This is probably why science standards in so many American school systems are lacking: it’s just that dangerous to the establishment in so many places.
One of the reasons why Germany always had social democratic structures in its political economy is because prior to unification, it was a series of little principalities and kingdoms, each with its own customs agency.
In order to get goods from the landlocked principalities to the sea, merchants had to get their goods across national borders– and yes, deal with the customs when each border was crossed. Some nobles along the Rhine were notorious for charging very high duties to pass through their territory, and these nobles were given the name “Robber Barons.”
To deal with all that custom bureaucracy, the nobles needed a literate population, and they educated their people.
But as their people became more educated, the more they demanded from their rulers, and that’s one reason why the Germans developed the social democratic culture centuries before it became implemented elsewhere.
The American economy now requires very well-educated workers. We are no longer in an economy that can hire large numbers of people for manufacturing jobs. Technology has made a lot of manufacturing jobs obsolete, but technology also means that there are great opportunities.
To fill those opportunities, we need to have a very well-educated workforce.
The problem is that a well-educated workforce will not accept thing the way they are.
And that’s the really the big conflict. People who understand how to think skeptically are very hard to govern, even if they are also the people you need to have a prosperous economy.
That’s one reason why I think the great progressive struggle right now must be the struggle for rationalism and skeptical inquiry.
You cannot lecture to people what the truth is. You must give them the tools to figure out for themselves.
And trust me, most people can figure it out once they learn how to use their brains.
Dr. Tyson actually said “bullshit”? The mind boggles. I’m trying to picture him in one of his TV shows actually saying something as earthy as that. I’m sure he must have but I always get this Mr. Rogers vibe from him. And yet here he is channeling Aron Ra. ;^)
I beg to differ (a little). It is possible to have a technologically sophisticated society that is politically retarded – a lot of technically brilliant fascists. We should remember to include some of those Enlightenment Ideas in our technical ed. programs. But, then, bearing in mind that Enlightenment Ideas lend themselves well to supporting laissez-faire capitalism, we should probably toss in some reminders to the effect that brilliant engineers are still workers. Failure to grok that concept brings about, IMO, a lot of psychological aberration. Just saying. (I’d be hard-pressed to support this point. Need some history courses!)
BTW, how did Germany then get into 2 world wars and the nazi thing? This is not a challenge, just a real question.
Capitalism is older than the Enlightenment, and one should keep in mind that many of the critical left ideas actually stem from Enlightenment thought. Like:
1. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Discourse_on_Inequality
2. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Agrarian_Justice (Which is why I laugh my ass off when I hear Glenn Beck compare himself to Thomas Paine.)
Socialism, in the English tradition at least, goes all the way back to the Rev. John Ball, the Lollard priest, who wrote ” “When Adam delved and Eve span, who was then the gentleman?” That is, where was the class system in genesis?
Thomas Paine was writing about property issues about 150 years after there were various experiments with English socialism, including most famously the Diggers. They based all their socialism on the bible. All of those movements that came out of the defeat of the Royalists during the English Civil war were violent repressed.
Thomas Paine is actually writing a response to those older English social movements and the new sort of laissez-faire- supporting revolutions that were happening all around him.
The Nazis maintained social democratic structures during their rule, and the German Empire before the First World War was the model state that all the early political scientists, including many who would call themselves progressive, admired. There were elections in that Empire and political parties. It was not like the Russian Empire, where one family and its friends had all the rights and political power. The only thing about the German system is, the Kaiser had a lot of power, and it often didn’t matter what the partisan make-up of the parliament was. If the Kaiser wanted it, he got it.
Thank you. I didn’t know all that. I was aware that social progress in America is based on the Christian value of charity. I did not know that any of it went back to the Enlightenment. (Tom Paine invented Social Security?) That is, the Enlightenment opposed social classes based on birth, but I did not know they opposed or even acknowledged class based on anything else. Hmm.. one more argument for better education in history.
The reason I go back to Marx persistently is because people seem not to know the mechanics of capitalsm. The confusion with Christian values actually impedes progress, as far as I can tell, and provides support for obfuscation. For example, I once worked for a family business where we were allowed(!) to discuss whether the company was sufficiently kind to its workers. (It wasn’t: you can take that on faith.) We went back and forth about whether pizza parties and free beer could pay the rent, that sort of thing. What was not tolerated, however, was the idea that the company could not and should not make an attempt to be “kind”, the idea that morality was inappropriate behavior for a capitalist entity. Well, of course: that sort of theory implies that the workers should rise up and attempt to help themselves! I see this problem everywhere, especially among professionals who fancy themselves to be profit centers, who are uncomfortable with the notion that they are mere costs of doing business. We have very smart people who are exploited workers who do not understand the predicament they are in.
That was the problem I was trying to address.
As I recall, Germany ended up in WW2 because of the financial reparations demanded by the victorious countries after WW1. The Weimar republic simply went bust – bankrupt – and in the ensuing chaos there was a place for any strong leader full of promises.
After WW2 the victors helped to restore Germany – so that wouldn`t happen again.
Well, that`s what I was taught.
Elizabeth