Why is socialism so strong in the education system?
Discussion
Is there any reason why socialism is supported so strongly by both staff and students in the education system? You would think that with 'education', that they would realise how the economy works, the need for people to work and not sponge..... but it seems many don't understand these basic concepts.
Has it always been like this? Just interested to know the origins of the left-wing ideals and how they became so strong in schools and University (seemingly in many countries, not just the UK)
Has it always been like this? Just interested to know the origins of the left-wing ideals and how they became so strong in schools and University (seemingly in many countries, not just the UK)
Tsippy said:
Has it always been like this? Just interested to know the origins of the left-wing ideals and how they became so strong in schools and University (seemingly in many countries, not just the UK)
My experience of many teachers ((I include University Lecturers in this) is that they haven't ever had a "real job". They have lived in a state existence often having gone from University straight into teaching themselves....Oddly, a few of my lecturers who did have real life experience weren't lefties......;)
Jasandjules said:
Tsippy said:
Has it always been like this? Just interested to know the origins of the left-wing ideals and how they became so strong in schools and University (seemingly in many countries, not just the UK)
My experience of many teachers ((I include University Lecturers in this) is that they haven't ever had a "real job". They have lived in a state existence often having gone from University straight into teaching themselves....Oddly, a few of my lecturers who did have real life experience weren't lefties......;)
Depends on the field. Theoretical Hard Sciences (Physics) don't exist without amazing amount of money from central governments the more directly practical ones can (most Engineering). Same thing in Social Sciences with both Econ and to a lessor degree Political Science being somewhat fiscally conservative with the psychology, anthropology, and sociology spending most of their time holding each other and crying. The first two have some outcome of policy study and the others don't. Amazingly how not being accountable in the real world means you end up studying that what doesn't exist.
Part of this is due to interest but also to self-segregation. You can call yourself a communist and be in literature but if you try that in Econ you're just going to get laughed at no one likes to be the open joke of a department.
Part of this is due to interest but also to self-segregation. You can call yourself a communist and be in literature but if you try that in Econ you're just going to get laughed at no one likes to be the open joke of a department.
It is an unfortunate fact of life that many teachers want to do what is best for their students. They are hit time and again by restrictions to this target and they, quite unnaturally, resent it.
When I was at school we were taught all about pax Britannia, the benevolent nature of our wonderful government and how mill owners were the salt of the earth. I was also taught to respect our leaders, how they knew best and that if I thought any different then I was wrong.
Not by all of them of course. There were one or two weirdoes who suggested I should make up my own mind, one of whom was my history teacher, but luckily these were few and far between. Most saw the light: for god, queen and country. I was also taught that the Irish were lazy good for nothings.
As with any youngster I rebelled and did a lot of research into the industrial revolution and the history of suffrage. I was told by one teacher that the Luddites were people who rebelled against progress. I was told by another that they were merely being selfish. By research I found that neither was right.
For years I believed that the British Empire was a terrible burden to bear but we British managed it without complaint. As time went by I got a much more balanced point of view.
What is the real tragedy is that many people believe what they are told whilst others will believe the precise opposite. If you believe what you were taught then your education has been very poor as what it should have done was to teach you to find things out for yourself.
Of all the teachers at the school all four of my kids went to I would say more were to the right than the left. The ones more likely to have left leanings were those dealing with history and politics. What do they know about it, eh?
Of course I don’t know the leanings of the majority of teachers. I haven’t met all that many. I have two friends, or actually the wives of friends, who are teachers and they are both resentful of the way they were treated under the Blair government but whether this makes them right or left is problematical.
I do, of course, hear and read about teachers on the news and in newspapers. However, this is not enough to base assumptions on about the majority.
I did not go to university but from friends who did it seemed quite clear that many, if not most, were right wing.
The word socialist is used on PH quite a lot. I would suggest that I have met few teachers whom I would regard as what I call socialist. They might be left of what I consider the centre – which is probably identical to what most people view as the centre, i.e. what I see my politics as – but they are certainly not socialist. I’m not sure I would class any Labour spell in government as socialist. Even Clem Attlee, one of the greatest post war leaders, was only a little left of centre.
I believe in a certain degree of public ownership but there’s no way I, nor any of my friends I bet, would call me socialist. Or even leftish.
I view the Blair government as right of centre. I find it difficult to believe that anyone should think otherwise. I find it impossible to give any credence to it being socialist. That’s too off the wall.
