On Pevensie Education Politics

Tolkien Lore made a video answering a point by GRRM which I had already answered in another way.

No, GRRM, We Don't Care About Aragorn's Tax Policy
12th Oct. 2020 | Tolkien Lore
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lXM9NWd1Q7Y

Hans-Georg Lundahl

Actually, I did care enough to come up with a tentative answer.

Just as I care very much for the part of the Pevensie education politics that disenforced school.

But, here is my answer about Aragorn and taxes:

Φιλολoγικά/Philologica : Answering GRRM on JRRT's character Aragorn
https://filolohika.blogspot.com/2014/06/answering-grrm-on-jrrts-character.html

Writing this before watching your video.

Eru Ilúvatar

Pevensie education politics?

Sounds interesting enough.

Chrysalis Maria Adolphus von Schwarzenfels

What does "Pevensie education politics that disenforced school" mean? Google didn't provide the answers...

Hans-Georg Lundahl

@Chrysalis Maria Adolphus von Schwarzenfels Look up last chapter of The Lion, the Witch and the Wardrobe, or if it was last paragraphs of previous chapter. School compulsion had existed under the White Witch and was abolished by Pevensie kings.

In other words, school (attendance) had been enforced under the White Witch and was disenforced under the Pevensies.

Eru Ilúvatar

@Hans-Georg Lundahl I wonder what effects that had on litteracy and soforth.

Hans-Georg Lundahl

@Eru Ilúvatar I don't think literacy is more important than wellbeing of children.

I also don't think literacy is inaccessible by other means than school compulsion, for instance parental or sometimes lordly lessons. Remember what the Gaffer said about Bilbo? He had taught Sam letters, not meaning any harm ... that's lordly lessons, but obviously many parents a bit more literate than Gaffer Gamgee would be able to give their children literacy, if desired or needed.

Eru Ilúvatar

@Hans-Georg Lundahl School is enforced in many ways in the modern world as well, and it (generally) doesn't effect the wellbeing of children (this changes in later years as the amount of work etc increases, but that's besides the point). Now, I'm going to assume those the white witch had were much worse than those..but wouldn't it be a better move to just make the schools themselves *better*, rather than leaving the possibility of a large part of the population not getting an actual education?

Hans-Georg Lundahl

@Eru Ilúvatar "and it (generally) doesn't effect the wellbeing of children"

It does that of those forced to attend despite harassment from either teachers or comrades.

"Now, I'm going to assume those the white witch had were much worse than those.."

Why?

"but wouldn't it be a better move to just make the schools themselves *better*,"

One way of making them better is making children's attendance voluntary to parents so that school teachers have to be attractive and keep an attractive social atmosphere.

" rather than leaving the possibility of a large part of the population not getting an actual education?"

There is a huge difference between an actual education per se and an actual school education.

Eru Ilúvatar

@Hans-Georg Lundahl
1st point: If we simply look at our own systems, where attending school is often mandatory (and enforced), which seems to go quite well in a lot of countries, why would it not work there.
Also 1st point: Teachers/Students harassing Students...there would be things in place to prevent this in a good system, that don't involve making schools/education no longer mandatory.
2nd point: Because if they're not worse then why remove the mandatory aspect
3rd point: the better was mostly reffering to if they are infact worse than our own.
@Hans-Georg Lundahl
4th point: there is not as much of a difference as you might think. Being homeschooled isn't the best option in a lot of cases

Hans-Georg Lundahl

@Eru Ilúvatar "1st point: If we simply look at our own systems, where attending school is often mandatory (and enforced), which seems to go quite well in a lot of countries, why would it not work there."

Would Sweden and England be among these countries? Sweden is where ma was harrassed by a teacher. England is where C. S. Lewis was harrassed by comrades at a boarding school. In Austria I was harrassed by teachers, but ma took me out to homeschool me. On returning to Sweden I was harrassed by pupils in one school, then homeschooled, social welfare stopped that and I was put on a boarding school, with the result I was harrassed by pupils there too.

"Also 1st point: Teachers/Students harassing Students...there would be things in place to prevent this in a good system, that don't involve making schools/education no longer mandatory."

Not mandatory is the simplest way of preventing this.

"2nd point: Because if they're not worse then why remove the mandatory aspect"

Because mandatory schools here are bad enough.

"3rd point: the better was mostly reffering to if they are infact worse than our own."

OK?

"4th point: there is not as much of a difference as you might think. Being homeschooled isn't the best option in a lot of cases"

It certainly beats being harrassed in school.

It also beats getting indoctrinated by a school with a state sponsored agenda. You know evolution belief, Draper White thesis, Whig bias in history ...

Eru Ilúvatar

@Hans-Georg Lundahl Evolution belief? Are you one of those fools who doesn't believe in evolution? If so, this is exactly what I mean

@Hans-Georg Lundahl Harassment isn't always as severe as you have apparantly experienced. Trust me -_-

@Hans-Georg Lundahl Draper white Thesis...the conflixt thesis, about science and religion..I do not recall this being forced as truth, nor do I see why this would be beneficial for indoctrination

@Hans-Georg Lundahl Whig bias is also not everywhere....

Hans-Georg Lundahl

@Eru Ilúvatar "Are you one of those fools who doesn't believe in evolution? If so, this is exactly what I mean"

Well, this attitude is exactly what I mean about harrassment.

"Harassment isn't always as severe as you have apparantly experienced"

Isn't always doesn't equal the harrassed should have no way out.

"I do not recall this being forced as truth, nor do I see why this would be beneficial for indoctrination"

I suppose you are from US?

That would explain your not recalling so, and that would explain why you haven't seen as severe harrassment. I am from Sweden, and in the 80's, our schools were infiltrated by the Stasi, according, not to a conspiracy theory, but an ordinary news outlet in Sweden.

"Whig bias is also not everywhere..."

Could it be that the option of homeschooling in US actually promotes some kind of quality control?

Eru Ilúvatar

@Hans-Georg Lundahl I'm not from the US, I'm from the Netherlands.

@Hans-Georg Lundahl That attitude isn't harassment. It's stating that I think people who don't believe in evolution are fools

Hans-Georg Lundahl

@Eru Ilúvatar OK, your being of the Netherlands is compatible with ultimately Calvinist adoration of literacy and a modern equally fanatic adoration of state control of schools.

Your telling me in one conversation what you think of creationists is indeed not harrassment, but your attitude was the basis of very much of the harrassment I did suffer. Comrades starting debates to shift to collective threat and jeering before I could make a point and so on.

You are fairly much part of the problem C. S. Lewis was addressing.

Eru Ilúvatar

@Hans-Georg Lundahl ....

While you did appear quite reasonable to start with you have felt the need to use one's country of origin and beliefs to justify whether they are right or wrong, which is not something to encourage in a debate. The original debate was if school attendence should be enforced or not, and what would/should happen with changes to that. so I shall give a full argument on that. And that alone.

If you do make it so going to a school (not 1 specifically..just to a school out of however many there are) is no longer enforced, it should atleast be ensured that children are educated in other ways to a certain degree (via private tutors, etc). If homeschooled, preferably with a proper curriculum. It is however, from my point of view, a better choice to at the very least make children go to school for a basic education, if not more than that. This would give them a basis to learn from, makes sure they have basic skills that could be necessary, etc. My own preference would be to enforce schools up to high school* (so untill 18), with any further education being choice, and the place where you go to school also being one's own choice** (well, that of the parents, but you get the point).

*This is ofcourse for a situation in our own world, not in Narnia, where I doubt they would have more than basic education anyway.

**Along with switching schools if necessary, if one is harassed and in a situation where the school cannot (or will not) do something about it, and to make sure that a school one goes to is good for them.

Hans-Georg Lundahl

@Eru Ilúvatar " The original debate was if school attendence should be enforced or not, and what would/should happen with changes to that."

