Security Leads to Freedom
David Brooks writes today in the New York Times (subscription) about the obsolete message of the GOP.
…Today the big threats to people’s future prospects come from complex, decentralized phenomena: Islamic extremism, failed states, global competition, global warming, nuclear proliferation, a skills-based economy, economic and social segmentation.
Normal, nonideological people are less concerned about the threat to their freedom from an overweening state than from the threats posed by these amorphous yet pervasive phenomena. The “liberty vs. power� paradigm is less germane. It’s been replaced in the public consciousness with a “security leads to freedom� paradigm. People with a secure base are more free to take risks and explore the possibilities of their world.
People with secure health care can switch jobs more easily. People who feel free from terror can live their lives more loosely. People who come from stable homes and pass through engaged schools are free to choose from a wider range of opportunities.
…The Republican Party, which still talks as if government were the biggest threat to choice, has lost touch with independent voters. Offered a choice between stale Democrats and stale Republicans, voters now choose Democrats, who at least talk about economic and domestic security.
I tend to agree that the current themes of the GOP are obsolete for compelling the growing ranks of moderate independent voters. What I prefer is pragmatic management that aims to draw us together, rather than inflaming our differences. The Dems do their share of pandering and favoritism, as necessary to get and maintain power, but in comparison, at this time, they are aiming to do more good for more people than the GOP.
Unless the GOP has an epiphany I will be sending most of my campaign contributions to Democrats.
58 Responses to “Security Leads to Freedom”
Agreed. That’s why I get all my facts from Rush Limbaugh and Fox News. That, or I just go with what my gut tells me.
Nic I would not believe what Rush Limbaugh tells you. He actually is a right wing fanatic who spends his days dreaming up ways to anger the left and thats not exactly the prescription for intelligent discourse.
Fox news is well Fox News. I hate to break it too you but they have an agenda and I dont think their reporting is actually all that fair and balanced.
Just so you know. But you do what you want. Maybe you should go back to Google and Wiki. In your case it might actually do you some good.
A large number of Americans are willing to give up some freedoms in order to guarantee their safety. They are willing to allow NSA wiretaps etc. if that means they can remain safe and secure in their homes and cities.
However A large number of Americans are not willing to give those up and Think it is an egregious crime and are willing to howl till the moon sets at the criminality of it.
Who is right? Without compromise their is no solution.
And now you know the rest of the story.
Thanks for quoting me out of context Nic.
I in no way in my post advocated giving up freedoms at all. Period. I said many are willing. Many are not. I was not advocating either position only discussing said positions.
My wife would laugh at HawkishDove’s approach to teaching. While she would not accept a Wikipedia article she recognizes the value of the internet in allowing students to do research. But the value of the research is no better than the end source. If they are writing a paper where a newspaper or similar media outlet is an acceptable source it doesn’t matter if it is read off of paper, microfilm or a computer screen. The same applies to online encyclopedias or any other source that would be acceptable in hardcopy.
Im sure your wife is an excellent teacher. I’m sure she woud laugh at me. I’m sure she would have an earful to give me about the wonderful merits of “The POOF and your There” Invention of the Internet.
But what of the journey? What of the excitement of delving into the books and their crumpled yellow pages and to read the 32nd edition of a book that began being printed on the shores of Dover in 1712? Does the internet provide that?
What about the feel for textual development. What about the feel of a book in ones hand as one delves into the authors ideas and concepts knowing that scholars of old have held that same book in their hands as they formed their own ideas and went on to intellectual and scholarly greatness? Does the internet provide that?
What of the journey to understanding. It is a lifelong process and it begins with a book. I fear it might end with the internet and I personally see the internet as a massive book burning event. Radical. Yes. But anything that wants to replace an actual book is in my opinion a Book burning event.
Then one day we will wake up and find their are no books. Only the internet. Only the “Poof and your their mentality.”
For me this week has been spring break. This week has been about delving into the internet in an attempt to understand its nature. What I have found is people like you Jim who treasure the internet to the extent that you are willing to “scold” old professors who treasure “books” in a belief that only “You” are enlightened. What I have found on the internet is an intolerance of all things as we “hurry” to make our point.
I do not find enlightenment or tolerance or learning on the internet. I find greed, avarice, and contention. Where ever humans interact on the internet their is contention. What ever website you visit their is greed and avarice.
No I want my students to understand the message of History contained in a book or many books. I want my students to turn off the switch of their computers and to join me on a journey of learning that does not include the internet and its “Poof and your there” mentality. The journey is about learning what “I” teach them. The journey is about discovering what is inside of their minds. Unlocking that is the discovery. Exposing that is the mission.
I am sure your wife would laugh at this notion. However I laugh at the professors today who are in such a hurry to teach that they do no longer care “How” their students learn. They only care that they do learn. I do not take that approach.
How they learn is as important to me as what they learn. So Im sure your wife would laugh at me. I understand the need for speed. But it does not apply in my classroom.
Um, I love books. There are approximately 5000 of them in my house including signed first editions by Robert Heinlein, a first edition of the Sword in the Stone, a second edition of a math textbook co-authored by Albert Einstein and many other signed firsts from the science fiction field. I completely understand everything you said about that. Heck, when I was in England I was just thrilled at the British Museum with seeing the handwritten manuscript of Alice in Wonderland, the first printing of Newton’s Principia and an early printing of Starry Messenger by Galileo among others. I stayed at a hotel in Reading that dated back to the 16th century and had roped off in a corner a writing chair/desk (Think an adult sized version of the chairs with a writing surface common in schools.) that Charles Dickens would write at when he stayed there.
I am simply speaking of taking a pedagogical approach that allows for modern research methods where appropriate. I could agree completely with making your students do it the “old fashioned” way on at least one paper, just not all of them.
You must be young my friend. For you must not remember the time when ALL papers were turned in using a good old fashioned type writer. Papers were researched in the halls of the library and written in longhand to be typed later by either yourself if you had been smart enough to learn to type or by wise students making a fine living earning 50 cents per type written page. In fact when I graduated it was perfectly acceptable to turn in nearly all papers in Longhand.
So forgive me my humor when I hear you gasping at the thought of “My gosh how cruel you are for making them use the library for more then one paper.”
Let me try to explain it this way. Remember Geometry? Or Calculus?
How many of your professors just wanted the answer? How many wanted you to show your work?
All I am doing is teaching my students to show me “How they arrived” at their answer using the good old fashioned library and a good old fashioned pen.
I am not that young. I do remember those times you speak of. They were the times I grew up in as well. I just don’t consider them the end all and be all of scholarship. I remember having to show every single step of a math solution. I considered it reasonable in home work. It irritated the heck out of me when the work was done in class under the teacher’s eye so there was no question of cheating. I could “see” every step in my head much faster than I could write them down. Not having to write the ones down that I could solve in my head in seconds would have left me more time for those more difficult problems where I did need to write the steps down because it helped me. Pure pragmatism on my part.
Using the library does not show the steps they took. That is the task for proper citations in any paper.