A Socialist View from Outside the Box

The smoking debate has taken another focus, this time centred on a TV commercial designed to portray what a child loses if their parent dies as a result of smoking. The commercial in question centres around a boy who loses his mum at a train station with the reflection focused on losing the boys mum for a few minutes compared to losing her for life. In the commercial the boy is realistically upset at losing his mum in a crowded train station.

The local newspaper has run several letters to the editor focusing on why the commercial is wrong. Its not fair to do that to a kid, even if it is only for a few minutes some people have said.

The commercial in question uses a real life mother and son acting team. The boy, around 4 years old, knows the commercial is make believe and that his mum has only disappeared around the corner. The commercial is realistic but I don’t see any long-term problems for the boy in making it.

One particular letter in the local newspaper focused on the fact we are all going to die one day and we should be left alone to enjoy the pleasures of life until such time as its our time to leave.

This particular letter put many thoughts in my head and spurred me to write this article today.

The question in my head is why so many people look at life only as a precursor to death? As a people, do we really have such a low opinion of our abilities and ourselves.

Yes, we are all going to die some day. There is not much we can do about that. We are, however, not born only so we can die. Death should be the result of a long lived, full life – not forced upon us by actions we know are going to kill us.

Our kids look upon their parents for guidance. If it is all right for Mummy and Daddy to do it, it must be ok for me. We can attempt to live a do as I say, not as I do education pattern with our kids, but in the end, our kids will copy what we do more than what we ask them to do.

We all have the potential to leave a legacy to our own families and our community. I don’t believe we should belittle life to the point that we look upon it as an unnecessary precursor to death.

I think Tony Robbins put it best when he said “…It is not what we get. But who we become, what we contribute… that gives meaning to our lives…” not a packet of ciggies.

Eric J. Smith

The idea and concept of freedom has been expressed in many ways by many cultures. The democratic concept of freedom is probably the most talked about. The concept of being free and holding onto our freedom is right and powerful.

When looking at the concept of freedom, we have to do so with the point of view that the traditional idea of freedom requires that someone must be put out for another to achieve or receive their own personal freedom. That’s how the democratic system works. Smoking is a good example of this.

In most countries smokers have the right to engage in their “hobby” knowing they have the freedom to do so. Those of us who do not smoke have to put up with the ghastly smell of smoke while a smoker expresses their freedom to light up.

The major down side to the freedom concept is in the lack on personal responsibility.

A Lack of Personal Responsibility and accountability for individual actions is where freedom takes a fall. Our society teaches us to avoid taking responsibility for our actions. For example, these days we can keep our No Claim Bonus even if the accident was our fault.

Individuals have the freedom, whether legally or not, to drop coins into slot machines, open their veins to drugs and consume excessive amounts of alcohol. When addiction sets in society must pay for the avoidance of individual personal responsibility.

As a society we should be given the freedom to do what’s right, in fact we shouldn’t be given the right to something we already possess. If our actions cause no inaction to others we should be able to express our autonomy within the bounds of governing law.

We do however need to be given less freedom to do what’s morally and ethically wrong. If our individual actions cause the loss of freedom to another individual, then we need to reconsider those selfish actions from the point of view of the person being put out.

We should have the freedom to be right and just. That doesn’t mean we should be free to be unjust.

The democratic system was set up to give individuals the right to express their individual freedom. There was no major emphasis put on doing what’s right by others. We have therefore grown into a society who grasps onto personal freedom but forget that our actions may be putting others out.

Zig Ziegler was quoted as saying… “We can have anything we want in life, simply by helping others get what they want…”

I think that sums up what this article is about.

Eric J. Smith

It has been said “…Parents have the right to require that their children be taught in an atmosphere that reflects their values…”. Unfortunately, in deliverance this is wrong. Ask your school principal to change your child’s Education to reflect your family values and you will be quickly told why your values are wrong.

Parents are invited to express their opinion only so the Education system can say they have given the family options. The Education system is designed to run in a particular order delivering a particular curriculum to a particular type of student. The school system acts like a sieve to sift out the lumps to ensure it runs smoothly.

Having spent many hours in the Principals office (as a parent, not a student) I can say without doubt School principals and senior staff DO listen to parents. From experience I can say however, this is NOT to enable the implementation of our values as parents, but rather to explain to us why our values are wrong.

Prior to the 2007 Election in Australia the John Howard Coalition Government implemented change in the Industrial relations act giving more freedom to employees and employers. These changes enabled Individual work place agreements to be negotiated between employer and employee. It gave more freedom to both the worker and the boss. The Rudd Labor government overturned the system after the election in 2007.

