Trump is not all wrong, but neither is he all right — Athena

Sure. This can be said of most Reps and Dems. The problems is that Reps and Dems are not allowed to disagree with their own party and tell them when they are wrong, and find the good in the other side to reach a compromise.

Is eliminating government waste a good thing? Instead of just working against anything Trump does, even though they have done it themselves in the past, why not try to work with the other side to have some input in what is being cut. The Dems have cried wolf so many times when it comes to Trump that no one cares any more about the fear-mongering they propagate, even when he actually does something wrong - like when he recently spoke about ignoring the separation of church and state. The Dems are just as much at fault that Trump is president as Trump is.

I see you are on the same page as AmadeusD. — Athena

You wound me deeply!

Human nature has not changed but its organization and technology has changed. — Athena

What's that to do with the historical inaccuracy of the Huxley quote?
Every society uses state-of-the-art technology to organize its power structure and deal - well or badly - with its population's requirements. This includes all tyrants and despots of past and present. They had available exactly the same tools as did their opposition.

And my point is what education has to do with leaving our democracy undefended. — Athena

I'm quite familiar with your point by now. It's a bit late to fix the multitude of Trumpian crimes with a change in education. Anyway, his regime intends to do away with education, social services and science altogether. Once they're gone, whoever is still here (unlikely to include your or me) will have to rebuild civilization in their own way.

Sure. This can be said of most Reps and Dems. The problems is that Reps and Dems are not allowed to disagree with their own party and tell them when they are wrong, and find the good in the other side to reach a compromise.

Is eliminating government waste a good thing? Instead of just working against anything Trump does, even though they have done it themselves in the past, why not try to work with the other side to have some input in what is being cut. The Dems have cried wolf so many times when it comes to Trump that no one cares any more about the fear-mongering they propagate, even when he actually does something wrong - like when he recently spoke about ignoring the separation of church and state. The Dems are just as much at fault that Trump is president as Trump is. — Harry Hindu

Might I say the problem is human nature? We are evolved social animals, and as such, we have a strong sense of belonging. Labeling people is divisive. It winds up making membership in this group or that one very important. This truth was the most powerful factor in Nazi Germany. Like our South is doing now, citizens were encouraged to report their family, friends, neighbors to the gestapo. In some Southern states reporting someone for being involved in an abortion is encourage, with zero awareness this is one of the things that made the Nazi so powerful. People lived in fear of being suspect so they were driven to prove they were faithful to the Nazi party. This a truth of all groups, a fear of not belonging, or worse a fear of persecution.

Trump is like Hitler because he understands how to work our emotions to increase his own popularity. When we attract the Republicans or the Democrats, we participate in this divisiveness. We create a show that persuaded others to be one of "us", and possibly do terrible things to one of them. Now the peaceful protest become more and more threatening, as we must prove to our friends we are one of them and we are not afraid but bold, very bold.

What we see here is a troop of chimpanzees. Our need for belonging can lead to heroic behaviors or shockingly evil and destructive behaviors, as people are caught up in the moment, just like a lynching mob. Image being one of them, living in constant fear of persecution or being high on being a valuable member willing to step into the leadership role.

In the past, we were wiser when we designed our Constitution with checks and balances and prepared the young for good citizenship. Our forefathers knew our weaknesses and gave in to them on the slavery issue while also limiting the power of government. If we talked as much about the democracy we inherited and stopped playing into the divisiveness, perhaps our Hitler would be less successful in destroying and more successful in making changes that need to be made.

What's that to do with the historical inaccuracy of the Huxley quote?
Every society uses state-of-the-art technology to organize its power structure and deal - well or badly - with its population's requirements. This includes all tyrants and despots of past and present. They had available exactly the same tools as did their opposition. — Vera Mont

Unfortunately, not every citizen is well educated. If we studied German history, we would know what the Prussians did to manifest a very powerful bureaucratic power over the masses and the potential problems of this organization. The general public has no understanding of why this bureaucratic order is what we fought against.

This is from the 1917 National Education Association Conference in Portland, Oregon....
"Small wonder that the ideals of these countries clash with ours. With these people nationalism is a delusion by which they have perverted their civilization into a mechanical organization of power that now menaces the truest interests and welfare of mankind." Sara H. Failey, Teacher of English.

Fascism started in Italy and spread to Europe and the US.

