Human Kind, Yet Evil Rule

Humanity Good, Institutions Bad? Not so simple. Evil Rule (Pluto-Cracy) is a fundamental consequence of human nature, amplified by civilization.

In “Human Kind“, 14th October 2015 George Monbiot, published in the Guardian 14th October 2015, suggests that:“Fascinating new lines of research suggest that we are good people, tolerating bad things.”

Sounds good. It’s very self-congratulatory: defining oneself as “on the left”, “liberal”, etc. has much to do with self-satisfaction about what a great human one is. I sent the following comment:

“Saying that “people are good, while tolerating bad things” is an ineffective morality. The crux, indeed, is the moral nature of institutions, controlled by a few, rather than whether humans are kind or not.”

That observation of mine was censored, as  all my comments to Monbiot in the Guardian are. Human kind? Thus Monbiot readers’ minds are kept safe from my dreadful influence (lest readers flee the Guardian, and starts reading my site?).

Cephalopods Are Highly Intelligent, But They Have No Cultural Intelligence., Thus Stay Mental Miniatures

Cephalopods Are Highly Intelligent, But They Have No Cultural Intelligence., Thus Stay Mental Miniatures

Meanwhile in the terror war occupation in Israel, in a few days, more than 40 young Palestinians got killed. One by one. Human kind? If something looking like a Palestinian moves, it gets shot. Some Jewish Israelis got actually shot because other Israelis thought they looked like the enemy (hey, they are all supposed to all be Semites! One very blonde beauty with very long hair who happened to be an Israeli soldier shot dead a Palestinian youth who may have pricked her: she is OK, don’t worry).

Cephalopods are surprisingly intelligent. They even use tools (the definition of Bergson of man as Homo Faber, Homo Artisan-Of-Hard-Materials is to be questioned). However, cephalopods experience short, brutish, asocial lives, and that boxes in their intelligence. This demonstrates that fully-dimensioned intelligence is social, and, in particular, cultural.

Superior intelligence is not just about the individual, it’s about the collective. Our biosphere, our part of the biosphere, is collectively intelligent (somewhat as in the movie Avatar).

Before I quote the interesting part of Monbiot’s article (which mainly quotes others), let me re-iterate my main thesis on altruism and love:

All advanced brain animals have to love, love enough to raise the young. To say love dominates, is saying we have brains grown with culture. It’s an important thing to say. And it explains the experiences Monbiot mentions.

Compare to the poignant fate of cephalopods, whose bright intelligence starts from scratch, with no culture, whatsoever. Cephalopod intelligence shines brightly, and quickly peters out, in a flurry of new born eggs.

So, the difference between us and squids is that we are adorned with philosophers, and other thinkers. The scorn Monbiot heaps on them is neither kind, nor wise, not to say arrogant, coming from someone with a simple journalist background (and it shows!).

A review article in the journal Frontiers in Psychology points out that our behaviour towards unrelated members of our species is “spectacularly unusual when compared to other animals”. While chimpanzees might share food with members of their own group, though usually only after being plagued by aggressive begging, they tend to react violently towards strangers. Chimpanzees, the authors note, behave more like the Homo economicus of neoliberal mythology than people do.”

That is not just a funny joke, but a deep observation, that traders are just enraged chimps. However, to view chimpanzee behavior as typical of other animals is erroneous. Chimpanzees are half-savannah animals. I saw one once in an area with small, very small, and sparse trees, and the first serious forest was weeks of travel away. Not surprisingly, he was acting fiercely and dangerously, in an area roamed by lion prides. Lions having a look at him, won’t try to come close: he shook an entire small tree he was hanging from, and swung away, with incredible power and speed, after flashing his four inches canines.

Thus Monbiot go off the deep end with chimpanzees. Here is a more balanced view: humans keep much in common with chimpanzees. They both descend from common ancestors (who may have been more Homo like than Chimp like: we don’t really know, however fossils, and logic, point in that direction).

