However at the same time I acknowledge that the way lecturers present their lectures can have a big impact. Despite encouragement of critical thinking and academic freedom there will be some students who blindly follow what their text book says/their lecturer says without realizing that it is quite simply 1 of many perspectives.

I hope this clarifies my position more.

OK, fair enough. Just so I understand the argument fully, is it your position that no such indoctrination occurs??

“I don’t need any more idiots to argue with right now. I have four others already ranting their idiot heads off on another thread.”
Highly subjective term which in this instance comes with a taint of irony. For someone who is so keen to pick up on the wording used by others I wonder why you chose that exact word. A word which originally meant someone who does not partake in public affairs is an interesting choice to use against a person majoring in politics.

“The very fact that you think this selection is representative of “diversity” shows your conceptual limitations. Why don’t you try and place those groups on the political spectrum from left to right, and see how what you perceive as the furtherest right stacks up against say small government Conservatives who believe in Constitutional governance, no wealth redistribution, strong Defense forces, freedom of political expression, private property rights, freedom of religion and faith, minimal government and charity as opposed to welfare.”
The example I chose was designed more to combat an earlier assumption that university graduates are limited to green party supporters. It was also not intended to reflect the entire spectrum of political views at university. You are rapidly bringing us away from the issue of our discussion which was University indoctrinates green party supporters.

Look, you’re boring me. You did not ask that. You asked for an example of Stalinist/ Marxist speech codes. if you can’t even stick to your own arguments I suggest you go away and stop wasting both of our time. I don’t need any more idiots to argue with right now. I have four others already ranting their idiot heads off on another thread.

“Surely the fact there are Young Act, Labour, National and Green groups on campus further adds to the diversity of opinion?”

The very fact that you think this selection is representative of “diversity” shows your conceptual limitations. Why don’t you try and place those groups on the political spectrum from left to right, and see how what you perceive as the furtherest right stacks up against say small government Conservatives who believe in Constitutional governance, no wealth redistribution, strong Defense forces, freedom of political expression, private property rights, freedom of religion and faith, minimal government and charity as opposed to welfare.

“I will on the condition you deny it exists. Please post such a denial. Of course, this once again would be a demonstration of gross ignorance.”
I have already acknowledged that there is a very real chance such organisations exist. I am not saying they do not exist, I am simply asking for some of them.

“Your imagination is not anything that carries any weight in this discussion.”
I laughed at this comment.

“..and your apparent complete ignorance of that perspective would only further support it as the truth.”
I am completely aware there are numerous perspectives for any given topic. If there weren’t there would not be any such thing as politics. I am also somewhat aware of a few of the views as I find ideology to be quite fascinating. Your assumption that I do not have a varied understanding of ideology is a little bit false. I have written from the view points of a variety of them. For instance in one essay I wrote from a Marxist perspective, yet in another I wrote from a Neo Liberal perspective.

“What I will concede is that you are possibly an unknowing participant in this fraud. In much the same way as a an individual whitebait might think himself capable of independent thought and action amongst the shoal.”
You seem to be again asserting that there is a single voice/view. Which I can repeat again this is not the case. I have observed people in my classes that have numerous political leanings. There have been left leaning people, right leaning people and centrists. Some have been appraising of Labour while others have been very strong Act supporters. Surely the fact there are Young Act, Labour, National and Green groups on campus further adds to the diversity of opinion?

I would say this telling expression of gross ignorance disqualifies you from any further comment.

“Perhaps you could give me an example of what you are talking about?”

I will on the condition you deny it exists. Please post such a denial. Of course, this once again would be a demonstration of gross ignorance.

“Really? I imagine”

Your imagination is not anything that carries any weight in this discussion.

“You seem to be making the assumption there is only one perspective.”

..and your apparent complete ignorance of that perspective would only further support it as the truth.

What I will concede is that you are possibly an unknowing participant in this fraud. In much the same way as a an individual whitebait might think himself capable of independent thought and action amongst the shoal.

“All of the Marxist/ Stalinist language I read in any university code of behaviour I am mistaken about.”
Perhaps you could give me an example of what you are talking about?

“That students know so much about biodiversity and social justice and nothing of the American War of Independence is quite insignificant.”
Really? I imagine it would depend more on their chosen field of study.

“Pull the other one tiger. Its got bells on it.”
You seem to be making the assumption there is only one perspective. In all of my papers thus far they have strongly promoted critical thinking, telling us to NOT blindly accept what they tell us. If we disagree with something they say, then we have every right to do so. At times I have disagreed with my politics lecturer (Dr Richard Shaw) and I have yet to suffer an academic penalty as a result.

On that same note I find in my classes there is a wide variety of views and perspectives. I have yet to hear of someone failing based on what their perspective happens to be. Perhaps you are thinking of a more specific field of study at university?

I suspect a lot of those who told pollsters they would vote Green were really core Labour supporters who were unhappy with Labour and wanted to give it a slap, but did not want to say that they wouldn’t vote, so they said “Green”

When it came to the crunch, it was simpler for them to protest against Labour by staying at home than by going to the polling booths to vote for an option they did not really believe in.

Reference recounts. Don’t think Owen Glenn will come to the ‘Party’ this time.

O’connor out by 40 votes nationwide.. What is the bet that labour ask for selected recounts around the country to get another one back in?

I don’t think so. With all due respect to Mr. O’Connor, do you really think the Labour Party wants to be seen going to the High Court (in effect) questioning the competence or even integrity of election officials to get his arse back on the backbenches. In O’Connor’s position, I’d be gutted. But in Phil Goff’s I’d be very worried about the potential blowback of being seen as the leader of a pack of sore losers who’d rather litigate the election, than roll up their sleeves and start addressing the very very deep shit this country is in.

There does come a point where you just have to say losing a race by a thousandth of a second is still a loss. So suck it up and move on.

# David Farrar (1047) Vote: Add rating 2 Subtract rating 3 Says:
November 14th, 2008 at 8:35 am

Remember overseas votes are only 32,000 of the 240,000

http://www.kiwiblog.co.nz/2008/11/specials_scenarios.html

That’s natural goodness right there.

The enviroment is doing just fine. Strangely enough climates do change. And always have done.

The whole deal is bizzare due to special interests.

But what went wrong with the Green vote?

The New Zealand voters decided that they weren’t stupid enough to vote for a crazy, fringe party that wants to destroy the New Zealand economy and at its heart is an anti-human party. i.e. the Green party is not all about the children.

The q surely is, why don’t Labour Voters skirt and vote green.

Obviously, they see no difference in rhetoric or manifesto’s and ignor one as much as the other.

Helen and Sue Bradford are both a shame to them.

Thats a powerful truth to know!

They made damn sure they would!

And Labour supporters helped by staying home and insuring labour would lose.

I have to say I was a lil worried seeing so many Labour party supporters supporting their cause during the campaign
I also had to worry they were supporting an almost despot govt to getting it returned.

I thought they were very naieve but I’m not so sure.

But even the Labour govt ignored Sth Akld couldn’t help this time.

If National can convince Sth Akld they have a voice that is heard, they can win them.

Michael Jones and Inga will will be great influences in ensuring a swap of allegiences.

Thats the Polynesians though. Can’t do anything bout Maori. They’ll have us all in a police state as long as they get what they want. They’re where civil war would come from.