gilligus
Diplomat
Ambassador from the Alliance of Socialist States
Posts: 100
|
Post by gilligus on Oct 7, 2005 11:46:05 GMT
Amazing thinkers crop up in every culture, no matter what the education is like. Intelligence is not dependant on what an individual learns; it is the capacity to reason logically and to arrive at useful conclusions by that logic. Give an intelligent person the necessary mental tools, and it doesn't matter if the tools are brand new or old and rusty; what needs to be done will be done.
|
|
|
Post by Revolutionary Masses on Oct 7, 2005 11:54:22 GMT
Apologies I didnt mean that as 1/2 amazing one off, I meant that the overall standard was good.
|
|
gilligus
Diplomat
Ambassador from the Alliance of Socialist States
Posts: 100
|
Post by gilligus on Oct 7, 2005 13:42:21 GMT
I don't know what the standard for education in Soviet Russia was, but that may be the case. However, no matter what, a genius is a genius.
|
|
|
Post by Dobbyniania on Oct 8, 2005 18:17:25 GMT
And to add Learning is the greatest achievement of the human race It is something we start doing at (and quite possibly before)birth. For it to be diverted to another persons dogma is a crime. We are all born and we will all eventually die. Our lives are our own to choose what we do. For the state to interfere in this process is unacceptable. Bringing up a child in this state controlled environment would severely hamper original thinking and individual diversity and ultimately result in a stale and unhappy society We already have that now, it's called public education. Don't beleive me? come to my high school.
|
|
gilligus
Diplomat
Ambassador from the Alliance of Socialist States
Posts: 100
|
Post by gilligus on Oct 8, 2005 18:55:17 GMT
That's why my parents sent me to a private school. Public schools are one of very few examples in which unions hamper development: public schools in the US are no longer about the kids, they're about catering to the demands of the teachers, who go whining to the union when they get fired because their students are all failing geometry and history. Don't get me wrong, I'm pro-union all the way, but nothing is perfect.
|
|
|
Post by Revolutionary Masses on Oct 8, 2005 19:00:55 GMT
There is absoluterly nothing wrong with a public education, cause I dont know what the situation is like in the US but in the UK the only problems that we have are with the exam boards. Dicipline should also be improved in schools as that was my other problem....although its not as bad as n other places it would seem as a freind of mine lived in spain for a while and all the classrooms had panic buttons if things got out of hand! Bring back effective punishment like the cane :.D!
|
|
EuroSoviets
Defence Forces
Founders of the Allied States of EuroIslanders.
Posts: 697
|
Post by EuroSoviets on Oct 8, 2005 19:09:30 GMT
Private schooling in America works because those of a lower socio-economic disposition can't afford it. And those in that position are the kids who have less interest in learning - why? Because their parents are probably two busy working three jobs to take the time to read to them at night and to instil a sense of learning. Yet another reason communal development beats the pants off the nuclear family.
It has sweet fuck all to do with the Unions. That's right wing propaganda to shift the blame - and of course the American media swallows it whole.
|
|
gilligus
Diplomat
Ambassador from the Alliance of Socialist States
Posts: 100
|
Post by gilligus on Oct 8, 2005 19:23:32 GMT
You know what? When you have to put up with incompetant teachers for fourteen years of your life because the school is too afraid of over-zealous unions, THEN you can tell me that it's right-wing propoganda.
I will, however, say that part of the problem is due to lack of funding. If the government could/would afford the wages necessary to attract good teachers, it would definately improve the situation. But as the situation stands, school teacher unions are definitely impeding the schools' ability to hire good teachers and get rid of the bad ones, as well as that of the ability of the children to learn in an adequate environment.
|
|
|
Post by Revolutionary Masses on Oct 8, 2005 19:35:56 GMT
I will say that there is nothing worse that a teacher who cannot teach, if dicipline is good and funding not an issues failing teachers should not be maintained, they should find employment elsewhere.
|
|
EuroSoviets
Defence Forces
Founders of the Allied States of EuroIslanders.
Posts: 697
|
Post by EuroSoviets on Oct 8, 2005 21:39:57 GMT
I've met plenty of lame teachers - and the some of the dumbest people I know go to British Public Schools (the equivalent of American Private schools). I don't need a lecture on the state of American education - Dobbyniania keeps me well filled in among many other Americans that I talk to. But American Unions have bugger all on their northern European counterparts and America still comes bottom (I think) of the 21 developed countries for education funding.
|
|
gilligus
Diplomat
Ambassador from the Alliance of Socialist States
Posts: 100
|
Post by gilligus on Oct 9, 2005 1:09:08 GMT
Like I said, I agree that funding is a major problem. If public schools could attract the good teachers that go to private schools because that's where the "smart" (i.e. rich) kids go, then this wouldn't be a problem.
I've talked to teachers at public schools about union problems, and some of them acknowlege that the only reason some of their less intelligent colleagues keep their undeserved jobs is because it's nigh on impossible for a public school to fire a teacher without the teacher's union going ballistic. Just about every single public school teacher in the US is in the teacher's union, so the objection to a firing is almost always taken up with the union, who, by nature, sides with the workers, whether the cause is legitimate or not.
Like I said, I believe that, in general, unions do great things for society. But there are bad eggs in every lot.
|
|
Ketoprofen
Defence Forces
Ketoprofen - The Proletariat Coalition
Posts: 1,883
|
Post by Ketoprofen on Oct 11, 2005 8:04:16 GMT
The role of the Union is to protect the interests of the workers. What else could you expect?
|
|
gilligus
Diplomat
Ambassador from the Alliance of Socialist States
Posts: 100
|
Post by gilligus on Oct 11, 2005 17:37:00 GMT
They may be protecting the interests of workers, which is usually good, but in this case, it's at the expense of the students, which,I hope we can agree, is definitely bad.
|
|
EuroSoviets
Defence Forces
Founders of the Allied States of EuroIslanders.
Posts: 697
|
Post by EuroSoviets on Oct 12, 2005 13:08:13 GMT
Or how about stop considering things within the framework of capitalism.
Following your train of thought, you get Unions selling out because corporations threaten to move elsewhere. They rationalise it to their members by saying, you must work harder for less or else you'll lose your jobs. Which is nonsense. Unions in Germany face this more than any others in Europe. The answer is unrelenting strike or else seize the factories themselves and barricade them. The employers won't move because they would need to employ the forces of the state - and in this time, that would have global ramifications.
Unions should fight for their members alone. If the children aren't getting enough time with teachers or enough school books, it is the responsibility of the government to provide them. If the government says it can't, it is lying. Cf the war in Iraq.
|
|
|
Post by daziarn on Jan 9, 2006 23:49:56 GMT
Yes, I completely support the abolition of the family and I completely agree with Marx that the family relationship (i.e. parent to child) is purely monetary ultimately. The abolition of family seems to me exaggerated. You see, think about the period and social context in which Marx and Engels lived: at the time, farmers and large workers family grows up with dozen of children, that soon became workers to sustain the family. It was a crude necessity. There was no birth control, and women were seen mostly as "baby-makers". From this point of view, children were effectively "a resource". Today, the situation is changed, and people make children mostly for the desire of having them, almost in developed countries. Sure, they will influence their children's views, but if they don't do this, another will do it. Children are always influenced by people surrounding them. I see no way to prevent that. Perhaps today it's most dangerous for a child to be raised from the television, to leave him alone with this magical box that brainwash him about what he needs and what is Good. I don't think being socialist today means take Marx literally. We must also be able to read him through the past, understanding it, and go on. Just my 2 cents. Oh, and it's my first post here P.S. Sorry for my poor english, I'm Italian...
|
|