The idea of the “rambler” was created by Jim Hegel, (or it might have been Rickie “the people’s person” Engels”) as we all know, as a proposed form of entertainment for his friend Marx, for the times when Marx was not fathering boys on his wife’s serving-maid, in North London.
Nobody who lives there will from now on be able to do anything at all, except supplicate to “Natural England” about the particular shade of white paint to do his windows and doors in. They’ll also have to host thousands and thousands and thousands of parties of comprehensive-school “learners”, doing “Geography Projects” about “Are the South Downs a Honeypot?” and “What is the effect of traffic congestion on the South Downs?”
“Sink schools” exist because the GramscoFabiaNazis have brought them into being on purpose. The justification to create them was the pressing and fast need to de-educate an entire civilisation. Therefore, the punishments for bringing them into being, and which will be retributed from the perpetrators, will be exemplary. I will not say what here: it will be revealed in due course. But the Enemy Class’s surrender will be unconditional, and we have no peace terms at all, to offer for discussion.
The perpetrators of these “sink schools” are not the current “heads”, nor even probably most of the present or absent teachers, or even the poor robbed children – subjected as they are to the planned secondary assault by “popular culture”. The guilty ones (of which there will an excitingly large number) among these Enemy-Class-minor operatives will merely become people without any job or any future income of any kind whatever until their death. No. The War-Criminals are the “educationist” GFNs themselves, and their lackeys and running-dogs of the Enemy-Class, who deliberately planned for the generation of, and required for their success in domination and tyranny, a populace of uncurious helots to be elected as the New People brought into being.
Why do we think that Kenneth Tynan said “f***” on live Tele Vision exactly when he did? Why was sex invented precisely in 1963? It is because the GFNs were ready with the next, the first-occupation-wave, of the assault.
A whole nation’s schools have been used as machinery for the attempted, and largely successful, de-civilising of that entire nation, for the first time in recorded history. In the 1930s, the NSDAP, while “righting” knowledge to make a similar but craftier “people”, was merely tinkering at the edges: they had a global war to win, and “National Socialist Mathematics” was not going to cut the mustard with people like Stalin and the like, as was borne out by uncomfortable fact. Even with my A-level physics teacher on board for the Allies, it was an effing close-run thing.
It will not do to “close sink schools”: there is not time to resurrect proper ones to take the slack, and the damage will continue to be piled up against us if we do not drain the swamp, cleansing out the Augean Stables of wicked doctrine and “unfit thoughts” on day one.The “Nationalised Curriculum” will go, and knowledge and truth will be substituted.
These schools will have to be operated. But the terms will be initially harsh. The first people to get the point of it – after about Day Three – will be the students, who will be our first adherents and supporters in the plan.
There is such a thing as “political correctness”: and it is not what the Enemy Class says it is. It means being right. And they are wrong, they know it, have done it on purpose, and will have to pay.
This government is not content with forcibly occupying schools in the Austro-Serbian-1914 manner. Nor indeed in the manner of that of R3 in post-1933.
I respectfully suggest that this government is determined to exclude from society, and if possible destroy physically even including the use of death, any children whose outlook and innate relpectiveness might prejudice the growth of a population of biddable pro-GramscoFabiaNazi helots.The (a)moral position is halfway achieved already, since today British children are, functionally, State Property.
Hence, “bullying”, a custom long in use by children (until they learn property rights and about liberty) but hiterto controlled adequately by real schools, is allowed and promoted pro-actively. This is actively accomplished in schools by plans known as “anti-bullying policies”.
“Bullying” is probably a primordial hominid-survival-mechanism, useful perhaps 300,000 to 1 million years ago, and probably co-eval with the reise of language as a skill. It may have had a utility in ensuring that the most aggressive and the most “celebrity-clubbable” juveniles (of either sex but mainly males – and who would be popular on account of their size/outgoing-nature/use of growls to threaten predators/warped-sense-of-humour/…etc) survived better in the presence of scarce gatherable resources, to reproduce, at the expense of the more retiring and noncommunicative ones in a group environment. By either killing the “geeks” or driving them off into the bush to be eaten by Short-Arsed-Bears, the survival of the more clubbable and aggressive juveniles could be helped.
