Talking so much about Prussian militarism and Prussian bureaucracy, it should be noted that one of the most important pillars of the modern science and humanities oriented university, which integrates arts, humanities and sciences and uses a holistic combination of research and studies comes from Prussia. The idea of the Humboldtean university and the Humboldtean model of higher education with the Humboldt University in Berlin is one of the real things Prussia gave to this world. This university was the preeminent university for natural sciences in the 19th and early 20th Century and had alumni and teachers Albert Einstein, Karl Marx, Max Weber and Georg Wilhelm Hegel.

If Prussians revolutionized the military, so did the but in totally different way the Prussian educators with Wilhelm Humboldt leading the charge and the Prussian Reform Movement (that abolished in Prussia serfdom and was based on Enlightenment ideas).

And in the heart of Prussia.

Wartimes give one way to see things, but I guess now days the focus is on the competitive advantage and that education is viewed as literally as an investment to increase economic growth. It's not a militaristic view, it's more of a capitalistic view. Higher education is viewed as a hub that creates innovative new tech companies, creates new industries. I think that's the dominant view.

Wartimes give one way to see things, but I guess now days the focus is on the competitive advantage and that education is viewed as literally as an investment to increase economic growth. It's not a militaristic view, it's more of a capitalistic view. Higher education is viewed as a hub that creates innovative new tech companies, creates new industries. I think that's the dominant view. — ssu

I think the Germans/Prussians are pretty awesome people, and that is why I began reading about them.
You missed the point of why I write about Prussian military bureaucracy being applied to citizens. In the several years, I have attempted to raise awareness of the organizational difference between that bureaucratic order and the bureaucratic order the US had, no one has related with an understanding of what a difference bureaucratic order makes, and how this is connected with the change of education in the US.

For sure today's education is not about citizenship but is focused on producing products for industry. Now, this has something to do with the German influence. Long before we became so technologically smart, William James wrote of "the various ideals of education that are prevalent in the different countries,..... The German universities are proud of the number of young specialists whom they turn out every year," We adopted that education in 1917 and fully dropped the education for citizen we had in 1958. We are experiencing the social, economic, and political ramifications of that change. Adopting that change in education goes with adopting Prussian military bureaucracy and applying it to citizens, but I think it is futile for me to continue giving this explanation because obviously the problem is my prejudice against the Germans/Prussians and there is nothing to say about them but to praise them. :rage: The difference between specializing people and preparing them to be a cog in the machine, a mechanical society, and education for well-rounded individual growth, does not need to be considered, right?

I have chosen to avoid Historium and I don't want to deal with the problem here.

I think it is futile for me to continue giving this explanation because obviously the problem is my prejudice against the Germans/Prussians and there is nothing to say about them but to praise them. — Athena

The thing is that few explain the present by referring to the 19th Century, where you really had Prussia. I think you correctly understand that late 19th Century America sought example from Prussia / Germany, but in the post WW2 era this idea is very rare. Basically the present start post WW2, where the US finds itself in the dominant position (with nearly every other possible competitor in ruins). This causes the focus to be in the purely domestic scene and other countries being influenced by the US.

The thing is that few explain the present by referring to the 19th Century, where you really had Prussia. I think you correctly understand that late 19th Century America sought example from Prussia / Germany, but in the post WW2 era this idea is very rare. Basically the present start post WW2, where the US finds itself in the dominant position (with nearly every other possible competitor in ruins). This causes the focus to be in the purely domestic scene and other countries being influenced by the US. — ssu

You speak of history and what war did to Egypt, Athens, Roman, the Aztecs, or any civilization that is victorious in war. I am speaking of bureaucratic order and the New World Order replacing the old world order. I have given up on anyone understanding the less exciting subject of bureaucratic order and what it has to do to fundamentally changing our experience of life.

Should someone be permitted to move into my house and sleep in my bed? As one of God's children of equal worth, why should my bed be reserved for me and they be required to sleep somewhere less comfortable? — Hanover

Questions like that arise from a wrong understanding of Christian teachings. The Bible says:

"But if any provide not for his own, and specially for those of his own house, he hath denied the faith, and is worse than an infidel" (1 Timothy 5:8).

A government's first duty is to look after its own population. Charity and hospitality are OK but not when they are applied to the detriment of the giver or host, otherwise we're rewarding good with evil.

Immigration is also a matter of justice. How is it just for one population to be replaced and its territory to be taken over by another?

I have given up on anyone understanding the less exciting subject of bureaucratic order and what it has to do to fundamentally changing our experience of life. — Athena

Or perhaps explaining your reasoning? People are quite open to new ideas here in PF.

Or perhaps explaining your reasoning? People are quite open to new ideas here in PF. — ssu

That is sweet, and the invitation is like putting a horse at the starting gate of a race track. I have no idea how to get people interested in the fact that bureaucratic organization is far more important than who sits in the seats of power. I think we can make this compliant with the thread.

While I think we have a lot to learn from history, I agree with Thomas Jefferson about the importance of our future. Not just our future in the next 5 years but the future beyond our time on earth. Religion seems to want to hold people in the past, and democracy is about creating a better future. Bureaucracy is vital to what can be done. The bureaucracy of our forefathers was extremely weak compared to the bureaucracy we have today and perhaps this is essential to created heaven on earth? Evolving bureaucracy that manages every aspect of our lives can be a heaven or hell. We could not have Social Security and other such programs if we had not adopted the Prussian model of bureaucracy. But we need to be aware that this can lead to heaven or hell.

I disagree with "Human beings of equal moral value should be free to move about the world to maximize The value of their lives, as they define it." and agree with

A government's first duty is to look after its own population. Charity and hospitality are OK but not when they are applied to the detriment of the giver or host, otherwise we're rewarding good with evil. — Apollodorus

We are not of equal moral value. Our cultures make us very different from each other. The US handled the immigration problem by Americanizing them in the schools. It was thought the immigrant parents with no democratic experience would learn from their children.

Should someone be permitted to move into my house and sleep in my bed? As one of God's children of equal worth, why should my bed be reserved for me and they be required to sleep somewhere less comfortable? — Hanover

When growing up, I remember if an uninvited guest came for dinner and there was not enough to feed everyone, my mother went without dinner. As a grown woman I became an extension of my husband's and children's needs and wants and without them, I had no identity. I think this was expected of women and it worked as long as the woman's basic needs for food and shelter were met. The man was the provider and defender of the family.

The bureaucracy over us is the father and today I don't think it is a good idea to give all our power to the government as a woman of old gave the male head of the house all the power. Guests should not come to dinner without an invitation. Their right to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness is not a right to take what is mine. They do not get my dinner nor my bed, and I do not assume I can walk into people's homes uninvited and take their dinner and their bed.

This what I was going for in P1.

All humans have an equal basic moral status. They possess the same fundamental rights, and the comparable interests of each person should count the same in calculations that determine social policy. Neither supposed racial differences, nor skin color, sex, sexual orientation, ethnicity, intelligence, nor any other differences among humans negate their fundamental equal worth and dignity. — Rank Amateur

Did you cite the author John Kekes whos essay "A Reasonable Alternative to Egalitarianism" was published in "Debates in Political Philosophy"? You quoted him word for word here.

All humans have an equal basic moral status. They possess the same fundamental rights, and the comparable interests of each person should count the same in calculations that determine social policy....