Monday, July 24, 2017

Why Online Liberal Arts Colleges are a Good Thing

At first I was pissed.

I viewed online courses and the internet much like I do telecommuting - it was an innovation that would lead to genuine, revolutionary changes that would DRASTICALLY improve the lives of millions of Americans.  Telecommuting would eliminate rush hour, lower companies' lease expenses, and improve family stability beyond what any government program ever could.  It would usher in a new golden age of America, and its people would live dramatically improved lives for it.

Ergo, just like telecommuting held great promise for humanity, so to did online colleges and education.

The BEST teachers would offer the BEST classes at nearly ZERO expense to the world's ENTIRE student population, and all governments would have to do is set up some kind of certification board for people to test for their degrees.

Students would no longer have to commute.
Students could learn at their own pace.
Colleges and universities would have to jettison their worthless administrators and adult-children-do nothing professors.
The tax payer would no longer have to finance around half a TRILLION a year in student debts.
And the price of college would drop from $125,000 to free.

If governments truly cared about students and "the children" they would have implemented this 10 years ago, but the point still remains that online classes and online education can eliminate what is easily the largest hurdle facing young people today to get an education.

Some progress has been made with schools like Western Governors University and ASU Online, accredited colleges offering real degrees for a fraction of the cost of their brick and mortar counterparts.  And the IT world has always shown the online/self education to be a perfectly feasible and working model where certifications, and not degrees, land you jobs.  But when Coursera offered classes in "Social Justice Parasitism" I got pissed.


Forget that these classes operate from the false and arrogant premise that worthless, lazy, but above all else, stupid students, too lazy to major in STEM or something legitimate, are smart enough, let alone have the right, to "change the world."

Forget that these degrees are merely the entrance to an entire world of make-work government and non-profit jobs so these worthless people can feel like they're real adults, working real jobs.

And forget that deep down inside the people in these industries are simply the evil and parasitic among us.

My main complaint was how could Coursera, presumably one of the spearheads to eliminating the evil known as "Big Education," succumb to offering such worthless, evil, and parasitic classes to the easily duped students of today?  How could an entity that knows it's origin is founded in the noble purpose of making education cheaper to students, turn around and sell naive teens and 20 somethings this poison that has ruined the lives of millions?  Lila Ibrahim, and the executive staff of Coursera should be ashamed of themselves for dealing what is nothing more than the addictive mental drug of worthless degrees.

But then I received an e-mail.

It was a link to an article by Dr. Jordan Peterson, wherein he talked about his new goal to offer liberal arts degrees online for free.  His Patreon donations earn him roughly $40,000 a month, and with the modern technological power of the internet, he intends to, much like Western Governors, offer real degrees in the humanities and the liberal arts at a cost of near zero (unfortunately, I cannot find this article or link, so if anybody has it, please comment below).

This made me rethink my opposition to liberal arts education from one of principles to that of machiavellianism and practicality.

Yes, liberal arts degrees, especially the social justice warrior slop Coursera is serving up, are worthless, pointless, even damaging to the students naive enough to take them.  Yes, these courses/degrees will ruin their lives, at minimum sending them down the career path of poverty and e-begging, at worst replacing family, love, freedom, and excellence with a fervent ideological addiction to socialism.  And yes, you can learn this slop for free, with the exact same employment prospects, as going to the library and reading ALL the liberal arts/Marxist books you want.

But what do I care?

First, students stupid and arrogant enough to major in the liberal arts, let alone social justice, deserve the lives they choose.  They'll soon find out the real world needs Python programmers, not social justice activists.

But more importantly, second, if liberal arts and humanities degrees are offered online, AND it catches on with prospective and college bound students, it will DESTROY the largest and most vital organ of the left - academia.

If Dr. Peterson or Coursera or ASU want to offer worthless humanities and liberal arts degrees, let them.  One online college can do the work of a score of Middlebury's and Evergreen's.  If efficient and well-programmed enough, a mere handful of online colleges could wipe out ALL the liberal arts colleges across the world.  And thus, instead of the millions of professors, deans, vice chancellors, chancellors, diveristy directors, vice diversity directors, Women's Studies managers, diversity program managers that currently vampire $500 billion a year out of America's youth and taxpayers, you'd have around 50 offering the same education at nearly $0.  This would send the worthless vermin of academia out on the street where they'd have to e-beg, apply for government grants, apply to non-profits, or GASP!!!!...apply for real jobs!

