The Political Thread

[The Legendary Shark]

While the other two are fighting over spoons I think I'll settle down with a bit of Plutarch and see if I can fashion my spoon into a lock-pick.

[The Legendary Shark]

Going through the Green Party website now. I didn't really want to but it seems fair to explore the suggestion. So far, some of it at least is acceptable to me and some is not. I'll try and get through the rest after work.

As an example of something I like (except for calling legislation law):

"WR202 We recognise that the law must not be used as a way of dealing with the symptoms, whilst the source of the problem remains untouched. Laws designed to protect the oppressed, must also empower. Laws which penalise the oppressor, must also foster a sense of responsibility."

And the opposite:

(From ED001) "We hope by setting out an appropriate system for compulsory learning that this will nurture in everyone a desire to continue learning throughout life." (My emphasis.)

The adventure continues...

[Rara Avis]

4) There aren't any. Seriously, how many politicians are willing to stand up for ideas like government having far less power and being stripped of its "right" to initiate violence against its own or other people? Of being barred from dealing with the debt-based money system and moving over to a more Austrian School economic system? PM me his/her email because I'd love to chat.

Are these the only issues you're willing to vote on?

You can also use your vote to help others you know? You can use it to ensure LGBTQ+ are treated fairly in society, that women are given bodily autonomy, that children can have free school lunches .. it is the duty of the strong to protect the weak etc

[Leigh S]

Despite the lock not actually allowing you access to the mechanism from within the cell...

While the other two are fighting over spoons I think I'll settle down with a bit of Plutarch and see if I can fashion my spoon into a lock-pick.

[Rara Avis]

And the opposite:

(From ED001) "We hope by setting out an appropriate system for compulsory learning that this will nurture in everyone a desire to continue learning throughout life." (My emphasis.)

The adventure continues...

Wow, didn't realise they were trying to educate children. F**k those guys 

[Hawkmumbler]

Bringing back the work houses to own the libs.

[Rara Avis]

That's so unfair - not only getting free housing but jobs provided for them too!

[IndigoPrime]

(From ED001) "We hope by setting out an appropriate system for compulsory learning that this will nurture in everyone a desire to continue learning throughout life." (My emphasis.)

The Greens are in favour of a system closer in nature to Finland's, where schools start later and have fewer pupils per class. Formal education as we understand it today would be compulsory only between the ages of 7 and 16. Prior to 7, the party has an emphasis on mixed provision. Post-14, it wants to emphasise transition to career paths, with a mix of learning/training.

Notably, homeschooling forms part of the party's remit — as it does today by matter of law anyway — "support[ing] parents' right to educate their children in settings other than at school".

Given the manner in which Greens would also support people financially, this is the most flexible system I can imagine under any form of modern government, and I can therefore only imagine you are against it purely on the basis it would compel parents to educate their children rather than not. I find that a pity, because it pushes you into an extreme position where you would only accept government if every action from an individual was voluntary, and that in itself eradicates protections for those people living with bad actors.

If parents are not compelled to educate their children, that means some will choose not to, and those children will suffer. How would you deal with that on a societal basis?

EDIT: 14 is wrong. 16 is accurate.

[JayzusB.Christ]

(From ED001) "We hope by setting out an appropriate system for compulsory learning that this will nurture in everyone a desire to continue learning throughout life." (My emphasis.)

The Greens are in favour of a system closer in nature to Finland's, where schools start later and have fewer pupils per class. Formal education as we understand it today would be compulsory only between the ages of 7 and 14. Prior to 7, the party has an emphasis on mixed provision. Post-14, it wants to emphasise transition to career paths, with a mix of learning/training.

That's a tough one, for me at least.  In the Irish system, you carry on with the basics - Maths, English, and in my day Irish, but I don't know if that one's compulsory in modern multicultural Ireland - until you're 18 or so, but before that when you're about 15 you choose a few from the rest and stick with them - languages, one of the branches of science, art, tech drawing, business studies and so on. 

The thing was, art aside*, I made the wrong choices because I hadn't a clue what my career would be when I was 15.  I wish I had learned some more technical skills, as I needed them for both art school and basic day-to-day living in a boat, and some business skills, because I feel like I'm constantly winging it as a sole trader.

Just personal experience, though.

*the problem there, though, was most people chose art because they didn't want to study 'real' subjects, and a clueless and incompetent teacher was assigned accordingly. 

