That's odd. Others might find it more sensible to consider "the message of the gospel" as you put it as being merely derivative of these systems, which after all had existed for centuries before the gospels were written, or for that matter as derivative of the Western philosophical systems such as Stoicism, which also preceded the gospels by hundreds of years. Establishing that Christianity borrowed heavily from other religions or philosophical traditions wouldn't seem to indicate there's anything unique about it. — Ciceronianus

Plato has been left out and he seems to have been as concerned about the 10 commandments as Moses was but he came to this reasoning without an encounter with the God of Abraham.

Personally, I favor the Eastern gifts of knowledge over the Bible and I don't think it is possible to have a good understanding of Jesus without the Eastern perspective. I think the Eastern perspective is more compatible with democracy than the Bible because of the Eastern explanation of how we become better human beings that is not dependent on superstitious notions of needing to be "saved".

Thank you. I guess I am working on the background information now but this sure is an uphill battle because most people seem to believe what we have today is new and improved and the past has nothing to offer us. :lol: I have to laugh at myself because I feel cursed by what I have learned from old books. But if learn more philosophy and more about the proper form I can only become a better person, even if I fail to save the world for my grandchildren and their children.

And I really am thankful for your words and will enjoy contemplating the best way to work myself as I drift off to sleep. You made me realize that is doable. Perhaps I just need to be more realistic.

Schools in the 1950s had a strict curriculum and teaching methods, with little room for creativity or deviation from the norm. The focus was on traditional subjects such as math, science, and literature, and most instruction was done through lectures and rote memorization. In contrast, today's schools are more flexible and teachers have more autonomy to use different teaching methods and approaches that best fit their students' needs. This includes the use of project-based learning, group work, and other modern teaching methods that are designed to engage students and promote critical thinking skills.

I am glad you want information on the subject. When we entered WWII teachers who had taught for many years could no longer teach unless they went to college and got the newly required education to be teachers. My grandmother was one of these women. She began her day with the children by having everyone sing. You might like to know why Plato and Aristotle thought music was perhaps the most important t part of education and you can that information from their books.

The following is taken from the book "America's World Backgrounds" a grade school textbook by George Earl Freeland, copyright 1942.....

"The central purpose of this book is to make citizens better equipped to face realities. At every step the readers are made to see their relationship to everything that surrounds them. The role of people in every historical movement is made prominent so that the reader will understand his place and his importance in modern society, and accept his own personal obligation to be an intelligent and responsible citizen.

We suggest that the teacher remember the fundamental purpose of developing socially minded citizens. The plan is the selection of the subject matter on every page and in the lists of books, problems, and activities at the close of each unit is directed towards what A Charter for the Social Sciences calls the supreme purpose of the Social Sciences; "To create rich and many-sided personalities are informed about a wide range of affairs both immediate and remote. They are aware of personal and social responsibilities; they know that the environment can be changed within limits by individual and social action.

A Charter for the Social Sciences then enumerates very specifically the elements that make a good citizen, with a "rich and many-sided personality". In addition to a body of information about the modern world and the elements that form its background, the "Charter" suggests certain skills that must be acquired to give power; habits that should be formed such as cleanness, industry, courtesy, accuracy, and effective co-operation; attitudes, such as tolerance, open-mindedness, social-mindedness, and loyalty to America's domestic ideals that must be set up; courage and will power that should be developed by citation of noble examples of leadership in the struggle of mankind towards a richer and better life for all; constructive imagination that should be fostered; and finally, aesthetic appreciation that can inspire the pupils' minds with zeal for the finest products of genius."
There is more but I want to provide another source as well.

This next book is dated 1924 Reading and Living by Howard Copeland Hill and Rollo LaVerne Lyman

"Whether at home or at school, at work or at play, we spend most of our waking time with other people. Our pleasures and achievements depend largely upon our success in getting along with our companions; our problems and difficulties usually come from human associations. Indeed, a successful and happy life is chiefly the result of living well with other folk.

Great writers have been fascinated by human relationships. The poem, stories, essays, and novels usually deal with people living and working together. Literature is a mirror of life, reflecting those human interests and problems that grow out of our contact with one another; one of its chief values is to enable us to understand and to to appreciate life.

Selections have been chosen because they illustrate or illumine the art of living and working together...."

Maybe in the morning, I can find the book advising teachers to not fuss over whether a child remembers names and dates but pay attention to the child's understanding of the concepts. I have a lot of books to pull from but understanding why this education is important and what it has to do with democracy, is better understood by knowing what Plato and Aristotle thought of education. We are not the united and cooperative nation we were and coincidentally that domestic education was replaced with education for technology in 1958. Hum, I should quote the math book as well, as it explains the value of being math literate, in solving everyday problems and the book I have about math literacy explains how that can make us better voters. The past conceptual and domestic education did not leave people ignorant but 8th grade dropouts were capable of starting their own businesses. We were prepared to be independent and not have to rely on authority or the government. We prepared our young for life. Plato and Aristotle would approve as democracy is about each of us self-actualizing and developing the good. That is a cultural difference.

Thank you for replying. I am sincere about wanting to improve my communication skills. Tonight I listened to an explanation of Aristotle that made me aware of where my crazy ideas come from. You know, when you think your ideas are your own, but then you come across the original thought and you realize you had forgotten the book that gave you that idea? That goes with the question you asked but I want to be sure I understand you correctly.

Yes, I can think of another way to begin the discussion but I am too discouraged. It is like I am coming from Mars with such a different point of view, no one can relate to what I am saying. I am criticized for not explaining myself but I have worked hours on those explanations only to have them rejected. I don't mean anyone is arguing against what I have said. That would require having an understanding of what I said, and there is no understanding of the information I have provided. So now what?

So what is the correct form for opening a discussion and what is the best way to keep a thread on topic?

It's about the partisanship of US politics, I assume. He has a degree in communication, which is fine for a career politician. Seems like a nice guy, might a good president, but he can never be elected to that office: short, intelligent and vegan are a deadly combination in the USA. — Vera Mont

He lost the election to Bush Junior and if he had won, the neocons would not have been able to take us to war as they were intent on doing at least since Bill Clinton was in office. His response to 911 and Bush invading Iraq on trumped-up charges, was that we missed a golden moment to grieve and to be supported by the world that saw us as victims and not the victimized. The global reality would be totally different than it is today. I think your opinion of the US would be totally different if Kucinich had won that election.

I will try another question. Kucinich mentioned being motivated by principals. What principals? How do people learn about principals?

Something that drives my thinking is this explanation of fast and slow thinking.

We used to use the Conceptual Method of teaching children how to think. This was replaced with the Behaviorist Method which is also used for training dogs. Dogs do not vote but humans who may know a lot about one thing like how to get to the moon, may be no better prepared for thinking than a dog. As William James said "The German universities are proud of the number of young specialists whom they turn out every year,- not necessarily men of any original force of intellect, but men so trained to research that when their professor gives them an historical or philoogical thesis to prepare, or a bit of laboratory work to do, with a general indication as to the best method, they can go off by themselves and use apparatus and consult sources in such a way as to grind out in the requisite number of months some little pepper-corn of new truth worthy of being added to the store of extant human information on that subject. Little else is recognized in Germany as a man's title to academic advancement than his ability thus to show himself an efficient instrument of research."

What do you think he thought of how a German was prepared to think?

What might be the ramifications of changing how we teach children how to think? What is the moral of evolution or getting a spaceship to the moon that will help us be better voters?

Nonsense! You have made no case whatever - in all these pages - for why sound knowledge and useful skills are incompatible with virtuous character and good citizenship.

I have some issues - or rather, did have, when I was more directly interested in the process - with how certain subjects are taught, and how classrooms and testing are organized, but I see no reason - no reason whatsoever - why a person can't have a good education as well as good values.

I've been trying and trying to tell you: You don't have to choose! A well organized, well staffed, well conducted system of public education can achieve all of those objectives: well-rounded, confident, literate, numerate, logical people who take control of their own governance, economy and jurisprudence.
Don't believe me; compare the democracy index with the academic standings.

But the political entities and their special-interest supporters don't desire a knowledgeable, sensible populace: they desire a rabble that's easily swayed and buys all the merchandising.
And now, I'm weary of repeating it. — Vera Mont

:lol: Lets see if I can do as well as Socrates. He gave his life for democracy even though he thought poorly of the decisions that were made. What did Socrates believe people needed to know to make good decisions? How were they to gain that knowledge?

