Education and Americanization

We all must go through a process in life starting from 5 to up to 40 years old, for some. That same thing we all dread waking up to. The thing we all realize we must need to live the “American dream”. School is the essence of all learning in our society today. Whether it is the most remedial classes or the most in depth classes that we must take to get a degree for a job, we must go through it for at least 8 years, but for most is more. Some even go to the extent of calling it an “assembly line” of Americans. The point being that we, as brainwashed Americans, must be mass-produced. As if to say that the teachers, or instructors, of classes are the producers of the thoughts and ideas. All this poses the question: Does education make it impossible for other ethnicities to come to our country and keep their culture? 

Even in the past 70 years of education there has been a difference. For example, when my father was in school mostly his parents taught him. His parents were not all knowing, but they knew their history, literature, and mathematics very well. Needless to say the school did have a part in his education. However, if the teacher or even his own parents were biased in any sort of fashion it was left to him to think for himself on the certain subject. Is this sort of learning so bad? Have parents in America become dumber due to the fact that they have become dependent on public education to teach for them?

I would be willing to say that parents have become dumber in America today. The reason I say this, is for the very fact that all parents trust the schooling process to teach all “ pertinent information”. So because of this trust the schooling “assembly line” every single student is exposed to the exact same information. For instance, when teaching history, it is coming from the point of view of an American. So now students have no idea how other cultures view differs from our own and in this then makes us close-minded. When other people from different cultures come to America they are angered and rejecting of our American culture because of this close-mindedness. Does this make Americans hypocritical, because we advocate a society where anything is possible except maintaining their culture?

I think not, this makes us patriotic. We don’t force people from other cultures to come to America, because of this fact if they are not forced to succumb to Americanization, it is by their choice. Those people have no right to be mad in any way. If they are, they can go back to their country, or, better yet, go to a different country where they must assimilate completely. America is set up where other ethnicities can prosper from their cultural differences. America is the best country for other cultures to come and maintain most of their culture. They will lose some of it, however. For example, in order to communicate they must lose their language and accept English. Other than this one example they can keep their whole culture.

In fact those people have the best opportunity in America. the reason being because they can think both like Americans,  and whatever ethnicity they are. So they can think outside the box, or just different than born and raised Americans. Because of this they are more valuable to our society for their ideas, politics, and input.

Americans are not hypocrites when it comes to keeping other’s ethnical/cultural traditions. If you believe it is then you are not American, you just live in America. You have not thought of the ideological advantage that minorities have over the majority.

Technopoly

A democracy is a government put in place for the people to rule. Abraham Lincoln even went the incredible lengths of saying "for the people, by the people". Our American government keeps a Technopoly from happening in our society today. The idea that technology could be in authority, or the force in authority is ludicrous. The Constitution, as well as, humanity wanting to use technology to better ourselves not take over us, will keep a Technopoly from happening.

The U.S. Constitution stands for the people. It keeps the government from taking away our rights and liberties. Whether that government be the three branches or some sort of technology. These rights will stand forever as long as America stands as a country. The very moment these rights are imposed on there will be a revolt, or mutiny. Postman states, "... one of those thought-worlds will disappear.", while talking about the beliefs of many influential humans in the past. In America these "thought-worlds" that are going to disappear will always be the reigning worldview in the USA. It is our patriotism that will keep it that way. The people who love this land as much as anything else, or those who love what this country stands for won't let it happen. Using technology will always be a part of America, or any other country for that matter. Humanity will always have a need for technology, but this technology will never control us. We will control it and use it to better our opponents in war, games, etc.

In all this, however, a Technopoly may take place. I do not believe in America it will. America will fall apart before this could ever happen, actually the world will fall apart before this could happen. The concept of a Technopoly is crazy, and could never work in a democratic society. What Postman calls a Technopoly is actually communism.

Technology

Technology is science used to make or produce other goods or services faster. Raymond Kurzweil was a man who had an idea, or a prediction, that as technology got more advanced it would advance faster. Eventually it would grow so fast and do unbelievable things like merge with humanity, or even take over humanity. The only problem with this is that technology isn't growing exponentially. Technology is growing steadily.

Technology isn't growing any faster than it was back in ancient Rome. The ideas are getting more intricate, but this is only because we have had breakthroughs in certain fields. The most important of these fields is the computer. The computer brought about all kinds of technology we have today. For example the iphone, internet, blogspot, etc. So Kurzweil's idea is definitely possible, but not in his lifetime. Kurzweil says, "Also, computers are getting faster faster ". Although this may be true this is only one field of technology getting faster and faster. Also, just because we can merge these computer ideas with other things(i.e. guns and planes) doesn't mean that technology is going to grow faster. For example the latest advances in firearms is so minute it makes only a little difference. If what Kurzweil said is true, then after 910 years of guns we ought to have laser guns. I mean the computer is the basis of Kurzweil's argument.   If we look at other technologies and those are remaining the same and close to the same Kurzweil's argument is weak.


Even simple technology isn't growing exponentially . For example, irrigation is one of the simplest forms of technology. I t was invented by ancient people groups. We as americans still do the same things as those ancient groups of people, however. We irrigate water down hill or using gravity. The day we begin to irrigate mass amount of water up hill is the day Kurzweil's prediction may be getting close. With the allotted time given humans should be able to move rivers against gravity. 


Kurzweil's predictions are not possible in the next 60, even 100 years. Kurzweil however will not see that day. Nor will his dad for that matter. The given time is too short and Kurzweil has live too much life. However, i do believe that Kurzweil's legacy will live on, and someone will take over his role when he passes on.