Of course, I argue that you won't totally get rid of brick and mortar liberal arts colleges.  Too many students attend college for the "college experience," viewing it more as a birthright and party, than a serious and determined investment in education and one's future career.  But even if you can dupe half the naive high school juniors and seniors to earn their liberal arts degrees online, it spells doom for the leftist, parasitic denizens of professional academia today.  And if Trump and the Republicans in congress wish to hasten this doom, there's nothing better they can do than start certifying online liberal arts programs as accredited, perhaps even replacing degrees with a government certification board.

Though I know, that is asking for too much competence of the republican party.  Oh well, Enjoy the Decline.
______________________________
Podcast
Asshole Consulting
YouTube Channel
Twitter
Books by Aaron
Amazon Affiliate

How Stupid People Caused the Sub Prime Auto Loan Bubble

Not once is it suggested that people who are so stupid as to sign up for a 25%, 7 year auto loan on a USED CAR are the ones responsible and, like liberal arts majors, deserve to have their financial lives ruined for the rest of their life.

The fact the media and people are automatically programmed to think these people are victims only reinforces my "let it burn" attitude and commitment to enjoying the decline.

Friday, July 21, 2017

Episode #205 of The Clarey Podcast

In this weekend podcast special, Cappy doesn't want to write and opts to podcast instead.  Topics include:

Clarey's romantic as fuck.
Review of the movie "Crusher Joe"
SoundCloud's finanial troubles.
"Collaborative work environments."
Lumber 84's silently new CEO.

AND MORE!!!

In THIS EPISODE of The Clarey Podcast!

Direct MP3 link here.

Direct RSS feed here.

Wednesday, July 19, 2017

Tuesday, July 18, 2017

Curse Free Episode #25

In this "sorta" curse free episode:

Why doesn't Canada build some roads?
Seattle's income tax is a GREAT idea for leftists.
Men leaving the marriage market hurting Vegas wedding chapels.
A cashless society is not all that bad.

AND MORE!!!

In THIS EPISODE of The Clarey Podcast.

Direct MP3 link here.

Direct RSS feed here.

Monday, July 17, 2017

Job Hopping is Good for You

I loved it when all the gray hairs told me "you don't want to be a job hopper do you????"

Yes, actually, yes you do.

How Much Does the Stock Market Have to Increase By for Every American to Retire?

More than what it's gonna!


Can Muslim and Western Men Unite Against Feminism and Socialism?

"Any traditional man or woman, regardless of religion, must realize that we are facing the Borg when it comes to feminism and socialism."


Dotcom v. 2.0: Cryptocurrencies

I was on Kerry Lutz's show and we discussed, among other things, the Cryptocurrency market and how it's eerily similar to the Dotcom bubble.

None of them make money (because, they're well...currencies)
"New technologies" and fancy tech talk are the reasons they have value.
If you don't understand it, don't worry, I guess it's just over your head.

Oh yeah.   I almost forgot.

There's also 970 of them.

Friday, July 14, 2017

The Evil "White Plurality" Cometh

Understand that nearly all of the left's reasoning and rationality for the theft of other people's money is based on victimhood.  And this victimhood is defined by a trait or characteristic you were born with or have that is outside of your control.

Your race.
Your sex.
Your gender.
And the newest and fastest-growing trait, your made up mental illness.

This allows a leftist (regardless of stripe) to intellectually-dishonestly claim they are oppressed by the "majority" and are not only disadvantaged, but are also entitled to special privileges in society AND some of the majority's money.  Furthermore, any criticism or mere pointing out of this victim-whoring, is immediately met with accusations of racism, sexism, ageism, ableism, etc., as they cowardly hide behind their traits (and never own up to their personal actions that led to their lot in life).  The only thing more shocking or disgusting than this rank and cowardly parasitism is the right's failure to call them out on this as they are too afraid of being called  an "ist" or an "ism," and thus this pathetic strategy actually works..

But the left faces a long term problem with their victimhood strategy, particularly in its chief application - racism.  By about 2045 whites won't be the majority in the US anymore and victims who play the race card won't be able do so (at least honestly).

So how will the left go about perpetrating the race-victimhood racket?  Simple.

They will quickly discover and use the word "plurality."

