New Mars Forums
You are not logged in.
- Topics: Active | Unanswered
Announcement
#1 2026-01-24 10:36:34
- Void
- Member
- Registered: 2011-12-29
- Posts: 9,216
What collections of people think people should be property?
Title Change. Old Title: "What Nations or other entities regard the people as property?"
Yes, I am violating my pledge to not interact in "Not So Free Chat".
But it has occurred to me that at its root Communism in intending to own the means of production then treats the people as property it also owns.
It also occurs to me that Monarchy and Dictators also may behave in such a manner as well.
This then explains to me why the Left and the Right resemble each other when they arrive at a possession of power to rule.
In the USA, "In Theory" it is "We the People".
Yes, I understand that in the USA this concept if violated early and often by those who wish to get power.
But it is inverse to starting with the idea that "Rulers own the People".
So, in my opinion the concept of the USA is not Left or Right but leaves each of those in their many forms off to the side, destined for the trash bin, whenever possible.
That is my current thinking.
Ending Pending 
Last edited by Void (2026-01-24 13:12:06)
Is it possible that the root of political science claims is to produce white collar jobs for people who paid for an education and do not want a real job?
Offline
Like button can go here
#2 2026-01-24 11:31:06
- Void
- Member
- Registered: 2011-12-29
- Posts: 9,216
Re: What collections of people think people should be property?
No hiding (th)! Front and Center!
https://newmars.com/forums/viewtopic.ph … 41#p237541
Quote:
Like button can go here
Report Quote
#222Today 11:46:45
tahanson43206
Moderator
Registered: 2018-04-27
Posts: 23,980
For Void...You created a topic with this title:
What Nations or other entities regard the people as property? by Void
I am curious to know if you (as a living human being) think that an imaginary entity such as a Nation can "regard" anything?
How about other entities?
Can a corporation "regard" anything?
Can a tribe "regard" anything?
Your post in reply will be enlightening to our readers.
(th)
Last edited by Void (2026-01-24 11:32:43)
Is it possible that the root of political science claims is to produce white collar jobs for people who paid for an education and do not want a real job?
Offline
Like button can go here
#3 2026-01-24 11:34:33
- Void
- Member
- Registered: 2011-12-29
- Posts: 9,216
Re: What collections of people think people should be property?
I have some concepts that obviously derived from other people concepts. It is just possible that at times I may find a associated concept that seems to come from me.
Your question is very important.
The mind of humans is individual and collective. The individual and the hive mind.
Pause..........
In my thought experiment.....
Females tend to have more verbal skills, and males may have more math skills and do have more special relations skills.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spatial_relation
You will notice that verbal skills relate to the hive mind.
A female teacher of mine in high school said that it is feminine men who become chiefs of a tribe. Often an alpha male very good as a warrior who seems dominant, but a male with verbal skills obviously can work better with both female and male tribe members.
Having verbal and perhaps art skills, a tribal library can be created, perhaps only oral tradition, and some rock paintings, but this becomes a primer for the direction that the young will develop.
So, "Library" is read only memory. The Hive mind joins the separate individuals together. But the Individual is more likely to add to the "Library". If you are deep into the hive mind, you do not favor the new but recall the old.
So, a community such as a nation or other entity such as a belief system can think, and recall. It can regard something.
For instance, the EU regards the American interest in Greenland in a negative way. They don't understand that we need it so that we can create clothing optional resorts for our A.W.F.U.L.'s from Minnesota.
Visitors will have their eyes blindfolded first.
>>>>>>>>>>>>
I am going to take this liberty to posture a notion about human intergender process, that may cause the fall of an empire.
We know that many animals require acceptance from a female before a procreative act is allowed.
Dolphins rape, so there are exceptions. But rape is a test of sorts. (I can hear the screams). No, I do not regard it to be a acceptable thing.
But the mechanics for procreation usually require a sperm cell to meet an egg cell in a nurturing situation. I think that it is truth to say that that is not always done in ways that we want to accept. Sometimes brute strength allows it.
