-Caveat Lector-
In medieval society there was debtors prison
or you could sell yourself and your family as
slaves (serfs) to work someone else's land till
you paid off your debt and earned enough money
to do something else. People realized that you
did not always stay at the same economic strata
- even if some of the social statas had to be earned,
example knighthood, ect . There were gypsies,
bards, and the wandering minstrels or you could
try being like Robin Hood.
Now days with the cost of a roof over your
head so high being a migrant worker, or a college
student that travels the US for a year to and works
as they go is not the potential that it was in the
1960's and 1970's. When you and any that are
your dependents fall on hard times one of the only
options is welfare. The current rules of welfare
make it very hard to get off once you have gotten on.
The other variable is the type of jobs. The days
of helping round up someone cattle and getting
a bath and shave in town or a boarding house
are gone. In other words it is not a case of just
having a good set of muscles and a willingness
to work that is desired, some kind of technical
training is required. The powers that be see the
fact that those they were able to control as low
paid factory workers are finding out that they
can actually learn! Workers with a education.
The potential that control might change, ...
Is the experiment of Democracy dead?
Is the empire dead?
Is experiment of socialism dead?
So, is diversity of government desired?
Yet, life is diversity.
With cloning and patents is that desired?
This took off hard in the 1960's when TV
and true international communications came
into being. Early on Jacqueline Kennedy did a TV tour of
the White House for the viewing Public.
The potential of control from one
central location was seen.
But the idea of domination was alive
in the 1700's with the owners of the slave
ships and others. The King of England was
a convenient scrap goat. The propaganda
on empire is still based on that. The motto is
"to serve" though. What can you do that effects
the least person in your kingdom? Since the current
prince is a rotten scrap goat they are going after the
house of lords. I will say that the current prince
came off (in America) as a gigolo. I can understand
the Queen having him in boarding school, but things
evolve. How is this applicable and why would I say
that the Prince with a college degree and all his money
would be defined as a gigolo by some females that believe
in education of children?
Prince Charles was so worried that who ever he
married would some day have the potential of
becoming Queen of England that he neglected to
think that his future daughter in law would
follow after his wife. He did not "seem" to check
his children's education, a home schooling father
does not mess with the constancy of a daily
curriculum when he is not the one that has to
teach it, but he can and often does require a
monthly book report that he grades. Even if the
father had a job that required he be away, he would
be able to do this - by reading the book in his free time
in a motel room if nothing else. Why? To show that
even he still continues his education and that he
has respect and interest in his children's education.
With the lower
rate of Home Schooling in England I doubt that
such ideas have made the rounds in the UK, though
some educators might think that parents that do not
have anything AT ALL to do with the actual education
of the children. . .
So what might a wife that had been trained as a educator
think of someone that is willing to leave all educational
decisions to someone else, who allows someone else
to be the complete role model on education? Especially
when that person happens to be in the position where he
is suppose to be the apparent expert (after his mother)
in his career field - so even if he could not make hospital
times - it seems as if penciling in the person that would
inherit that job after him once a month or so would be a
good example for anyone else (as to a fathers respect for
education) including his own children.
---- to go back to the previous thread ------
The potential for some to have world control
for a international community BUT how would
this work for a intergalactic community? When
life is diversity, when something like an intergalactic
community is diversity. When we, as humans are
in the minority - bacteria rules. When we have what
amounts to alien DMA all around us from meteorites.
The basic brain or the part of the human brain called the
animal brain. Humans are empathic, could this potion of
the brain be empathic with bacteria / plants?
Bacteria / plants
have a high survival index. This is applicable when you
consider that survival and food are major requirements for
life.
This thread started because it was implied that to give
some nationalities their history would just start Nationalism
and that they would start old blood feuds all over again.
BUT why did they fight in the first place?
Any time a major center a learning has been amassed,
compiled or put together it has been destroyed. Why?
Why has China been able to have such a large population?
If you do not bogart human fertilizer then bacteria and plant
favor you. Think of the major forests of the European, and
Asian continent being cut down. If you were bacteria would
you rather live a few months in a grass plant or a 100 or more
years in a tree? Would you be upset if that walking fertilizer
factory called a human cut down your tree?
