Rethinking the University in an Age of Educational (009(.pptx
Wednesday, March 26, 2025
UNIVERSITIES FACE ONE-SIDED CURRICULA AS WELL AS REPRESSION OF DISSENT
Harry Targ
Purdue Today (March 25, 2025) posted an announcement of
an upcoming conference to be co-sponsored by its business and liberal arts
colleges. While we should celebrate the communications of all bodies of
scholarship (aside from clearly the voices of those who celebrate racism,
sexism, and nativism), it is worthy, in this time of reflection about higher
education, to be clear about the differences between ideology and empirical
reality.
Purdue
Conference Aims to Get at the Heart of Business and its Value - Purdue Business
One keynote speaker at the conference indicated her expectations: “My hope is that everyone in attendance will leave the conference with a better understanding of the uniqueness of the American capitalistic system and a renewed commitment to ensuring that the American ideals of freedom and capitalism are inherited by the next generation,”
Attendees will hear speakers from The National Review
Institute, The National Constitution Center, the Liberty Fund, and the Mercatus
Center. “to have a deep discussion about free markets and morality.” The
Conference is advertised as the “Cornerstone for Business.” Cornerstone refers
to the much-touted transformation of what used to be a vibrant program in
Liberal Arts to a pastiche of courses that are alleged to be interdisciplinary.
This conference melds the business school with what is left of liberal arts at
Purdue University.
The announcement indicates that there will be “an
opening keynote from President Emeritus of Purdue University Mitch Daniels and
informed discussions of the connections between business and AI; democracy and
business; markets and human progress; shareholders and stakeholders and more.”
While diversity of perspectives on a university campus
is commendable, one wonders if this conference is not so much about scholarship
and reflection as about the promotion of a narrow economic ideology.
For example the essay and data below indicates that
majorities of working people in Indiana have not been beneficiaries of the
“market,” the “pursuit of profit,” and economic concentration. In fact, as the
United Way survey mentioned below suggests almost 40 percent of Hoosiers
struggle to get by economically. It could be added that there has been a
systematic assault on workers, and their organizations, for at least 20 years
in the politics of the state.
***********************************************************************************
Friday,
October 27, 2023
THE INDIANA ECONOMY HURTS
WORKERS, WOMEN, MINORITIES
Harry Targ
Sorry for reposting this but I just heard former
Indiana Governor Mitch Daniels implying that the Biden economic record has been
poor for the economy. The material below indicates that under Republican rule
in Indiana for over a decade the economic circumstances (and education, good
paying jobs etc.) have worsened for Hoosier workers and their families.. The
Republican "business model" is a disaster for workers.
(From 2017 through 2022, the Indiana
economy grew more slowly than the nation as a whole. In inflation-adjusted
terms, the Hoosier economy expanded by 10.8%, while the nation as a whole grew
by 11.3%.
...the dismal growth of 2017 through 2020
accounts for all the lagging performance of the Hoosier economy. The expansion
from 2009 to 2019 was the worst relative performance of our economy in state
history. By 2019, the Indiana economy was slipping into recession due primarily
to the tariffs put in place by the Trump administration. "What the new GDP
data tells us about the Hoosier economy", Michael
Hicks Muncie Star Press, reprinted in the Journal
and Courier, January 8, 2024)
I am beginning to see tax abatements, huge
job promising government funded projects, military contracts, the privatization
of education from K through college, real estate speculation, and more as a
substantial cause of the movement of wealth from the 99 percent to the top one
percent. And we see in Indiana that 39 percent of households live below a
livable wage, healthcare is scarcer and more expensive, there are pockets
of food deserts, and across the state growing environmental degradation.it is
time to say enough is enough (HT, December 23, 2023)
Hoosier politicians and corporate/university elites
suggest that the Indiana economy is booming and will only improve with less
taxes, more support for industrial projects like LEAP, and a general reliance
on the "free market." The United Way ALICE reports suggest that
economic circumstances of large percentages of Hoosiers have worsened over the
last decade.
For example, a recent United Way Alice Report suggests
that the number of households in Indiana living below a livable income have
increased since the last decade.
*************************************************
An Historical Review:
Thursday, November 3, 2022
WORKERS SUFFER IN RED
STATE INDIANA
Harry Targ
Social and Economic Wellbeing Survey Shows No Progress
A flurry of newspaper stories appeared the first week
of February, 2017 in several Indiana newspapers reporting on data from a
“health and wellness” national survey about the performance of the 50 states.
Indiana according to several measures was ranked as the fourth “worst state” in
the country. The national survey consisted of data from 177,281 people
interviewed by the Gallup and Healthways organizations. Data included responses
to questions about feelings of community support and pride, physical health,
and financial security.
According to the survey The Times of Northwest
Indiana, (February 8, 2017) reported, “31.3 percent of Indiana residents
are obese, 30.6 smoke, and 29.4 percent don’t exercise at all.” Only 24.9
percent of the population had a bachelor’s degree (one of the lowest
percentages of any state). The NWIT article indicated that median
household income of Hoosiers was $5,000 less than the national median income.
On many measures Indiana’s rank was only ahead of Oklahoma, Kentucky, and West
Virginia.
Previous Data on the Indiana Economy
The centerpiece of Indiana public policy since 2004
has been corporate and individual tax cuts and reduced budgets for education,
health care, and other public services. Indiana was one of the first states to
begin the privatization of the public sector, including transferring
educational funds from public to charter schools. It established a voucher
system to encourage parents to send their children to private schools. Also,
Indiana sold public roads; privatized public services; and recruited controversial
corporations such as Duke Power to support research at the state’s flagship
research universities. Meanwhile the manufacturing base of the state shifted
from higher paying and unionized industrial labor (automobiles, steel, and
durable goods) to lower paying service jobs and non-union work such as at the
Amazon distribution center.
A positive narrative about Indiana economic growth
presented by the former Governor Mike Pence varied greatly from data gathered
between 2012 and 2014. For example, between 2013 and 2014, despite enticements
to business, Indiana grew at a 0.4 percent pace while the nation at large
experienced 2.2 percent growth.
Indiana’s economy historically was based on
manufacturing but has experienced declines since the 1980s (with only modest
increases in recent years). However, newer manufacturing between
2014 and 2016 was mostly in low-wage non-unionized sectors. For
example, the Indiana Institute for Working Families reported on data from a
study of work and poverty in Marion County, which included the state’s largest
city, Indianapolis. Four of five of the largest growing industries
in the county paid wages at or below family sustainability ($798 per week for a
family of three) and individual and household wages declined significantly
between 2008 and 2012 (Derek Thomas, “Inequality in Indy - A Rising Problem
With Ready Solutions,” August 13, 2014, (www.iiwf.blogspot.com).
Further, Thomas quoted a U.S. Conference of Mayors’
report on wages and income: “…wage inequality grew twice as rapidly
in the Indianapolis metro area as in the rest of the nation since the
recession.” This is so because new jobs created paid less on average than the
jobs that were lost since the recession started.
Thomas pointed out that the mayors’ report had several
concrete proposals that could address declining real wages and stimulate job
growth. These included “raising the minimum wage, strengthening the Earned
Income Tax Credit, public programs to retrain displaced workers,” and
developing universal pre-kindergarten and programs to rebuild the state’s
crumbling infrastructure. They may have added that declining real wages also
related to attacks on unions in both the private and public sectors and the
dramatic reduction in public sector employment.
Thomas recommended in 2012 that Indianapolis (and
Indiana) should have taken these data seriously because in Marion County
“poverty is still rising, the minimum wage is less than half of what it takes
for a single-mother with an infant to be economically self-sufficient; 47
percent of workers do not have access to a paid sick day from work, and a full
32 percent are at or below 150 percent of the federal poverty guidelines
($29,685 for a family of three).”
More recently, November 10, 2014, the Indiana
Association of United Ways issued a 250-page report on the state called the
“Study of Financial Hardship.” The study, parallel to similar studies in five
other states and prepared by a research team at Rutgers University, introduced
the concept of Asset Limited, Income Constrained, Employed or
(ALICE). ALICE refers to households with incomes that are above the poverty
rate but below “the basic cost of living.” The startling data revealed that:
-a third of Hoosier households cannot afford adequate
housing, food, health care, child care, and transportation.
-specifically, 14 percent of households are below the
poverty line and 23 percent above poverty but below the threshold out of ALICE,
or earning enough to provide for the basic cost of living.
-570,000 households are within the ALICE status and
353,000 below the poverty line.
-over 21 percent of households in every Indiana county
are above poverty but below the capacity to provide for basic sustenance.
