Religious Symbols in School

[Socialsmo o Muerte]

Due to the recent court order with the Muslim girl in England wanting to wear her religious dress, this issue has again been raised.

Personally, I don't think any religious symbols should be worn in the school. Although I am all for people practicing their faiths and the cultural diversity this creates, schools are not the places to wear religious symbols.

In school, uniform is worn so everyone feels equal. I know that as yet, not everyone gets an equal platform in education, but uniforms are an important part of creating such equality.

Wearing religious clothing or symbols such as the hijab, a turban, a Jewish hat ( i do apologise, i forget the name of them) or just a crucifix on a chain is seperating children in school leading to further, hidden segregation and it does not allow full integration between pupils at times, with "groups" sticking together because they know they are "the same" due to the adorning of such symbols. They basically create another "us and them" culture and it is not healthy.

[Take the Power back]

I am assuming you live in England? Because in America, most schools have no uniform code. I have never actually seen much relgious imagery in my school, but to be fair, my high school is pretty small (450 pop) and overwhelmingly white. A cross or two, nothing gawdy. The Jewish Hat is a "Yamaka", pardon my spelling. I think necklaces or something to a small effect are ok, but maybe wearing hats or veils is going to far. In these times, being PC means everything.

[hobosexual]

ya, i think it's pretty funny how they have seperation of church and state but they have in god we trust on all the currency, and how they don't want you to pray in school but since elementary they make you say the pledge of allegiance which has one nation undergod. it's bullshit.

[dopediana]

i love it how it's separation of the church and state but the church doesn't have to pay taxes.

well, all of what you said is true, SoM, but all the same i kind of dig being able to express myself, not necessarily religiously but otherwise. anyways, i think uniforms are a relief. i had to wear them in 8th grade. saves a lot of trouble.

[Kez]

Is banning these symbols progressive?

Well, the end result is arguably good, however, surely it should be the people who ban the religious mumbo jumbo shit? When the state has to do it, the element of progressiveness is diluted. It should be local community who decides if they should allow wearing of this crap.

[James]

This issue has been so distorted by the PC lobby.

She is a muslim, thus is meant to wear certain things; the school uniform did actually cover the basic dress required by her religion. What she wanted to wear was the complete thing, which is obvioulsy bad for several reasons;

A) safty - come on, we have all been in school corridors!
B) identification - "not a problem" of course when only one person wears it; but when a few cover their faces = problem.
C) school uniform - defeats the point of having one
D) her religious beliefs can be catered for with the above
E) this is more of a cultural thing: this is what the local muslim community even said (which works with the school obvioulsy).
F) there are other schools in the area which don't have such a uniform policy

Conclusion - no she shouldn't be allowed to wear it.



Should people be able to wear religious stuff? Well if the have to, by their religion - i can see the obvious need which needs to be catered for. This is where local communities and schools come into it - they should design a uniform with religious NEEDs in mind. Cultural things are different though, and shouldn't be allowed when there is a uniform.
I think a key word is: discrete


I am, by the way, all for uniforms. Think they are an excellent idea. I'm sad to see my old high school letting standards slip.

[h&s]

Uniforms stop people from being outcast because of the clothes they wear, so they must be a good thing.
the Muslim girl in the news at the moment was asking the wear the full veil, and because she wasn't allowed to, she hasn't been to school in 2 years.
The argument is that what she wants to wear isn't required by the Qu'ran; she is already allowed to wear that.
She wants to wear the veil that is just traditional dress in some Arab countries, so not letting her wear it is totally justified.

[Socialsmo o Muerte]

I also heard a Muslim woman talking on BBC News about this. She correctly pointed out that in Britain, all of our schools that require uniform, which is the vast majority, require it to be smart and respectable. That is, after all, the point of uniform. No school has a uniform policy in which girls have to show off their legs. Therefore, all school uniforms in Britain conform with the Qu'ran which says women must be seen to be respectable and not show off their flesh in the manner we see western women showing it off. I know that's not a direct quote, but that's the basic principle.

The hijab is not, so this woman said, a requirement in the Qu'ran. And as h&sforever pointed out, the particular dress which the girl wanted to wear was a cultural/ethnic kind, not one which was religiously required. And if one wants to come to our country and utilise our education system, they should have to abideby our customs and regulations, obviously.

I think the "PC-ness" of this issue needs to be taken out. Schools are schools and in schools everyone wears the same uniform so we are all equal by appearence and presentation. It is the most we can do to keep the poor amongst the rich as equals. In our society, this is one of the few principles which does this and it needs to be adhered to.

