I think his challenge was more of a "if the shoe fits" type of thing. He at least pointed out which way his own preconceptions initially leaned.

Thanks for sharing your remarkable background. Glad you saw some of the things I did in the piece.

Thx for the rec, Jolanta.

My pal Bernie the Attorney told me that a near universal human trait is that people shut down when new or conflicting information threatens to take them out of their bubble. It's why as a trial attorney, he had to get them to come to a particular conclusion on their own in a laborious, spoon-fed, step by step process. Anything too much outside of their comfort zone, and it's back to square one,

@WiWilliamCharlecritical Hence reflection, introspection & critical thinking.

The differences with regard to life experiences and worldviews were certainly substantial. I think preconceived notions in many areas are par for the course for most people, but what is essential for learning is to compare them with the reality once presented. He seemed to approach that in a stellar fashion. Certainly, not all could.

I tend to agree with your assessment. They didn't become the powerhouse they are by looking to upend the status quo in any substantial way that might reorder the prevailing stratification.

I find this pertains to your observations.

From: The Fate of an Honest Intellectual - Noam Chomsky
[chomsky.info]

"Still, in the universities or in any other institution, you can often find some dissidents hanging around in the woodwork—and they can survive in one fashion or another, particularly if they get community support. But if they become too disruptive or too obstreperous—or you know, too effective—they’re likely to be kicked out. The standard thing, though, is that they won’t make it within the institutions in the first place, particularly if they were that way when they were young—they’ll simply be weeded out somewhere along the line. So in most cases, the people who make it through the institutions and are able to remain in them have already internalized the right kinds of beliefs: it’s not a problem for them to be obedient, they already are obedient, that’s how they got there. And that’s pretty much how the ideological control system perpetuates itself in the schools—that’s the basic story of how it operates, I think."

I don't think I did anything of the sort. In fact, my purpose and my own approach is to subject my ideas to the most rigorous examination. I find that serves to sharpen my understandings, as well as often being the catalyst to reevaluating my views. To put things out there while indicating one's own outlook at the same time in no way invalidates the assertions, as rebuttals are both expected and welcomed.

I also find it useful to try to argue from the other person's perspective, and doing so by actually learning their position, and not just an inaccurate characterization of it.

The passage posted is the author's, not mine, btw.

@WilliamCharles

Let me re-read and assess a 2nd time. I was reacting to the nature of the stated challenge and not the article. I returned to graduate school at age 54, and got my PhD at age 60. I can relate to his experience. Will get back to you.

Those are some great observations. I was familiar with ZPG and NPG back in the day. I was troubled with the elements of anti-immigration that seemed to attract a particularly fervent right wing crowd, but also knew that aspect of the organization's goals still deserved to be discussed fully from all perspectives.

It is also a sad reality how funding largely determines who sets the agenda, and just how often the core mission is compromised because of that. Tell me what their ommitted issues are, and I'll show you their true agenda.

@WilliamCharles My late partner (an immigrant) had a question for her 2nd graders: What is more important, people or dirt? Thing is we cannot be more important that that which sustains us. There is a difference between immigrants and immigration. I just read a piece on this and it said we need to approach this issue from a different perspective than do the vitriolic conservatives. It is really the defining issue of the day and is causing nations to turn sharp right. When a nation implodes, due to an increasing carbon footprint, from any source, everyone loses, citizens and immigrants alike. Too many look at this issue from an economic view and I have yet to hear how it helps the environment. It does not and a truly sustainable policy needs to be created which will, unfortunately keep a lot of people out. BTW, NPG still is around and I am a member. [npg.org]
Thanks for the posting.

@JackPedigo

Though often these same conservatives will dismiss concerns about sustainability and growth by citing some factoid like the entire population of the planet could fit in the state of Texas with ample elbow room, ignoring the resources and substantial infrastructure needed for this to be in any way viable.

They'll also regularly ignore (both sides really) the impact that wars have on the population desperate to flee the carnage.

Often the pretext for demonizing the undocumented is in order to be able to continue to exploit them. Businesses that hire are rarely sanctioned in any meaningful way. Additionally, the current drive has many crops now rotting in the field.

The misery caused by Trump's detention camps ignores the fact that seeking political asylum is a legal avenue for entry. Many have been killed/died being repatriated to their homelands (or sent to a country they never lived in), and even those offered citizendhip for military service have been shamefully betrayed.

I fully welcome discussions/debates on growth and sustainability, but quite often there is misdirection serving only to provide cover for rapacious corporate entities denuding the planet for profit at the expense of all else.

@JackPedigo

I think it's also as much, how we live, as it is how many are alive. The wealth and prosperity if this country was largely through the exploitation of others through various means (often murderous and criminal), while we decry the growth rate of others seeking a comparable affluence. The ratio of the global resources we consume versus our population is quite skewed.

:-----:

“We are told ‘no’, we’re unimportant, we’re peripheral. ‘Get a degree, get a job, get this, get that.’ And then you’re a player, but you don’t want to play in the game. You want to reclaim your mind and get it out of the hands of the cultural engineers who want to turn you into a half-baked moron consuming all this trash that’s being manufactured out of the bones of a dying world.” – Terence McKenna

@WilliamCharles Unfortunately, it's not just the conservatives that seek to exploit immigrants. Almost every 'liberal' I have talked to say how we need to help others AND they do work Americans won't (this is common among all industrialized nations. With the Germans it was about the Turkish immigrants). I ask them how can we both help and exploit at the same time. They get really uncomfortable (and maybe I've planted a seed).
As you may well know the population issue is not just about numbers but how much of our resource base is needed to sustain us. When the Carbon footprint test first came online it was measured in acres (at the time it was 34 acres per capita). Now it is in how many Earths are needed. I find this a nebulous concept and feel we need to go back to actual land space.
Maybe we need to build a wall around Texas and let all the conservatives move there and see how it works for them. lol

@JackPedigo

Quite true. Offshoring certainly is bipartisan. Cheap goods are great, until producing them renders the population intended to serves as condumers are without income.

I want to see if I can learn more about his views with regard to how Yale presents the world of geopolitics and economics. Particularly as a veteran, he might have some input as to the role of military personnel (and the people of the nations his actions impacted) as pawns on a grand chessboard. Economically, how spending to build rather than destroy might have a greater ROI in both the long and short run.

There was a time when we actually saw winning hearts and minds as not just a key element, but the key element.