REAL WORLD EVENT DISCUSSIONS

Civil Disobediance.

POSTED BY: FREMDFIRMA
UPDATED: Thursday, June 5, 2008 21:16
SHORT URL:
VIEWED: 3303
PAGE 1 of 2

Sunday, May 25, 2008 10:26 PM

FREMDFIRMA


Good for them, I say - it's all well and good to have some assessment, but not at the expense of the whole curriculum and purpose.

Bronx 8th-graders boycott practice exam but teacher may get ax.
http://www.nydailynews.com/ny_local/education/2008/05/21/ 2008-05-21_bronx_8thgraders_boycott_practice_exam_b-1.html
(spaced link)

"They don't think we have brains of our own, like we're robots. We students wanted to make this statement."
-Johnny Cruz, Age 15.

Oh out of the mouths of babes...
Think they're not *aware* that we treat them as subhuman?
Better think again.

But Mister Avellas REAL sin against the establishment, and the reason they're gonna run him out of town on a rail is something else again, and he stands condemned from his own mouth.
"I teach them critical thinking."

Bloody Fool, that's the LAST thing our so-called 'educational' system wants.

And let's not forget the irony of a Social Studies teacher, who's students use a time honored method of social protest that is supposed to be honored in this country, then getting the axe for it - and showing them how things REALLY work.

As I recall, a certain school in Maryland played that game once over the dress code, and it ended really badly for them, didn't it now ?

-Frem

It cannot be said enough, those who do not learn from history, are doomed to endlessly repeat it

NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Monday, May 26, 2008 6:01 AM

SIGNYM

I believe in solving problems, not sharing them.


The article is short on facts. The student protest is based on the fact that they feel that they're being used as guinea pigs for a private company's experimental tests and face an excessive testing burden compared (one presumes) to richer schools. Their complaint has several parts:
1) They face an 'excessive" test burden.
2) It's being done by a private company.
3) Testing takes away from "valuable instruction time"

In addition, Frem has his own agenda
4) Teaching should be done by Uncle Frem, not by the gummint.
5) All standardized testing is bad, and
6) The teacher who is the putative instigator of the boycott shouldn't be fired.

I have one of my own:
7) what are the consequences of standardized testing?
-------------


1) It's unfair. I have no knowledge one way or another whether this particular school is a "proving ground" for new or revised tests. If the students have information that supports their claim the article didn't mention it. It's possibly true: perhaps the principal or school board made a quid pro quo deal with the testing firm for free instructional materials (or money directly in the pocket) in exchange for a test population. It's also possible that the students perceive an unfairness simply because they don't know what's happening in other schools. IF the school is being treated as a guinea pig for new tests, that should stop.
2) It's profit-driven Private testing companies are a fact of life in our hyper-capitalized environment. What students seem to be objecting to is being made to "pay" in order to put money in someone else's pocket. If that's what they're saying, I agree with them. But I'm not sure if it would really make any difference to them if excessive testing were being conducted by an agency as opposed to a private entity. In the end, their direct experience remains the same.
3) It impacts instruction time. Hmm... okay, maybe about 10% of the students really feel this. The other 90% don't like being tested because it makes them feel like dummies. It's not uncommon to present an argument in terms you think the "other side" has to agree with, but from MY experience most students are more than happy to lose "valuable instruction" time to special events, extracurricular activities, pep rallies, and just hanging out. The only thing worse than instructional time is testing time... Sorry, this argument just doesn't seem heartfelt for the vast majority of the students. Also, "test taking" can be a valuable experience.
4) The gummint shouldn't be teaching. I may be misrepresenting Frem's reaction. There are several parts to his reaction to standardized teaching (a) "What" is taught and (b) The "way" it is taught. (a) I agree that the current curriculum sucks. But the reason for standardized curriculum is to prepare everyone equally (one hopes) for participation in the world of work. You don't want to drive on a multi-lane bridge designed by Joe, who learned it from his grandpappy in exchange for lawn mowing because grandpappy once built a creek bridge. The benefit of teaching is that humans can accumulate knowledge over many generations, not re-invent the wheel every generation. I personally think the curriculum sucks. But I would want to change the curriculum not do away with it. (b) The WAY it is taught. Not everyone does well sitting still and listening to a teacher drone on for 40 minutes. That should be changed.
5) All standardized tests are bad At one time, I believe that Frem agreed that advanced studies require standardized testing, but perhaps I mis-remember. My problem with standardized testing per se is how the results are used, not that fact of standardized testing itself.
6) It's all about authority: Let's not forget the irony of a Social Studies teacher, who's students use a time honored method of social protest that is supposed to be honored in this country, then getting the axe for it - and showing them how things REALLY work.
If this is the teacher's handiwork I think he did a crappy job teaching the students how to "think for themselves" and "show them how things really work". The student argument (at least as presented in the newspaper) is well-crafted in that it mentions all the right buzzwords but it is short on facts. If my union rep went into a contract negotiation that unprepared I'd string him or her up. In addition, there appeared to be other remedies that the students ignored, and they overlooked the REAL real consequences of their actions, such as getting their favorite teacher fired. Just by the sheer sloppiness of the thing I think it was spontaneous. The teacher may have given them the buzzwords but he didn't create or direct the student response. Hopefully, what the students learned is that going off half-cocked doesn't work. What they could have done instead is compile a list of the tests they took and the number of instructional hours that took away, and compare it to a richer school, the take that to their parents, a newspaper, and the School Board. Schools are required to provide so many instructional hours per year. In addition, if the school is being unfairly used as a guinea pig, I would do some investigation about why this is occurring. Given that many local school boards are corrupt- because most parents are more interested in free baby-sitting services that pander to their local pride- the State may have to step in.
7) Use of standardized tests My objection is that standardized testing is used to sort students and punish schools. Standardized testing CAN be a valuable asset IF it is used to direct assistance and evaluate the curriculum, teachers, and administration. Schools that are falling far behind others clearly have problems that other schools don't. The answer isn't to bury our collective heads in the sand an accept second-rate schools but to pitch in and figure out what's going wrong, and fix it.

They tried accepting second-rate medicine at King Drew Hospital and look what happened there.

---------------------------------
Let's party like it's 1929.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Monday, May 26, 2008 6:47 AM

FLETCH2


Not commenting on the original article but putting forward an observation. People protesting and not seeing the consequences IS the characteristic of spontaneous protest. People generally don't consider the consequences of their actions.

Your union rep is NOT involved in spontaneous action. Even if things go badly and he calls a strike, one would assume the union has funds saved to promote it and a strategy for putting pressure on their management. That is after all their job.

So the idea that some kids going off half cock is in some way indicative of a lack of tradecraft in the area of protesting is wrong, spontaneous protests are messy, I'm not sure you can teach a better technique.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Monday, May 26, 2008 7:13 AM

SIGNYM

I believe in solving problems, not sharing them.


Quote:

So the idea that some kids going off half cock is in some way indicative of a lack of tradecraft in the area of protesting is wrong, spontaneous protests are messy, I'm not sure you can teach a better technique.
My comment was to Frem's idea that this shows kids how things "really" work. I guess it does, but not in the way he thinks. He portrays this incident as "the man's" universal response to ALL forms of change and I'm not sure that is the case.

www.nydailynews.com/ny_local/education/2008/05/21/2008-05-21_bronx_8th
graders_boycott_practice_exam_b-1.html

First of all, what the students boycotted was a "practice" exam.
Quote:

More than 160 students in six different classes at Intermediate School 318 in the South Bronx - virtually the entire eighth grade - refused to take last Wednesday's three-hour practice exam for next month's statewide social studies test. Instead, the students handed in blank exams.