It is just like when Muslims go to Mecca, they all shave their hair (men) and women cut a certain amount off and everyone wears the same thing. I think that is the best argument to put to the people who are arguing that people need to be able to "express themselves" - we are, fundamentally, following something which is one of the principles of Islam!

And, come on, it's for like 6 hours of the day! For the rest of it, everyone can wear what they want.

[cormacobear]

I have religous tattoos on my hands kind of hard to cover up so I am of course in favour of allowing religous symbolism in schools.

I hadn't considered the Identification thing though, if girls were allowed to wear Burka's you could send anyone your height to write your exams.

togh issue but it's that slippery slope again limiting the rights of a few leads to loss of rights to many, it always does.

[James]

hardly - its the way it has always been in british schools. Her rights arn't infringed at all - her religious needs are met by the uniform.

[Daymare17]

The capitalist state is behind this. The capitalist state is not a progressive thing. It wants to divide and rule rather than spread tolerance. It's like in the USSR when they put Lenin statues on top of mosques. Kids should be allowed to wear whatever in schools, and at the same time taught to tolerate this whatever. It's that hard if you have any level of confidence in people.

[praxis1966]

Originally posted by [email protected] 21 2004, 03:07 PM
hardly - its the way it has always been in british schools. Her rights arn't infringed at all - her religious needs are met by the uniform.
By this same logic I suppose that other delightful little customs ought to be retained as well. Like the practice of keeping illegal "sodomy" which basically outlaws any type of sex other than a man on top of a woman. It has always been this way, so let's not bother changing it.

What I would argue is that whether uniform requirements bar against the wearing of religious symbols in school is not the point. It places an unnecessary restriction on the right of the student to engage in one of the few forms of expression still tolerated in school. I could care less about this "us and them" culture you keep going on about. It still boils down to placing limits on personal freedom.

[redstar2000]

A nasty little problem, isn't it?

Since I'm opposed to the public expression of religion, I have no problem with governments banning as much of that crap as they think they can get away with.

On the other hand, I despise uniforms.

First of all, they are defended on the grounds that they "make people look equal"...as if the image of equality is an acceptable substitute for the real thing.

And secondly, what is a uniform intended to promote other than uniformity? The message is obedience to authority...not exactly one of our priorities, is it?

So, with a foot firmly in each camp, I will say...

1. Down with all public display of religious symbolism!

2. Otherwise, let people wear what they damn well please!

Footnote to 2: if you wear Nazi paraphernalia in public, it shall not be considered a crime if people beat the crap out of you.

I hate these kinds of questions.

:redstar2000:

The Redstar2000 Papers (http://www.redstar2000papers.fightcapitalism.net)
A site about communist ideas

[Socialsmo o Muerte]

"First of all, they are defended on the grounds that they "make people look eual"...as if the image of equality is an acceptable substitute for the real thing."

I certainly, and I'm sure others too, pointed out that it does not eradicate inequality obviously, but it is one thing that needs to be used to create such equality. If you think people should be allowed to wear what they want it is ridiculous. If one kid comes in in all his latest designer gear whereas a poor pupil comes in in his rags that his parents could barely afford, then it creates an inequality in the mind of the pupils from a young, impressionable age.


And secondly, what is a uniform intended to promote other than uniformity? The message is obedience to authority...not exactly one of our priorities, is it?

Uniform is used so pupils can get the attitude that looking respectable and tidy is important. Also, it's used for the above mentioned reason which you expressed your disagreement with and I have already answered.

Just out of curiousity, are you in America? If so, it's not suprising that you are anti-school uniform

[Guerrilla22]

In some high schools in the US you are not allowed to wear certain colors together or certain team apparell, because it is considered gang related. I don't see how banning religious symbols in public schools infringes on anyone's rights. Organized religion is essentielly the same as street gangs, they were certain things to make themselves visuable to others in attempt to either show off their superiority or intimmidate.

However, I will say that if they ban religious symbols it should be all religious symbols and that includes cross necklaces as well.

[James]

By this same logic I suppose that other delightful little customs ought to be retained as well. Like the practice of keeping illegal "sodomy" which basically outlaws any type of sex other than a man on top of a woman. It has always been this way, so let's not bother changing it.

What I would argue is that whether uniform requirements bar against the wearing of religious symbols in school is not the point. It places an unnecessary restriction on the right of the student to engage in one of the few forms of expression still tolerated in school. I could care less about this "us and them" culture you keep going on about. It still boils down to placing limits on personal freedom.



Not at all. In fact if you think that is the "same logic", i advise you seek a doctor.

Her religious needs (which this issue is about in the first place) is MET by the uniform. She wants to wear a cultural thing. Thats fine - but not at that school, which has a uniform code. There are other schools in her area that she could have gone to.

