Once I get my paper in a state where I feel comfortable having others read it, I’d be very happy to submit an extract to NM. ๐
I find comparative pedagogy fascinating, and I hope others reading this blog do as well. In my experience as both a researcher of the Thai educational system and as a teacher at a Thai university, I found many positive aspects to Thai sociopedagogy. For example, I observed that the Thai students seem to have a good sense of “classroom ownership” and Thai educators seem to have a good understanding of the realtionship between affect in the classroom environment and the acquistion of knowledge. However, at the risk of editorializing, at the Ministry level, I also found some things that seemed right out of Disney’s Education for Death.
To answer your question, the terms paideia and praxis have specific meanings in the field of Education and are understood by researchers in that discipline and related ones. It would be hard to fully express the meaning (both semantically and pragmatically) of those two terms in English. To be honest, by bringing up those terms, I was just niggling nganadeeleg a bit, due to his professed disdain of Greco-Roman loan words.
I do admit that in my correspondance with Sidh and nganadeeleg, I have been a bit heavy with the Latin; however, as I explained before, it was to make a point….and to engage in a little niggling, of course ๐
That having been said, as a linguist and language educator, I must admit to being leery of “plain language,” the language in this case being English. For example, I find that George Orwell’s famous essay, (which helped to launch the Plain English campaigns of the 20th century) “Politics and the English Language” to be fundamentally falwed in two ways. The first is that he argues that English is “declining,” from the standpoint of Linguistics, to say a language is improving or declining is utter nonsense. We call such viewpoints as “prescriptivist,” as opposed to the “descriptivist” position of Linguistics. Orwell’s second major flaw is that he argues that to employ unplain English is morally wrong. Again, I find it ludicrious to make a moral value judgement on someone’s choice of diction.
Ancedotally, I have found that those who support “plain language” movements tend to have been raised in a monolingual environment and belong to the majority ethnic group of their nation. Indeed, observe the irony of Thai language policy, where, for example, Issan schoolchildren are admonished not to use certain Tai-origin words (e.g. ัโฃะัโะฑัโโกัโะฒ, ัโะปัโะฑัโโ) in favor of “plain (i.e. standard/normative) Thai,” which more often than not have an Indic-origin (e.g. ัโะฐัโะณัโะณัโะฒัโโ, ัโะบัโโัโะฉัโโัโะ). What I am getting at is, who decides what is “plain”? After all, the terms paideia and praxis are quite plain to anyone who hails from the Hellanic Republic!
Having been raised bilingual myself, having a wife who was raised trilingual, and now raising a (hopefully) quadrilingual daughter, our household is a wondrous Babel of code-switching. If some of that spills over onto this forum, then just take it as the idiosyncrasies of someone who works with and loves languages. Perhaps, due to the cultural associations Latin has, some people took it as a gaudy display of erudition. I ask my fellow New Mandalaians, would you have come to the same conclusion if I code-switched in Yiddish?
Re: Meritocracy – Thanks for the examples, Grasshopper & James.
The examples are not exactly what I was seeking because both countries have elements of democracy, which I do not regard as meritocracy.
However, following up on Happy New Years post #14 above, it sounds like those who are sweating on getting meritocracy would probably be better off going to live in Singapore or England.
…..and will the Democrats then accept power being handed to them by a retired General who works for Sondhi as well as chairing a secretive subcommittee of the Election Commission which decides who and who is not actually elected using a process with no transparency, no evidence, no testimony, no defense allowed and no appeal……………..
….or will the Democrats and their Bangkok supporters be willing to stand up for a democratic Thailand………….
Nganadeeleg wrote:
Although there are places where meritocracy exists in some fields, I would be interested to know about any place that has it as a system of government.
Well, the British House of Lords is now basically a meritocratic body (I believe a few hereditary peers are still there for sentimental reasons) which reviews legislation according to (hopefully) long-term, enlightenment values rather than short-term ones. Seems to have worked ok so far.
Teth & LSS: You seem to think that I was implying one man is controlling everything – I don’t, and repeat what I said in post #18 above (because it has only just appeared on the site at the same time as your posts): When I say exercise control, I donโt mean controlling everything – he generally lets the children have their way and only intervenes when needed to avoid destructive harm.
Therefore I see no need to address you point, LSS, about classical Marxist belief.
As to your point, Teth, about the right or qualification to be the father of the country, I think you first need to refer to the constitution(s). Secondly, I think it’s more that he gets called upon to do something to sort out the mess created by the children, than being a domineering father.
Thirdly, it’s not for you or me to decide who has that right or qualification, it’s how the Thai people collectively feel that will be the determining factor.
I do, however, have concerns about the way the politicians & the bureaucracy manipulate every utterance of HMK to suit their own ends.
Yes Teth, you may call me Ngan (or even Ngarn or Hobby) and Happy New Year to you too.
LSS: I would be interested in ready a plain language version of your paper, otherwise you guessed correctly.
Happy New Year to you too ๐
Lleij – if you would like to submit an extract of your work to New Mandala we would be interested. My advice would be to avoid terms like “paideia and praxi”. Why not just say what you mean in plain language?
let’s assume that all of the politicians in Thailand follow the same methods, customs and procedures. That bringing campaign followers to capital cities in the course of organizing campaigns is normal activity in democratic elections all over the world. That reimbursing those people for air tickets, hotel rooms and per diems is also normal. That handing out election materials in the form of flyers, brochures or VCD’s is standard in all elections worldwide as is playing music or having some form of entertainment at campaign rallies. That organizing Bring Out the Vote drives which include helping people without convenient transportation get to the polls (as is done in all of the world’s democracies) is also normal…………..
The question is this:
having either supported or gone along with the first coup for all kinds of reasons visible and opaque, will the Bangkok middle-class, the Thai academics and the Thai press, now that they have seen the actual results of the first coup, passively stand back and accept a second, more devious coup that basically disenfranchises about half the citizens of Thailand, mostly rural, mostly Isan and mostly without university degrees?
But isn’t that the whole point, Nok Khamin? The people are still voting for who they want to vote for, regardless of the fact that everyone’s paying money?
I’m not saying its a good thing, but to assume the electorate is stupid is wrong. Instead, everybody should be talking about ways to stop the culture (and along with it those of corruption and nepotism).
Seeing the army as the vehicle for that sort of reform is laughable.
I respect [Teth’s] opinion, however I see it differently and think the control can only stop once the electorate show they have responsibility.
How is this belief any different than the classical Marxist belief that under Communism, society would first have to be under the strict control of the Communist Party and then over time it would evolve to be a “stateless” state? Across the world we have seen how successful various countries have been in undergoing such “evolution”. What makes you think “constitutional monarchy with Thai characteristics” is going to be any more successful in this task? Indeed, could there be any objective way to measure electoral responsibility? Or must the citzenry wait for “gifts of liberty” to be handed out through solely through the grace of an “benevolent” monarch, โะฐ la the House of Wangchuck?
As for your point about education and critical thinking, I think the father has tried, but he obviously needs to develop alternative teaching styles
When I publish my paper on Thai sociopedagogy, I would be happy to send you a copy. A section is devoted to how the national curriculum is shaped by the Thai government’s goal of “citizenship building” and how certain teaching methodologies which emphasize critical thinking skills are discouraged, downplayed, or ignored by the MoE as they have the potential to upset the hegemonic control of the powers-that-be. However, nganadeeleg, as I’d be employing terms like paideia and praxis, I doubt you’d be interested in reading my work.
Ngan, if I may call you that, your analogy strikes me as being oversimplified and incorrect on a few different levels. First, HMK has no right and no qualification to be the father of the country, no matter how aloof or holy he may act. Bear in mind that he did not ascend the throne as a genius superdad, and if any comparison were to be made with fatherhood, HMK would certainly not be the world’s best or virtuous dad. After all, HMK is more concerned about his own interests than about teaching the child to swim. Of course, you view these ‘swimming lessons’ as a sign of benevolence, but what do you base this opinion on? It is nice to come up with an analogy, but I would like to see some supporting evidence of this gentle, benevolent intervention. Oh wait, I think some parts of this intervention involves trying to drown the child. But that’s just me.
