Filed under: public education

Fascism in American Education

There are three achievements of secular progressives that have enabled leftists to control behavioral instruction in public schools. Their first big achievement was the counterrevolution advanced by secular majorities on the Supreme Court. Leftists’ opposition to American traditions and conventional morality intended by the US Constitution is illustrated by the Everson v. Board of Education decisions. Second was the takeover, beginning in the 1960s, of the then-conservative National Education Association by leftist militants. Also in the 1960s, secular progressives, committed to the elimination of self-government and liberty, reached their third achievement—the unionization of government teachers.

A government-established union monopoly, like an established state church, undermines the people’s right to choose between providers that must compete for a following. Union monopolies have always been power-corrupting institutions. Whatever their agenda by subject or region, accountability to the competition is removed and evil prevails. Union monopolies are antithetical to government of, by, and for the people. It is the collective political power foolishly granted to autoworker unions that brought the American auto industry to its knees. It is the collective political advantage of unionism that makes it possible for radicals to impose their atheistic worldview over the objections of both the majority of parents and the millions of excellent teachers caught in the union web.

There are millions of hardworking teachers, but they have no more control over the lifeview being taught in the soft sciences than do parents. Here’s an idea. An entirely different system for educating American youth is needed that will bypass the leftist teachers’ union monopoly; the education tax must be routed through the parents, similar to the G.I. Bill following World War II. This bill provided that education sought by veterans be paid from taxpayer revenues, and the veterans had the freedom to use the tuition grant in a public or private institution of their choice.

This consistent violation of citizen authority (government by, for, and of the people) is the radical politics of fascism—authoritarian hierarchical government. What is fascism but the politics of authoritarians who by any means prevent the citizens from exercising control over the use of government power through like-minded representatives?

Fascism

As Justice Brandeis said, “Sunlight is the best disinfectant.”

The American states did not become united until the constitutional delegates agreed to amendments that were specific about religious and educational freedom from government and nongovernment dictation.  The first ten amendments included the codification of the principles outlined in the Declaration of Independence (separation from authoritarian rule).  Far from being secular, all aspects of human endeavor, including government, fall under the purview of creation’s God.  The value system for determining the proper role of laws and the use of government power is clear.  We ought to obey God rather than men (Acts 5:29).  Adoption of this morally-specific, nonsectarian, God-honoring predicate has served as a marvelous unifier for our diverse immigrant nation.

Congress-large1

We no longer have public education.  In the behavioral and political sciences it has become government education comparable to the monopoly state doctrine that decimated Medieval Europe.

The secular militants claim to be patriots because, as they say, dissent is American.  What they mean is evident from how they have gutted traditional American values in public education.  They demand freedom for themselves but reject the American concept of academic freedom (the freedom to be honestly informed) and the freedom of others to make their own choices.  The soft underbelly of the secular left is the fact that they cannot withstand the competition of ideas.  For them, it is intolerable to allow students to learn of the God of creation alongside their atheistic lifeview.

An elaboration of “In God We Trust” is found in Proverbs 3:5-6:  “Trust in the LORD with all thine heart; and lean not unto thine own understanding.  In all thy ways acknowledge him, and he shall direct thy paths.”

The “In God We Trust” worldview has been the foundation for public education, beginning in the original thirteen colonies and continuing for over 250 years.  Tragically, the Supreme Court ruling in the Everson v. Board of Education decision of 1947 began a dramatic shift away from “In God We Trust.” 

Stay tuned for more discussion about socialism, civic religion and a strategy for restoring competition in education and choice by the people …

 

 

 

 

 

 

Secular? What Does THAT Mean?

It is necessary to reestablish the meaning of some key words in the educational debate.  This is because of the persistent dishonesty of radicals who migrated into the soft sciences* of universities and public schools saddled by tenure guarantees (which crept silently into collective bargaining laws starting in the early 1970s).

“Old European secular philosophy” is a general term that includes the many sects championed by God-rejecting intellectuals in Europe.  The traditional American use of the word “secular” is different ~ it was used to distinguish national, state, and local governments from church governments.  These governments, though not in themselves religious, were foundationally directed within a greater context that respected the values and will of God.

This has become too confusing for modern-day use on two counts.  First, used by radicals, the word “secular” leaves people blindsided to the fact that the science of their agenda is driven by deception and insistence on an atheistic-secular worldview monopoly.  Secondly, their atheistic worldview IS religious, with a deeply held Darwinian view about the origin and meaning of life.  In 1961, the Supreme Court in Torcaso v. Watkins classified secular humanism (the title used by secular militants in academia) as a religion.  To avoid the misleading use of the word “secular,” we suggest there are times that the phrase atheistic-secular be used.  Instead of being secular-authoritarian based, the American predicate for determining public policy is impartial, higher-authority and morality-based.

American conservatism transcends both the good and evil intentions of today’s adherents to the old European secular philosophy—the religious and political left.  Revisionist morality, supported by the Darwinian theory for life’s origin, meaning, and purpose, represents one of the greatest evils of our time.**  A focus upon the danger to American liberty can be narrowed to those who are at the seat of the problem—secular militarists.

*The soft sciences include literature, journalism, education strategies, political science, life-origins biology, life-origins geology, history, law studies, religion, social studies, arts, psychology and ecology.

**Charles Darwin published his theory for a God-rejecting worldview in the book The Origin of Species, published in 1859.  There is some adaptation within species, but the Herculean efforts of science pretenders to find evolution between species fail.  Sir Arthur Keith, a leading evolutionist has written:  “Evolution is unproved and unprovable.  We believe it only because the only alternative is special creation which is unthinkable” (Sir Arthur Keith, as citation in Wallie A. Criswell’s Did Man Just Happen? Grand Rapids MI:  Zondervan, 1972, p. 73).  D. M. S. Watson acknowledged the same in Nature, vol. 124, August 10, 1929, pp. 231-234. 

 

Secular_day

 

 

 

A Conservative's Tribute to Mikhail Gorbachev

That the God of creation is man’s benefactor is so foundational it cannot be arrived at by any other proposition.  It is the basic principle upon which all other principles follow.  When man chooses to walk according to God’s benevolent law, he learns of the power that is God’s alone and by which God grants him victory over evil.

Those who persist in the fantasy of revisionist morality (moral relativism) and a central government that compromises the people’s right to be fully informed have, in fact, ignored the irreversible laws of creation’s nature.  When liberal majorities on the Supreme Court and secular educators fail to uphold the God-honoring predicate of the US Constitution, they are, in effect, empowering atheistic revisionism that preys on societies.

At a United Nations forum, December 7, 1988, Mikhail Gorbachev, atheist leader of the Soviet Union from 1985 to 1991, repudiated the atheistic dogma shared by Karl Marx and Charles Darwin.  Reflecting upon the disintegration of the secular (progressive) system, Gorbachev said:  “The compelling necessity of the principle of freedom of choice is … clear to us.  The failure to recognize this … is fraught with very dire consequences ... Freedom of choice is a universal principle to which there should be no exceptions.  We have not come to the conclusion of the immutability of this principle simply through good motives.  We have been led to it through impartial analysis of the objective processes of our time.  This objective fact presupposes respect for other people’s views“ (George P. Schultz, Secretary of State under President Ronald Reagan, Turmoil and Triumph, New York:  Macmillan, 1993, p. 1107).

Failure to acknowledge the benevolent laws of God and conform to moral truth guarantees harmful consequences.  Gorbachev tried to prevent its collapse by relaxing socialistic rule.  To do this, he adopted perestroika and glasnost (which allowed the people to be informed and free to communicate) and property rights, but socialism had gone too far.  Beginning in 1989, the puppet Communist governments in captive countries controlled by the Soviets were overthrown by the people.  The Soviet Union fell apart when captive countries quit sending them the revenue required to keep the socialist economy afloat.

Gorbechev

Writing of perestroika, Gorbachev’s wife Raisa said:  “Our society has set out on the path of renewal and of demolishing totalitarianism and the obsolete command system of administering the country” (Raisa Gorbachev, Reminiscences and Reflections, Harper Collins, 1991, p. 174).

Whether or not Gorbachev realized it, the Soviet empire was being forced to acknowledge that those who reject the “sovereignty of man under God over government” run into the immutable laws of creation’s nature.  Those laws support life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness.  In contrast, the vacillating laws of man lead to exploitation, cultural decay, poverty, and tyranny.  When God’s benevolent provision is rejected in any particular, the rejecter bears the price of that sin against himself and the will of God.  

 

Fantasy vs. Reality

Flood_4
In the middle of a hillside surrounded by beautiful homes was a swampland that absorbed the surface water coming down from the properties above. This swampy area was filled with dirt and resulted in serious flooding below it. The goal of the neighbors living below was to solve the problem without an expensive lawsuit. The developer of the swampland was confronted with the truth. Knowing the historic consequences of rejecting truth, the developer agreed with reality. At considerable expense, he provided a large trench to collect and reroute the water away from the development. His acknowledgment of the timeless laws of creation’s nature caused him to solve the problem and avoid the consequences that come when truth is rejected.

Policies consistent with the truth provide significant benefits for states and nations as well.

Ideas for decision making have one of two origins—either materialistic and mortal or a basis upon reality of everlasting truth, according to God’s design.  The Word of the God of creation and creation’s nature has strangely disappeared from the lexicon of public education.  Conversely, those who persist in the fantasy of revisionist morality (moral relativism) and a central government that compromises the people’s right to be fully informed have, in fact, ignored the irreversible laws of creation’s nature.

William_blackstone

William Blackstone

1723-1780

Author of Commentaries on the Laws of England

 

William Blackstone’s Commentaries on the Laws of England were used by Abraham Lincoln and by students of law into the 1920s.  Blackstone said: “Man, considered as a creature, must necessarily be subject to the laws [principles] of his Creator …  These laws laid down by God are the eternal immutable laws of good and evil … This law of nature dictated by God Himself, is of course superior in obligation to any other.  It is binding over the entire globe, in all countries, and at all times:  no human laws are of any validity if contrary to this.”

 (William Blackstone, Commentaries on the Laws of England, vol. I, Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1765, 38-40)

 

 

Restoring Education Central to American Greatness: Fifteen Principles That Liberated Mankind from the Politics of Tyranny By David A. Norris

“As one of the tens of thousands who admire the action of your Grand Jury, I wish to commend Foreman Norris and his jury for their courageous and true Americanism in focusing public attention on the perverted minority… who would destroy what we have… in America and deliver us unto our enemies.” (E. Allen, Burlington, North Dakota, letter to the Nevada Iowa Journal)

 

Ames, Iowa – (AP) – The Grand Jury wants “moral pollution’… “and defamation of our country ( in the Humanities curriculum) stopped.” (Denver Post)

 

Posterous theme by Cory Watilo