Posts Tagged ‘democracy’
I recently posted a question on a Facebook group page asking people to consider why Karl Marx included free public education in his 10 planks of the Communist Manifesto. Someone soon came along and posted this:
“Please attempt to have a discussion about education that does not use comparisons to communism and/or Karl Marx. Attempting to demonize opposing views just shows a complete lack of desire to have civil dialog.”
“Who is demonizing…? Are you saying people who discuss education must stick their head in the sand and avoid some of the elephants in the room? Why can’t a person bring up an obvious point and have it considered rationally without being accused of demonizing?”
I thought the purpose of critical thinking skills that educators always talk about is being able to dissect and understand a topic by honest questioning. So why did Karl Marx include free public education as one of his 10 planks?
To understand this, one has to understand the foundation of the Manifesto’s goal. Marx wrote the Communist Manifesto to lay out a plan for the destruction of private property. Only with the destruction of private property can you have a communist way of life. From H. Verlan Anderson’s book, “Many are Called, but Few are Chosen,” we read this explanation:
“Not only does the Manifesto declare its main purpose to be the destruction of private property, but it contains a detailed plan by which this is to be accomplished in a nation such as the United States whose laws and constitutions were designed to protect this right.
The method proposed is not violent and bloody revolution (at least at the outset) but the peaceful and legal process of inducing the citizens of the United States and other nations to destroy the right themselves with their own legislatures, courts, and executives. We are to adopt a series of laws which will inevitably have this result. Listen to the Manifesto as it unfolds its plan:
‘We have seen above that the first step in the revolution by the working class is to raise the proletariat to the position of ruling class, to establish democracy. The proletariat will use its political supremacy to wrest by degrees all capital from the bourgeoisie (property owners), to centralize all instruments of production in the hands of the state.’
This naked appeal to the selfishness of the voter to use the government as an instrument of plunder is nothing but a proposal for legalized theft.”
The reason the communists promote Democracy is because once you establish class warfare to the point that the majority vote themselves property from the minority, the destruction of private property is ensured. The people will continue to vote socialist minded people into office to pass laws guaranteeing for themselves anything they desire. This is where we find the quote often attributed to Alexander Tytler so applicable.
“A democracy cannot exist as a permanent form of government. It can only exist until the voters discover that they can vote themselves largesse from the public treasury. From that moment on, the majority always votes for the candidates promising the most benefits from the public treasury with the result that a democracy always collapses over loose fiscal policy, always followed by a dictatorship.”
Can anyone argue we don’t have loose fiscal policy and we’re not headed for a dictatorship? If you don’t believe it, you’re not watching the mandates and sidestepping of the legislative process the President is engaged in.
So now why did Karl Marx declare free public education in government schools as one of his 10 main objectives to destroy private property? Here are three reasons I can think of.
1) Getting people without children to pay for the education of people with children, via compulsory taxation, takes the personal property of those who may not want to or be able to give, in order to pay for a good or service for someone else. This is a tremendous injustice to those without children. Parents, never having to write a check or make a payment for the service, cease to concern themselves with what their child is being taught or if waste is occurring in the system. There is no competition, just apathy. Some will say that paying for the education of other children is for the benefit of society, however, one could say that about almost anything. It never used to be this way till Marx and Horace Mann came along and got us into this model.
2) In a state school funded with public tax dollars, the lowest common denominator prevails meaning those who believe least (atheism) trump those who believe most (in God). Free government education is a way to destroy public morality and a belief in God, which was one of Marx’s goals to establish atheism. Our Christian founders wanted to have strong morals taught in schools from the Bible. Not sectarian beliefs, but morals grounded in God’s commandments which ultimately lead to the happiness of the people.
3) It removes from parents the authority and responsibility of being the primary educator of their children. The state takes an interest and with government money paying for the education, the government can create mandates on everything in the system including curriculum, testing, standards, teachers, administrators, etc… Parents lose the ability to control their child’s education.
Until parents directly pay for at least a portion of their child’s education, they will never take an interest in how funds are being spent and what their children are being taught.
From the Latter-Day Conservative website I got this excellent quote.
“God finds His glory, as Joseph Smith said, in providing laws by which other beings can come to enjoy the same perfections and glory He possesses. Our view and motivations should be the same. Rather than seeing law as an instrument of domination, it is our mission to use it as an enabling power to help men and women achieve greater independence and ultimate potential. We do so by acting to have our earthly governmental and legal systems mirror as closely as possible the divine order. – ”
(“Law and Becoming”, Elder D. Todd Christoffersons. Fireside presented to the J. Reuben Clark Law Society, February 4, 2011. Published in the Clark Memorandum, Spring 2011.)
What is the divine order? It is founded upon the principle of agency, or choice. One must choose to become educated. One must choose to be charitable. One should be able to choose the educational environment for their children. Government run public schools funded by tax dollars, forcing children to learn what the state tells them and in the manner in which they tell them, is a factory conveyor belt model for things that are to be acted upon like a raw material, not a place for sentient beings that need to learn to act and use choice or agency to put themselves into motion to accomplish great things. When responsibility is removed from people, even in education, apathy sets in and we become nothing more than drones. Parents and children should be active participants in the education process. When they are not, they relinquish their right to agency and personal growth.
What the “Occupy Wall Street” Democracy-lovers would do to us today is destroy private property in the name of immoral corporations. However, the problem isn’t with capitalism, it’s with morality. Our Founders said only a moral and religious people could maintain a free republic. With each action of government in removing God and religion in our daily lives, individuals have lost their moral anchor and believe they can take advantage of their neighbors to get ahead without any consequences. The problems in Wall Street, Washington, and everywhere else won’t be solved by more laws that force people into good behavior. New laws are the result of lost morals because everyone wants to clamp down on bad behavior. The solution to society’s ills can only be found in a return to God-centered morals. Only then will people treat each other with honesty and charity and cease taking advantage of each other through dishonest business practices, or plunder made legal through our process of lawmaking.
Perhaps the best statement I’ve read explaining this is from Howard W. Hunter, a past president of the LDS church, who said:
“What is the real cause of this trend toward the welfare state, toward more socialism? In the last analysis, in my judgment, it is personal unrighteousness. When people do not use their freedoms responsibly and righteously, they will gradually lose these freedoms . . ..
If man will not recognize the inequalities around him and voluntarily, through the gospel plan, come to the aid of his brother, he will find that through “a democratic process” he will be forced to come to the aid of his brother. The government will take from the “haves” and give to the “have nots.” Both have lost their freedom. Those who “have,” lost their freedom to give voluntarily of their own free will and in the way they desire. Those who “have not,” lost their freedom because they did not earn what they received. They got “something for nothing,” and they will neither appreciate the gift nor the giver of the gift.
Under this climate, people gradually become blind to what has happened and to the vital freedoms, which they have lost. (Speeches of the Year 1965-1966, pp. 1-11, “The Law of the Harvest.” Devotional Address, Brigham Young University, 8 March 1966.)”
Every violation of the constitution that provides a socialistic program to the public (yes, including public education), encourages the slide into the destruction of private property. The rallying cry of socialists is “Democracy” because it is through majority votes of the “have nots” that they take from the “haves” and the ongoing, systematic destruction of our economy creates more “have nots.” We must understand, respect, and defend the Constitution of the United States and honor the laws that protect our life, liberty, and property, or Democracy will be the downfall of this nation.
Hopefully this gives new perspective to why there is such a danger in our schools adopting slogans like “Enculturating the Young into a Social and Political Democracy.” This is simply a restatement of the communist goal to establish a democratic welfare state which serves to destroy morality and private property through the votes of a growing immoral majority.
It’s always good to find the things you are saying publicly corroborated. In this case George Soros has now confirmed the words of John Goodlad and Bill Ayers that the use of the term democracy isn’t about freedom, it’s about Direct Democracy as a form of government leading to a totalitarian state. Thomas Jefferson said, “The republican is the only form of government which is not eternally at open or secret war with the rights of mankind.”
How long will it be till people realize that in supporting public calls for “Democracy” they are helping bring about these radicals desire for revolution? These three are birds of a feather. Goodlad invited Ayers to be the keynote speaker at his NNER education conference in 2010. Soros funds Marxist organizations that want a New World Order of global communism which Ayers has been fighting for for decades. Goodlad’s NNER invited a Soro’s organization director to help them in their Agenda for Education in a Democracy. How close are they? Here’s a pop quiz. See if you can tell which person made each statement, Goodlad, Ayers, or Soros. Answers below…no peeking.
1) “If the question of sustainability comes down to a struggle between those who value short-term economic gain [corporations/capitalists] and those who value long-term environmental well-being, then engaging in deliberative democracy…may be the only way to grapple with and overcome this issue in a collective manner.”
2) “We can speak of the triumph of capitalism in the world, but we cannot yet speak about the triumph of democracy. There is a serious mismatch between the political and the economic conditions that prevail in the world today.”
3) “Capitalism promotes racism and militarism – turning people into consumers, not citizens. Participatory democracy, by contrast, requires free people coming together voluntarily as equals who are capable of both self-realization and, at the same time, full participation in a shared political and economic life.”
4) “Enculturating the young into a social and political democracy”
5) “We share the belief that education is the motor-force of revolution… overcome the failings of capitalist education as you seek to create something truly new and deeply humane.”
6) “The god of economic utility takes over and spins for us all an enticing narrative. This abuse discredits capitalism as a potential companion of democracy, stimulating attacks on the system that tend to obscure consideration of the possibility that the problem lies with humankind.”
1) Paul Theobald et al., in Goodad, John: Developing Democratic Character in the Young, pp. 94-110 (link)
2) Soros wrote in Open Society: Reforming Global Capitalism.
3) Bill Ayers’ 2006 speech at the World Education Forum in Caracas, Venezuela in front of Pres. Hugo Chavez
4) One of John Goodlad’s 4 moral dimensions which Alpine School District plastered on their teacher development center wall
5) Bill Ayers’ 2006 speech at the World Education Forum in Caracas, Venezuela in front of Pres. Hugo Chavez
6) John Goodlad, Developing Democratic Character in the Young, p. 5 (link)
Here’s a little “in their own words” video montage to enjoy.
I was invited to present on the topic of Republic vs. Democracy at Patriot Camp last week and it was a lot of fun. There were 6 groups of children moving through the camp and on my day we started with those going into 6th grade in my first session down to those going into 1st grade in the last. The children were great and seemed to have a good time and actually learn something.
The funniest line of the day was when I announced the topic, a little boy of perhaps 9 years old muttered, “I haaaaate that word” (democracy). Another funny line from a child was when at the end of each session we were choosing to elect 2 representatives. One had a platform of giving everyone free ice cream and the other says I’ll let you keep your money and buy your own ice cream. I asked the children, “what would be a good question to ask the candidates.” The older children came up with the right question very quickly, “how are you going to pay for the ice cream?” But in one younger group, when I asked the question, one child said, “is your ice cream organic?”
We were all pleasantly surprised that even the children going into 1st grade were able to figure out which candidate to vote for. They all wanted free ice cream until they figured out the candidate would tax them to give them the ice cream. This showed that children are quite capable of learning basic principles and making decisions even at a really young age.
BYU’s Department of Education has published their Spring 2011 edition of McKay Today Magazine and contained in this small compilation is a tribute by former dean Robert Patterson to none other than John Goodlad. Susie Schnell sent me a link to it and even though it’s an article that has been seen on BYU’s website in the past, they chose to re-emphasize their complete and utter devotion to a man who is seeking the overthrow of all that BYU supposedly stands for.
First and foremost, lets be 100% clear that John Goodlad is an anti-Christ, and in LDS terminology, we would also call him a Korihor. He is an atheist, humanist, socialist, who espouses population control, constructivist math, implementing the gay agenda in the classroom, and having teachers introduce Marxist social justice in the classroom. Goodlad invited Bill Ayers, the godless Marxist terrorist turned educator to be the keynote speaker at his NNER conference last October. None of these philosophies are worthy of BYU’s mission or standards, neither does it correspond with direct teachings from the Book of Mormon which instruct us that both our secular teachers, and ecclesiastical leaders, should be individuals who walk in God’s paths or we should not trust them.
Mosiah 23:14 “And also trust no one to be your teacher nor your minister, except he be a man of God, walking in his ways and keeping his commandments.”
The BYU Education Department’s infatuation with Goodlad is completely independent of the LDS church. The church may own the school, but once teachers have tenure their ideology comes out without much fear of retribution in spite of the poison they may subtly distribute to students who believe their teachers are only espousing God’s truths and not the philosophies of men. They embrace Goodlad’s worldly philosophies because he is nationally prominent and has bestowed honors upon them and their college of education, specifically naming two individuals (Steve Baugh and John Rosenberg) as AED Scholars (Agenda for Education in a Democracy), and working with BYU for decades within his national network.
There are three dangers that threaten the church from within, and the authorities need to awaken to the fact that the people should be warned unceasingly against them. As I see them, they are flattery of prominent men in the world, false educational ideas, and sexual impurity.
Joseph F. Smith
2 out of 3 ain’t good.
BYU’s Ed department’s embrace of Goodlad shows they have utterly failed to follow the counsel of leaders, and of their core scriptural beliefs.
Last year (2010) when BYU’s Education Department was under attack from us for being members of John Goodlad’s NNER, which was trying to force BYU to accept the gay agenda into their school, the Provo Daily Herald reported that BYU was dropping its membership with the NNER (National Network for Educational Renewal) for “financial” reasons. However, in that same article, the Herald said, “Far from divorcing themselves from Goodlad, BYU provided the Daily Herald with a summary of Goodlad’s achievements” and went on to praise and adore this prominent national educator.
So here we are one year later and some have wondered if BYU’s Education Department was possibly changing their direction. They have answered with a resounding NO.
This tribute (PDF) in their latest newsletter clearly shows where they stand. My comments are on the right. (I also suggest to BYU’s Ed Dept. that they look at the title tag they have used with Robert Patterson’s photo and correct the (Freudian?) slip where they have named him “John Godland.”)
|John Goodlad’s Influence on the BYU–Public School Partnership
By Robert Patterson
|Robert Patterson is a lifelong educator and author. He was a former dean of the McKay School of Education at Brigham Young University between 1999 and 2003, during which time he worked closely with John Goodlad.||John Goodlad has been working close with BYU’s Ed. Dept. since 1983 when he first set up the Public School Partnership between BYU and 5 surrounding school districts, and in 1986 when BYU’s Ed. Dept. became a founding member of the NNER.|
|As I participated in the various activities of the BYU–Public School Partnership (BYU–PSP), I experienced an oft-repeated query from fellow participants: “Why do we pay so much attention to the opinions and ideas of John Goodlad?” I want to offer three possible responses.||Here comes the official answer as to why BYU’s Ed. Dept. pays to much attention to John Goodlad.|
|First, I suggest we look at the professional record of this man. His colleagues have publicly acknowledged the extent and value of his work by literally showering him with prestigious awards, including the Horace Mann League Outstanding Friend of Public Education and the John Dewey Society Outstanding Achievement Award in 2009. He has tirelessly done his utmost to address educational issues in a manner to help fellow professionals as well as the larger interested public.||Reason 1: he’s a prestigious (prominent) national award winnerHorace Mann: Creator of compulsory education”What the church has been for medieval man, the public school must become for democratic and rational man. God will be replaced by the concept of the public good. The common (public) schools shall create a more far-seeing intelligence and a pure morality than has ever existed among communities of men.” -Mann
John Dewey: Original signatory on the atheistic, socialistic, Humanist Manifesto.
“Education is thus a most powerful ally of Humanism, and every American public school is a school of Humanism. What can the theistic Sunday-schools, meeting for an hour once a week, and teaching only a fraction of the children, do to stem the tide of a five-day program of humanistic teaching?” -Dewey
Evil, godless, prominent men who have an agenda to destroy faith in God and have awards named after them and Goodlad has received them. That’s reason #1 BYU’s Ed. Dept. follows Goodlad.
|The second compelling reason relates to his role in helping to launch and enrich the organization of the Partnership. On invitation from Curtis Van Alfen, the BYU dean of education in 1983, Goodlad spent several months at BYU helping school district and university personnel catch a vision of the benefits of a collaborative relationship.||Reason 2: Goodlad did tremendous service for BYU to help them catch a vision of a collaborative relationship.What is Goodlad’s agenda?”The curriculum of the future will be what one might call the humanistic curriculum.” -Goodlad|
|Goodlad also invited the Partnership to become a member of the National Network for Educational Renewal (NNER). As a result, participants of the BYU–PSP have received outstanding leadership training as well as the opportunity to interact with school or university faculty members from other NNER sites. One result of this interaction has been the replication of the Seattle Associates Program at BYU. The Partnership has used associates as one of the main ways of sharing ideas and promoting a common value position within the BYU–PSP.||Reason 3: If you read the titles of some of the NNER conference talks, of which BYU Ed. Dept. professors regularly presented (along with Alpine School District leaders from the PSP) you’ll find intriguing topics such as these:”The Creation of a Wise and Healthy People and a Culture for Sustaining and Renewing this Populace” (Sounds eerily like the U.N.’s Agenda 21 plan)”Expert Study Panel Groups (GLBT & Community Engagement)” (I don’t think I need to comment on this one)
“School-based Mentoring: A Nurturing Approach to Improve the Educational Outcomes of Students At-risk” (This particular session was taught by a BYU prof. and when you read the brief section below, you’ll see their mentoring/nurturing approach is to supplant the parent with a nurturing teacher. Where did that come from? “Most youth still hold the same values of their parents… if we do not alter this pattern, if we don’t resocialize, our system will decay.“- John Goodlad)
“And Justice For All: Using Artificial Environments to Create Community and Teach Diversity”
“The Re-emergence of the Research School: A Model To Meet the Challenges of Education for Democracy”
Whatever happened to teachers getting trained in how to teach math, reading, and writing? These courses have NOTHING to do with educating our children and EVERYTHING to do with indoctrinating them into a “social and political Democracy.”
|Another significant and valuable application of Goodlad’s leadership is our Center for the Improvement of Teacher Education and Schooling (CITES). By accepting Goodlad’s challenge to experiment with this new organizational structure, we have found ways to include other BYU colleges in the Partnership, to strengthen the in-service provisions offered for school personnel, and to generate ideas through research and program evaluation.||Reason 4: The wonderful CITES center where the application of Goodlad’s philosophies are extended to other colleges, and through which PSP school administrators and principals pass in order to be deemed “Goodlad-agenda-ready” for public service. CITES is run by Steve Baugh, Goodlad AED scholar. Baugh is the former Superintendent of Alpine School District where he helped bring constructivist math (ex. Investigations, Connected, and Interactive math) to tens of thousands of children, forever damaging their mathematical abilities, but following Goodlad’s recommendations that a socialistic style constructivist approach be used to help further prepare children for life in a social and political Democracy.CITES also receives hundreds of thousands of public tax dollars each year yet won’t allow for an audit or release of how those tax dollars are spent in spite of requests by legislators.|
|John Goodlad has encouraged and supported the BYU–PSP in powerful ways. Without the benefits derived from the focus associated with his writings and programs and the example of excellent leadership through skillful mentoring and modeling of ideas and practices, the BYU–PSP would be far less able to speak with pride of the quality of education in our partner districts and in our university teacher preparation programs. We continue to be richly rewarded for celebrating Dr. John I. Goodlad.||Quality of education in our partner districts? Is that why UVU has a math remediation *department* for the nearly 70% of incoming students who can’t do simple college algebra?Teacher prep is nothing more than indoctrination prep. There is precious little content knowledge being transmitted to those who obtain a teaching certificate, but loads of philosophical poison from Goodlad’s agenda. We need teachers who actually understand math to teach it.|
“As the educational system falls into the hands of the in-power political faction or into the hands of an obscure but tightly knit group of professional social reformers, it is used not to educate but to indoctrinate.” Ezra Taft Benson (An Enemy Hath Done this – pg. 229)
“I feel to warn you that one of the chief means of misleading our youth and destroying the family unit is our educational institutions. There is more than one reason why the Church is advising our youth to attend colleges close to their homes where institutes of religion are available. It gives the parents the opportunity to stay close to their children, and if they become alerted and informed, these parents can help expose the deceptions of men like Sigmund Freud, Charles Darwin, John Dewey, John Keynes and others. There are much worse things today that can happen to a child than not getting a full education. In fact, some of the worst things have happened to our children while attending colleges led by administrators who wink at subversion and amorality. Said Karl G. Maeser, “I would rather have my child exposed to smallpox, typhus fever, cholera or other malignant and deadly diseases than to the degrading influence of a corrupt teacher.” Ezra Taft Benson (The Teachings of Ezra Taft Benson, p. 307.)
John Goodlad is among the “others” mentioned and a disciple of John Dewey.
“There is a spirit working among the Saints to educate their own offspring. If our children will be all we will have for a foundation of glory in eternity, how needful that they be properly trained… There are wolves among us in sheep’s clothing ready to lead astray our little ones… Wolves do not devour old sheep when there are any young ones. I have herded sheep long enough to know that. Look after your children.”- Elder John W. Taylor, (Collected Discourses 2:138.)
What Is a Mentor?
Who was your mentor? Who could be trusted to answer the important questions you had? Who was there to give you advice? Who served as a role model at important points in your life?
Most successful people have had a mentor at some time in their life, whether in business, sports, the arts, the classroom, or university work.
FiVE Things You Should Know about Mentoring
1. What a Mentor Is and What a Mentor Is Not
A mentor is not:
What a mentor is:
- a parent
- a cool peer
- a babysitter
- a therapist
- a disciplinarian
- a parole officer
- a nag
- a savior
- an ATM
- a wise and trusted friend
- a link to another generation
- a confiant
- a tutor
- an advisor
- a visionary “seer” (been there, done that)
- a cheerleader
- a coach
- a listener
- an advocate
- a sounding board
- a guide
- a role model
- a partner
- a motivator
The greatest mentor I have had in my life is my father. I wonder how the department integrates the Proclamation on the Family into their philosophies? This article further shows the embrace of Goodlad’s philosophy as he believes:
“Public education has served as a check on the power of parents, and this is another powerful reason for maintaining it.”- John Goodlad, Developing Democratic Character in the Young, pg. 165
One of Goodlad’s core 4 dimensions of teaching is that teachers become the nurturers of students. Here’s a few Goodlad quotes (references at link) for you.
“[schools] should liberate students from the ways of thinking imposed by religions and other traditions of thought.”
“…educators must resist the quest for certainty. If there were certainty there would be no scientific advancement. So it is with morals and patriotism.”
“It is my expectation that Teacher Education for Democracy and Social Justice will become a rich resource for continuing this multi-layered conversation-from democratic belief to democratic action-that is the hallmark of educational renewal.”
“…the state we should strive for is better described in Deweyan terms as a social democracy.”
I ask, do you believe the philosophies of John Goodlad will help build up Zion? I say they will not. They will tear it down and destroy it. They will indoctrinate in false philosophies and destroy faith in God. Has the BYU Ed. Dept. fallen into this cunning plan?
2 Nephi 9
28 O that cunning plan of the evil one! O the vainness, and the frailties, and the foolishness of men! When they are learned they think they are wise, and they hearken not unto the counsel of God, for they set it aside, supposing they know of themselves, wherefore, their wisdom is foolishness and it profiteth them not. And they shall perish.
29 But to be learned is good if they hearken unto the counsels of God.
What is that counsel we are to hearken to?
“We have not been using the Book of Mormon as we should. Our homes are not as strong unless we are using it to bring our children to Christ.Our families may be corrupted by worldly trends and teachings unless we know how to use the book to expose and combat the falsehoods in socialism, organic evolution, rationalism, humanism, and so forth… And our nation will continue to degenerate unless we read and heed the words of the God of this land, Jesus Christ, and quit building up and upholding the secret combinations which the Book of Mormon tells us proved the downfall of both previous American civilizations. (A Witness and a Warning, p. 6.)
Those who fail to see the dangers of an alliance with John Goodlad reject the message of the Book of Mormon and are literally walking in darkness at noon-day as they become accomplices in an effort to destroy the morality and agency of man.
David O. McKay, a staunch fighter against humanism and socialism, must be weeping in heaven that his name is attached to this department.
Still think John Goodlad isn’t having a negative influence in Alpine School District? Schools are sending his socialist propaganda home in newsletters. John Goodlad is a John Dewey disciple and award winner. Dewey was one of the original signatories of the Humanist Manifesto and both these men have an agenda to embed the principles of socialism in our schools. When challenged, the principal and PTA president just brush it off and dismiss it as no big deal. Isn’t it?
Read what one parent wrote after receiving this school newsletter:
In February, my kindergartner came home with the monthly PTA newsletter, and every month, as usual, the Principal writes a few encouraging words to all students and parents of the school. As I read the second paragraph-I was alarmed by this statement “John Dewey, a respected educator said: ‘What the best and wisest parent wants for his own child, that must the community want for all of its children. Any other ideal for our schools is narrow and unlovely; acted upon, it destroys our democracy.‘”
My heart sank, and quickly I went to the school. Newsletter in hand, I asked the Principal why she decided to put a quote from John Dewey in the newsletter. I told her it was wrong to put any of John’s philosophies in a school newsletter. Dewey is not a respected educator; he is a socialist progressive. She informed me that it was only an innocent quote she happened to stumble upon and she thought it sounded nice. She ‘respects’ John Dewey; it’s just my ‘opinion’ that he’s not respected. She told me that next time, she’ll take out the ‘respected educator’ part.
I couldn’t believe what I was hearing, so that evening I called the PTA President. I told her that the PTA newsletter was very controversial. She knew exactly which part it was and immediately sided with the Principal. She told me (laughing) that there are much bigger problems in this world to be worried about, and that this is not a Big Deal. I told her that my children’s educations are a huge deal. “Yes, but Liz, I know all about John Dewey, and actually I admire him, and the things he says,” she said. “We shouldn’t be worrying about these little things, and I hope this won’t keep you away from helping the PTA,” she said. It certainly does, and I will never ignore the goings on in our community, especially the educational system. I will always stand up for what is right, even if it means noticing something so ‘small’.
After playing phone tag with the District Leader of our school, I ran into her in the Lehi Elementary School Library as I was checking out the patriotic section. She immediately asked me if I was part of the ‘Radical’ group in Alpine (I wasn’t at the time, but after our little conversation I asked around and found them and signed their petition). After some back and forth conversation, she asked me several times what can she possibly do to help the situation. I told her about the newsletter, concerned parents, and teaching the 3 R’s, so on… She said she would ‘talk’ to the Principal and that “Wow! I didn’t even think that anyone ever read the front page of the newsletter! (Laughing) Oh, but I’m not saying that you’re dumb or anything like that.”
She asked me what part of the quote was so controversial. I told her it was the Democracy part. So she so kindly explained to me what Democracy was. I asked her straight out if she incorporates Goodlad’s theories into our school. It was all just a confusing blur after that as she proceeded to tiptoe around that question and squirmed in her chair. I was treated like a dumb, ‘how dare you’ person. Since then, I have informed friends, neighbors and family what is going on.
(Here’s the full page if you want to view it)
A friend just sent me this list of a few quotes from the highly acclaimed (by educators) John Goodlad book “Developing Democratic Character in the Young.”
- “At its most basic, democracy means shared governance or shared decision making. In other words, if a decision will affect the lives of more than one individual, as most decisions do, that decision should be made by all of those affected, or by as many as possible.” (Paul Theobald et al., in Goodad, John: Developing Democratic Character in the Young, pp. 94-110)
- “There are many ideas, everything from “computer democracy,” which would enable direct rather than representative voting at the state and even the federal level (thus eliminating the effectiveness of corporate lobbying efforts), to the creation of new state charters of incorporation.” [he goes into some detail about why corporations are the source of injustice, and why we should essentially abolish them.] (Paul Theobald et al., in Goodad, John: Developing Democratic Character in the Young, pp. 94-110)
- “What makes popular rule legitimate is that it is a fair process, not that it produces results that are right.” (Paul Theobald et al., in Goodad, John: Developing Democratic Character in the Young, pp. 94-110)
- In order to produce right results, he says that popular rule “must be constrained by some substantive values.” (Paul Theobald et al., in Goodad, John: Developing Democratic Character in the Young, pp. 94-110)
In other words:
1) Enculturate the young with the values the state thinks are best,
2) Promote popular rule through direct democracy, so that
3) The people will vote for themselves what the state thinks is best.
Here is some of what he has to say about John Lock, Adam Smith, and the US Constitution:
- “…we must dismiss that part of our Locke-Smith heritage that separates the social and economic life from the political sphere. This is not easily done given that so much of Smith and Locke went into the Constitution.” (Paul Theobald et al., in Goodad, John: Developing Democratic Character in the Young, pp. 94-110)t
- If the question of sustainability comes down to a struggle between those who value short-term economic gain [corporations/capitalists] and those who value long-term environmental well-being, then engaging in deliberative democracy…may be the only way to grapple with and overcome this issue in a collective manner. (Paul Theobald et al., in Goodad, John: Developing Democratic Character in the Young, pp. 94-110)
- “democratic character” that must be developed in the young is defined as a “democratic concern for social, economic, and environmental justice.” Goodlad’s organization, the NNER, advocates dispositions favorable toward redistribution of resources, promotion of GLBTQQIIAA lifestyles, and environmentalism. (Paul Theobald et al., in Goodad, John: Developing Democratic Character in the Young, pp. 94-110)
Anyone care to argue that Goodlad isn’t looking for direct Democracy, the kind our Founding Fathers hated?
Someone sent me a link to an article yesterday where someone had used a feature on Google to crunch numbers on the amount of times the words “republic” and “democracy” appear in print. The word republic is in red and democracy in blue. Note that the crossover happened during the progressive movement when the socialists were changing their line of attack on the constitution. You can read some of that history from this chapter on republics from the 5,000 Year Leap.
Here’s a link to the article this chart comes from.
My daughter is actually studying the progressive era in her history class right now and I didn’t realize that initiatives, referendums, and recalls came out of that movement. These 3 items were designed by progressives to bypass constitutional government and begin to introduce direct democracy to the nation (ie. the kind the Framers warned us about). Each of these items gives citizens the ability to propose law, pass law, and undo appointments and elections, completely bypassing the normal process and doing it themselves. Thus by states adopting these measures they gave up republican government guaranteed in article 4, section 4 of the constitution. However, by writing them into state law, they are now constitutional at the state level. I would suppose a valid case could be made to overturn an initiative, referendum, or recall, based on them violating the U.S. Constitution since it is the supreme law of the law and trumps state law where it specifically declares something as law such as article 4, section 4 guaranteeing republican government to the states.
Aside from Elder Dallin H. Oaks’ great name, he’s also got a great legal mind. He recently gave a landmark speech on religious freedom and how our 1st amendment protection is under attack. Several of his remarks are directly pertinent to the issues we are dealing with in Utah, while others are shocking to see them happening anywhere in America.
This talk is not an “LDS” talk. It is specifically non-denominational on this subject and he liberally quotes from non-LDS sources throughout his speech. I have included a few quotes below but I encourage you to read the talk in its entirety (link).
“I submit that religious values and political realities are so inter-linked in the origin and perpetuation of this nation that we cannot lose the influence of religion in our public life without seriously jeopardizing our freedoms.”
“Whatever the extent of formal religious affiliation, I believe that the tide of public opinion in favor of religion is receding. A writer for the Christian Science Monitor predicts that the coming century will be “very secular and religiously antagonistic,” with intolerance of Christianity “ris[ing] to levels many of us have not believed possible in our lifetimes.”10
“A visible measure of the decline of religion in our public life is the diminished mention of religious faith and references to God in our public discourse. One has only to compare the current rhetoric with the major addresses of our political leaders in the 18th, 19th, and the first part of the 20th centuries. Similarly, compare what Lincoln said about God and religious practices like prayer on key occasions with the edited versions of his remarks quoted in current history books.11 It is easy to believe that there is an informal conspiracy of correctness to scrub out references to God and the influence of religion in the founding and preservation of our nation.”
“Granted that reduced religious affiliation puts religion “in the background,” the effect of that on the religious beliefs of young adults is still in controversy. The negative view appears in the Oxford book, whose author concludes that this age group of 18 to 23
“had difficulty seeing the possible distinction between, in this case, objective moral truth and relative human invention. . . . [T]hey simply cannot, for whatever reason, believe in—or sometimes even conceive of—a given, objective truth, fact, reality, or nature of the world that is independent of their subjective self-experience.”13
This is precisely what John Goodlad, John Dewey, Bill Ayers, and the NNER are working toward…democratic classrooms where truth doesn’t come from God, it’s only what you can see, feel, hear, taste, and touch. If you can’t, then truth is relative to the experience of the individual. This is such a dangerous position to hold for the future of our nation. It is almost unbelievable how strongly this false philosophy has permeated our state of Utah, in particular in Utah county.
“It is well to remember James Madison’s warning:
“There are more instances of the abridgement of the freedom of the people by gradual and silent encroachments of those in power than by violent and sudden usurpations.”40
Part 4 of his speech completely focused on this issue of moral relativism. Here are a couple of great quotes from his talk.
“What has caused the current public and legal climate of mounting threats to religious freedom? I believe the cause is not legal but cultural and religious. I believe the diminished value being attached to religious freedom stems from the ascendency of moral relativism.
More and more of our citizens support the idea that all authority and all rules of behavior are man-made and can be accepted or rejected as one chooses. Each person is free to decide for himself or herself what is right and wrong. Our children face the challenge of living in an increasingly godless and amoral society.
I have neither the time nor the expertise to define the various aspects of moral relativism or the extent to which they have entered the culture or consciousness of our nation and its people. I can only rely on respected observers whose descriptions feel right to me.
In his book, Modern Times, the British author Paul Johnson writes:
“At the beginning of the 1920s the belief began to circulate, for the first time at a popular level, that there were no longer any absolutes: of time and space, of good and evil, of knowledge, above all of value.”53
On this side of the Atlantic, Gertrude Himmelfarb describes how the virtues associated with good and evil have been degraded into relative values.54
A variety of observers have described the consequences of moral relativism. All of them affirm the existence of God as the Ultimate Law-giver and the source of the absolute truth that distinguishes good from evil.”
“Moral relativism leads to a loss of respect for religion and even to anger against religion and the guilt that is seen to flow from it. As it diminishes religion, it encourages the proliferation of rights that claim ascendency over the free exercise of religion.”
In his conclusion he lists these 4 points:
1. Religious teachings and religious organizations are valuable and important to our free society and therefore deserving of their special legal protection.
2. Religious freedom undergirds the origin and existence of this country and is the dominating civil liberty.
3. The guarantee of free exercise of religion is weakening in its effects and in public esteem.
4. This weakening is attributable to the ascendancy of moral relativism.
This is ultimately what has been the debate in Alpine School district over the past year. Goodlad’s indoctrination center has been gradually teaching the need for democratic classrooms that are accepting of false notions in the name of tolerance for others’ beliefs. We face an incredible battle in the future to help people understand that only through belief in God and His absolute truths can we have any kind of anchor in this world that we can create common standards from. Without God, and religious belief in Him, we will be tossed as the waves of the sea.
There is much more in this excellent speech by Elder Oaks which covers persecution, the gradual loss of freedom, the redefining of rights, and anti-religious bigotry. I strongly encourage you to read the whole talk here:
If you’ve never read the Screwtape Letters by C.S. Lewis, you’re missing out on one of the gems of literature. The book is a series of letters from the perspective of a master devil (named Screwtape) to his nephew (Wormwood) who is a beginning tempter “in the field” trying to win souls for the devil. Screwtape encourages Wormwood and guides him through various episodes in tempting humans to fall into sin. Occasionally he scolds Wormwood for allowing his subjects to become involved in something that may lead them toward the enemy (ie. God).
Sometime after Lewis wrote the book, he wrote an essay entitled “Screwtape Proposes a Toast.” I have a quote from this essay elsewhere on the site but I felt the need to share this clip with you. The essay itself is a satire on the American education system and in this clip, Lewis skewers our system of dumbing down our children in the name of “democracy.”
To read the entire and VERY worthwhile essay, you can find it anywhere online but here’s one link this clip came from (including the site’s bolding).
Now, this useful phenomenon is in itself by no means new. Under the name of Envy it has been known to humans for thousands of years. But hitherto they always regarded it as the most odious, and also the most comical, of vices. Those who were aware of feeling it felt it with shame; those who were not gave it no quarter in others. The delightful novelty of the present situation is that you can sanction it — make it respectable and even laudable — by the incantatory use of the word democratic.
Under the influence of this incantation those who are in any or every way inferior can labour more wholeheartedly and successfully than ever before to pull down everyone else to their own level. But that is not all. Under the same influence, those who come, or could come, nearer to a full humanity, actually draw back from fear of being undemocratic. I am credibly informed that young humans now sometimes suppress an incipient taste for classical music or good literature because it might prevent their Being Like Folks; that people who would really wish to be — and are offered the Grace which would enable them to be — honest, chaste, or temperate refuse it. To accept might make them Different, might offend against the Way of Life, take them out of Togetherness, impair their Integration with the Group. They might (horror of horrors!) become individuals.
All is summed up in the prayer which a young female human is said to have uttered recently: “O God, make me a normal twentieth century girl!” Thanks to our labours, this will mean increasingly: “Make me a minx, a moron, and a parasite.”
Meanwhile, as a delightful by-product, the few (fewer every day) who will not be made Normal or Regular and Like Folks and Integrated increasingly become in reality the prigs and cranks which the rabble would in any case have believed them to be. For suspicion often creates what it expects. (“Since, whatever I do, the neighbors are going to think me a witch, or a Communist agent, I might as well be hanged for a sheep as a lamb, and become one in reality.”) As a result we now have an intelligentsia which, though very small, is very useful to the cause of Hell.
But that is a mere by-product. What I want to fix your attention on is the vast, overall movement towards the discrediting, and finally the elimination, of every kind of human excellence – moral, cultural, social, or intellectual. And is it not pretty to notice how “democracy” (in the incantatory sense) is now doing for us the work that was once done by the most ancient Dictatorships, and by the same methods? You remember how one of the Greek Dictators (they called them “tyrants” then) sent an envoy to another Dictator to ask his advice about the principles of government. The second Dictator led the envoy into a field of grain, and there he snicked off with his cane the top of every stalk that rose an inch or so above the general level. The moral was plain. Allow no preeminence among your subjects. Let no man live who is wiser or better or more famous or even handsomer than the mass. Cut them all down to a level: all slaves, all ciphers, all nobodies. All equals.Thus Tyrants could practise, in a sense, “democracy.” But now “democracy” can do the same work without any tyranny other than her own. No one need now go through the field with a cane. The little stalks will now of themselves bite the tops off the big ones. The big ones are beginning to bite off their own in their desire to Be Like Stalks.