The National Forum   Donate   Your Account   On Line Opinion   Forum   Blogs   Polling   About   
The Forum - On Line Opinion's article discussion area



Syndicate
RSS/XML


RSS 2.0

Main Articles General

Sign In      Register

The Forum > Article Comments > This is not a drill, stupid > Comments

This is not a drill, stupid : Comments

By Mercurius Goldstein, published 7/8/2007

Book review of 'The Stupid Country': are we trashing the education system that helped build Australian democracy?

  1. Pages:
  2. 1
  3. 2
  4. 3
  5. ...
  6. 6
  7. 7
  8. 8
  9. All
It is interesting that the author mentions Geoffrey Robertson. His wife wrote a book called “Puberty Blues” which is required reading as a part of the compulsory English courses in a number of high schools across the country. However her latest book is titles “How to Murder Your Husband (and Other Household Hints”), so students will be forced to read the book “Puberty Blues”, knowing that the author is feminist and has also written a book on how to kill their father.

While it is said that public schools are important for democracy, private schools are also important for democracy, as history shows that far too many governments or political systems have taken hold the education systems and used it to brainwash the minds of young people.

So the public schools should act as a check and balance on the private schools and vice versa. After all, we don’t want children being brought up in Marxist/feminism, and believing that their father should be murdered.
Posted by HRS, Tuesday, 7 August 2007 9:50:41 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Australia ranks quite low on the scale for quality of education having experienced the system first hand at the higher education level and being able to compare that with the US and UK systems. Education here is peddled off much like groceries stacked on store shelves – literally a buy one get one free deal! Couple that sort of mass merchandising with a poor system at the institution level for evaluating the quality of programs especially those for reviewing the quality of teachers and you have a recipe for long term stupidity for a significant majority. The system is nicely setup for a few here and the few like to keep quiet about it. After all, any form of parity would increase competition and that’s not a good thing. Seriously – why do you people bother? Just go to the beach and do what you’re world renowned for doing – talking a lot, being lazy, and getting drunk.
Posted by pricewatcher, Tuesday, 7 August 2007 10:30:45 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
HRS is deadly.

He pounces on Mercurius Goldstein's comment that Geoffrey Robertson had made some remarks supportive of one of the themes in the new book, "The Stupid Country: How Australia is dismantling public education".

HRS is breathless to tell us that Geoffrey Robertson’s wife has written a book called “How to Murder your Husband (and other handy household hints)” [in fact it’s not “Murder” but “Kill” – but who wants to be pedantic?]

From that HRS concludes that ‘…students will be forced to read the book “Puberty Blues” [also by "Robertson’s wife"], knowing that the author is feminist and has also written a book on how to kill their father.’

As one reviewer of this work of fiction says (yes it’s a novel by Kathy Lette) ‘the book is pure chick lit for the thirty- and forty-something crowd, with a lot of laughter thrown in to counterbalance the deadly accurate reflections of nuptial life. …Not a deep or memorable book by any means, it is nevertheless a good book to throw at your husband (be it figuratively or otherwise) when the going gets tough.'

What has Kathy Lette – her comic novel or her marital connection – got to do with this OLO book review?

HRS obviously sees the connections as he slides from fiction to farce: ‘So the public schools should act as a check and balance on the private schools and vice versa. After all, we don’t want children being brought up in Marxist/feminism, and believing that their father should be murdered.’

I wish someone would throw a copy of "How to Kill your Husband" at HRS…No, better still, throw a copy of "The Stupid Country". It might be more deadly.
Posted by FrankGol, Tuesday, 7 August 2007 11:58:01 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
As someone who had a less than adequate education in the "area" schools of South Australia, often taught by teachers who had only studied a year beyond the subject matter they were teaching and with no hope of reaching university entrance standard at such schools, I feel we should welcome the increase in numbers attending private schools. Why? Because the cost to the government should decrease. Private schools are subsidising the state system. There should be more money to spend on state schools.
Unfortunately the states have abused this with a "the Coalition is subsidising private education by funding it and not state schools" argument. This is nonsense and the politics of envy and greed at work yet again. It also makes the quite unwarranted assumption that everyone who sends their child(ren) to a private school is wealthy.
If every private school in Australia was closed tomorrow and the taxpayer had to pay the full cost of educating every child then the system would collapse completely. The states know this, they also know they could not fund a reasonable level of education for all but the economics of the situation is lost on most Australians.
The idea that state schools are "on fire" is ridiculous. There are excellent state schools and bad private schools and vice versa. There are excellent schools with few facilities and bad ones with many facilities.
But, if we recognised that, there would be no book and less for the states to complain about.
Posted by Communicat, Tuesday, 7 August 2007 12:25:22 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
pricewatcher, if you're a product of the vaunted overseas education systems, and all you can do is prattle stereotypes and insult nationalities in response to the article, perhaps the Australian system isn't so bad in comparison after all.

Ultimately, I tend to think our system is indeed far less stringent than many overseas nations, such as say, Japan.
Much of the issue is indeed culture, though I suspect our teaching system isn't so far divorced from the UK - after all, there is a strong push to poach Australian educators to teach there.
Posted by TurnRightThenLeft, Tuesday, 7 August 2007 1:22:34 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Sniff, Sniff pricewatcher.
Do I smell whingeing Pommie?
Posted by Goddess, Tuesday, 7 August 2007 2:25:04 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Frank Gol
A very violent posting from you.

Maybe you have read Katthy Lette already, and now you want to throw things and kill.

The article is on democracy, and to maintain democracy, there has to be checks and balances structured into the system. Education is very important in democracy, but if given a chance, education systems can be manipulated by those who may want to throw things and kill.

So to avoid that, parents should have a choice as to where they send their children.

For example :- If parents form a belief that a school wants to teach their children to throw things and kill, or the school wants to teach their children to be Marxist or feminist, then the parents should be able to put their children in another school. That would be an imporatant part of democracy.
Posted by HRS, Tuesday, 7 August 2007 2:44:36 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Hrs, a 'hard-hitting' posting I would have thought rather than 'violent'. Sticks and stones may broke your bones, but words...

Now give us again the connection between Kathy Lette's comic novel and a review of education text, "The Stupid Country".

Pat Barker's novel, "Border Crossing" (also a set text) wasn't at all about asylum seekers you know. But the violence is strong! What do they say about book titles and content?

You say: "...if given a chance, education systems can be manipulated by those who may want to throw things and kill." Can you give one single piece of evidence that any part of the Australian education system is in any danger - or ever has been - of being "manipulated by those who may want to throw things and kill". Of course you can't. It's a figment of your very infertile imagination.

Can you give me one single snippet of evidence of any school in Australia where parents have formed "...a belief that a school wants to teach their children to throw things and kill?

Can you name any school in Australia which "...wants to teach their children to be Marxist or feminist"?

Now why don't you go back to the article - or better still read the book under review - and respond to the issues raised rather than taking off on some weird side track?
Posted by FrankGol, Tuesday, 7 August 2007 8:21:26 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Communicat, every one of your misconceptions about funding for state and private schools are comprehensively refuted in a single chapter of the book (Ch.7, pp.114-140).

The authors can explain it better than I, but in summary, if every private school in Australia were closed tomorrow, then public schools would be awash with funds, because they are funded based on the number of enrolments at their school.

Every time a child drops out of a public school, that school loses per-head funding for that child. However, as you can imagine, the marginal cost decrease in a school's running costs is basically nil, yet the school loses approx $8K-$11K per year, depending on the school's individual circumstances. That's about 15% of one teacher's salary the school loses for a single child's lost enrolment. Lose seven children, lose a whole teacher's salary...

Conversely, if the school enrols one extra child, they get about $8K-$11K extra funding that year, but the school's marginal running cost increase is basically nil. Gain seven children, you can afford a new teacher...

At around $8K-$11K in funds per child, I can promise you public schools would welcome back every single enrolment with open arms.

Also, taxpayer costs wouldn't increase substantially, since the money's allocated now - taxpayers already fund an estimated $8K per annum for each "private" enrolment, based on DEST and State govt. figures. And the states have to fund state schools out of GST revenue, which wouldn't increase - so the bucket of taxpayer money involved won't change. Indeed, as public school enrolments have dropped, State governments have been closing schools and re-allocating the money elsewhere - so sure they'd have to switch it back to schools, but the overall tax take doesn't change.

