Uprooting the Flower Children of Higher Education

FUSION JANUARY/FEBRUARY 2010

<< Back to Fusion Index

By Zach Lahn

One of the most successful movements in modern history was the counterculture movement of the 1960s. Surprising as it may be, the anti-establishers and their "enlightenment" introduced America to endearing things like Woodstock, irregular bathing habits and "free love." In many ways, that lifestyle has gained ground (see: VW van sales), subjecting America to a new, more "progressive" way of thought.

While the psychedelic revolution may have stopped, the movement against the so-called establishment has not. It has only made a change in venue—somehow gaining credibility along the way. The counterculture movement is now taking the stage in college and university classrooms around the United States, though students are not the sponsors.

Who are the sponsors? A 2007 study published by Harvard University makes the answer very clear: the professors. At least 61 percent of Liberal Arts college professors surveyed identified their political and social preferences as liberal. As for the other side of the coin, conservative professors accounted for just 3.9 percent of the chalkboard dust.

The information above is easily grasped by understanding the following truism: The Woodstockians have grown up, and they, or their trainees, are now teaching America’s youth.

Being a college student at a very liberal institution, I have come to realize that the danger in academia is not coming from the one percent of outspoken Ward Churchill types. Teachers in this category are known to be radical and are marginalized by a majority of students. The true danger is the remaining 60 percent of the above-mentioned statistic. This group includes professors who are able to portray themselves as impartial while in reality are dangerously biased in their teaching.

The liberal indoctrination pushed by professors today is a combination of what they choose to teach students and what they refuse to teach students. Most students have no idea that the information they are receiving is one-sided. They do not recognize that many professors—especially those in the social sciences—are masters of casually "agendizing" the classroom. These professors allow their prejudice to determine course content. By assigning published books that align with their beliefs as mandatory reading, they are able to relay their message in a manner that looks credible to students.

Take an upper-division American history class and you will soon realize that America’s past wrongdoings have become the focal point of lectures. In my experience, many liberal professors see America as an evil, unjust land of oppression, a land that needs to be "fundamentally transformed." For example, capitalism is viewed not as having the potential to unleash prosperity, but rather as a source of discrimination and inequality. Pretty psychedelic considering that, in reality, our country and capitalistic system have given more rights, freedoms, and liberties to more people than any other system in the history of mankind.

Another example is the constantly debunked fiction of man-made global warming, which is presented as fact on campus. In a public policy class, the question was asked: "What policies can our government institute to stop global warming?" When I questioned the science behind the subject, I was told the global consensus was evidence enough. To quote Gen. Patton: "If everyone is thinking alike, then someone isn’t thinking."

In this case, a lot of people aren’t thinking.

These types of personal views are transferred to students daily through lectures, assigned reading, homework and exam questions. The result: Many students are graduating unaware that they are carrying a transplanted, one-sided worldview based on compliance rather than reason.

Societal punishments are born

through this compliance. It’s no coincidence that wealth redistribution and

other collectivist programs are heavily advocated by our current president and his Cabinet considering they’ve spent a combined 180 years studying at institutions of "higher education."

The war for our country must begin here—on the college campus. Unfortunately, we are fighting the symptoms rather than the cause; we are taking on the products rather than the producers. We have to rethink our strategy.

If we are serious about ensuring our country’s success, we must defeat the source of its failures by breaking the liberal stranglehold on academia.

Thomas Paine once said: "When men yield up the privilege of thinking, the last shadow of liberty quits the horizon." Today’s society proves him right. The lights cast by critical thinking are dimming, causing the shadows of our liberty to disappear.

Our battle is in the classroom. College must once again become a place of objective thinking. Informed students must take it upon themselves to recognize bias and intellectually stand up against it. Not only is it our right to question, it is our duty. Our questioning mellows the spread of the liberty dimming professorial disease and prevents it from clogging our classmates’ cranial critical thinking centers.

The aging counterculture crowd and their freshly sprouting flower children are attempting to author our country’s new establishment. For the sake of our future, we must retake the intellectual reins, rise against this far-out ideology and become the new change agents…or the new hippies. But this time around, bathing is not only allowed, it’s mandatory.

Everything comes down to the two Senate runoffs in Georgia. If we lose both races, we lose the country. Democrats know this and are pouring in millions to usher in a Marxist agenda.

As the Left tries to hide how radical the two candidates really are, Glenn takes us inside the Democrat war room to expose the wolf in pastor's clothing, Raphael Warnock, and America's Justin Trudeau, Jon Ossoff. Socialism, the Green New Deal, and "defund the police" are all on the table. And Glenn warns of what's to come if conservatives don't activate: Chuck Schumer will weaponize the Senate, and the radical Left will launch an all-out assault to ravage the Constitution.

Watch the full special below:

The election and its aftermath are the most important stories in America. That's why we're offering our most timely discount ever: $30 off a one-year subscription to BlazeTV with code "GLENN." With BlazeTV, you get the unvarnished truth from the most pro-America network in the country, free from Big Tech and MSM censors.

Sen. Ted Cruz (R-Texas) joined the "Glenn Beck Radio Program" to explain how mail-in ballots are typically disqualified during recounts at a far higher rate than in-person, Election Day ballots, and why this is "good news" for President Donald Trump's legal battle over the election.

"One of the things that gives the greatest cause for optimism is, this election ... there's a pretty marked disparity in terms of how the votes were distributed. On Election Day, with in-person voting, Donald Trump won a significant majority of the votes cast on in-person voting on Election Day. Of mail-in voting, Joe Biden won a significant majority of the votes cast early on mail-in voting," Cruz explained.

"Now, here's the good news: If you look historically to recounts, if you look historically to election litigation, the votes cast in person on Election Day tend to stand. It's sort of hard to screw that up. Those votes are generally legal, and they're not set aside. Mail-in votes historically have a much higher rate of rejection … when they're examined, there are a whole series of legal requirements that vary state by state, but mail-in votes consistently have a higher rate of rejection, which suggests that as these votes begin being examined and subjected to scrutiny, that you're going to see Joe Biden's vote tallies go down. That's a good thing," he added. "The challenge is, for President Trump to prevail, he's got to run the table. He's got to win, not just in one state but in several states. That makes it a lot harder to prevail in the litigation. I hope that he does so, but it is a real challenge and we shouldn't try to convince ourselves otherwise."

Watch the video clip below to catch more of the conversation:

Want more from Glenn Beck?

To enjoy more of Glenn's masterful storytelling, thought-provoking analysis and uncanny ability to make sense of the chaos, subscribe to BlazeTV — the largest multi-platform network of voices who love America, defend the Constitution and live the American dream.

Subscribe to BlazeTV today with our BEST DEAL EVER for $30 off with promo code GLENN.

Fox News senior meteorologist Janice Dean is perhaps even more disgusted with New York Gov. Andrew Cuomo (D) for his coronavirus response than BlazeTV's Stu Burguiere (read what Stu has to say on the subject here), and for a good reason.

She lost both of her in-laws to COVID-19 in New York's nursing homes after Gov. Cuomo's infamous nursing home mandate, which Cuomo has since had scrubbed from the state's website and blamed everyone from the New York Post to nursing care workers to (every leftist's favorite scapegoat) President Donald Trump.

Janice joined Glenn and Stu on the "Glenn Beck Radio Program" Tuesday to ask why mainstream media is not holding Gov. Cuomo — who recently published a book about his leadership during the COVID-19 pandemic — accountable?

"I'm vocal because I have not seen the mainstream media ask these questions or demand accountability of their leaders. [Cuomo] really has been ruling with an iron fist, and every time he does get asked a question, he blames everybody else except the person that signed that order," Janice said.

"In my mind, he's profiting off the over 30 thousand New Yorkers, including my in-laws, that died by publishing a book on 'leadership' of New York," she added. "His order has helped kill thousands of relatives of New York state. And this is not political, Glenn. This is not about Republican or Democrat. My in-laws were registered Democrats. This is not about politics. This is about accountability for something that went wrong, and it's because of your [Cuomo's] leadership that we're put into this situation."

Watch the video excerpt from the show below:

Want more from Glenn Beck?

To enjoy more of Glenn's masterful storytelling, thought-provoking analysis and uncanny ability to make sense of the chaos, subscribe to BlazeTV — the largest multi-platform network of voices who love America, defend the Constitution and live the American dream.

As America grows divided and afraid to disagree with the Democrats' woke plan for America, Megyn Kelly is ready to fight back for the truth. For nearly two decades, she navigated the volatile and broken world of the media. But as America leans on independent voices more than ever, she's breaking new ground with "The Megyn Kelly Show."

She joined the latest Glenn Beck Podcast to break down what's coming next after the election: Black Lives Matter is mainstream, leftists are making lists of Trump supporters, and the Hunter Biden scandal is on the back burner.

Megyn and Glenn reminisce about their cable news days (including her infamous run-in with then-presidential candidate Donald Trump) and to look into the chaotic and shady world of journalism and the growing entitlement it's bred. For example, many conservatives have been shocked by how Fox News handled the election.

Megyn defended Fox News, saying she believes Fox News' mission "is a good one," but also didn't hold back on hosts like Neil Cavuto, who cut off a White House briefing to fact check it — something she never would have done, even while covering President Obama.

Megyn also shared this insightful takeaway from her time at NBC: "Jane Fonda was an ass."

Watch the full podcast here:

Want to listen to more Glenn Beck podcasts?

Subscribe to Glenn Beck's channel on YouTube for FREE access to more of his masterful storytelling, thought-provoking analysis and uncanny ability to make sense of the chaos, or subscribe to BlazeTV — the largest multi-platform network of voices who love America, defend the Constitution and live the American dream.