Hey, Teacher! Leave Those Kids Alone!
Presented below is a short clip from the 1982 movie "Pink Floyd: The Wall." It's well worth watching, because it explains, by perfect visual metaphor, what's fundamentally wrong with the government school regime. The school as factory -- kids dehumanized and stripped of their individuality -- kids being literally homogenized -- it's all here. If reading John Taylor Gatto is too much trouble for you, just watch this clip, and you'll get pretty much the main idea.
Don't forget to visit John Taylor Gatto's website! Read his book online, or -- even better -- order a few copies in paperback to give to your friends and family members. Alternatively, you can get some instant gratification by watching the following 34 minute interview with Mr. Gatto:
Don't forget to visit John Taylor Gatto's website! Read his book online, or -- even better -- order a few copies in paperback to give to your friends and family members. Alternatively, you can get some instant gratification by watching the following 34 minute interview with Mr. Gatto:
posted by J. Kendrick McPeters | 8:34 PM
60 Comments:
On the "George Carlin" thread, Anonymous, August 05, 2007 10:17:00 PM, said:
Profound stuff - unfortunately true to the mark.
The whole subject of "education" is both infuriating and depressing to me. Infuriating, to know that the schools don't suck "by accident," but by deliberate conspiratorial plot... and depressing, to think of all the lives ruined, and all the human potential that's gone unrealized. (And that especially goes for the "minorities" who are "served" by the government school monopoly!)
If one sifts through the newsreels of WWII Germany - (rise & fall) we see the same PR & hype, with degrees, pedigrees, & trophies for all, from the most mentally handicapped to the chosen few who get to run the light show.
It only makes sense that our system would, by now, bear a strong resemblance to the Nazi school system. After all, American government schools with mandatory attendance and a dumbed down curriculum, were based on the Prussian (ie, German) schools of the 1840's-- which were, of course, also the root of the Nazi school system. If you start with the exact same seed, you should wind up with the exact same fruit, right?
It's no longer a mental game. It's a free for all hog sloppin money machine.
Boy can you say that again!
The Giles County School System is the tail that wags the Giles County dog. Tee Jackson has more hirelings than any other local "business," and given how school employees (plus their family members) tend to vote monolithically, it's no surprise that Jackson can get away with almost anything he pleases. (Including building a new office that nobody wanted but him!) Tee is the man with the money, after all, and "his" money funds all sorts of patronage positions in this county.
This much, everyone with a half a brain already knows. Everyone knows that the schools are bleeding the taxpayers dry, and that schoolteachers "vote their paycheck," and pretty much determine the results of every local election.
What's really amazing, is that most people put up with this state of affairs, because they are sympathetic toward teachers, and assume that the bulk of the "educational" money goes to pay them. People here, like most everywhere, naively believe that their school money is being spent "in the classrooms," as they like to say.
But it's not!
During the 2004-2005 school year, Giles County's classroom teachers got only 38.8% of the total school spending! Transportation, food service, plant maintenance, and plant operations all put together made up another 18.8% of school spending. And the remaining 42.2% -- totaling $12,722,213 -- was spent on.... what, exactly? Building a bureaucratic empire? Waste, fraud and abuse? It certainly wasn't spent on "the kids," that's for darn sure!
Anyway you slice it, Giles County's government schools are costing an enormous amount of money, especially considering the mediocre quality of their "product." Today's "high school" graduates only have to demonstrate middle school proficiency, in order to receive a diploma.
For a real eye-opener, check out what used to be expected of eighth graders in the dark ages of the late Nineteenth Century:
http://mwhodges.home.att.net/1895-test.htm
Did you know there is $1.3 million in the 2007-8 budget for medicators, mind programmers, and literary imprinters?
(shudder) I sure am glad I missed out on all of that! I found school to be a monumental bore, and spent most of my class time daydreaming. I'm sure I'd have been stuffed full of Ritalin, had they been handing it out back then to boys like party favors, as they do nowadays.
Funny, isn't it, how the same government that will kick your door down, and start indiscriminately shooting, in order to "bust" you for "possession" of a natural organic substance created by God (eg, marijuana)... will, without even a sense of irony, compel little boys to take mind warping Ritalin (and other drugs), simply to tranquilize away the natural reaction which little boys have toward boredom and regimentation? The government says, "Drugs are bad, mmm'kay? Don't do drugs, mmm'kay? Except, you know, for Ritalin and Xanax and the other drugs sold by Big Pharma... we'll make you take those, mmm'kay?"
They had a great episode of "The Simpsons" where Bart was put on "Focusyn" to calm him down. Alas, all I can find on the net is this short two minute snippet:
http://snipurl.com/1p8vz
Did you know your little bundle of joy will be learning to appreciate the values of Teddy, Barney, & the ACLU?
Well, isn't that really one of the big "points" of having the government run the schools? The powers that be know what values are best, and they use their school curriculum to shove those values down the throats of our children.
So, homosexuality is promoted, from a very early age, in the name of non-judgmental "toloerance," along with Earth Worship (aka environmentalism), Government Worship, Unquestioning Darwinism, and the "moral relativism" that is part and parcel of the government school's "official religion"-- secular humanism. It's amazing that the "schools" have any time for "readin', ritin' and rithmatic," given how much effort is expended every day drumming in the "appropriate" attitude and values.
Oh well. As long as the government employed school teachers are satisfied to get forty cents out of every dollar of the blood money which is extorted from the taxpayers at the point of a gun..., then I don't guess it's likely to get any better, anytime soon. Seeing as how the teachers are in charge of all things educational, rather than the taxpayers or (God forbid!) the parents, and all.
And how do you suppose things will go, in the very long run? To answer that, you need merely rent and watch Mike Judge's recent (suppressed) film, "Idiocracy." Here's a short, and somewhat funny, clip:
http://snipurl.com/1p8xa
Idiot! Go back to school!
Forgot to mention: The opening page of T Jackson's 2007-8 budget -we find some of the "Techy" stuff in the school's arsenal of "edukayshun". It's the bar charter! What's a "bar chart?" depnds on which bar we're talking about! How about the no behind left status, in the race to confusion & chaos? Let's call it "Academic Achievement"!
How about English !! - with the state total stated as 90.3 above a bar one notch high. Then we see GC next to it with 98.3 above a bar 4 notches higher than the state. Eyes don't deceive, the GC results are four times better than the state - 400% better! For those of you who believe 8 percentage points (.08 roughly) is really 4 times better (400%? or 4.00), you are ready for a new Reedy, Lovell, & Holt tax plan.
Then there is GC Algebra 1 with a "79.5" bar 3 clicks high compared to a "75.9" state bar 1 click high. This time 4% points is 2 times better than the state. Or, is 80 twice more better between 76? It's all relative?
Then comes Biology 1 with a 97.2 bar 3 clicks higher than the 95 state. (enhanced relativity?)
All of this is topped off with Giles County k-8 "Value added grades" (a solid "B", as in BS")
If you get the point, you should be mad - but, if you have been halucinating in 12 years of no tolerance tolerance & ridlin, the focus switch is off.
Reality is too bizzare to quantify - perhaps Mr Jacksin can tell us how this works at his next budget meeting - matter of fact, why not bring the whole school board in to help him explain what they are "on".
I see a very dangerous person on this blog. And I wonder if anyone else sees this????
There is always danger when people of intelligence begin to speak and use that intelligence.
656: The threat is real - what will you be, if you're held to truth. What can you teach when the you're held to fact and substance. You'll be doing what you do best, clraning restrooms or waving a "will work for food" sign on an interstate exit.
One thing for sure - your nose will be rubbed in it, as long as it continues! You will be known by what you are. 1019
You can't have any pudding if you don't eat yer meat. How can you have any pudding if yer don't eat yer meat?!?
Our schools are breeding a generation of idiots
Anonymous, August 06, 2007 9:29:00 PM, said:
Idiot!
If I remember correctly, idiots are "profoundly retarded," and have IQs of 20 or below. I'm pretty sure that if I was that mentally impaired, I'd not be able to operate a computer, much less score in the 99.67th percentile on the PSAT. But, I tell you what we can do, just to be sure... if you'll reveal your "secret identity," we'll get together, and visit the School Central Office, where we'll get copies of our "permanent records," which, of course, include IQ measurements. Then, I'll scan your records, and mine, and post them to this blog for public inspection. That way, anyone who cares can easily determine which one of us is closer, on the "normal distribution curve," to the ranks of the idiots. Mmm'kay?
Go back to school!
Why would I want to do that? I escaped the Publik Skool Gulag over 25 years ago, and, as I've never since stopped learning -- there's this new thing they've come out with called "reading books," which you might want to look into -- I frankly cannot imagine how I would benefit from further exposure to the dumbed down curriculum promulgated therein. It's true that I could benefit from brushing up on higher math, but, if I wanted to pursue that, I'd simply buy one of the "self-teaching" computer programs used, to such good effect, by countless home schoolers. But, thank you ever so much for your concern!
Anonymous, August 07, 2007 6:56:00 PM, said:
I see a very dangerous person on this blog.
Wow, I am amazingly flattered to hear you say that! Since you and I both know that I don't present anyone with a physical danger, you must, by the process of elimination, be referring to the "danger" inherent in my ideas. And, whether you realize it or not, that implies that they might "catch on" with the general public. After all, an idea that only one person believes, threatens no-one...
I am curious, however, as to why you feel threatened by the spread of my ideas. Are you, perchance, a parasite who lives off the taxpayers? Perhaps a government school administrator, a welfare bum, or someone else similarly devoid of productivity? If so, I can see why you don't appreciate my calling a spade, a spade. The longer the general public is lost in a daydream, the longer you'll be able to continue receiving your precious "check" for doing nothing. But if the public ever wakes up... watch out!
And I wonder if anyone else sees this????
I dunno... why don't you explain exactly what is "very dangerous" about me? Is it because I believe that governments should be held to the same moral law, as ordinary people? (Including the part about "thou shalt not steal!) Is it because I believe children deserve a real education, rather than being force fed 12 years of politically correct pablum, anti-Christian, pro-government indoctrination, and psychiatric drugging, when they exhibit the first sign of boredom?
Or am I "dangerous" because I believe that "all power is inherent in the people," and fight the powers that be, to get us referendums on zoning? Maybe it is "dangerous" for me to expose the lies and lawbreaking of our elected officials? Or do you have something else in mind? By all means, please enlighten us, so that your fellow citizens can keep a close eye on me!
Anonymous, August 06, 2007 10:19:00 PM, said:
Reality is too bizzare to quantify - perhaps Mr Jacksin can tell us how this works at his next budget meeting - matter of fact, why not bring the whole school board in to help him explain what they are "on".
Well, it's good to see that Tee has a well thumbed copy of this book:
http://www.amazon.com/How-Lie-Statistics-Darrell-Huff/dp/0393310728
Truncating the bottom of a bar chart is the oldest trick in the book! Nobody should be fooled by that sort of distortion-- if a bar chart doesn't start with "zero" at the base, it's a deliberate attempt to defraud. For shame, Tee! For shame....
And are we supposed to be satisfied that "our schools" are maybe a little better than the average Tennessee government school? Why doesn't Tee cook up an honest graph comparing Giles County schools with schools in, say Japan? Or to the performance of the average American homeschooler? Being a little better than solidly mediocre Tennessee Gub'mint Skools is nothing to brag about, believe me.
Thanks for bringing this absurd lie to the public's attention, by the way!
Anonymous, August 07, 2007 10:21:00 PM, said:
You can't have any pudding if you don't eat yer meat. How can you have any pudding if yer don't eat yer meat?!?
Aha! Someone did watch that Pink Floyd clip I posted! It's great, isn't it? I especially enjoyed seeing the children rising up in revolt and burning down their school... too bad that turned out to be the kid's daydream! Dang it.
Our schools are breeding a generation of idiots
Why are you complaining? That's what they were designed to do. As both Gatto and Carlin point out, the purpose of "edumakashin" is to mold children into "obedient workers" (and taxpayers). Smart people with well developed critical thinking skills are simply not a benefit to our plutocrat masters, or to the public officials they puppeteer, or to the well paid "teachers" who do the heavy lifting in suppressing intelligence in America. Since all of these people have vastly more influence than any coalition of parents, children, or taxpayers... it's their interests that will be served. And that brings us back to cranking out generation after generation of idiots, like you said.
If the average American knew about how badly they were being scammed and manipulated by the above mentioned elites, we'd likely see a lot of people getting tarred and feathered, if not hung from the lamp-posts. Oh happy day! Perhaps if Gatto ever gets his documentary finished this will someday happen... but I'm not all that optimistic, alas.
