What promotes bullying and polarization?

So many people have commented to me that America seems to be so much more polarized and violent than what they remember.  And that coincides with my impression.  So...why is that?

On reflection, there are many candidates...and I strongly suspect that no one of them are the sole basis, nor do I think my list is complete, but I would argue that if we take them all together we will have a pretty good idea of some major influences that work to tear us apart as a nation.

Has anyone else noticed how violent the ads on tv are these days?  Notice how medicine attacks germs, stuff like mucus is killed by whatever medicine prevents it, how bugs aren't prevented, but killed in their tracks?  Everything is not only the best to solve your problem, but seemingly needs to kill the behavior that it is intended to prevent.  And it happens more than ever before.  Think it is an influence on behavior?  Or just a reflection?  Think about it.

How about political correctness?  It stifles a clear expression of what you believe and, more importantly, feel.  Emotions that are squashed and forced to be held in lead to higher stress levels and tend ultimately to show up in physical action...and that is violence.

At the same time, it prevents responding in kind when you are verbally insulted, attacked or disrespected.  Notice how often when someone is bullied in school and reacts by attacking the bullier, it is the person who acted to protect him or herself from the bullying is the one who is punished?  Apparently the bullier is the one protected.  Why?  Again the questions: an influence on behavior, albeit deferred?  And a sign that bullying is a protected activity, despite words to the contrary?  After all, actions speak so much louder than words.

And how about the prevalent attitude that no one should suffer consequences of their actions?  When I was growing up I was taught that all actions had consequences...good,...and bad.  I learned civilized behavior from my parents.  But I learned them from the words and direction...and I learned them from consequences of not acting "civilized."  Lying was punished...immediately.  It wasn't cute to tell "stories" and it wasn't laughed at just because it was inventive...it was punished.  Fighting was allowed if it was to defend you or your relatives honor should that be disrespected.  Fighting just because you wanted something someone else had was not allowed and was punished.  Bad language (and unlike today it included all swear words and scatological references) was punished immediately and the punishment usually included improving your vocabulary, the argument being that if one had an adequate vocabulary to describe your feelings, one needn't employ swearing.

And as to shoplifting and any other law-breaking, like vandalism and other inappropriate acts, it almost never required the attention of the law.  Why? Because the law could never know like my parents how to reach my very soul and the punishment of my parents was personal and left me with immense guild; a punishment by the "state" would never have been so effective.

When in today's America have any of seen true consequences delivered to anyone as not only a punishment but as a natural order of things?  Doesn't occur much today.  Is this absence contributory?

Our teachers are tasked with teaching.  Yet both administration and parents often act as if teachers are only to be "praisers" of children, approving everything they do, passing out passing grades as a matter or right, and never interfering with children's social lives even during class time...and if they dare interfere and the child physically attacks the teacher, it is the teachers' fault.  Does this sound like civilized behavior, much less justice, to you?  Doesn't make much sense to me.  Teachers are not always blameless, but I think that they could accuse most administrations and parents of fraud in the inducement; what they got isn't what they were promised.

I don't have the expertise to define what is cause and effect here, but it is hard to look at all these tendencies so prevalent today and not think that civilized behavior is not of high priority in the minds of today's citizens.  Narcissism is the practice of today, with parents choosing to accept government benefits that will have to be paid by their as-yet-unborn heirs, and even to the point of meeting their own desires while ignoring the needs of actual children.  How sad!  How ugly!  And how profoundly disappointing to those of us who must witness it and not have the power to effect any meaningful change.

Still another comment on America's Educational system...

While I have known plenty of teachers in my life who were dedicated to their students and their futures, the majority of teachers chose that line of work because when in college the idea of a 9 or 10 month work year with summers off plus a guaranteed job after 3 years (tenure) seemed like a safe and desirable alternative to working for a full year with two weeks off and the prospect of having to prove yourself every day or get fired.

All of these people found that it was harder than it appeared: you had to use your summers to get advanced training and degrees; the hours were often 12 in length because of the need to grade papers and prepare lesson plans. It didn't turn out to be the utopia that it seemed in the callow days of their youth. And many did not have that drive to be educators...but now they were locked into the job. But...how to improve pay? Unionize. To a professional, that was the wrong way to go; better to start a professional society and mandate performance that would lead to competition for better pay. But remember that most teachers were disillusioned with no concept of "professionalism"; they just wanted more money to pay for the unexpected working conditions. Logical, really. But this failure to see teaching as a profession has led our educational system into the morass which exists today.


 Get rid of tenure and cut the power of unions and demand that there be some evaluation of dedication to TEACHING for someone to get into and REMAIN in the PROFESSION.

Why do the best Educated usually write so poorly"

I read an article the other day...or was it this morning...that declared that the written word has become a poor excuse for communication.  And that the more educated the writer, the poorer the writing.  Well, in the process of acknowledging this obvious truth I caught myself up short and pondered the subject for a bit.

True, writing has deteriorated a lot.  I have commented verbally and in writing at length of the extinction of the profesional journalist, of someone who could clearly provide facts without judgmental adjectives that direct the reader to an opinion.  But is this disrespect for the writings of the learned REALLY appropriate?

Now, I do remember (now that I am forced to do some time travel) that, among others, I once had a very distinguished and highly acclaimed Professor of Economics who had just finished a text on his view of the field of Economics and how it worked.  He wanted us to use his "in process of being published, but not yet available, text" so we were forced to stand in line and receive each chapter on copy paper (which or course required us to punch holes in each sheet and accumulate them in an extremely large loose-leaf binder).  And what stood out in my memory was that each and every chapter...correction, each and every PAGE was as if written in Greek.  This very intelligent person, I am quite certain, knew his subject well...perhaps even at a genius level...but his ability to combine words into comprehensive sentences in order to pass on his genius was, alas, absent.  One Hundred Per Cent Absent.

Moving on to current articles and studies that have come to my attention, I was forced to conclude that even today many University level articles written by those  at Professorial and above levels were virtually unreadable...I have known sixth graders who could write as well...and perhaps better.  Of course that is not necessarily a vote of confidence.  But then I pondered some more...

The denigration of professorial writing, while correct, is perhaps a tad unfair.  The pressure to publish or be denied tenure and perish has panicked  many an academic into writing that in later years caused them to blush.

I have occasionally wondered how many self-declared literary and academic journals have been started, and continue to be supported, by bands of desperate supplicants for tenure in order to provide themselves a ready source for publication...creating, in the process, sort of a vertically integrated academic industry where they could control their destiny without it being readily apparent.

But...I suspect I am more content not actually knowing that kind of information, as it allows me to grant academics some contented regard...

And I wonder occasionally if we use the right criteria for selecting teachers...at any level.  Do degrees trump teaching skill?  Of course we want both, but which deserves the most weight?  A faculty with many advanced degrees gains a certain respect in the academic community...and that draws students and additional highly-qualified faculty.  But the real talent of teaching helps to best achieve student learning.

I would hope that a school board, or principal, or College or University Dean would chose the most talented teacher, trusting on student success to ultimately guarantee the reputation of the school, and the criteria would include the goal of teaching students HOW to think, rather than WHAT to think, to imbue them with the knowledge that reading and listening are the tools that guarantee the opportunity to pursue happiness, by whatever definition.

One can hope...