Welcome login | signup
Language en es fr
We are the 99 percent

Occupy UMass Boston

Posted 9 years ago on Jan. 23, 2012, 1:15 p.m. EST by OccupyWallSt

https://twitter.com/#!/OccupyUMB For more information.

Press Release transcription below the fold from: http://www.scribd.com/doc/78957195/Occupy-UMass-Boston-Press-Release-1-23-2012

Students Occupy the University of Massachusetts, Boston in Solidarity with Occupy Wall Street

Monday, January 23rd, Students Occupy The Campus Center at The University of Massachusetts, Boston

The movement that began on Wall Street on September 17 has continued for over 5 months to spread globally and brought people together to take part in direct democracy. Occupy UMass Boston moves to bring this conversation to the campus this spring semester. We seek to create an alternative to the prevailing corporate model of education that excludes students, faculty, and staff from the decision making process.

Occupy UMass Boston liberated the first floor atrium at the UMass Boston Campus Center in Boston, today Monday, January 23 at 7 a.m., to begin an ongoing protest to provide a forum where students, staff, faculty, and members of the community can come to a consensus on what concrete changes would provide quality, accessible education in Boston that is available to everyone in the 99%.

Occupy UMass Boston seizes this space in solidarity with #OccupyWallStreet, #OccupyBoston, Students Occupy Boston, as well as others across the globe, from Spain, to Egypt, Tunisia, the UK, and elsewhere, who stand in resistance against the attacks by the 1% on working people.

Occupy UMass Boston is the beginning of an ongoing discussion about the problems with America's public higher education system and how it has become less and less accessible to communities of the poor and minorities while simultaneously increasing the dichotomy between the haves and have-nots. We recognize that this divide is destructive not just to our generation in this country but to the global community.

In UMass Boston's original statement of purpose, presented by Chancellor John F. Ryan in 1966, it states "As urban problems mount, many of the city's most able people flee to the suburbs and leave the oppressed (...) to struggle alone. The urban university must stand with the city, must serve and lead where the battle is."

The problems that burden our working class are even greater today. According to UMass Boston's October 2010 "Beginning College Survey", 45% of UMass Boston freshmen respondents believe that "Paying for College" will be "Very Difficult". And yet, tuition and fees are ever rising: since 2006, UMass Boston in-state tuition and fees have increased 38%, from $8,266 to $11,406, and the administration is proposing continued increases by a rate of 8% annually. This is a result of both state and federal government policies defunding public higher education and campus administration actions to convert UMass Boston into a privatized university.

During this indefinite occupation at the only public four-year university in Boston, Occupy UMass Boston will demand that our university runs on the principles of transparency, democratic decision-making, accessible public higher education, and protection for the rights of students, staff, and faculty.

"Education is a right, not a privilege." "Education for the 99%" "UMass for the Working Class"

Official Website : http://occupyumb.tumblr.com/ Twitter : @OccupyUMB Youtube : YouTube.com/OccupyUMassBoston Ustream Live Video - http://www.ustream.tv/user/OccupyUMB



Read the Rules
[-] 3 points by struggleforfreedom80 (6584) 9 years ago

Speaking of Occupy Boston, make sure you all watch this one: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IZbNT62aprM (q&a at 28 minutes)

yours s sff http://struggleforfreedom.blogg.no/

[-] 1 points by dreamingforward (394) from Gothenburg, NE 9 years ago

"Education is a right" is only true in a world where "right to (land) property" has created a scarcity in ability to live. Are you sure you want to fight for that, rather than against "right to property"?

[-] 1 points by neutrinobambino (12) 9 years ago

i think you are mistakenly presupposing a certain function of education. Education does not exist simply to remedy a "scarcity in ability to live," and the pursuit of education solely for the purpose of enabling oneself to live, as in making money, is exactly what plagues the American education system. Our education system is underfunded but in addition to that, the humanities are undermined and even more underfunded because they are not "productive" by the standards late capitalism sets for us. We need to question what it means to succeed, and how much we have let capitalist imperatives define what we think are personal or even universal desires. Marx did not study philosophy because he wanted to make sure he made money and lived comfortably; if so he would have followed his father's wishes and studied law. I use Marx only as an example; the theories that allow us to understand the context in which we live require education on the most useless of topics, and remain relevant regardless of one's personal property or security.

[-] 1 points by dreamingforward (394) from Gothenburg, NE 9 years ago

But pursuit of education for the joy of learning wouldn't be a right or is there some other purpose of education?

[-] 1 points by neutrinobambino (12) 9 years ago

it's not just for the "joy of learning;" if that were the case then universities would not be necessary. one may do anything that gives them joy in a library or with the internet. another point of education is to develop critical thinking, an understanding of society, politics, culture, etc. that make good citizens. one may make money without having an understanding of these things, but people who lack critical thinking but are educated are in the strange position of making decisions in the world without necessarily being equipped to do so wisely. emphasis on necessarily. one may learn about these things outside of the university, but learning from a professor offers unique benefits. i think having a well-rounded education infused with the humanities is...well...good for humanity.

[-] 1 points by dreamingforward (394) from Gothenburg, NE 9 years ago

Hmmm, it seems if you made education a "right" then you will go against your goals of critical thinking....

[-] 1 points by neutrinobambino (12) 9 years ago

i'm not offering an imperative for all of society, by the way, just stating my opinion about some benefits of education outside of both pleasure and money-making.

[-] 1 points by malixgad (1) from Rijeka, Primorsko-goranska 9 years ago


If someone would care for this, I am happy to share.

[-] 0 points by marga (82) 9 years ago

The world is looking for people with a fresh mind, some one who is not locked in place by orthodox science and religion. They are merely believes and believes are nothing more then placeholders to keep you fixed as long as you hold that belief. We have entered the digital age and need a whole new mathematical system to get us to the next level in life. Even thou many people try to fight the system its a battle they cannot win for the simple fact that its roots took hold in your childre

[-] 0 points by socialmedic (178) 9 years ago

And child bearing is a responsibility not a right. Every child born MUST be educated. And at WHOSE expense? Do we breed masses of children to be crammed neglected 500 to a lecture hall? Is education a matter of mass manufacture? Do we crank degreed children out on an assembly line? Is it fair that one family dump 19 children on the public expenditure for attention their education while another only 2 or 3? Democracy is an elite value. It demands that its constituents be well educated which means that the individual needs of those to be educated must be well addressed in reasonably sized classrooms with qualified teachers who care about EDUCATING, not about who is the popular kid in the class, the favorite pet, not about research papers and publishing, and the host of a billion other things teachers are required to perform as if teaching were not justification enough for their presence in the class room. I would add Quality to Education for the 99% with the stipulation that the 99% can not breed the country into the poor house while crowding its classrooms until they burst!


[-] 0 points by DonHawkins (37) 9 years ago

http://knowledge321.wordpress.com/ somebody had to say it....

[-] 0 points by JohnWa (513) 9 years ago

There are many inter related issues not just lack of tax take.




[-] -1 points by Lardhead2 (67) 9 years ago

"Liberated the first floor"? Are you kidding? You people are soooo melodramatic!


[-] -1 points by Ninetyninenot (-57) 9 years ago

So, college kids, unless they fuck up and study something useless, that are destined to live better than most people are somehow "down with" the masses? Too funny. Sure, it was even funnier at the more elite Harvard, but it's still laughable.

Little whiners that want more subsidy as they pretend to feel the poor's pain, nothing else. Maybe they should make their case for subsidy to the 3/4 of the country that DIDN'T go to college. But, heh, college is the age for not realizing simple shit like that.

Funny too how easier the word "right" rolls out of the loons. They never quite get around to explaining whose OBLIGATION it is to pay for that right.

[-] 3 points by proudofOKC (361) 9 years ago

I have a college degree and I am not "destined" to be much of anything. If a college student wants to be proactive in changing to system to help the common man, are you really going to judge that person? Is that not motivated out of compassion? Also, since you obviously did not go to college, you probably don't know how expensive it is. I'll be happy to give you some of my student loans, since I'm obviously "destined" for more than this. Of the Americans who did not go to college, do you not think there are any who wish they had had the chance to go, but didn't because it was too expensive? Making education cheaper, or at least more fair, would not have benefited anyone of the masses at all? So truly everyone in the 3/4 of population deliberately did not go to college because they really hate college and now they just want to bash debt-ridden college students on a website.


[-] 0 points by Ninetyninenot (-57) 9 years ago

The "common man" didn't go to college. Dopey college students are too self-involved to realize that at their age.

There's our old throw-back "compassion". But it's just that kind of compassion that's detached from thinking that causes one to have no idea about who loses in your debt give away. And another one "cheaper", another code word for subsidy and someone else paying for it.

Students have a responsibility to use educational resources wisely. Investing large amounts of money in things with no economic results is a poor decision unless you have that money to spend.

College students have made some horrible choices borrowing like lunatics against soft majors and then wanting non-college grads to pick up the tab. Sorry, it's time to grow up.

[-] 2 points by mserfas (652) from Ashland, PA 9 years ago

We used to have a nobler notion of what higher education was about in this country. It was not an "investment", a tool of the trade, a means by which we could certify that the children of the wealthy are better than the children of the poor. The idea was that all the people would have the freedom to learn, to think, to discuss and invent with the resources of a mighty society behind them, not merely for personal gain but for the advancement of the world's knowledge. I think sometimes we forget how far we've fallen, how much we've lost to an ever-increasing inequality and the desperation it breeds. Students are reaching the point where cheating is practically a legitimate activity, because if the only point of college is to be the one who gets the job, to be a good competitor, then cheating to win is the sensible route, indeed, proof that a person has the ambition and boldness to succeed. But it is not the way to put men on the Moon.

[-] 0 points by Ninetyninenot (-57) 9 years ago

Not the way we put men on the moon? Neither is a debt fueled degree in gender studies. LOL

Take a look at a course book from 1960. Take a look at one from today. Compare the two. Notice the emergence of soft trash majors in the interim. Now go back to your moon-shot comment.

[-] 2 points by proudofOKC (361) 9 years ago

Honestly, everything you are saying is incorrect. The Occupy movement contains college students who are trying to change the system to help not only themselves but the common man, who like you said, did not go to college. I'm not sure how you read my sentence as saying that the common man went to college.

I do not believe my compassion is detached from thinking. I am educated and I read up on issues. The decisions I make are educated decisions.

