The education system is inherently corrupt.

submitted by CarlDung from self.200acres

sorted by:
top
newinsightfulfun
you are viewing a single comment's thread.

view the rest of the comments →

[–]christine_grab 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (9 children)

The problem lies in the people, and the deviant behavior they somehow tout as a progress to some direction without understanding that with every structural change their problems have only taken a different form, as the problem was never in the structure, but instead, it is always the people.

Correct. As I said above, usually its one group of power-hungry people throwing out the existing group in power and setting up the same basic type of system of control via manipulation that is executed by false narrative. People need to learn to identify false narratives and manipulation. Maybe those are things we can teach in school?

Your Catholic Church example was great. Basically, you said clearly that historically, society rewards wealth. Over time, different manipulators changed the societal narrative to steal the power and then hoarded the power and wealth for themselves. But you basically said they should have stuck with the original corruption of the Catholic Church and never should have changed it in the first place. The reason it changed each time was because that societal narrative wasn't working for the masses and they all agreed to a new narrative that they hoped would work better for them. It didn't but that is because the narrative-makers were self-serving. We need to stop rewarding manipulators with wealth. And in those days, it was very easy for TPTB to control the narrative, yet they couldn't keep up the false narrative forever.

Going to stick to the examples currently happening in the US: ANTIFA and BLM are both spouting false narratives. The color of your body suit has no bearing on your character, for better or worse, and is thus a false narrative. Violence is a violation of the sovereignty of others and is reprehensible in all forms. Saying violence is ok for the sake of protest is a false narrative. Everyone who supports these movements has been duped by the false narratives. If I understand where your point of view is coming from, this is what you mean by counter-culture, correct? A narrative different than the main societal narrative, but not necessarily any more true (and possibly demonstrably less true) than the official societal narrative?

The truth is that in the current economic system, the rich are hoarding all the resources to the detriment of the masses, and as a society, we need to change the way money distribution works. Maybe we need to change the way money works altogether since fiat currency is dubious. That is the truth that TPTB are trying to keep covered up. They know that the money system only is in place because we as a society have agreed to it, and we can stop agreeing at any moment. The MSM and many corporations seems to support these false BLM and ANTIFA narratives, which makes it appear that the current group in power are grabbing on to a new angle with which to hold power since their current narrative is rapidly disintegrating with the light of truth shined on it from social media and alternative journalism. Hence the mass banning we are seeing now on Twitter, FB and Reddit.

But things like communism simply move the wealth from private to government, giving those in the government all the power to exploit the same as the private owners did before them. Switching from one exploitative system to another does no one any good.

The solution is to 1. stop rewarding manipulators with wealth 2. educate people better they have better discernment skills to spot false narratives and manipulation. 3. Then there will be more people like me, who go after the existing government legally and peacefully in order to change it so it serves the people instead of exploits the people. With more people pushing on the government to force them to operate openly and fairly, things will just naturally improve.

[–]CarlDung[S] 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (8 children)

Correct. As I said above, usually its one group of power-hungry people throwing out the existing group in power and setting up the same basic type of system of control via manipulation that is executed by false narrative. People need to learn to identify false narratives and manipulation. Maybe those are things we can teach in school?

Well, people might figure out what is best for them, but there's no guarantee it will work in the large scale. Nobody is educated enough to fix the big picture, and this is the reason we still need a bigger structure, because there will always be states which punish their neighbors for not being competitive enough either economically or having a capable military to defend themselves. This goes into geopolitcs, but it is another topic I guess.

Your Catholic Church example was great. Basically, you said clearly that historically, society rewards wealth. Over time, different manipulators changed the societal narrative to steal the power and then hoarded the power and wealth for themselves. But you basically said they should have stuck with the original corruption of the Catholic Church and never should have changed it in the first place.

Few centuries ago (—something between 300 to 400 years) Jean-Jacques Rousseau was working with some corrupt bureaucracts in the border customs, and he thought the idea of nationalism would fix everything, as they would switch their loyalties from their own bosses / authorities to the people. Practically it meant to switch loyalties from the French crown to the French people i.e. having monoculture, instead of two hierarchies where aristocrats had their own concept of good and where masses had their own.

The reason it changed each time was because that societal narrative wasn't working for the masses and they all agreed to a new narrative that they hoped would work better for them. It didn't but that is because the narrative-makers were self-serving. We need to stop rewarding manipulators with wealth. And in those days, it was very easy for TPTB to control the narrative, yet they couldn't keep up the false narrative forever.