I was brought up in a very political family. I was fed a type of propaganda almost on a weekly basis. I regarded my most left uncle as a hero, which he was during the war, and before it fighting fascism. But I have absolutely no belief in his politics. So brainwashing is not really what happens.
Concern for the environment is not leftish thinking although many seem to think so on here. Further, care for the underprivileged was very much a right wing, religious movement even up until the second world war and for some time after. Yet now, somehow, it is thought of as ultra left. Yes, that revolutionary semi-military band, the Salvation Army. Can’t get more left than them.
It’s all very odd.
I seem to have followed the format of my contemporaries. When I was a kid I thought along the lines of what now would be called leftish although then was fairly middle of the road. As I grew older and particularly had a mortgage I drifted to the right.
Now, fast approaching retirement age, I see it for what it all is. Left/right, Labour/Conservative and Unionist, socialist/capitalist: it is all nonsense. But if it gives you comfort to believe in one or the other then, like religion, you enjoy it. Just don’t expect me to treat it seriously.
When I was at school we were taught all about pax Britannia, the benevolent nature of our wonderful government and how mill owners were the salt of the earth. I was also taught to respect our leaders, how they knew best and that if I thought any different then I was wrong.
Not by all of them of course. There were one or two weirdoes who suggested I should make up my own mind, one of whom was my history teacher, but luckily these were few and far between. Most saw the light: for god, queen and country. I was also taught that the Irish were lazy good for nothings.
As with any youngster I rebelled and did a lot of research into the industrial revolution and the history of suffrage. I was told by one teacher that the Luddites were people who rebelled against progress. I was told by another that they were merely being selfish. By research I found that neither was right.
For years I believed that the British Empire was a terrible burden to bear but we British managed it without complaint. As time went by I got a much more balanced point of view.
What is the real tragedy is that many people believe what they are told whilst others will believe the precise opposite. If you believe what you were taught then your education has been very poor as what it should have done was to teach you to find things out for yourself.
Of all the teachers at the school all four of my kids went to I would say more were to the right than the left. The ones more likely to have left leanings were those dealing with history and politics. What do they know about it, eh?
Of course I don’t know the leanings of the majority of teachers. I haven’t met all that many. I have two friends, or actually the wives of friends, who are teachers and they are both resentful of the way they were treated under the Blair government but whether this makes them right or left is problematical.
I do, of course, hear and read about teachers on the news and in newspapers. However, this is not enough to base assumptions on about the majority.
I did not go to university but from friends who did it seemed quite clear that many, if not most, were right wing.
The word socialist is used on PH quite a lot. I would suggest that I have met few teachers whom I would regard as what I call socialist. They might be left of what I consider the centre – which is probably identical to what most people view as the centre, i.e. what I see my politics as – but they are certainly not socialist. I’m not sure I would class any Labour spell in government as socialist. Even Clem Attlee, one of the greatest post war leaders, was only a little left of centre.
I believe in a certain degree of public ownership but there’s no way I, nor any of my friends I bet, would call me socialist. Or even leftish.
I view the Blair government as right of centre. I find it difficult to believe that anyone should think otherwise. I find it impossible to give any credence to it being socialist. That’s too off the wall.
I was brought up in a very political family. I was fed a type of propaganda almost on a weekly basis. I regarded my most left uncle as a hero, which he was during the war, and before it fighting fascism. But I have absolutely no belief in his politics. So brainwashing is not really what happens.
Concern for the environment is not leftish thinking although many seem to think so on here. Further, care for the underprivileged was very much a right wing, religious movement even up until the second world war and for some time after. Yet now, somehow, it is thought of as ultra left. Yes, that revolutionary semi-military band, the Salvation Army. Can’t get more left than them.
It’s all very odd.
I seem to have followed the format of my contemporaries. When I was a kid I thought along the lines of what now would be called leftish although then was fairly middle of the road. As I grew older and particularly had a mortgage I drifted to the right.
Now, fast approaching retirement age, I see it for what it all is. Left/right, Labour/Conservative and Unionist, socialist/capitalist: it is all nonsense. But if it gives you comfort to believe in one or the other then, like religion, you enjoy it. Just don’t expect me to treat it seriously.
Derek Smith said:
some stuff
I was once told by a (very drunk) senior left wing figure that "the left" had made a conscious effort in the 1960s to "rebalance" the education system to their long term political advantage. It was felt that that by targeting teacher training it would be possible to create a cadre of politically left sympathetic teachers who would go on to pass their views on to their pupils. This strategy, when coupled with the imposition of the "comprehensive education system" would ensure that what was seen as the "right leaning" combination of traditionally trained teachers (many ex servicemen) within the Grammar/Secondary Modern system would be eradicated within a generation. Of course, that would never happen..............
Edited by andymadmak on Saturday 4th December 21:48
Tsippy said:
Is there any reason why socialism is supported so strongly by both staff and students in the education system? You would think that with 'education', that they would realise how the economy works, the need for people to work and not sponge..... but it seems many don't understand these basic concepts.
Has it always been like this? Just interested to know the origins of the left-wing ideals and how they became so strong in schools and University (seemingly in many countries, not just the UK)
I think you will find socialists recognize the need to work. One of the differences between socialism and capitalism is that distribution of wealth is based on the contribution an individual makes to society. Since many spongers contribute nothing to society they would receive very little in a socialist based economy.Has it always been like this? Just interested to know the origins of the left-wing ideals and how they became so strong in schools and University (seemingly in many countries, not just the UK)
Because socialism breeds dependency. A dependant populous is a compliant one. Independent thought is not welcome.
Therefore it maintains the status quo of top down capitalism where the dross fund the few at the top with the brains to figure out how the real world works. The politicians pander to the dross by showering them in free stuff further encouraging socialist creep.
Basically its transfer of values and preconceptions of who people are and what they can achieve from the majority of the capitalist disconnected teachers to the masses.
As per above, there are some good teachers who know whats up, the rest wallow in the filth they came from and perpetuate the cycle.
Or did I get the wrong end of the stick!?
Therefore it maintains the status quo of top down capitalism where the dross fund the few at the top with the brains to figure out how the real world works. The politicians pander to the dross by showering them in free stuff further encouraging socialist creep.
Basically its transfer of values and preconceptions of who people are and what they can achieve from the majority of the capitalist disconnected teachers to the masses.
As per above, there are some good teachers who know whats up, the rest wallow in the filth they came from and perpetuate the cycle.
Or did I get the wrong end of the stick!?
plasticpig said:
Tsippy said:
Is there any reason why socialism is supported so strongly by both staff and students in the education system? You would think that with 'education', that they would realise how the economy works, the need for people to work and not sponge..... but it seems many don't understand these basic concepts.
Has it always been like this? Just interested to know the origins of the left-wing ideals and how they became so strong in schools and University (seemingly in many countries, not just the UK)
I think you will find socialists recognize the need to work. One of the differences between socialism and capitalism is that distribution of wealth is based on the contribution an individual makes to society. Since many spongers contribute nothing to society they would receive very little in a socialist based economy.Has it always been like this? Just interested to know the origins of the left-wing ideals and how they became so strong in schools and University (seemingly in many countries, not just the UK)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/From_each_according_t...
From each according to his ability, to each according to his need (or needs) is a slogan popularized by Karl Marx in his 1875 Critique of the Gotha Program.[1] The phrase summarizes the principles that, in a communist society, every person should contribute to society to the best of his or her ability and consume from society in proportion to his or her needs. In the Marxist view, such an arrangement will be made possible by the abundance of goods and services that a developed communist society will produce; the idea is that there will be enough to satisfy everyone's needs.
Surely the definition of socialism "To each according to his contribution" ends up as capitalist "if" those at the top are self made. (ie) Started with nothing and built up a large capital base. How do socialists square that circle?
I would suggest as hinted above that what we are really talking about is communism in the education system. I see virtually no difference between capitalism and the definition of socialism given above. Other than in the case of inherited wealth, which arguably is pretty minimal.
ringram said:
Surely the definition of socialism "To each according to his contribution" ends up as capitalist "if" those at the top are self made. (ie) Started with nothing and built up a large capital base. How do socialists square that circle?
They don't. Even Marx admitted that it couldn't work - you either need infinite wealth to start, or to treat the population as unpaid slaves to continue the illusion. Neither is workable. Marx hoped capitalism would generate enough wealth to get close. He didn't exactly rush to join the Bolshevik revolution, instead saying "If this is Marxism, then I am not a Marxist".Mostly socialism is a pack of lies for the stupid to get them to elect you. Once in power, who gives a f
k. Stalin used to laugh about the "Lifestyle Fascists" as he saw them.Conservatives, libertarians, by definition, tend to believe in the individual, and liberty pertaining to the individual. Socialism relates to groups and adherance to their values. The campus environment forces people into a communal and closed minded form of existence, where dissent is frowned upon, and only ideas from within that construct are entertained.