+ + +


First of all, they are defended on the grounds that they "make people look equal"...as if the image of equality is an acceptable substitute for the real thing.

Well they do. This is the real world: today. Of course in the ideal world which may exist in the future everyone will be equal (blah blah blah)
But today this isn't the case.
Uniforms do provide equality: go to a brit school on non-uniform day and you'll see how school uniforms are a GOOD idea.


And secondly, what is a uniform intended to promote other than uniformity? The message is obedience to authority...not exactly one of our priorities, is it?

Are you for or against the concept of school?

[Daymare17]

redstar2000 I guess you supported the CC of the CPSU when it demolished churches, and put Lenin statues on mosques while there were still many Christians/Moslems in the USSR?

[h&s]

There are other schools in her area that she could have gone to.
True, but she refused to go private (good on her!)

[elijahcraig]

I really couldn't care less if some little jesus freak wants to wear a cross or a muslim wants to wear something, or buddhist or whatever.

At my school, towards the end of the year, some jesus freaks started to "protest" the rule that they couldn't pray in school by having group prayers in the hallways every morning in front of everyone in a circle. Every one looked, ...then walked away, even the teachers. Eventually, when they saw no one was coming from the ACLU, and no one at the school gave a shit...they stopped praying. I thought that was hilarious. Was the point that they wanted to pray or that they wanted the right to pray? Moronic jesus freaks.

[James]

True, but she refused to go private (good on her!)


State schools too.

[Frederick_Engles]

Originally posted by [email protected] 22 2004, 02:15 PM


At my school, towards the end of the year, some jesus freaks started to "protest" the rule that they couldn't pray in school by having group prayers in the hallways every morning in front of everyone in a circle. Every one looked, ...then walked away, even the teachers. Eventually, when they saw no one was coming from the ACLU, and no one at the school gave a shit...they stopped praying. I thought that was hilarious. Was the point that they wanted to pray or that they wanted the right to pray? Moronic jesus freaks.
hey replace the words "Jesus freaks" with "damn commies" and "praying" with "speaking" and hey presto, it's a cut out from combat18.org forums

[elijahcraig]

Yeah, that's the same.

Dumbass.

[Frederick_Engles]

care to elaborate?

[elijahcraig]

No.

[Daymare17]

Elijah Craig, what organisation are you a member of?

[elijahcraig]

I'm not joining your cult.

And I don't like catholics, Engles.

[Frederick_Engles]

You're choice, mate

[Socialsmo o Muerte]

"I don't like Catholics".

Nice.

It is interesting what you said before though. Do people protest about these things because they want to do certain things, or just because they want "the right" to?

Or maybe that's not interesting.

I also of course agree with James' point against redstar. Similar to mine, but it does seem that redstar is surely against the concept of school as well as you pointed out!

[Frederick_Engles]

"redstar"
*cough*, need I say more?

[praxis1966]

Not at all. In fact if you think that is the "same logic", i advise you seek a doctor.

And if you think that it's not, you should see an English teacher. Maybe then you would understand the concept of analogy.

In any case, you have ignored what I see as the most central part of my argument. This is a case of personal freedom, and within certain reasonable limits, I don't see what the problem is with wearing whatever you want in school.


In some high schools in the US you are not allowed to wear certain colors together or certain team apparell, because it is considered gang related. I don't see how banning religious symbols in public schools infringes on anyone's rights. Organized religion is essentielly the same as street gangs, they were certain things to make themselves visuable to others in attempt to either show off their superiority or intimmidate.

And when was the last time you heard of someone being beaten or stabbed by a marauding gang of Jews in a public school? The two are not the same as gang colors are not allowed to provide for the physical safety of students.

[Guerrilla22]

True, however, religious symbols can lead to violence in schools as well.

[James]

And if you think that it's not, you should see an English teacher. Maybe then you would understand the concept of analogy.

In any case, you have ignored what I see as the most central part of my argument. This is a case of personal freedom, and within certain reasonable limits, I don't see what the problem is with wearing whatever you want in school.


Its a bad analogy.

I said its not part of a slipery slope, because such a claim seems to suggest that this policy is something new. But uniforms have been around for years and years and years...

Is it a slipery slope to infringement of rights? Not at all.

How are her rights infringed? I proved that they are not.
I didn't ignore your main "point" at all: I'll repeat it again for you.
She had personal freedom to follow her religious needs within the school uniform. Ok? Do you follow? Her 'religious rights' were okay dokay with the uniform. There was no infringement. Ok?? Do you follow?
Or do you argue otherwise?

The school has a uniform policy. There are other state schools in the area, which don't have a uniform policy, which she could have gone to. So if she was dead against uniforms (which i fail to see - seeing as what she wants to wear is pritty much a cultural uniform), she could still go to a school.

