This is so insane and sick
Children of Iranian regime leaders work as professors in the US
I am afraid college really is a scam in that country, an indoctrination hub.

#dc comics#batman#dc#tim drake#batfam#bruce wayne#dick grayson#batfamily#dc fanart



seen from United States
seen from Belgium
seen from Spain
seen from United States
seen from China
seen from Yemen
seen from Hong Kong SAR China

seen from Croatia
seen from United States
seen from T1
seen from United States
seen from Canada
seen from United States

seen from Egypt
seen from United States
seen from China

seen from United States
seen from United Kingdom
seen from United States

seen from United States
This is so insane and sick
Children of Iranian regime leaders work as professors in the US
I am afraid college really is a scam in that country, an indoctrination hub.
God I love sitting in the back row for my education class cause like we are all future educators that will be in charge of shaping the youth in like three years but there is currently one guy watching basketball on his laptop, one is playing tetris, my partner is doing an essay for another class, I’m on tumblr posting this, all while our professor lectures about having high expectations for our future students
Learn how data science can help in decision making and harness the skills required to analyse data and extract information to make sound bus
**************** BLOG and SOCIAL NETWORKS **************** https://www.BeFree.Earth https://www.facebook.com/BeFreeEarth https://www.instagram.com/BeFree.Ear...
As students and teachers head back to school, many children across the country still cannot afford school lunch. Families are forced to choo
what do you think school/education is like? I have to imagine they learn science, (basic biology, o2=life, etc.), math and such. But beyond that I assume it’s fairly minimal, since the bishops would want them to know as little as possible about, well, anything. how much of how little education do the citizens get? And who gives it?
excellent questions! the education of the citizens is important and, if the boys were ever to explain it, we would learn quite a bit about the city. depending on what the citizens would need to learn, it would reveal how old they are when they arrive! if they were born in the city, they would need education from their childhood onward, but if they arrived as young adults, they would need less education. if they arrived as full adults, they may not need any education at all.there are so many theories about how people arrive in dema that I’m unsure which one I agree with most. I think that they either arrive as adults and are still arriving, or they originally arrived as adults, but that no more people are being brought into the city and that children are being born to the original demans.in the first case, the people will not need any sort of traditional schooling. they may have parts of their memories wiped, including anything involving their pasts, their families, and their lives outside of dema. they may remember the knowledge (that 2 + 2 = 4) but not how they learned it or who taught them.in the second case, the original adults probably had parts of their memories wiped as in the last example, but now there’s the matter of the children of dema. yhey probably learn many subjects that we learn/learned in school, but at different levels, and some may be left out entirely.I believe that they would learn higher level classes of science and math, but no history, foreign languages, art, or music. english would likely be taught, but mostly just grammar, no reading of classic literature; in fact, they may not be able to read or write at all, unless taught in secret by their parents. writing would be considered a form of self expression, something that is strongly frowned upon by the bishops. some people might be taught to write later, as part of their jobs, or they may be taught separately from the other students.that’s where the teaching gets a little different. once the children reached a certain age, probably their teens, they would be assigned and prepared for a job. they would learn how the job works, how to use the machinery (if applicable) and anything else needed for the job. those who would work in the fields, for example would learn the science of farming, and how to harvest the crops.but who would the bishops trust to teach the youth of dema? if they chose the wrong people, they might ‘corrupt’ the children into anything other than complete obedience. yhe bishops would have to choose their teachers carefully, selecting them for their loyalty over their experience with the subject. yhe science teacher might not know a whole lot about science, but they would be absolutely compliant with anything the bishops asked of them, including report possible rebellious children to be straightened out. it’s possible that the bishops themselves would visit the classrooms occasionally to see that the children were being properly taught, and to instill a sense of power and respect. thank you for asking! I really enjoyed answering this.
We don’t want your guns. We just want them to stop taking away OUR children. Sensible Gun Reform now.
In 2016, pundits speculated endlessly on that mysterious place called Trump Country. To many in the Beltway, much of America was a foreign country, to be analyzed statistically rather than in person. Chris Arnade, on the other hand, was determined to escape his coastal bubble. Arnade got into his old van, and has spent the last several years traveling hundreds of thousands of miles, interviewing people all over the country, discovering their joys, sorrows, discontents, and aspirations. In the process he has produced a set of photographs and stories, depicting the everyday Americans who are left out of the media’s understandings of the country, and who feel left out of the 21st century economy. Arnade spoke to Current Affairs editor Nathan J. Robinson about what he has learned in his travels.
