The Marxist Redistribution of Teachers and Forced CCSS

Do you have a successful school? Lots of good teachers doing a good job educating students? Do you enjoy the federal dollars you receive for funding? The feds are about to turn that peanut butter and chocolate combination into cyanide and chocolate. (chocolate being the good local teachers just to clarify the analogy :))

A few days ago congress was presented with an 860 page education bill from Democratic Senator Tom Harkin of Iowa. The Heritage Foundation has started a review of the bill and notes:

For example, the bill would codify Obama Administration education priorities, such as the “equitable distribution” of effective teachers among schools. It would eliminate “adequate yearly progress”—the onerous federal requirement that mandated every child be proficient in reading and math by 2014—but would replace it with requirements that states prove they have “college- and career-ready” standards, giving Washington more control over the content taught in local schools.

Good news for schools on getting rid of AYP but if you’re successful, it’s time to chop that school up and send some of those teachers to failing schools to make sure they get quality teachers too. Oh, and don’t miss the great news that the Feds aren’t mandating national standards, they’ll just force you to be on “college- and career-ready” standards. Gee, I wonder where we can find national standards that will fit that bill? Oh yeah, the CCSS are available for use. We’ll just force everyone taking federal dollars to get on those standards so the federal assessments being rolled out will apply nationally. The factory model of education can continue but with total control from the top.

Educators and legislators, if you thought NCLB and AYP were bad, wait till this rolls out. You’ve got to get us off the federal welfare dime or what’s coming isn’t going to be good for anyone. Teachers are going to lose jobs in places they like, they’re going to lose freedom to teach what they deem necessary and be forced to teach to a national test, and children are going to lose any hope of having an education customized to their needs because the factory belt model of compulsory education is going to become more vise-like than ever.

What is being done? Heritage is pushing forward with an “A-PLUS” plan to bring accountability to parents and taxpayers while reducing the federal footprint, but I do not think this will happen in time to help our state. State lawmakers and educators need to work together to completely eliminate all federal funding and reject all mandates that come from Washington.

On this current education nightmare bill above, Washington always seems to have a way to get these things through, but thankfully the House is controlled by the Republicans so the Democrats are going to have a hard time getting this bill passed. Senator Rand Paul talk here about introducing 100 amendments to stop this bill in its tracks. I hope he’s successful.

Related post:

8 Responses to “The Marxist Redistribution of Teachers and Forced CCSS”

  • […] The Marxist Redistribution of Teachers and Forced CCSS October 20th, 2011   Utah’s Republic Educators and legislators, if you thought NCLB and AYP were bad, wait till this rolls out. You’ve got to get us off the federal welfare dime or what’s coming isn’t going to be good for anyone. […]

  • Everyone needs to refuse the federal teat.

  • Professor/Father:

    When you throw around the “M” (Marxist) word, I tune out. 

  • Just calling a spade a spade. Karl Marx wrote the Communist Manifesto specifically for the destruction of personal property and redistribution of wealth. Most of the points dealt with confiscation of property through various means of progressive taxation and seizure, but point 10 dealt specifically with providing a free public education to all children because that “benefit to society” is a great way to take money from people without children and have them pay for someone else’s education. If you’ve seen the latest demands from the Occupy Wall Street protestors, they now want a free university education for everyone. How do we pay for that?

    What I put above is just another step in this same scheme of making sure nobody gets ahead by taking great schools and leveling them downward by making them cough up some good teachers to try and help failing schools. The law that Harkin put forth would redistribute teachers just like Obama and his supporters want to redistribute wealth. That is Marxist by definition, not name-calling.

