Category Archives: education

The progression of the police state

“A society of free people will always have crime, violence and social disruption. It will never be completely safe. The alternative is a police state. A police state can give you safe streets, but only at the price of your human spirit. ”

These are the words of Alexander Shulgin in 1991, a name you may know as an expert in psychopharmacology. The full text of the lecture that this quote was taken from is linked below. I urge you to read it. He’s talking about the US war on drugs, but his words are strikingly relevant to the current “war on terror”. I do not post this for it’s words on drugs but rather as a mirror held up to the progression of society which is equally as applicable today as in 1991 when this was written.

Today, right now, our “leaders” are making an attack on our privacy, our right to expression, our right to communicate. David Cameron is seriously suggesting that the UK outlaw encryption and allow open monitoring of any and all of our communications, without the requirement for a court order. Does that fit the definition of a police state?

Don’t get me wrong, I understand that the security services need the ability to monitor, surveil, spy in the interest of national security, but not to offer the protection to the freedoms of the individual by requiring a court order to do so does, in my opinion cross the line into a police state and is disproportionate and dangerous, particularly if we allow politicians to decide who is surveiled and when. Politicians should only wield so much power and there should be protection against them using this power for their own gain.

There are so many parts of this text which are quote-worthy, but I will leave you with this.

“Let me ask each of you this simple question. What indicators would you accept as a definition of a police state, if it were to quietly materialize about you? I mean, a state that you could not tolerate.”

RIP Alexander Shulgin, 1925 – 2014.

http://www.psychedelic-library.org/shulgin2.htm

Black History?

My daughter’s school class talked about “black history” last week. They spoke about Martin Luther King and Rosa Parks. Now, whilst these people both have historically significant stories, is this not more American history?

I am puzzled why there appears to have been no mention of Africa and the common heritage of all African-descended peoples, why there was no mention of other signficant figures; there are plenty to choose from. Nelson Mandela, Malcolm X, Marcus Garvery, the list could go on, The aniversary of Halie Selassie’s famous “war” speech to the UN was on the fourth of this month.

Now I know, it’s only middle-school level and I can’t expect too much. However, the apartehied regime in South Africa, for example, was within my lifetime. Nelson Mandella was mentioned a lot in the news when I was young and the links between the regime in South Africa and the UK are arguably stronger than those between the UK and the USA. The same is true with Jamaica, being a former British colony. We also have a connection to India and hence to the life of Gandhi. Should black history not encompass more than just the USA; the majority of black peoples worldwide live outside of the USA.

I can’t help think that the school have paid lip-service to this part of the curriculm by providing a small snapshot of Black people in American culture. Perhaps if I lived in a more culturally-diverse area this would not be the case. I wonder if schools in more culturally diverse areas are more likely to provide a broader view of this subject. Now I know, all of this is probably not deliberate, the teachers probably have little knowledge of the subject matter themselves and even less time to research it. The lesson plan probably originated from a Google search which turned up american websites. However, should a broader view of this huge chunk of international history be more integrated into the school curriculm and by so doing understanding be cultivated, even in areas of lower cultural diversity?

Is the government’s “Bums on seats” approach to education damaging our children?

I’ve been thinking about the government’s decision to impose fines for non-attendance on parents and the tightening up of the regulations around when a child can be absent from school and I can’t help but think that this approach cannot be productive. We seem to be seeing a gradual but relentless erosion of the rights of the parent and the child in favour of having our children’s “bums on seats” in the classroom.

The government fails to recognise that education and learning is much, much, more than just learning to a pre-determined academic standard in a classroom. If, as parents, we have a responsibility to ensure our children receive an education it follows that we also have a right to have our say in what that education involves. We need to reclaim that right.

The decision by the government to put a blanket ban on term-time holidays and other trips is a case in point. For many families a holiday is their time to re-connect as a cohesive unit. With many parents working full time and children in school every day, families become disjointed; disconnected from each other. Holidays have huge emotional and educational benefits, as the family experiences different environment and cultures as a joined-up unit. It is a time for parents to enjoy time with their children and a chance for children to see their parents relaxing and having fun. A connected, close, family unit will help the child cope with stressful situations not just now but potentialy for life. These children will require less support from the system and potentially be less likely to be involved with the police and other services. For this reason alone, it makes sense to encourage a cohesive family unit. For some it is simply impossible to take holidays during the official school holiday time because of the costs involved. Unscrupulous holliday companies have realised that they have a capitve audience and have inflated their prices so much as to make holidays at thise time unaffordable for many.

What about a family educational trip, for example a trip to one of the national museums in London? Many schools are so under pressure to deliver the national curriculm and so afraid of health and safety law that children simply do not go on trips such as this any more. Children should not have to miss out on the hugely rich, multisensory educational experiences avaliable on these type of trips because of this. What about reconnecting with our environment? Being out in “nature” is arguably one of the most important things our children can experience when they are young to develop a healthy respect for their environment when they are older.

If schools can’t offer these experiences, if they are not required to listen to our views as parents with regards to our children’s education, we as parents should be free to decide that these type of experiences are important to our children’s education and well-being. We should be able to choose to take our children out of school so that they can experience a richer, wider educational experience than our schools can offer.

It is often stated that some parents will not take attendance seriously if there is not a financial penalty for non-attendance. To proponents of this argument, I would ask, why does the child not want to attend school? Most children who do not want to attend school feel this way because there is a problem that needs adressing. Forcing parents to force children to attend school does not help their learning and it certainly does not help the relationship between parent and child. This approach can damage a child’s approach to learning for life and damage their relationship with their parents irreparably. Instead, we should ask, what is the school not doing to support and engage this child and make them want to attend school and interact with their peers? Perhaps we should be fining the school or the Local Education Authority for non-attendance as they have obviously failed in their duty to support, engage, nurture and encourage the growing minds that they are entrusted with.

What about periods of illness? I hear stories of schoools requiring ridiculous proof of children’s illness, sometimes so invasive that it could be considered as harassment. Schools should accept proof of ilness on the same basis as if you were off work. This implication that when children are off ill, the parent is lying and proof needs to be provided is simply unacceptable.

So, parents, let’s reclaim our rights and assert our moral responsiblity to do the best for our children. Our government needs to listen. We are not bad parents just because our children have time off of school. We as parents know what’s best for our children and we have a right to be listened to.