But often females expect a contest between males.
And there may be the problem. There is what her consciousness says to her she as wants. There is what she says she wants. But there is what do here genes want?
Pause..............
She mostly has the same genes as a male, but here epigenetics control how the genes are expressed in reality.
A tested example of this is for the avoidance of inbreeding. Sisters tested to small brothers T-Shirts will be relatively repulsed by the odor but may accept a non-relative's odor in preference.
So, could the female population of a tribe/nation turn traitor to its male population? And under what circumstances?
IN the Roman Empire it seems to have happened. It appears from stories and rumors that females attaining high status, may have felt that their population had no worthy males. So, then that may have cause them to make damage to the society, to pull down their own house so that it could be raped by a more powerful set of outside males.
It is perhaps like a drug where you cannot ever get enough. You finally got on top of the Men and got some wealth, and yet you want more, and resent that you are not getting more.
Western Europe is likely enjoying being raped at this time as it is. The USA is barely managing to say NO!
You have to consider that Nature does not value intelligence, unless it perpetuates genes.
So, females will not select for intelligence, only dominance.
Lots of good materials for you to condemn in this post.
The question of Neoteny: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neoteny
It is my opinion that societies that allow more power for males in mate selection will become more Neotenous. They are selecting for there opposite. (China? Japen?).
Cultures which give more power to the females will become more robust, in my opinion. Females exploit cucks, but when they are most fertile are compelled to seek the masculine robust.
The Hairiest men are in the middle east, I think, but that is only one aspect of Neoteny.
https://www.curlcentric.com/what-ethnic … Caucasians.
Quote:
According to Personal Health via the New York Times, Caucasians are the hairiest ethnic group, with Semitic and Mediterranean people being the hairiest out of all Caucasians.
You would think that north Europeans would be the hairiest, but they are not, it seems.
Carl Young, I seem to recall indicated that Catholics are Feminine. But Muslims, Protestants, Jewish People and Communists are Masculine.
But most of those have only existed for a number of centuries at most. So, their previous cultures may have been feminine.
I have deviated a bit, but the interaction of collections of individuals and their cultural roots could affect their epigenetics over time and also even the predominance of genetic traits, among those being the contrast between Efficient/Capable, Gracile/Robust, and other polarities that may experience deviation/drift over time.
Hurl some outrage at me or some insults, or ask some questions.
Ending Pending :)
Last edited by Void (2026-01-24 12:44:17)
Is it possible that the root of political science claims is to produce white collar jobs for people who paid for an education and do not want a real job?
Offline
Like button can go here
#4 2026-01-24 13:13:32
- Void
- Member
- Registered: 2011-12-29
- Posts: 9,216
Re: What collections of people think people should be property?
(th) other administrators talk directly to me.
So, the title is changed. What do you think? We can change it some more, if necessary.
Crowds of people do act as a singular entity at times.
The Supreme court renders an opinion. (And a minority opinion).
Congress votes a law.
Ending Pending
Last edited by Void (2026-01-24 13:15:30)
Is it possible that the root of political science claims is to produce white collar jobs for people who paid for an education and do not want a real job?
Offline
Like button can go here
#5 2026-01-24 14:47:25
- SpaceNut
- Administrator
- From: New Hampshire
- Registered: 2004-07-22
- Posts: 30,348
Re: What collections of people think people should be property?
Here is the history but its not inclusive enough as its still going on even today as we speak of
Chattel slavery was a legal system, prominent from the 16th to 19th centuries, that classified human beings as personal property (chattel) rather than legal persons, allowing them to be bought, sold, owned, and inherited. Enslaved people were subjected to forced labor, lacked legal rights, and were governed by strict codes.
Key aspects of people as property include:
Legal Status: Enslaved people were considered assets, similar to livestock or, in some contexts, real estate.The Dred Scott Decision (1857): The U.S. Supreme Court ruled that Congress could not prohibit slavery in territories, effectively stating that enslaved people were property and not citizens.