This is really hard to fix, because some people are always better than others in playing the system for their own benefit.

If I understand where your point of view is coming from, this is what you mean by counter-culture, correct? A narrative different than the main societal narrative, but not necessarily any more true (and possibly demonstrably less true) than the official societal narrative?

Yes, corrrect.

The truth is that in the current economic system, the rich are hoarding all the resources to the detriment of the masses, and as a society, we need to change the way money distribution works. ... The MSM and many corporations seems to support these false BLM and ANTIFA narratives, which makes it appear that the current group in power are grabbing on to a new angle with which to hold power since their current narrative is rapidly disintegrating with the light of truth shined on it from social media and alternative journalism. Hence the mass banning we are seeing now on Twitter, FB and Reddit.

True, the narrative—at least for me seems to point towards "divide and conquer" style of politics. I don't think it will work on the long run, but they might go with is because there's no better alternatives, or they are just going with it to adjust their internal structure for the imminent fallout.

But things like communism simply move the wealth from private to government, giving those in the government all the power to exploit the same as the private owners did before them. Switching from one exploitative system to another does no one any good.

True.

The solution is to 1. stop rewarding manipulators with wealth 2. educate people better they have better discernment skills to spot false narratives and manipulation. 3. Then there will be more people like me, who go after the existing government legally and peacefully in order to change it so it serves the people instead of exploits the people. With more people pushing on the government to force them to operate openly and fairly, things will just naturally improve.

This is tricky, because e.g. without criminals, there would be no need for police, but after creating a police force, you'll eventually have police officers who incidentally exploit their position of power. We therefore return to the end of my last comment, it is the problems within the people, which could be dealt with various ways. Some people might be deterred for doing criminal acts by the fear of punishment, but some people become criminals just despite it. Some people might think they'll never get caught, so educating them might be a lost cause if they are not intelligent enough, or lack the mental faculties to become better persons.

[–]christine_grab 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (5 children)

You make excellent points. I believe that the current system rewards sociopathy. Sociopaths like Bill Gates will do ruthlessly unfair things, like stealing other people's technology and monopolistic business practices, to grab on to power and wealth. They then use that power and wealth to exploit resources/people on bigger and bigger scales. With Bill, it started in one sector, tech, and he progressively spread out into other sectors -- now he is literally trying to take over the whole world with his COVID-19 vaccine. And how many millions of people idolize Bill Gates as a hero simply because he is wealthy and created an empire?

We need to identify effective ways to identify and stop these sociopathic behaviors before the sociopath becomes an all-powerful oligarch. Once sociopathy is no longer highly rewarded, people may not desire to emulate people like Gates. We also need to figure out a new system of distributing money/resources. And I don't mean by socialism... I have been thinking maybe we should get rid of the minimum wage so that small business can afford to compete in the marketplace and make a pay cap of the highest paid person in a company can only make 20X more than the lowest paid person? So say, Aetna can no longer pay a janitor $15 and hour while the CEO makes $1,900 per hour. I admit, I need to put a lot more thought into revamping how money/resources fairly works.

We also need to stop the manipulators from encouraging criminal activity. Here is a relevant video on that topic: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=26ORPuH1-rU&feature=share. If you are like me and don't like to watch videos, here is the text that the rap star reads/comments on in the video: https://www.reddit.com/r/conspiracy/comments/hdfm30/the_secret_meeting_that_changed_rap_music_and/?utm_source=share&utm_medium=ios_app&utm_name=iossmf. Back to my BLM/Antifa analogy, we're seeing a lot of criminal activity being glorified right now (ie looting and rioting) and it is deeply disturbing. We need to get the BLM/Antifa supporters to understand that TPTB are manipulating them to be pawns in a bigger agenda.

But back to the original discussion that started this very interesting and thought provoking thread... I think it is too late to go back to the days of monoculture. With the internet, it is just too easy for information that goes against the official narrative to be uploaded and shared. We have to accept that things are moving forward in a new way, embrace the new way, and try to utilize it for the greater good.

Thank you so much for this discussion. I have thoroughly enjoyed it :)

[–]CarlDung[S] 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (4 children)

I believe that the current system rewards sociopathy.