NR: You’ve traveled over 100,000 miles across America talking to people from all stripes of life. What are some of the misconceptions that people have about the country they live in? What are some things people think they know about America that are totally wrong?
CA: Everyone knows we’re a divided country, but I don’t think people understand exactly how deep that division is, and what the true nature of it is. I was a banker for 20 years. I lived in Brooklyn Heights, I sent my kids to private school. I was paid well; I had a Ph.D. in physics. I was kind of the New York neoliberal elite who valued science, valued rationality. And that elite built a world over the last 30 years that is massively unequal. I think everybody knows statistically that we have massive wealth inequality and continued racial inequality. But we kind of pat ourselves on the back and say we’re an egalitarian society in other ways. We’ve given equal legal status to gender, sexuality, and race. And so we kind of think we’ve addressed many of the issues. But when you go out in the country, you realize that we’re massively unequal, and we’re unequal beyond economics. We’re unequal in terms of the way we live, how we choose to live, unequal in our valuation framework, what we view as moral, what we view as right and wrong, what we view as the goals. And beyond the obvious racial differences, which are huge—I spent, as much time in poor minority neighborhoods as I did in poor white working class neighborhoods—the most salient division I see beyond race is education.
NR: Yes, you’ve described this framework for thinking about educational inequality, what you call the “front row kids” versus the “back row kids.” The kids who did well in school and advanced to the top of the economic ranks, and the kids who were sort of left behind, and the differences that creates in their worldview. Could you talk a little bit about that framework and what that division in worldview really is?
CA: Right, the front row kids and the back row kids. Now within that there are some divisions and complexities obviously. But the most salient thing about it is that it’s not about political party. It’s non-partisan. “Front row kids” means both Jeb Bush and Hillary Clinton. The front row is anybody who comes from an elite school, Princeton, Harvard, the Ivies or has a postgraduate degree, Ph.D. They’re mobile, global, and well-educated. Their primary social network is via college and career. That’s how they define themselves, through their job. And within that world intellect is primary. They view the world through a framework of numbers and rational arguments. Faith is irrational, and they see themselves as beyond gender. You can describe this using other frameworks, like “the Acela corridor” types.
On the Democratic side, you can think of the Matt Yglesias types in the media, these kinds of global technocrats, policy wonks. Their framework is: “Give me a problem and I’ll devise a maximally optimal solution using my data.” Most importantly, though, they view their lives as having been better than their parents, and they think their children’s lives will be better than their own. And for them, that’s still true.
The front row kids have won. They’re in charge of things. They are the donor class in politics, they’re the analysts and specialists who scream every time someone has a policy difference they disagree with. “You can’t do X, you’re going to cause a global world war.” Or “You can’t get rid of NAFTA,” “you can’t do Brexit.”
NR: What about the “back row kids,” then? What is that segment of society, and what is the difference in its worldview?
CA: It encompasses a lot of types of people, but it’s defined by its difference with the front row. It’s not just the “white working class,” it includes minorities, black kids who are stuck in east Buffalo or central Cleveland or Bronx in New York. Mostly they don’t have an education beyond high school degree and if they do it’s kind of cobbled together through trade schools and community colleges and smaller state schools. Their primary social network is via institutions beyond work such as family. And their community is defined geographically, meaning they generally don’t leave where they grew up. They might leave for 5-6 years to go to the military, take jobs that bring them to Alaska for a few years, but they’ll come back.
And they have different kinds of worldviews and values. They find meaning and morality through faith, which is also a form of community. And if you read the work of [Harvard sociologist] Michèle Lamont, she writes about the ethos of the decency of hard work. It’s the idea that you don’t necessarily use your brain to advance, you use your strength and you use your commitment. You’re going to play by the rules, you’re going to break a few rocks, you’re going to work hard. It’s also, and here’s where I’ll sweep a lot under the rug, a kind of traditional view of race and gender.
This group of people views their life as worse than their parents, and they think their children’s lives will be worse than theirs. And that’s rational, from their perspective. After all, they’ve lost. Their kind of worldview has been devalued, because it’s the front row kids that have been in charge: the globalized, rational meritocracy versus the more traditional concepts of morality.
