Scientific Study Says People Are Too Stupid for Democracy

[celtic_crippler]

You think the Founders wanted a democracy? Evidence points to the contrary:

“A Democracy is nothing more than mob rule, where fifty-one percent of the people may take away the rights of the other forty-nine.” ~ Thomas Jefferson

"Hence it is that democracies have ever been spectacles of turbulence and contention; have ever been found incompatible with personal security or the rights of property; and in general have been as short in their lives as they have been violent in their deaths... A republic, by which I mean a government in which a scheme of representation takes place, opens a different prospect and promises the cure for which we are seeking." ~James Madison, Federalist Papers, the McClean Edition, Federalist Paper #10, page 81, 1788

"Democracy is two wolves and a lamb voting on what to have for lunch. Liberty is a well-armed lamb contesting the vote!" Franklin, Benjamin
“Remember, democracy never lasts long. It soon wastes, exhausts, and murders itself. There never was a democracy yet that did not commit suicide.” - John Adams

“Democracy will soon degenerate into an anarchy; such an anarchy that every man will do what is right in his own eyes and no man's life or property or reputation or liberty will be secure, and every one of these will soon mould itself into a system of subordination of all the moral virtues and intellectual abilities, all the powers of wealth, beauty, wit, and science, to the wanton pleasures, the capricious will, and the execrable [abominable] cruelty of one or a very few.” - John Adams

Anybody here remember reciting the Pledge of Allegiance in school? Yeah, they’ve taken it out in a lot of them now, right? Probably another reason today’s generation has no idea we’re actually a Republic. It states “…and to the Republic, for which it stands…” is does not say, “…and to the Democracy…”

A republic and a democracy are identical in every aspect except one. In a republic the sovereignty is in each individual person. In a democracy the sovereignty is in the group.

Republic. That form of government in which the powers of sovereignty are vested in the people and are exercised by the people, either directly, or through representatives chosen by the people, to whome those powers are specially delegated. [NOTE: The word "people" may be either plural or singular. In a republic the group only has advisory powers; the sovereign individual is free to reject the majority group-think. USA/exception: if 100% of a jury convicts, then the individual loses sovereignty and is subject to group-think as in a democracy.]

Democracy. That form of government in which the sovereign power resides in and is exercised by the whole body of free citizens directly or indirectly through a system of representation, as distinguished from a monarchy, aristocracy, or oligarchy. [NOTE: In a pure democracy, 51% beats 49%. In other words, the minority has no rights. The minority only has those privileges granted by the dictatorship of the majority.]

http://1215.org/lawnotes/lawnotes/repvsdem.htm

Good read. I highly recommend it. Once you understand the difference it may enlighten you to a great many things.

To me, it is quite evident when observing the nation’s issues being played out like a soap opera today by the main-stream media, that this idea of individual liberty is too abstract a notion as to be comprehended by the masses.

And why is that? I assert that the involvement of the Federal Government in education has quite a bit to do with the ignorance that abounds. It is that ignorance that enables them to take away our liberties. They and their Elite puppet masters are the only ones who are benefiting, after all.

But the masses have been programmed by the mass media to identify people like me as crack-pot, paranoid, conspiracy theorists because we challenge their control while at the same time they are being indoctrinated to believe nonsense like our government is a democracy and to ignore the lessons of history because “that could never happen here, that could never happen to us”.

Well, it’s happening and has been happening in “real time” for quite a while. And, unless something changes, it will continue on its course and we’ll continue to repeat history because we apparently didn’t learn from it the last 100 times.

:soapbox:

 

[celtic_crippler]

Oh... and BTW, not that it's pertinent to the topic, but I have 4 students that I do not charge. So... nyah! LOL

 

[Tez3]

The point is that people who want an education will find a way to make it happen. Sometimes words aren't enough in terms of persuasion. People need to see results. They need to see consequences. That's what motivates people to take martial arts instruction. That is also what motivates people to take any education.

One of the effects of government compulsory schooling is that it changed the way people view education. When everyone is forced to go, education no longer becomes the pupils responsibility. It's something that others do to you, not something you do for yourself. The effect of this change has been horrendous for our students. It has effectively removed the drive to learn anything.

