It seems ironic so many atheist evolutionists, those who hold to Darwinian survival of the fittest, are also socialist. It seems to me these people would be the most adamant capitalists or oligarchs who would proselytize the virtues of strong-man politics governed by action and reaction, rather than a system that, historically, corrupts production and weakened nations.
It seems strange so many people who bitch about the inequality of the distribution of wealth within the U.S. have no intention of giving up their disproportionately large piece of the global pie to those starving, dieing of preventable diseases, suffering the cultural apathy of horrendous education systems, and unable to grow because the resources have been corrupted, mismanaged, and withheld by dictators and strong-man governments.
It seems odd that those preaching the importance of education, the school system, and teachers are the ones least likely to try and fix the actual problems that plague the decline of the American student. It isn't the lack of money but the misuse of resources. Before you throw money at a problem, get a system that works.
It seems disingenuous when a person spends $35 on a fair trade t-shirt, with maybe a buck going to those in need, rather than $1.99 on a thrift store version and $33 on school sponsorships or micro loans.
It seems funny that those most willing to speak/riot/berate are often those least willing to act/reconcile/build.
I wish more people thought their way through issues instead of using feelings as guides to logic.
It would be nice if I knew what I was talking about.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
So you think the Republicans (the ones not preaching about the importance of education) are more likely to fix the "actual" problems with your education system?
ReplyDeleteAnd who exactly are all these socialists?
I don't see any support for the Republican Party here. Only criticism for the pervasive, self centered and short sighted notions of humanitarianism, which are easy to hold because they don't actually demand you do anything at all.
ReplyDeleteThe only politicians I've heard talk about fixing the issues rather than throwing money at the problem and empowering unions have been a few minor Republicans, but no I don't think they are likely to fix anything either. I doubt the solution will come from inside any of the established voices. Most teachers care about their jobs, the unions care about the teachers, and the politicians care about the unions (one way or the other). Private schools in the U.S. spend, on average 1/3 less to educate each student, catholic schools 1/2, yet they almost always have smaller class sizes and do better jobs educating the students. If all those people ranting about education cared to actually educate students better, it seems like they could have changed their business model a long time ago and saved a shit load of money.
ReplyDeleteAs for the socialists, that was more of a general statement. I've talked to a lot of socialists, Marxists, anti-capitalist, and straight up "new" communists who are adamant evolutionists and preach the whole Darwinian "survival of the fittest" foundation for life thing. It wasn't an attack on any particular, current, political party. I could be tempted to find one though.
Seems you're getting your facts from http://mjperry.blogspot.com/2007/10/private-school-tuition-13-to-12-less.html which is frankly bollocks. It's comparing private tuition fees (one "in") vs what is spent per student in the public system (all "out"). Private schools get a lot of money from donations. Private schools don't take the "problem" kids. Private schools often get some government funding. Church schools don't pay rent.. etc. etc. It's a meaningless comparison
ReplyDelete"Darwinian survival of the fittest" refers to the survival of your genes, not your person, and one of Darwinian theories trickier problems has been explaining altruism. But it turns out there are some good explanations! Taking care of kin is actually a good way to propagate your genes. http://www.radiolab.org/2010/dec/14/equation-good/
ReplyDeletehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Evolution_of_Cooperation
"It seems strange so many people who bitch about the inequality of the distribution of wealth within the U.S. have no intention of giving up their disproportionately large piece of the global pie." I, for one, am an enthusiastic supporter of open borders. Anyway, minus points for ad hominem.
To call say that "the actual problem" is "the misuse of resources" is so banal as to be meaningless. Of course we're misusing resources! Which ones? It also ignores "indirect" contributors to educational inequality, like actual inequality. Pretty much every successful school system anywhere in the world has a strong "socialist" (socialized?) component somewhere in its lineage.
"I wish more people thought their way through issues instead of using feelings as guides to logic." It's nice to have that window into your feelings.
Rowan - Similar data different source. There is the pesky little detail that public schools still spend more on average than private http://www.cato.org/pub_display.php?pub_id=11432 this is a trend that's been going on for a while http://www.publicpurpose.com/pp-edpp.htm I don't get your point on church schools not paying rent, all the church schools I know of had to buy their own property and pay for their own structures or they payed rent to non church groups. There are probably a few smaller schools that operate in churches for free, but not a significant enough number to change any of the numbers. If this was a debate on preschool spending, you may have had a point. The "problem" students you mentioned is an argument I've heard before. Private schools are not without theirs, but the number is probably significantly higher in public (I haven't seen anything to back this up, and the nature of the problems could be the result of the system as well as the home life and mental/physical capacity of the students... just guessing.) The point is public schools spend more and perform poorer which makes it difficult to argue the failings are attached to funding issue rather than a structural/mindset issue.
ReplyDeleteAlexander - Thanks for your response.
ReplyDeleteBelieve it or not, these "rants" weren't against socialism. Granted, I hate capital "S" socialism and I'm happy to attack it, but that wasn't what this was. If creationists or those believing in divinely influenced evolution were strong socialists who believed it to be the best system, I would disagree with them, but it would make sense. For a Darwinist to think it's a good idea to help out family members and share resources within a small community, in which the survival of their genes is mutually beneficial, makes sense. To bump it up to a national level, historically speaking (USSR and China specifically), the system attacks the individuals. If Darwin valued creating a "Thunderdome" or "Lord of the Flies" environment where only the strong survive and the community as a whole is weakened, then capital "S" socialism makes sense. The system itself doesn't support survival, growth, prosperity, or strength, as evidenced by the constant failings, and eventual collapse, of the USSR and the economic and social rejuvenation of China once it started "toying" with capitalism (I still wouldn't want to be a girl child there).
Sorry for the ad hominem, it was enjoyable though. I don't have any problems with open boarders and I don't think banks should average out every account, nationally or internationally. I just think it's disingenuous for a fat man to "complain" about food portions when there are people outside starving.
"Banal"? Perhaps. I don't know why you brought the "socialist" stuff in though, I wasn't arguing against the existence of public schools. Universal education, to a certain extent, is a public benefit, like interstates, fire departments, law enforcement, etc. In spite of my libertarian/anarchist tendencies, I have no problem with the community sharing the burden of general education. My point was the public system, as it now exists, spends more money and does less than other systems already existing. To say more funding will fix their problems ignores the evidence. Public education is a big business and, for all its talk, the good of the student isn't the main concern. Private school teachers, on average, are paid less, have less training, are more satisfied with their work, and produce students that outperform their public counterparts. Even if private school students come from more supportive home environments, in general, how does more money for teachers and administrators fix the deeper issues?
As for my "feelings", trust me I feel like an ass for a lot of my beliefs. The problem is I've seen to much to believe good intentions can fix anything. I wish welfare (as it has existed in much of America) didn't create a system of dependence, I wish pacifism and appeasement always led to peace, I wish foreign aid and humanitarian efforts didn't often cripple local economies and cause long term damage, I wish gun control meant criminals didn't use them, I wish socialism benefited everyone, etc. I hold many of by beliefs in spite of my feelings and wishes.