1) Your obsession with the enforcement of rules--as a psychological phenomenon--is disturbing. Period.
2) Zinn was a fraud and a hack. The point of view of history's observers has zero effect upon the nature of those events. The reason why the point of view of 'the rich' is taught in schools is because that is what actually happened.
And who is 'they' that want it this way? I'm smelling Zionist lizard-men from Mars all over this...
Without rules, there is chaos, anarchy and destruction. The lack of rules paves the way for the destruction of all life as lack of order gradually whittles away the meaning and fulfillment that life can offer.
The THEY that want it this way are those who are in power. Those that have power want to keep it, and they want more. Throughout the centuries, there have been people who had families who had power that passed this power down. These people planned well enough so as to keep out of view. They were the power that directed the throne. Certainly, they wouldn't want to give up this power, so they devised a long term plan, which would be carried out over thousands of years, and one that keeps evolving as time goes by. They keep refining their methods of social control in order to make people more and more productive, for the benefit of these few in power. I think they are long term thinkers.
First it was the pharaohs who were supposed to be living gods, and people got tired of that, so they made up kings, who were the go between between man and God. Then people got tired of that, and so communism, socialism, and capitalism were invented, all towards the same end, which is the enslavement of all mankind. -Correction-the CONTINUED enslavement of all mankind. Why do I think this? Because Some people always want power and in every government that has ever existed, it has been to serve the purposes of the few at the expense of the many. It's human nature. Since human nature hasn't changed, I see no reason to believe that the ultimate agenda of ANY government is for anything but enslaving it's people. Hey, I'm a pessimist. Whether they are Zionist, or lizard men, or from Mars, or all of the above or none of the above doesn't matter.
Does it really matter WHO is controlling or enslaving people, or what they look like or where they are from. Not to me it doesn't. I admit that I did hear this theory postulated by other people on public radio, so I cannot take credit for it. However, knowing how much human beings like power, and also knowing that human nature has never changed (We'd all like to believe that it has changed for the better, but I think that to be naive and pollyanna), I have no reason to believe that it isn't the case, and in fact, I think it far more likely that it IS the case, because that's how people ARE.
Happiness comes from peace. Peace comes from harmony. Harmony comes from order. Order comes from rules. Ergo = Happiness comes from rules.
Of course, the only valid rules are the ones consistent with peace, harmony and order. Happiness is consistency with peace, harmony and order. Of course, I am referring to absolute peace, harmony and order, since to have a definition, it must be as definite, or concise as possible and thus must be as absolute as possible, and so it must be absolute peace, harmony and order.
To the degree something is consistent with peace harmony and order, it will give oneself true happiness, and to the degree it it inconsistent with peace, harmony and happiness, it will cause suffering.
Most people usually feel RELATIVE happiness to be happiness, as when something is only relatively consistent with harmony. That means that something will be harmonious with, or like, something already inside oneself, like a feeling, and because that thing is LIKE what one already feels inside oneself it will be PERCEIVED as making one feel happy, because relatively speaking, it does, even though it is not consistent with peace or order.
And so, the more that rules are consistent with enforcing peace, harmony, and order, (simultaneously that is)the more that those are beneficial rules. Obviously, the more inconsistent with those things rules are, the worse those rules are, and the more they support an oppressive government.
Absolute enforcement of rules isn't a problem per se, it is only which rules that being enforced at all that can be a problem.
There could be absolute rules that say if you don't breathe once a day, or if you don't drink water in some form once a month, you will be executed, and that would apply to everyone. No problem. That rule could be enforced, and no one's freedom would be infringed upon, ever. Basically, beneficial rules protect the absolute highest quality of life for the most people.
Which brings us back to video cameras in schools. I knew of a guy in high school who weighed maybe 98 pounds and was about 5 foot 5. He kept to himself mostly, and minded his own business, and was very socially awkward, but was still a good kid. He never started any trouble. There was another guy who was about 235 pounds, 6 foot 3, who was picking on this smaller kid on a regular basis. He was kicking him against the brick wall of the gym, throwing him against it, pushing him against it, and punching him, and slapping him around. The smaller kid didn't do anything to the bigger kid. This was going on for weeks or months. At least a couple times a week I think. I actually saw it once, so I know.
The smaller kid went to the administration for help, and they did nothing. I think he may have gone to them for help 3 times. I guess they didn't think this was important enough to look into.
This was probably the greatest injustice in the school for the past year or two, and they did nothing. One day, the smaller kid comes to school with a .22 semi-automatic pistol. The bully confronted him as usual, and then the smaller kid pulled the gun. Somehow, the gun got dropped and it didn't go off, so no one got hurt. I think perhaps the big guy didn't even push the smaller guy around that day. The result was that the smaller guy got expelled and the bigger guy got one or two week suspension. That was wrong. If anything, the big guy should have been expelled, to some high school with Mexican gangs ( No offense to Mexicans, but they are abut the only kind of gangs around here) and then let the big bully try to start his shenanigans there. The smaller kid shouldn't have been expelled, IMO. He just needed help. No one would help him, and he had to go to school. ( I suspect he had a strict father who would hit him if he didn't go, but this is just speculation. ) If there were video cameras, then all of the bullying would have been documented, and the bully would have gotten what he deserved, and the smaller kid would never have been driven to such a desperate act.
THAT is one of the reasons why we NEED video cameras in public schools.
If may be so bold, this is a very "comfortable" donation, since Lucas knows he is filthy rich he can easily do this.
