On Gherald’s recent education topic, here’s Sully:

There is much truth to his criticism of the left and its approach to education, although Obama’s break from orthodoxy on teacher accountability is ignored (even Rupert Murdoch gives Obama credit on that). But Goldberg begins the passage by insisting that problems in American education are completely the fault of the left… and concludes by noting that the GOP, when it last controlled the White House and the legislature, massively increased education spending without actually improving the system. And this is offered as a defense of the Republican record on education!

As for ideologically conservative follies in education, Goldberg should read up on “intelligent design,” and ponder the education systems in locales like Alabama and Mississippi, perennially among the worst performers relative to other states. But that would force hi to acknowledge and criticize the religious fanatics in the GOP base, and that he cannot and will not do – for purely political and partisan reasons.

One general tip that I think everyone can use to great effect: never believe anything that comes out of Jonah Goldberg’s mouth (or computer).  He’s a shameless hack.

Metavirus filed this under: ,  
  1. Gherald says:

    Your value-added sentences do not follow from the quoted passage. As Sullivan says from the start, "There is much truth to [Goldberg's] criticism of the left and its approach to education," (!!)

    Regarding the rest:

    | And this is offered as a defense of the Republican record on education!

    More specifically, it's offered as a defense against the typical Democratic charge that Republicans have underfunded education.

    I agree that the Republican--especially Bush Republican--record on education has been awful.. But this is because they regularly capitulate to left-liberalism on this issue. 'No Child Left Behind' is the starkest example.

    The left will never admit how much failed and wasteful programs like NCLB and Medicare Part D were an embrace of their way of doing things. It's much more rhetorically convenient to pummel an unpopular figure like Bush for the failures and pretend these aren't essentially left-liberal programs that Republicans capitulated to for political expediency.

    It was similar how Democrats often capitulate to Republicans on issues like tax cuts and defense spending, only worse.

    And Sullivan has long argued that Bush Republicans betrayed conservatism and right-liberalism. He's correct about that. But lately (past year or two) he's been even more interested in reflexively defending Obama and belittling the right.

    | , Goldberg should read up on "intelligent design,"

    These religious/social issue kerfuffles are not why US public education is failing. They certainly have nothing to do with why e.g. basic reading and math scores are so bad.

    | and ponder the education systems in locales like Alabama and Mississippi, perennially among the worst performers relative to other states

    This requires a more nuanced perspective. Yes, places like Alabama and Mississippi perform terribly. But their cultures and economies are terrible. A place with more poor blacks and more white trash is going to perform worse relative to the rest of the country, and this'll show up on an intra-US relative map like you posted in the other thread.

    But Goldberg's argument isn't about intra-US differences. It's about the US liberal approach to public education taken as a whole vis a vis the rest of the world.

  2. Metavirus says:

    this is because they regularly capitulate to left-liberalism on this issue

    omg hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha. Halp! The liberals have us at gunpoint and are forrrrrcing me to pass stupid lawsssss!!! HALP!

    hahahahahahahaha. with all due respect, what a crock of horseshit (no offense). Republicans pass wasteful boondoggles not because its the LIBERAL way of doing things, its because THAT'S WHAT ALL POLITICIANS (including democrats) DO (i.e., come up with ways to pass billion-dollar programs that give shit out to people in order to make people want to ELECT THEM). Republicans have been doing this for scores of decades and so have Democrats. Republicans are just better at convincing the ignorant american voter that they give a shit about too much spending when in reality, they spend at least as much if not more than democratic regimes. Saying that wasting money to buy votes is the province of liberals is just laughable.

    p.s. can you stop with the "left-liberal" thing? it is discordant and is hurting my brain.

    p.p.s. on your second point, a goodly majority of our country's schools are doing just fine on reading and math scores. its primarily schools in inner-city population centers, schools in the south and schools in border states that have the problem. where do the social issue kerfuffles happen? the south?

    • Rupert Psmith says:

      "p.s. can you stop with the "left-liberal" thing? it is discordant and is hurting my brain. "

      Yes! Me too! This weird taxonomy has the crazy whiff of a Glenn Beck theory to it.