Emotionally and socially, the psychology of chimps is very similar to humans,” says famous primatologist Frans de Waal at Emory University in Atlanta (a Dutch who started his famous observations in the Netherlands; universities in the USA have more money).

For instance, de Waal noted, chimps have shown they can help unrelated chimps and human strangers at personal cost without apparent expectation of personal gain, the sort of selfless behavior often naively claimed as unique to humans. They also display culture, with groups of chimpanzees socially passing on dozens of behaviors such as tool kits, and methods from generation to generation that are often very different from those seen in other groups. There are basically as many Chimpanzee cultures as chimpanzee tribes (and that’s thousands).

The big difference I see going for us is language,” de Waal said. “They can learn a few symbols in labs, but it’s not impressive in my opinion compared to what even a young child can do. They don’t really symbolize like we do, and language is a big difference that influences everything else that you do — how you communicate, basic social interactions, all these become far more complex.

Mathematics is, first of all, a language, remember.

The hyper aggressivity of Chimpanzees is related to their evolution: “They don’t like cooperating with strangers, that’s for sure,” de Waal said. Harvard biological anthropologist Richard Wrangham suggested this pattern of genetic (so to speak) violence may have been part of humanity’s legacy for millions of years. Yet, de Waal observed that based on what the canines of Ardipithecus suggest, “chimpanzees may be specialized in that regard [hyperviolence]. It’s only with the special recent human conditions of settlement and agriculture that gave us the incentive to worry about wealth, leading us to become warriors that way.”

This is close to my thesis: EVIL RULE (“Plutocracy”) was made possible by civilization. Before that it was just Demonic Males. Demonicity plus civilization = Evil Rule.

Compare de Waal’ subtlety with Monbiot’s imbalanced enthusiasm characteristic of the journalist he is:

“Humans, by contrast, are ultra-social: possessed of an enhanced capacity for empathy, an unparalleled sensitivity to the needs of others, a unique level of concern about their welfare and an ability to create moral norms that generalise and enforce these tendencies.

Such traits emerge so early in our lives that they appear to be innate. In other words, it seems that we have evolved to be this way. By the age of 14 months, children begin to help each other, for example by handing over objects another child can’t reach. By the time they are two, they start sharing things they value. By the age of three, they start to protest against other people’s violation of moral norms.”

Altruism is shown by nearly all advanced animals, because that’s how intelligence is grown. Thus, it’s not about material rewards. On board (so to speak) systems reward altruism intrinsically. Monbiot again:

“A fascinating paper in the journal Infancy reveals that reward has nothing to do with it. Three to five-year-olds are less likely to help someone a second time if they have been rewarded for doing it the first time. In other words, extrinsic rewards appear to undermine the intrinsic desire to help. (Parents, economists and government ministers, please note). The study also discovered that children of this age are more inclined to help people if they perceive them to be suffering, and that they want to see someone helped whether or not they do it themselves. This suggests that they are motivated by a genuine concern for other people’s welfare, rather than by a desire to look good. And it seems to be baked in.

Why? How would the hard logic of evolution produce such outcomes? This is the subject of heated debate.”

The heated debate is happening because the sort of view I defend (the view in Avatar, that of global intelligence, one could say) is progressing against the very reduced Survival-Of-The-Fittest approach.

The difference between us and squids is that we are adorned with philosophers, and the scorn journalist such as Monbiot heaps on them is neither kind, nor wise, not to say arrogant.

Humans are intrinsic scientists and philosophers, not just lovers and warriors. To try to say they are all one, and not the others misses the big picture.

The left, by insisting that humans are kind, underestimates the evil institutions are capable of. Institutions, although moral persons, in the legal sense, are not held back by human ethology in the behaviors they are capable of. (Nazism provided with plenty of example of that: even the very worst Nazis, including Himmler or Eichmann, found really hard to go all the way, and could do it, only by using institutional tricks, making institutions, Nazi institutions to force them to do what even them found too hard to do.)

