‘Revolutionary Marxism’ course??

[sk8Joyful]

at Portland State University, Oregon: both instructors for the Revolutionary Marxism class are members of the International Socialist Organization.

The course curriculum requires students to attend four events by Occupy PSU, Occupy Portland, MeCHA, NAACP and other approved groups.

This course is designed to introduce students to the basic concepts of Marxist thought with an emphasis on the practical applications of Marxist Theory in local political struggle. We will focus on four major areas throughout the semester, including theFundamentals of Marxist Theory, Marxism and Oppression, Revolutionary Practice, and The Future of Socialism. In exploring these four areas of focus, the course will compare and contrast revolutionary Marxism to Stalinism, reformist socialism, leading academic interpretations of Marxism, as well as other radical leftist ideologies.

Read more: Marxism | Portland State University | Communism | The Daily Caller
​

 

[Respecthelect]

The tenets of Marxism sound reasonable on their face, the whole is greater than the individual, equal outcomes, greater good, etc., but within those tenets is pure evil. Few seem to be able to learn from history why these principles lead to misery. Fewer seem to see that Marxism is in direct opposition to biblical principles.

One wonders if Barack Obama might have taught such a course, had his life not turned to politics? Perhaps his goal is to teach a much larger class (all Americans) the misery of Marxist equality? Equality of outcomes, rather than equality of opportunity.

 

[katherine2001]

Considering that President Obama is not a marxist, why would he have taught such a course.

 

[Almighty's humble servant]

We are already living in a form of Marxism. 98% of the wealth is in the hands of 2% of the population. The middle class is all but gone, and the gap between the middle class and the poor is nearly as wide as the gap between the elite and the socalled middle class.
The middle class is essentially either slaves to the govt working in bureaucratic roles or slaves to corporations. Essentially this entire mass of ppl are expendable. The poor would gladly step into their roles in high paying manufacturing jobs, and the wealthy would eliminate them altogether if they knew for a certain that revolution would be staved off.

The class warfare being waged right now is essentially a move to divide the lower level earners soas they can not easily define the true enemy. If the middle consider the lower to be the cause their burden they will look to the upper for support. And if the poor are envious of the middle they will not see that it is the upper who hold them down. And those in the middle who empathize with the lower are turned into pariahs, called socialists, marxists, whichever. And those of the lower who strive to move to the middle are called the same.

It is what it is. The love of money is the root of ALL evil. Not some, not much of it, but ALL of it. We just can't be happy with our lot in life.

 

[tulc]

at Portland State University, Oregon: both instructors for the Revolutionary Marxism class are members of the International Socialist Organization.

The course curriculum requires students to attend four events by Occupy PSU, Occupy Portland, MeCHA, NAACP and other approved groups.

This course is designed to introduce students to the basic concepts of Marxist thought with an emphasis on the practical applications of Marxist Theory in local political struggle. We will focus on four major areas throughout the semester, including theFundamentals of Marxist Theory, Marxism and Oppression, Revolutionary Practice, and The Future of Socialism. In exploring these four areas of focus, the course will compare and contrast revolutionary Marxism to Stalinism, reformist socialism, leading academic interpretations of Marxism, as well as other radical leftist ideologies.

Read more: Marxism | Portland State University | Communism | The Daily Caller
​

uhmm...so?
tulc(just curious)

 

[David Brider]

at Portland State University, Oregon: both instructors for the Revolutionary Marxism class are members of the International Socialist Organization.

The course curriculum requires students to attend four events by Occupy PSU, Occupy Portland, MeCHA, NAACP and other approved groups.

This course is designed to introduce students to the basic concepts of Marxist thought with an emphasis on the practical applications of Marxist Theory in local political struggle. We will focus on four major areas throughout the semester, including theFundamentals of Marxist Theory, Marxism and Oppression, Revolutionary Practice, and The Future of Socialism. In exploring these four areas of focus, the course will compare and contrast revolutionary Marxism to Stalinism, reformist socialism, leading academic interpretations of Marxism, as well as other radical leftist ideologies.

Read more: Marxism | Portland State University | Communism | The Daily Caller
​

Okay, so people can go on a course to learn about Marxism.

Your point is..?

David.

 

[WinBySurrender]

Okay, so people can go on a course to learn about Marxism.

Your point is..?

David.

