Showing posts with label Educational psychology. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Educational psychology. Show all posts

Thursday, October 26, 2017

The Origin of Discontent

Via The Daily Bell


America is collapsing on almost every crucial level.


Our great universities, which were once a fortress of reason, are shamelessly responsible by producing men and women hell-bent on destroying our free nation. In the last decade especially, corruption has become so widespread in America that many citizens accept it as the norm.


This collapse of law and order didn’t occur overnight, even though it is fashionable to think so by blaming it on the Trump administration. It began years ago when educators systematically began to encourage student disrespect toward America by romanticizing globalism. The anarchy that I predicted in the 80s in my nationally acclaimed novel The Fire Within has today become a reality.


Many of the schemes to break down societal order, first tested and perfected in inner-city schools, have spread throughout the public school system, and into our great universities. This has left many parents bewildered and searching for an explanation.


The excuses often echoed by prominent educators and publications like Education Week are almost always the same with parental neglect, stagnant school spending, lack of diversity, and even racism usually getting top listing. Rarely are educators heard sharing the real reasons for the problem. Those credentialed men and women who have the knowledge and the willingness to shed light on what’s happening are not being allowed to speak out publicly. Whatever crucial information that they may have to share is silenced by disagreeable students and the endless blast of denial and propaganda from the mainstream media.


Our great universities, which have the skill to unite the country, are working hand-in-hand with the media to divide it. To circumvent this national trend, many prominent leaders committed to open dialogue and freedom of speech are boldly resisting this trend by attempting to speak out on campuses against the organized movement to silence them and to subvert freedom. What they are facing almost everywhere for their efforts is armed resistance.


The very institutions that once peacefully guarded our freedom and nurtured our independence are encouraging rioting. UCLA-Berkeley is an excellent example. In a Los Angeles Times article, one demonstrator, disturbed by the negative news coverage campus protestors were getting, wisely believed that such continued coverage would turn the public against the student movement. Unfortunately, the demonstrator didn’t seem to realize that this was exactly what the masterminds behind the rebellion wanted.


In order to break down order in a powerful country like America, they needed widespread discontent. The best way to do this was to train students in Alinsky-style protesting and turn one group against the other. As a young man, educated traditionally in the forties and fifties, I wasn’t prepared for the modern classroom. In my day, the schools were orderly, not a fist-fighting, pill-popping jungle.


Although I was sometimes smart enough to spot the mendacity and propaganda that was creeping into the schools during my school years, the schools were generally a safe place for traditional learning. Most students were taught to understand through education and hard work that they could realize their dreams. When I decided to teach in the sixties and seventies, I saw for the first time the raw reality of change, especially in inner-city schools.


Understanding the cause for this rising breakdown of order didn’t come easily for me. It took time – and much reading, thinking and testing to identify. Like so many teachers, I was concerned about the students’ freedom to run wild and to destroy property with immunity.


At first, I blamed the principal, attributing the disorder to his inability to motivate the students – until I realized that the principal was in place, not because of some accident, but because he was exactly the person needed by the system to advance such chaos. This was true, not just where I taught, but at other inner-city public schools as well. Many principles were used like pawns, carefully chosen, to set in motion activities that would accelerate the disintegration of education.


They did this by employing a myriad of activities, like mismatching teachers and subjects, encouraging student power, and supporting academic programs that would handicap learning. (Several examples of the latter included teaching the look-say reading method, the confusing new math system, and even revisionist history.)


To give purpose to the chaos that followed, ruthless teachers who thrived in failing classrooms were hired to advance their political agenda, in lieu of reading, writing, and arithmetic. When I finally stepped through the cloud of deception, carefully created to blur my understanding of the problem, I began to see a very dark force at play.


Quite by accident I came across Dr. Maria Montessori’s book, The Absorbent Mind, which was published many years earlier. This honest, and easy-to-read book immediately clarified the problem for me. Instead of advancing the moral relativity inherent in pragmatism, taught in most government schools, Dr. Montessori advanced a philosophy of education that respected the moral and intellectual growth of each child.


In my novel, The Fire Within, I identified these two diametrically opposing views of education and set them against each other to demonstrate what would happen when they were put into action. After publishing my book, I went on the road in the early 80s to promote it. Through hard-work and design I was booked by many talk shows, locally and nationally.


I believed then, as I do today, that the surest way to societal salvation begins with the right educational philosophy. This can best be achieved through an education system, like the Montessori system, which respects moral development and individual freedom.


