"White flight" in the selective school system

[LOVEPHYSICS]

And so can porn, brothels, boozing, capitalism, high heels, ‘slut’ wear, sex before marriage and smoking weed. All of these can also, in many ways, lead to an unhappy and unhealthy life. Be careful in proclaiming the universality of a value. I think it is important to realise that the mainstream values out there today are predominantly Western. It is internalized within most of the people who spent a considerable amount of time growing up in a liberal Western country, be they of Caucasian or of other ethnic background. The Western world, or those attuned to the Western culture, create dominant images of the world and don’t quite see that they construct the world in their own image. Thus, it is through assimilating, be it conscious or not, to this Western construct, that lives can be ‘improved’ in a Western dominated society. And I repeat, being part of this cultural hegemony does not mean you have hatred or malice for other races, in fact it is most likely the opposite. The only problem is, most people wouldn’t realise or see their privilege because they have cease to recognise ‘whiteness’ as a race. No race can act and speak for all. It is the reality of cultural hegemony and subjugated knowledge (read up on Foucault). It is simply not a case of racial sensitivity or insensitivity like so many have inferred. 

Simply put, all of our values are culturally constructed and we all have different concepts of morality and that of a good, happy life.
Peace.

[Eriny]

^ Curious. Are you saying that the value of school-based education is Western, or that Western people don't understand that value because it isn't Western? I would probably suggest neither, that instead studying with vigour is a way to achieve different things that are valued both in the West and elsewhere (mostly money and a prestigious profession) and pressuring your children to do well at school seems to be the easiest way to do that (particularly if you yourself lack money and a prestigious profession). The problem is that it doesn't necessarily always pay off in the way that parents hope it might. People seem to think that improving your lot in the West is something that people get through hard work, but actually the reality is far less straightforward and again, depends on what you value.

It's interesting because I very much value education myself, and indeed in the West generally (and I've noticed in other places too) education is seen as one of the tenets of meritocracy and social mobility, which may be the case, but I think that incessant studying is a perversion of what education is capable of doing for someone, which is to give them the freedom to actually (and ironically) challenge authority.

[LOVEPHYSICS]

Something along the lines of your first proposition. In other words, what we learn, the values we have and our notions of right and wrong are very much articulated and channeled within society. What I am asking for, is the tolerance, not necessarily acceptance, of a range of values, or simply put, moral plurality. The first step however, is the recognition that values are constructs of cultures. I think we can all agree that we should not seek to impose values over one another. However, the reality is far from that, we do it all the time without realising it because we have unfortunately, internalized within us, the assumption that our impositions are universal- these are common values and thus should be accepted by all. The fact is that there is no such thing as common morality or values. There is no such thing as the universal man, or woman. The domination of the Western culture, means that the white man has become equated to the norm, and this 'whiteness' starts to set standards for humanity "by which they are bound to succeed and others bound to fail". Case in point, I do think that the two articles, especially when written and placed after one another, is highly unnecessary. It seems to be unfairly picking on the Asian/Confucian mentality and value of 'education is everything', making out the issue a lot worse than it is and also in the process, fails to see that its judgment is after all, premised upon very Eurocentric values of moderation and arete (excellence in all areas). The unconscious, assumption here for many being that the European belief is correct or superior. Same goes with the issue of female circumcision, in which the West terms as female mutilation, although this is off topic. Point being, cultures are like theories, each have their own ways of doing things, and one cannot speak nor act for all.

I am in no sense, against civilized discourse. I simply am not a fan of the way the media swing things and I believe that fair discourse can only occur in an empty, public sphere which does not privilege or preset any sort of universal value, morality or conception of the good.

Yes, I value education above, probably most things I could think off right now. And I do believe that most, if not all cultures value some form of education, they just have different approaches or standards or ideals by which education should be passed or taught. I find the freedom to challenge authority bit interesting. One of the great flaws of communism is that it does a great job in educating its people, but when its people starts questioning, they are slammed down. Foucault did mention that Western capitalism ensures that knowledge/ power is channeled within the upper bourgeois class, the proletariat or those poor will never have the knowledge or education necessary to realise that they are being exploited, and thus never question authority. You can also argue that those in the upper or elite class, because of the knowledge and education they have, will never challenge authority and get rid of the highly exploitative capitalist system because it is essentially  'their greatest invention',  and it is through this invention that they can subjugate knowledge and maintain their power over the other classes.