You are saying that we should not go to college unless we're going to be petroleum engineers that will actually be able to pay back our student loans. I have lived in two different countries where education was subsidized by the tax dollars of the rich and it seemed to be a great system. Before you go docking France, I was in Korea and Japan.

I just don't see why education should be so expensive in America when trillionaires are paying a smaller percentage in taxes than I am. If you think that is reflective of a just system, then I'm not the only one who was some growing up to do.

[-] 2 points by DarknessOfGreed (41) 9 years ago

If everyone who's not dirt poor decided not to care about "the poor man's problems" then nothing would ever be reformed. Progress cannot come solely from those oppressed. It's up to the people who haven't been hit as hard to embody the voice of the voiceless. Not everyone who goes to college should go. However, there are many who should have the opportunity to go, yet are held back by the rising tuition costs. This isn't about socialist vs capitalist or left vs right...this is about the facts. And the fact is that college tuition prices are getting ridiculous in a time when our countries so-called greatest minds are ignoring the problems by telling everyone to go to college. The common man cannot make a living doing necessary labor based american jobs. This must be corrected just as the problem of college tuition must be corrected. And this is not to say that we should just dump off student loans on the common man, rather, we must reform the college system.

[-] 2 points by proudofOKC (361) 9 years ago

Yes, thank you. You have clearly said what I have tried to say. I need say no more, so thanks. :-)

[-] -1 points by Ninetyninenot (-57) 9 years ago

Someone pays. Every OWSer should write this down and tape it to their refrigerator.

Is it really this hard? Are people now really this lost? Is this the dumbest generation ever? School is an investment. Especially if you are borrowing money, it is wise to consider the economic returns of that investment. Ignoring this point creates difficult situations and much whining later. So, borrowing money for a goofy major like Women's Studies is a pretty obvious path to tears (and for OWSers, blame).

Education is expensive for some simple reasons: 1) It's worth it (unless you're stupid and self-destruct by studying something useless); 2) A demographic bulge created outsized demand; 3) Too much money is being indiscriminately thrown at it (see the earlier points and note your own inability to connect spending on education to a realistic assessment of what you get for your money).

Mix extensive access to money (borrowed and otherwise) with really really poor consumers (today's exceedingly dopey students) and you have a recipe for inflation. It doesn't matter what product you're talking about. Pretty basic stuff and something they cover in college in a class called E c o n o m i c s.

Sure, take it from someone else. I get that, that's always the liberal answer.

[-] 1 points by neutrinobambino (12) 9 years ago

i love how "soft" degrees are getting so much antagonism, with women's studies as the leading example, as though most people who get screwed over in college major in women's studies, as though women's studies can't enhance one's performance in a number of professions, and as though the departments that house these "soft" majors don't enable a stronger, more complex approach to things like economics, political science, psychology, etc--areas where there are many jobs. even if people throw away their money majoring in bengali girlology or whatever else, these "soft" departments themselves do so much to enrich a diverse array of educational tracks.

[-] 0 points by Ninetyninenot (-57) 9 years ago

Heh, you pick it but Women's Studies comes up for good reason; it's simply an example of the fraudulent soft majors invented in the 60s and 70s. But there are others like Gender Studies, Chicano Studies, Sociology, Urban Studies and the like. And then at the individual course level, it's taken to even greater extremes of hilarity. It's simply a fraud brought on by liberal schools with too much undisciplined funding, too many gullible and pliable students, and too much political meddling.

You can sell them all you like, but mixing them with debt is dangerous. Some kids figure that out, others are stunned as to why they're 35 living in the parents' basement paying off their students loans with a job at Starbucks. It's just a big mystery.

Let's set the context. College at least used to be a place where at least our relatively best and brightest went to further their education. So, here we have our best and brightest making horrendous decisions about the educational investment choices they're making with the borrowed money. It's just stunning how something so simple glides over so many college kid heads.

There's a great opportunity for students to smarten up and ratchet up their own respect for the money they're spending. Now that's a route out of mom and dad's basement.

[-] 1 points by neutrinobambino (12) 9 years ago

on the one hand, you're right about how one ought to spend borrowed money. I can't afford to squander my education, and personally would have never considered majoring in something like "women's studies" because i need a job.

on the other hand, you seem to be missing the biggest problem of student loan debt. why do people take out student loans? because they cannot afford to go to college. why can they not afford to go to college? because while the tuition rates have escalated steadily, the median income level has remained stagnant. it is the same reason we ran into a housing crisis. people cannot afford to live as they desire and perhaps even deserve to live.

further, the imperative to go straight into college after high school leads a lot of people to decide their fates and career paths, and take out loans, before they have at all developed as individuals. they know only their parents' homes, their high schools, and their equally inexperienced friends. this is a cultural problem that sometimes leads people to pick majors frivolously.

nonetheless, i refuse to concede that "soft" degrees lack academic merit, or that their offerings are irrelevant in the market place. the use of majoring solely in such a specific area of study is debatable, but these "soft" degrees reflect the complexity of the world with which graduates and people in general must come to terms.

[-] 1 points by proudofOKC (361) 9 years ago

I am in favor of tax fairness. If I am taxed a certain percentage, then billionaires and trillionaires should not be taxed less than that. I don't view that as taking from them but rather as fairness.

Of course someone pays? I feel like we are throwing around empty signifiers instead of having an actual conversation. A post containing the word dopey cannot be considered credible.

[-] 0 points by Ninetyninenot (-57) 9 years ago

All you're really saying is that capital gains and dividends tax rates should be the same as ordinary income tax rates. That's fine, but that's what you're saying. Conversely, I guess, the nearly have that pay nothing are due for a tax increase as well.

Yes, of course someone pays. That gets lost in all the "compassion" and "make it cheaper" talk.

I post regarding students, their choices and debt can't be credible WITHOUT the use of the word "dopey".

[-] 0 points by smartcapitalist (143) 9 years ago

Depends on what degree you earned in college. If you paid a whopping amount for a degree which does not have much practical application then you made the wrong call. But people with degrees in Math, Engineering and even professional degrees are living better than everyone else. And yes, I did go to college.

[-] 2 points by proudofOKC (361) 9 years ago

I agree that engineers live better than everyone else, but I fail to see why that justifies higher education being cripplingly expensive when billionaires pay a smaller percentage in taxes than I do. Education should be affordable so that anyone who has the brains to handle it can go to college.

So since I did not major in math, engineering, or nursing, I should be punished? What if I majored in education to teach in a public school? How about music because I want to be a high school orchestra director who encourages kids to make more of themselves? What about art therapy, so that I can work in a rehabilitation center for children who have been abused? What about social work? Yes, all of these people should be punished with debt for life because they went into professions that don't make any money and are therefore not useful at all.

[-] 4 points by TheIllusionCalledMoney (56) 9 years ago

ProudofOKC: Your comments are very well thought out, intelligent, and make complete sense. They just don't make sense, or should I say, threaten those who want to keep the existing system going, despite all the misery and division the existing system causes to billions of us in the world. When one is threatened. you'll note that logical arguments are no where to be found. Instead you get responses like, "fuck up", "little whiners", "shit", "dopey", "lunatics", "fucking obvious", etc. I think I recall MLK and Gandhi used similar inspiring arguments and vocabulary.

Keep increasing your knowledge, after all, once the system collapses, bright, open-minded people like yourself will be the ones bringing the world together for the betterment of all, including those trying currently doing everything they can to kill the movement, the same people suggesting we get rid of things like the arts, music, teaching & education, etc. in support of a world where one can do no more than make more money to keep this same vicious cycle going.

After all, if we use that logic, perhaps the world never really needed the likes of those like Voltaire, Beethoven, Michelangelo, Van Gogh, MLK, Gandhi . . .

[-] 1 points by proudofOKC (361) 9 years ago

Thank you for your words and thoughts. I'll keep my chin up! Solidarity. :-)

[-] 0 points by smartcapitalist (143) 9 years ago

Again, you have to decide what is good for you. If you think you can't pay for it then dont take it. It will reduce demand and the fees for those courses will drop eventually (though I doubt if universities would want to use that much of differential pricing across courses). And I would agree that it has become prohibitively expensive for students who don't have any scholarships. I am all for making it free but I doubt we will be able to attract good faculty that way. American higher education is world class because it has some of the best faculty and resources and I doubt if making it free would be able to sustain them. Besides, at a time when we are already under $15 trillion debt no one in high right mind would think about it.

Say you majored in music and want to teach school kids, that's your call. You can't expect to get paid well for that because society values a music teacher far less than it does an engineer. Why? Well it could be the scarcity of the skill, the level of skills required, the revenue generated by that person etc.

[-] 1 points by proudofOKC (361) 9 years ago

You say very sensible things here. I think what you say is what is happening, that many students are choosing not to go to college because they can't afford it. The decision is not based on intelligence, but because they were born into a poor situation in a community with little economic opportunity. The decision to go to college is not based on whether the student is smart enough to handle to curriculum, but because they are rich or poor. The result is smart people not going to college and kids who do not like school going to college anyways because that is the only way to get a job.

Also, a lot of people took out loans for college expecting to be able to pay them back when they get employed after graduation. Instead they graduate into unemployment or part-time work and have no ability to make their payments.

When I say that college should be free, I mean for the student. If a child is smart enough to handle the curriculum, that child should be able to go to college. If they get into MIT, then they should go, regardless of whether they were born into a rich or poor family. If the rich were taxed at the same rates as the poor, we would have the money for this.

[-] 3 points by TheIllusionCalledMoney (56) 9 years ago

You said something seemingly so inconsequential, yet so important, and so many people don't yet get this, and refuse to open up their minds to the life-altering possibility: You said, "kids . . .going to college anyways because that is the only way to get a job". That is what college has become, and it's so sad - a way to get a job. We used to go to college to follow our dreams in advance of a profession or idea we loved. Now you see kids going to college, and actually selecting a major based on a better opportunity to get a job rather than following their dreams. Is there anything sadder than this? This is what our society has become under the veil of the current economic paradigm. Yes, tell all the kids of the world to go to school to become bankers, so they will all find employment upon graduation. Can you imagine a future generation where the entire society is comprised of only bankers and the like? And yet, that is what so many of us are telling our kids to do, so they can SURVIVE (no, not live, survive) upon graduation. Oh, and by the way, a bit of a newsflash here: Has anyone noticed the number of kids today graduating with 2 or more degrees, and still being unable to find employment? Hmmm... should we investigate why this is, or continue to bury our heads in the sand like many of those who accuse the occupiers of not "trying hard enough" to get a job.

We need to wake up as a society and civilization to understand that, drum roll here, the current paradigm of work for pay is coming to and end. The jobs are going away, replaced by technology (a beautiful thing, mind you) and they are not coming back, despite the rhetoric put forth by politicians every month with their smoke and mirror fraudulent employment updates to the sleeping public who continue to soak it up like sponges (because, after all, facing the reality of, well, reality, is certainly frightening).

How about this: instead of trying to keep the current dying paradigm of college for jobs alive, let's recreate the brilliance of universities of centuries ago, when people studied as generalists - generalists who's aim was to enlighten themselves and at the same time solve truly magnificent human problems. Does anyone wonder why people of such distant times, without any technology, were so brilliant? Did they have different DNA? Nope. It's because they were generalists who knew a lot about a lot, and who thought critically EVERY DAY OF THEIR LIVES, rather than going to college to get spoon-fed information only to then have to regurgitate it back for a "job".

So... since the jobs are going away forever, perhaps it's time to change the paradigm....

Oh, and ps: For those who refuse to believe that jobs/employment for pay (not to mention money itself) will be a staple of humanity's existence for the next 10,000 years, please bury this comment thread in your backyard, and feel free to dig it up when reality comes knocking at the door of civilization. . .

Much love....

[-] 1 points by proudofOKC (361) 9 years ago

Thank you so much for your words! I agree with well, everything you said. Especially the first paragraph articulated exactly what I have been trying to say and couldn't. We have indeed passed the period of usefulness for the current paradigm. However, as a community we need to be very proactive in setting up the next system so that it has already been fine-tuned and is ready to rumble when the current system collapses.

I need an example to paint a picture of this, and I keep thinking of the engagement ceremony for my friend whose family consists of Chinese immigrants to Thailand. There was a lot of tradition involved and hundreds of tasks, and yet with a huge family full of differing personalities and bickering the preparations were run like a well-oiled machine because each person had been raised participating in the ceremonies and everyone knew what to do. The tasks were small and could be easily assigned, and no one task was so important that anyone felt left out. I was put in charge of gluing good fortune stickers on mangoes. The women who did not go to the dress fitting for the bride/fiance were in charge of finding her shoes and accessories. The men handled the shipment of food baskets to the ceremony, etc.

This is the kind of template we must keep in mind when finding a way to replace the current system. It must be something that each generation teaches to the new and the children get to experience it and witness all of its bugs so many times it has been converted to instinct by the time they inherit the planet. We need this system to get started now, so that several generations can tweak it over time and it can begin to meet the needs of the community. The system can grow and coexist with capitalism, picking up where capitalism leaves off and helping sustain the common man despite the massive leach on our backs. Then when the current paradigm collapses, it is not catastrophic because we already have a system in place that can slide in and life goes on as usual.

This, for me, has been the beauty of GAs, because it is a prototype, the very beginning, of what we need. It is riddled with gaping holes to be considered, experimented with, addressed and fixed. We need a cloud talking about what kind of system the community would like to have, how things like a GA meet some needs and neglect others, what can be done to make the governing/participatory process available to everyone, and whatnot.

[-] 1 points by smartcapitalist (143) 9 years ago

Agreed. Well one easy way would be for the government to set up a cheap loan scheme for the truly deserving but poor students. Many countries do that.

[-] 1 points by proudofOKC (361) 9 years ago

Yes, I agree. There are a few different systems that seem to work for some countries, and it would be wise to evaluate them and see if they would work in America. I know in Japan corporations will sponsor students of all majors, so even a literature student would get a tuition waiver from a company like Toshiba. As long as they keep their grades up they keep the waiver. Then when they graduate they go to work for them. In translating this to America I think some things would need to be considered, such as allowing students the freedom to choose their major, so that everyone isn't signing up for engineering just for the waiver or something. It also kind of rubs up against the ability to choose your own destiny in my opinion, but if going to school and getting a stable job with good benefits and pay is what you want then it's great.

[-] 1 points by JohnWa (513) 9 years ago

I would be interested in how you see the obligation of the 1% who strip their massive wealth out of the rest or society.

The idealism of youth may not be misplaced. Their efforts will be to the benefit of all as they are the next generation.

[-] -2 points by Ninetyninenot (-57) 9 years ago

Yes, benefit the next generation. Tell them not to whine and to smarten up about the consequences of borrowing money. Tell them that when you borrow money, you should give at least some thought to how you'll pay it back. Tell them that teeing up $100k in debt for a sociology or women's studies major probably ain't gonna turn out real well.

Yes, benefit the next generation: tell them the really fucking obvious stuff that escaped this one.

[-] -2 points by Carlitini99 (-167) 9 years ago

Education may be a right, but come on are majors like Mexican Studies really necessary to spend our hard earned taxes on?

[-] 2 points by socialmedic (178) 9 years ago

You know one of the really great things about Harvard University is that Harvard holds classes in practically any subject you want, from occult sciences to Hindi. It offers up an entire gourmet smorgasbord of subjects for those who really love to learn. That is why it draws applicants from all over the world which is why the United States can boast one of the greatest universities in the world. What is American education to become, the McDonald's french fries, of education?

[-] 0 points by Carlitini99 (-167) 9 years ago

Harvard is not a great University anymore, it became a global university to make money. And shouldn't American universities give Americans education not foreigners?

[-] 1 points by TheIllusionCalledMoney (56) 9 years ago

Isn't it amazing. From space, one cannot see the fictitious, invisible lines humans have created to divide countries, cultures and people, yet still we even have wars to defend these invisible, man-made lines. And as long as we continue to divide the world with comments that separate US from THEM in any context, we are doomed to continue the same old same old . . . What is a foreigner by the way? Such a strange term . ..

[-] 0 points by Carlitini99 (-167) 9 years ago

From space you can't see your stupidity either, doesn't mean its not there. So you are a no border's guy. So borders are stupid, please then go live in Nigeria, or N. Korea you will see how borders and culture make a big difference

[-] 1 points by TheIllusionCalledMoney (56) 9 years ago

And by the way, to use your words, borders are "stupid". Borders divide people, not bring them together. Borders cause wars, not peace. Borders, I think you would agree, are not part of nature, rather they were created by powerful people a long time ago who decided that they, not nature, were rulers of the planet, and then went on to do a beautiful job over the centuries dividing and conquering the world, going as far as creating imaginary lines to say, like a 5-year old, "This is mine, and you can't have it". One day, I believe, but am not so sure, we will be a more civilized world and wake up to realize we're all here on this planet as one species. Why don't you and I watch together and see if we move towards a world where all are equal and live in peace with one another, or destroy the planet and wipe out our species.

[-] 1 points by beautifulworld (23464) 9 years ago

Here's a great book about how fictitious our borders and "nations" are:

"Imagined Communites" by Benedict Anderson

[-] 0 points by Carlitini99 (-167) 9 years ago

unfortunately, there are people out there who would like to kill and steal, so your utopia can't exist yet.

[-] 1 points by TheIllusionCalledMoney (56) 9 years ago

Carlitini: Thanks for the enlightened remark (i.e. my stupidity). Very well-thought out response. We need more intelligent, forward thinking people like you on this planet. Wishing you the best of luck in your mission of changing the world by bringing people together..

[-] 0 points by Carlitini99 (-167) 9 years ago

you are welcome :)

[-] 1 points by neutrinobambino (12) 9 years ago

jaw drop i cannot believe how much xenophobia and racism is on this discussion board. Are Arab, Chinese, Nigerian, Guatemalan Americans not the 99%?

[-] 0 points by Carlitini99 (-167) 9 years ago

IQ check. you must be the racist, i am talking about borders, and the Amercan culture. Any one from the countries you mentioned can be in our borders legally and become a part of American culture. No problem. Why would they come to American if it was the same as China,or Nigeria , failed or despotic countries? America is great because we are all Americans.

[-] 1 points by neutrinobambino (12) 9 years ago

I don't think borders are necessary in all universities. If Harvard were a state school, it would be problematic for it to be a global university. Further, I don't see how the quality of education is diminished because it is not all-American or whatever. also, i'm sorry if you felt specifically targeted by the racism comment, I am also disturbed by the antagonism some people have demonstrated against ethnic studies.

[-] 1 points by ohmygoodness (158) 9 years ago

When one understands other cultures there will be a lower probability of war and hence a lower war expenditure, more money for education and other more civilized endeavors.

[-] -1 points by Carlitini99 (-167) 9 years ago

1st we should know our own culture, i have no interest in my kids being taught how America is bad and all the other cultures are great. That's what these ethnic studies are all about.

[-] 1 points by neutrinobambino (12) 9 years ago

this is absurd and reductive. furthermore, it is not relevant to what stands before us Right Now in terms of improving our education system, unless you feel that we should not work on funding and economic disparity so long as--god forbid--mexican studies classes exist. i mean, a social worker in a predominantly mexican neighborhood doesn't need to understand the culture of the people she works with and for? mexican americans aren't american enough?

[-] 0 points by Carlitini99 (-167) 9 years ago

exactly why do we need a social worker trained in mexican studies? Mexican americans (legally here) need to become part of American culture, Americans do not need to become Mexicans. Why do you think the Mexicans came here? If they wanted to be in Mexican culture they would have stayed in Mexico. The U.S. is great because we are not Mexico, Guatamala , Nigeria and other failed states. We should be studying math, science, business and just lump mexican studies , black studies, lesbian studies into a social science class. People can celebrate and learn about their culture from and with their families and neighbors. But we all must be Americans 1st ....

[-] 0 points by CephaIus (34) 9 years ago

American culture is made up of the cultures from everywhere else around the world. It's a country built on immigration. What the hell are you talking about American Culture? Do you mean people should learn about McDonald, BayWatch, and Diet Pepsi?

[-] 0 points by Carlitini99 (-167) 9 years ago

that shows how stupid you are thinking that American culture is McDonalds. We have over 300 years of history here, we have a culture, a great culture. It may be changed and influenced by immigrants over the centuries of course, but it is a unique American culture. Why do you think we are a better country than Mexico? We have strong work ethic (except for occupiers), an excellent system of government, and a culture of individual responsibility (except for occupiers).

[-] -1 points by CephaIus (34) 9 years ago

I don't think US is a better country than Mexico. I think saying something like that is extremely naive. I think US is a different country than Mexico, but I don't believe we can measure if a country is better than another in an objective manner.

Personally, I would never want to live in US. It would be one of my last choices. The only countries I would prefer US over would be Middle Eastern countries. I just don't like the US vibe. To each is own. Defining what's better is entirely subjective.

And, by the way, US is made up of immigrants. That is your culture, so it's important to study the history of US and of its immigrants. US is all about immigration. Studying the Mexican culture can only be a good thing. There's no knowledge that's bad.

[-] 0 points by Carlitini99 (-167) 9 years ago

Then why are there 12million illegal Mexicans here and not 12 million Americans in Mexico. Do Mexicans have a tax funded U.S. study dept in their universities where they say how bad Mexico is and how great Mexico is? Probably not. The U.S. is made up of immigrants but not all of us came to the U.S in the last 40 years, most Americans have had their ancestors here for much longer and don't identify with a foreign country.

[-] 1 points by neutrinobambino (12) 9 years ago

studying a certain culture does not necessarily indicate that it is "better" than other cultures; it is necessary to understand it. A person's heritage and cultural roots do not disappear as soon as they leave those countries. You cannot understand differences in values, family structure, and things like gender roles, relationships with authority, etc. if you do not attempt to understand the history from which people emerge. thus a good social worker who is working with immigrants needs to understand from where they come IN ADDITION TO understanding American culture and society. Not instead of--

[-] -1 points by Carlitini99 (-167) 9 years ago

interesting that our ancestors that came before all of this government waste, didn't have social workers at all, and they turned out fine. Whereas the Mexicans with all the social programs seemed to fall into crime and gangs.

[-] 1 points by neutrinobambino (12) 9 years ago

you're right. our ancestors turned out fine, if by "fine" you mean "dead" like everyone else, and really in that case nbd. otherwise, i don't really see how you have any rational argument here at all, and certainly no historical or sociological basis for your statements.

[-] 0 points by Carlitini99 (-167) 9 years ago

what are you talking about, dead.?? You are making up data and being untruthful.

[-] 1 points by neutrinobambino (12) 9 years ago

i'm not making up data, you can look it up yourself. while some ancestors (parents, grandparents, etc.) remain alive, the vast majority of ancestors are, in fact, dead. it was only inevitable, imho. i don't know if they "turned out fine," in good or bad condition compared to anything else, but i'm not going to argue your point. i'm sure they are fine.

[-] -1 points by CephaIus (34) 9 years ago

It's think it's very simple-minded to think that one country is better than another. You can't plot these types of things in objective manners. It's all subjective. There's really no point to it anyhow. I know a lot of American expats who prefer to live in all types of countries instead of US. It depends on the person and his goals in life.

[-] -1 points by Carlitini99 (-167) 9 years ago

Is Mexico better than N. Korea? Yes of course it is. And the U.S is better than Mexico by most measurements. Use your common sense.

[-] 0 points by CephaIus (34) 9 years ago

It's subjective. For a North-Korean who can't speak Spanish and has no money nor family in Mexico, it's probably better for him to live in North-Korea.

Personally, US is much too conservative for my liking. Many Mexican laws are more forward thinking that laws in US. I don't know. I think US is messed up. It's really not a place where I would want to live.

[-] 0 points by Carlitini99 (-167) 9 years ago

Fine, good just stay put, we don't need anymore America haters.

[-] 0 points by CephaIus (34) 9 years ago

I don't hate America. I'm a realist. I simply told you my opinion. I don't hate or like countries. I think they are all different with their good and bad points. Only children say that one country is better than the other. It's simple-minded nonsense.

[-] -2 points by DrHRGoetting (1) 9 years ago

Filthy racism @ publisher John Wiley & Sons‏

Publisher John Wiley & Son’s Chairman P.B. Wiley is a racist

Chairman Peter Booth Wiley is a worst-case racist who likes to use obscene expressions. He is also promoting race discriminations in an evil way - that is what sociologists refer to as intentional discrimination. His idea of proposing canned edible John Wiley & Sons textbooks for the African university markets will turn into a real can of worms for him.

Listen to Chairman Peter Booth Wiley’s mud slinging, the champion of all things African: "With my great invention of canned edible learning products I have solved the African hunger and illiteracy problems for everyone not suffering from bulimia and learning disorders". The Chairman’s information leak shows that people in America think it's cool to be stupid.

Chairman Peter Booth Wiley was sliding off his chair and tried hard to push himself back up again. His racial joke amused him so much that he burst into laughter and whisky sprayed out from his mouth. "I want to bring edible education tools to them Negroes". Chairman Peter Booth Wiley virulent attack speech is a repulsive, bad American dream come true! John Wiley & Sons itself is an uncivilized and racist assault to the very idea of academic freedom.

The First Amendment to the American Constitution covers Chairman Peter Booth Wiley’s hate speech and makes him an honorary Ku Klux Klan member, where such racism flourishes. "I know another one", he announced with tears of laughter in his eyes. "Do you know the colonial law of the plantations in Africa?" The master-slave interpretations of Chairman Peter Booth Wiley take Africans to a new low point of reference. "Twenty-one on the ass to make the lazy nigger work again" he told for extra credit. After his reflection on race relations in Amerikkka, Chairman Peter Booth Wiley shrieked and was shaken with laughter. It's the same old filthy dehumanizing business that has been at the core of John Wiley & Sons all along.

John Wiley & Sons, Inc. might have to recall its contaminated edible canned education books.

"Selling our products in Africa is like throwing pearls before swine". Chairman Peter Booth Wiley became more and more bad tempered. "They don’t have the brains of human beings". He talked himself into a mind-boggling rage. "These dumb black hate mongers". Chairman Peter Booth Wiley spoke one language, and was especially fluent in a 2nd: racism!

The hell knows why, but Chairman Peter Booth Wiley insists he is not a racist; he only likes to stay in his own lane, race wise. "I am not one of those people" the Chairman slapped his knee and gurgled with laughter and sent more whisky gurgling down his throat. He will learn the hard lessons of the instantaneous digital world very soon. Chatter on the web makes outrage spread virally faster and hotter across this world than John Wiley & Sons could put a razor-wire fence around it.

Advanced studies in Behavioral Sciences show that small changes in a man’s sex-life can have XX-large effects on keeping secrets. I worked for eighteen months at John Wiley & Sons’ San Francisco archive, which was for me as if visiting a U.S. war-of-aggression zone where sexual degradation, torture and rape flourish. My hellish work at Wiley’s archive was interrupted by Chairman Peter Booth Wiley’s disgusting demonstrations of affection: his ungentlemanly hands fondled among my pink boxer-shorts as the predator whispered, mouth foaming, a scary “I love you“ into my ears.

Before I edited the quotes from Chairman Peter Booth Wileyto make them ready for publication, they were a big pile of unorganized papers in a shoe-box containing only my hand-scribbled notes. I tried to report word by word what I had penciled down during the intimate ‘interviews’. I also played the devil’s advocate by brainstorming and debating the tongue wagging of Chairman Peter Booth Wiley; by giving satirical interpretations; by using the method of dramatizing and narrating. My sarcastic undertones fall under the protection of the First Amendment. It’s a new kind of investigative journalism, where obsolete rules where thrown out. I use an intermediate standard for publishing, since the quotes from Chairman Peter Booth Wiley do not lend themselves to firm corroboration. Should I check out my deep-throat with U.S. authorities?

As editor I was not only participant in reconstructing the conversations, its perverse drama of unwanted homo-sex and the Chief’s alcoholism, but also commentator of John Wiley & Sons ugly history. It is an opinion-driven investigation that has an interview basis, in which I tried to get answers from Chairman Peter Booth Wiley, who lives in San Francisco / Amerikkka.

In addition: I was working for eighteen months at publisher John Wiley & Sons’s San Francisco archive, located inside Chairman Peter Booth Wiley‘s office. This was for me as if visiting a U.S. war-of-aggression zone where cultural degradation and hate flourish. The problem with Chairman Peter Booth Wiley is a scandal that no American journalist previously touched. America‘s journalists failed to unmask racist Chairman Peter Booth Wiley putting down Chinese. Chairman Peter Booth Wiley is inheritor of textbooks and academic journals publisher John Wiley & Sons.

Chairman Peter Booth Wiley came back from his ‘lunch’ totally drunk. Moments later Chairman Peter Booth Wiley exploded in a rage and smashed an empty whisky bottle on the floor, making shards of broken glass fly across the carpet. Chairman Peter Booth Wiley eyes puffed out like cherries and filth poured from his mouth. "Fuck the Chinese"! John Wiley & Sons is a scientific book & magazine supplier iceberg, with nine-tenth of it below the waterline. Chairman Peter Booth Wiley doesn’t worry about animal rights or human rights; he worries about copyrights and his honorary Ku Klux Klan membership in California.

"The Chinese are a bunch of damned copy cats worse than the Japs" Chairman Peter Booth Wiley cursed. Doubts might be expressed whether the statements of foolish Chairman Peter Booth Wiley benefit the image of John Wiley & Sons in China. "They haven’t changed since 300 years; one should make the Chinese eat their shit copies". It’s time for China to close the chapter on John Wiley & Sons once and for all. "They can greet each other with ‘have you eaten shit yet?" giggled Chairman Peter Booth Wiley in reference to the Chinese habit of greeting with the question if one has eaten already.

Chairman Peter Booth Wiley is holding a very simplistic view of the world outside the U.S. "What they need is another Opium War and another conflagration of a Summer Palace". Chairman Peter Booth Wiley pantomimed the execution of his Chinese enemies with a pointed finger and added sound effects of shots being fired. Is the Summer Palace Yuanmingyuan a symbol for what John Wiley & Sons perpetrates at Chinese universities, namely looting and cursing Chinese cultural values?

[-] -2 points by jagillis02909 (-6) 9 years ago

'us' being the rest of us that are not outside with you 99%ers protesting

[-] -2 points by jagillis02909 (-6) 9 years ago

our... not 'out'

[-] -2 points by jagillis02909 (-6) 9 years ago

stick to "tax equality" as your sole mission.... we all will hear you.. then provide us with out rep and senate numbers so our voice will be heard

[-] 1 points by proudofOKC (361) 9 years ago

Or you could do something for yourself?