Stuff like this is why we get parents claiming that teachers are trying to indoctrinate children.
So it's not vocab knowledge on the part of the parents? Because a teacher's job is literally to indoctrinate.
Why We Banned Legos (2006)
91–100 of 440 posts
Re: Why We Banned Legos (2006)
#92This article is the best argument for unsupervised free play that I've seen. Adults have no business moralizing and interfering as children negotiate relationships on their own. It's developmentally important. Children who lack that experience will constantly look for authoritative arbiters of the relationships. That's the soil that societal authoritarianism grows in.
Absolutely not. “Negotiation of relationships” practically means bullying and all sorts of antisocial and abusive behavior. There must be boundaries set by adults.
Right!? This person must have never been on the bottom of the social totem pole in school or I guess thought suffering traumatic abuse made them stronger or something.
The power struggles of kids at that age are honestly more extreme than what adults face because kids are forced to interact, have low agency outside of play, and underdeveloped empathy.
Re: Why We Banned Legos (2006)
#93They banned them because the teachers hadn't been paying attention (and kids were hoarding the "good pieces"), and brought them back with three rules: 1. everyone can play with any structure but you can't change someone else's structure 2. play has to be together 3. all structures must be a standard size So, Minecraft claims.
Pretty much. It's a basic story of teaching kids about unfairness and how to play nicely with each other. The hysteria in some of these comments is baffling.
But I think the issue is the reliance on "the system" to correct that for you.
You can't build the best structure if the system doesn't like it
You just wait for hand outs, the system will make it correct for you.
In a non-ironic way, this sort of regulation came from ethic systems like a sense of community it the dreaded religion system (help the poor, tithe 10% gains for God) but are now being trained to be replaced by the mechanics of a political governance system.
I think most conservatives take to the individual responsibility for this reason. One I personally subscribe to.
(Edit: not sure why the downvotes? Sorry if I'm incorrect, just trying to feel out ideas)
Re: Why We Banned Legos (2006)
#94Earlier quoted context omitted.
On the one hand, the kids had developed a system that excluded other kids from playing. Past generations would use this as an opportunity to teach sharing and taking turns. These teachers, on the other hand, took it as an opportunity to teach socialism and collectivism.
>On the one hand, the kids had developed a system that excluded other kids from playing. according to the teachers. they are not a reliable unbiased source here. they are seeing everything through a marxist lens of exploitation. but we don't have the kulak-kids' side of the story.
I've been in a foster home with a wide age span. Big kids hogging all the good pieces so that little kids don't get any checks out.
Re: Why We Banned Legos (2006)
#95I feel visceral disgust reading this article. It seems like the kids were playing with each other in a healthy way and the teachers interposed themselves to change how the kids were playing for political and ideological reasons. This is disgusting to me because I think it's analogous to physical abuse. A teacher hitting a child is bad not just because it's a violent crime, but also because children are especially vul…
They spent WEEKS doing this! And did you get the part where all of their "sessions" with the kids were being recorded and analyzed? And the things they said were used against them in future lessons?
Re: Why We Banned Legos (2006)
#96>We saw the decimation of Lego-town as an opportunity to launch a critical evaluation of Legotown and the inequities of private ownership and hierarchical authority on which it was founded. Wealth redistribution is fun and games, until they take everything you have and also kill you and your family. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Execution_of_the_Romanov_famil...
Surely these teachers who reject private ownership share all their wealth and own as little as possible?
Hierarchical authority as part of private ownership is especially hilarious as the teachers make brutal decisions like taking all of Legotown away. Disowning and redistribution requires the hardest and cruelest of authorities.
Re: Why We Banned Legos (2006)
#97Earlier quoted context omitted.
I really want to know what you see the difference to be.
Sharing and taking turns is interpersonal generosity which works very well in the real world. Socialism and collectivism is enforced resource allocation typically requiring authoritarian rule which typically becomes oppressive when manifest in the real world.
[deleted]
Re: Why We Banned Legos (2006)
#98Earlier quoted context omitted.
I really want to know what you see the difference to be.
Sharing and taking turns is interpersonal generosity which works very well in the real world. Socialism and collectivism is enforced resource allocation typically requiring authoritarian rule which typically becomes oppressive when manifest in the real world.
except... it isn't? that's literally not what socialism or collectivism is. socialism is just the idea that "wealth" (or any substitute, like lego) should be owned by the community, and rules that bind that community should be made by a consensus of the members.
Re: Why We Banned Legos (2006)
#99Earlier quoted context omitted.
Intervening when some of the kids are hogging all the pieces doesn't seem all that unreasonable, especially since, in this case, the adults noticed it was mostly older kids not letting any of the younger kids play with any of the pieces. That's not a healthy environment. That's literally the big man screwing over the little man.
I don't have a problem with telling kids they have to share if they can't work it out. I do have a problem with the 90% of the article that was about the teachers pushing their ideological beliefs on the children who defenseless against the adults indoctrinating them.
You clearly read your own bias into the article, because nothing about it rises to the 90% hype angle you're pushing.
Re: Why We Banned Legos (2006)
#100I feel visceral disgust reading this article. It seems like the kids were playing with each other in a healthy way and the teachers interposed themselves to change how the kids were playing for political and ideological reasons. This is disgusting to me because I think it's analogous to physical abuse. A teacher hitting a child is bad not just because it's a violent crime, but also because children are especially vul…
They spent WEEKS doing this! And did you get the part where all of their "sessions" with the kids were being recorded and analyzed? And the things they said were used against them in future lessons?
"reflecting on things that you've learned is indoctrination, actually"