Shop your neighbour and kids
- This topic has 15 replies, 5 voices, and was last updated 10 years, 3 months ago by
.
-
Posts
-
Sir Michael Wilshaw says when he was a headteacher he told parents if they were behaving badly.
The government should look at rewarding "good citizens" to knock on their neighbours' doors and demand why their children are not in school, the chief inspector of schools has said.
Ofsted's chief inspector, Sir Michael Wilshaw, told MPs that, as a former headteacher, he "saw the result of children being brought up badly by their parents" and communities should play more of a role in supporting problem families.
Where will the above stop? This kind of shop anyone you don't like, will result in a bigots charter and there are quite enough of those to start with.
The Nazis and Stalin could not have instituted their reigns of terror, to such an extent, without actions like the above, being carried out by those in the wider society.
If my kids were still young enough for school and a neighbour had "demanded" to know why they were not at school, I'm afraid the answer would have been an explanation of why the education system actually exists in Capitalism, followed by a geordie handshake, or a fist in the face. Hopefully the latter coming after the former, the questioner would remember the former, and not be so brainwashed!
Reminder: Rule 7. You are free to express your views candidly and forcefully provided you remain civil. Do not use the forums to send abuse, threats, personal insults or attacks, or purposely inflammatory remarks (trolling). Do not respond to such messages.
moderator1, you are having a laugh right? A comment, to a non specified neighbour, and you remind me of rule 7! moreover, mention trolling in respect of the same? How can one "troll", a non existent person? The comment was made, to show how seriously I take this state sponsored intrusion into workers lives. If you cannot see this, well, mores the pity!I'm very sorry if I mention this on this thread and do not take it up elsewheres but this is ridiculous and needs to be shown as such.Warning Rule15. Queries or appeals relating to particular moderation decisions should be sent directly to the moderators by private message. Do not post such messages to the forum. You must continue to abide by the moderators’ decisions pending the outcome of your appeal.
I am minded by the saying that it takes a village to rear a child and when i was brought up, neighbours and family friends were an integral part of my upbringing. The debate about the continued existence in socialism of the family and "my" kids, i believe, has not been resolved completely. Whose house we were in at meal times fed us, we stayed overnight with one another, and we got hand-me-downs when other children outgrew their clothes. We were protectively watched over by non-family members and sometimes chastised by them. As teachers are parentis loco, so were next door neighbours and the wider community. The atomisation and isolation is a problem of capitalism which doesn't just effect children but often our lonely old folk and the sick and disabled. Showing concern about possible neglect, which depriving a child of learning and interaction with his or her age peers could be a sign, surely does not deserve a Geordie handshake or a Glaswegian kiss. The more we intervene and interact with those around us, the more it should be welcomed. SOCIALism.I am sure the suggestion by Ofsted is about creating some formal structure and not organising vigilantes.
steve colborn wrote:Ofsted's chief inspector, Sir Michael Wilshaw, told MPs that, as a former headteacher, he "saw the result of children being brought up badly by their parents" and communities should play more of a role in supporting problem families.Wilshaw's yet another rich dickhead. Social analysis is beyond the thick.Why doesn't he 'see the result of' Cameron, Osbourne and Johnson 'being brought up badly by their parents'. Their parents (and other forebears) were thieves, who for generation after generation have been stealing our wealth. They brought up their little horrors to continue to ransack our society, and yet Wilshaw worries about a few 'problem families', who by comparison cause virtually no problems, and whose 'problems' will be easily remedied, given the economic and cultural resources.Our world community 'should play more of a role in expropriating problem families', not 'supporting' them."Wilshaw! Get to the back of the class, lad! And put on the pointy hat with the big 'D' on it…"
