Julia, I am sorry, but it's a little unintellectual of you to conclude that anyone was trying to shove anything down your throat..or you feel like it anytime someone mentions the word God? (ch) We are just analyzing, phylosophically talking about different peoples 'ideology and thinking, and the basis of it...so, from our perspective many (not all, of course) people who are not religious tend to look up for government for support and hope..remember Hope and Change(ch) ..others try to find strength within themselves and their faith..and you don't have to agree with it..it's just someone's perspective and observation..
Yes, it's true that conservatives along with our founders believe our rights and freedoms come from God, not government..because if it comes from government, the government can also take them away..so, it's all part of the phylosophy..

Just wanted to remind some of you that Ayn Rand was an intellectual also. Of the highest mark, too.
This partisan labeling becomes annoying. Intellectuals are automatically commies, conservatives are automatically saints.

Yes, it's true that conservatives along with our founders believe our rights and freedoms come from God, not government..
-----------------------------------------------------------
the founding fathers are spinning in their graves... can God also take them away? when and how has he done that?

because if it comes from government, the government can also take them away..so, it's all part of the phylosophy..
---------------------------------------------------------------------
you don't seem to have a problem with the government taking away the rights and freedoms of those held at guantanamo bay... you take your kids' rights away when they misbehave, we lock up those that break laws... are you saying that we are not within our rights when we do that? how much jesus juicehave you hadtoday?

who is arguing that Ayn Rand was a great intellectual?? or that every side have intellectuals?? it has not been the point at all..the point was, if you read all the articles, that intellectuals have no responsibilities of their ideas, and many of their ideas have had very unpleasant and sometimes tragic consequnces, but for some unknown reason some or most of them tend to think they know better and have an authority to decide on many aspects of our lives..
and that's what made Rand great - she understood the consequences of it..

Sveta, nice answer to Julia ( I wish Julia becomes less afraid of the word "God" (ch) , if one does not believe in one, then why be afraid?)
My other observation about intellectuals - there are a lot of selfish and envious individuals among them. They crave fame and power.

My other observation about intellectuals - there are a lot of selfish and envious individuals among them. They crave fame and power.
---------------------------------------------------------------
except for Ayn Rand of course, and any other conservative intellectual

( I wish Julia becomes less afraid of the word "God" (ch) , if one does not believe in one, then why be afraid?)
------------------------------------------------------------------
did she use the word fear? its not God that sends chills down my spine, but rather his crazy worshippers

There is nothing wrong with Ayn Rand.
The funniest things - she becomes more and more famous because her predictions are coming true - because of our big and enlightened GOVERNMENT, which wants to be everywhere...

The problem is that the word "intellectual" is on quick downward spiral to loose its original meaning and become a misinterpretation. Just like "liberal" has no connection with "liberty" anymore. I recall Bill O'Reilly using the word "intellectual think tank" with the same look on his face as he would have describing Bangalore public toilets.

here is another one - past performance doesn't guarantee future results..
justbecause I admire Ayn Rand and value her contributionS to the society,doesn't mean I have to agree with her on many other issues..and withher I have a choice which part of her philosophy to accept..when itbecomes on the "global" level, I might not have that choice..as long asall the intellectuals' ideas are not "shoved down our throats" assomething we must all embrace, because "the intellectuals" say so,under the name of saving humanity, it's all great..

Kindergarten clone, this is the last post of yours in my topic..I can't take anymore of this тупости anti-intellectualism :-D

я помню любимое ругательство пролетариата было "интеллигент" i guess history always repeats itself :)

Мишань, не волнуйся, тебя бы я никогда так не кликнула, и даже не подумала..;-) keep digesting those charts..:-)

Look, nobody is afraid of word God, as well as has nothing against practice of any religion whatsoever. Go ahead, knock yourself out.
Nobody should care. The problem is - there is too much CARING about it going around in this country. Politics and religion should not mix. And they were INTENDED not to mix in this country. Religion and all the matters that have to do with God should be personal, private matters. And ,honestly, haven't we all seen enough how those folks who preach to others then cry about their "sins" o national TV ,making total fools of themselves?
The reason I want religious practice and politics separated because , other then hypocrisy and waste of time on rhetoric , nothing good comes out of this "marriage".
Show me if I'm wrong - with facts only, please.