Then they submitted signed petitions with a list of grievances to school Principal Maria Lopez and the Department of Education. "We've had a whole bunch of these diagnostic tests all year," Tatiana Nelson, 13, one of the protest leaders, said Tuesday outside the school. "They don't even count toward our grades. The school system's just treating us like test dummies for the companies that make the exams."

So, are they diagnostic tests or practice tests? Hmmm... It seems that the students can't tell the difference. In addition, a lot of school boards (and students) hate the standardized testing because it points up their failure versus other schools. They would like to go back to the the diploma based on school grades because it is less rigorous. But in point of fact, in CA you can't graduate from HS with a diploma unless you pass that standardized state test.

All I can do is point to one of our local hospitals and draw a comparison to some of our local School Boards.

King Drew was a "black hospital for a black community". It was helmed by black administrators. Every time it came close to failing the Joint Commission's inspection or a significant problem was uncovered and a change of leadership was called for, the "black community" championed by County Board member Yvonne Brathwaite Burke would rise up and cry prejudice. And so the hospital limped along, slowly having its teaching and treatment functions amputated until it finally utterly failed the Joint Commission's last chance inspection and was forced to closed its doors. Ethnic pride trumped performance, but eventually the community not only lost it's second-rate "flagship" hospital, it lost ALL medical services.

Which reminded me very much of some local school systems and city governments. Several school systems in our area have been in the news because of rife corruption and mismanagement. One school system had an accounting department that allowed theft by every employee in the system including many employees that didn't exist, for a kickback of course. Another was dominated by a very angry large man, his sister and his cousin who loudly claimed "racism" with every school failure. And most parents were ready to believe that it was racism - not corruption- that was the cause of the school failures because it was a sop to their local pride.

What I'm detecting is just sheer lack of accountability. If parents do not insist on a good education for their children, if they're ready to claim "racism" for every failure on THEIR part, the kids are going to carry that message forward.

I'm willing to say that the amount of testing conducted in that school should be investigated but otherwise... pppphhttt. I think the kids should suck it up and hit the books. If they or their parents think the curriculum or the testing is flawed, take it up with the school board.


-------------------------
Let's party like it's 1929.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Monday, May 26, 2008 7:46 AM

CHRISISALL


We can't have the sheep attempting to question the shepherd now....

Chrisisallbaaaaaaa

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Monday, May 26, 2008 11:20 AM

SIGMANUNKI


I'm all for questioning when questioning is appropriate. But, what's going on today is that the experts are being questions because the people FEEL or THINK that (s)he isn't right. Which is rather the really big problem today. People go with there gut regardless of what the facts say.

These students were fools to do what they did. There are many different ways to make change. But, just "doing something" (i.e. going with THINK and FEEL) without looking into how things actually work is stupidity that should be punished.

----
I am on The Original List (twice). We are The Forsaken and we aim to burn!
"We don't fear the reaper"

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Monday, May 26, 2008 11:36 AM

CHRISISALL


When the 'experts' start thinking for themselves rather than just responding to computer analysis & peeps above them doing anything to justify their position, Sigma, I will share that sentiment.

isall

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Monday, May 26, 2008 1:08 PM

SIGMANUNKI


I don't know what world you live in, but I live in one where that already happens. Then again, if you want to contradict the experts, then I'd like to see those degrees and the reasoning why.

----
I am on The Original List (twice). We are The Forsaken and we aim to burn!
"We don't fear the reaper"

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Monday, May 26, 2008 2:45 PM

FLETCH2


Quote:

Originally posted by SignyM:
There are several parts to his reaction to standardized teaching (a) "What" is taught and (b) The "way" it is taught. (a) I agree that the current curriculum sucks. But the reason for standardized curriculum is to prepare everyone equally (one hopes) for participation in the world of work. You don't want to drive on a multi-lane bridge designed by Joe, who learned it from his grandpappy in exchange for lawn mowing because grandpappy once built a creek bridge. The benefit of teaching is that humans can accumulate knowledge over many generations, not re-invent the wheel every generation.



Just had to comment. Chances are that the multilane bridge would not be built in Fremworld anyway. Remember Fremworld doesn't scale well to big city style living --- there would have to be too much shared resources and too much administration for that kind of society to work. In Fremworld no community ever gets big enough to need a multi lane highway bridge anyway and the scale of bridges that can be built with just the community's local resources is likely to be something you sling over a creek.

Remember this is a society where trading fuel oil for ammunition is a big deal and a few of your relatives cooking the doc a good meal pays your medical bills. it doesnt do anything that needs big investment or million dollar resources, for one thing the moment you have projects that large you end up getting the power structures to administer them.

He has a simpler, smaller paradyne in place here.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Monday, May 26, 2008 4:16 PM

SIGNYM

I believe in solving problems, not sharing them.


Quote:

He has a simpler, smaller paradyne in place here.
One in which I think you can kiss off electricity, antibiotics, the internet, and internal combustion engines, all of which required patient accumulation of knowledge and technology over centuries.

But I have to say that Frem is honest about the results of his paradigm, unlike some libertarians who think they're going to reap all the rewards of advanced technology in a horse-and-buggy society.

---------------------------------
Let's party like it's 1929.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Tuesday, May 27, 2008 1:15 AM

FREMDFIRMA


Sorry for the late response, some drunk plowed nose to nose into #35 and the freakin heater core blew out and sprayed hot coolant all over my feet, which didn't do jack to the right one as it's plastic, but the left one is kinda burnt, not to mention the hassle and paperwork, no question of fault since the other driver blew about twice the legal limit and was in my lane, but a pain in the ass all the same.

I think you've got it a bit wrong here, and imma get to that in the next post with a full explaination, gimme a bit to write it.

-F

NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Tuesday, May 27, 2008 2:06 AM

FREMDFIRMA


Ok, now...

It's not that I don't feel the Gov should be teaching, but they really should separate themselves a bit more substantially from the process, public education as it is currently done is pretty terrible, and I have a particular beef with Civics, Social Studies and History classes being so propaganda-laden as to be ineffective at imparting actual knowledge of events.

As for any idea of ME teaching folk, heh, other than History, Small Engine Repair and perhaps Anarchist Philosophy, I am not especially qualified to teach most subjects, but I can most certainly assist someone in improving skills they do know - having the rare ability to "light the fire" and make folk WANT to learn does not in this case translate into knowing how to teach beyond a rare few subjects.

You might be surprised that most of my beefs actually echo yours, in fact.

I too think the curriculum and style sucks, we really need to go more hands-on in many cases and show the real world benefits of being able to USE that knowledge - the home economics class I took way back when was probably one of the best educational setups I've seen, as they had an artificial "store" and checkout line where one could put into practice not only what they had learned in that class but also demonstrate how good math skills could benefit you directly.

There's much to be said for not reinventing the wheel either, but we really should go back to phonics and meaning based reading of the Lippincott model rather than the rote memorisation and see-n-say Caldwell model.

I don't know if those are actually the proper names, but due to the changeover, I got one, and my sister got the other, and it really shows in our reading and language comprehension and abilities, even this many years later.

Other than that, our basic curriculum isn't THAT bad until about grade four-five.

The artificial social structure is pretty awful, and the same authoritarian cycle of squeeze-resistance-squeeze more which has failed in every other damn thing it's applied to simply isn't going to work, these kids have to understand the REASONS for rules and those rules should make SENSE in a real world sort of way - a little communication in that respect would go much, much further than simply putting the boot down and giving orders, a school is not a factory production line, and unless you want to run the place like a kennel or prison, and I have seen that too many times in public schools to deny it happens very often - you MUST have a bridge of communication with your students, and it MUST go both ways.

I don't have anything against standardised testing per-se, it's just that when you're doing little else but prepping for and taking them, you're not actually TEACHING, because you are artificially limiting the subject - and to make schools financially dependant on these things just feeds a bad cycle.

