First link: university of toronto. doesn't apply

Second link: yeah, an obscure history class. Not exactly economics 101. But the facts never stopped your spin before. Don't expect them to do so now.

As to Utah- I said hard pressed, not impossible. And It looks like a grad class, and not a '101' class.

Ohh, wow, and the CSU requirement? Well, its not, its an option on a list of 12, the student must take 4. And its a pHilosophy course, not economics 101.

The one Econoimics course you found does not say its a required course, is not an intorductory course, and includes readings such as:

Garegnani, Piero. 1984. “Value and Distribution in the Classical Economists and Marx.”, which if I recall is NOT a support of marx,

And numerous other writings that are more about other Marxian philosophies (you see, he was not just an economic philosopher):
Wolff, Richard. 1996. “Althusser and Hegel: Making Marxist Explanations
Antiessentialist and Dialectical.”

In general, SDAI, not reading Marx and understanding Marx, as a philosopher, an economist or a historian is unwise to the extreeme. Aside from the writings of Locke, Reusseu and Descartes, NOBODY else has shaped world notions of political philosophy and civil social structure and RECENT HISTORY like Marx. Even those countries/economies/philosophies thatw ere not Marxist HAD to come up with an answer to Marxism and communism, and the nature of that answer has had a PROFOUND effect on the current geopolitical lay of the land. To say that exposure to Marxism, or a deep understanding of Marxim peddled in colleges is somehow anti-american or wrong or even advocates Marxist idelogies is ignorance in action, and is a PROFOUND misunderstanding of the educational process (and pray tell, SDAI, how much time have YOU spent educating minds in college?).

SDAI wrote: "most are clearly unabashed Marxists. You don't get awards when you extoll the virtues of capitalism.
"

you know nothing of academia, SDAI- don't pretend to. You are just stating your beliefs again. Publishing extensively on Marx does not make you an advocate. Understanding Marx, the resulting revolutions in his name and his philosophy is vital to understanding the modern era. So is Adam Smith. So is Darwin. etc. Publishing on and area is the only way to gain and demonstrate expertise.

That Economics is taught using the Marxian perspective and from a marxian standpoint is absurd. It is a modern rightist urban legend, one that has been propagated for decades. I urge you to look into modern Econ textbooks, modern Econ syllabai and the class notes of current econ courses as-posted on the web. You are painfully ignorant here, and the sad thing is you don't understand that you are.

Before you make a "look at it and CLEARLY you see that" statement, try a little self reflection and self-examination. If you get beyond the trivial instant-gratification answers, I think you'll find the world is substantially more subtle than you wish to paint it as.

Davin L.