I really gotta piss

>>The changes You would want to see in future
What is defined as "in future"? Are we talking a month? A year? 10 years? Are these changes expected to be permanent, and are their repercussions if they are found out to not be permanent? Who measures whether or not these changes adhere to the expected results within the specified time period that occurs on a later date?

>>I am me
Who art thou?
>>expecting a discussion
I don't understand what you were hoping it would achieve by pointing this out. Are you not on a medium where discussions clearly already take place?

>>a history topic, nothing more
That's a very small scope to confine something in. If someone were to pull this particular thing outside of the "nothing more" boundary, what are the repercussions they will endure?

>>we are above that
What do you mean by "we"?

>>If you need some sort of deebine insigt XD go meditate in a forest, it's pretty nice, get in touch with nature
Define "deebine insight", this particular phrase seems entirely detached from the rest of your sentence...making this a rather confusing statement. Are you trying to devalue activities that are possible within a forest? Are you trying to devalue meditation itself? Are you aware that there are perfectly normal reasons to even be in a forest in the first place?

>>People
Very broad.
>>should be taught
>>instead of
Just so you know, humans are capable of retaining multiple things they have been taught. They are not a piece of machinery on a conveyer belt line, which has been programmed to only be capable of retaining one singular instruction set for dealing with only one single task over their entire purpose of existence.

>>Everyone attending school should wear a uniform
In what context? What sort of schools are you referring to? What type of uniforms? At what point in time must they not be wearing the uniform, over the entire period of them being listed on the register of a school?
>>act accordingly
This is completely vague and does not add any substance to your sentence. What does it mean to "act accordingly"? Who gets to decide what act should be put forward, what must this act abide by when attempting to be in accordance, and what is the subject of topic put forward that the act is trying to achieve?

>>this will give class to everyone and reduce bullying based on clothing
Please provide an example of a scenario, on record, where bullying has been reduced across an entire scope defined as "everyone", purely because of an item of clothing.

>>If we properly raise little humans
What do you mean by "we"?

>>this should start happening so that we get humanity on the tracks of success
Too broad. Heavily vague. Success at what? What entity are you referring to when you say "humanity"? What are defined as "tracks"? And in the literal sense, where do these tracks lead? What is the foundation for these tracks? What requirements are put forward, in order to consider something as successfully abiding by the "tracks" that are set in place?

>>Teachers shouldn't be allowed to make their own tests
>>shouldn't be allowed
If something is forever permanently in the "shouldn't be allowed" category that you keep bringing up, as though a rule is frozen in time, what are the repercussions of someone not abiding by this?
Again, too vague.
Teachers of what? Public schools? Private schools? A music teacher I called from the phone book and paid fair money to, in order to receive lessons?
What is defined as a "test"? Something in which the results must be passed on to a higher entity?
What makes it "their own"? Does it become their own test only if it is not released under a particular license?
>>those should be official and standardized so that it doesn't matter what school you attended you still got the same education
Please rephrase this statement. It is very vague.
What does it mean to be "official"? Can I obtain this simply by placing a marking upon recorded information using a red wax stamp and a particular indented shape?
What do you mean by the "same education"? You do realize that humans can be educated on a very broad range of topics, correct? What are you trying to generalize here as needing to be required under one single scope of process for learning?

>>People should be thought to respect their race and heritage, not nationality
Why not all three? Why must it be one thing, and not another?

>>don't forget who you are
What if a person suffers from amnesia, loss of identity, under-developed or mutated sections of the brain, or have been miss-treated by their parents during youth, therefore having no physical recollection of "who they are"? What are the repercussions of this rule, if someone is not able to recollect this particular information or state of mind?

>where you live is not important
Who gets do decide this? What factors has this decision been based on, and in what context has any measurement of importance been removed from ones situation of living? What factors are at play, in order for ones place of living to have no importance? What if someone lives in multiple locations? What if someone does not have a place of living, but instead has lively hood which puts them in a situation of constant travel?

>>We don't need to brainwash little humans, we need to point them in right direction, make them think like reasonable human beings.
What is with this constant referral to "little humans"? How little are we talking here? Are we even referring to height?
What is referred to as the "right direction"? What is the "wrong direction" in this scenario? What are the repercussions for not following this direction, and who must be answered to in order for these repercussions to not occur?
What is considered "reasonable"? What is not considered "reasonable"? Is this written down somewhere?

