Customer Reviews

The Burden of Bad Ideas: How Modern Intellectuals Misshape Our Society

5 star:		(28)
4 star:		(4)
3 star:		(1)
2 star:		(5)
1 star:		(5)

 

 

The essays in Heather Mac Donald's collection are all provocative, if not inflammatory, with the most ironically insightful her piece on reforming the contemporary American school system, "Why Johnny's Teacher Can't Teach." Mac Donald suggests the system may neither need nor even be open to meaningful reform since it is the perfect complement for certain modern parents' methods of child-raising and for the biases spread by teacher education programs. If children are raised as imperial selves whose willfulness is to be cherished and whose behavior is not to be shaped by adult expectations, by the time such ineducable "students" reach school it is no surprise that professional "facilitators" will turn necessity into a virtue and create child-centered classrooms, spaces in which the clueless, still freed from adult authority, will lead the inept. Such parents and such educators, mutually abdicating authority to the wise child, are taking in each other's laundry, and what is there to reform, since all the key players are or should be happy? Mac Donald's are surely more important considerations than those of money, class size or computers in the classroom, and we owe her credit for calling our attention away from such palliatives to a pondering of the actual, though infrequently discussed, sentimental, anti-intellectual goals of our current schools.

I recently began a teacher's certification course here in the Seattle area. Our course on Learning has focused on group discussions, group camraderie building, doing skits on learning, and how we "feel" about our experiences with children. The professor also proudly stated that she was only going to discuss the Constructivist view on learning because that was the ONLY approach to learning. I thought I was going insane. Was I back at summer camp? How could an upper level college class be so trivial? So narrow-minded? How could it be so divorced from the real world of classroom teaching? After reading Ms. MacDonald's book, I now realize that this Constructivist (all knowledge is relative, students construct their own knowledge) approach to teacher training is more common than one would think. Although the essay "Why Johnnie's Teachers Can't Teach" was written in the mid 1990's, it is as if MacDonald teleported herself into the future, observed how my Learning class was being taught, teleported herself back to the 1990's and then wrote the essay based on what she saw in 2001. It is almost spooky how the author's details about "Constructivist" college classrooms are so descriptive of what I am experiencing now. Future teachers read this book before you choose where to receive teacher certification. I would have given this book 5 stars, but it really needs a bibliography.

There have been other books exposing: (a) the terrible consequences of radical and multicultural theories and the arrogance of the obtuse people who believe in them; and (b) the journalists who act as unpaid cheerleaders for these activists, dispensing a picture of reality that is often 180 degrees away from the truth. But none of these books have been better-written than Ms. MacDonald's, which covers precisely these topics. She has a superb sense of the dramatic and the ironic and is not afraid to mete out criticism where it is warranted.

The only thing missing in this book, which I would like to have seen in it, is an in-depth analysis of the motivation of the sort of people the author depicts. Ms. MacDonald has shown us WHAT they've said and done, but we also need to know WHY. However, the WHO can tell us the why. The crackpot theories and identity politics she exposes are the exclusive property of politicians, sheltered academics, cloistered and muddle-headed bureaucrats, and professional "community activists" whose thinking is far-removed from the workaday world and the people who inhabit it. It's no accident that working-class people do not go along with these inanities, while so many upper-middle-class people do. In her Introduction, Ms. MacDonald offers an explanation for this. This cluster of trendy ideologies "assures its adherents that they are compassionate and caring, merely by virtue of subscribing to it. It gives them a sense of specialness." In other words, this set of ideological beliefs acts as medicine, which explains why its followers cling to it despite its consistent counter-productive results. Instead of relieving pain, it relieves the discomfort of upper-middle-class guilt.

Amazon.com carries a book that explores this exact topic-the relationship between such class-guilt and political ideologies. Its title is GUILT, BLAME, AND POLITICS, and it's well worth reading. Dr. Thomas Sowells's THE VISION OF THE ANOINTED, also carried by Amazon, makes some very similar points.

