Speakeasy forum

General discussion

Socialism taught in our schools

by Evie / December 25, 2003 11:46 PM PST
Child abuse in government schools


So, while you think your precious children are off at their local government school learning how to read, how to do basic mathematical computations, how to communicate effectively in the English language ? plus a bit about science, health, our economic system and American and world history ? your kids may instead be engaging in exercises created by leftist, anti-capitalist college professors designed to teach them that wealth is distributed, rather than earned, and that our economic system is based on something comparable to a mad scramble for pennies

Read the exercise for yourself and see if you can find one reference to actually working to acquire wealth. Look for any reference to the benefits that can flow from good decision making.

Students, for instance, are given the opportunity to donate pennies to others, but the exercise does not give students with more pennies the option of actually hiring a student with less to actually perform some task or chore (clean our my book bag?) in exchange for a few pennies. No! Never! We can't teach that in a government school! Why in the world would we want to teach school children that preparation, knowledge, training, hard work and good decision making are the keys to acquiring wealth?


Don't take Boortz' word for it, actually read the instructions for this little activity.

Is it any wonder that home schooling is becoming so popular? In closing Boortz calls for a separation of education and government. I'm not sure we need to go that far, but the public school system is out of control, sucking large sums from property owners and taxpayers and churning out far too many dumbed down, indoctrinated students. I wonder what the educrats think of the injustice -- in terms of future earning ability -- of depriving these kids of basic math and language skills and depriving them of any understanding of hard work and rewarding merit so as not to injur their delicate self esteems. Will they accept their share of the blame for making them less prepared for a real world where you do have to work for your needs, and there is no entitlement? Doubtful.

Evie Happy
Discussion is locked
You are posting a reply to: Socialism taught in our schools
The posting of advertisements, profanity, or personal attacks is prohibited. Please refer to our CNET Forums policies for details. All submitted content is subject to our Terms of Use.
Track this discussion and email me when there are updates

If you're asking for technical help, please be sure to include all your system info, including operating system, model number, and any other specifics related to the problem. Also please exercise your best judgment when posting in the forums--revealing personal information such as your e-mail address, telephone number, and address is not recommended.

You are reporting the following post: Socialism taught in our schools
This post has been flagged and will be reviewed by our staff. Thank you for helping us maintain CNET's great community.
Sorry, there was a problem flagging this post. Please try again now or at a later time.
If you believe this post is offensive or violates the CNET Forums' Usage policies, you can report it below (this will not automatically remove the post). Once reported, our moderators will be notified and the post will be reviewed.
Collapse -
Re:Socialism taught in our schools
by Louis M / December 26, 2003 12:28 AM PST
Collapse -
I found one response interesting
by Diana Forum moderator / December 26, 2003 7:39 AM PST

"Darwin's Law of Natural Selection will shrink the population back to the levels of 300 years ago.

When Africa is depopulated it will once again become a garden of eden."

I doubt if neglect and starvation will make it back to a garden of eden because the only ones left will be the President's cronies and it's obvious that they don't know how to farm.

Collapse -
Interesting links ...
by Evie / December 28, 2003 11:08 PM PST

... and rather sad. Exemplary of how morally bankrupt the UN is as Mugabe is often an honored speaker at conferences about race and human rights Sad

With the overthrow of Iraq, I think this guy has the right idea re: Iraq's oil to really change the lives of the people in that country.

Evie Happy

Collapse -
Re:Socialism taught in our schools
by Edward ODaniel / December 26, 2003 12:50 AM PST

Of course Dave will deny it although this goes along with the revamping of history initiated during Clinton's first term (Education 2000) as well as the dumbing down of the basics to the lowest denominator (supposed to enhance "self esteem") rather than forcing the low achievers to work harder to attain a higher standard.

I especially liked seeing this necessary part of the instructions "Guard against having this activity confirm the existing inequalities in wealth and power."

Their listing of "Activists" was interesting not only for who was listed but especially for who was not--I am a little surprised the Che Guevara was not on it.

Collapse -
This is simply ghastly!
by Bo Boggs / December 26, 2003 2:30 AM PST

It appears to start from the assumption that individual to international, wealth and power is a zero sum game. No mention that one can produce something of value and exchange it for a part of the money.

The emphasis on redistribution is sickening. If all the current wealth in the world were evenly distributed, it would take only 3 generations to reproduce the current ratios.

Sigh......

Bo

Collapse -
Even worse guys ...
by Evie / December 26, 2003 2:54 AM PST

... is Activity One which I assume precedes this one. Basically Anti-America 101. Imagine a Countryt

We must trick the students by filling their minds with selective anti-America statistics to promote their agenda:

1. Distribute Handout 1, Imagine a Country to participants and ask different participants to read each of the discrete statements. Note: Do not indicate that each statement is about the United States.

I doubt any balance is encouraged or provided. For example, from Handout 1

May I suggest that
1. A country that is the richest in the world with the highest Gross National Product, but where one out of four children is born into ?official poverty,? where one out of four of these ?officially poor? children lives in a family where one or more parents work full time, year round, and where the ?official poverty? line is set well below the actual cost of minimally adequate housing, health care, food, and other necessities.


be countered with Poverty American Stylet
The following are facts about persons defined as "poor" by the Census Bureau, taken from various government reports:

Forty-six per cent of all poor households actually own their own homes. The average home owned by persons classified as poor by the Census Bureau is a three-bedroom house with one and a half baths, a garage and porch or patio.

Seventy-six per cent of poor households have air conditioning. By contrast, 30 years ago only 36% of the entire U.S. population enjoyed air conditioning.

Only 6% of poor households are overcrowded. More than two thirds have more than two rooms per person.

The average poor American has more living space than the average individual living in Paris, London, Vienna, Athens and other cities throughout Europe. (Note: These comparisons are to the average citizens in foreign countries not to those classified as poor.)

Nearly three-quarters of poor households own a car; 30% own two or more cars.

Ninety-seven percent of poor households have a color television. Over half own two or more color televisions. Seventy-eight percent have a VCR or DVD player. Sixty-two percent have cable or satellite TV reception.

Seventy-three percent own microwave ovens; more than half have a stereo, and a third have an automatic dishwasher.

As a group the poor are far from being chronically undernourished. The average consumption of protein, vitamins and minerals is virtually the same for poor and middle-class children, and in most cases is well above recommended norms. Poor children actually consume more meat than do higher-income children and have average protein intakes 100% above recommended levels. Most poor children today are in fact super-nourished, on average growing up to be one inch taller and ten pounds heavier than the GIs who stormed the beaches of Normandy in World War II.


Evie Happy

Collapse -
Oh my God! I think I must be poor!
by Kiddpeat / December 26, 2003 3:18 AM PST
In reply to: Even worse guys ...

These folks live as well, or better (?), as I do. Does that mean I can get more pennies?

Collapse -
Who does the teacher represent?
by Kiddpeat / December 26, 2003 3:29 AM PST

The teacher is apparently the source of all the rules, the wealth, and the distribution. The teacher chooses the winners and losers, and enforces adherence to the rules. The teacher makes it a zero sum game. What is the ultimate goal with respect to the teacher?

This is one of the reasons that my daughter was sent to a Lutheran school for K-9.

Collapse -
I think the teacher will fit in very well with the United Nations
by SteveGargini / December 26, 2003 8:19 AM PST

The biggest bunch of useless people ever to walk this planet. Sad

Collapse -
They should make them keep 'playing' the game
by James Denison / December 26, 2003 12:53 PM PST

and see how quickly the children resent losing thier pennies to others and how quickly they no longer want to participate enthusiastically if they are going to lose most of it anyway. Add into the game a measure of work for each penny obtained and then see how well they take having their pennies removed from them. I think we could dress this game up a bit and maybe REALLY teach them something.

Collapse -
I know an even better lesson for them
by SteveGargini / December 26, 2003 8:01 AM PST

The playing area is a representation of a Zimbabwean farm, and the pennies represent the amount of harvesting and food production accomplished.
In the first scenerio we have the farm being owned by white farmers, who are very skilled, and we show a large pile of pennies gained from a great harvest.
In the second scenerio, we show a lunatic leader, throwing the white farmers off their farms, with the resulting tiny pile of pennies, and the black population starving. The result of a non existent harvest, and a bunch of ignorant people who don't know the first thing about food production.
Show the children the difference between what can be accomplished with hard work, compared to being lazy and doing nothing.

Collapse -
Three more good lessons:
by Paul C / December 26, 2003 9:08 AM PST

1. Have them learn the names of all 800,000 Rwandans slaughtered while the UN's precious "peacekeepers" stood by;

2. A video presentation of the mass graves of Iraq, where over 300,000 souls lie after the dictator the UN so mollycoddled for 12 years had them murdered;

3. An analysis of life expectancy, infant mortality and income levels in Russia after it was put on the rack of socialism for 75 years.

When the English settlers landed in Massachusette in 1620, they originally had organized themselves on the "from each according to his abilities, to each according to their needs" - IOW, socialist - model, and damned near starved to death. The famed Mayflower Compact was an (successful) effort to put some - gasp! - profit motivation in the system, and of course it worked.

Will these folks ever learn that as far as economics are concerned, socialism is the equivalent of Tyrannosaurus Rex - an evolutionary dead end?

Collapse -
I agree Paul - 3 more very good lessons
by SteveGargini / December 26, 2003 11:02 AM PST

I sometimes wonder how the leader of the UN can sleep at night after being found guilty of such gross neglect of duty.
When the English settlers landed in Massachusette in 1620
Not too sure that they were at all political, but I think they were very religious. My memory of events back there in the 17th century get a little forgotten after 384 years. Happy
Guy fawkes attempted to blow up parliament at the end of that century, and he was more of an anarchist.
I shall have to take a peek at that time in history to see if the country had left wing political views.

Collapse -
Guy Fawkes - 1605 the plot got rumbled-sounded like religion as the reason. NT
by SteveGargini / December 26, 2003 11:51 AM PST

Some reforms were going on around that time, but I doubt that they had any left wing views.

Collapse -
Re: Socialism taught in our schools
by Dave Konkel [Moderator] / December 26, 2003 12:29 PM PST

Hi, Evie.

The definition of "socialism" is "government ownership of the means of production." Now how does an exercise intended to show that he equality preached widely is a myth have anything to do with socialism? Not that it's necessarily a good exercise for public schools, but this is another example of redefining terms to try to make your political opponents into a boogeyman -- a page taken straight out of Newt's candidate manual.
-- Merry Christmas!
Dave K, Speakeasy Moderator
click here to email semods4@yahoo.com

The opinions expressed above are my own,
and do not necessarily reflect those of CNET!

Collapse -
Selective editing?
by Kiddpeat / December 26, 2003 2:32 PM PST

The Random House Unabridged Dictionary says socialism is 'a theory or system of social organization that advocates the vesting of the ownership and control of the means of production and distribution, of capital, land, etc. in the community as a whole'. Sorry Dave, no mention of government, and it sounds pretty much like the class exercise to me.

Collapse -
The old shell game, Kiddpeat...
by J. Vega / December 26, 2003 5:10 PM PST
In reply to: Selective editing?

Kiddpeat, he's just playing politics and trying the old shell game. The object was to somehow say something negative about the Republicans - any time, any place.
See the words " another example of redefining terms to try to make your political opponents into a boogeyman -- a page taken straight out of Newt's candidate manual."? Classic shell game, he mentions making somebody into a bogeyman, and immediately turns around and tries to do it with the name Newt. See him switch the litle pea?

Collapse -
Re: Selective editing?
by Dave Konkel [Moderator] / December 27, 2003 1:15 AM PST
In reply to: Selective editing?

Hi, KP.

In a democracy, the government is the "community of the whole" -- as Lincoln (first Republican President) put it in arguably his most famous speech, government of, by and for the people, so "government" is usually used in such context to mean "community."
-- Merry Christmas!
Dave K, Speakeasy Moderator
click here to email semods4@yahoo.com

The opinions expressed above are my own,
and do not necessarily reflect those of CNET!

Collapse -
Re:Re: Selective editing?
by C1ay / December 27, 2003 1:25 AM PST
In reply to: Re: Selective editing?
In a democracy...

Irrelevant, we live in a republic, not a democracy.
Collapse -
Now you're arguing both sides of the issue in the same thread!
by Kiddpeat / December 27, 2003 10:21 AM PST
In reply to: Re: Selective editing?

Don't you remember? I've already explained this once. We don't live in a democracy Dave. We live in a Republic. We have a constitutional government composed of the executive, legislative, and judicial. Dave, I must say, you remember this well enough when you're claiming that the function of the judiciary, if not the entire government, is to protect minorities from the majority.

Even if you are right that the people are the government, this invalidates your original criticism doesn't it? Now, the 'government', i.e. the class, IS being led to impose control on the means of production. So, where is your apology for charging underhanded tactics?

Collapse -
Re:Selective editing?
by C1ay / December 27, 2003 1:23 AM PST
In reply to: Selective editing?

No, he was just skimming again...

Collapse -
Why do you always leave out the rest of
by Edward ODaniel / December 27, 2003 12:52 AM PST

so

Collapse -
Re: Why do you always leave out the rest of
by Dave Konkel [Moderator] / December 27, 2003 1:16 AM PST

Hi, Ed.

Given that the Cold War is over and there are really only two Communist governments left (Cuba and North Korea), definition 2 is really of historical interest only.
-- Merry Christmas!
Dave K, Speakeasy Moderator
click here to email semods4@yahoo.com

The opinions expressed above are my own,
and do not necessarily reflect those of CNET!

