Poland and its schools

[Ben No.3]

As you may or may not be aware, right now a rather.... Conservative party is in power in Poland. As of now, the polish government said it would want to introduce "patriotism" as a school subject, since "history" does "not educate the children enough in a patriotic spirit". What do we think of this?

 

 

 

Personally, I think it is disasterous. Patriotism on this scale easily leads to nationalism, and I regard nationalism as a very dangerous mindset to have. It is also very worrying that this is happening in a EU member state.

Edited November 20, 2016 by Ben No.3

[Ben No.3]

If anyone wonders about the sources:

http://mobil.n-tv.de/politik/Patriotismus-als-Schulfach-article184631.html

Sorry, I'm on the phone. Feel free to translate if you don't believe me. Google translate does an okay job

[BruceVC]

I am very concerned about the rise of right-wing influence in Poland, we have several Polish forum members so Im interested to hear from them  " why is the right gaining so much influence "  and also "  where is this all going for the future of Poland " ?

 

For example this anti-abortion bill was raised before Polish parliament but thankfully blocked 

 

http://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-37573938

[Meshugger]

Before you know it, Poland will demand it's rightly earned Lebensraum to the west and annex Germany.

 

I think that we can all get behind this.

[pmp10]

We could talk a lot about Poland and it's sorry state but I'd like to know one thing first:

Why have you dug up a 10 year old article to inform yourself about it's current state?

[BruceVC]

We could talk a lot about Poland and it's sorry state but I'd like to know one thing first:

Why have you dug up a 10 year old article to inform yourself about it's current state?

But we all acknowledge that the right wing is on the rise in Poland, that article is irrelevant ...I didnt even read it because its not in English

 

I would rather discuss how real or serious the right wing is in Poland if anyone has some insights ?

[Ben No.3]

We could talk a lot about Poland and it's sorry state but I'd like to know one thing first:

Why have you dug up a 10 year old article to inform yourself about it's current state?

Excellent question

Because I just heard a feature on how that developed on the radio, but I felt like I needed some sort of source. After all, that is a for some surely hard to believe story.

Edited November 20, 2016 by Ben No.3

[Ben No.3]

Anyway, maybe it's not all to bad after all.... Maybe German trade could benefit. We still have a lot of school books from the 30s and 40s, maybe we could adjust them a bit and then sell them to Poland.

[pmp10]

 

We could talk a lot about Poland and it's sorry state but I'd like to know one thing first:

Why have you dug up a 10 year old article to inform yourself about it's current state?

But we all acknowledge that the right wing is on the rise in Poland, that article is irrelevant ...I didnt even read it because its not in English

 

I would rather discuss how real or serious the right wing is in Poland if anyone has some insights ?

 

Irrelevant to you, but questionable source have let to quite a bit of western condescension which in turn fuels that right wing.

 

As for the right - it's real and it's serious. 

You should be able to tell by the populist party in government and their actions.

Few conservatives would tell you that constitution of their country is a mere guideline.

 

'Why' is far more complex but I'd say it mostly comes down to economic crisis during the reign of previous government.

That and slow but constant stream of left-leaning people leaving the country.

No reason to live poor if you can sacrifice your emotional attachments.

[Ben No.3]

Adding to that, I feel like there is also a reason why people (in general-I don't know if this also applies to Poland, but I'd guess so) usually rather resort to right extremism than left extremism: Right extremism is largely based of dogmatic thinking. That there is us, we are the best , and others want to take that away. Left extremism on the other hand is (often) based of Marx and Engels, and thus an economic theory that requires some time to fully understand. More so, you lack the "I am great", since the goal is to make everyone equal.

 

I see two reasons why right extremism is more popular than left extremism:

 

1. It's way of thinking is much more easy to understand and adapt, it is more mass-able to say so

 

2. It's much more pushed by immigration. If there are many immigrants and a lot of natives are poor, it is very easy to abuse that situation and blame the immigrants. Left extremism on the other hand blames the elite and the system, but it is often much more easy for people to blame someone who is not them.

[Guard Dog]

Adding to that, I feel like there is also a reason why people (in general-I don't know if this also applies to Poland, but I'd guess so) usually rather resort to right extremism than left extremism: Right extremism is largely based of dogmatic thinking. That there is us, we are the best , and others want to take that away. Left extremism on the other hand is (often) based of Marx and Engels, and thus an economic theory that requires some time to fully understand. More so, you lack the "I am great", since the goal is to make everyone equal.

 

I see two reasons why right extremism is more popular than left extremism:

 

1. It's way of thinking is much more easy to understand and adapt, it is more mass-able to say so

 

2. It's much more pushed by immigration. If there are many immigrants and a lot of natives are poor, it is very easy to abuse that situation and blame the immigrants. Left extremism on the other hand blames the elite and the system, but it is often much more easy for people to blame someone who is not them.

