Why teach kids to share?

[The Idler]

Why do capitalists teach kids to share?

[Manifesto]

Most likely because it is to install morals into their kids even though as they get older these will eventually disappear.

[Bud Struggle]

It's to instill in children the idea that sharing is a child's preoccupation.

Competition comes with first grade.

[#FF0000]

You know it isn't as if every facet of life is specifically crafted by the bourgeoisie themselves to serve them in their insidious plots.

Even in capitalism, people need to interact and work together.

This is a really dumb question

[Pirate turtle the 11th]

Why do capitalists teach kids to share?

Because not doing so in day to day life makes you a social reject. (For instance if you have a bag of chips or whatever and dont offer them around people will think your a twat).

[GPDP]

Because otherwise they'll grow up to be nice little sociopathic Objectivists, and god knows we don't need any more of those here in the OI.

[jake williams]

You know it isn't as if every facet of life is specifically crafted by the bourgeoisie themselves to serve them in their insidious plots.

Even in capitalism, people need to interact and work together.

This is a really dumb question
You're oversimplifying. Public schools in capitalist have been meticulously designed by the state - which of course is run by capital and almost always acts at the highest levels in the interests of capital. The process of developing public education has been ongoing, and a major force if not the main one is the capitalist state. Yes, there is democratic resistance, but its successes and effects are complex, and mitigated. The resistance of teachers - who are designed as models of authority figures (ie. bosses) for students - is even more mitigated. It exists and it's not insignificant, but the black and white view that's common even to a lot of critical education theory is even damaging.

You learn to "share" in kindergarten at the same time as you're being to sit down, shut up, and do what you're told. It ain't that liberal. Schools tend to be more left-leaning than a lot of other spaces in capitalist societies, but again, it's complex, and there are reasons for it. In fact, not only is the mainstream of capitalism often liberal or even "left" leaning - but even the right wing of capitalism regularly uses liberalism as a veneer of humanity and morality. Much of the perceived coziness of schools is that: it wouldn't do to run schools exactly like factories. It is also, to be fair, the result of democratic resistance, and the sincere beliefs of teachers that they are agents of love and morality. But plenty of bosses (hi "Bud Struggle") 'love' their employees too. Paternalism is not respect, it's barely even genuine concern.


edit:

It's to instill in children the idea that sharing is a child's preoccupation.

Competition comes with first grade.
Actually, come to think of it, I think this is probably actually a major part of it.

[ʇsıɥɔɹɐuɐ ıɯɐbıɹo]

Because it prevents fights and leads to the ease of parenting. Less pulled hair and screaming children.

[danyboy27]

beccause paying taxes have to be learned somewhere

[jake williams]

beccause paying taxes have to be learned somewhere
I think it's easy to overstate that, yes, capitalism does socialize production
(compared to feudalism yada yada) and to organize people for socialized production you do need people to "cooperate" in a deranged way. This affects school, yes; but the fact is, basic human nature, baseline functioning interpersonal relationships in virtually any society - in fact, perhaps the least in our own with it the most extensive formal public education system in human history - involve a very routine morality of sharing and common decency. If anything school works a lot against this: one of the most angrily insisted things is that for most work, you do it completely alone. In addition, of course, to competition for grades and so on.

[danyboy27]

I think it's easy to overstate that, yes, capitalism does socialize production
(compared to feudalism yada yada) and to organize people for socialized production you do need people to "cooperate" in a deranged way. This affects school, yes; but the fact is, basic human nature, baseline functioning interpersonal relationships in virtually any society - in fact, perhaps the least in our own with it the most extensive formal public education system in human history - involve a very routine morality of sharing and common decency. If anything school works a lot against this: one of the most angrily insisted things is that for most work, you do it completely alone. In addition, of course, to competition for grades and so on.

education isnt really the problem, its the quality and the quantity the problem.

i really doubt that every facet of schooling is a grand conspiration by the evil capitalist bourgeois. i think sharing is important beccause without it our society wouldnt be that advanced.

also, if there wasnt all that sharing and morals the school teach MANY people would becomt total sociopath.

i know something about it, without it i would probably be homeless with a needle in my arm in a alley.
i come from a poor family.

[IcarusAngel]

Generally our school system emphasizes competiveness over cooperation. There is always the idea of doing better than someone else in sports, math, English, and so on, and all of those have various "tests" that are emphasized in school, even though to excel in those subjects it actually takes quite a bit of cooperation I would imagine. Like in English you would want someone to teach you the rules of grammar, and you would be influenced by other writerse, etc.

This is probably also why things like art, music, etc. are not as emphasized as it's harder to judge who is "better" in these areas. But anyway, we do not have a Deweyite educational system at all.

