My point is that as amember of the organisation you were expected to
tow the party line. But the party was a mess too! Whether or not all
the thus far quoted mis-demeanors were actually known about in the
headmasters study may be questionable, although the general ethos
of "beat it out of them", almost certainly was! If you're not trained
properly to deal with learning difficulties, for example, then you
can always misuse the philosophical teaching and claim that the
recalcitrant pupil is "denying the truth". To actually confront
issues related to learning difficulties, or dealing with children who
do not respond to unimaginative methods of teaching would have
involved consulting "experts" - these were to be avoided,
particularly if they were not members of the organisation. So these
teachers from the past who have been accused of unpleasant behaviour
towards children - beatings etc -did they have the mental space to
stop and ask themselves what they were doing? Did they have the
autonomy to say,"this isn't working in my classroom - i'll try
something else which may draw a more positive response - i'll suggest
that we consult someone who is actually trained to deal with these
issues". Those teachers will have been schooled in the thinking that
the ses had the answers to all the world's problems. If they thought
independently beyond a certain point, they would have been obliged to
leave. This does not excuse incontrolled use of force upon children,
but it is worth considering that maybe they too were victims of
arrogant thinking from above.