[IndigoPrime]

First, I had errors in my post. The compulsory range is 7–16, but with 14 being a breakpoint for potential dovetailing with a level of workplace training. Secondly, I'm not convinced by all their policy in this area, not least the level of local demolition that—without extremely strong monitoring—could lead to all kinds pf problems in terms of educational biases. That said, ED124 does note that there are issues with the current mix in schooling types causing division.

Personally, I'd like to see the UK learn from e.g. Finnish schooling, rather than repeatedly ignoring the key benefits of later academic starts, reduce the exam load on kids, and broaden education during teen years. The English system is far too restrictive at A-Level, where you scythe education from nine or ten subjects down to three or four, and potentially ditch entirely key foundational skills.

[The Legendary Shark]

Are these the only issues you're willing to
vote on?
You can also use your vote to help others you
know? You can use it to ensure LGBTQ+ are
treated fairly in society, that women are
given bodily autonomy, that children can have
free school lunches .. it is the duty of the
strong to protect the weak etc

I'm not willing to "vote" on any issue because... Well, I've been through my reasons often enough, recently and in the past.

I use my personal vote to help people quite often, with my own two hands, you know? As, I'm quite certain, do we all. I have no interest in protecting the privileges of minorities or even of majorities - all that different privileges (name changed to "rights") baloney just fosters division. My interest lies in protecting the rights of everyone, of everyone having the same basic rights (and responsibilities, lest we forget) - from the basest criminal to the Queen.

At the last, I agree that we should all protect each other - but to hand that responsibility over to inadequate representatives working for an inadequate system is to protect nobody. Relying on noblesse oblige, on the self-devised and implemented largesse of "better people than me," hasn't worked particularly well in the past and I don't believe it's an anywhere near practical solution for the future.

Despite the lock not actually allowing you
access to the mechanism from within the
cell...

I take it that there is oxygen inside the cell, and access to food, water, etc.? If so - and I'm not going to starve or suffocate - then I'll still just leave the two spooners at it. If one wants to get out by digging holes with a spoon, and the other one wants to stay in by filling in holes with a spoon (as the cell also seems to contain an unlimited amount of wet concrete, for some reason), and they aren't physically fighting (or even if they are), then again it's best to leave them to it while I consider other means.

Wow, didn't realise they were trying to
educate children. F**k those guys

If you (who I presume went through state schooling) think that the only alternative to compulsory schooling is no education, then I suggest you've just added another reason for radically changing the current system.

[The Legendary Shark]

Bringing back the work houses to own the libs.

If you (who I presume went through state
schooling) think that the only alternative to
compulsory schooling is workhouses, then I
suggest you've just added yet another reason for radically changing the current system.

If parents are not compelled to educate their children, that means some will choose not to, and those children will suffer. How would you deal with that on a societal basis?

Do you need to be compelled to educate your children? I expect not - and I expect most parents feel the same way. Yes - some will feel otherwise but some always do. That's not a separate problem but part of the whole.
Any solution will have to address this aspect.

I'm not going to go into possible solutions right now because you don't think there's a problem, or, at least, you see different problems. There's this guy called John Taylor-Gatto, a retired US teacher, who has a much better handle on the problem than I do. There are interviews with him scattered about the net at places like Peace Revolution and School Sucks but they are quite lengthy - as I seem to recall, the PR podcast interview is around five hours long. That's a fantastic interview, btw, but who has the time, right? So, here's a random  interview with him I found  at Homeschool World - which, of course, barely scratches the surface but is a decent start.

[Rara Avis]

I'm not willing to "vote" on any issue ... I use my personal vote to help people quite often -

I have no interest in protecting the privileges of minorities or even of majorities -  BUT  My interest lies in protecting the rights of everyone, of everyone having the same basic rights

You're all over the shop here mate.

If you (who I presume went through state schooling) think that the only alternative to compulsory schooling is no education, then I suggest you've just added another reason for radically changing the current system.

Compulsory schooling just means that children have to receive an education no one ever argued it should be exclusively through the state school system.

[The Legendary Shark]

All over the shop? Really? I want a system where everyone is treated equally as a matter of course rather than being treated differently due to one or more personal differences, as we have now.

Not through the state, then, just enforced by it? Either way - learn what the state wants you to know or be punished.

[Rara Avis]

You don't vote except when you do.

You don't want to protect the rights of anyone (sorry you said privileges of minorities and majorities as though they are the same thing) but want to protect the rights of everyone.

You do realise that education benefits society as a whole? I'm not sure what your argument against educating people is. Do you think that children going to school should be optional and not mandatory? That is going to lead to a system were everyone is treated unequally as a matter of course due to personal differences.