Youth Rights

Discussion in 'Health and Lifestyle' started by catzmeow, Dec 18, 2008.

  1. catzmeow
    Offline

    catzmeow BANNED

    Joined:
    Aug 14, 2008
    Messages:
    24,064
    Thanks Received:
    2,922
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Location:
    Gunshine State
    Ratings:
    +2,974
    Posted by Agna in another thread:

    Okay, you've posted this in it's entirety, but it is not all entirely relevant to a discussion of youth rights in the U.S.:

     
    Last edited: Dec 18, 2008
  2. pegwinn
    Offline

    pegwinn Top of the Food Chain

    Joined:
    Apr 17, 2004
    Messages:
    2,549
    Thanks Received:
    329
    Trophy Points:
    98
    Location:
    Texas
    Ratings:
    +329
    Youth liberation?

    Sure. At the moment they are an adult they are liberated. Until then, they live in PEGWINNLand and I am the All-Knowing-All-Seeing-Lord-Protector-and-Benevolent-Despot.
     
    • Thank You! Thank You! x 2
  3. catzmeow
    Offline

    catzmeow BANNED

    Joined:
    Aug 14, 2008
    Messages:
    24,064
    Thanks Received:
    2,922
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Location:
    Gunshine State
    Ratings:
    +2,974
    Dude, tell the truth. That's when WE get liberated...from car pools, balanced meals, not drinking too much in front of the kids, being quiet during sex, etc.
     
    • Thank You! Thank You! x 1
  4. pegwinn
    Offline

    pegwinn Top of the Food Chain

    Joined:
    Apr 17, 2004
    Messages:
    2,549
    Thanks Received:
    329
    Trophy Points:
    98
    Location:
    Texas
    Ratings:
    +329
    LOL. There are certainly benefits at our end.
     
  5. editec
    Offline

    editec Mr. Forgot-it-All

    Joined:
    Jun 5, 2008
    Messages:
    41,427
    Thanks Received:
    5,598
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Location:
    Maine
    Ratings:
    +5,618
    God bless the child that's got his own.
     
  6. pegwinn
    Offline

    pegwinn Top of the Food Chain

    Joined:
    Apr 17, 2004
    Messages:
    2,549
    Thanks Received:
    329
    Trophy Points:
    98
    Location:
    Texas
    Ratings:
    +329
    Eh? Got his own what? C'mon I'm having a dummy moment here.....
     
  7. Agnapostate
    Offline

    Agnapostate BANNED

    Joined:
    Sep 19, 2008
    Messages:
    6,860
    Thanks Received:
    344
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Location:
    The Quake State
    Ratings:
    +344
    So this is the "evisceration" I've heard about? Oh, dear. :lol:

    On the contrary, you're clearly unfamiliar with the history of the American schooling system and the American labor system as it relates to "minors." The beginning of child labor laws were not ill-conceived in that they were intended to protect the most vulnerable members of society from brutal work conditions. But activists like Jane Addams went too far in applying these same restrictions to individuals with the rights of adults, and to forms of employment that were relatively benign. More than that, a degree of malevolence and greed was later responsible for youths' expulsion from the workplace and coerced entry into the schoolhouse. Examine the sadly crooked graph below.

    [​IMG]

    Notice that the number of white males aged 16 in school prior to 1930 and beyond exceeded that of the number of white males aged 16 that were working, but not by a substantial amount. In the early 1930's, however, with more than a quarter of the population unemployed due to the Great Depression, the government was successful in passing legislation largely eliminating youth from the formal workforce, eliminating them as a source of competition for the multitudes of unemployed workers. Previous attempts to do this, such as the Keating-Owen Child Labor Act of 1916, were declared unconstitutional by the U.S. Supreme Court. (See Hammer v. Dagenhart.) But this process was renewed once the Depression was in full swing through measures such as the 1933 National Industrial Recovery Act, which set a minimum working age of 16 in many industries. This second attempt to expand the Commerce Clause was again declared unconstitutional in Schechter Poultry Corp. v. United States. Not to be deterred, several components of the 1936 Walsh-Healey Public Contracts Act included federal guidelines prohibiting "child labor." The Fair Labor Standards Act of 1938 was the final nail in the coffin, and essentially established the current working age of 16.

    Now, I don't know if this "suburban child" mention is a reference to my own childhood, but I have a slight suspicion that you're a bit more "suburban" than me, if it is. Since you choose to focus on my personal characteristics here and elsewhere...I'm Mexican, and an indio Mexican at that. I live in L.A. And not some lovely little neighborhood in Beverly Hills either. You, on the other hand, are...not...and you "work with" racial minorities or troubled youth or some other shit.

    Unsurprisingly, you have utterly conflated the meanings of "school" and "education." Though the basis of the American schooling system was of a similarly well-meaning manner at first, various negative intentions Directly contrary to your claim, one of the primary purposes of the establishment of the school system was to ensure "industrial discipline."

    To quote Grace Llewellyn's own quotation of historian Lawrence A. Cremin, author of American Education: The National Experience 1783-1876,

    "[Factories] required a shift from agricultural time to the much more precise categories of industrial time, with it's sharply delineated and periodized workday. Moreover, along with this shift in rhythm, the factory demanded concomitant shifts in habits and attention and behaviour, under which workers could no longer act according to whim or preference but were required instead to adjust to the needs of the productive process and the other workers involved in it...The schools taught [factory behaviour], not only through textbook preachments, but also through the very character of their organization--the grouping, periodizing, and objective impersonality were not unlike those of the factory."

    To branch into another facet of my anarcho-syndicalist beliefs, (Yes, I read what you wrote about Professor Chomsky, and I know that you think anarchists are idiots, but that's too bad), this "industrial discipline" is preserved not only in the industrial sector, but in the technological, medical, and "information" sectors that you mentioned. Though I'm deviating from standard youth rights doctrine into my own personal beliefs, the preservation of hierarchical management inhibits the efficiency of the workplace, even in an industrialized first-world country. As you ought to know, the libertarian socialist recognizes that the formal certification process involved in the school system is not necessarily involved with skill level, as the orthodox economist will claim, but with a basis for instilling "industrial discipline" in future workers so that they might perpetuate a system of hierarchical wage labor.

    Had I time, I would elaborate on such modern successes as the Brukman Factory and the Hotel Bauen in Buenos Aires, and the Fabrica Sin Patrones, and the 200+ workplaces and 10 to 15 thousand workers that now operated using direct democracy and workers' self-management in order to illustrate the successes of autogestion.

    But I digress. The "industrial discipline" that students are indoctrinated with while in schools is wholly inapplicable to many facets of a post-industrial society, as the technological, medical, and information sectors that you mentioned often require greater innovative skills than are provided by such indoctrination.

    Consider the words of Dan Greenberg.

    "In the post-industrial society there is essentially no place for human beings who are not able to function independently. There is no room for people trained to be cogs in a machine. Such people have been displaced permanently from the economic system. The economic demands of post-industrial America are something that you hear from personnel directors in every industry and company today, small or large. The demands are for creative people with initiative, self-starters, people who know how to take responsibility, exercise judgment, make decisions for themselves."

    I'll be willing to wager that these dangerous sectors remain preferable to criminal ventures that those prohibited from meaningful work are attracted to. You also need another reminder of the facets and components of dual labor market theory. Since you continue to operate on the incorrect assumption that I, ASFAR, or any other youth rights activist is content to preserve the school system in its current condition, you incorrectly assume that we would be content to permit the current state of affairs go on as it is.

    I see we're moving on to the personal jabs. Just for the sake of "informing" you, I'm quite familiar with the jobs that illegal immigrants do. Whether it's my grandfather's strenuous toil in the bracero program, my uncle's collapse in a ditch in a vineyard, or the rest of my family's numerous experiences, including my mother's, I'm quite familiar with the struggle of immigrants. I'm also familiar with the society that they're forced to live in when they're not permitted to emigrate. Even the affluent are afflicted...was it fair for my cousin to be kidnapped and killed even after her father paid the local cartel $4 million for her return? I think not. So believe me, I'm quite familiar with the struggle of immigrants.

    Again, I would encourage you to study the facets and components of dual labor market theory. The primary labor sector is the ideal one, in which "skilled" workers, often unionized, and with a considerable capacity to promote to higher positions and earn higher wages and benefits. The secondary labor sector

    They would not, because you continue to operate on the inaccurate assumption that we wish to change nothing except child labor laws.

    Indeed. But we have already addressed the nature of the current school system as it relates to the indoctrination of "industrial discipline." Rest assured, this is not a radical tenet espoused only by me. Consider what Reiver, my fellow socialist, has had to say on the matter.

    Political Forum - View Single Post - Capitalism vs Socialism

    "Consider, for example, education. That should fullfil the human capital investment role. Indeed, orthodox and radical schools agree that such a role exists. However, the socialist is able to also refer to the consequences of hierarchy. They'd acknowledge that such hierarchy isn't simply based on 'division of labour' criteria (in order to maximise productivity). Instead, its about controlling labour militancy (and therefore maintaining economic rents). Education then has the additional role of legitimising that hierarchy (e.g. you do not attend university to increase your productivity, you attend to achieve the certification required to be considered for the 'good jobs'). This will then suggest the social benefits from education are not fully realised (e.g. see Britain where its tertiary education investments have reduced social mobility, given it provides extra opportunities to lower ability youngsters from high income backgrounds). To deliver optimal education we'd need a socialist economy."

