krazny
29th January 2012, 20:03
I'm thinking out loud as much as I'm looking for feedback, so bear with me if you would...
One of the major roadblocks I've found in thinking about how we will transition to socialism in some form is our failed educational system. It's quite clear to me that it needs to be burned to the ground, at least through the secondary level, and rebuilt on the ashes. The question is how.
One of the problems we as socialists face is that we seem to have a predisposition to think in terms of equality for the least of us, and in an educational setting this holds back the most qualified. Bear in mind, of course, I'm not suggesting that we stop providing special education services and such. There is a frightening number of students who don't pass because they just don't bother, not because they need "special education," etc. Instead of going over the same material seventy times, and losing the interest of the top half of the class, it makes far more sense in my mind to move at a reasonable pace - say, a pace appropriate for the 70th percentile - and expect the rest of the class to keep up. Those who choose to do so will come out better educated. Those who choose not to will become a lost generation, admittedly, but their offspring will see the importance of working at an appropriate level in order to have more opportunities.
Anyone who finishes high school is guaranteed a job at a reasonable level. Anyone who doesn't finish high school or doesn't graduate is welcome to go back, prove they have the requisite knowledge, and get what we'd think of as a GED today. I don't see a way to do this without losing part of a generation - I'm open to ideas on that.
Those who don't want to put in the work more than likely will find themselves in gangs and the like. That said, gangs are not per se a bad thing. Putting aside the large criminal enterprises - which would be stamped out anyway as capitalist monstrosities - smaller gangs could actually be good for society. Rather than giving the police a monopoly on enforcement and concerns for the neighborhood, leverage the leaders of "gangs" to bring the dropouts and such into productive work bettering the neighborhood and enforcing minor violations as a citizen watch group. Yes, that's a bit idealistic, but prevents entirely losing part of a generation.
This theory isn't perfect, but so few are. I'm interested in discussing and building this concept, and in picking it apart to make it more reasonable to implement and doing away with the holes in it...
One of the major roadblocks I've found in thinking about how we will transition to socialism in some form is our failed educational system. It's quite clear to me that it needs to be burned to the ground, at least through the secondary level, and rebuilt on the ashes. The question is how.
One of the problems we as socialists face is that we seem to have a predisposition to think in terms of equality for the least of us, and in an educational setting this holds back the most qualified. Bear in mind, of course, I'm not suggesting that we stop providing special education services and such. There is a frightening number of students who don't pass because they just don't bother, not because they need "special education," etc. Instead of going over the same material seventy times, and losing the interest of the top half of the class, it makes far more sense in my mind to move at a reasonable pace - say, a pace appropriate for the 70th percentile - and expect the rest of the class to keep up. Those who choose to do so will come out better educated. Those who choose not to will become a lost generation, admittedly, but their offspring will see the importance of working at an appropriate level in order to have more opportunities.
Anyone who finishes high school is guaranteed a job at a reasonable level. Anyone who doesn't finish high school or doesn't graduate is welcome to go back, prove they have the requisite knowledge, and get what we'd think of as a GED today. I don't see a way to do this without losing part of a generation - I'm open to ideas on that.
Those who don't want to put in the work more than likely will find themselves in gangs and the like. That said, gangs are not per se a bad thing. Putting aside the large criminal enterprises - which would be stamped out anyway as capitalist monstrosities - smaller gangs could actually be good for society. Rather than giving the police a monopoly on enforcement and concerns for the neighborhood, leverage the leaders of "gangs" to bring the dropouts and such into productive work bettering the neighborhood and enforcing minor violations as a citizen watch group. Yes, that's a bit idealistic, but prevents entirely losing part of a generation.
This theory isn't perfect, but so few are. I'm interested in discussing and building this concept, and in picking it apart to make it more reasonable to implement and doing away with the holes in it...