Children's Railways of the Former USSR(dzd-ussr.ru)
dzd-ussr.ru
Children's Railways of the Former USSR
http://www.dzd-ussr.ru/english/index.html
101 comments
These children were mostly railway workers' kids. Whole purpose of it was to teach them railway jobs were cool to make them follow their parents' steps.
In the Soviet Union, and to a great extent in Russia till now, railway system is very independent from the State. It's frequently called a state within a state. It has it's own power stations, construction departments that build among other things, housing for workers, their own hospitals and even their own medical schools, it's own police, their own hotels and Black Sea resorts for workers, in the Soviet times they had even their own Gulags. It's a closed-loop system largely independent from the rest of it. So they have their own take on schooling, too.
Happened that way because after the Revolution of 1917, the state largely collapsed and was unable to do shit for at least next 6-7 years. Railway had to figure out how to work on its own.
In the Soviet Union, and to a great extent in Russia till now, railway system is very independent from the State. It's frequently called a state within a state. It has it's own power stations, construction departments that build among other things, housing for workers, their own hospitals and even their own medical schools, it's own police, their own hotels and Black Sea resorts for workers, in the Soviet times they had even their own Gulags. It's a closed-loop system largely independent from the rest of it. So they have their own take on schooling, too.
Happened that way because after the Revolution of 1917, the state largely collapsed and was unable to do shit for at least next 6-7 years. Railway had to figure out how to work on its own.
Railroad police certainly is fairly common https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Railroad_police. I think that’s because their operation stretches over all kinds of political boundaries.
(Highway police (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Highway_patrol) can have the same role for roads(
Some countries also have special electricity networks for rail, “generally […] only if the railway in question uses alternating current (AC) with a frequency lower than that of the national grid” (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Traction_power_network)
(Highway police (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Highway_patrol) can have the same role for roads(
Some countries also have special electricity networks for rail, “generally […] only if the railway in question uses alternating current (AC) with a frequency lower than that of the national grid” (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Traction_power_network)
> housing for workers, their own hospitals and even their own medical schools, it's own police, their own hotels and Black Sea resorts for workers,
Other large enterprises in the USSR had similar things, to one extent or another. Railway police are common in other countries.
Other large enterprises in the USSR had similar things, to one extent or another. Railway police are common in other countries.
You’d be surprised but Deutsche Bahn fit the description as well.
Can we find similar ideas in the way Samsung is run ?
I think many huge corporations start building their own resorts, housing, hospitals, etc. I mean, you can practically live at Google campus, right?
All self respecting industry operations in Sweden (steel, wood, papermills, weapons) had their own seaside resorts for workers from about 1920 to the late 1980-ies. Most had housing and company clinics too. Some of these companies were state owned, some in private hands. It all ended when the world went stock-market crazy and the maximize profit guys started to "core-business" the industries, and colsolidation started.
I think that capitalism was kind of hi-jacked by the money guys at that point. Lots of company towns where, if not thriving, getting along, working. Not super profitable but doing ok. Then practically overnight they turned to wasteland when the mills closed.
I think that capitalism was kind of hi-jacked by the money guys at that point. Lots of company towns where, if not thriving, getting along, working. Not super profitable but doing ok. Then practically overnight they turned to wasteland when the mills closed.
It's the railways in the US that have their own private police force. Soviet and Russian railways had/have dedicated departments responsible for the railways within the larger national police force, because otherwise local police departments along the route would have to coordinate train-related crimefighting themselves.
Also, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Russian_Railway_Troops have position/separation greater than elsewhere.
For other oddities, USSR has army, navy, air force and anti-aircraft branches.
For other oddities, USSR has army, navy, air force and anti-aircraft branches.
> My 30 year old masters students are not even allowed to run their own WiFi network
Because they're students, or because IT doesn't want random people running their own networks that are halfway part of the school's systems but independently administered?
Because they're students, or because IT doesn't want random people running their own networks that are halfway part of the school's systems but independently administered?
> because IT doesn't want random people running their own networks
that are halfway part of the school's systems but independently
administered?
IT people have nothing to do with it. They just peck at webmin interfaces and pretend to understand what Microsoft tell them to do. If it were up to IT they'd just grunt and shrug, and the students would get on with it.
Decisions to directly counter to the core mission of the institution and stand between students and the education they paid for are way above IT's pay grade. For that we have a special class of random, low skilled people with an over-inflated sense of themselves called "policy makers" - a different cadre of unassailable, unaccountable centre of "shadow power" IT guys can only dream of :)
IT people have nothing to do with it. They just peck at webmin interfaces and pretend to understand what Microsoft tell them to do. If it were up to IT they'd just grunt and shrug, and the students would get on with it.
Decisions to directly counter to the core mission of the institution and stand between students and the education they paid for are way above IT's pay grade. For that we have a special class of random, low skilled people with an over-inflated sense of themselves called "policy makers" - a different cadre of unassailable, unaccountable centre of "shadow power" IT guys can only dream of :)
So this may well be true; certainly there are places where IT is incompetent and admin is... unhelpful. However, as someone who has been IT and who went to a school that had a... "fun" time with wifi[0], I can assure you that letting just anyone run a wifi network can have some fairly nasty fallout when they all fight over the same 3 channels and nobody can actually use wifi at all. Further, unless the students in question are actually doing a computing program that includes wireless network as part of the curriculum, it's not part of "the education they paid for", it's a service that the school should be providing (and yes, in the case of finite shared spectrum, imposing a monopoly on). If it's a computing masters program that includes networking, then yes of course the school should arrange a lab environment where the students can mess around, and the above only applies outside of that environment.
EDIT: [0] Although actually thinking about it now, I think the primary reason that policy was enforced had more to do with that letting people set up their own WAPs would undermine the 802.1x user<->IP mapping and the security folks had opinions about that. Dorm wifi was a mess because the sheer number/density of clients was awful regardless, but allowing just anyone to fight over channels would have made it even worse.
EDIT: [0] Although actually thinking about it now, I think the primary reason that policy was enforced had more to do with that letting people set up their own WAPs would undermine the 802.1x user<->IP mapping and the security folks had opinions about that. Dorm wifi was a mess because the sheer number/density of clients was awful regardless, but allowing just anyone to fight over channels would have made it even worse.
I'm way too much of a simpleton to comprehend your philosophical musings of cosmic proportions, but this I know: students should not be in charge of the WiFi or anything else network related at an academic institution. This is a job for professional, dedicated IT staff.
Pretty obviously I'm the professor, right? The assignment is WiFi AP
points and attacking authentication. It's in the syllabus (signed,
sealed and approved all the way up to VC). Attacking the institutional
access points would definitely not be okay. Where do you suppose
professional, dedicated IT staff come from?
Look, I'm sure whatever beef you have with IT staff and admin policy is completely well-founded. But comparing the children's railway to IT limitations preventing graduate students from running their own WiFi networks is absolutely ridiculous. University IT has lots of good reasons for centralizing the administration and allocation of WiFi networks that have nothing to do with "children" (30 year olds) not being "respected". The fact that you can't get an exemption for your practical lab assignment is ridiculous, sure, but it has nothing to do with "children not being shown respect" and everything to do with how large bureaucracies behave in general for any institution, not just universities.
This is a complex area that I can't sensibly respond to in this forum.
But JFYI I have written counter-policy documents and popular articles
[1] that sparked investigations into how ITC is managed in educational
institutions.
Things do need to change.
[1] https://www.timeshighereducation.com/features/we-cant-teach-...
Things do need to change.
[1] https://www.timeshighereducation.com/features/we-cant-teach-...
That article doesn't say anything about wifi networks, or about why you wouldn't be able to setup an isolated lab for students to try out attacking access points. And for such an isolated lab (no internet access is required), I can't imagine a university IT department having to be involved except possible to request that the lab have isolation to prevent the APs you're using from interfering with theirs.
[deleted]
I'm not following. Are you in favour of letting children operate trains or against it?
The GP was saying that comparing the children's railway to IT limitations preventing graduate students from running their own WiFi networks is absolutely ridiculous. University IT has lots of good reasons for centralizing the administration and allocation of WiFi networks that have nothing to do with "children" (30 year olds) not being "respected"
Railway networks have many reasons to not let children run a rail line. I realize there are reasons and arguments for the default position, but well... these are arguments for the default position.
Of course WiFi admin is different from rail transport from farm management, etc. That doesn't negate the fact that they're also similar in some respects, and affected in similar ways by prevailing culture and attitudes.
Of course WiFi admin is different from rail transport from farm management, etc. That doesn't negate the fact that they're also similar in some respects, and affected in similar ways by prevailing culture and attitudes.
Why would you consider the management of an academic institution "shadow" power? It seems pretty clear they are the "actual" power, nothing hidden about it.
Here's a couple of detailed and quite challenging videos [1,2] to help
you understand, in words far better than I can offer, why the present
governance structures of universities are widely regarded as
illegitimate by some of the greatest minds who work in them.
