Social Engineering

I am not a housewife. I am a domestic engineer.

This thread blooms out of the 'meaning of democracy' thread. While social engineering is most certainly germane to the subject of democracy, I think we need a better understanding of it to avoid arguments that were derailing that thread.

Since mankind first sat around the communal fire pit, social engineering has occurred (informal or housewife stage of social engineering). We can think of social engineering as public speaking, telling people what they need to know, and what they should or should not do. In an autocracy the power of the public speaker is backed by a fear of God or a police force (formal authority over others). In a democracy, the power of the public speaker rests the people's ability to reason (formal- people as authority, dependent on mass education in abstract thinking and logic).

In his 1899 book, William James says:

quote:

---

'If we reflect upon the various ideals of education that are prevalent in the different countries, we see that what they all aim at is to organize capacities for conduct. This is most immediately obvious in Germany, where the explicitly avowed aim of the higher education is to turn the student into an instrument for advancing scientific discovery.'

---

I wish these concepts were not so complex, and I could meet the young persons' demand that I define everything in clear and simple terms. A demand that would not have been made when we had liberal education and used the Conceptual Method for education, instead of the Behaviorist Method. A huge communication problem between the generations results from this change in education. When we used the Conceptual Method of education, we taught increasingly complex concepts, and everyone knew the demand to define things in such way that they can be argued as either right or wrong, was not possible. There isn't exactly a right or wrong, but different points of view, when we understand democracy is living in imitation of gods. How to explain? If you want military might, this is the best way to go, but if you want liberty and justice, that is a better way to go. How do I explain the complexity of these decisions, and the futility of demanding simple definitions that might be argued as either right or wrong, to those not educated with the Conceptual Method and who have a completely different learned thinking process than my own?

When we replaced liberal education with the German model of education for technology for industrial and military purpose, we not only changed the focused of education, but also how we teach children how to think, and our culture. This change in education, makes the US more like the enemy it defended its democracy from, than enemy it defeated, because of the nature of evolution. You know, the ape has become more ape, as humans have become more human. When we imitated Germany we became more German than the Germans, who pulled back and rethought the direction they were going. The US, with its advanced technology (purpose of education) is now more totalitarian than was the enemy it defeated in two world wars. And certainly more totalitarian than any country it is fighting today, because these countries do not have the technology for control that the US has.

quote:

---

'In the past, personal and political liberty depended upon governmental inefficiency. The spirit of tyranny was always more than willing; but its organization and material equipment were generally weak. Progressive science and technology have changed all this completely.' Aldous Huxley

---

So the argument begun over social engineering programs in the democracy thread, attacks Rockefeller rather than the greater education issue of who should determine how our children are educated, and through what mechanism should we bring this about, and for what purpose should we educate our children anyway?

Thomas Jefferson, devoted his life and fortune to promoting mass education, as the only way to have a strong republic, and protect our liberty and justice. Around 1840, because of wide spread social problems resulting from the conflict over slavery, and from mass immigration and economic problems, the US federal government mandated communities provide free public education. That was the liberal education that was the education of our forefathers. The education Thomas Jefferson would have us have. For military reasons, this education was changed. At first it was changed just a little bit 1917, and then education for technology for military and industrial purpose, completely replaced liberal education 1958.

Wanting to argue a decision some committee made, and about the good or evil of industrial leaders, and if they should continue to receiving tax deductions for their contributions to education, is like picking at a pimple instead, instead of understanding the bigger picture. Every nation in the world must make education decisions (social engineering , and a possible choice is teach nothing but the Koran, instead what the evil west teaches their children, or use the bible and protect the children from the evils of science such as the science of evolution). How should this decision be made, and for what purpose should the next generation be educated? We can now engage in war in 4 hours and do more damage than many troops could have done in several months. We are the leading nation in the world. This was not possible before education for technology for military and industrial purpose. Is this the best purpose of public education? What of the social ramifications?

What is being missed here is indeed an even bigger picture.

I perfectly respect your formal learning and research, but it is exactly why you are limited in your ability to even address my true concerns.

And I see quite well the apparent complexity and dynamics in play.

But you must go deeper, you must include the behind the scenes information that would never be allowed otherwise.

Now I will ask for a third time if you are familiar with these congressional investigations and their findings?

It is extremely relevant to my point which highly influences your own.

You keep balking at and blowing off the notion that intentions and agendas can both be known and even potentially intentionaly negative or threatening.

Hitler, Stalin, Mao were all very effective social engineers, do you sneer at judgement of their intentions and agendas?

Now, it sounds somewhat like you endorse the educational reform, in its time, that prepared for war, and if so I would assume it would be because you feel that the wars were important if not necessary and that such build up is what allowed us to save the day from the "enemies" you afore mentioned, yes no?

If so this would further lead me to speculate that your understanding of those conflicts is equally as formally derived from as equally mainstream means. Safe to say?

Which is again why my points and the information that's shapes their perception and arguement are so vitally important.

Im sure you've heard plenty of information that was conflicting about all topics thus far addressed, yes? And up to this point for whatever reasons, like most, you have chosen to believe one way or another about each individual bit of conflicting information and the ultimate tapestry it thusly weaves, a fair way to phrase it?

What I again ask, now more broadly, is what you are familiar with, what you dismiss, and why? So far you have still not directly addressed anything I speak of, which does grow incredibly tiresome, by the way, and is still, hopefully unintentionally, condecending.

I understand your unecessarily repeated notion that somehow the point is either moot or that you simply still assume I am not grasping what you are saying, I am afraid I will again have to ask you to kindly knock it off.

Humor me if nothing else. Because my points still stand and I am getting very tired of you repeating yourself as correct and in no need of answering direct question because there is no chance a young mind might have something of importance or value that might even somehow trump your entire belief system.

So as to address one thing about your sweeping from the dawn of man complexity issue, I will bring this unfortunately difficult for you discussion to a more direct point of relevance.

Regardless of goals and methods, tweaks and guided reforms, what I unequivocally take issue without, regardless of who is or how many are deciding what course and and what reason behind our choices in educational method.

If the goal is education, for the sake of education and empowerment through knowledge for all equally for not only mutual benefit but mutual self defense, as it is for me, I will say that it is deception, suppression, censoship, manipulation and the like, especially for the intentional purpose of building and propagating a system of the extraction and perpetual consolidation of wealth and power into the hands of a few at the cost of the many that I take issue with.

I give no quarter to the notions of forcefully taking freedom for any idea of a greater good, that job of sacrifice is to be voluntary under full educated and aware decision making only.

No debate or timeless and convoluted struggle affect my point. So please stop the circular non arguement and answer some questions so this may truly move forward like you claim to desire.

If you don't actually participate in a two way conversation soon as opposed to this tiresome lecturing, the further informing part is fine and good but you need to answer some questions and actually address direct points directly, and incessant dismissals through further repetition and failure to hold your peers, as we are all peers here, intellect regardless of total knowledge base, which yours is in question if you haven't noticed through the forced repeating of direct and unanswered questions, in equal standing, then I will be left with no choice but to indeed find you either incapable of actual debate or dasterdly trying to indoctrinate and manipulate the education of anyone who reads these words.

Are you here to preach a gospil or teach AND LEARN?

So far it it is pretty clear and the judgement unfavorable.

And I would also appreciate it if you are going to dismiss and avoid, to stop mischaracterizing my words and positions. You sound like a mainstream news anchor when you do that and this audience deserves better.

Yours truly and infinitely patiently,

Ironwood.

To further address your concerns and elaborate on that which indeed helps simplify this complexity that does exist.

There are basic concepts that are imperative to the foundation of any education system regardless of model or purpose.

Those are such as the importance and relevance, the understanding of the concept of eternal vigilance for the sake and protection of any freedom or right, ever and always regardless of the state of social or educational systems.

As well as the why behind and understanding of the concept of knowledge equalling power, not just math or physics or theology, but transparency and accountability to any power structure that affects any life. Be that government, industry etc.

