Utopianism and America

1. 78

   Kathryn L Hillposted 3 years ago

   Utopianism is that which can never be, because it is not based on what works on a realistic level. What works is based on human nature. Human nature is not perfect, therefore, we need to adapt to what is imperfect in man.
   
   Consider the reality that foreigners, if given the chance, will enter a country and help themselves to whatever resources they find to the detriment of the legal, tax paying citizens.
   
   Consider that to facilitate a "green new deal" is to tear down what is working quite well for the sake of that which is more "natural" and does not work quite well. Consider that windmills kill innocent birds who fly into them!
   
   Consider that guns allow people to protect themselves in times of invasion or war from individuals of other countries. Sorry, but we do have enemies and people with bad intentions on this earth.
   
   These conclusions are based on common sense, but, when people no longer have common sense, Utopianism is agreed upon, to the detriment of the entire nation.
   
   Is it common sense for a nation to be open to non-citizens who decide to cross its borders?
   Is it common sense to remove a nation's modern and efficient methods of producing energy?
   Is it wise to remove the right and ability of citizens to defend themselves with the most powerful of defenders: guns?
   
   Really?

   replyreport
   1. 80

      peterstreepposted 3 years agoin reply to this

      Consider that guns are made to kill. Consider that every day in the US there is a mass shooting..
      https://www.gunviolencearchive.org/repo … s-shooting
      
      Consider that more animals and people are killed by oil and gas pollution than windmills.
      
      Consider that the US is built on immigration. Are you indigenous?

      replyreport
2. 0

   Rotoiposted 3 years ago

   America and Canada are a dream!

   replyreport
   1. 78

      Kathryn L Hillposted 3 years agoin reply to this

      

      replyreport
      1. 0

         Rotoiposted 3 years agoin reply to this

         

         replyreport
3. 78

   Kathryn L Hillposted 3 years ago

   But Canada's taxes are higher, so less of a good dream.

   replyreport
   1. 0

      Rotoiposted 3 years agoin reply to this

      Those are differences of the dream's quality. Btw, Australia and New Zealand are also dreamlike. European Union is also a fantastic dream.

      replyreport
   2. 0

      Rotoiposted 3 years agoin reply to this

      China and India are working hard to become dreamlike: https://www.google.com/search?client=fi … n+one+test

      replyreport
4. 78

   Kathryn L Hillposted 3 years ago

   Any country can be a good dream as long as freedom within appropriate boundaries is maintained through common agreement.

   replyreport
5. 78

   Kathryn L Hillposted 3 years ago

   Anarchy is the most destructive and most utopian of regimes and leads to a very bad dream.

   replyreport
6. 78

   Kathryn L Hillposted 3 years ago

   Beware of all anarchists in this country, I say. They hold the most destructive of views because they do not understand the basis of the US constitution. They want to trash what is beneficial to our lives and protective of our rights to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness.
   
   They don't understand a lot of other things, as well.

   replyreport
7. 0

   Rotoiposted 3 years ago

   Both of us used to talk about education. Education has a philosophy. The philosophy is this: its genesis is in the day when the first woman became aware of the first rapist. That woman them dreamed of a regime that would inspire little boys to adopt a mentality that would please a girl.
   
   So the entire school education is designed, in its kernel, to make boys who would worship the femininekind.

   replyreport
   1. 78

      Kathryn L Hillposted 3 years agoin reply to this

      so they (boys... who are destined to become men) are oppressed,(originally) by the school system? I wonder what this says about  y o u ?
      
      wondering
      
      The truth is that boys do need a different sort of education than girls.
      And they need to learn in groups of boys. Preferably of all ages.
      They need to learn in a concrete way by manipulating useful items and objects, (tools,) in real time for real purposes and reasons. They also need to be physically active and learn how to use, (and enjoy) their bodies for health and defense.

      replyreport
      1. 78

         Kathryn L Hillposted 3 years agoin reply to this

         In time, young men learn of their own accord and inclination, based on natural interest and hormones, how to please a woman.
               Of course, the early training of boys should include good manners and habits of hygiene and health. If allowed to flourish in their own gallant natures, men become irresistible to women who are attracted by a man's strength, intelligence and (sincere) willingness to assist them.

         replyreport
         1. 0

            Rotoiposted 3 years agoin reply to this

            We have to think education in terms of rapists.
            
            Rapists are an old thing.
            
            They can be traced in the religious and non-religious literature of all cultures. Even Christ is an example of rapists. His pain is shown in contrast to the pain a woman undergoes in the hand of a rapist: It's kind of like asking a woman: would you take nails like Christ, and that pain, or would you prefer to be in the hand of rapist?
            