What we oughta do, is have a standard set of more or less "finals" for each grade and leave it at that, make them a requirement of advancement to the next grade, and add a few elements of ceremony and tradition to that so that the child sees their own accomplishment actually acknowledged and respected, which will encourage them and offer emotional support in an environment strangely devoid of it in these days.

As for the incident in question - the school completely failed to take advantage of a truly great educational opportunity here, Fletch mentions unintended consequences, and what better way to teach about them than in an actual environment where they can be effectively shown and demonstrated in a semi-controlled environment ?

As well, there's the hypocrisy issue of teaching the value of nonviolent social protest on the one hand, and then penalizing it severely the instant that students choose to utilize that method, don't think for a moment that particular little "lesson" hasn't made an impact here, which is going to have it's own set of unintended consequences using the force-resistance-more force model.

I think they had a great teaching opportunity here and not only blew it, but did so in such a way that it's going to have a long lasting negative impact on the relationship between the students and educators here, is what I mostly meant.

I will not delve too deep here into the artificial social structure, since it's a seperate issue which has been discussed at length before and isn't fully applicable to this particular situation, but that's also a factor in the problems of our educational system so I feel it should be briefly mentioned regardless.

The two things we most need to improve matters seem to be more flexibility in the curriculum and more communication between students, educators, and administrators.

----

On the other note, about smaller paradigms, that's a little more complex than your making it, but not so much - the idea of the style I propose is doing away with structures that nearly everybody wants gone with the full understanding of how that would limit your technology and production base, what I have described before as incremental minimalisim.

Example: If we choose to dismantle structure A, then we will lose Technology B and the ability to produce product C.

Do we have perhaps an alternate tech or product we can live with ?
If not, are we all ok with losing B & C ?

If-Yes-Next Structure...

And so on and so forth, to a point where folks are comfortable with, which is far more likely to be somewhere in between here and a horse and buggy culture, it was just a convenient example of the degree it could be taken by folk hell bent on it - but not necessarily where it WOULD go.

Hope that clarifies things a bit.

-Frem

It cannot be said enough, those who do not learn from history, are doomed to endlessly repeat it

NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Tuesday, May 27, 2008 2:57 AM

CITIZEN


Quote:

Originally posted by Fremdfirma:
On the other note, about smaller paradigms, that's a little more complex than your making it, but not so much - the idea of the style I propose is doing away with structures that nearly everybody wants gone with the full understanding of how that would limit your technology and production base, what I have described before as incremental minimalisim.

Example: If we choose to dismantle structure A, then we will lose Technology B and the ability to produce product C.

Do we have perhaps an alternate tech or product we can live with ?
If not, are we all ok with losing B & C ?

If-Yes-Next Structure...

And so on and so forth, to a point where folks are comfortable with, which is far more likely to be somewhere in between here and a horse and buggy culture, it was just a convenient example of the degree it could be taken by folk hell bent on it - but not necessarily where it WOULD go.

Hope that clarifies things a bit.

Surely it isn't that simple, given the interconnected nature of modern society.



More insane ramblings by the people who brought you beeeer milkshakes!
No one can see their reflection in running water. It is only in still water that we can see.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Tuesday, May 27, 2008 2:58 AM

HERO


Quote:

Originally posted by Fremdfirma:
...no question of fault since the other driver blew about twice the legal limit and was in my lane, but a pain in the ass all the same.


Sorry to hear that. Hope your local Prosecutor is good.

H

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Tuesday, May 27, 2008 9:03 AM

SIGNYM

I believe in solving problems, not sharing them.


Quote:

Sorry for the late response, some drunk plowed nose to nose into #35 and the freakin heater core blew out and sprayed hot coolant all over my feet, which didn't do jack to the right one as it's plastic, but the left one is kinda burnt, not to mention the hassle and paperwork, no question of fault since the other driver blew about twice the legal limit and was in my lane, but a pain in the ass all the same.
Ouch! Damnitall!


---------------------------------
Let's party like it's 1929.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Tuesday, May 27, 2008 9:22 AM

RUE

I have a vote and I'm not afraid to use it!


Considering most iron ore is in Minnesota (and requires complex mining to extract), and the closest coal is located in Kentucky (and requires complex mining to extract) - I think with small local societies you can kiss even the simple cast-iron stove goodby, let alone the small engine.

***************************************************************
"Global warming - it's not just a fact, it's a choice."

NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Tuesday, May 27, 2008 9:30 AM

FLETCH2


But without the intrastructure to extract and refine oil you have no way of running cars. Therefore you have an almost limitless supply of already extracted scrap iron and aluminium.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Tuesday, May 27, 2008 9:57 AM

RUE

I have a vote and I'm not afraid to use it!


I'm not sure what you're referring to. I wasn't referring to cars - just small engines - which take the place of hand pumps for wells; donkeys, horses and cattle for agriculture; metal rims on wooden wheels so they last longer; wooden tips for plows; etc.
Iron smelting takes place at high temperature. It can be done in small batches with a lot of human effort (bellows) with charcoal, but is most efficiently done with coal. Generally, reliably smelting iron in sufficient quantities requires resources to be gathered for distant places. And that's not even talking about alloys.
And even scrap iron requires smelting to make it useful.
Frem's society envisions large quantities of useful iron. That wouldn't happpen in small isolated communities.

To use SignyM's analogy, it's like trying to use iron in a bronze-age society.


***************************************************************
"Global warming - it's not just a fact, it's a choice."

NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Tuesday, May 27, 2008 10:09 AM

FLETCH2


We have massive amounts of mined iron cruising the roads right now, which in Fremworld will not all have fuel to power them. We are already seeing scrap metal prices rise because of the demand and the high costs of extracting new ore. How long before people are tunnelling into garbage dumps to "mine" discarded metal?

Would certainly happen in Fremworld.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Tuesday, May 27, 2008 10:59 AM

CHRISISALL


Quote:

Originally posted by SigmaNunki:
if you want to contradict the experts, then I'd like to see those degrees and the reasoning why.


'The experts' just KNEW Saddam had WMD. The highest paid, best trained, most technologically proficient peeps on the planet, right? Lots of degrees in that bunch....
'The experts' just KNEW margarine was better for you than butter.
'The experts' just KNEW the Earth was flat.

Wherever there is political pressure for a desired 'expert opinion', I can be sure it's full of shit.

Peeps doing pure science, devoid of politics, yeah, I'll take those folks word on it. My mechanic too. There's lots of good experts out there.
But more often than not, they're just well-spoken mouthpieces saying what's been 'approved' by their idiot bosses.

Face it man, our whole society is BUILT on deceit and ass-kissing.

Bad mood Chrisisall

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Tuesday, May 27, 2008 11:24 AM

CHRISISALL


Quote:

Originally posted by SigmaNunki:
if you want to contradict the experts, then I'd like to see those degrees and the reasoning why.


'The experts' just KNEW Saddam had WMD. The highest paid, best trained, most technologically proficient peeps on the planet, right? Lots of degrees in that bunch....
'The experts' just KNEW margarine was better for you than butter.
'The experts' just KNEW the Earth was flat.

Wherever there is political pressure for a desired 'expert opinion', I can be sure it's full of shit.

Peeps doing pure science, devoid of politics, yeah, I'll take those folks word on it. My mechanic too. There's lots of good experts out there.
But more often than not, they're just well-spoken mouthpieces saying what's been 'approved' by their idiot bosses.

Face it man, our whole society is BUILT on deceit and ass-kissing.

Bad mood Chrisisall

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Tuesday, May 27, 2008 11:52 AM

FLETCH2


The experts KNEW how to avoid double posting....

