How many people remember the 1963 Disney cartoon film The Sword in the Stone? Like many works from that era which are tailored for children, there is a segment portraying dogmatic thinking as unattractive. The film also seems to embrace having an open mind towards facts and learning.
Here is a snippet:
Today, there is much less endorsement for this sort of thing - for children to be well-read, independent thinking and intellectually curious. The new frame of mind carries over into attitudes towards home schooling and affects attitudes towards higher education. For example, we tend to trust those who have the "certification stamp" from certain schools although, in many cases, getting such a stamp requires one to not be independent thinking or intellectually curious - at least as far as the spin on curriculum is concerned.
Is being educated and book-wise only "good" when it comes to certain subjects and material from certain sources? Who decides which and who? And, if truth is still what we are after, and truth is still considered "good", then why is inquiry and debate discouraged? Is the Enlightenment dead? Or was it simply a tool used to undermine the values and beliefs of one elite's dogma and replace them with another?
Tying directly into the theme of dogma, free-thought and censorship, Armed with Knowledge's YouTube channel is apparently back online four months after YouTube terminated it, although all videos and commentary were purged from existence; because we have seen this sort of thing before, I am inclined to think that this latest move is not so much of a YouTube hat tip to the open democratic forum than it is something like an animal toying with its prey, waiting for the victim to expel energy while thinking it is free, all just to take pleasure in watching the struggle and finally re-exert the same crushing dominance and power.
The thing is, I have no interest in playing such games with YouTube - or expelling energy and investing time just to watch my work and time investment turned to dust. And I especially feel this way if it means posting work that diverts traffic from YouTube's rivals, who give the American public greater access to the truth, and thus give the American public a better chance to make its decisions based on that rather than the unchallengeable influence of a certain elite plutocracy and their smoke and mirrors - even if that means investing in a foreign country. Because here is the thing: either we Americans value Enlightenment principles, or we do not; either we Americans believe in the principles of informed democracy, or we do not. These are not concepts to just be summoned in name for their emotional value, or selectively used just to get certain ideas out, only to slam the door on others. But that is exactly what is happening, and has been happening for quite some time in the name of defending "liberal democracy" while implementing a grid of control that keeps the challenge to power that could unfold from an open forum democracy at bay.
Here is a snippet:
Today, there is much less endorsement for this sort of thing - for children to be well-read, independent thinking and intellectually curious. The new frame of mind carries over into attitudes towards home schooling and affects attitudes towards higher education. For example, we tend to trust those who have the "certification stamp" from certain schools although, in many cases, getting such a stamp requires one to not be independent thinking or intellectually curious - at least as far as the spin on curriculum is concerned.
Is being educated and book-wise only "good" when it comes to certain subjects and material from certain sources? Who decides which and who? And, if truth is still what we are after, and truth is still considered "good", then why is inquiry and debate discouraged? Is the Enlightenment dead? Or was it simply a tool used to undermine the values and beliefs of one elite's dogma and replace them with another?
Tying directly into the theme of dogma, free-thought and censorship, Armed with Knowledge's YouTube channel is apparently back online four months after YouTube terminated it, although all videos and commentary were purged from existence; because we have seen this sort of thing before, I am inclined to think that this latest move is not so much of a YouTube hat tip to the open democratic forum than it is something like an animal toying with its prey, waiting for the victim to expel energy while thinking it is free, all just to take pleasure in watching the struggle and finally re-exert the same crushing dominance and power.
The thing is, I have no interest in playing such games with YouTube - or expelling energy and investing time just to watch my work and time investment turned to dust. And I especially feel this way if it means posting work that diverts traffic from YouTube's rivals, who give the American public greater access to the truth, and thus give the American public a better chance to make its decisions based on that rather than the unchallengeable influence of a certain elite plutocracy and their smoke and mirrors - even if that means investing in a foreign country. Because here is the thing: either we Americans value Enlightenment principles, or we do not; either we Americans believe in the principles of informed democracy, or we do not. These are not concepts to just be summoned in name for their emotional value, or selectively used just to get certain ideas out, only to slam the door on others. But that is exactly what is happening, and has been happening for quite some time in the name of defending "liberal democracy" while implementing a grid of control that keeps the challenge to power that could unfold from an open forum democracy at bay.