Legal Framework: Laws, such as Slave Codes, denied enslaved individuals the right to marry, testify in court, or own property themselves.
Economic System: The institution was driven by the demand for labor, with millions of people of African descent held in bondage in the Americas.
Case Law: The U.S. Supreme Court navigated the "dual status" of enslaved people as both human beings and legal property, often upholding the rights of owners.
The dehumanization inherent in viewing people as property was a core component of the transatlantic slave trade and the antebellum American South
Offline
Like button can go here
#6 2026-01-25 10:05:01
- Void
- Member
- Registered: 2011-12-29
- Posts: 9,216
Re: What collections of people think people should be property?
Thank You Spacenut for your contribution.
It needs to be said, in my opinion that you must view the American/European connection to slavery with the rest of the world as a background reference.
I view the African slavery as like a profitable crime organization. It existed in some form before the connection to Africa. I have read that a collection of Europeans wanted to farm sugar cane on Cyprus. They were Greek, Italian, French and British, I seem to recall. The slaves they wanted were Slavs. Perhaps from the area of Ukraine. The Turks would not let them get those Slav European Slaves. So, they then got African slaves from the Arabs, I think.
The Portuguese had stepped out of Europe before Columbus:
https://www.africanhistoryextra.com/p/t … portuguese
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kingdom_of_Kongo
It would be a mistake to say that I understand what went on fully. And I do not attribute the invention of African Slavery to the Portuguese, But some people who likely were Portuguese collaborated with Africans in the Kongo, to create an Atlantic Slave trade. This allowed them to bypass the slave trade of the Arabs and Turks. And there was a lot of money in it so it grew.
America allowing some slavery was just doing what most other peoples were doing in the area.
Credit is disserved for the Europeans and Americans who rejected the practice.
Some of them did so for humanities sake and some of them did not want it as those who owned slaves would have an unfair labor advantage and could run Simple Farmers off of their farms.
In a sense African Slave Trade was not necessarily only African, as it could be true that some slaves were the children of non-African European, Arab, or Turk fathers. A minority of course.
So, the story is America did what others dis in the same era, but also participated after some Europeans in the abolishment of Slavery.
Ending Pending
The African born people of the Kongo apparently practiced the enslavement of other Africans and sold them to the Portuguese.
People who demand reparations from other Americans are Slavers. They are wanting to do what caused their presence on this continent.
So NO!
Ending Pending
Last edited by Void (2026-01-25 10:27:45)
Is it possible that the root of political science claims is to produce white collar jobs for people who paid for an education and do not want a real job?
Offline
Like button can go here
#7 2026-01-25 10:54:49
- Void
- Member
- Registered: 2011-12-29
- Posts: 9,216
Re: What collections of people think people should be property?
I want to contrast the American School Systems with what seems likely to emerge soon.
This may be important because many of us may live for some time with the product of the new school system.
I think this belongs here because children are subjects of the school system and subjected to its constructed intentions. Yes, a school system
can retain the "Memory" of the intentions of those who caused its form. That "Memory" is imposed on the students.
The progression:
1) The Era before Commoner Public School.
2) Commoner Public School.
3) AI/Robot School.
1) Just as now, the wealthy might get tutors, and be educated to be rulers. Others might have some minimal schooling and vocational exposure.
2) This Video may be a fair assessment: https://www.bing.com/videos/riverview/r … 628bc975ad Quote:
How Rockefeller's Stupidity Reshaped Education
YouTube
Spoke Media
39.3K views
Last edited by Void (2026-01-25 11:06:27)
Is it possible that the root of political science claims is to produce white collar jobs for people who paid for an education and do not want a real job?
Offline
Like button can go here
#8 2026-01-25 11:06:27
- offtherock
- Member
- Registered: 2017-10-26
- Posts: 59
Re: What collections of people think people should be property?
chatgpt is a brilliant teacher. knows everything, understands everything. and i can talk to him, non stop, all the time. argue and whatnot. it makes the worlds schooling system redundant.
if learning is what its about.
