The implementation of the left-wing liberal imagination of social life and its underlying strategy of values is an accessory to the detonation of disturbances among children and young people. The sparked fire tries to extinguish itself with petrol, offering to make a greenhouse environment for the students to which access will not have “obstructive” rules, standards and requirements.
In the beginning of the school year Polish children will be guided by left-wing liberal politicians for the first time in a long time – people who are usually attracted to pedagogical news prepared for progressive social change. There is simply quite a few exaggeration in the revolutionary conspiracy attributed to them – Minister of Education Barbara Nowack presented his subversive imagination of changes in education both during his presence at Campus Polska Rafał Trzaskowski and in many interviews given to the media. She outlined the school's image; a painting that alters simple meanings
and rules governing the current process of developing cognition and shaping the character of the student. In accordance with the rule of “know your opponent” it is so worth noting the top dangers of this imagination and offering parents and teachers an adequate consequence to it.
RISK 1 – School is to halt being hierarchical
According to the progressive left, hierarchy present in public institutions (especially educational and educational institutions) seeks to reproduce oppression in society, as it forms a man who is easy subject to authority, prone to obedience and prone to exploitation by the dominant classes. In a school context, this sovereignty is manifested in the relation between the teacher and the student, in which the erstwhile directs the educational process of the second. According to both the erstwhile and contemporary left, the process of formatting critical, emancipated and rebellious society should begin with negating the direction of the flow of cognition and habits from the teacher towards the student. The place of the old order is to be occupied by the "democratic optics": the teacher can learn as much from the pupil as he can from him (and in the extremist version – even more!).
This “democratisation” of the teaching process is simply a departure from the natural order of things. In the natural world, older individuals always teach younger people how to adapt to the environment around them, and leaving this regulation usually ends with the death of young people. Gradual separation from the view of absolute conditions of nature, however, creates the illusion that the biological endurance of man is so apparent present that it is not even worth pursuing. What is easy to forget, nature did not disappear, but hid under the decorations of modern times, under which its laws will enforce as strictly as ever. Interestingly, despite all the propaganda of infantile pajdocracy, young people somewhere profoundly realize the constant actuality of the laws of nature – erstwhile a ‘aspiring to modernity’ teacher simulates any form of egalitarian ‘brothering’ with a student. Most often, however, he does not gain his respect, but frequently becomes a laughingstock; the teacher who does not abuse his authority, but retains (healthily understood) the hierarchy and treats his subjects seriously. This is simply a natural, indigenous consequence of a young man, due to the fact that it is precisely the behaviour of a certain kind of authority that determines whether he will receive from a more experienced individual the cognition and skills that will enable him to carry out his best interests at a mature age.
THREAT 2 – School is expected to teach questioning position quo
A tormented social hypochondria the left looks for further fields of inequality and social injustice. erstwhile they are (usually provisionally) eliminated, they are taken for another, regardless of how attempts of this leveling will affect the functionality of the full social body. Infected by this way of thinking, the student is subject to premature politicisation. As a result, discipline becomes for him only another field of ideological battle, not a credible description of reality. There are many indications that the fresh power to indoctrinate students will be a subject called Citizen Education. This can be concluded by drawing out his thought as an exact antithesis of the "substantiated" supposedly past and Present, as well as the announced teaching of criticism on social issues.
Loved in social change, progressive educators, however, forget that the school should teach not only the courage of reasoning and critical approach to reality, but besides the awareness of the limitations of our mind, whose origin is the virtue of humility (very crucial in science). The engagement of citizens in questioning the planet we find usually ignores the fact that social and cultural institutions which, at first glance and at a glance, may be accused of impugning inequality, are not always unnecessary and unfair. They frequently enable society to function smoothly, and the profits from these "irrequalities" outweigh the losses and are borne by all parties. Similarly, with spiritual content, which the head without humility (quiet) despises and aims at flattening itself with only a known dimension. So an urgent student of Barbara Nowack's school will learn to question perfectly status quo, not besides afraid about trying to discover deeper meaning in specified a, alternatively than another socio-cultural structure.
RISK 3 — discipline has only a utilitarian dimension
From the bizarre matrimony of the left and liberals in the ruling camp, the schizophrenic belief was born that public education, on the 1 hand, would lead to this "social change" (rolling old oppressive principles and customs) and, on the another hand, be subject to future material advantages. The consequence of specified an internally conflicting education mission must be a man divided up and pitching between revolutionary idealism and materialistic calculating. Our “utilitarian visionaries” reject the pattern that has been proven so far, according to which the educated man is simply a man of advanced culture who can sometimes look beyond the easy calculated material benefit. This has its deep meaning, due to the fact that the consequence of a civilization based on materialism is the individual enslavement of man, and this enslavement understood on many levels. The commercial and usury head usually has tight and narrow horizons. He is besides susceptible to any marketing tricks, fashion-created, effort to depend on subsequent services and products. It besides yields to modern discreet methods of operation in the workplace (e.g. the cost of moving to infinity the establishment of your own family). Its disability is to ignore many dimensions of reality that are not in terms of career and profit; the ability to perceive these dimensions (spirit, aesthetics, wisdom) can make more easy in school years – later it may be besides late for many.
