Chain of Command Theory Leads to Total Collective Tyranny

[Gdjjr]

I couldn't decide on a specific forum as this lists several hot button issues so I post it here.
I'll "cliff note" on one of the more egregious affronts.

This experiment orchestrated by the most powerful among us has been more successful than could have been initially imagined. In the middle of the 19th century, the U.S. was a nation filled with readers, and the literacy rate was between 93% and 100% of the population. Education at that time was completely private, and advanced teaching in the classical manner was the norm, with absolutely no centralized control. Latin, Greek, strong history and exceptional science and philosophical studies were universal, but a society of intelligent individuals was not compatible with the power agenda of the ruling class.

Since the first compulsory school in Massachusetts in 1852 was established, the intellect of Americans began its decline, and that decline continues to this day. A nation once made up of individual thinkers has become a nation of sheep. A nation of obedient workers with limited intellect was necessary to fulfill the agenda of the oligarchs, and that is exactly what they were able to accomplish through a premeditated plan of indoctrination through “education.”
.........

The Greater Good is created through Individual effort. It can't be legislated or mandated.

Chain of Command Theory Leads to Total Collective Tyranny

 

[MisterBeale]

The Seven-Lesson Schoolteacher - By John Taylor Gatto, New York State Teacher of the Year, 1991
The Seven-Lesson Schoolteacher - By John Taylor Gatto, New York State Teacher of the Year, 1991

"Call me Mr. Gatto, please. Twenty-six years ago, having nothing better to do at the time, I tried my hand at schoolteaching. The license I hold certifies that I am an instructor of English language and English literature, but that isn't what I do at all. I don't teach English, I teach school -- and I win awards doing it.

Teaching means different things in different places, but seven lessons are universally taught from Harlem to Hollywood Hills. They constitute a national curriculum you pay for in more ways than you can imagine, so you might as well know what it is. You are at liberty, of course, to regard these lessons any way you like, but believe me when I say I intend no irony in this presentation. These are the things I teach, these are the things you pay me to teach. Make of them what you will.

1. CONFUSION

A lady named Kathy wrote this to me from Dubois, Indiana the other day:
"What big ideas are important to little kids? Well, the biggest idea I think they need is that what they are learning isn't idiosyncratic -- that there is some system to it all and it's not just raining down on them as they helplessly absorb. That's the task, to understand, to make coherent."

Kathy has it wrong. The first lesson I teach is confusion. Everything I teach is out of context. I teach the un-relating of everything. I teach disconnections. I teach too much: the orbiting of planets, the law of large numbers, slavery, adjectives, architectural drawing, dance, gymnasium, choral singing, assemblies, surprise guests, fire drills, computer languages, parents' nights, staff-development days, pull-out programs, guidance with strangers my students may never see again, standardized tests, age-segregation unlike anything seen in the outside world....What do any of these things have to do with each other?

Even in the best schools a close examination of curriculum and its sequences turns up a lack of coherence, full of internal contradictions. Fortunately the children have no words to define the panic and anger they feel at constant violations of natural order and sequence fobbed off on them as quality in education.. . . . "

 

[MisterBeale]

Dumbing Us Down - Wikipedia

https://iwcenglish1.typepad.com/Documents/Gatto_Dumbing_Us_Down.pdf

The Underground History of American Education - Wikipedia

John Taylor Gatto The Underground History Of American Education Book : santa barbarian : Free Download, Borrow, and Streaming : Internet Archive

The Underground History of American Education: A School Teacher's Intimate Investigation Into the Problem of Modern Schooling : John Taylor Gatto : Free Download, Borrow, and Streaming : Internet Archive

 

[jwoodie]

[QUOTE="Gdjjr, post: 23472317, member: 72639"]Chain of Command Theory Leads to Total Collective Tyranny[/QUOTE]

A chain of command is merely a description of the responsibility structure of an organization. In theory, this structure allows information to flow in both directions in an efficient manner. However, the human element in middle management often interferes with this flow by withholding information deemed threatening to the individual. One way to address this problem is to allow unfettered communication throughout an organization. However, this can become cumbersome and inefficient in larger organizations. Another way is to establish a "complaint department" designated to receive and process employee input. This provides some protective anonymity, but seldom results in practical improvements in the flow of information.

A third option would be to establish a literal chain of command, wherein overlapping links provide for direct communications between employees and secondary management positions. This could establish greater cohesion while providing quicker responses to new information within an organization. However, it would require smaller spans of control at each level.

 

[Gdjjr]

[QUOTE="Gdjjr, post: 23472317, member: 72639"]Chain of Command Theory Leads to Total Collective Tyranny

A chain of command is merely a description of the responsibility structure of an organization. In theory, this structure allows information to flow in both directions in an efficient manner. However, the human element in middle management often interferes with this flow by withholding information deemed threatening to the individual. One way to address this problem is to allow unfettered communication throughout an organization. However, this can become cumbersome and inefficient in larger organizations. Another way is to establish a "complaint department" designated to receive and process employee input. This provides some protective anonymity, but seldom results in practical improvements in the flow of information.