What does this quote mean?
“Unless we’re motivated by principle in our voting, we walk into a mirrored echo chamber, where there’s no coherence,” Kucinich

If they don't learn to read and count in the early grades, higher education is off the table before they can even think about whether they want it. Self-governing adults are not necessarily innumerate, hero-worshipping science-deniers. — Vera Mont

Thank you for representing the million of people who do not see the importance of education for democracy and pulling out my thoughts about why a liberal education is so important! Children who do not have good character development are going to fail no matter what. Demanding they know New Math when their parents can not help them and there is no one to tutor a struggling child, only harms the child with the constant failure the child can not avoid. Especially if the child has bad parents and/or has a life of constant adversity, this can consume the child's awareness making it impossible for the child to learn. But there is a cure- anyone can be a good citizen with good forefathers and strong mothers if the schools teach this.

These are the characteristics that describe the ideals and procedures of democracy....

1. Respect for the dignity and worth of the individual human personality.

2. Open opportunity for the individual.

3. Economic and social security.

4. The search for truth.

5. Universal education.

6. The rule of the majority; the rights of the minority; the honest ballot.

8. Justice for the common man; trial by jury; and arbitration of disputes; orderly legal processes; freedom from search and seizure right to petition.

There are 4 more but I have to run. I would give anything including my life if this would be taught in all schools along with learning the virtues that make it possible for us to engage courageously with life and our fellow human beings. Then maybe the young people who go into debt to pay for college, will succeed in having the career they were educated to have. That education for technology is no good without the character to take advantage of it.

What part does culture play in our understanding of how to parent, and how to behave, and our values?
— Athena
A big one. And it changes over time. — Vera Mont

I was rushed earlier and I missed saying how glad I am that we no longer beat the devil out of our children. I think some serious changes have followed such as knowing old ways were abusive and lead to social problems. We now know a strong and loving family results in children having better health physically and mentally. This seems to be bleeding over to workers demanding better treatment along with higher wages. I am not sure how this is going to work out but the positives and very encouraging. However, I am not sure that a failure to have a sense of family duty is a good thing? Research has indicated children with single parents are more at risk.

At any moment, regarding some nations, you can say so. As I already pointed out, that applies more to monoethnic societies than to diverse ones. Of course, with globalization, instant communication and large-scale migration, all cultures are increasingly influenced by other cultures. (I could swear this, too, has been mentioned before.) There are no static cultures, and haven't been any for a considerable time now, no matter how yearningly some people in just about every culture hark back to an earlier period they imagine to have been better. — Vera Mont

:grin: We are back on track. This is a mind-provoking comment "At any moment, regarding some nations, you can say so. As I already pointed out, that applies more to monoethnic societies than to diverse ones." I can think of a few things that divided us. Cattle ranchers didn't like sheep herders, slave and none slave states, of course, Industry versus agriculture, living in the city or the country, living by a seaport or far from the oceans. However, education should unite us with a fundamental understanding of democracy and what it means to be a good citizen because we can not defend our democracy without that knowledge. It is fine to be a Hippy :starstruck: or Asian or Native American or a person of color who wants to identify with people in a particular region, but as Americans we need some agreements about what means to live in a democracy.

Thanks to you, and looking for more information, and finding the explanation of California and Texas having different history textbooks, I am :broken: brokenhearted to know these states are controlled by politics and not the determination to know the truth and to be honest. We can not be united if we do not share the history and fundamental values.

Your explanation of who decides what children will learn is excellent! A professor who sits in the hot tub where I go, said I have the best chance of affecting policy if I personally know someone and if we continue this discussion, I may give up being a Senior Companion so I have the time and energy to focus on education. I am wondering if a hundred-dollar donation would encourage our Governor to have lunch with me and talk about the need for Oregon to law that we have civics education!

These arguments lead to finding important information that my old books don't have :lol: and also increase my awareness of what is important to bridge with others. Being alone with my books does not develop my thinking as I must do if I am going to be effective. :worry: If I had a teaching career I would naturally be more informed about what is happening today and who it is important for me to have lunch with. Even if I had a child in school that would help, but being an outsider and coming in with different ideas DOES NOT GO SO WELL!

They each decide what they themselves value. The DoE imposes some conditions on the allocation of federal funds, but individual institutions of higher learning, administered by state agencies, have their curricula dictated by state policy and local boards of education choose and reject textbooks. This is what causes the disaster of teaching creationist doctrine in science class, climate change denial and high rates of illiteracy in the worst governed states. (I assume California is near the bottom because of its large immigrant population, but I haven't followed that up.) — Vera Mont

My concern is the education of small children, not higher education. My argument is the priority for education was preparing the children to become self-governing adults. That is what liberal education. Education for technology is more concerned with test scores and international ratings, not the individual child. In the past teachers help a child discover his/her individual talents and interests. Today I think most of the children are denied the education they need as we focus on those going to college because that is what the federal government funds.

Preparing the young to be self-governing adults, is the first line of defense against social problems reducing crime and the need for public assistance, and this why I write. There are two ways to have social order, culture or authority over the people- a police state and people controlled by fear of losing of their jobs. Culture is vital to our liberty and this does not mean the freedom to dye one's hair green or put a stud in one's nose.

OMG Oregon, where I live, is at the bottom of academic achievement! I just looked that up. California is close to the top and above Texas. Texas teachers took Texas to the Supreme Court to end forcing them to teach creationism as science, and the Supreme Court ruled creationism is not science. For political reasons, book manufacturers write different accounts of history for Texas than they write for California. That difference in education is the fuel for civil war. So yes, we do have a serious problem.

About the part culture plays you said.

A big one. And it changes over time. — Vera Mont

If we want our liberty and avoid the conditions of a police state and possibly another civil war, there are elements of culture that should not change. Do you want to argue against that? I am in agreement that we have culture change. The US is what we defended our democracy against, but is this a good thing? We have progressed in reducing racial of gender discrimination but I think some things have gotten worse, like reliance on authority.

I don't see this as anything but me. — Patterner

Ah, a brain in a vat would not get essential information without a body. What are you without a body? What is your body without a brain? People with Alzheimer's Disease have a sense of who they are but they may not remember anyone around them. They are not exactly in the here and now, but often in the past.

So, it would just be a different you, not in the sense of function, but in the sense of experiences, where one you would think one way going through one set of experiences, and the other would think in the exact same way (functionally not content wise), but having began to lead a different life with different experiences.
what do you all think of this? — Lexa

I think we need our bodies to experience life and that every cell in our body is part of our consciousness, so if our consciousness were transferred to a different body we would have a problem identifying that different body as who we are.

There are several fun movies about people whiching bodies. In one such movie a grandfather and grandson trade bodies. In another a mother and daughter trade bodies. I think there are a couple where and man and woman trade bodies. However, my reply also comes from what I have read and experience. We know who we are by checking in with our bodies that hold our memories.

Germans have human minds. No infant comes out of the womb with a brain of any particular nationality. They're potentially clever or slow, verbal or visual, have a facility for numbers or abstract ideas or arts. What happens next depends on the child's circumstances.
Whether a nation adopts the better or worse ideas of its clever citizens depends on the national aspirations at any given period. — Vera Mont

What part does culture play in our understanding of how to parent, and how to behave, and our values?
Coming from your arguments I will ask is there such a thing as a national culture and then subculturals? Is there anything Educators can do to influence the culture and subcultures?

How do we get our ideas of what we want to be and what we should be? This goes with what is the purpose of education.

Educators, not politicians, and not clergy. — Vera Mont

Okay and who decides what the Educators know and value?

Who determines the purpose of Education?

Teachers are dependent on manufacturers for learning supplies. Who determines what they say in the text and provide on the Internet?

States rights in education do students a grave disservice! — Vera Mont

Who should determine what a child learns?

I can avoid the man who has 8 children and never married.
— Athena
I would take him for a few beers and see if I could help him and his wife (married or not makes absolutely no difference at all, imo.) directly with his 8 children, or give him the info he needs to get all the state help he is due, or I would help those who were campaigning to get his like more help and support and try to make sure his children have more opportunities and support than he ever had. I reckon you would also try to help such a family in such ways. In fact I think you would be compelled to help them, if they needed it, even more than I would. — universeness

Not that long ago, an adult was judged by certain behaviors. We held different expectations for men and women and their status in the community depended on their character and signs of being responsible. When a man married and had a child he had a better chance of getting jobs and advancement. His wife could be an equally important part of these status judgments. You know, the man whose wife sat on civic committees and the couple limited the number of children they had. I am not in favor of destroying this system of organizing society. That is what I mean by being aristocratic.

I do not expect things to improve until we replace the autocratic model of Industry with a democratic model. I do not question the importance of education for democracy and the importance of putting democracy into practice economically as well as politically. Teaching the principles of democracy and then living autocratically creates a problem.

People who hang out in the pub will be pleased with a free beer but why would we think this person would appreciate our advice on how to live? The wife waiting at home with children may not appreciate his time in the bar. His pursuit of happiness is not accumulating knowledge. I think we can work on social and economic matters but not personal matters. Education can work almost miracles in a person's life but what will motivate a person to desire education?

You achieved world domination, miltarily, politically and economically. That's not nothing: that's wealth and power and exceptionality. And no, you didn't become anything like the nations you fought against, both of which became well organized, well-run modern industrial nations, while the USA grew increasingly corrupt and divided since WWII. That has nothing to do with the model of education or tech culture, and everything to do with the sway of moneyed interests, (harnessing religious ones) which had been playing a decisive role in American politics from the very beginning. — Vera Mont

I did not achieve world domination and my fellow citizens are completely ignorant of the reality of a Military Industrial Complex. If there were not so much ignorance we would have a different reality. Public public education with mass media and the internet can certainly manifest a better reality. It was not the intent of the US to have world domination. We were strong isolationists wanting to stay out of Europe's wars. I hope everyone will find the following link interesting and that the discussion of military technology and the New World Order/ Military Industrial Complex will improve.

Do democratic norms and political culture play a greater role than structural determinants
in realizing a democratic peace? Alexis de Tocqueville, a hitherto unappreciated theorist
of international politics, offered such a view 175 years ago. This article examines
Tocqueville's perspective on civil-military relations and the connection between democracy
and peace. Tocqueville concludes that the key to the pacifism of a democracy is the equality
of conditions it enjoys and the education that its soldiers receive prior to entering the military.
Thus, in Tocqueville's estimation, the democratic peace has little to do with the practice of
democracy, and everything to do with the economic well-being and political virtue of its
citizens.

Democratic states do not go to war with one another. That is the central tenet of
democratic peace theory.1
Although it has been clarified and slightly altered since it
originated with Emmanuel Kant's notion of a perpetual peace, it is, perhaps more than any
other theory in international relations, widely accepted among scholars. As Levy notes,
"the absence of war between democracies comes as close to anything we have to an empirical
law.":
Similarly, Diehl has called the democratic peace "axiomatic."1 — Steve n Michels

You may of course jump on the fact that the US was divided and fought a Civil War that was far from civil and we can talk about why this happened.

Paranoia is not synonymous with actual threat. And it couldn't have been "totally unprepared" if it kept winning all those wars - mostly for expansion of territory. In most countries where it exported and imposed "American democracy", the US succeeded only in setting up a dictatorship (or chaos) The only successful conversions were Germany, Japan and Italy - presumably because those nations already had the social infrastructure to support democratic governance. That learning of useful skills isn't all one way! — Vera Mont

Thank you for this argument. There is some question if the invading Europeans would have walked across the northern continent if the native population had not been devastated by disease. Once the Europeans brought in their horses the Comanche established an empire. Winning wars is very much about technology.

The Comanche and other native peoples adapt the horse as a powerful ally in the fight to protect their land and way of life. The Comanche consider the horse a relative and a gift from the Creator.Aug 15, 2018

Native America | The Comanche and the Horse | PBS — PBS

I do not think the US was paranoid when the first world war began. But it was alarmed by the amazing success of Germany's invading forces. Here we need to understand how radically different this military achievement was. After the end of the Second World War, Eisenhower wrote a letter praising Germany for its contributions to democracy and a good understanding of why Eisenhower thought Germany made a contribution to democracy would be helpful.

I wish I had a better understanding of why the US took the British side in this war because that does not make sense to me given the fact that the Germans were doing better in manifesting overall well-being than Britain. I don't think the British have an admirable history.

And yes, the US was totally unprepared for World War one and two. It was that first war that was perhaps the most vital because that is the war that woke the US up to the importance of education for technology to national defense. For the first time, the US schools added more technology to education than the 3 R's. The rush to advance technology was a radical change in education.

You may notice it took the US at least a year to mobilize for those wars. Public schools were essential to the mobilization for war and for keeping the US running while our men were fighting overseas. Amusingly, not until WWII did the US fully commit to the Military Industrial Complex. Before the military technology of WWII, the priority of public education in the US was preparing our young to be good citizens who understood democracy and why it must be defended.

The German mind is certainly one to be admired. But a liberal education is essential to democracy. What I am arguing for, is a better balance of preparation for democracy and education for a technological society. I think since WWII Germany has leaped ahead in the advancement of a civil civilization. As they have filled their cities with reminders of what was done to Jews, the US needs to fill its cities with reminders of its wrongs. This is essential to completing the transition to the New Age.

:lol: AA, owning up to our wrongs and increasing our awareness of rights and the higher power.

Thanks for your reply! :smile:
But sorry… I’m not much of an expert in the very important subject of world arms trading.
I started to watch a video recently, but stopped after 5 minutes because the combination of greed, heartlessness, and inevitable violence was nauseating.
Amazing how all these weapons can be used purely for the noble purpose of national and self-defense.

Thanks though for your discussion about the 1958 shift in education in the USA, which had enormous implications. — 0 thru 9

We share a lot of agreement regarding the weapons Industry and having a president tell countries they have to build up their own weapon supply because we are not going to carry the responsibility of defending them. I would love to cut the US free of the responsibility of defending other nations, but escalating the devastation of war by increasing the stock of weapons around the world does not impress me as a good idea.

I do not believe humans kill each other because Adam and Eve ate the wrong fruit, nor that war is inevitable. The characteristics of democracy are opposed to war and all modern nations practice a form of democracy. War is not good for anyone's economy.

The Iroquois or more correctly the Haudenosaunee Confederacy have a story of a man coming and teaching the way of peace. This became the foundation of the Haudenosaunee Confederacy. They inspired our movement from warring kingdoms and populations divided as into masters and servants, to a democracy. However, the masses never got the information that is being made available to us today.

I believe the New Age is a period of high-tech, and peace, and the end of tranny. I believe we are entering that now but this period of transition is very difficult.

William James has rather harsh and simplistic opinions about other cultures.
As for the Jefferson thing... Sure, he wanted educated white middle-class men to carry on his traditions.
I take it Sinclair would have preferred an effective armed forces, such as the one that eventually defeated Germany, rather than one Germany would have defeated. You're so proud of winning, but seem to wish it could have been done without a winning strategy. It can't. — Vera Mont

:lol: I do not know why you say I am so proud of winning a war. Especially when we fought those wars for nothing because we are now what we defended our democracy against.

Also, I am not so sure we should have entered the First World War. Germans had a higher standard of living and the poor children in Britain were horribly abused! I am not sure if universeness's feelings towards aristocrats is because of a very ugly history? But when it comes to war I like what Professor Harnack had to say, "A permanent peace can only be achieved by hard intellectual effort and intellectual honesty".

Most generals of any nationality would rather recruit/conscript healthy young men who follow orders than smartasses who question the military routine.
Did they already know about Hitler in 1917? And did Germany have a healthy, illiterate population in 1939? Actually, no: the literacy rate was 90% or better. And they had stories, too, of their heroic ancestors and glorious deeds. Everybody does. That doesn't mean you have to neglect maths and science. — Vera Mont

Why would they need to know about Hitler in 1917? Charles Sarolea's 1915 book "The Anglo-German Problem" provides all the information we need. William James wrote of Germany's education in 1899.
In 1916 Scott Nearing, Ph. D. wrote "Poverty and Riches A Study of the Industrial Regime" which is information on Britain, Germany, and the US. There was information for those who wanted it. And yes in 1939 Germany was comparatively doing very well despite the hardships put on it following the First World War. Maybe because I am tired but you seem a little antagonistic to me.

