That is what this COMPLETE GUIDE has as a goal here in US today courtesy CLINTON/BUSH/OBAMA and their global banking 5% freemason/Greek ROBBER BARON players now morphing into EDUCATIONAL ROTC TRAINING CAMPS for our US 99% of WE THE PEOPLE children/students.
Starting a Private Military Company – A Complete Guide
Are you interested in starting a private military contractor company?
It's always good to corrupt our youngest of children to global banking 1% civil unrest civil war death and destruction so to advise a perspective 5% freemason/Greek player to utilize our BOY SCOUTS AND GIRL SCOUTS as sources of distributing advertisement acts as well as a recruitment of these children to team ROTC MILITARY JUNTA.
'While your flyers are being printed, you should be lining up your delivery people -local Brownie or Cub Scout Troops. No big problem here. Either look up their local headquarters office in your phone book or call a friend or two with children about the right age for the name and phone number of troop leaders. Arrange to pay these scout troops $10 for each thousand circulars they hand out door-to-door'.
Our US baby boomers as children often joined CAMP FIRE GIRLS, GIRL SCOUTS, as BOY SCOUTS----we NEVER were approached as children to work for criminal global cartels made to feel OBEYING THE LAW OF THE PACK was to join a FREEMASON/GREEK MAFIA. During CLINTON/BUSH/OBAMA that is exactly where our US children were recruited to PLEDGE TO OBEY what was that global criminal cartel------global 1% OLD WORLD KINGS AND QUEENS KNIGHTS OF MALTA---TRIBE OF JUDAH.
'To obey the Law of the Pack'.
Today, in US cities this corruption of our once pathway to good citizenship is running rampant.
BUT IT'S THE MADMAN TRUMP MOVING FORWARD CRIMINAL militarization of our US 99% WE THE CHILDREN----
NO-----that was CLINTON/BUSH/OBAMA.
Boy Scout Oath, Law, Motto, Slogan, Outdoor Code, & Cub Scout Promise
Boy Scout Law, Moto, Slogan, Oath, Outdoor Code, & Cub Scout Promise
A Scout Is:
Clean, and Reverent.
(Remember, there are 12 points.)
As an American, I will do my best to:
Be clean in my outdoor manners.
Be careful with fire.
Be considerate in the outdoors.
Be conservation minded.
On my honor, I will do my best to do my duty to God and my country and obey the Scout Law; to help other people at all times; to keep myself physically strong, mentally awake, and morally straight.
Do A Good Turn Daily
The Scout sign shows you are a Scout. Give it each time you recite the Scout Oath and Law. When a Scout or Scouter raises the Scout sign, all Scouts should make the sign, too, and come to silent attention.
The Scout salute shows respect. Use it to salute the flag of the United States of America. You may also salute a Scout leader or another Scout.
Give the Scout salute by forming the Scout sign with your right hand and then bringing that hand upward until your forefinger touches the brim of your hat or the arch of your right eyebrow. The palm of your hand should not show.
The Scout handshake is made with the hand nearest the heart and is offered as a token of friendship. Extend your left hand to another Scout and firmly grasp his left hand.
Only use this handshake when both people are in uniform.
Cub Scout Promise
I, (say your name), promise
To do my best
To do my duty to God
And my country,
To help other people, and
To obey the Law of the Pack.
One such global banking 1% OLD WORLD KINGS AND QUEEN'S KNIGHTS OF MALTA TRIBE OF JUDAH structure to recruit children as military junta we see below. The Somalian war lords we see driving around in jeeps all having AK 47s answered that same advertisement----filed a grant, became that outsourced military contractor-----just as we shared yesterday happening in US today. The first thing global banking 1% trains these ROTC global banking 5% civil unrest civil war players is ------CONTROL THE CHILDREN-----go after the BOY AND GIRL SCOUTS.
Al-Shabaab or Al-Shabab (الشباب ash-Shabāb) is an Arabic phrase meaning "the Youth". It may refer to:
- Al-Shabaab (militant group), a Somalia-based militant Islamist group aligned with Al-Qaeda
Al-Shabab as ISIS is a global banking military contractor corporation paid to create civil unrest between population groups to open the door to civil wars. This is ARABIA/AFRICA-----these same global banking 1% structures existed in LATIN AMERICA--SOUTHEAST ASIA using the same MODEL.
We are seeing today this same global banking 5% freemason/Greek player morphing from ROBBER BARON mafia into recruiting children to being those ALT RIGHT ALT LEFT CIVIL UNREST CIVIL WAR juntas.
REMEMBER---THOSE GLOBAL BANKING 5% CIVIL UNREST PLAYERS WORK FOR OLD WORLD KINGS AND QUEENS----TELLING OUR US 99% OF WE THE CHILDREN THEY ARE HELPING THEIR COMMUNITIES AND FAMILIES.
This is global corporate campus ROTC in ARABIA AFRICA MOVING FORWARD to US FOREIGN ECONOMIC ZONES----like Baltimore.
Al-Shabab kidnaps Somali children to fill its ranks. Parents pull kids from school or flee to protect them.
June 19, 2018 · 4:45 PM EDT
By Tonny Onyulo
Members of the al-Qaeda-linked militant group al-Shabab surrender to authorities in the north of Somalia's capital, Mogadishu, Sept. 24, 2012.
Credit: Omar Faruk/Reuters
You can hear the anguish in Maalim Mohamud’s voice when he talks about his son Ismael.
Ismael disappeared on his way home from school in the town of Baidoa in southern Somalia two years ago. He would be 13 years old today.
“I still feel the pain as a parent. I can’t believe that I will never see him again,” said Mohamud, 45, a father of five who now lives in the Somali capital of Mogadishu. “He was the hope of this family and we loved him. We miss him so much.”
Mohamud says he suspects that al-Shabab militants kidnapped Ismael with three other students from Baidoa primary school. The al-Qaeda-linked terror group regularly enters villages and demands that families give up their children. If parents resist, the militants often capture the children and force them to join their ranks.
“We suspect that they were kidnapped by al-Shabab soldiers because they have been ordering us to hand over our children as young as 7 years to help them fight,” he said.
Al-Shabab has conscripted children throughout its decade-long insurgency in Somalia, but it escalated its campaign of forcibly recruiting child soldiers in mid-2017, according to Human Rights Watch.
In January, Somali soldiers, with support from US forces, conducted a raid on an al-Shabab camp in the Middle Shabelle region in southern Somalia and freed at least 32 child soldiers.
After the raid, Somali Information Minister Abdirahman Omar Osman told Reuters that al-Shabab’s reliance on child soldiers proved Somali troops and their allies were making headway against the group.
“It is unfortunate that terrorists are recruiting children to their twisted ideology,” said Osman. “It showed how desperate the terrorists are, as they are losing the war and people are rejecting terror."
That assessment hasn’t comforted Somali parents in vulnerable communities. Some families are keeping their children out of schools. Others have left villages in remote areas and moved to major cities like Kismayo and Mogadishu.
Related: The death of a Navy SEAL reveals US mission creep in Somalia
Bashir Abdalla, 16, who now works as a waiter in Mogadishu, was forced to leave his home in the town of Berdale in southern Somalia when militants threatened to kill everyone in his family if he wasn't willing to train and defend his country as a jihadi.
Abdalla was in 10th grade at the time. He said friends who had escaped from an al-Shabab military training camp told him that children like him join fighting units in their mid-teens after three months of training.
“I was very scared for my life and I had to run to Mogadishu and look for a job,” said Abdalla who is now living with his aunt. “I had to drop out of school because I knew they will kill me and my family. I was very worried.”
Human Rights Watch said more children are likely to drop out of school and flee their rural homes if more isn't done to protect children.
“Al-Shabab’s ruthless recruitment campaign is taking rural children from their parents so they can serve this militant armed group,” said Laetitia Bader, senior Africa researcher at Human Rights Watch. “To escape that cruel fate, many children have fled school or their homes.”
In the south, elders — community leaders with significant authority — are deeply worried over the situation, saying the future of their communities is in jeopardy.
“We’ll have no male children in the region if the trend continues,” warned Ahmed Aden, 65, an elder from Bay who now lives in Mogadishu. “We are losing our sons every day because they are being killed by the hundreds. Our children are not going to school and their future is uncertain.”
Al-Shabab has been battling the UN-backed government in Somalia for years. The group has carried out a string of attacks in neighboring Kenya, including the Garissa University attack that left 148 students dead in April 2015. The group has been pushed out of most of the large cities it once controlled, like the port city of Kismayo, but it remains a potent threat.
This month, al-Shabab killed an American special operations soldier in an attack on Somali troops and US forces near Jamaame. In October last year, more than 300 people were killed in Mogadishu after twin car explosions, making it the deadliest attack in the country's recent history. Al-Shabab claimed responsibility for both attacks.
But as African Union Mission to Somalia is expected to withdraw its 22,000 troops by 2020, residents in the East African country are worried about the future.
“Foreign soldiers should not leave Somalia. They should in fact increase the number so that they can defeat al-Shaab," said Mohamud. "I cannot wish anyone to go through the anguish I have been through.”
HUMAN RIGHTS WATCH is UNITED NATIONS----as too global banking 1% global corporate campus ROTC targeting those sovereign children with military contractor employment-------these UN global banking 1% neo-liberal players are WORLD BANK/IMF pretending to need to come in to rescue those children captured by global banking WORLD BANK/IMF civil unrest civil war players.
United Nations | Human Rights Watch
www.hrw.org/topic/united-nations Human Rights Watch leverages our research on countries and issues addressed at the United Nations to inform UN officials and member states of key findings, influence policy on a wide range of discussions and push for urgent action on human rights crises.