I disagree. Left wing extremism is a harder sell because the ideology of the left devalues the individual. Look at communism where all property, money, labor, everything is considered to be "communal" which really means no one owns anything, not even themselves. Small wonder that can only be enforced at gunpoint. It's contrary to human nature. The funny thing about the political philosophy spectrum is it in not linear. It's more like a U. The two extremes are closer to each other than either is to the mean. Right extremism I'd define as tribalism. The master race, the right religion, we're superior to them, that group is sub-human, etc. Neither extreme values the individual which I think is the best. The right and the left both consist of forced associations and rigid adherence to the rules of those associations. Associations should all be either free or loose enough to empower the wants and drives of the individual. I also disagree with Bruce in that patriotism does not give rise to nationalism. But it's not something that needs to be or even should be taught. And honest instruction of a nation's history should be accompanied with the suggestion to take pride in what is good about your country as well as acknowledge it's shortcomings. Take South Africa for example. It's past treatment of it's people during apartheid does not inspire national pride but it is also the country where the ruling class turned it's back on it's own power and gave up apartheid. That kind of thing is rare in the world and should be a source of pride for South Africans. I don't think patriotism needs to be taught. It's supposed to be organic.

 

But of course not all patriotism is good:

 

[Rosbjerg]

 It's contrary to human nature. 

 

While I'm not arguing for communism, I think it's interesting that you're arguing from a point of 10k years of history versus 2 million years .. Before agriculture, we speculate based on findings that personal properity was very very limited to a selcect few very personal items - and the tribe co-owned and shared all things.

 

So in fact, it would be more accurate to to say that communism is human nature - and we have deviated greatly from the norm in the last 0,5% of human history.

[213374U]

Generally, when someone tries to school the audience on "human nature", I immediately tune out. Unless it's Richard Dawkins and he's talking from a genetics-based ethology perspective. Then I just want to kill myself.

 

something something state capitalism something soviet communism something 

[Ben No.3]

Generally, when someone tries to school the audience on "human nature", I immediately tune out. Unless it's Richard Dawkins and he's talking from a genetics-based ethology perspective. Then I just want to kill myself.

 

something something state capitalism something soviet communism something

Hey come on...

Both systems are flawed. I'd say we should listen exactly and take the best of communism and capitalism into one

[Guard Dog]

OK, forget I said communism. Let's just say collectivism. Communism and Capitalism are economic systems. We're talking about how people behave.

 

If you want to compare communism and capitalism I really only have one question: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BIroRqO_BpM

[Ben No.3]

Let me answer none of them....

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

I hope I could clear things up

Edited November 20, 2016 by Ben No.3

[PK htiw klaw eriF]

 

It's contrary to human nature.

 

 

While I'm not arguing for communism, I think it's interesting that you're arguing from a point of 10k years of history versus 2 million years .. Before agriculture, we speculate based on findings that personal properity was very very limited to a selcect few very personal items - and the tribe co-owned and shared all things.

 

So in fact, it would be more accurate to to say that communism is human nature - and we have deviated greatly from the norm in the last 0,5% of human history.

"Human Nature" is determined by material conditions, a man living in a post-scarcity society would not have the same "nature" as an otherwise identical man living in feudalism. Using it as an argument to say one thing is more natural than the other is dumb because natural is dependent on what the enviorment is.

 

Blah blah muh culture blah blah commies blah blah watch this three hour molyneux video blah blah

 

Anyways just invade Poland like any good German would, it's not like it's that hard anyways.

[Ben No.3]

To be honest, it would be... Our army is in a disasterous state

[PK htiw klaw eriF]

Just do it.

[Guard Dog]

 

 

It's contrary to human nature.

 

While I'm not arguing for communism, I think it's interesting that you're arguing from a point of 10k years of history versus 2 million years .. Before agriculture, we speculate based on findings that personal properity was very very limited to a selcect few very personal items - and the tribe co-owned and shared all things.

 

So in fact, it would be more accurate to to say that communism is human nature - and we have deviated greatly from the norm in the last 0,5% of human history.

"Human Nature" is determined by material conditions, a man living in a post-scarcity society would not have the same "nature" as an otherwise identical man living in feudalism. Using it as an argument to say one thing is more natural than the other is dumb because natural is dependent on what the enviorment is.

 

Blah blah muh culture blah blah commies blah blah watch this three hour molyneux video blah blah

 

Anyways just invade Poland like any good German would, it's not like it's that hard anyways.

 

No, human behavior is dictated by conditions. Human nature is what it is. The enrichment and care of our families and ourselves is always first. If I'm busting by ass growing beans only to get the same portion of beans as that jerk who sits on his butt all day doing nothing then sooner or later (probably sooner) I'm going to say "to hell with you guys, I'm going to go live somewhere else where I can get the benefit from all my hard work growing these beans". 