(Yet again: your democracy was never under any threat in either of those wars.) — Vera Mont

I am not so sure the US did not feel threatened by the fact it was totally unprepared for modern warfare. I do know I am very tired and it is not a good idea for me to continue. I am thinking you have a bone to pick with the US and I should not take what you say personally. Hopefully, things will go better when I am rested.

Yet we still have billions of believers in woo woo, many of whom use this foundation as a guide to their actions and who they vote for. Do you assign no part responsibility for this to Ancient Greek, Spartan 'storytellers' and/or Prussian theists , who also peddled these same lies as facts? — universeness

That appears a very interesting subject but I am not sure what you are talking about. To me the term "woo woo" is insulting like name calling and has no intellectual value. On the other hand, a better understanding of Athens and Sparta's military thinking is exciting to me. We can follow this under the subject of culture because truly Athens and Sparta had extremely different cultures. Thanks to the Prussians who united and protected Germany, Germany was the modern Sparta and the US was the modern Athens. If you can advance this argument I will give it my best shot.

As a school teacher and a Labour Party/young socialist party member, yes, and even as a union shop steward for a while, I have served on many committees, but mostly as talking shops and any resulting decisions made, did not affect 'millions of people.' A ship can easily be run perfectly well by a cooperative rather than a dictatorial captain (captain Bligh perhaps). A single leader can be useful at times but any wise members of a collective can 'play that role,' if and when such is needed. — universeness

I like that last point. Democracy means everyone is prepared for leadership because we are all responsible. But we also respect the person in the seat of authority and do not compete with him. Today there is a lot of lusting for power, and there is no respect for the person in the seat of power. That is in part because the persons taking the seats of power do not have the necessary virtues, but hell, the voters don't understand what virtues and morality have to do with anything away. We do not have the CULTURE that is essential to good relationships.

I agree with 'emergency defence powers,' kicking in, if a community is under 'live' attack or imminent attack but I would not allow any elected body to unilaterally declare war, without a public majority mandate to do so. I would change your 'as soon as possible,' to 'with as much wisdom as possible.' — universeness

I am not finding the right words. We need some agreements to work together well.

Most teams will function better and more fluidly with a team captain working in tandem with the coach to ensure there’s properly respected leadership on and off the field. — Hustle

Oh yeah, and that is why our forefathers made it very hard to go to war. Congress holds the purse strings so supposedly we can not engage in war without the citizens agreeing to pay for the war. However, Bush and Hitler were able to engage in war without war budgets. Without a good education, we no longer understand the wisdom of our forefathers. And you moved me to google for information and I found something I love and this needs to be a discussion of the Military Industrial Complex and how it is not the democracy we defended in two world wars.

How the US Public was Defrauded by the Hidden Costs of the Iraq War
Print
The tenth anniversary of the US-led military intervention in Iraq has been met with a number of retrospective analyses examining various aspects of the war. This article argues that the Bush administration intentionally hid the costs of war by publically underestimating its costs, recording significant expenses outside of the Pentagons annual budget, and relying on private military contractors rather than traditional military forces. While none of these measures actually reduced the monetary costs of war, they obscured expenses and minimized the potential for public concern. Private military contractors were not only costly, but their involvement in numerous infamous incidents may have had a destabilizing effect, exacerbating the conflict and its costs. Ultimately, the Iraq war demonstrates that, despite the reassurances or subterfuge of political leaders, war is an inevitably costly endeavor. — Michael Boyle

:lol: I have gone from discouraged to joy. There is so much to say about war. Christianity got a lot of converts because it was believed the people with the most powerful god won wars, and Romans with their superior armies won a lot of wars and brought Christianity to conquered people. However, the Athenians did not like their war god who brought chaos.

Was Ares popular in Athens?
Ares, in Greek religion, god of war or, more properly, the spirit of battle. Unlike his Roman counterpart, Mars, he was never very popular, and his worship was not extensive in Greece. He represented the distasteful aspects of brutal warfare and slaughter.Oct 1, 2023

Ares | God, Myths, Siblings, Family, & Facts | Britannica — Britannica

I have already stated, many times, how vital, effective, robust, ingrained, checks and balances against any abuse of authority are. Any proposals for a fully representative democratic socialist system, with global, international, national and local tiers, will fail, without them. — universeness

Do you have a chart of that organization? Sometimes it is easier for me to understand if I am looking at a picture. I wish I had more time and energy because I would like a separate thread to handle the subject of how governments are organized. This is a very important and complex story crucial to the subject of culture. Your citizens can do only as well as they learn to do. They must be educated and that is the subject of this thread. It is a twin to the subject of organization because if the government is too strong it disenfranchises citizens and becomes the enemy of democracy.

Would you consider Hitler or any such butcher or someone like a pedophile/rapist/theistic suicide bomber, a scumbag? and if you did, would you consider such a statement, a statement that also means that you feel superior to such people? I certainly would not play such conceptual games. I think you are fully able to understand the different mind states between these two quotes of mine below, and find both statements valid in the way I intend them to be received. — universeness

I do not think a suicide bomber is a scumbag. I do not know if Hitler brutalized anyone. I think he delegated responsibility and did not pay attention to what others were doing. I don't think any of the war criminals saw themselves as evil wrongdoers. There is a danger of mob mentality or being caught up in the drama of the moment. This is where the subject of the importance of learning virtues and culture comes in. The Ku Klux Klan was a horrible racist organization and very nice Christian women were very much of this racist culture. We sure do not have clean hands and maybe sociology has something valuable to teach us?

I do not about me being superior to others, but I know there is a higher self and I strive to be a better person. I am so much wiser than I once was and it is just good luck that my life came out pretty well. I am extremely grateful to those who helped me do better.

I spit on all notions of aristocracy, no matter how you try to dress such a category up, to make such seem clean and attractive. — universeness

Well, I will do my laundry tomorrow and wash away the spit. And I will dress nicely and behave civilly and indulge myself in some intellectual pursuit. that gives me pleasure and I am very grateful for the very good life I have even though I have always been monetarily very poor. So I will keep saying we can all be aristocratic and I think this is a good thing about democracy. I can avoid the man who has 8 children and never married.

he USofA has been at war with somebody though pretty much its entire existence. And its thriving industry has always been a great supporter (and supplier) of those wars; reciprocally, the army (and black ops) was always available to safeguard American enterprise in foreign lands. Friends with benefits, as it were. Even if it meant overthrowing a democratic government or any kind, really, when they threatened US business interests. — Vera Mont

The subject is not the morality of war, but a change in military technology that led to a change in education. This change in education made the US, the Military Industrial Complex, which it defended its democracy against in two world wars, and Trump is our Hitler. Trump is not our Hitler because of who he is, but because he is being what half our nation wants our president to be, and that is not the democracy we defended in world wars. We are no longer the democracy we were. The citizens of the US are their own worst enemy and this is why I write.

Perhaps another quote from a book about Germany written as Germany prepared for the First World War would help, but I am tired and very discouraged. A Prussian explained the change in the military organization that was essential to modern warfare. The new army includes a nation's Industrial leaders taking over the tasks of supplying the army's needs. Now Government and Industry are linked together as they never were before. This is very much an economic challenge because the modern military force requires the very best technology and that is very expensive, so the government must take control of the economy as it never did before. If Russia and China are smart they will encourage wars that involve the US and strictly avoid engaging the US in war. All they need to do is bleed our economy by creating conditions that demand the US come to someone's defense. A bankrupt nation can not afford war, if our credit is destroyed and we have to pay more to borrow money, we are dog meat! Today's war is not the war of the past where the men can walk to the battle with their own rifles and possibly be on the winning side. Our military superiority has been our economy and military technology, not the brave or stupid men who fought in the past. Take out our satellites and we are in deep shit. Money and technology.

We seriously need to expand the discussion of fascism as an economic organization that can improve our lives.
— Athena

Not here, I think. Only let me observe that taking good ideas from other developed or developing nations does not logically require that you also follow their political regime.

I have to say what a pleasure it is to discuss things with a person who is so well-informed.
— Athena
I can't really accept the compliment, since I didn't know many of those facts - or only the broad outlines - until I looked them up. I do a lot of research for my work, so I've developed a nose for good sources. — Vera Mont

For many years, no one else has cared enough to do any research based on what I say. No one else has come as close as you to grasping the subject. Understanding German history and fascism is important but we can focus on education and make progress.