Let’s not underestimate institutionalized evil. It has no bounds, whatsoever. Nazism, or Stalinism, were not about just a few very bad guys, they were about evil institutions, including a Prussianized army (in contrast to a human one). Let’s build human kind institutions that cannot not be commandeered by just a few (as our entire democracy-through-representatives regime gangrening the West, not to say the world, is).

Thus, to progress morally will mean to progress in the intelligence of the institutions we will set-up to rule over us. Hence moral progress will be a consequence, and only a consequence, of scientific and technological approfondissement (deepening).

Patrice Ayme’

Tags: , , , , , , ,

34 Responses to “Human Kind, Yet Evil Rule”

  1. brodix Says:


    In the grand scheme of things, your point is akin to, age rules, because it succeeds youth.
    Evil is decay. Nothing more, nothing less. It breaks down the old, to make way for the new.
    It’s just that some of these cycles are much to big for human sensibility to encompass. What we gain is knowledge, even if it’s just encoded in the genes.


    • gmax Says:

      Wait a minute, are you saying age brings forth cities, and cities are a form of decay. Bizarre bizzare. Patrice says civilization brings plutocracy, but it’s a malady (to speak like Pope Francis). Nothing to do with age. Humanity is very old, cities very young


  2. Patrice Ayme Says:

    3 successful, infection free limb amputations by Neolithic men, 7.000 years BP. We progressed, but only slightly:

    … A warning for those who think we are so far ahead, from recent efforts. Or that altruism was not an engine, from way back.


  3. Gloucon X Says:

    “Let’s not underestimate institutionalized evil. It has no bounds, whatsoever. Let’s build human kind institutions that cannot not be commandeered by just a few. Thus, to progress morally will mean to progress in the intelligence of the institutions we will set-up to rule over us.”

    I live in the US where such intelligent and humane thinking is rare.
    Thank you.


    • Patrice Ayme Says:

      Yes, thanks Gloucon X, for the support. The USA has, in many ways, regressed. And that’s a global problem as the USA is the leading nation.

      An example: a lawyer in Silicon Valley was the one who instigated pursuits against Microsoft for acting as a monopoly. His actions were successful. He says that the situation is worse now with Google, Facebook, and a few others. However, he found out that he could not do anything in the USA: the authorities refuse to do anything whatsoever against large firms misbehaving. Instead, the gentleman sue the USA giants in… Europe. There are no less than 5 type of charges against Google… Obama keeps on touring the SV, making millions each time, something quite incredible considering what used to be the prestige of the USA president (I don’t mean him, but any president before Clinton).


      • Kevin Berger Says:

        I take that you are refering to the “techtopus”, the silicon valley (and beyond, since it turned out to include Hollywood-companies) cartel to supress wages and keep employees boxed-in?


  4. EugenR Says:

    EugenR: The worst rule the world, because they are the worst.
    GD: Not for long

    EugenR: For ever

    GD: What about Non Violent Civil Disobedience ?

    EugenR: At the end the “Non Violent Civil Disobedience” is a human organization, and as such it will either die out, or in worse case will have an organizational structure in which the worst bullies will be on the top. There is nothing new under the sun.

    GD: At the end the truth, that at the age of internet is a simple finger click away, will win.

    EugenR: At the end the truth wins, the question is when and at what price. In between the lie and cruelty celebrates. Just remember the last century events (Hitler, Stalin, Mao Zedong, Pol Pot, Mugabe i mean Dr Mugabe, etc.). All of them are gone (except the least evil Dr Mugabe). Did you know Pol Pot studied in Paris? Don’t be upset by history but learn from it. And now you have the Islam fundamentalism, that is all about cultural and religious non tolerance, racism (Sudan, Darfur, etc.), legitimization of enslavement of the non Muslims, intellectual degradation of women, death penalty for apostasy (Under current laws in Islamic countries, the actual punishment for the apostate (or murtadd مرتد) ranges from execution to prison terms. Islamic nations with sharia courts use civil code to void the Muslim apostate’s marriage and deny child custody rights, as well as his or her inheritance rights for apostasy. Twenty-three Muslim-majority countries, as of 2013, additionally covered apostasy in Islam through their criminal laws.), etc.

