Rightwing group offers students $100 to spy on professors

Originally posted by centurion1211
My daughter was in 8th grade art class, where her teacher gave the class an assignment to make a poster out of words. His example to the class was to combine the words "Bush" and "Liar". Then her English teacher decided (for what reason????) to explain the political spectrum to her class by saying "democrats are over on this side of the spectrum with greens while Republicans are over on this side of the spectrum with skinheads and nazis".

[edit on 1/19/2006 by centurion1211]

Ya know, I can understand your position about the English teacher, for being both an ignorant simpleton when it comes to political classification and forgetting the fact that he/she is there to teach english not political science. However, when it comes to the B.S. with the Art teacher I think you are guilty of exactly the same type of narrow-mindedness in demanding your political view be held as most high.

It's "ART" for god sakes. It's about expression and communication of personal beliefs, feelings, thoughts, perspectives, ideas, etc. So you didn't like his example, well so what??? Why not form your own form of Artistic Expression from your perspective instead of smashing out all others you don't happen to agree with. I mean I think Monet paints like a 12 year old with bad eyesight but you don't see me crying about it and burning every lame picture of potted flowers I come across.

In and of itself, "an assignment to make a poster out of words" is a great assignment. His example, also, is a perfect example. It communicates his view point while at the same time invoking some thought and emotion in others. Sure some art may be about clowns and puppies running in sprinklers. But other art includes disaster, death, pain, fear, struggle and tragedy just to name a few. Art should challenge the observer. It should inspire the viewer to shake the dust from their mind and explore ideas that have been left stagnant or hidden from view.

You're caught up in a double standard where it's ok to express your own political views but not an opposing one, with the assumption that yours is correct and theirs is not. Why is it not allowed for an "Art Teacher" to openly express his/her point of view while your own point of view should carry such divine authority as to trump all???

Nobody is saying you have to agree with it, like it, support it, or believe any word of it. So why all the anger, fear and effort to destroy it???

Yes, it is about art, NOT about using the classroom and his position of authority to brainwash students. There is a huge difference between teraching children how to be artistic and directing them toward WHAT to think. There is a HUGE difference between the two, and that art teacher should not be allowed near any children other than his/her own.

You know, after looking at the forum this was dropped in, and the source of the info, I am pretty sure even I can do nothing to make it conspiratorial. This is not WoT related.

A number of Education providers in may have left wing leanings if thats the case get over it !!
There are plently of outlets for people with right wing adgendas to purse there agends.
Why is ok for the likes of the religious right to undermine society and the government but when a College professor questions the government there is a outcry ?

Well, if the foot were on the other shoe, and all professors were right winged radicals we wouldnt have any complaints on this subject, no offers of money, or spying...Well, maybe Louis Farakan would be out there spewing some rhetoric but who listens to him....

The source of this story is just as credible as any, imo.

Originally posted by dgtempe
Well, if the foot were on the other shoe, and all professors were right winged radicals we wouldnt have any complaints on this subject, no offers of money, or spying...Well, maybe Louis Farakan would be out there spewing some rhetoric but who listens to him....

The source of this story is just as credible as any, imo.

Yes, but all the evidence seems to show that the shoe is not on the other foot, as you put it, now is it?

Instead you ought to be saying that any attempt at political indoctrination (left or right) in our schools is wrong.

Or, having repeatedly failed at the ballot box and now in the judiciary, is that the only way remaining for the left to win in your opinion? Ah yes, a favorite tactic of many on the left over the years - the ends justify the means.

[edit on 1/21/2006 by centurion1211]

Any attempt at political indoctrination in schools is wrong. Having said that, it is also wrong and unamerican for either party to have groups offering bucks and recorders so the students can snitch.

You DO have to admit its more prevalent now, for some reason.

Why single out Left wingers? I'm sure there are profs out there who spew fascist rhetoric in class as well... Of course the "people"(and I use that term lightly) who thought this stupid bribery campaign up would have to let go of their political biases but we can't have that now can we?

Well I did mention in my post that no matter which side is doing this, it all has to stop.
Using your classroom as a forum to push your political views on others is simply wrong.
If anyone wants to start a fund so they can pay students to identify right wing professors, please do so, I'd even donate to it.

Now, whether some of you like to admit it or not, most professors at major Universities are on the left side of the spectrum. As a result most of these cases will involve them, so instead of whining about that, why not get on board and support keeping classrooms politics free.

Having said that, it is also wrong and unamerican for either party to have groups offering bucks and recorders so the students can snitch.

I’m am not aware that this group is sponsored by the RNC, can you prove that this is true?

It's about time college professors stop getting a free ride when it comes to brainwashing students.

I applaud the students on 2 counts. 1st they are learning to become good capitalists, and 2nd is seeing bias and reporting on it.

Back in 1990 when I was in college I had a liberal kook as a history teacher. She asked what amendment would you amend. I raised my hand and said the one that restricts President to 2 terms, then I quickly added that if we didn't have that amendment Reagan would still be President! What happened next was right out of The Exorcist! I did get affirmation by a couple of students after the class, but I did not answer another question the rest of the semester.

Anyway to call this spying is crazy. Aren't you suppose to use what you learn in college in the outside world? So be it if you learn that there is a liberal bias in college and want to report on it.

