A leap of faith on school freedom?

mark

Regarding your point on accountability: you need not worry, new free schools and academies will be no more accountable to LA's than many that exist now. Accountability means through OFSTED and league tables.

There will of course need to be Local Authorities, somebody has to be responsible to ensure provision of education for all and that parents are compelled to fulfill their legal obligations to have their children educated.

If Gove's wishes come true and"Academie s become the norm" then Authorities will not be locally democratically accountable. They will carry out statutory duties dictated by Whitehall but without the power to compel Fee Schools and academies to accept students.
perhaps a small rump of Local authority schools will survive in some areas to cater for students rejected by autonomous schools.

The result will be a mess which will be ripe for a future Labour (Labdem?) government to centralize. Central government will fill the power vacuum if Local authorities are emasculated. Do be careful what you wish for.

Ian

Talk about glass half empty...

Henrietta Shoemaker

Under the labour councils many schools was closed down their excuse was the schools was not doing well, wich is not true, they marge the worst schools in the community with the best schools in the community, rather then changing the management of the bad schools, the good schools become worse than the bad ones, it affected also the education of the hard working students, this people didn't leave the good schools alone, the labour councils did the same with safe neighborhoods, they never leave the safe area alone they build social housing next to it to make it unsafe, and some of those people who live those housings states steal the bicycles, cars and everything they can find, I see the lib-democrats want to do what the other government was doing and it is not going to work, things have to change and I have a feeling that Micheal Grove is in the right direction.

Tiberius

If you pose the question to Fiona Millar, Melanie, I'm sure you'll get the answer you want to hear.

JohnBUK

@mark "There will of course need to be Local Authorities, somebody has to be responsible to ensure provision of education for all and that parents are compelled to fulfill their legal obligations to have their children educated."

Given that a large percentage of children are leaving school with little or no qualifications perhaps the LEAs need to define "education".
It could be said purely sending your child to certain State schools doesn't achieve that legal requirement.
There is no need for LEAs at all nor OFSTED. All schools, like businesses, should publish "accounts" showing what they believe are the key results that prospective pupils would be interested in - if their results are poor then they go out of business as "customers" migrate elsewhere.

Tom

Be honest. Until and unless these schools select by admission, they will always lag the independent sector. The real tragedy of this is that the product of independent schools is itself deficient in so many ways, a half-decent state sector should be able to do better.

William Boyd

I noticed that bit about "all schools are held properly to account" and did wonder too.

Immanuel Kant (that German geezer who influenced Karl Marx a bit) wrote an essay on education whose progressive tendency would make your blood freeze over Mel (amongst other innovations he suggested teaching children to read by letting them invent their own alphabets for starters) but I do recall him making one remark which seemed to me right on the money and doesn't seem to have found its way into the quotation
books - he said that there were two arts that mankind had invented that have proved more troublesome than all others, one being the art of government and the other the art of education, and then goes on to reflect that just because an ideal is so far unnatained (or he might have said 'unattainable' - 30 years since I read) doesn't mean it's not worth striving for. Amen to that and I do wish Michael Gove well with his reforms and especially I would like to see the powers of the National Curriculum repatriated (trendy context) back to schools themselves - let them decide what to teach.

But I don't share your touching faith in parents. Let there be a governing body representing all local interests.

mark

@JBUK.

I was not commenting on the quality of service LA's deliver, the standard is as variable as the standards of schools, both maintained and those with Academy status. My point was that both provision and consumption of education is compulsary. Whilst it is someone, somewhere has to both ensure that sufficient provision at a local level and ensure that the "customers" comply.
If not a body accountable to the local electorate then what? Ultimately commissioning agents for central government.

You are absolutely right to put the word "customers" in inverted commas. The central flaw in any free-market plan for education is unlike any other market, there is an obligation to have a product to "sell" to customers and obligation for them to "buy".

Terry, Eilat - Israel

I have to say that the time when gov't. needed to provide universal education passed quite some time ago. Gov't. should get out of the education business altogether - all education should be privatised & non-union. Nothing gov't. does ever works, everything gov't. undertakes, they ruin. In the long term, private schools, possibly financed by a voucher system, will provide better education at lower cost.
There is no country in the world today, to my knowledge, where gov't. has not managed to destroy the educational system.

Aberdeen Angus

mark - I think you have hit the nail on the head. The problems being talked about here ultimately stem from compulsary schooling. We have a situation where the willing, the unwilling and the anti-social are all thrust together in what are basicly open borstals. This provides the worst of all worlds for everyone.

