Krugman and Subjectivity - Essay Example

Krugman and Subjectivity In a recent New York Times article, Paul Krugman, a frequent columnist, attempted to explain some aspects of Mitt Romney’s presidential campaign through a classed analysis of expectations of privilege that wealth affords a person. Essentially, he argued that Romney’s campaign’s apparent discomfort with attacks on his economic record amount to an expectation that because he is wealthy he should be privileged by avoiding these attacks. Krugmsna’s points, though somewhat valid fail to actually pass muster, and demonstrate a degree of subjectivity effecting his interpretation.

He argues that Romney should have “expected” such attacks, given that he is trying to argue that his business experience makes him a better leader (Krugman, 2012). This fundamentally amounts to the idea that if Romney brought it up, it should be fair game. The problem is, this logic does not stand up to a rigorous study. John Kerry, for instance, famously tried to market himself as having military cache based on his experience in the Vietnam war, and in response to this Republican leaning groups started a campaign of vicious attacks questioning Kerry’s service, and accusing him of lying about his experiences.

Krugman rightly attacked this process when it was applied to Kerry (2006). But if Krugman argues that if a presidential candidate brings something up, they should expect it to be viciously and sometimes spuriously attacked, then it stands to reason that Kerry should have expected such attacks based on bringing up his military history. Krugman’s analysis, while convincing, does show that he has some kind of subjective bent, either a political, social or cultural ideology that affects the way he thinks or argues things.

He sees things that are unacceptable against some candidates as being acceptable against others.Task B: I believe that one of the greatest areas my subjectivity might affect my teaching is a general sense that one should constantly be questioning and challenging dominant narratives. Though critical thinking skills are widely taught in schools (with the exception of Texas, if recent published goals by the Texas GOP are enacted), I believe this can have a problematic effect when confronting people who are set in their beliefs, and find them comforting.

To me, the only way to truly know that you believe something is to attempt to tear it down then rebuild it. To others, however, they might not find the idea of attacking their beliefs comforting, and may find it quite stressful. Furthermore, one of the many tasks of curriculum is to tell a dominant narrative about things like the history of the country and so forth, as the public and the government want that story told. While teaching children to question what they are told is usually allowed if not encouraged, it is often more frowned upon when challenging the foundational myths and narratives of the controlling structures.

I have to be aware that while critical thinking skills are always useful, it is my role to teach them and then let children execute them in everything they do, rather than trying to put everything the children believe into doubt. This might be a bit of a challenge for me, and is something I need to be conscious about when teaching.Works CitedKrugman, P (July 20 2012). The Pathos of the Plutocrat. New York Times.Like everyone else following the news, I've been awe-struck by the way questions about Mr.

Romney's career at Bain Capital, the private-equity firm he founded, and his refusal to release tax returns have so obviously caught the Romney campaign off guard. Shouldn't a very wealthy man running for president -- and running specifically on the premise that his business success makes him qualified for office -- have expected the nature of that success to become an issue? Shouldn't it have been obvious that refusing to release tax returns from before 2010 would raise all kinds of suspicions?

Krugman, P (January 2006). Swiftboating the Planet. New York Times.