"Whatever their efficiency, such great organizations are so impersonal they bear down on the individual lives of the people like a hydraulic press whose action is completely impersonal and therefore effective in crushing out individual liberty and power." Tagore, poet and seer of India.

Please excuse, but we can not carry on this discussion until I see your ID. Perferably, you have the Real ID driver's licence that is required for you to fly even if your flight does not leave the USA. Not really, but I hope I have made a point about what we have turned into. Today our experience of being a US citizen is very different from being a citizen before WWII, when we could freely travel to Canada or Mexico with no ID. Roosevelt and Hoover gave as a more efficient bureaucracy with new powers that were essential to our progress but also, dropping the humanities in our education to focus on education for technology for military and industrial purpose, and the spread of that bureaucratic model to all industry and institutions, means Germany effectively won the war because we are not the democracy we defended in two world wars. We are the repressive, militant order we defended our democracy against.

And won't we be proud when Trump ties his birthday to a Military parade. We will all wear our Trump hats and shirts so everyone knows we follow our great leader and our great military might, and God given ability to rule the earth. Amen

Today is nothing like the past. History might knock us down as it knocked Athens, Rome, the Mayans and the Nazi down.

I'm quite familiar with your point by now. It's a bit late to fix the multitude of Trumpian crimes with a change in education. — Vera Mont

On what facts do you base your argument? Education is scrambling to fix the problem. I am not alone, but unfortunately, I appear to be the only one who knows what wars have to do with changes in education and what the Prussian new military order had to do with increasing bureaucratic power.
In the past, armies provided their provisions, not industrial leaders.

Okay, where are you facts?

In fact I will go out on a limb and say that these things are good for societies - not just for individual people. — EricH

I am not sure. I think we need to consider our human nature and what brings out the best in us and what brings out the worst in us. In the past, we were concerned with human dignity. That is why social security was based on age rather than need. At the time, Roosevelt was hoping older people would give up their jobs to younger ones. Social Security enabled them to stop working on the grounds that they earned their Social Security, and it was not charity.

I see many people on the edges of society, and I am not sure if meeting all their needs without them earning what they get is a good thing? I think we need to have organization for our personal lives and a way of giving back. What do you think?

Unfortunately, not every citizen is well educated. — Athena

Huxley was. He had no excuse for misstating the role of past dictators.

I'm quite familiar with your point by now. It's a bit late to fix the multitude of Trumpian crimes with a change in education. — Vera Mont


On what facts do you base your argument? Education is scrambling to fix the problem. — Athena

Education is about to be disembowelled by the Trump administration, as well as several Republican states. Even if some of it survives and does a better job that its predecessors, their product won't be ready to vote until long after the damage has been done.

Okay, where are you facts? — Athena

P 1:It's 2025.
P2: In 2024, a large enough percentage of the product of American education elected a mad, narcissistic ignoramus with a long record of criminal behaviour, public lying and reckless rhetoric president.
P3: After everything that mni wrecked in 100 days, his approval rating among the product of American education is still 41%.
P4: The next election is three and half years away.
C: however hard American education scrambles to reform, it cannot conceivably turn out an educated electorate in that time.

Trump is like Hitler because he understands how to work our emotions to increase his own popularity. — Athena

The vast majority of political messaging is made to work people's emotions, though. That's not just Trump.

Worse still, with Trump it is very obvious, and thus limited in its effectiveness, whereas the messaging you ought to be really worried about is the stuff that is not obvious, and thus finds its way straight into their recipients' subconscious.

They become societal paradigms which are no longer questioned, no matter how defunct they might be.

So, what do you think US education is doing right, and what is it doing wrong, and why is this so? What do you believe is the purpose of education? What do you believe should be required subjects?

The vast majority of political messaging is made to work people's emotions, though. That's not just Trump.

Worse still, with Trump it is very obvious, and thus limited in its effectiveness, whereas the messaging you ought to be really worried about is the stuff that is not obvious, and thus finds its way straight into their recipients' subconscious.

They become societal paradigms which are no longer questioned, no matter how defunct they might be. — Tzeentch

What you said might radically change for at least two reasons. The reason that is the most fun to think about is how new technology is making it possible for us watch the brain working and apply test to better understand how our brains work.

The second reason is a reaction to what is happening today. Many schools dropped civics and education for the humanities was completely replaced with education for technology. We are seeing the result of that now. For God's sake, we have a President who does not know the Constitution and can not answer questions about Constitutionally protected rights and wrongs. There is a chance voters may not have made this choice if they knew the Constitution and why it is important.

