Good to see the warriors being challenged Frank. Lovely !
A friend who rarely watches TV taught in schools for years and was regularly puzzled by the strange ideas so many students had about how our society works. Usually they were thinking and talking like Americans and assumed that we operated the same way.
After the Referendum I worked for a survey about how people voted.
Many conversations went like this -
"And why did you vote NO?"
"We ought to elect our President."
"Why?"
"The Americans do."
"Yes, but....."

Max Harris used to use unusual words. He thought it was his readers' job to understand him, not his to talk down to them.

"Most if not many would fail a test of our history,law and Govt."

Now I wonder what politically correct left wing education system was responsible for this sad state of affairs?Perhaps two wrongs make a right, ie just let anyone into Australia,or is it too many lefts make us totally bereft?

Arjay,
It would have to be a "left wing" system, wouldn't it which is why it has churned out voters who vote for extreme "right wing" Howard Governments for the past decade, sometimes Arjay you come up with really good arguements, this is not one of those times.

Professor, you are so right "One of the reasons why governments fail to do their job is because people do not know enough to hold politicians to account." Most don't even know their rights when questioned by a policeman about a traffic offence. And is this not the fault of the people? They are apathetic. She'll be right?
But are you going to be different? Should you get into Parliament will you represent the people or the Party? If it is the former you'll not last long - the Labor Party is past master at hatred. If the latter then what use will you be to the people. I suppose that that sounds defeatist. Not quite.
Take a look at todays press! That bastion of public input, that pillar of democratic thought, that foundation of our Judicial system, the jury, doesn't know. And that strengthens the hand of those who wish to destroy the JURY system. For who wants to tell a magistrate or Judge that his directions are not agreed with?

In the 1940s all those fact were taught, and had to be learnt by rote. The highly-educated university-trained people who populated the "curriculum branches" followed revolutionary thinking -- learning by rote was wrong.
They had another item of doctrine. Everyone was equal. So everyone would know the subjects. Ergo -- there was no need to mark people by percentages.
Not for them social studies theories that people had different levels of intelligence, different levels of "stickatability", and so on. No, every child must be promoted every year, and all undergraduates SHALL graduate at university.
The generations that learnt by rote had developed the atom bomb and flown men to the moon, had conquered infectious diseases (well, many of them), and invented the motor car, aeroplane and computer.
I recommend that politicians and others declare that learning the alphabet, grammar, the tables, formulae, etc, is RIGHT, right, right, and that not everyone can or ought to graduate, and then send all the curriculum branch people out to teach in classrooms.
-- John Massam 46 Cobine Way, Greenwood, WA 6024. 08 9343 9532

johnmassam,
So what is your point, in regards to the 21st century mate?