This “WorkChoices” system failed because it did not accommodate for Greed. This was perhaps the only problem with the structure. Giving Freedom to Individuals rather than a collective body IS a good thing, when implemented with protection for both employer and employee.

The Education system is run in a similar way to the current Union based Industrial Relations system. Everything is done based on a collective criteria and curriculum. The only students who are eligible to receive an Individual Education Program (IEP) are those with higher support needs. Even then, the IEP’s have to reflect Implementation through a collective system.

The Individual as such has no rights under any collective system. The development of which is done based on an assumed majority.

Parental Autonomy does not exist within the Education System as it currently exists.

It’s obvious the system needs drastic change to accommodate the individual more so than the collective.

3 areas needing change are:

1. All students should receive Individual Education Programs.
2. Students from 8 years of age should be encouraged with support, to set their own curriculum based on pre-determined testing criteria to ensure a streamlined Testing program.
3. Parents should be included in the Design, Implementation and Updating of the Students individual education program.

Eric J. Smith

I heard a story once about a dog that would sit on the same step of his owner’s porch for years. Day in day out he would sit on the same step. Over the years the step wore out and nails and splinters started showing through the boards. The dog however would continue to sit on the same step, even though on occasion he would moan and yelp as a splinter dug into him or a nail scratched him.

The pain of sitting there was less painful than the idea of having to Change his ways and perhaps move to a less painful part of the step.

We are a lot like that dog. We know the current government system is wearing out. It needs upgrading to a newer model. But the thought of changing to an unknown or untested governing system is more painful than just going with the flow of the current system.

There is no doubt that change is needed because if we keep going in the same direction we are likely to end up where we are headed. The step is only getting thinner. At same point it is going to break and the dog will be forced to consider something new.

It would be a good idea to give the system a much-needed service now, before it breaks down altogether.

His mind is like concrete, all mixed up and permanently set. That may well be the quote we have to contend with when considering any change in Government.

Life is full of many changes that happen naturally but when faced with reason to make a drastic change that could be considered “life altering” we ask ourselves if its absolutely necessary and 9 times out of 10 we end up doing what we always done.

5 Key reasons for change:

1. The world is changing and Governments are not The system needs to catch up with the wants and needs of the Country.
2. Governments are at a point where they are governing people and not services such as Health and Education.
3. Governments today are focusing more on their own power and less on the services they are governing for the people.
4. There are currently too many levels of government.
5. Governments DO need to exist to provide a systemised deliverance to services such as Health and Education as well as support for businesses. Governments are also required to provide domestic services like waste removal and water supply.

We have to be willing to accept change.

Eric J. Smith

Teachers in Special Schools work very hard with Children with Special Needs Disabilities. They work to ensure a sound understanding is achieved with situations many take for granted.

While children in mainstream schools are learning the ABC’s, kids in Special needs facilities are learning to dress themselves, learn to communicate through alternative channels, basic life skills, toileting and the like.

Although Special needs children receive the specialised support they require there are several powerful reasons these Special Needs services to be provided in a mainstream setting.

5 Reasons to Enrol Special Needs Children in Mainstream Schools with full time support:

1. Mainstream Students learn to accept the Child behind the disability. While ever kids are made to feel different or “removed” from society there will always be issues relating to acceptance. Students with disabilities need to learn, fail and succeed like any other mainstream student.

2. Disabled Children develop a sense of acceptance. Removing Special Needs Kids from a mainstream setting for permanent education in purpose built facilities does, by default, give them a sense of not only being different but forced to feel unaccepted by society. Kids from All walks of life are different. Some are Short, Some are black, some have red hair and freckles some are obese. All of these differences does not cause these kids to be treated differently. It also does not force them to attend Specialised Education.

3. Social Interaction becomes a permanent part of the Child’s Education and not a “Special Event” or excursion. Removing a child from society to teach them social skills makes about as much sense as taking the paper OUT of the printer to print a document.

4. Not only do Special needs kids learn about the real world, Mainstream Students also learn about the world of a special needs child. Mainstream kids should be given the opportunity to learn a non-spoken language such as Makaton. It not only allows communication with those who can not speak it is also a powerful communication language for people in noisy work environments.

5. Specialised services become more readily available to other students in Mainstream schools. There will always be students with difficulties in all levels of school. Some students with mild Autism, Cerebral Palsy or ADHD. When students with more severe disabilities are educated at mainstream schools, the services for the less severe disabilities are available on hand rather than by appointment.

