“Democracy and socialism have nothing in common but one word, equality. But notice the difference: while democracy seeks equality in liberty, socialism seeks equality in restraint and servitude.” — Alexis de Tocqueville

Note: I am now rereading “Democracy in America” by de Tocqueville. I heartily recommend this to all as a brilliant expose of our American democratic experiment. I read this many decades ago, and apparently didn’t really get it. Now, decades later and all that experience behind me, I am astonished how brilliant this work really is in spelling out aspects of our system. Few really understand, or even realize, these things.

It is available in every format, and Kindle versions can be had to $.99.

Thanks for the reminder. Alexis de Tocqueville should be required reading both in High School and College.

Could you imagine the horror if it actually was required?

quote:

Originally posted by thunderson:
Thanks for the reminder. Alexis de Tocqueville should be required reading both in High School and College.

Could you imagine the horror if it actually was required?

That would merely engage the creativity for evading it. Cheating, IOW.

I think it ought to be available and recommended, and those who care about themselves, who don’t want to be as dumb for the rest of their lives as they were last week, will read it and pay attention as best they can. If you don’t, there isn't much point in the requirement.

I bought the hard cover version of the book several years ago and read it. It was a bit tedious in parts but overall a good read.

When I moved, it was somehow lost, or didn't get unpacked and got tossed in the trash so I bought another version - soft cover, and read it again.

Its one of those books that should be required reading in school civics programs.

I am so glad we aren't a democracy.

OK will do. the books been on my shelf forever, time to bear down.

quote:

Originally posted by JALLEN:
That would merely engage the creativity for evading it. Cheating, IOW.

I think it ought to be available and recommended, and those who care about themselves, who don’t want to be as dumb for the rest of their lives as they were last week, will read it and pay attention as best they can. If you don’t, there isn't much point in the requirement.

You are of course correct about the cheating aspect and I was only so serious about the suggestion of making it mandatory. Or was I? I don't really know the answer here.

The problem is the assumption that there are kids who know they need to increase their knowledge on these matters. The fact is they don't know, so they can't make the decision to better themselves. Kids today are not stupid but misinformed.

Prior to the industrial revolution, Education consisted of 3 basic stages- Grammar, Logic, and Rhetoric.
Grammar- who? what? where? when? why? how?- all those facts stuffed in to be repeated back by rote. Logic- Examining methods of taking acquired facts and forming logical conclusions. Rhetoric- Clearly and effectively communicating those conclusions reached through Logic based on facts.
This resulted in students who weren't necessarily told what to think, but how to think for themselves. It was in fact a Classical education.

From the industrial revolution on the budding socialists in education thought that the poor huddled masses would do better if educated in a way befitting their future jobs in factories. The Grammar stage was extended throughout schooling years and the Logic and Rhetoric stages were gutted and pared down to basic elements. What to think became much more important than how to think. You can't have consistent results if the guy on the line is second guessing and besides...that guy will be much happier if he just does exactly what we tell him.

From a political/social standpoint this caused a few interesting ripples....

1)Those who could afford it started sending their children to private schools for a more classical education.

2)Those classically educated children grew up and generally designed, built, and owned the factories. They became the new capitalists.

3)Socialists in education doubled down and sought to fight back by upping their game in math and science. Of course that meant great reductions in Literature and Music.(Bonus-more grammar and less free thinking, and we can now blame the capitalists for cutting funding!)

4)Politics and Social issues as taught in Public Schools became ever increasingly Grammar driven and therefore often "boring".(Bonus-If based on simple rote memorization we can now teach only those facts we the educators deem acceptable thought.)


The end result is there are a lot of extremely bright students today who have absolutely no clue that there are legitimate differences in thought. They have been rewarded for regurgitating and what little logic and rhetorical skill they have is put to use citing previous like minded individuals. Objectivity can only come from the ability to think freely, something they have NOT been trained in.

Most won't better themselves because they honestly do not see a problem. Anyone who indicates there might be a lack is..(fill in your choice of racist, fascist, sexist, or all of the above). They are already perfect. They have the trophy to prove it.

On a personal note- I am well educated and nearing my 50's. I never heard of Alexis de Tocqueville until I was out of college and well past 30.

quote:

Originally posted by JALLEN:

quote:

Originally posted by thunderson:
Thanks for the reminder. Alexis de Tocqueville should be required reading both in High School and College.

Could you imagine the horror if it actually was required?

That would merely engage the creativity for evading it. Cheating, IOW.

I think it ought to be available and recommended, and those who care about themselves, who don’t want to be as dumb for the rest of their lives as they were last week, will read it and pay attention as best they can. If you don’t, there isn't much point in the requirement.

I don't remember who said it, but they were absolutely correct: "Those who refuse to read are no better off than those who are unable to read."

quote:

Originally posted by synthplayer:

I don't remember who said it, but they were absolutely correct: "Those who refuse to read are no better off than those who are unable to read."

Usually credited to Mark Twain