Remember the "Real Issues" thread I started on the old FireShelby Board on April 18, 2004? It seems especially relevent today after reading The Independent. Here is the first post on that thread:
"I would love to hear a discussion of the Real Issues. So I imagined what a debate with Roy Klumb would be like. My guess he would make the following points.
1) This state can’t support so many institutions of higher learning (Univ.s and C. Colleges) so institutions must find their own sources of funds. 2) The main purpose of universities in the state must be to provide a skilled labor force for economic development in order to solve the financial problems. 3) If students can get an “education” along the way of being “trained” great, but that is not necessary for the present needs of this state. 4) Major funds can only be brought to the University by disciplines that supply a “product” or “service” to industry. 5) Thus major support must be directed to science, engineering and technologies. 6) Arts and Letters must be reduced to supply the capital. (Enough leaders can be supplied the state by U. of Miss and Miss. State U.) 7) The freedom to make such “creative” moves require the removal of the antiquated institution of tenure.
So here we are deciding on what will be the nature of a University is Mississippi. Are the above points valid for Mississippi today? How would you respond? "
Otherside
The responses to this post are some of the best arguments for a University. It may be a good time to review them.
From a purely pragmatic standpoint, those points are totally valid. They do, however, represent only one side of the pragmatic argument. Mississippi is poor, and Mississippi needs economic development more than it needs art appreciation. Perhaps when Mississippi gets out of a financial bind, then it can afford to provide a more cultural education to its residents.
However, if we provide a cultural education to residents, then the population will become more cultured, and it would value education more and would agree to taxation for supporting education.
From an idealistic standpoint, those points are appalling. However, you are fighting ideals with ideals. Klumb, et. al., are shouting them from the rooftops while USM faculty are, by comparison, quiet as church mice.
It's Friday & once again time for the Nom d'Aplomb People's Choice balloting. To rate this week's slate of nom-inations, go to the Vote-O-Matic™ & rank any or all of the board aliases on the ballot using a scale of one to five, where one & five mean whatever you want them to mean.
This week's secret access code is:
GnomeAn Is An Island
Remember, your opinion is important to the Emergency Ad Hoc Committee. That's why we give you as many chances to register it as you wish to take (or have time to waste).
Again, visit the Vote-O-Matic™ to rank your favorite nom d'aplombs!
quote: Originally posted by: Ted Jefferson, Thomas' more pragmatic brother "From a purely pragmatic standpoint, those points are totally valid. They do, however, represent only one side of the pragmatic argument. Mississippi is poor, and Mississippi needs economic development more than it needs art appreciation. Perhaps when Mississippi gets out of a financial bind, then it can afford to provide a more cultural education to its residents. "
There was a study done that showed the the arts brought millions of dollars into the community. You want people to come to an area--it needs to have something there in addition to golf courses.
quote: Originally posted by: foot soldier " There was a study done that showed the the arts brought millions of dollars into the community. You want people to come to an area--it needs to have something there in addition to golf courses. "
well shelby did his part, he closed a golf course. addition/deletion shelby is always ready to do HIS part for economic development
The original Real Issues thread, originally posted by Otherside, is found on the FireShelby link from the sticky section at the top of the AAUP message board. Once in the old FS site, it is on page 9. Many of the responses to your original post are also found at the bottom of page 67 on this website in a thread called Best Pieces by USM Sympathizer.
quote: Originally posted by: WBO "The original Real Issues thread, originally posted by Otherside, is found on the FireShelby link from the sticky section at the top of the AAUP message board. Once in the old FS site, it is on page 9. Many of the responses to your original post are also found at the bottom of page 67 on this website in a thread called Best Pieces by USM Sympathizer."
That's odd. When I check the FS site the "Real Issues" thread is on page one about 3/4 of the way down. Maybe we have our browsers on different settings. Yes, I'm familiar with the "Best Pieces". It's all good reading.
quote: Originally posted by: Otherside "That's odd. When I check the FS site the "Real Issues" thread is on page one about 3/4 of the way down. Maybe we have our browsers on different settings. Yes, I'm familiar with the "Best Pieces". It's all good reading."
My mistake, I sorted by "started by" to find it and that's how it came up on p.9. Sorry for the confusion.
quote: Originally posted by: WBO "My mistake, I sorted by "started by" to find it and that's how it came up on p.9. Sorry for the confusion."
Thanks WBO. Now I'm getting worried when read the paper that my speculations that began the Real Issues thread may have given the local business leaders ideas. Its scary if my fun speculations were really what they were planning. Where are the intellectuals in this state?
I didn't think you posted "fun speculations" last spring. Your posts were not casual then and I'm guessing they are not casual now, especially after six months of being MIA. Your "real issues" weren't so far-fetched at the time, nor were the responses that you received. Open dialogue and open decision making, even if it is not in the direction some of us would choose to go, is legitimate. What is not legitimate is deal-making in the dark. Certainly you would agree?
quote: Originally posted by: WBO "I didn't think you posted "fun speculations" last spring. Your posts were not casual then and I'm guessing they are not casual now, especially after six months of being MIA. Your "real issues" weren't so far-fetched at the time, nor were the responses that you received. Open dialogue and open decision making, even if it is not in the direction some of us would choose to go, is legitimate. What is not legitimate is deal-making in the dark. Certainly you would agree?"
Yes, WBO, you are right. And I was serious about those speculations. The real value are the rebuttals that really need to be reread and used to counter this latest anti-Liberal Arts outbreak. I wish there were some way to get the "community leaders" attending that meeting at the Coke plant to read those rebuttals to their anti-intellectual mentality.