Do we agree education and culture go together? Perhaps I should have begun with the following quotes but I hate copying them out of books. The following is from an 1899 book "TALKS TO TEACHERS ON PSYCHOLOGY; AND TO STUDENTS ON SOME OF LIFE'S IDEALS".

"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 higher education is to turn the student into an instrument for advancing scientific discovery. The German universities are proud of the number of young specialists whom they turn out every year,- not necessarily men of any original force of intellect, but men so trained to research that when their professor gives them an historical or philoogical thesis to prepare, or a bit of laboratory work to do, with a general indication as to the best method, they can go off by themselves and use apparatus and consult sources in such a way as to grind out in the requisite number of months some little pepper-corn of new truth worthy of being added to the store of extant human information on that subject. Little else is recognized in Germany as a man's title to academic advancement than his ability thus to show himself an efficient instrument of research.

In England, it might seem at first as if the higher education of the universities aimed at the production of certain static types of character rather than at the development of what one may call this dynamic scientific efficiency. Professor Jowett, when asked what Oxford could do for its students, is said to have replied, "Oxford can teach an English gentleman how to be an English gentleman. But, if you ask what it means to 'be' an Englishman, the only reply is in terms of conduct and behavior. An English gentleman is a bundle of specifically qualified reactions, a creature who for all the emergencies of life has his line of behavior distinctly marked out for him in advance. Here, as elsewhere, England expects every man to do his duty. — William James

William goes on to explain "The Neccissity of Reactions" and that, of course, is about culture. It goes with Thomas Jefferson's concern. This link is worth reading if an understanding of how to protect democracy. Jewet is speaking of Thomas Jefferson.

He placed education as the foundation of democracy. Ignorance and sound self-government could not exist to- gether; the one destroyed the other. A des- potic government could restrain its citizens and deprive the people of their liberties only if they were ignorant.

Thomas Jefferson and the Purposes of Education — Dr. Thomas O. Jewett

Now we need awareness about what war and military technology have to do with education and culture change. The following quote comes from the 1917 National Education Association Conference. Sinclair was one of the speakers. The Prussians united Germany and centralized education and focused it on education for technology for military and industrial purposes. That is the education that results in Sinclair's admiration of Germany.

The German military organization is the world's model, at least from the standpoint of immediate accomplishment of results, and therefore we can hardly do better than to emulate it in its perfect working. It was effected in its minutest detail by the very essence of scientific thought and application. In that organization every tongue fitted its groove, every tooth its socket. We have seen how the Kaiser's marvelous soldiers carried their banner to the very outskirts of Paris in August and September,1914. It is the Great God efficiency, to which the Germans were required by their commanders to pay the homage of worship- and it behooves us either to effect a thing that will operate as well or to copy theirs. The fact of the world at war has silenct the erring lips that declared against the necessity for preparation against disaster, like that of Belgium and Servia.

They had developed in Europe and in America, among those active in the cause of universal peace, a trend to discredit the military service of their countries in their armies and their navies. In America this was particularly true, in spite of the fact that no one can look carefully into the work of our Army or Navy without concluding that either branch offers a career of which any parent may be proud, and which any son may enter with the fullest devotion and the highest ideals. ... — J. A. B. Sinclair, Surgeon, United States Navy,

At the same conference, Sara H. Fahey and an English teacher spoke about Americanizing immigrants who had no understanding of our democratic institutions and prepared all children for good citizenship. This education was a literary one that transmitted a culture, not education for technology. We did not count on parents to teach their children good citizenship because their parents were not prepared to do this. At the time parents were mostly illiterate and/or immigrants. Jobs depended on healthy bodies not book learning. A healthy body without the necessary education can serve Hitler or anyone else just by following orders. And we may have our own Hitler resulting from education for technology trumping liberal education for good moral judgment and good citizenship.

An effective civil service is vital to a nation's well-being and with big, diverse populations, it had better be well organized to be any use at all. If Germany got its act together sooner, their example was worth following. However, the US civil service was reformed in 1978 and again 20 years later, with more changes and cutbacks introduced in the present century, so it's a long way from the post-war model by now. Political appointments to the directorships of departments are huge drawback in policy-making and employee participation, as well as risk management - which is presumably why its effectiveness is waning. Of course, if the Trumpites take over, it'll just be torn down anyway. — Vera Mont

Oh boy, I love that statement!:heart: If Germany got its act together sooner, their example was worth following. Oh, oh are you aware of the Steam Punk movement?

Steampunk is a subgenre of science fiction that incorporates retrofuturistic technology and aesthetics inspired by, but not limited to, 19th-century industrial steam-powered machinery.[1][2][3] Steampunk works are often set in an alternative history of the Victorian era or the American "Wild West", where steam power remains in mainstream use, or in a fantasy world that similarly employs steam power. — wikipedia

That might not be the best explanation as steampunk is so tied to our higher human potential and how capitalism wasted away the higher potential of technological development. Artistically and poetically it is tied to our struggles and capitalist exploitation that left the masses out in the cold. Whereas Germany was the first to have universal medical coverage, workers' compensation, and a national pension plan. The book Poverty and Riches written at the beginning of WWI argued against the British and US exploitation of humans and against taking the British side considering how much better Germany was doing. It provided a higher standard of living and like it or not, many thought fascism was the best way to avoid economic crashes. We seriously need to expand the discussion of fascism as an economic organization that can improve our lives.

I have to run, but once again I have to say what a pleasure it is to discuss things with a person who is so well-informed. Yes, the German bureaucratic model and education for technology make achieving a high standard of living for all, possible. Unfortunately, we have been focused on the national defense side of the German model. THANK YOU FOR KNOWING ENOUGH TO ADVANCE OUR UNDERSTANDING OF THESE MATTERS. :heart:

No country's actual history lives up to its mythology, never mind its patriotic hype.
If it's any consolation, the US civil service ranks 11th in effectiveness (this year - it's been in the top 10 before) and Germany was way down at 24th in 2017. This is interesting. — Vera Mont

:gasp:

Another very important exception is when we get into any origin of the universe proposal. It is not currently known whether or not the origin of the universe was causal. — universeness

Of course, you are right there. I think most of the time we need to be okay with "I don't know" an unknown. We should never be too sure of ourselves, but neither should we accept myths as God's word and a rational explanation of life. That is going too far in not asking the right questions and attempting to answer them.

I think it is and even if our approach to such proves to be forever asymptotic, then so be it, that remains the goal. — universeness

This disagreement seems pretty easy to end. Have you served on committees? I can not imagine anyone serving on a committee that needs to make serious decisions believing millions of people can argue something until they have a consensus. No one would enjoy being on a ship without a captain and an agreement that the captain has the authority to make decisions.

Important to this thread is there is no time after an invasion to argue about the response. The response needs to occur as soon as possible. In the past, all of government in the US was strong individuals holding the authority to make decisions. We could vote them in or out of office but the bulk of the decisions were made without including everyone in the decision-making and our forefathers attempted to limit governing power with a system of checks and balances that is totally broken now because we ended education for democracy and have a large percent of citizens who reject democracy.

Autocracy is very efficient. Democracy is not. Each manifests a different culture.

Why? You are an honest person Athena, are you not? — universeness

:lol: I try to be honest but I am often confused and frequently don't know enough and I am becoming increasingly aware of how strongly my emotions affect what I think. I feel like I am on friendly grounds with most posters here, so when I feel offended I check myself, however, this does not happen with everyone. Occasionally I think a person is being intentionally offensive and don't stop to question that.
How we feel in relation to others really matters and hope all of us agree on this. This is one of the most important points I wish was on everyone's mind. How we feel matters, so attack ideas but not the person. Do not intentionally make cutting remarks. That destroys the very foundation of democracy.

I find any notion of personal superiority between human beings, vile and disgusting and I will fight against such notions in every way I can, until I no longer exist. — universeness

I love your comment! :heart: Can we reframe that? It is not the person we are judging but the behavior. As my statement above explains I do not judge everyone equally but have an emotional reaction that determines my behavior. When I think I am on friendly terms with someone and feel offended I check myself, however, when it seems obvious to me that someone is intentionally being offensive, I protect myself by avoiding that person. Some humans improve our lives and others damage us and we need to know which is which. :grimace: OMG this is a difficult subject! It is so complex! My son-in-law is a very good guy and he has also been a very, very bad guy. We need to judge the behavior, not the person. Help am I making sense?

And I am making that argument because it goes with judging my own behavior. Am I being the person I want to be? What is a good person? What does it mean to be civilized? How can we have the best discussions and make our best contribution to life? Not a superior person but superior thoughts and actions. God knows I have made some really bad choices and have my share of regrets. The virtue of forgiveness is very important, especially in old age when we are shocked by how little we knew and feel bad about all the errors.

Many 'real' aristos, rather than via your notional and fabled 'noble' imagery of aristocracy, were serious scumbags. The French response to their tyranny was completely understandable. Unfortunately, they took their response tooooooooo far (Israel is repeating that bad mistake now, imo) and ended up with a butcher like Napoleon in charge. Generations of French were slaughtered as a result. But at least they destroyed the aristos. Now they have the more hidden, but as nefarious, French super-rich to deal with, but they are a global phenomenon that are a global scale problem, rather than merely a French one. — universeness

What is a scumbag? Are you superior to a scumbag? :lol: I laugh because what we are talking about is so complex. Athens had gods and heroes. The gods were not perfect. They did not know everything and they did not have control over everything like the God of Abraham. Can you imagine having an imperfect god who does not control everything? Now what is a hero? What are the virtues that make it possible for us to do great things? Is being superior because of making an effort to be superior, to be a hero, a bad thing? I am dealing with a family that rejects everything I am saying here and they can barely afford the basics of rent and food. They are victims and have no idea how to stop being victims. :broken: I hope I can do better in forums than I have done with my own family. My son learned of the Greek gods when he was in school but the teacher had zero understanding of why they are important. I am in a philosophy forum because in my desperation to do better in life I found philosophy and the ancient Greeks.

In a democracy, we can all be aristocrats. If one's life is totally impoverished hopefully that person can get to the library and start learning. Hopefully, everyone can pick themselves up and learn of the virtues that we need to get through life. :cry: Our children need to learn this before they can take advantage of an education, and thanks to education for technology the parents don't know the value of this knowledge, not even their teachers know. Our young are being prepared to enter the Borg. They are not being prepared for life! They think if they live in poverty that is the whole of life and they are victims and they have no clue how to improve their lives. Life becomes a reaction based on what one feels at the moment, and if you are mad enough, pick a gun and feel the power you have to kill everyone in sight. There that will show them! We need to educate our young for life.

Yes, diversity can be very beneficial. The gods and goddesses were very different. They each had their own point of view and they argued a lot! That is how our primate intellect grew and grew and has us thinking thoughts far beyond the thinking of days gone by. However, the captain has the authority.

Oh, oh Star Trek. Kirk was the John Wayne of outer space and Picard is the Group think generation. For our symposium let's have plenty of food and drink, and watch Star Trek, and enjoy discussing the ideas brought up in the shows.

:hearts:

Unfortunately, it is a wolf in sheep’s clothing. No… a wolf posing as a loyal guard dog.
And I imagine many investment advisors are recommending weapons manufacturers as a sure thing. — 0 thru 9

Hey, I think you may understand what I am talking about. Can you expand on what you said? Do you know what merit hiring and advancement has to do with today's changed organization?
Right after WWII, President Eisenhower wrote a letter to Germany thanking them for their contribution to democracy. We adopted the German (Prussian) models of bureaucracy and education. That radically changed the US. My words are failing to explain the importance of this. Can you do better? Please, help if you can.

I think once our military-industrial complex was established
— Athena
Concord, 1775? https://www.history.com/news/what-was-the-shot-heard-round-the-world — Vera Mont

Absolutely NOT! I want an emoticon banging its head on a wall. Our governing organization in 1775 didn't come close to the Prussian Military Industrial Complex that now defines the US and all modern industrial countries today.

What is the best way for me to deal with this problem of my words having absolutely no meaning to those who read them? Everything that I believe is important rests on people understanding what the Prussian Military Industrial Complex has to do with our culture today, our organization, our economy, and how we experience ourselves as human beings. Our understanding of the relationship between education and our culture, therefore our democracy, is crucial and I am totally failing to make my point.
:broken:

Why would Calvinism have any effect on that arrangement? The elite are never constrained by the limits and demands of religion: strict adherence is for the hoi polloi. As is the infamous "work ethic". — Vera Mont

Indentured servitude is a form of labor where an individual is under contract to work without a salary to repay an indenture or loan within a certain timeframe. Indentured servitude was popular in the United States in the 1600s as many European immigrants worked in exchange for the price of passage to America.

Indentured Servitude: Definition, History, and Controversy. The Catholic church did not encourage the development of capitalism. Spain and Portugal were established in South America and it remains mostly Catholic and poor. While today the division of Catholics and Protestants is not obviously an economic one, in the past the economic divide was defining. While all of Protestantism advanced a more democratic economic system that was especially true for Calvinism which became Puritanism. According to Calvin, only a select few will go to heaven and they do so because God chose them. This odd belief system led to Puritans trying to prove to themselves and everyone else that they were chosen, by accumulating wealth. You know, as God blessed kings with wealth and slaves.

Weber wrote that capitalism in Northern Europe evolved when the Protestant (particularly Calvinist) ethic influenced large numbers of people to engage in work in the secular world, developing their own enterprises and engaging in trade and the accumulation of wealth for investment. In other words, the Protestant work ethic was an important force behind the unplanned and uncoordinated emergence of modern capitalism. — Wikipedia

The Puritans sure as blazes were not inclusive folks. Unless a person strictly met their standards, that proved they were not "chosen" but oddly if they were chosen they could do whatever they wanted like Nietzsche's Superman. And I am sure most of their slaves were indentured servants.

Indentured servitude is a form of labor where an individual is under contract to work without a salary to repay an indenture or loan within a certain timeframe. Indentured servitude was popular in the United States in the 1600s as many European immigrants worked in exchange for the price of passage to America.

Indentured Servitude: Definition, History, and Controversy — By CARLA TARDI Updated September 19, 2022 Reviewed by MICHAEL J BOYLE

Back in the day, Martin Luther believed it was necessary to have witch hunts identifying those possessed by Satan and demons, and he also believed God determines who would be maters and who would be slaves. The social order was much closer to the Old Testament- Hebrew or Jewish social ordering dependent on who the parents are. As a person inherited the father's land, he also inherited his father's slaves, and his fathers position. The Greeks used the merit system when assigning people jobs and the Jews and Greeks had a little war because of this.

The rebellion started as a guerrilla movement in the Judean countryside, raiding towns and terrorizing Greek officials far from direct Seleucid control, but it eventually developed a proper army capable of attacking the fortified Seleucid cities.

Maccabean Revolt - Wikipedia

Wikipedia
https://en.wikipedia.org › wiki › Maccabean_Revolt — wikipedia

Yipes too many words again. There could be a whole thread just to explore the relationship between religion and economics. This relationship includes who is a master and who is a servant and what our relationships are all about. If we want to understand democracy, then perhaps we should know more about the New Social order and the reasoning for it. I really appreciate your explanation of economic matters because it gives me an understanding of the government giving railroads land on both sides of the track. The whole notion of a king distributing land as he sees fit has always mystified me. I can understand how the people who benefit from this distribution of land go along with it, but there are many more people who did not benefit from this and why would they buy into it?

:cry: Too much to think about- like the Native American women and some in China who assumed they owned their homes and they ruled. Oh man, I like to think we are in the Resurrection and it is geologists, anthropologists, and related sciences resurrecting our history and our job is to rethink everything!

As our Declaration of Independence says "That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness. " Our understanding of Justice today is totally different from any past understanding of it and it is time for a "Quantum Shift in the Global Brain".

Ok, I see what you mean. I certainly have much more time for the Greek atomists than I do for their 'silly' theists. — universeness

:heart: Why does it all have to be so difficult? The argument for all things having a cause is self-evident. Except when we get into quantum physics things get a little crazy.

I don't think a fully representative democracy is possible and I question if it is even desirable. Now I feel cornered and need to confess I am aristocratic. An aristocrat is defined like this....

1. a member of the aristocracy; a noble
2. a person who has the manners or qualities of a member of a privileged or superior class
3. a person who advocates aristocracy as a form of government

I was not born into nobility but my understanding of democracy is that we can all achieve the manners and qualities of an aristocrat. Arguing in favor of an aristocratic form of government is, to me, the equivalent of the merit system. I am not a competitive person and I have no problem volunteering to support representatives to hold the positions that give them power and authority so I don't have to. All of those representatives are to serve us. We can vote them out of office if they don't.

I think you and I share agreements but we have different points of view and this is excellent for democracy because it is the area of disagreement that opens the opportunity for greater understanding. It is "yes but-" and the picture becomes bigger.

One area that can seem to be an argument is how much authority should those in the seats of authority have. On a small scale direct democracy may be the best, but on a national level that is insane! When too many people have the decision-making power, nothing gets done. But if we break this power up with many democratic industries, and democratic institutions such as schools, hospitals, and municipal government, then the people have control where the industry and institution affect their lives. It is not the federal government making blanket decisions for everyone.

I think we need to give the distribution of power and authority more thought. Decisions that are based on science might be best coming from the federal level. Decisions that affect only a small group of people need to be made by those affected. Parents should hold the power of authority over their children's education, but there also needs to be a way to inform the parents of why one decision may be better than another. Decisions should not be based on ignorance and feelings.

Indeed! I didn't actually miss that. The legacy of royal land-grants, aristocratic families and fortunes founded on preferential trade with other British colonies.
Monarchy and moneyarchy. — Vera Mont

Whoo, that is very convoluted and worthy of contemplation. Would you happen to know how Calvinism is tangled up with all of this? If you do, I suggest we buy a bottle of fine wine and spend at least one evening unraveling why the American economy did so well compared to the Spanish colonies.

As I understand it, the immigrants who went to the kings domain in the Southern part of the New Land were out to find riches and those who went North wanted to manifest saints and perfect communities. Calvinism made the accumulation of wealth essential to this pursuit of heaven on earth and that might be a blessing to us. If it were not for our economic development we could be like a third nation where extremely few people have any power.

Ah, there is a very important question. I was thinking if we all shared a good understanding of democracy the power of the people would be so strong we would not fear an enemy invasion.
— Athena
Weeelll - that rather depends on how many of the nations you've helped arm will constitute the "enemy". And whether the ensuing war gives people time to decide how they feel about it.

@0 thru 9 helped me clarify my sense of purpose. I think once our military-industrial complex was established it was misused resulting in the problem of which you speak and that the creation of the military-industrial complex means we fought every war for nothing because we are what we defended our democracy against. This has always been clear to me, but O thru 9 helped me clarify my purpose is to revive the American Spirit that I believe came with being a democracy. That is, the thinking began in Athenians and was revived during the Reannance. We need another Reannance because we sure as blazes did not begin with the desire to be a military-industrial complex! Only when democracy is defended in the classroom is it defended and if our military-industrial complex is destroyed in a war, that would be unfortunate but we might consider we are what we defended our democracy against, so how much does matter if our military-industrial complex is brought to an end?

Also what makes dominant cultures more or less resistant to assimilating minor differences in speech, religion, art and domestic arrangements. We seem pretty quick to accommodate new foods.

I am looking at the US today and I don't think we have a culture anymore.
— Athena
Like ourselves, you never did have one culture. You had many, with people in each region or social circumstance being aware of only their own. Over time, people in the dominant ethnic group adopted some aspects of African, French and Hispanic cultures; the middle class affected some working class customs and vice versa; rural and folk moved to cities; the North and South imitated some of each other's behaviour; in cities with large immigrant populations, Italian, Irish, Nordic, Russian and Yiddish symbology and folklore crept into Anglo-American art, homes and social life. Motion pictures and television tend to homogenize these accidental overlaps and exchanges into American popular culture.
It seems to enjoy considerable success abroad, as well.

I am sharing a lot of agreements with people my age and we do not recognize the values of younger people today as the values we shared in the past. Walter Cronkite's generation of reporters was not as reporters are today. When our local paper the Register-Guard printed its earliest papers the journalists actually thought they were defending our democracy. It may be futile for me write on and on about the changes but I will stand by the belief that education did make us a strong and united nation as Jefferson thought education should do. This changed in 1958 and I do not think today's social media is transmitting a culture that is healthy for a civilization.

If something happened that destroyed our lives as they are today, I don't think democracy would survive.
— Athena

It'll always have Sweden! In fact, atm, it's healthier in Germany than in the USA. Anyway, the concept isn't going anywhere.

The concept is dying in the US. Perhaps I shouldn't let that trouble me because the concept has a good chance of surviving in other countries. However, that will not do squat for my grandchildren and their children.

I think there has been some misunderstanding / crossed lines here. My posted sentence of:
The principle of sufficient reason states that everything must have a reason or a cause.
— universeness
was just a quote from the link provided by 180proof with:

on what basis then, universeness, would you refute its proof that this 'same – one – mind' is God (the PSR)?
— 180 Proof

His PSR link was about The principle of sufficient reason. My response was to a point he was making regarding theists, the claim that god exists, and the resulting burden of proof, it did not relate to my exchange with you. — universeness

Interesting clarification. I could be wrong but I see the Greek philosophers standing behind the need for proofs. I see these philosophers standing behind the notion that things do not just appear out of nowhere but there is a cause for that appearance. That pits democracy against Christianity and a God that is not ruled by the laws of nature but makes things appear on a whim. Today I will create Satan, whoops that didn't go so well. I think I will try creating a man and woman from mud. Whoops that didn't go so well. Those Bible stories do not go so well with believing there is a cause for everything. An explanation of evolution gives us causes.

If that does not belong with what you are talking about, I am sorry and will withdraw from the subject of gods and causes.

I guess you didn't bother to read – — 180 Proof

You are correct. I have limited time and need to be selective about how I use it.

Odds are that it is not the ordinary average human, their families and communities that are priority. — 0 thru 9

Oh but come look at my old school books. In my grandmother's day of teaching, teachers thought it was their purpose to defend democracy in the classroom and this meant helping each child discover his/her interests and talents so they could make their best contribution to our civilization. We thought our greatness was all the individuals cooperating to get things done.

Our education was modeled after Athens's education for well-rounded individual growth and the American experience was self-actualization. When the 1958 education change was pushed through the system and my grandmother's way of disciplining children was not accepted so she quit her job and found another school. I am horrified today whenever a professional is treated like someone working on an assembly line. I am offended by the message that the phone call may be recorded to ensure things are being done correctly. If an employer does not trust the employee then the employer should drop that person and move on to an employee who is trusted.

Please, you are so perceptive, can you see how not trusting people to do a good job destroys morale and harms the employee, which goes on to harm the family and then the nation? If we can not self-actualize through our jobs, is there enough money to make us want to do our jobs?

When I was trained to be a supervisor using the democratic model, we were taught to be like coaches helping the employee to be the best s/he can be and preparing the individual for advancement. If something went wrong, the supervisor took responsibility for that, by checking to be sure all necessary information was communicated and understood. Again helping the person be the best s/he can be, which leads to positive feelings and those positive feelings come back to the family and flood the community. We can do this. When turned to civic action, it means resolving community problems or just doing fun things that build community relationships.

DO YOU UNDERSTAND WITHOUT YOUR POST I COULD NOT THINK OR SAY THE REALLY IMPORTANT THINGS? This is democracy working. Your ability to communicate what really matters moves our thinking in a positive direction. This is totally different from what some posters do. Posters who intentionally put us on the defensive make a valuable discussion impossible. When we are defending what we already said the thinking can not move on to the bigger picture. We can not get to rule by reason when we stubbornly disagree and find fault. However, when are in agreement we tend to move forward, and have positive feelings, and believe we can accomplish something. That high morale is the Spirit of America and the military mindset that has gripped our nation and taken over education, is killing the Spirit of America. The military-industrial complex is the enemy we defended our democracy against.

In doing what? Treating them all fairly and decently? Or have the immigrants done well in adapting to conditions and overcoming barriers?
So why admire non-adaptive Jews in Europe more than assimilated Italians in America? And why not admire non-adaptive Chinese in America for maintaining their identity? — Vera Mont

Ah, there is a very important question. I was thinking if we all shared a good understanding of democracy the power of the people would be so strong we would not fear an enemy invasion. Perhaps we can explore what makes people more or less willing to adopt the ways of other people?

Charles Sarolee wrote in his book "The Anglo-German Problem" that the Prussians do not have a culture. I am looking at the US today and I don't think we have a culture anymore. If something happened that destroyed our lives as they are today, I don't think democracy would survive. I think the rulers would become the few most powerful people and all the rest would become subject to their rule as is so in other countries. The cause of this is replacing education for good citizenship and democracy with education for technology.

But this breakdown is essential to change and hopefully, the changes will eventually be good changes. I really would like to replace the autocratic model of industry with a democratic one. An autocratic model of industry along with education for democracy could mean a quantum shift in our consciousness that would be very pleasant.

For all the good religion has done it has done just as much evil
— Athena

I agree, it's a net negative. Religion is pernicious. — universeness

I want to focus on what you said about knowing the cause of things and what that has to do with democracy. Especially when so many people were dying of COVID-19 in New York that they had to put their bodies in freezer trucks, the debate over wearing masks and vaccines was insane. What is the truth and how do we know it?

Never have I heard so much paranoid fear of our government controlling us. It is true our federal government is controlling more and more of our lives. A Military Industrial Complex controls every aspect of our lives and attempts to control the economy more than the government did in the past. Yet people are in denial of the US becoming a Military Industrial Complex in 1958 and people do not want to talk about that. So here is something lurking in the back of our consciousness and it emerges when, for purely scientific reasons our government tells us to wear masks. This paranoia is very damaging to how we react to events. It obviously leads to believing lies.

This is a cultural problem I am hoping to resolve. Trust is essential to everything and we need to restore that.

Stands for, but does not deliver.
Even if democracy were operational in the US, it would not be the reason for entering all of those wars, since the American form of government has never been under any outside threat. Every administration had its own reasons for embarking on a war or undeclared armed intervention in foreign affairs. In no case did those reasons have any bearing on the defence of their own democracy. And in no case was the polity consulted before taking the decision that would take many of their sons and lately daughters, nor were the lower ranks of the armed forces asked for their consent. — Vera Mont

You missed an important way our democracy is manifested. Democracy was a new social order. Monarchies were organized very differently. However, our Democracy was and is polluted by the order of a kingdom. It made perfect sense for the owner of a business to have control of the business, but when we shifted from farmers and craftspeople owning their businesses to industries, that was a good time to apply the democratic order to our economy. Obviously, that did not happen. The path we have followed is divisive, separating the halves from the have-nots, with landlords and employers exploiting humans and this could be even worse than slavery. Wow, this really makes a mess of democracy because that reality does not support liberty and justice nor the conditions for healthy families.

The Persian war left Athens flush with money and this money was spent on Athena's temple which was a tourist site teaching the world about new relationships and democracy. Money was spent on a university to also attract people from around the world as teachers and students. Government jobs were created so the people without land could earn enough to have a decent standard of living and time to indulge in government. But here we are in a New Land and with no experience with democracy. While things can be different, the consciousness is still the consciousness of kingdoms. Each man's home was his castle. The Bible the only book most people know about, explains kingdoms and slavery. Extremely few people were literate in Greek and Roman classics.

Education in the North advanced democracy and when the South realized Northern books were spreading a different culture than the one they wanted, they began printing their own books. As we spread across a frontier there were many challenges along with opportunities. It was a long time before those communities had schools and they did not come with all the books and supplies a good education requires. We seriously need to have a better appreciation of our lives being very primitive as late as 1950. WWII changed everything in huge ways! We are losing those pioneers who came west with the promise of homesteading. Now not only do we have a railroad that goes from one coast to another but we also have private cars and highways. Before all this, our primitive lives made the federal government almost non-existent. There is no way it had the organization to affect our lives as it does today. Our freedom and liberty was based on living miles away from anyone else and a social life that may have been limited to going to church. I know their stories because I visited some of them once a week until they died. Also because of my collection of books.

Just as we got to a point where every child could go to school and those schools had all the books and supplies and technology required for a good education today, we stopped preparing our young for democracy. I say too much and I may have completely failed to make my point.

What Tocqueville had to say about democracy in 1830 is very interesting. I wish we could all share this book. https://files.libertyfund.org/files/2288/Tocqueville_1532.04_LFeBk.pdf

But the biblical ones are! That's one of the main problems of religion, yes? Lies and fables and resulting edicts on how humans must behave based on the fantasy words of non-existents. — universeness

Oh yes, yes, yes! Good moral judgment depends on knowing the truth. Believing in a God who wants people to fight wars, is not going to bring us to peace and the God of Abraham is a war God. He is a very divisive God and I will be glad when we give up this God and understand..."The principle of sufficient reason states that everything must have a reason or a cause" and what that has to do with democracy.

The Europeans invaded the New Land and decimated the Native American tribes just as God told the Hebrews to take their promised land by killing everyone. We retarded our knowledge of reality and brought the world to global warming with false beliefs and rejected the Native American understanding of nature and the need to care for our planet. For all the good religion has done it has done just as much evil because people remained ignorant and violent and totally unaware of what truth and morals have to do with democracy.

A burden is a burden only if one consents to carry it. When you attempt to burden someone else and they reject it, your only recourse is to have a negative opinion of them. You cannot force your load on them. — Vera Mont

We do not stand alone. We share the burdens of life or we do not. Which is most apt to get good results?

No Man Is An Island Poem by John Donne

Poem Hunter
https://www.poemhunter.com › Poems
Jan 3, 2003 — No man is an island, Entire of itself, Every man is a piece of the continent, A part of the main. If a clod be washed away by the sea, — John Donne

So, not a fan of the American melting pot? My immigrant ex-compatriots assimilated in one generation and seem none the worse. (In fact, given the current state of my native land, far, far better!)
What's so admirable about stiff-necked adherence to a foreign culture at sharp variance with the country in which one is living? That national identity has brought the Jewish people no end of strife and sorrow, and culminated in occupying another people's land, marginalizing and pauperizing those other people (by 'right' of having done it once, a long time ago, then lost it to a second and third invader) with the aid and continued patronage of great imperial powers, becoming a nation that commits war crimes.
My sympathies lie with the ten lost tribes.
That's just a by-the-way about how critical culture really is. — Vera Mont

I do not understand your question and explanation. Liberty and justice for all means there are no favorites. Athens thinking advanced to universal thinking. Cicero tells us that nature has us programmed to do the right thing and if we do wrong it is because of our ignorance. This worldview is not about turning to a God but turning to math and science and reasoning with each other until we have a consensus on the best reasoning. No one is excluded from this because of racial or circumstance differences.

However, if most of the population is uneducated, or poorly educated, we have a very hard time manifesting democracy and raising the human potential. Now I am totally confused by your comment about culture. Considering the US has always had to deal with immigrants who do not understand our institutions and way of life, I think the US has done amazingly well. That is, until we stopped transmitting a culture based on democratic ideals, and stopped educating everyone for good moral judgment, and left moral training to the church. Now we are in crisis. Only when democracy is defended in the classroom is it defended.

we have fought every war for nothing if we do not believe we are a democracy.
— Athena
The word is a good slogan and recruitment tool, but is certainly not the reason for wars. — Vera Mont

Does Christianity exist? It has had a few thousand years to make Western civilization an ideal place to have and raise children. Because that has not happened should we claim Christianity does not exist?

With Memorial Day upon us and Thanksgiving coming, the TV channel I watch has given us stories of veterans, including people of color who fought for democracy since the American Revolution. Why democracy? Because it stands for rule by reason, and liberty, and justice for all. No one knows better than people of color who fought for this, that we have not lived up to this ideal because they are still fighting for it liberty and justice. However, take democracy out of the equation, and what is left to justify their fight for equality?

As for Native Americans, some of them have also served in the military when we claimed to be defending democracy, several times I have seen programs about how Native American women had power in their organization of life and what they had to do with our women's suffrage. Not only did they own the property and participate in governing decisions, but their creator is a female. Our federation is a model of the Native American federation. The strongest force against these people was Christianity. I think considering the power of Christians we could fairly say we are a Christian nation even though we have not changed our ugly ways. We have improved our human potential but this is a work in progress. Only democracy is going to keep us on the path to continued improvement but we stopped educating for that.

I could be wrong but I think without the Greek and Roman classics that resulted in us knowing about democracy, things would be a lot worse. Christians are as addicted to killing as the Jews when they have the power and justification to take what God gave to them. We have heard Israel is a democracy and I don't think I have ever heard anyone say Israel is not a democracy but a republic.

When since 1789 has the USA been a "democracy" and not an oft-illiberal (minoritarian electoral college rigged, gerrymandered, nativist, imperialist) constitutional republic? :chin: — 180 Proof

Do you really expect me to reply to you when you have not explained what democracy is?