[1] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Z5EWYohECRQ
[2] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ANdhnoAadZk
[1] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Z5EWYohECRQ
[2] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ANdhnoAadZk
I worked in IT at a state university and they were quite competent overall, many had done computer science research at a graduate level.
The responsibility here is to give rides to other children. It is not used for real transportation needs.
Responsibility refers here to is transporting actual humans (that will die or will be maimed in case of an accident).
In this sense yes. The phrase "real passengers" can be interpretted differently, more seriously.
But I am not sure the drivers are children. And even if they are, of course not the yongest ones. And if 14/15 year old is allowed to drive after getting trained, it is not a big problem, I think. In some countries 15 year olds can drive cars.
In any case, this railroad is supervised by adults. It is more of an educational establishment.
We have such a railroad here in Minsk. I never cared to visit, even when was a child. Although I briefly knew one person attending it, he was dreaming to work on railroad.
But I am not sure the drivers are children. And even if they are, of course not the yongest ones. And if 14/15 year old is allowed to drive after getting trained, it is not a big problem, I think. In some countries 15 year olds can drive cars.
In any case, this railroad is supervised by adults. It is more of an educational establishment.
We have such a railroad here in Minsk. I never cared to visit, even when was a child. Although I briefly knew one person attending it, he was dreaming to work on railroad.
> This scared the living shit out of governors and politicians who realised such a radical agenda might create young adults able to think and politically organise.
Can you provide any examples of this? I'm skeptical of this claim given that Gatto was a prominent Libertarian, which don't really believe in political organization. The Libertarian movement is inherently individualistic. Not to mention his work with a Christian documentary about children failing to learn about family and God in public school[0]. Not to cast stones here, but organized religion isn't big on teaching critical thinking either.
I can't find any quotes or responses from a governor or politician that supports your characterization of his work.
0: http://www.indoctrinationmovie.com/
Can you provide any examples of this? I'm skeptical of this claim given that Gatto was a prominent Libertarian, which don't really believe in political organization. The Libertarian movement is inherently individualistic. Not to mention his work with a Christian documentary about children failing to learn about family and God in public school[0]. Not to cast stones here, but organized religion isn't big on teaching critical thinking either.
I can't find any quotes or responses from a governor or politician that supports your characterization of his work.
0: http://www.indoctrinationmovie.com/
The list of scientists, authors, and innovators who were not only Catholics, but Catholic priests is enormous.
Maybe you've met some dopey religious folks, but don't paint with too broad a brush.
Maybe you've met some dopey religious folks, but don't paint with too broad a brush.
Yep, and a lot of them lived back when being accused of heresy by the church was literally a death sentence. So again, not exactly an environment that fostered critical thinking, certainly one that punished speaking out against the church in any sort of way.
Galileo, for example, was condemned on his death bed by the pope and buried in an unceremoniously small room next to the novice's chapel for almost 100 years before he was reburied in the main basilica[0] .
0: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Galileo_Galilei#Death
Galileo, for example, was condemned on his death bed by the pope and buried in an unceremoniously small room next to the novice's chapel for almost 100 years before he was reburied in the main basilica[0] .
0: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Galileo_Galilei#Death
Galileo was sentenced to house arrest, for disobeying a direct order from the pope to tell geocentrism and heliocentrism were both possible.
This was actually the best scientific conclusion at that time until Foucault proved that the Earth was rotating two centuries later.
Actually, the worst enemies of Galileo were the Aristotelians which teachings were not based on religion. They used the inquisition to stop Galileo.
source: same wikipedia article.
This was actually the best scientific conclusion at that time until Foucault proved that the Earth was rotating two centuries later.
Actually, the worst enemies of Galileo were the Aristotelians which teachings were not based on religion. They used the inquisition to stop Galileo.
source: same wikipedia article.
Thomas Aquinas (just to name one) was a scholar of the highest order and was absolutely not just pretending to be a Christian. It’s a strange worldview to imagine that Christianity provided no academic contributions to the world. To some extent, it invented academics. This is more or less z
I am not a Christian and was for a long time a fairly militant atheist - but this point is historical fact.
I am not a Christian and was for a long time a fairly militant atheist - but this point is historical fact.
I don't think that this fact some how dismisses the likelihood that many people throughout history merely pretended to be Christian simply to avoid being burned at the stake.
That's what organized religions did/do to non-believers. They burned them at the stake. Or stoned them to death, Or drowned them, or exiled them.