[acinod]

Today, The Age published an article which I find relates very close to the "White flight" article.
http://www.theage.com.au/national/education/bamboo-ceiling-stymies-rise-to-the-top-20111017-1lt8x.html
It talks about the 'Bamboo Ceiling' which is a term that describes:

...how few Asian Americans reach the top leadership jobs in their professions — despite being heavily over-represented among graduates of elite universities, and gaining entry and middle-level jobs with top companies.

Once again I am extremely against these arguments and the amount of bias in these articles is absurd.

[LOVEPHYSICS]

Precisely. It seems very much to me that The Age have some kind of agenda and is trying to make a point with their little series of articles. There was a research done on how introverts can also be great leaders, just a different form of leadership most wouldn't expect. Obviously, Mr Zhao and his many assumptions doesn't seem to realise that.

[Russ]

How is the 'academic' testing system not being accurately measured? From my knowledge, it is maths, science and english. Everyone does the same paper.

Based on what the articles are about, it seems to be that some students (ie Asian minority) are obsessing over tutoring and teaching to an exam, which means the selection process isn't about potential but is about who had the most tutoring in the last 12 months

[ninwa]

Something along the lines of your first proposition. In other words, what we learn, the values we have and our notions of right and wrong are very much articulated and channeled within society. What I am asking for, is the tolerance, not necessarily acceptance, of a range of values, or simply put, moral plurality. The first step however, is the recognition that values are constructs of cultures. I think we can all agree that we should not seek to impose values over one another. However, the reality is far from that, we do it all the time without realising it because we have unfortunately, internalized within us, the assumption that our impositions are universal- these are common values and thus should be accepted by all. The fact is that there is no such thing as common morality or values. There is no such thing as the universal man, or woman. The domination of the Western culture, means that the white man has become equated to the norm, and this 'whiteness' starts to set standards for humanity "by which they are bound to succeed and others bound to fail". Case in point, I do think that the two articles, especially when written and placed after one another, is highly unnecessary. It seems to be unfairly picking on the Asian/Confucian mentality and value of 'education is everything', making out the issue a lot worse than it is and also in the process, fails to see that its judgment is after all, premised upon very Eurocentric values of moderation and arete (excellence in all areas). The unconscious, assumption here for many being that the European belief is correct or superior. Same goes with the issue of female circumcision, in which the West terms as female mutilation, although this is off topic. Point being, cultures are like theories, each have their own ways of doing things, and one cannot speak nor act for all.

I am in no sense, against civilized discourse. I simply am not a fan of the way the media swing things and I believe that fair discourse can only occur in an empty, public sphere which does not privilege or preset any sort of universal value, morality or conception of the good.

Yes, I value education above, probably most things I could think off right now. And I do believe that most, if not all cultures value some form of education, they just have different approaches or standards or ideals by which education should be passed or taught. I find the freedom to challenge authority bit interesting. One of the great flaws of communism is that it does a great job in educating its people, but when its people starts questioning, they are slammed down. Foucault did mention that Western capitalism ensures that knowledge/ power is channeled within the upper bourgeois class, the proletariat or those poor will never have the knowledge or education necessary to realise that they are being exploited, and thus never question authority. You can also argue that those in the upper or elite class, because of the knowledge and education they have, will never challenge authority and get rid of the highly exploitative capitalist system because it is essentially  'their greatest invention',  and it is through this invention that they can subjugate knowledge and maintain their power over the other classes.

1) I don't have a problem with Western values dominating in a Western society. If you don't like it then feel free to go back to where you came from (and I say this as a first generation Chinese immigrant)

2) Did you seriously just suggest female genital mutilation is in any way acceptable? No, you are wrong, there are some "values" which ARE undeniably wrong, there is no "relatively speaking" about it

3) What on earth does capitalism have to do with this?

4) You'll find that Foucault applies very little to Australian society, you can quote him all you want but you'll find that we have one of the best education systems in that those of lower socio-economic status have almost the same opportunities as those of a more privileged background (see: HECS. see: American tertiary education system)

[enwiabe]

Something along the lines of your first proposition. In other words, what we learn, the values we have and our notions of right and wrong are very much articulated and channeled within society. What I am asking for, is the tolerance, not necessarily acceptance, of a range of values, or simply put, moral plurality. The first step however, is the recognition that values are constructs of cultures. I think we can all agree that we should not seek to impose values over one another. However, the reality is far from that, we do it all the time without realising it because we have unfortunately, internalized within us, the assumption that our impositions are universal- these are common values and thus should be accepted by all. The fact is that there is no such thing as common morality or values. There is no such thing as the universal man, or woman. The domination of the Western culture, means that the white man has become equated to the norm, and this 'whiteness' starts to set standards for humanity "by which they are bound to succeed and others bound to fail". Case in point, I do think that the two articles, especially when written and placed after one another, is highly unnecessary. It seems to be unfairly picking on the Asian/Confucian mentality and value of 'education is everything', making out the issue a lot worse than it is and also in the process, fails to see that its judgment is after all, premised upon very Eurocentric values of moderation and arete (excellence in all areas). The unconscious, assumption here for many being that the European belief is correct or superior. Same goes with the issue of female circumcision, in which the West terms as female mutilation, although this is off topic. Point being, cultures are like theories, each have their own ways of doing things, and one cannot speak nor act for all.

I am in no sense, against civilized discourse. I simply am not a fan of the way the media swing things and I believe that fair discourse can only occur in an empty, public sphere which does not privilege or preset any sort of universal value, morality or conception of the good.

Yes, I value education above, probably most things I could think off right now. And I do believe that most, if not all cultures value some form of education, they just have different approaches or standards or ideals by which education should be passed or taught. I find the freedom to challenge authority bit interesting. One of the great flaws of communism is that it does a great job in educating its people, but when its people starts questioning, they are slammed down. Foucault did mention that Western capitalism ensures that knowledge/ power is channeled within the upper bourgeois class, the proletariat or those poor will never have the knowledge or education necessary to realise that they are being exploited, and thus never question authority. You can also argue that those in the upper or elite class, because of the knowledge and education they have, will never challenge authority and get rid of the highly exploitative capitalist system because it is essentially  'their greatest invention',  and it is through this invention that they can subjugate knowledge and maintain their power over the other classes.

What a load of moral relativist tosh.

Some morals are objectively better than others and you can establish why. For example, don't kill people is a moral which can be defended internally by considering humans have an innate survival instinct and in order to preserve the lives of everybody, it must never be okay to kill anybody.

Easy. Done. Onto FGM.

We all have the moral right to physical safety. Why? Because nobody (except a masochist, perhaps) wants their physical safety compromised. And, once more, in order to preserve that desire for everybody, it must be upheld for everybody. This means I can't go and start a culture where in order to fit in, at the age of 14 you have to have your left arm lopped off. Oh but that's part of my CULTURE. That must make it WORTH something.

No.

[iffets12345]

In the article about asians workign hard: http://www.theage.com.au/national/education/clever-diligent-and-feeling-the-pressure-20111016-1lram.html

The last line said "Tomorrow: the bamboo ceiling"
Am I overexaggerating in thinking that was a bit racist?

Personally I think there's nothing wrong with having high standards. Compare what was overexaggerated in the article, with what I see in my old public schooL;

Year 9 girl: What's Obama?
Year 9 girl: When I say "I went to school" is the word I in capital letters?
Year 10: Sine. SOHCAHTOA.. SOH... Sine is over hypotenuse.

[paulsterio]

1) I don't have a problem with Western values dominating in a Western society. If you don't like it then feel free to go back to where you came from (and I say this as a first generation Chinese immigrant)

2) Did you seriously just suggest female genital mutilation is in any way acceptable? No, you are wrong, there are some "values" which ARE undeniably wrong, there is no "relatively speaking" about it

3) What on earth does capitalism have to do with this?

4) You'll find that Foucault applies very little to Australian society, you can quote him all you want but you'll find that we have one of the best education systems in that those of lower socio-economic status have almost the same opportunities as those of a more privileged background (see: HECS. see: American tertiary education system)

I'm not defending LOVEPHYSICS, but this is my rather neutral opinion

1) There are always people who have a problem with other society's values, however, that's all fluff and talk. If you think about it for a second, as humans, we all have a set of moral standards with which we just instinctively live by. I refer to these as virtues, others may call them different things. But I think that all cultures appreciate things such as orderliness, hard work, contributing to society, helping others, standing up for one's rights, respecting other people...etc. There are no such things as "Western" or "Eastern" cultures. Sure, we may act differently when we are in different parts of the world, but that comes down to a different way of showing those virtues, rather than a difference in virtues themselves. For Example, I may say "thank-you" as a sign of appreciation here, but in another country, the accepted practice is to bow. That's two different cultures, exhibiting the same values.

2) No, female genital mutilation is not acceptable, neither is murder, or rape, or oppression...etc. Again, that contradicts our human virtues, no matter what "culture" you live in, you cannot use "culture" arguments or "religion" arguments to argue a basic and intrinsic virtue.

3) Capitalism is a political theory, which has nothing to do with the topic at hand, countries can be fair and their cultures be free no matter whether they are Capitalist, Communist, Theocratic...etc. It is irrelevant, it is the way the leaders act that determines the state of the society, not the political ideologies of that country.

4) I agree with you, in that Australia has an amazing educational system. The fact that there is HECS means that anyone has access to tertiary education. This means that the proletariat will have every opportunity to access an education. It is in societies such as Australia that tries to bridge the gap between the proletariat and the bourgeois so that society becomes more unified. You can argue all you want for either communism or capitalism to have fundamentally better education systems, LOVEPHYSICS, but the truth is you're arguing based on the issue of class separation. In a Marxist or Communist state, the proletariat is the ruling class, eliminating what is essentially the "middle man" (the business people) - so yes, in Marxist states, you, by theory, should have a more even access to education. However, if you are living in a Capitalist state, it does not mean that education is not available to all. Intelligent governments, such as the Australian government, are able to see that education is a good investment. By pumping money into education the government ensures that it will get more taxpayers in future and less will be dependent upon government handouts, thus, they are willing to lend money to people to get educated. Thus, the class separation becomes blurred. In states such as Australia, the proletariat will have almost equal access to tertiary education as the bourgeois.

[LOVEPHYSICS]

Something along the lines of your first proposition. In other words, what we learn, the values we have and our notions of right and wrong are very much articulated and channeled within society. What I am asking for, is the tolerance, not necessarily acceptance, of a range of values, or simply put, moral plurality. The first step however, is the recognition that values are constructs of cultures. I think we can all agree that we should not seek to impose values over one another. However, the reality is far from that, we do it all the time without realising it because we have unfortunately, internalized within us, the assumption that our impositions are universal- these are common values and thus should be accepted by all. The fact is that there is no such thing as common morality or values. There is no such thing as the universal man, or woman. The domination of the Western culture, means that the white man has become equated to the norm, and this 'whiteness' starts to set standards for humanity "by which they are bound to succeed and others bound to fail". Case in point, I do think that the two articles, especially when written and placed after one another, is highly unnecessary. It seems to be unfairly picking on the Asian/Confucian mentality and value of 'education is everything', making out the issue a lot worse than it is and also in the process, fails to see that its judgment is after all, premised upon very Eurocentric values of moderation and arete (excellence in all areas). The unconscious, assumption here for many being that the European belief is correct or superior. Same goes with the issue of female circumcision, in which the West terms as female mutilation, although this is off topic. Point being, cultures are like theories, each have their own ways of doing things, and one cannot speak nor act for all.

I am in no sense, against civilized discourse. I simply am not a fan of the way the media swing things and I believe that fair discourse can only occur in an empty, public sphere which does not privilege or preset any sort of universal value, morality or conception of the good.

Yes, I value education above, probably most things I could think off right now. And I do believe that most, if not all cultures value some form of education, they just have different approaches or standards or ideals by which education should be passed or taught. I find the freedom to challenge authority bit interesting. One of the great flaws of communism is that it does a great job in educating its people, but when its people starts questioning, they are slammed down. Foucault did mention that Western capitalism ensures that knowledge/ power is channeled within the upper bourgeois class, the proletariat or those poor will never have the knowledge or education necessary to realise that they are being exploited, and thus never question authority. You can also argue that those in the upper or elite class, because of the knowledge and education they have, will never challenge authority and get rid of the highly exploitative capitalist system because it is essentially  'their greatest invention',  and it is through this invention that they can subjugate knowledge and maintain their power over the other classes.

1) I don't have a problem with Western values dominating in a Western society. If you don't like it then feel free to go back to where you came from (and I say this as a first generation Chinese immigrant)

2) Did you seriously just suggest female genital mutilation is in any way acceptable? No, you are wrong, there are some "values" which ARE undeniably wrong, there is no "relatively speaking" about it

3) What on earth does capitalism have to do with this?

4) You'll find that Foucault applies very little to Australian society, you can quote him all you want but you'll find that we have one of the best education systems in that those of lower socio-economic status have almost the same opportunities as those of a more privileged background (see: HECS. see: American tertiary education system)

1) Neither do I. Like I have said, I only have a problem when the West is equated to the norm. And I am here because I recognise the many educational opportunities and benefits you get in Australia, in comparison to where I originally came from. Also, I am not quite sure of your intention in informing me that you are a first generation Chinese immigrant. I will try not to make any assumptions. But still, it is highly irrelevant and may detract from what you have to say, ninwa.

EDIT: Are you acknowledging that Australia is not multicultural and at the same time implying that Australia should not be multicultural?

2) Yes. And that's circular reasoning. I am sure you will recognise that as flawed. What makes a value undeniably wrong? By whom? On what terms? To be honest, I would gladly go into further depth, if I could, but I think it will be too off topic to do it in this thread.

3) I am not sure where you are getting at. But I will have a stab. Capitalism, or Western economic liberalism is a product of time and place. In other words, it is a phenomenon born in and out of the West. That is why it is relevant.

4) Take it easy. Like I said, I was only pointing it out in response to Erinny, because I found it "interesting". I wasn't referring to a particular educational institution/country anyway.  I am quite aware of the many merits and the occasional flaws of the Australian education system thanks.

Appreciate you commenting.

[LOVEPHYSICS]

Something along the lines of your first proposition. In other words, what we learn, the values we have and our notions of right and wrong are very much articulated and channeled within society. What I am asking for, is the tolerance, not necessarily acceptance, of a range of values, or simply put, moral plurality. The first step however, is the recognition that values are constructs of cultures. I think we can all agree that we should not seek to impose values over one another. However, the reality is far from that, we do it all the time without realising it because we have unfortunately, internalized within us, the assumption that our impositions are universal- these are common values and thus should be accepted by all. The fact is that there is no such thing as common morality or values. There is no such thing as the universal man, or woman. The domination of the Western culture, means that the white man has become equated to the norm, and this 'whiteness' starts to set standards for humanity "by which they are bound to succeed and others bound to fail". Case in point, I do think that the two articles, especially when written and placed after one another, is highly unnecessary. It seems to be unfairly picking on the Asian/Confucian mentality and value of 'education is everything', making out the issue a lot worse than it is and also in the process, fails to see that its judgment is after all, premised upon very Eurocentric values of moderation and arete (excellence in all areas). The unconscious, assumption here for many being that the European belief is correct or superior. Same goes with the issue of female circumcision, in which the West terms as female mutilation, although this is off topic. Point being, cultures are like theories, each have their own ways of doing things, and one cannot speak nor act for all.

I am in no sense, against civilized discourse. I simply am not a fan of the way the media swing things and I believe that fair discourse can only occur in an empty, public sphere which does not privilege or preset any sort of universal value, morality or conception of the good.

Yes, I value education above, probably most things I could think off right now. And I do believe that most, if not all cultures value some form of education, they just have different approaches or standards or ideals by which education should be passed or taught. I find the freedom to challenge authority bit interesting. One of the great flaws of communism is that it does a great job in educating its people, but when its people starts questioning, they are slammed down. Foucault did mention that Western capitalism ensures that knowledge/ power is channeled within the upper bourgeois class, the proletariat or those poor will never have the knowledge or education necessary to realise that they are being exploited, and thus never question authority. You can also argue that those in the upper or elite class, because of the knowledge and education they have, will never challenge authority and get rid of the highly exploitative capitalist system because it is essentially  'their greatest invention',  and it is through this invention that they can subjugate knowledge and maintain their power over the other classes.

What a load of moral relativist tosh.

Some morals are objectively better than others and you can establish why. For example, don't kill people is a moral which can be defended internally by considering humans have an innate survival instinct and in order to preserve the lives of everybody, it must never be okay to kill anybody.

Easy. Done. Onto FGM.

We all have the moral right to physical safety. Why? Because nobody (except a masochist, perhaps) wants their physical safety compromised. And, once more, in order to preserve that desire for everybody, it must be upheld for everybody. This means I can't go and start a culture where in order to fit in, at the age of 14 you have to have your left arm lopped off. Oh but that's part of my CULTURE. That must make it WORTH something.

No.

Yeah it does sound a bit trashy now that I have re-read it. But it has to be tosh so that I can make my point.

Enwiabe, like many others, I think you are investing too much emotionally on a myth, a myth that asserts the existence of 'sameness', without realising that the many values you hold closest to heart, is after all, a reflection of the primacy of 'whiteness' in you. This 'whiteness' plays a critical role in informing who you are, but more importantly, how you think and rationalise, be that conscious or unconscious. I hope I don't come off harsh/racially insensitive/provocative with using the term 'whiteness' so sparingly, truth be told, I hate it, but for for the sake of reality and for this topic, the West is very dominant, both in a domestic and local scale.

I don't really get the survival instinct of self-preservation leads to the 'universal' value that we should not kill. Just because we recognise that humans are beings and that self-preservation is a base instinct, does not in itself, tell us that it is immoral or wrong to kill a being (Singer). What makes something moral or immoral,  right or wrong or acceptable? On whose criteria? Of whose interests? For example, a utilitarian or consequentialist will tell you that is immoral to preserve the life of a human being if it will destroy the lives of others. And there is always the necessary evil view, the collective security.Your view of 'it is never okay to kill anybody' is interesting. Do you hold the same view in regards to abortion or euthanasia?

And on female circumcision, maybe another thread for this, not here. But one thing and this applies to all, is that I think people should really try and get better informed, better in the sense of getting a more thorough understanding of the issue through looking beyond Western resources and interpretations. AWWG (African Women's Working Group) and EWG (Eriterean Women's group) are good places to start.

Just curious, don't answer but what do you guys think of female vaginal rejuvenation?

Appreciate your comments.

[LOVEPHYSICS]

1) I don't have a problem with Western values dominating in a Western society. If you don't like it then feel free to go back to where you came from (and I say this as a first generation Chinese immigrant)

2) Did you seriously just suggest female genital mutilation is in any way acceptable? No, you are wrong, there are some "values" which ARE undeniably wrong, there is no "relatively speaking" about it

3) What on earth does capitalism have to do with this?

4) You'll find that Foucault applies very little to Australian society, you can quote him all you want but you'll find that we have one of the best education systems in that those of lower socio-economic status have almost the same opportunities as those of a more privileged background (see: HECS. see: American tertiary education system)

I'm not defending LOVEPHYSICS, but this is my rather neutral opinion

1) There are always people who have a problem with other society's values, however, that's all fluff and talk. If you think about it for a second, as humans, we all have a set of moral standards with which we just instinctively live by. I refer to these as virtues, others may call them different things. But I think that all cultures appreciate things such as orderliness, hard work, contributing to society, helping others, standing up for one's rights, respecting other people...etc. There are no such things as "Western" or "Eastern" cultures. Sure, we may act differently when we are in different parts of the world, but that comes down to a different way of showing those virtues, rather than a difference in virtues themselves. For Example, I may say "thank-you" as a sign of appreciation here, but in another country, the accepted practice is to bow. That's two different cultures, exhibiting the same values.

2) No, female genital mutilation is not acceptable, neither is murder, or rape, or oppression...etc. Again, that contradicts our human virtues, no matter what "culture" you live in, you cannot use "culture" arguments or "religion" arguments to argue a basic and intrinsic virtue.

3) Capitalism is a political theory, which has nothing to do with the topic at hand, countries can be fair and their cultures be free no matter whether they are Capitalist, Communist, Theocratic...etc. It is irrelevant, it is the way the leaders act that determines the state of the society, not the political ideologies of that country.

4) I agree with you, in that Australia has an amazing educational system. The fact that there is HECS means that anyone has access to tertiary education. This means that the proletariat will have every opportunity to access an education. It is in societies such as Australia that tries to bridge the gap between the proletariat and the bourgeois so that society becomes more unified. You can argue all you want for either communism or capitalism to have fundamentally better education systems, LOVEPHYSICS, but the truth is you're arguing based on the issue of class separation. In a Marxist or Communist state, the proletariat is the ruling class, eliminating what is essentially the "middle man" (the business people) - so yes, in Marxist states, you, by theory, should have a more even access to education. However, if you are living in a Capitalist state, it does not mean that education is not available to all. Intelligent governments, such as the Australian government, are able to see that education is a good investment. By pumping money into education the government ensures that it will get more taxpayers in future and less will be dependent upon government handouts, thus, they are willing to lend money to people to get educated. Thus, the class separation becomes blurred. In states such as Australia, the proletariat will have almost equal access to tertiary education as the bourgeois.

Paul, I appreciate your neutrality. Truly.

1) I think you are simplifying it way too much. Easy analogy. If I am having dinner with Caucasians and I slurp my noodles, or burp after the meal, I will be considered rude. But if I were having it with Asians or Arabs, it would have been a sign of respect and politeness. Polite in the sense that I appreciate the host in having me for dinner and that I thoroughly enjoyed the meal/noodles whatever. The reality and problem is that values clash all the time. And 'cultural values' exist. I don't want to go to the moral standards we instinctively live by notion again, read what I have written to Enwiabe.

2) Read what I have written to Enwiabe.

3) Read what I have written to Ninwa.