Solidary Confinement
Hello and welcome to the first ever installment of Jazz and Politics.
In holding with the good traditions of blogging, I will never make any sense, and just rant at random about anything and everything that comes to mind, be it political, musical or just general bitterness over the rotten state of the world. The name of my blog may be a bit misleading, as I don't intend to restrict myself to just these two topics. So sue me. Having said this, let us begin.
I'm currently sat at the Finnish Socialdemocratic Youth's biannual congress. Well, atleast I was when I wrote this, right now I'm sat on a bed. It's not even a particularly comfortable bed. I'm told you should first seek to be comfortable before you start talking about politics. Wether that is because you're going to be in the same position for quite some time, or just because the person who said it liked to be comfortable, I do not know. But I digress.
We've just elected a new president for the party. There's a lot of patting each other on the backs, a feeling of well done. Yet is it justified? Over these two days so far I've come to realize we're a horribly stagnated organization. We are a politically correct socialist youth organization, and if there ever has been a greater tragedy, I do not know it.
Political correctness is one of my favored talking points; it is a state of mind I do truly despise. It is a view of the world which is horribly distorted. Instead of seeing the world for what it is, you chose to see a world which is in the fundamentals fair and equal, if not in practice. However this is not the case. The very nature of man is diverse, and we have different premises upon which to build. In the case of many leftist movements, people choose not to see these different premises and instead treat all as one. This leads to a discrimination of people of a higher intellectual potential. You might note that the logical assessment would be that both high and low would fall in between the cracks, however the solidarity of the socialist movement tends to reach out to the weak and do its best to lift them up. Those of a higher intellect however are not treated as kindly. Any mention of IQ in a socialist forum will get you shunned by the rest of the leftists, as if not our movement was based on a tradition of intellectuals. There is in fact a correlation between higher intellectual capacity and leftist political views. Why then do we deny any association with intellectualism? Is it truly so fundamental to solidarity to associate not with the intellectual elite but with the common man and none other, that we choose to completely overlook the needs of the potential leaders of our future?
If you're a politically correct socialist you are probably wondering why I would proclaim any special needs for those of a higher intellectual ability. Fear not, I shalt explain. There are two basic types of high intelligence people. There are those who are born in families with others of equal potential, go to schools with others like them and grow up in a bubble of intellectual discourse. And then there are those who are not. Brought up as part of the general society, they have trouble surpassing the communications barrier which exists between people of different levels of intellect. They have a significantly higher tendency towards mental problems, withdrawal from society and general misanthropy. Because of their intellectual ability, things tend to come easily for them. Confronted with a lack of challenges growing up, they develop a basic understanding of everything, yet never commit to any given thing. They develop a pattern of lazily drifting through life without exercising their mental ability.
I hear you saying that this is all good and well, but how does this become a problem of society as a whole? A definition of genius has been given, in which the common man is fully capable of taking in and making use of information, yet the ability to go beyond what is common knowledge is what makes the genius special. For the progress of society and the well being of us all, the genius should be nurtured and integrated into society, not put down upon and shunned by society. For the betterment of mankind, we need to keep innovating, and the only way to do so is through the cultivation of our greatest natural resource, the human brain. I thus propose that the only truly solidary action is to take into consideration both the needs of high as of low. We need to reform society in a direction where we do not alienate our greatest intellects from society but integrate them into society and show them the measure of respect they deserve.
-Johan
In holding with the good traditions of blogging, I will never make any sense, and just rant at random about anything and everything that comes to mind, be it political, musical or just general bitterness over the rotten state of the world. The name of my blog may be a bit misleading, as I don't intend to restrict myself to just these two topics. So sue me. Having said this, let us begin.
I'm currently sat at the Finnish Socialdemocratic Youth's biannual congress. Well, atleast I was when I wrote this, right now I'm sat on a bed. It's not even a particularly comfortable bed. I'm told you should first seek to be comfortable before you start talking about politics. Wether that is because you're going to be in the same position for quite some time, or just because the person who said it liked to be comfortable, I do not know. But I digress.
We've just elected a new president for the party. There's a lot of patting each other on the backs, a feeling of well done. Yet is it justified? Over these two days so far I've come to realize we're a horribly stagnated organization. We are a politically correct socialist youth organization, and if there ever has been a greater tragedy, I do not know it.
Political correctness is one of my favored talking points; it is a state of mind I do truly despise. It is a view of the world which is horribly distorted. Instead of seeing the world for what it is, you chose to see a world which is in the fundamentals fair and equal, if not in practice. However this is not the case. The very nature of man is diverse, and we have different premises upon which to build. In the case of many leftist movements, people choose not to see these different premises and instead treat all as one. This leads to a discrimination of people of a higher intellectual potential. You might note that the logical assessment would be that both high and low would fall in between the cracks, however the solidarity of the socialist movement tends to reach out to the weak and do its best to lift them up. Those of a higher intellect however are not treated as kindly. Any mention of IQ in a socialist forum will get you shunned by the rest of the leftists, as if not our movement was based on a tradition of intellectuals. There is in fact a correlation between higher intellectual capacity and leftist political views. Why then do we deny any association with intellectualism? Is it truly so fundamental to solidarity to associate not with the intellectual elite but with the common man and none other, that we choose to completely overlook the needs of the potential leaders of our future?
If you're a politically correct socialist you are probably wondering why I would proclaim any special needs for those of a higher intellectual ability. Fear not, I shalt explain. There are two basic types of high intelligence people. There are those who are born in families with others of equal potential, go to schools with others like them and grow up in a bubble of intellectual discourse. And then there are those who are not. Brought up as part of the general society, they have trouble surpassing the communications barrier which exists between people of different levels of intellect. They have a significantly higher tendency towards mental problems, withdrawal from society and general misanthropy. Because of their intellectual ability, things tend to come easily for them. Confronted with a lack of challenges growing up, they develop a basic understanding of everything, yet never commit to any given thing. They develop a pattern of lazily drifting through life without exercising their mental ability.
I hear you saying that this is all good and well, but how does this become a problem of society as a whole? A definition of genius has been given, in which the common man is fully capable of taking in and making use of information, yet the ability to go beyond what is common knowledge is what makes the genius special. For the progress of society and the well being of us all, the genius should be nurtured and integrated into society, not put down upon and shunned by society. For the betterment of mankind, we need to keep innovating, and the only way to do so is through the cultivation of our greatest natural resource, the human brain. I thus propose that the only truly solidary action is to take into consideration both the needs of high as of low. We need to reform society in a direction where we do not alienate our greatest intellects from society but integrate them into society and show them the measure of respect they deserve.
-Johan
posted by Shamad at Sunday, May 28, 2006
2 Comments:
Det är ett intressant moraliskt dilemma du lyfter fram. Jag har för mig att du anklagar skolundervisningen för att den inte tar i beaktande denna lyckligt lottade minoritet. Det som skolundervisningen kan göra i detta fall är väl att stimulera elevens intellekt genom tillämpade uppgifter och genom att uppmuntra honom/henne att utveckla sin förmåga. Att isolera sådana elever i egna skolor är inte ändamålsenligt. I skolan lär sig eleverna trots allt även sociala färdigheter och att fungera i grupp med olika människor. Genom att dela in barn i goda och dåliga skolor, skapar man konstgjorda samhällsklyftor och motsättningar som undergräver den jämlika välfärdsstaten.
Som vi diskuterade under kongressen är det inte skillda skolor jag förespråkar, även om jag nu förstår hur man kan få den bilden av skrivelsen. Den intellektuella "bubblan" är den normala beskrivningen av välanpassade intellektuellas uppväxt, men är inte den ända vägen. Redan de alternativa och kompleterande uppgifterna som Mats Hilli talade om skulle gå långt för att stimulera deras kapacitet och uppehålla deras intresse. Det är efter allt viktigast att göra ingrepp i de lägre stadierna av skolning, efter högstadiet kan då dessa söka till skolor med högre inträdeskrav och därmed skall kunna antas att de finner tillräckliga utmaningar inom dessa skolor. Det viktiga är då att de inte vant sig in i en spiral av apati inför skolarbete, eftersom detta är en ond cirkel som är ytterst svår att bryta. Jag skulle även förespråka att skolhälsovårdare och skolpsykologerna skulle, då lärare lagt märke till en elev som har det väldigt lätt inom skolan, skulle kontakta mensa och att skolsystemet skulle samarbeta med mensa för att ge dessa barn möjligheter att utväklas enligt sin fulla potential. Detta vore icke olikt alla idrottsevenemang som ordnas via skolor, skillnaden vore då att man skulle dra nytta av redan existerande expertis för att driva saken framåt.
Post a Comment
<< Home