Plus, many private schools currently make free or next-to-free use of state bureaucracies for their external examination marking and curriculum services. Switching those students to public schools wouldn't increase the cost of those services - they're already payed for by the taxpayer.

However if you'd prefer your opinions to remain untrammelled by facts, feel free to ignore this post, and the book.
Posted by Mercurius, Tuesday, 7 August 2007 10:10:45 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Inspired by HRS' helpful exposé of the pernicious and obvious links between Puberty Blues (1979) and Geoffery Robertson's speech (2006), I have followed the entire web of conspiracy, and can now advise that our current school curriculum was written by Kevin Bacon, the Illuminati, the Wiccan Womyns' Basket-weaving Collective, and the Islington branch of the Australian Communist Party (now defunct).

As for the bizarre meditation on schools that teach people "to throw things and kill", I am in truth investigating reports of a prestigious Sydney independent Christian school at which a senior member of the school executive warned the assembly that France's new President Sarkozy is an 'Antichrist', because he is Catholic.

It's good to see such rational checks and balances in place against our Marxist public schools, yes?

HRS, I was taught about economic rationalism and free market economics in Year 11 at a public school, in the same year as the Berlin Wall fell. Perhaps you didn't get the memo, but the cold war ended a generation ago, the Reds aren't under the bed, and the horse you are flogging is long dead.
Posted by Mercurius, Tuesday, 7 August 2007 10:30:20 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
If Mercurius & others interested in education in a "democracy" want opinions to be "trammeled" by facts, and students to be invited to consider the evidence and form their own responses, they should present the following facts to their colleagues and students.

Note that they have been submitted to numerous reporters and editors, most recently to Sam North & his Fairfax colleagues after Paul Sheehan’s candid observation that “the media's grip on the political debate is never relaxed”. To ask why that grip is still not relaxed, call the SMH on 02 9282 2833 & ask for Sam or the newsdesk.

The following undisputed facts are a few that electors must grasp and understand for change of Commonwealth MPs to be democratic and lawful.

On 5 February 2003, uncertainty as to the meaning of “vote for”, as it refers to the conduct of elections held under the Commonwealth Electoral Act, was agreed without dispute or objection before five of the seven Justices of the High Court of Australia. http://www.austlii.edu.au//cgi-bin/disp.pl/au/other/hca/transcripts/1998/S126/2.html?query=S126/1998

The above uncertainty was in answer to whether voters can be compelled to “vote for” candidates that they do not wish to “vote for” and is still unsettled despite several subsequent attempts to get appropriate officials, including the parliament, court officers and judges to deal with it.

In 1920, after official errors made him uncertain that a majority of intending voters would have “voted for” Edwin Kerby, High Court Justice Isaacs voided Kerby’s 1919 election. http://www.austlii.edu.au//cgi-bin/disp.pl/au/cases/cth/HCA/1920/35.html?query=Kean%20v%20Kerby

In his reasons for the above judgment, Justice Isaacs disclosed his understanding of “vote for” by his use of “or” in “evidence as to the intention of those electors to vote for the one or the other candidate”. His “those” were electors disenfranchised by what he called “a great number of official errors”
Posted by Humble Hack, Tuesday, 7 August 2007 11:18:04 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
One of the annoying thing after a well-considered article is the trail of blog responses which stray further and further from the essential purpose of the article, as people saddle up their hobby horses to enter the fray, any fray.

Notwithstanding the merits or otherwise of "The Stupid Country", Mercurius' review is a gem - so very well crafted. The analogy with the fire is terrific and Mercurius is spot on when he refers to to people shouting "fire".

One could argue that there are just as many making artificial smoke which has successfully managed to obscure the real issues.

So all power to your pen, Mercurius.
Posted by bunyip, Wednesday, 8 August 2007 10:22:54 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
CJ. Morgan,
Are you a comic, or just someone who wants to throw things and kill.

