pass the barf bag

External Locus of Control

I made myself sick today. I found out P - 20 isn't preschool-20 (college) as I thought. Oregon, Michigan, Kansas ( and likely every state) have websites about P - 20 which state it is prenatal - college. Yes, prenatal. To quote http://www.michiganschildren.org/Speaking-Up-For-Kids/what-is-p-20.html,

"p 20 is a cradle-to-career approach to education recognizing that education does not start and end at the classroom door". 

Yes....no sugarcoating here, they overtly mentioned a government sanctioning of cradle to grave control.
Here I thought all along, phew I have my kiddos until pre-school or kindergarten. I have them for their most influential formative years, go me! Take that, government! My dreams were shattered today. No longer are my children my own, but part of the state, parens patriae, the idea of the state as parent, since, apparently, these elitist experts know best. No more mommy knows best...this world is too "complicated" for us simple folks, an idea dating back to the Utopian goals of the Progressive Era and the notion of social efficiency.

Let me provide a disclaimer and interjection. I do not inherently see a problem with prenatal care and early childhood education. Our infant mortality rate and pregnancy complication rates are quite dismal for a first-world country. As a mother of two, I am all for prenatal care. As a teacher, I am all for early childhood education. During my first year of teaching, I found out that many kindergartners in my poverty stricken school neighborhood came to school utterly unprepared. Many had never used crayons or held a pencil. They had never even heard the ABCs and did not know their own name (often called mijo/a, baby, etc at home). I kid you not. These children are the most in need of intervention and the most targeted for such things. Therefore I wish to reiterate that I advocate prenatal care and early learning.

The Factory Model

But if history means a darned thing, this scares me... targeting the most at risk populations can mean they receive a stellar education that teaches them to think, ask questions, create, innovate, argue. Or it can teach them job skills like how to ring up a burger and fries and how to operate a vacuum, you know, skills that CC offers through the 70% weight of informative text in Language Arts courses.

The idea of scientifically managing the population to control them, as part of a Utopia, is hardly new. It originated in Prussia (see http://3rseduc.blogspot.com/search?q=prussia for background info on Prussia's influence on our education system) as noted at http://www.lewrockwell.com/2010/09/john-taylor-gatto/the-prussian-connection/ A concept called

"psychological parenthood" began to take shape, a radical notion without legal precedent that would be used down the road to support drastic forcible intervention into family life. It became one of the basic justifications offered during the period of mass immigration for a compulsion law intended to put children under the thrall of so-called scientific parenting in schools"

This idea that the families of the nation were ill-equipped to raise children; that scientific management thereof could save us, is prominent in the past and perhaps today.

in "Education for social efficiency: a study in the social relations of education" By Irving King (1915),

"It was devised as a means of insuring that the child should learn certain things which he would not be able to learn satisfactorily if he were left to pick up things for himself by imitation and simple contact with the life that was going on daily about him. As culture increased in complexity, more and more of the burden of education had to be shifted to formal agencies, specifically to the school"

From the same document,

"And this education must be largely wrought out through the school. The ideal of a social life adequate to modern conditions of living must take its place as an object of explicit and conscious training, just because it is too complex and difficult to attain in any other way"

For a nice outline of the Progressive Era and the influence on society and education, visit http://people.uncw.edu/ricej/education/The%20Progressive%20Era%202%20Social%20Efficiency.htm

As the Progressive Era rolled in, social efficiency reared its ugly head. I don't like using wikipedia as a reliable source, but instead of quoting ten separate sources to validate wiki, I will give you the wiki definition of social efficiency- I could not have said it better.

Social efficiency educators" such as theorists Ross, Bobbitt, Gilbreth, Taylor, and Thorndike were aiming to design a curriculum that would optimize the “social utility” of each individual in a society. By using education as an efficiency tool, these theorists believed that society could be controlled. Students would be scientifically evaluated (such as IQ tests), and educated towards their predicted role in society. This involved the introduction of vocational and junior high schools to address the curriculum designed around specific life activities that correlate with each student’s societal future. The socially efficient curriculum would consist of minute parts or tasks that together formed a bigger concept. This educational view was somewhat derived with the efficiency of factories which could simultaneously produce able factory workers. Critics believe this model has too much emphasis on testing and separating students based on the results of that testing.

Social efficiency keeps at it; A.H. Lauchner, a principal in 1951, said,

 "not every child has to read, figure, write and spell...that many of them cannot or will not master these chores." 

Meaning, why teach true academic curriculum to certain children to whom it would be a waste?

Okay so my point here is this, social efficiency used the "science" of test scores to drive curriculum to scientifically manage the populace, to determine which students were to be doctors and which were to be laborers. With the p-20 data tracking system, a student with behavioral issues, an IEP, low math test scores may be pigeonholed- on purpose- into becoming a manual laborer, even if their dreams and skills are in interpreting law or motivating students or what have you.

Sire, you say, this cannot happen. Or perhaps it is an old fuddy duddy idea that never came to fruition and never will. To re-quote one of my posts from this year,

From http://www.wiche.edu/info/publications/FrameworkForAMultistateHumanCapitalDevelopmentDataSystem.pdf

"The workforce sector wants information about prior training in
high school and postsecondary institutions as a foundation for
working with both education sectors to address identified skill gaps
in the workforce, as well as to identify equity gaps with respect
to demographic representativeness by job category. Knowing the
education sectors’ capacity to respond (i.e., by increasing the flow
of graduates with particular skill sets) will also help the state decide
whether to invest in education to address skill gaps or establish
incentives to induce more workers with needed skills to move
into the state. Moreover, linking with the education sectors would
provide labor market analysts with a wealth of data that would be
useful for examining equity in employment."

This document is a modern document, written sometime between 2009-2013, and it states that schools can increase the flow of graduates with certain skills. How might they do this? If society needs more engineers, or fast food workers, how will it "increase the flow" without either data manipulation (suddenly Johnny's test scores plummet and his education is individualized to send him into fast food) or using tracking to label students (everyone who struggled in science gets to work in fast f

Your Secret is Safe With me

Everyone keepos saying the data collected will remain anonymous, and will solely be used to improve prenatal care, career readiness programs, etc, But of course the data will be shared with any government organization or third party vendor or person in education (textbook companies, educational consultants) which will remain anonymous once out of the school level. Students will be numbered, data will be meta data, and it will be secure. (Just like our IRS records, social security info, etc which surely has never been compromised...ha ha).

"Anonymous" meta data is extrapolated from identifiable data, those "80% have graduated on time" had names and identities attached to them.  Collect some meta data such as addresses, parent's names, etc and enough datamanipulating can lead back to the student. Or, if anyone decides to be evil, a school official could leak identifiable student data, or how to access it (ie that student #642t50 is Jane Plain). But don't worry,,,your data is "safe".

Which leads back to social efficiency... whitehouse.gov had said,

Pearson will share data into the Learning Registry about many of their existing teaching resources including those that support CCSS so that they can be used n each students' personal learning path

Yep, right back to pigeonholing students in a certain direction as part of social efficiency, or as we call it now, human capital.  From http://www.csctulsa.org/content.php?p=195 we bring you,

The P-20 concept is a way of thinking and acting that promotes systematic aligning of multiple education, health, and social support resources to best advance human capital development from prenatal through postsecondary and employment, and on to sustained lifelong well-being...

See, my long-winded post does all come together right there. And it scares me. It is wrapped up in a pretty package- who doesn't want "sustained lifelong well-being"? But the question is, who decides what well-being means? Perception is everything and one man's well being could be another man's hell. Is the government's idea of my well being what I desire? Likely not, since obviously life- and my own well being- are "human capital" and must be micromanaged and decided for me.

Eugenics, Racism, and the Progressives

Sometimes I find tidbits of research I like sharing. Yep. Another cut-and-paste blog entry...sorry. And it relates to education since all are part of our educational model but ehhh.... I will at some nebulous point (aka "when I write my book") connect it to education and actually compose a well written bit without cut-and-paste mania.

from Eugenics and Economics in the

Progressive Era

Thomas C. Leonard ....