My hypothesis may imply that “bullies” could be quite “intelligent”. This is not a problem for me, for most bullies I have ever met were at least not very much more dim than most normal people, and probably had other useful qualities if only these could be exposed and/or channelled.
Regarding “Policies” …. I relate the story of the Bishop who, when asked what was his policy regarding SIN, replied “I’m against it”. Schools today in the UK, for the benefit of our overseas reader, all have to have “policies” tod eal with “bullying”. these are often highly comples and deliberately unintelligible documents (we don’t want parents detecting that the verbiage means sod-all now, do we) which talk about the appointment of “peer mentors” (which is to say other children) to whom one should go on being bullied. Or that “The School absolutely does not tolerate bullying of any kind, and works with the appropriate practitioners, carers and organisations towards a strategy of agreement on how to co-ordinate the relevant activities, measures and experts’ skills in order to formulate a pastoral-care-pathway designed to eliminate the ….”...f***-it – I could go on.
In my day in the 1950s and just after, there was indeed bullying. My parents firstly tried to help me combat it by saying to the bullies: “But I will go to University and you will not!” Poor buggers my parents: they simply didn’t understand the mind of the English young male post-war bully. But schools had a more robust attitude happily. After a little time I was encouraged by the teachers, mostly ex-WW2 RSMs and redundant ex-Imperial ADCs from upper-Jipoopooland, to take matters into my own hands. I was not strong or large, but there were sharp things such as my teeth, fountain pens and compass-points, which it seemed I was not … officially … discouraged from using. So I did.
Injured bullies leaking blood were generally chastised by the nearest teacher and sent to Matron to be sewn up again and given permanganate swabs, plus a stern note to their _Father_ . It stopped after a few weeks, and I was not thereafter troubled.
Bullying will stop if recipients or “bullees” are permitted to retaliate with force. I believe that there are no conditions under which it will stop if the existing “policies” (which expressly preclude absolutely any retaliation by bullees) are allowed to continue. Since the kinds of people targetted as “bullees” are generally either not the product of the Labour-spawned underclass, or else do not generally conform to TV-driven “cultural norms” such as chavs, thugs, hairless-male-youths-who-crash-W-reg-white-Vauxhall-Novas-full-of-girls, and celebs, then “policies” for “anti-bullying” must be a deliberate attempt to wipe out, by self-harm, the young population of those reflective enough not to conform and agree.
I rest my case.
…sorry…the end of the poll-question should have said “The New Utopia”.
Beware the Enemy Class, for this is the sort of thing that its activites being about, and which it likes to do on pupose. It does. Believe me, for I am the Director of Northern Affairs for its opposition, and I sometimes watch in horror. It sets out to cause individual humans, who would otherwise behave normally towards, say, new-born-babies, to just ditch them in the attic in a box, if it means having to not watch Big Brother or Top of the Pops instead. And the removal of anything worthwhile from school learning has only a majority-part in this and not the whole blame.
WE watched, as is usual when we have the time, the Belgian Formula 1 GP, which was slightly less unexciting than normal owing to a good pile-up on the first lap. Perhaps we subliminally enjoyed the implied violence? I do not know….
…There is something wrong with today’s car-racing tracks, which I will deal with in time. But in short, they are (1) too short, (2) have got too many really really sharp corners straight after the start, and (3) don’t allow driver/car-changes midstream if you prang or the driver gets killed, and (4) don’t allow you to jump into the spare car (and where is it then?) while the track is still covered with shrapnel. Peter Davis and I did a nice track nearly two years ago on here, about 26 miles long and rather interesting on Googleearth. We will come back to it. You can serch for it in the meantime.