The 1958 National Defense Education Act put the Military and Industry in charge of education decisions.
I am saying this education for the Military, Industrial Complex is what made the US like the Germany that followed Hitler. Okay, Trump has moved for a complete breakdown of this Military Industrial Complex reality. That is both good and bad! I hate doing all the talking so can you or anyone else say why the change is both good and bad?

I know I have overlooked the concern for today's social media. That is serious but if we want change it must begin with education, so I narrowing my reply to public education.

So, what do you think US education is doing right, and what is it doing wrong, and why is this so? — Athena

I'm not that familiar with the current states (50?) of US education; I only see the odd articles like this; and on book-banning, forbidding the discussion of certain subjects. And one can't help noticing the astonishingly uneven levels of rudimentary knowledge. While there are many clever, well-read, knowledgeable Americans in medicine and other sciences, in entertainment, literature and jurisprudence, so many (even among university educated) people seem be clueless about so many things that they ought to know. (See Trump for a high-profile example. He's supposed to have earned a degree in economics.)

What do you believe is the purpose of education? — Athena

To impart to children the information required to navigate their culture and become aware of other cultures, the skills to take care of themselves, the foundations and tools to continue learning more complex material and they grow older; enable students to find sources of information, solve problems, evaluate situations and communicate with others. To prepare the young for responsible citizenship.To teach young people any skills and knowledge required to perform whatever specialized work they have the talent and inclination for, so that they can contribute and prosper.

What do you believe should be required subjects? — Athena

In elementary school: literacy and numeracy, basic geography and history, science - heavy on nature studies - music, art, literature, articulate discourse and social demeanour; health, safety and physical fitness, survival skills. Also the practice of elementary civics, kitchen and workshop skills.
In middle school, wider and deeper literature, art and music, research, debate and review; peer justice. Advanced history, geography, science, math and civics; comparative religion and at least one other language. Continue that through secondary school and build on the other subjects as the students advance.
From age 12 onward, take at least three months out of the school-year for real life activities: construction, community services, camping and foraging, mechanics, food production; various team projects under the guidance of adults who are versed in the particular trade.

Of course, throughout, the students need to be tested effectively for comprehension of what they have learned before proceeding to the next level. Rigid division of grades by age is ridiculous.

On the topic of education, I think it would require a radical paradigm shift indeed.

It's often said that education alone does not actually make people less susceptible to propaganda, and in fact might make people more susceptible, and that includes academics.

One reason for that is obvious, namely that the public education they're being given is often heavily influenced by the state apparatus, laying the bedrock for the propaganda people will be presented with later in life.

But the second reason is perhaps not so obvious, and in my view more interesting.

I think modern education has a way of disconnecting people from their intuition, and attempts to replace it with pure reason. Such people are, paradoxically, much easier to manipulate. Because reason has its limits too, and a clever mind can rationalize literally anything - something which the propagandist makes eager use of.

Even though the person themselves is disconnected from their intuition, the propagandist makes it their profession to understand, and often has a much better understanding of what makes their target audience tick than the audience itself.

ago — Vera Mont

I love what you said about education. That is a liberal education, not education for technology. I think some schools are returning to that, but right now, it may be hard to get good books for a grade school liberal education.

Brain research resulting from improved technology for brain research may help turn the tide back to liberal education. Once the brain is better understood and the benefits of education for good citizenship and good moral judgment are understood, I think liberal education will be more appreciated.

It is cost-effective to have education for good citizenship because that is how to prevent crime and keep prison and welfare populations low. And it does so without authoritarian rule above the people. Learning self-government begins with governing ourselves and knowing that obeying the law is how to protect our liberty.

The vast majority of political messaging is made to work people's emotions, though. That's not just Trump.

Worse still, with Trump it is very obvious, and thus limited in its effectiveness, whereas the messaging you ought to be really worried about is the stuff that is not obvious, and thus finds its way straight into their recipients' subconscious.

They become societal paradigms that are no longer questioned, no matter how defunct they might be. — Tzeentch

:chin: It is just Trump and the leaders of India and Brazil, and maybe Israel, because Israel is so much about Jewish versus everyone else. Hitler and the Nasi did a lot of surveys in the rural areas to find out what people were most angry about and what they feared most, then they rented large rooms and gave great speeches about how the Nasi party would take care of all these problems. They did this year-round and not just when an election is to happen. Fascism is built on fear and anger.

What other president of the US comes close to Trump in this video?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5NsrwH9I9vE

Your bottom line is perfect. I think we have a problem with that reality because of being overly enthusiastic about what technology can do for us and the denial of our limits. Also, when we turned to education for technology, we left moral training to the Church, and were pretty naive about understanding the importance of culture!

Eisenhower realized the dangers of this turn to technology when he warned us of the Military Industrial Complex, but I don't think he was aware of the importance of a liberal education when he asked Congress to replace our "domestic education" with education for technology. The 1958 National Defense Education Act was a reaction to Sputnik, and it had a 4 year limit. Instead of returning to our domestic education, we continued education for technology and a society with unknown values.

Countries could use psychoanalysis just like individuals may need it, because stuff in the subconscious is causing problems. Every culture has a limited consciousness, with some things being taboo. This subconscious is manifested and is causing problems. This is so obvious today with Trump cramming our history of slavery into our subconscious, making it illegal to talk about this taboo subject. The Whites have always had the power to suppress and control our consciousness. How much of a jump is it from hating people of one shade to hating all colored people, and this is a cornerstone of Fascism.

I think modern education has a way of disconnecting people from their intuition, and attempts to replace it with pure reason. Such people are, paradoxically, much easier to manipulate. Because reason has its limits too, and a clever mind can rationalize literally anything - something which the propagandist makes eager use of.

Even though the person themselves is disconnected from their intuition, the propagandist makes it their profession to understand, and often has a much better understanding of what makes their target audience tick than the audience itself. — Tzeentch

Oh yes, education for technology is disconnecting us from intuition. I learned in college that our personal experiences do not matter and our arguments need to be empirical. A large part of Fascism is the power of technology and opposed to the power of the individual. We are not only separated from God, but also ourselves and in our desperate aloneness, we need the crowd. Hail, Hitler is a wonderful feeling of belonging. We disrespect our leaders but love the power of a strong leader.

I love your bottom line and see a connection to feeling separate from God and ourselves. The independent thinker is a stronger person and does not need the approval of the crowd. We thought everyone to be independent thinkers and replace that with "group thinking".

More recent brain research is making us aware of what our emotions have to do with what we think.

That is a liberal education, not education for technology. — Athena

You go to technical school for careers in technology - but only after having mastered the principles and operations of science and math through elementary and secondary school.
I've never figured out exactly how 'education for technology' differs from general education.

What's wrong with the current system is that teachers don't have the time, resources or freedom to help each student develop their understanding of the world at their own pace.

But that was never the case in formal classrooms; only Montessori, Waldorf and various new nature-centered initiatives recently starting in Canada are child-centered. It doesn't matter whether the children have to chant the times tables or a loyalty oath or a prayer, it's equally regimented. And the curricula are all based on an unquestioned value system. Little children are taught arithmetic with exampled of the price of apples and told stories about beggar girls becoming princesses, subliminally reinforcing, day by day, the inevitability of a monetary class system. Or they're told stories about brave soldiers and patriotism. Or Jesus and the saints. Some prefabricated frame of reference from which they are not permitted to stray.

So, the values taught in formal education systems always, always instill in the impressionable young the status quo of their their society. Wealth is good, poverty is shameful. Christians are virtuous; pagans are immoral. My country ('s current government), right or wrong, is worth dying and killing for. Love God, the Queen, the Flag, the President, the Shah.... no difference. Good citizenship in each country takes a slightly different form, but it's always about obeying the Law.

I wonder what we'd discover about the present state of American affairs if we reviewed the history of school curricula and voting patterns, state by state. Would the roots of this 'moral' divide become more evident?

It is cost-effective to have education for good citizenship because that is how to prevent crime and keep prison and welfare populations low. — Athena

Wouldn't a more equitable distribution of wealth be even more effective? And maybe enacting fair laws?

I don't think anything is just good or bad. As I age, I appreciate the complexity of everything. Something may seem bad, but in relation to everything else, it can be good, or vice versa.

