Lech Walesa urged to "reduce Russia" to 50 million people

I wanted to see what Paulina, as a member of the younger generation, would have to say about that, and I suppose I could write a lengthy essay about the matter but basically it's...


This.


This.


And this. Plus, the feminisation of the teaching profession has, in general, made a mess of the entire thing (a topic for another essay).

If I were to add anything else, I would also stress the idiocy of co-education, the pauperisation of young teachers (and hence negative selection to the profession), and the disappearence of master-student relation (teachers these days are basically expected to be waiters serving knowledge). The compulsory education until the age of 18 is another example of lunacy - we are keeping a bunch of retards at schools, retards who can't wait to be 18 and finally be "free"; they should be freed much earlier, when they're about 13 years old and are able to read and write (barely).

All of the above has, of course, profound influence on many areas outside education, like for example the ridiculous overproduction of idiots with higher education, with worthless diplomas and degrees, who expect to join the middle class (at least!) just because they graduated from a university, and the resulting chronic lack of good and affordable plumbers, tilers and electricians.

Besides, social media, internet and mobile devices wrecking kids' attention span, too many distractions, the drastic fall of readership, the reluctance to undertake mental effort of any sort... *sighs*... I could go on.

Of course I meant those for whom school education is torture. Others, over 13, should continue learning but it should no longer be compulsory, and should be considered a privilege not a right.

What a load of bollo**.
1- it would encourage parents pushing kids out of education to start working.
2- some kids are late bloomers and find interest in learning later.
3- there is the option of joining vocational school and learn a trade, much better then throwing them into the world with nothing.
4- bad economically as the less educated the workforce the less mobile, adaptable etc.
5- work is becoming more and more automated. There is less and less work for simply manual work.

Nope. Compulsory education for those who have neither intelligence nor the willingness to do so is a load of bollox. They not only waste their own time but also make it difficult for others to learn, as they tend to be the biggest trouble makers. Why should 20 students in each class suffer because of 5 retards?

1. What is better - parents pushing kids out to schools, just to get rid of them (it is usually the greatest half-wits who are always at school, for their own parents can't stand them so much that they kick them out to school every day and complain whenever there is bank holiday and their genetic progeny has to stay home with them) or encouraging them to find employment?

2. In my 20 years of teaching, on every possible level from primary school to university, I am yet to meet someone who would be completely unwilling to learn until the end of primary school (13-14 years old) and then suddenly find studying fascinating. If there are such people, they are 1 in a million, and you can't design an educational system for 0,0001% of students.

3. Nobody is talking about throwing anyone "into the world with nothing". Education not being compulsory doesn't mean that it would be forbidden. Simply, those who have no interest at all in learning nor willingness to learn, wouldn't be forced to stay at schools until they're 18.

4. For the people I'm talking about, staying at schools for 4-5 more years wouldn't mean they would be better educated. They would be just pushed up a class every year, just to get rid of them (if you don't think that's the case, you don't know the reality in Polish schools), demoralising normal students in the process and making education more difficult for them.

5. There will always be grass to cut, sidewalks to sweep, trash bins to be emptied and city toilets to be scrubbed perfectly clean. Not everything will/can be automated. Our cities and towns will simply be cleaner and better looking.

I didn't ignore it - I pointed out to you that East Asians are hard-working and crazy about education "by default". It doesn't have anything to do with "Russian" or "Western" education systems lol


So is India and Japan lol


You know, I'm honestly wondering whether you're really so ignorant about the world or whether you're so nationalistic and arrogant that it makes you stupid or are you consciously manipulating? o_O

Because according to your logic Japan is full of "engineering talent", because they were occupied by the US lol 🤦

And are you going to tell me that the Chinese invented paper and gun powder thanks to "Russian education system"? ;D

Btw, from what I know communism didn't make the Chinese famous for inventing stuff... They're known for copying Western stuff, actually.


I agree with this and all of your 5 points. Torq is a messed up idiot on yet another front o_O

You could say the same thing about Hitler, Stalin or child rapists, so I think you know where you can shove this "brilliant" comment of yours.


No, I'm not. I'm simply not blindly RuSSophilic like you and I get my moral priorities right.


I do notice good things. Once or twice I even enumerated all the characteristics of Bobko that make people overlook what a f-ed up, lying Putinist sociopath he is :) But since I'm a moral person I can't overlook this.

I don't know about you, but for me being evil outweighs having good manners and being "pleasant", for example. I won't overlook evil just because the evil person is nice to me lol 🤦

Then it means that you have equally low reading comprehension. Take for example point 3 - I never argued against trade/vocational schools and never said that education over 13 would be forbidden for anyone. Merely that it wouldn't be compulsory for those who are not willing to continue their education but are forced to because of enforced obowiązek szkolny until they're 18 years old.

Lenka created a strawman argument and you agree with it. :)


I didn't call either Lenka or you any names and you insulted me just like that. Your vulgar chamstwo would be despicable even in a man, and you call yourself a woman. Pathetic.

In reality though it is not kids who decide about that. It's their parents.

And that leads us to Lenka's point number 1:


And that's enough of a reason to make education compulsory. Anyone who doesn't understand this is an idiot for me - sorry.


Really? I didn't notice anyone calling Novichok "vulgar" for calling people "morons" all the time :)))

Again, sorry for being blunt, but that's what I think - your take on compulsory education is idiotic for me. And especially concerning considering that you're a teacher. You'd rather I pretended otherwise? Or should I put it more "nicely"? :)))

And most parents, apart from an insignificant low-life minority, want the best for their children and certainly wouldn't force their academically gifted kid out of education. So, you are trying to justify something that is detrimental to the educational system as a whole, and to the overwhelming majority of students, with something that pertains only to small minority. That is idiotic.


... and most teachers I know share my point of view. I suppose it might be a good idea to work as a teacher for a while, to understand what they think and why, and it might be a good idea to have children, to understand what parents think and why. Try to go easier on judging people and calling them names before you try either of the two things. :)


Is that the standard of behaviour that you want to reach? Good luck. :)

How do you know that? Can you imagine what would be happening in the countryside, for example?


Nonsense. I went through all the stages of compulsory and non-compulsory education and the fact of it being compulsory for others was in no way "detrimental" to my education lol

Another thing you seem to be forgetting about is that education has yet another purpose - not only preparing future employees. It's also preparing future voters... and future parents... and just future adults in general.


Provide a link to a poll conducted among teachers or you're talking out of your ass :)


No, I'm just pointing out the hypocrisy :)

Bingo!


Bingo!

Torq's entire posting on this topic is one big B-I-N-G-O

One clarification regarding the feminization of teaching. Feminized teaching has its place and is important in the primary grades. Probably even preferable in 4th and 5th grades.

Thanks, Anti. It's years of teaching experience, observing the students and talking to other teachers and parents - the conclusions are inevitable. Alas.


At most.

I haven't experienced this. During my education the least intelligent and the academically unsuccessful were the nice ones. It was the more intelligent "alpha boys" from "good homes" and liked by teachers who were the biggest bullies and a$$holes.

And, btw, it was in secondary school when kids misbehaved the most in my experience. Most of them - even the girls (I mean talking in class - stuff like that). Our biology teacher ended up with mental breakdown ;O High school was a heaven in comparison lol


No bingo here. During my time it was the "retards" who were suffering. Noone was adapting to them.


Hehe... Oh, men are welcome to try the teaching profession - but why don't they? :D
Again, my experience - at my primary and secondary school 99% of teachers were women. At high school - math, physics, history and most of art subjects were taught by men.

University was the most balanced - I'd say it was 50/50.

Conclusion? Men don't want to work with younger kids... "Surprise, surprise"... 🙄


Haha... You f*cking lazy, selfish a$$holes... As usual you want to leave the worse for women.