Well, from the online syllabus"

The goal of student participation will be to learn to apply Marxist theory and analysis into practice in view of current issues and events. Students can choose any of the following local organizations or movements to participate in [sic]; we encourage students to investigate other options based on their interests and get approval from the instructor(s).
​

The syllabus goes on to name "Occupy PSU", "Occupy Portland", the ISO, the May Day Coalition, Industrial Workers of the World and even the NAACP.

Question: Why "participate" rather than "observe"? Not just study Marxism, but become immersed in Marxism? That goes beyond the scope of a college class. It is indoctrination. Of course, most of the students who sign up for this class are going to be bent towards socialism anyway. After all, these are the people who put Empty Suit in office.

That's the point.

Just as an aside, I had to type verbatim the excerpt from the syllabus. Trying to cut-and-paste resulted in a whole page of this (I've deleted a good portion of it because it takes up the whole page otherwise):

����������

They've encrypted the .pdf so it can't be copied. What are they afraid of?

 

[tulc]

Well, from the online syllabus"

The goal of student participation will be to learn to apply Marxist theory and analysis into practice in view of current issues and events. Students can choose any of the following local organizations or movements to participate in [sic]; we encourage students to investigate other options based on their interests and get approval from the instructor(s).
​

The syllabus goes on to name "Occupy PSU", "Occupy Portland", the ISO, the May Day Coalition, Industrial Workers of the World and even the NAACP.

Question: Why "participate" rather than "observe"? Not just study Marxism, but become immersed in Marxism? That goes beyond the scope of a college class. It is indoctrination. Of course, most of the students who sign up for this class are going to be bent towards socialism anyway. After all, these are the people who put Empty Suit in office.

That's the point.

uhmmm unless you're sk8Joyful how do you know that was the point?

Just as an aside, I had to type verbatim the excerpt from the syllabus. Trying to cut-and-paste resulted in a whole page of this (I've deleted a good portion of it because it takes up the whole page otherwise):

����������

They've encrypted the .pdf so it can't be copied. What are they afraid of?

There could be several reasons for it and fear wouldn't have to be part of it.
tulc(just in case you were curious)

 

[Yarddog]

The tenets of Marxism sound reasonable on their face, the whole is greater than the individual, equal outcomes, greater good, etc., but within those tenets is pure evil.

The tenets are not evil, the people who enforce the tenets have been the evil ones. The leaders of the revolutions and those who ran the governments became the new upper class in Marxist countries.

Few seem to be able to learn from history why these principles lead to misery. Fewer seem to see that Marxism is in direct opposition to biblical principles.

Mainly because Marxism was atheistic. Done properly, and the concept fits fairly well.

One wonders if Barack Obama might have taught such a course, had his life not turned to politics?

Nothing in his early life would give that idea.

Perhaps his goal is to teach a much larger class (all Americans) the misery of Marxist equality?

Nothing in his political views gives that idea.

 

[WinBySurrender]

uhmmm unless you're sk8Joyful how do you know that was the point?

I'm sure he posted it for the same reasons I quoted the syllabus.

There could be several reasons for it and fear wouldn't have to be part of it.
tulc(just in case you were curious)

I was, and I still am. It's a publicly available document, so why encrypt to avoid duplication? (notes that tulc didn't address the core issues of my post)

 

[tulc]

I'm sure he posted it for the same reasons I quoted the syllabus.I was, and I still am. It's a publicly available document, so why encrypt to avoid duplication?

I have no clue why they do it, I just tend to not see fear as the first reason why someone does something. Perhaps it has to do with copyright issues? Maybe not on the things they wrote but the things they quote from? Any way about this:

(notes that tulc didn't address the core issues of my post)

I simply addressed the point I was interested in addressing.
tulc(just a thought)

 

[Respecthelect]

When the debate moderator asked the candidate, "if raising taxes reduced revenue, would you still raise taxes?" and the candidate said yes, it was a clear sign that candidate was a communist-socialist. The candidate was Barack Obama.

That the American people would elect a person answering yes to the question was a disappointment, because the only possible reason to raise taxes (when guaranteed loss of revenue) is pure spite. Big-government liberals can call it "fairness" or equal outcomes, if they want, but at its base, it's nothing more than jealousy and coveting.