            No woman can walk safely in the middle of the night alone, anywhere in the world. America, Canada, Europe, Australia, New Zealand, etc are a dream - because you have cars. In a car, a woman can safely go anywhere even in the middle of the night.

            replyreport
         2. 0

            Rotoiposted 3 years agoin reply to this

            The fear of this violence that a woman (may) undergo in the hand of a rapist, is mitigated via religion, and secular education. A rapist may rape a woman, but then he marries. Through that marriage, he receives a girl child. If he does not marry, that is another thing. It is the task of religion to do this kind of calculations.

            replyreport
         3. 0

            Rotoiposted 3 years agoin reply to this

            The rapist's daughter feels pain, even in the presence of her dad. She then marries. She then dreams of an education for her boys. The educationists of our world have been the sons of a rapist's daughter.

            replyreport
8. 0

   Rotoiposted 3 years ago

   I am kind of regretting that I deleted the philosophy work. I had almost figured out the KERNEL.
   
   . . .Next time!

   replyreport
   1. 0

      Rotoiposted 3 years agoin reply to this

      Although the work is lost — the Heads that had conceived the work — is deathless.

      replyreport
      1. 78

         Kathryn L Hillposted 3 years agoin reply to this

         ... the minds.

         replyreport
         1. 0

            Rotoiposted 3 years agoin reply to this

            Yes.

            replyreport
         2. 0

            Rotoiposted 3 years agoin reply to this

            What we did in our discourses, sealed the leaks in our subtle-body. We have heavier weight now, because we have sealed leakages. What we did, although lost, nonetheless is not wasted.
            
            For example, if we run for political office, we would have good chances of winning; if we start a company, we would have good chances of succeeding, etc.

            replyreport
9. 0

   Rotoiposted 3 years ago

   I will clear up and elaborate the education philosophy tomorrow. It's 11 PM of night here. Will be here again in the morning. Take care. See ya!

   replyreport
10. 0

    Rotoiposted 3 years ago

    Now, the real question is rather this: What if a rapist himself becomes an educationist?
    
    The answer is this: He can't! Because anyone with proper education, will not become a rapist. And without education, one can not become an educationist.
    
    A rapist is the result of poor education.
    
    
    So education is the key.
    
    Those who become educationists, get tapped into this societal dream of boys' education.

    replyreport
11. 0

    Rotoiposted 3 years ago

    I had written a philosophy of education, titled: "Spirituality and Education - How to Revolutionize School Education Worldwide". So how do I synthesize that prior knowledge with this new knowledge?
    
    I'll clear up that soon.

    replyreport
    1. 78

       Kathryn L Hillposted 3 years agoin reply to this

       New knowledge: The basis for education! But the question is, how does a person, child through adult, (considering the various stages,) receive new knowledge!

       replyreport
       1. 78

          Kathryn L Hillposted 3 years agoin reply to this

          I once asked my educational psychology professor what guarantees that a child in a classroom will retain what is being taught. (After all, isn't that why teachers teach: to make a child oh so smart? Isn't the teacher attempting to create a child in his or her image according to what is deemed pertinent by the teachers, the school board and the state? How can such a transformation occur if the child does not absorb and remember what is being taught?)
          
          My very learned professor said:
          "It's hit and miss."
          
          I could not accept that answer.
          
          I said, "Isn't it based on the pupil's interest in what is being taught?"
          
          He ignored my answer/question.
          
          ( I aced the final in that class, but he gave me a C.
          I dropped out of the credential program at the university.)

          replyreport
          1. 0

             Rotoiposted 3 years agoin reply to this

             I'm sorry to hear that he behaved to you in that repulsive manner, but what he about about It's hit and miss, is nonetheless correct!

             replyreport
       2. 0

          Rotoiposted 3 years agoin reply to this

          If you are asking about how the entirety of our philosophy will be shared with the world, then the answer is this: the Heads are in the world. The Heads that had conceived the philosophy, can not be (permanently) terminated. They are integral and permanent parts of the MATRIX.
          
          As long as the Heads are in the matrix, they will be influencing the matrix in infinite ways, by their mere presence (as magnets do to conductive metal).
          
          The other part of the answer is this: TIME. Time will teach the world this new knowledge. The Hegelian dialectical forces are working nonstop in the heart of the world. It will impart the new knowledge - not in the form of literal philosophy - but through life itself.

          replyreport
12. 78

    Kathryn L Hillposted 3 years ago

    ... actually, teaching with love as opposed to force would be the key to a revolution in education. Why would this be so hard to implement? and meet with so much resistance?
    Because it is easier to force kids to sit in classrooms and be force-fed information which they must regurgitate on the day of the test.
    
    Love would mean finding creative ways to inspire and encourage learning. It would mean being sensitive to intrinsic motivations and interests. It would mean a willingness to be observant enough to learn about each child in a whole-child and relevant way.

    replyreport
    1. 78

       Kathryn L Hillposted 3 years agoin reply to this

       I'm sure this new way is being done in schools and classrooms across the nation. Well, it was being done and will be done again soon.
       
       After all, we are becoming more enlightened with every passing day.

       replyreport
       1. 0

          Rotoiposted 3 years agoin reply to this

          True

          replyreport
13. 0

    Rotoiposted 3 years ago

    
    
    https://youtu.be/4iQSr-aDuow

    replyreport