Nanny has an almost messianic belief that she would make a better parent to people's children, rather than the parents themselves.As such it should come as no surprise to learn that Nanny's special little friend, Children's Minister Beverley Hughes, wants to force parents to go to special classes to learn to sing their children nursery rhymes.
For farks sake!
In Nanny's view, those who fail to read stories or sing to their youngsters threaten their children's future and the state must therefore "correct" their inadequate parenting.
Now, I fully agree that interacting with children by reading stories etc is a good thing. However, how precisely will the state determine if a parent is interacting enough?
Cameras in people's homes maybe?
Encouraging children to nark on their own parents, as they did in Nazi Germany and in Orwell's "1984"?
Nanny Hughes said in November that the state would train a new "parenting workforce" (who the fark thinks these phrases up?). This "parenting workforce" would ensure that parents who fail to do their duty with nursery rhymes are found and "supported".
How will Nanny "find" these non singing parents?
What constitutes "support"?
Bliary Poppins, the man who invaded Iraq and caused countless deaths of women and children, says that he believes strongly in family values. He is now backing a variation on the ASBO, the FASBO.
A FASBO is a pre-emptive ASBO, designed to "correct" (whenever the state uses the word "correct" I immediately wretch) the lives of children who are likely to fail even before they are born.
How can you possibly identify a failure before they are born?
In Victorian times there were those who believed that criminal behaviour could be identified, by reading the bumps of people's heads. It seems that we have a new breed of "bump readers".
Parenting orders are now likely to be directed against parents whose children have committed no criminal offence.
Nanny Hughes gave details of the new Nursery Rhyme directive, when she outlined details of Bliary's "national parenting academy" in November. This is the body that will train teachers, psychologists and social workers to intervene in the lives of families and become the "parenting workforce".
Quote:
"Some parents already know that reading
and singing nursery rhymes with their young children
will get them off to a flying start
often because this is how they themselves were brought up.
For other parents without this inheritance
these simple techniques are a mystery
and are likely to remain so
unless we act and draw them to their attention."
Nanny Hughes condemned the way governments before 1997 (ie she took a cheap swipe at the Tories) thought they had no role in the upbringing of children, which it "regarded as the entirely private arrangements families make."
The reason that governments pre 1997 thought that it was a private matter, is because it is!
Herein we see the fundamental problem with Labour, they believe that they know better than the individual as to what is best for the individual.
When the state thinks that it knows better than the people who elect it, then we really are in trouble.
Nanny Hughes then said that without Labour's policies:
"We would be on the road to ruin..."
Hah!
The arrogance of the woman!
Pass me the sick bag someone.
Nosey, nosey nanny
ReplyDeleteMy rules are a plenty
I'm upstairs and downstairs
In all of your houses.
There I met a couple
Who wouldn't read their rhymes
So I took their children in to care
And through them into jail.
Nanny has, in her own way, hit upon a brilliant reproductive strategy. Make procreation so onerous, expensive, humiliating, and potentially litigious an activity that no one with a grain of sense and access to dependable birth control would ever even contemplate it.
ReplyDeleteThusly, those who do procreate will be drawn exclusively from the sub-literate, low-IQ reaches of society. They will have kids as naturally, and as thoughtlessly, as cows produce calves. Some will be motivated by the social status that only parenthood can bestow upon an unschooled, unemployed, sixteeen year old boy or girl. Others, simply because they can't remember how not to get pregnant while f*cking.
While they won't relish the prospect of parenting classes, nor parenting itself, for that matter, they will be more than happy to unburden themselves of their little bundles of grief onto Nanny, who will raise the mewling brats from infancy onward, creating a sort of inverse master-race of sub-cretinous, infantilized hangers on, whose only means of sustenance lies in devotion to Nanny herself. The only detail yet to be resolved: who will pay for the upkeep of this intellectual and cultural diseugenic underclass? Nanny has approximately 20 years to work that part out.
Hmm.
ReplyDeleteDelta's I suppose. Sounds good. Need a lot of them. Would make good cannon fodder for my overseas expeditions.
Were are working on the bottling side of reproduction now.
Only need a few betas and others above the deltas to do the donkey work for us alphas.
Control is all. Paradise beckons.
I have set a target of 15 years with a 40% reduction in carbon emissions for this project.
Road to ruin.its a five lane toll motorway built under pfi to disaster and may i suggest there first stop is no 10 cos at least two of tonys kids are screw ups.
ReplyDelete