"The more we intervene and interact with those around us, the more it should be welcomed. SOCIALism." I think, Alan, you have completely missed the point. Wilshaw is not bothered at "all" about disadvantaged children, he is worried more for the rules and regulations of the state being flouted. As an ex headmaster, he will surely have seen children that he "knew" were underfed, were living lives of poverty. He will, unless he is a complete cretin, moreover know that in Capitalism today, with the attacks on the poor and disadvantaged, that this will be going on now. Has he urged so called communities to get involved in this? To inform wider society, of the level of deprivation in certain households? Not on your nelly!You say, "I am sure the suggestion by Ofsted is about creating some formal structure and not organising vigilantes." Have you not seen and are you not aware, of the false atmosphere of moral indignation created today, by the state and it's mouthpieces in the press and broadcasting, with regards "benefit cheats", and the false representation that "all" benefit claimants are scrounging, malingering, graballs-do nowts? This, to my mind, is merely a continuation of the same process!What of the two "lil rich kids" who fucked off from school, and did a flit on their credit cards to the Caribbean? I watched the news broadcasts on this, not a mention of "their wealthy parents" being "sanctioned", more an atmosphere of, "oh what a jolly jape. No mention by Wilshaw, that the friends of these parents, should take the long hike up their neighbours driveways and "demand" to know why their kids were not in school, no sireebob. Reminds me of arsehole Blairs kid, Euan, being found pissed as a commoner in the middle of London when underage, this at a time when pro-Capitalist Labour were introducing parenting classes, for the lower classes, who did not tow the line. Once again, our betters were treated differently. "Oh it was the end of his exams and he was 'just' blowing off steam", was the media interpretation.This latest episode is merely one more of the attempts to portray large sections of "us", as morally and socially reprehensable and inept. I do not know were you come from but here, it could indeed lead to a form of vigilanteeiam, as impressionable fall for the "spin" and take matters into their own hands!Come and spend a night in Deneside Workingmens Club and listen to the bile and venom spouted by our fellow workers, towards their "own" class!I'm afraid it is you, Alan, who are out of touch. I do not recognise your "Peter Pan, never never land, interpretation of "Community".As to the debate about "my" kids, existing in Socialism, you are introducing a straw man. We live in "Capitalism" and it is not so much "my" kids but Capitalism kids that exist today. In a sane and rational society, kids would indeed be treated as the "responsibility of all" but I'm afraid to bust yer bubble comrade, we aint there yet.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Xe1a1wHxTyo I do not recognise your "Peter Pan, never never land,
I fail to see the relevance of your post Alan, to my comment above, nor the relevance of the Monty Python sketch, funny as it was.
It was a very tenuous link to be truthful.Simpler put, my reality was perhaps not your reality Another recollection of my youth were the white sheet collections. If someone died , neighbours went around the estate door to door holding a white sheet in which money would be thrown to pay for funeral costs. That survived in other forms today in the estate i lived in and also the place i worked. Yes there exists community and society. While not denying the reactionary attitudes of my class, and it would be very easy to detail these, i also recognise their strong socialistic tendencies which is being suppressed. Instead of forcing people to live another way, which i think is a moralising religious approach, the aim is to allow them to live as they truly are. Socialism is merely removing the obstacles to a way of life in which ‘humanness’, which already exists, would be allowed to develop. To blame Wilshaw personally for not understanding socialism , we might as well blame every teacher , every social worker, every psychiatric/occupational nurse for the exact same failure and by logical progression , blame each and every individual member of the working class for their own suffering. Didn't another thread or forum have someone say we are against the system, not the person and our task is to explain the system, not scapegoat individuals.
alanjjohnstone wrote:To blame Wilshaw personally for not understanding socialism , we might as well blame every teacher , every social worker, every psychiatric/occupational nurse for the exact same failure and by logical progression , blame each and every individual member of the working class for their own suffering. Didn't another thread or forum have someone say we are against the system, not the person and our task is to explain the system, not scapegoat individuals.I don't think it wise to remove the human agent from social processes. Yes the system in many ways forces us to act in certain ways but as a human being I can refuse some actions. For example, capitalism causes war but I will do my best not to fight in them.What I am picking up on is that the Coalition has been taking action to deliberately divide workers and we need not passively accept this.I can't simply say " it's not his fault, it is the system's fault. From a sociological point of view : human beings make structures. Capitalism may contribute to you killing people and breaking into their homes but does that remove all responsibility for human action?Why blame workers but not Tories? They are engaged in a ideological attack on the working class and they are to blame.I will have to delve deeper but I don't think Marx and Engels made excuses for the Bourgeoisie
Is anyone experiencing site problems? I am having trouble getting posts through. I know there have been issues with the site previously, does anyone know if they are reoccuring? Thanks Stevie C. Sorry for the off-topic question.