On uniforms.
They are a VERY good thing. You may not think so, but you don't live here, so i don't expect you to understand the positive effect they have. And they do have this old boy. I do understand that on paper they can be made out to be "tools of tyranny" etc etc - but such a view, when relating it to british schools is one that is philosophically detached from reality.
They may be representative of conforming blah blah blah (such a line of argument usually ends in the opinion that schools are a bad idea: which i fundamentally disagree with) - but in fact they give equality which would be unatainable without.
As i said, go to a british school on a non-uniform day and you'll be shocked by the inequality.

Boring? Well good! means the kids can concentrate on the work. I personally feel that letting standards slip in my old school regarding uniform has party contributed to the general break down in order (which is a good thing in lesson - i was there to learn, not to listen to some idiot rant on about how its "unfair").

[redstar2000]

Are you for or against the concept of school?

Education in a Communist Society (http://redstar2000papers.fightcapitalism.net/theory.php?subaction=showfull&id=1082767212&archive=&cnshow=headlines&start_from=&ucat=&)


redstar2000, I guess you supported the CC of the CPSU when it demolished churches, and put Lenin statues on mosques while there were still many Christians/Moslems in the USSR?

They didn't do those things nearly enough! They should have demolished all the cathedrals and churches, closed the seminaries, etc.

I hadn't heard the one about "Lenin statues on mosques" though. I'm sure Lenin would have been "honored". :lol:


On uniforms. They are a VERY good thing. You may not think so, but you don't live here, so I don't expect you to understand the positive effect they have.

What is "positive" about deliberately creating a false image of equality and a true atmosphere of spineless conformity?


I do understand that on paper they can be made out to be "tools of tyranny" etc etc - but such a view, when relating it to British schools is one that is philosophically detached from reality.

Things that "look bad" on paper generally turn out to be bad in practice.


They may be representative of conforming blah blah blah (such a line of argument usually ends in the opinion that schools are a bad idea: which I fundamentally disagree with) - but in fact they give equality which would be unattainable without.

They do not "give equality" except in appearance.

It is fake equality!


I personally feel that letting standards slip in my old school regarding uniform has partly contributed to the general break down in order...

Yes, standards are always "slipping", aren't they? Would you like to bring back the cane?


...I was there to learn, not to listen to some idiot rant on about how it's "unfair"...

Yeah...bunch of whining bastards! Did you admonish them to "keep a stiff upper lip"?

Of course you did.

:redstar2000:

The Redstar2000 Papers (http://www.redstar2000papers.fightcapitalism.net)
A site about communist ideas

[Socialsmo o Muerte]

Btoh of your arguments against uniform are just the same as arguing against anything which has any sort of order or organisation to it.

Uniforms are practical in so many ways. It's the equality reason that me and James are arguing, which I maintain is the main reason why I support them. redstar, you say it is "fake" equality, covering up the real inequalities. Are they covering up the real inequalities? Speak for yourself. I don't think anyone takes for granted that inequality remains in schools, so I don't think you have a point at all. Like I have pointed out, it is one thing that can be, and of course is being, done to try and maintain a state of mind in the pupils that they are all equal to one another in the class room. And DON'T BOTHER SAYING IT...We KNOW that they are not really. But it is one thing that is a part of trying to get to that equality.

What else? School uniforms are cheap; all pupils, whatever their financial situation, can afford them. And if they really can't, the school provides it. Can't see fairer than that. If there is a child in such a situation that they can't afford uniform, imagine the humiliation they would suffer day to day seeing the wealthier kids wearing their clothes.

I think what your forgetting is that schools ARE NOT society. Your arguments are ones which you gain when putting schools into a similar light to society when, in reality, they are not. The people who go to schools are not mature adults, they are children aged 5 to 17/18, they do not think the same as adults. THAT is why uniforms encourage, in their minds, a sense that they are equal to the next child and will go some way to helping them succeed. YES, more has to be done, but it is a stepping stone.

As for the Americans arguing in this; you cannot understand. Maybe, in your schools, the pupils were so open minded andnobody cared what each other wore to school. Maybe that is why you are arguing like you are. But I very much doubt it. I think it is just out of a need to "rebel" and go against uniformity. Which is just reactionary.

And what else is practical? They are smart, they are safe, they are cheap as I mentioned, they can be adapted to the weather, hey, they can even give a child at a young age a sense of pride to be wearing a uniform. You have to remember that it is children, not adults we're talking about.

And as for the Muslim girl. It is like I have mentioned. By definition, school uniforms adhere to Islamic needs for what women "should" wear. The school in question even went a step further to provide a different uniform for Muslim girls as well.