It hasn't worked that way everywhere so perhaps there's something about the American school system rather than compulsory education that has made it that way. It's not that compulsory education makes people think it's somethig done to you, it's what is being taught and by whom. In Nepal education is now compulsory and the drive to learn is very much there because everyone sees the worth in it. My Gurkha shift partner sees education as far more important for his children than anything else he can give them, it's one reason he's stayed on in the UK so his children can go to university, one's has just qualified as an engineer and the other is off to Sixth Form College which is where he will take the exams he needs to go to uni.

I found this interesting, it seems to indicate that Americans think the government schools rate badly but those that their children go to aresatisfactory! It would seem to be more about perceptions than actual education.
http://www.gallup.com/poll/156974/private-schools-top-marks-educating-children.aspx

"Implications
Americans are much more inclined to believe students in private, parochial, or charter schools receive a high-quality education than to say this about students in public schools and those who are home schooled. Americans in general are not highly satisfied with the state of public schooling in the United States, although that is probably not a commentary on their own child's school and schools in their local area because Americans have historically been quite satisfied with each of those. Rather, Americans may just have a general sense that U.S. public education is not where it needs to be, perhaps due to news media reports that American students lag behind students in other countries in basic academic skills."

Is there proof that American schools lag behind others in the world?

All childen are born with a clean sheet despite who their parents are or what they might be, a country owes it to those childen as well as it's self to educate those children to the best of it's ability, put crudely all children are a country's resources and should be given the best opportunities to excel. Limiting education to only those who can pay limits a country in it's choice of leaders, scientists, medical staff etc etc. It won't get the best until all children are educated to a high standard. If a person is well educated hopefully they will be good and productive citizens saving everyone time, effort and what seems more important in America money. if they turn out not to be those good citizens well then you can shrug and say well they had a chance and they are on their own.

You may want to look at the so called teaching 'experts' rather than the schools, education can be a very faddy place where the latest methods of teaching are put into place rather than anything thats tried and tested, teachers often protest but to no avail. it seems too that your government plans to have all schools out of the sytem and into private hands by 2014, that hasn't been mentioned on this thread.

http://www.nea.org/home/39774.htm

Wise words.


[h=2]"On How to Improve Our Schools[/h]What can we do to improve schools and education? Plenty.
We must first of all have a vision of what good education is. We should have goals that are worth striving for. Everyone involved in educating children should ask themselves why we educate. What is a well-educated person? What knowledge is of most worth? What do we hope for when we send our children to school? What do we want them to learn and accomplish by the time they graduate from school?
Certainly we want them to be able to read and write and be numerate. But that is not enough. We want to prepare them for a useful life. We want them to be able to think for themselves when they are out in the world on their own. We want them to have good character and to make sound decisions about their life, their work, and their health. We want them to face life’s joys and travails with courage and humor. We hope that they will be kind and compassionate in their dealings with others. We want them to have a sense of justice and fairness. We want them to understand our nation and our world and the challenges we face. We want them to be active, responsible citizens, prepared to think issues through carefully, to listen to differing views, and to reach decisions rationally. We want them to learn science and mathematics so they understand the problems of modern life and participate in finding solutions. We want them to enjoy the rich artistic and cultural heritage of our society and other societies.
If these are our goals, the current narrow, utilitarian focus of our national testing regime is not sufficient to reach any of them. Indeed, to the extent that we make the testing regime our master, we may see our true goals recede farther and farther into the distance. By our current methods, we may be training (not educating) a generation of children who are repelled by learning, thinking that it means only drudgery, worksheets, test preparation, and test-taking.
Our nation’s commitment to provide universal, free public education has been a crucial element in the successful assimilation of millions of immigrants and in the ability of generations of Americans to improve their lives. As we seek to reform our schools, we must take care to do no harm. In fact, we must take care to make our public schools once again the pride of our nation. To the extent that we strengthen them, we strengthen our democracy"







[h=1][/h]
[h=2][/h]

 

[Makalakumu]

You might want to go back and read post 47 where I detail the history and philosophy of modern compulsory schooling. It's a long post, but I think it lays out the agenda of the creators of the system quite well.

It hasn't worked that way everywhere so perhaps there's something about the American school system rather than compulsory education that has made it that way. It's not that compulsory education makes people think it's somethig done to you, it's what is being taught and by whom. In Nepal education is now compulsory and the drive to learn is very much there because everyone sees the worth in it. My Gurkha shift partner sees education as far more important for his children than anything else he can give them, it's one reason he's stayed on in the UK so his children can go to university, one's has just qualified as an engineer and the other is off to Sixth Form College which is where he will take the exams he needs to go to uni.