'Human Rights Watch said more children are likely to drop out of school and flee their rural homes if more isn't done to protect children'.
Here in Baltimore and US CITIES DEEMED FOREIGN ECONOMIC ZONES across the US----these same GLOBAL CORPORATE CAMPUS ROTC 'education' are being installed. Baltimore is MOVING FORWARD with all theses structures today.
We posted yesterday those US schools being made more and more exclusive-----selective and without coincidence they are the same US schools having the strongest ROTC STUDENT 'education' ------and of course they are tied to being global multi-national 'education' institutions.
These are those dastardly UNITED NATIONS NGOs being allowed to replace our US local government-----and indeed they are the ones tasked with creating the societal conditions inside US cities and our rural counties for widespread civil unrest civil war. Just as PRE-WEIMAR HITLER. Who has built these structures? CLINTON/BUSH/OBAMA global banking 5% freemason/Greeks.
Best ROTC Schools in the Country?
Interested in Joining the U.S. Military?
ROTC schools are the best Option!
ROTC acronym for Reserve Officers’ Training Corps is a program designed to prepare college students for future service in the U.S. Navy, Army and Air Force. Students interested in gaining exposure to the rigors of military training can do so through junior ROTC or JROTC programs offered at the high school level. Once students reach college level, they can enroll in ROTC schools specific to their interests whether Army, Air Force or Navy.
BEST FRIENDLY MILITARY COLLEGE DEGREES
For qualified students, ROTC programs cover the cost of their education in exchange that students will pursue active duty services in their chosen area of the military. There are more than 1000 colleges and universities in the United States that offer ROTC programs, and listed below are some of the top ranked institutions to choose from.
Best Army ROTC Schools:
1. California Institute of Technology – Caltech offers Air Force and Army ROTC programs through a partnership with the University of Southern California. More information on Caltech ROTC programs can be requested from the Dean of Students office.
2. Claremont McKenna College – regarded as the best ROTC programs in the country, the college offers an ROTC program that provides interested individual tools, training and experiences to become officers in the U.S. Army. The experience you gain through the ROTC program is like none other where you even receive help with your college tuition.
FREE MILITARY CAREER GUIDE! KNOW YOUR MILITARY OPTIONS!
Best NAVY ROTC Schools
1. Columbia University – Known to produce some of the best thinkers and leaders in the country, ROTC programs at Columbia University provide students with financial aid and scholarships, and some the best leadership training the country has to offer.
2. Cornell University – with a history of producing more army officers that any other ROTC program in the United States, Cornell University offers excellent training to become an officer in the U.S. Army, while simultaneously studying at one of the most esteemed education institutions in New York. If you’re looking for the best Army ROTC program, the Cornell University is definitely worth exploring.
3. Duke University – designed to provide leadership skills to full time students, the ROTC program at the Duke University provides all the essential skills to be great leaders in military as well as civilian environments. After successfully completing the ROTC Army curriculum at the Duke University, students receive a designation of an officer in the army with an obligation to serve in the Army National Guard, Active Army or Army Reserve.
Best U.S. Air Force ROTC Schools
1. Harvard University – a military partner since 1916, the Harvard University is one of the most acclaimed Naval ROTC curriculums in the United States, and has provided the military some of the finest leaders in the country. Established in 1916, the Harvard is home to both Army and Navy ROTC and offers all three service programs – Army ROTC, Navy ROTC and Air Force ROTC.
2. Columbia University – the university offers Air Force ROTC as well as other ROTC programs and needs no introduction with regards to its reputation. Students interested in the ROTC program at Columbia University can expect to receive the best leadership training in the country.
Those calling for the end of BOY SCOUTING were likely parents seeing this corruption of our once strong youth organization from being good US citizens----to being ROBERT GATES' as global banking 1% OLD WORLD KINGS AND QUEENS KNIGHT OF MALTA-----youth working for global corporate campus military junta.
Gates is of course BUSH-ERA DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE when generals as global development corporations emptied our US treasuries with massive frauds and fueled all this government corruption. CIA working under EISENHOWER ACT for foreign sovereignty of MALTA---KNIGHTS OF MALTA has been this civil unrest civil war tool for several decades overseas in installing FOREIGN ECONOMIC ZONES----and is indeed behind corrupting all that is our US public military academies and our civic-minded youth groups.
CIA director, U.S. Secretary of Defense, and university president'
Military Service and the Boy Scouts of America
Posted on January 26, 2010 by Ian Graham
For nearly 100 years, the Boy Scouts of America (BSA) has created a strong foundation of leadership, service, and community for millions of America’s youth. It is no surprise, then, that many Scouting alumni go on to serve their nation in the U.S. Armed Forces.
The link between the military and Scouting traditions is strong. The BSA counts Defense Secretary Robert Gates, Gen. David Petraeus, Adm. Elmo Zumwalt and countless others among its distinguished alumni. In addition to the top brass, there are tens of thousands of in the ranks.
In 2010, the BSA turns 100. It is an exciting time for the organization. But rather than focus on an incredibly rich heritage, the BSA has sights set on the next century. We would like to invite the military community to get involved:
Through BSA Alumni Connection, we are inviting Scouting alumni (including friends and supporters) to reconnect and become active and involved with Scouting programs once again.
Scouting alumni are eligible to do something they haven’t done since they were Scouts … earn a merit award. Through A Year of Celebration, A Century of Making a Difference, individuals can earn up to five award ribbons that hang from our centennial patch. An article on 100th Anniversary activities could call special attention to this program, and encourage military men and women to earn the awards.
Please help us spread the word. Let us know what you are able to do.
Director of Alumni Relations
Boy Scouts of America
'The President of Stanford University should invite the U.S. military to re-establish an on-campus ROTC program consistent with the recommendations of this Committee'.
Those calling for the end of BOY SCOUTING were likely parents seeing this corruption of our once strong youth organization from being good US citizens----to being ROBERT GATES' as global banking 1% OLD WORLD KINGS AND QUEENS KNIGHT OF MALTA-----youth working for global corporate campus military junta.
Gates is of course BUSH-ERA DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE when generals as global development corporations emptied our US treasuries with massive frauds and fueled all this government corruption. CIA working under EISENHOWER ACT for foreign sovereignty of MALTA---KNIGHTS OF MALTA has been this civil unrest civil war tool for several decades overseas in installing FOREIGN ECONOMIC ZONES----and is indeed behind corrupting all that is our US public military academies and our civic-minded youth groups.
CIA director, U.S. Secretary of Defense, and university president'
Those not knowing---STANFORD, JOHNS HOPKINS, YALE are the far-right wing global banking 1% KNIGHTS OF MALTA-----while HARVARD, PRINCETON, UNIVERSITY OF CHICAGO, BERKELEY are the global banking 1% TRIBE OF JUDAH----BANKING LOVES MILITARY.
Below we see not an ACADEMIC 'education structure---but a global corporate campus ROTC military junta training for people who will work in FOREIGN ECONOMIC ZONES as global military mercenary security, surveillance, SWAT TEAMS and all-around civil unrest civil war 5% freemason/Greek players.
Towards an on-campus ROTC program at
A Report and Recommendation
by The Ad Hoc Committee
(Appointed by the Faculty Senate
“to investigate Stanford’s role in preparing
students for leadership in the military, including potential relations with ROT”)
Ewart Thomas, Professor of Psychology (Chair)
Greg Boardman, Vice Provost for Student Affairs
Eamonn Callan, Pigott Family School of Education Professor and Associate
Dean for Student Affairs in the School of Education
Ingrid Deiwiks, Administrative Services Administrator, Freeman Spogli
Institute for International Studies (staff)
Imani Franklin, International Relations, ’13 Hester Gelber,
Professor of Religious Studies
Akhil R. Iyer, International Relations, ’11
Sharon Long, William C. Steere, Jr. - Pfizer Inc.
Professor in Biological Sciences and Professor, by courtesy, of Biochemistry Orrin “Rob Robinson, Professor of German Studies and, by courtesy, of Linguistics Scott Sagan, Caroline S. G. Munro Memorial Professor in Political Science
and Senior Fellow at the Freeman Spogli Institute for International Studies
Section 1: A brief history of military studies on U.S. college campuses
Section 2: A brief history of ROTC at Stanford University
Section 3: Rationale
for a restructured ROTC program
Section 4: Key characteristics of a restructured ROTC program
Section 5: Objections to the Committee’s recommendation
5.1. The antidiscrimination argument
5.2. The civilian-military divide
Appendix 1: A
sample of arguments that were not extensively
discussed in the Ad Hoc Committee’s Report
ROTC programs at other universities
The Faculty Senate Ad Hoc Committee on ROTC has considered carefully a variety of evidence, arguments, and likely consequences pertaining to a possible renewal
at Stanford University of the Reserve Officer Training Corps program within the U.S. military.
The Committee concludes that an on-campus ROTC
program can be designed that conforms closely to standard academic practice at Stanford.
Further, the Committee concludes that such a purposefully designed restructuring of ROTC would, on balance, further
the educational interests of Stanford students, keep faith with
the broadly civic values in Stanford’s founding grant,
and contribute in a small but significant way to reducing the
perceived gap between the military and civil society in the US
did not try to specify the exact terms of an appropriate ROTC program at Stanford, because we expect that such details will arise out of future discussions with the military. Instead, we have tried to describe a well-designed process that,
we believe, would lead to an appropriate on-campus ROTC program.
Accordingly, the Committee unanimously recommends
The President of Stanford University should invite the U.S. military to re-establish an on-campus ROTC program consistent with the recommendations of this Committee.
The Faculty Senate should appoint immediately a Stanford ROTC Committee as a standing subcommittee of the Committee on Undergraduate Standards and Policy.