Plurality, among many other definitions, means the largest segment or percentage of.  It doesn't mean an outright majority, including 50%+, but just the largest single group among many groups.  And while leftists may be too lazy to increase their vocabulary on any given day, I can guarantee you when the 2040's come, nearly every leftist is going to make this part of their daily language.

"The white plurality."
"You benefit from pluralism."
"The oppressive and privileged white plurality in this country..."

You get the idea.

What this belies is a larger trend, even genetic fact about leftists' DNA that every hard-working person in the world, regardless of country, regardless of race, and regardless of gender, better learn about leftists.  They will stop at nothing to get your money.  They will stop at nothing to get your wealth.  They will stop at nothing to live off of you.  Be it a mentally ill millennial college student majoring in "Gender Studies" claiming you're oppressing it because of a new gender that was created 30 minutes ago or Karl Marx's illogical and incoherent ramblings from 150 years ago, the left will come up with any excuse - nuanced, complex, completely fabricated, or otherwise - to excuse their living off of you.  Matter of fact, when you look at the amount of effort Marx put into his ramblings or modern day academic leftists put into entirely fabricated faux-studies, their commitment to parasitism becomes very clear.  They'd very likely make infinitely more had they just worked real jobs instead of becoming professional whiners, but their commitment to professional victimhood and living off of others is so fervent, so fanatical it becomes their religion, which guarantees they waste their one precious and finite life on this planet.

With this level of dedication - to come up with any lie, to create entirely fabricated academic studies out of whole cloth, to even waste their entire lives in the pursuit of other people's money - the productive people of the world better accurately comprehend and appreciate just what a threat to their freedoms and personal finances the left in the world present.  And "The Evil White Plurality" which is coming to a theater near you in the Summer of 2045 is just a mere insight into their total and fanatical commitment to continue living off of you.
______________________________
You can check out more of Aaron's cool stuff below!
Podcast
Asshole Consulting
YouTube Channel
Twitter
Books by Aaron 
Amazon Affiliate

Thursday, July 13, 2017

Is It Moral for Conservatives & Libertarians to Collect Social Security?

Yes.  Hell yes.  Matter of fact, they're the only ones morally entitled to it.

Horsies!!!!!

I know it's a bit dated, but a friendly reminder to you boys, women with horses are not mentally stable.  Combined that with being a teeeeeaaaacheerrrrrr and there's nothing but trouble waiting for you ahead.