Well, you did mention something about countries where it was supposed to work better than in Narnia's Long Winter. I challenged you on whether that included the countries where C. S. Lewis and my ma and myself had personal experience of school attendance.

"you have felt the need to use one's country of origin and beliefs to justify whether they are right or wrong"

No, the country is relevant to topic as per where you might pretend things work better than under the White Witch, not in general, but as to school attendance and its being enforced.

I did not rely on my beliefs as to enforce school attendance was wrong, you relied on yours to enforce home schooling being wrong. I mentioned mine as per arguing how I had been bullied.

"My own preference would be to enforce schools up to high school* (so untill 18),"

This in turn involves refusing pregnant teens to marry the dads. Refusing marriage before 18 is a very Dutch as well as a very Sovietic preference. It may originally hinch on a very Protestant superstition of education (Lenin had Lutheran grandparents or at least one, from 19th C when Lutheranism was very influenced by Kant and therefore Calvinist if not specific beliefs at least culture).

"and the place where you go to school also being one's own choice** (well, that of the parents, but you get the point)."

"**Along with switching schools if necessary, if one is harassed and in a situation where the school cannot (or will not) do something about it, and to make sure that a school one goes to is good for them."

But when you say "if necessary" you mean it is first of all necessary to prove one is harrassed. There are ways around detecting harrassment. Like in one school, pretending the harrassed person is abnormal and therefore a harrassment magnet, and in another, the boarding school, making sure the bullies are never really punished there either.

Two years of hell - because it was unacceptable that sons of better paid parents than my ma should be pointed at as my bullies. And because it was unacceptable to extend full innocent victim status to a non-feminist or anti-feminist who was also creationist. That latter part being where I suspect the Stasi infiltration of Swedish schools would have been relevant.

Eru Ilúvatar

@Hans-Georg Lundahl It would not need to be proven to anyone but the child's parents if they simply wished to switch.

@Hans-Georg Lundahl 'this in turn involves refusing pregnant teens to marry the dads. Refusing marraige before 18 is a very Dutch as well as a very sovietic preference'

Again with using the country of origin/ideology thing. Also implying marrying as a teen is some kind of right and must be exercised, and that marriage has anything to do with actually staying in school untill 18. You are seeming more and more backwards, and discriminatory towards certain groups and beliefs

@Hans-Georg Lundahl You are using your own/other's beliefs to justify things. You litterally do so in your next paragraph.

Tolkien Lore

I don’t see how it’s discriminatory to recognize that different people have different cultures that lead to different behaviors. Take a minute to think about what he’s saying and don’t jump to conclusions.

Hans-Georg Lundahl

@Tolkien Lore "It would not need to be proven to anyone but the child's parents if they simply wished to switch."

This is easiest to realise if the parents don't have any school obligation in the first place.

"Again with using the country of origin/ideology thing."

Well, Spain 100 years ago or little before that allowed marriage from 14 for boys and 12 for girls. As did the Papal states up to the horrible year 1870. As did canon law up to at least 1917 (it was switched up two years per sex, that year or later, not sure). This is very opposed to Kingdom of Sardinia / Italy, first country I suppose to introduce 18/18, Soviet Union, second country, and while nearly all states in Europe now have that limit, Spain is more ready than Netherlands to allow for younger marriages.

"Also implying marrying as a teen is some kind of right"

Yes, I very much do think that. Especially, but not exclusively, if the female partner is pregnant. Like, you know, it is a preferrable option for children to grow up with two parents being married to each other.

"and must be exercised,"

I don't think rights must be exercised, neither for marriage nor for education. But both as for right and as for certain circumstances of "must" I think marriage ranks higher than getting a school education, from when it is normally physically possible.

"and that marriage has anything to do with actually staying in school untill 18."

Having to attend school is usually obstructive to making a living as a couple or one in a couple. It is also psychologically a strain on the marital relation if the wife has to have a good relation to a teacher. Before Bill Clinton, it was legal in the US (at least South Carolina) to quit school if you married. One girl of 12 did, and Clinton promised to make this impossible.

"You are seeming more and more backwards,"

I thank you very sincerely for the exquisite compliment!

"and discriminatory towards certain groups and beliefs"

I didn't know Soviet tyranny (including in the more capitalistic and limited to some situations like school version in the Netherlands) constitute a group. I do discriminate against beliefs like Calvinism and Communism. I think one should.

// I did not rely on my beliefs as to enforce school attendance was wrong //
"You are using your own/other's beliefs to justify things. You litterally do so in your next paragraph."
// This in turn involves refusing pregnant teens to marry the dads. //

Oh, you pretend, if I think a pregnant teen should marry the dad of the child, I am using "my beliefs", but if you think a pregnant teen girl should stay in school, even if it involves abortion, you are using ... what do you call your beliefs instead of calling them your beliefs? Comedy gold!

Tolkien Lore

He never said they were inherently bad that I saw. And frankly I bet he would admit his only culture has its own problems.

Eru Ilúvatar

@Tolkien Lore You cannot know that he would, however. And let me explain what I have gathered from my conversation; Since he knew my country of origin he has constantly been using one of it's various faiths as a basis for why the things he does not like about it's values or education policy are bad. He has also drawn associations between that and the soviets. Those people who would go on to kill millions. I have a right to find those things somewhat discriminatory, and to be offended by it.

@Hans-Georg Lundahl I am however not using the belief to justify things. I am using other things to justify my belief.

@Hans-Georg Lundahl Again, if switching is allowed to be done by law, it is just as if not more easy than not having school obligation- that should be quite clear by now

Hans-Georg Lundahl

@Tolkien Lore and the other guy, here is to both:

"And frankly I bet he would admit his only culture has its own problems."

Yes, like being mostly mis-pastored by intruders like Frankenpope who is not really of it.

All things have problems in a fallen world, but the Church law of centuries and the Roman custom of having education of the young a private matter for the parents are good solutions agreeable to the natural law (good and ill are not one among elves and another among men, etc).

I do call the total overall arrangement for the young these days inherently bad. Each separate item (except raising marital age to 18/18 minimum without exceptions and keeping young schooled where either miserable or needed in a married home and obviously abortion) could be defended. The overall combination cannot so.

"Those people who would go on to kill millions."

Have a look at 80 Years War, at support for Cromwell and William (III in England) of Orange, at what either meant to Ireland ...

Have also a look at where your ideologies (about marriage possibly, you didn't say downright you were against lowering of marital age, school compulsion certainly) come from historically over the XXth C. In 1914, Russia had no school obligation (and unlike other places in Christendom with this asset, also little access to school if wanted, which is not an asset). 1924, Soviet Union had school obligation, introduced by Lenin. Can you say this happened earlier in Netherlands?

Oh, unfortunately you can:

"De eerste leerplichtwet in Nederland werd aangenomen in 1900 en trad in werking op 1 januari 1901. Deze wet verplichtte kinderen van 5 tot 12 jaar tot het volgen van onderwijs. De leerplicht startte dus bij de aanvang van het schooljaar nadat de kinderen ten volle 5 jaar geworden zijn. Voor sommige kinderen werden uitzonderingen gemaakt, zoals voor boerenkinderen tijdens de oogsttijd. Dochters mochten ook thuisblijven om het gezin te verzorgen."
https://nl.wikipedia.org/wiki/Leerplicht#Geschiedenis_2

However, this was not to 18, it was to 12. It did not concern teens. Its prolongations came in 1928, 1942 and 1975.

Gezin = household?

Confer Belgium:
"De Belgische grondwet schrijft dat iedereen recht heeft op onderwijs, met eerbied voor de fundamentele rechten en vrijheden. Om dit leerrecht te garanderen, is er een leerplicht. Het maakt niet uit hoe het kind onderwijs krijgt. De vrijheid van onderwijs is in België van toepassing op de ouders. Overtredingen van de leerplichtwet kunnen nooit door de leerlingen, maar enkel door de ouders begaan worden."

In other words, homeschooling is allowed, as long as a basic vague curriculum is followed. Why? Perhaps because Belgium is former Spanish Netherlands. Catholicism = freedom for parents.

"I have a right to find those things somewhat discriminatory, and to be offended by it."

You do, but why don't you get offended of having things in common with Soviets as opposed to with Belgium?

"I am using other things to justify my belief."

Which you didn't exactly mention, plus how they justify one belief depends on another belief on what is good.

"Again, if switching is allowed to be done by law, it is just as if not more easy than not having school obligation- that should be quite clear by now"

It is clear you assert it, but it is not clear how it would in practise be so. "My son needs to switch to a school on the other side of the Graacht" - "OK, wait two weeks so we can make the paperwork" (two weeks later:) "Sorry, the school at the other side of the Graacht can't take your son, do you still want to switch?" - "Yes." - "Which school?" - "The one three Graachten away." - "OK, wait two weeks ..." (two weeks later:) "I am sorry to hear your son committed suicide, I think he should have switched schools a bit earlier"

Sociodemographic Differences in Time Trends of Suicidal Thoughts and Suicide Attempts Among Adolescents Living in Amsterdam, The Netherlands
https://econtent.hogrefe.com/doi/full/10.1027/0227-5910/a000735

Figure 4: Estimated percentage of 13–14-year-olds reporting suicide attempts during the past 12 months, stratified by educational level, for school years 2010–2011 to 2014–2015.

An overall downward trend from 2010 to 2014, but only school form responsible for it is practical pre-vocational. It dropped from c. 5-6 % suicide attempts to under 3 %. Theoretical pre-vocational was steady just below 3 %, slightly rising. Senior general secondary about 2 %, slightly rising. Pre-university, steadily 1%.

For some reason, I get overall stats for Belgium (which are higher) but not stats for Belgian teens under 15, which is the comparable group.

Margatatials

@Eru Ilúvatar someone doesnt know of anyone abused in the English school system of the past

Eru Ilúvatar

@Hans-Georg Lundahl That last example is very exaggerated. Paperwork generally doesn't take that long or lead to refusal

@Hans-Georg Lundahl You wish to know why leerplicht was implemented and prolonged here? To prevent child labour and to make it so all children had an education regardless of wealth or how much their parents knew

@Hans-Georg Lundahl Gezin is family

Hans-Georg Lundahl

@Eru Ilúvatar Generally not, meaning sometimes so.

"To prevent child labour and to make it so all children had an education regardless of wealth or how much their parents knew"

I believe you.

This doesn't make it good.

"Gezin is family"

Veel bedankt. Something more respected in 1900 than in 1975, then.

Eru Ilúvatar

@Hans-Georg Lundahl Catholiscism is not the only thing that dictates that.

@Hans-Georg Lundahl I got offended to the soviet thing...and several other comments.

Not the belgians

Eru Ilúvatar

@Hans-Georg Lundahl why is it "unfortunate" that there was a leerplicht in the netherlands earlier
..?

Hans-Georg Lundahl

@Eru Ilúvatar Well, it makes Netherlands a bad model in Russia second time ... first under Peter the Great, then under Lenin.

Eru Ilúvatar

@Hans-Georg Lundahl It isn't good that it stopped child labour?

Hans-Georg Lundahl

@Eru Ilúvatar Depends on what child labour.

If you mean in mines, that should be stopped, but if you mean Heintje singing and acting ...? Or if you mean daughters knitting sweaters then sold ...?

And above 12, I'd not agree it is a question of children with girls, as with boys above 14.

@Eru Ilúvatar Other example of acceptable child labour. St. Helen was c. 22 / 24 when marrying Constantius or at first perhaps becoming his concubine, but before that she had had a carreer as stablegirl.

What modern girl would not envy her that teen labour?