That's true. Every era and society has rewarded different kind of people. I've always found it funny how deeply primitive we are in this sense. I mean, even when we want to tell ourselves how civilized we are, the most common form of dealing with injustice in our entertainment industry is to teach how physical demonstrations of strength will fix everything. Batman fixes organized crime by beating them up. Marvel superheroes beat up whatever seems to be threatening the order.

With Bill, it started in one sector, tech, and he progressively spread out into other sectors -- now he is literally trying to take over the whole world with his COVID-19 vaccine.

I'm not familiar with this, but I'll try to research this topic later.

We also need to figure out a new system of distributing money/resources. And I don't mean by socialism... I have been thinking maybe we should get rid of the minimum wage so that small business can afford to compete in the marketplace and make a pay cap of the highest paid person in a company can only make 20X more than the lowest paid person?

It feels weird, but we had this same issue a bit over a hundred years ago. Back then the ideas which were thrown around were communism or capitalism, and then those who advocated for "third way" i.e. something in between, which was usually distributism, social corporatism or fascism. I was once really interested about distributism, because it emphasizes the the spiritual aspect of wellbeing a lot.

But back to the original discussion that started this very interesting and thought provoking thread... I think it is too late to go back to the days of monoculture.

Well, before the national cultures of french, german, italian etc. there were other cultures. Usually people forget their culture when it doesn't offer anything for them, or when their culture becomes too impractical guideline to function properly in this world. Just like we are discussing about government structures. When the ruling culture has failed to integrate individuals to follow its founding principles, people tend to invent a new one. Sometimes these cultures take the form of political parties, and such thing happened e.g. in Russia, they truly tried to eradicate everything during the communist era that somehow reminded them of the time of Russian monarchy ruled by Tsar.

I personally believe cultures have a certain kind of lifecycles, which either can be rejuvenated with every new generation, or they can be denied by big catastrophes which shake down the old order. Founding a new structure takes a lot of energy, and revolutions are not always peaceful, and this is the reason why I don't necessarily like multiculturalism, it creates unnecessary uncertainty and ethnic as well as cultural tensions.

Thank you so much for this discussion. I have thoroughly enjoyed it :)

Yeah, and thank's for you too! I has been really interesting talk!

[–]christine_grab 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (3 children)

"I mean, even when we want to tell ourselves how civilized we are, the most common form of dealing with injustice in our entertainment industry is to teach how physical demonstrations of strength will fix everything. Batman fixes organized crime by beating them up. Marvel superheroes beat up whatever seems to be threatening the order."

AMEN!

"I was once really interested about distributism, because it emphasizes the the spiritual aspect of wellbeing a lot."

I am curious to hear more. I have just started thinking about this issue recently.

"such thing happened e.g. in Russia, they truly tried to eradicate everything during the communist era that somehow reminded them of the time of Russian monarchy ruled by Tsar."

Didn't the Communists eventually allow religion and some other cultural/history back in because they realized that the culture wasn't rich enough to satisfy (meaning effectively control through narrative) the people? Or do I have that wrong? Clearly, you are very knowledgable about history. I love history, but they don't teach much of it in the US, and what little they do teach is not necessary accurate.

"and revolutions are not always peaceful, and this is the reason why I don't necessarily like multiculturalism, it creates unnecessary uncertainty and ethnic as well as cultural tensions."

You have valid points about people being suspicious and fearful of others who don't think/do things the same as they do. But different does not mean bad, and I think this may be the sticking point we've had in our discussions.

[–]CarlDung[S] 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (2 children)

I am curious to hear more. I have just started thinking about this issue recently.

It begins from Pope Leo XII's encyclical letter "rerum novarum", but they didn't call it distributism. In that letter they mainly address the problem with capitalism and socialism, but without any concrete solution. I've read some short essays from "Distributist perspectives vol1", where most writers thought it would be best if everyone had the chance to work towards their own happiness without government meddling. It sounds a lot like what people in this subreddit talk about, trying to figure out how to live in a rural setting because governmental policies have made people miserable in big cities.

One interesting point was that originally, when industrial development needed more workforce, the government installed heavy taxes on goods produced in the countryside. In England this was the corn laws of 1846. In practice this mean that people had to sell their farms and move to big cities to work in factories, because they couldn't produce enough agricultural products live comfortably. Many people found out the living quarters were far worse, the infrastructure beginning from schools etc. couldn't handle the population surge, and created ghettoes and social problems, and one of the things dissatisfied population turned to was socialism. This also meant that a lot of people went to America, because they were advertised that they could continue their rural lifestyle without governmental meddling, but here we are again, government doing their nasty stuff again.

