Slashdot Mirror

i was born a free and sovereign being ..

i never granted anyone authority over my life and being ..

i don't require anyone granting me rights and privileges ..

and i never agreed to play by anyone's rules ..

but the vast majority of people ..

who have gone through the state controlled education system (mass brain washing) and grown up being influenced by a corporate controlled media (propaganda machine) ..

are not likely to know or remember this fact..

the vast majority of beings are/have accepted a "Social" world based on competition and control VS cooperation and empowerment ..

the rule of law and political party based democracy (limited dictatorships) .. so often espoused these days .. is a very convenient system for controlling natural beings .. by those in a privileged position of power.. haven't you noticed how the vast majority of politicians are either lawyers .. doctors .. or accountants ..

oh! .. forgive me .. their education makes them qualified and gives them the "right" to rule over my life ..

John Taylor Gatto - Challenging the Myths of Modern Schooling
http://www.johntaylorgatto.com/

The Underground History of American Education
http://www.johntaylorgatto.com/chapters/index.htm

some relevant .. though still to limiting links:

How I Clobberd Every Bureaucratic Cash-Confiscatory Agency Known To Man- Mary Croft
http://www.wealth4freedom.com/law/Mary.htm

Natural person - Wikipedia
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Natural_person

Paradigm
http://www.naturalperson.com/

Natural Persons
http://naturalpersons.org/

the only comforting fact in my life .. is knowing that it is destined to fail miserably and most likely with a catastrophic result .. though it maybe with a whimper do to a lack of atmospheric oxygen ..

i was born a free and sovereign being ..

i never granted anyone authority over my life and being ..

i don't require anyone granting me rights and privileges ..

and i never agreed to play by anyone's rules ..

but the vast majority of people ..

who have gone through the state controlled education system (mass brain washing) and grown up being influenced by a corporate controlled media (propaganda machine) ..

are not likely to know or remember this fact..

the vast majority of beings are/have accepted a "Social" world based on competition and control VS cooperation and empowerment ..

the rule of law and political party based democracy (limited dictatorships) .. so often espoused these days .. is a very convenient system for controlling natural beings .. by those in a privileged position of power.. haven't you noticed how the vast majority of politicians are either lawyers .. doctors .. or accountants ..

oh! .. forgive me .. their education makes them qualified and gives them the "right" to rule over my life ..

John Taylor Gatto - Challenging the Myths of Modern Schooling
http://www.johntaylorgatto.com/

The Underground History of American Education
http://www.johntaylorgatto.com/chapters/index.htm

some relevant .. though still to limiting links:

How I Clobberd Every Bureaucratic Cash-Confiscatory Agency Known To Man- Mary Croft
http://www.wealth4freedom.com/law/Mary.htm

Natural person - Wikipedia
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Natural_person

Paradigm
http://www.naturalperson.com/

Natural Persons
http://naturalpersons.org/

the only comforting fact in my life .. is knowing that it is destined to fail miserably and most likely with a catastrophic result .. though it maybe with a whimper do to a lack of atmospheric oxygen ..

See John Taylor Gatto:
    "The Underground History of American Education: A Schoolteacher's Intimate Investigation
Into The Problem Of Modern Schooling"
    http://www.johntaylorgatto.com/underground/index.h tm
    http://www.johntaylorgatto.com/underground/toc1.ht m
For example:
    http://www.johntaylorgatto.com/chapters/2e.htm
"I have little doubt the fantastic wealth of American big business is psychologically and procedurally grounded in our form of schooling. The training field for these grotesque human qualities is the classroom. Schools train individuals to respond as a mass. Boys and girls are drilled in being bored, frightened, envious, emotionally needy, generally incomplete. A successful mass production economy requires such a clientele. A small business, small farm economy like that of the Amish requires individual competence, thoughtfulness, compassion, and universal participation; our own requires a managed mass of leveled, spiritless, anxious, familyless, friendless, godless, and obedient people who believe the difference between Cheers and Seinfeld is a subject worth arguing about."

The biggest problem with compulsary "public" education is that unlike "public" libraries, you can't (easily) escape by just walking out the door. (Well, you could for a day or two and then the police machinery related to truancy will start grinding on you, unless it is appeased in other ways.) Most "private" education is little better in the compulsary aspects or preventing bullying.

While this may seem paradoxical, as you continue your quest for spritiual growth, consider the idea that the bullies you faced are in some sense just as much victims of those systems as you were.

A good resource:
    http://www.bullyonline.org/
    http://www.bullyonline.org/schoolbully/index.htm
    http://www.bullyonline.org/schoolbully/myths.htm
Example from the myths page: "Children have it drummed into them from the moment they are born that they must not hit, punch, kick, bite, scratch, pull, push, poke or use any form of physical violence. Children are often punished - sometimes brutally and humiliatingly - for exhibiting any form of violent behaviour. Some adults then criticise children for not using violence when faced with a thug. Child targets of bullying also know (better than adults) that if they retaliate physically, the bully will feign victimhood (often with a convincing flood of tears) and the responsible adults will be fooled into believing that the target is the bully and the bully is the target. The (real) target is then punished by the adults whilst the bully looks on, enjoying every moment. Once the adults turn their backs, the bully starts on their target again. Targets are also people with high moral integrity, a well-developed sense of moral values, and a clear understanding of the need to resolve conflict with dialogue. This is how we teach children to behave and how society demands that children behave. We should therefore not be surprised when targets of bullying display their maturity by going to great lengths to resolve the violent acts committed towards them with dialogue rather than with fists or feet. Trying to resolving conflict with dialogue is a hallmark of integrity and strength of character. Bullying is a hallmark of lack of integrity and weakness of character."

See John Taylor Gatto:
    "The Underground History of American Education: A Schoolteacher's Intimate Investigation
Into The Problem Of Modern Schooling"
    http://www.johntaylorgatto.com/underground/index.h tm
    http://www.johntaylorgatto.com/underground/toc1.ht m
For example:
    http://www.johntaylorgatto.com/chapters/2e.htm
"I have little doubt the fantastic wealth of American big business is psychologically and procedurally grounded in our form of schooling. The training field for these grotesque human qualities is the classroom. Schools train individuals to respond as a mass. Boys and girls are drilled in being bored, frightened, envious, emotionally needy, generally incomplete. A successful mass production economy requires such a clientele. A small business, small farm economy like that of the Amish requires individual competence, thoughtfulness, compassion, and universal participation; our own requires a managed mass of leveled, spiritless, anxious, familyless, friendless, godless, and obedient people who believe the difference between Cheers and Seinfeld is a subject worth arguing about."

The biggest problem with compulsary "public" education is that unlike "public" libraries, you can't (easily) escape by just walking out the door. (Well, you could for a day or two and then the police machinery related to truancy will start grinding on you, unless it is appeased in other ways.) Most "private" education is little better in the compulsary aspects or preventing bullying.

While this may seem paradoxical, as you continue your quest for spritiual growth, consider the idea that the bullies you faced are in some sense just as much victims of those systems as you were.

A good resource:
    http://www.bullyonline.org/
    http://www.bullyonline.org/schoolbully/index.htm
    http://www.bullyonline.org/schoolbully/myths.htm
Example from the myths page: "Children have it drummed into them from the moment they are born that they must not hit, punch, kick, bite, scratch, pull, push, poke or use any form of physical violence. Children are often punished - sometimes brutally and humiliatingly - for exhibiting any form of violent behaviour. Some adults then criticise children for not using violence when faced with a thug. Child targets of bullying also know (better than adults) that if they retaliate physically, the bully will feign victimhood (often with a convincing flood of tears) and the responsible adults will be fooled into believing that the target is the bully and the bully is the target. The (real) target is then punished by the adults whilst the bully looks on, enjoying every moment. Once the adults turn their backs, the bully starts on their target again. Targets are also people with high moral integrity, a well-developed sense of moral values, and a clear understanding of the need to resolve conflict with dialogue. This is how we teach children to behave and how society demands that children behave. We should therefore not be surprised when targets of bullying display their maturity by going to great lengths to resolve the violent acts committed towards them with dialogue rather than with fists or feet. Trying to resolving conflict with dialogue is a hallmark of integrity and strength of character. Bullying is a hallmark of lack of integrity and weakness of character."

See John Taylor Gatto:
    "The Underground History of American Education: A Schoolteacher's Intimate Investigation
Into The Problem Of Modern Schooling"
    http://www.johntaylorgatto.com/underground/index.h tm
    http://www.johntaylorgatto.com/underground/toc1.ht m
For example:
    http://www.johntaylorgatto.com/chapters/2e.htm
"I have little doubt the fantastic wealth of American big business is psychologically and procedurally grounded in our form of schooling. The training field for these grotesque human qualities is the classroom. Schools train individuals to respond as a mass. Boys and girls are drilled in being bored, frightened, envious, emotionally needy, generally incomplete. A successful mass production economy requires such a clientele. A small business, small farm economy like that of the Amish requires individual competence, thoughtfulness, compassion, and universal participation; our own requires a managed mass of leveled, spiritless, anxious, familyless, friendless, godless, and obedient people who believe the difference between Cheers and Seinfeld is a subject worth arguing about."

The biggest problem with compulsary "public" education is that unlike "public" libraries, you can't (easily) escape by just walking out the door. (Well, you could for a day or two and then the police machinery related to truancy will start grinding on you, unless it is appeased in other ways.) Most "private" education is little better in the compulsary aspects or preventing bullying.

While this may seem paradoxical, as you continue your quest for spritiual growth, consider the idea that the bullies you faced are in some sense just as much victims of those systems as you were.

A good resource:
    http://www.bullyonline.org/
    http://www.bullyonline.org/schoolbully/index.htm
    http://www.bullyonline.org/schoolbully/myths.htm
Example from the myths page: "Children have it drummed into them from the moment they are born that they must not hit, punch, kick, bite, scratch, pull, push, poke or use any form of physical violence. Children are often punished - sometimes brutally and humiliatingly - for exhibiting any form of violent behaviour. Some adults then criticise children for not using violence when faced with a thug. Child targets of bullying also know (better than adults) that if they retaliate physically, the bully will feign victimhood (often with a convincing flood of tears) and the responsible adults will be fooled into believing that the target is the bully and the bully is the target. The (real) target is then punished by the adults whilst the bully looks on, enjoying every moment. Once the adults turn their backs, the bully starts on their target again. Targets are also people with high moral integrity, a well-developed sense of moral values, and a clear understanding of the need to resolve conflict with dialogue. This is how we teach children to behave and how society demands that children behave. We should therefore not be surprised when targets of bullying display their maturity by going to great lengths to resolve the violent acts committed towards them with dialogue rather than with fists or feet. Trying to resolving conflict with dialogue is a hallmark of integrity and strength of character. Bullying is a hallmark of lack of integrity and weakness of character."

For the rest of the sordid story behind almost-all public (and also most private) education see the book:
_The Underground History of American Education_ -- by John Taylor Gatto
available on-line here:
http://www.johntaylorgatto.com/underground/index.h tm
From the prologue: "Our problem in understanding forced schooling stems from an inconvenient fact: that the wrong it does from a human perspective is right from a systems perspective. You can see this in the case of six-year-old Bianca, who came to my attention because an assistant principal screamed at her in front of an assembly, "BIANCA, YOU ANIMAL, SHUT UP!" Like the wail of a banshee, this sang the school doom of Bianca. Even though her body continued to shuffle around, the voodoo had poisoned her. Do I make too much of this simple act of putting a little girl in her place? It must happen thousands of times every day in schools all over. I've seen it many times, and if I were painfully honest I'd admit to doing it many times. Schools are supposed to teach kids their place. That's why we have age-graded classes. In any case, it wasn't your own little Janey or mine. Most of us tacitly accept the pragmatic terms of public school which allow every kind of psychic violence to be inflicted on Bianca in order to fulfill the prime directive of the system: putting children in their place. It's called "social efficiency." But I get this precognition, this flash-forward to a moment far in the future when your little girl Jane, having left her comfortable home, wakes up to a world where Bianca is her enraged meter maid, or the passport clerk Jane counts on for her emergency ticket out of the country, or the strange lady who lives next door. ... You aren't compelled to loan your car to anyone who wants it, but you are compelled to surrender your school-age child to strangers who process children for a livelihood, even though one in every nine schoolchildren is terrified of physical harm happening to them in school, terrified with good cause; about thirty-three are murdered there every year. From 1992 through 1999, 262 children were murdered in school in the United States. Your great-great-grandmother didn't have to surrender her children. What happened? If I demanded you give up your television to an anonymous, itinerant repairman who needed work you'd think I was crazy; if I came with a policeman who forced you to pay that repairman even after he broke your set, you would be outraged. Why are you so docile when you give up your child to a government agent called a schoolteacher? I want to open up concealed aspects of modern schooling such as the deterioration it forces in the morality of parenting. You have no say at all in choosing your teachers. You know nothing about their backgrounds or families. And the state knows little more than you do. This is as radical a piece of social engineering as the human imagination can conceive. What does it mean? One thing you do know is how unlikely it will be for any teacher to understand the personality of your particular child or anything significant about your family, culture, religion, plans, hopes, dreams. In the confusion of school affairs even teachers so disposed don't have opportunity to know those things. How did this happen? Before you hire a company to build a house, you would, I expect, insist on detailed plans showing what the finished structure was going to look like. Building a child's mind and character is what public schools do, their justification for prematurely breaking family and neighborhood learning. Where is documentary evidence to prove this assumption that trained and certified professionals do it better than people who know and love them can? There isn't any. The cost in New York State for building a well-schooled child in the year 2000 is $200,000 per body when lost interest is calculated. ... You wouldn't build a home without some idea what it would

What the hell happened? Who suddenly decided that kids weren't capable of this?

The people who operate public schools, that's who. Read "The Underground History of American Education" by John T. Gatto for more insight: http://www.johntaylorgatto.com/underground/toc1.ht m

No shortage of teachers bashing the system though, so what's your point? Start with http://www.johntaylorgatto.com/

That would have been too obvious. Instead, they created the public school system, the "experts" that are always on CNN telling us how to live, and other general means of convincing people to take their freedom and use it for exactly what they are told to do.

Read this.

Pardon me for opening with an ad hominem, but you are an ASS, and so are the people that modded you up. You are looking at a static picture of where we as a society are today. The grandparent is really talking (offtopic perhaps, and in a somewhat inflammatory tone, I'll grant you) about what led to our present state of affairs.

The problem with your whole rebuttal is that you're addressing the symptoms, whereas the grandparent is looking towards the root cause. You're not arguing the same argument.

"It's always nice when someone new walks into a process that's been going on for hundreds of years and gets angry that no one sees his simple solution, even though that's where we started and we've been fixing the problems with it ever since."

There is a great body of libertarian thinking, dating back to the Moses time (for examples, read The Discovery of Freedom", Rose Wilder Lane) that supports some of the grandparents inadequately presented points.

"They're too busy talking about the financial freedom lost when you have a work force of illiterates who can't add."

It is a well documented fact that literacy rates were shockingly higher than today's throughout early American history, and without public education. On the other hand, mandatory state sponsored education has been used by every systematically tyrannical government as a means to keep the population in line (read Underground History of American Education). Why isn't education working?

"And your constructive solution is then to let thousands and thousands of people either die or turn to crime? Step one, end social security. What's step two? Please answer. If you've got a way to make this work, please tell us. I really, really want to be on your side, because that's a lot of money."

Here's a solution for you that's been suggested by a courageous few and rejected by many a fool for ages of men:

1. Love your enemies, as well as your neighbors. Forgive those who have done you wrong so as to end the animosity between you, rather than perpetuate it.
2. Treat others as you want to be treated
3. Do not judge others before you judge yourself.
4. Help anyone who asks you. Be approachable. Participate in your community and build strong ties in your family.
5. Stop assuming that institutions, laws and power hungry liars can possibly solve the worlds problems when you haven't even the decency and wherewithall to say hello to your own neighbors in passing.
6. Instead of robbing from peter to pay paul (are you a socialist?), just cut out the bloated middle man (uncle sam) and buy your elderly neighbor lady a bag of groceries.

The problem with this, is that in our degenerate society (I am not a Christian, btw), no one really fucking cares as long as they have beer, cable and cheesepuffs. Oh, and free porn...

"Genius! How could that possibly go bad? Combine this with your no-free-schooling idea and we've got ourselves a plan that just might solve everybody's problem."

Honestly, while I believe you're entitled to your opinion, I don't think it is in any way insightful to slap down someone else observation with an equal dose of pap.

Slashdot mods: How the hell does the grandparent get modded a troll and the parent's uninformed bullshit gets modded +5 insightful? Both of them are blowing hot air out their ass, regardless of which opinion I find more tolerable.

Here's a suggestion for everyone: Learn how to carry on a constructive argument, quit with the conversational terrorism already, and direct your energy to making the world a better place instead of sitting on your ass casting aspersions to the wind...

Thanks for reading,

Chris

[quote]They're too busy talking about the financial freedom lost when you have a work force of illiterates who can't add.[/quote]
Your arguement is based on several assumptions:

1. You assume that government schools are teaching kids literacy and math. ("public" schools are churing out illiterates who can't add in record numbers. It terms of science, math, and english, are children are getting stupider as government takes a larger and larger role in their education).

2. You assume that the government is the only institution capable of providing education (When in fact, homeschooling, religious schools, private secular schools in the U.S. seem to do better that public schools in teaching math, science, and literacy... There are an infinite amount of possible education models besides the State-Run Prussian Military School model we use in the United States).

3. You ignore the terrible social effects public schools have on children (conditioning them to obedience to authority, squeltching individualism and diversity, taking away their privacy, age and skill segregation). Government schools primary purpose is social conditioning and propogandizing... Education is secondary... at least according to the founders of modern public education in America (check out http://johntaylorgatto.com/ for lots of information on the history and purposes of public education in the U.S.)

We don't all share your absolute faith in government, and government is not the only model of social cooperation that we are able to comprehend. No Government Schools != No Education ... that might be hard for someone to grasp who has been conditioned that the state is everything.

[quote]And your constructive solution is then to let thousands and thousands of people either die or turn to crime? Step one, end social security. What's step two? Please answer. If you've got a way to make this work, please tell us. I really, really want to be on your side, because that's a lot of money.[/quote]
Once again, your statement has many assumptions... A Christian says "How are you going to avoid going to hell if you don't except Christ to wash away your sins", and the statement seems common sense to them, because they have already assumed all the premises of Christianity (for example, that hell exists, that there is actually something called sin, and that Jesus can redeem sin, etc. etc.). But if a Buddist, or Taoist, or Athiest hears that sentence, it just sounds silly, because they have not accepted all the Christian assumptions on which this "common sense" is based.

Here are your assumptions:

1. You assume that Medicare is the only social structure capable of providing health care to those that need it. (In fact, there are any number of models of healthcare that we could use, if the government would allow such things... government isn't the only means of social organization).

2. You assume that Medicare somehow makes healthcare more available (instead of, say, pumping money in without increasing supply, and thus raising the price of medical care for everyone - acting as an unofficial government subsidy of big pharma, the people who pay to lobby to increase medicare).

3. You assume that Medicare is a sustainable, viable system. (Social Security, of which Medicare is a part, will no longer be financial viable when the number of people collecting benifits approaches the number of people paying into the system. This is set to happen when the baby boomers stop paying, and start collecting).

I mean, listen to the rhetoric we are using: "If we don't have Medicare, thousands and thousand will die on the street or be commiting horrible crime!" - I mean what kind of sensational reactionary statement is that? Let me do one better:

"You must all send me $10,000 - because if you don't, I will not be able to say my magical incantations, and thousands and thousands of people will be killed by angry spirits! What, you don't want to send me $10,00

I think it was Richard Maybury's Whatever Happened to Justice where I first read about the "bandit theory of government". It goes something like this: in the beginning, people got together to work to provide for a living. But some people didn't want to work. So they set up a camp, and periodically raided the surrounding villages. Eventually they decided that banditry was too much work, so one time they moved in, and never left. "I am your King, these are my royal officers, it is your privledge to pay us tribute." Then tribute became "tax", and the government began to provide services to justify collection of said tax.

According to Mr. Maybury, there are three politcal systems: Liberty, Tyranny, and Chaos. Liberty is what America is about; bandits have successfully re-taken the American government over the last 100+ years, leading to the problems facing the country today. Government schools were instituted to "dumb down" the population, and strip them of the possibility of an independant livelihood. (Reference: writings & speeches of John Taylor Gatto, specifically On The Scientific Management of Children: A Short Angry History ).

Government is the problem. Many people advocate that the bandits set up false terrorist attacks, to solidify their power. Some of these people are certainly kooks, but following the general principle of 'where there's smoke, there's fire', there has to be something to the claims of a grand conspiracy.

Richard Maybury predicted the current World War III 10 years ago. He's certainly worth investigating...

I think it was Richard Maybury's Whatever Happened to Justice where I first read about the "bandit theory of government". It goes something like this: in the beginning, people got together to work to provide for a living. But some people didn't want to work. So they set up a camp, and periodically raided the surrounding villages. Eventually they decided that banditry was too much work, so one time they moved in, and never left. "I am your King, these are my royal officers, it is your privledge to pay us tribute." Then tribute became "tax", and the government began to provide services to justify collection of said tax.

According to Mr. Maybury, there are three politcal systems: Liberty, Tyranny, and Chaos. Liberty is what America is about; bandits have successfully re-taken the American government over the last 100+ years, leading to the problems facing the country today. Government schools were instituted to "dumb down" the population, and strip them of the possibility of an independant livelihood. (Reference: writings & speeches of John Taylor Gatto, specifically On The Scientific Management of Children: A Short Angry History ).

Government is the problem. Many people advocate that the bandits set up false terrorist attacks, to solidify their power. Some of these people are certainly kooks, but following the general principle of 'where there's smoke, there's fire', there has to be something to the claims of a grand conspiracy.

Richard Maybury predicted the current World War III 10 years ago. He's certainly worth investigating...

Couldn't get more than 20-30 pages into it.

Tried to read Moby Dick for my 10th grade honors English class... Had something to do with a whale, but that was just the picture on the cover.

Tried to read The Hobbit several times. Another 20-30 pages...

Tried to read The Lord of the Rings before I saw the movies. 10 pages before I gave up.

I couldn't even read Harry Potter.

I did really well on all those standardized reading tests they make you take in government schools, and I do just fine on magazine article-length pieces, or technical stuff... I never really did any reading for my B.S. degree - went to class, skim-read the texts.

Finally, a year after finishing my 16.5 years of schooling, I picked up a copy of John Taylor Gatto's A Different Kind of Teacher. In the first chapter, Mr. Gatto talks about how he found that his 7th graders ("at some of Manhattan's best schools, and at some of the worst") were unable to read, beyond for a standardized test. To prove it for his readers, he said to read the first 20 pages of All Quiet on the Western Front (available at just about any library), and then he'd have a question. Well, I read the question first, so I knew the answer. But I didn't read the second question, and even after I had, I still had NO IDEA WHAT WAS TAKING PLACE. I could pass my eyes over the words, but I was incapable of extracting the story from them.

Mr. Gatto says that the way reading is taught in schools today & for the last 60+ years actually discourages children from visualizing the story as they read it. Which is certainly my problem, and the reason why I couldn't read all those books I gave above.

While I can't blame school for my inability to visualize, I do resent how they led me to believe that I knew how to read, when that certainly wasn't the case. They wasted 13 years of my life in Elementary, Middle and High schools, and I wasted 3.5 years and a whole lotta $$$ in College. I could've learned so much more if I'd been able to read beyond the level of standardized test.

(My problem with visualization was due to a medical problem that I am only now resolving, with the assitance of a capable Osteopathic physician in the Cranial Field.)

So anyways, back to the subject at hand: It's nice that Movie Studios are putting these classic novels on film. This way, since so many of us are incapable of reading complex stories due to our miseducation by the government (ref: books by John Taylor Gatto & others), we can still enjoy the stories our ancestors got from reading the books.

We are in a free country, aren't we?

Absolutely. But when you vote for the federal or state government to get involved in taxing me to pay for your kids' educations, it isn't free. You can join the government-funding of schools, but don't force me to do it. I disagree with everything a public school stands for. I am no longer free.

Nope. I choose to tax everybody so everybody have enough money to raise their children, disregarding where they were born or under what surname.

Yet if the parents don't take an interest in their childrens' educations, the childrens' lives won't be any better from having an education or not. The old rule is if you give someone something for free, they will treat it badly. If they pay for it themselves, they will have more interest in following through. If you are a parent and have children, you should consider how you'll raise them and how you'll pay for that. For those who can't afford an education, there has always been ways to get children educated, at least until government decided to intrude.

That really smells even at the end of a ten foot pole. That simply is FALSE on big capital letters.

You must be a teacher or very young. Our literacy and educated rates have fallen as the public education system has grown. Some show that in 1940, whites had a 96% literacy rate while minorities were at 80%. In 1840, 1 out of 579 citizens were illiterate. At the end of the 20th century, National Adult Literacy Survey and the National Assessment of Educational Progress say 40 percent of blacks and 17 percent of whites can not read. How much more do we spend on public education, and why is minority illiteracy doubled and white illiteracy quadrupled?

Don't compare graduation rates if the graduates today can't compare to those who left schooling for real jobs 50 or 100 years ago. Graduation != educated. I know, I have to employ the morons that get graduated from public schools today.

If you are a symbol about what can I learn there, no thanks. You are utterly wrong.


We'll have to agree to disagree. You want to force me to pay for your childrens' education. You want to force me to accept your currency that has devalued over 99% in 100 years (my currency has appreciated over 1000% in 100 years versus your currency, and has stayed virtually the same in value over the past 2000 years). You want me to give 50% of my income to your government for all its various powers, which I believe is theft. You want to force my children to join your army to fight your wars. You want to tell me how to build my home. You want to force my business to allow any customer that walks in, even if I don't trust them or like them.

Conformity and process are the primary goals of the educational system, even though many teachers are striving for excellence in educating the students. There is a reason the only objection to homeschooling is, "But what about his/her socialization?" Read some of John Taylor Gatto's stuff http://www.johntaylorgatto.com/ or Linda Schrock Taylor http://www.lewrockwell.com/taylor/taylor-arch.html Homeschooling allows you to teach your children what they want to know. The big secret to good homeschooling is to link whatever you feel the need to teach to what they are interested in. Give them a reason to learn something and they'll devour it. Go to the next subject when they had mastered the first. Remember Magic: the Gathering most people who played it memorized the attributes of hundreds if not thousands of cards. Schools had to ban it because they had nothing to compete with it, but they still asked students to memorize thousands of facts about Brazil and Ancient Greece, but they just couldn't make it interesting.

same difference.

http://www.johntaylorgatto.com/
http://www.cantrip.org/gatto.html

I found this essay in the Fall '91 issue of Whole Earth Review. It finally clarified for me why American school is such a spirit-crushing experience, and suggested what to do about it.

Before reading, please set your irony detector to the on position. If you find yourself inclined to dismiss the below as paranoid, you should know that the design behind the current American school system is very well-documented historically, in published writings of dizzying cynicism by such well-known figures as Horace Mann and Andrew Carnegie.

The Six-Lesson Schoolteacher

by John Taylor Gatto, New York State Teacher of the Year, 1991

Call me Mr. Gatto, please. Twenty-six years ago, having nothing better to do, I tried my hand at schoolteaching. My license certifies me as an instructor of English language and literature, but that isn't what I do at all. What I teach is school, and I win awards doing it.

Teaching means many different things, but six lessons are common to schoolteaching from Harlem to Hollywood. You pay for these lessons in more ways than you can imagine, so you might as well know what they are:

The first lesson I teach is: "Stay in the class where you belong." I don't know who decides that my kids belong there but that's not my business. The children are numbered so that if any get away they can be returned to the right class. Over the years the variety of ways children are numbered has increased dramatically, until it is hard to see the human being under the burden of the numbers each carries. Numbering children is a big and very profitable business, though what the business is designed to accomplish is elusive.

In any case, again, that's not my business. My job is to make the kids like it -- being locked in together, I mean -- or at the minimum, endure it. If things go well, the kids can't imagine themselves anywhere else; they envy and fear the better classes and have contempt for the dumber classes. So the class mostly keeps itself in good marching order. That's the real lesson of any rigged competition like school. You come to know your place.

Nevertheless, in spite of the overall blueprint, I make an effort to urge children to higher levels of test success, promising eventual transfer from the lower-level class as a reward. I insinuate that the day will come when an employer will hire them on the basis of test scores, even though my own experience is that employers are (rightly) indifferent to such things. I never lie outright, but I've come to see that truth and [school]teaching are incompatible.

The lesson of numbered classes is that there is no way out of your class except by magic. Until that happens you must stay where you are put.

The second lesson I teach kids is to turn on and off like a light switch. I demand that they become totally involved in my lessons, jumping up and down in their seats with anticipation, competing vigorously with each other for my favor. But when the bell rings I insist that they drop the work at once and proceed quickly to the next work station. Nothing important is ever finished in my class, nor in any other class I know of.

The lesson of bells is that no work is worth finishing, so why care too deeply about anything? Bells are the secret logic of schooltime; their argument is inexorable; bells destroy past and future, converting every interval into a sameness, as an abstract map makes every living mountain and river the same even though they are not. Bells inoculate each undertaking with indifference.

The third lesson I teach you is to surrender your wi

Sure. You can read The Underground History of American Education online. If you don't feel like you have time to read the whole book just now, start with his short essay, The Six-Lesson Schoolteacher .

The school system in this country also needs to be radically improved.

dood, talk to the children: almost all of them hate their government schools. School is the problem. Read some John Taylor Gatto and you'll understand why.

You're right on about needing CEOs who are Engineers and not Beancounters, though... Read about what happened at General Motors with their EV1 project. The engineer-CEO & board members who said "we can do this!" (meet California's Zero Emission Vehicle mandate) got kicked out in 1992 after a recession caused them to miss profit expectations. They were replaced with Beancounters, who gave the EV1 project lipservice, but did everything they could to kill the mandate. Now look at GM: giving away their cars for 3+ months (employee discount program, losing >$1,000/car). There are no profit expectations because the analysts expect that they're going to lose lots of money.

http://ev1-club.power.net/ - 100+ people offered GM $24,000/each for USED compact-sized EV1's. GM said "no thanks" and took the cars to Mesa, Arizona where they were uncerimoniously crushed.
GM Deathwatch (part 1 of 34+)

And ignorant replaceable workers are exactly what our current system is built to create.

Free Your Mind

So, what do we do? We lock them up in a sterile environment, where they're told not to question the teacher, and never to talk to the kids next to them. We prevent their natural curiousity, and instead, browbeat them into performing tricks like a circus animal. The apathy of the schoolchild is both detrimental and obvious.

If you haven't heard of it, I think you'd find The Underground History of American Education interesting. John Taylor Gatto puts forward the hypothesis that forced schooling is designed to produce just the kind of mindless robot you speak of (or at least keep the children away from the streets). The few that do manage to rise to the top can be trusted with the keys to the kingdom as they've proven their non disruptive nature before, and hence pose no threat to the powers that be. While that might not be that fresh a point of view, he's done a lot of research into the issue, and presents his case well. I'll be damed if I believe it (at least to the extent he argues) but it's a worthwhile read. And it's avaliable for online reading.

...or maybe he had a natural resistance to an educational system designed to pump out servants of corporate and political management for the mass consumerism dominating our country. "Traditional forms of instruction in America, even before the Revolution, had three specific purposes: 1. To make good people 2. To make good citizens 3. And to make each student find some particular talents to develop to the maximum. " For an American Education History Tour of the NEW Fourth Purpose see- http://www.johntaylorgatto.com/historytour/history 1.htm Some call it "Human Civilization", others know it as the "IT virus". There is no IT. There only IS. -Gaia

...or maybe he had a natural resistance to an educational system designed to pump out servants of corporate and political management for the mass consumerism dominating our country. "Traditional forms of instruction in America, even before the Revolution, had three specific purposes: 1. To make good people 2. To make good citizens 3. And to make each student find some particular talents to develop to the maximum. " For an American Education History Tour of the NEW Fourth Purpose see- http://www.johntaylorgatto.com/historytour/history 1.htm Some call it "Human Civilization", others know it as the "IT virus". There is no IT. There only IS. -Gaia

...or maybe he had a natural resistance to an educational system designed to pump out servants of corporate and political management for the mass consumerism dominating our country. See: http://www.johntaylorgatto.com/historytour/history 1.htm Some call it "Human Civilization", others know it as the "IT virus". There is no IT. There only IS.

Looking back, abundant data exist from states like Connecticut and Massachusetts to show that by 1840 the incidence of complex literacy in the United States was between 93 and 100 percent wherever such a thing mattered. According to the Connecticut census of 1840, only one citizen out of every 579 was illiterate and you probably don't want to know, not really, what people in those days considered literate; it's too embarrassing. Popular novels of the period give a clue:

Last of the Mohicans, published in 1826, sold so well that a contemporary equivalent would have to move 10 million copies to match it. If you pick up an uncut version you find yourself in a dense thicket of philosophy, history, culture, manners, politics, geography, analysis of human motives and actions, all conveyed in data-rich periodic sentences so formidable only a determined and well-educated reader can handle it nowadays. Yet in 1818 we were a small-farm nation without colleges or universities to speak of. Could those simple folk have had more complex minds than our own?

- http://www.johntaylorgatto.com/chapters/3b.htm

Mom didn't know any better, and sent me to school to learn how to read. I learned the alphabet and short words in Kindergarten, simple sentances in first grade, slightly more complex sentances in second grade, etc. And today, while I can read /. just fine, if it's anything sufficiently complex, I'm lost. I couldn't read Moby Dick in my 10th grade "honors" english class, I've tried to read The Hobbit and Fellowship of the Ring multiple times (but can't get more than 20 pages into them). I certainly couldn't read Last of the Mohicans - I couldn't even finish the second Harry Potter.

And I tried to read the assigned reading for my

Looking back, abundant data exist from states like Connecticut and Massachusetts to show that by 1840 the incidence of complex literacy in the United States was between 93 and 100 percent wherever such a thing mattered. According to the Connecticut census of 1840, only one citizen out of every 579 was illiterate and you probably don't want to know, not really, what people in those days considered literate; it's too embarrassing. Popular novels of the period give a clue:

Last of the Mohicans, published in 1826, sold so well that a contemporary equivalent would have to move 10 million copies to match it. If you pick up an uncut version you find yourself in a dense thicket of philosophy, history, culture, manners, politics, geography, analysis of human motives and actions, all conveyed in data-rich periodic sentences so formidable only a determined and well-educated reader can handle it nowadays. Yet in 1818 we were a small-farm nation without colleges or universities to speak of. Could those simple folk have had more complex minds than our own?

- http://www.johntaylorgatto.com/chapters/3b.htm

Mom didn't know any better, and sent me to school to learn how to read. I learned the alphabet and short words in Kindergarten, simple sentances in first grade, slightly more complex sentances in second grade, etc. And today, while I can read /. just fine, if it's anything sufficiently complex, I'm lost. I couldn't read Moby Dick in my 10th grade "honors" english class, I've tried to read The Hobbit and Fellowship of the Ring multiple times (but can't get more than 20 pages into them). I certainly couldn't read Last of the Mohicans - I couldn't even finish the second Harry Potter.

And I tried to read the assigned reading for my

Looking back, abundant data exist from states like Connecticut and Massachusetts to show that by 1840 the incidence of complex literacy in the United States was between 93 and 100 percent wherever such a thing mattered. According to the Connecticut census of 1840, only one citizen out of every 579 was illiterate and you probably don't want to know, not really, what people in those days considered literate; it's too embarrassing. Popular novels of the period give a clue:

Last of the Mohicans, published in 1826, sold so well that a contemporary equivalent would have to move 10 million copies to match it. If you pick up an uncut version you find yourself in a dense thicket of philosophy, history, culture, manners, politics, geography, analysis of human motives and actions, all conveyed in data-rich periodic sentences so formidable only a determined and well-educated reader can handle it nowadays. Yet in 1818 we were a small-farm nation without colleges or universities to speak of. Could those simple folk have had more complex minds than our own?

- http://www.johntaylorgatto.com/chapters/3b.htm

Mom didn't know any better, and sent me to school to learn how to read. I learned the alphabet and short words in Kindergarten, simple sentances in first grade, slightly more complex sentances in second grade, etc. And today, while I can read /. just fine, if it's anything sufficiently complex, I'm lost. I couldn't read Moby Dick in my 10th grade "honors" english class, I've tried to read The Hobbit and Fellowship of the Ring multiple times (but can't get more than 20 pages into them). I certainly couldn't read Last of the Mohicans - I couldn't even finish the second Harry Potter.