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Tuesday, May 27, 2008 12:12 PM

CITIZEN


Quote:

Originally posted by chrisisall:
'The experts' just KNEW Saddam had WMD. The highest paid, best trained, most technologically proficient peeps on the planet, right? Lots of degrees in that bunch....
'The experts' just KNEW margarine was better for you than butter.
'The experts' just KNEW the Earth was flat.

Although there's a certain level of appeal to authority in what Sigma posted, to be fair I don't think the 'experts' ever said any of the above.



More insane ramblings by the people who brought you beeeer milkshakes!
No one can see their reflection in running water. It is only in still water that we can see.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Tuesday, May 27, 2008 12:33 PM

RUE

I have a vote and I'm not afraid to use it!


Yes - landfills could be a resource. Just that you do have to rework the stuff you find - re-smelt the iron for example. That old rusty engine block isn't going to do you any good if you really need a pump-head.

But as I've been thinking about it - unless one has machining tools the best you'll get from the local blacksmith are crude iron objects. Plow tips, pans, knives, maybe even a musket - but not a small engine which relies on good machining and close tolerances.

***************************************************************
"Global warming - it's not just a fact, it's a choice."

NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Tuesday, May 27, 2008 1:13 PM

RUE

I have a vote and I'm not afraid to use it!


Hey Chris,isall

Sorry you're in a bad mood. Sometimes as you get off painkillers that can happen. When I stopped taking hydrocodone I was grumpy(ier than usual) for a week plus. Or if you're coming down with the flu the cytokines can get you that way too.

I hope you are back to your usual self soon.


***************************************************************
"Global warming - it's not just a fact, it's a choice."

NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Tuesday, May 27, 2008 1:17 PM

CHRISISALL


Quote:

Originally posted by rue:


I hope you are back to your usual self soon.



Thanks Rue. I just rented "Rambo"; I'll have the grumpy worked out of my system soon.






AGHHHHHHHHHHHisall

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Tuesday, May 27, 2008 1:18 PM

CHRISISALL


Quote:

Originally posted by Fletch2:
The experts KNEW how to avoid double posting....

You so funny.



isall

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Tuesday, May 27, 2008 1:44 PM

FLETCH2


Well effective steam engines only happened because John Wilkinson had developed a machine for precisely cutting cannon bores. Without a precise bore you wouldn't be able to have cylinders that could hold a high pressure without leaking. Without some mechanism like a Bessemer converter you could not produce steel in enough quantity to make industrial mass production possible.

Technology is built up in steps, sometimes you need to make the machine that makes the machine that you actually need. Often this process is repeated several times. (Think how hard it is to make screws without a screw lathe and how hard it is to make most anything without screws....)

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Tuesday, May 27, 2008 2:40 PM

RUE

I have a vote and I'm not afraid to use it!


Which is why I think Frem's (and Le Guin's) idea of how things could be just will never work - sadly. You really do need a larger integrated society to provide just the basics.

And besides, I like my running water and such-like.



***************************************************************
"Global warming - it's not just a fact, it's a choice."

NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Tuesday, May 27, 2008 3:03 PM

SIGNYM

I believe in solving problems, not sharing them.


And there is the conundrum posed by Jared Diamond in Collapse: How Societies Choose to Succeed or Fail. The issue is this: Humans, being as short-sighted as we are, tend to breed or otherwise use up our resources to the very brink of disaster. We increasingly depend on clever technology to allow us to consume beyond the local carrying capacity. But if several things fail- for example if drought comes and trade routes are disrupted and the economy has to fall back on it's local ecology- all of the "easy" resources have already been used up. There is no EASY way to step backwards to a less intensive, less destructive way of life. The path forward cannot be traced backwards.

---------------------------------
Let's party like it's 1929.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Tuesday, May 27, 2008 3:09 PM

FREMDFIRMA


What I fail to see is how dismantling useless and counterproductive Govt agencies that suck up money and resources like there's no end, limit our rights and freedoms, and can't seem to manage at any time to actually do the intended job - would kill our tech base ?

WTF does the one have to do with the other ?

I mean, are you SO sure we can't get along without the Office of mattress tag enforcement backup redundancy division ?

Or is it just that your "religion" gets in the way of critical thinking here ?

We CAN do without a lot of the useless and counterproductive structures of Govt - hell, you could go through the list of porkbarrel agencies with a chainsaw and make NO essential difference but to increase our freedoms, resources and prosperity just by cutting loose the deadweight.

But of course you have to strawman it, because without the State to nitpick every single aspect of our lives, we wouldn't know what to do with ourselves, right ?

-Frem

It cannot be said enough, those who do not learn from history, are doomed to endlessly repeat it

NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Tuesday, May 27, 2008 4:05 PM

KWICKO

"We'll know our disinformation program is complete when everything the American public believes is false." -- William Casey, Reagan's presidential campaign manager & CIA Director (from first staff meeting in 1981)


Frem: I'm waiting to be told how to respond to that... ;)




Mike

"I supported Bush in 2000 and 2004 and intellegence[sic] had very little to do with that decision." - Hero, Real World Event Discussions

I can't help the sinking feeling that my country is now being run by people who read "1984" not as a cautionary tale, but rather as an instruction manual. - Michael Mock

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Tuesday, May 27, 2008 11:47 PM

CITIZEN


Quote:

Originally posted by Fremdfirma:
What I fail to see is how dismantling useless and counterproductive Govt agencies that suck up money and resources like there's no end, limit our rights and freedoms, and can't seem to manage at any time to actually do the intended job - would kill our tech base ?

It seemed earlier you suggested that whole reams of society, including technological base, could be removed if we didn't want them, without causing 'unintended' consequences, which simply isn't true.

In fact:
Quote:

Example: If we choose to dismantle structure A, then we will lose Technology B and the ability to produce product C.

Do we have perhaps an alternate tech or product we can live with ?
If not, are we all ok with losing B & C ?

If-Yes-Next Structure...

I think you're pretty clear here about technology being on the potential chopping block, so I really don't think you can accuse people of strawmanning your argument in that regard.

In any event I think the major problem of the Federal US Government isn't that it's too big, per se, but that it's size isn't derived through public concern. I believe the public employment of the Federal Government is about 1-3 million people, but that if you take into account private companies doing government work, it rises to 10-13 million. You've got more for profit private concerns, free of the sort of public government oversight afforded government agencies, doing government work by several orders of magnitude.

Blackwater is Alric the Visigoth to your Imperial Rome, and we should all know how that worked out.



More insane ramblings by the people who brought you beeeer milkshakes!
No one can see their reflection in running water. It is only in still water that we can see.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Tuesday, May 27, 2008 11:50 PM

RUE

I have a vote and I'm not afraid to use it!


I think the idea is you can't get very far without a common currency. And investment, can't forget that either.

And what Citizen said.


But seriously Frem, you have already posited a local, barter, isolated economy with only backyard technology. I'm just saying the technology cut goes further than you envision.

Let's go back to your original post from a long time ago. While you may know how to forge iron in your backyard - can you do everything with just the stuff in a 10 mile radius - indefinitely ? Or will it take distant resources and compounded resources ? And if so, HOW do you expect those things will be there ?

You've figured out how to forge iron in your own backyard - now figure out how you can personally build a small engine at your forge, with just resources located within 10 miles. And before you cry strawman remember this local, isolated, barter society is one YOU posited.

***************************************************************
Ya' can't have an iron age technology in a neolithic society.

NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Wednesday, May 28, 2008 5:44 AM

SIGNYM

I believe in solving problems, not sharing them.


Like Cit, Mike and Rue said. Only they said it better than me.

---------------------------------
Let's party like it's 1929.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Wednesday, May 28, 2008 6:20 AM

FREMDFIRMA


Quote:

It seemed earlier you suggested that whole reams of society, including technological base, could be removed if we didn't want them, without causing 'unintended' consequences, which simply isn't true.

