Unless the classes want to teach how not to protest....
We need to wait and see how the OWS 'movement' (or bowel movement) shapes up. So far it looks like a bunch of whiny, kooks who feel entitled to everything, including a time machine to take them back to the 1970s.
#OWS has no clear message. Their meandering list of demands shows their clear lack of understanding of American economy, individual liberty and freedom.
If they didn't like Wall Street receiving taxpayer money from Washington DC, they should camp out in front of the White House, Fannie Mae, and Freddie Mac. They should demand the resignation of those who bailed out GM, Goldman-Sachs, AIG, etc...
NYU to Offer Two 'Occupy Wall Street' Classes: Too Soon?
SodaHead News
2011/12/12 07:08:47
|
|
|||||
|
152 votes
|
|
58% | |||
|
61 votes
|
|
23% | |||
|
49 votes
|
|
19% | |||
Despite being only a few months old and (perhaps) far from dying out, the “Occupy” movement will soon be the subject of two NYU courses.
One, which will be taught next semester by the Department of Social and Cultural Analysis’ Lisa Duggan, is an undergraduate course titled “Cultures and Economies: Why Occupy Wall Street?”
The beginning of the course description reads: “The Occupy Wall Street demonstrations are catching on across the United States, linking with popular discontent with economic inequality and financial greed and malfeasance around the globe. This course is designed to provide a background for these momentous events.”
A graduate-level course on OWS will be taught by Jeff Goodwin.
In some ways NYU is a fitting place to study the “Occupy” movement, as it is located only two miles from the Zucotti Park protest site.
However, at the same time, NYU’s $42,000 per year price tag means that the students are likely to be of two types: 1) members of the %1—the very subjects of many “Occupy” protests; or, 2) members of the 99% who may graduate from NYU saddled with loans and unable to find jobs. Should make for some interesting class discussions!
Nevertheless, we think it’s far too soon to be offering college courses on the “Occupy” movement.
What do you think?
One, which will be taught next semester by the Department of Social and Cultural Analysis’ Lisa Duggan, is an undergraduate course titled “Cultures and Economies: Why Occupy Wall Street?”
The beginning of the course description reads: “The Occupy Wall Street demonstrations are catching on across the United States, linking with popular discontent with economic inequality and financial greed and malfeasance around the globe. This course is designed to provide a background for these momentous events.”
A graduate-level course on OWS will be taught by Jeff Goodwin.
In some ways NYU is a fitting place to study the “Occupy” movement, as it is located only two miles from the Zucotti Park protest site.
However, at the same time, NYU’s $42,000 per year price tag means that the students are likely to be of two types: 1) members of the %1—the very subjects of many “Occupy” protests; or, 2) members of the 99% who may graduate from NYU saddled with loans and unable to find jobs. Should make for some interesting class discussions!
Nevertheless, we think it’s far too soon to be offering college courses on the “Occupy” movement.
What do you think?
Read More: http://www.observer.com/2011/12/occupation-101-nyu...
Top Opinion
-
Fef 2011/12/12 07:34:33
This is just the begining.
Shouldn't the singes they hold at these protest say "we are the 47%". seeing they pay nothing in taxes, they do not have the right to talk for the 53% of us that do pay taxes
Anyone surprised by their move, considering who they are?
[hip-uh-krit-i-kuhl] Show IPA
adjective
1.
of the nature of hypocrisy, or pretense of having virtues, beliefs, principles, etc., that one does not actually possess: The parent who has a “do what I say and not what I do” attitude can appear hypocritical to a child.
You gonna teach them that Wall street may have bad guys , but those that can be bought are the real bad guys??
Wow, how classy!
I know which college I won't allow my children (with their high (145 IQs) to attend!
"studied".
Occupy Wall Street is an egalitarian movement, so there are numerous causes being supported/represented, but there ARE fundamental basics:
1) Wealth and its associated power are now concentrated in such a small segment of population that over 99% of American citizens have been disenfranchised, both economically and politically.
2) That wealth and power are being used to purchase politicians (that is, their votes). Our voices (mine and yours) are no longer represented in America’s ‘representative democracy’ …only those of the wealthy and powerful (both individuals and corporations) are being heard.
