Nov 08, 1994 08:20 AM
by Michael W. Grenier
> Oh gosh, I could rant and rave for another twelve pages on
>that one, but I also don't want to drift to far from theosophy,
>which is what the theme of this net is supposed to be. The issue
>is representation. According to my wife's research in this area
>(she teaches political theory at the University here) The poor
>and the working class are the very people who would stand to
>benefit the most from the "liberals" in this country. But they
>are also the people least likely to vote. The poor and working
>class believe that their vote doesn't count and nothing can be
>done. The majority of voters in this country are a retired and
>very conservative minority. They want more jails to lock up the
>young drug addicts who steal their "stuff" that they have
>accumulated over their lives. Their kids have grown up, so
>education is not an immediate concern, in fact they are
>mistrustful of it--consider it a failure--therefore they are more
>than happy to divert funds from education to build more prisons.
Being very much on the right end of the political spectrum, I
have to make a few observations:
1) I believe your wife's assesments are correct.
2) Charles Murray's book "The Bell Curve" provides some
fascinating insight into these problems.
3) To some extent, I also feel that PUBLIC education is a
failure. My children, ages 3, 5, 7, are now in a private school
where they are not limited to the lowest common demoniator.
Parents are upset. The public school spends 4 times what this
private school spends per pupil but the private school seems to
do a better job (at least according to tests). Many of our
friends who are not as fortunate to be able to afford a private
school end up home schooling. Yet, if the public school district
provide, let's say, $1000 of the $4500 they spend per student and
give that money to the parents if the parents agree to put there
child in a private school, the district would actually save money
and the child would get a better education.
> Ollie North was operating from the ethical value of
> "loyalty"--"My country right or wrong." From the
> Kohlberg scale of six, he was operating at stage three.
> Only a minority of people operate at
> post conventional level of 5 or 6 (values of right and wrong--
> good and evil that transcend considerations of selfishness,
> greed, loyalty and law).
Perhaps Ollie was considering the good of supporting the freedom
fighters in Central America. Unlike you, I don't know him well
enough to judge. I suppose that G. Washington and others were
also judged a 3 since they disobeyed the laws of the land at that
This nation and this planet do have some serious problems and
books like The Bell Curve show how difficult it is going to be to
make improvement. Still we must TRY.
Michael W. Grenier firstname.lastname@example.org
612-456-7869 Unisys - Air Traffic Control
[Back to Top]
Dedicated to the Theosophical Philosophy and its Practical Application