Circular File

Christopher Stasheff wrote (d. 2018) a more-or-less lighthearted scifi-fantasy mashup series that reflected the ethics/morality of his religious convictions without beating folks over the head with his principles; he just had characters that lived their fictional lives to a high standard of morality and ethics. What made that work, though, was that he told cracking good stories.

Fast forward to today’s introduction to a plot that attempts to use the same strange premise as Stasheff’s most popular work. . . and does so. . . poorly. *sigh* Four chapters in and I am about to ditch the book. I do not like the main character because the character is just about (well, almost) empty—there is no “there” there to the character, just *poof*, and I am still waiting for the story to get beyond the setup. Four chapters in. Just no.

Yeh, goodbye.

Schools and Parents

In many places nowadays, schools are tending toward shielding themselves from parents supervising the schools’ activities: general and specific policies, teachers’ behaviors, etc., including enabling children in empowering gender dysphoria, punishing children for being. . . normal, and engaging in psychological evaluations and labeling that pubschools are unqualified to do (not that a growing number of credentialed p-sychs are not disqualifying themselves, but that’s another issue).

But schools have always, well, as long as I’ve been alive, at least, had problems with teachers or admins arrogating powers unto themselves that they are not qualified to wield.

Exhibit A: 9th Grade. I was sent to thee principal’s office for disrupting my English class. what was my actual offense? I had finished an in class written assignment FAR too quickly, because I had read the textbooks during the first week of class, and was able to (correctly) finish the assignment without re-reading thee assigned material from the lit book. Unacceptable! I was instead supposed to wear Harrison Bergeron’s handicaps and plod along with thee rest of the cud-chewers.

Fortunately, my parents were called, and the teacher ended up allowing me to work at a reasonable (for me) pace for the rest of the year, and the following years I was not placed with the cud-chewers. (When a similar situation cropped up in my second year of Spanish, that was nipped in the bud before it became a problem. History helped in that case.)

Parental engagement–though not the “parental Karens” kind–can be a positive force for good.


(N.B. I was placed in cud-chewer, A.K.A. “normal,” classes in 9th grade because we had moved from out of state, and the new district just did not want to credit past performance. This also resulted in a biology class that was a lower level review of my 7th grade bio class, notwithstanding the fact that my 8th grade human anatomy class surpassed even that. Nowadays, I shudder to think what might happen.)

BTW, I was NOT, and never have been, a model student, at least not in the institutional frame. I am like our Aussie Lap Puppy in one regard: I learn what interests me. Oh, if a compelling reason presents itself, I can and do learn things that are otherwise not interesting to me, but the inducement in those cases has to be pretty convincing. ¯\_(?)_/¯ For example: I never saw a convincing reason to learn how to use a keyboard until I ran across a piece of software that enabled engraver-level composition, transcription, and arranging of music playing between my ears. Finally, a motivation.

The One-Sided War Has FINALLY Seen a Reply to the Enemy

I see some saying the craziness resulting from TDS and completely whacko reactions to DOGE cutting waste, fraud, corruption, and blatant treason (supplying BILLIONS in aid and comfort to avowed enemies of the US) is evidence that the Loony Left Moonbat Brigade does not think of long term consequences. Au contraire, mon frère. Some leftists do think of long term consequences. It’s why they have had so much success with the “Department of Misunderedumacationism” in dumbing down America. #gagamaggot Surely you don’t think the 45 years of policies and pressures from the DoE that have caused such harm in the supposed cause of “helping” schools have all been from a LACK of thought about the results! Nope. The harm done has been intentional.

“Once is happenstance; twice is coincidence; three times is enemy action” and 45 years of harmful acts is a war.

DoE: DOA. RIH.

The Theory of Education in the US

Fascinating, challenging, frustrating, disheartening, encouraging: the 1931 Page-Barbour Lectures at the University of Virginia, compiled into The Theory of Education in the United States, by Albert Jay Nock. A significant read, IMO. My library? Two electronic formats and paperback. Read this, then Ortega’s Revolt of the Masses. The two seem to cover most of the bases in revealing why our society is so muddled. And often (appears to be?) sinking.

Merit Should Be the ONLY Standard

College admissions.

Group That Pushed SCOTUS To End Affirmative Action ‘Gravely Concerned’ Elite Colleges Aren’t Complying With Ruling

Self-anointed “elites” are above the law, don’t you know? After all, the Constitution only applies if they agree with it. Otherwise, it’s just dead words, you know? #gagamaggot

Yeh, 14th Amendment guarantees of equal protection under the law are apparently not recognized by “elite” universities that are nevertheless quite willing to accept federal funds to continue to thumb their collective noses at the Constitution.

There is NOTHING—absolutely NOTHING—good, ethical, virtuous, or societally healthy about “affirmative action.”

OTOH, while not necessarily unlawful, the “good old boy”/nepotistic admissions network is also repugnant. I recall the day when my mom, who was working in the high school supervisors’ offices (large district; half a million pop at the time) came home with an offer from one of the supervisors to gain me admission to an Ivy League school, complete with scholarship aid. I found it. . . distasteful that he would pull strings to get me “in.”

Glad I rejected the offer.

“Against Stupidity. . . “

“. . .the gods themselves contend in vain.” – Schiller,

    Maid of Orleans.

    A frequent subliterate “Dunning-Krugerand” ploy when confronted with an argument they cannot counter is to accuse their interlocutor of throwing up incoherent word salad found by (virtually?) thumbing through a thesaurus and picking “big words” to confuse the issue. Of course, all that means is that the subliterate “Dunning-Krugerand” can’t comprehend clear, plain English that is composed of words outside his pathetically small vocabulary. It also means that the subliterate “Dunning-Krugerand” (probably) cannot conceive of an expanded vocabulary that does not issue from abusing a thesaurus.

    Those of use who grew up reading dictionaries for fun just laugh. Then we may, if sufficiently provoked, raucously mock them. Without end, until they slink away dragging their lobotomized Bonobo Chimpanzee ghost writer with them.

Writing Tip #4,957

Eschew obscurantism, redundancy, and prolixity. That is, avoid arcane, esoteric, recondite, or obscure expressions; avoid undue repetition, reiteration, and duplication-reduplication of statements, and, above all, refrain from extreme, inordinate, unbridled, unchecked, and exorbitant wordiness.

YW.

Addendum: dictionaries are your friend. Thesauruses? not so much.