He was a pretty awesome prof. He also made a "kid" in his early 20s cry in class after berating him for at least 15 minutes for answering the question (paraphrased) "What policies could the continent of Africa benefit from the most?" with "They could stop having so many kids, hyuck hyuck hyuck."
...
He just kept asking question after question (all relevant and educational), and the more the kid tried to squirm out or avoid it, the more he'd dig in and keep asking the kid to explain his point. He cited the average family size of other regions at similar GDP per capita figures and explained that subsistence farmers often needed larger families, noting he was confused as to what point the kid was actually making. He just wouldn't let up. He cited child mortality rates and how families needed older children to work, asking how you manage if you are going to lose 1 to 3 children in your pursuit of 4 to 5 adolescents, and on and on. The more the kid gave up trying to articulate himself, the angrier the prof got, eventually getting personal. After the kid wiped away his first set of tears, the prof just told him to GTFO.
God, I loved that prof. He hated stupid people and stupid questions, but if you were genuinely curious or didn't understand, he had no issue explaining the topic in depth. You just had to try. He was also super loud, which made it all the more fun when he lost his temper.
The best part was after his tirade, he went, "Who else has an idea?" I was the only one who raised my hand (knowing his style) and gave an answer related to credit: "Exactly!" he said, and proceeded as if he hadn't just embarrassed that kid to no end and terrified the rest of the class.
I'm not enough knowledgeable in that topic of ''
What policies could the continent of Africa benefit from the most?'' but i'm really curious about the kind of answer you had given him. What was it ?
Not the guy your looking for, but Botswana has a decent track record for policies after their independence.
The idea is to nationalize your most valuable natural resources (like rare earth metals), then take the profit and invest it into the education of the upcoming generation. They will go off to college in places like London and Boston and Shanghai and Seoul and then come back to become competent administrators, educators, and business people. Thus, your economy will diversify, literacy and health will improve, and everybody wins.
Of course this really, really depends on the state company exploiting the resources. If those guys are corrupt it really breaks the whole system.
We're going back a decade here, so it's not a crystal clear memory (especially with the more exciting portion of that specific lecture).
The core issue was a structural conflict in incentives. Foreign aid programs supplied funding under rigid spending constraints that prioritized debt service. This created an absurd feedback loop where incoming aid was effectively absorbed just to cover debt obligations owed to other international development bodies and liquidity providers.
My suggestion at the time (I think?) was a temporary standstill on both conditional aid disbursements and debt service payments. The goal was to eliminate external conditional constraints, giving national authorities the fiscal sovereignty needed to restructure budgets and allocate funds where most needed before resuming debt obligations.
Not the guy your looking for, but Botswana has a decent track record for policies after their independence.
The idea is to nationalize your most valuable natural resources (like rare earth metals), then take the profit and invest it into the education of the upcoming generation. They will go off to college in places like London and Boston and Shanghai and Seoul and then come back to become competent administrators, educators, and business people. Thus, your economy will diversify, literacy and health will improve, and everybody wins.
Of course this really, really depends on the state company exploiting the resources. If those guys are corrupt it really breaks the whole system.
Please I beg you, tell me more about this prof. I could read a book about him, he sounds like a fascinating person and you have a way of painting a picture with words
Instead of berating ignorant students, making them cry, and then kicking them out of the classroom, he could've taught them in a manner so that they actually understood and learned something.
At the end of the day do you think that student actually learned anything? Or has that student spent the last X number of years of their life remembering nothing but hatred towards that professor?
Instead of berating ignorant students, making them cry, and then kicking them out of the classroom, he could've taught them in a manner so that they actually understood and learned something.
During my undergrad, I took four waitlisted courses, two were with this professor. He was in high demand because he was an excellent instructor. That student's experience was entirely self-inflicted. Bringing a bullshit, bigoted response to a 3000-level seminar deserves immediate challenge. The professor pressing him simply exposed that the student had zero substance to back up his claim.
When classroom seats are limited and serious students are stuck on waitlists, a professor's priority is maintaining academic integrity for the room, not coddling someone who came unprepared.
At the end of the day do you think that student actually learned anything? Or has that student spent the last X number of years of their life remembering nothing but hatred towards that professor?
It does not matter. University is not mandatory education, and a 3000-level lecture is not the place for remedial hand-holding or entertaining bigoted ramblings. This professor had an extensive record in both the public and private sectors, and he went above and beyond for students who came to learn. He was not kicked out of the university; he was removed from a single three-hour lecture for derailing the class. The professor's duty is to the students there to learn, not the one who wasted everyone's time.
Edit: I'm also biased. This is a Prof who helped me salvage my education during a very difficult time. He's a man who on multiple occasions after class drive me home (30mins + depending on traffic) in the opposite direction from where he lived because we would often talk after class.
I'd bet the professor would have stopped as soon as the student answered honestly. Which would probably be "I said some braindead racist bullshit because I thought it would be funny to be racist and insult Africa for being poor, and some fun replacement theory bullshit about how non-whites are having too many kids."
I'm sure the end result would still be "get the fuck out," but without the 20 minutes of rhetorically getting his shit kicked in.
To be honest, giving bad answers wasn't a problem. Giving bad explanations or making bad arguments was unacceptable. That's where the kid fucked up, think 'The Gentleman's scène with the youths and the coach in the shop, he's trying to get them to be witty and the disappointment got them beat up.
39
u/MethodicallyRight Aug 04 '26 edited Aug 04 '26
He was a pretty awesome prof. He also made a "kid" in his early 20s cry in class after berating him for at least 15 minutes for answering the question (paraphrased) "What policies could the continent of Africa benefit from the most?" with "They could stop having so many kids, hyuck hyuck hyuck."
...
He just kept asking question after question (all relevant and educational), and the more the kid tried to squirm out or avoid it, the more he'd dig in and keep asking the kid to explain his point. He cited the average family size of other regions at similar GDP per capita figures and explained that subsistence farmers often needed larger families, noting he was confused as to what point the kid was actually making. He just wouldn't let up. He cited child mortality rates and how families needed older children to work, asking how you manage if you are going to lose 1 to 3 children in your pursuit of 4 to 5 adolescents, and on and on. The more the kid gave up trying to articulate himself, the angrier the prof got, eventually getting personal. After the kid wiped away his first set of tears, the prof just told him to GTFO.
God, I loved that prof. He hated stupid people and stupid questions, but if you were genuinely curious or didn't understand, he had no issue explaining the topic in depth. You just had to try. He was also super loud, which made it all the more fun when he lost his temper.
The best part was after his tirade, he went, "Who else has an idea?" I was the only one who raised my hand (knowing his style) and gave an answer related to credit: "Exactly!" he said, and proceeded as if he hadn't just embarrassed that kid to no end and terrified the rest of the class.