Wednesday, March 22, 2017

Education goals. No, Judge Gorsuch. No limits fixed in advance based on status. No mestnichestvo here.


Mestnichestvo in America.
Creeping Crud in the Social Realm.
Russia saddled. 

Russia couldn't rid itself of it, and neither can we 
If mestnichestvo takes hold even one inch more. 

Russia? Russia? Did somebody say Russia? 

I.  Topic.  Reasons to say no to Judge Gorsuch:  Our kids.  Reject his position to fix status by statute, to  limit in advance what education is appropriate for a child unable to attend school in a regular classroom.  See https://www.nytimes.com/2017/03/22/us/politics/gorsuch-education.html?_r=0.  Extend a hand to the child measured as an individual, and the caretakers who yearn to breathe a little more freely, by funding regular opportunity at a reasonable level. Choose equitable, as part of any policy.

That helping hand  is as American as -- as what?

Well, look at our own heritage.  Freebies, strategically and equitably offered, are our warp and woof. Warp and weft?
  • Freebies. Part of our great tradition? Yes, freebies are just that. Part of our warp and woof. See Freebies in American History. The main problem is not the fact of someone gets a chance to improve quality of life. It is is that someone who had felt superior feels threatened by the movement of others, outside the imposed lower rank allotted to them as the exploitable, there to be exploited. That may even mean that the person on top is not there by merit. So the ones on top put back the fence, make it higher.
    • Remember the era of 40 acres and a mule to former slaves after the Civil War. Once it was realized that whites also could use that land, the benefit disappeared for blacks.
    • Freebies: Look at its broader context, its role in the "superiority" of those on top. Inheritance rights even with some tax is also a freebie. It is a matter of law. No merit required. Statutory succession is there for you, apart from objective merit.
    II. Purposeful Ramble

    A. Examine ranks, status in our society. How is it like mestnichestvo. Other cultures have worshipped rank, hierarchy and status as fore-ordained:  How did that work out?  Feudalism, and, in old Russia, mestnichestvo.   Rights recognized as to children. or those born outside the marital sheets, or on a non-center area in spectrum of gender, all reflect hierarchy and conscious law. Some are valid for other reasons than mere status; a child's rights do not extend to his making his own health and safety decisions all the time.
    B.  Mestnichestvo. Back to current politics.  Judge Gorsuch whose opinion determined that a child need get from the state only minimal education if he cannot attend a regular classroom. Clear mestnichestvo. System of rank and privilege predefined.  Just plug the person in the slot.
    Mestnichestvo: A system to fix status and privilege, role and rank. See https://russiacontextrussiaroadways.blogspot.com/2016/11/russia-glossary-ranks-A-Z-boyar-russ-rus-varyag-varangian-more.html  Mestnichestvo was abolished by statute finally in the 19th Century.
    • Since that formal repudiation of legal mestnichestvo in Russia, however, there have been and are those who get around that legal inconvenence by simply taking more than their reasonably fair share of something, or issuing executive orders, kleptocracy-like. 
    • These swipings have ramifications in social attitudes, resources to be allotted,and must be examined, contained if need be for a common good.  Let them stay around long enough, and they tend to become "normal."

    C.  What provisions can we make, as a nation, to foster merit rather than definition by condition that is beyond that person's control.  Who gets opportunity affects productivity not only of that person, by foreclosing possbility, but also of the caretakers who get no reprieve.
    • Start with financial support for overall quality of life, in a spectrum of activities, arts, child care, eduction, mobility, training for modern jobs, enrichment, health so somebody can decently get out of the house to do more of something.  
    • This also means a look at caretaking for elderly now sitting in rings in their wheelchairs, noddingly drugged.  For whose benefit is that? In privately run facilities, it does increase the profit margin because less physical supervision is needed. Is that inevitable?
    • What does that enrichment equitably cost?  For the families freed of anxiety, and the person. Example.  
      • What if we allocated a percentage of all income from all sources derived and from anywhere that exceeds triple the poverty level as set by (think bipartisan, how to factor regional differences, etc).
    D. Funding reasonable opportunity so more people can be productive, including caretakers:

    An allocation (yes, tax for the privilege of being an American, perhaps) of everyone's income over 3X poverty, and problem solved and nobody put in poverty, many lifted out, and why not/  Think about it.  Budget problems solved, some equity restored, and, really, like the workers on Bloody Sunday, 1905 St. Petersburg Russia, demands of regular people are not outlandish.  Just bend, you tsars, just a little.

    Common sense for a common good. The people hope that the idea of a common good has taken root in Gorsuch.

    1.  Explore, Judge Gorsuch.  What are our kids capable of? Not yours, who are fine and in your accepted parameters of worthiness. Ours is a reasonable inquiry.  We don't throw assets away.
    • Explore and find that my kid exceeds yours in compassion, street smarts, historical knowledge, initiative, job performance over 20 years and still going.
    • How did that happen? Him, himself, plus systems that welcomed him.
      • Outside school  No two families work out the same mix of interest, risk-tolerance, combined with the qualities of the kid in question ( now adult), but let people find out. 
        • Financially a little help  property dispensed and overseen (yes, there is a place for agency administration) would make a big difference and lead to more productivity for more than the child.
        • We budgeted for him, less than a car would cost a "normal" guy, he contributed, and he went to where the history was, and it stuck.  He has a lifetime fascination going.   That is freeing for all of us.
        • What would other families do? Not our route, probably (very nontraditonal) but let them work it out.
    Could Judge Gorsuch think big and more broadly in terms of society's total productivity, of course.  Judge Gorsuch.  Rights to opportunity have a ripple effect.




    Hear the opposition: No opportunity that those on the bottom do not earn, now. Let serfs stay serfs, let the landed keep their lands and privilege and welcome another Bloody Sunday. Down Syndrome in Russia: may be improving but ,ong way to go, while we regress? http://www.newsweek.com/2016/07/01/down-syndrome-kids-russia-472276.html
    Hear the families, not raised to enjoy Mrs. Burgwin's Dancing Classes. How does anyone raise a child these days, much less include enrichment?  See  Parents and the High Cost of Daycare)  Universal basics even makes more (here you go) capitalism possible because people have money to spend.  How will you rule, Judge?  For American mestnichestvo, as the current majority House and Senate now seem to want? Or a higher water level for everyone, and (ahem) more capitalism opportunity, but of course that means competition and the uppers can't have that, can they.

    Mestnichestvo says you have no rights to quality of life. You serve the Estate. And they hold the Estate. So far. 

    No comments: