Guest OldGreyEagle Posted March 3, 2004 Share Posted March 3, 2004 This thread was spun from another thread.It was recently posted about the Boy Scout movement that: "...It needs to be adult lead. Boys are boys. This idea that children need to lead and to have some say is purely the drivel of John Dewey and his marxist philosophy of education..." I would like to remind the Forum of what B-P said in his book, Aids to Scoutmastership "SCOUTING IS A GAME for boys, under the leadership of boys, in which elder brothers can give their younger brothers healthy environment and encourage them to healthy activities such as will help them to develop CITIZENSHIP. His unit is the natural gang of the boy, led by its own boy leader. The best progress is made in those Troops where power and responsibility are really put into the hands of the Patrol Leaders. This is the Secret of success in Scout Training. The formation of the boys into Patrols of from six to eight and training them as separate units each under its own responsible leader is the key to a good Troop But first and foremost: The Patrol is the character school for the individual. To the Patrol Leader it gives practise in Responsibility and in the qualities of Leadership. To the Scouts it gives subordination of self to the interests of the whole, the elements of self-denial and self-control involved in the team spirit of cooperation and good comradeship. But to get first-class results from this system you have to give the boy leaders real free-handed responsibility-if you only give partial responsibility you will only get partial results. The main object is not so much saving the Scoutmaster trouble as to give responsibility to the boy, since this is the very best of all means for developing character. I don't know if this makes B-P Marxist, but he sure had a strong opinion that boys should lead the troop. (This message has been edited by OldGreyEagle) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Adrianvs Posted March 3, 2004 Share Posted March 3, 2004 I'm with Lord Robert Baden-Powell on this one. Besides, there is nothing Marxist about giving children leadership positions or "some say." Marx and his intellectual progeny would give children far less responsibility and say than any sane philosopher. As for Dewey's education, I must remind you that BP did not deny that schoolmasters and parents were supposed to be authoritative figures. Instead, he stated that Scoutmasters were not to lead as schoolmasters or commanding officers. They were to lead as older brothers. Scouting is not school. Scouting is not the military. Scouting is not Sunday school. Scouting is not some microcosm of Plato's republic or Aristotle's society. It is Scouting. It is composed of patrols and troops under the leadership of youth leaders and the guidance of old scouts acting as older brothers. Thank you for your insight, B-P. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fuzzy Bear Posted March 3, 2004 Share Posted March 3, 2004 A few years ago there was this leader, Dalton G. He was lean, tall, and kind of funny looking. He was so good with the Scouts and adults. I sat in several of his training sessions. He was remarkable. He loved Scouting and was allot like a big brother. He moved one day and his real brother held a garage sale. I happened on it by accident. I bought several of his Scouting things, including some picture/slides. I still have this one slide of a parade that Dalton lead. He was in the front carrying the American flag. The Scouts were flanking him and everyone simply blended together. The Scout uniforms, the smiles, the "march", out of step and spread in a Vee formation. If you didn't know Dalton, you would not recognize him from the Scouts but that was the way he was with all of us. He was a big brother that we loved to be with on so many occasions. I guess when someone talks about Scouting and big brothers and older brothers; I see that picture in my mind like a Rockwell painting. If BP was wrong in some way, then there was so much he was right about that I forgive him. I deeply honor him for the gift he gave us. FB Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WHEELER Posted March 3, 2004 Share Posted March 3, 2004 The Boy Scout Troop is a Republic. Boys learn by leading as Patrol leaders. The Old Scout handbook said "BOY AND MAN LEADERS". Both are needed. I was responding to the slant of the previous thread where boys are to assume ALL leadership. The Scoutmaster is the guide, a Leader, the Monarchy. The Boy Leaders are the aristocracy; the non-commissioned officers of the Troop. They are learning to lead. The others are the demos, learning the ropes. It is all a paideia. It is a harmony of all for all. To make it ALL youth led leds to disproportion. Disproportion is what is evil. Youth do not have the fullness of knowledge or experience that it takes for the knowledge of the GOOD. Non-commissioned officers do not run the military. The Boy Scout movement is based on the structure of the military and on another basis. Employees do not run the store. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
evmori Posted March 3, 2004 Share Posted March 3, 2004 Patrol members are demos? That's a new one! So patrol members are just here for demonstration? I'm confused. Maybe I need to spend more time in the library looking up useless stuff & less time in the real world! Ed Mori 1 Peter 4:10 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WHEELER Posted March 3, 2004 Share Posted March 3, 2004 One needs to read "What is a Republic" to understand the way I used it. "demos" is short from democracy meaning "the People". All human institutions are of the tripartite paradigm!!! "What is a Republic" is necessary for understanding leadership paradigms of all human insititutions. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NJCubScouter Posted March 3, 2004 Share Posted March 3, 2004 Ed says: Patrol members are demos? Well, I know this line has already been used in the forum recently, but: It's all Greek to me! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
firstpusk Posted March 3, 2004 Share Posted March 3, 2004 "The Boy Scout Troop is a Republic. Boys learn by leading as Patrol leaders. The Old Scout handbook said "BOY AND MAN LEADERS". Both are needed. I was responding to the slant of the previous thread where boys are to assume ALL leadership. The Scoutmaster is the guide, a Leader, the Monarchy. The Boy Leaders are the aristocracy; the non-commissioned officers of the Troop. They are learning to lead. The others are the demos, learning the ropes. It is all a paideia." The Scoutmaster is not a king, nor is the boy leadership an aristocracy. As with the evolution thread, it is quite clear that you are talking about something you know absolutely nothing about. "It is a harmony of all for all. To make it ALL youth led leds to disproportion. Disproportion is what is evil. Youth do not have the fullness of knowledge or experience that it takes for the knowledge of the GOOD. Non-commissioned officers do not run the military. The Boy Scout movement is based on the structure of the military and on another basis. Employees do not run the store." Scouts run the troop. If you think that is harmony, you document your ignorance of the BSA program. The adults are there to train boy leaders, provide resources for the program and to ensure health and safety. I may (and do) know a lot that the boys don't. That doesn't mean I step in at every opportunity to show my superior knowledge. The job of the Scoutmaster is not to lecture. We take the development of leadership much more seriously than you do. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WHEELER Posted March 3, 2004 Share Posted March 3, 2004 They are being taught, by implication, that there is no such thing as a firm, objective reality, which mans mind must learn to perceive correctly; that reality, is an indeterminate flux and can be anything the pack wants it to be; that truth and falsehood is determined by majority vote. And more: that knowledge is unnecessary and irrelevant, since the teachers views have no greater validity than the oratory of the dullest and most ignorant studentand, therefore, that reason, thinking, intelligence and education are of no importance or value. To the extent that a student absorbs these notions, what incentive would he have to continue his education and develop his mind? THE ANSWER MAY BE SEEN TODAY ON ANY COLLEGE CAMPUS. (Caps are mine. pg 211) Following this method, the teacher abstains from lecturing and merely presides at a free-for-all or bull session, while the students express their views on the subject under study, which they do not know and have come to school to learn. What these sessions produce in the minds of the students is an unbearable boredom. (pg 211) Ayn Rand here is pointing out the situation now current in all schools and universities. And where do these ideas of listening to children come from? These teachers are influenced by John Dewey in their paideia. The "we as adults" need to start listening to children dictate what happens and what goes is pure poppycock. First Pusk, I was involved in the White Stag program in the Monterey Bay Area Council. It was a leadership program. I have also been in the Military which you haven't. You promote feminism which is marxist sociology, Why wouldn't you be promoting socialist pedogogy also? Which you are. You don't promote the Boy Scouts as a place where a boy learns to be a man so how do you know anything on male pedogogy? Nothing at all. If you knew male pedogogy you wouldn't be promoting females in the Boy Scouts. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
firstpusk Posted March 3, 2004 Share Posted March 3, 2004 Congratulations on participating in the White Stag Program. And thanks for your military service. Good for you, but neither addresses my points. I have more than a dozen years as a Scoutmaster and a trainer of Scoutmasters. I also have been on staff and directed a Junior Leader Training Conference. Just like a troop, the boys lead the JLTC. Monarchy has nothing to do with the process of running a troop. I stated something that I stand behind. There are plenty of women that are better at the role of Scoutmaster than you could ever be. I am pretty pleased with the scouts I have helped over the years. They speak for me just as they do for my fellow scouters on this forum. You have done nothing for scouting in your adult life and your "ideas" contribute nothing of value to the movement. When it comes to scouting, it is all greek to you. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fella Posted June 15, 2004 Share Posted June 15, 2004 I don't think it achieves much to speak disparagingly ("drivel") about the founder of the scouting movement. Only people with some kind of radical social agenda would presumably have some interest in doing that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
firstpusk Posted June 15, 2004 Share Posted June 15, 2004 I think you missed the "WHEELER" era. His input drove a number of folks to distraction. OGE's comments and the thread itself were for this person's benefit. The use of the word "drivel" was meant to be ironic. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest OldGreyEagle Posted June 15, 2004 Share Posted June 15, 2004 To fully appreciate this thread, you have to do a search of any of the threads that WHEELER started and read some of his oft rambling asertions that the BSA was quite often the best thing since slice bread and being robbed of its manhood by pinko fascist weirdo hippie freaks, or words to that end. I quoted Wheeler at the beginning, he stated boys did not have to lead and this was the drivel of John Dewey. I was pointing out that B-P thought rather highly of boys leading. I would ask you read ten of my posts and tell the fourm what you think my agenda to be, sometimes a cigar is just a cigar Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EagleInKY Posted June 15, 2004 Share Posted June 15, 2004 WHEW! I scanned this message and saw the Wheelman's name and nearly had a panic attack. Thankfully, it's an old thread just resurrected. The wheel is still deflated. I can calm down again. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PatBB Posted June 15, 2004 Share Posted June 15, 2004 To better make OGE's point of sarcastically dissing Wheeler's label of 'drivel', I have added the quotation marks with the meaning of 'alleged' or 'so-called' so Fella can understand it better. The unfortunate allure of street gangs to boys is that A Boy is the Boss, in contrast to most of the legitimate youth orgs., where a Chaperone or Adult Advisor runs the show & the Boys or Girls are treated as members of an inferior social class called 'Kids' who are incapable & unworthy of leadership positions. It doesn't work well because 2B legitimate, a Leader must earn Authority. No one likes a Know-It-All who believes that he has the God-Given Right 2B Boss just because of how/when/where he was born. A Dictatorship By the Adults will only intensify Scouting's unfortunate image as Nerdy/Dorky. Therefore, I agree that the Big Brother model of adult leadership is close to the happy medium, where Kids are taught to lead or become leaders. Further, I like the Scout Law of Scouts Australia better than the BSA version: Down Under, A Scout Is Respectful rather than Obedient and Reverent. Finally, Martial Arts training gets it right: The Sensei (Master Instructor) teaches, the students learn, & the mid-level students both learn & teach. Everyone is climbing the ladder & helping each other climb together toward becoming Masters. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts