Nanny-methods nothing for a democratic school...

Mary Poppins.

Mary Poppins:
[Spoken]
In ev'ry job that must be done
There is an element of fun
You find the fun and snap!
The job's a game

[Sung]
And ev'ry task you undertake
Becomes a piece of cake
A lark! A spree! It's very clear to see that

A Spoonful of sugar helps the medicine go down
The medicine go down-wown
The medicine go down
Just a spoonful of sugar helps the medicine go down
In a most delightful way

A robin feathering his nest
Has very little time to rest
While gathering his bits of twine and twig
Though quite intent in his pursuit
He has a merry tune to toot
He knows a song will move the job along - for

A Spoonful of sugar helps the medicine go down
The medicine go down-wown
The medicine go down
Just a spoonful of sugar helps the medicine go down
In a most delightful way

[Interlude]

The honey bee that fetch the nectar
From the flowers to the comb
Never tire of ever buzzing to and fro
Because they take a little nip
From ev'ry flower that they sip
And hence (And hence),
They find (They find)
Their task is not a grind.

Ah-h-h-h-h-h-h-h-h-h-h ah!

A Spoonful of sugar helps the medicine go down
The medicine go down-wown
The medicine go down
Just a spoonful of sugar helps the medicine go down
In a most delightful way

From one of my teachers’ papers today; the editor's chronicle “Nanny-methods nothing for a democratic school.”

Where you can read that the trend with harder grips against children in our society has got an against-reaction. The [Swedish] professors Mats Ekholm, Hans-Åke Scherp and Bengt-Erik Andersson have reacted strongly in a petition against super nanny methods like expelling, taking no notice of, and putting children in the corner - and against the government’s policy with harder grips in the school.

The professors want us to meet children and adolescents as we wish them to be – responsible taking, enterprising and critically reflecting. They also want that Sweden shall incorporate the UN’s child’s conventions in the Swedish legislations. And many agree with them. Almost 20,000 (6,000??) people have signed the petition Barnuppropet ”Barn har rätt – Lagstadga barns rätt att utvecklas med lust i trygghet!” or the Child Petition ”Children have the right – Lay the Children’s Rights to Development With Lust in Security Down by Law!”

That psychical abuse or mistreatment of children is sent as entertainment in TV and that the methods are taught on different courses, of course influences how we think and react the editor thinks [this was one of his better contributions, because I haven't been so fond of this newspaper and its tame and lame views, colored by this editor??]. The school and teachers are influenced by this too.

During the former century the Swedish society made a journey from an undemocratic society to a democratic. From an undemocratic school where the students were disciplined with violence to a school with a democratic and humane outlook on mankind.

This journey has been very positive for both students and society. Swedish students are frank, open and creative and they dare to call things in question they think are wrong. Swedish students don’t do their school tasks because they fear their teachers, but because they have an inherent lust to learn. This is an outlook on students and a school we shall take care of.

Do we really need sugar to help the medicine go down???

From the petition in my a little free translation:

“The former century’s big catchword – the child’s century [see pictures here from a series in Swedish TV on The Child's Century] – quickly disappeared from those in power and moulders of public opinion. The media producers use to send psychic abuse of children as entertainment. From the ideal of the Super nanny parents are taught to expel and ignore their child when it needs nearness and warmth. Standing in the corner is reintroduced but is called time-out.

Education programs are brought about for school and child care where the personnel are trained to discipline with authoritarian shutting off (suspension) and humiliating treatment. Instead of teaching children to respect themselves and other people it is raised to staking on own profits (gains): what can I loose or win doing as the grown ups want?

The government is walking at the head of a hardened fashion in meeting children and young people. In its rhetoric knowledge is honored. It would be valuable if the government uses systematic knowledge also in the education area [They ought use the knowledge that they say they honor - quite ironically!!]. Contrary to scientific findings punishment is advocated as a raising method, for example in form of detention./…/

Young people grow when they are put demands on and when they meet challenges in safe contexts, where it is allowed and desirable that they are learning by mistakes as well as ‘successful tricks’. Young people are growing best in circumstances when they are accepted/recognized and when their way of thinking and feeling is met with respect. We urge ministers/secretaries and other moulders of opinions ceasing to treat children and young people as less worth. Show them respect instead. Use science and well-tried experiences when initiatives are taken so that young people are allowed to develop from desires, joy and engagement in secure circumstances. Meet children and young people as we want them to be – responsible taking, enterprising, creative and critically reflecting.”

People having fun:

We live in a political world...

Människorna är grymma mitt barn
och storhetsvansinniga
hela mänskligheten är storhetsvansinnig
vart vi än ser
ser vi storhetsvansinnig mänsklighet
vi är mitt
i en katastrofal fördumningsprocess
(Thomas Bernhard, his official home-site)

my amateur-translation:
The human beings are cruel my child
and megalomaniac
the whole of mankind is megalomaniac
wherever we see
we see megalomaniac mankind
we are in the middle
of a catastrophic dulling-of-the-intellect-process [so true!!! Does the power think people are stupid?? Arrogantly acting over our heads?]
---
We live in a political world
Love don’t have any place
We’re living in times where men commit crimes
And crime don’t have a face
We live in a political world
Where courage is a thing of the past
Houses are haunted, children are unwanted
The next day could be your last
(Bob Dylan)

I have had a book (among many!) lying here and started to read it yesterday. It’s by the Swedish author Bodil Malmsten (living in France since six years). Her blog (in Swedish) here. I used to be fonder of her earlier. Laughed a lot when I read her former book three years ago. She is in denial about the severity of childhood experiences I think. But that’s another question, and another posting?

Anyway, I want to quote her.

She reacted a lot against Nicolas Sarkozy who said fall 2005 during the revolts in France that if certain immigrants don’t like France there is no reason for them to stay!!! Something that became a law spring 2006 as she writes!

She writes that if a foreigner is judged for rebellious behaviour – rebellion - the one in question looses his/her long-term residence permission (uppehållstillstånd) and is given – if the person is lucky – a temporary residence permission which has to be reconsidered (omprövat) yearly (årligen)!

The same destiny befalls those immigrants who don’t show due (tillbörlig) respect (!!!) for the French flag and national-hymn!!

How is this possible? How come this is opportune today?? How can one say such things? Why don’t people react? And react MUCH MORE? And much louder!

Malmsten says she is stricken by how invisible Sarkozy succeeded being then (before he was elected president 2007), especially when things were burning, then he managed to look as if he didn’t belong to the unpopular government! But usually, or in all other occasions he succeeded in being nearest all cameras and microphones she writes (quite ironical, and yes, she watches French TV-news? So she must see more than we do)!!!

A radio-reporter Anne Sinclair with a lot of routine makes comparisons between today’s demonstrations and the demonstrations 1968. 1968 the youth demonstrated with a hope for the future. The students rebelled against the old, reactionary and hardened (förstockade), while the youth of today rebels of fear for their future. Doesn’t sound good!! This is horrible I think.

I will quote more when I come back from work later today. Really want to write more about this.

After work, continuation (sidetrack: maybe I could learn something from her: namely writing much more briefly!? Or?):

She writes more about the demonstrations in France: The school-minister (Sarkozy then?He was both minister of interior and for the education 2005-2007?) in France was forced to say that the government was open for dialogue about CPE (contrat première embauche or First Employment Contract), the minister said it was still time for dialogue (!!!).

“That’s what’s so good with murmurs of discontent (missnöjesyttringar) as yesterday’s demonstrations.

For if all these students, employees, people connected with the trade-unions and people not connected with them, younger and older who demonstrated in Paris yesterday, had stayed at home and got out burnt each one of them, then the government hadn’t become forced to take the time for dialogue as is necessary in a democracy, before the changes which affects a whole people are carried through .”

She writes about her sister’s cat lying at a hospital in Stockholm with drop. So what? The Avian flu is ravaging in the world just now (written a couple of years ago?). In this devastated world with its starvation, its epidemics, its increasing gaps between poor and rich. Its wars, its middle-east, its Rwanda, its Darfour.

One chapter has the title “Why are you so angry, Bodil Malmsten?”

And she answers for instance (my a little free translation and interpretation):

“Why I am angry?

I am not angry.

I am exhilarated and grateful for living in a world more complicated than I myself am./…/

I fear all groups more than everything else and all sorts of grouping.

I am against the family as a power factor but for the individuals in it; I love my family – the whole humanity – but I have difficulties with a lot of people.

But not all, not all the time, not at all.

I love all respecting the security-distance /…/

I hate hierarchies.

A woman at the top or not – it’s the power structure I am against. /…/

I am against Nicolas Sarkozy /…/ and everything he stands for – harder grips and bang! at the weaker.”

PS. In the evening: it stands that Sarkozy's father was immigrant from Hungary and his mother has Greek ancestors; from the aristocracy ("hypocrisy"??) in both cases!!! And the radio-reporter Anne Sinclair is daughter of a rich industry-man, but she seems to stand on the "weak's" side despite HER background!! She is 7 years older than Sarkozy? Her grandfather owned art-galleries (if I understood the French right?? :-) It's 35 years since I read French).

We live in a political world

We live in a political world,
Love don't have any place.
We're living in times where men commit crimes
And crime don't have a face

We live in a political world,
Icicles hanging down,
Wedding bells ring and angels sing,
clouds cover up the ground.

We live in a political world,
Wisdom is thrown into jail,
It rots in a cell, is misguided as hell
Leaving no one to pick up a trail.

We live in a political world
Where mercy walks the plank,
Life is in mirrors, death disappears
Up the steps into the nearest bank.

We live in a political world
Where courage is a thing of the past
Houses are haunted, children are unwanted
The next day could be your last.

We live in a political world.
The one we can see and can feel
But there's no one to check, it's all a stacked deck,
We all know for sure that it's real.

We live in a political world
In the cities of lonesome fear,
Little by little you turn in the middle
But you're never why you're here.

We live in a political world
Under the microscope,
You can travel anywhere and hang yourself there
You always got more than enough rope.

We live in a political world
Turning and a'thrashing about,
As soon as you're awake, you're trained to take
What looks like the easy way out.

We live in a political world
Where peace is not welcome at all,
It's turned away from the door to wander some more
Or put up against the wall.

We live in a political world
Everything is hers or his,
Climb into the frame and shout God's name
But you're never sure what it is.

More on communication, dialog, individualism…

[May 23: the language slightly changed. I hope to the better a little]. Written in a hurry: In a leader-chronicle with the heading ”Human fellow being rather than supporter on distance” the leader-writer and priest Helle Klein reflects upon communication, active talk, dialog, being human fellow being… She writes about building bridges between the author and her/his reader. A Swedish author Stig Dagerman thought that literature should be an active talk. Involving the reader in a way of being or doing to life.

She also referred to the author Sonja Åkesson whose communicative credo was that the author must be a human fellow being. Also see here about her.

It stood about solidarity and understanding, that we are alike towards life.

If one should judge from the current debates on literature here art seems to become more and more like monologues rather than being carried by a will to a meeting with The Other Klein writes. The human being of today is either a distanced viewer of other people’s misery or totally blinded by what we call “navelskådande” (sitting watching ones navel, see about hesychasm). “Me” stands in front of “You” and the talk ceases.

She then draws parallels to the political world, to politics. We are daily reminded about this distanced “we and them” thinking in the talk about outside-ship, insurance-cheating and integration. The old popular movements are crackling. You are rather supporter than member in political parties today. The members are no longer team-players but rather a claque of supporters. The political pros manage the societal work. We others are viewers watching. As supporters we maybe get season-cards and MAYBE an autograph by the team-leader or favourite-player. But that we should have viewpoints on the play. No, that would be impossible. We can of course scream till we are hoarse (husky) in the galleries (bleachers).

Even our social democrat language (here) has lost the sense that solidarity sprouts in mutuality.

How would it be if the strategists invited to a realization of the vision about a social and democratic society?

Is it time for the campaign: the politician as human fellow being? How realistic?

And today there is a leader in a local newspaper here about the biggest party to the right, the Moderate party, saying that this party isn’t democratic either (something we don’t really expect however).

The leaders have turned more and more authoritarian again, it looks (feels) as they are thinking they are doing what they are doing for "our own good"? As if they think they know best what our best is (talk about having high thoughts about themselves). Authoritarian – you don’t have to listen, you can sail above people arrogantly.

And at last; I found "A disobedient child is worthy of death"! There it stands in the beginning:

“FIRST BIBLE LESSON: MATTHEW 19:19

‘HONOR THY FATHER AND THY MOTHER: and, THOU SHALT LOVE THY NEIGHBOR AS THYSELF.’

SECOND BIBLE LESSON: LUKE 2:51

‘And he went down with them, and came to Nazareth, and was subject unto them: but his mother kept all these sayings in her heart.’

GOLDEN TEXT: MATTHEW 15:4

‘For God commanded, saying, HONOR THY FATHER AND MOTHER: and, HE THAT CURSETH FATHER OR MOTHER, LET HIM DIE THE DEATH.'"

Many still live after this?

What sort of models do we have? Why have we voted for those (lousy, yes, I think they are :-)) politicians?