232 Comments
Apr 23Liked by Robert Reich

The start of the GQP war on higher education.

Expand full comment

Maureen, just publicly funded education or speech at any school that they disagree with.

Expand full comment

Then it's no longer higher education; it's just indoctrination.

Expand full comment

That’s painting with a VERY broad brush.

It’s easy to say all of something is a certain way. Like all politicians are crooks, all athletes are egotistical, all Southerners are racist, all college professors are indoctrinators, etc. etc.

And certainly examples can be found. There are crooked politicians, egotistical athletes, racist Southerners. But there are also people in each of this categories who aren’t. Or who are, but to a limited degree (this Senator accepts bribes while that one is too easily swayed by lobbyists).

Sweeping statements sure make things easier and simpler, but they also are a cop out. A way to try to just end a discussion without actually having discussed/evaluated anything.

Expand full comment

Maureen, yup, that's the goal. Scary stuff. Create everyone in their image.

Expand full comment

That sounds more like Frankenstein than God.

Expand full comment

Maureen, I agree.

Expand full comment

Cutting in here, half a day late. A healthy educational entity should be a combination of 1.) certain common curricula, such as how to "read and cipher" and beyond that, "how our government works and here's how to function there."—these are examples of broad curriculum to which we all should be exposed, and; 2) the pursuit of individual interests, whatever they are. Pure "indoctrination" is undesirable, and it's easiest to create inside a classroom. The classroom must be abandoned and the village re-created. Abraham Lincoln, among other famous historical figures, grew up in a village. He had only 50 weeks inside a classroom, enough time to learn "how to read and cipher."

Expand full comment

Sandra B, I am not sure if your comment is in good faith or not, as at least part of it seems to be disjointedly lifted from an outside text, rather than in your own words. Nevertheless, I will give a good faith response.

A good education does already envibe the village. Teaching students directly and indirectly: to look beyond their nose, to learn about other people, to try to understand other people's perspectives, to treat people with dignity and respect, to appreciate and understand their citizen responsibility to the common good, to think with a wide lens not just a narrow one, to take responsibility when they harm someone, to try to avoid harming others, to recognize that their opinions are valid, to speak and give their opinions when they feel it necessary to do so, to be cognizant of and advocate for their's and others' well being, etc. These are already being taught by good teachers. This is good citizenship and it is absent from your list of a good curriculum.

I strongly disagree with your characterization that indoctrination is easiest to create inside a classroom. This is completely false. The first and most influential teachers in a child's life are their parents. Indoctrination (negative, demeaning, harmful conditioning is how I define it) is easiest to create inside a family where hidden away from other people, parents can use fear, anger, intimidation, violence, abuse, and neglect to indoctrinate children to be the same.

Regarding doing away with public education, it springs to mind how gleeful the oligarchs and the politicians they fund would be at your comment. Those who are devoid of feeling a bond, a kinship with their fellow citizens, and are unable to see our interconnectedness and our sacred obligation to the sum of us, are opposed to taxation.

The oligarchs want a return to the feudal system where only the wealthy can afford or have access to resources to get a good education, thereby returning the rest of the citizens to peasantry as was the case for most of human history. Which by design, further cements the wealth of the oligarchs, and their political, social, and economic influence because poor, uneducated people without resources or knowledge are very easy to manipulate, control, and exploit.

I can't imagine you would want to return to a time when a few rich people owning everyone else was the norm. Destroy public education and that's what you'll get.

Expand full comment

M Tree : it all counts! And none of it is "just"!

Expand full comment

Laurie Blair, by just, I meant they only dislike publicly funded higher education because it requires taxes being paid by their big donors but they are fine with privately funded higher education. I used just as a word to show they are selective in their war on higher education.

Expand full comment

M Tree ; and I used the word "just" to address the unfairness of it all, that they would abuse power to silence speech, that protests against such unfairness.

Expand full comment
Comment removed
Expand full comment

I was a Psych Grad in the 60's too, and I chose Jerome Bruner and Rollo May to follow. Psych is ALWAYS subjective, in’t it?

Expand full comment

I was a psych grad student in the 70s. The major disagreements were between the Freudians and all their varieties, and the behaviorists, and all of their variations. 80% of the popular therapies were due to skillful marketing more than any empirical evidence. Now, several, but certainly not all, psychologists realize that human behavior is a complex mix of genetics, environment, including the family and community, general health, and just random events. One way of trying to see how these factors interact is to use large computer models. A lot of therapists are resisting this. People who want to help people changing often have difficulty changing.