If someone said that, it sure hell wasn't me, as usual - what's it gonna take for y'all to not throw other peoples arguments at me as if I made them ?

My primary beef for structure removal is stuff that's deadweight, sucks up resources and doesn't benefit us, which is why Gov goes on the chopping block first, obviously - and I happen to be the quickest to point out that if you remove the support infrastructure for certain things, you lose the ability to produce them, with potentially other consequences of the cascade failure variety.

That's the primary reason for incremental scaling down, because of the chance of something biting you on the ass that you did not consider, it improves your chances of coming up with an alternate or replacing the bit you just scaled down without so much hassle, yes ?
Quote:

I think you're pretty clear here about technology being on the potential chopping block

Well I don't see how it's NOT bloody obvious that should you scale down the industrial base REQUIRED to produce something, that you won't be able to produce it - time and time again I have said this, pointed it out over and over again, that in a reduced industrial base you WILL take a technological hit, and time and time again have been told I either didn't say it, or said something else.

Do you have any IDEA how annoying this cycle is getting ?

I don't think we need to scale down the industrial base THAT much, but I used simple low tech examples to prevent the argument from getting deliberately sidetracked by folk who wanted to fight instead of discuss - which it was anyway and continues to be by folk who think shitcanning redundant Government offices will instantly reduce us to barbarism once the gates of change are pried open.

As far as common currency goes, even our founding fathers made that one a no-brainer, the whole damn world uses rounds of precious metal even now and they make as fine a currency as any, since they cannot be debased or devalued without detection, nor are they subject to the ills that paper fiat money is.
Quote:

And before you cry strawman remember this local, isolated, barter society is one YOU posited.

In direct response to Geezers theoretical about dropping a bunch of Anarchists onto unclaimed, undeveloped land with NOTHING.

In fact, in that post I pointed out just what a fekkin disaster that would come to, only you seem to have quite deliberately not stated THAT part.

In fact, to be EXACT, I pointed out that most folk do not even know what a swage or a hardy is, much less what they are used for, suggesting that starting from such a primitive tech base without the proper skills, you'd play merry hell even making nails, for crying out loud.

But as usual you've chosen to distort, decieve and sidetrack instead of addressing the topic at hand - you know, the one your ideological fanaticism and blindness led to you miss ?

We were discussing flaws in our educational system, something that was actually being discussed usefully by at least Siggy and Myself before your ire at having your sacred cow of all knowing, all beneficial, omniscenent and all present Goverment got a little flogged and religious zealotry intervened.

If you wanna go beat the dead horse of arguments I didn't even make, go do it somewhere else, instead of wrecking useful discussions about another topic entire.

If you wanna discuss flaws in our educational system and thoughts on how best to correct them, then by all means do so.

Sig - your input on the idea of standard testing in a finals form as a requirement for grade advancement ?

I thought that was a pretty effective concept for resolving much of the issues with such things, myself.

-Frem

It cannot be said enough, those who do not learn from history, are doomed to endlessly repeat it

NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Wednesday, May 28, 2008 7:05 AM

CITIZEN


Quote:

Originally posted by Fremdfirma:
If someone said that, it sure hell wasn't me, as usual - what's it gonna take for y'all to not throw other peoples arguments at me as if I made them

Frem, I quoted you.
Quote:

Do you have any IDEA how annoying this cycle is getting ?
Considering this is what you're actually doing to me, rather than vice verse, yeah I've got some idea. You were saying you hadn't brought technology into it, that you were talking about government, I quoted you and said that's why people are talking about technology. You then come back and tell me I'm throwing other peoples arguments at you, when I directly quoted you, with your words from your post. It's like talking to Finn.
Quote:

Well I don't see how it's NOT bloody obvious that should you scale down the industrial base REQUIRED to produce something, that you won't be able to produce it - time and time again I have said this, pointed it out over and over again, that in a reduced industrial base you WILL take a technological hit, and time and time again have been told I either didn't say it, or said something else.

You're premise maybe that you remove structure A and you lose technology B and thus product C, you don't need to argue that's what you're saying, we know that's what you're saying. Perhaps before getting on your high horse and martyring yourself you should find out what other people are saying yes? Because what I'm saying is that it's not as simple as 'remove structure x, lose small defined subset of technology y'.

Modern technology is not a group of unrelated strands, you can't take one strand away and expect it all the other strands to remain unaffected. All those strands are interconnected, take one away and it'll pull the rest with it.

What that has specifically to do with government I don't know, but it seems to me you brought it up.



More insane ramblings by the people who brought you beeeer milkshakes!
No one can see their reflection in running water. It is only in still water that we can see.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Wednesday, May 28, 2008 12:06 PM

RUE

I have a vote and I'm not afraid to use it!


S'wenyways - Frem, let's just take one example.

You've been very clear all along you want to get rid of money. Money isn't a 'technology' like fire or the bowl, but it is a way people organize and cooperate over long distances and over time, and accumulate resources in a (fairly) non-volatile way. (ie It doesn't spoil, evaporate or get consumed like food, water or fire.)

What I was doing was pointing out that even something as simple as a small engine requires sustained long-distance inputs - accumulated resources from different areas like iron, coal and other metals; and accumulated resources over time like machine tools and knowledge.

This is something I've been puzzling over for a while.

I really, really like Le Guin's version of society, but even when I first read it decades ago it I wondered - how do they keep the train running ? And how do they fix it when a part breaks ? Without the ores, without the foundry, without the machine tools, without the metallurgy, without the experience and knowledge, without the ability to bring it all together in a coordinated way, I've recently come to the conclusion the answer is - they don't.

If you are looking for a society without currency or larger organization you will get a small, isolated and impoverished group completely limited to local resources - like stone, leather or wood. Not the utopia you think you'll get.

***************************************************************
"Global warming - it's not just a fact, it's a choice."

NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Wednesday, May 28, 2008 2:44 PM

FLETCH2


Frem's examples include money, they have commodity based currency (gold standard in fact) to allow for abstracted trading. So in theory community A can sell their production for hard currency that can be sent to community B to buy B's materials. Because there is currency the system doesnt really entirely on A having some product that B is willing to barter for.

The bigger problem is going to be investment. Let's imagine for a moment that community A finds exploitable resources they could mine but they need a pump to reach it. If the pump costs more than they have unless they can find someone outside the community willing to invest they won't be able to afford to get the pump. Capitalism started in part because the agricultural revolution produced a class of people with excess capital, it was those people that ultimately financed the industrial revolution. If nobody has excess capital to invest it would be hard to see where the money would come from to allow extraction of resources where the setup costs exceed the communities own capital resources.


NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Wednesday, May 28, 2008 6:37 PM

KWICKO

"We'll know our disinformation program is complete when everything the American public believes is false." -- William Casey, Reagan's presidential campaign manager & CIA Director (from first staff meeting in 1981)


Frem:

I think I feel SOME of what you're talking about. Doing away with useless government agencies without doing away with the actual WORK that gets done - simply getting the work done through OTHER government agencies that are more appropriate or more geared toward that work in the first place.

I'm dealing with a bit of an example of a useless government agency right now, and wouldn't you just know it, it involves guns. This is long, even by my standards, so those who aren't interested might want to go get coffee about now...

Some years ago, I was given a Russian Saiga 7.62x39mm rifle. It's a rifle that was based on the venerable AK-47 design, but modified with a "Monte Carlo" stock so that it looks like your standard hunting rifle. It came with a 10-round magazine, which was the maximum allowed under the Assault Weapons Ban of '94. It was manufactured by one of the AK makers, Izhmash Automat of Russia, who also produced the Dragunov sniper rifle for the Russian military.

Now, of course, the AWB has expired, so I can now legally buy and use the high-capacity 30-round magazines for the gun. And I want to. Don't get me wrong; I don't have any real NEED for a high-cap mag - I just like the idea of being able to buy and use them without hassle. And they're American-made, which should help our local businesses, right? Plus, when some other form of ban comes around, high-cap mags are nearly worth their weight in gold.

Here's where it gets fun. Because of Section 922r, I can't legally put that mag in my rifle, because then it would no longer be a "sporting" rifle, and would have too many foreign-made parts to be considered an "American-made" rifle. I can OWN the magazine, but if I put it into the rifle it's made for, it becomes an "assembly", and as such an illegal one. So the government doesn't have a problem with me owning an "assault weapon", per se, they just want to make sure that my assault weapon of choice is made right here in the good old US-of-fuckin'-A.

How ridiculous does all this stuff get? Well, I just want the 30-round mag. I like going to the gun range and running lots of ammo through the thing, tearing up paper targets, blowing off steam, having fun with friends, appreciating well-made machinery (I'm lousy about cars that way, too). Having 30-round mags would mean I would spend less time at the range reloading mags (at $15 an hour for range time), and more time at the range actually shooting. I could do all my loading at home, where I'm not paying $15 an hour for the privilege.

So, with the 30-round mag, my rifle would look like merely a rifle with a longer magazine. But the government says that would be a federal firearms violation. It would be legal to do, IF I were to replace a certain number of OTHER parts with US-made replacements. As it stands, the gun has 14 "foreign" parts, which is acceptable if it is a "sporting" rifle. However, if you put a higher-capacity magazine in it, it is now NOT a "sporting" rifle, but an assault rifle, and as such must have no more than TEN foreign parts. The hi-cap mag is American-made, so that puts me at 13 foreign parts - three too many. So I'm left either not going with the hi-cap mags, OR I'm forced to replace or modify and add things like stocks, handguards, muzzle brakes, flash suppressors, gas tubes, gas pistons, fire-control groups, and the like with American-made parts, so that I can get the total down to 10 or fewer foreign parts. Nine or less is recommended, just in case the ATF or a local prosecutor wants to try to make a test case out of you.

The result? If you want a higher-capacity magazine, you're forced to build something that looks and acts like a full-on assault weapon, complete with skeleton stocks, pistol grips, multi-rail tactical guards with points for mounting lasers, flashlights, night-vision scopes, and tactical red-dot scopes and the like, and big, beefy muzzle brakes and all sorts of other mean, nasty-looking stuff. All so that I can make sure to have no "sporting" intentions whatsoever, and to make it even more likely that anyone seeing me with such a monstrosity would be SURE I was going well and truly postal...

OR... you can simply apply for an exemption and send it along with your $200 bribe - er, I mean *FEE* - so that the BATF will either ignore you or kick your door in.

Now, doesn't this all seem a bit useless? I mean, if it was my mission to have an assault rifle, wouldn't it just be scads easier to buy a pre-ban AK-47 off the rack at the local gun store? Or a fully-automatic AK on the black market? If I'm going to be a federal criminal either way, I mean...

I can't quite figure out if all this bureaucracy is aimed at (a) making it more hassle than it's worth to own a gun, (b) surreptitiously making it illegal to modify any gun, thereby making criminals out of well-intentioned and under-informed gun enthusiasts, (c) "stimulating" the US economy by restricting repairs and replacement parts to American-made only in order to expand our home-grown AK manufacturing base, (d) just trying to collect bribes - er, I mean *revenue* - on the part of the ATF, or (e) all of the above. My suspicion is that the correct answer is (e).

My real gripe is that if they really wanted to ban assault weapons, I'd have had no real problem with that, and I would have complied and gone along with it. But they didn't do that - nothing close to it. They made it LOOK like they were doing something, while in reality, they were doing less than nothing, and making it harder on people who are trying to obey the law!

By the way, the Saiga has turned out to be quite a pleasant surprise. I initially thought of it as a cheap knock-off, but it's proven to be every bit as rugged and reliable as its forebears (over 1000 rounds through it, and exactly one jam and no misfires). I clean it every time I get home from the range, but that's just out of habit and the way I was raised. I'm fairly sure it doesn't really care if it gets put away dirty...a far cry from my dad's AR-15!




Mike

"I supported Bush in 2000 and 2004 and intellegence[sic] had very little to do with that decision." - Hero, Real World Event Discussions

I can't help the sinking feeling that my country is now being run by people who read "1984" not as a cautionary tale, but rather as an instruction manual. - Michael Mock

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Wednesday, May 28, 2008 6:54 PM

FLETCH2


I wonder if this isn't to encourage people to buy more expensive American made guns and discourage folks from just importing cheap AK's? The way it's set up doesn't actually discourage folks from having the US equivalent of that class of weapon so it doesnt sound like back door gun control, it sounds like back door protectionism.

Wonder who bribed who to get that legislation passed?


NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Wednesday, May 28, 2008 8:52 PM

FREMDFIRMA


Quote:

Frem, I quoted you.

No, you did not - you attributed to me a statement I never made and in fact have argued AGAINST every single time it's been brought up.
Quote:

It seemed earlier you suggested that whole reams of society, including technological base, could be removed if we didn't want them, without causing 'unintended' consequences, which simply isn't true.

I did not say this.

In fact I never said or even suggested this, ever, at any point in any discussion here, whatsoever, period - end of line.

And yet in thread after thread, after having that pointed out repeatedly, you continue to attribute to me a position that not only do I not hold, have never held, but in fact do not agree with.

And in thread after thread, I have pointed that out, again and again, and I am sick of it to the point of fury, especially when it wrecks otherwise useful discussions, as it apparently has here - and I am completely done being polite or reasonable about it.

Just to prove a point...
Quote:

You're premise maybe that you remove structure A and you lose technology B and thus product C, you don't need to argue that's what you're saying, we know that's what you're saying. Perhaps before getting on your high horse and martyring yourself you should find out what other people are saying yes?

I DO need to argue it, because somehow every fucking time I SAY that, some shithead comes around and tries to claim I said we could remove structure A without consequence, which is what is pissing me off, I am sick and tired of playing this fucking game with you people, when I say something five and six times only to be told I didn't say it, said something else, or "but what you really MEANT was..."

I took MORE than enough of that shit in the FLDS thread, and far too much over this stupidass argument I never made in the first place - do I have to preface every fucking post I ever make with it because you seem to have less longterm memory than a common mayfly ?

Or should I just quote whole damn posts at you, in triplicate ?

Let me repeat it one more time so that you jackasses fucking for once might acknowledge it for more than sixty seconds.

I did NOT at any time suggest reduction to an iron age society, I simply used a low tech example to simplify a point about how if the cost of seizing a resource by force will be higher than negotiation and trade for it, then even an amoral goon is going to go with negotiation and trade as a cheaper option.

And I used a low tech example simply for the fact of simplifying the goddamn argument so that it would not be nitpicked half to death by folks who wanted to fight and flame instead of usefully discussing the topic.


But it sure didn't stop the shitheads that wanted to do just that, and trying to be reasonable with you fuckwads hasn't either, and if you want to nitpick over a mere simplification of an ENTIRELY DIFFERENT ARGUMENT that happened MONTHS AGO, just to be assholes because you have nothing of actual USE to contribute to the topic at hand....

It might be a better idea if you just shut the fuck up and let folks who ARE willing to discuss the topic do so, for once.

Which is, again, Problems within the educational system and potentive concepts for solution - and if you ain't discussing THAT, from this point, you'll be discussing with yourself, although I think for some of you that's rather a common practice.


-F

NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Thursday, May 29, 2008 1:20 AM

CITIZEN


Quote:

Originally posted by Fremdfirma:
No, you did not - you attributed to me a statement I never made and in fact have argued AGAINST every single time it's been brought up.