Wednesday, July 12, 2017

In Search For Fool's Gold: The Saga of Progressive Credentialism



By Aleksey Bashtavenko
Academic Composition
            From Kindergarten to High School, America’s youngsters are taught that education is the key to success in life. The underlying explanation is simple and straight-forward. In order to land a high-paying job, you must be able to think critically and display a good deal of mental agility. After all, if you want to be engineering, you must have a solid grasp of science and mathematics. If you want to be a lawyer, you must be verbally proficient and if you intend to enter medicine, there is an altogether different body of knowledge you must master. What about all of the other, less intellectually rigorous professions?
            As for that, our guidance counselors would say that a degree makes you stand out. If you want to be a book-keeper or a financier, you’d have a much higher chance of getting hired with a degree. Today, more people have academic credentials than they did decades before. Previously, a degree offered one a way of standing out from the crowd, today, it has become the new norm. In other words, a Bachelor’s degree is the equivalent of a High School degree in the 70s.
            As appealing as this comparison may seem, it is a false equivalency. In the 70s, employers had considerable confidence in the quality of education High Schools offer. As such, they were able to justify their preference for applicants who finished High School over those who did not. At that point, it seemed clear that High School graduates displayed superior intellectual, practical and interpersonal skills to those of Middle School graduates. Yet, can one say that today’s graduates are superior to High School graduates in these respects?
Managers routinely complain that College graduates are deficient in basic skills required at the work-place such as verbal communication skills, mathematical calculation, writing proficiency, public speaking and interpersonal ability.
            (https://www.forbes.com/forbes/welcome/?toURL=https://www.forbes.com/sites/karstenstrauss/2016/05/17/these-are-the-skills-bosses-say-new-college-grads-do-not-have/&refURL=https://www.google.com/&referrer=https://www.google.com/_). In a rigorous academic environment, youngsters can cultivate all of such skills, yet it is no secret that the standards American universities employ tend to be woefully inadequate. This is evident in light of the proliferation of ill-conceived majors such as Women’s Studies, Queer Studies, Transgender Studies and so forth. Even students who pursue more respectable scholarly disciplines do not receive the quality of education that their parents and grandparents did (https://www.insidehighered.com/news/2016/03/29/survey-finds-grade-inflation-continues-rise-four-year-colleges-not-community-college).
In the late 60s, the self-esteem movement began taking root on America’s college campuses and the seeds of this worldview were planted in the minds of educators across the country. Shortly thereafter, a significant percentage of teachers and administrators believed that all disciplinary behaviors among children stemmed from a low-self-esteem (https://www.amazon.com/Narcissism-Epidemic-Living-Age-Entitlement/dp/1416575995/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1498883511&sr=8-1&keywords=Narcissism+epidemic). To rectify this apparent problem, teachers lavished praise on youngsters and evaluated their students’ work in an exceptionally lenient fashion.
Since then, the trend of grade inflation has accelerated and now the students often display the kind of ignorance and intellectual incompetence that would have been unthinkable for previous generations of college graduates to show (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=I-t2TwLRdgk&t=1s). Despite the staff’s efforts to accommodate the dullest and least industrious of their pupils, the student body continues to demand further concessions. Today, the students are no longer satisfied with a curriculum where almost anyone can earn an A with a minimal expenditure of effort, they now demand to be sheltered from views that they may disagree with (https://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2015/09/the-coddling-of-the-american-mind/399356/). It is now customary for professors to issue “trigger warnings” about any readings they may assign that expose students to ideas that may be considered “sexist, racist, homophobic, transphobic, ableist” and so on.
The foregoing generations not only had to be exposed to the conflicting point of view, they were required to consider them with an open-mind. Likewise, they were forced to display a much higher level of academic rigor and communication skills throughout their discussions in class than today’s student do. By the same token, students from 30 years ago were given far greater opportunities to learn to think in an objective manner and form a balanced worldview.
. In 1975, liberal  professors outnumbered their conservative peers by a ratio of 3 to 1 (http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2016/oct/6/liberal-professors-outnumber-conservatives-12-1/). Today, this ratio is 12 to 1 and continues to increase. In departments where curricula are known to carry a heavy left-wing bias, that ration is often as high as 30 to 1. While a significant percentage of instructors in departments of finance, economics and engineering identify as conservatives, such pedagogues are virtually unheard of in departments of literature and gender studies.
Despite this, left-leaning “news outlets” routinely propagate the notion that even the professors of “soft sciences” are intellectually honest enough to refrain from forcing their views on students (http://www.latimes.com/opinion/op-ed/la-oe-gross-academia-conservatives-hiring-20160520-snap-story.html). The reality is that the matter is much more complicated than that. Considerable evidence suggests that human judgment can often be influenced by subtle hints. (https://www.amazon.com/Pre-Suasion-Revolutionary-Way-Influence-Persuade/dp/1501109790/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1498890295&sr=8-1&keywords=Pre-suasion). For example, the effectiveness of an advertisement can be significantly changed if only one word is altered. Likewise, individuals tend to focus on ideas that they were most recently exposed to. In surveys where one is asked if they are “unhappy” with the product or experience in question, most people are likely to reflect on their negative experiences. Yet, the opposite occurs when the question is phrased in a way that emphasizes the positive elements of one’s experience. These findings prompt the question of how the views of students may change when they are constantly exposed to ideas that subtly reinforce the left-wing perspective. Even if the instructor does not explicitly articulate their point of view, they often unwittingly leave subtle hints or assign readings by authors who are sympathetic to the leftist perspective. In other words, the professor does not need to openly claim that “right-leaning Americans are racist and sexist”, all he needs to do is keep on bombarding the students with readings that imply this premise.
At Academic Composition, we’ve served over 10,000 different students, many of whom called for our help with their papers for “electives” and “general studies” courses. Instructors who teach these “disciplines” tend to show much less restraint than those who are in charge of more respectable scholarly m├ętiers such as economics, history, philosophy and political science. Karl Marx infamously declared that the philosopher’s task should be not to understand the world, but to change it. Remarkably, 18% of social science professors identify as Marxists and many others have been influenced by Marxism in subtler ways (http://econlog.econlib.org/archives/2015/03/the_prevalence_1.html). Such academics now subscribe to the ideology that can be broadly described as post-modernism (https://www.realclearpolitics.com/video/2017/06/05/jordan_peterson_why_you_have_to_fight_postmodernism.html).
Unlike the Marxists, post-modernists deny that reality is objective and can be understood in an unequivocal fashion. However, they embrace the Marxist premise that human nature is malleable and the human condition is predominantly a consequence of environmental rather than biological influences. Building on that assumption, they maintain that the most powerful people in society have the capacity to control the destiny of all others. Similarly to how Marxists regarded the capitalists as the oppressors of the working class, the post-modernists impose the same condemnation upon the “privileged white males”.
In large part because of the alliance between Marxists and post-modernists, professors of the humanities can openly support socialist policies without openly endorsing Marxism or communism as it was implemented throughout the 20th century. Without offering clear-cut policy prescriptions, such academics champion vague slogans such as “fighting the right”, “redistributing the wealth”, “taxing the rich” and “doing away with capitalism” (https://www.campusreform.org/?ID=9381). In light of the post-modernists’ rejection of objective truth, it is now acceptable for instructors to parade such platitudes without taking responsibility for their intellectual negligence (http://dailycaller.com/2017/06/13/marxist-wisconsin-professor-rakes-in-170000-per-year-teaching-about-inequality-and-oppression/).
The fusion of Marxism and post-modernism not only creates an environment where professors tend to be biased to the point where they are likely to skew the students’ ideological orientation to the left, even if they do not intend to do so, but also that the collegiate milieu is unlikely to foster the youngsters’ intellectual growth. In a classic on education, “The Closing of the American Mind”, Allan Bloom has shown that the attitude of cultural relativism dampens the students’ passion for the truth (https://www.amazon.com/Closing-American-Mind-Education-Impoverished/dp/1451683200/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1498975060&sr=8-1&keywords=The+closing+of+the+American+Mind). The underlying rationale is simple and straight-forward: if one believes that there is no objective truth, there is no reason for anyone to spend their time wrestling with the big questions of life. As a result, learning becomes perfunctory, routinized and aimed at the achievement of extrinsic results.
In light of these developments, it is clear that today’s generation of college students will not receive the quality of education their parents and grandparents took for granted. Although employers may harbor nominal expectations that “college educated” applicants are better workers, they are starting to question this assumption. With every passing decade, employers become more cognizant of the gap between what academic credentials putatively represent and what they empower graduates to achieve. Hence, a Bachelor’s Degree is no longer the ticket to a middle-class living that it used to be.
Despite the diminished economic value of academic credentials, the apologists for the Ivory Tower continue to insist that formal education bestows intangible value upon students that they cannot receive elsewhere (https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2017/may/12/humanities-students-budget-cuts-university-suny). In other words, it is often maintained that the humanities “teach people how to think” in an environment where such lofty skills cannot be acquired anywhere else. It is a well-documented fact that ideological bias is a significant impediment to intellectual growth and multiple academic departments are immersed in it. Moreover, in the minds of many academics, the dogma of post-modernism appears to justify the rapid decline of academic standards. In light of the proliferation of ill-conceived majors and abysmal standards that students must fulfill in order to graduate with distinction, the suggestion that “humanities teach people to think” is risible.
Although it is true that numerous employers see academic credentials as an indicator that the applicant in question is capable of “finishing something” and in this sense, an impractical university degree may not be entire worthless. However, attaining such credentials is seldom worth the cost. In the amount of time one devotes to a degree in order to show that they can “finish something”, they could have learned a trade and acquired considerable work experience. Regardless of what skill one chooses to pursue, there is a considerable advantage to postponing formal education in favor of entering the work-force. First of all, this is a great way for a youngster to obtain relevant work experience and determine if a university degree serves their purpose. Secondly, if college education seems appropriate at that point, it will become easier to see which specific major is worth pursuing. Thirdly, real-world experience should inoculate most people from the ideological indoctrination that takes place in the general education courses. Fourthly, students who have practical experience will then see formal education as merely one activity they could pursue. Unlike those who enter college straight out of high school and think that earning a degree is their only viable option, the world-weary students will be in the position to evaluate all of their options and commit to a judicious course of action. 




"Cultural Incompetency"

All I ask is that Western Civilization keep the lights on for another 35 years.  You can go to pot for all I care after that.