[Kobbot 401]

Even if religon was not the issue, and the student was still forced into wearing a school uniform, that dose not stop that student from being diffrent. I have dressed and tryed to look the same like meny students at my school, but i am still a social outcast.

[truthaddict11]

I think what your forgetting is that schools ARE NOT society. Your arguments are ones which you gain when putting schools into a similar light to society when, in reality, they are not. The people who go to schools are not mature adults, they are children aged 5 to 17/18, they do not think the same as adults.
funny, because ever since I could remember in school I wanted to be treated with the same as an adult.


THAT is why uniforms encourage, in their minds, a sense that they are equal to the next child and will go some way to helping them succeed. YES, more has to be done, but it is a stepping stone
i dont see how wearing polo shirts and navy blue pants (which seem to be the norm for uniforms here in the US) give a since of equality, some kids will always be more popular and liked than other kids. case closed.


I think it is just out of a need to "rebel" and go against uniformity. Which is just reactionary. if speaking out against conformity is really reactionary then what the hell are you doing on a communist message board?


they can even give a child at a young age a sense of pride to be wearing a uniform. .
really? from what I remeber when I was in school when rumors were around that we may be having to wear uniforms the majority of the students where pretty pissed about it, luckily it was just a rumor.


You have to remember that it is children, not adults we're talking about so their opinions dont matter then? why? shouldnt children no matter how young be given the choice to wear hot itchy uniforms or what they want?

[James]

i dont see how wearing polo shirts and navy blue pants (which seem to be the norm for uniforms here in the US) give a since of equality, some kids will always be more popular and liked than other kids. case closed.

Well look at it the other way.
Kid 1 has latest fashion blah blah blah
Kid 2 has pair of old shorts and a second hand shirt.

"Case closed"

[h&s]

Speaking from expierience, I will always support uniforms in school.
In my school uniform was compulsory, and it didn't stop people from being individual with it, but there were no problems.
Whenever we had a 'non-uniform day' some people would come in wearing stylish stuff, which made them feel good, but others couldn't afford that stuff, and were ridiculed for it.
Non-uniform days always separated us out even more than we were already.

[redstar2000]

Both of your arguments against uniform are just the same as arguing against anything which has any sort of order or organisation to it.

How so?

"Order" and "organization" are not "abstract virtues" in themselves...except, perhaps, to fascists.

To rational people, these characteristics must have rational purposes.

What are the rational purposes of school uniforms?


Redstar, you say it is "fake" equality, covering up the real inequalities. Are they covering up the real inequalities? Speak for yourself. I don't think anyone takes for granted that inequality remains in schools, so I don't think you have a point at all.

I'm not even sure what you're trying to say here. Are you saying that "real inequalities" don't exist?

Putting class, wealth, etc. aside, what about the kid who starts school but who has spent his/her formative years in a home environment where reading books is considered not only desirable but normal...vs. the kid that's never seen anything but dummyvision?

In addition, consider this: why should school authorities want to create an image of (fake) "equality" in the first place?

Well, isn't fake equality what bourgeois ideology is all about? Fake equality "before the law"? Fake equality "in the free market"? Why not fake equality in schools?


Like I have pointed out, it is one thing that can be, and of course is being, done to try and maintain a state of mind in the pupils that they are all equal to one another in the class room. And DON'T BOTHER SAYING IT...We KNOW that they are not really. But it is one thing that is a part of trying to get to that equality.

I see. You're going to make kids "feel equal" by lying to them.

Perhaps you hope -- and certainly the school authorities hope -- that if the kids get suckered by fake "equality" then they'll never get around to demanding real equality, right?


If there is a child in such a situation that they can't afford [a] uniform, imagine the humiliation they would suffer day to day seeing the wealthier kids wearing their clothes.

Imagine their delight when their (radical) teachers made a point of repeating now and then that who you are does not have fuck all to do with what you wear.

That substance is something different from image!


I think what your forgetting is that schools ARE NOT society...The people who go to schools are not mature adults, they are children aged 5 to 17/18, they do not think the same as adults.

Thanks for offering that platter of sweeping generalizations but...I'm on a diet. :lol:

Seriously, the proposition that "children" don't think like "adults" cannot withstand critical examination. The differences that do exist seem primarily the results of simply having less information to work with.

Someone who is 18 appears to think very differently than someone who is 5; but someone who is 19 thinks very much like someone who is 18...as someone who is 6 thinks very much like someone who is 5. As information accumulates, thinking "changes".

It ought to be needless to add, but arbitrarily labeling someone on the basis of their calendar age "a child" without regard to the information they've actually accumulated is rationally indefensible.


YES, more has to be done, but it is a stepping stone.

Lies are never "stepping stones" to anything but even bigger lies.


As for the Americans arguing in this; you cannot understand. Maybe, in your schools, the pupils were so open minded and nobody cared what each other wore to school.

Some did, some didn't. I recall catching some flak in the 7th grade for wearing sandals in warm weather...the phrase "get a life" had not yet been coined, but that was pretty much the substance of my response.

I find the suggestion that "the English are special" with regard to judging people by their dress lacking in credibility. There are people in every country who are preoccupied with their own appearance and the appearance of others...sensible folks avoid them if at all possible and certainly pay no attention to their, duh, "opinions".


Maybe that is why you are arguing like you are. But I very much doubt it. I think it is just out of a need to "rebel" and go against uniformity.

Duh, yeah! I think rebellion against "uniformity" is generally "a good thing" and something that communists should always encourage.


...hey, they can even give a child at a young age a sense of pride to be wearing a uniform.

What a disgusting thing to be "proud of"! Will they take equal pride, when they "grow up", in the new uniform they get to wear on occupation duty in Iraq? (Will they compete for the "best dressed torturer" award?)


You have to remember that it is children, not adults we're talking about.

It's the kind of adults you want to make them into that concerns me.

------------------------


I have dressed and tried to look the same like many students at my school, but I am still a social outcast.

So was I. So are many and perhaps even most bright kids. Don't let it get you down; just go ahead and do the things you enjoy doing and to hell with the rest. You will, in time, find the people who want to hook up with you.

The worst thing you can do is try to fake a sense of "identity" in order to overcome social isolation. You'd end up hating yourself.

Don't do that.

:redstar2000:

The Redstar2000 Papers (http://www.redstar2000papers.fightcapitalism.net)
A site about communist ideas

[James]

Some did, some didn't. I recall catching some flak in the 7th grade for wearing sandals in warm weather...the phrase "get a life" had not yet been coined, but that was pretty much the substance of my response.


LOL, i got that last year too!

[Daymare17]

I totally agree with redstar2000. Instead of administratively "abolishing" differences in clothing the kids should be taught that clothes don't matter. There is no other way.

[James]

and do you think that abolishing uniforms would do that?
Do you think lessons in class will do "that"? They havn't done much regarding "citizenship".

I suggest that maybe you are all being philosophically detached from the actual issue and real life situation. Unless you are going to drastically change attitudes (which i think is impossible to the extent you are implying), getting rid of british uniforms will only increase feelings of inequality.

If uniforms do help the young feel equal (which i do believe in - and i'm speaking from experiance); then surely that is what you want. It isn't "lieing", its helping these kids break down the barriers that would otherwise exist.

Do not underestimate the power of perception.

[Socialsmo o Muerte]

I fail to understand how you think. You think uniforms hide inequality and only serve to increase it. However you think abolishing them will help more? Why? Because, you say, the attitudes should be changed. Like James said, you cannot unfortunately change an attitude over night. And besides, uniforms go some way to getting rid of the attitude that because one is wealthier, he is better.

truthaddict: "if speaking out against conformity is really reactionary then what the hell are you doing on a communist message board?"

Is that what Communism is to you? You can just go to your local student union to fulfill your ideal Communist utopia then.

And not once did I say the childrens opinions didn't matter. What I was getting at was that schools are where their minds are being educated. They need to be educated with a perception that all are equal.

And if you're going to harp on about your "personal experience" then I will about mine. Coming from a working class family in a working class neighbourhood, yet going to a working class school, I found that seeing the "rich kids" wearing the same as me and being in the same position as me encouraged me through school. It helped me believe I could acheive just the same as them. As it happens, I did acheive along "their" lines and also became extremely close friends with "them". If, from the age of 11, we had all gone to school in our regular clothes, I don't think it would've happened quite the same. Let's face it, the majority of people in our countries are materialistic and for children at that age, such things matter.


redstar: "Duh, yeah! I think rebellion against "uniformity" is generally "a good thing" and something that communists should always encourage."

A similar comment to the one I quoted from truthaddict above, but I also want to ask you: What about when the "uniforms" of life are created in a Communist society? Do we rebel against those? For what? That attitude is one which is ridiculous as there is never actually an end to the "means" you use.

[redstar2000]

I suggest that maybe you are all being philosophically detached from the actual issue and real life situation.

The "real life situation" is that people are unequal in class society.

The use of uniforms to attempt to "hide" that fact from kids is dishonest.

The "superior" kids are not fooled by it. And to the extent that you do succeed in fooling the "inferior kids", you have simply misled them about their real position in class society.

You have implanted a false sense of equality.