I am not against regimented education. Some things just have to be memorized, and when they are, that frees the mind for more complex thinking. I so wish I could spend more time with you, but I am in a rush to join friends at Cafe 60, and what you said is sooo good, I want to have time to work on a response. One reason my thinking is different is that it comes out of very old books, and I love it when someone engages me is a discussion of education and forces me to think about what I think. You have stirred many thoughts. Thank you

I am not against regimented education. Some things just have to be memorized, and when they are, that frees the mind for more complex thinking. — Athena

If it stopped at times tables and metric conversion, passages from Hamlet or The Highwayman, I'd have no problem with it, either. It's the loyalty oaths, patriotic platitudes and reverence for the aristocracy (landed, business, military or clerical) that I find offensive. That's what makes political disagreement a moral issue; what puts political parties into the same category as churches.

If it stopped at times tables and metric conversion, passages from Hamlet or The Highwayman, I'd have no problem with it, either. It's the loyalty oaths, patriotic platitudes and reverence for the aristocracy (landed, business, military or clerical) that I find offensive. That's what makes political disagreement a moral issue; what puts political parties into the same category as churches. — Vera Mont

Are you saying literacy in the classics is a good thing?

Why do you object to loyalty oaths?

I was not sure what a patriotic platitude is, so I googled that term and got these examples...

Patriotic quotes
"This is your democracy. ...
"Where liberty is, there is my country." – ...
"True patriotism springs from a belief in the dignity of the individual, freedom and equality not only for Americans but for all people on earth." – ...
"Freedom is nothing but a chance to be better." –
More items...•Jun 19, 2024
https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/2024/06/19/patriotic-quotes-america-usa/74070993007/

What is the problem with those statements? I think some defining statements are necessary. It might be a good thing if all citizens agreed on these platitudes. Trump appears unaware of them, making me think his followers are also unaware of them. I don't think that is a good thing.

I think some people relate to political parties as they relate to foot ball teams, and that kind of a relationship is not equal to church membership because there is a lack of sense of responsibility. As a citizen and church member there should be a sense of responsibility and that is not so with foot ball.

Wouldn't a more equitable distribution of wealth be even more effective? And maybe enacting fair laws? — Vera Mont

That is a lovely question. Some members of society contribute more than others. I think that justifies differences in resources. This was not as much of a problem as it is today. Our cities and towns have a surplus of non-productive human consumers. What is fair?

Are you saying literacy in the classics is a good thing? — Athena

Of course. Not just the 'classics', in all cultures, all kinds of [age-appropriate] literature. I studied The Highwayman in Grade 8 and wasn't particularly impressed (though I learned a lot about meter, cadence and alliteration, which have all stood me in good stead.) My bother, who was in Gr. 5, loved it so much, he kept reciting it for years, the way I love The Walrus and the Carpenter, which we didn't study in school. Yes, this was good for us.

Why do you object to loyalty oaths? — Athena

I explained above: indoctrination; the making of baby zealots before they can read, think critically or make informed choices. The internalize early in life, the assumptions they will not question: ours is the best political system; ours is the best social organization; ours is the best economic system; ours is the best religion; we are the best people in the world.

What is the problem with those statements? — Athena

Short answer: they're wishful thinking at best - more often, lies.

It might be a good thing if all citizens agreed on these platitudes. — Athena

If all citizens agreed that these statements should become an accurate description of the actual country in which they live, and worked toward that end, that would be good. Believing they are true when a Nixon or (gods help you all!!) a Trump is allowed to gain power over that country, not so good.

Trump appears unaware of them, making me think his followers are also unaware of them. — Athena

They're not unaware: they've been convinced, via slogans and patriotic claptrap, that they alone have the truth of those statements. After all, America used to be great (they've been told); the Democrats or BLM or uppity wimmin, or immigrants made it ungreat. So they alone are qualified to put it back at the pinnacle of Creation, which is the rightful place of [God, Guns and Trump] America.

Some members of society contribute more than others. I think that justifies differences in resources. — Athena

Except, the distribution is upside-down. The poor produce; the rich consume.

This was not as much of a problem as it is today. — Athena

True. The robber barons of 1900 were fewer in number had 400 times as much as the average employee; the present-day ones have 4000 times as much. But, of course, in the olden days, even after they lost their slaves, they could take advantage of cheap labour from children, women and immigrants. They had few restrictions in terms of product or worker or environmental safely .... Oh, wait, that's true again. Well, the future ones will have robots to do the work and concentration camps for the surplus population.*

Our cities and towns have a surplus of non-productive human consumers. — Athena

Oh, yes, the homeless people who "made the wrong choices'. They're a burden on society. The landlords who own a hundred thousand rental units as well as their own six or seven luxury residences are pillars of the community.

What is fair? — Athena

Think about it and devise your own scale of justice.