    GD: The real question is do we have less fear because we have more access to knowledge? Or more fear because the media has portrayed fear as the new normal? I am not sure that mass herd mentality works in modern society anymore. And that is how dictators ruled. The new fear is forced acceptance. It is worse. Or should I say financially forced acceptance.

    AH: I believe that unarmed truth and unconditional love will have the final word in reality. This is why right, temporarily defeated, is stronger than evil triumphant. Take the example of Martin Luther King, Jr.

    EugenR: Yes, they were in history few good leaders who won. Martin Luther King is among them, others are N.Mandela, M. Gandhi, V. Havel all of them won, but at what personal price. Two of them murdered, two served years in jail. And anyway after them came some scoundrels destroyed anyway their achievements. Still the strife for self evident justice (that’s what these leaders were after) must go on. But who are the new Mendelas, Gandhis, Kings or Havels? In the best case those who came after them are at the best Obamas.

    AH: It is a process. In the last 500 years from time of Galileo (who was threatened by his Church for telling the truth about the nature of the planets) to today there has been tremendous progress on a global scale. We with progressive values and committed to the path of love, must remember that darkness is also part of human nature (perhaps an essential part) and remain vigilant — and hopeful.

    EugenR: I assume you never lived in a country where the government terrorizes its citizens. Try to express your truth in one of the terror countries, like Saudi Arabia, Iran, Afghanistan, Pakistan, etc. Try to say there, it is wrong not to let women to have education (about 50% of them are illiterate). Try to say something about freedom of faith. Communism was wiped out only 20 year ago, its leftovers are regimes like the one in N. Korea but also Cuba. You say, ……darkness is also part of human nature…. The question is not if darkness is part…… definitely is and nobody can deny it, but how do you fight it. In most of the cases the fight is with even more darkness.

    AH: I have never lived in a terrorizing country. I did have terrorizing parents and an entrenched belief in a terrorizing Pentecostal God. I am a racial minority in a world that devalues everything I do because of my skin colour. We all have our challenges. In the end, it is arrogant for me to think you can make (force) people do what I think they should do or feel what I think they should feel. This is exactly the mindset of the dictator and I reject that thinking completely. The best I can do is look at my inner signaling. I seek to elevate my own consciousness and change myself for the better. The next step is the social conversation. I share my thinking and values with others in the hope that they too will be inspired to change themselves for the better.
    Darkness cannot drive out darkness: only light can do that.
    Hate cannot drive out hate: only love can do that.
    ― Martin Luther King, Jr.

    EugenR: Sorry Alexi, this time M.L.King had it wrong. The Nazis were defeated by Stalin, just because his cruelty did not have limits, while the Nazis limited their cruelty only to the non Germans. Without Stalin the Western powers would never stand against the Nazis.

    AH: If you think about it carefully, the darkness of Hitler was replaced by the darkness of Stalin. This was true for the USSR, East Germany, East Berlin and most of East Europe. So Stalin did not drive out darkness, he just replaced it with his own dark shadow.
    Alexi: Stalin was in control by 1923, ten years before Hitler (Lenin tried to stop him at the end of his life).

    PA: The French started the nuclear bomb program in 1938. Nobel Laureate Irene Curie was certain that a bomb could be made. The program went to Manhattan, in total secret to the Nazis, and total opening to Stalin. Hitler would have been nuclear bombed into submission.

    EugenR: If we speak about destiny probably Hitler would survive even the nuclear bomb, as he survived about 30 assassination attempts. If to believe in God here you have him. God is against humanism and humanity, and mainly against his “chosen people”. As he misled His Own People, some Jewish rabies made a trial of God in some extermination camp, and their verdict was, Death penalty. But then after the verdict they went to the next ceremonial pray. The religion is not about morality (mostly in contrary), not about reality or evidence, not about belief in truth (I know many skeptic believers), not even about tribalism since there are religious newcomers, who did not grow in the tribal tradition.
    It is all this about some false answers to questions of eternal life? It can be right for some, but not for everyone. So tell me, what it is all about? The faith in communism did not include even belief in eternal life, and still it has so many followers. It seems religion or faith is a need of the human spices to believe in some fundamental dogma, be it even an obvious lie, all it needs is enough followers, and supporters of a false idea. In a way to be a football club fun is also a religion.


    • Paul Handover Says:

      What an absolutely, engrossing dialogue. I don’t know if it was based on previously published exchanges, or just the product of a very clever mind, but who cares! As a stroll through the philosophy of homo sapiens it was fabulous. We are, indeed, a very strange lot. Thank you.


      • Paul Handover Says:

        Just read it out to Jean and realised that it would be great to share it with my readers over on Learning from Dogs. Would that be OK?


        • Patrice Ayme Says:

          Paul, you are more than welcome to share my essay with your readers, and I would not be surprised if you found, as you often do, fascinating ideas and emotions to add.


          • Paul Handover Says:

            Patrice, to correct a small misconception, what I wanted to republish was the response, the dialogue as it were, from EugeneR. Presumably, he should be the one to respond to my request.


          • EugenR Says:

            Off course you are welcome to share it with your readers. I myself will do the same, even if it is just a edited version of previously published publication. All we do in this site or on others is to open others to my or our perspective of reality, in the social, economic, political or scientific fields of intelectual activity. I personaly feel, that the game now in the world is about double or nothing, so better end with double.


          • Patrice Ayme Says:

            Ooooppsss, my bad, Paul, hahaha.

            I just realized my error many hours later. Since I had a sort of dialogue between Monbiot and De Waal, I thought you were thinking of that dialogue.
            I replied to Eugen’s comment, BTW.
            I could reply to it even more. The subject of killing Hitler is fascinating, and very instructive. I do not agree with Eugen there. It broaches on a much broader problem: telling the truth. Maybe I write an essay on this.


      • Patrice Ayme Says:

        Well, Paul, I am more than glad that you find it “absolutely engrossing”. In a sense, you are an incipient author, because you called my attention to Monbiot’s essays in the past. So I thank you too.


      • EugenR Says:

        Thanks for appreciation. It was edited from a conversation in the past. I found it to be a relevant response to the assay.


        • Patrice Ayme Says:

          An assay is an investigative (analytic) procedure in laboratory medicine, … century, from Anglo-Fr. assai and the meaning “analysis” is from the late 14th century.
          ‎Bradford protein assay – ‎Electrophoretic mobility shift … – ‎Bicinchoninic acid assay Related to assessment.

          Essay is when one tries (essayer in French) to say something intelligent, in particular in writing. Hence “Essais de Montaigne“.


    • Patrice Ayme Says:

      Wow, Eugen, quite a comment, lots to answer. OK, AH is Alexi Helligar, PA is your truly, who is GD?

      That the present system political selects for the worst is caused by the simple fact that it was organized by the worst.

      Hitler’s survival of “30” attempts (a number often brandished, but I begged to differ) was both extremely accidental, but also systemic. Just as god has been American, god, for a while, was Nazi: the Battle of France of May 1940, or the non-explosion of a bomb put in Hitler’s plane by high German officers were god-induced Nazi miracles (god, for want of a better word: the hand of fate).