...getting rid of British uniforms will only increase feelings of inequality.

Such feelings need to be increased...drastically!


If uniforms do help the young feel equal (which I do believe in - and I'm speaking from experience); then surely that is what you want.

Nope. As a communist, I want the kids "on the bottom" to develop a fierce hatred and contempt for their "superiors". It will be good experience for them when they enter the "working world".

They will be under no illusions of "equality" under capitalism.


It isn't "lying", it's helping these kids break down the barriers that would otherwise exist.

What it actually does is help a few of the "inferior" kids climb up a few rungs on the social ladder...they're not aware of their real status so they think that with "hard work" they can "rise to the top". The "glass ceiling" for people of their class is "invisible"...until they crack their heads into it.


[Children]need to be educated with a perception that all are equal.

That is a false perception in class society.


What about when the "uniforms" of life are created in a Communist society? Do we rebel against those? For what?

I have no idea (like everyone else) of what the "uniforms of life" will be in communist society...or even if there will be such things.

But I do know that a rebellious attitude is always useful in human affairs.

The willingness to assert one's autonomy against the insolence of office is what makes one truly human.

:redstar2000:

The Redstar2000 Papers (http://www.redstar2000papers.fightcapitalism.net)
A site about communist ideas

[Reuben]

excellent pos redstar, i agree wholeheartedly

yes james perceptions are singnificant - but equality is not something that exists in the human mind, it is something t hat exists in the material world in terms of the distribution of resources. It is not simpl something that wil evaporate once we stop percieving each other as unequal. Regardless of what clothes we where their is a basic conflict betwwen the poor and the ruling class and whle their may be h a few exceptional individuals the interests o the 'haves' rely fundamentally on the 'have nots' (what ever clothes they are wearing)remaining in their place..

S o M in giving your account of the importance of uniform to educational achievment i believe you neglected to mention the role of priveleged education in your school career - did you not go to both a private and state sleective shcool - both of which have the luxury of picking and choosing who they want and do not want and palming those percieved as 'problem kids' off on those of us in the so -called comprehensives ( schools which - due to selective and private schools - are anything but comprehensive).

[James]

equality is not something that exists in the human mind, it is something t hat exists in the material world in terms of the distribution of resources.

Then why do people who are materially equal still feel unequal?
I think you are wrong - equality is not something that exists only in the material world in terms of the distribution of resources.

[Reuben]

Originally posted by [email protected] 26 2004, 10:24 PM
Then why do people who are materially equal still feel unequal?
I think you are wrong - equality is not something that exists only in the material world in terms of the distribution of resources.
yes - i per hhaps should have expessed myself better. Whati feel is that it does not exist *only* in the human mind and theat it exists most significantly and consequentially in the material world

[Raisa]

Originally posted by Socialsmo o [email protected] 22 2004, 02:52 AM

I certainly, and I'm sure others too, pointed out that it does not eradicate inequality obviously, but it is one thing that needs to be used to create such equality.

The thing about uniforms is since every one is wearing the same thing, then in order to know about a person you are obligated to pay attention to them, and what they have to say. You cant make conclusions by looking at their clothes. And in effect people can develop more of a real social personality, beyond superficialness.
I think this is important when you are going to learn something, to put superficialness aside, because its ignorance, and ignorance doesnt belong in school.

[Kobbot 401]

Finding equality is perhaps pointless in sosiety, because everyone thinks that they are better then the person right next to them. Even manic depresents feel that their pain is worse then others. How are uniforms going to change human instincts that we are better then someone else?

[Commie-K]

You can't achieve equality suddenly, you have to take small steps at it over time. You can definitely say that blacks are much more equal to whites (I don't want a speech about how they're not equal, I know racism still occurs, I'm just making a point.) now than during the 1800's. Change takes time. It WILL take time to gain full equality. Dressing everyone equally is just one of these steps.

[Socialsmo o Muerte]

My point exactly. Thank you.

[DaCuBaN]

Originally posted by [email protected] 26 2004, 04:43 PM
The "real life situation" is that people are unequal in class society.

The use of uniforms to attempt to "hide" that fact from kids is dishonest.

The "superior" kids are not fooled by it. And to the extent that you do succeed in fooling the "inferior kids", you have simply misled them about their real position in class society.

You have implanted a false sense of equality.
Class society or otherwise, there will always be inequality of a form, but it is this that we need to focus on. I'm sure you wouldn't disagree that one of the greatest things about humanity is our diversity of intellect, agility, strength and countless other attributes which allow each and every one of us to specialise our tasks.

I agree with this in mind that the use of uniforms is dishonest, but I perceive the message very differently from you: I see it as a great way of instilling comradery between schoolkids and of bringing those who come from wealthy beginnings down to the same level as the rest of us.