      • Gherald says:

        Liberalism is a broad term whose typical usage varies in different parts of the world, particularly the US. Since I write about the world as a whole and am not solely interested in the US's conventional left-right / liberal-conservative divide, I need to keep the terminology straight. "liberal" is too general.

        I happen to be a liberal in the classical sense, and am quite proud of my liberalism. But I need a way to distinguish myself and European liberals from the US's left-liberalism, which in Europe they call social democracy.

        • Metavirus says:

          i know, i get it, but most of the blogs readers are from the US so its ok if you just say liberal -- especially if we're talking about an explicitly US-centric topic like US education performance standards. my brain will thank you! :)

          • Gherald says:

            Well, liberals in other countries don't have as much of a monopoly over their education sector and many of their schools seem to be performing better than the US's. And since my post was commenting on an international comparison, I felt the need to specify which kind of liberal I was talking about.

            Goldberg just used "liberal" because his post was directed towards American conservatives who "understand" that "liberal" means "our evil opponents".

            • Rupert Psmith says:

              One could simply say "Left" which while different here than Spain or Germany, etc. is understood I think fairly clearly by most readers in context.

              • Metavirus says:

                that works for me. i always enjoy leftish too (e.g., leftish policies)

              • Gherald says:

                I would be delighted if mainstream Democrats were comfortable with "Left". It's actually my preferred term, as I resent how you've co-opted "liberal" from its original meaning. I want my word back!

                Yet most Democrats resent being called "Left", fearing it implies communism. They don't want to be associated with those kiddies wearing Che Guevara T-shirts.

                So my use of left-liberalism or US liberalism was actually a nod to mainstream Democrats….

                Because mainstream Democrats are definitely responsible for the state of US education. They regularly demagogue the issue. So I didn't want to risk implying to them that it's the ones further left who are responsible for its state.

                • Metavirus says:

                  well then why don't you just go with the newest rebranding campaign and call a liberal a progressive!

                  • Gherald says:

                    Uhhhmm, because:

                    A few emailers took offense to the term “leftists,” or “lefties.” Is that pejorative now? Well, okay. What would you like to be called? As I understand it, “liberal” went out of vogue in the late 1980s. Which is fine, because as a libertarian, I’d actually like to have that word back.

                    Sorry, but I’m not using “progressive.” It’s a loaded term which implies that the people who disagree with you are opposed to progress. I disagree with you more often than not. And I don’t consider myself regressive. I just have a different concept of progress than you. Also, I don’t quite understand why that word is so popular right now. You do realize that the progressives of the early 20th century were generally anti-abortion, pro-eugenics, and pro-prohibition, don’t you? More than a few of them–including progressive hero Woodrow Wilson-were also ardent segregationists.

                    But I digress. What exactly should I call you that won’t give offense?

                    I'm similarly flummoxed.

                    • As long as you are clear it probably doesn't really matter and I appreciate your wanting to save the term from us dirty hippies. :) There is something very awkward though about the constructions " left-liberalism" and "right-liberalism" — maybe it's just the late Wittgenstein in me but language should be used to clarify, not obfuscate (settle down, I'm not accusing you of doing this intentionally) and the use of liberalism, by way of Adam Smith, doesn't really help me understand what you are saying about American public schools in 2010 … but I guess that's just my problem.

                      On a hopeful note, while there's been a lot of heat on this (mentioning Jonah to a "liberal" is like throwing a grenade into a conversation) I bet if we sat and discussed solutions we would find a lot more common ground than disagreement. I'm all for experiments to see if we can improve the public schools and I think we need to try new things.

                      Regarding "progressivism" — blame GHW Bush for that. He and the GOP so demonized the term "liberal" in the late '80s and early '90s that you can't really be surprised there was a rebranding. If you make a perfectly reasonable ideology sound like a weak-kneed, murder/rapist/NABLA coddling alien species then don't be surprised if its members dig around for some other term to identify with.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>