The difference between a liberal and a Christian might be summarized by asking, "if you could double your standard of living, but your peers would quadruple theirs, would you do it?" The liberal would never accept the unequal outcome, while the Christian would gladly accept and thank God for the win-win.

Stop voting to spite yourselves liberals. Take joy in other's success. Pray to be surrounded by a world full of richer people. It may be the easiest road to heaven.

 

[sk8Joyful]

Okay, so people can go on a course to learn about Marxism.

Your point is..?

First, let's say what the point was
Not:
that Marxism/Oppression/EXternal-control/mass-poverty/misery/genocide
were Satan originated.
+
that therefore Satan has had no shortage of human idiots to do his bidding.
+
that (particularly since Satan uses the "public"-school system as one of his best ways of indoctrinating his agenda),
therefore such courses would continue in colleges too. TWO such employees in that class teaching/furthering his bidding. Only that m.o. is allowed?

The point was: that university, could easily either
offer one (of each:
1. Moral, Conservative teacher
&
2. Liberal Leftist professor)
or
One teacher (capable of presenting both for comparison), for students to examine... to learn to determine which existence Advances...every human as God us so created.

God gives humanity choices... The Bible is full of choice... Jesus gives each person their own choices...

But in that Revolutionary Marxism class, how will
students have, but one choice: Satan's?

 

[tulc]

When the debate moderator asked the candidate, "if raising taxes reduced revenue, would you still raise taxes?" and the candidate said yes, it was a clear sign that candidate was a communist-socialist. The candidate was Barack Obama.

That the American people would elect a person answering yes to the question was a disappointment, because the only possible reason to raise taxes (when guaranteed loss of revenue) is pure spite. Big-government liberals can call it "fairness" or equal outcomes, if they want, but at its base, it's nothing more than jealousy and coveting.

The difference between a liberal and a Christian might be summarized by asking, "if you could double your standard of living, but your peers would quadruple theirs, would you do it?" The liberal would never accept the unequal outcome, while the Christian would gladly accept and thank God for the win-win.

Stop voting to spite yourselves liberals. Take joy in other's success. Pray to be surrounded by a world full of richer people. It may be the easiest road to heaven.

hmmm..you do realize the above isn't even sort of true, right?
Oh! And one more thing: I'm both a liberal (at least by what you apparently believe anyway) AND I'm a born again Christian. So there's actually no difference between a liberal and a Christian.
tulc(just thought you should know)

 

[Yarddog]

When the debate moderator asked the candidate, "if raising taxes reduced revenue, would you still raise taxes?" and the candidate said yes, it was a clear sign that candidate was a communist-socialist. The candidate was Barack Obama.

I'm not sure about the if this was asked but why does this answer make a person a "communist-socialist"?

That the American people would elect a person answering yes to the question was a disappointment, because the only possible reason to raise taxes (when guaranteed loss of revenue) is pure spite.

Give the full context of the line of questions. Very rarely does raising taxes reduce revenues according to data from the IRS.

The difference between a liberal and a Christian might be summarized by asking, "if you could double your standard of living, but your peers would quadruple theirs, would you do it?" The liberal would never accept the unequal outcome, while the Christian would gladly accept and thank God for the win-win.

Since this is only an unfounded opinion of yours, it means absolutely nothing. Most liberal, just like most conservatives, are Christian.

 

[tulc]

First, let's say what the point was
Not:
that Marxism/Oppression/EXternal-control/mass-poverty/misery/genocide
were Satan originated.
+
that therefore Satan has had no shortage of human idiots to do his bidding.
+
that (particularly since Satan uses the "public"-school system as one of his best ways of indoctrinating his agenda),
therefore such courses would continue in colleges too. TWO such employees in that class teaching/furthering his bidding. Only that m.o. is allowed?

The point was: that university, could easily either
offer one (of each:
1. Moral, Conservative teacher
&
2. Liberal Leftist professor)
or
One teacher (capable of presenting both for comparison), for students to examine... to learn to determine which existence Advances...every human as God us so created.

God gives humanity choices... The Bible is full of choice... Jesus gives each person their own choices...

But in that Revolutionary Marxism class, how will
students have, but one choice: Satan's?