A third option would be to establish a literal chain of command, wherein overlapping links provide for direct communications between employees and secondary management positions. This could establish greater cohesion while providing quicker responses to new information within an organization. However, it would require smaller spans of control at each level.[/QUOTE]
I don't disagree with your assessment, per se'- however, the author's assessment is a big picture effect whose foundation is formed at an early age in school and carried over in every aspect of life- to wit: "Today’s chain of command in this country consists of the ruling elites in banking and corporate America, followed by the political class, the mainstream media, the controlled university systems, the defenders of this power in the corrupt police and military, and finally the lowly citizenry. This is a top down command structure accomplished by a bottom up strategy. By fooling the common people into accepting desired change from the top, the people actually helped to accomplish the goal of the oligarchs. A similar psychological comparison would be the idea that the individual citizen has power over his rulers because he is allowed to vote in an election. While this is nonsense, it is still believed by most of the common people."
Which leads to my beliefs led by; "The Greater Good is created through Individual effort. It can't be legislated or mandated."
The collective is tyrannical by nature. It is disrespectful to the Individual who is the one who has to put forth the Individual effort even for the collective to be successful- the collective is led by an Individual who exerts his authority and receives only screened rebuttals- that screening is carried out by an Individual or his directives- to ignore the Individual is to ignore one's own worth in any situation. That includes the leader and his screener(s) whose obvious insecurity is bolstered by like minded zealots/acolytes.
It comes back to the lack of education early in life where the lack of a solid foundation is key to a shifting belief based on which way the wind is blowing- being trained in emotional opinion vs a solid knowledge is also disrespectful to the Individual, not to mention society as a whole- the ruling elites, as the author calls them, are very aware of this phenomenon, if not behind it, and use it to their advantage to group people into whatever category they can use to keep us divided- we the stinky tourist allow it if not encourage it because we don't think for ourselves. We follow the lead of a group regardless of how much evidence there is to show the group cares not a whit for anything other than perpetuating itself and certainly doesn't care about the Individual and doesn't want the Individual to think, or act, for himself.

 

[whitehall]

The infamous Supreme Court decision of 1947 that created the barrier between Church and State was intended to curb the proliferation of private (mostly religious) schools that challenged the government run institutions. The "separation of church and state" opinion that had no basis in Constitutional law was authored by a Justice appointed by FDR (Hugo Black) who was a former KKK member. The KKK was infamous for it's bigotry against Black Americans but it also hated Papists (Catholics) and the decision was aimed at Catholic schools at the time. Through the years it was expanded (mostly by democrat institutions) to every aspect of religious belief that used to be guaranteed by the 1st Amendment.

 

[occupied]

Literacy rates in the 19th century were probably much lower than you claim, especially in the South. I was once helping my grandfather do some genealogy research. On the microfilm confederate military records I noticed at least 2 in 5 were signed with an "X" and cosigned by someone who could write. There was also the phenomena of the people who were illiterate but had learned to write their name so I would put literacy rates at closer to 50%.

 

[Gdjjr]

Literacy rates in the 19th century were probably much lower than you claim, especially in the South. I was once helping my grandfather do some genealogy research. On the microfilm confederate military records I noticed at least 2 in 5 were signed with an "X" and cosigned by someone who could write. There was also the phenomena of the people who were illiterate but had learned to write their name so I would put literacy rates at closer to 50%.

I questioned that number as well- still, it wasn't institutionalized illiteracy like we have now-

Many college students struggle with the literacy skills needed to be successful in higher education (Bettinger & Long, 2009; Snyder, Tan, & Hoffman, 2004). The difficulties emerge within students’ capabilities in reading and writing. Students must be taught the skills needed to be successful to complete the tasks assigned in college classes and in their future jobs (Hammond, 2008; Jobs for the Future, 2005). Students must think critically, connect ideas, and complete research projects (O’Sullivan & Dallas, 2010). Poor metacomprehension while reading results in difficulties comprehending text or writing efficiently (Thiede, Griffin, Wiley, & Anderson, 2010; Wood, Motz, & Willoughby, 1998; Yang, 2010). Interventions are essential to enhance comprehension and improve writing skills.

https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/EJ972863.pdf

 

[jwoodie]

The infamous Supreme Court decision of 1947 that created the barrier between Church and State was intended to curb the proliferation of private (mostly religious) schools that challenged the government run institutions. The "separation of church and state" opinion that had no basis in Constitutional law was authored by a Justice appointed by FDR (Hugo Black) who was a former KKK member. The KKK was infamous for it's bigotry against Black Americans but it also hated Papists (Catholics) and the decision was aimed at Catholic schools at the time. Through the years it was expanded (mostly by democrat institutions) to every aspect of religious belief that used to be guaranteed by the 1st Amendment.

I have to agree that the Separation of Church and State decision was made of whole cloth and had no basis in the Constitution, which merely forbade the establishment of a national religion. Perhaps such "interpretations" should be subject to SCOTUS reaffirmation every 20 years or so. It is ridiculous to let judges rewrite the Constitution whenever they they feel like it.