    You should familiarize yourself with these components of political economy before making such remarks.

    Congratulations on completely ignoring the UNICEF study, which I again brought to your attention this morning. Though the raw numbers and rates between the United States and Bangladesh are very obviously different, the two nations share a common framework of a dual labor market among many populations. According to the UNICEF study that I cited earlier, after the implementation of the Child Labor Deterrence Act, which prohibited the importation of goods produced by child labor, UNICEF estimates that 50,000 children lost employment positions in the garment industry, and instead were forced to resort to "stone-crushing, street hustling, and prostitution," all of which UNICEF described as being "more hazardous and exploitative than garment production." Consider the commentary of the UNICEF study regarding the wisdom of attempting to outright prohibit child labor.

    I would advise you to familiarize yourself with this data.

    You continue to conflate schooling with education, and are unable to proceed further until you are able to comprehend dual labor market theory and the industrial discipline promoted by the school system.

    I don't know why you keep reverting to this belief that you and your daughter constitute the center of the universe. This "absurd rhetoric" refers to the attitudes of many anti-youth commentators in the media, which is atrociously biased against youth as a whole.

    Obviously, I don't agree, considering that these pursuits don't end up producing a meaningful result in many cases. Youth may have their minimum wages...that may still be garnered by their guardians. Once they possess the capacity to sign legal contracts, own property, and work as they please, then perhaps we shall agree on this matter.

    Indeed. But what about my paragraph?

    One wonders whether this would be a problem were they not legally bound to them. Your problem is that you place an inordinate amount of focus on one issue, and assume that we are interested in reforming that issue while otherwise maintaining our current state of affairs, which is not the case.

    Just a little tip: I have a feeling I've spent a bit more time in the inner city than you have. My family's been spread out over various parts of South L.A. and the surrounding county; Watts, Compton, South Gate...thankfully, many of them have moved on to a position of greater affluence at this point. But really...you're white. You "work with 'troubled' youth." I live with so-called "troubled youth." I grew up with them. We went to school together. We got kicked out of school together. We went to continuation school together. I have a feeling I know them.

    As to the comment made outside of the personal attack, evaluate a student of Summerhill School and evaluate a student from a hierarchical, authoritarian, typical school, and tell me which has encountered preferable conditions.

    You already know for a fact that I dispute that.

    More yammering that ignores the aforementioned realities of dual labor market theory and the industrial discipline of the current school system.

    I'd say the same to the above, but it's one inane sentence.

    Ah yes, your daughter. As earth-shattering a revelation as this may be, there are other youth in existence besides your daughter. Your observation of your daughter, a single individual, does not form a basis for any capacity to judge the capacities of youth as a whole, which is one of the reasons that your "criticisms" contain such gaping flaws.

    Mmkay. Guten tag, mein herr.

    As much fun as these things are, my anarchist friends already gave me that and more. Hence, my own fleeting "adolescence" (essentially gone now) was enjoyable enough.
     
    Last edited: Dec 29, 2008
  8. Modbert
    Offline

    Modbert Daydream Believer Supporting Member

    Joined:
    Sep 2, 2008
    Messages:
    33,178
    Thanks Received:
    2,957
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Ratings:
    +2,962
    Alright Agna, without giving me some long-winded explaination.

    Simply put:

    What do you consider "economic power"?

    And why do you feel youths should have "political power" and the right to bear arms?

    Youths, I also assume you define as 12/13-17.
     
  9. Agnapostate
    Offline

    Agnapostate BANNED

    Joined:
    Sep 19, 2008
    Messages:
    6,860
    Thanks Received:
    344
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Location:
    The Quake State
    Ratings:
    +344
    Economic power amounts to the right to freely work, the right to own property, and the right to sign legal contracts.

    I feel that youth should have the other rights because they are rational agents capable of making informed decisions about their present and future lives, and have successfully accomplished such endeavors in the past. Modern adolescence is only about a century old. The word "teenager" first appeared in print sometime around...1943, I believe.
     
  10. AllieBaba
    Offline

    AllieBaba BANNED

    Joined:
    Oct 2, 2007
    Messages:
    33,778
    Thanks Received:
    3,648
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Ratings:
    +3,650
    They are not rational agents. That's where everything falls to pieces.

    Well, it also falls to pieces when you say that allowing children into the work force will improve safety, lol. That's pretty much understood by all the free world to be a lie, and is why the child labor laws were put into effect in the first place. Children were working in mines, in mills, in boats, in factories, and dying in droves. Being starved, beaten, etc. because they were considered little adults, with the same ability to reason and function...and predators took advantage of them then, as they would now, given the opportunity.
     

Share This Page