I happen to believe the two points above do have to be dealt with in order to secure a democratic future for America. Right now, there is a de facto plutocracy in place. Plutocracy and democracy can’t co-exist. The normal political route won’t work to correct the problem; we have to try something different.
The movement started in a very unique way that captured the imaginations of people all around the globe. It’s had some difficulties, yes …it must evolve, and it is doing that. In fact, it seems to be thriving on evolution. If we aren’t successful at making the necessary changes, the destruction o...
Occupy Wall Street is an egalitarian movement, so there are numerous causes being supported/represented, but there ARE fundamental basics:
1) Wealth and its associated power are now concentrated in such a small segment of population that over 99% of American citizens have been disenfranchised, both economically and politically.
2) That wealth and power are being used to purchase politicians (that is, their votes). Our voices (mine and yours) are no longer represented in America’s ‘representative democracy’ …only those of the wealthy and powerful (both individuals and corporations) are being heard.
I happen to believe the two points above do have to be dealt with in order to secure a democratic future for America. Right now, there is a de facto plutocracy in place. Plutocracy and democracy can’t co-exist. The normal political route won’t work to correct the problem; we have to try something different.
The movement started in a very unique way that captured the imaginations of people all around the globe. It’s had some difficulties, yes …it must evolve, and it is doing that. In fact, it seems to be thriving on evolution. If we aren’t successful at making the necessary changes, the destruction of democracy will continue, whether there’s a Democrat or Republican in the White House. The problem is far greater than who’s sitting at that desk in the Oval Office.
If you get a chance to watch this, you should. It’s not OWS propaganda ...the lecture was given over a year ago. The timer indicates two hours, but it actually only takes 68 minutes to get through the lecture portion. This is from Boston University, the first lecture from the 2010 Howard Zinn Memorial Lecture Series. I highly recommend it from the perspective of understanding.
http://www.bu.edu/buniverse/v...
There’s nothing wrong with understanding, even if you end up disagreeing. In fact, there’s nothing wrong with disagreement. If somebody out there has a better idea at correcting the problem, I wouldn't be the only one who'd love to hear it.
Oh, I've written my proposals any number of times here on SH - and they seem to scare the hell out of people. I refuse to go through all that again, but my way would eliminate national politicians and campaigns and lobbyists. My way would cost a LOT less than what we fund now and the people would be freer and that freedom would be assured by setting up a system with more checks and balances than we now have and would not be socialist, communist, oligarchy, or any other known government, at least none that I know of. It could not be overthrown. Victimless crimes would not be punishable by imprisonment. Horrendous crimes would be meticulously investigated, tried, and when found guilty would get a sentence that fits the crime.
Anyone who wants to know more, simply PM me.
1) Presuming to know what someone thinks and being unwilling to listen. Everybody wants to talk and nobody wants to listen (i.e., LEARN). Moyers makes some valid points, which are well backed up. You don’t have to agree, but consideration is a part of learning. Much as you may not believe it (or like it), you don’t know everything and you never will. You stop learning when you stop listening.
2) I don’t know how much time you’ve spent blogging, but if it’s been more than an hour (cumulative), you should have figured out that 99% of bloggers aren’t the least bit interested in truly considering somebody else's opinion (unless it's an exact match to their own). They’re interested in one thing …insistence that they are correct, even when all the facts are contrary to their opinion. Vicious cycle, eh? Too bad you’re part of it.
If you’re presenting an idea on a blog, you should expect exactly what you are personally willing to do. Why do you expect from others what you won’t do yourself? Seems a bit daft to me.
Good luck with your ideas …they won’t do anybody any good on a blogging site.
And I’ll keep in mind that I can’t possibly know anything about events that occurred prior to my birth. I wish I’d known that at university; could have spent more time having sex. I’ll never get that back …that hurts.
"what did you learn in college?
" I learned how to make cardboard signs and loiter on sidewalks, spouting Marxist rhetoric!"
" You're HIRED!- Here's your mop!"
1. get a permit
2. have your march
3. obey the law
4. respect your fellow citizens
5. clean up your mess
6. go home