But don't be dissuaded by Ms. MacDonald's neglecting to include psychological factors. Her wonderful book succeeds in doing exactly what it set out to do: clearly and even entertainingly demonstrating the real cost of bad ideas and fuzzy-minded bureaucratic social engineering. It's ironic that such ideas have been flourishing even after the collapse of Marxism, the ultimate nonsensical bad idea; but we must remember that practical results don't matter at all to people who embrace ideologies designed to make them feel better. These ideologies still do that, whatever their other results; so as far as their adherents are concerned, the ideologies have succeeded! Read THE BURDEN OF BAD IDEAS and you'll see that in the ways that really matter, these dogmas have utterly failed.

This book is a series of case studies (and is available in its entirety on the internet-- except for the chapter "Revisionist Lust") on certain topics. The articles are actually about things that went down at the middle and end of the 1990s-- even though the paperback was published in 2007-- but the events are the most controversial of that time period (and hence easy to remember). The book is also very New York City heavy-- and that's a good thing. It may yet be possible that the whole US will not descend into the stupidity of New York City and that the rot will just remain local (I hope so, otherwise I can't see a future for the country).

Good points:

1. A lot of books by liberals spend a lot of time talking about what should or what might be. But this book deals with what ACTUALLY HAPPENS. People such as Susan Sarandon/ Bruce Springsteen ("41 shots") have opinions about everything-- and write songs about those opinions, too. But they can't be bothered to get their facts straight. The antidote to incorrect information is correct information, and this book provides that in abundance.

2. Lots of intellectuals whine about how it is a "moral obligation" to do this or that. But they don't study what actually happens in the cases where the government does try to get involved.

3. I could have done with a chapter about WHY intellectuals/ entertainers have the ideas that they do. The lack of such a chapter did not diminish the book, but the author's thoughts are so interesting that I would like to have read them just the same.

4. The writing was very light and easy to read. It went by very fast. The information was very dense, and a reread of the first 100 pages (or every chapter) might be in order to come to grips with the sheer volume of the information.

5. MacDonald makes a very clear demonstration of how certain elements of the media will turn reality on its head (i.e., the New York Times) for their own purposes. And in each case, her assertions are backed up with evidence and numbers and not just ipse dixit assertions.

This is a great book, and the low cost (nothing other than the paper that it takes to print it up) makes it required reading.

Ms. Mac Donald's collection of essays explodes the conventional liberal wisdom that has taken hold of many of our institutions. The outrages she sets forth in essays such as her powerful discussions of the Smithsonian's assaults on traditional American history (she notes that Eli Whitney's cotton gin is displayed with a sign describing it as "an engine of slavery") and of the New York Times' despicable treatment of the New York City Police Department (and its support of Al Sharpton) are especially powerful.

Ms. Mac Donald's command of the English language is remarkable, and her belief in individual responsibilty as the salvation of our way of life is set forth in paragraph after paragraph of memorable prose. On page ix of her Introduction she writes that examples of bad ideas of the present liberal culture are those that presume that "government can assume the role of parents; that America's ineradicable racism and sexism require double standards for minorities; that reason is a tool of male oppression; and that education is not about knowledge but ethnic empowerment."

This is a stunning and eloquent book in every way.

David W. Lee

Where has Heather Mac Donald been hiding? We,in the midwest, ave not had the benefit of her writings. She obviously had a liberal education at Yale and Cambridge and must have come to these social issues with a positive outlook. It is apparent, however, that she, unlike her liberal collegues, actually went and talked to the people who were supposed to be the benefactors of the Great Society. It is, therefore, a greater pleasure to see someone carefully, slowly, and permanently destory the liberal shibboleths which have caused our societal decline. Her first chapter shows the villainy of the philanthropic foundations (Ford, Carnegie, etc.) whose boards have taken money created by capitalists and used it to destroy the values which only a capitalist system can create--hard work, responsibility, independence, and morality. They have used their funds to create programs which have had the opposite effect of their intended consequences. The creators of all this wealth would be turning in their graves if they knew how their money was being spent. This attempt by liberal socialists to order every part of society has trickled down to every aspect of our lives. Ms Mac Donald shows the smoldering, withering, destructive effect of these social programs on everything from law school, medicine, policing, to museums. Mac Donald pulls no punches and she has a lot to throw because she has been there. This is a wonderful book and a must read by anyone who cares about our American culture.

