Are you looking for a way to receive continued support and resources for your blueprint projects? Check out these amazing resources available through the Americans for Informed Democracy network.

For more information, click on the following links.

[asset|aid=332|format=image|formatter=asset|width=256|height=256|align=right|resizable=true]

My problem is not with the author's argument towards academic freedom and nuetrality, but rather his claim that this is a nonpartisan movement that liberals for some reason hate.  

The author completely undermines his nonpartisian claim , first, with his name.  Horowitz is somewhat of a megalomaniac and has put a lot of effort in being instantly recognized as a conservative.  Its like Bill O'Reilly suddenly deciding to be an advocate for unbiased television.  Second, he continues to looks for conservative, rather than bipartison, support when ever he goes to states or universities to campaign his issue. Third, he makes no effort to find abuses from both sides, because unfortunately conservatives are not politicaly bias-free either.  Also if he really cared about the next generation being taught to be objective and rational than he would attack public high schools, middle schools and elementary schools too, not just higher education.

If the author would just write about something he actually knew about...I think if the title of his next book were "Horowitz: How Self-Promote and Become a Megalomaniac" I would trust his opinion.    

 

[asset|aid=311|format=image|formatter=asset|width=256|height=256|align=right|resizable=true]

So I just started reading David Horowitz "Indoctrination U: The Left's War Against Academic Freedom".  

  I'm only at the beginning-but I must say that it is not all horrible.  His main argument is for academic freedom and a revivial of professionalism, political neutrality and intellecutal diversity at American universities.  He previously created an "Academic Bill of Rights"  which he urges campuses to adopt.  I read that too and its not scary.  In fact its basically really fair and about setting professional standards for professors.  In fact it is so fair that I would bet most universities have already had something exactly like this for decades.

Why would the author want to go on a campaign to have schools re-adopt policies they already have? What is it about this supposedly fair document that puts radical leftists in a frenzy? It's fairness? Or is it more likely its the name and agenda behind it?

I'll let you know what happens as the mystery unfolds. The supsense is already really intense and I'm only at the beginning.

 

[asset|aid=49|format=image|formatter=asset|width=256|height=307|align=right|resizable=true]

Last year alone, the Radical Right invested $48 million in 10 primary youth organizations working to support the next generation of ultra-conservative leaders.

Recent examples of this investment in action include campaigns against college courses that conflict with the right-wing agenda, as well as a circulated "blacklist" of more than one hundred college professors accused of making "anti-American" statements.  Additionally, the Radical Right has sponsored workshops with titles such as, "How to Stop Liberals in Their Tracks," and ensures that these students have internships, fellowships, and jobs waiting for them when they graduate.  

The conservative investment in leadership development over the past 30 years has paid off. A powerful network of young ultra-conservatives fill the state houses, the halls of Congress, the executive branch and the courts; they are supported by community leaders, skilled organizers, academics and media personalities that help dominate the debate. The leaders in whom they have invested in are familiar names in the public dialogue.

In 1970, a man named Karl Rove was head of the National College Republicans. In 1981, Grover Norquist took the reins. And in 1983, it was Ralph Reed.

Progressive forces have not matched the growing presence of the Right on campuses--and it is critical that we do so. It's not a matter of starting from scratch, but of catalyzing and supporting the untapped potential of young progressive leaders and sustaining their connection to and increasing their roles within the progressive movement.

It has become imperative to focus our attention on leadership development as a critical issue in the larger effort of strengthening the progressive movement.

Scaling up nascent leadership development programs is central to addressing the changing ideological shifts of young people, the lack of effective opportunities to reach young people and the need to build a sustainable, long-term progressive leadership pipeline within a current climate of shrinking resources.