>>How people should be educated
>>basic things about math, nature, art, how to act like an educated human being
What does it mean to "act" educated, as a human being? Who gets to decide this, and at which point will this judgement be made upon those defined as "kids"? What is considered "basic"? What specific categories of math, nature and art are being considered here?
>>same as kids just advanced
Defined "advanced"
>>here we put in a second, possibly third language they might need in life based on where we currently are
What do you mean by "we"? Currently where? Are you referring to ones location? Ones progress at some particular task?
Ones living location, which could possibly contradict your earlier statement, which I quote, "where you live is not important"?

>>later we divide their education into different fields
>>later
When exactly does "later" occur? Who gets to decide this, and under what circumstances?
What happens when someone excels in one particular field, and does not wish to divide this into different fields? What will be the repercussions?

>>stuff like nature and math should still be present due to it being necessary for a human to understand this world
At which point does it no longer become "present"? And in what context? What has to have occurred in order for these to not be present in the first place? What does it mean to "understand this world"? What "world"? Is there only one world in this context? Are other worlds, regardless of whether their existence is known or not, completely disregarded in this scenario?

>>finishing your education in a specific field you'd like to work in, or are just most interested in
What does it mean to "finish" ones education? When happens after one has achieved this finished state? At what point is the divided set of topics suddenly discarded for a specific field? What are the repercussions for not following this? Who gets to decide what is perceived as being "interested" in a field?

>>It kind of sounds like the education we have today
What do you mean by "we"?
What specific education are you referring to? This is too generic. Are you referring to an entire scope of education from birth to death? Or a specific time period in which a specific type of education is expected to take place?

>>People of race A should reproduce with people of race A
Why?
What happens if someones origin is of multiple races? What are the repercussions if one does not abide by this, and who gets to decide?

>Immigration should be carefully monitored
What does "carefully monitored" mean? Who is responsible for doing this task? What rules are put in place to assure a specific level of care is achieved during the monitoring process, in which those responsible do not receive any repercussions?

>>People with defective genes should not reproduce, genetic engineering can help them put an end to bad genes and still they could get children
This statement contradicts itself, does it not? What does it mean to "get children"? What level of defectiveness are we talking here? Who gets to decide this as well as enforce it? What are the repercussions?

>>Doing this would rid us of "unlucky" humans that aren't capable of living like "lucky" ones
What state must ones person adhere to, in order to be perceived as "unlucky" or "lucky"? Who is "us"?

>>Now now, we don't have to kill anyone
What do you mean by "we"?

>>we just don't breed in a way that can result in defective children
Elaborate. What "way" or "ways" are you referring to? Can you provide examples, with sources?

>>gays, trannies and similar
What is defined as "similar"? What is referred to as "gays"? This is very vague and ambiguous. It can refer to a sexual orientation by means of slang, or it can refer to a state of mind in which a person is cheerful, and feeling fulfilled.

>>they should be discarded like the waste they are
Who is responsible for performing the discarding? Who will pay for the waste treatment that is performed during this discarding process? Why must the waste only be discarded, instead of recycled or put towards another purpose?

>>We can make them a Degeneratistan where they can dwell in their own shit, away from prosperous Humans
Who controls how far away this dwelling occurs, and what are the repercussions if this dwelling overlaps outside of its boundaries?

>>They are the cancer that would turn this world into a wasteland
Wouldn't a collective of people being sectioned off into a dwelling built upon the concept of their own shit, most certainly be a wasteland already on its own, regardless of what type of person it is and whether or not they were cancerous?
Isn't a dwelling of human feces already a wasteland simply by definition? How would this achieve an outcome that's any different to what you are already referring to?


You ideology of what people "should do" is that of a lifeless robot who wishes to capture a non-existent, theoretical state of existence on a single, small planet, and freeze it in time. For what purpose?
This is the only quality you have portrayed via your write-up. Tell me OP, under the most vulnerable, defenseless state of being, what would you do for a Klondike?
What do you think this would achieve? This concept of "perfection", as one could suggest you might wish to reach?