I the requirement for compulsary education was abolished this could be ended. There could be actual borstals for the most anti-social and everyone else could be free to go to school or not.

People accept compulsary schooling because they are used to it but in reality it is a monstrous imposition on freedom.

At the absolute bare minimum the age of compulsary schooling should be reduced from 5-16 to 7-14 but even this moderate idea will not be implemented because it redues the power of the state.

raymond d

Here in Northampton, parents at Unity CofE school, are about to be handed over to top Tory Donor, David Ross. He will turn us into an Academy. Gone will be our church status. Gone will be our much wanted christian headteacher. Gone will be our dignified and practical purple school uniform. Gone will be all the christian symbols put in place to celebrate the opening of the school by Archbishop sentamu. All this done without parental consent. Cheers everybody who is doing this shameful deed !

Comprehensiveboy

I admit I've been reading too many right wing blogs but some recent experiences may be of passing interest. On and off I've worked in education for 15 years or more as a teacher mostly in the state secondary sector. Something was very wrong but I couldn't quite put my finger on it. My name indicates my own social background. For a few years I worked in an independent school in an administrative capracity and then got the same job in the state sector. I noticed something painfully clearly for the first time. It was like being part of a communist system. Even the idea of separate schools with a name and identity is fundamentally and illusion. It's all centrally controlled - the IT and its content filters even. I was oddly shocked to realise the timetable is written centrally not by the school itself. The LEA really runs one big school. If you raised this you would be looked at blankly. There is little diversity of opinion or even discussion. No one in their right mind would would want to be a Head as there is no real power and full accountablility. Then there are FE colleges. A colleague went to work in one and mentioned blandly that it had 25000 students. Isn't this a bit big and monopolistic? Why are there not many competing providers? Do we lack the imagination? Is it just economies of scale?? Why is this unquestioned? I developed a strong sense of almost cosmic and spiritual aversion to all this. It seems deadening and depressing. Just what people said about communism. The point about compulsion is of course central. It doesn't match with the level choice in other areas of our lives in the free society we have chosed to create. However, The thought of freedom in this area seems terrifying socially doesn't it? Are we right to feel this way? It must surely be better to recognise this reality, question it and at least try to counter it because to allow this to continue without criticism must surely be wrong.

Augustus

Obviously, because of the very nature of public education, not all schools can be 'outstanding'
both from an academic, as well as a school management viewpoint. But anything must be an improvement on the Ed Balls regime. Once teacher standards improve learning standards will follow. Also, classes of 40 pupils seem ridiculously high. they should not exceed 30 in primary and secondary schools in
my opinion.

Baron Pippin II

Comprehensiveboy @ 12.56:

you so right it pains. The central control’s there for a reason though. One has to capture the young mind early. Jesuits, child of seven, the man comes to mind.

Keep saying it, nobody listens. The whole project of Gove’s, whether right or wrong, will come to nothing, the vested interests will see to it. The Tories should have bumped off the LEAs, most of the educational set-up, the unions and stuff, and only then had a go.

Augustus

As I understand it the 'free school status' which Michael Gove wants to implement by fast-tracking certain secondary schools to academy status has survived the coalition talks.
But, as Sweden has discovered, professionally run companies who run schools for a profit is essential because it drives expansion and produces economies of scale. Unless the Government is willing to provide enough start-up capital for the new reforms (unlikely
under present circumstances) a non-profit policy would prove a disincentive to attracting the independent education firms keen
to enter the market. The big question regarding the business of setting up and running a school free of local authority
interference is: Will that competition actually raise academic standards at the upper school level (16-19 year olds)?

Orlando

Melanie,

I agree that schools should be allowed to set their own admissions policy - be that by academic selection or by faith, or other (secularist, scientific bent, etc.) but what does that mean for the rise of Islamic faith schools? Can we handle an open-market in school delivery and deal with Muslim separatism? Will such a policy enable the further separation and indoctrination of Muslim children?

Mr Melrose

ABERDEEN ANGUS - Have you been drinking (or worse?)

As a punishment (youll be keen on that) you must sum up in a paragraph or so what Britain will be like after 7 years or so of millions of childeren living daily on the street with no education whatsoever. How will this improve our future work force?

I understand a lot of you on here want to get back to the 1950's, but I didnt realise there was also a hankering for the wonderland of Early victorian times.