And I tried to read the assigned reading for my

"If more contemporary comparisons are sought, we need only compare the current black literacy rate in the United States (56 percent) with the rate in Jamaica (98.5 percent)--a figure considerably higher than the American white literacy rate (83 percent)." ...
Footnote 1: The discussion here is based on Regna Lee Wood's work as printed in Chester Finn and Diane Ravitch's Network News and Views (and reprinted many other places). Together with other statistical indictments, from the National Adult Literacy Survey, the Journal of the American Medical Association, and a host of other credible sources, it provides chilling evidence of the disastrous turn in reading methodology. But in a larger sense the author urges every reader to trust personal judgment over "numerical" evidence, whatever the source. During the writer's 30-year classroom experience, the decline in student ability to comprehend difficult text was marked, while the ability to extract and parrot "information" in the form of "facts" was much less affected. This is a product of deliberate pedagogy, to what end is the burden of my essay.

The percentage of people aged 15-24 who can, with understanding, both read and write a short, simple statement related to their everyday life. 2004 - 94.5%

Try Gatto's writings:

Cited:
http://www.timboucher.com/journal/2005/07/25/gatto -on-literacy/

Gatto says:
http://www.johntaylorgatto.com/chapters/3j.htm
http://www.johntaylorgatto.com/chapters/3b.htm
(And so on).
He cites military test results in particular.

People used to learn the basics from their parents. Gatto and others like Holt argue it doesn't take more than a hundred hours or so of instruction for almost all kids to learn the basics of reading, writing and arithmetic, and then bootstrap from there on their own, once a kid actually decides they want to learn those things. The notion that it takes years of study is just self-justifying propaganda put out by the school system.

Gatto writes: "Looking back, abundant data exist from states like Connecticut and Massachusetts to show that by 1840 the incidence of complex literacy in the United States was between 93 and 100 percent wherever such a thing mattered. According to the Connecticut census of 1840, only one citizen out of every 579 was illiterate and you probably don't want to know, not really, what people in those days considered literate; it's too embarrassing. Popular novels of the period give a clue: Last of the Mohicans, published in 1826, sold so well that a contemporary equivalent would have to move 10 million copies to match it. If you pick up an uncut version you find yourself in a dense thicket of philosophy, history, culture, manners, politics, geography, analysis of human motives and actions, all conveyed in data-rich periodic sentences so formidable only a determined and well-educated reader can handle it nowadays. Yet in 1818 we were a small-farm nation without colleges or universities to speak of. Could those simple folk have had more complex minds than our own?"

Try Gatto's writings:

Cited:
http://www.timboucher.com/journal/2005/07/25/gatto -on-literacy/

Gatto says:
http://www.johntaylorgatto.com/chapters/3j.htm
http://www.johntaylorgatto.com/chapters/3b.htm
(And so on).
He cites military test results in particular.

People used to learn the basics from their parents. Gatto and others like Holt argue it doesn't take more than a hundred hours or so of instruction for almost all kids to learn the basics of reading, writing and arithmetic, and then bootstrap from there on their own, once a kid actually decides they want to learn those things. The notion that it takes years of study is just self-justifying propaganda put out by the school system.

Gatto writes: "Looking back, abundant data exist from states like Connecticut and Massachusetts to show that by 1840 the incidence of complex literacy in the United States was between 93 and 100 percent wherever such a thing mattered. According to the Connecticut census of 1840, only one citizen out of every 579 was illiterate and you probably don't want to know, not really, what people in those days considered literate; it's too embarrassing. Popular novels of the period give a clue: Last of the Mohicans, published in 1826, sold so well that a contemporary equivalent would have to move 10 million copies to match it. If you pick up an uncut version you find yourself in a dense thicket of philosophy, history, culture, manners, politics, geography, analysis of human motives and actions, all conveyed in data-rich periodic sentences so formidable only a determined and well-educated reader can handle it nowadays. Yet in 1818 we were a small-farm nation without colleges or universities to speak of. Could those simple folk have had more complex minds than our own?"

When textbook buying became centralized the quality of the materials went way down. Read "Surely You're Joking, Mr. Feynman" for an account of how incestuous the relationship between publishers and textbook committees was even in the '60s. The people making the decisions are just not capable. Nor are the teachers, for the most part. Having a hard science or engineering degree is no help in getting hired as a public-school teacher in most states - an "education degree" is required, and to get one of those you have to be a rather dim herd animal or you'll be driven nuts by the inanity.

A detailed account of the incredible dumbing down of the public by the policies of state schooling can be found in The Underground History of American Education by John Taylor Gatto. (full text online)

I agree for the most part, except that I think that the likelihood that the majority will figure it out is quite slim. The public education system has manufactured enough stupidity and inculcated enough belief in the powerlessness of individuals to ensure that that won't happen. The echo chamber of corporate media controls the terms of debate for both the masses and 95% of the nominal elites anyway.

The practical ability to mount a revolt had already been managed out of existence sometime between 1910 and Roosevelt's second term. (H.L. Mencken is a good guide to the history of that process. Gatto's Underground History of American Education, especially chapters 9 and 15, also has a great deal of information about the methods of mass control.)

The Patriot Act - no, let's not give them that control over language - rather, the Police State Act is just a manifestation of the natural amoral imperative of all organizations to expand their dominion by any means available. Its purpose is to provide the State justification and cover for using the power they already had to crush whomever might get in their way. The jack-boots are not too worried about mass movements, since they have the ability to strangle most such movements in the crib. Those that might slip through will have their votes counted on these rigged machines, as you said. It's a belt-and-suspenders approach that shows every sign of being successful so far.

So, no, don't take off your tinfoil hat unless you think it might just be enhancing your radar signature. ;|

See also John Taylor Gatto's related writings on-line:
http://www.johntaylorgatto.com/underground/toc1.ht m
"The shocking possibility that dumb people don't exist in sufficient numbers to warrant the millions of careers devoted to tending them will seem incredible to you. Yet that is my central proposition: the mass dumbness which justifies official schooling first had to be dreamed of; it isn't real. ... The secret of American schooling is that it doesn't teach the way children learn and it isn't supposed to. It took seven years of reading and reflection to finally figure out that mass schooling of the young by force was a creation of the four great coal powers of the nineteenth century. Nearly one hundred years later, on April 11, 1933, Max Mason, president of the Rockefeller Foundation, announced to insiders that a comprehensive national program was underway to allow, in Mason's words, "the control of human behavior.""

I am sympathetic to your point, but I think that your evaluation of what kids must learn and by what means has been overly shaped by the assumptions of schools.

The idea that students are something that schools "turn out", objects of manufacture produced by pedagogical factories, is an anti-human idea that only took hold relatively recently.*

The public schools have demonstrated that they are unable to achieve the ends you desire. Except for the "savants" part, you have given a fair description of many teachers. Anyone basing his or her judgement only on observation rather than the self-serving statements of those employed in the system would have to conclude that the schools are there to discourage learning, instill a hatred of books, infantilize their students, ensure passivity and submissiveness and prevent them from competing with adults in the economy. In short, schools' "education" is a front for totalitarian brainwashing. The reason that many students do not pursue learning as we both would wish has more to do with them learning the lessons of school too well rather than too poorly.

* http://www.johntaylorgatto.com/underground/toc1.ht m

Your PBS history likely misses a few things about the history of American education, which has changed dramatically for the worse since the beginning of the 20th century. See John Taylor Gatto's book:
_The Underground History of American Education_
A Schoolteacher's Intimate Investigation Into The Problem Of Modern Schooling
(full text available online at: http://www.johntaylorgatto.com/chapters/index.htm)

John Taylor Gatto quit teaching with a broadside on the op-ed page of the Wall Street Journal in 1991 while he was still New York State Teacher of the Year, saying that he was "no longer willing to hurt children".