Expand full comment

This really clarifies the human/ lower primate connection. The leaders sure get nasty, the self serving asses!

Expand full comment

Did TFG figure this out for himself? Nah, he must have had help since apparently he doesn't read anything. (Perhaps he CAN'T read and hires others to do it for him, who, of course, probably go unpaid.) He certainly has one of the most successful cults going with millions of zombie followers. Hard to control them when you've been indicted for so many, many crimes: it seems now that more and more are defecting like the proverbial rats leaving a ship in distress. Like most cults it will end in some kind of personal disaster more with a whimper than a bang to paraphrase Eliott.

Expand full comment

There seem to be millions of American Christians who believe that Drumpf is the messenger of God. How to account for why God would use such an immoral person as messenger? Just read the Bible to see examples such as King David or Cyrus, the emperor of Persia. Or read, in the New Testament, how Paul of Tarsus laments his weaknesses. The mentality of many naive Christians runs along this groove.

Expand full comment

Well yes, but it was aleady in play. These students accomplished a "temporary break through" fueling our modern movements towards equality and fairness Now we face a tide seemingly in the other direction. All authoritarian movements begin with control of higher education, faculty, students, curriculum. It is as important as the funding of wealthy they seek. Control of money + speech= total control.

Expand full comment

👍

Expand full comment

Stupid comment on an article that is misleading... at best.

Earlier in the year (1964) SCOTUS ruled on free speech in the landmark case NY TIMES CO vs SULLIVAN.

If the state of California punished anybody for criticizing government agencies, government officials or anything else regarding actions of public officials... it’s a clear violation of civil rights. The ruling was in place at the time of this occurrence.

That ruling also protected free speech and publication of written matter by placing the burden of proof, for showing malice, on the plaintiff... meaning that if a suit were to be filed and argued in court, the party bringing the suit is required to show the malicious intent of the defendant.

Justices Goldberg, Black, and Douglas opined that an totally false statement is allowed by the Constitution which would have influenced how the COVID dialogue was/is handled.

This is not a party issue, it’s a government issue.

The Board of Regents is responsible for implementing anything and everything within the state university system of California... not the governor.

Expand full comment

The majority of the board (18 Regents) is appointed via nomination by the Governor of California and confirmation by the California State Senate to 12-year terms. One student Regent is selected by the Board to represent the students for a one-year term through a hiring process that is conducted by the board. The remaining 7 Regents are ex officio members. They are the Governor, Lieutenant Governor, Speaker of the State Assembly, State Superintendent of Public Instruction, President and Vice President of the Alumni Associations of UC, and President of the University of California

Expand full comment

Ronnie Rayguns - the gift that keeps on giving and the beginning of today’s insanity. Oops! Almost forgot about Nixon and his reign of terror.

Expand full comment

...though since 2017 we realize that Nixon wasn't the bottom of the barrel.

Expand full comment

Intellectual curiosity and Regan a man that never had an intellectual thought in his whole life. His Dementia was in effect for most of his years in office …

Regan’s intellect was limited to the pages of the current Script he was reading for a movie or a political statement…

The highest he could count was limited to longest script placed in his hands…

Regan his head was empty long before dementia set in …

Expand full comment

The students burned US flags, Reagan wrapped himself in the flag. He won. Lessons?

Expand full comment

Reagan predated Nixon by two years. Reagan initially focused on creating class division, and making education seem foreign and dangerous. Nixon focused on division by race. Of course each dabbled in the other’s preferred boogeymen but they had specific skill sets. But by 1979 Reagan had realized the force of racism and added it fully into his arsenal.

Expand full comment

I don’t think Regan added or subtracted anything from a script he just worked on emoting the proper tone of voice to convey his delivery…

Expand full comment

Whenever Red Skelton stood aside from a comic persona and wanted to sound pretentious, he sounded a lot like Raygun. Maybe they influenced each other.