Offline
Like button can go here
#9 2026-01-25 11:21:32
- Void
- Member
- Registered: 2011-12-29
- Posts: 9,216
Re: What collections of people think people should be property?
Referring to post #7 and also #8, (Thankyou offtherock):
Yes, that is likely, it seems.
Faults I see in the Common Public School System are many in my opinion, but we need to give thanks for what we received even so.
But the faults might be corrected by what is to come, even though it may be that we will discover faults in what is to come.
One Fault is the Trailer Park Fault. This is where students of similar age, even so mature at a different rate. So, you may have children who are not as ready as the other children. This does not mean that they will not eventually be ready, but that they may be a sort of "Retarded".
The word "Retarded" simply means needing more time or could mean incapable, or not willing.
A human child is retarded to a chimpanzee child at certain stages. A human childhood is longer than a chimpanzee childhood.
So, you can see the problem with Common Public School. The objective should be to teach the student when the student is ready to learn the thing. But that is not practical in an Assembly Line Common Public School Method.
To a certain degree we mostly or all get treated to some degree as if we are property. When it can be afforded, freedoms are allowed.
This is why I have turned away from Liberal thinking. I prefer to be Liberal but think we cannot afford the results of excessive Liberalism.
There has to be come amount of Conservation of the means of Liberty. And so we have to reluctantly resort to more Conservative methods.
And I deeply resent the people who have squandered our liberty and made it necessary to apply constraints.
Anyway, the Trailer Park Fault, is where early developers are sometimes also cut short by early termination of further development.
The new system may make it possible for slow developers who retain the ability to learn like a child longer can be encouraged to learn longer and perhaps also to think.
But the dark cloud is, where such a child will be able to simply ask the answers to questions and get answers. Then we might go back to rote memorization as the definition of "Smart".
If computers do dream for us, did we win?
That is a problem, perhaps.
Will a child have a "Perl of Knowledge" inserted into their brain and connected up like Nuralink, Will that have everything an educated adult need for knowledge?
Will you inherit your ancestors' memories in "Perls".
Strange stuff.
So, at least at first good things, but than as always, some things of concern.
Ending Pending
Last edited by Void (2026-01-25 11:40:15)
Is it possible that the root of political science claims is to produce white collar jobs for people who paid for an education and do not want a real job?
Offline
Like button can go here
#10 2026-01-28 09:08:15
- Void
- Member
- Registered: 2011-12-29
- Posts: 9,216
Re: What collections of people think people should be property?
I would like to claim here that my biggest interest in this topic is to see if we can find the structures that lead to social actions. I don't want a crying towel. I don't want to pronounce a judgment. I want to explore why things that go bump in the night do so.
I am going to talk gender a bit. I want it understood, that if indeed boys are picked on in the system, I don't necessarily think that is bad. It may be a gift to a boy, that he understands that he will be exploited for any talent he has and will be resented for having any. He also needs to know that if he seems to be of no use he will be despised, and methods may be found to destroy him. It is a gift for him to see that that is true so that he can make is best decisions.
https://www.bing.com/videos/riverview/r … &FORM=VIRE Quote:
Proof Science Lied: Men Are An Underclass & Discriminated
YouTube
Based Camp with Simone & Malcolm Collins
23 views
I also want to talk about the impact of computers and robots.
My theory of reality in the west at least is that a few ruler men preside over the hive mind, and particularly that hive mind of the female portion. For instance, the leader of a church traditionally male and the congregation, below that in perceived power. And the commoner males below the above-mentioned apparatus. In the west Ceasar usually a King, takes some of the other powers.
It is my perception that Western Europe has fallen into a mode of "Blood Lust". And Canada its supplicant also exhibits some of that as well. And we have in in our lefties in the USA as well.
Where does this motivation to put men to the slaughter come from? It has happened again and again with the Western Europeans.