*Re which: You know Trump wants to give people $5000 per new baby (presumably white, born in Christian wedlock) You can deport five Hispanic children for that, if you skip all the tedious due process. It costs $+/- 18,000 in medical bills to have a baby in the US - that's before medical care, feeding, loss of pay and daycare even begin. The man has a BSc in economics.

I heard about a study not long ago ( by Jonathan Haidt) which showed that conservatives have a broader set of values. It also showed that conservatives can model what liberals think, but liberals have no idea what conservatives think and they think that conservatives are just evil. This study would seem to be consistent with the idea I just described that leftists have a lower level of moral development than conservatives. A understanding B and B not understanding A would seem to indicate that A is more developed. — Brendan Golledge

You don’t understand, perhaps willfully? We all have the same moral intuitions. How could we not?! It’s just that, according to moral foundations theory, conservatives value intuitions more evenly and liberals favor care and fairness, if I recall correctly. The idea that liberals cannot conceive of or are lacking intuitions like loyalty or sanctity is obviously absurd.

Btw, can you explain to me why I support a woman’s right to choose despite the intuition that abortion is wrong?

It’s just that, according to moral foundations theory, conservatives value intuitions more evenly and liberals favor care and fairness, if I recall correctly. — praxis

But that's not the present political divide, is it? There are no real conservatives in evidence now. (They exist and still hold the same values they did in 1900 and 1950 and 2000, but they have no public voice.) The political divide is liberals of every stripe and moderates vs the MAGA cult. When there were sincere conservatives and liberals, they could communicate and compromise.

According to MFT, I guess MAGA is skewed towards Loyalty/Betrayal, Authority/Subversion, and Liberty/Oppression.

I have no idea what that means.

You’re not missing anything. Many consider moral foundations a half-baked theory.

Oh, yes, the homeless people who "made the wrong choices'. They're a burden on society. The landlords who own a hundred thousand rental units as well as their own six or seven luxury residences are pillars of the community. — Vera Mont

Wait a minute-. I am not sure, but I think I see the world very differently from how you think I do. I have
always lived in poverty. I know poverty as a result of capitalism and sexism, and someone has to care for the children, the sick, and the elderly, and we women do that because it is the right thing to do. I have volunteered most of my life because I need to believe I am of value to society. At first, I had a husband who supported the family with money, and soon after the divorce, I qualified for disability. The idea of taking charity and not giving back is shameful to me. I feel fortunate that I have had good volunteer opportunities.

However, that is not how I judge everyone, because much of the time, I was working with people with more severe disabilities. For a while, I had a job preparing young, severely cognitively challenged people for jobs. That was so sad because they were hopeful and worked hard, but there are no jobs for them.

My attitude about accepting charity is from my grandmother's generation, when severely cognitively challenged people would get jobs, because of a community agreeing human dignity is important, and jobs were not so demanding! Roosevelt used government money to provide jobs, not charity. Social Security was based on age, not need, to protect the dignity of older people.

I have to run- and I hope we can continue this discussion. I could be wrong, but when it comes to morals, I think human dignity is a priority! When I stayed at home to raise my children, I thought having a paid job was a wonderful thing, and I looked forward to it. I volunteered and went to college, expecting to have a career. Whatever, I know a lot about poverty and the people living at this level, and also those living in prison. The underbelly of our great society.

Wait a minute-. I am not sure, but I think I see the world very differently from how you think I do. — Athena

It wasn't about your view of the world. (I'm familiar with your history of good works and civic improvement.) But I did have a problem with

Our cities and towns have a surplus of non-productive human consumers. — Athena

Which sounds a lot like what I hear every day from right-wingers and prosperous people loath to give up any of their privilege, let alone pay their fair share into the government coffers; who assert that poverty and disenfranchisement are personal choices, while supporting the party that promotes every retrograde measure from whites-only immigration to defunding school lunches.

I agree that human dignity - indeed, the dignity of all sentient beings - is important. I disagree that it can be attained either by scutt-work or charity - though both may often be preferable to starvation. Throwing people on the mercy of the "job-creators" is not the solution. A more equitable social organization, economy and legal system is far preferable. Old age security, health care, shelter, safe food and water should be the right of every person, not something they have to scramble, fight one another or beg for.

