That all sounds pretty reasonable.
I don’t think that it’s the school’s fault. I think it’s a combination of the kid’s own personalities, their choices, and possibly parenting. I think it’s easy to blame a certain school, but in a lot of cases, you get out of college what you put into it.
Good. It’s important for people to learn about consent and how “no means no.” Learning about “consent” is NOT anti-capitalist agenda. It’s basic respect for other human beings.
6 Likes
And how lack of a clear statement of consent, or any impairment like being drunk, should be interpreted as “no”.
7 Likes
yes
And I think that’s probably very true. First, basic expectations have risen a lot. We had a single car growing up. Homes were smaller and vacations were simple. Today, social media and the wealth gap means people can more easily see how others live. And the middle income American is making much less over the last decades when adjusted for inflation.
I think the children of the wealthy will continue to do well. The middle and lower groups will struggle more. IMO, the huge burden of student loans and high prices for houses will negate the value of a college education in most places. That doesn’t mean some won’t figure it out. But, there will be an expectation that you aren’t going to do better than your parents, because your parents lived in a different time when wages were higher and costs were lower. Not to even mention inflation.
Therefore, it makes complete sense for most kids to get an education that’s based on making a good living rather than an intellectual exploration. Only the very wealthy are going to be able to study without regard for outcome, IMO.
3 Likes
@natty1988, you may be misinterpreting what I wrote. I prefaced the statement about consent by saying that my kids didn’t feel pressure about anti-capitalism, but that the socialization had more to do with gender, sex and race. So, I was clearly not arguing that discussions of consent were part of an anti-capitalist agenda.
I don’t agree that the schools bear no responsibility for enabling an anti-capitalist zeitgeist. While parenting, the kid’s personality, and the kid’s choices undoubtedly affect what the kids take away from the school, I think that a school can make policy choices that shape the environment students live in. I sense real differences between schools.
1 Like
As a practical matter, a few small LACs or a few faculty members at various colleges are probably a tiny influence compared to a growing feeling among the general population (not just college students) that US capitalism is working well only for a few at the top of the income and wealth range and is not working that well for most of everyone else.
However, college students’ choice of majors which lean more toward pre-professional majors indicates that they are prioritizing their own survival in what they see as a difficult economy for them, rather than focusing on changing or overthrowing the system in their choice of college majors. (But this does not prevent some of them and others from supporting stuff like communism, racism, conspiracy theories, etc. whose appeal increases to people who feel that the existing system is not working for them.)
2 Likes
Since this thread pretty much is going off the rails I will chime in. There has been a lot talk about capitalism recently and I am trying to find out where it exists. Because we all know it doesn’t exist here in its full form. Because if it did then the banks would have failed in '08 and my tax dollars wouldn’t have been sent to them. At best we have crony capitalism where the folks with the most money can dictate what is going on. If you don’t believe that then you don’t understand what a SuperPac is and how the Supreme Court said a Corporation has freedom of speech.
Heck not too long ago women couldn’t get credit themselves. People could only live in certain areas of a city.
Of course we don’t want to move toward socialism, but yet we live with it everyday of our lives. The military, police, fire department and roads & highways are all prime examples of socialism in this country. If we are going to be a true capitalist country then you need to pay for your own security.
1 Like
Some ways to tell you live in a capitalist country
-Credit markets. Get a credit card in less than a week.
-Mortgages: Get a mortgage, less than a few weeks.
-Start a business: Pretty quick depends on type.
-Trusts, stock market, sale of assets, purchase of assets, allotment of income
-Ability to change jobs anytime without government involvement.
-Free speech (having many issues, but not completely shut down) and not tied to ones ability to get services.
-Housing, live where you want, move when you want. Chose to live homeless/unhoused.
-Kids: Have as many or as few kids as you like
-Passport, you can get one anytime just pay the fee, no approval necessary except you meet the criteria. You don’t have to be a member of the party or approved for travel by govt agency, etc.