Expand full comment

Red skeleton was a true gift to us all…

Expand full comment

I got your point clearly, but they were lied to along with the rest of us…

Lots of good people got sucked into a lot of lies and Liars…

Expand full comment

Yes, I enjoyed Red’s performances. A comic genius. The point i wanted to make was that his voice, when he turned to editorializing, sounds remarkably like Reagan’s when preaching about values. Must be a Hollywood thing.

Expand full comment

Skelton's silent portrayal of an aged patriotic war veteran attending a military parade is a classic for the ages. Very moving.

Expand full comment

A long time ago, but I think I remember what you're talking about. Did Red have an agenda like raygun?

Expand full comment

Red was pro-Vietnam War and liked the phrase “Under God” on coins and in the Pledge of Allegiance. Sometimes, at the end of his comedic performances, he would step to the edge of the stage and address the audience sanctimoniously as Reagan did.

Expand full comment

Might have been art Karney in the Honeymooners.

Expand full comment

Might have been art Karney in the Honeymooners.

Expand full comment

Typical Republican behavior.

Expand full comment

Dinah, Reagan was part of the natural progression of Republican Party politics. Reagan evolved along with Nixon, and like Nixon was really into the "witch hunts" of the 1950s and early 1960s and benefited tremendously from his participation with the HUAC process. The Bushes were also in the line of succession, non-entities who could be counted on to do things that would do harm to the American people: Daddy Bush appointed a Supreme Court justice who was meant to insult Black Americans (Thomas), talked about 1000 points of light and di nothing to actually keep any lights of hope and caring burning. Baby Bush didn't have the experience to have quality leaders in his administration who could listen to and interpret intelligence, so we got 9-11 and 2 wars, neither of which helped anyone except the super rich military-industrial complex. He appointed inept justices who would rather go with their own personal beliefs than with our Constitution, while claiming some kind of "originalism" a ridiculous concept that cannot ever really exist. The Republicans tried to float McCain whom they thought could be easily manipulated, and Mitt Romney who had the proper, for the party, contempt for the American people, but both failed to get enough people on board. Trump was just right for the takeover and destruction of rational thinking. We were only saved when he was in office by people working with Trump who actually live their oath to preserve and defend our Constitution. Those guys will not be around next time because if there is one certain thing, Republicans learn well how to fix what didn't work for them the first time to next time, make things even worse for everyone but themselves.

Expand full comment

Let's not forget two things:

(1) Reagan did not do this on his own. He was chosen, backed and to some extent controlled by a cabal of California millionaires (when that meant something) who had been part of California's far right for many years. This was never a spontaneous campaign.

(2) While the Free Speech Movement was indeed one of Reagan's targets, his primary target was California's black population. His campaign made heavy use of dog whistle racist appeals that played on white fears in the wake of the Watts Uprising in August of 1965. Anti-Communism and racism have always been a potent combination in American history. Those of us who survived 8 years of Ronald Reagan in California knew that the country was screwed when he was elected president. We are still paying dearly for the mistake of electing Reagan.

Expand full comment

Reagan was the president who brought together libertarians and revanchist Confederates, and, yes, he also appealed to white Evangelicals. That's Trump's coalition today.

Expand full comment

"Those of us who survived 8 years of Ronald Reagan in California knew that the country was screwed when he was elected president. We are still paying dearly for the mistake of electing Reagan."

Baloney! Are you a fan of the old Soviet Union? Who brought that to an end?

Expand full comment

Bill, you know Reagan didn't bring down the Soviet Union, the only union(s) Reagan brought down were the American unions, Traffic Controllers first, then others as jobs were outsourced overseas. The Soviet Union was imploding because it was a flawed system that had outlasted its model. Reagan happened to be in office here when it happened, and he and the Republicans certainly did take advantage of it for political gain here.

Expand full comment

Great post , Ruth. Concise and factual

Expand full comment

I can agree with Rae Reich and Ruth Sheets that leaders of the USSR helped bring down their own government. I don't agree that they were solely responsible. Reagan, Thatcher, Walesa, Pope John Paul II, and others were definitely influential. My comments were written perhaps in haste but not intended to be insulting, that is in the eye of the beholder. There is in these posts and comments a tendency to erase history of all good aspects of Republican administrations and to ignore all faults of Democratic administrations.

I'm not a fan of unions, excepting when management wields too much power over their employees. The most damaging unions in the US today are the teacher's unions. Their power needs to be reduced dramatically at all levels in education.

Ruth, if you believe the USSR failed for being a flawed (communist) system, then I ask what you would put in its place? Trump may have some personal flaws as we all do, but he does understand business, in which we are all participants. Biden and crew have no such understanding which has led to inflation, debt, wars, energy ignorance, a two tiered system of justice, etc. Despite some minor criticisms I will be voting for Donald Trump.

Expand full comment

A vote for Trump is a vote for dictatorship. In the 1930's Hitler got the pro-business vote.

Expand full comment

BS. Please do not reply.

Expand full comment

Bill, I am sorry you are with Trump, but that is your choice. As for teachers' unions, you have no idea what you are talking about! As a member of a teachers' union, I know how valuable they are. Without them, teachers are at the whim of whatever wind blows and whatever crap those who know nothing of quality education foist on them. Besides that, teaching is an incredibly challenging job that requires teachers to be up on current practice, able to adjust curricula at a moment's notice to meet the need of students in the class, and often roll with the many personalities of school management. I don't know where you get your information about teacher's or any other unions, but you clearly have a grudge. That's sad, but exactly what one would expect from a Trump supporter. He did not want unions because they would have forced him to pay reasonable salaries to his minions and rich guys just can't have that!

Expand full comment

Sorry for the delay in responding. Let's put it this way...my grandmother was a teacher, my mother was a teacher, my sister was a teacher. I have a PhD but chose to work in industry rather than teach. It is my opinion that America's current teacher's unions from K through tenured university professors, or retired professors such as Robert Reich are doing an increasingly poor job of teaching. There is too much emphasis on DIE and the promotion of social action harmful to the purpose of education. I hold that school purpose is to create, transmit, and store useful knowledge, to inculcate civics and to build character regardless of skin color, in other words helping produce graduates with merit, ready for useful employment in the real world, not for shutting down a campus to protest in favor of Hamas. Though I see teacher's unions in a bad light, I have worked with union members in manufacturing plants and found many of them to be bright, helpful, hardworking employees, even those with sixth grade educations. I'm sure there are some of these in teacher's unions, though not with sixth grade educations. But not the leaders or their direction. Actions during Covid is a good example.

Cheers.

Expand full comment

Soviets

Expand full comment

And their own power-mad policies.

Expand full comment

If you are suggesting Reagan, the Strategic Defense Initiative, and "Tear Down that Wall" had nothing to do with demise of the Soviet Union you are badly informed. If you believe with Robert (your relative I presume) that Reagan did nothing to bring us out of the malaise of the Carter years you are willfully blind.

And if you are another acolyte of the Biden/Democratic Party, eager for a one party fascistic or CCP style government in America you need to wake up.

Expand full comment

Bill, my my a lot of insults! Shame!

Expand full comment

It is typical of Republicans to accuse Democrats of what they themselves are trying to do. They are completely amoral.

Expand full comment

Speak for yourself. I am not amoral. The rest is projection from R to D and vice versa according to you.

Expand full comment

Reagan’s attack on Berkeley is the epitome of hypocrisy and irony. The anti-government poster child cracking down on students’ right to freedom of speech.

Expand full comment

again, the current GOP says "hold my beer".....

Expand full comment

And isn't it ironic that Reagan could not be elected dog catcher by today's GOP, the same group Reagan turbo-charged with his "Fuck the poor" policies?

Expand full comment

When Reagan said that the government is the problem he was appealing to opponents of racial desegregation and business interests. There you have fascism in the bud.

Expand full comment

SUBSIDIZING INTELLECTUAL CURIOUSITY !!!! Wonder what the founding fathers would think about that phrase being a slur in the 20th century. Shameful the slogan resonated with so many voters.

I was a young kid on the opposite side of the country when the Free Speech movement was playing out in Berkley. I was dimly aware of the controversy but unaware of the details and what was at stake. Thanks for the incisive history Prof Reich. It is a history basic to our understanding of American Democracy - and how fragile it is, and how bad actors (sorry for that ) can subvert our politics.

Expand full comment

That phrase struck me, too, robert. I mean, how dare students learn to think and want to satisfy their curiosity about various subjects???

Expand full comment

RWF - Thanks, you took the words of recollection right out of my memory and saved me the trouble of sharing them myself.

RSH, AU/SIS ‘70

Expand full comment

In November, 1964 I was the Political Editor of the Spartan Daily, the student newspaper at San Jose State. I covered the Free Speech Movement at Berkeley which resulted in my writing of an editorial supporting the objectives of the student protests at Cal. Our faculty advisor at the Spartan Daily didn’t like my position in the editorial but our editorial board voted to approve my draft and it ran on November 16th, 1964. I felt vindicated on December 8th when the University of California Academic Senate voted 824 to 115 in support of the students and the Free Speech Movement at Cal (San Francisco Chronicle, Dec. 9, 1964).

Expand full comment

Bob - I was at Parkhurst Hall in 1969 for the Dartmouth protest. I’ve been waiting 50+ years for student activism to return.

Tom M. Cooper ‘71

Expand full comment

The right to disagree (when it’s peaceful and in good faith) ought to be sacrosanct.

Expand full comment

Reagan was a demagogue. I have a lot of respect for his kids, Patti Davis and Ron Jr., who opposed many of his policies. https://www.amazon.com/Home-Front-Patti-Davis/dp/555137047X

Patti now says she doubts that even e=her father would want to be associated with the Republican Party. https://thehill.com/homenews/campaign/4462982-reagan-daughter-patti-david-gop-trump/

Ron Jr. Opposed GWB, now says , his father would be "ashamed" over the influence of Trump in the Republican Party. He currently works for MSNBC as a political analyst.

However, please note that hate speech and "fighting words" do not constitute discourse. I kissed the ACLU goodbye when they defended Nazis. Threats of violence are not "speech."

Expand full comment

Nor is harassment allowable free speech. As to Reagan, unlike Trump, he sincerely tried to unify us. He never claimed that he would make the USA "great again," because he believed that the USA was great. Trump is piece of self-centered poop by comparison with Reagan.

Expand full comment

👍

Expand full comment

Reagan was a piece of poo

Expand full comment

Well said.

I like the alliteration as well...

Expand full comment

I was at UC Berkeley for all of this. I remember Joan Baez entering the occupied Sproul Hall, sitting on a table and singing peace songs for us. Today, there is a “Free Speech Cafe” on campus.

Expand full comment

I voted republican in my first primary to vote for John Anderson, my congressman, against Ronald Reagan- the hero of our neighboring town of Dixon Illinois. I knew there was more to the story than just his views. Thank you for the history lesson today. My feelings were so strong- I had to declare myself a republican, at the beginning of my voting history, to try to prevent the harm I could see was coming, namely redistribution of wealth and war. I cried for 2 days when he was elected. As a mere 18 year old, I was devastated that all those older voters did not see what was coming. I truly thought the voting public was easily fooled. That blew me away but not as much as having Trump elected. Of course that took Russian misinformation but still it was even more devastating to my confidence that we fulfil our founders' legacy.

Expand full comment

Crying is only a temporary cure …

Expand full comment

First I believe in free speech. But I also believe in the majority over the minority. A vocal minority can force their way into appearing to be a majority. MAGA for instance. This is where the media comes in by covering the minority loud mouths over the quieter majority furthering the appearance.

Expand full comment

In that case,the "quieter majority" should learn to speak up.

Expand full comment

We keep doing that but to no avail in the media. The media always resurrects the sensational nowadays. The media will end up the way the Russian et al media has, silenced, in prison, or dead, if they don’t stop it.

Expand full comment

The media has a 24-hour day to fill and clicks to generate.

Media is now a business and has a bottom line, journalistic honesty be damned.

Expand full comment

Reagan called it the Silent Majority. But we have social media now- no one is silent

Expand full comment

Mario Savio was a genius. Kerr received a big ovation at the end of his speech. It felt like he had ended the conflict, brought peace to the campus. Then Mario Savio walked from off stage to the podium Kerr has just vacated and attempted to speak. Immediately a big uniformed cop came out and dragged him off stage. Complete pandemonium. Kerr's speech was instantly forgotten. Everyone rushed to Sproul Plaza.. It felt to me as though the University was literally crumbling.

Expand full comment

Heheh. . and then we rocked the cop car. . .

Expand full comment

Thanks! Now I'll have that in my head all night, and I didn't even click the link. Seriously, love the song.

Expand full comment

Wow! This is interesting history. I was in elementary school during this. I never realized that Reagan was such an a-h0le.

Expand full comment