They justified racebased

immigration restriction as a remedy for “race suicide,” a Progressive Era term

for the process by which racially superior stock (“natives”) is outbred by a more

prolific, but racially inferior stock (immigrants). The term “race suicide” is often

attributed to Edward A. Ross

“The theory that races are virtually equal in

capacity leads to such monumental follies as lining the valleys of the South with the

bones of half a million picked whites in order to improve the conditions of four

million unpicked blacks.”

“every improvement . . . increases the amount of the deficiencies which

the laboring classes may possess without their being thereby overcome in the

struggle for subsistence that the survival of the ignorant brings upon society.”

In response, Patten ultimately argued for the state taking over the task of

selecting the fittest—eugenics. “Social progress is a higher law than equality,”

Patten (1899, pp. 302–303) volunteered, and the only way to progress was the

“eradication of the vicious and inefficient.”

Ross, Patten, Fetter and Farnam all saw higher living standards and Progressive

Era reforms less as a victory for social justice than as an impediment to Darwinian

weeding out. Their response was not to argue against reform, as might a social

Darwinist, but to advocate for eugenics, the substitution of state selection for

natural selection of the fittest.

Like Fisher, Ross, Patten, Fetter and Farnam, Walker endorsed eugenic policies.

“We must strain out of the blood of the race more of the taint inherited from

a bad and vicious past,” Walker (1899, p. 469) proposed, “before we can eliminate

poverty, much more pauperism, from our social life. The scientific treatment which

is applied to physical diseases must be extended to mental and moral disease, and

a wholesome surgery and cautery must be enforced by the whole power of the state

for the good of all.”

“Democracy and opportunity

[are] increasing the mediocre and reducing the excellent strains of stock . . . .

Progress is threatened unless social institutions can be so adjusted as to reverse this

process of multiplying the poorest, and of extinguishing the most capable families.”

Eugenic policies would introduce, Fetter argued, “an element of rational direction

into the process of perpetuating the race . . . .”

However, the progressive economists also

believed that the job loss induced by minimum wages was a social benefit, as it

212 Journal of Economic Perspectives

performed the eugenic service ridding the labor force of the “unemployable.”

Sidney and Beatrice Webb (1897 [1920], p. 785) put it plainly: “With regard to

certain sections of the population [the “unemployable”], this unemployment is not

a mark of social disease, but actually of social health.”

olumbia’s Henry Rogers Seager, a leading progressive economist who served

as president of the AEA in 1922, provides an example. Worthy wage-earners, Seager

(1913a, p. 12) argued, need protection from the “wearing competition of the casual

worker and the drifter” and from the other “unemployable” who unfairly drag

down the wages of more deserving workers (1913b, pp. 82–83). The minimum

wage protects deserving workers from the competition of the unfit by making it

illegal to work for less.

For progressives, a legal minimum wage had the useful property of sorting the

unfit, who would lose their jobs, from the deserving workers, who would retain their

jobs.

“Better that the state should support the inefficient wholly

and prevent the multiplication of the breed than subsidize incompetence and

unthrift, enabling them to bring forth more of their kind.” A. B. Wolfe (1917,

p. 278), an American progressive economist who would later become president of

the AEA in 1943, also argued for the eugenic virtues of removing from employment

those who “are a burden on society.”

Eugenics found advocates whose ideologies spanned the entire political spectrum.

The eugenics movement attracted some reactionaries and conservatives.

Leading eugenicists, such as Francis Galton and Charles Davenport, director of the

Eugenics Record Office at the Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory, can be described as

social conservatives. But others, such as Karl Pearson, were socialists. Eugenics won

many advocates on the left, such as birth control advocate Margaret Sanger, who

began intellectual life as a radical anarchist. Fabian socialists such as Sidney Webb,

George Bernard Shaw and H. G. Wells were eugenicists, as were Harold Laski and

John Maynard Keynes (Paul, 1984). The Marxist economist Scott Nearing (1912)

and the feminist economist Charlotte Perkins Gilman (1900) also embraced

eugenics.

Many biologists were drawn to eugenics. For example, David Starr Jordan,

president of Stanford, was a tireless advocate of the eugenic idea that “the blood of

nation determines its history,” as was Harvard geneticist and eugenicist E.M. East

Eugenic ideas were not new in the Progressive Era, but they acquired new

impetus with the Progressive Era advent of a more expansive government. In effect,

the expansion of state power meant that it became possible to have not only

eugenic thought, but also eugenic practice. As eugenics historian Diane Paul (1995,

p. 6) writes, eugenics legislation had to await “the rise of the welfare state.”

to the solution of the problem.”

Progressive opposition to laissez faire was motivated by a set of deep intellectual

commitments regarding the relationship between social science, social scientific

expertise and right governance. The progressives were committed to 1) the

explanatory power of scientific (especially statistical) social inquiry to get at the root

causes of social and economic problems; 2) the legitimacy of social control, which

derives from a holist conception of society as prior to and greater than the sum of

its constituent individuals; 3) the efficacy of social control via expert management

of public administration; where 4) expertise is both sufficient and necessary for the

task of wise public administration.

The legitimacy of social control meant, in practice, the legitimacy of state

control. For progressives, the legitimacy of state control derived from their conception

of the state as an entity prior to and greater than the sum of its constituent

individuals, a conception that opposed the traditional liberal emphasis on individual

freedom and the liberal view that the state’s legitimacy derives solely from the

consent of its individual creators. Lester Ward devised the term “sociocracy” to

describe the “scientific control of the social forces by the collective mind of society”

politics. As one widely read eugenics

text put it: “[G]overnment and social control are in the hands of expert politicians

who have power, instead of expert technologists who have wisdom. There should be

technologists in control of every field of human need and desire”

[O]nce we

admit that it is proper for the instructed classes to give tuition to the uninstructed,

we begin to see an almost boundless vista for possible human betterment.”

Popenoe and Johnson

argued for legislation that would abolish child labor and provide education for all

children, quintessentially progressive policies. But compulsory education and child

labor bans, for Popenoe and Johnson, were desirable because the unfit poor would

be unable to put their children to work and thus would have fewer children, a

eugenic goal.

Eugenics and Population Control

From http://www.emmerich1.com/EUGENICS.htm a few highlights. As always please ignore formatting, Blogger doesn't cooperate well and I do not have Word to convert to html and make things pretty. Anything I've written is NOT in italics.

\The essence of evolution is natural selection; the essence of eugenics is the replacement of 'natural' selection by conscious, premeditated, or artificial selection in the hope of speeding up the evolution of 'desirable' characteristics and the elimination of undesirable ones."

The Population Council, one of the new eugenic organizations that emerged after World War II, no longer spoke of eugenics as a religion (in fact, avoided the word eugenics altogether), but launched "studies relating to the social, ethical and moral dimensions" of population studies, recognizing that these questions involve matters "of a cultural, moral and spiritual nature." The new field of bioethics is a response to issues raised by eugenics. Bioethics is based on situation ethics, which was developed largely by Joseph Fletcher, a member of the American Eugenics Society.

of note, recall my post on TeenScreen, their Exec. Director Laurie Flynn, "she was appointed by President Bill Clinton to the National Bioethics Advisory Commission" . Hmm. A loose connection to education, but TeenScreen wants to test EVERY child for mental illness, offering them incentives for taking the test. Might this be a way to determine who is the inferior stock? More on inferior stock later...

At least one contemporary understood what Galton was doing. Friedrich Engels, a collaborator with Karl Marx, was contemptuous of the way Malthus' ideas about economics were inserted into biology and then retrieved as gospel: "The whole Darwinist teaching of the struggle for existence is simply a transference from society to living nature of Hobbes' doctrine of bellum omnium contra omnes and of the bourgeois doctrine of competition together with Malthus' theory of population. When this conjurer's trick has been performed ... the same theories are transferred back again from organic nature into history and it is now claimed that their validity as eternal laws of human society has been proved. The puerility of this proceeding is so obvious that not a word need be said about it."

He devised various methods for measuring intelligence, and concluded that Europeans are smarter than Africans, on average.

Recall some of my previous posts on testing and how it is eugenic in nature. Might these exams, by design, promote the achievement gap?

It is noteworthy that this ideology of arrogance proved to be appealing on the right (Galton), then the left (British Socialists), then the right (German National Socialists), then the left (American environmentalists), then the right (see The Bell Curve debate). Galton's work is still used today. He used statistical methods, including the now-famous "bell curve," to describe the distribution of intelligence within a population.
A key program of the eugenicists was cleansing the human race by sterilizing the "unfit." By 1931, sterilization laws had been enacted in 27 states in the United States, and by 1935 sterilization laws had been enacted in Norway, Sweden, Denmark, Switzerland and Germany. But the efficiency of the German eugenicists caused trouble.

Makes me think of Planned Parenthood, Zero population supporters, and the like.

Most people have never heard of eugenics, and most of those who have heard of it think it died with Hitler. Of the few people who are aware that eugenics was still a force after World War II, many believe that its remnants were reformed. In fact, the eugenics movement continued to thrive, without reform. The development and promotion of birth control was a major eugenic success. The discovery of the population explosion and the hysteria about the need to control it was a major eugenic success. The field of genetics grew faster than fruit flies in the 1950s, and although the accumulating knowledge was valuable, the field was dominated by eugenicists, who could use their knowledge for eugenic purposes. UNESCO, founded in 1948, was directed by Julian Huxley, a determined eugenicist who used his global platform very effectively. The welfare state in Britain was based largely of the work of Richard Titmuss, John Maynard Keynes and William Henry Beveridge, members of the Eugenics Society.

Huxley- brother of author Aldous Huxley, said, (Huxley was one of many intellectuals at the time who believed that the lowest class in society was genetically inferior. This passage, from 1941, puts the view forcefully:)

"The lowest strata are reproducing too fast. Therefore... they must not have too easy access to relief or hospital treatment lest the removal of the last check on natural selection should make it too easy for children to be produced or to survive; long unemployment should be a ground for sterilisation.

Keynes is "the" Keynes of Keynesian economics so popular today. They are en vogue in our progressive government and often are called "socialist", I argue they are economic eugenics.

Beveridge hob-nobbed with the Fabian Society (A "conspiracy theory" organization of world control

Historians who rely too heavily on the eugenicists themselves will overlook a great deal. Daniel Kevles, for example, makes the post-war eugenics movement sound like a group of dusty academics. But one of their activities in Britain beginning in the 1960s was running a flourishing abortion business. Beginning in the 1960s, a few members of the Eugenics Society built and controlled almost the entire private abortion industry

Remember, Margaret Sanger, founder of Planned Parenthood, was a eugenicist. Ever wonder why PP clinics are most common in the "ghetto"?

"That the Society should pursue eugenic ends by less obvious means, that is by a policy of crypto-eugenics, which was apparently proving successful in the US Eugenics Society."

Yes! See I've said that Prussian education, Preogressive meddling, marginalization, and eugenics - all part of our educational system in the past- have become institutionalized, such an invisible part of our education today. These crypto-eugenics kind of confirm my suspicions.

In 1960, Blacker's proposal was adopted by the Eugenics Society. A resolution which was accepted stated (in part):

"The Society's activities in crypto-eugenics should be pursued vigorously, and specifically that the Society should increase its monetary support of the FPA [Family Planning Association, the English branch of Planned Parenthood] and the IPPF [International Planned Parenthood Federation] and should make contact with the Society for the Study of Human Biology, which already has a strong and active membership, to find out if any relevant projects are contemplated with which the Eugenics Society could assist."

The dominant figure in the eugenics movement in the United States, considered by the English to be a model of crypto-eugenics, was Major General Frederick Osborn, a master propagandist. In 1956, he said people "won't accept the idea that they are in general, second rate. We must rely on other motivation." He called the new motivation "a system of voluntary unconscious selection." The way to persuade people to exercise this voluntary unconscious selection was to appeal to the idea of "wanted" children. Osborn said, "Let's base our proposals on the desirability of having children born in homes where they will get affectionate and responsible care." In this way, the eugenics movement "will move at last towards the high goal which Galton set for it."

It seems since we can't abort or sterilize all the unfit, we will rage a war on poverty. We will allow social services to rule schools, psychologists and pharmaceuticals to "fix" students, and voila, we can create a managed dumbed-down, Spartan-Helot style populous. All via a caring (albeit compulsory) education system, cradle to grave.

Osborn stated the public relations problem bluntly: "Eugenic goals are most likely to be attained under a name other than eugenics." He pointed to genetic counseling as a prime example: "Heredity clinics are the first eugenic proposals that have been adopted in a practical form and accepted by the public. ... The word eugenics is not associated with them."

Before the war, the American Eugenics Society laid out its research aims, including many investigations in sociology, psychology, anthropology and biology. But they noted especially the important new fields: population study and genetics.

Negative eugenics, or ending the over-production of the "unfit," is obviously well underway with widespread contraception, sterilization and abortion. But positive eugenics, or the increased production of the "fit," can be advanced through artificial insemination, in vitro fertilization and genetic engineering. The Human Genome Project would certainly help in a scheme of positive eugenics.

I've yet to delve into the Human Genome Project, perhaps out of fear. But I had to sign affadavits when pregnant, refusing genetic testing. I was hounded about it and had to re-sign paperwork they "lost" to request no testing of my child in utero. (The mystical prick of the foot test after birth is a must have and I never got "results" or info on what they tested....)

After World War II, the eugenics movement discovered (or invented) the population explosion, and whipped up global hysteria about it. From 1952 on, a major part of the eugenics movement was the population control movement. The population explosion made it possible for eugenics movement to continue its work more from the fit, less from the unfit with the same people to do the same things, but with a new public rationale.

One of the organizations that promoted eugenics under the new population rubric was the Population Council. It was founded in 1952 by John D. Rockefeller 3rd, and spent $173,621,654 in its first 25 years. That is not a bad budget for one of the organizations in a dead movement! Clearly, the people who think the eugenics movement died in the rubble in Berlin do not understand crypto-eugenics, genetics or population control!

Rockefeller family....financing U of Chicago, Columbia Teachers College, and the vast majority of the educational structure of today. Surprise surprise. (Thanks John Taylor Gatto for your info on the Rockefellers.)

The population control movement has not been noted for respect for human rights. In 1972, for example, essays by members of the American Eugenics Society appeared in Readings in Population. Kingsley Davis explained the need for genetic control, and examined the obstacles, including a widespread attachment to the ideal of family life. But he saw some hope of developing a more effective program of improving the human race, although improvement would be slow:

"Under the circumstances, we shall probably struggle along with small measures at a time, with the remote possibility that these may eventually evolve into a genetic control system. ... The morality of specific techniques of applied genetics artificial insemination, selective sterilization, ovular transplantation, eugenic abortion, genetic record keeping, genetic testing will be thunderously debated in theological and Marxian terms dating from ages past. Possibly, within half a century or so, this may add up to a comprehensive program."The coercive Chinese policy has a great deal of acceptance and support in the United States, including from feminist leaders like Eleanor Smeal and Molly Yard. When the Reagan administration cut off funds for the United Nations Population Fund (UNFPA) because of its support for the Chinese population program, two American organizations sued to restore funds: Rockefeller's Population Council and the Population Institute in Washington. A 1978 survey of members of the Population Association of America found that 34 percent of members agreed that "coercive birth control programs should be initiated in at least some countries immediately."

How is it decided which countries to exterminate, or which peoples to sterilize?

And a few blurbs and facts from the aforementioned Population Council,

The Population Council is an international, nonprofit, nongovernmental organization that seeks to improve the well-being and reproductive health of current and future generations around the world and to help achieve a humane, equitable, and sustainable balance between people and resources.

The Council conducts research in three areas: HIV and AIDS; poverty, gender, and youth; and reproductive health.

the effects of population factors on a country's ability to provide a better life for its citizens to research that investigates the influence of education and livelihood opportunities on young girls and women. The Council is also concerned with the reproductive health and well-being of the one billion adolescents in the developing world who are about to enter their reproductive years and whose behavior will shape the future of their countries.

The board of trustees for the council includes a senior advisor at Lazard Ltd, a managing director at D.E. Shaw, an Advisory partner at Greylock Partners, these businesses being global investment funds, and Realm, a hedge fund. So these are the people in power. Scary.

Okay I realize this post is very haphazard, but I wanted to collect some eugenic tidbits for my own research need, and compile some here, trying to find connections to education and our current world, society, and government.

But to add to my jumbled thoughts, at

http://atrueott.wordpress.com/ (A doctor, so no wacko idiot) under the heading The Plan Exposed in 1969, with links to transcripts, mentions some haunting tid bits which sound all too real and "now" no matter what side of the political spectrum you fancy. I'm posting them all so you can weed through and choose which interest and spook you the most.

IS THERE A POWER, A FORCE OR A GROUP OF MEN ORGANIZING AND REDIRECTING CHANGE?

EVERYTHING IS IN PLACE AND NOBODY CAN STOP US NOW

PEOPLE WILL HAVE TO GET USED TO CHANGE

THE REAL AND THE STATED GOALS

POPULATION CONTROL

PERMISSION TO HAVE BABIES

REDIRECTING THE PURPOSE OF SEX

CONTRACEPTION UNIVERSALLY AVAILABLE TO ALL

SEX EDUCATION AS A TOOL OF WORLD GOVERNMENT

TAX FUNDED ABORTION AS POPULATION CONTROL

ENCOURAGING HOMOSEXUALITY

TECHNOLOGY

FAMILIES TO DIMINISH IN IMPORTANCE

EUTHANASIA AND THE ‘DEMISE PILL’

LIMITING ACCESS TO AFFORDABLE MEDICAL

PLANNING THE CONTROL OVER MEDICINE

ELIMINATION OF PRIVATE DOCTORS

NEW DIFFICULT TO DIAGNOSE AND UNTREATABLE DISEASES

SUPPRESSING CANCER CURES AS A MEANS OF POPULATION CONTROL

INDUCING HEART ATTACKS AS A FORM OF ASSASSINATION

EDUCATION AS A TOOL FOR ACCELERATING ONSET OF PUBERTY AND EVOLUTION

BLENDING ALL RELIGIONS, THE OLD RELIGIONS WILL HAVE TO GO

CHANGING THE BIBLE THROUGH REVISIONS OF KEY WORDS

THE CHURCHES WILL HELP US

RESTRUCTURING EDUCATION AS A TOOL OF INDOCTRINATION

MORE TIME IN SCHOOLS, BUT THEY WOULDN’T LEARN ANYTHING

CONTROLLING WHO HAS ACCESS TO INFORMATION

SCHOOLS AS THE HUB OF THE COMMUNITY

BOOKS WOULD JUST DISAPPEAR FROM THE LIBRARIES

CHANGING LAWS

THE ENCOURAGEMENT OF DRUG ABUSE TO CREATE A JUNGLE ATMOSPHERE

ALCOHOL ABUSE

RESTRICTIONS ON TRAVEL

THE NEED FOR MORE JAILS, AND USING HOSPITALS AS JAILS

NO MORE SECURITY

CRIME USED TO MANAGE SOCIETY

CURTAILMENT OF AMERICAN INDUSTRIAL PRE-EMINENCE

SHIFTING POPULATIONS AND ECONOMIES – TEARING THE SOCIAL ROOTS

SPORTS AS A TOOL OF SOCIAL CHANGE

SEX AND VIOLENCE INCULCATED THROUGH ENTERTAINMENT

TRAVEL RESTRICTIONS AND IMPLANTED ID

FOOD CONTROL

WEATHER CONTROL

KNOW HOW PEOPLE RESPOND – MAKING THEM DO WHAT YOU WANT

FALSIFIED SCIENTIFIC RESEARCH

TERRORISM

FINANCIAL CONTROL

SURVEILLANCE, IMPLANTS, AND TELEVISIONS THAT WATCH YOU

HOME OWNERSHIP A THING OF THE PAST

THE ARRIVAL OF THE TOTALITARIAN GLOBAL SYSTEM

As regards education, he indicated that kids would spend more time in schools, but in many schools they wouldn’t learn anything. They’ll learn some things, but not as much as formerly. Better schools in better areas with better people, their kids will learn more. In the better schools Iearning would be accelerated. This is another time where he said, “We think we can push evolution.” By pushing kids to learn more he seemed to be suggesting that their brains would evolve, that their offspring would evolve; sort of pushing evolution where kids would learn and be more intelligent at a younger age. As if this pushing would alter their physiology. Overall, schooling would be prolonged. This meant prolonged through the school year. I’m not sure what he said about a long school day, I do remember he said that school was planned to go all summer, that the summer school vacation would become a thing of the past. Not only for schools, but for other reasons. People would begin to think of vacation times year round, not just in the summer. For most people it would take longer to complete their education. To get what originally had been in a bachelor’s program would now require advanced degrees and more schooling. So that a lot of school time would be just wasted time. Good schools would become more competitive. I inferred when he said that, that he was including all schools – elementary up through college – but I don’t recall if he actually said that. Students would have to decide at a younger age what they would want to study and get onto their track early. It would be harder to change to another field of study once you get started. Studies would be concentrated in much greater depth, but narrowed. You wouldn’t have access to material in other fields, outside your own area of study, without approval. This seem to be more where he talked about limited access to other fields. I seem to recall this as being more at the college level perhaps. People would be very specialised in their own area of expertise. But they won’t be able to get a broad education and won’t be able to understand what is going on overall.

of key note to me were..

CONTROLLING WHO HAS ACCESS TO INFORMATION

He was already talking about computers in education, and at that time he said anybody who

wanted computer access, or access to books that were not directly related to their field of study would have to have a very good reason for so doing. Otherwise, access would be denied.

SCHOOLS AS THE HUB OF THE COMMUNITY

Another angle was that the schools would become more important in people’s overall life. Kids in addition to their academics would have to get into school activities unless they wanted to feel completely out of it. But spontaneous activities among kids; the thing that came to my mind when I heard this was – sand lot football and sand lot baseball teams that we worked up as kids growing up. I said the kids wanting any activities outside of school would be almost forced to get them through the school. There would be few opportunities outside. Now the pressures of the accelerated academic program, the accelerated demands where kids would feel they had to be part of something – one or another athletic club or some school activity – these pressures he recognized would cause some students to burn out. He said. “The smartest ones will learn how to cope with pressures and to survive. There will be some help available to students in handling stress, but the unfit won’t be able to make it. They will then move on to other things.” In this connection and later on with drug abuse and alcohol abuse he indicated that psychiatric services to help would be increased dramatically. In all the pushing for achievement, it was recognized that many people would need help, and the people worth keeping around would be able to accept and benefit from that help, and still be super achievers. Those who could not would fall by the wayside and therefore were sort of dispensable ­ ‘expendable’ I guess is the word I want. Education would be lifelong and adults would be going to school. There’ll always be new information that adults must have to keep up. When you can’t keep up anymore, you’re too old. This was another way of letting older people know that the time had come for them to move on and take the demise pill. If you got too tired to keep up with your education, or you got too old to learn new information, then this was a signal – you begin to prepare to get ready to step aside