-The list goes on and on.
If you don’t think you live in a capitalist country you should visit a communist/socialist one and see the differences. The military, police and fire are public services in all types of government and have nothing at all to do with socialism 
2 Likes
Some places have capitalist (or crony capitalist) economies, but not full freedom of speech. Examples include Hong Kong, Singapore, UAE, and Georgia (the Caucasian country, not the US state). Including crony capitalist places, there is Russia, which has returned to close to Soviet levels of authoritarianism without the communist economics or ideology.
Nevertheless, they are still socialized services in the US and other predominantly capitalist countries. And some students’ post-secondary educational choices aim for employment in such entities.
2 Likes
Absolutely true.
I would say that this is still in their manner of thinking. Since no country is a pure example of any specific ideology, I’d say Russian leans towards communism and allows for oligarchs and other forms of gov’t that wouldn’t be tolerated in some nations. Their economic system is still closely tied to one/few groups having major control as opposed to a capitalist competitive marketplace.
Socialized services, maybe, though I’d just say they are safety services used in every nation. Examples of socialism, never.
Definitely not prime examples of socialism. Ownership or control of the means of production is not the same as government services/safety services.
1 Like
BlockquoteDefinitely not prime examples of socialism. Ownership or control of the means of production is not the same as government services/safety services.
Ownership or control of of the means of production is communism not socialism.
Why don’t we have socialized medicine if we provide safety services?
Why do corporations dictate policy in this country. Internet companies get laws written that cities can’t provide their own internet. They have created monopolies in many areas.
I am not saying our whole system is trash, but there are many parts that favor certain people or entities. And you just can’t overlook the past the harm that has been done to certain people.
3 Likes
Well said and so true!
That said, maybe we need to get back on topic…
Yes, please. These definitions are making me worry.
I am refraining from commenting on some of these social issues because I don’t want to veer into the political.
So back to the topic, and perhaps repeating: I have a CS major kid making lots of money and a performance art kid making a whole lot less, but I would not say one is happier than the other. I supported the choices each made along the way.
6 Likes
I found the diversion to the very liberal nature of some SLACs interesting. The topic was whether to push kids to easier or lucrative career paths by major. A natural corollary is whether one should push kids away from SLACs that are perceived to be “anti-capitalist” because of the same thing.
As with the major guidance, I think that some kids would be the same regardless of what college they attended, and some wouldn’t be.
Liberal arts colleges generally offer fewer overtly pre-professional majors, so students with more overt pre-professional goals (e.g. major in business, engineering, health professions, etc.) are less likely to attend them. The lack of such students may cause some of the noisier “anti-capitalist” types to be more visible at some of the liberal arts colleges.
On non-economic issues, residential colleges that try to attract students from the entire country (or internationally) are likely to lean somewhat left of “diversity” issues, and the students willing to attend them are probably similar in that respect. Sometimes, a college’s desire to market to a wider range of students runs into conflict with the preferences of others with interest (e.g. alumni and donors; see WLU and its controversies about putting away the CSA flags and considering changing its name).
SO TRUE!
Again, very true!
1 Like
Cquin, You are right; Bowdoin is not to blame for my niece’s relative lack of financial standing - she is. Despite having the grades, standardized test scores and ECs to study almost any major at all but a couple universities in the US she chose to study liberal arts at a small college in Maine. And while she could have pursued a more lucrative career that was neutral on course of study, she chose to work for a NGO that did not pay well. So no, my niece is not lazy or unemployable.
You make a good point about people without prestigious degrees making a good living. I worked much of my career with skilled trades in construction and manufacturing who do very well, and likely earn more than most liberal arts BAs. My son’s school district has a vocational program where students earn their HS diploma and a certification in a marketable skill like programming or CNC machining in five years. Students a couple years out of the program earn north of $100k.
In this day and age, what social media circles we belong to, what websites we frequent, and what stations we listen/watch have a lot more influence on our political views than the colleges.
4 Likes