Anonymous, August 07, 2007 10:08:00 PM, said:
You'll be doing what you do best, clraning restrooms or waving a "will work for food" sign on an interstate exit.
It's quite possible that you're right about that! If, as seems exceedingly likely, the person you were speaking to is a government school employee, there's basically every reason to assume he's unfit for a productive job in the real world. Just look at the test scores of "education" majors! They're right there at the bottom of the barrel, along with other mickey mouse type majors such as "social work" and basketweaving.
Don't believe me? I just googled "education majors GRE" and here's the first thing that came up:
http://ace.acadiau.ca/arts/phil/why_phil/scores.htm
Read it and weep! People who major in education appear to be almost sub-literate. It's quite likely that, in the unlikely event they were given a rigorous curriculum to teach, they'd find themselves unable to do so!
Maybe we should re-think this whole idea of "credentialism" and simply let, say, people with a degree in "Chemistry" teach Chemistry, without requiring them to first be indoctrinated in ed school? Imagine that! People who know something about their subject, being allowed to teach it! Wow, what a revolution that would bring in the good ole US of A!
We must migrate back to the 6-7-7 Tennessean headline, "EASY TESTS INFLATE TN STUDENT'S PROGRESS" - "State plans to toughen exams by 2009" - "GAP in academic standards" !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
WHY WAIT????????? Apparently Tennessee is 60 to 66 percentage POINTS below the federal standard - actually worse than Washington DC! That would mean Jackson's 96% average is more like 30%. The pitiful part is the absolute fact that children can learn and teachers can teach if you let them do their thing!
Vision -Teacher trying to save drowning child. Queen Mary with boat load of bureaucrats pulls up alongside to help. If they survive the wake, guess who drops the anchor on who's head?
I've figured it out - Jackson tipped the bar charts upside down, filled the void with smoke, & worse is better! If you aren't a winner, why not be the biggest loser? We can't have any losers, can we? Only a doctor of indoctrination could come up with this mess!
That was the good news. If there was a meaningful financial report, the people could see that all this requires huge sums of money and ever bigger sacrifices from all, including roads. Imagine, there really isn't enough money to fix roads, but the book doctors at the skoo parlor got $150,000 from the county fund for bleachers, won the $10 million state lottery (25/75 matching loot) & have more than a million more they forgot to tell the people about!
It's like an old time band of gypsies invading the community, running around blessing everyone's money, & skeddalin off before the law can catch them! Maybe the law doesn't even want to catch them?
Kendick said:
"I'm pretty sure that if I was that mentally impaired, I'd not be able to operate a computer, much less score in the 99.67th percentile on the PSAT".
Is that your only claim to fame? I guess that is why you think you are so much smarter than everyone else...you scored high against all of the "dumbed down" students in the nation. Isn't that kind of like being the least rotten apple in a barrel? You are still rotten, even though you aren't the worst apple in the bunch.
Anonymous, August 08, 2007 12:06:00 PM, said:
Is that your only claim to fame?
As a matter of fact, no. Not even when it comes to academics. As regards "fame," I once wrote a law giving Giles Countians a vote on zoning, and managed to get it passed unanimously by the state legislature, and ratified by nearly a 4 to 1 margin by Giles voters. This law, by the way, was the first private act in the history of the State of Tennessee, to be ratified by local referendum, rather than a 2/3 vote of the County Commission. All of this was my idea, and I'm very proud of how it all turned out. If I were to state anything as being my "claim to fame," that would almost certainly be it.
I guess that is why you think you are so much smarter than everyone else...
First of all, please note that the only reason I brought up my PSAT performance, was to counter the absurdly silly remark that I am an "idiot." If the anonymous sniper (you, perhaps) hadn't attacked me, I'd have never had a reason to even mention my intelligence on this blog, okay?
Second, and I sure don't want to belabor this point..., but I don't merely "think" I'm smarter than the average bear, I happen to know I am, based on my consistently scoring at the top of the standardized achievement tests, ever since I was a wee little boy.
However, unlike most people at the extreme far right of the bell curve, I don't think that my intelligence translates into some sort of God given "right" to make decisions for other people. No, I believe, with all my heart, that everyone should be given an equal vote in a town hall style political process, and allowed to run their own private lives without interference from "smart people" in the government, or from anyone else.
This attitude makes me fairly unique amongst my intellectual cohort-- most of my gifted brethren believe that they should be put in charge, and allowed to run other people's lives. Just look at smarmy elitists like Bill and Hillary Clinton, if you are unfamiliar with the type of person I'm speaking of. I'm not anything like they are... really, I'm not.
you scored high against all of the "dumbed down" students in the nation.
Well, to be fair, kids that went to elite private prep academies also took the same test, along with ordinary private schoolers and homeschoolers. So not everyone I was scored against was taught the same dumbed down curriculum I endured.
And for that matter, when I was in school, things hadn't been dumbed down nearly to the extent they are today. Nobody back in my school days talked about "invented spelling" or "close enugh math" or Ebonics as a viable substitute for English. Things have gone waaay downhill in the past 25 years, even if test scores have been repeatedly "re-normed" to disguise this unpleasant fact from the voters.
Isn't that kind of like being the least rotten apple in a barrel?
No. The apples at the top of the barrel aren't rotten. And of course, this particular apple never stopped learning, even after getting out the barrel which held all the other apples! So, even if I had a brush with rottenness in my youth, I've left it long behind me, and advanced myself mentally to the point where I'm a great deal smarter than I was, back in the ole apple barrel days...
You are still rotten, even though you aren't the worst apple in the bunch.
You can look at it that way if you really want to... but if you do, you are implicitly accepting my critique of the school system, and should either support my proposed solution, or propose one of your own. You can't just say that a top scorer is a "rotten apple" by virtue of having attended Giles County schools, and simultaneously claim that our government owned and operated schools are doing "just fine." Don't you see what a contradiction that would be?
Also, if you really believe that I'm academically rotten, then I suppose you'd be happy to publicly compare our respective achievement test scores?
Finally, I'm going to give you one warning, and one warning only. In the future, you will either address me as "Kendrick" or "Mr. McPeters" or "Hey You" or something with at least a modicum of respect or you will start finding your worthless posts bounced over to "The Mouthbreather's Zone." If you insist on childishly calling me "Kendick" or any variation on that theme, then you are gonna be out of here!
So now its back to bashing teachers? I think that a shame. Nobody gave teachers a degree. They went out and earned it. Furthermore, the teachers I know are highly professional people who DO have the best interests of young people at heart.
Is it not enough that they do this for low pay? Do you have to ridicule them and insinuate that they do a disservice to our kids? Shame on you!
I think you should be arrested for suggesting that students should burn up their schools.....you do realize that now-a-days we do have students who would.........some very young ones have set cars on fire.
Kendrick -- I think you should come to our classrooms and observe.
Evidently you had a bad experience in school.
Somewhere along the line, the government decided that FOOD was a pretty good thing, and that people generally were better off not starving to death. But, having decided to prevent starvation, what did the government do?
Well, what it didn't do was to set up government owned and operated farms, where food approved of by government bureaucrats would be grown by government employees.
It didn't set up government owned and operated grocery stores, at which EVERYONE BUT THOSE ABLE TO AFFORD "PRIVATE GROCING" would have to shop for that government grown food.
It hired no government nutritionists to lead us down the aisles of these stores, telling us what to put in our basket, after which the groceries would be bagged, and then taken home for "free."
The government didn't do any of that, even though such a system certainly WOULD keep people from starving. Why didn't they?
Perhaps because "public groceries" obviously wouldn't be as convenient a system as what we currently have. Maybe because they realized the selection of products would, of necessity, be quite limited.
And it probably was also obvious that, although the food would be "free," government run stores would be staffed with unionized employees and have multilevels of bureaucracy; resulting in a very high cost of food delivery.
The average person would surely pay more in taxes for their "free" food, than we today spend buying food from private grocers. And, because only a very few people would be able to afford to pay for their food twice -- once for "free" groceries that aren't picked up, and once for groceries bought at private stores -- it would be certain that only the elite would enjoy the privilege of "private grocing." Of course, we can expect that private groceries, in a world where most people get "free" groceries, would also be very expensive.
Now, lucky for us, the government DIDN'T set up a chain of "free" grocery stores to insure against starvation. Instead, they issued a means tested voucher for food -- known as a Food Stamp -- which is redeemable for food at most groceries.
In other words, rather than assume the reponsibility of PROVIDING FOOD, the federal government simply provided the MEANS to buy privately produced and distributed food.
Now, try a thought experiment. Suppose that the government really HAD been in the business of providing "free" food, as outlined above. What would the reaction likely be if someone were to propose "privatizing" the sale of groceries, and instituting a "voucher system" identical to our real life Food Stamps? I think the reaction would be hysteria.
I think liberals would denounce it as an attempt to undermine "public nutrition." I think editorials would say that the poor would starve to death, if all grocery stores became private.
I believe that the government grocery store unions would spend tens of millions of dollars fighting any proposed food voucher plans. Their spokesmen would say that ordinary shoppers need help selecting nutritious food, and that, when given a "choice," non-experts often make bad decisions.
It would even be loudly claimed that "public stores" with "free" groceries were an important part of our national heritage -- and that private groceries, even if better in some narrowly defined economic way, would still be detrimental overall, because "public groceries" are "a cornerstone of our democracy."
Does any of this sound a bit familiar? It should, because the "public grocery" concept is precisely the same in principle to the government school concept. And the hysterical denouncements that would meet an attempt at grocery privatization are EXACTLY the same arguments used today against empowering parents via school privatization.
The bottom line is, anyone who believes that government schools can -- in terms of delivering better service at a lower cost -- do a better job than private schools, MUST come up with a reason to explain why food stamps and private groceries obviously work better than would "free" food and "public groceries."
If means tested vouchers for food work so well, why won't they work with education?
Kendrick,
In my opinion, you are not only an idiot, but you are a lunatic as well.
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
Anonymous, August 08, 2007 7:18:00 PM, said:
Evidently you had a bad experience in school.
And evidently, you don't have the slightest clue as to the making of a logical argument! So let me offer you a free lesson in remedial logic, okay?
I've posted many, many facts in this and other threads -- such as a claim that Giles classroom teachers only get 36.4% of the money spent on "education" -- and yet, not one person has even attempted to dispute, let alone refute, the claims I've made. Without exception, every one of my "critics" -- and I use that term very, very loosely -- has simply tried to steer the "debate" away from facts and issues related to the subject being debated, and on to me, as a person, and my alleged deficiencies.
But that is a really, really STOO-PID way to try and engage in a "debate." It is, quite simply, childish in the extreme, and shows the utter intellectual impotence, of those who dislike what I am saying.
I am making many claims, on many threads, most of which would be considered "controversial" by the average person, and yet.... nobody on the other side makes any attempt to refute them. Instead, all you folks can do is sputter that I'm "an idiot" or "very dangerous" or the like.
But the truth is, facts stand or fall on their own, irrespective of who happens to bring them up in a debate. Thus, my factual claims are either right or wrong, and it simply doesn't matter whether I'm short or tall, fat or thin, black or white, happy or sad, married or single, gay or straight, religious or atheist, wealthy as Bill Gates or poor as Job's turkey, crazy as a loon or totally sane, educated in an Ivy League school or completely raised in the woods by a pack of wild timber wolves, and so forth.
NONE... OF... THAT... STUFF... MAKES... ANY... DIFFERENCE... IN... AN... HONEST... DEBATE... BETWEEN... GROWN-UPS... WHO... ARE... CAPABLE... OF... RATIONAL... THOUGHT!!!!!!!
Do you understand what I'm saying, or do I have to repeat myself, even slower and louder?
Tell ya what, I'll just turn over the floor to "Wikipedia," and see if it can drum some basic grasp of elemementary logic, into your apparently thick skull:
An ad hominem argument, also known as argumentum ad hominem (Latin: "argument to the person", "argument against the man") consists of replying to an argument or factual claim by attacking or appealing to the person making the argument or claim, rather than by addressing the substance of the argument or producing evidence against the claim. It is most commonly used to refer specifically to the ad hominem abusive, or argumentum ad personam, which consists of criticizing or personally attacking an argument's proponent in an attempt to discredit that argument.
Other common subtypes of the ad hominem include the ad hominem circumstantial, or ad hominem circumstantiae, an attack which is directed at the circumstances or situation of the arguer; and the ad hominem tu quoque, which objects to an argument by characterizing the arguer as being guilty of the same thing that he is arguing against.
