Justin Lookadoo Found Drunk

On By southwerkIn business ethics2 Comments

Justin Lookadoo Found Drunk

Humiliated Sexist Conservative ‘Christian’ Gets Arrested For Being Drunk In Public On Same Day He Was Supposed To Speak To Teens

via – Humiliated Sexist Conservative ‘Christian’ Gets Arrested For Being Drunk In Public On Same Day He Was Supposed To Speak To Teens.

What Was He Selling?

My perception is that a good number of people get drunk all the time and generally, it’s not worth much discussion. Hopefully, they do it privately and avoid harming themselves or others. But there are circumstances when my business ethics radar senses a blip.

What is Justin Lookadoo’s job? What does he sell? He sells morality and a particularly twisted sort of “Christian” morality. Lookadoo lectures on males being wild and untamed while females should be as domesticated as possible. Having read some of the content, that he believes women should be subservient would be an accurate summation. He goes to high schools and explains to the students such nuggets of wisdom as – “Dateable girls know how to shut up.” Schools pay him for this. From what I can ascertain he makes a living from tax money that was given to schools for abstinence programs. You might assume that he is a Texas phenomenon because of the recent press. Don’t believe that. He sells his “motivational message” all over the United States. His web site suggests thousands of presentations.

A major idea in American culture is usually phrased, “You can talk the talk but can you walk the walk.” Hypocrisy is a common malady. We all have beliefs that we are not able to always live up to. But most of the time our hypocrisy is limited. Few of us are willing to sell things that we would not use ourselves. Few of us practice a profession out of alignment with our own beliefs. And it’s not so much that he was drunk but that he was scheduled to speak. His hypocrisy directly affected his performance.

Where’s the Business Ethics?

Justin Lookadoo advertises himself as a Christian motivational speaker whose presentations are designed to reinforce the importance of high moral values and character for teens. He sells a form or morality which he is unable to maintain in his own life.

But that’s not the big issue here. This man is hired to give messages to teens in schools across the country. It would appear that his “Christian” misogynistic presentations of powerful males and dutiful females are much approved by school boards and administrators.

I have no objection to Christians or motivational speakers in school. Nevertheless, a school system has a responsibility to vet these people before they hire them. Where was the process in this case? There were already red flags raised about this man on the internet before the drinking incident. And yet he was scheduled to speak to middle school students on that same day. I find it hard to think of a more impressionable group of young people than middle school students being told by the adults that this is an important speaker with an important message.

How hard would it have been to check him out online? It took me according to my computer, .28 seconds to Google him and it pulled up such cautionary tales as this one back in 2013.

But the thing that troubles me most is the labeling here. Put the word, Christian, in front of a speaker or high school presenter and for thousands of school administrators and school boards, that is all they need to hear. That’s wrong. You vet all the speakers. You check out the internet and call the schools where whoever it was gave their last presentation. Because using the adjective, Christian, does not make it so.

Our children deserve the same basic precautions for every speaker advertised as Christian or not.

James Pilant

On The Same Subject

http://blogs.houstonpress.com/hairballs/2013/11/the_6_creepiest_things_about_r.php

The school hasn’t yet said how it paid Lookadoo’s speaking fees, but a PDF on his Web site offers the following helpful advice.

Justin has a variety of programs suitable for all age groups and all kinds of schools.He is covered under many federal programs, including Safe and Drug Free Schools, Campus Improvement, Title I, Title IV, Character Education, Abstinence Education, Pregnancy Prevention, Tobacco Prevention, and many others.

http://wordofawoman.com/tag/justin-lookadoo/

Why in the world would any public school have a man in to teach the students about dating and relationships whose book comes down to, men are the architects of their own lives and women are the furnishings. Please excuse me while I bang my head against the wall.

http://rebeccahains.wordpress.com/2013/11/17/an-open-letter-to-justin-lookadoo/

As mothers, university professors, specialists in the field of psychology, mental health, sexuality and gender for almost 20 years, and yes, Christians, we are taken aback by and incredibly disappointed in your message.

Massachusetts Police Form Private Corporations

On By southwerkIn business ethics4 Comments

Massachusetts SWAT Teams Insist They’re Private Corporations With No Public Accountability

At a time where our police force is better armed than the actual armies of small countries, the idea of a “corporate” police force that has the ability to arrest, detain or kill American citizens with no oversight is absolutely horrifying.

via – Massachusetts SWAT Teams Insist They’re Private Corporations With No Public Accountability.