Yes I did, and your stubborn insistence that the statement I quoted wasn't made by you just makes you look like either a pathelogical liar, a collosal moron, or both. The statement I quoted, the one I replied to, and the one you keep insisting isn't yours:
Quote:

Originally posted by Fremdfirma:
On the other note, about smaller paradigms, that's a little more complex than your making it, but not so much - the idea of the style I propose is doing away with structures that nearly everybody wants gone with the full understanding of how that would limit your technology and production base, what I have described before as incremental minimalisim.

Example: If we choose to dismantle structure A, then we will lose Technology B and the ability to produce product C.

Do we have perhaps an alternate tech or product we can live with ?
If not, are we all ok with losing B & C ?

If-Yes-Next Structure...

And so on and so forth, to a point where folks are comfortable with, which is far more likely to be somewhere in between here and a horse and buggy culture, it was just a convenient example of the degree it could be taken by folk hell bent on it - but not necessarily where it WOULD go.

Hope that clarifies things a bit.

-Frem

The name at the top of that post is Fremdfirma, the sign off at the bottom is -Frem, your fucking sign off. Any further doubts this is the direct link to your fucking post:
http://fireflyfans.net/thread.asp?b=18&t=33772#613066
I am not attributing to you a statement you never made, it is a statement you made, and it's not my fault if you're not man enough to stand by your fucking statements, you fucking liar.
Quote:

I did not say this.

In fact I never said or even suggested this, ever, at any point in any discussion here, whatsoever, period - end of line.

I just quoted you again, liar.
Quote:

And yet in thread after thread, after having that pointed out repeatedly, you continue to attribute to me a position that not only do I not hold, have never held, but in fact do not agree with.
Thread after thread? Thread after fucking thread you lying piece of shit? Name one time, just once where I've attributed to you a position you don't hold. You can't because it's made up, as made up as the accusation was here.
Quote:

And in thread after thread, I have pointed that out, again and again, and I am sick of it to the point of fury, especially when it wrecks otherwise useful discussions, as it apparently has here - and I am completely done being polite or reasonable about it.
I'm done being polite and reasonable in the face of your outright pathelogical lies and complete unreason, your not being even a bit reasonable you dellusional shit. I fucking quoted you, the post the quote came from had YOUR FUCKING NAME ON IT SHIT HEAD. It's your fucking quote, and you have the cheek to turn around and call me a liar? Fuck you . Jesus christ even at his worst AURaptor doesn't deny he's said something when the direct quote is staring him in the face.
Quote:

I DO need to argue it, because somehow every fucking time I SAY that, some shithead comes around and tries to claim I said we could remove structure A without consequence, which is what is pissing me off, I am sick and tired of playing this fucking game with you people, when I say something five and six times only to be told I didn't say it, said something else, or "but what you really MEANT was..."
No you don't need to argue that's what you're saying you thick fuck, because your premise that I outlined and you've just confirmed is what we're arguing against. Obviously you're not intelligent enough to get this rather simple point.
Quote:

I took MORE than enough of that shit in the FLDS thread, and far too much over this stupidass argument I never made in the first place - do I have to preface every fucking post I ever make with it because you seem to have less longterm memory than a common mayfly ?
You're the one denying you said things you flat out stated you lying hypocritical retard.
Quote:

Or should I just quote whole damn posts at you, in triplicate ?
No, but obviuosly I fucking have to:
Quote:

FREMDFIRMA
Anarchist Propaganda Minister
Tuesday, May 27, 2008 - 12:06

Ok, now...

It's not that I don't feel the Gov should be teaching, but they really should separate themselves a bit more substantially from the process, public education as it is currently done is pretty terrible, and I have a particular beef with Civics, Social Studies and History classes being so propaganda-laden as to be ineffective at imparting actual knowledge of events.

As for any idea of ME teaching folk, heh, other than History, Small Engine Repair and perhaps Anarchist Philosophy, I am not especially qualified to teach most subjects, but I can most certainly assist someone in improving skills they do know - having the rare ability to "light the fire" and make folk WANT to learn does not in this case translate into knowing how to teach beyond a rare few subjects.

You might be surprised that most of my beefs actually echo yours, in fact.

I too think the curriculum and style sucks, we really need to go more hands-on in many cases and show the real world benefits of being able to USE that knowledge - the home economics class I took way back when was probably one of the best educational setups I've seen, as they had an artificial "store" and checkout line where one could put into practice not only what they had learned in that class but also demonstrate how good math skills could benefit you directly.

There's much to be said for not reinventing the wheel either, but we really should go back to phonics and meaning based reading of the Lippincott model rather than the rote memorisation and see-n-say Caldwell model.

I don't know if those are actually the proper names, but due to the changeover, I got one, and my sister got the other, and it really shows in our reading and language comprehension and abilities, even this many years later.

Other than that, our basic curriculum isn't THAT bad until about grade four-five.

The artificial social structure is pretty awful, and the same authoritarian cycle of squeeze-resistance-squeeze more which has failed in every other damn thing it's applied to simply isn't going to work, these kids have to understand the REASONS for rules and those rules should make SENSE in a real world sort of way - a little communication in that respect would go much, much further than simply putting the boot down and giving orders, a school is not a factory production line, and unless you want to run the place like a kennel or prison, and I have seen that too many times in public schools to deny it happens very often - you MUST have a bridge of communication with your students, and it MUST go both ways.

I don't have anything against standardised testing per-se, it's just that when you're doing little else but prepping for and taking them, you're not actually TEACHING, because you are artificially limiting the subject - and to make schools financially dependant on these things just feeds a bad cycle.

What we oughta do, is have a standard set of more or less "finals" for each grade and leave it at that, make them a requirement of advancement to the next grade, and add a few elements of ceremony and tradition to that so that the child sees their own accomplishment actually acknowledged and respected, which will encourage them and offer emotional support in an environment strangely devoid of it in these days.

As for the incident in question - the school completely failed to take advantage of a truly great educational opportunity here, Fletch mentions unintended consequences, and what better way to teach about them than in an actual environment where they can be effectively shown and demonstrated in a semi-controlled environment ?

As well, there's the hypocrisy issue of teaching the value of nonviolent social protest on the one hand, and then penalizing it severely the instant that students choose to utilize that method, don't think for a moment that particular little "lesson" hasn't made an impact here, which is going to have it's own set of unintended consequences using the force-resistance-more force model.

I think they had a great teaching opportunity here and not only blew it, but did so in such a way that it's going to have a long lasting negative impact on the relationship between the students and educators here, is what I mostly meant.

I will not delve too deep here into the artificial social structure, since it's a seperate issue which has been discussed at length before and isn't fully applicable to this particular situation, but that's also a factor in the problems of our educational system so I feel it should be briefly mentioned regardless.

The two things we most need to improve matters seem to be more flexibility in the curriculum and more communication between students, educators, and administrators.

----

On the other note, about smaller paradigms, that's a little more complex than your making it, but not so much - the idea of the style I propose is doing away with structures that nearly everybody wants gone with the full understanding of how that would limit your technology and production base, what I have described before as incremental minimalisim.

Example: If we choose to dismantle structure A, then we will lose Technology B and the ability to produce product C.

Do we have perhaps an alternate tech or product we can live with ?
If not, are we all ok with losing B & C ?

If-Yes-Next Structure...

And so on and so forth, to a point where folks are comfortable with, which is far more likely to be somewhere in between here and a horse and buggy culture, it was just a convenient example of the degree it could be taken by folk hell bent on it - but not necessarily where it WOULD go.

Hope that clarifies things a bit.