But…..male aggression. It’s probably one of the things that made Homo sapiens sapiens as successful as (he) is, in the battle for survival against shithead short-arsed-bears bureaucrats, sabre-tooth tigers Soviets, and so on. I have been thinking about this for some time as I find that male students vary considerably in their ability to manage or mask or evince aggression as a statement of attitude, and it does seem to vary corelationally by school. (The Governmint might want to know that.) Janet Daley today examines what she suggests the fascist PC-left have done to being about the explosion of gang culture and knife crime among young boys and young men. It’s worth a read, even though lots of libertarians don’t like her.
In “New Britain”, youth male aggression is not channelled, and so individual directionless crime is rife: why? Because:-
(1) There are no fathers, only “mums”. Girls are born to “mums”, but boys are born by parthenogenesis to “single partners”. “Fathers” are just devices which prodice the necessary gametes, seemingly on demand (I can’t figure out how or why.)
(2) Young boys have to have their heads shaved at three and watch football all day on the Wireless Tele Vision, and “hang out”.
(3) “Schools” have sold their football fields for the building of “affordable housing”, so there are no “competitive sports” which foster “elitism and “inequality” anyway, and so are bad.
(4) The Naitonalised Curriculum has been voided of content and also femiNazised, in order to render school (on purpose) seemingly useless to boys, so that they can be made to prefer streetgangs as a form of daytime outdoor relief.
Socialism (a fungus) of course needs this machinery to propagate within what is otherwise a highly-ordered civilisation, formed sort of accidentally under liberty.
Is socialism a fungus born out of evolution and natural selection, and which exploits a niche? DISCUSS
If you remove all semblence of interesting knowledge – along with anything that helps one’s ability to marshall facts and opinions, let alone distinguish one from the other – from what schools teach, then you will get pupils deciding it’s less depressing for them if they just don’t turn up any more. Frankly, I don’t blame most of the poor little buggers. With of course 50 years of hindsight, I’d be turned off dead by most of what they have to “learn” today. It’s all dressed up as “child-centred” and “relevant” and “interactive”. But to pass the exams, you have to use the words in the Vulgate and tick the right boxes.
Children, by the age of seven – or eight at the very very latest – ought to be able to do long multiplication and long division. This is a simple hominid brain-skill which merely involves adding, takking away, multiplication, simple division, and “place-value” – which the Hindu philosophers invented fourteen centuries ago. None of this was beyond the wit of average, undernourished English boys and girls in the 1950s, such as myself, when sugar was on-ration and we all had Ricketts and Worms (so we must have been “eating healthily”) to do this thing, when we were starving and still bust. It was not even unavailable to people classified as “Dumb Children”, who were classed as “dumb” by their teachers, their schools and their own perfectly willing parents, but who still tried hard, because they were given no option. Like D-Day landings, or Dunkirk, or Alamein, which some of their fathers (whom I of course knew as I played with their sons) had of course experienced without complaint.
Why they therefore can’t do it now must be down to the Universal Provider of the “skill-delivery-system” … which has to be … “The State!” For most of them at least.
And, more worsely, the “Private sector” can afford to mark time and NOT teach cubic factorisation by the age of twelve, because it can still stay ahead even when not doing so.
It cannot be suitable to suggest that the children today are “more dumb” than 50/60 years ago. Therefore, “non-availability-of-skills” has to be down to “non-delivery-of-solutions”.
Instead, they spend seven years, – SEVEN YEARS – in “primary schooling” … and what do they do? They colour in posters about “healthy eating”, and they learn that “The Tudors” were responsible for “Pirates, Smoking and Slavery”, and that Henry the Eighth “had SEX WIVES!!!!”
So….two whole generations wasted… and the best part of a third. And all that time lost. Fred Bloggs, who very kindly sometimes writes for us, asked me the other day about what could be done to rescue the education system in the UK. I had to admit that if I was him, I would not have started from here. And it would take decades, and we probably had run out of time.