This committee would be available to advise the President during any exchanges between the university and the military that might ensue from the invitation.
The committee also would work with ROTC representatives on the design and scope of the Stanford-ROTC program.
The Stanford ROTC Committee and designated ROTC representatives will review the instructors and instruction of ROTC courses on campus. This committee, through CUSP,
will recommend, on a case-by-case basis, whether an
instructor be given a lecturer or visiting professor status
, and will be responsible for maintaining coordination between the university and the national ROTC programs.
After the first ROTC instructors have been appointed, the Stanford ROTC Committee may be expanded to include some of these instructors.
ROTC courses should be open to all Stanford students whether or not the students are in ROTC. Exceptions
need to be approved by the Stanford ROTC Committee.
The courses in the Stanford-ROTC program
may be eligible for either academic or
activity course credit, following existing Stanford curriculum review and approval processes.
The Stanford ROTC committee should encourage opportunities for Stanford faculty and ROTC instructors to design jointly taught courses that could meet both academic credit standards and ROTC training requirements.
The Committee looks forward to discussing its recommendation for an on-campus ROTC program with the Faculty Senate on April 28, 2011.
STANFORD, YALE, JOHNS HOPKINS are the BUSH/WOLFOWITZ global banking 1% OLD WORLD KINGS AND QUEENS KNIGHTS OF MALTA TRIBE OF JUDAH MILITARY JUNTA who will not stop continuous wars even if they are successful in MOVING FORWARD ONE WORLD ONE GOVERNANCE ----because they are super-duper sociopaths.
So, MOVING FORWARD kills all our US public militia----including our public military schools---ROTC training ---and enfolds them into multi-national corporate campuses simply PRODUCT MILLS using our US students as FREE LABOR----but also will be the source of recruiting, training, supplying military contractors sold as global corporate security.
Below we see the MORPHING of US politics from far-right wing Bush neo-conservatives pretending to be REPUBLICANS ----and far-right wing Clinton neo-liberals pretending to be DEMOCRATS-----CREATING the civil unrest civil war structures blamed on
ALT RIGHT ALT LEFT MARXISM-----VS ALT RIGHT ALT LEFT RIGHT WING CORPORATE FASCISM.
Army Splits with West Point Tweeter of 'Communism Will Win'
In this May 2016 photo provided by Spenser Rapone, Rapone raises his left fist while displaying a sign inside his hat that reads "Communism will win," after graduating from the United States Military Academy at West Point, N.Y. (Courtesy of Spenser Rapone via AP)
The Associated Press 19 Jun 2018 By Mary Esch
BUSH WOLFOWITZ could not have installed the generals as global development criminal cartel moving tens of trillions of dollars from our US treasuries in massive and systemic frauds without those global banking.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to navigation Jump to search
Paul Wolfowitz, co-author of the doctrine.Wolfowitz Doctrine is an unofficial name given to the initial version of the Defense Planning Guidance for the 1994–99 fiscal years (dated February 18, 1992) authored by Under Secretary of Defense for Policy Paul Wolfowitz and his deputy Scooter Libby. Not intended for public release, it was leaked to the New York Times on March 7, 1992, and sparked a public controversy about U.S. foreign and defense policy. The document was widely criticized as imperialist as the document outlined a policy of unilateralism and pre-emptive military action to suppress potential threats from other nations and prevent any other nation from rising to superpower status.
Such was the outcry that the document was hastily re-written under the close supervision of U.S. Secretary of Defense Dick Cheney and Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Colin Powell before being officially released on April 16, 1992. Many of its tenets re-emerged in the Bush Doctrine, which was described by Senator Edward M. Kennedy as "a call for 21st century American imperialism that no other nation can or should accept."
'It isn’t just my Catholicism that leads me to oppose American militarism or the idea that Americans ought to have the ability to project military power anywhere in the world, it is my conviction that war was abolished on the cross. I am a citizen of the Kingdom of God, first. That trumps America every time'.
SPENCER RAPONE above tells us his new-found 'communism' stems from his connection to STAN GOFF----who has been Bush era special forces in all those civil unrest civil war overseas regions below proclaiming the need for COMMUNISM----MARXISM to bring back REAL religion. Goff is from San Diego---home of far-right wing military dominance----and of course MARXISM is far-right wing, authoritarian, militaristic, extreme wealth extreme poverty LIBERTARIAN MARXISM---global corporate campus SOCIALISM.
GOFF is simply that global banking 1% OLD WORLD KINGS AND QUEENS JESUIT KNIGHTS OF MALTA meets JACOBIN TRIBES OF JUDAH pretending to be that MARXIST REBEL. GOFF and SPENCER simply represent that global banking MARXIST REBEL creating military contracting businesses to stir civil unrest against a TRUMP/PENCE global corporate fascism.
Full Spectrum Christian: An Interview with Stan Goff
Posted By Mark Gordon
Stan Goff’s military resume reads like a chickenhawk’s wet dream: retired Army Master Sergeant, airborne infantry, Ranger, Jungle School cadre, Green Beret, Delta Force operator, instructor in military science at West Point, service in Vietnam, Grenada, Haiti, Columbia, Peru, El Salvador, Guatemala, Mogadishu, and most likely other places he can’t talk about.
But by the conclusion of Goff’s 26-year career the dream had turned into a nightmare, not least because he had abandoned the body of lies that many American soldiers cling to as a way of justifying the unjustifiable. No more lying self-talk for Stan Goff. He’d seen and learned too much.
About a month into my son’s 2007 combat deployment to Baghdad with the Army’s 3rd Infantry Division, he called me and announced, “this whole thing is bullshit, dad.” I should have sent him Goff’s 2003 book “Full Spectrum Disorder,” but I didn’t know about it back then. I had no idea how expertly Goff had autopsied the corpse of the American empire, laying out all its diseased organs for inspection on the cold steel table of his own experience and withering analysis. Come to think of it, even if I had known I wouldn’t have sent the book to my son after all. He might have gone AWOL on the spot and hitched a ride all the way to Fort Leavenworth.
For a long time after crossing the event horizon of military retirement, Goff self-identified as a Marxist, and much of his early published writing rests on more or less standard anti-capitalist, anti-imperialist themes. But embedded in that body of work were two intellectual currents that mark Goff as a superb synthesizer: systems thinking and feminism. “Full Spectrum Disorder” includes two chapters that critically examine US military strategy in light of chaos and entropy, two key concepts in systems thinking And in 2006, Goff published “Sex and War,” an exploration of the psychology of war that draws on the feminist criticism of writers like Patricia Williams and bell hooks.
Adaptability is the critical element in the resilience and sustainability of systems. Goff’s commitment to intellectual adaptability flowered in the mid-2000’s when he began to read Stanley Hauerwas, John Howard Yoder, Ivan Illich, and other Christian radicals and pacifists. By 2008, Goff had embraced Christianity and was baptized as a Methodist. In 2011, he crossed the Tiber and reconciled with the Catholic Church.
Today, Stan Goff lives in Michigan, works on peace, permaculture and community sustainability, blogs at Chasin’ Jesus, and will soon release a new book titled “Borderline – Reflections on War, Sex, and Church.” Goff’s nom de Facebook is “Pistis Christou.” I interviewed him via email.
MARK GORDON: Stan, when did your view of American foreign policy begin to change? Was there one “breakthrough” moment or was it an accumulation of experiences?
STAN GOFF: I didn’t suddenly go blind on the road to Damascus, if that ‘s what you’re asking. It would make a better story, I suppose, but it was more of a cumulative epiphany that played out over decades.
In Vietnam, I found out how easy it was to become a racist, for example. On the ground, that was a race war. Grunts learned to hate all Vietnamese, because those are the people we simultaneously had to control and fear. That happens during every invasion. Koreans or Vietnamese become gooks. Arabs become hajjis, ragheads, et cetera. I saw that, and I became very sensitive to racism, at least personal race hatred, but I wanted to preserve what I could of my former outlook.
Then, when I was in Special Operations, I did some missions through the State Department, and alongside CIA folks. In Latin America, in particular, during the Reagan years, drunken agents would tell me how we actually did work with death squads, and the Ambassador’s most frequent contact was with the host nation Chamber of Commerce. So a new light went on, like, okay, this is about money, and we will help rich people overseas to kill poor people they don’t like. At that point, I had to give more credence to what people on the left were saying, because I’d discovered that most of what they were saying about Latin America and US foreign policy was quite true.
I still wanted this to be an aberration, though, because I still needed to believe that there was something essentially good about my country that was merely being corrupted around the edges. I was wearing the uniform, carrying a gun for my country, and I wanted to believe it was for more than defending rich, powerful people’s interests.
The real break with that commitment finally came in Haiti, during the 1994 occupation, when I watched my own government subvert the democratically elected President there even as they were ostensibly re-installing him. Of course, the US rather unapologetically removed him again in a coup d’etat in 2004. At some point during the occupation of Haiti, I finally had to admit that my country’s foreign policy was consistent, and that it was in many respects just an ongoing war against poor people. I also came to terms with racism as a structural phenomenon, characterized by power and a kind of internal colonization, and not just “prejudice,” as we liked to call it once.
By the time I retired, I had become completely disillusioned about our foreign policy, as well as our domestic policies, and I became involved fairly quickly with various politics of resistance to these policies.
MG: Your intellectual journey included a brief period as a Marxist, but in 2008 you became a Christian and was baptized in the Methodist faith. Then in 2011 you entered the Catholic Church. What compelled you to seek reconciliation with the Church, and how has being a Catholic informed your views on the US military and its role as the projection of American power?
SG: I had broken with Marxism before I converted to Christianity. It would be easier for me to trace this evolution through philosophy than politics, even though I was deeply involved with politics for a few years after I retired from the Army in February 1996. To do that, I have to go back again to that transitional period when I was on active duty.
By 1973, I had already been exposed to feminism, and as a kind of principled libertarian, I was very committed to the notion of legal equality between men and women. That made me a minority in the Army, especially among the uber-conservatives in Special Operations. And my sister was very involved in feminist politics in the 80s, which also influenced me that way, even after I had abandoned the libertarian point of view as simplistic and utopian. My wife has also been a powerful influence, because she held my feet to the fire when I was talking a good game, but only talking. So that bias I had toward feminism acted as a kind of strange attractor, if I can steal a concept from chaos theory, throughout my subsequent philosophical development.
During my first break in service, I had studied literature, and I was very interested in existentialist writers, because many of them had experience of war and they articulated the kind of alienation that I’d felt ever since Vietnam. So I already had a passing familiarity with Sartre and Camus, of course, but also with Nietzsche, Kierkegaard, Heidegger, and others. When I got out of the Army for good, I picked up that interest in big ideas again, and that is when I discovered not just Marx, but several of the thinkers who have been influenced by Marx. Gramsci, Luxemburg, and some more contemporary thinkers, like geographer David Harvey, historian Robin D.G. Kelley, and anthropologist Alf Hornborg, as well as post-Marxist feminists like Catharine MacKinnon and Nancy Hartsock, and black feminists like Patricia Williams and bell hooks.
But again, my break – if you can call it that – with Marxism as a political movement in the US, happened over this gender issue again. Most Marxists talk a good game about sexual equality, but it is like a formal position that doesn’t often translate into practice. Men still predominate in their organizations, even when they put women in as the titular heads . . . they can be very tokenistic . . . and if you visit their websites and chat rooms, they are boys’ clubs where there is often open hostility to feminism, which is dismissed as identity politics, and that same kind of macho bullying attitude that makes virtual spaces feel unsafe and unwelcome to women all over the internet.
That wasn’t the sole source of my break with Marxist activism, though. My engagement with feminism had increased after 2001, when the attacks on the World Trade Center and the Pentagon was being wrangled into an excuse for a full scale invasion of Iraq and a long term occupation of Afghanistan. I was working with a lot of antiwar veterans and making speeches and writing articles, and I was railing against militarism. And one thing that my familiarity with feminism had taught me was that militarism has a powerful gender component that reaches right down into the pre-critical psychic lives of men.
At the same time, I’d discovered a number of feminists who had powerful critiques not just of male domination, but of liberalism, even modernity itself. These women, like Carolyn Merchant, Maria Mies, Carole Pateman, and Vandana Shiva, also placed great emphasis on how industrialism, not just capitalism, is disorganizing the entire biosphere in very dangerous and unpredictable ways. Both capitalist apologists and Marxists shared, with a few exceptions, the kind of radical technological optimism that has led to this very frightening environmental impasse we face now. Both are committed to large-scale, highly centralized, highly specialized economies. Both regard nature, I would call it Creation now, as somehow inert, a “resource,” something to be controlled and exploited. And this is an idea held in common, because it is historically a male idea that can be traced to Bacon and his period. Historically speaking, both liberalism and Marxism were male philosophical orientations originating in explicitly male dominant post-Enlightenment discourses, discourses that emphasized the domination of an essentially female “nature.”
Maria Mies fleshed this out, saying that modern men in the powerful nations associate masculinity with three kinds of conquest, each of which serves a metaphor for the other: conquest of women, conquest of nature, and the conquest of colonies. These are the three major spheres where men can “prove” masculinity constructed as domination.
The other thing these eco-feminists, for lack of a better term, convinced me of is that we have to question the idea that science functions as an ultimate and totalizing truth claim. Not that science doesn’t yield practical knowledge. It does that so powerfully that it can be dangerous. But it can only answer the question, What can we do? It can never answer the question, Should we do it?
It was when I was sitting with these questions that I had to take notice of something else. A lot of the most courageous and principled people I knew about were Christians. That applies to contemporary figures like Kathy Kelley and the Berrigans and Cornell West and Rachel Corrie, but also to Martin Luther King, Jr., Archbishop Romero, Mother Teresa, Bishop Desmond Tutu, Dorothy Day, and so on. And so I took an interest in Christianity and began to learn more about it.
The rest is difficult to explain in text, but once you begin looking into the waters of the Jordan hard enough, you’re apt to fall in. I was baptized as a Methodist, at the age of 56, on Easter 2008. In 2011, I was confirmed as a Roman Catholic in St. Mary of Good Counsel parish in Adrian, Michigan.
Just as I narrate my conversion to Christ through feminism; I can narrate my conversion to Catholicism through a prominent Protestant theologian, Stanley Hauerwas. It was he, and through him, Catholic philosopher Alasdair MacIntyre, who introduced me to both virtue ethics and to the mystery, the beauty, and the philosophical depth and diversity of the Catholic sacramental tradition. It turns out I am a smells and bells kind of person.
No Christian confession is perfect, far from it, and the Roman Catholic Church is no different in that respect. But my own philosophical evolution, which is now also a theological evolution, has led me away from liberalism – which Catholic social critic Ivan Illich calls not post-Christian, but a perversion of the Gospels driven by the urge to criminalize sin, that is, by the seductions of power. Reason and revelation can work hand in hand, I believe. I’m not presumptuous enough to call myself a Thomist, given how superficial my knowledge of St. Thomas is, but the relation, not opposition, of revelation to reason, is a firmer anchor for me than anything I have known for answering that question, Should we do this or that? Should I do this or that?
If I were to summarize my own Christian convictions, I would say I believe Jesus is God, incarnated. He is the Word made flesh. You can recount the creed, and between “born of the Virgin Mary” and “He will come again,” I believe some other things. Jesus’ teachings and example were meant for real people, for us, and they were not meant to be foreclosed by pragmatism. Jesus’ ethic of self-giving, neighbor-love, enemy-love, and sacrificial service are not anachronisms that apply only to first century Palestine. Nothing in Jesus’ teachings or example suggests that Christians must take up the “responsibilities” of political power, compromise self-giving, turn neighbor-love into clientelism, set aside enemy-love in defense of nation, or eschew sacrificial service in the name of political pragmatism. Jesus’ teachings and example do have actual social significance, for us, now, and cannot be launched into an extraterrestrial orbit and deferred until we are all conveniently dead. The Gospels provide us with a way of being that transcends time and place understood as “the way of the cross.” Works and faith are inseparable. The world is redeemed in Christ, and not by progress, technology, democracy, political revolution, money, education, or any other idol. That’s a summary of my faith.
The church is participating in the Christian story, and as a church full of people, we are a sinful church. We’ve been tempted by all these idols, and church members in the United States have been tempted by the idol of American patriotism. We are a story-formed community, as Hauerwas and MacIntyre would say, and that story is the story of Christ.
But what happens in a world like ours, when the Christian story is drowned out in this cacophony of propaganda, public relations, advertizing, hucksterism, and a multitude of electronic hallucinations, is that we are bombarded with other stories, especially the story of the American nation-state, with its triumphalism and exceptionalism, and that story competes for dominance against the Christian story. It competes so well that we get what Catholic theologian William Cavanaugh has called the “migration of the holy” from Christ to the state.
We have sacralized the state. In fact, many Roman Catholics went to war in Iraq at the behest of the state, even when the leadership of the church said this was an illegal and immoral war. It isn’t just my Catholicism that leads me to oppose American militarism or the idea that Americans ought to have the ability to project military power anywhere in the world, it is my conviction that war was abolished on the cross. I am a citizen of the Kingdom of God, first. That trumps America every time.
And then again, as a truth-teller, which we are also called to be, I have to be honest about that projection of power, of which I was once an instrument, and tell people something that should make sense whether you are a Christian or not. This militarism and this world dominance is not driven by any higher good except maintaining power for those who are in power. Anyone can get that.
For Christians, however, this ought to have special significance, because the first temptations of Jesus were the temptations of power. This was also the temptation that clouded the vision of his disciples, and led them to expect a new David who would open a big can of whoop-ass on the Romans and their collaborators. But in the end, it was the faith of Christ, the pistis Christou, that pointed the way, the nonviolent way, and that way led to the cross. This was the scandal of death on the cross; and the male disciples ran for the hills. It was too hard for them to understand, this vulnerability to death. Only the women understood it at first.
MG: One can be a practitioner of nonviolence without being a dogmatic pacifist. Both Gandhi and King fit that description, for instance. Is that your point of view, or have you embraced a principled pacifism? What do you see as the difference between nonviolence and pacifism?
SG: I’m not sure I see the difference between the two terms, unless I have some sort of context. Gandhi and King both rejected violence as a means to their ends. You can call that nonviolence or pacifism or a rubber ducky. It is what it is. The problem with either term in this case, speaking as a Christian to other Christians, is that this still divides us into different camps. I am not a Christian because I am a pacifist – meaning here that I will not use violence or support the use of violence to make things “come out right.” I am a pacifist, because I am a Christian. I’d like to see the time when this doesn’t have to be a compound sentence. When to be a Christian is assumed to be nonviolent. It’s part of the package. You cannot love the neighbor, or the enemy, and kill him or her at the same time. I’d like to see us practice what we preach.
Our job is not to save the world or make history resolve itself in a certain way. That road – sometimes called Progress – is littered with the dead, and now with a devastated ecology. To be a Christian, as I understand it, is to be very political, but not in the way people think when they give in to the temptation to power. It is to be a citizen of the Kingdom of God. We live our lives as a demonstration of our confidence that God will take care of the big picture, if we just embody God’s love with one another. We have that pistis Christou, the faith of Jesus, that radical trust in God that allows us to lose rather than injure and kill. We embody the Kingdom of God for others to see. This is the real evangelization. Right now, not just Roman Catholics, but most Christian confessions, are falling way short on that; and the reason is our attraction to power. This applies to liberal churches every bit as much as it applies to conservative ones. We can’t seem to resist the world’s politics. We lack the radical trust in God to leave it alone, then we rationalize with something called “responsibility,” another idea that has a hell of a damage path.
A Christian is not the same kind of pacifist as some non-Christians, who will argue that violence never works, or that without violence everything would just be okay. We recognize that we live in a fallen world. We even recognize that violence is effective . . . though I would warn anyone who latches onto that statement, violence is also highly unpredictable and self-perpetuating. If we want to know who created ISIS, it was us and the invasion and occupation of Iraq.
We know the world will continue to be violent. We know the world will continue to have wars. We know the temptation to power is itself very powerful, and many will answer its call. But as citizens of the Kingdom of God, we are living into a different story, even as we are inevitably residents of this world. That’s what it means to be a witness.
MG: As a young soldier, you no doubt had military heroes and models. As an older man and a Catholic, who are your heroes and models now?
SG: People we seldom notice. People who fix sandwiches and drop them off at homeless camps, and who know the people’s names and talk with them. People who are trying to grow food on abandoned city lots. People who help organize funerals. A guy I heard about on the radio, who bought a meal for a kid who tried to mug him with a knife, then asked for and received the knife afterward. People who care for really difficult old folks. People who raise severely disabled kids and know they are gifts. People who don’t get their backs up as easily as I do . . . that soldier is still in me trying to get out all the time. People with real patience.
MG: You’ve written eloquently (including in a letter to your pastor) about the encroachment of America’s civic religion on Catholic faith and practice. How does this syncretistic creed – which we might call “Americanist Catholicism” – distort both the Gospel and authentic patriotism?
SG: You won’t get me to endorse patriotism of any kind. My nationality is an accident of history and birth. Patriotism is a warlike phenomenon. It is engendered in war. It is sustained by the idea of war, of armed boundaries, of us versus them. Fromm called it incest and idolatry. I can’t disagree. And that is precisely how it runs counter to the Gospels. What Hauerwas said is true: we are Americans first, then Christians. We see no problem in dying, or killing, for the nation-state. But people who would die for their faith are considered insane now.
The Gospels foreclose killing as an option for us, for Christians. But the church’s cooptation by various polities as led us to try and lawyer our way out of this demanding nonviolence. We joined with the empire and went to war. We killed heretics, then went to war. We hunted “witches,” then went to war. We combined with the new nation-states, and Christians went to war against other Christians. By the time of the American Civil War, we had Catholics killing other Catholics in war, and churches joined to both Northern and Southern governments, flying opposing national flags in the sanctuaries.
Again, in modernity, as Cavanaugh said, we have seen the holy migrate from the church – which has been downgraded to a vague hedge against death or a weekly therapeutic pause – to the state, the nation, the idea of America the providential polity. We worship at malls more intensely than we do at church. And we’ve found all sorts of loopholes for “love your neighbor,” “love the enemy,” “turn the other cheek,” and “take up a cross.”
MG: Much of your recent work focuses on the role of gender in the psychology of war, particularly our culturally conditioned associations of masculinity and femininity with domination and submission, respectively. Tell us more about that and how does it factor into your new book?
Johns Hopkins was always far-right conservative-----capturing Baltimore's politics to a corrupted 'DEMOCRATIC' committee running FAR-RIGHT WING candidates.
Hopkins like Stanford always the corporate universities were FINANCIALIZED during REAGAN-CLINTON era-----meaning what used to be a local MR FROG became that global corporate black market MR ABRAHAM. Without coincidence Hopkins is that ROTC university.
All these 'DONATIONS' these few decades are simply SHAREHOLDER ACCOUNTS-----for what is indeed a raging muliti-national corporation as STANFORD----which intends to create the same civil unrest civil war failed city death and destruction as occurred overseas to install FOREIGN ECONOMIC ZONES.
This is to where an ANNAPOLIS NAVAL ACADEMY----a WEST POINT ARMY ACADEMY is moving having nothing but CONTEMPT for anything that is AMERICA.
This is why today coming from JOHNS HOPKINS we have FARMLAND AND CITY REIT setting the stage for consolidated land and militarized mass starvation-----we have WHISPERING ROOM TELEMEDICINE as POD PEOPLE and HUMANS AS BEAR HIBERNATION LSD VIRTUAL REALITY THERAPY------and it is why we have super-duper SMART CITY as deep, deep, really deep state here in Baltimore.
United Arab Emirates,
List Of Investment Banks In United Arab Emirates - Magazine
www.globalbankingandfinance.com/list-of... List Of Investment Banks In United Arab Emirates ... For the fifth consecutive year, Global Banking & Finance Review has awarded Arab African International.
We would suggest that BLOOMBERG is not worried about having UAE tied to Hopkins because this sheik is no more MUSLIM ----then BLOOMBERG Jewish-----then Hopkins tied to KNIGHTS OF MALTA being Catholic. They are all working for global 1% OLD WORLD KINGS AND QUEENS----taking America to colonial status.
N.Y. / Region
$1.1 Billion in Thanks From Bloomberg to Johns Hopkins
By MICHAEL BARBAROJAN. 26, 2013
Mayor Michael R. Bloomberg, on the Johns Hopkins campus this month, is the most generous living donor to any education institution in the United States, according to university officials and philanthropic tallies. Credit Luke Sharrett for The New York Times BALTIMORE -- He arrived on campus a middling high school student from Medford, Mass., who had settled for C’s and had confined his ambitions to the math club.
But by the time Michael R. Bloomberg left Johns Hopkins University, with a smattering of A’s and a lust for leadership, he was a social and political star — the president of his fraternity, his senior class and the council overseeing Greek life. “An all-around big man on campus,” as he puts it.
His gratitude toward the university, starting with a $5 donation the year after he graduated, has since taken on a supersize, Bloombergian scale.
On Sunday, as he makes a $350 million gift to his alma mater — by far the largest in its history — the New York City mayor, along with the president of the university, will disclose the staggering sum of his donations to Johns Hopkins over the past four decades: $1.1 billion.
That figure, kept quiet even as it transformed every corner of the university, makes Mr. Bloomberg the most generous living donor to any education institution in the United States, according to university officials and philanthropic tallies.
The timing of his latest donation, as the mayor’s third term draws to a close, offers a glimpse of the sky-is-the-limit philanthropy that he and his aides say is likely to dominate his life after City Hall. The mayor, who is 70, has pledged to give away all of his $25 billion fortune before he dies, and he has built up a foundation on the Upper East Side of Manhattan to carry out the task.
At the same time, the donations highlight the unusually close relationship between Mr. Bloomberg and Johns Hopkins, which, interviews show, has played an unseen role in several of his biggest undertakings as mayor.
In an interview here, Mr. Bloomberg said he was making his donations public to encourage greater charitable giving toward education. He lamented, “In our society, we are defunding education.”
The mayor, a member of the class of 1964, explained his fidelity to the university in deeply personal terms. Johns Hopkins, he said, was where he escaped the crushing boredom of Medford High and discovered an urban campus of stately Georgian buildings brimming with new people and ideas.
Mr. Bloomberg graduated from Johns Hopkins University in 1964. Credit Johns Hopkins University
“I just thought I’d died and gone to heaven,” he said.
“If I had been the son of academics,” he added, “maybe I would have been on campuses and would never have been as impressed as I was when I was here, because it’s the first time I really was walking among people who were world leaders, who were creating, inventing.”
Johns Hopkins as it exists today is inconceivable without Mr. Bloomberg, whose giving has fueled major improvements in the university’s reputation and rankings, its competitiveness for faculty and students, and the appearance of its campus.
His wealth — not to mention a small army of his favored architects, art consultants and landscape designers — has bankrolled and molded the handsome brick-and-marble walkways, lamps and benches that dot the campus; has constructed a physics building, a school of public health, a children’s hospital, a stem-cell research institute, a malaria institute and a library wing; has commissioned giant art installations by Kendall Buster, Mark Dion and Robert Israel; and has financed 20 percent of all need-based financial aid grants to undergraduates over the past few years. (Even his ex-wife and in-laws make a campus cameo, on the dedication plaque for a science building he financed.)
“The modern story of Hopkins is inextricably linked to him,” said Ronald J. Daniels, the university’s president, as he walked around the campus recently. “When you look at these great investments that have transformed American higher education, it’s Rockefeller, it’s Carnegie, it’s Mellon, it’s Stanford — and it’s Bloomberg.”
Hopkins, in return, has become something of a brain trust for Mr. Bloomberg, shaping his approach to issues like cigarette smoking, gun violence and obesity.
It was faculty members at Hopkins who introduced Mr. Bloomberg, as a donor and as a trustee, to a growing body of science linking behavior and disease.
“That is when he discovered public health,” said Alfred Sommer, the dean of the Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health from 1990 until 2005.
At times, Mr. Bloomberg, then a high-flying entrepreneur, was resistant to paying for such research, arguing that some of the most intractable health problems were best left to government. “That’s policy; that’s politics,” Mr. Sommer recalled him saying.
But the underlying ideas stuck, and, as mayor, Mr. Bloomberg pressed the City Council to ban smoking in city parks, and the Board of Health to require fast-food chains to post calorie counts and restaurants to stop selling oversize sodas.
“He was in a position to act on things he had once told us we really shouldn’t be bothered with,” Mr. Sommer said. “He has been the public health mayor ever since.”
Years before he would banish cars from parts of Times Square, Mr. Bloomberg removed them from the quads of Johns Hopkins as chairman of the board of trustees, arguing they were unsightly and impeded socializing. (To hide them, he paid for an underground parking garage.)
The relationship between Mr. Bloomberg and Hopkins is, much like the college admissions process, the product of happenstance.
In high school, Mr. Bloomberg worked at an electronics company whose owner happened to have a doctorate from the university. She urged him to apply, despite his mediocre transcript.
“Let’s be serious — they took a chance on me,” Mr. Bloomberg said.
At Hopkins, the boyish-looking Mr. Bloomberg, whose high school classmates branded him “argumentative” in a class book, blossomed into a charismatic figure, eager to organize those around him. An engineering major, he persuaded his fraternity brothers to pay for a chef to replace a chaotic dinnertime routine, and he doled out assignments to lab mates. “He was like the project manager, at 19 years old,” Jim Kelly, a classmate, said.
On campus, Mr. Bloomberg discovered the addictive power of the limelight. When a local judge, tired of hearing cases involving misbehaving Hopkins fraternity brothers, called for an end to Greek life at the college, Mr. Bloomberg challenged him to an hourlong public debate. A healthy crowd showed up for the occasion.
“Mike not only held his own,” Mr. Kelly recalled, “he beat him.”
Mr. Bloomberg still relishes his star turn in campus governance. “It’s the first time that I ever headed something,” he said. “The first time I got a chance to pull people together.”
These days, his status as the university’s top donor has given him mayorlike sway at Hopkins: deans routinely travel to New York to pitch him new programs and research.
His latest passion: genetically engineering mosquitoes to prevent the transmission of malaria. “He always asks about the mosquitoes,” said Dr. Peter Agre, a Nobel Prize-winning professor at the university, where Mr. Bloomberg has paid for a temperature-controlled center to cultivate the bugs. The mayor of New York City now speaks of “building a better mosquito.”
Mr. Bloomberg tends to finance ideas that appeal to his contrarian style and corporate ethos. For years he has rotated top executives around his media company to encourage collaboration. In the hope of replicating that experience, most of his latest donation, about $250 million, will be used to hire 50 new faculty members who will hold appointments in two departments as they pursue research in areas like the global water supply and the future of American cities. (The remaining $100 million will be devoted to financial aid.)
His approach to philanthropy at the university is remarkably hands-on. A trusted mayoral architectural adviser, Allen Kolkowitz, and an art guru, Nancy Rosen, guided the construction of the new Charlotte R. Bloomberg children’s hospital, named for the mayor’s mother. The building’s colorful exterior is a whimsical take on Monet’s paintings at Giverny. “He got very involved in the design,” said Dr. Edward D. Miller, the former chief executive of Hopkins Medicine.
Of course, certain courtesies are extended to a donor at Mr. Bloomberg’s level. When Dr. Miller realized that the Charlotte R. Bloomberg Children’s Center would be connected to a new tower named for Sheik Zayed bin Sultan al-Nahayan, the former president of the United Arab Emirates, he nervously called the mayor.
“Will you have a problem with this?” he asked Mr. Bloomberg.
The mayor thanked him for the call, but made clear he had no objection. “A Jew on one side, an Arab on the other,” he told Dr. Miller. “That’s what we should do in this world.”
There is nothing NEW in our 300 year US history of the rich by-passing military service and our US public militia being largely recruited from our US 99% WE THE PEOPLE especially the poorest of families.
When we listen to US national media telling us these former US IVY LEAGUE universities used as ROBBER BARON fleecing of AMERICA are now opening their doors with FREE TUITION to our lower-income families----we KNOW these will be tied to ROTC TRAINING EDUCATION----pathways.
STANFORD as a multi-national corporation as JOHNS HOPKINS ----are creating vocational pathways leading to military junta working for global corporate campuses in overseas FOREIGN ECONOMIC ZONES----as UNDERARMOUR MALAYSIA----but also as MOVING FORWARD civil unrest civil war 5% freemason/Greek military contractors as junta.
Stanford University and ROTC
Basically, it's one of the ways that the U.S. military recruits and trains university students to be officers. ROTC (sometimes pronounced "rotsee") candidates usually apply at the end of high school (but may also apply during their first two years of college), and are offered scholarships of varying amounts (or at least a stipend during their ...
What did OBAMA and Clinton neo-liberals do these 8 years in office? This dismantled all FEDERAL STUDENT LOAN AND GRANT pathways for our US 99% of WE THE PEOPLE to attend college and now global corporations handing out SCHOLARSHIPS like this will be the only pathway to vocational PRE-K to career.
Stanford’s Tuition Giveaway Is Not Good News
The university's decision to offer free rides to students whose annual household incomes are less than $125,000 says a lot about the financial barriers to higher education in the U.S.
James S. Murphy
Apr 10, 2015
Late last month, Stanford University announced that, starting next school year, it will expect zero tuition money from the parents of students whose annual household incomes fall under $125,000.
This is not good news.
Okay, fine. It’s good news for the students who will (or would want to) receive the benefit. However, Stanford’s tuition waiver—as well as those at other highly selective colleges--should be cause for concern for anyone who believes that it’s important for both disadvantaged students to gain access to top schools and well-off students to interact with people from other backgrounds. A key problem with this approach to correcting income inequality is that the scale of its impact outside and, most notably, inside the universities is fairly small. Tuition waivers alone cannot level a educational playing field so heavily pitched to the advantage of the wealthy, which is why relatively few people whose families make less than six figures annually attend Stanford.
The collapse of the economy in 2008 and the rise of the Occupy movement in 2011 made "economic diversity," as it's being called, an increasingly important part of many colleges’ missions. All of the Ivy Leagues now offer waivers for students whose families make less than $75,000 annually, as do a number of wealthy, elite private schools like Stanford and Duke. Even some state schools, including UC Berkeley and the University of Virginia, have made it easier for low-income and middle-class people to attend without amassing huge sums of debt.
Until this year, Stanford’s tuition-assistance program waived tuition contributions from parents making less than $100,000 a year. A waiver for both tuition and room and board went to families making less than $60,000 (the threshold has since been expanded to $65,000). As Karen Cooper, the associate dean and director of financial aid at Stanford, put it, "this expansion of the financial aid program is a demonstration of Stanford's commitment to access for outstanding students from all backgrounds."
The movement to increase economic diversity at colleges has gained so much momentum in recent years that it now even comes with a prize. This week, Vassar College won the inaugural Jack Cooke Kent Prize for Economic Equity for its success in significantly increasing the number of students it admits who receive Pell Grants, which are typically granted to students whose household incomes are under $30,000. The New York Times' David Leonhardt reported that a recent The Times analysis of "The Most Economically Diverse Top Colleges" influenced the contest’s selection of Vassar, which topped the newspaper’s list, too.
Stanford came in at No. 18 on the list. If this is 18, however, what would No. 50 or No. 100 look like? To put it simply, Stanford does not look like the rest of America—not when it comes to income. Like other elite schools on the The Times' list, it is more economically diverse than it was a decade ago, but it is hardly as diverse as it could or should be. According to Lisa Lapin, a spokeswoman at Stanford, approximately 30 percent of its undergraduates in recent years have benefitted from the under-$100,000 policy, and within that 30 percent are the roughly 18 percent of students who have received additional waivers for room-and-board fees.
While Stanford is understandably proud of these numbers, I cannot help but notice the cloud attached to their silver lining: the flip side of that 30 percent. In other words, 70 percent of Stanford undergraduates come from families whose incomes are over $100,000, even though only a little more than 20 percent of Americans made that much in 2010, according to census data. Worse yet, less than 18 percent of the students have family incomes under $60,000, even though more than half of Americans did in 2013. According to Lapin, between 20 percent and 25 percent of Stanford families pay full tuition, room, and board—fees that this year add up to $58,388 at sticker price. That means that there are more students who pay full freight at Stanford than there are students from households earning less than roughly that same amount.
What accounts for the discrepancy between the number of rich and poor students at Stanford and other elite schools? One reason, well reported by Leonhardt, is that elite schools have struggled to identify and recruit low-income students; indeed, a study he cites shows that selective schools do a poor job enrolling students from the bottom economic quartile. But it isn’t only the bottom that is being underrepresented: Lapin’s numbers suggest that Stanford’s undergraduates are overwhelmingly drawn from the top quartile.
There’s no reason to think that Stanford is basing its admissions decisions on incomes; on the contrary, Stanford employs a need-blind policy that theoretically preempts that sort of cherry-picking. The truth, I suspect, is worse.
One reason for this unequal representation might in fact be precisely that admissions are blind and are consequently more likely to identify wealthy students as more qualified. After all, these students tend to enjoy tremendous benefits growing up—among them opportunities to live in neighborhoods alongside like-minded families that have the resources to emphasize and invest in education, go to the best schools, hire tutors, and make the significant financial sacrifices needed to build an impressive extracurricular portfolio.
It is noble that Stanford wants to make sure that any kid who is talented enough to gain admission there, regardless of income, has the option of doing so. It is, of course, preferable that Stanford and other schools have tuition waivers than nothing at all. These programs can only achieve their objective, however, if there are enough low-income high-school students who are accomplished enough to make the application cut for elite schools.
As Alex Ortiz, a Boston-based tutor who previously taught grade school in Washington Heights recently suggested to me, perhaps it would be better if schools took need into account, using income as the basis for affirmative action and crediting students for achieving what they have despite missing out on privilege. Better yet, it seems that federal and state governments could also do a better job in their efforts to improve all kids’ learning experiences, from prekindergarten on. That way, the country wouldn't have to rely on the generosity of extremely wealthy private institutions to advance social progress.
Who created these global banking 1% civil unrest civil wars in LATIN AMERICA? The same global banking 5% ALT RIGHT ALT LEFT civil unrest civil war players as in AFRICA/ARABIA----and southeast Asia. They were recruited by these same private military contractor structures filling our US cities and rural counties driven by those same global banking 1% OLD WORLD KINGS AND QUEENS-----identifying those 5% freemason/Greek players pledging NOT TO CARE as says EMPIRE ALICE.
When our local youth organizations are controlled by global NGOS tied to UNITED NATIONS tied to WORLD BANK/IMF------as the US moves towards economic crash/economic collapse of dollar----the only JOBS JOBS JOBS will be that pathway to pre-K to career MILITARY JUNTA. Lot's of US 99% WE THE PEOPLE will be made impoverished----then more US 99% WE THE PEOPLE will be made impoverished----those dastardly 5% ROBBER BARON freemason/Greeks going under the bus----
THAT IS HOW MOVING FORWARD TAKES A STRONG, DEVELOPED FREEDOM, LIBERTY, JUSTICE, PURSUIT OF HAPPINESS HIGHLY EDUCATED, TALENTED, STRONG WAGES DOWN TO THIRD WORLD CHAOS LIBERTARIAN MARXISM.
RIGHT WING MILITARY JUNTA VS LEFT-WING REBELS--------------both working for global banking 1%
'untold numbers of babies and children were snatched by soldiers from their families during the civil war, which raged in El Salvador between 1980 and 1992, and which left about 75,000 dead and 8,000 missing. It pitched a vicious right-wing military junta against the left-wing rebels of the Farabundo Martí National Liberation Front'
Farabundo Marti National Liberation Front (FMLN)
The Farabundo Martí National Liberation Front is a left-wing political party in El Salvador and formerly a coalition of five guerrilla organizations: the Fuerzas Populares de Liberación Farabundo Martí (FPL), Ejército Revolucionario del Pueblo (ERP), the Resistencia Nacional (RN), the Partido Comunista Salvadoreño (PCS) and the Partido Revolucionario de los Trabajadores Centroamericanos (PRTC). The FMLN was one of the main participants in the Salvadoran Civil War.
News › World › Americas
El Salvador's war children return to their roots
- By Andrew Buncombe in Washington
- Monday 17 July 2006 00:00
They represent a lost generation - thousands of children kidnapped by soldiers or otherwise separated from their parents during the bloody and chaotic civil war that tore apart El Salvador.
Many of them were later adopted and grew up in the United States and Europe, curious about their heritage but knowing nothing of their original families. Many thought their relatives were dead.
More than a decade after a ceasefire that ended the fighting, some of those children are discovering their birth families and learning about their past. A recently completed database established by the University of California Berkeley and an El Salvadorean group, Pro-Búsqueda, is allowing young El Salvadoreans trace their families and, if they choose, to make contact.
"This does a number of things; it fulfils a need on both sides," said Rachel Shigekane, a director of the university's human rights centre. "It helps families who are looking for missing children. It also helps people who might be stuck in limbo [to] move on. Equally, it can help people [discover] who they are and where they are from. It's not always a happy situation but I think people would always say they were glad they did it."
Such a dilemma currently faces Angela Fillingim. The 21-year-old was just six months old when she was adopted from El Salvador by a couple from northern California. It was only in her late teens that she began to think more about her heritage and then, last year, when visiting El Salvador, she made the decision to try and trace her family. She provided a DNA sample to Pro-Búsqueda.
Earlier this year she was told that she has a mother, Blanca Rodriguez, and a younger brother, living in El Salvador. They have corresponded by letter and e-mail and Ms Fillingim is planning to visit El Salvador to meet them. There will be plenty to discuss: Ms Fillingim's mother has only told her that she put her up for adoption because in 1985 "it was not a safe time to have a child".
"It's confusing, to say the least, to have a family that is biologically related and yet emotionally distant," she said. "I know it sounds corny but I think this will be a great opportunity to bring both sides of my family together."
She knows that her mother lived in the north-eastern Chalatenango region of El Salvador, which in 1982 was subjected to a nine-day military operation that killed hundreds. Ms Fillingim said when she meets her birth mother she will ask more about the circumstances of her adoption and also about the identity of her father. "These are questions I will wait for until we meet face to face," she said.
The human rights centre said untold numbers of babies and children were snatched by soldiers from their families during the civil war, which raged in El Salvador between 1980 and 1992, and which left about 75,000 dead and 8,000 missing. It pitched a vicious right-wing military junta against the left-wing rebels of the Farabundo Martí National Liberation Front in one of the bloodiest episodes in Central America's history, and arguably represented one of the US's most shameful foreign policy interventions.
The administration of Ronald Reagan, fearful of the spread of Communism and having seen the Socialist Sandinistas sweep to power in Nicaragua in 1979, provided hundreds of millions of dollars of military equipment and training to El Salvador's government forces. It also sent Green Beret military trainers and special forces troops who covertly participated in the fighting, more than 20 of whom were killed.
Many of El Salvador's commanders were trained at the notorious School of the Americas at Fort Benning, Georgia, which taught brutal counter-insurgency tactics and even torture to cadets from throughout Latin America.
MOVING FORWARD in US cities deemed FOREIGN ECONOMIC ZONES under the guise of global corporate campus militarized security and policing with ROTC meets global military, mercenary corporate training----simply complete a form to be identified as a military contractor receive grants to fund the purchase of bullets, AK -47s ----and use local BOY SCOUTS to recruit and advertise your military JUNTA-------GO MARXISTS always helping the poor.
'The two primary actors in the El Salvador civil war were a Marxist-Leninist guerrilla group, called the Farabundo Martí National Liberation Front (FMLN), and the government of El Salvador. However, like most civil wars, the conflict was much more complicated than this'.
'These nonviolent pro-democratic forces were dispersed among parties on the left, the center and the right - as well as among those people who didn't support any political party'.
Twenty years after peace accords were signed, many aspects of El Salvador's long civil war remain murky.
by Mike Allison
1 Mar 2012
Scranton, PA - From 1980 to 1992, civil war ravaged the Central American state of El Salvador, claiming the lives of approximately 75,000 Salvadorans.
EL SALVADOR is a really small sovereign nation---
For three days this February, scholars from around the world gathered in El Salvador to assess the state of our knowledge of that country's civil war, 20 years after peace accords were signed that ended the conflict.
President marks Salvadoran civil war with apology
The seminar - "History, Society and Memories: the armed conflict on the 20th anniversary of the Peace Accords" - was organised by the Unit of Investigations about the Salvadoran Civil War (UIGCS) of the Universidad de El Salvador. In the largest meeting of researchers on the civil war in El Salvador, participants from Spain, Costa Rica, Mexico, France, Germany, Holland and the United States joined local academics in sharing what we have learned about the 12-year-long war.
According to Jorge Juárez of UIGCS, the seminar's goal was to "make known to the public a version [of the war's history] without passions, without ideology, that presents the simple truth of the facts".
The two primary actors in the El Salvador civil war were a Marxist-Leninist guerrilla group, called the Farabundo Martí National Liberation Front (FMLN), and the government of El Salvador. However, like most civil wars, the conflict was much more complicated than this.
The FMLN was supported by the Nicaraguan, Cuban, and Soviet governments. Most people who have studied the conflict in El Salvador would argue that the Soviets did not provide much direct support to the guerrillas. I agree - but Nicaragua and Cuba would not have been able to provide support to the guerrillas had the Soviets not been supporting them. It's also true that the FMLN did not get as much military and financial support from these two governments as the Salvadoran government received from the United States.
However, the FMLN benefited tremendously from the opportunity to use Managua and Havana for meetings of its General Command. The FMLN was able to move weapons and personnel in and out of the country undetected via the Gulf of Fonseca and Nicaragua. Soldiers trained and received medical care in Nicaragua and Cuba. Many family members sought sanctuary abroad for the duration of the conflict to avoid falling victim to the government's death squads.
Members of the ERP making grenades [GALLO/GETTY] The FMLN also received support from individuals in Costa Rica and Mexico. The FMLN and its political wing, the Democratic Revolutionary Front (FDR), were recognised as a belligerent force by France and Mexico in 1981. Several panelists lamented the fact that we do not yet have a comprehensive understanding of the international support that came from these governments and their citizens during the war. To my knowledge, no one has estimated the value of such support.
Other aspects of the FMLN's history are similarly murky. In October 1980, several groups - the Popular Forces of Liberation Farabundo Marti (FPL), the People's Revolutionary Army (ERP), the Armed Forces of National Resistance (FARN), and the Armed Forces of Liberation (FAL) - officially joined together to create the FMLN, with the addition of the Revolutionary Workers Party of Central America (PRTC) in December of that year.
However, the first guerrilla cells appeared a decade earlier. We know much less about the individual groups that operated during these years. Alberto Martín Álvarez of Mexico's Universidad de Colima shared his research on the origins of the FPL and the ERP. According to another speaker, Jorge Cáceres Prendes of the Universidad Nacional de Costa Rica, many radicalised students at the Universidad de El Salvador eventually founded or found their way into the guerrillas.
A history of violence
The FMLN's use of violence has also been insufficiently studied. While the majority of human rights violations was committed by the government and its security forces, the guerrillas carried out kidnappings, bombings and bank robberies during the 1970s to support their revolutionary dreams.
During the 1980s, the FMLN killed several mayors, informants and traitors, all crimes under the rules of war. There are also strong indications that the guerrillas began to rely more on terrorist tactics during the late 1980s.
There are also strong indications that the guerrillas used terrorist tactics more frequently during the later years of the war, alienating many Salvadorans and causing rifts with the democratic Left. Panelists also spoke about the systematic use of repression by the FPL in San Vicente. Violence against civilians perpetrated by the FMLN has often been dismissed as the actions of drunken commanders, or with the not-so-convincing argument that "the other side was worse". My impression is that most academics are also sympathetic towards the FMLN, and are not as interested in studying how the organisation used repressive tactics. As a result, we know much less about the FMLN's use of violence and its effect on postwar support for the party.
The government's role
The other main actor in the country's civil war was El Salvador's government, which was backed politically, economically and militarily by the United States.
Internationally, many people look to the murder of Archbishop Oscar Romero in March 1980 and the murders of six Jesuits, their housekeeper and her daughter in November 1989 as the unofficial start and end dates of the war. However, to really understand why war erupted in 1980, one must analyse the failed October 15, 1979 coup.
In El Salvador, many people describe the coup as an element of the US-backed counter-insurgency effort. However, French sociologist Guilles Bataillon described the coup as a truly Salvadoran effort to avoid war. The coup was led by moderate elements within the military, but it was backed by Archbishop Romero, priests from the Jesuit-run Universidad de Centroamericana, as well as other civilian pro-democratic forces. The moderate military that led the coup was eventually pushed aside by the older, more hardline faction, and its civilian members quit following the military's escalating repression.
Those of us who study El Salvador typically see the coup in the way that Bataillon described it, but it was interesting to learn that how we understand the 1979 coup was not the dominant narrative in El Salvador. There, the US was seen as the primary mover.
Following the 1979 coup, José Napoleon Duarte became the most important civilian political figure in El Salvador. He joined the junta in March 1980 and became head of state that December. Here we could use more research on the relationships between Duarte and his Christian Democratic Party (PDC), El Salvador's military, the right-wing Nationalist Republican Alliance (ARENA) party, and the United States government.
The US sought to prop up a moderate civilian government led by Duarte, to isolate the far-right, and to defeat the FMLN. The US hoped that a moderate PDC, backed by a land reform programme, would undermine support for extremists on both the left and the right. However, the US' support political and economic reform led directly to the creation of ARENA. ARENA's founders did not support the PDC, a party that they characterised as a "watermelon" - green on the outside and communist-red on the inside. They also felt threatened by the proposed land reform programme which, if implemented, would strike directly at the source of the oligarchy’s economic power.
Therefore, Roberto D'Aubuisson created ARENA because he rejected the reforms supported by the US. It is true that prominent US politicians like Senator Jesse Helms (Republican-North Carolina) supported D'Aubuisson, who had trained at the infamous US School of the Americas in the early 1970s.
But it is also true that the US prevented his selection as interim president in 1982. When D'Aubuisson ran for president in 1984, the US funded his opponent. The US also would not permit D'Aubuisson, who allegedly threatened to kill the US ambassador in El Salvador, to enter the United States. We could use better details on D'Aubuisson and ARENA's relationship with the White House, members of the US Congress, the State Department, the Defense Department, and the CIA. Our knowledge of ARENA's death-squad origins and its subsequent activity as a political party often starts and stops with D'Aubuisson. To say that the US supported or did not support the man sometimes known as "Blowtorch Bob" - for his tendency to torture political prisoners with blowtorches during interrogation sessions - obscures as much information as it conveys. History is, obviously, more complicated.
"El Salvador's president, Mauricio Funes, recently apologised for one well-known massacre involving several hundred civilians."
How the Salvadoran armed forces thought and operated is also under-researched - even though they were responsible for the majority of human rights violations committed during the conflict, including a number of terrible massacres during the early 1980s.
El Salvador's president, Mauricio Funes, recently apologised for one well-known massacre involving several hundred civilians - primarily children, women and elderly - that the military carried out in El Mozote in December 1981. The details of the massacre are told in Mark Danner's terrific book, The Massacre at El Mozote. The book paints the US and the Salvadoran military in a horrible light, but it also leaves many questions unanswered.
According to Danner's reporting, Domingo Monterrosa, the military commander of the Atlacatl Battalion that conducted the operation at El Mozote, was killed in 1984 by the FMLN because they wanted revenge, and because he seemed to have changed his approach to counterinsurgency. He allegedly had started to promote a policy based upon winning the hearts and minds of the civilian population, rather than exterminating it.
Hopefully, with President Funes' recent creation of a military commission to investigate the history of the armed forces, we will have a better idea as to how the Salvadoran military's mindset changed during the conflict - or whether it changed at all. We might also gain a better appreciation of its relationship with the US, the PDC government, and the military in neighbouring Honduras. Unfortunately, since the commission looks like it will be comprised of military officers, I am not optimistic.
Eduardo Rey Tristán from the University of Santiago de Compostela in Spain explained that there are major knowledge gaps surrounding the extreme right and the army during the war, the political evolution of ARENA during and after the war, and many issues concerning human rights violations, perpetrated both by the government armed forces as well as those committed by the guerrillas. I would also add that there has been no systematic study on what I would characterise as the pro-democracy forces.
These nonviolent pro-democratic forces were dispersed among parties on the left, the center and the right - as well as among those people who didn't support any political party.
Inside Story Americas - El Salvador's open wound
Why was the conference important? Well, it was the largest meeting of its kind, bringing local and international scholars together to discuss the war. We not only learned from each other, but we learned from the non-academics in the audience. We believe that it was important for Salvadorans to hear what we have learned about the war. During the 1980s, most Salvadorans received their information through propaganda put forth by the military and the rebels, or by a biassed media.
Most postwar discourse has been driven by elites who participated in the conflict either on the part of the guerrillas or the government. It's not that these individuals' perspectives are wrong; it is just healthier if they are challenged or supplemented by outside views. Those could come from more objective academics or from non-elite testimonies such as those provided by Lotti Silber in Everyday Revolutionaries: Gender, Violence and Disillusionment in Postwar El Salvador and by Carlos Enrique Consalvi and Jeffrey Gould in La Palabra en El Bosque. These two works let the people of Chalatenango and Morazán, the two departments most affected by the war, tell their own stories.
Another reason why the conference was important was that El Salvador's Armed Forces participated. Those in attendance sincerely hoped that the military's participation marked the beginning of a greater openness towards its participation in the war. Colonel Adalberto Ernesto Garcia Rivera explained to the audience what material of theirs was available to the public and to academics for their personal and scholarly use. Remarkably, he was sitting next to the director of the Museum of the Word and Image, Carlos Enrique Consalvi, who was the voice of the FMLN's wartime radio station, Radio Venceremos. The two men even joked about the possibility of collaborating at some future date.
Former Tendencias editor Roberto Turcios said he hopes that the Unit of Investigations about the Salvadoran Civil War (UIGCS) will eventually become the premiere institution for the study of the civil war and that the knowledge produced there will be accessible to all Salvadorans. I hope that UIGCS' work will help to ensure that people do not forget what happened during the 1970s and 1980s - and that today's youth will have a place to learn more about their not-so-distant past.
Keep in mind all last century our US GI BILL with its emphasis in social benefit to our US veterans allowed our veterans to attend ANY university----take ANY career pathway-------today the GI BILL is being gutted and dismantled and this will be the ONLY PATHWAY for our military families.
'Aid for Military Families | Federal Student Aid
The federal government and nonprofits ... Scholarships for Military Families—Provides resources and contact information ... Army ROTC scholarships are offered ..'
This is how MOVING FORWARD US CITIES DEEMED FOREIGN ECONOMIC ZONE---makes far-right wing, authoritarian, militaristic, extreme wealth extreme poverty LIBERTARIAN MARXISTS of a 300 year US DEMOCRATIC REPUBLIC capitalist sovereign nation.
HARVARD as global banking 1% does not feel the need for ROTC on its campus----but stands up for STANFORD, JOHNS HOPKINS, AND YALE as global banking 1% KNIGHTS OF MALTA.
Obama: Time for ROTC to Return
By Tara W. Merrigan and Zoe A. Y. Weinberg,
Crimson Staff Writers January 26, 2011
President Obama’s State of the Union address last night touched upon several issues that are likely to affect the University, including the Reserve Officers’ Training Corps, funding for science research and technology, and the DREAM Act.
In his speech, which favored breadth over specifics, Obama managed to maintain a strong presence as a leader but the challenge will be implementing his proposals, professors said.
Barbara L. Kellerman, a lecturer at the Harvard Kennedy School, said that she felt Obama was able to do what he needed to in order to reassert his authority.
“Tonight he was the central figure that Americans have historically looked to, which was not the case for most of 2010,” Kellerman said.
Obama emphasized the importance of education, science scholarship, and technology, calling these pursuits “our generation’s Sputnik moment.”
Government and Sociology Professor Theda R. Skocpol said she felt his
“call to build American competitiveness” with countries such as China and India was a much needed vote of confidence in the country.
In light of Obama’s emphasis on improving education, professors said that they were not concerned that Harvard, which receives significant federal funding for its research projects, would be adversely effected by the partial five-year spending freeze that the President proposed last night.
Obama also called for colleges and universities to open their doors to ROTC after the repeal of “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell,” in what some professors said they felt was a powerful message to the University.
“That was delivered right to Harvard,” said Kennedy School lecturer Elaine C. Kamarck.
Harvard and other universities have previously barred ROTC from their campuses because “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” violated their non-discrimination policies.
Though University President Drew G. Faust has recently said she welcomes the military’s return to campus, it remains unclear if ROTC will be reinstalled at Harvard.
“There is nothing more symbolically important than Harvard getting ROTC back,” added Kamarck. “The preeminent university in the country should have ROTC.”
Obama also discussed immigration reform and the politics of the DREAM Act—a bill which would extend a path to citizenship for undocumented minors—without mentioning it by name.
The president’s decision to speak vaguely about this legislation, for which Faust has been a major advocate, may have been an effort to diffuse partisan tension in the room, Kamarck said, considering that the speech comes close on the heels of the Tucson shooting.