Here's an appropriate Gatto quote:
"Mass schooling of a compulsory nature really got its teeth into the United States between 1905 and 1915, though it was conceived of much earlier and pushed for throughout most of the nineteenth century. The reason given for this enormous upheaval of family life and cultural traditions was, roughly speaking, threefold:

1) To make good people. 2) To make good citizens. 3) To make each person his or her personal best. These goals are still trotted out today on a regular basis, and most of us accept them in one form or another as a decent definition of public education's mission, however short schools actually fall in achieving them. But we are dead wrong. Compounding our error is the fact that the national literature holds numerous and surprisingly consistent statements of compulsory schooling's true purpose. We have, for example, the great H. L. Mencken, who wrote in The American Mercury for April 1924 that the aim of public education is not

' to fill the young of the species with knowledge and awaken their intelligence. ... Nothing could be further from the truth. The aim ... is simply to reduce as many individuals as possible to the same safe level, to breed and train a standardized citizenry, to put down dissent and originality. That is its aim in the United States... and that is its aim everywhere else. '

Because of Mencken's reputation as a satirist, we might be tempted to dismiss this passage as a bit of hyperbolic sarcasm. His article, however, goes on to trace the template for our own educational system back to the now vanished, though never to be forgotten, military state of Prussia."

http://www.spinninglobe.net/againstschool.htm

People don't want to spend all their money on a great education...

I spent all my money on schooling (3.5 years at a rather expensive "institute"). About a year after I got out, I was going through John Taylor Gatto's A Different Kind of Teacher, and identified strongly with his experience of his 7th or 8th graders reading comprehension abilities were dismal. I took his simple reading test (first 20 pages of All's Quiet on the Western Front), and couldn't answer his simple questions.

16.5 years of schooling, and I still can't read. The signs were there all along - couldn't get more than 20 pages into The Hobbit or the first Lord of the Rings, and I have no clue what Moby Dick's about, or any of the other books I supposedly "read" for english class. Sure, I scanned the pages, and did okay on the teacher's tests, but I had no real comprehension of what all those books were about. I somehow managed to get through the first Harry Potter (it's about a boy who goes to wizard school), but I couldn't read the second one.

But I could do well on standardized reading tests (which should not to be cnofused with actually reading something), so no one ever caught on. According to Mr. Gatto, 90%+ of his students couldn't really read before they got to his class.

Don't be fooled. "School" is not Education. It can be, but just 'cause you go doesn't mean you'll be "educated".

http://www.johntaylorgatto.com/

He's a teacher, and he knows the problems with the school system, and has some solutions. Have a look.

http://www.johntaylorgatto.com/underground/

the simple FACT is that forced government education was intended to create a dumbed down slave class. period.

it doesnt take some pot smoking republican (aka libertarian) to understand that government is the problem with education.

"The Underground History of Education" by John Gatoo is a great place to look. I don't agree with all the points it makes, but it does make them well.

http://www.johntaylorgatto.com/

The problem, he says, is that the system is used to crank out individuals who are ideally situated to perform in the corporate world with minimal thought dedicated to the overall system and its implications, both to ourselves as well as to the general socioeconomic structure of the nation and the world.

I've had the benefit of taking courses in "traditional" settings. What do I mean by "traditional"? Well, the classes that I have taken have been centered on the knowledge itself, with no tests, no benchmarks, no attendance. Students are expected to take what they can and utilize it to further themselves.

The obvious complaint, of course, would be that unmotivated students would not be interested in this form of class and would actually do worse than in the present system. One must ask, however, how much of the current lack of motivation is driven by the absolute nonsense of school system.

Take, for example, the punishment system. Gatto speaks about an early 1900's book (prior to current method of schooling) that outlines the very structures of our current schooling method. In this book, punishment is used to whip children into unquestioning obedience that slowly drains the child of any inquisitiveness. Hall passes are used to isolate freedom of movement, random shifting of students and assigned seating keeps students from interacting in positive ways.

For those of you who are interested, I would recommend the discourses of JT Gatto, (http://www.johntaylorgatto.com/). He doesn't necessarily provide answers, but does outline the problems quite well.

As for possible solutions, I feel that more independence needs to be given to children, so that they can succeed or fail with direct knowledge of the impact of such success or failure. Home-schooling goes a long way in providing this, by allowing a child to pursue areas of study that interest him and allow him to grow as much as possible.

Another aspect that needs to be reintroduced is the study of classical texts, which have carried a strong tradition of rhetoric and stylized writing. If you have every sat with someone skilled in these two fields, you will know why.

enough writing; back to studying, lol

Public schools were never meant to educate -- well, educate as in the normal /. expectation of the word. Public schools were meant to breed a newer, better, factory worker that could at least keep himself/herself company at cocktail parties. Give them enough knowledge that they are not easily bored, and teach them:

1. To show up on time (school bells?)
2. Take instruction
3. Perform repetitive tasks without supiervsion
4. Don't ask questions
5. Don't question authority

There was no suprise that Henry Ford himself helped tailor the american public school system, and to this day it is doing its job; it is cranking out mindless automotons. If you need any proof of this, try ordering by number at a fast food restrraunt (65% of my orders are screwed up). The school system hasn't failed, the humans driving it have failed -- they have failed to shift the focus on public school from factory automoton, to a more "renesaunce man". Even then, do we want that? Do we want kids that can so easily do whatever they want. Or rather would we want kids that have to struggle to do what they want, bust their butt to get above and learn the value of hard work (or cheating -- but even in that there is hard work). Would we want a smart lazy society, or a society of mindless drones doing all the gruntwork while the few pundits wonder -- "how did the public school system fail?".... I believe that with a little bit of old fashion "parenting" and an early start at learning in the home -- with parents that actually care to be in their childrens lives -- kids can grow up with much more intelligence then they could ever grasp in the classroom.

You can't expect much "learning" to go on in a classroom with a student/teacher ration of 30:1...even 25 or 26:1 ...too many individual needs get quashed for the greater good of the group. Couple that with california's rediculous standards (do kindergartners *REALLY* need to know their multiplication tables?), and teachers dont have time to cater to individual needs -- they are hurried just to get in all the content they are required to teach -- far beit if a child falls behind....he won't be "left behind"...he'll be dragged behind the cart....

A good book on Public school historu (avail. free online) is John Gatto's Underground History of American Education.

Laptops replacing textbooks? Won't make a difference. The traditional educational system is severly broken. But don't take my word for it. Take a look at what the 1991 New York State Teacher of the Year who quit education says about what's wrong.

The first (and only) reply to the thread's original post that isn't all pity-fishing and "oh, woe is me!"

Everybody had problems in high school, including the popular kids, and a lot of these problems were self-inflicted. And most of the so-called "non-conformists" were as conformist as everyone else, just to a different ideal. None of this justifies killing people, and you probably need professional attention if you sympathize with Klebold and Harris. Get over yourselves.

That said, high school is certainly designed to have a Lord-of-the-Flies social system, so created to prepare kids for the corporate-dominated real world, which is a lot more similar to high school than most people would like to admit. Read this.

Rob

I keep on hearing the same old rehashed arguments about how Communism is here and destroying society. Its like the Red Scare and McCarthy all over again, only that we aren't having virtual lynch mobs for people who dissent against the popular political tone of the day.