Why on earth would you pay to have students spy on professors? Just because there's people like Ward Churchill who won't allow people to record their classes or anything of that nature as they turn their English, particle physics (my experience), art, music, or biology into an opportunity to politically grandstand, fooling many parents who think they're paying for their children's education when, in fact, they're paying for a forced, year long political rally.

Why spy? Because there are no watchdogs over what professors say or teach in their classes. Because there's professors who tell their students that, if they had their way, that student would never be able to speak and their hateful, evil ideals (conservativism) would die.

Would this not be happening if there were an extreme right wing bias in the schools? I dunno, ask John Titor to slip to a different dimension and let us know. I would suspect, though, that under the same situation, yes, the same reaction would take place, too.

EDIT: I would also like to point out that this isn't government sanctioned. These are private parties offering this. Do we have to legally control how people spend their money now, too?


[edit on 2/7/06/07 by junglejake]

Last semester I had a conflict with a professor. I got sarcastic with him, he approached me in a threatening manner and started cursing, I stood up and told him to get out of my space. When he didn't step back, I threatened to move him back, and we then agreed to take it outside. Luckily, several of my friends saw fit to save me from expulsion by getting between us.

Now I was none too happy that this blow hard thought he had the right as a professor to get in my personal space and curse me out, but I wouldn't report him to an outside organization, even if my first impulse was significantly more ill-advised.

If I had a prof who I felt was unjustly discriminating against political viewpoints in the classroom, I'd handle him the same way I eventually handled the prof I almost brawled with:

I'd go to the dean of the department and tell him the entire truth (if there's anything in your profs favor, don't leave it out- you're preempting his defense). To the extent that you're in the right, you'll get what your want.
(In my case, I went in and explained what happened. I said that I felt we were both completely out of line, and admitted that my actions certainly warranted expulsion, but that if the professor were to seek that, I would have to seek his termination since he threatened me and agreed to engage in mutual combat. The dean made sure that he and I called it water under the bridge, and I was allowed to drop the class.)

If I felt the dean had been unfair, I'd keep going up the chain of command. Only if I had come to the end of the line without results, and had confirmation from objective listeners (not my buddies from school, but maybe a more sympathetic professor or someone well acquainted with the law), would I then find it reasonable to go to some third party asking for intervention.


Earlier I stipulated unjust discrimination. What exactly is that? I do not believe that there is any harm in a professor telling jokes to liven up the class, expressing examples or interpretations relevant to the class based on his opinion, or even saying just a few words off topic, because professors are absolutely notorious going on tangents every now and then, and I'm sure it's easy to do when you have to give the same 1 or 2 hour speil several times a week.

If a class is in discussion format and certain viewpoints are arbitrarily forbidden, while analogous statements from the opposite end of the spectrum are allowed, that's out of line I think.

If you can demonstrate that you earned a certain grade, but you have been marked down for expressing political views relevant to the class, that's out of line.

If you are required to learn blatant propaganda as part of the curriculum, ie: "for half your test grade, explain in 500 words or more why Bush is worse than Hitler", that's out of line.


If Dr. G, my International Relations prof, catches the class dozing off and decides to joke that he thinks Bush and Condi are a little more than just friends- for God sake, pretend to laugh.

Afterall, the poor SOB has so little. He used to know Bill O'Reilly, and is probably the smarter of the two, but now Bill's moved on from teaching to TV and Dr. G is still lecturing at a community college. I think if Dr. G. want's to call him "Bill O'Moron", I don't think he's going to accidentally indoctrinate anybody into a member of the Hillary Clinton fan club with that.


Last but not least, I think the payoff thing is very unwise, because it shades the motives of those who report. Watchdog groups and those who aid them ought to be working strictly for their values, not for cash.

I agree completely with your last point. It does stand to cause a loss of legitimacy by offering cash. This can be redeemed, however, if they just use that information as a starting point of who to look into.

As to how to handle it, I would probably handle it the same way. I actually had a critical writing and thinking class where we were supposed to write an argument paper taking on a controversial subject. Although it was tough for me to make any definitive statements that could be controversial (turn extreme sarcasm off here), I wrote the paper on liberal indoctrination of our schools. My primary sources were that class's student handbook, our textbook and the actual class. The teacher was fair, and gave me an A for the paper, but wrote at the top of it, "what's wrong with this?" It was a legitimate question, as I had assumed it would be blatantly obvious why using an English class as a political forum for the teacher was wrong. So, for my next paper: Why liberal indoctrination was wrong. Got an A on that one, too

However, there are many people who are more timid. Surrounded on every side by people who would want to silence you and make your opinion disappear (at least in the student's mind), often at a rather insecure point in their lives, they would rather do it as discreetly as possible. It is unrealistic, in my opinion, to expect the courage of a lion from somebody to, at great risk, stand up for a principle. You had the courage to risk expulsion to do what you did; I only had the courage to risk my grade, but even that terrifies many. I wish there were more who were willing to face the music when the time came, but in my experience they're the minority. I even had a safety net in what I did, as I'd be able to bring the dean a well written paper with a cruddy grade if the prof didn't like what I had to say and chose to reflect that dislike in my grade. That was part of the reason I did it that way; well, that and I thought it was frickin' hilarious.

For many, it goes beyond gaining the ire of their teacher. In their minds, and in many cases in reality, it will cause a stink with their classmates, too, which can be a far stronger deterrent to speaking out than failing a class. You can take a class again, but if a group of students gets together to make the rest of the time you're at college hell for you, it's going to be a long 4 to 12 years.