Unfortunately, pragmatism, which basically conflicts with the Montessori system, has a stronghold on today’s education. Ending this stronghold isn’t going to be easy. But if we are to survive as a free and independent society, we must succeed. What is happening today all around us should convince us of the urgency.


Joe David is the author of numerous articles and six books, including The Fire Within and The Infidelswww.bfat.com

Friday, August 25, 2017

China Launches Official Investigation Into US Intellectual Property Practices

By Chris at www.CapitalistExploits.at


Last week, China bypassed the World Trade Organisation agreements and using an old law officially launched a probe into Americas intellectual property practices.


China"s foreign affairs minister, talking of America, stated that:





"We’ve come to the conclusion that they’re in an economic war and they’re crushing us.”



Reiterating this stance, a Chinese Communist Party spokesman went on to say:





“The economic war with America is everything and we have to be maniacally focused on that.”



 


“If we continue to lose it, we’re five years away, I think, 10 years at the most, of hitting an inflection point from which we’ll never be able to recover.”



China"s president Xi Jinping explained things further:





“It’s my duty and responsibility to protect the Chinese workers’ technology and industry from unfair and abusive actions.”  



“We will stand up to any country that unlawfully forces Chinese companies to transfer their valuable technology as a condition of market access. We will combat the counterfeiting and piracy that destroys Chinese jobs.”



Actually, none of that happened. At least not that way around.


Think about it for a minute. Put the shoe on the other foot and it seems outrageous... because, well, it is.


Ok now I"ve just three things to say about this.


1. Whenever a government - who we should remind ourselves is not a producer but rather a consumer of resources - states that they are having "their" intellectual property stolen, this should make the private individuals, corporations stakeholders, and employees of those companies stand up and say: "Whoah! Hang on a second... You don"t own that. I do. What the hell?"


It"s a strange situation where the guy who got a C average in his high school finals and never made it into university but actually runs a business dealing with China can see it makes no sense but a politician with a degree from Oxford cannot.


When some Chinese company copies the iPhone, it"s not Washington"s IP they"re stealing. It"s Apple"s. Nobody wants Washington"s IP because raw sewerage isn"t valuable. That Washington lays claim to the IP of all US businesses should scare the isht out of any US-based company.


Which brings me to my second point...


2. Imagine you"re a US company with most of your value in your business being in IP. Now, imagine further that Washington brings about a trade war. What happens next?


Well, your product has just been cut off from THE world"s fastest growing consumer market in the world, and the decision as to whether or not you would participate in that market was just taken away from you whether you like it or not.


That"s all dandy if you"re 4. Parents need to make those calls for you until you"re emancipated. But you"re a grown adult entirely capable of making that judgement call all by yourself.  


A US-led trade war vs. China would be disastrous for tech firms targeting the world"s fastest growing consumer market.


A couple of reminders are worth looking at...


When I was explaining how China is increasing political global power, I mentioned that China is:


  • Asia’s largest trading partner

  • US largest trading partner

  • Germany’s largest trading partner

  • Australia’s largest trading partner

  • Russia’s second largest trading partner (after Germany)

  • Africa’s largest trading partner

  • South America’s largest trading partner

So you see the trend is most certainly established, and this trend is like a supertanker - difficult to turn around. It"s certainly a lot smarter to get on the right side of that trend than to fight it... which is impossible.


The other thing with IP is precisely what I was rabbiting on about in when discussing the coming financial disruption. You see, governments, and the nation state in particular, survives by commandeering assets. Don"t believe me? Stop paying your property tax and find out who exactly owns your house.


This sort of control is kinda easy when the assets are Billy"s steel factory but when it"s something like Vitalik Buterin"s Ethereum platform or Google or Baidu... or any number of the thousands of companies out there where IP forms the largest value component, then things get a wee bit trickier for the nation states.


Moving IP is really very easy. It involves cancelling your gym membership, downloading software onto an encrypted drive in the cloud, and booking a one-way ticket to someplace friendlier.


3. And the third thing... Ok, I lied. I"ve only 2 things to say, though I do think there"s a single reason for all this.


The Real Reason for This Stupidity


While it could backfire more spectacularly than a 50-year old Lada, it"s probably this:


Washington"s strategy to dealing with North Korea has been attempting to get Xi to do the dirty work on that snotty kid next door who"s making them look impotent. It"s silly as I mentioned last week when I explained how brain dead sanctions on young Kim really are, which is all the more reason why politicians will pursue it.