Perhaps this is why there's a large percentage of 'Middle Class Commies' in the UK.


As a communist, I want the kids "on the bottom" to develop a fierce hatred and contempt for their "superiors". It will be good experience for them when they enter the "working world".


sing uniforms actually helps here - although this is a front I do not promote. It creates the 'us and them' psychology.



The willingness to assert one's autonomy against the insolence of office is what makes one truly human.


Perhaps.... Although I would rephrase it to be more general

"The willingness to assert one's autonomy against authority makes one truly human"

[redstar2000]

I see it as a great way of instilling camaraderie between schoolkids and of bringing those who come from wealthy beginnings down to the same level as the rest of us.

On what grounds?

Granted, it make make it a little more difficult and time-consuming to sort out one's "social peers"...since you can't necessarily tell by appearance alone, you have to talk with someone for a few minutes before you can decide if they are "one of us".

But "camaraderie"? I don't believe in that for a second; the "superior" kids locate the ones who are "like them" and that's who they hang out with. Here and there one can find "cross-class" friendships but I'm a little suspicious even of those; I had a personal experience along those lines when I was in high school...only to learn that I was being patronized by this rich kid -- I was supposed to be the "symbol" of his "tolerance". Fuck that shit!


Perhaps this is why there's a large percentage of 'Middle Class Commies' in the UK.

There may well be "middle class" people who are sympathetic to some communist ideas...but I think if they were actually "face-to-face" with a soviet of workers' deputies, they wouldn't much like it.

:redstar2000:

The Redstar2000 Papers (http://www.redstar2000papers.fightcapitalism.net)
A site about communist ideas

[Socialsmo o Muerte]

It seems this is all based on personal experience because I find it inconceivable that you have that view.

And whoever said differently before, I went to a state comprehensive school, not a private one so that is not the reason I have these views.

Uniforms definately help children make friends based on who people are rather than what they are and what they wear. That is my experience. Your views completely do not fit into what I know.

Also, in studying school systems in Sociology, I know this is also the same for the vast majority in Britain.

It seems as though it is an American thing.

[Reuben]

sorry comrade i had a vague memory of this thread http://www.che-lives.com/forum/index.php?showtopic=4094&st=0

and mistook you - in my memory - for sociaist2000

sorry


Reuben

[che-Rabbi]

Im a jew and i go to a catholic school . Ive always been wearing my yamaka( jewish hat) to shcool from time to time and no one can make me take it off. Its my right as a Canadian . If people of different faiths choose to wear theyre spiritual clothing or religous ensembles then let them but dont expect me to come crying for pity when i get my ass kicked lol. although i do not tolorate any racism... EVER.

[Socialsmo o Muerte]

Oh you're hard.


Try and think of a wider social perspective on this rather than your personal predicament and you'll see that ridding our schools of religious symbols is a good thing.

Why do you need to wear your yamaka? Why do you need people to know you're Jewish? Why do you require that to have an "identity"?, which seems to be the argument used by many people.

Is it not enough for you to have your faith in God all day and know inside you who you are and what you believe in? Do you have to wear something to show people you believe in these things?

[DaCuBaN]

I don't agree with the way uniforms are though... Boiler suits would both be more practical, longer wearing, cheaper to produce and to me better looking. The old fashioned uniform idea server no purpose to me


If people of different faiths choose to wear theyre spiritual clothing or religous ensembles then let them but dont expect me to come crying for pity when i get my ass kicked

On the contrary, I believe you really shouldn't be wearing anything of a religious nature in schoolsThey can quite easily incite hatred, and although not directly the fault of the wearer, they could have avoided the scenario simply by not putting on that cross, or not wearing the yamaka. Considering that clothes are utterly meaningless things anyway, why does it matter?

[che-Rabbi]

I wear it simply to demonstrate my passion for being a man of a certain faith on religious holiday like hanuka ect... I have often been met with racism and little jokes however this only made me feel stronger about what i believe in and why i should stick to my familys values. I know that this wont make god like me or make me any more special than a jew who doesnt. But i do it to demonstate the fact that i have rights and i will exploite the finer points of my constitutional rights.

[Guerrilla22]

Making kids wear uniforms to defer inequality is not possible. The kids that are poor still know they are poor and the ones that are rich still know they are rich. This does nothing to promote a classless society.

[DaCuBaN]

Indeed, I suppose it could be taken that it might exacerbate the problem... I don't think so though. My reasoning behind wanting uniforms isn't based on equality at all, that was simply my way to appeal for it... I think that without uniforms vanity becomes an issue, and if there's on thing I truly hate it's vanity.

More so than nazism.