch for me, these are the groups Kremlin finances, along with the far right. But you know as well as I do that the purpose these views and actions are even mentioned is to smear "the Left" as a monolith whole. By "the Left" some understand anyone not willing to condemn all Muslims to concentration camps, or having the gall to disagree with anti-Islamic hate speech. See the march against Motion M-103 above.