Jump to content

Recommended Posts

I was being hostile to the reigning ideology, and the idea that the best we can do is to reform it gradually to be slightly less shitty for working people. I don't hate you, Nice, I just think you need professional help. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

For higher education, I think that's increasingly happening.  But typically even where schools are state-funded, they still typically need a lot of money from tuition in order to keep them going.  If all the course materials were online there might be less incentive for people to invest a lot of money in getting what superficially seems like the same education.  So goes the argument; not watertight, as I think a lot of people are now going to college to help them get a decent job afterwards.  But if online courses become more of a serious threat to universities you could have many people investing in an online degree for cheaper rather than go to a brick and mortar school and take on a lot of student debt, which could force many less prestigious colleges to close.

 

It's hard to gauge the benefits of online higher education on the public.  When you have a brick and mortar university you can have lecturers assess students in a much more dynamic way, seeing how well they are learning or if they have to teach a different way.  If all online courses were for small class sizes, with a good medium for interacting with individual students, and everyone's internet connection was great, this might not be such of an issue, but it is in practice.  Moreover, retention rates for online courses (for instance) are very low.  Which is a reflection of the sad reality that most people can't be trusted to learn stuff on their own, they need a community of people to work with and to make them go.  If public education went online-only, or mostly online with brick and mortar for a privileged few, it would be a disaster.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yeah, it's inconsiderate towards teachers to make education (i.e. one streamed classroom with the nation's best teacher) free for all, no doubt about that. But a corporation can be 'evil' as long as it plays within the legal system. IKEA burns the entire rainforest as I write this. Apple pollutes entire regions. Even if the state doesn't dare to piss off teachers, the lack of general interest in freer education (online, self-controlled education) remains a mystery.

I'm just wondering why there's no Evil/IDGAF Corporation/Venture for online education. Like Wikipedia and Google laid a shit on libraries. I'm just surprised stuff like coursera.org has to be a private venture. That site happened eventually, and the whole "public should be good to teachers too" argument falls apart as soon as the Evil Capitalist goes and makes the better service and beats the shit out of public classroom hell. Then suddenly, you chose to obstruct a publicly owned alternative to the disrupting venture. Your moral highground obstruction of 'dangerous public projects' will, when a private venture dares to be too 'evil', changes to a failure to have built a more publicly vested alternative to the private 'evil'.

Like when the state builds a military. That sucks. But it stops sucking when another military is built under someone else's control. Then your 'evil project' becomes the lesser evil, compared with the new, non-public evil.

 

If public education went online-only, or mostly online with brick and mortar for a privileged few, it would be a disaster.

 

For those brainwashed to a socialist, dependent mindset. After a while of self-discipline, the plasticity of the brain would change to take the task at hand, by its own built-up discipline, need, and interest.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Listen Eat Shadows. College has to gain a new meaning. Fuck classrooms. Fuck transport. Fuck seats. College 2.0 means you get five years to study any book and lecture you want. You can choose to follow entire courses for a higher quality of credit (silver, gold, premium). You can take courses from Stanford, MIT, Harvard, Oxford, Beijing, Qatar. Local buildings are repurposed to hold 'Topic Groups' for medicine, computer science, biology etc. Like band practice. No one is in control. Lots of instructional info online, lots of reviews for any lecture, but no one fucks with you, no one takes your seat, no one drives a bus anywhere, and Milo just stays at home becoming one of the countless professor of the 21th century.

Who's obstructing this vision? The state. Why is it doing so? Because of bus drivers, teachers, and seat-makers. How does the populace disrupt this policy? By securing the bus drivers, the teachers and seat-makers. Secure their lives by safe food and housing, and suddenly education can go 21st web 2.0. There'll be no bus driver in the way. And the teachers might shut the fuck up when they see the superiority of the College 2.0 Product.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest Eat Shadows

I'm pretty sure "the state" is not the only thing hold that method of education back. For many people getting accepted to and a diploma from a prestigious university is all that matters. They don't give a fuck about what they learn there as long as they can make some money off of it. 

 

here's a free online class about collaborative, community based learning though for you offered free by harvard: http://online-learning.harvard.edu/course/making-learning-visible-power-group-learning-and-documentation-classrooms-and-communities

http://www.mlvpz.org/

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yeah, it's inconsiderate towards teachers to make education (i.e. one streamed classroom with the nation's best teacher) free for all, no doubt about that.

It's not even about the teachers per se, although you're right that it doesn't benefit them either.  It would be inconsiderate to the students, indeed the educational attainment of people in general.  How experienced and talented you are as a teacher is one thing, but being approachable and flexible about how you teach your course matters a lot.  And as I said, most people lack the self-discipline to study on their own even for a subject that they're interested in.

 

You don't have to take it from me - check out the dropout rate of MOOCs, generally over 90 percent.  Nightmare scenario is that projected in every course taken in every college across the whole country, to almost every student whose parents can't send them to a top-tier school.

ban ad hominems likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

For those brainwashed to a socialist, dependent mindset. After a while of self-discipline, the plasticity of the brain would change to take the task at hand, by its own built-up discipline, need, and interest.

This is a nice idea but I just don't think that's true.  Some people do OK on their own.  If you were to leave everyone to work on their own without other people, I'm not optimistic about what the outcome would be.

ban ad hominems likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I know, ocean. I even compiled a simple list of online edu resources (eduindex.comoj.com)

But my quite socialist state does not support online edu resources. The state takes half one's income to spend it mainly on paid education (!) and healthcare. But you can't talk to a doctor online (via Skype or something). You cannot get paid for courses unless you actually take a bus (or bicycle) every day to a crowded and noisy lecture hall. At one point, you have to ask yourself who benefits from the hassle. My only hypothesis is that no one has given it thought. If they started paying people to take engineering courses on Coursera, the economy would be better off than the current "Oh there's a leftover seat over at the performance art degree, and also in the Greek bachelor course"

It would be fucking badass if students got paid to just dive into any subject from their own computer and met up with their Anarchist group every few days.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

"Socialism means but one thing, and that is the abolition of capital in private hands, and the turning over of the industries into the direct control of the workmen employed in them. Anything else is not socialism, and has no right to sail under that name. Socialism is not the establishment of an eight-hour day, not the abolition of child labor, not the enforcement of pure food laws, not the putting down of the Night Riders, or the enforcement of the 80-cent gas law. None of these, nor all of them together, are socialism. They might all be done by the government tomorrow, and still we would not have socialism. They are merely reforms on the present system, mere patches on the worn out garment of industrial servitude, and are no more socialism than the steam from a locomotive is the locomotive." - Daniel de Leon

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

How the fuck do the worker-controlled industries know what to make if private capital is abolished and there is no one to buy their product?

Is there a board of party elites who establish production quotas and distribute the goods to the workers? 

I seriously do not understand the desire to overhaul the entire economy when welfare states work just fine and collective ownership is entirely compatible with the current system. 

Considering we are trending toward a post-labor economy, the whole idea of workers is a bit antiquated. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

How the fuck do the worker-controlled industries know what to make if private capital is abolished and there is no one to buy their product?

Is there a board of party elites who establish production quotas and distribute the goods to the workers? 

I seriously do not understand the desire to overhaul the entire economy when welfare states work just fine and collective ownership is entirely compatible with the current system. 

Considering we are trending toward a post-labor economy, the whole idea of workers is a bit antiquated. 

Just google syndicalism, that's one alternative.

 

Capitalism has a habit of making millions of things no one wants or ever buys, so I don't see a strong argument that anyone knows what to make RIGHT NOW.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Oh, I know: The gross inefficiencies of market capitalism are one of my largest complaints. Especially when it comes at such a high social and environmental cost.

Syndicalism doesn't necessarily abolish private capital. There is nothing to stop worker-own enterprises from thriving in the current set up, aside from some regulatory obstacles that give shitty corporations a competitive marketplace advantage.

ban ad hominems likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Look, I just don't think the freedom to sell your labor and choose what entertainment to consume is real freedom.  I think we can do better, by each other (meaning humanity as a whole) and by the environment.  I'm hopeful about a post-labor, post-scarcity society, but I fear we could be on the path to a global nightmare if we couple post-scarcity with the value systems of capitalism.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Largely, I agree on these broad philosophical ambitions on how we ought to live.

And you are right about there being a real danger moving toward a post-labor society.

What is real freedom?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Freedom of association, movement, expression.  Things we have in theory now but not in practice.  I recommend reading the Mars Trilogy by Kim Stanley Robinson, and when you get to the third book, Blue Mars, pay close attention to how the characters live.  They stay in one place for a while and volunteer with massive environmental projects, and then move and spend a couple of years with a theater troupe, and then take a year to study biology and contribute to basic research, all the while never worrying about food, clothing, shelter.  I think that it's a vision of a very possible future for humanity.  Creative, unencumbered, collaborative...productive and fulfilling rather than productive and alienating.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

did you run out of likes again? 

nope, I was singling out the part of your post I most agreed with :shifty:

 

I only rarely do it purpose, tbh. :(

still don't know what you're talking about whatever it was I didn't notice I think you're projecting judgment where it doesn't exist 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now


  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×