It's a class in collage, like math or history and those are the teachers who're teaching the class. I must admit, I'm still at a loss as to the point of this thread.
tulc(is still curious)

 

[sk8Joyful]

It's a class in collage, like math or
history and those are the teachers who're teaching the class.
I must admit, I'm still at a loss as to the point of this thread.
tulc(is still curious)

I stated the point (even in bold, & underlined): The point was: "That university, could easily either
offer one (of each:
1. Moral, Conservative teacher
&
2. Liberal Leftist professor)
or
One teacher (capable of presenting both for comparison), for students to examine... to learn to determine which existence Advances...every human as God us so created."

It was written in plain, short, little words English, easy
to understand for anyone who wants to understand.
.

 

[David Brider]

First, let's say what the point was
Not:
that Marxism/Oppression/EXternal-control/mass-poverty/misery/genocide
were Satan originated.

It's good that that wasn't your point, because Marxism isn't Satan-originated; it's Marx-originated.

that (particularly since Satan uses the "public"-school system as one of his best ways of indoctrinating his agenda)...

The public school system is just a way of teaching people. Teaching =/= indoctrinating.

therefore such courses would continue in colleges too. TWO such employees in that class teaching/furthering his bidding. Only that m.o. is allowed?

Who, exactly, is furthering Satan's bidding in this scenario?

The point was: that university, could easily either
offer one (of each:
1. Moral, Conservative teacher
&
2. Liberal Leftist professor)

The best teachers for a course are those who are familiar with, and can communicate well, the subject matter of the course. Whether they're moral or immoral, liberal or conservative, rightist or leftist, are all largely irrelevant issues.

or
One teacher (capable of presenting both for comparison), for students to examine... to learn to determine which existence Advances...every human as God us so created.

A course about revolutiionary Marxism is presumably going to chiefly teach about revolutionary Marxism, rather than teaching other worldviews and ideologies for comparison. I'm guessing that if someone signs up for a course called "Revolutionary Marxism" they know what they're getting, and if they want "Comparative Political Worldviews" they can sign up for that (as well or instead).

God gives humanity choices... The Bible is full of choice... Jesus gives each person their own choices...

But in that Revolutionary Marxism class, how will
students have, but one choice: Satan's?

You assume that learning about revolutionary Marxism is Satan's choice and not God's choice.

I think you're wrong to make that assumption.

David.

 

[David Brider]

Well, from the online syllabus"

The goal of student participation will be to learn to apply Marxist theory and analysis into practice in view of current issues and events. Students can choose any of the following local organizations or movements to participate in [sic]; we encourage students to investigate other options based on their interests and get approval from the instructor(s).
​

The syllabus goes on to name "Occupy PSU", "Occupy Portland", the ISO, the May Day Coalition, Industrial Workers of the World and even the NAACP.

Why "even the NAACP"? I'm not familiar with the organisation - what is it and what do you see as being so wrong with it that it merits an "even"?

Question: Why "participate" rather than "observe"?

Why not?

Not just study Marxism, but become immersed in Marxism? That goes beyond the scope of a college class. It is indoctrination.

Unless students are signing up for this course without having read the syllabus first, they know what they're getting involved with. They're presumably going to at least have some sympathy with, or interest in, left wing ideologies in general or Marxism in particular before signing up. So no, it's not indoctrination in any meaningful sense. In the same way that when I was studying world religions it wasn't indoctrination to visit a Hindu Temple or a Synagogue. It's just first hand experience. Which is far better than book learning.

Just as an aside, I had to type verbatim the excerpt from the syllabus. Trying to cut-and-paste resulted in a whole page of this (I've deleted a good portion of it because it takes up the whole page otherwise):

����������

They've encrypted the .pdf so it can't be copied. What are they afraid of?

It's not terribly well encrypted, otherwise you wouldn't be able to read it. I suspect there are copyright issues behind you not being able to copy and paste it, nothing more or less.

 

[Ana the Ist]

So, I went to Portland state university's website to check the curriculum for a political science major, and I didn't see this course listed. It's entirely possible that I looked in the wrong place, if I did forgive me. HOwever, if this course isn't "required" how can it possibly be considered indoctrination? Especially when so many of the required courses were really benign. US politics, American politics, US politics (early) political theory, modern political theory, contemporary political theory, etc.

Some people here seem to be under the notion that this course is required, while opposing ideological theories are kept quiet. I've seen nothing in the article that was linked to suggest that, nor in the curriculum in Portland either. Where is this idea coming from??