Of all the social critics lamenting the conditions of the welfare state-- such as Thomas Sowell, Michelle Malkin, Martin Gross, and Dinesh D'Souza-- it is Heather MacDonald who burns the brightest. This slim book, "The Burden of Bad Ideas," is an erudite and scathing assault on all of the leftist sacred cows currently stampeding through our society. The picture of a giant lemon on the cover sets the tone right from the start. The book is a collection of essays MacDonald wrote for something called the "City Journal," a New York publication concerning urban affairs and related issues.

What is so impressive about MacDonald's detailed expositions is her coverage of topics that do not appear often in other publications or books. MacDonald examines, by turns, the corrosive effect of leftist foundations on society, the elevation of poverty into sainthood, education colleges and their bubble head curriculum, the Smithsonian Institution's rabid devotion to identity politics and white guilt, the wackos inhabiting some of our elite law schools, the Amadou Diallo farce, and several other important topics ignored by our supposedly unbiased media systems. Several of the essays were so depressing I had to lie down and rest after reading them.

Even when MacDonald covers a familiar topic she does so from a different perspective, uncovering infinite layers of chicanery from those lovable leftists. For example, a discussion about the sorry state of our schools finds MacDonald analyzing the merits of a special school in New York that teaches ghetto culture as a serious academic discipline. Students learn how to improve their graffiti skills through in class study sessions. Whether these students eventually break the law by applying what they learn in real life situations is not the point; they are "artists" who aren't allowed to "express" themselves by the larger society. It is garbage, of course, and MacDonald pulls no punches revealing the warped minds behind the madness, minds devoted to racial hate of whites, derision towards western culture, and a total disregard for the concepts of private property and law. These three warped concepts emerge again and again in MacDonald's essays.

The essays are timeless, showing the progression of leftist ideas through both time and space. An essay on the "Hundred Neediest Cases" best expresses this point. In 1913, The New York Times began a run of Christmastime articles about the worst cases of poverty in the city. The emphasis at this time was on people in true need, those who worked hard but fell on bad times due to circumstances beyond their control. MacDonald follows the series through time, showing how leftist ideas about poverty began to dominate the series. By the 1960's, poverty cases no longer spent much time discussing the poor orphan or widowed mother. Instead, dope users, teen mothers, and other assorted losers lacking any concept of personal responsibility took the spotlight. Grousing about lack of funds for the poor began to appear, as did politically correct ideas about the nature of poverty. This essay alone proves, beyond any doubt, the rapid decline of our values and our country.

Bureaucracy is often found at the bottom of the leftist agenda. Safely ensconced in their cubicles beyond the reach of the voter, bureaucrats are the shock troops of leftist ideology. Bureaucrats constantly create new "services" to remedy problems created by previous "services." It is a never-ending cycle, and one that creates more dependency, more drug and alcohol addiction, more unwanted children, and more taxes for those who live responsibly. Regrettably, MacDonald makes the mistake here that many social critics make, namely that changing administrations will solve the problems. The bureaucracy is here to stay, folks. Only a revolution will produce the sweeping changes needed to reverse the odious problems ailing our society.

The essays in this book are brilliant. "The Burden of Bad Ideas" is still available, just in time to stuff your favorite leftist's Christmas stocking. MacDonald has a new book coming out soon, and if it is anywhere near as brilliant as this book MacDonald will soon appear on a news channel near you.

Heather MacDonald will take your breath away with her razer sharp analysis and in depth understanding of public policy issues. She skins alive those who would use the poor, the uneducated and the homeless to further their march toward power and recognition. Her ability to state it in a format as easy to read as a suspense novel keeps one glued to the pages. Her use of "man on the street" stories to make many of her vivid points keeps the action moving. I now am a fan of this writer and will follow her career with great interest.

