A Defense of a Liberal Arts Education

I repeatedly referred to the University of California system in this thread. The 2025 Nobel Prize winners were from UCLA, Berkeley, UC San Diego, UC Santa Barbara as best I recall.

What does it matter what school I went to? California is a global leader in scientific research, medical research, and Nobel Prize laureates. That's a claim Texas, Florida, and the deep South cannot make.
Since this is all about politics and identity, interesting that the Deep South and Texas were blue for like a century while California was red for long periods of time.
 
Just the title of this OP......"A defense of a 'LIBERAL' arts education" should make
everyone cringe. Anything having to do with the word 'LIBERAL', especially when it
comes to the political association of that word should make everyone dismiss that
type of liberal education.

I'm a liberal. And proud of it.

Cypress, Hume, Walt, et al are NOT liberals, they are Marxists. Collectivist totalitarians dedicated to ending personal liberty and civil rights.

Liberalism is defined as support of Laissez Faire Capitalism and individual freedom. Government, like fire has uses but must be kept carefully confined and controlled. Let fire take over your house and you are left with ashes. Let government control your country and you have the same result.
 
I repeatedly referred to the University of California system in this thread. The 2025 Nobel Prize winners were from UCLA, Berkeley, UC San Diego, UC Santa Barbara as best I recall.

What does it matter what school I went to? California is a global leader in scientific research, medical research, and Nobel Prize laureates. That's a claim Texas, Florida, and the deep South cannot make.
How about New York, New Jersey, Connecticut, Maryland, Vermont and Rhode Island? Can any of those states make that claim?

Edit: Actually, no other state can make the claim California can. Massachusetts comes closest but their winners are all at private Universities. You going to start ripping on liberals in other states for not caring about education?
 
Last edited:
I'm a liberal. And proud of it.

Cypress, Hume, Walt, et al are NOT liberals, they are Marxists. Collectivist totalitarians dedicated to ending personal liberty and civil rights.

Liberalism is defined as support of Laissez Faire Capitalism and individual freedom. Government, like fire has uses but must be kept carefully confined and controlled. Let fire take over your house and you are left with ashes. Let government control your country and you have the same result.

I am referring to the way leftists use and call themselves liberal. What murph and other lefties should understand that there is a hundred percent difference between today's liberalism and yesterday's classical liberalism. I take it you abide by classical liberalism.
 
How about New York, New Jersey, Connecticut, Maryland, Vermont and Rhode Island? Can any of those states make that claim?
Yes, New York, Massachusetts, New Jersey, Connecticut most definitely give California a run for their money in Nobel Prize laureates because the northeastern U.S. is epicenter to many of the most prestigious universities on the planet: Harvard, Princeton, Yale, MIT, Columbia, Cornell, NYU, etc.
 
Yes, New York, Massachusetts, New Jersey, Connecticut most definitely give California a run for their money in Nobel Prize laureates because the northeastern U.S. is epicenter to many of the most prestigious universities on the planet: Harvard, Princeton, Yale, MIT, Columbia, Cornell, NYU, etc.
LOL, you just listed all private Universities.

It's funny when it becomes a political argument, not a principled one, because you have to continually move goal posts to try and achieve your goals.
 
Yes, New York, Massachusetts, New Jersey, Connecticut most definitely give California a run for their money in Nobel Prize laureates because the northeastern U.S. is epicenter to many of the most prestigious universities on the planet: Harvard, Princeton, Yale, MIT, Columbia, Cornell, NYU, etc.
Just wondering about the thread topic. Why is what universities have Nobel Prizes important?
 
Since this is all about politics and identity, interesting that the Deep South and Texas were blue for like a century while California was red for long periods of time.
Pat Brown, a Democratic governor, is most responsible for building the UC system into a globally recognized system of elite higher education.

For the most part, California has had very moderate Republican governors who generally would support the vision of UC to be a premier public higher education institution.
 
I am referring to the way leftists use and call themselves liberal. What murph and other lefties should understand that there is a hundred percent difference between today's liberalism and yesterday's classical liberalism. I take it you abide by classical liberalism.

I have NHB on ignore. She/He is just a Doc Dutch sock.
 
Pat Brown, a Democratic governor, is most responsible for building the UC system into a globally recognized system of elite higher education.

For the most part, California has had very moderate Republican governors who generally would support the vision of UC to be a premier public higher education institution.
Good to know Reagan was considered a moderate.

And the Northeast was heavily Republican and while the Deep South was heavily Democratic.

When you try to create these partisan narratives, they run into reality. And reality is never as nice and easy as we would like to imagine.
 
LOL, you just listed all private Universities!
I didn't say anything about whether a university had to be private or public. When I previously listed the total number of Nobel Prizes won in California, that number included Stanford, USC, and CalTech which are private.
👇​
Rank in total number of Nobel prize winners:​
California, 363 Nobel prize winners​

Texas, 21 Nobel prize winners​

Florida, 13 Nobel prize winners​
 
Good to know Reagan was considered a moderate.

And the Northeast was heavily Republican and while the Deep South was heavily Democratic.

When you try to create these partisan narratives, they run into reality. And reality is never as nice and easy as we would like to imagine.
Reagan was always a right wing extremist.
 
Good to know Reagan was considered a moderate!
Drunk this early? Your interminable frantic attempts at word parsing is very disingenuous.

I very specifically wrote "for the most part" California GOP governors were moderate because everyone is aware of Reagan.
👇​
For the most part, California has had very moderate Republican governors who generally would support the vision of UC to be a premier public higher education institution.
 
I didn't say anything about whether a university had to be private or public. When I previously listed the total number of Nobel Prizes won in California, that number included Stanford, USC, and CalTech which are private.
👇​
Before I go any further, did you give a source for those numbers?
 
Before I go any further, did you give a source for those numbers?
You first have to acknowledge your calculated mistake in falsely claiming I suggested all California GOP governors were moderates.
👉 see post #434​

Without that acknowledgement, I'll have to assume you are a bad faith poster I have no obligation to fetch links or do research for.
 
God damn, watching people blather about the number of Nobels as a bellwether for quality of education is about as stupid as it gets. The Nobel is rare, the universities most of you mouthbreathers are talking about as if they are worse than others actually often do some great research.

FOR THE SCIENTIFIC ILLITERATES IN THE CROWD: NOT ALL RESEARCH GETS A NOBEL YET IT CAN BE VERY IMPORTANT.

Fuuuuuck, watching a bunch of academic losers argue about which is the best school is just SAD.
 
UT Southwest Medical Center is home to at least 3 Nobel Laureates!
☝️​
That's absolute peanuts compared to the number of Nobel prize winners who have affiliated with Berkeley, Stanford, CalTech, MIT, Columbia, University of Chicago and many of the other California and northeastern universities.

Rice, Duke, UT Austin are respectable schools. But this nation's epicenter for elite higher education is largely in the north-northeast and California.
 
You first have to acknowledge your calculated mistake in falsely claiming I suggested all California GOP governors were moderates.
👉 see post #434​

Without that acknowledgement, I'll have to assume you are a bad faith poster I have no obligation to fetch links or do research for.
Get over yourself. If that literally is what drives you, then I feel sorry for you.

The northeast was longtime heavily Republican and the Deep South long time heavily Democratic. That throws off the partisan narrative you're attempting to create. This isn't about education, it's about identity and it's tough when that gets challenged.
 
Pat Brown, a Democratic governor, is most responsible for building the UC system into a globally recognized system of elite higher education.

For the most part, California has had very moderate Republican governors who generally would support the vision of UC to be a premier public higher education institution.

Partisan bullshit.

The UC system was nationally if not world renowned as far back as the 1920's.
 
Back
Top