  • Anonymous:

    Oak, once again you are making some weird connections.  I don’t see how this bill is seizing personal property or redistributing wealth.  I would certainly like to see less federal intrusion in our schools, but you can’t keep making these outrageous conspiratorial connections in everything you see.  You are also labeling the entire Occupy Wall Street movement as Marxist because a few of them want free university educations.  That is like saying the entire Tea Party movement believes in Darwin’s theories of natural selection because a few in the audience at a Tea Party debate shouted “let him die” when referring to a 30 year old man who was not smart enough to buy health insurance, but that is what the left-wing media did and now you are doing the same thing from the right.  You need to quit playing these political games and put away your label maker.  I agree with Professor/Father, you throw around Marxism too much.  Oak, the Cold War is over.  I know you have a nostalgic longing for a return to the days where Congress convened sessions on un-American activities.  Do you really want to return to those times?  Like Joe McCarthy, you may find yourself without a chair when the music stops playing.  In your zeal to “save” America, you could end up destroying it.  You can love something so dearly, that you can actually squeeze the life out of it and kill it.  We are a country of diverse people and opinions.  Attacking others as if they are an “enemy of the state” because of a viewpoint different from your own is more dangerous than anything I know in a “democratic republic” (a place where people freely elect those who represent them). Don’t forget that Rome lost her Republic and it wasn’t due to communists.  Power and greed are the downfall of nations and empires more often than an attempt to redistribute wealth equally.      

    My advice to you is to go ahead and be part in the political process but not of the political process.

  • Patti:

    I agree with Oak. If you familiarize yourself with the Communist Manifesto and look critically at those who are serving in the white house at the discretion of our current president, and you look at what they have accomplished as far as moving us closer to a socialized country, you would see what Oak is trying to exposed here! You can’t see it if you don’t research the people close to the president and at their agenda! When you do it’s as plain as day! Oak knows his stuff!

  • Anonymous:

    I’m very aware of the Communist Manifesto and I’m quite familiar with it.  I’m also good at reading things with the context in which something was written.  Where I disagree with Oak is in his correlation of the Communist Manifesto with current day politics and his lack of context in his interpretation of meaning. Certainly there are similarities in “some” of the viewpoints of Democrats and even some Republicans with tenets of the Manifesto.  You can do the same thing with Fascism in that there are correlative elements in the tenets of fascism and the ideologies of Republicans and even some Democrats, but I stop short of making the “giant leap” of logic where Obama or any other politician has a secret plan to make all of America into a communist nation. The same thing goes for making leaps of logic in teasing out conspiracy theories where Republicans are trying to create a fascist state. Calling Obama a Communist is just as irresponsible as calling George Bush a Nazi. 

    As a historian, I’ve seen the same thing played out before any time the economy goes sour.  The crazies on both the left and the right start going after each other, and as expected the majority in the middle act like helpless captive audience.  Well, I’m a well-educated independent that does speak out against both the extreme right and extreme left (both end up in dictatorships).  If you are trying to convince me of an argument, I need more than just conspiratorial rhetoric from mindless talk radio show hosts, I need proof.  What I mean by proof is not some sort of living room association with Bill Ayers or John Goodlad.  I need proof that Obama is trying to create a communist state by seizing private property, nationalizing corporations, setting up collectives, and eliminating all political opposition (like the Utah legislature does with gerrymandering).  If you can do that, then I will be more amenable to your persuasions.     

  • Good grief. If you can’t see Obama’s Marxist/Communist cabinet for who they are there is nothing else to discuss. The cold war *isn’t* over TKC. It’s like the beast in Revelation that was wounded and all the world marveled that it was healed. If you’re a historian, surely you recognize that Marxism is the redistribution of wealth from the rich to the poor. Marx and Engles wrote it to destroy private property. If you need to hear Obama in his own words, listen to this clip:

    Note also that it’s Obama, not Bush, who wants to create a civilian police force as strong as our national military. Who did that? Oh yeah, Fascist Hitler. Is Bush innocent? No, but you’ve got to stop playing games like this.

    I can’t take your last line seriously. Every time you and others bring up a charge, you tend to demand proof. I provide it, and you remain unconvinced. There is no proof available that will change a closed mind.