Thats why home schooling is seen as so very dangerous to socialists, or even illegal in some of the more totalitarian socialist states. It might challenge the idea that only the state should be able to indoctrinate people. How the state can say to a parent, you must send your child to a public or public sanctioned school, regardless of how poor it is, and consider itself a civilised country, is beyond me.
Schools should teach how to write, read and add up, anything else should be 'learnt' somewhere else. It would save a lot of money and result in far fewer narrow minded individuals corrupted by the little desktop Revolutionaries that fill our 'academic' insitutions
Thats why home schooling is seen as so very dangerous to socialists, or even illegal in some of the more totalitarian socialist states. It might challenge the idea that only the state should be able to indoctrinate people. How the state can say to a parent, you must send your child to a public or public sanctioned school, regardless of how poor it is, and consider itself a civilised country, is beyond me.
Schools should teach how to write, read and add up, anything else should be 'learnt' somewhere else. It would save a lot of money and result in far fewer narrow minded individuals corrupted by the little desktop Revolutionaries that fill our 'academic' insitutions
12gauge said:
Schools should teach how to write, read and add up, anything else should be 'learnt' somewhere else. It would save a lot of money and result in far fewer narrow minded individuals corrupted by the little desktop Revolutionaries that fill our 'academic' insitutions
Where is this mystical "other place" where things should be learnt?If the schools are staffed by "little desktop Revolutionaries" polluting the minds of our innocent kiddy-winks, why isn't the UK filling up with the rabid socialists they churn out?
Makes no sense.
Insofar as there is any left leaning amongst teachers and academics I suggest it is because they tend to be products of a system who then go on to work in that same system. You might say they could benefit from greater exposure to the harsh realities of life in the outside world. However, having said that it's lucky we have people who want to be teachers, many of whom are very dedicated to their work.
12gauge said:
Conservatives, libertarians, by definition, tend to believe in the individual, and liberty pertaining to the individual. Socialism relates to groups and adherence to their values. The campus environment forces people into a communal and closed minded form of existence, where dissent is frowned upon, and only ideas from within that construct are entertained.
You're new here, aren't you.PH is extremely right wing (mainly Conservative to Fascist), but places The Group above The Individual. Look for references to The Underclass, Hoodies, Scum and so on. The place is heavily hegemonised, even for the internet, witness the baying mob when someone dissents.
Tsippy said:
Is there any reason why socialism is supported so strongly by both staff and students in the education system? You would think that with 'education', that they would realise how the economy works, the need for people to work and not sponge..... but it seems many don't understand these basic concepts.
Has it always been like this? Just interested to know the origins of the left-wing ideals and how they became so strong in schools and University (seemingly in many countries, not just the UK)
Do you actually believe that Socialist=sponger?Has it always been like this? Just interested to know the origins of the left-wing ideals and how they became so strong in schools and University (seemingly in many countries, not just the UK)
Ozzie Osmond said:
Where is this mystical "other place" where things should be learnt?
If the schools are staffed by "little desktop Revolutionaries" polluting the minds of our innocent kiddy-winks, why isn't the UK filling up with the rabid socialists they churn out?
Makes no sense.
Interesting point - meant without being patronising. It made me think.If the schools are staffed by "little desktop Revolutionaries" polluting the minds of our innocent kiddy-winks, why isn't the UK filling up with the rabid socialists they churn out?
Makes no sense.
There is little doubt in my mind that England in particular has moved to the right in my lifetime, and by quite a margin.
When I was a kid, and being taught by a majority of right wing teachers, the public at large were more accepting of the NHS, the nationalised industries (not all, there never seemed that many in favour of taking over car manufacture) and other such matters which are now regarded as left wing.
Clem Attlee was seen as something of a hero even of my right wing teachers - and it should be remembered that he was well on the right of the Labour Party.
So it seems that England has moved right in contrast to the movement to the left (in theory) of the teaching profession.
A bit simplistic I know but it was your post that made me think of it.
Might do some research on that.
Pothole said:
Tsippy said:
Is there any reason why socialism is supported so strongly by both staff and students in the education system? You would think that with 'education', that they would realise how the economy works, the need for people to work and not sponge..... but it seems many don't understand these basic concepts.
Has it always been like this? Just interested to know the origins of the left-wing ideals and how they became so strong in schools and University (seemingly in many countries, not just the UK)
Do you actually believe that Socialist=sponger?Has it always been like this? Just interested to know the origins of the left-wing ideals and how they became so strong in schools and University (seemingly in many countries, not just the UK)
Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff