Lemming

I see.

I don't remember learning much morality or ethics in school, myself.

Though I suppose in Language Arts, there were fiction and autobiographies.

That one received moral lessons of a 'sort from, but I don't 'remember in depth discussions on ethics or morality.

'Might have been though.

History class, one year, had a thing each week where each student researched some foreign affairs event.

That 'might have been discussed a bit, I don't recall.

Pretty sure sex education was had at 'some point, but it didn't stick in my mind really.

Personally, for some subjects, I think I'd rather schools just sent parents a pamphlet in the mail, detailing how to explain the birds and the bees, or recommending that the parents tell their kids about birth control, if they 'can't wait, but still encouraging the kid to wait.

Though I imagine 'most parents already do the talk.

Though straight sex education, is off the topic of explaining the existence of lbtq+ or schools going out of their way to 'endorse saying its 'ok to be LGBTQ+. . .

If religions are often just what people think reality 'is, a history of what 'was, and how people 'ought act, what's so dissimilar in atheist groups who believe in the same reality, history, and ethics?

Work for someone else, save your money, invest your money, retire.

Invent something. (Item/service/system)

Start your own business. (If feasible/possible)

Though there may be problems with my vague idea of this.

I like that SirAnonymous can see a degree of value in some of the policies of political individuals, he does not necessarily care for.

@SelfLooking At#27

Hm, I need to work on not being irritable or rude with people I disagree with, slipping a bit.

While I can understand the concept of it being unlikely for someone to seize 'all the money supply,

Monopolies still seem worthy of concern,

A common understanding of monopolies 'is their ability to stop others from competing with them.

We like multiple branches, checks and balances in government, would it be bad to implement to a degree in economics?

That's a bit too 'compact for my understanding, can you repeat it differently?

What about monopolies?

They control a 'percentage of the market, rather than an 'amount of wealth, I 'think.

And can lead to unequal working conditions, possibly requiring Theodore Roosevelt the Trust Buster, at times.

As well as often try to hinder any competitions existence, I 'think.

How ought the establishment respond to unrest in a country, I wonder?

Going by the Shah in Iran, 'or Louis XVI of France, extravagance, 'apparent corruption, 'apparent incompetency, or straying from the idealized path, often seems to irritate the people. Inducing their hatred of their current affairs.

I suppose if the Shah had gone for a more 'limited monarchy, for example your article mentioned 

Reminds me of American Supreme Court.

Not stealing, not hurting others, 'is 

They are policy and law, by which we live in this society.

Christian Ideology for example, 10 Commandments.

From what I remember of school, there were questions in the back of each chapter, that asked you questions about 'why this or that is,

I remember as a student being able to ask my teacher questions if I wanted.

If the parents and community lived by Communistic system and values, it'd make sense for them to hold said beliefs, for their kids to inherit those beliefs.

But we live in America.

I think kids should be told, not to steal from and punch one another repeatedly, is this not indoctrination?

You mean education?

Well, I 'already call myself a moral nihilist, subjective 'works too?

If I can say Lions, Tigers, and Leopards exist,

Or Democrats, Republicans, and Whigs,

Why not human ethnicities?

Is there a DNA difference between Neanderthals and Homo sapiens?

I have mainly unhelpful negative things to say, to post #137, but I'll not say them, because again, they're unhelpful negative things to say.

Not saying that 'your post was unhelpful or negative, just that my response to it was.

So instead I'll try to be more constructive to myself in learning,

What law's in particular?

Not saying that they're 'aren't, but that I don't always pay attention to the news.

Honestly with technology being the way it is, seems it 'ought be easier than ever for parents to homeschool, and have their kids interact with other kids of similar values.

Than 'have to settle for public school, and 'other people's values.

(Edit)

Video included, partly as joke.

Some stories 'are written for the intent purpose of allegory though?

Additionally, there's the difficulty of time passing. We lose context, we forget what a word 'meant to people thousands of years ago, or we use a 'different word in a new language, we forget customs, historical happenings, 'people that once existed thousands of years ago and their 'place in people's mind, relevant to the conversation.

Though the 'Additionally part, in which I speak, has more to do with my view of taking the Bible with salt, than allegory.

Not because the Bible is not true in parts, but because for many of us, we can't 'tell what is 'what, 'precisely, in truth, without spending years reading history books to try to gain context.

Though it 'also has to do with the allegory part, because of people's use of turns of phrase, break a leg, Idioms.

I think 'crowds of people, often don't know what's good for them and everyone, nor do 'crowds always deserve the property of an individual's effort.

Socialism would bother me 'less, if say a group of Socialist/Communist minded individuals,

'Founded a new city in some location, with the infrastructure to 'provide that which they claimed.

And lived 'themselves, the lives they thought others ought live.

There's a book I tried reading once, I couldn't really understand it, or follow it well at the time, maybe I should try reading it again.

. . . 'Anyways, this conversation sparks that book in my mind somehow.

Though I mention it merely because I like to see the title in words out before me, not because I'm trying to get you to read it, or hold it up as any sort of proof or argument. Just for myself, though it's odd to say something publicly, just for oneself.

Sounds like Too much bureaucracy, Communism, and lack of freedom, to me.

What aspects or methods in particular?

I suppose I wouldn't mind some wars, police efforts by the USA government, if they were 'purely volunteer forces going.

I dislike it when we enter a war, or put boots on the ground, because it doesn't seem to me soldiers have much 'choice in going.

I know people join the military, and get placed like pawns, where the higher ups want.

But some 'unpopular wars, deployments, seem to me like they'd be 'less unpopular, if those deployed or dead were saying

"'Yes I 'want to be here, I think it's in America's interest, or the interest of what is 'right, that I am here. I am willing to risk my life for this cause, I 'asked to come here."

People get upset at war casualties for instance, but that's a bit I imagine, because one understands that soldiers more often do what they're told, than choosing causes in which they believe.

United Nations Peacekeeping, for example, 'maybe, 'sound volunteer like, though I don't really know much anything 'about the organization.

Do you advocate,

For a specific different system?

That we ought find a new, yet tried system?

That we ought increase regulation on the capitalist system that already exists?

That our current system works, but is one society ought keep an eye on?

That we ought mix and match 'elements of capitalism, with other systems?

Other?

I 'am rather unfamiliar with the Bible, and how different people interpret it.

Though I have a vague understanding that some view parts of it allegorical, or explanation as best we could give at the time.

Though I can understand some people's concern that this leads to a materialist view of the Bible, or a Bible 'without an afterlife, or God in the literal sense.

Fair point.

Though if he'd been dreadfully incompetent, even that money might not have kept him afloat.

Personally, I don't see the disconnect with believing in evolution and being a Christian.

A different 'type of Christian I suppose, but the people who believe in both the Bible and evolution, still refer to themselves as Christian, I'd imagine.

People inherit genes, are born into family circumstances that develop them into an individual, what's wrong with inheriting money?

I 'do like that you referenced it.

But again ask,

Why 'not

- HB5 | Florida 2021 | Civic Education Curriculum | TrackBill

@#23

Why is it wrong to tell people right from wrong, wrong from right?

Parents of course having the 'closest relationship with their children, then the state, then whatever job or community one 'has to live in (Mandatory training videos in workplace, so on)

But there's 'always going to be people indoctrinating, 'telling the kid what's what.

Better then, that it's their parents, and the state (With the parents permission) given that the state's instructing the kid on everything else.

Sure one might say church will teach the kid right and wrong, but unless it's a private school with a church, won't be happening 'that much I imagine.

As you say, other option is,

"Leave it to social media." - zedvictor4

Too Many Cooks vs. Don't Hug Me I'm Scared: Decoding the Disturbing – Wisecrack Edition - YouTube (7:26 in)

Though, what I disagree with drlebronski and Theweakeredge on, is teaching that "lbtq+ exists and its ok to be LGBTQ+" to people that disagree.

Interesting perspective, though I don't agree or disagree with your view, myself.

Have you read many self help books yourself?

Interesting read, both the post and the further reading.

Sorry about length.

Well, I'll admit now that he 'said it.

But I can't say I'm 'greatly 'bothered, by him saying it.

Have you never heard of the Vietnamese boat people - Wikipedia?

Boat People Flee Vietnam
 "After the fall of Saigon in 1975, more than a million people left Vietnam, about 5 percent of South Vietnam’s population, most of them by boat. Many were Chinese Vietnamese. Some didn’t make it to their final destinations. Some died. Most settled in the United States, which accepted political refugees but turned back economic refugees. Many of those who didn't make it were detained at camps in Hong Kong or the Philippines.
 For this privilege of leaving Vietnam Chinese had to pay the Vietnamese government about US$2,000 a head in gold. At the time these fees were Vietnam's main source of hard currency. At that time the Chinese owned many businesses in Vietnam and there was a lot of hostility towards Chinese in Vietnam. China and Vietnam have long history of animosity. Many Chinese were thrown out of Vietnam at the time China and Vietnam fought a border war in 1979. In the early 1970s there were about a half million ethnic Chinese in Vietnam. In the early 1980s there were practically none. Vietnam made US$2 billion from the forced migration. [Source: William Ellis, National Geographic, November 1979]
 Many of refugees crowded onto unseaworthy boats. Large ships with over 2,500 passengers were organized by Vietnamese racketeers. Smaller ships were purchased by people who pooled their money. Life savings were paid for a place on a boat. Families split up. Fat people were sometimes denied a spot because they took up as much room as two smaller people that paid as much.
 People died of thirst, hunger, exposure. Some people who got very sick were pushed over the edge. Some boats had engines that conked out at sea. Some of the boats lost more than half their passengers to exposure, drowning, starvation and attacks from pirates.
 About 90 percent of the boats didn't make it. Those who made it to Hong Kong, Thailand or Malaysia were often turned back, driven from shore or towed back to sea. In Hong Kong authorities tried to prevent the ships from landing. One ship was moored in Hong Kong harbor for 20 weeks until someone cut the anchor. When the boat drifted into shore hundreds of people jumped overboard and fled to the hills where they were later rounded up and placed in a camp."

“The price? I couldn’t begin to give you the numbers,” says Carlos Ponce, the director of the Latin American and Caribbean division of the human-rights group Freedom House. “I can tell you that 2 million Cubans live outside Cuba, I can tell you that in the last 10 years, there have been nearly 18,000 political detainees.
“How many in jail since 1959? How many executed? How many lost at sea? I can’t even guess.”
There are organizations that try to track those numbers. But extracting information from a secretive totalitarian regime that likely doesn’t even know the answers itself is a nearly impossible task and likely to remain so, even if there are significant changes in the way the the Cuban government does business following Fidel Castro’s death last month.
“Even after the Soviet Union fell, when some of its archives opened up for a time, all we really learned was the extent of the cover-up, all the measures the Soviets took to cover up their crimes,” says Marion Smith, executive director of the Victims of Communism Memorial Foundation, which studies the human-rights histories of communist regimes.
“But we never got a precise number of victims, or their names. The Soviets didn’t want to keep precise records — they had learned their lesson from the Nazis, who did keep precise records, which were used to indict Nazi war criminals at Nuremberg.”

. . .

From Ron DeSantis point of view,  he 'is endorsing teaching the objective facts, it just 'follows, that the objective facts lead to the 'conclusion of the repression, death, lack of freedom, in Dictatorships.

'Before 3:10, he mentions how many students are 'unfamiliar with what civic rights they have, responsibilities in society. States the need for certain key principles and facts to be taught.

I see nothing wrong.

I'll admit though, that I know next to nothing about modern day Vietnam, and current immigration rates from that country to this country.

North Korea example is a 'monstrously unfair comparison, I'm sure. (Not sarcasm)

What's the difference between an individual/Their actions, and an ideology?

When we speak of something being 'good or 'bad.

'Everyone is fed propaganda, brainwashed.

It's just a stupid way of 'putting it, in my opinion, better reserved for the most extreme examples.

However, Vietnam's successes came at the cost of increasing violations of rights: restrictions on freedom of speech; failure to protect the right of privacy; and ...

Should they be taught whether Hitler is good or bad?

Just so I understand your gist.

"Some Americans who pushed towards the bus tried to pull their Vietnamese wives and children along with them," reported Bradley. "There were desperate scenes of families separated and crying out for help, pleading not to be left behind, clutching at the last straw of hope."

We don't see many North Korean immigrants either, but of course that's because North Korea is a wonderful place, leader with the highest amount of support, than any other nation, I hear.

More unbiased view,

I see no quote in the article of Governor Desantis, saying "communism is evil"

I'm sure all the people executed in the Cuban Revolution were appreciative of their new Communist government. (Sarcasm)

"Unlike most of the foreign-born from Asia, those from Vietnam came to the United States mainly as refugees and asylum seekers from the mid-1970s onward. Today, the U.S. is home to about 1.1 million Vietnamese immigrants, making them the fifth-largest immigrant group."

We live in a Capitalist society, it is reasonable that American students are taught of what type of society they live in.

@#1

What you say is 'nothing new at all.

Individual tribes have 'long been fighting other individual tribes close by, only to form into larger tribes, and fight 'other larger tribes, only to merge with the larger tribes and become nations, the nations fighting with other nations until they merge to form a larger nation, the larger nations fighting with other larger nations, until they merge to form an empire, the Empires fighting with other nearby Empires,

And so on.

It's only been Technology and the Entropy of Nations, that has prevented a single country from conquering the globe.

If the Mongols had planes, they could have taken the Earth.

If the British had been more giving of rights to other countries, 'accepting them into it's Empire, as equals instead of vassal resources, they could have taken the world by this time.

If the West had capitalized on the power of the nuclear bomb, been ruthless, the world could have been unified by now.

But instead, the board is equalizing, and such prospects look dangerous,

The current Nation States, 'I expect, will continue on for quite some time,

Unless I misjudge the recklessness of nations (Which I might)

Never bought one of my self help books myself, but if they help some individuals try to improve their lives, or succeed in improving their lives, what's so bad about that?

Objective history as the 'Left would have it, is the demonization of 'everything the white man ever did in America, even though it's clear enough admitted in the history books 'already, that mistakes, errors, flaws in character existed.

That 'school textbooks don't go into 'everything in detail, is just a limitation of palpability, and how much information can be crammed into students heads.

Though this is more my 'opinion and memory, than cited fact.

'My recollection of history, was 'not it being 'whitewashed as people claim, though that 'was a while ago, school.

To steal a Reddit user's post,

"Old-fashioned ideology: Columbus was a hero who discovered America.
Modern ideology: Columbus was a racist colonizer who oppressed the Native Americans.
Non-ideological: Columbus was an Italian explorer who sought passage to the East Indies. He was appointed as governor of the Indies, but was later removed from his position after accusations by his colonial subjects of brutality.

Another example:

Old-fashioned ideology: Martin Luther King was a civil rights hero who fought for equal rights for black people.
Modern ideology: Martin Luther King was a Black hero who stood up against white oppression and was murdered for it.
Non-ideological: Martin Luther King was a Christian minister and prominent figure in the civil rights movement of the 1960s. He was opposed to racial discrimination, poverty, capitalism, and the Vietnam war."

They have the right of self determination, to an extent, as American citizens, 'currently, I'll admit.

It seems a bit difficult, to my thinking, to teach objective morals/behaviors/expected behavior in society?

Doesn't really matter if Atheist, Christian, Nihilist, Humanist, Russian.

None of those have a 'claim on one 'exact measure of values.

It's more. . 'Specific to whatever current population and time, you're referring to.

Well, that depends on ones values.

Your explanation is appreciated.

I didn't report it, but do find it odd, that it has 7 likes.

No, I think his point is that the Africans of today, are not the Africans of 2 million years ago.

Europeans, Asians, Hispanics, aren't descended from modern Africans.

The out of Africa theory, posits that Africans, Europeans, Asians, Hispanics, are descended from 'ancient man, who coming from Africa where it's hot and sunny, many assume had black skin.

Though unless they've done a DNA test to prove that, I don't see why it couldn't be orange or blue skin.

I say that though, out of ignorance, I'm 'Not trying to say,  there's no way ancient humans were black.

I am not a Neo-Confederate.

The 'lack of Confederates, is because frankly, they were right.

And when they lost, their culture was degraded, their 'Nations/States, religions, bastardized over time.

Their people's sense of identity.

I'm certainly glad legal slavery in America is no more.

But the current 'state of existence, to 'me, shows the Southerners saw the future clearly.

Should 'We take down the Confederate statues,?

No not I.

Should individual communities, Yes and no, I'd say.

If the descendants of the Confederates who fought and died for the liberty of their land and 'some of their people, Are dead and no longer value filial piety, Then I wouldn't be surprised by statues being removed to museums. Also if said descendants are now a minority, their culture diminished, their sense of identity assimilated into 'Greater 'America, I wouldn't be surprised by statues being removed to museums.

If the descendants of the Confederates who fought and died for the liberty of their land and 'some of their people, Are yet living and value filial piety, Then I would be surprised by statues being removed to museums. Also if said descendants still a majority, I would be surprised by statues being removed to museums. Subjective question really, I think. Depending on 'who you ask, 'where it is asked, Providence of said statues. The values held by who you ask.

. . .

Frankly, it makes me sick with rage, eh, irritation,

That people so willingly abandon their own fathers.

Though admittedly they are not 'everyone's heritage.

I understand the people with no positive connection in culture or blood, being so willing.

Ought the Brits snivel and whine apologies for their Empire that 'once 'was.

Oh the poor Aztecs, might modern day Spain say?

Oh - Grr, stop the sarcasm Leaning. . .

The Aztecs were an Empire themselves.

. . .

The point is I appreciate people, who appreciate family, history.

We are not Germans, and General Lee's actions are not synonymous with Hitler's.

If you start a formal debate on the subject, equivating the two, I 'might be convinced, but more likely not.

Even if 'Germans chose to build a statue of Hitler, I would not be offended, though I would not build one myself, and may think it a bit odd.

This does not mean I would want slavery in the modern era, or that we conquer and slaughter other peoples.

I am one to acknowledge my mistakes at times, 'not to regret them.

To act differently in the future, 'not to regret them.

I wouldn't call it buying 'into victimhood on my part.

But myself, I recognize an amount of causality in existence, though I admit I 'do find that distinction more important 'after, than 'before or 'during a situation.

And even then, there are many occurrences, in which 'after, I can see how the situation 'might have been different, with other actions, effort, or awareness.

From my perspective, I 'do think there are events that are a 'bit beyond individuals 'reasonable responsibility or control.

That come upon them as an unexpected natural disaster, from the blue.

Though,

I 'admire will to power, individuals with motivation.

. . .

Shyte happens, 'is a perspective I understand.

Of keeping it together, being stoic, acting as the situation requires for success, self control, and grace amidst disaster.

By this I can appreciate an individual wishing to improve the environment an individual grows up in. To remove that which hinders, harms. And promotes good soil.

. . .

Of Mencius, it is not God that he takes umbrage with, but 'mankind, I'd assert.

Our prison systems could be an example, one 'could assume there was nothing but a bad individual from the start,

But Mencius would say instead, it is the was the individual has been 'treated by his environment, by society.

As you fauxlaw say, "Are we totally incapable of creating that environment if we choose to do so?"

Well, I'd say an uneducated or callow youth, 'might be unlikely to see his situation clearly, understand a better path, or have knowledge on how to walk it.

. . .

Though I 'still admire your view of individuals and communities taking responsibility.

I 'would frankly, rather 'they help themselves and their neighbors, than the government do so.