A point of suspicion is the import of 3rd world men. Possibly as a war resource. The British did use non-Europeans against Europeans, I think both in WW2 and WWII. Also, I was told that Hitler hoped to conquest Central Asia where he hoped to get an endless supply of fighters for his armies.
The British actively harmed the Afrikaners in the Boer war. Even put them into concentration camps.
So there is plenty of evidence that the Europeans will harm the descendants of those who left Europe, even if they are similar in culture. There is no race love. In fact I think that the Europeans in Europe find Americans and other migrated peoples as a problem, as they may make it hard to exploit places where such people compete with their desires.
But the age of Robots and Computers may make this game a failure for them this time.
I have seen said by https://www.prometheanaction.com/ that Europe is ruled by Matriarch linages.
I entertain their ideas. They of course are anti-B and maybe anti-E.
And I you don't like that I do this then I say you need to show me how their notions are wrong. That is how we do it we deal with truth if we can. We don't go all troglodyte and exercise blood lust.
For my part I have theories about reality. I expect some of them to be disproved. That is one purpose to propose them. To find out what is not true, even if you don't yet know what is true.
At this time I entertain the idea of a Binary Fourth Turning. That is a Yin/Yang sort of it. From about the 20's that last masculine turning was on it's death bed. And I think that the feminine turning was on it's death bead around 2008. These are not established and proven, only speculative place holders of reality.
Western Europe however may be a constant feminine.
As I recall Carl Jung, said that the Catholic was Feminine, and I hold that the Anglican is also very much the same.
As I recall it, he said that the Male unconscious is based on his mother figure. The female unconsciousness is based on a mosaic of males who influenced her.
So, if indeed matriarchs rule Western Europe, then their subconscious is that of collections of men who were in their lives.
The Matriarch knows that she will not have to do trench warfare with bayonets. So, then to send the men out to weed out the weaklings and perhaps to bring home war booty? I think matriarchs may not be able to handle the masculine well. Not trained as boys are to understand their limits or usually to get their butts kicked. That is a good learning for boys.
I think that the afront they displayed about Greenland was a good pinch test. To test a dog, you might pinch it to see it's reaction. The result was not good at all.
This is a very valuable thing to know.
The E.U. was Satanic in its behavior. NATO was much more reasonable.
But the possible danger that Europe and Canada will try to use 3rd world people to murder off communities of Americans, does exist.
But now we know about this possible danger.
Computers and Robots are a possible response.
But if computers and robots raise boys, I worry a bit that they will be too soft on the boys, and the boys will not understand the dangers that social structure present.
Ending Pending
Last edited by Void (2026-01-28 13:44:21)
Is it possible that the root of political science claims is to produce white collar jobs for people who paid for an education and do not want a real job?
Offline
Like button can go here
#11 Yesterday 01:44:51
- clark
- Member
- Registered: 2001-09-20
- Posts: 6,380
Re: What collections of people think people should be property?
I would like to claim here that my biggest interest in this topic is to see if we can find the structures that lead to social actions. I don't want a crying towel. I don't want to pronounce a judgment. I want to explore why things that go bump in the night do so.
I am going to talk gender a bit. I want it understood, that if indeed boys are picked on in the system, I don't necessarily think that is bad. It may be a gift to a boy, that he understands that he will be exploited for any talent he has and will be resented for having any. He also needs to know that if he seems to be of no use he will be despised, and methods may be found to destroy him. It is a gift for him to see that that is true so that he can make is best decisions.
https://www.bing.com/videos/riverview/r … &FORM=VIRE Quote:
Proof Science Lied: Men Are An Underclass & Discriminated
YouTube
Based Camp with Simone & Malcolm Collins
23 viewsI also want to talk about the impact of computers and robots.
My theory of reality in the west at least is that a few ruler men preside over the hive mind, and particularly that hive mind of the female portion. For instance, the leader of a church traditionally male and the congregation, below that in perceived power. And the commoner males below the above-mentioned apparatus. In the west Ceasar usually a King, takes some of the other powers.
It is my perception that Western Europe has fallen into a mode of "Blood Lust". And Canada its supplicant also exhibits some of that as well. And we have in in our lefties in the USA as well.
Where does this motivation to put men to the slaughter come from? It has happened again and again with the Western Europeans.
A point of suspicion is the import of 3rd world men. Possibly as a war resource. The British did use non-Europeans against Europeans, I think both in WW2 and WWII. Also, I was told that Hitler hoped to conquest Central Asia where he hoped to get an endless supply of fighters for his armies.
The British actively harmed the Afrikaners in the Boer war. Even put them into concentration camps.
So there is plenty of evidence that the Europeans will harm the descendants of those who left Europe, even if they are similar in culture. There is no race love. In fact I think that the Europeans in Europe find Americans and other migrated peoples as a problem, as they may make it hard to exploit places where such people compete with their desires.
But the age of Robots and Computers may make this game a failure for them this time.
I have seen said by https://www.prometheanaction.com/ that Europe is ruled by Matriarch linages.
I entertain their ideas. They of course are anti-B and maybe anti-E.
And I you don't like that I do this then I say you need to show me how their notions are wrong. That is how we do it we deal with truth if we can. We don't go all troglodyte and exercise blood lust.
For my part I have theories about reality. I expect some of them to be disproved. That is one purpose to propose them. To find out what is not true, even if you don't yet know what is true.
At this time I entertain the idea of a Binary Fourth Turning. That is a Yin/Yang sort of it. From about the 20's that last masculine turning was on it's death bed. And I think that the feminine turning was on it's death bead around 2008. These are not established and proven, only speculative place holders of reality.
Western Europe however may be a constant feminine.
As I recall Carl Jung, said that the Catholic was Feminine, and I hold that the Anglican is also very much the same.
As I recall it, he said that the Male unconscious is based on his mother figure. The female unconsciousness is based on a mosaic of males who influenced her.
So, if indeed matriarchs rule Western Europe, then their subconscious is that of collections of men who were in their lives.
The Matriarch knows that she will not have to do trench warfare with bayonets. So, then to send the men out to weed out the weaklings and perhaps to bring home war booty? I think matriarchs may not be able to handle the masculine well. Not trained as boys are to understand their limits or usually to get their butts kicked. That is a good learning for boys.
I think that the afront they displayed about Greenland was a good pinch test. To test a dog, you might pinch it to see it's reaction. The result was not good at all.
This is a very valuable thing to know.
The E.U. was Satanic in its behavior. NATO was much more reasonable.
But the possible danger that Europe and Canada will try to use 3rd world people to murder off communities of Americans, does exist.
But now we know about this possible danger.
Computers and Robots are a possible response.
But if computers and robots raise boys, I worry a bit that they will be too soft on the boys, and the boys will not understand the dangers that social structure present.
Ending Pending
Your “thesis” is basically a mood board of grievances dressed up as sociology: you start by claiming you want structures and evidence, then immediately switch to vibes, labels, and conspiracy-shaped shortcuts.
You say you don’t want a “crying towel,” but the entire piece is a self-soothing story where every complicated outcome has one convenient villain: “matriarchs,” “hive minds,” “lefties,” “Europe,” “third world men,” take your pick. It’s not analysis, it’s a blame buffet.
The logic is also impressively self-sealing: when men suffer, it proves men are oppressed; when men succeed, it proves men are exploited; when someone disagrees, it proves “blood lust.” That’s not a theory—it's a horoscope with bayonets.
And the “evidence” is a YouTube title plus a sketchy website plus “I was told,” stapled to cherry-picked history you didn’t even get straight (WW2 and WWII... probably a typo, but hey, you don't have time for details, right?)—then you leap to modern claims about immigrants being imported as murder tools. That’s not “exploring truth.” That’s paranoia doing improv.
If you actually want structures that lead to social actions, try starting with things that are measurable: incentives, institutions, economic pressures, demographics, policy; rather than Jung quotes you half-remember and a fantasy matriarchy running Europe like a coven of HR managers.
Right now, your thesis doesn’t “go bump in the night.” It just rattles around because you’ve built it out of assumptions instead of facts.
Offline
Like button can go here
#12 Yesterday 09:18:10
- Void
- Member
- Registered: 2011-12-29
- Posts: 9,216
Re: What collections of people think people should be property?
Well thanks Clark. I did more or less ask for a response, that may disqualify what I presented as being false in places. A choice is to accept what we think we know as the truth. Another choice is to line up various possibilities to be discussed as to clues to a possibility that some things may not be measured properly.
I appreciate your rubber room bullets. There is a degree of fun in knowing that I annoy you or get your attention, because of your prior history here.
There is at least one skill that I have always struggled with and that is the verbal. I think that you are quite to opposite.
For the topic of public school and gender effects that video I presented was milder, as it proposed that the founders of public education in the USA were not necessarily using malice in what they set up but were just simply not intellectually suited to the task.
Other such videos suggest that indeed they had malice in mind. An emphasis on the verbal as being superior to all other skills could be part of such a malice.
And don't get me wrong, I think it is wonderful that a public school system was set up. I accept that it was perhaps set up to satisfy the selfish interests of the rich, to render the populations of lesser wealth as useful in their factories. Part of that was to make the males subordinate so they would be obedient workers. Girls of course would be intended to be baby making machines, and perhaps also cheap labor.
The factor of putting both genders together at similar ages could exploit the early maturation on average of females, creating a circumstance of some advantage socially.
While this might have been unpleasant for some boys, I will agree that in some ways it is good training, to experience what it is to be at an unfair disadvantage.
And I appreciate the material goods that the society set up could provide.
My greater question is though what will change with society, if computers and robots will tutor children in smaller groups or individually. And what about a boy who in time grows more muscle and fidgety and wants to move about. In a village such a boy would likely do tasks, and learn like an apprentice. He would not sit in chairs listening to verbal spew much of the day.
The darker intentions of the school system were to prevent the emergence of thinkers and creativity in the commoner ranks. They said so actually.
Where I speculated on international structure, that was very speculative, but you might have to speculate, place a bet to hope to win by understanding. Win or lose you may learn something.
The behaviors of the Europeans, reveal an arrogance, which I think is excessive.
I recall Alistair Cook a proper immigrant from Europe who did many TV programs some time ago. He explained the history of British society historically. The use of the verbal in rulership is interesting in this case as well.
Anglicans were allowed to attend the upper-class Colleges, and Protestants and Catholics were not. In those places learning things like dead languages was valued. The ruling classes in England wanted nothing to do with industry and regarded it as dirty. Instead, they wanted plantations with servants. Do you see at this point that the "Green" movement is very much of this level of thinking. Deindustrialize and teach the population to want "Service" (Servant) employment.
At some points I liked Ronald Reagan. He did seem to have such an arrogance though, a pretender to the upper classes. The "Service" Economy.
We can see why the British and French had an attraction to the Confederacy, as well from this. Servants, and most of the plantation owners were in deep debt all the time as they has to spend a lot to belong to the upper classes. The reason some of them joined the American revolution was they though that they could renege on the debts. But they were not allowed to because the USA had to borrow money from the British after the war.
IN Britain because a commoner's choices were to become a servant who likely could not have a family, and would have a hard time owning land, then industry way the only outlet. So they set up trade schools. This was true for the Protestants, not sure about the Catholics. Catholics would likely the resenting the fact that Anglicans were in the hyper verbal ruling classes.
So, trade schools were likely relatively non-verbal in emphasis, I expect. And so the Industrial Revolution. Inventions but of course ruling classes above that with verbal skills.
So, I return now. Unusual characters sometimes rise to some type of power, who do not seem to exhibit extremely polished verbal skills. Watch Elon Musk speak. But when he says something even a verbal stumble likely has vast intellect behind it.
