People just don't want to know - Problem with education

[Moskitto]

I've noticed a problem with educating people.

Looking at Red Encyclodeadia's biographies the visitor numbers for Stalin and Mao Zedung (seen as being evil people we idolise) are 888 and 513 respectively.

Yet those for Ken Livingstone and Thomas More (who's socialist ideas are unknown by many people especially for Thomas More) are 97 and 96.

It seems to me that the problem isn't that people don't know that socialism doesn't mean Stalin and Mao. It's that people don't want to know and don't want to find out about any non-Stalinists.

So please if you produce a website, denounce Stalin, Draw his policies in comparison to Hitlers, show that politics is Lateral not Circular so Stalin has to be the same as Hitler not "the opposite but just as bad."

Then again that won't work because people just shut off.

[Pete]

I know it is sad. I think dummyvision has a lot to do with it. hey do you know that I found this on page 41 of the back pages? Nice eh?

[Felicia]

HAHAHA you found this :biggrin:

[redstar2000]

Looking at Red Encyclodeadia's biographies the visitor numbers for Stalin and Mao Zedung (seen as being evil people we idolise) are 888 and 513 respectively.

Yet those for Ken Livingstone and Thomas More (who's socialist ideas are unknown by many people especially for Thomas More) are 97 and 96.

Well, I can see one problem with this comparison.

Ken Livingstone is the "red" mayor of London, right? That means he's almost completely unknown outside of the U.K. In addition to which, of course, he is but a very pale shade of "pink" at best.

Why would anyone look him up?

"Saint" Thomas More (canonized in the 1930s, probably for executing at least four people for "heresy" back in the 1500s) has not been read widely in at least a century and probably more...works that old (like Utopia) are almost unreadable to those who know only modern English.

I have no idea if he had any "socialist" ideas, but if he did, they must have been very fragmentary indeed, probably based on the usual scraps from the "Book of Acts".

Why would someone interested in socialism look him up?

Stalin and Mao, on the other hand, were (along with Lenin), the dominant figures of 20th century communism...they cast a long shadow. Everyone knows that on this board and across the internet, those guys loom large.

In the real world, the image of Stalin is slowly fading (too slowly, to be sure) and the remaining guerilla movements that take their inspiration from Mao don't really amount to much any more.

Time will do its usual good work on those "eternal monuments".

But there's something else at work here too. In the western world, we have been trained to be "star conscious"...to think of ideas as great or trivial depending on how famous the advocate is. (Pete is right about the influence of dummyvision here.)

How many people will look up Alexandra Kollantai or even Rosa Luxemburg? They both had better ideas than Stalin or Mao...but they're not famous.

One way to oppose this: constantly criticize the "star system" in left politics!

The worship of "famous lefties" is just as bad as the worship of gods; nothing good can come from it.

:cool:

[Pete]

Utopia isn't actually written in that 'ununderstanble' english, but then again I also have no problem reading shakespeare who was around at a much more turbulent time for the English langauge.

[redstar2000]

Pete, if you have truly mastered the vocabulary that Shakespeare used to such an extent that you have no difficulty reading him, I congratulate you.

The edition of the plays that I read in high school had more footnotes than text...and it was still tedious and laborious going, like swimming in quicksand.

Of course, one can still "catch the drift" of what 15th-17th century writers were saying...sort of. And late 18th century writers are often quite accessible, inspite of their somewhat ornate style (I still read Gibbon for pleasure).

But the modern reader, for the most part, is "used to" a straightforward discourse and rarely has the patience to follow the convolutions of early writings. Combine this with an obsolete vocabulary, archiac meanings of words that are still used but have new meanings, and a "mind-set" that "feels" alien...and it all equals a readership as close to zero as makes no difference. If there were no university courses that required the student to read More's Utopia, would anyone bother?

A few people are passionately interested in "all the old stuff" and more power to them.

But if you pointed a gun at me and made me choose between Thomas More and "The Simpsons", even I would have to pick the dummyvision.

A personal choice, of course.

:cool:


(Edited by redstar2000 at 1:07 pm on June 12, 2003)

[Kez]

redstar, wtf, lenin is not even in the same category as stalin or mao, grow up man

im gonna start a threaad on Lenin so we can finalise this bullshit u spread so u wont keep pointing out false facts in every fuckin thread.

i'll 'av u

[redstar2000]

As usual, Kamo, you completely miss the point of the discussion.

Look at Moskitto's original post; did he even mention Lenin?

He was speaking of educating people whose only knowledge of communists were Stalin and Mao.

I mentioned Lenin in passing because, in my experience, many people have heard of him too.

Among communists, Lenin has the greater reputation...but for people alive today, Stalin and Mao are the towering figures of 20th century communism.

Start as many Lenin threads as you like, Kamo. I'm almost always in the mood to give worshippers like yourself "a boot in the arse" and smashing idols is my favorite sport.

Especially so-called "communist" idols.

:cool:

(Edited by redstar2000 at 1:21 pm on June 12, 2003)

[Pete]

If there were no university courses that required the student to read More's Utopia, would anyone bother?

The past is a treasure, one just must remember not to get lost in it. Our copies of Shakespeare have all of those foot notes, but after grade 10 I didn't really need them any more, except for some lewd mentions and sexual innudendos which are centurys dead. I have a few of his non-footnoted works lying around somewhere. Books. Lovely books.

The literary genius has been lost and replaced, and I think television is replacing our modern literary genius. But I will stop talking about this out side of literature, unless of course you would like my babble to continue.

Especially so-called "communist" idols.

I think the only true idols are ones own self, everyone else is just fodder for our minds. If we cannot become above what we want to be, and be able to in a way idolize what we are doing, not to the point of arrogance but to the point of confidence, then we are nothing and empty. Idolize yourself not some dead, or living, human. Change will not come from them but from yourself.

[CruelVerdad]

Many times people just don´t give a fuck, about socialism, communism, etc... And say whatever they want about it, with out knowing by sure what they mean...
People should read and learn before saying something...