Re: DSM: The Value of the Sudbury Model

From: John Axtell (newlife@theofficenet.com)
Date: Mon Apr 16 2001 - 16:48:31 EDT


David and Christopher,

I strongly disagree with your interpretation of what a Statist ideology is.
However I am not sure it is all that appropriate to this discussion group.

Christopher wrote:
statism is "the practice or doctrine of giving a centralized government
control
over economic planning and policy." The forcible redistribution of the
wealth
of the governed is one fairly clear indication of a statist system.
... the decision of society that education is a public responsibility is a
statist decision. It's not even an
opinion.

While the forcible redistribution of wealth may be a statist decision the
use of that money does not seem to me to have anything to do with how it is
gotten. The definition you give is clearly relating to economics and not
education.

Now to David's point:

I can not believe that loyalty can be bought. In fact I think it is clear
that people with money gladly pay the state what is needed to keep the poor
loyal, until there is an uprising and then they find out that you really can
not buy loyalty:)

I am totally involved with state money, and they do not have my loyalty. I
use the system that is in place to achieve my goals. If I can also meet
their needs to achieve their goals that is fine, however I do not compromise
anything of importance and from what I know of Marko I doubt that he will
either.

It is far better to work within a system and serve students that can not
afford the SV experience than to do nothing.

I would also like to point out that the state solves the problems of all
sectors of society. The concept that some are economically weak is unsound.
The real concept to understand is to comprehend who is getting more money
from the state. All money comes from the state, period. Those who are best
paid tend to be working directly for the state, then comes the private
sector that gets all of its money from the state. Some people are just lower
on the feeding chain than others.

You are already living in the Brave New World you refer to but do not
realize it :) You are just higher up on the feeding chain than some of
Marco's potential students, and probably all of my students parents.

By working, as Marco states, to improve the educational options of the poor
and unparented, or poorly parented, during the first 12 years we hope to
allow them to break into the upper social class that goes to college rather
than staying in the lower class.

John

David Rovner wrote:

> Marko Koskinen wrote:
>
> >This is also the main reason why I would want our school to be
> >government funded, so that everybody regardless of their economic status
> >could take advantage of the model.
>
> Marko, evidently you are guided by the statist ideology:
> meaning that you believe the state should solve the problems
> of a certain sector of the population -- the economically
> weak in this case, but not necessarily being always the
> case -- with the means of the economically stronger sector
> of the population.
> In a statist ideology, the state "buys" the loyalty and
> support of some groups with money extorted from others.
>
> Is that the "Brave New World" were we would want to live?
>
> David Rovner rovners@netvision.net.il
>
> ---------- Original Message ----------
>
> >From: Marko Koskinen <marko@vapaus.net>
> >To: Sudbury Valley mailing list
> <discuss-sudbury-model@aramis.sudval.org>
> >Date: Mon, 16 Apr 2001 00:10:29 -0400
> >Subject: DSM: The Value of the Sudbury Model
>
> >John, this is aimed mostly to you =)
>
> >I believe that in our culture or in any culture in that matter, children
> >tend to pick up the same professions their parents have. They look up to
> >their parents very much. If their parents are working class, the
> >children tend to pick up working class professions, and that goes to
> >middle class and owning class children as well.
>
> >The value of the Sudbury Model is to provide a wide variety of
> >alternatives to the professions that the parents can provide. The young
> >people in Sudbury model schools are exposed to lots of different
> >possiblities. This doesn't mean that the model undermines the role model
> >function of the parents but it gives some alternatives.
>
> >This is one of the main values I see in a Sudbury Model education, to
> >mix the social classes in an empowering environment. In public schools
> >the social classes are somewhat mixed also but because of the oppressive
> >environment that doesn't really do the job.
>
> >This is also the main reason why I would want our school to be
> >government funded, so that everybody regardless of their economic status
> >could take advantage of the model.
>
> >John, I've understood that the young people you are talking about are
> >mostly from working class and poor families. Without intervention of a
> >mixed social class group of young people in non-formal setting, the
> >chain of social class background cannot be easily broken.
>
> >Marko

Christopher wrote:

statism is "the practice or doctrine of giving a centralized government
control
over economic planning and policy." The forcible redistribution of the
wealth
of the governed is one fairly clear indication of a statist system.

> If so, then I understand your response.
> If not, then I submit that all he is saying is that, if a society decides
> that education is a community responsibility that should be paid for
through
> taxes, then democratic schools should be allowed to be part of that
system.

Whether or not Alan is himself a libertarian, the decision of society that
education is a public responsibility is a statist decision. It's not even
an
opinion.

But I'm not sure if tha's what you meant.

On a completely unrelated topic, what has SVS or other model schools done
about
students who violate the law while at school?

Christopher Weeks



This archive was generated by hypermail 2.0.0 : Mon Nov 05 2001 - 20:24:28 EST