[Pidesco]

If the current American situation has taught us anything human behavior is more like this:

 

"If I'm busting my ass growing beans only to get a much smaller portion of beans than that jerk who sits on his butt all day doing nothing then sooner or later (probably sooner) I'm going to put that guy in charge, and figure that guy is going to fight for my right to beans and allow me to get the benefit from all my hard work growing these beans".

[PK htiw klaw eriF]

 

 

 

It's contrary to human nature.

 

 

While I'm not arguing for communism, I think it's interesting that you're arguing from a point of 10k years of history versus 2 million years .. Before agriculture, we speculate based on findings that personal properity was very very limited to a selcect few very personal items - and the tribe co-owned and shared all things.

 

So in fact, it would be more accurate to to say that communism is human nature - and we have deviated greatly from the norm in the last 0,5% of human history.

"Human Nature" is determined by material conditions, a man living in a post-scarcity society would not have the same "nature" as an otherwise identical man living in feudalism. Using it as an argument to say one thing is more natural than the other is dumb because natural is dependent on what the enviorment is.

Blah blah muh culture blah blah commies blah blah watch this three hour molyneux video blah blah

Anyways just invade Poland like any good German would, it's not like it's that hard anyways.

No, human behavior is dictated by conditions. Human nature is what it is. The enrichment and care of our families and ourselves is always first. If I'm busting by ass growing beans only to get the same portion of beans as that jerk who sits on his butt all day doing nothing then sooner or later (probably sooner) I'm going to say "to hell with you guys, I'm going to go live somewhere else where I can get the benefit from all my hard work growing these beans".

Human nature is nebulous jargon that doesn't mean anything. If you're just saying self-interest is motivation for most then leave the spooks out of it and say it plainly.

 

I agree with your analogy by the way, but unfortunately the choice is between working your ass off to benefit some lazy jerk who somehow gets the product of your labor because he has a piece of paper that says he owns the land or starvation. Much as I wish I could simply move away, there are scarce few places on earth where a state isn't using its power to ensure the ruling class stays in power off the backs of everyone else. It's almost as if my self-interest is opposed to that of the lazy jerks.

[213374U]

Human nature is what it is. The enrichment and care of our families and ourselves is always first.

See, if you had said "survival", I would wholeheartedly agree. "Enrichment", however, means accumulating wealth, which in turn necessitates private property. That is a relatively modern concept. "Human nature", whatever the hell that is, predates any such concepts by ~200,000 years, which is how long ago the first anatomically modern humans (indistinguishable from you and me) appeared.

 

So, no, the right to private property is certainly not "natural". I assure you, nothing in my "nature" compels me to "enrich" myself at the expense of everyone else. I honestly feel sorry for you if that's how you regard yourself first, and everyone else next.

 

edit: I didn't mean for that to sound as condescending as it turned out, but oh well

Edited November 20, 2016 by 213374U

[imaenoon]

"Self-love, my liege, is not so vile a sin, as self-neglecting.”

[Darkpriest]

Ehh it's really not a rocket science... it's a push back vs overtly aggressive indoctrination on how people should think behave etc. coupled with increasing wealth disparity and disappointment that after 25years of transformation, a lot of people do not see benefit of it (even though they are richer, but really a jump from 50USD a month to 400USD a month, is not where they imagined they would be)

 

When there is no economic security and perspective, people tend to look for security in "tribal" type of community, which emphasize "us vs them" that allows them to find an easy culprit of their current condition.

 

People in this part of Europe do not like ideological leash forced from outside. It's not why the fought for freedom, to have it taken away. All of that, pushes people into idea that a strong, nationalistic state can make their life better.

 

It cannot, but I guess they need to feel the pain of it on their own ass. (Even though, they will most likely blame jews, masons, liberals, yeti and not themselves for this)

 

We have same issues as in more developed economies, but they are resonating more, as it's not what a lot of people imagined, when they signed up for capitalism

 

We have over 50% of working people earning less than 1,000 EUR a month gross, high taxes and ****ty state services. You are in top 5% if you are earning more than 2,500 EUR a month, which is basically nothing compared to money earned in Germany, Sweden, Norway, etc. (and simple people compare only on this level, instead of GDP, local costs, costs of the state etc.)

 

No middle class, all intelligence and high born families purged during World War two, who could basically carry over some higher value - country devastated to near 0, and then rebuild on communist lies, that simple worker is the highest value to society + cheating state and circumventing regulations was a mark of resourcefulness, and such people later started businesses, once transformation hit the country.

 

I could write a long essay, but basically PL needs to have 2-3 generations die out and then it has a shot at going back to normalizing society. That is, if the economic perspective would be a stable growth. But that's hardly possible with what people are being elected to create law.

Edited November 20, 2016 by Darkpriest