Eru Ilúvatar

[to what kind of work] @Hans-Georg Lundahl working Factories, building, long workdays, that sorta thing- btw, I also found a suicides per 100,000 for age 15-19 for this year, on which belgium has 6/6,5 and the netherlands has 4,5/5

[to stable girl St. Helen] @Hans-Georg Lundahl quite a few actually..especially those who tried it themselves..and those are often in their late teens

Hans-Georg Lundahl

@Eru Ilúvatar OK. Now, work in factories, building, long work days ... in Sweden one could work some things from 13 when I was young (I didn't) and these were not among them.

Serving in shops or bars was more like it.

Nevertheless, some teens who worked in stables and didn't like that may have liked school even less.

Higher suicide rates per 15-19 in Belgium, noted, but that includes 19 year olds who don't have to go to school (so school environment is not he question) and I would argue it involves none of those who were in homeschooling.

Overall, I think Belgium has highest suicide rate in European Union, and that for ages over 15. Belgium has a problem, or more than one, but not having leerplicht in public schools is not one of them.

Also, the work Netherlands did to avoid suicide thoughts in practical pre-vocational schools among 13 to 14 year olds back in 2015 may have paid off in less suicides in 2020. Whatever it was, it is laudable, and if you were one of them who helped that, hat off. Netherlands clearly are doing something very right.

Eru Ilúvatar

@Hans-Georg Lundahl It's true that it isn't necessarily the cause, but it presents the case that not having leerplicht does not mean there will be less suicides.

Hans-Georg Lundahl

@Eru Ilúvatar This does not hold ceteris paribus. Belgium has for instance probably most immigration in Europe.

I will give a parallel between two countries that are perhaps more comparable, Germany and Austria.

Anzahl der Suizide 2019 = Deutschland
10 bis 15 22 insgesamt 11 Männer 11 Frauen
15 bis 20 163 insgesamt 121 Männer 42 Frauen
163+22 = 185

Bev. 6-13 irrelevant? 5,92 Millionen
Bev. 14-17 3,03 Millionen
Bev. 18-20 2,53 Millionen

5.92+3.03+2.53 = 11.48 Millionen
3.03+2.53 = 5.56 Millionen

185/55.6 = 3.3273381295
185/114.8 = 1.61149825784
___________
Abbildung 2: Standardisierte Suizidraten (pro 100.000 EW; 5-Jahres-Durchschnitt 2014–2018) nach Altersgruppen - Österreich
10 - 14 c. 1. oder weniger
15 - 19 10 Männer, 3 (4?) Frauen, 7 insgesamt
1+7 / 2 = 3.5
_____________________
Actually, suicide rates in the age groups are lower in Germany. I don't think this is directly because of Schulpflicht, but I think some suicide prevention has compensated. In 1975, it may have been the other way round, but I don't know that.

Eru Ilúvatar

@Hans-Georg Lundahl Actually, that is untrue. The Country with the most Immigration in Europe is Germany

@Hans-Georg Lundahl infact, The Netherlands, for example, also has more immigration

Hans-Georg Lundahl

@Eru Ilúvatar than Belgium?

Eru Ilúvatar

@Hans-Georg Lundahl more than belgium, yes..forgot to add that

Hans-Georg Lundahl

@Eru Ilúvatar OK, I seem to have been wrong on some, then.

Eru Ilúvatar

@Hans-Georg Lundahl It happens

Hans-Georg Lundahl

@Eru Ilúvatar Yes, I was wrong to think homeschooling, just because it is legal, is so widespread it makes a big difference in Belgium. 2000 - 2014 Flemish homeschoolers grew from 100 to 1000 in total. In Austria, they are over 2000. But that would mean, less than 3000, in total.

Both countries have restrictions making it less pervasive than it should be.

Other differences between Netherlands and Belgium, Germany and Austria carry more weight.

And those other differences are then not the numbers of immigrants, at least not in the way that conflicts would have led to more suicides, if anything, immigrants rather helped.