JohnBUK and Terry Israel - you have obviously been at the same stuff as AA (but just the one bottle)

Where would you suggest your 'customers' 'migrate' to, when living in say, rural Herefordshire or in an inner city with several failing schools?

The general theme here seems to be to seperate good god-fearing children (few in number) from the worthless scum (millions) who should be left to rot.

What kind of country will this produce?

Margaret Muller-Johansson

Imagine putting Bronx, NY in the middle of Upper East Side, this is the way London is and I think other big cities in Britain could be the same, it is the way the authorities, the government and the council planned, designed and putted things together, personally i don't think this is normal when rich are living the same street that the poor live, I can see the gap easily when i am in the capital i feel i am in Latin America or something, I don't know if the new secretary of education can change anything but I wish him good luck!

Terry, Eilat - Israel

Mr Melrose.

You seem to think that people can't manage their own affairs, that someone else should make decisions for them. Allow people choice & you will be very surprised at how well they manage. Privately owned & operated schools, financed by a voucher system, but run as a profit-making business, can achieve results, particularly if they are not unionized. There is no reason that this would not work in rural areas as well as in inner city areas. Competition creates the incentive to obtain a successful result. Education is a product like any other product, best run by entrepreneurs rather than a monstrous self-serving gov't. bureaucracy that cares nothing for it's customers.

Linda Smith

Augustus wrote: "classes of 40 pupils seem ridiculously high, they should not exceed 30 in primary and secondary schools in my opinion."

In the 1950s, there were 45 children in my primary school class. I, and many of the other children, were selected for grammar school. We didn't sit the 11+ as it had been abolished by the time I was 11 years old. The modern excuses for poor educational achievement trotted out - such as poor school buildings, too big classes - are red herrings.

The key to improving educational standards is to improve teacher standards and restore discipline in schools. We now have the poorly educated products of the last 30 years teaching our children. My niece is a primary school teacher - she can't spell!!! The approximate age of commenters on these threads can be guaged by their ability to insert an apostrophe in the correct place. Many seem to have no idea at all about the rules for the use of the apostrophe. Phil, of course, is an exception to this rule as he has previously explained he has a Spanish typewriter.

Aberdeen Angus

Mr Melrose - "I didnt realise there was also a hankering for the wonderland of Early victorian times."

They had compulsary education in parts of germany in early victorian times and earlier. Are you suggesting these places were 'wonderlands'

"what Britain will be like after 7 years or so of millions of childeren living daily on the street with no education whatsoever"

Compulsary education does not seemed to have eliminated the problems of delinquency or ignorance. On the contrary by forcing together all types of personalities and intellects it has destroyed the education of many and actually encouraged delinquency. Children should only be compelled to go to school if their parents demand it, in fact many might be more willing to demand it knowing it was not compulsary. There are a couple of interesting essays here which explain the subject further

http://mises.org/daily/2226

http://www.libertarian.co.uk/lapubs/educn/educn036.htm

Theodore Dalrymple also tentatively makes the case here for the abolition of state schools.

http://www.salisburyreview.com/articles/20100226_3

Now I am not convinced that the state should withdraw from proving economic support for education. But as has been pointed out by mark above (although he was arguing the opposite case) as long as education is compulsary there will be this stifling bureaucratic control.

"The general theme here seems to be to seperate good god-fearing children (few in number) from the worthless scum (millions) who should be left to rot."

No, that is the system we have now. The few go to good private schools and the rest are not just left but forced to rot, hence the present government front bench.

Mr Melrose

Terry Israel

The thing about competition is that there are winners and loosers. OK for football but not for education.

If you were to run schools as a purely commercial activity, say like restaurants, you would get some exeptional food, but also lot of decidedly second rate places which are nevertheless popular, due to being convenient and cheap. Your personal wealth and your location determine where you eat.

I also have no problem with people who know what they are talking about making decisions on my behalf in areas such as health treatment, flying the plane, education etc.

I am fairly 'well educated' but would not have a clue (or the time, even if I did) how to set up and run a school. Nor would you, or 95% of the population.

It amazes me that there are so many people around that think having a bit of 'common sense' is equal to or better than years of specialist training and experience.

It is also (a fairly sad) fact that most of the population either don't care or have their hands too full tying to live their own lives to worry about getting involved with the environment, planning, education etc.

I have been involved with extensive public consultation exercises and the response (apart from a few issues - guess what they are) is usualy depressingly low.