Collapse -
I am constantly amazed by the gap between belief and reality
by gearup / December 27, 2003 3:22 AM PST

which is fortified by so many in this forum. Logic should tell you all that no political party or system is always 100% correct or 100% wrong. For instance the ultra-conservative governments of Mussolini and Hitler were famous for making the railroads run on time...something which it seems cannot be accomplished by either the "Republicans" or "Democrats". Not surprising as the only difference between the two parties is their philosophy concerning the methodology endorsed to allow the rich to grow richer...an illusory philosophy as the barons of industry need no help in that area. True reform could actually be accomplished by a successfull search for an honest
auditor...something which I am sure will not happen in my lifetime!

Collapse -
and your point with respect to the thread is? (NT)
by Kiddpeat / December 27, 2003 10:34 AM PST

.

Collapse -
And considering the number of socialist countrys...
by Edward ODaniel / December 27, 2003 3:28 AM PST

the second part is of great FUTURE interest.

Any reason you neglected VietNam and Laos and China which are still Communist (not to mention large and heavily populated with active Communists)?

The creeping socialism leads, as it did in the past, to communism and indications are that there are many who are striving for that very goal (demonize success and wealth and redistribute wealth and property).

The ENTIRE definition is still appropriate and accurate and should be kept in the open where the unwashed can see it.

Collapse -
twaddle once again.
by IanC_OZ / December 29, 2003 9:06 AM PST

It was interesting to read the definitions provided.

Have you read all the works of Karl Marx? Until you have read and understood every word, phrase, sentence, paragraph, chapter, volume and the entire works,

by your own statements to me,

you are unqualified to make any comments upon communism.

Have you read all the works of Lennin and Stalin, Mao and Lao Tse, for if not, you are unqualified to draw conculsions about socialism.

Ed - you are a fraud. You are very good at selecting links and people to quote. The operative word is selecting.

So, anti-communist dictionaries still show the reractionary view of socialism that lead to the domino theory and the Vietnam war. Big deal. The theories didn't pan out then, and there is no evidence they are true today.

Ian

Collapse -
Ah yes, another world heard from...
by Edward ODaniel / December 29, 2003 12:52 PM PST
In reply to: twaddle once again.

You ASSUME far too much Ian. As a matter of fact I have indeed read up on the subject by those who pushed it (why did you neglect to mention Engles and especially little "Father Ho"?) although I will not claim to have read ALL the works and letters and I am sure you haven't either. I would actually bet you have read less than I, far less. It was recommended (and still is) to "know your enemy", and I knew mine quite well (but didn't and still don't feel that reading all of Mao's works for instance were necessary although his 1937 work "On Gurilla Warfare" was as was his "Red Book" (quotes of the chairman). His poetry was valueless but interesting if somewhat vapid.

Ian, you have problems with the links and definitions go do a bit of looking yourself--try the OE Dictionary (unless you feel it is too "anti-communist"). Surely you are capable of finding definitions. You apparently have lots of trouble understanding them, but surely you can locate them.

Long ago I mentioned several times that I would rather people do their own link searches because of exactly what you charge now Ian but as memory serves YOU are one who whinged about my not doing it so I started. Now again you whinge simply because I do post the links. Still however, there is absolutely nothing stopping you from locating some of your own except your lack of initiative.

The fraud here is you Ian, you and your "book a day". You do have a good imagination however and, as stated here before, I do get a kick out of reading your fictions.

Collapse -
Re: And considering the number of socialist countrys...
by Dave Konkel [Moderator] / December 29, 2003 12:32 PM PST

Hi, Ed.

Don't know much about Laos, but both China and VietNam, though officially still Communist, are becoming increasingly capitalist economically. And as Gorbachev discovered, a little capitalism/freedom is a very dangerous thing to a Communist state.
-- Dave K, Speakeasy Moderator
click here to email semods4@yahoo.com

The opinions expressed above are my own,
and do not necessarily reflect those of CNET!

Collapse -
Re:Re: And considering the number of socialist countrys...
by Edward ODaniel / December 29, 2003 12:57 PM PST

Yes Dave, they are indeed venturing into limited capitalistic endeavors BUT they still remain Communist.

Both China and Vietnam as well as Laos keep this under control and aren't looking as if they will be anything but Communist for many more years to come.

Popular Forums
icon
Computer Help 51,912 discussions
icon
Computer Newbies 10,498 discussions
icon
Laptops 20,411 discussions
icon
Security 30,882 discussions
icon
TVs & Home Theaters 21,253 discussions
icon
Windows 10 1,672 discussions
icon
Phones 16,494 discussions
icon
Windows 7 7,855 discussions
icon
Networking & Wireless 15,504 discussions

CNET ON CARS

Want to see the future of car technology?

Brian Cooley found it for you at CES 2017 in Las Vegas and the North American International Auto Show in Detroit.