Enforcement and Education: A short rant

Quote: We already need help in schools because of all the PC crap and not enough defined rules that teachers (and parents for that matter) can inforce without being crucified for. No wonder our children are confused about societies boundaries.


For many individuals, “enforcement” is just a way to push back with more violence and anger. And, as has been shown through the example of History, violence begets violence. You may lay the blame for this on parents, and you may be right, but as teachers, we are here to change the societal example of violence, to show that violence isn’t necessary to achieve greater things, to show that understanding and compassion help build positive communities, to show all students that there is a happier and more stable world they can grow up in without ever resorting to enforcement; when a teacher or parent tries to enforce a rule, they only give the example that pushing your will over other people is absolutely fine. Now extrapolate that out on students who are not fitting in or have some serious pent-up anger inside them.

Enforcement is the refuge of the weak who need to push their will over others.

Student productivity decreases when class sizes increase because there is not enough one on one time for students and teachers. This one-on-one time is ultimately the deciding factor as has been proven,and can only be achieved in smaller classes and more teachers. Strict rules and reinforcement only alienate the students who neither understand nor relate to the rules. And the argument “but rules are rules and everyone needs to abide by them” holds no water in a multicultural environment where all students have different values and personal beliefs. The only rule in any classroom that all need toabide by is that we look after each other and respect each other’s opinions while sharing communally in our acquired knowledge.

Ownership

"I am convinced that no one loses anyone, because no one owns anyone. That is the true experience of freedom: having the most important thing in the World without owning it."

- Paulo Coelho

The only thing a person can ever – truly – own is themselves.

 
The idea of ownership is based on possession and means towards possessing, but the two are very different qualities. Possession is to acquire from without and to have a means of physical control over it, though that control may be tenuous depending on the object; ownership is to have full control and to relegate all influences to a lesser position. In this respect, you can never own me, because I relegate you to a lesser position; your law, your rules, your ideas are nothing but words that I choose – that I choose! – to allow to have an influence over me – nothing more.

A person may acquire material objects through financial means, they may say "I own these because I paid for them," but this is no different than a thief re-acquiring the same objects and saying "I own these because I stole them." In both cases, possession is this 'thing' that is referred to as 'ownership'.

True ownership has no acquisition. It simply exists. "I own this because I have absolute control over it, and nothing will ever change that." You can take all my possessions away from me, you can take me hostage, you can deprive me of my identified rights, but I will always have full control over the self, over my thoughts – free my hands and legs from these chains and this mind will determine what is done with them.

This even extends to what is called 'under duress' for it is still I in ownership of myself that makes the decision to carry the crime forward. Many would face death than commit the crime, others are little concerned with the crime and value self preservation first.

I guess there are those who would say that this is all self-evident and nothing to get excited about, but I still meet many people who cling to ideas and grievances that rule their world as though they are afraid that by relinquishing control over what they cant control, everything will fall apart. But control is so fickle and only ever subject to its own subjects, which seems self defeating in the long run. Control of the self is a given, and subject to itself is filled with its own choices.

Acknowledging Personal Tragedy

"Many people spend an inordinate amount of emotional effort on deluding themselves into thinking that they have not experienced any tragedy. They are afraid to acknowledge the sadness they feel because it can be all-consuming and interfere with normal social relations. In public, we are expected to swallow our sadness. We try not to cry or to express our sentiments too openly. This is part of a grand conspiracy. If everyone acknowledged the reality of tragedy, we would realise how painful life really is.

"I have never felt comfortable deluding myself into thinking that my pain isn’t so bad. If I feel a great loss, it gives me no comfort knowing that others have lost more, are more confused, or have had worse things happen to them. My feelings are my own, and I cannot compare them with other people’s feelings. My pain and yours will always be different. We don’t have any way of gauging its abundance. But ignoring it is nothing more than delusional." (p.123)

- Greg Graffin, Anarchy Evolution (2010)

.