-Frem

It cannot be said enough, those who do not learn from history, are doomed to endlessly repeat it/B]


Quote:

Let me repeat it one more time so that you jackasses fucking for once might acknowledge it for more than sixty seconds.
Yeah, lets repeat it one more time so the stupid lying fucking moron can get another chance of getting it:
Quote:

Originally posted by Fremdfirma:
On the other note, about smaller paradigms, that's a little more complex than your making it, but not so much - the idea of the style I propose is doing away with structures that nearly everybody wants gone with the full understanding of how that would limit your technology and production base, what I have described before as incremental minimalisim.

Example: If we choose to dismantle structure A, then we will lose Technology B and the ability to produce product C.

Do we have perhaps an alternate tech or product we can live with ?
If not, are we all ok with losing B & C ?

If-Yes-Next Structure...

And so on and so forth, to a point where folks are comfortable with, which is far more likely to be somewhere in between here and a horse and buggy culture, it was just a convenient example of the degree it could be taken by folk hell bent on it - but not necessarily where it WOULD go.

Hope that clarifies things a bit.

-Frem


http://fireflyfans.net/thread.asp?b=18&t=33772#613066
Quote:

But it sure didn't stop the shitheads that wanted to do just that, and trying to be reasonable with you fuckwads hasn't either, and if you want to nitpick over a mere simplification of an ENTIRELY DIFFERENT ARGUMENT that happened MONTHS AGO, just to be assholes because you have nothing of actual USE to contribute to the topic at hand....

It might be a better idea if you just shut the fuck up and let folks who ARE willing to discuss the topic do so, for once.

No, what would be a better idea is that instead of being a collosal troll, instead of being the argumentative moron you accuse everyone else of, instead of lying about what you said, what would be better is if you acted like a half decent human being for once in your fucking life. If your quote was poorly stated BY YOU, a decent human being wouldn't be calling everyone else liars, wouldn't be saying that a direct quote of words THEY FUCKING TYPED, were typed by someone else, a decent human being would appologise for stating their position poorly, and try to state it better. A lying hypocritical brainless argumentative peice of shit troll would flat out lie, tell people the direct quote wasn't written by them, and insult those reading their fucking words.

Pop quiz, frem, what did you do, exactly?
Quote:

Which is, again, Problems within the educational system and potentive concepts for solution - and if you ain't discussing THAT, from this point, you'll be discussing with yourself, although I think for some of you that's rather a common practice.
Yeah, someone here seems to be having problems along those lines.

If you were trying to prove you're nothing but a hypocritical lying retard cunt, bravo, mission accomplished.



More insane ramblings by the people who brought you beeeer milkshakes!
No one can see their reflection in running water. It is only in still water that we can see.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Thursday, May 29, 2008 5:07 AM

SERGEANTX


So, a couple of nights ago, I made the mistake of honestly expressing my opinion of the polical status quo around my girlfriend. She immediately took a defensive posture and became angry.

I explained that I wasn't attacking her and that there was no reason to take it personally. Her response was painfully candid and, I think, really gets to the core of the bitter resentment that such criticism often provokes. She said that I was attacking her, that I was, in effect, telling her that her whole life was a lie, that she's been a dupe and a fool.

Pointing out that the emperor wears no clothes isn't always a welcome revelation.

Frem, you ever read Ibsen's "An Enemy of the People"?

SergeantX

"Dream a little dream or you can live a little dream. I'd rather live it, cause dreamers always chase but never get it." Aesop Rock

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Thursday, May 29, 2008 5:24 AM

CITIZEN


Excuse me sarg, but Frem did attack me. He openly used personal insults, and he called me a liar because I quoted him and he didn't want his quote on record.

The only person here lying or making up attacks that don't exist here is Frem, evidently he takes it as an attack if people don't buy into his Quasi-Anarchist-Amish crap on face value. Frem's the one who doesn't like being questioned, evidenced by the fact he blew his top, accusing me of prescribing other peoples word to him. Point one I did no such thing, they were his words from his fucking post, point two the only person who has ascribed other peoples word to anyone is Frem to me. For all his talk about what I did to him in the FLDS thread, I don't even recall replying to a single post of his there. If that lying little shit wants to talk to and about me the way he has he's got no fucking right to complain when he gets the same treatment back.

If you're trying to pass off my valid objection to the way Frem has lied about me, while being a hypocritical insulting prock in the process, as me being unable to accept 'criticism of the status quo', then you can go fuck yourself as well, frankly.



More insane ramblings by the people who brought you beeeer milkshakes!
No one can see their reflection in running water. It is only in still water that we can see.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Thursday, May 29, 2008 6:37 AM

FLETCH2


Sarge, I suspect this is a gender related issue. Men tend to get obsessively focused on something and fail to notice the subtle clues that women drop that say "I'm not really interested in this, let's change the subject."

I suspect this is less to do with her rejection of the "truth" and more to do with "OMG he's banging on about this AGAIN?"


NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Thursday, May 29, 2008 7:18 AM

SIGNYM

I believe in solving problems, not sharing them.


And then again there's Sarge's unwarranted arrogance. He has all the subtlety of a newly converted Xtian fundamentalist because, by god, he has THE TRUTH on his side.

Coming at people that way guarantees rejection.

---------------------------------
Let's party like it's 1929.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Thursday, May 29, 2008 7:30 AM

SERGEANTX


ayup...

SergeantX

"Dream a little dream or you can live a little dream. I'd rather live it, cause dreamers always chase but never get it." Aesop Rock

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Thursday, May 29, 2008 8:06 AM

CHRISISALL


Are we goin' back to the Iron Age? I don't wanna go back to the Iron Age!

Steel Age Chrisisall

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Thursday, May 29, 2008 8:18 AM

FOSTER


Just popped over to the department of Education site and I have to say that what I found was interesting.

There mission statement for any who have not visited the site before is :

Quote:

ED's mission is to promote student achievement and preparation for global competitiveness by fostering educational excellence and ensuring equal access. ED's 4,200 employees and $68.6 billion budget are dedicated to:
• Establishing policies on federal financial aid for education, and distributing as well as monitoring those funds.
• Collecting data on America's schools and disseminating research.
• Focusing national attention on key educational issues.
• Prohibiting discrimination and ensuring equal access to education.



Nothing about actually educating just fostering educational excellence. Wonder how their four points do that?

hmmm

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

YOUR OPTIONS

NEW POSTS TODAY

USERPOST DATE

OTHER TOPICS

DISCUSSIONS
Russia Invades Ukraine. Again
Thu, March 28, 2024 05:27 - 6154 posts
In the garden, and RAIN!!! (2)
Thu, March 28, 2024 02:07 - 3408 posts
Russian losses in Ukraine
Wed, March 27, 2024 23:21 - 987 posts
Elections; 2024
Wed, March 27, 2024 22:19 - 2069 posts
human actions, global climate change, global human solutions
Wed, March 27, 2024 15:03 - 824 posts
NBC News: Behind the scenes, Biden has grown angry and anxious about re-election effort
Wed, March 27, 2024 14:58 - 2 posts
BUILD BACK BETTER!
Wed, March 27, 2024 14:45 - 5 posts
RFK Jr. Destroys His Candidacy With VP Pick?
Wed, March 27, 2024 11:59 - 16 posts
Russia says 60 dead, 145 injured in concert hall raid; Islamic State group claims responsibility
Wed, March 27, 2024 10:57 - 49 posts
Ha. Haha! HAHA! HAHAHAHAHAHAHAAHAHAHAAHAHA!!!!!!
Tue, March 26, 2024 21:26 - 1 posts
You can't take the sky from me, a tribute to Firefly
Tue, March 26, 2024 16:26 - 293 posts
Tucker Carlson
Tue, March 26, 2024 16:24 - 132 posts

FFF.NET SOCIAL