It seems that there exists a group of neo conservatives who associate any form of dissent against their socio-political views to be a form of communism. One only needs to look at history to see the sheer stupidity and irrationality of this overhyped fear of communists to see just what they are all about. The book "1984" was once put on a banned books list in the United States becuase it was alleged that it was covertly supporting communism. In reality, the book was only slamming the excesses of the very type of authoritarian regimes that existed both in many hardline communist nations. 1984 offended many of these hardline anti-communists becuase the book dared to challenge and criticize authoritative excesses in government.

I dont know if the people who keep preaching about how communism is creeping into society really believe what they say or not, but they are using the theme as a tool to smear political dissent and rally people with fear against an enemy that really doesn't pose the threat they claim it does.

The continual dumbing-down of our educational system and the increasing banality of popular culture are just two clear trends, now becoming so clear we can look through them to their source.

I disagree.

Firstly, pop culture is being perpetuated by the heavily capitalist market.

Does the government pick and choose which CDs make it into Wal Mart? Does Atty. General Gonzales have a comittee to decide which shows MTV puts on the air? I'm sorry but popular culture icons are defined by the marketplace, not some silly communist influence. Pop culture icons are telling everyone to buy and spend the latest trendy fashions and other goods. Your argument is silly.

As far as the schools are concerned, I don't know how you can blame communism for that either.

The modern incarnation of the public school is a result of capitalist influences (http://www.johntaylorgatto.com/historytour/histor y2.htm). The "dumbing down" of public schools simply reflects the fact that these are the values that our culture and our marketplace embrace.

Communism, you see, is not "dead." It is not even napping! In fact, it is right out in the open

Okay, show me.

Our nation's newspapers are edited by socialists.

I'll give you credit for liberals in the media. Don't really see an abundance of hardline communists though.

The TV networks spew endless hours of mind-numbing groupthink.

Again, this is a result of the market place. TV networks put on what generates viewership (which, ultimately, drives commercial ad sales).

Society has become so left-of-center that most people do not recognize Communism when they step in it. Even Republicans get down in that wallow, like porky squealing pigs.

Left of center meaning what? That some of us dare question the reasons for going to war in Iraq?

Of course the Democrats have been totally up front about their support of Communism since the FMLN/Contra War. Give 'em a point for honesty, at least.

Who?

My mom tells the story of baking something with my cousin reading the recipe. My cousin reads out "peanuts", and my mom thinks "that's not right..." She takes a look at the recipe, and it says "pecans". She mentions this to my cousin, and he says something about how they look similar and that they're both types of nuts.

Later my mom mentioned this incident to our common grandmother, who hooked my cousin up with a phonics-based reading program. He eventually learned to read just fine.

Spellcheckers can fix bad spelling, but there's little hope for you if words you've never seen before trip you up. See John Taylor Gatto's refutation of the "whole word" language-teaching methodology in his Underground History of American Education

My mom tells the story of baking something with my cousin reading the recipe. My cousin reads out "peanuts", and my mom thinks "that's not right..." She takes a look at the recipe, and it says "pecans". She mentions this to my cousin, and he says something about how they look similar and that they're both types of nuts.

Later my mom mentioned this incident to our common grandmother, who hooked my cousin up with a phonics-based reading program. He eventually learned to read just fine.

Spellcheckers can fix bad spelling, but there's little hope for you if words you've never seen before trip you up. See John Taylor Gatto's refutation of the "whole word" language-teaching methodology in his Underground History of American Education

You said it. Check out an on-line book which I came across today:

_University Secrets:Your Guide to Surviving a College Education_
by Robert D. Honigman
http://www.universitysecrets.com/table.htm

especially, for example:

http://www.universitysecrets.com/ch11.htm

Excerpt: "Pyramid scheme-- There is a curious parallel to the policies of academe and the recruitment of junior associates in the private sectors of law and accounting. In major accounting firms, newly hired junior associates are worked very hard for a number of years, but only about one in ten makes partner. At major law firms a similar pyramid scheme is employed. James Stewart explains in his book The Partners: Inside America's Most Powerful Law Firms (1983):

The key to profitability in such firms is the partner/associate ratio and "pyramid" staffing of client matters. There must be more associates than partners -- the bigger the disparity the better -- since the firms make money from associates by billing their clients for their work at rates which more than compensate for the associate salaries and overhead (376).

This is the same pyramid staffing common in universities. Graduate student assistants, part-time faculty, and junior faculty cost far less than tenured faculty, but bring in the same tuition fees and state allocations (based on student head-count). Untenured junior faculty "do exactly what the senior faculty does, only for half the pay, less status, fewer amenities, and an uncertain future" (Rosovsky). This generates a "profit" for the senior faculty and administration and enables them to support the superstructure of graduate education and research (Mayhew 1972, 2).

This pyramid staffing pattern recalls an old joke: how do you transport a ton of canaries in a half ton truck? Answer: you beat on the side of the truck and keep half the canaries in flight. The university's problem is: How do you get years of teaching work out of people without paying them very much? Answer: you promise them a future and then beat on the side of the truck with tenure."

====

I've also been reading the online book: _The Underground History of American Education_ relating to K-12 by a New York State "Teacher of the Year".
http://www.johntaylorgatto.com/underground/toc1.ht m
It begins: "The shocking possibility that dumb people don't exist in sufficient numbers to warrant the millions of careers devoted to tending them will seem incredible to you. Yet that is my central proposition: the mass dumbness which justifies official schooling first had to be dreamed of; it isn't real. .. The Way It Used To Be. Our official assumptions about the nature of modern childhood are dead wrong. Children allowed to take responsibility and given a serious part in the larger world are always superior to those merely permitted to play and be passive. At the age of twelve, Admiral Farragut got his first command. I was in fifth grade when I learned of this. Had Farragut gone to my school he would have been in seventh. ... The secret of American schooling is that it doesn't teach the way children learn and it isn't supposed to. It took seven years of reading and reflection to finally figure out that mass schooling of the young by force was a creation of the four great coal powers of the nineteenth century. Nearly one hundred years later, on April 11, 1933, Max Mason, president of the Rockefeller Foundation, announced to insiders that a comprehensive national program was underway to allow, in Mason's words, "the control of human behavior." ... Something strange has been going on in government schools, especially where the matter of reading is concerned. Abundant data exist to show that by 1840 the incidence of complex literacy in the United St

Gatto argues schools are functioning perfectly to accomplish what they were designed for about 150 years ago by industrialists -- dumbing down the masses so they become compliant factory workers and consumers, with any initiative to press for change alone or through unions long since beaten (psychically) out of them.

So is it any surprise real wages per worker (adjusted for inflation) have dropped since the 1950s, but news articles frequently misleadingly trumpet that family incomes have risen -- yet ignore the fact that is only because now both parents work and the kids are left unsupervised to be brainwashed by school and television and dumbed-down peers?

Gatto argues schools need to be completely dismantled, a big project as at the same time other aspects of our society need to be rethought as well. Because, as W and continued oil dependency and unsafe SUVs show, the current system has failed the US and the world. Neither more money, better teachers, or better blackboards will make much of a difference without changing the rest -- the compulsory aspect being the worst part.

The US public school system itself is counterproductive to education and has been for over 100 years. Read John Gatto's account of the downward spiral of the American educational system. It's quite eye-opening, especially if you, like myself, are a product of the US public school system: http://www.johntaylorgatto.com/chapters/index.htm/

Quandrum, judging from your comments, it sounds like you might enjoy reading Gatto's Underground History of American Education.

Then again, maybe you already have.