You will find that people with the drive, skills and time to get involved are already involved. It is a myth that there is an army of brilliant, part time educators out there who will burst to life once the shackles of government are off.

Plenty of people trying to make a quick buck, lone nutters, and special interest groups maybe, but like I said most of the people who care are already doing it.

Why not leave it to the proffessionals?

And your problem with unions is?

Linda Smith

Aberdeen Angus: "compulsary" education evidently didn't teach you to spell. Would you have learned to read and write at all if you had not been subjected to "compulsary" education?

Terry, Eilat - Israel

Mr Melrose.

I see the Nanny State has you well trained. Good grief, we certainly wouldn't want any winners & losers, would we? What, then, should we have, in your opinion? Equal outcome, no winners, no losers? That's not exactly how the real world works, except perhaps in some crappy socialist utopia where in reality, everyone is a loser except for the enlightened few Party members.
The current educational systems in most countries (including my own) are already decidedly second-rate (a kind assessment) & generally, the ''exceptional'' schools are already private & very expensive. Privatising schools along with some voucher system would increase the number of exceptional schools AND make them affordable for a great many more people.
You may place your faith in ''experts'' but personally, my experience in life is that so-called ''experts'' are often total idiots, frequently are far too self-interested, are also very conformist & march in lock-step to some conventional wisdom. When I go to an ''expert'' - my doctor, an accountant, whatever, the responsibility is mine to do some research, to learn a bit about the subject, to get a second opinion on occasion. I do not recommend blindly accepting ''expert'' opinion.
You have only to look at the world around you, in politics, in economics, to see what a mess ''experts'' have made.
There is a lot to be said for common sense.
By the way, I should think that my problems with unions would be self-evident.

Aberdeen Angus

Linda Smith - ""compulsary" education evidently didn't teach you to spell."

No it did not. I have inadvertently illustrated my own argument.

"Would you have learned to read and write at all if you had not been subjected to "compulsary" education?"

Absolutely yes. I learned to read before I started school. I also learned to use a computer after I left school. My reading ability and IT literacy are fine. My weak point is my spelling - which I learned at school. To give another example there are and have been many IT professionals who are now over 40. None of those people learned to use a computer at school. On the other hand thousands leave school after 11 years of compulsory education functionally illiterate.

So yes I would have learned to read and write without compulsOry education - although whether my spelling would have been any better is another question.

Aberdeen Angus

I should make clear that I think that a lot of teachers do great work in teaching children and that most children would benefit from going to school. I do not think however that the state telling parents how and when and for how long their children will be educated helps that effort.

If the state education system is so great why do parents who can afford it tend to avoid it for their own chidren. Even champions of the workers like Diane Abbott sent their children to private school. The Queen never went to school at all. Thomas Edison had three months of formal schooling. Abraham Lincoln had a total of about 50 weeks and Ben Franklin about 2 years.

Its all very well to say the education system has 'experts' who people should trust so that there are no winners and losers. But private schools tend to do better in part because they know that if they are not popular enough they close. Insufficiently popular private schools closing is a regular occurance. There are already winners and losers amongst the students. The state educators wants to make sure there are not winners and losers amongst themselves.

Herbert Thornton

"We will work with faith groups to enable more faith schools". "Faith groups?" Why isn't this "Jewish and Christian groups"? Is it not obvious to all that the expression accepts that Islamist groups should be encouraged and that parts of the education system should be handed over to them?

Is it not also obvious that the expression "faith schools" must include Madrassas?

Does Britain now have a government only superficially distinguishable from the previous one? One that is just as deceitful and determined to impose the nationally suicidal tenets of multiculturalism - but that operates under an extra outer coating of slipperiness?

Barry

Linda Smith at 1:25pm: Good points.

I'm a teacher and many of us are, frankly, third rate. We spend hours preparing for lessons and much of this time is consumed devising entertaining ways of holding the attention of children who will only cooperate on their own terms. Lessons should be interesting as far as possible without diluting content but the constant desire to entertain raises expectations that will never be satisfied. It's hardly surprising that many children find it difficult to adapt to gainful employment. Sadly, many colleagues defend this approach.

It is, in theory, possible to teach a class of 45, but not in the UK in 2010 without the use of shackles and electrified cattle prods. Sadly, these are not provided since most of the budget goes on interactive white boards and the like - part of the normal classroom entertainment system.