Especially for boys. By time they hit 11 (probably that's even too old) they should have men (not effeminized twats who have XY chromosomes) as a majority teaching them.


Why were they suffering? Could it be because they didn't have the intellectual skills or interest and were being forced to attend what they perceived as a torture chamber?

Students don't need to adapt, the schools and curriculum do the adapting for them. Ergo, they aren't challenged to reach their fullest potential because their schooling has been adapted to the lower level student.

How's that worse? Every teacher I know say that those are the great grades to teach. Most of the students aren't trouble, the rewards of seeing new learners learn to read and such are great.

Nature has it that women are just a helluvalot better at nurturing than men. Those younger grades are still in need of the nurturing a woman is better at giving.

I somehow can't see men wanting to teach them :)))


Because of how they were being treated by some of the teachers and fellow classmates.


That's not how it was when I was attending my compulsory education.


Again, that's not how it was during my time.

That smiley thing doesn't make your comment about Bobko more acceptable.
So may I kindly ask you to **** off of Bobko and comment on his posts, instead. If he leaves this forum because of azholes like you I will have to stop being nice.

Indeed...

... and here we arrive at the problem of teachers' salaries. A lot of women take up teaching profession because they have high earning (or at least well-earning) husbands and can choose a career that gives them job security, a lot of free time (because most of them stick to one job at one school - that's 18h/week in Poland), as well as certain amount of prestige (especially in smaller towns and villages) because remuneration is not their primary concern.

Men, on the other hand, are traditionally seen as providers in Polish society, so if they decide to take up teaching, they have to be prepared to work crazy hours to live on a decent level - especially at the beginning when salaries are ridiculously low. Of course, with time, when they are promoted, their salaries rise, they have two full-time teaching jobs (or more!), plus something on the side (private tutoring, matura courses, extramural classes on weekends etc. etc.) they can make very good living. Unfortunately, not too many have enough grit and determination to stay at school for that long or are willing to work that hard.

So, salaries should be higher but as long as there are hordes of women willing to do the job for peanuts money, they won't be higher. One solution would be to give up coeducation - if women were allowed to teach only girls and men only boys, it would force the government to rise the salaries just to find enough men willing to do the job. Of course, the cost of state-run education would skyrocket in such case, so the system stays the same when it comes to wages but changes when it comes to the level of teaching (the dumbing down and trimming of curricula is nothing short of frightening). It's hard to be an optimist about the future of it all.

Because we are not naturally suited the type of nurturing young people need at that age-we simply don't have the same level of nurturing genius women have. Nature has a place in all this.

I have been thinking over 16, More in accord with our current system but I agree with you on your points. Told you that Paulina is a moron and it shows.

Intellectually, financially, prestige-wise. University professor earns more than a primary teacher and there's greater prestige connected to it.


How many of them were women and how many men? :)


Those are basics though. Not "interesting" enough for men, clearly :)


Women are better at "giving" and "nurturing", because they're being conditioned to be like that from an early age. In my opinion (and not only mine) it has more to do with nurture rather than nature. And, btw, we had a female primary teacher that shouldn't be let anywhere near children.

That is unassailable.

The idea of getting rid of co-education is interesting. Here in the states, all Catholic high schools used to be segregated by sex, it worked very well.

Thanks, Iron. It's just common sense, nothing else. I don't know why Paulina gets so worked up about it.


But it takes time to become a professor, and an adiunkt doesn't earn all that much more than a primary school teacher (the job is easier though, and the prestige higher - that I will admit).


All around the world, students in segregated schools achieve better results than in coeducational ones. But... the problem of money is the same everywhere.

Not really as not all would go into high school education and that only a few places should be paid by the state on unis.

By the way Tusk gov is bigger sh't that I have expected and they killed CPL for good.

@Paulina

I don't buy feminist theory, and frankly I'm bored with it.

Huge disappointment :(

What is CPL?

@AntV

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Central_Communication_Port

Looks like a pretty good idea. I could see something like that having a sizeable positive economic impact.