Concepts such as responsibility of citizenship and power. Of balance and equality and the folly of greed and imbalance, yes, the pendulum must always swing and reach all extremes equally, but any stop, like a heart, equals not only stagnation but death.

The thing that does make this complicated is the will of the people, their choice to deserve horrible fates and enslavement and genocide.

Because of this there is a very real agenda in play to eradicate up to ninety percent of the worlds population.

And I have a hard time dissagreeing with it.

Again, the complexity you reference is important, but the ultimate point comes down to, as you said, what we choose our purpose to be.

And I don't mean warlike at this time in case of this threat, aggricularist at this time or this or that balance of focuses.

But seekers of truth and building towards the empowerment and freedom of all equally, all potential at all times, or any limited singular pendulum position at any given time. Especially allowing the stagnation and even intentional arresting of the evolution of humanity in the position of extreme corruption.

Are we striving for something better with our sacrifice or continued nonsense for eternity?

These debates were different in a different time, but this is now. How we got here, while important to be aware of, does not change the fact that we are coming to the ultimate choice unlike any in recorded human history.

The exponential growth in technology, information, and spirituality are.coming to a head.

That is why truth and enlightenment vs ignorance and oppression are able to become black and white questions.

Universal empowerment and free life vs enlsavement and death.

I have a feeling that all our practice and study is coming to its ultimate test, and though im not sure what failing means or leads to, think I know what would be failure.

Are you so jaded and morally undecided as to feel that we are indeed unable to call it wrong when the masses, who can intuitively sense injustice, greed, and corruption, give away their power out of fear, weakness, decadence, and the deception, force and manipulation of the good will of others to the end result of unecessary and intentional oppression, poverty, hunger, genocide by design of the third world for the purpose of propping up the first world? Which now too is being gutted and further consolidated to blatantly expose who is to blame as you so assuredly espouse as irrelevant?

When do you call murder, rape, and theft and standing idly by and even allowing or forcing such actions wrong? Hmm? When? Does your intellectualized hem hawing make you feel better as if you can just convince yourself there was no way to know what the right thing to do was so you never have to feel responsible and never have to take action?

Please, do tell.

I am sorry, but I can not understand why your opinion of me is the polar opposite of what I am about, and I can not cope with this any more.


Replacing liberal education with education for technology for military and industrial purpose, is destroying our democracy.

Good bye.

My god, what is wrong with you?

Stop worrying about what I or anyone thinks about you and address the freaking information, answer the goddam questions.

Ya, those are problems destroying our democracy, but there is more to it. Someone still has to give orders based on an agenda, anti war obama isn't dropping bombs and killing innocent civilians just because we don't have liberal education.

I have no words for the level of dissappointment and frustration you elicit with this highly unproductive behavior.

It saddens and frightens me to think that you may be out there with such vigor shutting young minds off to sources of issues that could be addressed.

Your quest in general is noble, but its limitations have deadly consequences.

Your entire premise is the issue of a dying democracy yes? And what harms are you concerned about, so far you have mentioned we are as bad or worse then our defeated enemies who killed millions of people.

Yes, brainwashing is bad, but isn't murder worse?

Why is it that you wont address anything but education? We are killing millions of people, right now!

And there are reasons and agendas that have nothing to do with the education system.

Yes, the people need to be educated of the problem, which does not happen when you avoid the topic by focusing only on the education system.

The reason our democracy is dying is because people are being cowards, just like you are being by avoiding and running away.

Your behavior is appalling.

But, if your intentions are pure, you shouldn't worry, but if you actually want to help and not be part of the problem, I invite you, for the millionth time, to actually have a conversation for a change.

If you agree, this information is far too important, and a quitter is no type of role model for the change this country, and indeed the world, is in need of.

Surely you can do better.

I think I've done a good enough job tempering my reactions and directly addressing issues here.

But given the turnout im forced to ask others who may be following these threads for their perspective of the behaviors involved.

