Tuesday, 16 March 2010

Capitulation? No Thanks.

Two words I particularly dislike:

Pragmatism: "Pragmatism is a philosophical movement that includes those who claim that an ideology or proposition is true if it works satisfactorily, that the meaning of a proposition is to be found in the practical consequences of accepting it, and that unpractical ideas are to be rejected."


Capitulation: "A military term. Capitulation refers to surrendering or giving up.

In the stock market, capitulation is associated with "giving up" any previous gains in stock price as investors sell equities in an effort to get out of the market and into less risky investments. True capitulation involves extremely high volume and sharp declines. It usually is indicated by panic selling."

Now I have been told that the reason for my dislike of these particular words is that I am an idealist, as though idealism were a bad thing; a childish fantasy; a silliness not to be entertained by proper grown up people. I disagree, obviously.

There is much talk of the war against Home Educators continuing after the election, no matter which party *wins*, because the LAs are going to keep on pushing the powers that be for more and more power over us, so we'd better brook a deal, hadn't we?


Because it's the pragmatic thing to do of course.

No. making deals with other people's freedom is wrong. We have no right to give up this fight for the sake of a bit of peace. If anyone seriously believes that we will achieve that longed for respite from the fighting by capitulating, then frankly they need their heads read. A timely reminder of the attitudes we are up against can be found here over at Douglas Carswell MP's blog.

Do you honestly believe that if these people have more power they will respect us? Treat us and our children well? Give us that longed for peace we all desire? They are incapable of using the powers they already have for goodness sake.

Those in parliament have no respect for the rule of law, let alone those who they are supposed to be there to serve. Can any of you honestly say that watching the performances in the houses of parliament - that most ancient and revered of political institutions - filled you with pride and honour? That you felt respected as sovereign beings? That your children would be safe in the hands of these twisters of words? Or did you feel like me and my family did - horrified that this was how our laws are made? That this was surely a farcical pantomime not the workings of government? That there was no way that lot are to be trusted to do what is right and just?

Once upon a time many of us would have recoiled in horror at the idea of being considered anarchists, but the truth is that more and more of us are now finding we have anarchist leanings and the government have only themselves to blame for that.

I, along with other HEing friends, eagerly tuned into Newsnight to watch Balls, Gove and Law discuss education. What a great debate that would be I thought, we might see some real discussion; some real ideas; some real movement forward. What a bloody joke. It was playground behaviour, political point scoring in the run up to the election. Well it's just not good enough. This is the education of our children they are playing silly buggers with, and bickering will not come up with a solution to the problem. If they can't get their act together how can they expect parents to blithely accept what the state provides? Why are more and more parents turning to Home Education? Because the state is failing the country's children and parents are (in the most part) hard wired to do what is best for their own children. As Heidi so brilliantly points out:

"A parent is biologically and psychologically designed, programmed, conditioned – call it what you will – to care deeply about the wellbeing of their child. If the child is threatened, or the parent’s ability to nurture the child to the best of their ability is threatened, the parent cannot help but defend themselves, their children and family. Moreover, the parent is unable to be motivated by, and give a normal response to, needs that come higher up the hierarchy until this fundamental need has been satisfied."

Our children come first. They are our main priority. We must do our damnedest to preserve and protect their freedoms, they will not thank us for capitulating. Those who think they know better, who meet behind closed doors, who value pragmatism over idealism, who think they can make deals on our behalf, ought to know that this is not acceptable. They have no more authority to do this than the LAs and the government and they will look very foolish when we all JUST SAY NO! No one says it will be easy, but we have come this far, why on earth would we back down now?

Liberty has never come from the government. Liberty has always come from the subjects of it. The history of liberty is a history of resistance. ~Woodrow Wilson


  1. Tech for PM!!

  2. I took a bit of a different tack on my blog:


    My issue is that the government have made negotiation in the pursuit of a common preference pretty much impossible. Now the outcome of any negotiation would result in a winner and a loser at best, or two losers at worst.

    Also it seems to me that most of the population want to be regulated, and to see everyone else equally (or more) regulated. Until that is changed, the war will continue. As it is the avowed intent of state, press and business to keep the people in this drugged, reliant, consumerist state, the chance of change is very slim.

    As we can't have a win-win situation, the result will be that either we fight and win and so live to fight another day, or we fight and lose. This won't end until society itself changes and finds for itself a new paradigm of trust and support to replace the current model of suspicion and control.

  3. Well, you all live there, and I don't. I felt exactly like you did, Tech, when I left Ontario. And, considering what I have learned, and seen in your blogs about how things are, it could well be that a system like the one Arizona has just wouldn't work because the bureaucratic culture you have to face is so much more invasive. That's the problem, every place is so unique.

    That Ontario managed to negotiate the status quo absolutely blew my mind. I suspect that if I had been at the table it might have gone differently, as I was so hostile. Thank God I wasn't there, is all I can say. Anyway, my hope, as ever, is that, you all achieve the same result, absolutely everything you want. If there really is not other way than to fight to the end, I hope that you do fight, and win. I'm going to post this comment on my blog as well, and link over here.

  4. Something I meant to tie in to this post but didn't:

    Cornwall Council is finding it difficult to fill the role of Director of Children, Schools and Families. Now I don't know why that is, but you'd have to wonder if it's because no one is daft enough to want to put themselves through hell. So you never know, with a few more of these jobs being left open, we could start to see a massive culture change.


  5. Brilliant post Tech. My sentiments exactly tho I do feel like a dying breed at the moment.

  6. "Or did you feel like me and my family did - horrified that this was how our laws are made? That this was surely a farcical pantomime not the workings of government? That there was no way that lot are to be trusted to do what is right and just?"

    YES, that's exactly how I felt, to such an extent that I can't even bring myself to engage with the process any more.

    Love ya Tech, thanks for this xx

  7. He that would make his own liberty secure, must guard even his enemy from opposition; for if he violates this duty he establishes a precedent that will reach himself. ~Thomas Paine

    Couldn't agree more.


  8. Great post, Tech.

    Just wanted to add that am quite convinced that as things stand, Schedule 1 will result in the deaths and long term damage of many children.

    Have explained reasons here:


  9. Yes, making deals with other people's freedom is wrong.

    I think that having the academic debate is perfectly reasonable (and healthy too) but taking action that would compromise the security of other people's lives is unacceptable. Only they know what is best for themselves.