Massachusetts Police Form Private Corporation

SWAT teams in Massachusetts are claiming that because they are incorporated, they’re immune to the state’s open records law. “The state’s residents aren’t permitted to know how often the SWAT teams are used, what they’re used for, what sort of training they get or who they’re primarily used against.”
Some departments in Massachusetts are not able to form their own SWAT teams so several departments would get together and organize a “law enforcement council.” These can be incorporated as a non-profit.
One such organization is NEMLEC, the North Eastern Massachusetts Law Enforcement Council, it claim 3975 members: 3275 sworn officers and 700+ Sheriff’s officers. According to their web site, they cover 930 square miles and a population of 1.6 million people.

These organizations have existed for many years. Their original purpose was to promote cooperation among police and sheriff’s departments. That role has expanded significantly. They now apply for government grans, maintain military vehicles, run SWAT teams and other kinds of rapid response units.

Let’s be clear. These are public agencies, government employees, and clearly by the current rules, any LEC acts under color of state law.

Is this a Business Ethics Issue?

Yes, by organizing supra- corporations over their individual law enforcement agencies have clearly moved from the public to the private. By denying access to their records on the ground of their incorporation, they are exerting corporate rights.

As a 501C’s, they are incorporated non-profits. This transforms these law enforcement agencies into hybrid public/private organizations able to act as public agencies, for instance, in exerting their immunities while acting under state authority and as a private corporation when wishing to evade their responsibilities as servants of the public interest. For the agencies, it is an ideal situation. For a democratic society, it has definite downsides. A large organization composed of thousands of armed personnel, equipped with armored cars, automatic weapons and secure bases are claiming the right to escape state supervision.

And if their claim to immunity from the state open meetings law is upheld, what other rights can they claim? What keeps them from making policy both formal and informal? What stops them from collecting revenue or “encouraging” the cooperation of public officials, other state agencies or the citizens? What about shared information, Internet, city and municipal surveillance cameras as well as license plate scanners?

There is nothing inherently wrong with police departments sharing information, building common resources or perform civic activities like annual golf tournaments. But we expect in a government by the people that public organizations be subject to the rule of law. A private police force has a different set of goals than a public one.

It is to be hoped in this country that those who serve in the defense of the public have the interest of the public in mind.

James Pilant

Luis Guillermo Solis Gives Up Vanity

On By southwerkIn business ethics

Luis Guillermo Solis Gives Up Vanity

Costa Rica president ends ‘worship’ of his office | Al Jazeera America

Costa Rican President Luis Guillermo Solis, a month into his first tem in office, doesn’t want his name on plaques at public works or his portrait hung in public offices.

In a decree, Solis prohibited his name from being used on plaques inaugurating bridges, roads and buildings, as had been the custom in previous administrations. From now on, plaques will carry only the year the project was inaugurated, according to the BBC.

via Costa Rica president ends ‘worship’ of his office | Al Jazeera America.

They are everywhere, in public buildings, state offices and any other public edifice. The pictures and the plaques of the men and women “responsible” for their construction and continuation. They are a muted form of immortality, at least as long as our civilization continues.

And yet, Luis Guillermo Solis, the President of Costa Rico, has dispensed with this. He says, “The works are from the country and not from a government or a particular official.” In this he is very much correct, yet his stand against such things is very much the exception.

Vanity or vainglory or self-idolatry has been recognized as a fault for much of history. However, we in the United States are very much taken with it. We like to think of ourselves in grandiose ways. We tell ourselves that our electronic devices make us more than human and many look forward to cyborgs and trans-humanity.

Is vanity a business ethics problem?

Absolutely. The CEO who buys with company money a $6,000 dollar shower curtain or a one million dollar birthday party for his wife, has got a problem with vanity. How many billions of dollars are spent each year out of money invested by or due others in every kind of business on frivolities, on bizarre perks or just spent because they can?

The Greeks believed that hubris or overweening pride was a major fault but not us. We put chief executive officers on magazine covers and lionize them as “job creators.” I have watched in astonishment as disgraced CEO’s are showered with attention and allowed to recover their reputations. Jordan Belfort is now a motivational speaker. After a disastrous tenure at Hewlett-Packard, Carly Fiorina has been appointed to numerous corporate boards and travels the country dispensing advice. Corporate predators who destroyed thousands of jobs are consulted about issues of public important, as if their very notoriety meant expertise.

We would do better in this nation and practice virtue ethics and exalt in public the characteristics that make for good and great citizens, leaders and Americans. And not just exalt the good but diminish the bad, we should be cruel to the corrupt and incompetent. They be publicly shamed for their crimes whether prosecuted or not. How much virtue can you have if wickedness is not punished?

James Pilant

On The Same Subject

http://blog.startupiceland.com/2014/05/21/hubris-and-learning/

Hubris according to Merriam Webster is a great or foolish amount of pride or confidence. I meet and talk to a number of entrepreneurs and investors, I am always on the lookout for characteristics of Hubris. I am not being judgemental, but what hubris does is it gets in the way of learning.

http://professorianrobertson.wordpress.com/2014/02/13/hubris-power-and-the-correct-way-to-topple-dictators-an-interview-with-david-owen/

Owen, who trained as a neurologist/psychiatrist before going into politics, coined the term “Hubris Syndrome” to describe how power can change the personality of power-holders, not just in politics, but in every realm of life ranging from business to the media.

Mother Dies in Jail

On By southwerkIn Economic Justice3 Comments

095-1Have You Ever Been in Jail?

Read the headline below.

Impoverished Mother Dies In Jail Cell Over Unpaid Fines For Her Kids Missing School

Have you ever been in jail? I have. No, I didn’t do anything. I’ve worked in criminal justice. I was an intern in a U.S. Probation office and I worked with juvenile delinquents. I’ve visited jails. I didn’t mind the little town jails. They seem almost friendly. But the city jails, especially the big cities. They were awful. I always wanted to leave as quickly as humanly possible.

The big city jails are crowded. The clientele varies from next to nothing in terms of offenses (not being able to pay a fine) to people who can’t make bail for major offenses like murder. There are always prostitutes. And they don’t look like the ones on television. They aren’t pretty and they don’t have hearts of gold. They look beat up and worn. They talk nasty and think it’s funny. The atmosphere is oppressive and the facilities limited.

People used to tell me about how they wish they could live the life of the jailed or the inmate of a prison – free medical care, free dental, three squares a day and you don’t have to work – paradise. It takes an incredible absence of knowledge and poor judgment to believe that about one of these places. In one big city jail I visited, the cells housed twenty four prisoners each. That’s 24 beds and two steel toilets out in the open. (The seasoned professional I was with told me to keep my eyes open. Sometimes the inmates throw excrement at you.) There’s a television posted out of reach at the end of the cell. If you’re not in the bed nearest it, it’s a little difficult to see and hear, and if you are at the far end, it’s about the size of a postage stamp. And that was a brand new model installation that was not overcrowded and run down.

They took a mother of seven away from her children and put her in one of these places for non-payment of a fine. She didn’t commit a crime and they put her in there. She owned money and they locked her up – debtor’s prison – you know, those things we abolished in the United States.

She was scared. She was stripped and cavity searched. It’s not in the article but that’s what happened. It’s standard procedure. It should only happen to people who committed crimes. It’s demeaning and humiliating.

They put her in there with real criminals. Being a mother of seven is probably not a good preparation for jail. She had high blood pressure. She was middle aged. She was a law abiding citizen trying hard to raise her children.

She had 55 truancys that she owed thousands of dollars for. That sounds like a lot. But it’s not. The offenses date from 1999. That’s fifteen years. For one child that is an average of three and one half offenses per year. For seven children, that’s an average of one-half a truancy a year. I’m not sensing Al Capone here.

She’s dead. End of story. A county in Pennsylvania has criminalized non-attendance in school and chosen to punish the parents with thousands of dollars of fines. And when they don’t pay, they go to jail.

But the story gets better. You see, if you read the article, it’s obvious the court knew she was on welfare and had no money. She didn’t bring her paperwork showing her lack of income. The court was punishing her for not having proof of what was obvious.

Obviously, that’s justice. Well, in Pennsylvania.

Where’s the business ethics?

This isn’t a business? The city uses the truancy law to impose thousands of dollars of fines which it extracts under fear of imprisonment. Isn’t that policing for profit? More and more cities and counties are using these kinds of fines to generate revenue. It’s deliberate policy. It’s a recent development historically and my understanding is that it is increasing in use across the nation.

If a city or a county uses fines for a revenue stream, justice is not a real consideration. Getting the money is. They’re using the jail to make money.

I appeal to your judgment – are fifty-five truancys over fifteen years worth thousands of dollars of fines? And isn’t it obvious that these fines and the penalties for non-payment are going to fall most heavily on the poor?

Jails and prisons are supposed to be for criminals. They are not supposed to be tools for cash strapped municipalities to balance the budge on the backs of the poor.

When the courts are no longer dealing justice but making money for the government, the central purpose of the criminal justice system is perverted and forgotten. The inmates are people being punished for committing crimes. They are living, breathing revenue streams who must be subject to fines and stacked penalties to squeeze out that last dime.

Justice is the goal we should aim at as a society, as a nation and as individuals. There are other ways to raise money. There have to be.

James Pilant

On the Same Subject.

http://antzinpantz.wordpress.com/2014/06/14/mom-dies-in-jail-for-not-paying-school-fines/

More than 1,600 people have been jailed in Berks County alone – two-thirds of them women – over truancy fines since 2000 …

http://mybraincage.wordpress.com/2014/06/13/mother-dies-in-jail-cell-where-she-was-serving-a-two-day-sentence-for-her-childrens-absence-from-school/

 

George Will Crosses the Line

On By southwerkIn Editorial

George Will Crosses the Line of Decency

I had pondered for a number of days whether or not to discuss the Will column on campus rape and his claim that Progressivism had transformed rape into a “coveted status.” I was upset, but he has said many foolish things as have many other writers on the Washington Post. So, I was leaning toward skipping the topic and discussing the oligarchy of internet providers. But today, the Washington Post responded to criticism, and it was a remarkable response.

According to Post Editorial Page Editor Fred Hiatt he welcomed the column and it “was well within the bounds of legitimate debate.” Really, that’s what he said.

What are the facts?

George Will downplayed the seriousness of campus rape, suggested that women claimed rape when it was not an appropriate charge and out of political correctness. I am familiar with the studies done on campus rape.  Here is one from the National Institute of Justice, an arm of the United States Justice Department. It indicates that on a campus of 10,000 female students, there will be an average of 350 rapes a year. The report indicates that five percent of the women in college are likely to experience rape in any given year (page 11). I can go on and tell you more findings, but does it appear to you that campus rape is a made up crisis? or that it was brought about by Progressivism run amok?

The Business Ethics of the Situation

The Washington Post is a newspaper, a business. It is supposed to provide news and commentary. Many things are debatable and a good newspaper provides a platform for vigorous debate over the great issues of the day.

But some things are facts. And trivializing facts about the nature of rape and suggesting that women are willing to decide later that it wasn’t consensual and that being raped is a positive status would seem in my mind to be in a real way a defense of the rapist, the poor misunderstood male who interpreted a woman’s “No” as part of a twisted game, who may have felt that if a woman dresses suggestively, drinks or invites him into her living quarter, she’s just asking for it.

It was to be hoped that these few men, for the statistics are clear – only a small proportion of the male population rape, could be deterred by more vigorous administrative action or at the very least they could be subject to more vigorous punishment. But this is now rendered more unlikely by George Will and defenders of a status quo which celebrates past custom and male aggression. For the poor, much put upon males, it was in his mind one indignity too much.

This issue brought forward by the commentary page of the newspaper is about crime. I firmly believe that if Will had trivialized armed robbery or shoplifting, he would have been fired yesterday. A great newspaper does not ignore facts or imply that a crime is okay because it has been the custom in the past – so was slavery and wife beating. Times have changed and George Will likes the old way.

But crime is crime, and the newspapers twisted ideas on what constitutes fair comment distorts a horrible act into a matter of dispute. That’s not responsible commentary.

James Pilant

On the same subject:

https://fishershannon.wordpress.com/2014/06/09/a-letter-to-george-will-in-response-to-his-june-6-2014-opinion-piece/

http://tpfleming.wordpress.com/2014/06/10/george-will-lashes-out-at-rape-victims/

http://barrystuartlevy.wordpress.com/2014/06/09/george-will-being-a-victim-of-sexual-assault-is-a-coveted-status-that-confers-privileges/

Obama Lied About Net Neutrality

On By southwerkIn Capitalism

Obama Lied About Net Neutrality

Net neutrality is a business ethics issue. Are a handful of cable companies able by skillful lobbying and enormous campaign contributions going to be able to end the open internet? The question is one of basic fairness. Will the government allow the regulations to be changed so that small players on the internet (like me) can be placed on the slow track to oblivion while large companies like Netflix have priority for internet use? If the regulations are changed as planned, my tiny voice and millions of others will probably disappear because who wants to wait around while our content loads?

This problem was not supposed to happen. In fact this situation is supposed to be impossible because the President of the United States said it wouldn’t happen.

Many people in the United States, literally millions of them, believed that they elected as President, a man committed to net neutrality. For he did not imply that he was in favor of an open internet, he loudly proclaimed his support and said he would not appoint an FCC commissioner opposed to net neutrality. You can hear that direct statement in one of the You Tube video’s below.

If Obama had been defeated in 2008 or 2012, I would have expected a challenge to net neutrality. It is appalling that after all his honeyed words, his dramatic phrases, net neutrality is on the chopping block.

James Pilant

 

Watch Obama Lie About Net Neutrality Three Times Below

(I can get you more – do you really need them?)

In the one below he says he is a big believer in net neutrality.

In this one, in 2007, the President says he will take a back seat to no one when it come to net neutrality.

In this one, an interview on MTV, he is asked if he will support net neutrality and pledge not to appoint someone to the FCC who will oppose it.

Public Funding and Science

On By southwerkIn Comments

Public Funding and Science

Today, the good author at “Why We Are Screwed,” commented on my post https://southwerk.com/2014/05/27/do-the-american-people-need-to-become-re-introduced-to-science/

Here is his comment in full. I totally approve.

James Pilant

 

Yes! I am sure I sound like a broken record – but once again, public funding for science needs to be increased, prospective science/engineering PhD students need to be told that they are unlikely to land assistant professor positions upon study completion, and working conditions for PhDs also need to improve drastically. Universities need to cut the administrative fat, cease functioning like corporation and put the focus on the purpose of university; getting research and teaching done.

I will also argue that the United States should improve its immigration policies and procedures to make it easier to attract and retain talented foreign scientists. Many are unhappy with the American immigration and education system, which does not make it easy for PhDs/post-docs to balance their professional and personal lives.

Canada, which is a resource rich country, needs to spend a larger percentage of its GDP on more scientific research and development, to align itself with the spending of other wealthy countries. The current and recent governments have had dismal records in this regard.

Finally, in Canada/US there are too many PhD scientists working on either post-doctoral salaries — or not in their fields at all.

If we continue down this path there will be fewer and fewer good scientists to learn from – and we will continue to carry out research which is only in the interest of corporations and not the public good.

The web site, Why We Are Screwed is here. Please go and visit. Sign up as a follower and get e-mail updates!

Burglary and Banking

On By southwerkIn Business Ethics2 Comments

Burglary and Banking

What if we punished burglars the way we punish banks for crimes?

Let us assume the burglar steals one hundred high definition televisions from one hundred different homes and sells them for one hundred dollars each. He now has ten thousand dollars. If caught and convicted of all these offenses, his sentence could run into hundreds of years and he would be forced to restore any stolen property and profits derived from the sale of such property.

Now, let us use banking penalties – The same burglar steals the same number of sets and makes the same profit, 10,000 dollars. We catch him and after some negotiation he is willing to accept a fine but will not admit committing a crime. The fine is usually around ten percent of his ill-gotten gain, thus he owes the government, 1,000 dollars.

Obviously, he will not commit this same offense because of the stigma that now hangs over him from being caught committing a crime, and since his reputation has been damaged, no further punishment is necessary as a deterrent. And since, he is an upstanding and valued member of the community because many can buy inexpensive televisions due to his financial innovations, and a number of people who sell his “finds” rely on him for their jobs – for this man is indeed a job creator.

Now a cynic might point out that the burglar can replace all his losses from the fine by stealing just ten more televisions. And that if he is only caught ten percent of the time and has to pay ten percent of his gains each time, his penalty would only come to one percent of his criminal profits.

That is the situation the banks are in. To reiterate, if you pay a ten percent fine on your thefts and you are only caught ten percent of the time, you are out 1% of your profits.

Now, you are reasonable human being, if you were the burglar in this example and subject to these kinds of penalties would the pressure on you reform you or inspire you to even greater crimes?

James Pilant

On The Same Subject.

http://ronmamita.wordpress.com/2014/04/21/banking-fraud-under-attack/

Doug McMillon, Just Another Associate?

On By southwerkIn Capitalism
Just Another Associate?
Just Another Associate?

Doug McMillon, Just Another Associate?

McMillon, Wal-Mart’s CEO was at a conference last week and gave the audience an opportunity to ask questions. They asked what he planned to do for his workers, in Wal-Mart speak, associates. Whereupon, he told the assembled multitude that he too was an associate – Ich bin ein Berliner. 

Corporate executives spouting PR points as if they were a revered truth have long been a part of the American scene. Generally, they aren’t actually lying, they are exaggerating, emphasizing certain aspects of a situation, trying to persuade the public that their actions are legal or righteous in some sense. But this one tests the limits of credulity.

McMillon did at one point work for Wal-Mart in their warehouse. He could have said with perfect truth that he had once been an associate, a telling point in an argument, that he is speaking from direct experience. But no, his PR staff undoubtedly explained to him that It would be far more convincing if he could persuade an audience that his company was one big family struggling together against a cruel world of which he was but one insignificant player among many.

But he’s not an associate and only his PR flacks and he find it credible to claim otherwise.

What’s the business ethics of claiming to be just another employee? What’s the business ethics of being a multimillionaire and claiming the mantle of those a bare step above a minimum wage? This is both an organizational and a personal business ethics problem. There can be little doubt that McMillan did not construct the “millionaire CEO as regular worker” ploy. It has too much PR built into it, it feels like an ad campaign. But while both McMillan and an associate are both Wal-Mart employees, there is just too much distance in status and renumeration to make this a viable claim. On the personal ethics level, that McMillon said this knowing that most people would consider it a lie does not speak well of his judgement either.

It seems to me that when your resort to this kind of hollow argument, that you must be flailing around looking for something that might work because what worked in the past, doesn’t sell anymore.

James Pilant
McMillan, Walmart’s CEO Says He’s Just Another Associate—Except He Makes $9.56 Million a Year

Walmart’s CEO made about $10 million last year, but he’s just another “associate,” he says.

http://www.slate.com/blogs/business_insider/2014/06/05/doug_mcmillon_walmart_s_ceo_insists_he_s_no_different_from_associates_making.html

From Around the Web.

http://walmart1percent.org/boardofdirectors/doug-mcmillon/

McMillon is said to be close to the Walton family and reportedly was their choice for Duke’s successor.

Are Students Idiots?

On By southwerkIn business ethics4 Comments

!!@@#dddddd444lotr_18thAre Students Idiots?

There is a new article in Slate written by Rebecca Schuman.

She discusses (the article is linked below) a famous college professor named Slavoj Zizek who is important in his field, loved by his students but considers those same students to be idiots. Zisek also hates office hours and gets upset whenever a student shares a personal story or wants to be friends.

Let’s be clear, I do not regard my students as idiots. I like my students and want them to succeed. Mr. Zizek’s opinion of his students is offensive to me.

However is this a business ethics problem?

On the surface, there would seem to be no problem at all. He is popular with his students and important in his field. We can safely conclude that he is teaching his classes successfully, so where’s the problem? I want to find a problem because I don’t like his attitude but he fulfills the requirements of his position and his students find him lovable. I would like to think I can probe beneath his success at his job and find some moral lack but by the rules of business ethics, I don’t see one.

I view teaching as a calling, more an art than a science. So when someone finds his students in a sense, unworthy, my personal values seemed to be attacked. I would rather every professor cared about their students as much as I do. I would rather that every professor would willingly do his office hours. And I would rather that professors feel honored that a student would confide in them.

I don’t know if you remember Wesley’s line from the movie, The Princess Bride, when he says to Montoya, “Learn to live with disappointment.” Apparently, I have to learn that too.

James Pilant

Slavoj Zizek calls students stupid and boring. Stop worshiping this man! (VIDEO.)

He is also a grade-A, number-one, world-class jerk, who brings to life the worst caricature of the humanities eminence: someone who loves subjecting other people to his talks, but who loathes contact with students—who, being “like other people,” are mostly “boring idiots.”

via Slavoj Zizek calls students stupid and boring. Stop worshiping this man! (VIDEO.).