Mercurious,
I have also investigated a number of public schools, such as the public school that called its Shakespeare course “The Literary Canon :- Just dead White Males”. That school was a highly feminist school that did not want males, and there was continuous devaluing of the male gender within the school, and the boys were being pressured to leave the school early and get a trade job, while the girls were being pressured to go to Universities.

I have also made complaints to several Universities regards the syllabus of a number of their courses that maligned the male gender and never said anything positive regards the male gender. Those courses were total discrimination, and I believe a part of a system to remove males as much as possible from the education system

The spending of money on schools is totally meaningless unless it is clearly defined what the education system is trying to achieve. In fact the definition of education seems to be becoming more vague in time, and I have even heard teachers say that education should be an “experience”, rather that talk about whether or not the students actually learn anything.

If it not clearly defined what schools are supposed to be doing, then money spent on schools eventually becomes a waste of money, and it is also likely that that there will be people who will attempt to get into the education system so as to manipulate the minds of the young, and use the education system as a political tool (but a political tool for themselves and not for the common good).

In the mean time, parents should definitely shop around before enrolling their children in any school, whether it be a public or a private school. They should ask many questions of the principals and definitely ask what is being taught at the school, and also ask what the students actually learn (as there can be a difference).

That is definitely a part of the democratic process
Posted by HRS, Wednesday, 8 August 2007 11:00:34 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Bunyip, & others invoking "democracy" in their posts

We are commenting on a review of Chris Bonnor and Jane Caro's book subtitled "are we trashing the education system that helped build Australian democracy?". We may disagree what the "essential purpose of the article" is. After all that purpose was in the mind of Mercurius, and who are we to discern it?

The essential purpose of my post was to let readers examine evidence relevant to the subtitle. Do you each think that evidence is relevant?

If so please say so & if not please post reasons. Thankyou.
Posted by Humble Hack, Wednesday, 8 August 2007 11:53:36 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Ah Mercurius I wondered when someone would come up with the arguments you posted.
Unfortunately the book is based on false economic premises - it has to be or there could be no book. The book has a political point to make.
Yes,it could be argued that the burden of cost would just shift - but shift a load too much and it can scatter across the highway, cause accidents and leave a mess to be cleared and, if people and animals are involved cause death and injury.
The cost burden of educating all children in the state system would be too high for the taxpayer to handle, unless of course you are prepared to lower standards. (Look at what happened to the 'mainstreaming' of children with special needs...governments around the country were delighted by this demand...it saves them a packet and the standards of care for this group continue to go still lower.)
Posted by Communicat, Wednesday, 8 August 2007 2:29:38 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Communicat - can you provide figures to back your claim that the cost of educating all of Australia's children would be too great?

Quite frankly, I'm skeptical.

I've always considered education to be among the prime responsibilities of government - it's all about priorities. Other nations have managed, why can't we?
We are after all, supposedly in a time of an economic boom...

Besides - as it stands, we still give an enormous amount of subsidy to the private sector. Wouldn't it then make more sense to make those who send their children to private schools get less funding? If the cost is indeed as you have indicated, then a pretty persuasive argument could be mounted that more is therefore needed for the public education sector...
Posted by TurnRightThenLeft, Thursday, 9 August 2007 10:01:20 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
HRS, your exhortation to check out different public and private schools is commendable. If only all parents were so diligent.

Since you see it as an essential building-block of democracy to have parents involved in the process of choosing the school, may I ask whether your definition of "democracy" extends to the children? And does the community around a school have any democratic say in whether they want a large congregation of a particular group of kids plonked in their midst? After all, private schools can open pretty much wherever they like and enrol their own selection of children...should the neighbours get a "look-in", so to speak?

Everyone has their own appetite for democracy - but in everybody's definition, there's always some people who somehow get excluded from the "demos". Hmmmmm.

In addition, what effect do you think it has on a diverse democratic society like Australia, for large numbers of our children to be educated in little cocoons of like-mindedness – where they rarely have contact with anybody who doesn't share their religious, cultural, linguistic or socioeconomic background?
Posted by Mercurius, Thursday, 9 August 2007 6:28:09 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Turn Right Turn Left, I regret to say that you're wasting your time.

As I noted in the review, the book most likely won't change people's preconceptions on this issue, and Communicat has proved me right.

Perhaps it will be for future generations to examine how Australia lost the value of a free, secular and tolerant education system, because we were too busy counting the cost.
Posted by Mercurius, Thursday, 9 August 2007 6:31:17 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
HRS

I have yet to come across a school that requires its students to read 'Puberty Blues'.

And I think you are a little bit confused about the agenda of the girl's school teaching unit.

'Dead White Males' is a play written by David Williamson. He also wrote the screenplay for 'Gallipoli'.

In 'Dead White Males', some of the characters are postmodern representations of characters in Shakespeare's 'The Taming of the Shrew'. Therefore, the two plays are compared and contrasted.

There's no sinister agenda there HRS.
Posted by Liz, Thursday, 9 August 2007 7:54:51 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Liz,
“Puberty Blues” has been on required reading lists of various high schools for years.

The title “The Literary Canon – Just Dead White Males” was applied by a public high school to a course in Shakespeare, although hardly a title to motivate boys to want to learn Shakespeare, and I believe that was the intention when the course was so titled
Posted by HRS, Thursday, 9 August 2007 9:56:32 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
And then there was the private school that cautioned its students not to associate with athiests, agnostics or public school students because they would introduce them to drugs and crime.

There are stupid people doing stupid things in all kinds of schools, both public and private, and there always will be. The discussion here ought to be about the long term consequences for our future in a globally competitive world where we are way out on a limb compared to other OECD countries to the extent our school achievement (or lack thereof) is linked to social class.

Stephen Schwartz the new VC of Macquarie Uni is an American - they never fail to be horrified by our schooling system and the way it entrenches privilege and underprivilege. In today's SMH, he has just announced that his Uni will institute an aptitude test for kids seeking entry because he is afraid they are missing out on talent because so many of the kids getting in are there simply because they have parents who could afford school fees and coaching, rather than because they had actual talent. He may also be conscious of the ( at least 3) studies that have consistently shown that, once they get to the more level playing field of uni, kids from public comprehensive schools out-perform both their selective and private school peers. Could this be because they have been taught to think, rather than just pass an exam?
Posted by ena, Friday, 10 August 2007 12:05:28 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Hrs

I'd suggest the title of the unit was 'Literary Canon: Dead White Males', and you have added the 'just' for effect.

I haven't read 'Puberty Blues'. I'll have to put it on my list of must reads this year.

But I still haven't come across a school that 'requires its students to read' it.

But if it is on the list, what's wrong with the book? Have you read it?
Posted by Liz, Friday, 10 August 2007 6:24:51 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Ena,
You have hinted on the rock and the hard place. The private schools can become elitist, while the public schools can become Marxist/ Feminist.

To fix both problems then there should be performance pay for teachers and a common curriculum, which is exactly what the federal government is attempting to do.

But in terms of democracy, then I think there is far more democracy in the private schools than in the public schools at present. In a private school a parent can demand more for their dollar, but in a public school a parent can have virtually no say in what occurs in the school. About all they can do is go to a P&C meeting, and at those meetings there are often more teachers than parents, and the teachers can be quite militant and run the meetings anyway.

Liz,
Despite my mostly public school upbringing I can read, and the title of the course in Shakespeare was “The Literary Canon – Just Dead White Males”.

In most high schools, English is a compulsory subject for students in grades 11 & 12. So if someone wants to brainwash the students, they would of course concentrate on the English subjects, and this is why so many feminists are involved in English courses.

You can read “Puberty Blues”, although it is very feminist and attempts to portray women as being oppressed by surfies.

Of course surfies do oppress women, which is why so many women walk up and down the beach in tiny bikinis, or sometimes only ½ a bikini. And if you buy a surfing magazine, then every article in the magazine will be on “How To Oppress Women”, and not one article will be on surf, surfboards and surfing.

So you can read “Puberty Blues”, but also go to the beach to see all the oppressed women at the beach, and also buy and a number of surfing magazines, which are readily available from your local newsagency.
Posted by HRS, Saturday, 11 August 2007 6:15:16 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
HRS

You are simply out of your tree.
Posted by Liz, Saturday, 11 August 2007 8:43:25 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Liz, I'm reluctantly inclined to agree with you.

If HRS's assertions were even close to correct, our universities & apprenticeship positions would be chock-a-block with supposedly "brainwashed" Marxists & feminist kiddies. They're not. Not even close.

I've spent the last 4 years on a typical uni campus. The undergraduates were in nappies when the Berlin wall fell. Getting involved in Marxism would be like dressing up in their parents' clothes and listening to their Led Zep records - how daggy. About 50 out of 40,000 students go to "rallies".

As for feminism, the girls are getting ready for a career, the boys are getting ready for a career, the girls are getting ready to start a family 'one day, but I want to travel first', the boys are getting ready to start a family 'one day, but I want to travel first'. They're all forming relationships and breaking up, just like kids always have.

Really HRS, you need to stop jumping at shadows.

BTW, here's the list of English HSC prescribed texts in NSW. A very insightful and challenging selection:
http://www.boardofstudies.nsw.edu.au/syllabus_hsc/pdf_doc/hsc_english_poster_A2_0608.pdf

So HRS, what "brainwashing" is taking place with that list of texts? Are they hypnotising the kids and reading them revolutionary passages from Wuthering Heights?

Also, as demonstrated by his/her posts, HRS' definition of "democracy" seems to be limited to parents demanding things from schools in exchange for money. That's not a definition of democracy to be found in any political philosophy I know of. I'm sorry HRS, but demanding things in exchange for money is a plutocracy.

What about the children? What about the teachers? What about the local community? What about the people who don't have money? Where do they fit into your "democracy by purchase"?
Posted by Mercurius, Sunday, 12 August 2007 8:11:35 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Mercuius,

Liz would know. As a democratic and non-feminist teacher, she once said she doesn’t like the “men” in the education system. Ask her.

The situation is not ideal, but the situation is as follows:-

If a parent has children going to a private school, and the parent learns of something that they do not like, they can ask the school to do something about it, because they are paying money.

If a parent has children going to a public school, and the parent learns of something that they do not like, the parent can do naught.

Going to a P&C meeting is normally a joke, and in states such as QLD, going to the local member is normally a joke also, as the state is now run by a highly centralised bureaucratic system called the Premiers Office (that employs more journalists than the Courier Mail and depends on brainwashing the public).

So it is not ideal, but a parent with children going to a private school and paying money can have much more say than any parent with children going to a public school.

Also have a look at the US university system, and wonder why various universities are now on recruitment drives to attract both male students and also male lecturers back into their Universities.
Posted by HRS, Sunday, 12 August 2007 11:58:31 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Since I haven't been following this thread, I only just came across this weird post from HRS:

"CJ. Morgan,
Are you a comic, or just someone who wants to throw things and kill."

Since I hadn't posted anything here, I found that comment to be more than a little odd, so I continued to read the thread, with mounting amusement. I subsequently came across this from Liz:

"HRS

You are simply out of your tree.".

I, like Mercurius, am reluctantly inclined to agree with her.
Posted by CJ Morgan, Sunday, 12 August 2007 12:49:40 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
HRS,
On Wednesday, I pleaded with Bunyip, & others invoking "democracy" in their posts to examine evidence [in my Tuesday post] relevant to the subtitle "are we trashing the education system that helped build Australian democracy?" and to say if that evidence is relevant.

I fear you and the others have invoked the word "democracy" without examining the evidence. Could it be you were and still are, a victim of a "brainwashing the public" that began in school, whether funded by tax-payers or parents?
Posted by Humble Hack, Sunday, 12 August 2007 12:54:44 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
C.J Morgan,
Like Liz, you appear to be highly democratic and non-feminist, and also highly articulate and very capable of expressing yourself.

Humble Jack,
Here is an example of democracy in the education system. A book was published by the NSW education department, but the book was banned and was not able to be distributed.

Very democratic, considering the book was printed with taxpayer money.

http://www.smh.com.au/news/National/Censored-the-boys-own-manual/2005/05/02/1114886318639.html

Also note the bumper stickers available from this site, all funded by the taxpayer.

http://www.women.qld.gov.au/?id=48

Put the 2 together, and make up your own mind about democracy.
Posted by HRS, Sunday, 12 August 2007 2:05:24 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
HRS,
You seem to have missed my point in asking you you were and still are a victim of "brainwashing the public" that began in school, whether funded by tax-payers or parents.

Please examine the evidence in the following undisputed facts posted on Tuesday. In your words, put them together, and make up your own mind about the education system that helped build Australian "democracy".

On 5 February 2003, uncertainty as to the meaning of “vote for”, as it refers to the conduct of elections held under the Commonwealth Electoral Act, was agreed without dispute or objection before five of the seven Justices of the High Court of Australia. http://www.austlii.edu.au//cgi-bin/disp.pl/au/other/hca/transcripts/1998/S126/2.html?query=S126/1998

The above uncertainty was in answer to whether voters can be compelled to “vote for” candidates that they do not wish to “vote for” and is still unsettled despite several subsequent attempts to get appropriate officials, including the parliament, court officers and judges to deal with it.

In 1920, after official errors made him uncertain that a majority of intending voters would have “voted for” Edwin Kerby, High Court Justice Isaacs voided Kerby’s 1919 election. http://www.austlii.edu.au//cgi-bin/disp.pl/au/cases/cth/HCA/1920/35.html?query=Kean%20v%20Kerby

In his reasons for the above judgment, Justice Isaacs disclosed his understanding of “vote for” by his use of “or” in “evidence as to the intention of those electors to vote for the one or the other candidate”. His “those” were electors disenfranchised by what he called “a great number of official errors”
Posted by Humble Hack, Sunday, 12 August 2007 3:05:39 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
HRS

Never said what you said I said.

I'll speak for myself, if you don't mind.

AND you are NOT the spokes person for secondary school curriculum, you ignorant twat.
Posted by Liz, Sunday, 12 August 2007 10:02:51 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Must apologise for the 'ignorant twat' comment.

I'm just a little fedup with HRS bringing his agenda over to education.
Posted by Liz, Sunday, 12 August 2007 10:16:30 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Liz,
I a aware that you are a highly democratic, non-feminist and articulate teacher, but how the education department allows you to continue teaching, and how the education department allows you to be left in charge of children is beyond all levels of comprehension.

Humble Jack,
There is minimal voting in the education system. About the only voting rights a parent has is to vote with their feet and move their children into a private school, which many parents are now doing
Posted by HRS, Monday, 13 August 2007 12:10:19 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
HRS, can you please enlighten me as to what this comment was about:

"CJ. Morgan,
Are you a comic, or just someone who wants to throw things and kill."

As with much of what you post, it seems a little bit odd.
Posted by CJ Morgan, Monday, 13 August 2007 12:24:58 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
C. J Morgan,
It is obvious that I mistook you for a Frank Gol, which is not difficult.

It is interesting that you find my postings odd, when the amazingly articulate teacher Liz uses such abusive language, and in every dictionary I have looked in so far, one of the terms she has used in her abuse, has been described in each and every dictionary as being “vulgar”.

All the teacher training, student free days and teacher’s union meetings have done wonders for Liz, and more parents are now exercising their democratic rights, and moving their children into private schools, where the children may be able to get away from teachers such as Liz, and a higher level of standards are being applied.
Posted by HRS, Monday, 13 August 2007 2:22:11 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
C. J Morgan,
HRS writes to you: "It is obvious that I mistook you for a Frank Gol, which is not difficult."

Now that makes three of us totally confused. But at least you and I appreciate that we are confused - and it's not our fault.
Posted by FrankGol, Monday, 13 August 2007 7:00:26 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Indeed, Frank. I think I'll just take the confusion with you as a compliment, and not waste any time trying to fathom what it is s/he's on about.
Posted by CJ Morgan, Monday, 13 August 2007 7:19:37 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
HRS,

As I asked above, please examine the evidence in the above undisputed facts, such as the uncertain meaning of "vote for".

Surely you were taught to look at facts for yourself, not just accept or repeat opinions before relevant examining facts. You may believe that the meaning of "vote for" is certain, but the High Court disagrees.
Posted by Humble Hack, Monday, 13 August 2007 10:44:34 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
In Michael Moore's Sicko, Tony Benn (I'm pretty sure it was him) makes the following great remark "Democracy moved power from the wallet to the ballot." Being able to buy a "better" education for your children has nothing to do with democracy -people with means have been able to do that since Roman times. The great founding principle of democracy, surely, is that all children are entitled to a decent education regardless of who their parents are, in their own right as citizens. Having to rely on being lucky enough to be born to parents who are either able or willing to pay for you to get a decent start in life spells the end of real democracy, it seems to me.
Posted by ena, Tuesday, 14 August 2007 8:45:38 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
C.J Morgan and Frank Gol,
Maybe I’d have to communicate like Liz (the non-ignorant and non-feminist teacher) before you can understand me. I’d have to communicate by using abuse and vulgarity.

Humble Jack,
There is minimal democracy or voting in the education system. You get what you are given, and if you want “more”, then you have to pay for it.

Not good, but that is the way it currently is.
Posted by HRS, Tuesday, 14 August 2007 4:31:14 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
HRS

Just thought I'd let you know, considering you think so highly of me, and you are also so taken with private schools, that I am, infact, the product of a private school education.
Posted by Liz, Tuesday, 14 August 2007 7:24:10 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Liz,
You obviously went to the wrong private school. There is a choice available with private schools, but not much choice with public schools, and not much say either.

But if things get any worse in public or private schools, then a parent could always send their children to another country, where the children can't understand the language from the teacher.

Its not that ridiculous. I have heard of professors in US universities who have sent their sons and daughters to universities in other countries, rather than sending them to a US university. Australia will probably follow along the same path.
Posted by HRS, Tuesday, 14 August 2007 7:52:29 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
HRS

Well, I won't brag about my school.

Nevertheless, I am still a female teacher in a public school. You've got my 'vulgar', 'abusive', 'feminazi' hide cornered HRS.

Considering you are such an expert on me and my feminazi sisters (is Frankgoi a feminazi?), could you please send me your list of senior syllabus novels so that I can successfully implement my 'feminazi' propoganda?

Possibly you could send along a unit plan inclusive of feminazi ideology, so that I have step-by-step indoctrination methodology. I must have failed that subject in my 'teacher training' course.

For some reason I've been left out of the feminazi loop HRS, although you appear to be in the know.

Bu the way, do you have their number?
Posted by Liz, Tuesday, 14 August 2007 8:14:25 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Liz,
I have never once called you, or anyone else “feminazi” in any posting I have ever made. It is easy enough to check on that, (so please do).

In fact, I have previously said that you are a democratic, non-ignorant, non-feminist and articulate teacher, and in another thread, I have even referred to you as being “gracious”.

You can check on that also.

As a gentleman, I have now given you many compliments, and in return you have given me considerable abuse, and also called me a vulgar term, (that is defined as being “vulgar” by several dictionaries such as Meriam-Webster, Bartleby, Collins, Your Dictionary.com etc).

Hopefully this is not the latest form of democracy in the education system.
Posted by HRS, Wednesday, 15 August 2007 4:46:41 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
My apologies HRS. The term you use is not 'feminazi', but 'Marxist-feminist'.

Now if you don't mind, I'm finding you quite tiresome, so I'm not going to continue responding to your comments.
Posted by Liz, Wednesday, 15 August 2007 8:46:55 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Liz,
I am not troubling you. You post of your own choice, and you give abuse of your own choice.

I do not force you.
Posted by HRS, Wednesday, 15 August 2007 10:46:52 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
The following two links will be of significant interest to those following the discussion:

http://www.adogs.info/pr216.htm

and

http://www.adogs.info/pr215.htm
Posted by petal, Tuesday, 21 August 2007 12:22:08 PM
Find out more about this user Visit this user's webpage Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
  1. Pages:
  2. 1
  3. 2
  4. 3
  5. ...
  6. 6
  7. 7
  8. 8
  9. All

About Us :: Search :: Discuss :: Feedback :: Legals :: Privacy