However, corporations cooperate all the time. They cooperate to lobby bills. They cooperate to lobby congress. They cooperate to get hand outs from the government. They cooperate to fix prices. And so on. Only the "little people" are expected to fight to survive and get what they can in a "free-market," the ruling class is well protected.

[danyboy27]

Generally our school system emphasizes competiveness over cooperation. There is always the idea of doing better than someone else in sports, math, English, and so on, and all of those have various "tests" that are emphasized in school, even though to excel in those subjects it actually takes quite a bit of cooperation I would imagine. Like in English you would want someone to teach you the rules of grammar, and you would be influenced by other writerse, etc.

This is probably also why things like art, music, etc. are not as emphasized as it's harder to judge who is "better" in these areas. But anyway, we do not have a Deweyite educational system at all.

However, corporations cooperate all the time. They cooperate to lobby bills. They cooperate to lobby congress. They cooperate to get hand outs from the government. They cooperate to fix prices. And so on. Only the "little people" are expected to fight to survive and get what they can in a "free-market," the ruling class is well protected.

soo..another bourgeois conspiracy?
i dont see any problem with putting an emphasis of getting better, of course its important to also take in consideration people who got difficulties in some stuff, but overall, getting better and try to excel perfection is not a bad thing.

[jake williams]

education isnt really the problem, its the quality and the quantity the problem.

also, if there wasnt all that sharing and morals the school teach MANY people would becomt total sociopath.

i know something about it, without it i would probably be homeless with a needle in my arm in a alley.
i come from a poor family.
I'm not against education per se. I'm against the almost universal form it takes in our capitalist societies. And for the most part, unfortunately, the way we've seen it in what little we've seen of socialist societies.


i really doubt that every facet of schooling is a grand conspiration by the evil capitalist bourgeois. i think sharing is important beccause without it our society wouldnt be that advanced.
I really have no idea how it's so controversial to suggest that schools are shaped by the nature of the capitalist state. It seems like one of the most obvious and pertinent conclusions one could come to in analyzing capitalist societies. Schools are an arm of the capitalist state. A particularly ideological arm, in addition to its economic functions. Part of the functioning of most capitalist states is a democratic component - but it's a really weak kind of democracy with limited, albeit significant effect. I'm not even mentioning the fact that this "democracy" excludes the people who are actually the objects of public education from almost any kind of participation at all. Parents - working class parents - are part of the problem too, even if they're a bigger part of the solution at the same time. Life is complex.


This is probably also why things like art, music, etc. are not as emphasized as it's harder to judge who is "better" in these areas. But anyway, we do not have a Deweyite educational system at all.
I think it probably has more to do with the fact that almost anyone whose views are actually taken seriously, and implemented, even if they sound very progressive, school is conceptualized as a training centre. Arts basically contribute very little to the economy - especially educated arts, where it's something people can do for themselves. Compared against technical skills and training for obedience.

The political economics of physical education in this analysis is interesting too, but I have to leave and can't get into it at the moment.


However, corporations cooperate all the time. They cooperate to lobby bills. They cooperate to lobby congress. They cooperate to get hand outs from the government. They cooperate to fix prices. And so on. Only the "little people" are expected to fight to survive and get what they can in a "free-market," the ruling class is well protected.
This is a major contradiction of capitalist society - class solidarity versus market competition - and I'm well aware of it.

[LOLseph Stalin]

It's simple really. Children are taught to share for several reasons. For one, at that early stage in life, children are just beginning to be introduced to things such as good morals and how to properly interact with the people around them. I think sharing is a big part of this since without it most people at this stage would just become social rejects. It's generally our nature to interact in this way(well unless there's money involved then it's a whole different story...). So yea, sharing just generally helps children get along. Of course, they begin to lose this as they get older and start making money, especially those who become hardcore Capitalists and owning huge corporations. It does help with some things though. As Spetnaz said it could be helpful to get people to pay taxes and donate to charities if they're encouraged to share as children.

[Dr Mindbender]

I think capitalism likes to encourage sharing in the charitable sense because charity acts as a 'band aid for the conscience' against the crisis that it causes.

Ergo, people are led to believe they've done enough which numbs their appetite for radical change.

[dogfooddi]

sharing is an important part of socialization that makes children more pleasant to be around. if you share, you are also likely to be interested in other people and be able to establish better rapport with them.

now, just as important, how do you teach kids to actually work for what they want and not be self-entitled freeloaders? mooching sources including parents, friends, the "system" or whatever? how do you teach a person to be engaging as well as friendly?
don't get me wrong, this isn't some capitalistic attitude or anything. i mean "working for what you want" in the terms of appreciating what you have and understanding what you had to do to get it.

so how do you teach kids to share responsibility?