Ad hominem arguments are always invalid in syllogistic logic, since the truth value of premises is taken as given, and the validity of a logical inference is independent of the person making the inference. However, ad hominem arguments are rarely presented as formal syllogisms, and their assessment lies in the domain of informal logic [1] and the theory of evidence.
On the other hand, the theory of evidence depends to a large degree on assessments of the credibility of witnesses, including eyewitness evidence and expert witness evidence. Evidence that a purported eyewitness is unreliable, or has a motive for lying, or that a purported expert witness lacks the claimed expertise can play a major role in making judgements from evidence.
Argument ad hominem is the converse of appeal to authority, in which the arguer bases the truth value of an assertion on the authority, knowledge or position of the person asserting it. Hence, while an ad hominem argument may make an assertion less compelling, by showing that the person making the assertion does not have the authority, knowledge or position they claim, or has made mistaken assertions on similar topics in the past, it cannot provide an infallible counterargument.
A (fallacious) ad hominem argument has the basic form:
Person A makes claim X
There is something objectionable about Person A
Therefore claim X is false
Ad hominem is one of the best known of the logical fallacies usually enumerated in introductory logic and critical thinking textbooks. Both the fallacy itself, and accusations of having committed it, are often brandished in actual discourse (see also Argument from fallacy). As a technique of rhetoric, it is powerful and used often because of the natural inclination of the human brain to recognize patterns.
An ad hominem fallacy consists of asserting that someone's argument is wrong and/or he is wrong to argue at all purely because of something discreditable/not-authoritative about the person or those persons cited by him rather than addressing the soundness of the argument itself. The implication is that the person's argument and/or ability to argue correctly lacks authority. Merely insulting another person in the middle of otherwise rational discourse does not necessarily constitute an ad hominem fallacy (though it is not usually regarded as acceptable). It must be clear that the purpose of the characterization is to discredit the person offering the argument, and, specifically, to invite others to discount his arguments. In the past, the term ad hominem was sometimes used more literally, to describe an argument that was based on an individual, or to describe any personal attack. However, this is not how the meaning of the term is typically introduced in modern logic and rhetoric textbooks, and logicians and rhetoricians are in agreement that this use is incorrect.
[herein ends Wikipedia extract]
If the above wasn't enough to make you "see the light," then there's much more -- including some pretty diagrams! -- right here:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ad_hominen
Please, for the love of God, give up the foolish and utterly lame use of ad hominen, and start dealing with the substance of the arguments I present here. Many thanks in advance!
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
Anonymous, August 08, 2007 5:11:00 PM, said:
So now its back to bashing teachers?
You think so? On the "Bernetta" thread, I propose giving teachers a 495% raise, and putting them 100% in charge of the schools, which they would, in fact, own. If I simply wanted to "bash" teachers, why would I want to see them given more money and more power?
I think that a shame.
Really? Well, I think it's a shame, on par with the Holocaust, that children who cannot afford private school are not only denied a good education, but deliberately dumbed down to insure that they will grow up to be obedient workers, and cheerful taxpayers. Since when has a government school ever tried to stretch a child's mind, or encourage them to develop critical thinking skills? That's right. Never.
Nobody gave teachers a degree.
Just because it cost them money, doesn't mean it's actually worth anything. (Look up the fallacy known as "the labor theory of value" sometime.) Outside of the government schools, ed degrees are generally viewed as being worthless.
They went out and earned it.
So what? They can dig holes, and fill them back in, and they still aren't accomplishing anything. Basically, all that an ed degree does, is mark one as likely being at the very bottom of the barrel, academic achievement wise. Most people consider mastery of real and valuable knowledge, to be more valuable than "knowing about teaching school." As the old saying goes, those who can, do... and those who can't, teach.
Furthermore, the teachers I know are highly professional people who DO have the best interests of young people at heart.
Well, I'm sure that many of the guards at Nazi death camps were highly professional people who had the best interests of the Jews at heart. Alas, what's in your heart, counts for very little, if you happen to be in an institutional setting where your job requires you to gas and burn Jews. Or, as the case may be, to gas and burn young minds, removing all shreds of individuality from them, and hammering them to conform to the same low standards, as everyone else.
Is it not enough that they do this for low pay?
Low pay??? What low pay????
The average Giles County worker makes exactly $22,307 for nine months of labor. In the same time frame, a Giles classroom teacher makes $38,362!!! That's 72% more than the "average worker," in case you're keeping score. And, really, they're being paid all that money, primarily for babysitting and brainwashing. It's hard to justify such extravagent pay, given that fact, as well as the utterly mediocre "product" that they extrude from their pedagogal meat grinder. (See the Pink Floyd clip if you don't get this allusion.)
Do you have to ridicule them
I'm only stating the facts. If that makes them look ridiculous, that's their problem, not mine!
and insinuate that they do a disservice to our kids?
Since when have I ever "insinuated" anything? Are you quite sure that you know the meaning of the word "insinuate?" Look, pal, I come right out and say that schools are death camps for independent thought, and the "teachers" are morally equivalent to death camp guards! How much more directly can I condemn the immoral, evil, and utterly worthless socialistic boondoggle known as "public education?" Help me out here, cause I'm at a loss for words!
Shame on you!
Shame on me? What about the teachers who work in "the system" -- paid with blood money extorted at the point of a gun -- who spend their working hours hammering square peg children to fit the round holes mandated by a government whose only concern, is that they grow up ignorant and obedient? Do you think they should take pride in an awful job like that? Shouldn't they feel remorse for doing their part in snuffing out so many potentially bright futures? I know I would!
So, how about seeing them showing a little shame, for taking so much taxpayer money, and delivering so little academic benefit in return?
In Washington DC, the educrats spend over $12,000 per child per year, and achieve the most dismal results imaginable!
http://snipurl.com/1pd36
Over one third of Washingtonians are functionally illiterate, along with one fifth of the general public! Isn't that pretty horrific? And, no, this disaster isn't caused by most of the children being born black. Teachers like Marva Collins, and Jaime Escalante, have proven that minority children are educable... if they are taught properly, by people who actually believe in them. (See the movie "Stand and Deliver" for a true life example of this.)
Of course, socialist bureaucracies don't tend to look favorably on renegade teachers who do a good job with kids slated to grow up and be wards of the state, so heroes like Collins and Escalante inevitably wind up clashing with the "suits" of the Central Office, and either get fired or are driven off. How dare they? Don't they know that some kids have been predetermined to be losers, and must be allowed to fail?
As the reporter on-scene at the Hindenburg crash said, "Oh, the humanity!" Government schools are, quite simply, the most evil institutions ever created by mankind. Killing an innocent child's soul, spirit, and life potential, is the worst crime that I can imagine.
Anonymous, August 08, 2007 6:54:00 PM, said:
I think you should be arrested for suggesting that students should burn up their schools.....
Really? That's swell, Toots.
I actually didn't realize that I was dispensing advise to children. Nor was I aware that the "First Amendment" had been repealed when I wasn't paying attention...
Anyway, I liken children burning down a school, to slaves rising up and killing their masters. Or to the Jews at Sobibor, who rose up against the Nazis, killed them, and then fled to safety.
I think the government schools are really, really bad, and I've never made any secret of my desire to see them all torn down. But I don't really expect today's well indoctrinated kids to develop enough courage or wisdom, to actually rise up against their oppressors.
But, if they do, I think they should march on the Central Office and burn it down first. Naturally, I hope that Martha Ferguson (a former teacher I respect) is allowed to escape with her life. But as for that monument to soul killing bureaucracy, I can only say, "burn, baby, burn!"
you do realize that now-a-days we do have students who would.........
Not my kids; ergo, not my responsibility.
some very young ones have set cars on fire.
Public floggings carried out on the square, would go a long way toward discouraging anti-social behavior of that sort. I heartily recommend them!
Anonymous, August 08, 2007 6:55:00 PM, said:
Kendrick -- I think you should come to our classrooms and observe.
Man, I don't think so! First of all, if I set foot in a government school, it would probably rekindle the repetitive nightmares I had for years, where I'd find myself back in school. And I really don't need those nightmares to come back.
Second, and far more important, there is literally nothing you can show me, which would cause me to hold a positive view of government schooling. You see, I am not an economic illiterate, and I therefore know that there are certain laws, as immutable as the law of gravity, which govern how human institutions work.
Central planning by government never works as well as leaving things up to the free market. The Russkies found that out the hard way, and eventually, the true believers in school socialism, will come to the same realization.
You see, without the incentives of profit and loss, no bureaucrat is motivated to make good decisions. In fact, the incentive structure of government bureaucracies is simply perverse; the more you fail, the more heavily you are bailed out by the taxpayers. And what happens when central planners make a really big mistake? Usually nothing! There simply is no accountability under socialism.
Take the government roads, as an example. The feds collect literally twice as much gas tax, as they need for road construction -- half is pilfered by being placed in the "general fund" -- and even when they DO spend the money on transportation, their highest priority is pork barrel spending in the districts of influential Congresscritters. (Google "bridge to nowhere Alaska" for a prime example of this).
What do you suppose is their lowest priority? Yeah, you guessed it... maintenence! And guess what happens when you have thousands of bridges under your control, and you don't religiously keep them up? Yep. Eventually, a bridge will collapse, killing lots of innocent people in the process.
How many bureaucratic heads will "roll" over the I-35W Bridge collapse? None! And how many pork barreling Congresscritters will lose their seats, thanks to their contributory malfeasance? That's right... none!
Politicians and bureaubots are not held accountable under road socialism. That's just not the way the system works... which should be plain to see, for anyone with eyes and a working brain.
But what if that bridge had been a privately owned "toll bridge?" Can you imagine, if that was the case, its owners neglecting to keep up the required maintenence? There's no money to be made from a private bridge that falls into the river, and enormous legal risk from the inevitable survivor lawsuits. So of course, the bridge would've been well taken care of. The desire to continue raking in profit, and to avoid incurring loss, would positively compel the bridge owners to act much, much more responsibly, than did I-35W's actual owners, the federal government. You know this is true, and by now you should be realizing that the same principle holds true in regards to schooling: private schools are accountable to their customers, and have an incentive to excell... while government schools have diffused authority and no profit/loss incentives, and, as a result, simply suck.
As icing on the cake, herding everyone's children together, and telling them what to think, creates irrestable temptations for certain elites, leading to a great deal of mischief. "Capturing the curriculum" is a real source of power, when schools are compulsary monopolies. And of course, in history, we see just that sort of thing happening over and over again!
First, the Protestants around 1840 used the mandatory curriculum to try and "fix" the hordes of Irish Catholics that were then flooding into the US. About fifty years later, men of great wealth -- Rockefeller, Carnegie, and the like -- became alarmed at how well the little one room schoolhouses were teaching reading, and encouraging unwanted abstract thought amongst the "commoners."
So, the plutocrats of the "Gilded Age" created foundations and other front groups to push their dumbed down "learn just enough to be a good factory worker" agenda, on an unsuspecting public. Locally controlled "one room" schools were razed, and replaced with "consolidated" schools controlled by a central bureaucracy that danced to the tune called by the plutocrats, and ignored the wishes of the parents.
And so, people were molded to become stupid enough so that the upper crust elite could finally stop worrying about them, but, alas, that was not the final degradation forced on the kids of America.
Eventually, the government school curriculum was captured by left wingers who wanted to create some sort of utopian world where everyone loved each other, and lived in perfect harmony. They stripped out all references to God, and pumped in all sorts of "politically correct" tripe meant to reward some "victimized" groups, at the expense of others who were deemed to be "oppressors."
I could go on, and mention things like the laughably counterproductive "DARE" program, which actually encourages kids to use drugs (researchers deem this problem the "boomerang effect")... but really, why bother? Surely my point has been adequately made by now, right?
If the schools are owned and operated by the government, then everything about them becomes, of necessity, a "political football," and the kids are treated much the way lab rats are treated by behavorial scientists. But, in a world where all schooling is private, you have none of these problems. The schools simply teach what the parents want their kids to be taught; it's as simple as that! And since different parents want different types of education, a free marketplace in K-12 schooling would reflect that diversity.
Christians would send their kids to Christian schools; atheists would send their tykes to atheist schools, Moslems to Moslem schools, etc. Nobody would be in a position to second guess the parents, or dictate the curriculum in any way. Kids belong to parents, not to the State, so what could be better than the free market I've described? And I haven't even mentioned how much higher quality the instruction would be in decentralized, private, for-profit schools, ruthlessly competing against each other!
Anywaaaay... thanks for the invite to visit the schools, I suppose. But I'm much more likely to convert to "flat-earthism" than I am to become any sort of believer in school socialism. It's possible a local school might be able to whip up a "Potemkin Village" that looks pretty snazzy, but, the fact remains that I can no more stop believing in the Law of Supply and Demand, than I can in the Law of Gravitational Attraction. Sorry.
Anonymous, August 08, 2007 9:24:00 PM, said:
In my opinion, you are not only an idiot, but you are a lunatic as well.
Your "opinion" is duly noted.
NOW, do you care to address any of the facts I've brought to light, or debate me on the position I've staked out? You're perfectly free to remain an anonymous coward, but it would be nice if you'd show some concern for the real issues, rather than pointlessly fixating on me.
I am not the issue, here. The morality, workability, and necessity of having a government owned school system, run according to the whims of a mostly unelected tri-level bureaucracy, and tapped directly into the life-blood of the American taxpayers, IS what is at issue, here. So, let's try and stay "on topic" in the future, okay? Thanks.
Kendrick, you border opon being paranoid skitzophrenic, full of delusions about society as a whole. You had the audacity to suggest on one of these rambling threads that someone who disagreed with you was waiting on a check from the government. Here is what I think about yourself...
The truth is, if it weren't for you living off of your Mother's and/or Dead Father's social security and/or Pension income, you would not be able to function normally in society because you would have to go get what is known as a "job" like any other contributing member. How close am I?
Kendrick..
I do not endorse what someone said about you and your parents. I think it's shameful to say such a thing.
However, I also think you owe teachers a huge apology. You can criticize them all you want, but the fact remains that teachers do incredibly good things for our children. Having said that, I hope you will consider the gravity of your unkind remarks and give that much needed apology. Perhaps your post should be re-directed to the Mouthbreathers thread?
Anonymous, August 09, 2007 4:42:00 PM, said:
Kendrick, you border opon being paranoid skitzophrenic, full of delusions about society as a whole.
Okay, whatever you say. Now, before I get around to answering your post, would you mind being a little bit more specific? I'm sure you'd have no problem pointing out which, precisely, of my various beliefs are delusional, right?
Here, I'll help you out, by giving you a numbered listing of seventy of my beliefs, and you can just go down the line, and identify each of them as either "delusional" or "non-delusional." Okey doke? Good!
(1) Freedom is every American's birthright.
(2) Free people own their own bodies, and are allowed to make their own decisions for themselves, without interference or compulsion from outside parties.
(3) Stealing is always morally wrong.
(4) The government should be held to the same moral standards, as are applied to individuals.
(5) Taxation without representation is slavery.
(6) The "little man" in America today has no representation; only special interest groups, big corporations, and the super rich, are truly represented by modern politicians.
(7) The IRS Code consists of 16,845 pages of incomprehensible legalese.
(8) Taxes are collected at the point of a gun; refuse to pay taxes, and the government will likely hunt you down and shoot you dead.
(9) Since no normal human being can fully understand the IRS Code, it is an injustice to attempt to enforce it using threats of incarceration and/or death.
(10) The IRS was unable, at the recent Tom Cryer trial, to prove that ordinary wage income is taxable.
(11) The "war on drugs" has no Constitutional basis.
(12) Even "suspected "drug dealers" are human beings, and shouldn't be beaten and tortured and threatened with death by government employed police officers.
(13) "Peace officers" are vastly preferable to "law enforcement officers."
(14) All power is inherent in the people.
(15) "We The People" have at all times, an unalienable right to alter, reform, or abolish the government in such manner as we may think proper.
(16) Non-resistance against arbitrary power and oppression is absurd, slavish, and destructive of the good and happiness of mankind.
(17) That government is best, which governs least.
(18) Elected officials should always tell the public the truth, and be careful to obey whatever laws apply to them.
(19) When elected officials lie and/or break the law, it is the right and duty of concerned citizens to engage in vigorous peaceful protest.
(20) Local government is generally more responsive to the wishes of the voter, than are the state and federal governments.
(21) We would be better off, if our "representatives" were selected by random lot, just like juries, rather than by picking them "democratically" using popularity contests.
(22) The game of politics is "rigged" in favor of incumbents, by means of campaign finance laws, ballot access laws, and subsidies to the "official" two parties.
(23) There's not a dime's worth of difference between the "Republicans" and the "Democrats."
(24) The government does a poor job at most everything it attempts to do, because bureaucrats are not held accountable for failure, there is no "reality check" from competition, and there are no incentives based on profit and loss.
(25) There is a difference between "schooling" and "education."
(26) Benjamin Franklin and Thomas Edison are good examples of well rounded, highly educated people.
(27) The cost of government schooling has, in constant dollars, more than tripled in the last fifty years, while student test scores have declined sharply.
(28) The teacher's unions represent the interests of the teachers, not those of the kids.
(29) Well educated citizens, who are adept at critical thinking, are not particularly desired by the government, or by some business leaders.
(30) Government schooling was deliberately dumbed down in America, at the instigation of Gilded Era "robber barons" who wanted "obedient workers" to man their factories.
(31) Critical thinking skills, including familiarity with the rules of informal logic, are desperately needed in a "democracy," but, for some unfathomable reason, they almost never are made part of the government school curriculums.
(32) The modern day government school curriculum is used to proselytize children into accepting the values of secular humanism, political correctness, environmentalism, and victimology.
(33) If parents had a free choice about where their kids attended schools, most would choose schools similar to those of a hundred years ago, with God and prayer being allowed, and rigorous instruction in the basics being emphasized.
(34) God has been exiled from the government schools, but Charles Darwin and the religion of secular humanism are taught as the absolute truth.
(35) If it wasn't for the indoctrination carried out by the government schools, almost nobody would believe the Darwinian dogma that everything in the universe came into being "by accident."
(36) Religious parents are forced to pay for government schools which mock and belittle their beliefs.
(37) It is unfair for people who choose to homeschool, or privately school, to be forced to pay taxes which go toward a government school system which they don't support or utilize.
(39) The average Giles County worker makes $22,307 for nine months of work.
(40) The average Giles County government school classroom teacher makes $38,362 for nine months of work.
(41) The average Giles County government school classroom teacher is paid about $26.00 per hour for work that mostly consists of babysitting and brainwashing.
(42) There are only 14.13 students in the Giles County government schools, for each classroom teacher currently employed by the School Board.
(43) The Giles County government schools spend $7,465 per student per year.
(44) Classroom teachers in Giles County receive only 36.4% of the total government school spending.
(45) It would be possible for teachers to make roughly $190,000 per year as entrepreneurs in a decentralized and privatized "one room" school system.
(46) Stay at home moms without college degrees are often able to do an excellent job selecting a curriculum and teaching it to their children.
(47) Certified Giles County teachers would be able to do an excellent job selecting a curriculum and teaching it to other people's children, without any help or oversight from federal, state, and local bureaucrats.
(48) The free market could deliver education services with the same excellence and efficiency that it currently delivers supermarket groceries.
(49) Unionization, multilayers of bureaucracy, and the insistence on "one size fits all" service, contribute to the high cost, inefficiency, and poor quality which characterizes government owned and operated enterprises.
(50) One room school houses of a hundred years ago, taught kids more in eight years, than today's government schools teach in twelve.
(51) Only about 1 child in a 100 is born with physical problems which lead to mental retardation.
(52) If a child is taught a good curriculum by competent teachers, and is not mentally retarded, he should have no problems in becoming a competent reader.
(53) When non-retarded children are unable to learn to read proficiently, that is generally a sign that something is wrong with the instruction they are being given.
(54) It is a maxim of basic economics that, when the government subsidizes something, we inevitably get more of it.
(55) Through the "IDEA" program, the feds subsidize imbecility.
(56) Although only 7/10 of 1% of Giles County school children are mentally retarded, nearly 13.8% of the student population is enrolled in federally subsidized "special ed" classes.
(57) It appears that federal "IDEA" subsidies have led to our having a bumper crop of imbeciles in the Giles County schools, at a tremendous cost to the taxpayers.
(58) Private schools, using old fashioned methods of teaching reading, generally do not have 1/8 of their non-retarded children enrolled in "special ed" classes.
(59) When government bureaucracies fail at what they try to do, they are rewarded with additional tax funding to "fix the problem" and no-one is held responsible for the lack of success. (60) When private companies fail at what they try to do, they are punished with loss of profit, if not bankruptcy, and the person responsible for the lack of success, is usually fired.
(60) In the real world, incentives matter.
(61) In the real world, socialism doesn't work.
(62) Government schooling is a prime example of socialism.
(63) The world is so very complex that government central planners cannot know enough to make intelligent decisions.
(64) No one on earth knows how to make a pencil.
(65) The "North American Union" is a plan to merge the US with Canada and Mexico, probably leading to less freedom and a lower standard of living for Americans, if implemented.
(66) The corporate owned "mainstream news media" cannot be trusted to keep Americans fully informed of what their oligarch puppeteered government is up to.
(67) George W. Bush is a traitor, although not a particularly intelligent one.
(68) There is a God, and He created the Universe, along with everything within it, including Man.
(69) My "critics" love to call me names, and make baseless insinuations, but they never seem to be willing to take issue, in a specific way, with any of the claims I make on this blog.
(70) My "critics" never have the cojones to post under their own name, whenever they attack me.
That should be enough for a good start, shouldn't it? And, considering that the above 70 points pretty much summarize everything I've recently posted here... if I've been exhibiting any signs of delusion, then you should have no problem finding examples of that delusion, in the above list.
Please understand that it took me several hours to laboriously compile the above 70 point list of my beliefs. It will only take you a few minutes to identify which ones are delusional, and which ones are not. And I believe, after all the work I've put into this, that you owe me at least that much. For you to simply call me delusional, and refuse to back it up by naming examples of my allegedly delusional thinking, would obviously be nothing but another baseless smear against me. And I'm sure you don't want to be seen as an anonymous smear artist, throwing around ad hominens to deflect attention from the real issues, right?
I eagerly look forward to your reply. Once I receive it, I will begin the long process of completely answering your question about whether or not I work or otherwise contribute anything of value to society. But, I only will go to that much effort, after you hold up your end of the deal, as outlined above. If you insist on continuing to call me delusional, then you simply must be willing to give some specifics. Understand? Good.
Anonymous, August 09, 2007 6:28:00 PM, said:
I do not endorse what someone said about you and your parents. I think it's shameful to say such a thing.
I agree. Thanks for condemning it.
However, I also think you owe teachers a huge apology.
What for? Be specific, please. You might want to reference the 70 point list of my beliefs, posted above, to identify what I've said that perhaps merits an apology. Thanks!
You can criticize them all you want, but the fact remains that teachers do incredibly good things for our children.
Really? Try naming one good thing that they do, which wouldn't be done even better by a free market in education, if our rulers would simply allow one to exist? Again, please be specific!
Having said that, I hope you will consider the gravity of your unkind remarks and give that much needed apology.
Good lord, man.
Have you never considered the incredible, black hole like "gravity" of the fact that men survive by use of their rational faculties, and that the government schools do pretty much everything they can to hinder the development of a child's rational faculty?
Have you never considered the "gravity" of the fact that men like Rockefeller and Carnegie felt endangered by the intelligence and independence of the common American farmers of their time, and launched a conspiracy to re-engineer schools for purposes of cranking out "obedient factory workers" who would never threaten to rock their yacht?
Please understand, the many, many failings of the government school system are NO accident! The dumbing down of America was the result of a carefully conceived and well executed plan. Does that not make you absolutely furious? It certainly should!
Please don't take my word on this "right out in the open" conspiracy of the plutocrats. Read John Taylor Gatto's book for yourself! The entire sordid plot is thoroughly documented, complete with voluminous footnotes pointing to the original sources. Since you can read Gatto's entire book online, and at no cost, there is no excuse for you to remain ignorant on this oh so very important subject.
http://www.johntaylorgatto.com/
Finally, if you just absolutely, positively, are unwilling to read Gatto's book -- or even his much shorter articles which I've posted on this blog -- please, at the very least, watch the 30 minute video of Gatto I've embedded in the "Hey, Teacher! Leave Those Kids Alone" thread.
Please don't bury your head in the sand any longer, okay? Cause as the old saying goes, if you aren't part of the solution, you're part of the problem!
Finally, I'd like to ask you a question, and then receive from you a straight, yes or no, answer.
Elsewhere on this blog, I posted an extended anology regarding the idea of "government grocery stores" versus "food stamps" as a solution to the problem of hunger. Given all the likely ramifications of cancelling the Food Stamp program, and replacing it with a system of bureaucratically directed "mandatory" tax-funded government grocery stores, would you in fact want to do such a thing?
And if your answer is "no," I'd really like to see some sort of explanation as to why a free market can be trusted to provide food, but not educational services. Honestly, what is the difference? Please enlighten me!
Perhaps your post should be re-directed to the Mouthbreathers thread?
Which one? Again, I must ask for specifics! Thank you.
Anonymous, August 09, 2007 4:42:00 PM:
Despite several passes of proof-reading, I still managed, in my very long list of beliefs, to screw things up. And, since I can't edit postings after they've been made, I'll simply beg your forgiveness, and try using the following "workaround"--
Since I accidentally numbered two questions "60," please refer to them in your response as "60-A" and "60-B" if that's not too much trouble to do:
(60-A) When private companies fail at what they try to do, they are punished with loss of profit, if not bankruptcy, and the person responsible for the lack of success, is usually fired.
(60-B) In the real world, incentives matter.
I deeply regret allowing this unfortunate error to occur. Sorry!
Hey, teachers... would you like to learn a new word for today? Well, why not try this one on for size:
COMPRACHICOS
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comprachicos
The comprachicos or comprapequenos, were a strange and hideous nomadic association, famous in the seventeenth century, forgotten in the eighteenth, unknown today...
Comprachicos, as well as comprapequenos, is a compound Spanish word that means "child-buyers."
The Comprachicos traded in children.
They bought them and sold them.
They did not steal them. The kidnapping of children is a different industry.
And what did they make of these children?
Monsters.
Why monsters?
To laugh.
The people needs laughter; so do the kings. Cities require side-show freaks or clowns; palaces require jesters...
To succeed in producing a freak, one must get ahold of him early. A dwarf must be started when he is small...
Hence, an art. These were educators. They took a man and turned him into a miscarriage; they took a face and made a muzzle. They stunted growth; they mangled features. This artificial production of teratological cases had its own rules. It was a whole science. Imagine an inverted orthopedics. Where God had put a straight glance, this art put a squint. Where God had put harmony, they put deformity. Where God had put perfection, they brought back a botched attempt. And in the eyes of connoiseurs, it is the botched attempt that is perfect...
The practice of degrading man leads one to the practice of deforming him. Deformity completes the task of political suppression...
The comprachicos had a talent, to disfigure, that made them valuable in politics. To disfigure is better than to kill. There was the iron mask, but that is an awkward means. One cannot populate Europe with iron masks; deformed mountebanks, however, run through the streets without appearing implausible; besides, an iron mask can be taken of, a mask of flesh cannot. To mask you forever by means of your own face, nothing can be more ingenious....
The comprachicos did not merely remove a child's face, they removed his memory. At least, they removed as much of it as they could. The child was not aware of the mutilation he had suffered. The horrible surgery left traces on his face, not in his mind. He could remember at most that one day he had been siezed by some men, then had fallen asleep, and later they had cured him. Of what? He did not know. Of the burning by sulphur and the incisions byiron, he remembered nothing. During the operation, the comprachicos made the little patient unconscious by means of a stupefying powder that passed for magic and suppressed pain...
In China, since time immemorial, they have achieved refinement in a special art and industry: that of molding a living man. One takes a child two or three years old, one puts him into a porcelain vase, more or less grotesque in shape, without cover or bottom, so that the head and feet protrude. In the daytime, one keeps this vase stading upright; at night, one lays it down so the child can sleep. Thus the child expands without growing, slowly filling the contours of the vase with his compressed flesh and twisted bones. The bottled development takes place for several years. At a certain point, it becomes irreversable. When one judges that this has occurred and that the monster is made, one breaks the vase and the child comes out, and one has a man in the shape of a pot. (Victor Hugo, The Man Who Laughs, translation mine)
Victor Hugo wrote this in the nineteenth century. His exalted mind could not concieve that so unspeakable a form of inhumanity would ever be possible again. The twentieth century proved him wrong.
The production of monsters--helpless, twisted monsters whose normal development has been stunted--goes on all around us. But the modern heirs of the comprachicos are smarter and subtler than their predecessors: they do not hide, they practice their trade in the open; they do not buy children, the children are delivered to them; they do not use sulphur or iron, they achieve their goal without ever laying a finger on their little victims.
The ancient comprachicos hid the operation, but displayed its results; their heirs have reversed the process: the operation is open, the results are invisible. In the past, this horrible surgery left traces on a child's face, not in his mind. Today, it leaves traces in his mind, not on his face. In both cases, the child is not aware of the mutilation he has suffered. But today's comprachicos do not use narcotic powders: they take a child before he is fully aware of reality and never let him develop that awareness. Where nature has put a normal brain, they put mental retardation. To make you unconscious for life by means of your own brain, nothing can be more ingenious.
This is the ingenuity practiced by most of today's educators. They are the comprachicos of the mind.
They do not place a child in a vase to adjust his body to its contours. They place him in a "Progressive" nursery school to adjust him to society.
The Progressive nursery schools start a child's education at the age of three. Their view of a child's needs is militantly anti-cognitive and anti-conceptual. A child of that age, they claim, is too young for cognitive training; his natural desire is not to learn, but to play. The development of his conceptual faculty, they claim, is an unnatural burden that should not be imposed on him; he should be free to act on his spontaneous urges and feelings in order to express his subconscious desires, hostilities and fears. The primary goal of a Progressive nursery school is "social adjustment"; this is to be achieved by means of group activities, in which a child is expected to develop both "self-expression" (in the form of anything he might feel like doing) and conformity to the group....
The purposeful, disciplined use of his intelligence is the highest achievement possible to man: it is what makes him human. The higher the skill, the earlier in life its learning should be started. The same holds true in reverse, for those who seek to stifle a human potential. To succeed in producing the atrophy of intelligence, a state of man-made stupidity, one must get hold of the victim early; a mental dwarf must be started when he is small. This is the art and science practiced by the comprachicos of the mind.
At the age of three, when his mind is almost as plastic as his bones, when his need and desire to know are more intense than they will ever be again, a child is delivered--by a Progressive nursery school--into the midst of a pack of children as helplessly ignorant as himself. He is not merely left without cognitive guidance--he is actively discouraged and prevented from pursuing cognitive tasks. He wants to learn; he is told to play. Why? No answer is given. He is made to understand--by the emotional vibrations permeating the atmosphere of the place, by every crude or subtle means available to the adults whom he cannot understand--that the most important thing in this peculiar world is not to know, but to get along with the pack. Why? No answer is given.
He does not know what to do; he is told to do anything he feels like. He picks up a toy; it is snatched away from him by another child; he is told he must learn to share. Why? No answer is given. He sits alone in a corner; he is told that he must join the others. Why? No answer is given. He approaches a group, reaches for their toys and is punched in the nose. He cries, in angry bewilderment; the teacher throws her arms around him and gushes that she loves him..
Animals, infants, and small children are exceedingly sensitive to emotional vibrations: it is their chief means of cognition. A small child senses whether an adult's emotions are genuine, and grasps instantly the vibrations of hypocrisy. The teacher's mechanical crib-side manner--the rigid smile, the cooing tone of voice, the clutching hands, the coldly unfocused, unseeing eyes--add up in a child's mind to a world he will soon learn: phony. He knows it is a disquise; a disquise hides something; he experiences suspicion--and fear.
A child is mildly curious about, but not greatly interested in, other children of his own age. In daily association, they merely bewilder him. He is not seeking equals, but cognitive superiors, people who know. Observe that young children prever the company of older children or of adults, that they hero-worship and try to emulate an older brother or sister. A child needs to reach a certain state of development, a sense of his own identity, before he can enjoy the company of his "peers." But he is thrown into their midst and told to adjust.
Adjust to what? To anything. To cruelty, to injustice, to blindness, to silliness, to pretentiousness, to snubs, to mockery, to treachery, to lies, to incomrpehensible demands, to unwanted favors, to nagging affections, to unprovoked hostilities--and to the overwhelming presence of Whim as the ruler of everything. (Why is there nothing better? Because these are the protective devices of helpless, frightened, unformed children who are left without guidance and are ordered to act as a mob. The better kinds of actions require thought.)
A three-year old delivered into the power of a pack of other three-year-olds is worse off than a fox delivered to a pack of hounds: the fox at least, is free to run; the three year-old is expected to court the hounds and seek their love while they tear him to pieces.
After awhile, he adjusts. He gets the nature of the game--wordlessly, by repetition, imitation, and emotional osmosis, long before he can form the concepts to identify it.
He learns not to question the supremacy of the pack. He discoverse that such quesions are taboo in some frightening, supernatural way; the answer is an incantation vibrating with the overtones of a damning indictment, suggesting that he is guilty of some innate, incorrigible evil: "Don't be selfish." Thus he acquires self-doubt, before he is fully aware of a self.
He learns that regardless of what he does--whether his action is right or wrong, honest or dishonest, sensible or senseless--if the pack disapproves, he is wrong and his desire is frustrated; if the pack approves, then anything goes.
He learns that it is no use starting any lengthy project of his own--such as building a castle out of boxes--it will be taken over and destroyed by others. He learns that anything he wants must be grabbed today, since there is no way of telling what the pack will decide tomorrow. Thus his groping sense of time-continuity--of the future's reality--is stunted, shrinking his awareness and concern to the range of the immediate moment...
He has nothing left to guide him, except his feelings, but he is afraid to feel. The teacher prods him to self-expression, but he knows that this is a trap: he is being put on trial before the pack, to see whether he fits or not. He senses that he is constantly expected to feel, but he does not feel anything--only fear, confusion, helplessness, and boredom. He senses that these must not be expressed, that there is something wrong with him if he has such feelings--since none of the other children seem to have them. (That they are all going through the same process, is way beyond his capacity to understand) They seem to be at home--he is the only freak and outcast.
So he learns to hide his feelings, to simulate them, to pretend, to evade--to repress. The stronger his fear, the more aggressive his behavior; the more uncertain his assertions, the louder his voice....
Now he is ready to discover that he need not gamble on the unpredictable approval of the intangible, omnipotent power which he cannot name, but sense all around him, which is named the will of the pack. He discovers that there are ways to manipulate its omnipotence. He observes that some of the other children manage to impose their wishes on the pack, but they never say so openly. He observes that the shifting will of the pack is not so mysterious as it seemed at first, that it is swung by a silent contest of wills among those who would compete for the role of pack leaders.
How does one fight in such a competition? He cannot say--the answer would take conceptual knowledge--but he learns by doing: by flattering, threatening, cajoling, intimidating, bribing, deceiving the member os the pack....
The issue to him is now metaphysical [that is, a part of reality comparable to gravity]. His subconscious is programmed, his fundamentals are set. By means of the wordless integrations in his brain, the faceless, intangible shape of the pack now stands between him and reality, with the will of the pack as the dominant power. He is "adjusted."...
It is the little "misfits" who have the best chance to recover--the children who do not conform, the children who endure three years of agonizing misery, loneliness, confusion, abuse by their teachers and by their "peers," but remain aloof and withdrawn, unable to give in, unable to fake, armed with nothing but the feeling that something is wrong in that nursery school.
These are the "problem children" who are periodically put through the torture of the teachers' compaints to their parents, and through the hopeless despair of seeing their parents side with the torturers. Some of these children are violently rebellious; others seeem outwardly timid and passive, but who are outside the reach of any pressure or influence. Whatever their particular forms of bearing the unbearable, what they all have in common is the inability to fit in, i.e., to accept the intellectual authority of the pack. (Not all "misfits" belong to this category; there are children who reject the pack for entirely different reasons, such as frustrated power-lust).
The nonconformists are heroic little martyrs who are given no credit by anyone--not even themselves, since they cannot identify the nature of their battle....
The modern educators--the comprachicos of the mind--are prepared for the second stage of their task: to indoctrinate the children with the kinds of ideas that will make their intellectual recovery unlikely, if not impossible--and to do it by the kind of method that continues and reinforces the conditioning begun in the nursery school. The program is devised to stunt the minds of those who managed to survive the first stage with some remnants of their rational capacity, and to cripple those who were fortunate enough not to be sent to a Progressive nursery school....
John Dewey, the father of modern education (including the Progressive nursery schools) opposed the teaching of theoretical (i.e. conceptual) knowledge, and demanded that it be replaced by concrete, "practical" action, in the form of "class projects" which would develop the students' social spirit.
"The mere absorbing of facts and truths," he wrote, "is so exclusively individual an affair that it tends very naturally to pass into selfishness. There is no obvious social motive for the acquirement [sic] of mere learning, there is no clear social gain in success thereat." (John Dewey, The School and Society, The University of Chicago Press, 1956, p. 15)...
Instead of teaching children respect for one another's individuality, achievements, and rights, Progressive education gives an official stamp of moral righteousness to the tendancy of frightened half-savages to gang up on one another, to form "in-groups" and to persecute the outsider. When, on top of it, the outsider is penalized or reprimanded for his inability to "get along with people," the rule of mediocrity is elevated into a system....
One of the most evil aspects of modern schools is the spectacle of a thinking child trying to "adjust" to the pack, trying to hide his intelligence (and his scholastic grades) and to act like "one of the boys." He never succeeds, and is left wondering helplessly: What do I lack? What do they want?...
If you want to grasp what the comprachicos' methods have done to the mind of a high-school graduate, remember that the intellect is often compared to the faculty of sight. Try to project what you would feel if your eyesight were damaged in such a way that you were left with nothing but peripheral vision. You would sense vague, unidentifiable shapes floating around you, which would vanish when you tried to focus on them, then would reappear on the periphery and swim and switch and multiply. [The same way unidentified and un-validated abstract ideas and principles float around in the mind when logic and rationality are too suppressed to identify and integrate them into something meaningful.] This is the mental state--and the terror--produced in their students by the comprachicos of Progressive education....
*********************************
The above is a brief excerpt from a very lengthy essay written by the Russian born novelist/philosopher, Ayn Rand. Entitled "The Comprachicos," this essay was written in 1970, and is included in a collection of Rand's essays on the New Left called "The New Left: The Anti-Industrial Revolution."
Although, in my opinion, Ayn Rand was wrong about a great many things, there's really no denying that she "nailed it" when it came to explaining the inner workings of the modern day government school. Now do you people see why I equate "publik skools" with Nazi Death Camps, and pine away for the day they're all burned or torn down???
In the "New Forum For The Malcontents" thread, I posted "new rules" which included the following:
Discussion of the Blogmaster, other than perhaps to thank or compliment him, will always be considered "off topic" and result in such comments being deleted and transferred to "The Mouthbreather's Zone."
I want to assure Anonymous, August 09, 2007 4:42:00 PM, that the above rule doesn't apply to him, at the least at this time. Until the issue of my allegedly "delusional" thinking is thrashed out and resolved, debate about my alleged "paranoid delusions" will be on-topic for this thread. In fact, I welcome anyone who wishes to discuss this -- and not just Anonymous, August 09, 2007 4:42:00 PM -- to feel free to chime in with their thoughts.
In short, I'm happy for anyone, whether they've earlier posted to this thread or not, to make specific claims about my alleged delusions, so long as they are specific. And, by "specific," I mean that a poster should either reference one of the 71 numbered "delusions" listed above, or make a claim along the lines of this:
Kendrick, you said (fill in this blank with a quote from one of my posts), but that is a delusional belief, because (fill in blank here with your facts and opinion) is the way things really are.
I'm sure everyone gets the idea, so, please, be candid and forthcoming in naming which of my beliefs are not only mistaken, but indicative of "paranoid" and "delusional" thinking on my part.
Anonymous, August 09, 2007 4:42:00 PM, I'm looking forward to hearing from you regarding which, specifically, of my beliefs are delusional! But, it's now been about 28 hours and 40 minutes since I posted my lengthy "laundry list" of alleged "delusions," and I can't help but wonder why it is taking you so long to respond to my simple challenge. Surely, the proverbial cat hasn't gotten your tongue, has it?
Regardless, I must go to bed for some much needed sleep. I'll check back in about 8 hours from now, to see if you've made any progress in identifying, specifically, which of my beliefs merits being called "delusional." See you then!
Kendrick...
Here's another old saying:
You should never argue with an idiot, because it will only pull you down to his level, and he will defeat you with experience!
"Why doesn't Tee cook up an honest graph comparing Giles County schools with schools in, say Japan? Or to the performance of the average American homeschooler?"
Let's see...in America, all children go to school, and teachers are faced with the task of teaching all children. That's not the case in Japan. Only select students, the elite, go to what we would consider secondary schools, and so only their scores are included when comparing the scores of American children to those in Japan. Not a fair assessment to say the least.
And what about the average homeschooler? If a homeschooled student decides to enter a public school, he is required to take the same tests that students in that school take in order to be placed at the grade level at which he claims to be. 85% of the time the homeschooled student fails at least half of those tests, often more than half. And these are the same tests which you claim show your intelligence. Perhaps your information is not as sound as you think.
Finally, if you think teachers' scores are at the bottom of the barrel in Giles County, then you haven't checked very closely. Perhaps you're basing your opinion on averages. Averages can be deceiving. I'm sure there are some whose scores aren't that fantastic, but there are just as many whose scores are outstanding. This would be true in any field or profession; there are always those who are more proficient than others. In Giles County, I know that there are many teachers whose scores are high, including teachers and administrators whose scores have always been at the 99% percentile, and no test shows a 100% percentile. These educators could have chosen many other professions and done well, yet they chose education, and certainly not because there was nothing else they could do.
As in any profession, there are a few who deserve your criticisms, but the majority deserve nothing less than respect. I think you would find this the case if you visited schools, as one poster suggested you do. Your choice not to do so simply indicates that you do not want to be proven wrong.
kendrick - part of 1 out of 70 ain't bad - #28 - teachers unions do not represent the interest of teachers or students. The budgets, funding, & where the money goes unequivocally proves that teachers are nothing more than an occassional pawn in the quest for more money & mind control! The union might come to rescue an incompetent teacher or a dead beat, but that's it. Look at what TJ & the boards cut from last year in the 2007-8 - Look who got raises & many more$ than taken away from teaching! Sick / sick / sick!
900 - The Jackson graph isn't about Japan or who flung dung.
It's about ZERO (Z-E-R-O) credibility in our school system.
If you are a teacher, TJ just made a complete imbicile out of you. You change the subject & defend him! Perhaps his assessment is correct - I do not see anyone in the system saying the graph is wrong, outrageous, and an insult to the many good teachers and others in the Giles County school system. There is only one reason anyone would stretch a lie to that extreme - complete failue plus absolute faith that the public is completely illiterate and gullible!
If your knowledge and values are that warped, you need to be cleaning toilets, not filling little heads with rubbish!
Are you warped enough to like the graph or just too cowed to say, "what in the world will he do to us, next?" Why not say, "NO!"?
Before I reply, I'd like to say how much I appreciate being spoken to in a reasonable manner, without te usual invective and abuse that typically is posted by my "critics." Thank you... and now I will move on to the "meat" of the discussion.
Anonymous, August 11, 2007 9:00:00 AM, said:
Let's see...in America, all children go to school,
Thanks to tyrannical "mandatory attendence" laws of the sort that caused Jaime Rouse to snap and go on a killing spree. You might want to rethink the paradigm, here...
Second, are all children educable, and if they aren't, what's the benefit of forcing them, at gunpoint, into the same schools which cater to educable kids?
Third, what really is accomplished by "going to school?" There's no such thing as "educational osmosis," so a child's mere presence doesn't really mean all that much.
and teachers are faced with the task of teaching all children.
Considering that some children are not educable, that's a fool's errand, and, consequently, nothing to brag about. I'm sure things like "IDEA" make the bureaucrats feel good about themselves, but how does anyone, other than the Xerxian Horde of teaching assistants, babysitters, and the like, actually benefit?
That's not the case in Japan. Only select students, the elite, go to what we would consider secondary schools,
You consider 94% to be an elite? And, aren't at least 6% of our secondary schoolers pretty much doing nothing but "taking up space" and disrupting the learning of their age group peers? If so, why are they forced to attend? To maximize the ranks of the teacher's unions, perhaps?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Education_in_Japan
and so only their scores are included when comparing the scores of American children to those in Japan. Not a fair assessment to say the least.
Perhaps, but you should realize that my argument isn't "government schools do a lousy job" -- I consider that to be a peripheral issue -- but rather, "government schools are used to promote beliefs favored by the elites -- unquestioning government obedience, if not worship, environmental hysteria, multiculturalism, ethical relativism, feminism, globalism, Darwinism, and secular humanism -- rather than the belief's favored by a child's parents." And, it makes no difference how high the test scores are driven (by teaching the test), so long as mandatory schools are used for what is essentially a propagandistic purpose. And as long as government is running things, that's always going to be on the agenda!
And what about the average homeschooler? If a homeschooled student decides to enter a public school, he is required to take the same tests that students in that school take in order to be placed at the grade level at which he claims to be. 85% of the time the homeschooled student fails at least half of those tests, often more than half.
Again, my concern is primarily with the inevitable indoctrination, not the test scores. Government is easily the most dangerous and lethal thing ever created by the mind of Man -- over 200 million innocents were "democided" in the 20th century alone -- and I quite simply fail to see the logic in, you know, allowing the government to forcibly determine what everyone in society is supposed to believe. The very idea of government schooling is downright totalitarian in principle, and, as we can see by surveying the wreckage of our society, govskools are doing their true job (of adjusting people to ignore the ever increasing weight of their chains) quite well.
And these are the same tests which you claim show your intelligence.
I'm afraid not. My intelligence is pretty obvious, even without my bothering to take any sort of test. That being said, I recall well the day when one of my high school teachers "let the cat out of the bag" and told me that one of the functions of the achievement tests students are given, is to measure their IQ. (This, despite the frequent claims of the test administrators of "don't worry, it's not an IQ test," which I well remember!)
Perhaps your information is not as sound as you think.
It's pretty sound, but all of this is a side issue. My complaint isn't that the chillun aren't getting an education... it's that they are getting propagandized through "values adjustment" and "socialization" and whatnot. Government today consumes about 52 cents out of every dollar earned. This would never have happened, had the government not taken over the schools.
Finally, if you think teachers' scores are at the bottom of the barrel in Giles County, then you haven't checked very closely. Perhaps you're basing your opinion on averages. Averages can be deceiving. I'm sure there are some whose scores aren't that fantastic, but there are just as many whose scores are outstanding. This would be true in any field or profession; there are always those who are more proficient than others. In Giles County, I know that there are many teachers whose scores are high, including teachers and administrators whose scores have always been at the 99% percentile, and no test shows a 100% percentile. These educators could have chosen many other professions and done well, yet they chose education, and certainly not because there was nothing else they could do.
Once again, you confuse me with someone who cares about relative measurements. I don't. What I care about is personal freedom, and I just don't see how we can hang on to our freedom, if we allow the government to dictate what our children believe. Honestly, do you deny the government has a vested interest in producing a population that is docile, obedient, and unable to see through the idiotic slogans politicians spout during campaigns? Furthermore, do you really believe that John Taylor Gatto simply fabricated all those damning quotes from the educationists of the early 20th century? You know, the ones from obscure folks like John Dewey, which said that people needed to be adapted for factory work, rather than abstract, critical thinking?
Here's a quick reality check for you... during the Colonial Era, pretty much every free white male was literate. And look at what these "backward" folks were reading! The Federalist Papers were written for public consumption; they were op-ed pieces published in the papers of the day. And Tom Paine's "Common Sense" was considered "required reading," and was what we today would consider a "runaway best seller." Now, as I say... READ THESE ESSAYS! They didn't just require very highly developed reading skills, but, familiarity with allusions made to Shakespear's works, and the history of ancient Rome. All of that stuff would be considered "college level" nowadays, but it was written as throwaway newspaper pieces for the huddled masses. My, how far we have fallen, as a nation! And fallen deliberately, as any reader of Gatto could explain to you...
As in any profession, there are a few who deserve your criticisms, but the majority deserve nothing less than respect.
I don't consider "stealing" to be respectable. Government school teachers engage in theft by proxy. Their checks are blood money extorted from the hide of the taxpayers, literally at the point of a gun. If the majority wants my respect, I suggest they stop bleeding the taxpayers, and find work in the private sector. If, in fact, they're as highly professional as you say, then it should be a snap for them to find parents willing to voluntarily turn their children over to them, and to willingly part with their hard earned cash, to pay for the teaching services. Shouldn't it be?
I think you would find this the case if you visited schools, as one poster suggested you do.
I patiently explained to that poster a few of the economic facts of life...didn't you read my response? You and I both know that economic facts aren't going to be changed by any anecdote I might pick up by visiting the local franchise of "Mind Control, Inc."
Your choice not to do so simply indicates that you do not want to be proven wrong.
What, pray tell, could I see in a local school, that would:
(1) Make me believe that government schools teach parental values, rather than those of the Ford Foundation, NEA-TEA, US Department of Education, and so forth?
(2) Make me believe that THREE LEVELS of deadweight bureaucracy are required to teach a child, when homeschoolers, for example, get by just fine without an army of bureaubots?
(3) Make me believe that there's some justification for having nearly 14% of the kids enrolled in "special ed," when only 7/10 of 1% are mentally retarded?
(4) Make me believe that 1 teacher is required, for every 14 kids?
(5) Make me believe that the present, centrally commanded, bureaucracy laden, system is, in any way possible, superior to what we'd have, if we spent the same amount of money, paying 134 "one room school house" teachers a net salary of $190,000 per annum, for delivering, on a free and competive market, the education desired by Giles County's parents?
(6) Make me believe that both the taxpayers, and the teachers, aren't getting well reamed, by a "school" system which spends only 36.4% of the money it steals from the taxpayers, on classroom teachers?
(7) Make me believe that Giles County's $7,465 per pupil per year represents a good value for the money, when, according to the US Department of Education, the average private school tuition is only $3,500 per year?
I could go on, but I guess that's enough. Can you honestly believe that a visit to Potemkin Elementary, is going to nullify all of these objections, any one of which is lethal to the "pro-government school" party line?
How about this? You seem to be a reasonable person. So why don't you skim over my 71 point list of beliefs, and jot down the numbers of those which you think are wrong. Not necessarily "delusional" -- simply wrong. Then you publish your numbered list, and we'll take it from there? Okay?
One last thing. I've expressed my opinion that it would be possible to scrap all the school bureaucracy, burn down the alienating "factory style" school buildings, and then give, to the best 38% of the current crop of teachers, a one room schoolhouse each... and to the parents, a voucher check good for $7,465 worth of private schooling. With each teacher setting their own disciplinary rules, and selecting their own curriculum, the parents would "shop around" and choose the best school for their children. Competition to deliver the best bang for the buck would ensue amongst the 134 schools-- a process known as "the free market in action."
Now, setting aside any practical consideration of HOW this plan could be implemented, without being squelched by federal jackboots parachuting into Giles County to burn, shoot and pillage... do you think the best 38% of Giles teachers would do a good a job of educating the kids this way? Would the prospect of netting $190,000 per year offer sufficient motivation for them? And if you don't believe that the "cream of the crop" of Giles educators could cut the mustard by themselves, set free from three layers of bureaucracy... then, why, exactly, should I have very much confidence that the general, non-cream, Giles teacher, paid only a fifth as much money, and facing pretty much no consequences for any failure that occurs on their watch (thanks to tenure)... is able to do even an adequate job?
Do you deny that incentives lead to results? Or do you believe there's some sort of loophole in the Law of Supply and Demand, that makes it inapplicable to the delivery of education services, at a profit, in a free market?
Please show me the error in my chain of reasoning. Pick one of my numbered "delusions" if you like, or name another... but just show me where I'm wrong! Thanks.
Anyone who doubts that modern governments hate Christianity on a visceral level, need only try imagining the following oxymoron: a taxpayer financed explicitly Christian school.
Bwah hah hahh ha haha... everyone with a lick of sense, knows that that would never be allowed to fly! Not with the ever vigilant ACLU, ADL, SPLC, NEA, PFAW, and the other enforcers of political correctness, standing always ready to begin stomping on any "display" of Christianity in the "public square," which rears its ugly head.
Unconstitutional!
Unconstitutional!!
Patently unconstitutional!!!
Nope, that'll never be allowed to happen.
But what have we here?
First, the Jews start getting federal funding for their schools, some of which (ahem) don't really exist...
http://tinyurl.com/2mktch
And then you see, in Florida, a taxpayer funded Jewish "charter school" being established...
http://tinyurl.com/ynlx5k
And now we find -- yes! -- that the Muslims are eagerly lining up to suck on the taxpayer's teat, too:
http://tinyurl.com/3csghq
A Christian school, supported by tax dollars? Utterly impossible! Which only goes to show that some folks really are more equal than others...
Mr. McPeters,
I'm a relative newcomer to your blog, but it's obvious that you have spent much time researching the subject of education. As a home schooling mother of five children, ages 5 - 17, my husband and I came to many of your conclusions about today's public schools. Although it has been a sacrifice financially, I will never regret the decision to stay home and educate our children. Thank you for your efforts to inform and educate readers of your blog.
Anonymous, August 09, 2007 4:42:00 PM:
[Ben Stein Voice]
Bueller?... Bueller?... Bueller?... Anyone?... Anyone?
[/Ben Stein Voice]
Would it be too much trouble, after 48+ hours, to either NAME ONE OF MY PARANOID DELUSIONS (citing it by number) or, to WITHDRAW, WITH AN APOLOGY the insulting statement you recently made about me?
Can't you be bothered to simply type a number (somewhere between 1 and 70) into the blog's comment form???
This is ridiculous. I spent several hours writing my lengthy response, and now two days have gone by, and you still haven't met my challenge.
Either answer me, by naming a specific "delusion," or stand revealed as nothing but a cowardly hit 'n run smear artist. It's your choice...
Kenrick, I haven't answered you yet because, unlike yourself, I have what is known as a "life" outside of this blog that you devote yours to. I don't visit this blog repeatedly every day just so that I can eagerly wait your rambling responses to my comments.
If you want me to name one of your delusions, that is easy. Anonymous above, Saturday, August 11, 2007 9:00:00 AM has already done that for me. You have delusions about society as a whole, and generalizing that all teachers score at the bottom of the barrel is just one of your delusions.
Now, what about you repsonding to my comment? You suggested that one of your critics was waiting on some sort of government check when they disagreed with you. What about yourself? I know that you don't work outside of your mommy's home, don't you wait on her social security check or your dead Dad's check every month?
Go out and get some exposure to the real world for a change, quit living in your little blogger world.
Okay, I have a problem with 56-58. Apparently you and all your family members have all been brilliant people. As a parent of a child who is not mentally retarded but has learning disabilities (there is a difference) and utitilizes those "special ed" classes, I very much resent the statements. There are students who are helped by those federally subsidized classes that are not mentally retarded. There are several examples of students who need those classes. I am not an educator so I can't tell you that. Some students have problem learning to read because of problems like dislexia that need those programs. You seem to keep referring back to the one room school house days. Do you remember any special need students in those schools. Nope, they were in mental institutions or at home with parents who were incabable of educating those children. Today many of the children who would have been institutionalized years ago, grow up to have jobs and families. Down's syndrome is an example. Those children had no chance back then. Today they are educated in public schools, because private schools do not want them and the public schools because of Federal dollars have the knowledge and the means to educate those less fortunate than you. I very much resent the statement in #57. My child is not an imbecile. You clearly have no idea what you are talking about when talk about those dollars subsidizing imbecility. These statements you have made in these points are a slap in the face to parents and grandparents who have children who are being helped by these programs. Your family has truly been blessed to not have needed these. I wish that we had all been that blessed. You need to thank God for that. But, you need to apoligize to the 13.8% of the student population who is being helped by these classes.
Kendrick...
You often mention that things can be incredible or unbelievable. Well, I'd just like to say that you applauding children who would rise up and burn their schools down is both!
Kenrick, I haven't answered you yet because, unlike yourself, I have what is known as a "life" outside of this blog that you devote yours to.
You don't have the time to name, specifically -- making reference to the numbered list I posted -- an example of one of my "delusions?" My, but you must be a busy, busy person. Not too busy to spend a minute or two banging out this latest "non-responsive" reply of yours... but far too busy to, you know, take five seconds to type in a number between 1 and 70, thus identifying a "delusional belief" of mine. Uh huh.
As to my "not having a life," I'm sorry about that. Really I am. There's a lot of things about "having a life" that I'm sure I would enjoy, but such is not in the cards for me at present. Had it been left up to my brother and sister, my invalid mother would've been warehoused in a nursing home years ago... but, as I made a specific promise to my late father that I'd never let that happen on my watch, I am duty bound to care for her, for as long as she continues to draw breath, even if it means the curtailment of the various and sundry opportunities which are associated with "having a life."
So, if you want to jeer at me for not "having a life," go right ahead and jeer. I truly don't care what you think, in this particular matter. And, although I currently don't have a life, that will certainly change in the future -- probably much sooner than I wish -- and, in the meantime, I can at least take comfort in the fact that I honor not only my commitments, but my father and mother, as well.
I don't visit this blog repeatedly every day just so that I can eagerly wait your rambling responses to my comments.
My comments "ramble," it is because (a) I have a lot to say, and (b) it takes longer to defend oneself from an unwarranted smear, than it does to make the smear in the first place. If you suffer from a short attention span, you have my condolences.
If you want me to name one of your delusions, that is easy.
Indeed it is! All you have to do is post a number between 1 and 70. Is that really too much trouble to manage? And you do realize that, by refusing to "pick a number," you are effectively conceding that my listed beliefs are NON-delusional. Is that really your intent?
Anonymous above, Saturday, August 11, 2007 9:00:00 AM has already done that for me.
No he didn't. First of all, the object of this exercise, is to SPECIFICALLY NAME an alleged "delusion" of mine, and the other "anonymous" you refer to didn't do that, even after I made it as simple as possible, by posting a numbered list of my beliefs. Secondly, that "anonymous" never even stated that I was delusional. He said I was wrong to believe in the statistics, which I'd earlier linked to, which show that ed majors score at the bottom of the barrel. Finally, I answered him at length, and did a pretty thorough demolition job on his arguments. So what is your point in bringing up that thoroughly refuted post?
You have delusions about society as a whole,
Again with that canard! Would you care to name even one of my delusions, in a SPECIFIC manner, so that this claim of yours rises above the level of generalized smear? You, could, you know... even pick a number between 1 and 70, if you felt like it.
and generalizing that all teachers score at the bottom of the barrel is just one of your delusions.
All teachers? Where the hell did I say ALL teachers? I am certainly aware that there are some smart teachers out there; I remember a few of them, and appreciate the excellent work they did in helping me to learn. (In an oblique way, I even paid tribute to one of them, when I said I hoped Martha Ferguson "escaped alive" in the event that "the children" wised up enough to torch the School Central Office Building.)
But, exceptions aside, no honest person can deny that MOST TEACHERS are intellectually mediocre. The GRE records don't lie, and they consistently rank teachers at the very bottom of the barrel, academic achievement wise.
Here's an excerpt from a column by economist Walter Williams, who, for some strange reason or another, shares in my "delusion" that most teachers are mediocre:
http://tinyurl.com/yo8b2o
Several weeks ago, my column on teacher ineptitude was about the sorry state of teacher quality and concluded that while teacher ineptitude is neither flattering nor comfortable to confront, confront it we must if we're to do anything about our sorry state of education.
The situation is not pretty. Philadelphia schools are typical of poor-quality big-city schools. Susan Snyder, Philadelphia Inquirer staff writer, in her article "District to Help Teachers Pass Test" (March 24, 2004) reported "that half of the district's 690 middle school teachers who took exams in math, English, social studies and science in September and November failed." Other test results haven't been released; Pennsylvania Gov. Ed Rendell said he understands "concerns that releasing the data could subject teachers to humiliation. ... "
The unflattering fact that we must own up to is that many, perhaps most, of those who choose teaching as a profession represent the very bottom of the academic barrel. Let's look at it.
The National Center for Education Statistics (NCES) compiles loads of statistics on education. The NCES "Digest of Education Statistics" Table 136 shows average SAT scores by student characteristics for 2001. Students who select education as their major have the lowest SAT scores of any major (964). Math majors have the highest (1174).
It's the same story when education majors finish college and take tests for admission to graduate schools. In the case of the Graduate Record Examination (GRE), education majors have an average score that's the lowest (467) of all majors except for sociology majors (434). Putting this in perspective, math majors score the highest (720), followed closely by economics in third place (625).
It's roughly the same story for students taking the LSAT for admission to law schools where the possible scores range between 120 and 180. Out of 29 majors, education majors ranked 26th, averaging a score of 148. Physics/math majors came in first with a 158 score and economics majors third with 155. Readers can readily obtain this information by a Google search using the words "GRE major" and "LSAT major."
So, anonymous... are you now gonna claim that Dr. Walter Williams, Phd -- a brilliant economist, and the only "guest host" that makes the Rush Limbaugh radio show worth listening to -- is also suffering from paranoid delusions?
Here's a link to some actual stats, which clearly show ed majors scoring in the bottom fifth of all college graduates. Are you gonna claim that it's "delusional" to take such objective statistics seriously?
http://tinyurl.com/2o64hh
Now, what about you repsonding to my comment?
I'd be happy to, but first things first. We're going to fully resolve the "paranoid delusion" issue -- and that means you are, at the least, going to SPECIFICALLY NAME one of my "delusions," thereby giving me an opportunity to muster evidence that refutes your claim -- before we move on to the "Kendrick is a worthless parasite because he lives with his mother, taking care of her 24 hours a day and keeping her out of the nursing home, thereby saving the taxpayers roughly $60,000 per year" issue that you seem so very keen to discuss.
I told you before that I'm not going to deal with the "parasite" smear, until we are COMPLETELY FINISHED with the "paranoid delusions" smear. Right now, the "delusion" claim is simply a general purpose smear. You say I'm "delusional about society as a whole," and I insist that you point to a SPECIFIC thing I have said -- regarding "society as a whole," or any other damned thing you please -- which is not only WRONG, but DELUSIONAL as well.
Obviously, if I say something which, by the evidence is FACTUALLY TRUE, then it cannot be DELUSIONAL, no matter how unpopular or politically incorrect it might be. For example, since I can easily prove that government school teachers consistently score in the bottom fifth of the GRE..., my claim -- and Walter William's identical claim -- that govskool teachers score at the bottom of the barrel, academically speaking, is a DOCUMENTED FACT, not a "delusion."
Comprende?
Anonymous, August 12, 2007 2:34:00 PM, said:
You often mention that things can be incredible or unbelievable.
The truth often sounds incredible or unbelievable, to people who derive their "knowledge" of the world from television, and other mainstream "mass media," which are all too happy to leave the public in the dark when it serves the interests of their corporate owners. (See, as a prime example, the "blackout" of US coverage on Bush's summit meeting sell-out, soon to be held in Quebec.)
Well, I'd just like to say that you applauding children who would rise up and burn their schools down is both!
Do you watch the movie "Braveheart" and cheer for the English? Personally, I always root for the underdogs. And the chillun are definitely "underdogs" when it comes to the sytematic abuse they suffer through, in the government schools.
To start with, they are kidnapped from their parents, at the literal point of a gun, and dumped into an environment that they may well not wish to be in. Then, they are taught reading in a manner -- look say "reading" -- that is guaranteed to cripple a large fraction of them for the rest of their lives. (I speak of the so-called "learning disabled" who have nothing wrong with their brains, but who have been victimized by bad teaching methods, and then blamed for the failings of the schools.) As icing on the cake, children are subjected to Skinnerian "conditioning" to turn them into obedient, interchangeable robots, who do as they are told, believe as they are told, and who never, ever question the way the guys "at the top of the pyramid" seem to get to run everything.
I really believe that government schools are just as evil as any Nazi Death Camp. So, it should be unsurprising to hear that, just as I cheer when I see Jews rising up against the Nazis, so too am I pleased to contemplate a possible future in which the victims of the educrats rise up, and burn down the Gas Chambers of the Mind and Soul, aka the "publik skool" buildings. But, like I said, I hope the lil tykes burn down all the administration buildings, first. Who knows? The gargantuan child warehouses, whose very size cause alienation, might well be converted to serve some useful function. Perhaps they'd make pretty decent homeless shelters? Hmmm.....
Anonymous, August 11, 2007 10:03:00 AM, said:
kendrick - part of 1 out of 70 ain't bad - #28 - teachers unions do not represent the interest of teachers or students.
Ooops, my bad. I should've said "professional educators" rather than "teachers" so as to include the vast Xerxian Horde of "administrators" and "assistant-administrators" and "assistants" and "assistant-assistants" and, of course, "janitors" represented by the NEA and AFT. What was I thinking???
The budgets, funding, & where the money goes unequivocally proves that teachers are nothing more than an occassional pawn in the quest for more money & mind control!
Agreed. The fact that Giles classroom teachers make only 36.4% of the total government school spending, pretty much proves that the union's real motivation is "No Tax Dollar Left Behind." What a ridiculous set of spending priorities, and how very strange it is that you so rarely hear a government school teacher complaining about it!
The union might come to rescue an incompetent teacher or a dead beat, but that's it. Look at what TJ & the boards cut from last year in the 2007-8 - Look who got raises & many more$ than taken away from teaching! Sick / sick / sick!
Agreed... and as good 'ole Bob Dole liked to ask about Slick Willie, "where's the outrage?" I mean, if I was a parent or a local teacher, I'd certainly be screaming my head off about this absolutely ridiculous way of spending money. It's just next door to evil to spend so much on the bureaucrats, while everyone else is getting the shaft. Oh well, I'm sure that the County Commission can always just shake the Money Tree once again, next time the unaccountable Tee Jackson finds yet another cool way to fritter away his stolen blood money.
Mr. Kendrick, I don't know where you people get the idea that administrators (I am no one) are getting bigger raises than teachers. The supervisor pay schedule get the same percent raise that teachers do. The only supervisors not on the schedule are the director and assistant director. I am sure you are welcome to go the Central Office and pick up one for this year and last year and compare. And by the way I am waiting on a response to the earlier response to your tyrade on the points of Special Education. #56-58.
Anonymous, August 13, 2007 6:41:00 AM, said:
And by the way I am waiting on a response to the earlier response to your tyrade on the points of Special Education. #56-58.
With my mother hospitalized, this will unfortunately take more time. But I certainly will get around to it, as soon as I possibly can...
Meanwhile, I'd like to ask you a question that will, I'm sure, seem rather bizarre. Please answer it anyway, because you will soon find that it is highly relevant to the issues being discussed here:
Suppose you were parachuted into a backwater Chinese village, filled with people who had never met an English speaker before, and who were fluent only in their native tongue. Without any translation aids to assist you, how long do you think it would take you to be able to speak and understand fluent Chinese? A day? A month? A year? Five years? Maybe never?
Give it some thought, and then please post a thoughtful answer to this oddball question. Many thanks in advance!
641 - if you read the numbers in the budget and the various audited results, you will have a clue. Right now you don't! The waste is astronomical!
Business has cut administration - they use computers, real technology & If next year is to be better & survivable, you don't add $2.5 million to the spending budget and then claim you cut spending when you intentionally only spend a hundred thousand or so less! You are not only liars, you are killing the golden goose!
I'm wondering why these people have now decided to jump on our county's teachers? Well, at least it will distract them temporarily from trying to ruin those elected or appointed officials they clearly don't like!
Anonymous,August 13, 2007 8:00:00 PM , said:
I'm wondering why these people have now decided to jump on our county's teachers?
If, by "these people," you are referring to me, I'd be happy to explain...
Like my hero Thomas Jefferson, I have "sworn upon the altar of God, eternal hostility against every form of tyranny over the mind of man." And, the more I look into matters, the more I see that there is no greater tyranny over "the mind of man" than the evil youth indoctrination camps which the easily deceived refer to as "public schools." Govskools need to go -- the sooner the better! -- if what is left of our tattered remnants of freedom, is to survive.
As to "our county's teachers," I have no special beef with them. They're no better, and no worse, than any other set of govskool employees. It is, and always has been, the evil of the blood money supported, bureaucracy laden, government schooling system that I so fervently oppose.
I've actually proposed a few ways to privatize the local schools, in the process giving them to the teachers, and allowing them to make much more money, on a free market, than they do now as cogs in the govskool machine. Would I make such suggestions, if I thought so little of the teachers? I think not.
Now, as to what brought up this topic, that's pretty easy to explain. I ran across, on YouTube, a clip by George Carlin which explains why the schools will always suck. So, I posted the clip, and challenged anyone who disagreed with Carlin, to show what he was wrong about. Nobody did that... but a few people (teachers, perhaps?) started attacking me as a person. I started defending myself, and the rest, as they say, is history.
Well, at least it will distract them temporarily from trying to ruin those elected or appointed officials they clearly don't like!
So your spin on "trying to hold accountable politicians who lie to the public and break the law," is that we're simply trying to "ruin" people that we "don't like," for no good reason? I don't think that will fly -- at least, for anyone with a brain, it won't. Sorry!
Kendrick,
Are you trying to kill this almost dead blog?
SECOND ATTEMPT:
...I'd like to ask you a question that will, I'm sure, seem rather bizarre. Please answer it anyway, because you will soon find that it is highly relevant to the issues being discussed here:
Suppose you were parachuted into a backwater Chinese village, filled with people who had never met an English speaker before, and who were fluent only in their native tongue. Without any translation aids to assist you, how long do you think it would take you to be able to speak and understand fluent Chinese? A day? A month? A year? Five years? Maybe never?
Anyone plan on answering this?
Bueller?... Bueller?... Bueller?... Anyone?... Anyone?
Are you trying to kill this almost dead blog?
My nefarious plan for world conquest is, of necessity, a slow and deliberate one. Just be patient, and you'll soon figure out what I'm up to! (Alas, by then, it will be too late for anyone to stop me...bwah hah hah ha!)
THIRD ATTEMPT:
Why not answer the question on Special Education. You seem to have plenty of words for nonsensical replies.
The answer to your bizarre question: Personally I don’t know how long it would take me to speak fluent Chinese, I have never learned any foreign language. From what I have been told it is a hard language to learn. Since I have no learning disabilities I don’t think it would take an extreme about of time. Out of necessity it would be hard not to. On the other hand, if I had learning disabilities, not that of a mentally retarded person but the inability to reason, to listen, to process thoughts like a normal person it would take me a long time. Think of special education students as elderly people since you are going through things with your mother. Sometimes it is hard to reason with an elderly person. It is hard for them to understand even simple tasks. Sometimes they do not retain lessons learned. These are all things that happen with special education children every day along with a multitude of other things. Should we set them aside to never be a productive members of society or maybe put them in institution like you are trying to keep your Mother out of today. Maybe it is hard for someone like you to understand what some of those children go through on a daily basis. I can completely sympathize with you in your situation, maybe you should walk in the shoes of a special education student or the parent of one. Apparently you have no clue!! It is heartbreaking for someone like you to talk about these statistics on a subject that you obviously have no clue about. Private school can accept any student they want and reject any they don’t want. Think about it, if you had a choice of teaching perfect little children and having great sports teams and great grade averages, whom would you choose. They don't have that many special ed students because they choose not to, DUH!!
THIRD ATTEMPT:
Why not answer the question on Special Education. You seem to have plenty of words for nonsensical replies.
The answer to your bizarre question: Personally I don’t know how long it would take me to speak fluent Chinese, I have never learned any foreign language. From what I have been told it is a hard language to learn. Since I have no learning disabilities I don’t think it would take an extreme about of time. Out of necessity it would be hard not to. On the other hand, if I had learning disabilities, not that of a mentally retarded person but the inability to reason, to listen, to process thoughts like a normal person it would take me a long time. Think of special education students as elderly people since you are going through things with your mother. Sometimes it is hard to reason with an elderly person. It is hard for them to understand even simple tasks. Sometimes they do not retain lessons learned. These are all things that happen with special education children every day along with a multitude of other things. Should we set them aside to never be a productive members of society or maybe put them in institution like you are trying to keep your Mother out of today. Maybe it is hard for someone like you to understand what some of those children go through on a daily basis. I can completely sympathize with you in your situation, maybe you should walk in the shoes of a special education student or the parent of one. Apparently you have no clue!! It is heartbreaking for someone like you to talk about these statistics on a subject that you obviously have no clue about. Private school can accept any student they want and reject any they don’t want. Think about it, if you had a choice of teaching perfect little children and having great sports teams and great grade averages, whom would you choose.
I've never commented on this blog but I just want to say that I went to school with Kendrick. He is older than I am but I remember him. What I remember is he was one of the smart kids. He didnt bother anyone and kind of kept to himself. He was never ugly to anyone and if I'm not mistaken got teased somewhat for being "different". I know he had friends b/c they would be together at school so he wasnt really a loner. He wasnt a bad different just the kind where he stayed to himself or with his unit of friends, did his work, minded his own business, that sort of different and unfortunately that got him teased. I always felt so sorry for him because he has as much right to be himself as anyone else does then or now. When I found out about this blog, I was personaly glad he had come out of his quiet shell. He's not a bad person from what I've ever seen and I admire him for standing up for what he believes is right. He's been the underdog so he knows how it feels. He stands for something.The right of free speech. My parents have always told me "What you do today, you'll
have to sleep with tonight and if you belive in something with all your heart,go down fighting for what you believe in. Other folks dont have to agree with you but they will respect you for making a stand. Say your prayers every day, keep your name clean and you'll always have something to be proud of". I think that's all Kendrick is trying to do And if that makes him anything but a person of his convictions then so be it.
Post a Comment
<< Home