This also used to be the case in America. Once immigrants were gradually led into the institutions, the work ethic that brought them to America in the first place really helped them excel at their studies. If you go back and compare the syllabi of history classes that were taught 100 years ago to the syllabi of those taught today, you'll be struck by the depth and complexity that students in the past were studying. You'll also be faced with the reality that our society has been dumbed way down. The statistics bear this out. If we look at the first achievement tests given out 80 years ago and compare them with achievement tests now, there has been a steady decline in scores. The scores have still declined despite the test being renormed several times in order to make it easier to achieve higher scores (and probably hide the decline).

One of the reasons why this happened is the same trend that is commonplace whenever an industry is nationalized. The free market teaches people through incentive and example. This is the most efficient way to motivate people because true information caused by the results of decisions or circumstance is allowed to inform human action. Therefore, the newly nationalized industries benefit from having people in them with strong work ethics and a drive to do well.

Over time, the lack of real feedback in a nationalized industry with no competition begins to affect the people in it. They lose the drive to change and evolve because the incentive structure is gone. When this is combined with the idea that a product is simply given and not earned, the results are catastrophic. All nationalized industries eventually fall into inefficiency and disarray as the entitlement mentality rots it from the inside out. Eventually, the institution falls apart because it can't keep up with the demands of a changing and vibrant world.

This has totally happened in education. Look at the basic structure of schools and the basic methods of instruction. The are the same as they were 50 years ago despite the revolution in information technology happening all over the West. Most schools have basically replaced their black boards with white boards. Computers are being introduced and this is the game changer, by the way. The revolution in computer technology has made traditional schooling obsolete...but they don't know it yet.

Watch this video understand how pathetically backwards schools have become.

http://www.ted.com/talks/sugata_mitra_the_child_driven_education.html

So, it doesn't surprise me that your shift partner and his family value education. When you come from a background where education is precious, the drive to learn is enormous. Give it a few generations though. The nationalized system will instill in them the entitlement mentality and will eventually turn them into the entitled masses that crowd the classrooms of today. They will learn that education is a right that the State must confer and all drive to learn will be lost.

 

[Tez3]

How many Americans posting on here are the product of free schooling as opposed to private?

For what it's worth mine for state school primary, private secondary (the one I went to is known as a Public school confusingly) and free university.

 

[Steve]

First step in "sorting" education out is to take it out of the hands of government bureaucrats and privatize it. Till we do that it will be about as efficient as the local department of motor vehicles.

I think there's a happy medium. I'd like to see a lot more creativity in education, but I think there needs to be some oversight. Private education is not necessarily better education. I went to two different private schools. One was terrific, and the other was not. In many States, private school teachers do not need any sort of certification to teach. There are academies where performance is high and students do very well. There are other schools where the academics are overtly secondary to religious education, and the teachers are hired more for their religious beliefs than their academic qualifications.

I want to be clear that I am all for some degree of privatization, but it's a dangerous road when you believe that a school is "better" because it is private. My kids are receiving a top notch education in public schools. My daughter is taking University of Washington courses in her high school (as a UW student, receiving UW credit) along with AP classes as a sophomore. She will likely graduate high school with over 2 years of college under her belt, much of that already established on a University of Washington transcript.

Their education is well rounded, emphasizing academic achievement, college prep, and also a good balance of liberal arts classes.

 

[ballen0351]

So only the educated or people who have sacrified get to vote. So what happens when they vote someone into office or pass a piece of legislation you don't like? Where does the bar raise from there? Poll taxes so only those who are 'makers' can vote? What about IQ test? Or should it be only people who served in the military? Start limiting the ability of everyone to vote and you start handing power to a smaller and smaller group of people. In a democracy that is the absolute worst thing you can do. Our founding fathers were actually pretty smart about this and so have our people over time, including minroty and womens suffrage. Personally I'd hate to see it thrown away by giving more power to less people. That is simply Anti-American.

Our founding fathers did limit people's right to vote. Also as stated 1000's of times were not a democracy never have been.

 

[Steve]

Did privatizing martial arts instruction take out of the hands of poor people or can people find ways to learn martial arts if they want to?

LOL... look at the disparity in quality between schools. Also, consider the fact that many commercially successful schools are successful because they focus on specific business practices that dilute the quality of the education. If educating kids becomes a "for profit" endeavor, we are doomed.

 

[Tez3]

You might want to go back and read post 47 where I detail the history and philosophy of modern compulsory schooling. It's a long post, but I think it lays out the agenda of the creators of the system quite well.



This also used to be the case in America. Once immigrants were gradually led into the institutions, the work ethic that brought them to America in the first place really helped them excel at their studies. If you go back and compare the syllabi of history classes that were taught 100 years ago to the syllabi of those taught today, you'll be struck by the depth and complexity that students in the past were studying. You'll also be faced with the reality that our society has been dumbed way down. The statistics bear this out. If we look at the first achievement tests given out 80 years ago and compare them with achievement tests now, there has been a steady decline in scores. The scores have still declined despite the test being renormed several times in order to make it easier to achieve higher scores (and probably hide the decline).

One of the reasons why this happened is the same trend that is commonplace whenever an industry is nationalized. The free market teaches people through incentive and example. This is the most efficient way to motivate people because true information caused by the results of decisions or circumstance is allowed to inform human action. Therefore, the newly nationalized industries benefit from having people in them with strong work ethics and a drive to do well.

Over time, the lack of real feedback in a nationalized industry with no competition begins to affect the people in it. They lose the drive to change and evolve because the incentive structure is gone. When this is combined with the idea that a product is simply given and not earned, the results are catastrophic. All nationalized industries eventually fall into inefficiency and disarray as the entitlement mentality rots it from the inside out. Eventually, the institution falls apart because it can't keep up with the demands of a changing and vibrant world.

This has totally happened in education. Look at the basic structure of schools and the basic methods of instruction. The are the same as they were 50 years ago despite the revolution in information technology happening all over the West. Most schools have basically replaced their black boards with white boards. Computers are being introduced and this is the game changer, by the way. The revolution in computer technology has made traditional schooling obsolete...but they don't know it yet.

Watch this video understand how pathetically backwards schools have become.

http://www.ted.com/talks/sugata_mitra_the_child_driven_education.html

So, it doesn't surprise me that your shift partner and his family value education. When you come from a background where education is precious, the drive to learn is enormous. Give it a few generations though. The nationalized system will instill in them the entitlement mentality and will eventually turn them into the entitled masses that crowd the classrooms of today. They will learn that education is a right that the State must confer and all drive to learn will be lost.

Asian thinking is very different to Western especially American. For Jews too education is very important it has been for generations throughout all types of schooling in all types of countries. If you are doing it right compulsory education will not engender the problems you think it will. American culture is very different from anyone elses, I'd go so far as to say it's unique so thinking that everyone will turn out the same as Americans is a mistake.

 

[Makalakumu]

LOL... look at the disparity in quality between schools. Also, consider the fact that many commercially successful schools are successful because they focus on specific business practices that dilute the quality of the education. If educating kids becomes a "for profit" endeavor, we are doomed.

I think you have a view of "quality" that does not match the people attending "substandard" schools. Perhaps the people who are paying for instruction are getting exactly what they wanted. Frankly, I completely understand the market for watered down martial arts instruction. It's easier, it's less dangerous, and it makes you feel like you've achieved something. As far as real skill is concerned, if there were an actual need for most people to have sharp self defense skills, you'd see the McDojos disappear. That's how the market shapes the industry. We live in a relatively safe world though, and that's what allows McDojos to flourish.

With education, there is a real need for highly skilled people. Schools that don't perform will have no students. There is a huge difference in those education markets. The aspect worth pointing out about the martial arts instruction industry is the efficiency of delivery. The variety of traditional school models is far less diverse than the variety of martial arts schools. This is a huge problem that is bred by State control of the industry. Rather then letting students and entrepreneurs tailor their approaches for each other's needs, like the martial arts industry, the State has a model that it forces everyone into regardless of student difference or need.

This is unbelievably ridiculous. According to NCLB, all students regardless of learning differences, are going to have to show 100% proficiency to national standards by 2014. No school can meet this because this mandate includes special education students. It will be interesting to see how the legislature handles this because this is an impossible mandate. I suspect that there will be much arguing and that the punitive provisions of the bill will be allowed to kick in. Those provisions start with sanctions, withholding of federal money, replacement of Administrators, and finally a Federal takeover of the schools. Which, I believe was the point of bill in the first place, set an impossible standards and use failure as an excuse to abolish local control in schools.

If you understand how these policies developed and you understand the history of the development of the institution, a clandestine federal takeover is exactly what should be expected from legislation like NCLB.

The point that I must make again, and I reference my post 47, is that compulsory schooling has always been the propaganda arm of the state. The Federal standards have a particular view of civics, of history, and of critical thinking that they actually mandate and measure. I foresee more Federal control from the DOE and I can see a public/private market developing that undercuts the teachers unions and deprofessionalizes the teaching profession. Money will be doled out to schools that deliver results along tightly determined federal standards. Competition will be used to weed out approaches that are too expensive or inefficient. President Obama's Education Secretary, Arne Duncan, is famous for starting a system like this in Chicago and he is adamant about doing this nationwide.

This is the fascist model of public education that is coming down the pipes.

Now, lets compare this to what would happen if we actually had a free market in education. Families would be able to shop around for schools that meet their specific needs and educational entreprenuers could change their practice in order to meet the needs of the consumer. We would see schools pop up online that teach basic skills on shoestring budgets. We'd see trade schools popping up in regions that have demands for skilled labor and the companies that need this kind of labor would offer grants for students to attend. We'd see schools develop that specifically train people for university and foundations would give grants to talented students who couldn't afford them. We'd see individual teachers creating small local learning communities that would cost a fraction of what it costs the State to educate students AND the teachers would be able to make a comfortable living doing this. Finally, I think we'd see the disappearance of learning disabilities. Learning differences are currently identified by the amount of deviance of achievement from a standardized norm. In other words, traditional schools basically have one approach and if a student is unsuccessful at meeting this approach they are identified, pathologized, and medicated (See post 47). In a free market, instruction would be offered to students based on their needs and abilities. If one approach is not successful, the market will demand that another appear.

This is exactly what we see in the martial arts industry. The efficiency of delivery in the market finds ways to get martial arts instruction to you depending on what you want to get out of it. You might not think a certain approach is worth it and you will have the freedom to not give that business your money. A free market completely changes the relationship between schools and students. A free market reincentivizes students by making participation voluntary. A free market makes education valuable again because now the industry can give you exactly what you want.

 

[Makalakumu]

Asian thinking is very different to Western especially American. For Jews too education is very important it has been for generations throughout all types of schooling in all types of countries. If you are doing it right compulsory education will not engender the problems you think it will. American culture is very different from anyone elses, I'd go so far as to say it's unique so thinking that everyone will turn out the same as Americans is a mistake.

http://www.amazon.com/Case-Against-Adolescence-Rediscovering-Adult/dp/188495670X

Cross cultural studies show the same problems that we see in America appearing in every country that implements Western style schooling. In developing countries where Western style schooling is implemented, there is a sharp uptick of literacy, followed by a downward slide of skills the longer this style of schooling exists. This book pretty much demolishes the notion that America is different from the rest of the world. The school model that I outlined in post 47 pretty much has the same effect on people where ever it is implemented.

I'm glad you brought up China. Did you know that the Chinese have one standardized test that determines everything about your future? Did you know that families in China run out of town any teacher that teaches anything but the material for this test? Students, parents, and administrators will literally shout you down if you attempt to teach anything that isn't directly related to the test. The result of this is that Chinese students are literally incapable of asking questions. They are great at memorizing and regurgitating but they cannot relate to information in any sort of creative way. This is causing a huge problem in Chinese culture because the amount of innovation that occurs has dwindled severely. This has caused something interesting to occur. Parents in China are beginning to send their children to countries where the school system is more diverse. The dividends that families see is that these children are the ones that come back with ideas and are able actualize them into businesses.

The Chinese government moves their mouths about this problem, but they actually like the mentality of the bulk of the students being produced (see post 47 again). They don't ask questions and they are great at following orders, that was the point of the Prussian system from the outset.

The ironic part about this is that the West is changing it's school system to become more and more like China's! A federal system with strict standards and one test is a bureaucrats wet dream...and the end of free thought in the world.

 

[Tez3]

I didn't mention China.

You should also realise that there's Western thought, Eastern thought and American thought, they are all different from each other.

Your link is that of someone who has a book to sell, again it's his opinion, it doesn't make it fact.