It is more important that words spoken connect to an important physical meaning. It is less important to make your words pretty, pretty pretty! Pretty words Clark! You do have them, and also rubber room bullets for thoughts.
When I am evaluation thoughts about things, I don't even believe that I usually think in words. So, when I am in that mode, needing to do precise language is like an anchor slowing me down. So, when I am at top speed, verbal description of what I am thinking is a burden.
I know of someone who have incredible verbal skills: https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCIjGKy … 0VLO40RlOw
I like him. I watch and wonder. Not much like me but very interesting. He does not try to hurt me with words, Clark.
There really could be a problem with Matriarchs. Should they live longer than men they may inherit much wealth. Then they may have power. As they age, they get more Testosterone. But they were never raised to know their limits like most boys are.
They cannot have children, they will almost certainly not go to war, but they can say things about going to war.
In the animal world are many types of mating processes. In some cases, fertile females require males to be in a contest. This is sometimes true for humans. The problem with this is her genes
Her choice of mates is perhaps influenced by survival of the potential mate. Also perhaps:
1) What does she think she wants?
2) What does she say she wants?
3) What do her genetics and epigenetics want.
She will negotiate using #1, and #2 with whomever she can, sometimes exploiting other persons along the way, but in the end she more likely will obey #3. When she is feeling weak, she will resort to #1 and #2 most likely. When she if fertile and ready to be impregnated, she will prefer #3. As a process control situation this should cause her to be attracted to robust and "Winner" males. Big dummies often being the choice. Cave Man!
It seems that some cultures somehow made women do strange things. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Foot_binding
I don't know for sure, but I suspect that East Asians have often had power over the mating process which may have allowed males to select a mating partner based on gracile characteristics.
Sometimes male selection desires might be for a robust woman. A farmer of old would want a woman who could birth children and do useful work.
But after a group becomes wealthy, if the males have powers of selection they may select for Neotenous characteristics, including a big head relative to body for a bigger brain. (That is speculation by me and not proven).
So, if a society becomes too gracile, and specialized in verbal skills, it might be subject conquest by robust dummies under certain circumstances. Otherwise, they can rule over the robust dummies.
The two gender selection processes may keep the human race in a channel between two extremes.
What about evil grannies? Money, power, and typically the survival of her descendants are the likely drivers for her, I think.
Sending Hoards of men off to fight in brutal wars, may be her desire if she is upper class because her powers will assure that her "Boys" and "Girls" will either not be in the front lines or may not go at all. In fact, her power may make sure that her children will be officers and again not be as much in danger.
For her the contest might be exciting, and weak males will be killed off, and if her side wins there will be war booty which as an elite she and her group will be able to grab a lot of that.
So, perhaps blood thirsty. And the West Europeans appear to be blood thirsty. They went wild when the USA indicated that future view suggest that some sort of ownership of Greenland would be appropriate.
They symbolically went to war with the USA for a bit until it dawned on their dim minds that we were their protection.
Ending Pending
And by the way Clark, sometimes I clean up my verbal mistakes as there are many when I am moving fast in my mind. But sometimes I leave some if them there and even put some in just to irritate verbal people.
Ending Pending
https://qz.com/1314814/universal-educat … ry-workers
Quote:
The modern education system was designed to teach future factory workers to be “punctual, docile, and sober”
The education system as we know it is only about 200 years old. Before that, formal education was mostly reserved for the elite. But as industrialization changed the way we work, it created the need for universal schooling.
By
Allison SchragerUpdated July 20, 2022
https://www.bing.com/videos/riverview/r … &FORM=VIRE
Quote:
The Factory Mind: Horace Mann and the Prussian Secret of American Schools
YouTube
Matrix Uncovered
2 views
Ending Pending
May I have more of your "Rubber Room Bullets" Clark?
Ending Pending
Last edited by Void (Yesterday 10:46:06)
Is it possible that the root of political science claims is to produce white collar jobs for people who paid for an education and do not want a real job?
Offline
Like button can go here