Jobs as we knew them are disappearing fast. A living wage for all is an impossibility already; in 15-20 years (always assuming this civilization keeps operating that long), gainful employment will be the norm for only about half the adult population. Very large adjustments must be made in that time to avoid collapse. Adjusting to a realistically envisioned future is not the direction in which I see America heading atm.

It wasn't about your view of the world. (I'm familiar with your history of good works and civic improvement.) But I did have a problem with
Our cities and towns have a surplus of non-productive human consumers.
— Athena — Vera Mont

But don't you see I am one of them! Don't you get how valuable we become when there are not enough people to do what needs to be done, but when there are more than enough people and they must compete against each other, then is when we feel pushed out and unneeded. Some of us are givers and excellent workers, but we are not intentionally competitive. Because we are not competitive, we are losers, and people look down on us and do not see our value. If others do not see our value, on what can we base a good opinion of ourselves? It is a downward spiral, and it can be next to impossible to get into a positive frame of mind. Life can become overwhelming, and that means being dysfunctional.

Jobs as we knew them are disappearing fast. A living wage for all is an impossibility already; in 15-20 years (always assuming this civilization keeps operating that long), gainful employment will be the norm for only about half the adult population. Very large adjustments must be made in that time to avoid collapse. Adjusting to a realistically envisioned future is not the direction in which I see America heading atm. — Vera Mont

We have agreement. I am horrified, even though Trump says we must have industry, when people speak of jobs, they are talking about a few good-paying jobs that require a college education, not employment for people who are not college minded. If we want everyone working, we must create simple jobs and make the work place a desirable place to be.

Our industry is based on the autocratic model, and that is very bad for our families and democracy and in general, our character. It creates inequality and authority over the people. If we want to make the US great we need Deming's model for Industry. Here are some of the points...

6. Institute Training on the Job: Provide on-the-job training to equip employees with the knowledge and skills they need to improve their work.
7. Institute Leadership: Focus on leadership, which encourages collaboration, understanding, and a coaching approach.
8. Drive Out Fear: Create a work environment where employees feel safe to share ideas and ask questions without fear of retribution.
9. Break Down Barriers Between Staff Areas: Eliminate departmental barriers and encourage cross-functional collaboration.
10. Eliminate Slogans, Exhortations, and Targets for the Workforce: Avoid using slogans and exhortations that can create a hostile environment.
11. Eliminate Numerical Quotas for the Workforce and Numerical Goals for Management: Avoid setting numerical quotas that can lead to poor quality.
12. Remove Barriers That Rob People of Pride of Workmanship: Eliminate barriers that prevent employees from taking pride in their work, such as inadequate tools or a lack of recognition.
13. Institute a Vigorous Program of Education and Self-Improvement: Encourage continuous learning and improvement through education and self-improvement programs.
14. Put Everybody in the Company to Work Accomplishing the Transformation: Make quality improvement everyone's responsibility. https://www.google.com/search?q=14+points+of+deming+in+quality+management&rlz=1C1CHBF_enUS926US926&oq=points+of+Deming+&gs_lcrp=EgZjaHJvbWUqCAgCEAAYFhgeMgYIABBFGDkyCggBEAAYChgWGB4yCAgCEAAYFhgeMggIAxAAGBYYHjINCAQQABiGAxiABBiKBTINCAUQABiGAxiABBiKBTINCAYQABiGAxiABBiKBTIHCAcQABjvBTIHCAgQABjvBTIKCAkQABiABBiiBNIBCjExNDYxajBqMTWoAgiwAgHxBXPu3B_Be_i6&sourceid=chrome&ie=UTF-8

You’re not missing anything. Many consider moral foundations a half-baked theory. — praxis

What does that mean? I just posted Deming's points for making better products and creating a better work environment. It is not half-baked. During the Great Depression, he tried to get Industry in the US to use his model and our autocratic Industry refused his model, so Franklin Roosevelt set out to regulate Industry from the federal government level, increasing the autocracy of our democracy. While Deming's model increases democracy and makes it better. That is also better for families because it is more humane and works to improve everyone and everything.

Because the US rejected his model, he went to Japan after the war and taught his model to the Japaness who than proceeded to out compete us for world markets. Today when people talk about what kind of car to buy, they talk about Toyota and Subreu, not Ford of Crysiller. Our high-tech electronics make Japan great because they are the ones putting out the best products.

Using the Deming model is better for families than the autocratic model. If our schools prepared us for a democracy and our Industry used the democratic model, our Democracy could be great and could manifest the Enlightenment dream of a better life for everyone.