Referring to those within the ALICE category of wage
earners who have struggled to survive but earn less than what it takes to meet
basic needs, Kathy Ertel, Board Chairperson of Indiana Association of United
Ways said: “ALICE is our child care worker, our retail clerk, the CAN who cares
for our grandparents, and our delivery driver” (Roger L. Frick, “Groundbreaking
Study Reveals 37% of Hoosier Households Struggle With the Basics,” Indiana
Association of United Ways, November 10, 2014, Roger.Frick@iauw.org).
The United Way published a revised ALICE survey in
2020 concluding that “In 2018, eight years after the end of the Great
Recession, 37% of Indiana’s 2,592,262 households still struggled to make ends
meet. And while 13% of these households were living below the Federal Poverty
Level (FPL), another 24% — almost twice as many — were ALICE households: Asset
Limited, Income Constrained, Employed. These households earned above the FPL,
but not enough to afford basic household necessities.” https://iuw.org/alice/
In 2022 Aaron Renn wrote that “The Hoosier
state has had a Republican governor since Mitch Daniels was elected in 2004. It
has been a Republican “trifecta” state, with GOP majorities in both houses of
the legislature, since 2011… its average disposable income had actually
declined to 89.5 percent of the national level….When Daniels was elected,
Indiana’s per capita disposable income was only 90.5 percent of the U.S.
average.” Aaron Renn,“Indiana under Republican Rule: ‘Pro-Business’ Policy
Disappoints outside the Sunbelt” American Affairs,Winter
2021 / Volume V, Number 4
But a recent Alec (the American Legislative Exchange
Council, a Koch Foundation economically libertarian lobby group) co-sponsored
study Rich States Poor States says the following: “Indiana is
currently ranked 7th in the United States for its economic outlook.
This is a forward-looking forecast based on the state’s standing
(equal-weighted average) in 15 important state policy variables. Data reflect
state and local rates and revenues and any effect of federal deductibility.” The
Rich States, Poor States variables used to rank states included
personal, property, and corporate tax rates, levels of workers compensation,
whether the state was a so-called “right to work state’, minimum wage laws, and
other pro-business measures. The more beneficial to business, the higher the
ranking the state was given. https://www.richstatespoorstates.org/states/IN/
In contradiction to this ALEC sponsored
report, David Ricks, CEO of Eli Lilly said that “Indiana’s focus for
so long, over so many years of Republican leadership, has been to create a tax
climate and a regulatory structure that is friendly enough to business that
companies can’t help but consider Indiana for major projects.” He referred to
national data indicating that the cost of living and business climate in
Indiana were strong but, in his words, “Our education attainment in the state
is not good. The ability to reskill the workforce, I think, could improve.
Health, life and inclusion, overall, I think, conditions rank poorly nationally
in our state. And also workforce preparedness, also related to reskilling, is a
liability for us.” https://www.wishtv.com/news/indiana-news/lilly-ceo-takes-critical-stance-against-indiana-economy/
In other words, Indiana’s economy, particularly in the
years of Republican one-party rule is one of prioritized tax cuts,
deregulation, privatization, and business incentives at the expense of
education, health care, wages, worker rights, and public institutions, And
this is the contradiction: Indiana being “currently ranked 7th in the United
States for its economic outlook” versus the dramatic ALICE estimate that 37
percent of Indiana households live below a livable wage. As Renn
summarizes it: “since 2000, the state ranks a dismal forty-sixth in median wage
growth, and the growth in median earnings has been at only half the rate of the
rest of the country. Only 42 percent of workers in the state earn a living wage
(adjusted for cost of living) and have employer-provided health insurance.”
Assessing these recent studies and the 2017 report
cited at the outset leads to the conclusion that an evaluation of the current
state of the Indiana economy depends upon where one is located in terms of
economic, political, or professional position. Those Indiana men, women, and
children who come from the 37 percent of households who earn less, at, or
slightly above the poverty line probably have a negative view of their futures.
For them, the tax breaks for the rich and the austerity policies for the poor
are not positive.
Indiana Politics
Perhaps the starkest fact to note in reference to the
growing economic insecurity in the state of Indiana over time is that in 1970
forty percent of Hoosier workers were in unions, then the state with the third
highest union density. By the dawn of the second decade of the twenty-first
century only 11 percent of workers were in trade unions. Recent legislation has
disadvantaged Hoosier workers including passage of a Right to Work law and
repeal of the state version of prevailing wage. The Mitch Daniels/Mike Pence
administrations (2004-2016) have used charter schools and vouchers to weaken
teachers’ unions. In addition, in his first day in office in January, 2004,
newly elected Governor Mitch Daniels signed an executive order abolishing the
right of state employees to form unions.
In 2005 the Indiana state government (legislature and governor) passed the
first and most extreme voter identification law. Voters were required to secure
voter identification photos. Michael Macdonald a University of Florida
political scientist estimated that requiring voter IDs reduces voter
participation by 4-5 percent, hitting the poor and elderly the hardest. In
addition, Indiana law ended voter registration in the state one month before
election day. And polls close at 6 p.m. election day, among the earliest
closing times in the country. Finally, requests for absentee ballots require
written excuses.
Republican control of the executive and both
legislative branches led to redistricting which further empowered Republicans
and weakened not only Democrats but the young and old and the African American
community. Nine solidly Republican congressional districts were drawn in
2000. In 2014, of 125 state legislative seats up for election, 69
were uncontested. 2014 Indiana voter turnout was 28 percent, the
lowest state turnout in the country. The Governor’s office has been held by
Republicans since 2004 and Republicans have had majorities in both legislative
bodies since 2010, when statewide redistricting was implemented.
Traditionally when Democrats were in the Governor’s
mansion and/or controlled a branch of the legislature, they too tended to
support neoliberal economic policies, but less draconian, and had been more
moderate on social policy questions. In recent years, many legislators and the
two most recent governors have been friends of or received support from the
American Legislative Exchange Council (or ALEC) funded by major corporations
and the Koch brothers.
With ALEC money, some active Tea Party organizations,
the growth of rightwing Republican power, and centrist Democrats, Indiana
government has been able to initiate some of the most regressive policies in
reference to voting rights, education, taxing, and deregulation in the country.
And as the data above suggests, the political economy of Indiana has increased
the suffering of the vast majority of working families in the state. Other data
suggests that the quality of health care, education, the environment, and
transportation have declined as well.
The political picture is made more complicated by the
fact that Indiana is really “three states.” The Northwest corridor, including
Gary and Hammond, are cities which have experienced extreme
deindustrialization, white flight, and vastly increased poverty. Political
activists from the area look to greater Chicago for their political inspiration
and organizational involvement. Democratic parties are strong in these areas
but voter participation is very low.
Central Indiana includes a broad swath of territory
with small cities and towns and the largest city in the state, Indianapolis.
Much of the area is Republican, many counties have significant numbers of
families in poverty, and some smaller cities have pockets of relative wealth.
Democrats hold some city offices but the area is predominantly Republican.
The southern part of the state, south of Indianapolis,
in terms of income, political culture, and history resembles its southern
neighbor Kentucky, more than the northern parts of the state. The state of
Indiana was the northern home of the twentieth century version of the Ku Klux
Klan. In the 1920s, the KKK controlled Indiana state government. That reality,
the institutionalized presence of overt racism, remains an aspect of Hoosier
history that may still affect state politics.
In sum, the working people of Indiana enter the coming
period with little economic hope, a politics of red state dominance. And as
Renn puts it: “Republican leadership, exemplified by Mitch Daniels, has chosen
to prioritize the preferences of businesses, or at least a subset of them, over
those of its citizens. The sentiment is captured in the state’s slogan, 'a
state that works,' which is emblazoned along with a sprocket logo on the side
of the state office building in downtown Indianapolis. In practice, Indiana has
pandered to low-wage employers, and sided with businesses over citizens in many
policy disputes."
Social change in Indiana, as with the nation at large,
will require a vibrant, active progressive movement in Indiana. It is clear
that in the 2022 elections and beyond, Hoosier’s, the vast majority workers,
must vote to end single-party red state politics, at the same time that
mass movements direct their attention to improving the lives of the 99 percent.
CONGRESS INCREASES THE COLD WAR CAMPAIGN AGAINST CHINA IN HIGHER EDUCATION
(Even though “research one” universities such as Purdue University, have mobilized their resources in the service of a New Cold War with China, the Congress is demanding more surveillance of students from China.
