avoid

Charity begins at home, I've been told, and yet in some ways it makes sense but not as I have been encouraged.

It begins with the self so that's one

Yet I propose the other is that to give of oneself is to take a back seat and not force food for thought of tummies on others and not to compete or indulge whilst others want.

The idea that I should give to those closest to me, like my sons and daughters is misconceived. True they get full attention in the womb and thereafter usually most of the Mothers and some considerable of the Fathers attention by way of Shelter and sustenance. Yet to continue feeding and sheltering offspring when they are indulgent and clearly have more than others is not charity at home but incestuous inbreeding of wealth.

It is no better to target other Wanters as by indulging them disparity is increased with other no-havers. Poverty is only relative, by getting closer to the poor the poor become richer, so charity begins at home by reducing consumption so that others do not have to struggle for theirs.

In a world of competitive beings that group to co-operate there seems little need or ability for the Haves to share the World. The Haves maintain their lofty position over the Destitute by force not by co-operation. The only co-operation is within the groups not within lives.

Life needs no co-operation as it is the same cloned being everywhere. Dreams however do need co-operation and that can only be maintained with Charity. The giving of oneself unconditionally to the other permanently.

Sit, sleep, walk; take a little time to think a little water to drink and wonder who else is thirsty who is uncomfortable and can be held close to their dreams by personal integrity.
Copied from an early rant I made in 1996

education Otherwise than @ school

The first thing that comes to mind is that most people think school is compulsory, and there are many who wish it was: some are children who just want to be with their friends who are already enrolled in a school, parents who don't want to spend so much time with their offspring and authorities that feed on controlling others and are generally paid to do so.

However whereas the 1996 Education Act clarifies the responsibility of the parent(s) to provide education, it does not demand that schooling is required. Clearly many who like to exercise power over others will tout the schooling as the best option, as it ensure maximum conformity to the authoritarian system of government and family.

So here follows extracts from; the current legislation; guidance to LEAs; and comments and concerns from parents who chose not to send their children to school. There is also a footnote on recent proposals to change the law to enforce more conformity to school and school standards and to monitor of children and parents that have to date the freedom to select their own methods to ensure their children are educated.

This and the following are taken from my old website, the pages dated 10~11 July 2009
elective.html

Pages: 1· 2