With regards to HMK having tried to educate us about critical thinking, I wonder, is he also a superteacher now? Yes, his birthday speeches may be useful occasionally, but how and what else has he taught the nation? Unity, military strength, etc. seems more to be his area of expertise.
Teth, I guess you and I both have a “lesser of two evils” argument – we just have a different take on who is the “lesser evil”, right?
I don’t see how Oct-76 invalidates my argument. I never argued that the palace is pro-democracy. You say the palace played the biggest role legitimizing the massacre. My response is: So? Who else could have “legitimized” the massacre? Certainly not the military itself! Who did (most of the) the killing? I recall scenes of soldiers shooting at students, I recall scenes of soldiers in boots threading on semi-naked women lying prone on the ground at Thammasart. Thailand in the period after the fall of Saigon was very, very tense. Everyone was fearing a red under their bed, and a vietnamese tank at their front gate in the morning – the palace included.
You also brought up a comparison with 1973. In fact does not 1973 (and May-92) support my argument?
The military will not fall apart without the palace. I would certainly like to hear your reasons why you think it will. With or without the palace, the rivalry among generals will be as intense as ever. Sure, the rivalry game may be played very differently and possibly in a more violent fashion if there was no Bhumipol, but there is just no reason why the military as an institution will fall apart. How the Tat Ma Daw sorts out its leadership issue is probably a good example.
What is the possibility in this day and age of the military ruling Thailand ever again?! I’m surprised you ask this question. Who has ruled Thailand over the past 15 months? The expanded powers of the ISOC also give the military immense power going forward.
The military holds all the real cards in the game against democracy. It controls the arms, tanks, and communications + propaganda infrastructure (include all those radio & TV stations). Sep-06 just proved once again that the soldiers think they have a manifest destiny to rule the country in order to “protect” it.
The Handley book, useful as it is, may have driven too many people to focus exclusively on the monarchy (and perhaps give the reader the impression that the military is now just a tool at the King’s disposal). Nothing could be further from the truth.
Brow beating might be the only style the father knows – at least he is consistent.
When I say exercise control, I don’t mean controlling everything – he generally lets the children have their way and only intervenes when needed to avoid destructive harm.
ladyboy, I did understand your point, of course, why would a King with such power want ordinary people to be liberal? As for being a blowhard, I am trying to work out my own ideas too. That’s why I post under a moniker.
nganadeeleg, I realize that by exercising control, the father is stunting the development of the child, but to me that seems a better alternative than the outright destruction that would probably occur if he let the child โsink or swimโ.
But discipline doesn’t have to be through brow beating control. I would think stunting development is only a better alternative if I was fearful of sinking if more people thought for themselves. Adding to Srithanonchai’s point, does the King get a say over where international aid goes?
Also, in regards to meritocracy being a system of govt; isn’t Singapore like this with added nepotism?
Does anyone here actually believe that the discussion of Thai politics is ever likely to be a productive activity?
Of course — because maybe after discussions you walk away with a new, perhaps enlightened, perspective you can influence others with. Even if those numbers influenced are only 1 or 2, maybe they go on and influence another 1 or 2 people and so on. Eventually it’s all peachy. Happy new year to you!
This is very interesting. While it does seem likely that those aligned against the PPP and Thaksin are trying to use their power against the party, I am wondering if anyone actually believes that all those elected PPP candidates in the northeast and other parts of the country actually got elected without buying votes. Let’s not be naive. However, surely other parties have also been doing the same.
“As for your point about education and critical thinking, I think the father has tried, but he obviously needs to develop alternative teaching styles.” >> I am not so sure whether he has tried, judging from the strong propaganda approach to teaching so far. Anyway, the “father-child” analogy does not fit well, because societies are complex systems with a great many actors and relationships, including power relationships and external links. Comparing this to a very small-scale family-like setting where a father teaches his children cannot but mislead.
Teth: I respect your opinion, however I see it differently and think the control can only stop once the electorate show they have responsibility.
I realize that by exercising control, the father is stunting the development of the child, but to me that seems a better alternative than the outright destruction that would probably occur if he let the child ‘sink or swim’.
As for your point about education and critical thinking, I think the father has tried, but he obviously needs to develop alternative teaching styles.
Happy New Year said: “If some want meritocracy, theyโre probably better off going to live somewhere else”
Although there are places where meritocracy exists in some fields, I would be interested to know about any place that has it as a system of government.
BTW, I don’t hold out much hope regarding your first question, and I treat my participation here as just a hobby.
In response, all I have to say is that Prince Inao has nothing on you, Mr. ngandeeleg.
I have already read your post #33, and I thought it was well-written. My request for a comment on Handley was directed toward Ian, who, after his his original expression of censure, has yet to contribute anything to this discussion concerning The King Never Smiles.
Getting back to your original request, yes, let us not go over old ground. If you, or someone else, wishes to continue to attack either my choice of diction or my first name (which happens with a disturbing regularity on this forum), you are most welcome to do so in a more private channel. As for discussion on the issues that Handley raises in his book, I am most willing to discuss them here; however, I think Grasshopper’s laconic comments in #228 say all that is needed to be said for the time being.
Facebook 
Twitter 
Soundcloud 
Youtube 
Rss
Using wisdom to see reality
Re: Andrew
Once I get my paper in a state where I feel comfortable having others read it, I’d be very happy to submit an extract to NM. ๐
I find comparative pedagogy fascinating, and I hope others reading this blog do as well. In my experience as both a researcher of the Thai educational system and as a teacher at a Thai university, I found many positive aspects to Thai sociopedagogy. For example, I observed that the Thai students seem to have a good sense of “classroom ownership” and Thai educators seem to have a good understanding of the realtionship between affect in the classroom environment and the acquistion of knowledge. However, at the risk of editorializing, at the Ministry level, I also found some things that seemed right out of Disney’s Education for Death.
To answer your question, the terms paideia and praxis have specific meanings in the field of Education and are understood by researchers in that discipline and related ones. It would be hard to fully express the meaning (both semantically and pragmatically) of those two terms in English. To be honest, by bringing up those terms, I was just niggling nganadeeleg a bit, due to his professed disdain of Greco-Roman loan words.
I do admit that in my correspondance with Sidh and nganadeeleg, I have been a bit heavy with the Latin; however, as I explained before, it was to make a point….and to engage in a little niggling, of course ๐
That having been said, as a linguist and language educator, I must admit to being leery of “plain language,” the language in this case being English. For example, I find that George Orwell’s famous essay, (which helped to launch the Plain English campaigns of the 20th century) “Politics and the English Language” to be fundamentally falwed in two ways. The first is that he argues that English is “declining,” from the standpoint of Linguistics, to say a language is improving or declining is utter nonsense. We call such viewpoints as “prescriptivist,” as opposed to the “descriptivist” position of Linguistics. Orwell’s second major flaw is that he argues that to employ unplain English is morally wrong. Again, I find it ludicrious to make a moral value judgement on someone’s choice of diction.
Ancedotally, I have found that those who support “plain language” movements tend to have been raised in a monolingual environment and belong to the majority ethnic group of their nation. Indeed, observe the irony of Thai language policy, where, for example, Issan schoolchildren are admonished not to use certain Tai-origin words (e.g. ัโฃะัโะฑัโโกัโะฒ, ัโะปัโะฑัโโ) in favor of “plain (i.e. standard/normative) Thai,” which more often than not have an Indic-origin (e.g. ัโะฐัโะณัโะณัโะฒัโโ, ัโะบัโโัโะฉัโโัโะ). What I am getting at is, who decides what is “plain”? After all, the terms paideia and praxis are quite plain to anyone who hails from the Hellanic Republic!