Certainly people make their own history. We are all responsible for our own actions.When i talked of past community i remember there was always someone ready to lend you the shilling for the electric meter, but also someone equally ready to break into that very same meter. I don't have a rose-tinted glasses view of the pastBut if we reject that we possess a social responsibility, we reject socialism. Our case is that not every aspect of capitalism is bad, it succeeded in socialising us much more than previous societies, but we now argue that it has outlived its past usefulness and hold us back now from further communal living.To return to the original post, i am not as scathing as Steve that neighbours and community should take responsibility for all people which may supercede the parents rights in regards children. Schooling may be a means of transmission for the ruling class ideas, but like everything capitalism produces it also serves contradictory purposes.I don't know too much about Wilshaw but a google showed he is critical of privileged private schools. "Independent your schools may be but isolated they are not. They are firmly connected to the wider community. Your pensions, many of the public may be surprised to learn, are subsidised by the taxpayer. Most of your teaching staff were educated at public expense. The independent sector gains 1,400 teachers from state schools every year," He dismissed their existing collaborations as "crumbs from their table. "…Harrow, Eton, Westminster, Charterhouse, Winchester and scores of others were endowed and established with the express purpose of providing an education for the poor. I am calling on you all to renew and deepen that commitment.". He conceded that the heads might run into opposition from unhappy fee-paying parents: "What might you say to parents who think that noblesse oblige is the latest perfume from Chanel?" Wilshaw has taken issue with those who had said state education is neglecting the wider needs of children."These heads in inner-city London, Birmingham, Manchester and Leeds haven't got the time to worry whether their children are climbing trees proficiently," Wilshaw said. "They would feel particularly insulted if this criticism was coming from some educationalists who have the luxury of teaching children from aspirant and often well-heeled homes – homes that would make damn sure that their children passed their exams, even though the school afforded them the time to climb trees and gaze upon the beauties of life."Sure, in the end he is a reformist, someone who rejects a socialist solution to the problems of education, but i do not share Steve's opinion that he is a proponent of Nazism and Stalinism. Slightly hyperbolic conclusion, imho. I share Wilshaws somewhat misplaced aspiration for education to be a community responsibility and not the choice of simply the parent. http://www.theguardian.com/education/2013/oct/02/ofsted-independent-schools-deep-pockets-wilshaw"We were taught under the old ethic that man’s business upon this earth was to look out for himself. That was the ethic of the jungle the ethic of the wild beast. Take care of yourself, no matter what may become of your fellowman. Thousands of years ago the question was asked: “Am I my brother’s keeper?” That question has never yet been answered in a way that is satisfactory to civilized society. Yes, I am my brother’s keeper. I am under a moral obligation to him, inspired, not by any maudlin sentimentality, but by the higher duty I owe to myself. What would you think of me if I were capable of seating myself at a table and gorging myself with food and saw about me the children of my fellow beings starving to death?" – Debs
I still don't think (as an example) that shopping your kids and neighbours to the police has anything to do with 'community'. It has more to do with capitalist economic interests. Our sense of community is manipulated to serve their interests. School does play a dual role- in fact many workers, myself included, say it is 'a fucking blessing' lol. I think parents would go round the bend without it, but they are also places where our minds are conditioned and we should all try and influence that. I loved Pink Floyd's 'Another Brick in the Wall' but I still sent my kids to school! That's just living in capitalism.
In fact here are some great articles on schools and education from an excellent well kept and up to date Blog http://socialismoryourmoneyback.blogspot.co.uk/search?q=schools
I did not in fact say that Wilshaw was a proponent of either Nazism or Stalinism but that what he was proposing had similarities to them."The Nazis and Stalin could not have instituted their reigns of terror, to such an extent, without actions 'like' the above, being carried out by those in the wider society."Capitalism exhorts us to be responsable for ensuring our kids get to school, but denies "their" resposability, to ensure that even the poorest of families, have the wherewithal, to ensure they are well fed before they go to school and indeed, during the rest of the days and weeks.Capitalism is, indeed, a pernicious ideology. It stinks with cant and hypocrisy. It is rank and fetid!
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.