On this occasion, it is worth mentioning another trick of educational revolutionaries. Aware of the reluctance of any Poles to a subject called Sexual Education to hide this controversial “leave” decided to sow the full forest and introduce the subject of wellness education (to appear in schools in 2025). Thus teaching about human wellness in general will place subversive sexual education "only" as its segment. Educators hope that the procedure will put parents and organizations who look at the hands of power to sleep. In addition to the demoralizing-sexualizing aspect of the full matter, this kind of “education” is besides reflected in the materialistic-utilitaristical stream, through the teardrop of love from the spirit for the sake of pure sensuality and mechanical perception of human relationships.
RISK 4 – intellectual welfare is more crucial than science
When the education and culture of a young man interferes with his well-being, progressive education should always win concern for intellectual welfare. This kind of reasoning shifts in the bans on homework or sarcasm to alleged evaluation, i.e. supposedly excessive (and possibly unpleasant) evaluation of the results of the student's work. Indirectly, the crucial function of the scientist in school and the request to increase its availability are besides raised.
In this kind of belief, we see another revolutionary shift – from this point on, the accomplishment of intellectual well-being becomes 1 of the most important, unless the most crucial goal of human life. 1 leaves the apparent – it would seem – the belief that human development, in addition to the reward component (satisfaction, a sense of constructive usage of time, reflection of progress) always had an component of discomfort (emotion, stress, challenge). The granting of absolute primacy to intellectual welfare, characteristic of progressive pedagogy, is fundamentally tantamount to the end of development, which, by its nature, must sometimes be occupied by unpleasant impressions. Of course, the issues raised present about intellectual disorders or the deficiency of meaning in life in young people are not issues that we can ignore. However, we should realise that most frequently they do not come from the expected oppression contained in the requirements or ominously "estimated" but from negating order as values and setting in its place a liberal imagination of freedom (do-what-wantism dressed in lofty slogans from ideological pamphlets). In another words, the implementation of the left-liberal imagination of social life and its underlying strategy of values is co-involved with the detonation of disturbances among children and young people; the sparked fire attempts to extinguish itself with gasoline by proposing to make a greenhouse environment to which access will not have “obsessive” rules, standards and requirements. The effects of these actions will, of course, be counterproductive, due to the fact that (as we have already written) nature has not gone anywhere and the minute of confrontation with its actual face can be postponed at most, in order to experience its sorrows.
RISK 5 – A young man knows best what he should learn
It comes from the Maoist Cultural Revolution, sold to the West and processed by revolutionary intellectuals (Ivan Illich, Michel Foucault), and present promoted by local net influencers (Krzysztof M. May) the belief that “one man has no right to command another what he should learn”, powerfully influences left reasoning about the directions of education. According to this utopia, the creativity of a young man is suppressed by a soulful and uniformized education strategy that tries to kill all originality in him. It is so proposed that the function of the education strategy should be limited to creating a student a space in which he develops himself. It is only equipped with appropriate tools and the ability to exchange cognition with another enthusiasts of a given field. This way of reasoning overestimates, of course, the self-consciousness and self-knowledge of most students; it does not take into account the real condition of human nature and the needs of structure; it sees all young people as "little Einsteins" and uncut diamonds... However, it is adequate to ask any teacher working at an average Polish school to find out that unfortunately the planet is not so beautiful. Moreover, the anticipation of self-generating a unique sense and goal of own education for most students will be a form of cruelty, due to the fact that they simply won't be able to do so. At the same time, it will harm to deny them conventional meanings (as “unacceptable interference in their freedom and autonomy”).
The sense of satisfaction that comes from gathering your duties frequently gives you a sense of meaning and makes you realize that abroad areas (and frequently emerging as hard ones) besides require control. The revolutionary ideologies completely overlook the fact that the culture hated by them, the “enemy of the individual”, makes advanced demands to meet the basic needs of this individual in the long term.
The set of responses to the revolutionary ideas of progressive education, mentioned here, is evidently not closed and requires a reflection of a wide scope of specialists. However, it remains to be hoped that it will provoke more discussion in conservative circles, and over time it will be supplemented and expanded by further threads.
Louis Loop
