New schools for a new world order: Sons of the red pioneers
The fundamental goal of socialism is the establishment of a sociopolitical milieu where the individual is controlled by the state from the cradle to the grave. It seems this dream has taken a few steps closer to reality for young children living in Washington, DC.
The City Council of the District of Columbia is considering a bill designed to lower the age of compulsory school attendance from five to three years old. WorldNet Daily points out that even children as young as two unfortunate to have their birthdays fall after the commencement of the academic year will be mandated to participate .
While the proposed legislation does not yet necessitate mandatory classroom attendance, it does require parents not forfeiting control of their toddlers to engage in formalized learning activities overseen by professional educators.
The bill’s primary sponsor, Councilman Kevin Chavous, told the Washington Post, “It would force the school system to take responsibility for every 3- and 4-year-old in the city to make sure they are prepared for kindergarten.” In other words, the government — not the parents — are to be the one’s granted ultimate authority in the eyes of the law over such young children.
Even more shocking, very few public officials objected to the scheme on ethical or philosophical grounds. Most only raised logistical or financial concerns. Most endorsed it with the enthusiasm of a Nazi Gaulieter invited to a Nuremberg Party rally or bookburning.
Mayor Anthony Williams endorsed the need to drag the exceedingly young into the snares of statist education. Particularly revealing as to the true agenda of this bill were the comments of Superintendent Paul Vance who told the Post, “The earlier you can get these youngsters to make social and cognitive impressions, the better your chances for having productive learners. I’d like to get all these youngsters in school as early as possible.”
I bet these scoundrels would. For when the Superintendent speaks of “social and cognitive impressions” he means more than having pupils learn their “ABC’s” or saying “please” and “thank you”. One might be surprised to learn that there is more to the notion of literacy nowadays in certain elite minds than “Seeing Spot Run.”
Along with more traditional interpretations of the concept pertaining to the comprehension of numerical and linguistic textual symbolism, Christian researcher Berit Kjos points out in the article “Redefining Literacy for a New World Order” posted on WorthyNews.com this academic goal has been transformed into a euphemism designed to impose a litany of dangerous social agendas onto the mind of America’s impressionable school children.
Among these new literacies ranks “sociopolitical literacy” (which Mrs. Kjos defines as the acceptance of differing interpretations of the Constitution, usually those limiting individual freedom) and “cultural literacy” (the appreciation and unquestioning acceptance of all other cultures, excluding of course the American version of the Western tradition).
It is highly doubtful either of these will do much in developing critical thinking skills because these will be downplayed since students will also be evaluated as to their compliance with workplace literacy. Workplace literacy will not so much gauge one’s work ethic or ambition for personal achievement but rather one’s willingness to bend to the mentality of the herd or the whims of management.
But perhaps most disturbing of all is something referred to as “family literacy”. Berit Kjos reveals that under the Workforce Investment Act of 1998 parents are to be trained as the as the primary educators of their children. So in essence, they will be subject to the same kinds of governmental oversight as other professional teachers, no longer to be seen as the independent caregivers of their offspring but simply as glorified zookeepers in an expanding bureau of centralized socio-economic planning.
The DC proposal hoping to lower the school age is just the tip of the conspiratorial iceberg. As anyone who has studied progressivistic evolutionary socialism knows, that unlike its cousin violent revolutionary Communism known to take over through an abrupt seizure of power, this form of totalitarianism slithers towards assuming absolute control by steadily taking often imperceptible but highly strategic steps.
Lowering the enrollment age is one such baby step. Elsewhere we find that legislators in states such as Maryland suggesting that couples go through an intensive period of counseling emphasizing the state’s version of appropriate family dynamics before being granted a license to marry. Yet nothing is done to punish those deciding to shack-up without the blessing of God or the sanction of law; and if children happen to result from these illicit pairings, the couple is often rewarded with extravagant welfare benefits.
Aldous Huxley in the dystopian masterpiece Brave New World foresaw a culture not unlike our own where babies were produced in a laboratory genetically preconfigured to assume their assigned social roles and where the government maintained control by distracting the population through gratuitous sexual entertainment.
Atheist philosopher Bertrand Russell argued in publications such as Why I am not a Christian that only women sanctioned by the government as certified breeders should be allowed to have children. Russell also hoped to strike an additional crippling blow to the traditional family (and to no doubt cover-up for his own philanderous proclivities that would make even a Congressional Democrat blush) by reducing marriage to a temporary arrangement based solely upon the criteria of physical connubial satisfaction.
Since these kinds of ideas already enjoy a robust airing in many intellectual circles, it is not hard to imagine a day when children will become property of the state upon leaving the birth canal. Already on some kibbutz communal farms in Israel children hardly even live with their parents, instead spending most of their time in separate barrack facilities. Laws and regulations lowering the school age and subjecting non-abusive parents to scrutiny by school officials are merely designed to desensitize the average American to this brand of radical sociological tinkering.
While one expects this nonsense to be quickly slurped up by pea-brained liberals, Americans had better think again if they expect to get much relief from powerful Republicans regarding these scholastic intrusions into their private lives. Republican leaders might not be as brash or overt in the way they endeavor to implement these kinds of social changes; yet the elephant is, nevertheless, plodding down the same destructive path as the ass in this regard.
Berit Kjos quotes former President Bush on his educational program America 2000 as saying, “Nations that stick to stale old notions and ideologies will falter and fail. So I’m here today to say … NEW SCHOOLS for a NEW WORLD ORDER.” Never mind the fact that the new approaches are what sparked America’s educational decline to begin with.
In some ways, the new George Bush is an improvement over the first occupant of the Oval Office to bear that name, but on the issue of educational policy he is clearly a case of like father like son.
According to Berit Kjos, at the Summit of the Americas in April 2001 George W. Bush announced plans to establish “Hemispheric Centers of Teaching Excellence”. So much for Republican talk of returning control of education to local hands.
Now it seems those sliding into office on promises of reducing the scope of government now want to expand its influence beyond our national borders, no doubt administratively consolidating the Americas and conditioning the peoples of these respective nations into placidly accepting whatever lot they are assigned by a gargantuan planetary bureaucracy by taking control of the minds of young people.
America’s system of public education is indeed in a state of near total disarray. However, good citizens must learn this is no excuse to allow the forces of despotism to undermine successful private sector approaches or as justification to abolish both our network of cherished liberties or the bonds of our loving families.