Heather MacDonald is a great journalist who writes mostly for the City Journal of New York. Living in New York, she gets to examine malaise and social decay up close and personal. She always presents herself as the sensible conservative covering the folly of liberal policies. The Burden of Bad Ideas shows that liberal philosophies of society's elites are adversely affecting the less capable of society. One does not who to hold accountable first, the elites with their bad ideas or the poor who follow them. MacDonald especially makes the point that comtemporary policies often don't work because they do not take into account any moral considerations. This lack of moral judgement leads to bad policy and encourages bad behavior.

I got the impression while reading that MacDonald is witnessing an insidious bolshevik takeover of America with its tools of anti-white racism to destroy that race and anti-white male sexism to destroy its men. These bolsheviks try to equalize everything whether it's ideas, people, incomes, lifestyles, morality, culture, sexes, intellects, or races despite evidence that we still live and always will live in hierarchical world. The technique is to denigrate the superior and uplift or not judge the inferior. Although she does not say this in so many words; these are my own impressions.

Many of her articles cover the public assistance system in which the policy is not to make judgements between the deserving and undeserving poor, as was done sensibly in the past. Not making judgements bankrolls immoral behavior such as illegitimate births, drug use, child abuse, professional homelessness, and promiscuity with its consequent STDs; this makes the problem worse since the behavior is encouraged if it is paid for. Organizations such as the Ford Foundation have wasted millions of dollars on making the public assistance problem worse by bankrolling irresponsible behavior.

MacDonald examines how education fads are destroying and warping students' minds with frivolous courses such as Hip Hop 101 in which students are encouraged to paint the neighborhood illegally with graffiti. I think the purpose of some educrats is to dumb down education so far that everyone passes and everyone is therefore equal. If hard courses were introduced, then some would do better than others, and of course, that must mean someone is oppressing the Other.

The Smithsonian Museum has gone PC trying to denigrate white Western culture and uplift every other culture besides that one. In Law School, we now have very touchy professors who now wear their race and gender identities on their sleeve and spend a lot of time "proving" how oppressed they are while insulting and psychologically attacking whites and men.

One last article covers law and order in New York City during the Diallo case in which a victim was accidently shot by the police. Al Sharpton and the rest of his charade including Hollywood celebrities tried to bring the tea kettle to boil with fake "designer protests". Meanwhile the folks back home in the neighborhoods generally like the police and believe in law and order because it keeps the drug lords off the streets. But New York Times kept the drum beat going for "justice" and therefore got some innocent readers in a resentful mood over the police because they naturally expect a paper to tell it like it is and not to advocate for trumped-up injustices.

MacDonald does a great job showing us the problem and a okay job suggesting solutions; the solutions part is usually given minimal space and it is more generalized than detailed, but it is morally correct in a good way. It is amazing how bizarre some of the reports were; I can only hope she is picking the worst cases and not just taking a representative samples.

Heather MacDonald does a wonderful job of outlining the results of utopian social and political policy gone awry; the legacy of the law of unintended consequences. Readers from the Hard, Far-Left will excoriate Ms. MacDonald as a running dog lackey of the right wing wall street money barons, but the truth is more elusive. In books supporting either side of these "worldview" arguments the point is often missed that it's really about people and not their attendant philosophies. Political views are mostly a diversion from the real issues which revolve around power, money, and the people who thirst for them, i.e. Fidel Castro has many homes and great personal wealth and so does the vatican and by proxy the pope. The difference is that the pope isn't running an island prison as is Castro. However, a cursory study of history would show intolerance by the church to the point where heretics in Rome and elsewhere were burned at the stake. Thus, dictators are the enemy and in this case the Left has controlled the intellectual argument for most of the 20th century. Check the political planks of the socialist party in America back to E.V. Debs and Norman Thomas and you will find all of these planks have been embedded in our social policy by the Democrat party which has, until recently, controlled the federal legislature. It's the results of these policies that Ms. MacDonald rails against and is justifiably enraged about. A great book which should be read by every citizen in America.