Posted by
Mhu Cao on Tuesday, March 04, 2008 4:55:49 PM
Many are up-in-arms that a know-nothing, do-nothing is charming his way through the nation.
The hand-wringing seems endless: "Why, oh why, can't they all see that he's an ampty suit?" "Why, oh why, do all of these young ones believe his hollow messages of hope?" "Why, oh why, is there no critical thinking in younger voters???"
Oh, stop! Why, oh why is there any surprise? This is a form of karma.
The bulk of the voting young (under 35) are the products of the self-seeding, inbred educational system of the 90's, where self-esteem, polite speech, and indoor voices were far more important than self-examination, open debate, and critical thinking.
Social compliance became an absolute requirement. Dissent was viewed as hostility.
Individual achievement in academics was (is) viewed as a pernicious form of elitism, threatening to disrupt the imposed harmony arising from doing just enough to get by. Individual expressions of boredom and brilliance were (are) met with institutional indifference and/or hostility.
In the 90's, the goal was to make kids feel good about themselves and to feel uplifted, and not to suffer with "excessive" assignments in reading mathematics, science, history, languages, and civil and government studies. Math, science, and critical thinking became de facto electives. Impressions and perceptions trumped facts and reality.
This is what happens when "academic excellence" is a slogan or a goal and not an end result.
Obama leaves these people feeling uplifted and good about themselves. After a rally, their self-esteem rises. He represents the carrot they followed for the formative years of their lives. Obama is feeding the monkey.
I've interviewed many people under 35 for responsible positions. A staggering portion of then cannot read, write, calculate, comprehend basic scientific principles, articulate our basic form of government and why we do *not* live in a democracy, or show me where Iran is positioned on the globe. Critical thought and analysis was too painful for these candidates, and they surrendered without breaking a sweat. The question was too tough or "unfair"!
The younger they were, the less they grasped the fundamentals.
A large number of them were college graduates. One had a graduate degree. Others walked in with great high school transcripts with sexy elective course titles or decent AP class scores. Nearly all were clueless about just how profoundly lost they were.
However, they did have great self-images. I almost envied their self-esteem.
Those with hard science backgrounds fared far better - across the board - than liberal arts or social sciences. To be sure, there are gems from all backgrounds, but there is stark divide between those able to tell fact from fantasy, and pragmatic reality from self-deluded wishful thinking.
So, it's no wonder that Obama has drawn the crowds he has. It may be a payback for the intellectual disingenuity and charlatanism that's been practiced over the past 15 years in the schooling of America. Many of those early 90's students are now teachers or administrators.
These folks need to have their self-esteem boosted and not be bothered by reality, facts, or experience. Obama fits the bill. His moonbeams makes their eyes sparkle, true?
One last thing. This is not a slam on "No Child Left Behind."