From Friday, September 1, 2023
THE NEW COLD WAR AND HIGHER EDUCATION: THE PURDUE CASE
Harry Targ
The conservative
Republican Indiana Senator recently visited Purdue facilities to observe the
university's role in protecting "national security":
The New Cold War With
China
The article linked below
illustrates how the United States is launching a campaign to repress Chinese
Americans and those who warn of a US New Cold War with China. Literature on
Cold War One recounts how government spokespersons, corporate media, and institutions
of popular culture and higher education launched a coordinated “red scare,”
centering on the former Soviet Union. It was not an accident that cold-war
anti-communism paralleled efforts to crush movements advocating more
progressive political agendas. The labor movement was a particular target of
state repression in the 1950s. The signaling of the first Cold War appeared
in a famous telegram George Kennan wrote Washington in 1946 warning of the
establishment of “an iron curtain” descending in Europe.
Today, new cold war
propaganda has been identified by a NATO document as “cognitive warfare,” that
is presenting narratives of the world that demonize China, demean movements for
fundamental global change organizing in the Global South, and advocate increased
militarization of foreign policy and domestic budgets.
To facilitate this New
Cold War think tanks, research institutes, and universities have mobilized
their skills for war while the state targets Chinese Americans and those who
oppose a New Cold War with China:
Higher Education and the
New Cold War
Purdue university in 2021 established what is called the
Krach Institute for Tech Diplomacy. Its goal, its website says, is to integrate “technology
expertise, Silicon Valley strategies, and foreign policy tools to build the
Global Trusted Tech Network of governments, companies, organizations and
individuals to accelerate the innovation and adoption of trusted technology and
ensure technology advances freedom.” New Purdue president Mung Chiang
reported that when he returned to the university from the State Department
as the Science and Technology Adviser to the U.S. Secretary of
State, his
vision was based on the view that “technology must advance freedom.” And the
Krach Institute, named after another State Department operative was created to:
“put the Purdue
Equation, “Transformation to the
Power of Trust,” to the test by
embarking on a global campaign to challenge the market dominance of Chinese
tech firms through the Clean Network. The strategy united countries and
companies around a commitment to a set of trust principles in technology
adoption, data privacy, and security practices. In this highly successful
strategy, Krach’s team transformed US diplomacy and created a new model based
on trust called Tech-Statecraft by integrating Silicon Valley strategies with
traditional foreign policy tools.”
And
recently according to the Taipei Times:
Purdue University
is launching a center to advocate for Taiwan as a trusted partner and encourage
US investment in the nation, former US undersecretary of state for economic
growth, energy and the environment Keith Krach told a news conference in Taipei
yesterday
Krach, chairman of the
Krach Institute for Tech Diplomacy at Purdue, first announced plans for the
establishment of the Taiwan Center for Innovation and Prosperity before his
arrival in Taiwan on Wednesday for a four-day visit.\
The center would be a
partnership between public and private sectors in the US and Taiwan to
“advocate for Taiwan internationally and attract more global partners,” the
institute said. Purdue launching center to advocate for Taiwan
Why a New Cold War With
China and Should the US Engage in Cooperation Rather Than Conflict?
Why is United States
foreign policy, both Biden and Trump, returning to a policy hostile to China,
perhaps creating a “New Cold War?” The answer has several parts. First, as
Alfred McCoy has described (In the Shadows of the American Century: The
Rise and Decline of US Global Power, Haymarket Books,
2017), the United States, relatively speaking, is a declining power. As to
economic growth, scientific and technological developments, productivity, and
trade, the US, compared to China particularly, is experiencing stagnation or decline.
China has engaged in massive global projects in transportation, trade, and
scientific advances and by 2030 based on many measures will advance beyond the
US as to Gross Domestic Product.
According to McCoy, the
United States has embarked on a path to overcome its declining relative
economic hegemony by increasingly investing in military advances: a space
force, a new generation of nuclear weapons, cyber security, biometrics, and
maintaining or enhancing a global military presence particularly in the Pacific
(what Obama spokespersons called “the Asian pivot”). In other words, rather
than accommodating to a new multipolar world in the 21st century, the
United States is seeking to reestablish its global hegemony through military
means.