And in case you're thinking, I'm not hostile to new technology - I build my own computers. We just need to remember that they're tools; status symbols have no place in the classroom.

David Skinner

Michael Give is a salesman for the Frankurt School - cultural Marxism.

Tim Carpenter (Libertarian Party)

Your fears are not misplaced.

Gove is even now aiming to reshape the History curriculum. If you think he will stop at that then good luck.

The geographical monopoly of the LEAs must be ended, but it does little to help us if we just replace it with a national monopoly.

Schools should be free to be independent of LEAs, which, frankly, will have little purpose once this occurs. Schools should be in charge of hiring their own staff, managing budgets (and keeping their reserves!), setting curriculae, pedagogy, basically everything.

I am sure services can be shared across schools acting in voluntary and mutually beneficial fashions, but that should be for them to decide.

Gove has introduced a bit of "reform" but in a manner that will skew it and risks queering the pitch for school independence for a generation. The LibDems seem hell-bent on keeping control at the LEAs, which is further proof that they are neither Liberal nor Democratic.

Vouchers, basic checks for literacy and numeracy and the rest? Well, I trust the Heads more than "the man from Whitehall" or "townhall" come to that.

Linda Smith

Barry posted:

"I'm a teacher and many of us are, frankly, third rate. We spend hours preparing for lessons and much of this time is consumed devising entertaining ways of holding the attention of children who will only cooperate on their own terms. Lessons should be interesting as far as possible without diluting content but the constant desire to entertain raises expectations that will never be satisfied. It's hardly surprising that many children find it difficult to adapt to gainful employment. Sadly, many colleagues defend this approach."

I was a college lecturer, trained in the early 1990s. The focus of my training was political - gay rights. In post, I had the same problem as Barry. I was expected to entertain students without books for 2 hour sessions. This was before the internet was invented. The sole objective of the college was financial, to keep bums on seats.
I quit.

Linda Smith

Tim Carpenter wrote: "...Gove is even now aiming to reshape the History curriculum.."

Hallalujah!!

I was talking to a 12 year old girl who told me she was taught history in "projects" such as "slavery". Time to get rid of this left-wing Brit bashing and bring back traditional teaching of British history in chronological framework.

Aberdeen Angus

Linda Smith "I was talking to a 12 year old girl who told me she was taught history in "projects" such as "slavery". Time to get rid of this left-wing Brit bashing and bring back traditional teaching of British history in chronological framework."

It's all very well saying change this curriculum, Two problems with that. Fistly this anti-Western curriculum, like the lack of school discipline, is only there because it was imposed by government. Its optimistic to hope they will effectively correct their own mistake.

Secondly even if you change the curriculum the schools and LEAs are still nests of unrepentent marxists. They are attracted to teaching because it gives them an opportunity to operate an authoritarian, bureaucratic, monopolistic and compulsory system. It like a little soviet union. The best, the only effective way of flushing out these people is through the market. Look the the general election results. With the exception of Brighton (where they elected a licensed fool for a town full of licensed fools) votes for far left parties were extremely low and falling. Given the choice people reject marxism.

But as I have argued above above there cannot be true school choice as long as there is compulsory education. It is from that piece of tyranny that all other problems flow.

Ronnie

I think, Herbert Thornton, you might calm down a bit, for the moment. What is it that these groups have faith in? Mostly God, as far as I'm aware. I see no problem with that.

Secondly, we may well see the end of the attempt to make 'faith-based' organisations do things that their faiths do not allow; such as the absurdity of making Christian organisations allow athiests to join them in the interests of human rights.

If I am wrong about this, Herbert, then I will jump over the wall and join you.

Linda Smith

Aberdeen Angus,
I don't understand your bizarre ideology. I hope you studied history. If so, it seems you want to put the clock back before 1870 when the first Education Act was introduced to ensure elementary education for all children.

If people are complaining about high levels of illiteracy now, you ain't seen nothing yet folks! Just vote for Aberdeen Angus and the abolition of compulsory education. It'll be only the children of the rich, and the middle classes who are able and willing to teach their children, who will be able to read and write.

By the way, I understand that the Green's ideology is marxist.

annabel

Linda Smith: Have you heard of Mruphy's Law? Yes, that's Mruphy, not Murphy. Mruphy's Law states that if you ridicule someone's spelling, you'll make a spelling mistake yourself while doing so.

It's 'gauge', not 'guage'.

Herbert Thornton

Ronnie -

If, as you suggest, we do indeed see the end of attempts to make 'faith-based' organisations do things that their faiths do not allow - such as the absurdity of making Christian organisations allow atheists to join them in the interests of human rights - then I agree with you that it will be a desirable outcome.

But I have a problem agreeing with you when ask 'what it is that these groups have faith in' and you suggest that it is 'mostly God'. To believe that it is 'mostly God' seems (to me) to miss the more important question - which is what these groups believe their God commands them to do.

I am neither Jewish nor Christian, but when I ask myself that essential question - i.e. what do Jews and Christians believe their God commands them to do - then to adapt your own words - I see little problem with it. Nor, for that matter with, say, Buddhism.

But I have difficulty viewing Islam in the same way.

If you ever decide to jump over the wall to join me, you will, I assure you, be very welcome.

Aberdeen Angus

Linda Smith - The ideology that you have says that the state must say when and how children should be educated. People don't think of it as an ideology because we are so used to it.

I'm not of the opinion that there should be no government help for education. Something like school vouchers should be available to help people afford to educate their children but that doesn't mean that the government should say how that education is carried out. The government pays child benefit and child tax credit to people to help cover the cost of raising a child but no one would accept the government then turning round to tell people how they must feed and clothe their children. People are free to make their own clothes if they wish or shop in any store they chose. People can grow their own food or buy fish fingers or fillet steak from any shop they wish. Beyond basic health and safety measures people are not restricted.

Can you imagine what it would be like if people were required by law to go governments shops to pick up fixed uniforms to ware and a fixed menu to eat. Imagine that the only other shops were only accessible by the wealthy. What would be the result? Bad food and bad clothes. It would be like the old Soviet Union only worse. People only accept this in education because they are used to it.

I will post these links again which explore these ideas a little more

http://mises.org/daily/2226

http://www.libertarian.co.uk/lapubs/educn/educn036.htm

Theodore Dalrymple also tentatively makes the case here for the abolition of state schools.

http://www.salisburyreview.com/articles/20100226_3

As for the Greens, I know they are marxists and far leftists. They did well in the election in the slightly odd town of Brighton but ad very poor and declining number of votes virtually everywhere else. The more openly far left parties did even worse.

Comprehensiveboy

As I may have started a trend for anecdotal evidence I'll add a few more. Some people doubt the counter-Gramscian analysis that the institutions have been taken over. I have a friend - lovely chap - who is incredibly erudite and a retired teacher who now works as a subject adviser in English. So he's in the educational establishment. When I mentioned I worked in an independent school he opined that it was quite wrong to 'allow' them and the parents of were using them as a 'weapon'. He meant in the class war essentially. The implication that these people and their children are somehow the serfs of the left and cannot declare any degree of independance. They have a 'job to do' you see as a kind of societal ballast. They must not be selfish after all. I pointed out that this view was totalitarian. I got the usual response. Just a sort of benign smile.... behind which is a rock.

Also, in my years of teaching the subject PHSE I never once saw the ideal of freedom being discussed or valued. The general thrust is a list of things you must not do or be. The no.1 crime (probably above paedophilia) which all children understand with utmost clarity and trepidation is that they must not be racist. There is no analysis of what this is.

Most people do not challenge this sort of thing. I tried going up to some 'protect Cuba' demonstators in Liverpool and got into a 'lively discussion'. What they are defending is disgusting - the denial of the cuban people's human rights. That's as disgusting as paedophilia. They shouted, 'Get away we know what you are like!' I'd be in their dungeon wouldn't I? This gave me a chilling moment of real education. I am not surprised the 20th century was so bloody.

Aberdeen Angus

Comprehensiveboy - Great posts. Every self described communist I ever met was envious, resentful and selfish. People will sometimes say 'Oh communism is great in theory but doesn't work in practise'. That's the exact opposite of the truth. Stalinism was not communism gone wrong it was communism taken to its logical conclusion.

People will say Nazis have nothing in common with socialists, as if the party was called national SOCIALIST as some kind of a joke. They will say hitler can't have beed socialist because he was pro-corporate, as if modern cultural marxists are not pro-corporate.

The truth is that communism is based on the same envy, spite, control freakery and intolerance as nazism. Marxists are just nazis with better PR.

Linda Smith

Annabel there's a difference between making occasional typos through speed or failure to proof read before posting and not knowing you have made an error because you never learned the rules in the first place.