(off to sleep - perhaps to dream - perhaps with
bacterial help,
I hope they are healthy bacteria and not
homicidal.)
piper - future science fiction writer
piper
William Hugh Tunstall wrote:
> -Caveat Lector-
>
> ---------- Forwarded message ----------
> Date: Wed, 8 Sep 1999 23:37:59 -070
>
> >From Sean:
> >Well. My senior honors government/economics class is well into the first
> >chapter now, and something's disturbed me about our textbook. Section 3 of
> >the book gives a basic run down of different economic systems and how they
> >work. There is a section for Democratic Socialism, it states how it works,
> >gives some of the pros, then a few cons. There is a section on Communism,
> >it states how it works, gives a couple pros, and a buttload of cons. Then
> >there is a section on capitalism. Capitalism is described at length as far
> >as it's basic functions and how it relates to the state, then it lists a
> >whole shitload of pros...but zero cons. With bias and propaganda even in
> >simple school textbooks, it's no wonder that we have such a hard time
> >getting people to listen to us. This is part of the root of out problem,
> >and it needs to be fought.
>
> Ah yes the ol' textbook = capitalist propaganda thing. Yep that is what they are for
> unfortunately. It is difficult to find a textbook at for high school that doesn't
> laud the "great" achievements of capitalism. And usually with the textbook you get
> teachers that just repeat what the holy book has given them. All too sad. But
> really that is what these subjects were created for. To teach you a little something
> about the world (but not too much!) and instill the idea that system is the best ever
> and it has no flaws, except maybe things like labor and environmental laws, taxes
> etc. Given the fact that the majority of people don't go to college and possibly
> have these walls broken down (though this doesn't mean that people in college don't
> continue to think the same as they do in high school) it builds a good core of people
> who don't question the system. Partly because they are not given the knowledge to so
> by our school system. This is what Italian Marxist Antonio Gramsci calls "bourgeois
> hegemony". And it is all too real.
>
> But things like the historical profession were created just for the exact reason of
> spreading nationalism. Before the 19th century there was no "history profession"
> i.e. where you go to college to get a piece of paper that says you are a professional
> historian. In the 19th c. in Germany and later in this country the historical
> profession was started to spread nationalism, and of course capitalism (just like in
> the Soviet Union, textbooks praised the greatness of the Soviet socialist system.
> All they taught about the US was that it had homeless people and racism). But that
> is what the historical profession was about until around the 1960s where history was
> used at a increasingly to critique the system, rather than support it. But many
> textbooks have missed this revolution in the profession and I think by conscious
> choice. I don't think it is a conspiracy by the government, schools, or teachers,
> but I do think that textbooks that do show a different viewpoint, that is if you can
> find one, are seen as too controversial and frankly I don't know of many k-12
> teachers who could handle anything different than what the textbook gives. They just
> don't have the knowledge to teach anything different from the "party line." I have
> always thought that Zinn's _People's History of the US_ would make a fine high school
> history textbook. But I don't see many schools adopting that book as an alternative
> viewpoint. I have always thought that there should be an attempt to show both sides
> in order to emphasize critical thinking skills (really in my opinion what the high
> schools should be teaching) and that subjects like history and political science are
> interpretations, not science based on facts. There are no meaningful facts in
> history
> "But if the designing of the future and the proclamation of the ready-made solutions
> for all times is not our affair, then we realize all the more clearly what we have to
> accomplish in the present--I am speaking of a ruthless criticism of everything
> existing, ruthless in two senses: The criticism must not be afraid of its own
> conclusions, nor of conflict with the powers that be." -- K. Marx
> ** David McReynolds for President! **
> --
--
Any person can stand adversity,
The true test is to give a person power.
If you treat a relationship as if you are the only one in it, eventually you will be.
Atrocities happen when the people about you - start considering you surplus.
"I tolerate with the utmost latitude the right of
others to differ from me in opinion"
---- Thomas Jefferson
http://freeweb.digiweb.com/science_fiction/ThePiedPiper/~index.htm
ICQ 14484977
DECLARATION & DISCLAIMER
==========
CTRL is a discussion and informational exchange list. Proselyzting propagandic
screeds are not allowed. Substance�not soapboxing! These are sordid matters
and 'conspiracy theory', with its many half-truths, misdirections and outright
frauds is used politically by different groups with major and minor effects
spread throughout the spectrum of time and thought. That being said, CTRL
gives no endorsement to the validity of posts, and always suggests to readers;
be wary of what you read. CTRL gives no credeence to Holocaust denial and
nazi's need not apply.
Let us please be civil and as always, Caveat Lector.
========================================================================
Archives Available at:
http://home.ease.lsoft.com/archives/CTRL.html
http:[EMAIL PROTECTED]/
========================================================================
To subscribe to Conspiracy Theory Research List[CTRL] send email:
SUBSCRIBE CTRL [to:] [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To UNsubscribe to Conspiracy Theory Research List[CTRL] send email:
SIGNOFF CTRL [to:] [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Om
