They've commenced the 'new' year in the same way as the 'old' one expired--plus Norway has secured 11m bird flu doses (two per resident), just in case you wondered if anyone learned a damned thing
This is what drives people to do hallucinogens. You just can't make it up that goverments have taken that book, Lies, Damn Lies and Statistics and used it as a training manual. And they have the major publish or perish Journals similarly allowing for us to read their junk science while hiding actual science outcomes. We're living in a reality exercise of their choosing and with their obvious choice of bad intent as an desired outcome.
Don't you think reality is already stranger than fiction at this point?
While I think you're right about the training manual here, I don't think anyone has read these materials. (My personal experience in Norway with admin people doing some kind of 'info' workshop or the like is typically having these people read PP slides…)
It is obvious these “scientists” are well aware who is signing their checks. They can think of no alternatives but to serve the Beast. Wage slavery enslaves.
Absolutely! People self-correct before it is even required of them. Too many are so captured cannot even see reality around them that clashes with their allowable thought frameworks. We are controlled mainly through a tight control of our thoughts. Most cannot discern they are manipulated; only ‘the other" side is manipulated; the "other side" is just a mirror image of them.
People are naturally inclined to think in binary terms (e.g. night and day, good and evil,…). Propaganda takes full advantage of this weakness.
Have you noticed that the structure of the language used in these and virtually all reports nowadays are identical, as if it was a fill-in-the-blanks kind of document makro that had been used?
There's zero variance, zero personality, zero individuality to phrases and phrasing or to descriptions. It's a poverty and paucity of expression even more trite and void than Hollywood-writing.
There's absolutely no discrepancy or conflict between writing a perfectly scientific paper on whatever, and writing it using your own personal style and mode of language.
It reads to me like the natural scientists are simply filling out forms. But why this bother over a personal (and professional) quibble?
Because language is thought, and what you express using language is what limits your thought; limited expression equals limited thought.
It is my suspicion that on a rather subtle and innocuous and subconscious level, the nivellation of style readily apparent to any reader of scientific journals on some natural science or other is a great part of the "likriktning"* of thought in the scientific community.
This something that was debated and warned about in the early 1990s when spell-checkers started to become normal, and again when they started suggesting the meaning and definition of words. If you can control what is an anto-/synonym, and if you can control which word means what and remove meanings you do not like. . . You don't even need an actual Though Police. Even if all the data points one way (mRNA-injections are dangerous in the extreme), the human mind looking at that data won't be able to host that thought, since [mRNA-vaccines] as an idea have been hard-coded to mean [safe and effective].
Against this, any and all academics and teachers in the social sciences and humanities and arts, are honour-bound to fight, because as history has proven - the engineers, tech-heads, natural scientists are completely unable to understand with what ease they can be steered and manipulated, since they think their science objective and "pure".
*Making all things point the same way; also, "lik" is "Leich" in Swedish, so it can also be read as "having as much free will and choice as does a corpse". "Lik" = "them same as" or "resembling", and "corpse". "Riktning" = "direction", physical or metaphysical or other.
I obviously noticed the creeping petrification and simplification of language use, and I can assure you that this is also a thing in the humanities and esp. the social sciences nowadays.
To cite but one anecdote: I typically ask all 'my' new graduate students (whom I supervise/mentor for 2 years during their MA training) about the last non-academic (i.e. fiction) book they've read. Most struggle to name an individual book (among the weirder ones was this one student a few years ago who, upon 'thinking aloud' for 2-3 minutes, merely came up with 'The Hobbit'.)
The core problems--in my view/experience--are family background and social environs during the formative years in high school and college: as to the family background, as an expat academic with kids, I've seen numerous living rooms of fellow academics in the past 10-12 years; nine out of ten of these apartments now don't include bookshelves in their living rooms (which used to be the number one indicator of middle class-ness, if you'd consider ownership of a multi-vol. encyclopaedia for instance). As regards the latter, the social milieux among esp. STEM students is so reading-averse with respect to classics, fiction, and even unrelated academic texts that it's obvious to me why they suck at writing: they were never reading long-form texts (fiction and non-fiction), which is ultimately compounded by the tendency in the STEM subjects to write article-based dissertations--doing so also abbreviates the flow of thought, one never really gets to develop an argument in excess of 8-10K words, etc. (As an aside, I'm observing article-based dissertations becoming more and more pervasive in the humanities and the social sciences, and I can assure you from painful personal experience how crappy most presentations are…)
Schooling these days compounds these problems, esp. in Scandinavia with its para-ideological ethos of making all kids equal and waiting for the weakest. I typically tell me elder daughter to bring a book and read if bored at school, but she says that's not allowed…
The lack of bookshelves is terrifying but not surprising. I try to keep a tab on what I’m reading and try to at least read a book a week. I only read around 47 last year but I put that down to spending 7 months reading the Bible cover to cover. It helps that mass entertainment has devolved to the level of dog shit. And as for your child not being allowed read in school… that pretty much sums up what passes for a school these days. My day job is private education so I see the fallout from what passes for schooling these days.
Oh, it's as you say: terrifying but hardly surprising.
I only read in my 'spare time'--it's something I so greatly enjoy doing that I consume books at a comparable rate, although I don't know because I don't count them; when I'm done with one, I'll grab the next one (or practice the playing the piano, which I recently had re-tuned to 432 Hz--and I'm loving it even more).
You write: 'And as for your child not being allowed read in school… that pretty much sums up what passes for a school these days.'
Yep, that's just it.
You write: 'My day job is private education so I see the fallout from what passes for schooling these days.'
I'm a college professor in Norway, and the worst of the worst are the teacher-students ('an E is o.k., I'm only gonna become a teacher'), superseded 'only' by my colleagues in the Faculty of Education (sic)…
I’m not sure how to even counter it anymore. Wallowing in ignorance should not be seen as a point of pride. Part of me thinks it’s to do with the feminisation of education as a whole. Competition is seen as a bad virtue so we end up with a crappy ‘participation medal’ model of education. Nobody is allowed to fail so we’re dragged further and further into mediocrity. I’m scratching my head trying to think of a solution other than grabbing the popcorn and watching things burn.
I asked my parents for my old primary school books (late 1980s), and I've got my Civics materials from 3rd and 4th grade--I looked at them and I was stunned: the 'stuff' we went through at ages 9-10 is almost like rocket science compared to the BS that my kids are doing at the same age over here in Norway…
And, yes, I can't tell you how much I loath these 'everyone's a winner' medals as you correctly hold, it's dragging everyone down. It's a race to the bottom and there's no end in sight.
As to solutions, there's no single-bullet. I think we need to two at least two things, though, if we were to have any hope of restoration:
* fix the labour market as 'feminism' (by which is meant women entering the labour market pushing wages down, in turn meaning that parents are thus 'glad' if the gov't offers 'free [sic] childcare') is a huge part of the problem: kids growing up in the presence of gov't employees as opposed to, say, parents and/or grandparents
* fixing the labour market will go a long way of restoring the (proper) role of family in child-rearing; as things stand--here in Scandinavia in particular--kids are supposedly in state-run childcare from ages 2-6, followed by primary school (5 years) of which the first four years also include after-hours 'store-away options' (SFO)--and that means your children spend most of their day in the presence of random strangers
If these two changes might do it, well, I'm unsure; we might need to bring back responsibility/competence in teacher education, by which is meant--abolish the Departments/Faculties of Education (they are fake anyways) as none of this bullcrap ever was required prior to the 1990s (give or take): if you've got a master's degree worth of training in any subject, that's what was required, and perhaps we'd need to bring back this kind of approach to teacher selection (perhaps adding a few practical courses in the first 1-2 years of teaching).
Tall poppy syndrome plus equality meaning sameness as the ideal is death, simply put. Another frequent commenter on various blogs, a fellow Swede residing in Austria by the way, used to use the phrase "Cult of Death" about what we call woke et c.
I'm of the opinion he was on to something.
Not being allowed to bring a book sounds like the teacher or whomever is straight out lying to your daughter - I cannot believe there's a single paragraph in Norwegian school-law supporting that. I am however familiar with the attitude, personally and professionally.
The norm ought to be one novel every other week (one week for reading, one week for writing - by hand - a "paper" on the text, age and level-adjusted) per subject in SS/Hum/Arts.
Comparing to my own years as a compulsory-school student, the lack of reading today is highly noticeable. Sweden now can boast about having gone from 0% illiteracy since before the 18th century, to ca 13% illiteracy. In my day, three to four novels per semester in Swedish, English, and whatever other language you took was the lower end (in addition to normal text-books of course).
However, confirming the importance of "reading-traditions" at home I had the privilege as the woke would say to have a paternal grandmother who worked at a publishing house - and who knew full well the importance of being able to read. Hence, I got about a grocery bag of books every birthday and Jul, and was encouraged to read "real" books as she put it.
What she meant was no reading the Disneyfied version of "Treasure Island" but the real thing. A bit of a challenge for a seven-year old who had to have an English-Swedish dictionary at hand when reading.
Since we know all that, about practice and how reading informs and evolves the brain when developing, and social backgrounds - isn't the only possible answer that schools must have a strict, demanding and supporting and compulsory, load of books that /must/ be read?
The ones with the same advantage as I had won't suffer, and the ones without will benefit. Same with math - had I been enticed, challenged and forced to keep at it and keep improving instead of being able to coast along from 4th grade. . . who knows?
Those who refuse to read (after school) refuse to think.
Re literacy rates: the amount of college-'educated™' people who struggle to use MS Office (sic) products beyond 1-2 pages is stunning already, isn't it?
This is what drives people to do hallucinogens. You just can't make it up that goverments have taken that book, Lies, Damn Lies and Statistics and used it as a training manual. And they have the major publish or perish Journals similarly allowing for us to read their junk science while hiding actual science outcomes. We're living in a reality exercise of their choosing and with their obvious choice of bad intent as an desired outcome.
Don't you think reality is already stranger than fiction at this point?
While I think you're right about the training manual here, I don't think anyone has read these materials. (My personal experience in Norway with admin people doing some kind of 'info' workshop or the like is typically having these people read PP slides…)
The Upton Sinclair quote comes to mind… ‘It is difficult to get a man to understand something, when his salary depends on his not understanding it.’
Exactly. And this sentiment also explains, to me, largely why the system has been set-up like this.
It is obvious these “scientists” are well aware who is signing their checks. They can think of no alternatives but to serve the Beast. Wage slavery enslaves.
The worst aspect of wage slavery is that it captures one's mind before the parasite starts consuming it.
Absolutely! People self-correct before it is even required of them. Too many are so captured cannot even see reality around them that clashes with their allowable thought frameworks. We are controlled mainly through a tight control of our thoughts. Most cannot discern they are manipulated; only ‘the other" side is manipulated; the "other side" is just a mirror image of them.
People are naturally inclined to think in binary terms (e.g. night and day, good and evil,…). Propaganda takes full advantage of this weakness.
Have you noticed that the structure of the language used in these and virtually all reports nowadays are identical, as if it was a fill-in-the-blanks kind of document makro that had been used?
There's zero variance, zero personality, zero individuality to phrases and phrasing or to descriptions. It's a poverty and paucity of expression even more trite and void than Hollywood-writing.
There's absolutely no discrepancy or conflict between writing a perfectly scientific paper on whatever, and writing it using your own personal style and mode of language.
It reads to me like the natural scientists are simply filling out forms. But why this bother over a personal (and professional) quibble?
Because language is thought, and what you express using language is what limits your thought; limited expression equals limited thought.
It is my suspicion that on a rather subtle and innocuous and subconscious level, the nivellation of style readily apparent to any reader of scientific journals on some natural science or other is a great part of the "likriktning"* of thought in the scientific community.
This something that was debated and warned about in the early 1990s when spell-checkers started to become normal, and again when they started suggesting the meaning and definition of words. If you can control what is an anto-/synonym, and if you can control which word means what and remove meanings you do not like. . . You don't even need an actual Though Police. Even if all the data points one way (mRNA-injections are dangerous in the extreme), the human mind looking at that data won't be able to host that thought, since [mRNA-vaccines] as an idea have been hard-coded to mean [safe and effective].
Against this, any and all academics and teachers in the social sciences and humanities and arts, are honour-bound to fight, because as history has proven - the engineers, tech-heads, natural scientists are completely unable to understand with what ease they can be steered and manipulated, since they think their science objective and "pure".
*Making all things point the same way; also, "lik" is "Leich" in Swedish, so it can also be read as "having as much free will and choice as does a corpse". "Lik" = "them same as" or "resembling", and "corpse". "Riktning" = "direction", physical or metaphysical or other.
I obviously noticed the creeping petrification and simplification of language use, and I can assure you that this is also a thing in the humanities and esp. the social sciences nowadays.
To cite but one anecdote: I typically ask all 'my' new graduate students (whom I supervise/mentor for 2 years during their MA training) about the last non-academic (i.e. fiction) book they've read. Most struggle to name an individual book (among the weirder ones was this one student a few years ago who, upon 'thinking aloud' for 2-3 minutes, merely came up with 'The Hobbit'.)
The core problems--in my view/experience--are family background and social environs during the formative years in high school and college: as to the family background, as an expat academic with kids, I've seen numerous living rooms of fellow academics in the past 10-12 years; nine out of ten of these apartments now don't include bookshelves in their living rooms (which used to be the number one indicator of middle class-ness, if you'd consider ownership of a multi-vol. encyclopaedia for instance). As regards the latter, the social milieux among esp. STEM students is so reading-averse with respect to classics, fiction, and even unrelated academic texts that it's obvious to me why they suck at writing: they were never reading long-form texts (fiction and non-fiction), which is ultimately compounded by the tendency in the STEM subjects to write article-based dissertations--doing so also abbreviates the flow of thought, one never really gets to develop an argument in excess of 8-10K words, etc. (As an aside, I'm observing article-based dissertations becoming more and more pervasive in the humanities and the social sciences, and I can assure you from painful personal experience how crappy most presentations are…)
Schooling these days compounds these problems, esp. in Scandinavia with its para-ideological ethos of making all kids equal and waiting for the weakest. I typically tell me elder daughter to bring a book and read if bored at school, but she says that's not allowed…
The lack of bookshelves is terrifying but not surprising. I try to keep a tab on what I’m reading and try to at least read a book a week. I only read around 47 last year but I put that down to spending 7 months reading the Bible cover to cover. It helps that mass entertainment has devolved to the level of dog shit. And as for your child not being allowed read in school… that pretty much sums up what passes for a school these days. My day job is private education so I see the fallout from what passes for schooling these days.
Oh, it's as you say: terrifying but hardly surprising.
I only read in my 'spare time'--it's something I so greatly enjoy doing that I consume books at a comparable rate, although I don't know because I don't count them; when I'm done with one, I'll grab the next one (or practice the playing the piano, which I recently had re-tuned to 432 Hz--and I'm loving it even more).
You write: 'And as for your child not being allowed read in school… that pretty much sums up what passes for a school these days.'
Yep, that's just it.
You write: 'My day job is private education so I see the fallout from what passes for schooling these days.'
I'm a college professor in Norway, and the worst of the worst are the teacher-students ('an E is o.k., I'm only gonna become a teacher'), superseded 'only' by my colleagues in the Faculty of Education (sic)…
I’m not sure how to even counter it anymore. Wallowing in ignorance should not be seen as a point of pride. Part of me thinks it’s to do with the feminisation of education as a whole. Competition is seen as a bad virtue so we end up with a crappy ‘participation medal’ model of education. Nobody is allowed to fail so we’re dragged further and further into mediocrity. I’m scratching my head trying to think of a solution other than grabbing the popcorn and watching things burn.
Beats me, if you're looking for answers.
I asked my parents for my old primary school books (late 1980s), and I've got my Civics materials from 3rd and 4th grade--I looked at them and I was stunned: the 'stuff' we went through at ages 9-10 is almost like rocket science compared to the BS that my kids are doing at the same age over here in Norway…
And, yes, I can't tell you how much I loath these 'everyone's a winner' medals as you correctly hold, it's dragging everyone down. It's a race to the bottom and there's no end in sight.
As to solutions, there's no single-bullet. I think we need to two at least two things, though, if we were to have any hope of restoration:
* fix the labour market as 'feminism' (by which is meant women entering the labour market pushing wages down, in turn meaning that parents are thus 'glad' if the gov't offers 'free [sic] childcare') is a huge part of the problem: kids growing up in the presence of gov't employees as opposed to, say, parents and/or grandparents
* fixing the labour market will go a long way of restoring the (proper) role of family in child-rearing; as things stand--here in Scandinavia in particular--kids are supposedly in state-run childcare from ages 2-6, followed by primary school (5 years) of which the first four years also include after-hours 'store-away options' (SFO)--and that means your children spend most of their day in the presence of random strangers
If these two changes might do it, well, I'm unsure; we might need to bring back responsibility/competence in teacher education, by which is meant--abolish the Departments/Faculties of Education (they are fake anyways) as none of this bullcrap ever was required prior to the 1990s (give or take): if you've got a master's degree worth of training in any subject, that's what was required, and perhaps we'd need to bring back this kind of approach to teacher selection (perhaps adding a few practical courses in the first 1-2 years of teaching).
Tall poppy syndrome plus equality meaning sameness as the ideal is death, simply put. Another frequent commenter on various blogs, a fellow Swede residing in Austria by the way, used to use the phrase "Cult of Death" about what we call woke et c.
I'm of the opinion he was on to something.
Not being allowed to bring a book sounds like the teacher or whomever is straight out lying to your daughter - I cannot believe there's a single paragraph in Norwegian school-law supporting that. I am however familiar with the attitude, personally and professionally.
The norm ought to be one novel every other week (one week for reading, one week for writing - by hand - a "paper" on the text, age and level-adjusted) per subject in SS/Hum/Arts.
Comparing to my own years as a compulsory-school student, the lack of reading today is highly noticeable. Sweden now can boast about having gone from 0% illiteracy since before the 18th century, to ca 13% illiteracy. In my day, three to four novels per semester in Swedish, English, and whatever other language you took was the lower end (in addition to normal text-books of course).
However, confirming the importance of "reading-traditions" at home I had the privilege as the woke would say to have a paternal grandmother who worked at a publishing house - and who knew full well the importance of being able to read. Hence, I got about a grocery bag of books every birthday and Jul, and was encouraged to read "real" books as she put it.
What she meant was no reading the Disneyfied version of "Treasure Island" but the real thing. A bit of a challenge for a seven-year old who had to have an English-Swedish dictionary at hand when reading.
Since we know all that, about practice and how reading informs and evolves the brain when developing, and social backgrounds - isn't the only possible answer that schools must have a strict, demanding and supporting and compulsory, load of books that /must/ be read?
The ones with the same advantage as I had won't suffer, and the ones without will benefit. Same with math - had I been enticed, challenged and forced to keep at it and keep improving instead of being able to coast along from 4th grade. . . who knows?
Equality equals death, indeed.
Agreed on all counts, esp. the death cult thing.
Those who refuse to read (after school) refuse to think.
Re literacy rates: the amount of college-'educated™' people who struggle to use MS Office (sic) products beyond 1-2 pages is stunning already, isn't it?