The problem is - there is too much CARING about it going around in this country. Politics and religion should not mix.
People care about it because they see their religious rights are beings impinged. Intellectuals slowly, piece by piece, try to take away religious freedoms. The very foundation of this country.
Politics and religion should not mix, but when progressives come with their aggressive anti-religious agenda masked under "intellectualism" and "science", somebody has to stand up to this bullying.
My favorite intellectual of all times in modern history is William Buckeley Jr.
He is a proof that one can be a first class intellectual while preserving deep religious faith, and doing great good to the society.

give us some references as to how religious rights are being impinged. Factual proofs.
There is a church, a synagogue, or a mosque on every corner.
See, the difference is not factual, it is purely psychological.
Conservatives see something taken away from them, while liberals see something imposed over them. And liberals feel bullied too. Less now, but under Bush it was pretty bad.

Julia,
Do you mean you want to see a list of law suits brought by "secular progressives" against the issues related to religious people, schools, churches, synagogues, etc... starting with war on Christmas, trying to prohibit the public displays of minoras, etc...?????
the list will be very long, but I have other things to do.

Maria wrote "people see their religious rights impinged".
I would like to see factual evidence that conservatives religious rights are impinged.
Btw, all those lawsuits you are mentioning that came from the "left" I personally consider bogus. Except for teaching intelligent design in schools - that drove me crazy, I would sue for this too if that was my kids school.

Julia,
1. who are your favorite intellectuals, American or not?
2. what ideas/work of theirs you admire the most and have turned out to be great with time?
3. your personal take why America has never created such extreme movements as communism, Nazism (remember Germany was a democracy and a very enlightened, intellectual nation), fascism, committed Holocaust or other atrocities as a nation (not early immigrants)?

no answers to my question, ha?
more questions from Sveta instead...
How do conservative religious feel their religious freedoms are stepped on? - that is what I keep asking...
please, give me some info so I will at least start to understand where you guys are coming from///

Julia, you can continue in your topic questions about religion, there are many examples..I was just more interested in talking about intellectuals and the effect of their ideas on society..do you have answers for me??
i have more questions..too..(ch)

***********.state.gov/r/pa/ho/time/id/16325.htm
here some facts about the disarmament efforts in the World prior WWII.."unsubstantiated facts"...(ch)
still no answers on favorites..:-(
I provided "the evidence"..(ch)

Maria said:
"People care about it because they see their religious rights are beingsimpinged. Intellectuals slowly, piece by piece, try to take awayreligious freedoms."
-
- as I suspected, there is not a single shred of any evidence of this... nothing at all.(ch) , not even one "piece be piece"...
great, let's move on to intellectuals:-D ....
maybe Maria will still get some stuff on this...

Julia, I posted it in your topic..it has about ten different examples..but since you insist here is one more..
***********.personalliberty.com/news/school-singled-out-for-alleged-attack-on-religious-freedom-19524493/
I thought intellectuals check their own topic for new posts and have other favorite intellectuals they can, at least, respect and prove they have been right..(ch)

here is an example of a very interesting , if you will, intellectual magazine:
***********.edge.org/
as you might see, it is largly apolitical... mostly focuses on culture, science and the nature of consciousness.
I am a big fan of Steven Pinker these days...
Ne is primarily a linguist and cognitive scientist.

ok, I will it move here too..just to make sure you finally see it (ch)
***********.examiner.com/x-12712-Northern-KY-Spirituality-Examiner~y2009m7d31-Attack-on-religious-freedom-in-America

Oh, I see, Sveta...I will look there, thanks... I was just reading these posts for sequence

Julia, here is his claim to fame
Pinker is most famous for his work — popularized in The Language Instinct (1994) — on how children acquire language, and for his popularization of Noam Chomsky's work on language as an innate faculty of mind. Pinker has suggested an evolutionary mental module for language, although this idea remains controversial. In The Language Instinct,Pinker argues that humans are born with an innate capacity forlanguage. In addition, he deals sympathetically with the claim that allhuman language shows evidence of a universal grammar. AdditionallyPinker argues that many other human mental faculties are adaptive (and is an ally of Daniel Dennett and Richard Dawkins in many evolutionary disputes).
popularization of Choamsky is "admirable" (ch) , but can you describe in your own words the breakthrough he was able to establish?? was he a pioneer of any sort?

can't agree more..:-) but there is so many like him in the academia :-(
what do you think about the notion that today there is a lot anti-wisdom in the intellectual circles...studies, articles, opinions, but wisdom, proven experienced, all are not embraced among the modern intellectuals..

here is another legacy of the progressive era..and it takes another intellectual to admit what took place and who was behind the ideas..
***********.princeton.edu/~tleonard/papers/retrospectives.pdf
Retrospectives
Eugenics and Economics in the
Progressive Era

The progressives’ somewhat antidemocratic impulses also led them tobelieve that academic experts were both sufficient and necessary forthe task of wise public administration, because they could and wouldsuspend their own interests to transcend the messy business of democratic politics. As one widely readeugenics[G]overnment and social control are in the hands of expertpoliticians who have power, instead of expert technologists who havewisdom. There should be technologists in control of every field of human need and desire” (asquoted from Albert Wiggam’s New Decalogue 1923, in Ludmerer, 1972, pp.16–17). The case for technocratic governance was put baldly by Irving Fisher (1907, p. 20):“The world consists of two classes—the educated and the ignorant—and itis essential for progress that the former should be allowed to dominatethe latter...
sounds familiar?? :-)

"what do you think about the notion that today there is a lotanti-wisdom in the intellectual circles...studies, articles, opinions,but wisdom, proven experienced, all are not embraced among the modernintellectuals."
- Sveta, I have no idea how you came up to this conclusion...
How many academic intellectuals do you hang out with?
I have fairly limited experience as well, only my son is in academia, one of my husband's uncles is physics professor, one of his tennis buddies is philosophy professor, well, I know a bunch of medicine academics, hang out with them a lot.
So - this group is as diverse as any.... there are all kinds, boring and eccentric, ultra-whatever, slightly more to the left, some with libertarian trends...Recently went to a lecture oninternational trade in one of our local Universities - speakers trends were rather to the Right, protectionists....
The point is - it is hardly fair to paint ALL academia the way you do

The point is - it is hardly fair to paint ALL academia the way you do
Julia, com'n, you have to know that, since it's a well-known fact that more than 90% of the humanity and social-science professor are ultra-liberal..moreover, there is a trend to disenfranchise the students with different views as long as their fellow professors..if you need proof, I will cite you many polls and articles on the issue..and to do it is very unintellectual from my point view, because it gives birth to group thinking as opposed to thinking people where different opinions are introduced and make you explore all different sides..
and when students are exposed in school to this kind of environment (where decent is not welcome), what do you think it does to their desire to pursue careers in those fields??

hmmmm..... let's see.
My kids are grown.
I watched their classmates go to Yale, NYU, Cornell, Harvard, MIT, Stamford, UPenn, etc..etc... My kids went to Wellseley and Caltech for undergrad. Let's see, now... one of their friends works at Amazon, one at Microsoft, one at some hegde fund, one at a law firm in NY, many are in medschools and PhD programs, a couple got some startup companies. Only one is a "tree-hugger" works for some environmental agency, but is going to open a restaurant next year, and one is in a rabbinical school ( my daughter's best friend, and my favorite "adoptive" daughter). Oh, yea, one guy who was the most liberal in college, now is a croupier in Vegas. Are most of them liberally minded? - Yes, but they are all young, 25-25 y.o... and I am sure will go into a 50-50 split in the future.
So, what I am trying to say - even those who got liberal education change with life... totally expected and nothing to fear

are your kids conservative? (ch)
it's not what I was saying at all - that conservatives are prevented from getting an education..they are, however, discouraged from expressing their views in many cases in the mostly liberal college environment, and it also discourages many students with conservative views from wanting to work in the academia and pursue careers where liberals dominate..

where did I say that conserv. are prevented from getting an education? anyone can get an education, just show your grades and effort.
What I am saying is that young people tend to be more liberally minded just because they are young. Liberal idealism appeals to youth more then conservative idealism. When people age, their value systems develop and shift their idealism as well. This is just a natural evolution of ideals, when you are young, you tend to be more outward-goodness oriented, when people age - it shifts for many , and there is nothing wrong with it.
None of those value systems is inherently wrong, they both have their strong merits.
And there is always place for all kinds of academics.
I remember meeting two of my daughter's college professors and ( this is not on topic , just an example) and they were arguing about theories of learned optimism vs realistic pessimism. They both taught in her college, totally different styles.

totally agree that that..especially with the point that life very often changes people's views - which kinda proves my point that conservative views are more realistic because they come not from theories, but from something that's proven to work or not..
and it also proves my point that if the majority of academia is liberal, their views are mostly theoretical that a lot of times never worked, but because many intellectuals don't like to be challenged, they don't tolerate dissent...and punish their (some) students from not following the indoctrination..
Julia, I was in college..I didn't have set political views back then, but now remembering some of the things my professors were saying, believe me - they were not conservative (ch) , and I was not even a social science major...(ch)

Ladies, read this - it fits well with this discussion
***********.nytimes.com/2010/01/18/arts/18liberal.html?partner=rss&emc=rss

or, rather, how much cynicism we are willing to mix into our realism and in what realms.(ch)
And , how healthy this is - individually and socially.

Realism, socialism, capitalism.. it is all too boring...
Lets talk about wild sex with bi sexual lesbians...