If your goal is to make contributions to society, in that context you're damn well going to say whatever you need to say about your personal beliefs to ensure that kind of shit doesn't happen to you. Hell, even if you don't care about making contributions to society you're still gonna say what ever needs to be said to ensure you don't end up burned at the stake.
The end result of all these theistic threats is that a lot of people who made great contributions to society did so under the auspices of religious organizations not because they genuinely believed in the tenants of those organizations, but because they had to.
And those organizations made those threats, and continue to make those threats because they know that this is the outcome -- that people will do things in their name to avoid the shit that the religion can do to them.
It's a racket, much akin to the mob coming up to a shop keep and telling them that it would be a shame if something were to happen to their business if it didn't have some kind of 'protection' that the mob can offer them.
It's no coincidence that the Catholic church and the mob originate from the same part of the world.
That's what organized religions did/do to non-believers. They burned them at the stake. Or stoned them to death, Or drowned them, or exiled them.
If your goal is to make contributions to society, in that context you're damn well going to say whatever you need to say about your personal beliefs to ensure that kind of shit doesn't happen to you. Hell, even if you don't care about making contributions to society you're still gonna say what ever needs to be said to ensure you don't end up burned at the stake.
The end result of all these theistic threats is that a lot of people who made great contributions to society did so under the auspices of religious organizations not because they genuinely believed in the tenants of those organizations, but because they had to.
And those organizations made those threats, and continue to make those threats because they know that this is the outcome -- that people will do things in their name to avoid the shit that the religion can do to them.
It's a racket, much akin to the mob coming up to a shop keep and telling them that it would be a shame if something were to happen to their business if it didn't have some kind of 'protection' that the mob can offer them.
It's no coincidence that the Catholic church and the mob originate from the same part of the world.
Isaac Newton clearly defies this theory. He dedicated a significant portion of his time to exploring religious ideas that practically made him a heretic. He would have had a lot less conflict with the church if we was just an atheist going through the motions, rather than a true believer with his own unique interpretation of the scriptures.
while these are interesting points, both posts are strongly euro-centric.
Religion was one of the stronger organizing forces of the old world and so good and bad both have roots in it. It was more stable than the leadership of kings/queens/chieftans which was blood-run and disrupted by the murder of either the existing leadership or the entire bloodline. Chaotic at best.
Learning/education has been shown to be part of religious teachings long before JC was even a discussed historical figure. For example, Buddha taught under Bodhi trees, Hindu philosophers under Banyans and so on. All kinds of 'modern' conceptions came from religious individuals, because most everyone was religious. It was deeply intertwined with early culture and simply belonging to a given geo-community
Our rejection - and I do mean our - of religion and easier coexistence culturally as atheists and agnostics is relatively recent.
Religion was one of the stronger organizing forces of the old world and so good and bad both have roots in it. It was more stable than the leadership of kings/queens/chieftans which was blood-run and disrupted by the murder of either the existing leadership or the entire bloodline. Chaotic at best.
Learning/education has been shown to be part of religious teachings long before JC was even a discussed historical figure. For example, Buddha taught under Bodhi trees, Hindu philosophers under Banyans and so on. All kinds of 'modern' conceptions came from religious individuals, because most everyone was religious. It was deeply intertwined with early culture and simply belonging to a given geo-community
Our rejection - and I do mean our - of religion and easier coexistence culturally as atheists and agnostics is relatively recent.
Many people, yes depending on how you define many. But majority or them? No.
But, no, in general people in the past believed their own religions. We are atheists culture and large atheist traditions at this point, we have hard time imagine it.
But, no, in general people in the past believed their own religions. We are atheists culture and large atheist traditions at this point, we have hard time imagine it.
Thomas Aquinas was a theologian, working purely within the circular Christian scholastic system to talk, essentially, about nothing. Where he did talk about concrete things (ethics, politics, even economics) he simply argued based on his religious dogmas. Meh, not very interesting.
> To some extent, it invented academics.
I'm not sure what you mean by this. Keep in mind Christians were responsible for the destroying huge amounts of books, temples, and cultural artifacts after they took power in the Roman Empire. The amount of knowledge lost to the murderous hands of Christian monks is incalculable. It was only really after the 10th century that Christian monks began to preserve and translate the classics to Latin (the common picture we have of the monk painstakingly hand-copying the classics to preserve them).
> To some extent, it invented academics.
I'm not sure what you mean by this. Keep in mind Christians were responsible for the destroying huge amounts of books, temples, and cultural artifacts after they took power in the Roman Empire. The amount of knowledge lost to the murderous hands of Christian monks is incalculable. It was only really after the 10th century that Christian monks began to preserve and translate the classics to Latin (the common picture we have of the monk painstakingly hand-copying the classics to preserve them).
Religion is a human need - maybe not an obvious animalistic one but because it crops up with every civilization, I think it isn't something on the outside, it's something within us.
Wheather you think it's a means of social control, a way to create distinct in-vs out group, a means to cope with death or whatever you attributes you give to it..
Just because you can rationalise it doesn't mean it goes away.. just like you can't suppress base biological urges by "thinking them away", atleast not in the long term.
Religion just comes back up in other places in forms that don't even look like the original thing but shows all the signs of it.
Wheather you think it's a means of social control, a way to create distinct in-vs out group, a means to cope with death or whatever you attributes you give to it..
Just because you can rationalise it doesn't mean it goes away.. just like you can't suppress base biological urges by "thinking them away", atleast not in the long term.
Religion just comes back up in other places in forms that don't even look like the original thing but shows all the signs of it.
Religion is far from a universal biological need. The proof of that is in the huge rise of secularity after (i) we began to rationally understand the universe, including deep questions such as how our bodies minds work, the origin the universe, etc, and (ii) religious freedom meant people could freely reject the dominant religion and not be killed for it, which is usually a pretty strong motivator to "love" the dominant religion.
The current belief in "The Simulation" has all the trappings of a newly forming religion.
And for example scientific foundations for Big Bang were put by Belgian priest and treated with suspicion as too consistent with world as created at some point.
> Belgian Catholic priest Georges Lemaitre proposed an expanding model for the universe to explain the observed redshifts of spiral nebulae, and calculated the Hubble law. He based his theory on the work of Einstein and De Sitter, and independently derived Friedmann's equations for an expanding universe
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_the_Big_Bang_theory
World is not some simple.
Also, do you really need throwaway account for THAT?
> Belgian Catholic priest Georges Lemaitre proposed an expanding model for the universe to explain the observed redshifts of spiral nebulae, and calculated the Hubble law. He based his theory on the work of Einstein and De Sitter, and independently derived Friedmann's equations for an expanding universe
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_the_Big_Bang_theory
World is not some simple.
Also, do you really need throwaway account for THAT?
Galileo didn't get in trouble for his theories about the Earth and the Sun, he got in trouble for making theological conclusions from them, and for being an utterly insufferable douche who also managed to personally piss off the pope.
His theories also did not have a scientific backing, given the knowledge available at the time, and were closer to wild-ass guesses that just happened to be right.
His theories also did not have a scientific backing, given the knowledge available at the time, and were closer to wild-ass guesses that just happened to be right.
> Not to cast stones here, but organized religion isn't big on teaching critical thinking either.
Some kinds of critical thinking are totally encouraged in eg some forms of Judaism and Christian Protestantism. (I don't know enough about other religions to comment.)
Some kinds of critical thinking are totally encouraged in eg some forms of Judaism and Christian Protestantism. (I don't know enough about other religions to comment.)
Catholic scientists, quite a list:
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Catholic_clergy_scie...
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Catholic_clergy_scie...
> The Libertarian movement is inherently individualistic.
Where do people get these ideas? Libertarianism is all about freedom, including the freedom to cooperate with others.
For example, a baseball team is all about voluntary cooperation for a common goal. Nobody is forced to play. Baseball has nothing whatsoever inconsistent with Libertarianism.
What Libertarianism lacks is forcing people to conform and cooperate.
Where do people get these ideas? Libertarianism is all about freedom, including the freedom to cooperate with others.
For example, a baseball team is all about voluntary cooperation for a common goal. Nobody is forced to play. Baseball has nothing whatsoever inconsistent with Libertarianism.
What Libertarianism lacks is forcing people to conform and cooperate.
What you describe may very well be a valid definition of "Libertarianism," but Libertarianism's modern form (at least in the United States) seems to fundamentally rely on the belief that individuals are on equal footing with megacorporations and that therefore removing restrictions on said megacorporations will result in them acting in ways that are better for society rather than worse.
But, given things such as the historical existence of company stores/scrip and the things mentioned in Upton Sinclair's The Jungle, I find such beliefs to be overly optimistic: we already have historical proof that companies will fail to pay workers with real money and will sell unsafe food to the public unless forced to do otherwise by government intervention.
Companies have less "freedom" now than they did 100 years ago, and we are better off for it.
But, given things such as the historical existence of company stores/scrip and the things mentioned in Upton Sinclair's The Jungle, I find such beliefs to be overly optimistic: we already have historical proof that companies will fail to pay workers with real money and will sell unsafe food to the public unless forced to do otherwise by government intervention.
Companies have less "freedom" now than they did 100 years ago, and we are better off for it.
Yes, unfortunately "Libertarian" in the US is a synonym for anarcho-capitalist.
Those people would have a stroke if they knew what Libertarian used to mean in the 19th century... ;)
Those people would have a stroke if they knew what Libertarian used to mean in the 19th century... ;)
"The Jungle" is a work of fiction written by socialist Upton Sinclair who was pushing his platform. It is evidence of nothing whatsoever, much like the Star Trek Federation utopia.
As for failing to pay workers, or selling unsafe food, that is against Libertarian principles because Libertarianism requires government to enforce contracts, and does not allow hurting one's customers.
As for failing to pay workers, or selling unsafe food, that is against Libertarian principles because Libertarianism requires government to enforce contracts, and does not allow hurting one's customers.
It probably meant that the railway was for kids as passengers.
But also, in Russian language, "child" doesn't imply someone younger than teenager, it does include adolescents too. There is a distinct term for "adolescent", but no distinct term for English "kid" or "toddler" except for some regional variants.
Hence, "childrens' railway" is the most broad term for it. Also, naming it "adolescents' railway" sounded more complex in Russian, a bit awkward, and would make visitors wonder: "do they allow little kids to ride?"
Regarding running the railway, there are very strict limitations what adolescents can do and what they can't do. IIRC, they can't control the fuelling of the vehicle, and some other arbitrary operations. Probably, they can't drive the engine, but just sit next to an adult driver.
Respect for the link to John T. Gatto, he was a great thinker, I even translated one of his essays from a link posted here a decade ago.
But also, in Russian language, "child" doesn't imply someone younger than teenager, it does include adolescents too. There is a distinct term for "adolescent", but no distinct term for English "kid" or "toddler" except for some regional variants.
Hence, "childrens' railway" is the most broad term for it. Also, naming it "adolescents' railway" sounded more complex in Russian, a bit awkward, and would make visitors wonder: "do they allow little kids to ride?"
Regarding running the railway, there are very strict limitations what adolescents can do and what they can't do. IIRC, they can't control the fuelling of the vehicle, and some other arbitrary operations. Probably, they can't drive the engine, but just sit next to an adult driver.
Respect for the link to John T. Gatto, he was a great thinker, I even translated one of his essays from a link posted here a decade ago.
The Budapest espisode of the show Travel Man featured a visit to the children's railway there.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6EU-dyv1iOM
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6EU-dyv1iOM
I grew up 5min walk from the station there and I have never realised it's operated by children
The steam locomotives (scroll down for color photos) look remarkably like Thomas the Tank Engine:
http://www.dzd-ussr.ru/towns/gorky/foto1-eng.html
Those photos are from the late 1990s, so maybe the resemblance is intentional.
http://www.dzd-ussr.ru/towns/gorky/foto1-eng.html
Those photos are from the late 1990s, so maybe the resemblance is intentional.
Thomas the Tank Engine is virtually unknown in Russia, so I doubt it
Way more plausible is that Thomas the Tank Engine was drawn based on how real world trained looked like.
Yes - he's drawn based on a specific kind of tank engine from the London, Brighton and South Coast Railway (E2 class). There's not a huge similarity with the engine in the photo except that they're both small and painted in a similar shade of blue.
Thomas's prototype causes problems for preserved railway lines in the UK, incidentally. 'Day Out With Thomas' events (where an engine 'dresses' as Thomas to run trains) are very popular, but there are actually zero preserved E2s, so they all look a bit wrong. If Rev Awdry had picked something more common (like a Jinty[0], say) to base Thomas on, there would be loads of nearly exact copies to go around...
[0]: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/LMS_Fowler_Class_3F
Thomas's prototype causes problems for preserved railway lines in the UK, incidentally. 'Day Out With Thomas' events (where an engine 'dresses' as Thomas to run trains) are very popular, but there are actually zero preserved E2s, so they all look a bit wrong. If Rev Awdry had picked something more common (like a Jinty[0], say) to base Thomas on, there would be loads of nearly exact copies to go around...
[0]: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/LMS_Fowler_Class_3F
That's incorrect. The show has been regularly broadcast since the 1990's. But it's not that big in Russia that people will deliberately style steam locomotives to look like Thomas or Gordon.
[deleted]
Other than being a steam engine in the same shade of light blue .. no? Different number of wheels, and without the characteristic rectangular water tanks on the side of the boiler that makes it a tank engine.
> A children's railway or pioneer railway is an extracurricular educational institution, where teenagers interested in rail transport can learn railway professions. This phenomenon originated in the USSR and was greatly developed in Soviet times. The world's first children's railway was opened in Gorky Park, Moscow,[1] in 1932. At the breakup of the USSR, 52 children's railways existed in the country.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Children%27s_railway
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Children%27s_railway
I actually rode a local museum steam railway this weekend where 6 of 8 staff members were children aged 10 to 15-ish - the driver and head conductor were adults.
They seemed to do their tasks quite well. And they took them dead serius. Felt kinda strange having a 10yo in uniform with a serius face marking your ticket.
They seemed to do their tasks quite well. And they took them dead serius. Felt kinda strange having a 10yo in uniform with a serius face marking your ticket.
Some of these still exist! https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dresden_Park_Railway
I live nearby, and my son absolutely loves riding their trains on weekends. They have two types of railways: regular children’s railways, and something I would call micro-trains that operate within smaller boundaries.
The whole facility seems to come from GDR times, and there are mountains of old rusty train parts around their depots.
The whole facility seems to come from GDR times, and there are mountains of old rusty train parts around their depots.
Google for "Children's Railway Kiev". It's a working thing here in Kiev in an excellent condition. I love it.
We have that in Budapest too: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Budapest_Children's_Railway
I really would have loved doing this as a child. I'm left wondering though if actually working on a railroad would have negatively affected my love of trains I still have now as an adult. Any readers lucky enough to have worked on these railways?
The site claims 1/3 to half of the children involved in running these would eventually end up working jobs related to trains.
I think this will be the last time that I see a website listing an ICQ number to contact the author. Does that network even operate?
It does. It's bought by the Russian Mail.ru group.
In 2016, I went to an interview in their office, and the interviewer made me an excursion around it. At one place I saw big ICQ logo with sign reading "ICQ Project Department".
- Wow, it still hasn't died?!
- Shhhhh! Don't say this so loud, the guys get very offended! - said the interviewer.
The office itself was spacious, with free snacks and drinks, including free fresh juice -- I remember a perfect set of 4 people sitting together, some holding those free juices -- a guy and a girl sitting on small either couchettes or stools, and two more sitting next to them a bit higher on the window, and together looking like sat down to make promotion pictures for some sort of bar. I joked that this was staged just for me.
Then, there was a nice sightseeing place: an imposing rotating armchair next to panoramic glass, to make photos with Moscow in the backdrop. When you enter or exit the office, you walk along a tennis-field-size playground, with people playing, surrounded by a net to catch stray balls. The interviewer joked that of course all this play was also staged just for the interview.
Regarding ICQ, I guess, the project is kept by the corporation for nostalgic reasons -- it was the default messenger in exUSSR in the 90s and 00s.
In 2016, I went to an interview in their office, and the interviewer made me an excursion around it. At one place I saw big ICQ logo with sign reading "ICQ Project Department".
- Wow, it still hasn't died?!
- Shhhhh! Don't say this so loud, the guys get very offended! - said the interviewer.
The office itself was spacious, with free snacks and drinks, including free fresh juice -- I remember a perfect set of 4 people sitting together, some holding those free juices -- a guy and a girl sitting on small either couchettes or stools, and two more sitting next to them a bit higher on the window, and together looking like sat down to make promotion pictures for some sort of bar. I joked that this was staged just for me.
Then, there was a nice sightseeing place: an imposing rotating armchair next to panoramic glass, to make photos with Moscow in the backdrop. When you enter or exit the office, you walk along a tennis-field-size playground, with people playing, surrounded by a net to catch stray balls. The interviewer joked that of course all this play was also staged just for the interview.
Regarding ICQ, I guess, the project is kept by the corporation for nostalgic reasons -- it was the default messenger in exUSSR in the 90s and 00s.
These pioneer kids would be learning the 'responsibilities' on DZhD, just to face the rampant bribes and neglect on RL 'adult' railroads and elsewhere in the ussr.
It may not seem so obvious, but those who lived their adolescence through the soviet 60-80s in ussr russia are the very same cohort that now authorize the killing and the violent destruction of the so 'cherished' soviet-built infrastructure in Ukraine.
This only underscores that the children inevitably absorb the moral corruption - as the soviet times were soaked through with - just as another survival-skill no matter how it was dressed.
Fuck the dusted off soviet nostalgy - look at the present deeds!
It may not seem so obvious, but those who lived their adolescence through the soviet 60-80s in ussr russia are the very same cohort that now authorize the killing and the violent destruction of the so 'cherished' soviet-built infrastructure in Ukraine.
This only underscores that the children inevitably absorb the moral corruption - as the soviet times were soaked through with - just as another survival-skill no matter how it was dressed.
Fuck the dusted off soviet nostalgy - look at the present deeds!
I for one have been very interested of late in the history of the USSR the Soviet Republics themselves and the style and achievements they put forward. I don't think this needs to be understood in the sense of nostalgia.
More than that I think it is important to understand the social decisions that lead to outcomes we despise. As you say, the kids who initially ran these railways had peers or passengers who now call the shots in a society we deeply disagree with. But at the same time we can marvel at how grown up a 10-15 year old can seem while shuttling around holiday travelers.
Somewhere along the way the Workers' principles were displaced by people who sought power over them. Often it is in others' experiences that we can start to understand ourselves, whether by contrast of complement.
More than that I think it is important to understand the social decisions that lead to outcomes we despise. As you say, the kids who initially ran these railways had peers or passengers who now call the shots in a society we deeply disagree with. But at the same time we can marvel at how grown up a 10-15 year old can seem while shuttling around holiday travelers.
Somewhere along the way the Workers' principles were displaced by people who sought power over them. Often it is in others' experiences that we can start to understand ourselves, whether by contrast of complement.
So, these were educational projects, the purpose being to instill in children a sense of responsibility. I'd be interested in hearing about how well it worked. I've lived in rural America and I see a huge difference in maturity between suburban and farm kids. The daily responsibilities of farm life seem to instill a focus and determination that carries into the workplace. The trains project would be a much less immersive experience, so I wonder how pronounced any benefit would be.
Just curious why do you say it would be a less immersive experience? Running a train system is no small thing. From drawing up time tables to ad hoc rerouting when something inevitably breaks to all the signal and rolling stock maintenance...
At least in my city, the child railway used to be an isolated bit of decommissioned railway. A kilometer or two of a single track to do back-and-forth runs.
While it still had to be great experience (it was closed many years before I was born), it was not that complicated :)
While it still had to be great experience (it was closed many years before I was born), it was not that complicated :)
It's still complicated, since your tiny train can run over some wino who fell asleep across your tiny track after finding a hole in the fence.
The trains experience would be something children would voluntarily spend a few hours on occasionally. Farm life would be a daily responsibility that children would have no option of walking away from. I anticipate that children running a train could be very immersed in the moment, but the goal of the activity was to instill a sense of responsibility, and I'm wondering how effective that transitory experience would be.
Small train but not run by kids... :/
https://visitorinvictoria.ca/train-rides-heritage-acres/#:~:....
I think that most of those railroads have nothing to do with children operation - it was just a narrow gouge standard railway for less intensive commuting, some specific industrial purposes (like bringing fresh cut wood from forest or clay from careers) or even military (railroad system build around Vilnius during Polish rule in 1930's to provide ammunition to underground forts) and some was built way before soviet union occupied Baltics.
In Lithuania this narrow gouge standard is called "Siaurukas" (eng. "narrowy") and some parts are still being operated as a tourist attraction [1][2]
[1] https://siaurukas.eu/en/history/ [2] https://lt.wikipedia.org/wiki/Siaurasis_gele%C5%BEinkelis
In Lithuania this narrow gouge standard is called "Siaurukas" (eng. "narrowy") and some parts are still being operated as a tourist attraction [1][2]
[1] https://siaurukas.eu/en/history/ [2] https://lt.wikipedia.org/wiki/Siaurasis_gele%C5%BEinkelis
> I think that most of those railroads have nothing to do with children operation
Except they are operated literally by the children? And many of them have 'Children's' in the name?
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Children%27s_railway
Except they are operated literally by the children? And many of them have 'Children's' in the name?
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Children%27s_railway
bitwize(3)
This blew my mind, and immediately made me think of John Taylor-Gatto [1] who won numerous teaching awards trying, but ultimately failing, to convince American teachers to show children the same respect.
My 30 year old masters students are not even allowed to run their own WiFi network never mind an actual RAILWAY NETWORK that carries real passengers.
Going way beyond Montessori's philosophies, Gatto (and similarly Sir Ken Robinson) insisted children should learn real life skills by being given responsibility. His methods were revolutionary and transformed some of the worst New York schools. This scared the living shit out of governors and politicians who realised such a radical agenda might create young adults able to think and politically organise.
[1] https://www.diygenius.com/changemakers-john-taylor-gatto/