NR: You mention rationality. One of the things that seems to puzzle elites as they try to understand these other parts of society is that they feel the grievances there are genuinely irrational. From their perspective, free trade has been good for everybody, it’s made everybody better off than the alternative. And so they don’t understand these kinds of populist backlashes in the form of the support for Trump (or Bernie Sanders), because they feel like the rage and the desire to destroy the elite is a failure to recognize their own self-interest. After all, why would you vote for someone whose economic policies are irrational, or who, like Trump, might destroy the universe? It just doesn’t make sense. They don’t know why people hate experts, since experts have expertise, and expertise is good!
CA: Well, let me approach it this way. I think that when you talk about any group’s failings as being atavistic, because of laziness, because of weakness, because of some other failing, you’re doing it wrong as a progressive. So when we progressives look at poor minorities and, from a sociological perspective, the frustrations and deviances that are there, and when conservatives say “Hey, there’s more crime in black neighborhoods because they’re more violent” or “There’s higher unemployment because they’re lazier,” we liberals rightly push back. We say “Whoah, let’s look at the structural issues here. Let’s look at the structural racism that denies them access to jobs. Let’s look at the structural inequalities in the educational system which provide a harder route for them to leave.”
And I’d say you have to do that for all groups, instead of dismissing them as irrational. And that includes the white working class. You have to look at the context of what they’re facing. So from their perspective, knocking over the system probably makes sense because their worldview is being devalued. It’s being devalued monthly, has been devalued for 25 years.
Now, some of that devaluation I agree with; I believe the idea that you should get supremacy from being white and male should be devalued. But regardless of what you disagree with, that devaluation is happening. And they’re also being devalued economically. And then, even further, their whole worldview, their sense of place and meaning, is being eroded.
So let’s talk about NAFTA, you alluded to NAFTA and free trade. Mathematically it works, because the winners win more than the losers lose. So on a net basis, you say: “Hey look! The data says everybody wins.” There are three fundamental problems with that. One is that winners never share with the losers, that just doesn’t happen. Secondly, what you’re measuring is a very narrow framework of what’s valuable; you’re making the assumption that everybody wants more stuff, having more stuff is what meaning’s about. But the back row finds meaning through their connections, their community, through their structure. When they lose, they’ve lost everything. When the factories go, the town and community fall apart. Their churches hollow out. Their families start facing problems with drugs. So when your sense of meaning and place and valuation comes from your community, and your community gets eroded, that’s it. Game over.
NR: And this something quite real, it’s not an illusion, it’s not just on paper. You’ve traveled all over, and there really are communities like that, that have just been hollowed out. And you’ve extensively covered the drug epidemic.
CA: I didn’t get into this because I wanted to write about politics. I got into this because I was writing about drugs. And I always kind of glibly say that wherever I went to find drugs, I found hope leaving. And where I found hope leaving I saw Trump entering, if it was a white community. Drugs don’t just go into a place because people are lazy; drugs go into a place because drugs work and help. They’re a get-meaning-quick scheme. So is fascism, so is populism. Both these things give a sense of meaning. People use drugs because they think their life is stuck. It’s a form of suicide, and for them, it’s a way of finding some relief from something that seems like it’s not working. That they’re humiliated and devalued, and they want to find a way to fight back against that. And drugs are just one way to do that, with another way being fascism and populism.
NR: So the rise of Trump is definitely some kind of response to despair and hopelessness, then.
CA: Oh, hell yeah. But I would go even further. First, just because I say I’m not surprised this happened, doesn’t mean I’m justifying it. But what I’m saying is: if you want to put a recipe together to create populist fascist white identity politics, we’ve done it over the past 20-30 years. We’ve created a system that’s immensely unequal, created a ruling class, which is educated and uses their education to elevate themselves and demean anybody else. And we’ve rendered it not simply economic, but cultural as well. These divisions are massive. You can blindfold me and put me in any town in the United States and I can tell you within five minutes if it has a college in it or not.
There are these marches across the country that are taking place against Trump. And they’re great. I approve. I don’t like Trump. But there’s a meme that’s going around now that says: “Look it’s all across America. It’s even happening in Texas! And Arkansas! But it’s happening on a goddamn college campus in Texas and Arkansas. I spent a week and a half in two towns, Kalamazoo and Battle Creek, Michigan, separated by 35 miles. One has a college, one doesn’t. Which one do you think voted for Trump? First time they ever voted for a Republican.
(Continue Reading)