Let me make a suggestion, because let"s face it, I"m not here to do anything other than figure this stuff out and see where and why capital will flow in any particular direction.


Governments, most of them being more broke than Borris Becker after Forbes & Manhattan screwed him over, are coming for our assets. The toughest assets to actually seize are those that live in the "digital world"... which is to say their value is more often than not in intellectual property and as such they can "live" pretty much anywhere.


The Best Investment Tip You"ll Read All Year


If you"ve a business built on IP, then may I suggest that looking NOW, ahead of trouble, for the best domicile could well provide you with the best ROI you"ll ever get.


And I won"t charge you a cent for the advice, though you can send donations to Bitcoin Address: 1LNjVKrv8pT1n5SZxkhNpPN9JPWxMwnHmm


Seriously, though remember Zimbabwe, which I spoke about recently? Well, after Mugabe seized all the fixed assets, they found that without the intellect available (it"d fled) those assets became worthless. And while that"s the case the intellect has moved on. It now provides value in other countries, countries that are more receptive to value.


Question


Wow Poll 23 Aug 2017


Cast your vote here and also see what others think holds more value


- Chris


"If protection of intellectual property begins to disappear, creative companies will disappear or never get started." — Steve Jobs


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


Liked this article? Then you"ll probably like my other missives on


this topic as well. Go here to access them (free, of course).


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

Saturday, December 31, 2016

The Political Left's Shmoo Theory Of Education

“Uneducated” is the favorite insult and excuse of the political left. In the past year alone, for example, a lack of education among voters has been used to explain each of the left’s electoral failures, as well as to dismiss criticisms of its people, policies, and institutions. These defenses are dubious to say the least. Yet setting aside the strategic choices of left-wing political groups, the obsession with un-education reveals that there are serious problems with the way education is understood by the intellectual classes.


Most importantly, the popular use of the word “education” suffers from the same error as the mainstream economic use of the word “capital.” This shouldn’t be a surprise, given that education is often metaphorically described as “human capital.” The error is that both capital and education are thought of as a kind of “homogeneous blob,” or “shmoo.” A shmoo is elastic and can be molded by the user into any shape necessary, and it’s therefore equally serviceable in all possible uses. Anyone who wants to use it as a production input must simply decide how much to apply to a specific problem.


In reality, of course, capital and education are both highly heterogeneous. The structure of production is extremely delicate and difficult to organize, and so too is the structure of human knowledge.


Unfortunately, this fact escapes those intellectuals who concern themselves with other people’s lack of education: in current discourse, education is a homogeneous good acquired exclusively through obtaining formal degrees. To lack a college degree is to lack education, while the more degrees one acquires, the better educated one is. Importantly, all education is equally serviceable across all areas of expertise. English majors can talk about economics, and physicists can talk about politics. But anyone who isn’t a product of the university education system is barred from participating in these discussions.


It should be easy to spot the errors in this kind of thinking. First, no matter what kind of education we pursue, we don’t simply add new blobs of it to a big pile. Instead, we acquire specific, distinct types of knowledge which vary widely in their serviceability. Second, and more important, education is not equivalent to obtaining degrees. It means different things in different contexts, and the education that takes place in higher education institutions reflects only a specific and narrow type of learning. Depending on one’s area of study, this kind of learning can often lack relevance outside the classroom, and in this sense, it actually undermines the role of education as a practical tool for learning how to create value within society. This is part of the reason why university-educated people flock to the intellectual class to begin with.


In fact, sometimes obtaining the relevant kind of education is impossible within higher education. To take some obvious examples, many of the most successful and world-changing entrepreneurs of the past few decades have been college dropouts. Needless to say, they’ve given a bit more to the human race than the average Huffington Post writer. On a smaller scale, Mises was fond of pointing out that consumers are often better educated about the state of the economy than many economists.


“Education” is another example of a kind of rhetorical imperialism that has already captured words like “science” and “evidence.” The bias in favor of “education” is basically a bias in favor of the opinions of the contemporary intellectual classes, and a devotion to the status quo in higher education. The intellectuals treat education as a shmoo because often, that’s exactly what it is to them: simply another word for describing their own collection of homogeneous opinions and concepts, which they believe should form the sum of all discussion. Fortunately, more and more people are beginning to realize that true education does not and cannot thrive in this environment, which increasingly closes itself off from the real world and the people in it. This is the perfect time for organizations like the Mises Institute to take up the challenge of bringing genuine learning to the masses, both inside and outside the academy.