Is my frustration justified in your opinion? Is it true that I am recognizing and at least appearing to listen and understand? Is is true that this is not as easily said of her? Or am I missing something? Help me out here, anyone, please.

I am not looking for justification, I know where I stand on it, im looking for honest outside opinion so I can understand outside perception of this situation.

And I wont lie, this is upsetting me quite a bit. Its a very important subject.

I very much would like the opinions of others, as Ironwood requested.

It is important to understand social engineering was not a Rockefeller invention. Humanity has survived by teaching the young what it is agreed the young need to know, and about right and wrong. This is what civilization is about, making the individual a part of the mass.

In the beginning of civilizations, it was the priest who controlled this. The ancient Greeks took a radically different approach, and developed a system of logic that brings an end to superstition.

Ancient people had education right? Secular education was created to meet the needs of government as early as Sumer. This is education for scribes. Now you have a blend of religion and vocational training. Centuries later the Greeks began dropping the myths of the gods, and became more and more focused on political concerns.

Spartans and Athenians are both Greeks, but they had extremely different cultures. Athens education was about well rounded personal growth, and is the foundation of liberal education. Spartans were only interested in military needs and demanded complete conformity. This is social engineering with two completely different results. The cultures of Sparta and Athens were polar opposites.

Pretty much, the US was the Athens of the new world, and Germany was the Sparta of the New World. In ancient times, Spartan won the war with Athens, and everyone who attacks democracy, speaks of Athens after Spartans the won the war. The US won the war with Germany, but immediately following that war, it replaced its liberal education with the German model, so Germany might as well have won that war. The US is now socially engineered to be what Germany wanted to be.

I appreciate the bravery you must feel you are showing in enduring my crazes insanity, and the strain it must cause to bother and to repeat yourself so, oh so much.

First, your failure to participate is disturbing on a pathological degree and I will be saving you as a case study.

Second, no one claimed social engineering to be a rockefeller invention, you indignant cow.

But our current educational structure however is a rockefeller creation, I do not understand your warped logic that allows you to make an arguement out of an agreement, not that it is the first time I've seen such behavior.

And the point is, once again, the agenda behind the desired and chosen education system, as you yourself have said.

Now, are you aware of the Reece committee and its findings?

I ask this question because it is extremely relevant to the state of democracy, our current education system, and our current social structure as engineered by its engineers.

So I will not, and do not have any reason to start a thread about it, just answer the fucking question, please and for the love of all that is holy.

Because none of these topics can properly be discussed without this information, period. If you don't understand that, that is fine, you will once you bother to have a conversation vs a lecture.

And if after that you still dissagree, that is ok too, perhaps you will be able to correct this mass misconception that I don't even know if you are aware of.

First, I am not the subject of this thread. Know I will stop reading your post when you make me the subject. If you have anything to say that is on subject, you will need to rewrite it, so your post is about the subject and not a criticism of me.

On a debate forum, you are unfortunately forced to address participants as well. This is especially the case when addressing those who will not properly participate while making claims of mistakes.and what not.

Your behavior is relevant to the progress of any discussion, and since you refuse to listen or answer questions, you will be scrutinized.

This forum is also about developing discussions and helping people with interaction skills and personal help and development as much as learning information.

So do the world a favor and stop trying to control other people and the conversation, and if you don't want to become the subject, then try participating instead.

Your words are becoming irrelevant and I could care less if you supposedly stop reading my posts because you have not properly listened or answered any questions yet anyway so its not much different.

Im speaking directly to you about these issues in attempt to correct the issue so there can be a conversation, your excuses and blaming the stagnation on me are your own doing, you have stagnated this, not me.

So stop concerning yourself and making excuses and just answer the questions and address others points and you wont be the subject as much, ok? Make sense?

Trust me its quite annoying for me to have to be ha img this conversation rather than getting my freaking answers and getting on topic, but you refuse to participate, so stop whining and get to it.

So let me guess, the reason you can't answer a simple question is because its not in your precious books. Pathetic.

No, the reason I can not answer a simple question is because to find your question, I have to read through a long list of personal criticisms based on your wrong assumptions, and I am not going to do that. If you can separate all the crap from the discussion of the subject, we might have a good discussion. And if this doesn't happen soon, I will stop returning to the forum, because now that I see the forum really is as the opening statement says it is, I am loosing interest in it. My opinion of rude and immature young men is not high. I want to scream "grow up" most the time, and there isn't enough good conversation to be worth my time.

Look, first you wouldn't be wading through bullshit if you had answered the question when it was asked, now would you?

The personal criticism is well earned by your failure to properly participate.

Your excuses and dodging the reality of your behavior only works in your head where your logic rules supreme and your denial is not challenged.

If you do not see how you are the source of the problem that you are complaining about, then you have serious issues.

Ya, you can blame me for the words I use, but I guarantee you that if I point out how you are causing a problem in any manner, you will flip out and throw a tantrum.

You are the one in need of growing. If this is going to be your consistent behavior I doubt anyone will care if you leave.

Id rather you didn't because I value you as a resourslce, but so far I detest you as a conversationalist. And rightfully so.

And you know damn well what question I'm talking about, as you repeated it yourself.

Reece committee, quit the game, answer the question, or quit your whining.

Public education in America began as a way to produce workers who were skilled enough to do certain jobs. The 'enlightened' angle was just sort of a rebellious byproduct cleverly slipped in throughout the course of time. Not the other way around. It's a nice fairy tale, but it just isn't true.

The sort of liberal education being referred too is still something that is largely unavailable to lower class persons. You're just not going to find too many roughnecks or janitors quoting Nietzsche.

Liberal education is a funny thing. If you don't teach a student to read and write extremely well, give them a massive vocabulary and some skill with numbers then all of the loftier notions that would fall after, are beyond their capacity to comprehend. The jump from see dick run to Gandhi is kind of a big one.

Now, from a practical standpoint.
If you spend all your time teaching liberal matters, and those people have to work two jobs to pay their bills due to a lack of technical skills, they aren't very likely to have the time to actually read on those loftier topics. They will also lack the will and energy to spend much time thinking about, or acting on those principles.

Thus, giving people a chance to thrive within the bounds of a system so that they have enough leisure to expand on what liberal education they did get, is more likely to produce prophets.

"Of all the weapons employed against slaves, none is more powerful than illiteracy."

Now why in the hell would affluent person try to educate the masses in such as fashion as to endanger their own opulence?

Also, as a note for amusement, the horrible term of housewife describes the original American philanthropists and the group of people who were pushing liberal education. Something of a hobby for bored housewives that their husband helped create to occupy their time.

Social engineering. This is a word that can include everything from educational policies and laws, to eugenics and population control. The hubris required to even imply that social engineering is a purely implicit process, like managing a nuclear household is an insult to the men and women who do actual social engineering. These are people who cover a number of fields, but who typically influence the world in very explicit ways. Take for example Swift and his generation, or Napoleon. Karl Marx is another example. Das Kapital was a huge piece of social engineering, and it was super duper explicit. Had it not been, it would not be influencing the world even today.

Books may not give us everything in life, but the notion that book learning is somehow inferior to inferential 'street smarts' is just stupid. It is a marked sign of criminal ignorance and intellectual frailty.

quote:

---

Ancient people had education right?

---

Ancient wealthy landowners had education. scribes were awarded educational rights because it was a required technical skill to be effective agents of social control for those in charge.
Enculturation is not the same. Half the Athenian population was enculturated with a whip, not a book. Same thing with the Sumerians and Greeks.

"This is what civilization is about, making the individual a part of the mass."

not so much. More like, mitigating our inner cannibals, at least within in groups. Civilization is about moving competition from the single celled organism to the vertebrate.

quote:

---

In the beginning of civilizations, it was the priest who controlled this.

---

Not so much. Try the person with the strongest arms, then the biggest grain stores, then the guy who used the priest as a tool....

Right and wrong are pretty much culturally relative in this sense.

So, is it wrong to buy new shoes before your old pair falls apart?