Didn't the Communists eventually allow religion and some other cultural/history back in because they realized that the culture wasn't rich enough to satisfy (meaning effectively control through narrative) the people? Or do I have that wrong?

I don't know for sure, but they used to allow different things during different eras. They started to open up during the 80s "glasnost" period. Some believe this was the reason why Soviet Union eventually collapsed, as the people became more knowledgeable about Western culture, movies and commercials, and became disillusioned about the achievements of the Soviet system. I hate to admit it, but monoculture in this sense also protects regimes like Soviet Union.

I love history, but they don't teach much of it in the US, and what little they do teach is not necessary accurate.

In some parts of Europe the state sponsors people to educate themselves. I think history is something deeply political, and it is impossible to be taught in an objective manner, so they don't want to touch the subject in fear of backlash.

But different does not mean bad, and I think this may be the sticking point we've had in our discussions.

True. Human societies have these recurring themes. Most people just want to live comfortably, but sometimes the emerging technology just makes the old way of life impossible. The same thing probably happens with the climate change, and it is yet to be seen where we end up.

[–]christine_grab 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

Thank you! This is very interesting info. I appreciate you for taking the time to write it. You've filled in a few gaps for me, particularly with the tax burden forcing farmers into the cities. I think because Europe is very old, people value history more than Americans do. Our country is only 300 years old, and we've essentially erased all history before the pilgrims arrived. I feel like in a lot of ways, Americans are arrogant teen-agers who think we know it all.

I read this last night and thought it was relevant to our discussion: "While mainstream "centrists" will acknowledge that our current way of doing things is unsustainable, they resist making meaningful change. This is because of a cognitive glitch humans have called status quo bias, which can cause us to fallaciously equate change with danger." Quote is from blogger Caitlin Johnstone.

[–]CarlDung[S] 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

I appreciate you for taking the time to write it.

No problem.

You've filled in a few gaps for me, particularly with the tax burden forcing farmers into the cities.

I have a bad habit of not explaining every detail in the process, and after viewing the wikipedia page, it seems to leave out that farmers had to pay toll when moving to a city to sell their products. The laws also blocked foreign grain imports, so the food prices went up without possibility to do much about it. Well, at least wikipedia doesn't hide the fact only big land owners profited from the arrangement.

I think because Europe is very old, people value history more than Americans do.

I have mixed feelings about this. Most European nations are just wallowing in self pity while every news media broadcasts how racist / colonial etc. we have been in the past.

"While mainstream "centrists" will acknowledge that our current way of doing things is unsustainable, they resist making meaningful change. This is because of a cognitive glitch humans have called status quo bias, which can cause us to fallaciously equate change with danger." Quote is from blogger Caitlin Johnstone.

That's a good quote.

[–]christine_grab 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

Sorry, I forgot to address an important point that you made:

Well, people might figure out what is best for them, but there's no guarantee it will work in the large scale. Nobody is educated enough to fix the big picture, and this is the reason we still need a bigger structure, because there will always be states which punish their neighbors for not being competitive enough either economically or having a capable military to defend themselves. This goes into geopolitcs, but it is another topic I guess.

My thinking may on this topic may be flawed and I am very open to feedback. But my current thought process is that the fortress of control by TPTB looks big and imposing, but it is made of hollow bricks that can be pushed over with enough effort. It's all one big wall, even on an international level because the same exploitative companies are in many countries. I am pushing on one small piece of wall with the CA income tax agency, and I am trusting that other people are also pushing on other parts of the wall, even if they are too far away for me to see. I think if each one of us focuses on one issue that needs fixing -- preferably the smaller local issues at first, then there will be a lot of gaps in the wall and the wall will be so weak that it will eventually collapse. But meanwhile, if we focus on fixing things from the local level and progress upwards, we'll have a lot more success in creating a functional system than starting at the top and trying to work our way down. Does that make any sense?

[–]CarlDung[S] 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

I understand your point, and I've thought about this sometimes. For me it is hard to say what should be done, or what is the original cause of these issues. Personally I tend to favor monoculture and ethical education, because good people can make the best out of bad situations, while bad people can ruin even best situations.

we'll have a lot more success in creating a functional system than starting at the top and trying to work our way down. Does that make any sense?

Yeah, it does make sense.