Society needs to move through generations of change and acceptance before Special Needs Kids and adults will be given some form of belonging to the real world.

Eric J. Smith

A recent forum conversation planted a seed and sparked an Internal debate within me about Governments, Change and Politics. 

Governments in most parts of the world follow a 3 Tier system. Federal, State and Local Government divisions are generally found around the world. 

In Australia, as in other parts of the world many have highlighted the need for less governance and a more streamlined approach to deliverance of services. 

I am all for the reduction in the size of Government but I can’t help but feel the implementation factor is the biggest problem in reducing the size of Government at ANY level. 

To highlight the services offered at the 3 tiers of government in Australia: 

At a Federal level, the Government supports:  

• Trade, Commerce, Employment, Corporations, Industrial relations & Taxation;
• Postal and Telecommunication services, Banking, Currency, Bankruptcy, Census & Statistics
• Defence Forces, Quarantine, International Treaties, Foreign Affairs, Immigration
• Navigation, Airports, Air Safety, Copyright and Patents;
• Social Security and Pensions

At a State Level the Government Supports:  

• Education
• Public Health and Hospitals
• Railways, Public Transport and Roads
• Police, Fire Brigades, Ambulance Services; Law Courts
• Forestry, Conservation, Water Control, Wildlife Protection and Tourism
• Local Government, Mining and Agriculture

At a Local Level, the Governing Council Supports:  

• Town Planning and Urban Use Planing; Land Subdivision and Building Standards
• Local Roads, Footpaths and Drains and Traffic Control
• Garbage and Sewage Disposal, Health Inspection;
• Childcare Centres, Public Libraries,
• Local Tourism Promotion and Sporting Grounds

When implemented at Individual Levels it could easily be said that Inefficiencies, Duplication of Time and Talent and a Waste of same is obvious. 

As with most things in life when fronted with the possibility of change people will usually choose to stay the same. 

At all government levels things DO get done. Promises ARE broken, People WILL be disappointed others SHOULD feel a sense of accomplishment and satisfaction. Its called Democracy. Change fails to take shape not from lack of want but more so from a case of “Better the Devil you Know” whether we are happy with the situation or not. 

Politicians in Government and Opposition won’t take on the change process realistically because it will hit them hard at the ballot box 

The system does need cleaning up. This is obvious. The question on most people’s lips is not if or when but How? 

Perhaps, rather than individual governments regulating a varied range of interests, perhaps we need a Federal governing body with sub councils implementing and running a smooth Implementation of Services currently delivered. 

For example, At a state Level councils could be established for – Education, Roads and Transport, Health and Hospitals etc, with Implementation arms at a Local Level. 

At least with that structure we could travel anywhere within Australia and expect the same level of deliverance across states. 

It works for McDonalds around the world, Why not For a Country ?

These days finding a special needs child in a mainstream school would be like finding an “Enter” key on a keyboard.

The concept of institutionalised care and education is almost a thing of the past. Though some circles still feel special needs kids and adults do not have a place in mainstream society, thankfully these groups are diminishing as the decades roll on.

The placement of Special needs kids in mainstream school has many benefits to the special needs child but also the school community as a whole. Mainstream school kids get to know the disabled child for the person inside the body, not the outward disability. This goes a long way to improving social acceptance of the special needs kids both now as a child in school and later as an adult in the community.

As a parent of a disabled child I often liken the use of Special School facilities to taking a bath without any water or taking a flight in a plane without wings.

Just like we need water to take a bath we also need a “normal” social setting to educate special needs kids about society and interacting in it. The use of Special Education facilities is like taking a mainstream school student to the desert to teach them to swim.

I should pause to explain that this article is written out of frustration due to a long run battle for our child to be accepted at a mainstream school on a permanent basis. The closest we have ever been able to get was 4 days at a mainstream school and 1 day at special education – with this likely to expand each year until she was a permanent pupil at the special education school.

As parents we are in no way against the Specialised Education our daughter requires. We do however, feel this Extra support could and should be made available to her at a mainstream school. She should have the ability to have lunch with her siblings, participate in Lunchtime activities with mainstream kids, Attend sporting events – whether participating or cheering – and generally socialise with her age group peers.

The concept of splitting Education between 2 facilities due to a disability is like splitting a child’s world in half. Its saying “Its ok to be called ‘normal’ a couple of days a week and ‘disabled’ for the rest of the week”.

The teachers call it “getting the best of both worlds”. Unfortunately we don’t live in 2 worlds. We live in one world and we should all be accepted as equal within it regardless of race, colour, ability, disability or orientation.