Second, the United
States is desperately seeking to overcome the end of its monopoly on
technological advances. In computerization, transportation, pharmaceuticals, it
is challenging Chinese innovations, claiming that China’s advances are derived
not from its domestic creativity but from “pirating” from United States
companies. For example, the prestigious and influential Council on Foreign
Relations issued a report in 2019 entitled “Innovation and National Security:
Keeping Our Edge.” The report warned that “…the United States risks falling
behind its competitors, principally China.” China is investing significantly in
new technologies, CFR claims, which they predict will make China the biggest
inventor by 2030. Also, to achieve this goal they are “exploiting” the openness
of the US by violating intellectual property rights and spying. Therefore, the
CFR concluded, since technological innovation is linked to economic and
military advantage and since US leadership in technology and science is at
risk, the nation must recommit to rebuilding its scientific prowess.
Third, while the
United States is engaged in efforts at regime change around the world and is
using brutal economic sanctions to starve people into submission (such as in
Venezuela, Cuba, Iran and 36 other countries victimized by economic sanctions),
China is increasing its economic ties to these countries through investments,
trade, and assistance. And China opposes these US policies in international
organizations. In broad terms Chinese policy stands with the majority of
countries in the Global South while the United States seeks to control
developments there.
Fourth, although Biden’s foreign policy as well as his predecessors, is
designed to recreate a Cold War, with China as the target, a policy also
embraced by most Democrats, there is at the same time counter-pressure from
sectors of the capitalist class who have ties to the Chinese economy:
investment, global supply chains, and financial speculation. Moreover, sectors
of Chinese capital own or have substantial control over many US corporations
and banks. In addition, the Chinese government controls over $1 trillion of US
debt. For these sectors of US capital, economic ties with China remain
economically critical. In addition, some writers, such as Jerry Harris, point
to the emergence of a “transnational capitalist class” whose interests are not
tied to any nation-state (Global Capitalism and the Crisis of Democracy,
Clarity Press, 2016).
Consequently, while the
trajectory of US policy is toward a return to cold war, there is some push back
by economic and political elites as well. Although with the emphasis on
domestic investments in technology highlighted in the 2022 National Security document
mentioned by Sanger, it appears the advocates of a New Cold War with China seem
to be in control of US foreign policy. (The CHIPS and Science Act of 2022
reflects this renewed commitment to technological advance in the United
States).
https://www.nytimes.com/2022/10/12/us/politics/biden-china-russia-national-security.html
Fifth, American domestic politics provide an additional
cause of the transformation of US/China policy. The popularity of the
Democratic Party and President Biden remain low. Therefore, a classic antidote
for politicians experiencing declining popularity is to construct an external
enemy, “an other,” which can redirect the attention of the public from their
personal troubles. It is this external enemy that becomes the source of
domestic problems in political discourse. In this context the President is talking
tough with the “enemy” of the United States, and, as former Secretary of State
Pompeo suggested, it was about time that the US government gave up illusions
about working with China.
Finally, the
ideological package of racism, white supremacy, and American Exceptionalism so
prevalent in United States history resurfaced in dramatic ways in the Trump
years and continues today. White supremacy at home is inextricably connected
with American Exceptionalism abroad. For example, President Theodore Roosevelt
in 1910 claimed that the white race has been critical to
civilization. Years later Madeleine Albright, the Secretary of State
in the Clinton Administration (and more recently President Barack Obama) spoke
about the United States as the “indispensable nation,” a model of economics and
politics for the world. For President Biden, the US stands with “democracy”
against the world’s leading “authoritarians.” This sense of omniscience has
been basic to the ideological justification of United States imperial rule.
Each of these elements,
from the changing shape of economic and military capabilities to political
exigencies, to the pathologies of culture, require a peace and justice movement
that stands for peaceful coexistence, demilitarization, building a world of
economic justice, rights of people to determine their own destiny, and
inalterable opposition to racism, white supremacy, and exceptionalisms of all
kinds.
And for scholars and
diplomats, the question for now is whether it is better to work for a world of
respect, cooperation, recognition of multipolarity and multilateralism, or for
war with China.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
-
Harry Targ Committees of Correspondence for Democracy and Socialism (CCDS) A Presentation at Fort Lauderdale, Occupy Labor Outreach, Marc...
-
From Upton Sinclair's 'Goose Step' to the Neoliberal University (lulu.com) Table of Contents Introduction Chapter On...
-
Harry Targ Gandhi once wrote, “Even the most powerful cannot rule without the cooperation of the ruled.” A Trump tyranny will not be ...
