Education vs Common Sense. Part 1.

Is it really true that education can destroy the ability to follow common sense?

Yes it is. Common sense is the way we always experience life. When faced with a new situation we simply apply lessons we have gathered from our general experience of life: our common sense.

For example, all experience tells us that there is a right way of doing anything and there is a wrong way. If you drive your car in the wrong way you can cause death or destruction. If you eat the wrong foods you could harm your body. And so on. That’s how we experience life.

But how many times do we hear a professor (especially in the social ‘sciences’) say “there is no right or wrong answer; there are just opinions, life is subjective.” And his students feel learned when they become less “judgmental” since there are really no objectively right or wrong ideas. They master this “learned” habit until they reach ridiculous levels of subjectivism: there is no right or wrong culture, it’s all subjective. We only have to understand other cultures.

Meanwhile those who are not privileged with such levels of advanced education can clearly see that just as there are destructive drivers on the road, there are destructive cultures in the world. They can clearly see some cultures leading to destruction of life, while the ivory tower professors continue saying that all cultures are valid, all ideas are valid, there is no right and wrong and there is (especially) no good and evil.

Nietzsche even wrote a book for the elite called “Beyond Good and Evil.” It is supposedly a state you reach when you become an advanced human being, above the lost masses who think that life is as simple as it looks. It is a state of an intellectual “over man” (super man).

And yet, in reality, it is this sort of irrational elitism that makes such people continuously craft policies (for “the masses”) that only lead to death and destruction. More people in history have died from the grand unrealistic visions of such leaders than have died from all natural disasters and calamities combined. But this fact does nothing to discourage them or to cause any sort of humble reservations before they embark on their next “plan” for the salvation of the poor masses.

In short, they have the audacity of hoping against common sense.

Zambians reject socialist “human rights.”

The large group of delegates that is currently dealing with the task of changing the Zambian constitution is reported to have derisively laughed out loud when a “human rights” clause was presented to it for inclusion in the next constitution. The clause basically stated that every Zambian has a fundamental right to shelter, food, water, etc, to be secured by the state. Fortunately, most of the delegates are apparently not educated enough to have abandoned common sense. They instantly and intuitively knew that this was laughable nonsense. One of them even stood up and correctly protested that this would only lead to unsustainably high taxes for the more productive citizens. Another one feared that this kind of idea sounded even worse than the policies of Zambia’s first (socialist) president, Dr. Kenneth Kaunda.

Most of the older Zambians can still remember what happens when you have policies that guarantee any form of “caring” for the poor: you simply get more people joining the ranks of the poor every day.

The Zambian people are not unique in relying on common sense to know when the educated elite are trying to impose their silly Utopian ideas on them. The people of the USA also rejected recent proposals by their new president that try to implement a (healthcare) Utopia. They too gave the same kind of arguments as the Zambians, driven by a grassroots movement called the “Tea Party” movement.

Unfortunately for Americans, their Marxist president seems to have prevailed so far by already having his hugely unpopular socialist bill passed into law. And in typical elitist fashion, he has decided that he will go around the country to try to explain to Americans why they are too stupid to understand his ideas. And to literally add insult to injury, he even claims that it is his policies that represent “common sense,” even though human history is replete with examples of countries that tried to do just this, always with predictably disastrous long-term results. Mr. Obama believes that Europe has implemented similar policies with great results.

The nation of Greece is already languishing from the inevitable long-term results of such Utopian ideas as we speak, but the American president somehow still insists that his ideas represent common sense.

I think common sense is knowing that there is no such thing as a free lunch. But even more, it is knowing that many people will be lazy when you politically promise to protect them from poverty and its painful effects.

How is this not common sense?

http://www.postzambia.com/post-read_article.php?articleId=8205

Why the Chinese won’t listen to Obama.

It was interesting to hear Mr. Obama lecture the Chinese on the need for keeping their currency under the dictates of the market. He explained that it was in the self interest of the Chinese to do this if they really want a more sustainable economy.

But why should the Chinese listen to a man who has rejected the supreme wisdom of the market in many areas of his own country’s economy? The main argument presented by his opponents in the healthcare debate was that this industry should be put under the forces of the market instead of subjecting it to the intrusive powers of the state (Chinese-style). They proposed reforms that included such market based ideas as allowing interstate competition among the health insurance companies. But he simply mocked them for their “blind faith in market fundamentalism” and even dishonestly charged that this is “the kind of thinking” that created the crisis in the first place (the crisis was created by government intervention).

Mr. Obama should hope that the Chinese haven’t translated his many antimarket speeches from English.