      Stalin and Hitler were entangled. From the preceding generation of fascists: the Kaiser and Lenin were allies. It’s not that they met and shook hands: but their collaborators did, and moved the world (or, at least, borders). The Soviet-German fascists alliance went on and one… arguably until Putin’s era.

      Civil Disobedience works only when authorities let it happen. Check Saudi Arabia, Iran, China, North Korea, Byelorussia, or even Russia itself, for when they do not.

      In particular civil disobedience in India was a joke.

      Mandela tried to be civil, then he turned to bombs, then to debate. He was lucky that De Klerck and company were getting too much heat from the rest of the white community, worldwide, and had to accept to listen to the Afrikaner speaking Mandela, a lawyer, but also a boxer. Mandela was totally great, Gandhi, a disaster.

      Hate can exterminate hate. Nazism was not loved to death, but bombed to death. MLK worked because the Kennedys collaborated with him. If instead they had passed the word to the FBI to make it so that, really, really potential assassins would be let real close to MLK, he would have been done for before. In the end, MLK was just about implementing passed laws.

      It’s Lincoln, Eisenhower and the head of his supreme court, who ordered the president to order implementation of the USSC’s orders regarding desegregation.

      Yes, religion is just re-ligare, re-tie. Soccer fans qualify. I have been trying to tech this to some middle ages famous philosophy professors, but they don’t get it.


    • gmax Says:

      I recognize many of Patrice’s ideas above, and it’s good to see them spread. Patrice would you care to expand that exchange?

      You see the task is to make people who think they are PC, realize they are NOT PC, but that YOU are PC. This will happen only with a torrent of knowledge.


  5. Kevin Berger Says:

    Random thought :


    • gmax Says:

      Very interesting. Totally atrocious. This country has a long way to go. Thanks. I had never heard of her.

      It’s easy to always talk of MLK with its feel good message. It hides the reality of what happened.


    • Patrice Ayme Says:

      Never heard of her either. How infuriatingly tragic!


      • Kevin Berger Says:

        It’s kind of well-known, a bit like the infamous “Black Wall Street riot” for example, and many other large-scale, organized violence versus Blacks, unions, migrants (often the same as unions),… occurring with the active support of society at large… sometimes, the “good” guys even won, such as the NYC Catholic Irish eventually rioting and beating WASP supremacism into the ground, even though the later had full institutional support.

        I do agree this hasn’t percolated into the “mainstream” US self-image… think, if you will, of the very interesting and revelatory WWII “Battles of…” race-riots involving White US servicemen and non-whites US servicemen or locals and often, White locals hostile to the US-enforced racial segregation (and we’re talking 1940’s era, not a time of rabid anti-racism in those countries neither, so this took some to shock White locals back then…), in Australia, NZ, even in the UK, or, hell, even in the USA with the “Zoot suits riots”, a rather sleazy episode of race/class pogrom turned into a joke by Spielberg in his “1941” comedy.

        Completely clashes against the self-service, rewritten, Captain America-like mythology of the “Good War”.
        Not that I think much of the feral Black underclass of the USA, which isn’t worth a lot of interest nor compassion to be honest, but the “race thing” in the USA is insane, and toxic, even more so since it has became the de facto norm of the “West”.


        • Patrice Ayme Says:

          To amplify your latest point: the oppressing masters in the USA have devised methods of exploitation and subjugation which are still under the radar. Demeaning and excusing oneself (but not for the exct thing) are part of it. Thanks to Sanders’ anger, though, the Democratic field has veered left a bit. I should say, veered towards the truth. (Bernie Sanders himself holds what is viewed in USA, and the right wing/plutocratic media as extreme left discourse, but he is NOT extreme left, not at all, extreme left!!!!!)


        • Patrice Ayme Says:

          MLK sells well, because his stuff is all about America-the-beautiful, always progressing for the best, instead of America-the-ugly, collapsing in plutocracy.


  6. John Rogers Says:

    “The crux, indeed, is the moral nature of institutions, controlled by a few, rather than whether humans are kind or not.”

    Nailed it again, Patrice. Kudos.


    • Patrice Ayme Says:

      Thanks, John! That calls it to my attention, I am going to tweet it, just to make sure it has a better chance to go around…


      • Paul Handover Says:

        And I am quoting it in tomorrow’s post over on LfD.


        • Patrice Ayme Says:

          I struck with my own amplified version of the conversation, just now, 2,500 + words of it. What happened is that we had elaborated, and vigorous exchanges, a few years back, and Eugen R made an abstract or two of a few of them. He found one last week (just one, there are others), and rolled it out. And that is excellent.

          It’s good to hear Senator Sanders saying many related things, things Obama avoided like the plague (and now try, too late, to implement through the back door of regulations, as I suggested to do; so now, for example, the banks are getting squeezed, behind closed doors… Too little, too late!)


  7. De Brunet D'Ambiallet Says:

    Another splendid essay. I would wish that Patrice reinforce Eugen’s synopsis


  8. Alexi Helligar Says:

    “…fully-dimensioned intelligence is social, and, in particular, cultural.
    Intelligence is not just about the individual, it’s about the collective.”

    Intelligence in the collective, indeed. No spontaneous Boltzmann brain without society to nurture it

    Liked by 1 person

  9. Forgive the introspection: Part Two | Learning from Dogs Says:

    […] few days ago, Patrice Ayme (PA) published a post called Human Kind, Yet Evil Rule. As so frequently happens, it attracted a clutch of fascinating responses.  One of those responses […]


  10. strike2020 Says:


    I think you are spot on, pointing directly to institutions and institutionalization as a locus for collective evil. We can go far in blaming the institution–particularly in our time when we see institutional collectives of all kinds (particularly profit-making ones) striving for the privileges and advantages of institutions while jettisoning corresponding responsibilities.

    Like you appear to suggest, I would lean away from institutions as the means for collective action altogether, but that isn’t the present world at all, so the best we might hope to find would address this disconnect between institutional advantage and institutional responsibility.

    That isn’t to suggest we’d automatically be saved by such a thing, only that it might help. We can, for sure, recall many instances of institutional evil promulgated by the well-meaning.

    There is this, too: it isn’t only the collective actions of institutions themselves which prove so often ethically problematic. It’s also the the making of people fit into them which harshly prunes human possibility, both by discarding large numbers who don’t tend to fit in well (a large many) to the advantage of those who do (a select few, and their unwilling factotums capable of putting up with things), and by carving hard upon individual difference, creative expression and any willingness to object in order to achieve uniformity.

    At some point, the well-formed institutionalized person knows just what to do.

    For 80 years or more, the US public school system has been serving first the demands and interests of institutionalization. For 80 years or more, the US public school system has been teaching students these lessons.

    1. Shut up and do as you are told.
    2. To Question is to Disobey.
    3. To be Different is to Fail.
    4. The Answer to any question can be Marked Right or Wrong by a person in Authority.

    5. Wait for (Our) Instructions. Do nothing on your own.
    6. Stay within (the) boundaries (We set). Do exactly as you are told.
    7. You are only as good as We say you are.
    8. Your time Is not your own. (Work only as assigned.)
    9. Your body is not your own. (Sit still unless We assign you games.)
    10. Your voice is not your own. (Your viewpoint calls for Our validation..)

    11. The measure of right and wrong is what We will tell you.
    12. Only answer the questions assigned to you
    13. We make you learn. (To learn Is not something you can choose on your own).

    14. Learning is not fun. Work is not play.
    15. Education Is training and training is education.

    Thank you for sharing your thoughts in this essay. I will read again.


    • Patrice Ayme Says:

      Strike2020: Sorry for allowing your comment so late, something went wrong in the WordPress system, and I did not see it until now. Your comments should now go straight through.


What do you think? Please join the debate! The simplest questions are often the deepest!

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: