of Montreal – Id Engager
Hope, Shoes, and Inertia
On all of this, the Bush administration has gone out of its way to lend a hand to Obama’s transition team and, in the process, help institutionalize the imperial transition itself. Like the new money arrangements pioneered in the 2008 elections, it surely will remain part of the political landscape for the foreseeable future. From such developments in our world, it seems, there’s never any turning back.
There’s nothing strange about all this, of course, if you’re already inside this system. It seems, in fact, too obvious to mention. After all, what president wouldn’t move into the political/governmental house he’s inheriting as efficiently and fully as possible?
The unprecedented size of this imperial pre-presidency, however, signals something else: that what is to come — quite aside from the specific policies adopted by a future Obama administration – will be yet another imperial presidency. (And, by the way, those who expect Congress to suddenly become the player it hasn’t been, wielding power long ceded, are as likely to be disappointed as those who expect a Hillary Clinton State Department renaissance under the budgetary shadow of the Pentagon.)
On January 20th, Barack Obama will be more prepared than any president in recent history to move in and, as everyone now likes to write, “hit the ground running.” But that ground — the bloated executive and the vast national security apparatus that goes with it (as well as the U.S. military garrisons that dot the planet), all further engorged by George W., Dick, and pals — is anything but fertile when it comes to “change.”
Tom Engelhardt, December 08, 2008
I have to admit that I almost– almost– felt sorry for our almost gone and not-to-be-missed president when I saw that shoe toss in Baghdad. He’s been reduced from the most powerful man on earth to a hapless, pathetic clown. It’s an almost too convenient metaphor for his legacy. Sabotage has a shoe-origin, too.
I imagine many people share the shoe tosser’s angry, frustrated exasperation. The thing about a presidency is that it has a certain inertia– it keeps going in the direction it been pushed for a long time, even after a decision to change course. That’s why so many of Obama’s fellow travelers have become so skeptical so quickly.
Given this imperial momentum, in other words, tossing a few shoes might well be a good choice. I am not sure, though, that I am ready to declare disappointment. For one thing, I want to keep my expectations reasonable. A president is just a president, not a revolution, and so there are limits to the sorts of change we can expect.
On the other hand, there’s a Nixon in China scenario here that I think is being ignored. It’s long been recognized that only Nixon could have gone to China; anyone else would have been called a communist sympathizer. We might optimistically hope for the same thing in the Obama administration.
Perhaps only Clinton– known for her Hawkish predilections– can credibly lead a State Department-focused foreign policy. Perhaps only Tom Dashel– as pragmatic as they come– could create a visionary transformation of health care. Perhaps this motley collection of Republicans and Washington insiders can make change work.
What a Class Barrier Looks Like
Students who start California community colleges as first-time students hoping to get a certificate, a degree, or transfer to the four-year college sector have only small chances of success: approximately one in four degree seekers beginning community college in 1999-2000 completed their program in six years (Moore and Shulock, 2007, p. 7). And the prospects are worse for those who start in pre-collegiate courses. These students may not even get to the transfer-level courses in those fields, much less actually graduate or transfer. According to the Center for Student Success, “Only one-quarter of students initially enrolling in a reading fundamentals course in community college ever enroll in a transfer-level English class, and only 10 percent of students beginning in a basic math course ever enroll in a transferable math course” (2005, cited in Moore and Shulock, 2007, p. 12).
Indeed, most of our SPECC colleges cite a figure of around 10 percent who move successfully from the lowest level precollegiate course to a transfer level course. Beyond dimming students’ outlook for completion, the inability to successfully complete the most basic level courses also has tremendous implications for literacy and numeracy more generally. Although the SPECC campuses focused on pre-collegiate programs for this project, it is clear that all programs, including technical and vocational programs, benefit when their students are able to read well, communicate clearly in writing, and handle basic calculations.
Listening to Students About Learning, Andrea Conklin Bueschel
As the cliche goes, we don’t talk about class in the U.S. because we believe that everyone is equal. Or, at least, everyone is given an equal chance to succeed or fail on their own merits. It has never worked that way, of course, because all sorts of things can give you an advantage, big or small.
Our main conduit of opportunity, and so in many senses the source of the great fog obscuring our social and economic system, has long been post-secondary education. There’s nothing false in the idea; people with college degrees make much more money than people who don’t. It’s that simple.
What’s less obvious is the way that our post-secondary education system, with it’s complicated hierarchies and multiple points of entry, is also a barrier. The number cited in this California study are remarkable. As many as 90% of the students who enter community colleges never take transferable classes.
That’s only a measure of success insofar as we define success in terms of a four year degree. That may not be true in every case, of course. But it is still a good indication of the strength of a class barrier. What’s the solution, according to the authors? Listen to the teachers and students.
Nothing Too Much Just Out of Sight