Having been raised bilingual myself, having a wife who was raised trilingual, and now raising a (hopefully) quadrilingual daughter, our household is a wondrous Babel of code-switching. If some of that spills over onto this forum, then just take it as the idiosyncrasies of someone who works with and loves languages. Perhaps, due to the cultural associations Latin has, some people took it as a gaudy display of erudition. I ask my fellow New Mandalaians, would you have come to the same conclusion if I code-switched in Yiddish?
Using wisdom to see reality
Re: Meritocracy – Thanks for the examples, Grasshopper & James.
The examples are not exactly what I was seeking because both countries have elements of democracy, which I do not regard as meritocracy.
However, following up on Happy New Years post #14 above, it sounds like those who are sweating on getting meritocracy would probably be better off going to live in Singapore or England.
Thailand’s coup by stealth
…..and will the Democrats then accept power being handed to them by a retired General who works for Sondhi as well as chairing a secretive subcommittee of the Election Commission which decides who and who is not actually elected using a process with no transparency, no evidence, no testimony, no defense allowed and no appeal……………..
….or will the Democrats and their Bangkok supporters be willing to stand up for a democratic Thailand………….
Thailand’s coup by stealth
Answer: yes, probably
Using wisdom to see reality
Nganadeeleg wrote:
Although there are places where meritocracy exists in some fields, I would be interested to know about any place that has it as a system of government.
Well, the British House of Lords is now basically a meritocratic body (I believe a few hereditary peers are still there for sentimental reasons) which reviews legislation according to (hopefully) long-term, enlightenment values rather than short-term ones. Seems to have worked ok so far.
Using wisdom to see reality
typo above, it should say:
LSS: I would be interested in reading a plain language version of your paper, otherwise you guessed correctly.
Using wisdom to see reality
Teth & LSS: You seem to think that I was implying one man is controlling everything – I don’t, and repeat what I said in post #18 above (because it has only just appeared on the site at the same time as your posts):
When I say exercise control, I donโt mean controlling everything – he generally lets the children have their way and only intervenes when needed to avoid destructive harm.
Therefore I see no need to address you point, LSS, about classical Marxist belief.
As to your point, Teth, about the right or qualification to be the father of the country, I think you first need to refer to the constitution(s). Secondly, I think it’s more that he gets called upon to do something to sort out the mess created by the children, than being a domineering father.
Thirdly, it’s not for you or me to decide who has that right or qualification, it’s how the Thai people collectively feel that will be the determining factor.
I do, however, have concerns about the way the politicians & the bureaucracy manipulate every utterance of HMK to suit their own ends.
Yes Teth, you may call me Ngan (or even Ngarn or Hobby) and Happy New Year to you too.
LSS: I would be interested in ready a plain language version of your paper, otherwise you guessed correctly.
Happy New Year to you too ๐
Using wisdom to see reality
Lleij – if you would like to submit an extract of your work to New Mandala we would be interested. My advice would be to avoid terms like “paideia and praxi”. Why not just say what you mean in plain language?
Thailand’s coup by stealth
let’s assume that all of the politicians in Thailand follow the same methods, customs and procedures. That bringing campaign followers to capital cities in the course of organizing campaigns is normal activity in democratic elections all over the world. That reimbursing those people for air tickets, hotel rooms and per diems is also normal. That handing out election materials in the form of flyers, brochures or VCD’s is standard in all elections worldwide as is playing music or having some form of entertainment at campaign rallies. That organizing Bring Out the Vote drives which include helping people without convenient transportation get to the polls (as is done in all of the world’s democracies) is also normal…………..
The question is this:
having either supported or gone along with the first coup for all kinds of reasons visible and opaque, will the Bangkok middle-class, the Thai academics and the Thai press, now that they have seen the actual results of the first coup, passively stand back and accept a second, more devious coup that basically disenfranchises about half the citizens of Thailand, mostly rural, mostly Isan and mostly without university degrees?
Thailand’s coup by stealth
But isn’t that the whole point, Nok Khamin? The people are still voting for who they want to vote for, regardless of the fact that everyone’s paying money?
I’m not saying its a good thing, but to assume the electorate is stupid is wrong. Instead, everybody should be talking about ways to stop the culture (and along with it those of corruption and nepotism).
Seeing the army as the vehicle for that sort of reform is laughable.
Using wisdom to see reality
re: nganadeeleg>
How is this belief any different than the classical Marxist belief that under Communism, society would first have to be under the strict control of the Communist Party and then over time it would evolve to be a “stateless” state? Across the world we have seen how successful various countries have been in undergoing such “evolution”. What makes you think “constitutional monarchy with Thai characteristics” is going to be any more successful in this task? Indeed, could there be any objective way to measure electoral responsibility? Or must the citzenry wait for “gifts of liberty” to be handed out through solely through the grace of an “benevolent” monarch, โะฐ la the House of Wangchuck?
As for your point about education and critical thinking, I think the father has tried, but he obviously needs to develop alternative teaching styles
When I publish my paper on Thai sociopedagogy, I would be happy to send you a copy. A section is devoted to how the national curriculum is shaped by the Thai government’s goal of “citizenship building” and how certain teaching methodologies which emphasize critical thinking skills are discouraged, downplayed, or ignored by the MoE as they have the potential to upset the hegemonic control of the powers-that-be. However, nganadeeleg, as I’d be employing terms like paideia and praxis, I doubt you’d be interested in reading my work.
Using wisdom to see reality
Ngan, if I may call you that, your analogy strikes me as being oversimplified and incorrect on a few different levels. First, HMK has no right and no qualification to be the father of the country, no matter how aloof or holy he may act. Bear in mind that he did not ascend the throne as a genius superdad, and if any comparison were to be made with fatherhood, HMK would certainly not be the world’s best or virtuous dad. After all, HMK is more concerned about his own interests than about teaching the child to swim. Of course, you view these ‘swimming lessons’ as a sign of benevolence, but what do you base this opinion on? It is nice to come up with an analogy, but I would like to see some supporting evidence of this gentle, benevolent intervention. Oh wait, I think some parts of this intervention involves trying to drown the child. But that’s just me.
With regards to HMK having tried to educate us about critical thinking, I wonder, is he also a superteacher now? Yes, his birthday speeches may be useful occasionally, but how and what else has he taught the nation? Unity, military strength, etc. seems more to be his area of expertise.
And Happy New Year, nganadeeleg.
The King Never Smiles?
Teth, I guess you and I both have a “lesser of two evils” argument – we just have a different take on who is the “lesser evil”, right?
I don’t see how Oct-76 invalidates my argument. I never argued that the palace is pro-democracy. You say the palace played the biggest role legitimizing the massacre. My response is: So? Who else could have “legitimized” the massacre? Certainly not the military itself! Who did (most of the) the killing? I recall scenes of soldiers shooting at students, I recall scenes of soldiers in boots threading on semi-naked women lying prone on the ground at Thammasart. Thailand in the period after the fall of Saigon was very, very tense. Everyone was fearing a red under their bed, and a vietnamese tank at their front gate in the morning – the palace included.
You also brought up a comparison with 1973. In fact does not 1973 (and May-92) support my argument?
The military will not fall apart without the palace. I would certainly like to hear your reasons why you think it will. With or without the palace, the rivalry among generals will be as intense as ever. Sure, the rivalry game may be played very differently and possibly in a more violent fashion if there was no Bhumipol, but there is just no reason why the military as an institution will fall apart. How the Tat Ma Daw sorts out its leadership issue is probably a good example.
What is the possibility in this day and age of the military ruling Thailand ever again?! I’m surprised you ask this question. Who has ruled Thailand over the past 15 months? The expanded powers of the ISOC also give the military immense power going forward.
The military holds all the real cards in the game against democracy. It controls the arms, tanks, and communications + propaganda infrastructure (include all those radio & TV stations). Sep-06 just proved once again that the soldiers think they have a manifest destiny to rule the country in order to “protect” it.
The Handley book, useful as it is, may have driven too many people to focus exclusively on the monarchy (and perhaps give the reader the impression that the military is now just a tool at the King’s disposal). Nothing could be further from the truth.
Using wisdom to see reality
Brow beating might be the only style the father knows – at least he is consistent.
When I say exercise control, I don’t mean controlling everything – he generally lets the children have their way and only intervenes when needed to avoid destructive harm.
The King Never Smiles?
Thanks Teth for your 233# post.
Using wisdom to see reality
ladyboy, I did understand your point, of course, why would a King with such power want ordinary people to be liberal? As for being a blowhard, I am trying to work out my own ideas too. That’s why I post under a moniker.
nganadeeleg, I realize that by exercising control, the father is stunting the development of the child, but to me that seems a better alternative than the outright destruction that would probably occur if he let the child โsink or swimโ.
But discipline doesn’t have to be through brow beating control. I would think stunting development is only a better alternative if I was fearful of sinking if more people thought for themselves. Adding to Srithanonchai’s point, does the King get a say over where international aid goes?
Also, in regards to meritocracy being a system of govt; isn’t Singapore like this with added nepotism?
Does anyone here actually believe that the discussion of Thai politics is ever likely to be a productive activity?
Of course — because maybe after discussions you walk away with a new, perhaps enlightened, perspective you can influence others with. Even if those numbers influenced are only 1 or 2, maybe they go on and influence another 1 or 2 people and so on. Eventually it’s all peachy. Happy new year to you!
Thailand’s coup by stealth
This is very interesting. While it does seem likely that those aligned against the PPP and Thaksin are trying to use their power against the party, I am wondering if anyone actually believes that all those elected PPP candidates in the northeast and other parts of the country actually got elected without buying votes. Let’s not be naive. However, surely other parties have also been doing the same.
Using wisdom to see reality
“As for your point about education and critical thinking, I think the father has tried, but he obviously needs to develop alternative teaching styles.” >> I am not so sure whether he has tried, judging from the strong propaganda approach to teaching so far. Anyway, the “father-child” analogy does not fit well, because societies are complex systems with a great many actors and relationships, including power relationships and external links. Comparing this to a very small-scale family-like setting where a father teaches his children cannot but mislead.
Using wisdom to see reality
Teth: I respect your opinion, however I see it differently and think the control can only stop once the electorate show they have responsibility.
I realize that by exercising control, the father is stunting the development of the child, but to me that seems a better alternative than the outright destruction that would probably occur if he let the child ‘sink or swim’.
As for your point about education and critical thinking, I think the father has tried, but he obviously needs to develop alternative teaching styles.
Happy New Year said: “If some want meritocracy, theyโre probably better off going to live somewhere else”
Although there are places where meritocracy exists in some fields, I would be interested to know about any place that has it as a system of government.
BTW, I don’t hold out much hope regarding your first question, and I treat my participation here as just a hobby.
The King Never Smiles?
Re: ngandeeleg
You said, “LSS: Lets not go over old ground.”
In response, all I have to say is that Prince Inao has nothing on you, Mr. ngandeeleg.
I have already read your post #33, and I thought it was well-written. My request for a comment on Handley was directed toward Ian, who, after his his original expression of censure, has yet to contribute anything to this discussion concerning The King Never Smiles.
Getting back to your original request, yes, let us not go over old ground. If you, or someone else, wishes to continue to attack either my choice of diction or my first name (which happens with a disturbing regularity on this forum), you are most welcome to do so in a more private channel. As for discussion on the issues that Handley raises in his book, I am most willing to discuss them here; however, I think Grasshopper’s laconic comments in #228 say all that is needed to be said for the time being.