Secrets of Our
Educational System
part 4
Educational System
part 4
The concept of an administrative utopia is a particular kind of dreaming by those with access to power. They are driven by an urge to direct the lives of others, organizing them for production, combat or detention. What are the operating principles of administrative utopias? They are hierarchy, discipline, regimentation, strict order, rational planning, a geometrical environment, production lines, cell blocks and a form of welfarism. I have just described public schools and also some private schools. These are laboratories for studying the technology of subjugation. In much the same way as fetishists enjoy the bound helplessness of a victim, schools practice a form of pornographic art, i.e. the total control and surveillance of the helpless. The aim and mode of administrative utopia is to bestow order and assistance on an unwilling population, to provide food and clothing, to schedule it, much the same as a health care bill that is voted down by the majority of a democracy and yet is still instituted in the name of government knowing what is best. Phrenologist George Combe wrote to Horace Mann, now of the Mann schools, in 1843: “The Prussian and Saxon governments by means of their schools and their just laws and rational public administration are doing a good deal to bring their people into a rational and moral condition. “ This was an answer to Mann’s previous inquiry of Combe as to the effectiveness of Prussian schooling. Previously a Senate House committee had been convinced to study the system Mann had suggested which was also financed by Industrialist Edmond Dwight, which would create a teacher’s college. After it’s study and the revelation of the Prussian system that was to be pervasive within the school board, the House denied the motion and told Dwight to take his money back.
The House had discovered that this school board of unitarians were actually out to install a Prussian system of education in Massachusetts. This would put a monopoly of power in just a few hands, a paradigm adverse to the true spirit of democratic systems. Interestingly, this didn’t stop Mann and his political cronies as the vote of the House went into the majority in Mann’s favor. One has to wonder how many House of Representatives sold their souls that day and the future of education down the river. Even in this day there was an argument over illegal immigration coming into the country to provide cheap labor. Mann thought the religious orthodox of his day was his greatest enemy, but to the contrary, Baptist, Congregational and Presbyterian all supported the idea of government schooling being a necessity to combat the influx of those immigrants who were mostly Catholic. Little did they realize the harbinger of doom secular schooling would provide for their denominations.
In much the same fashion as Kierkegaard constructed his thesis on existentialism, Mann forged his love for the Prussian school system based upon what he felt it was, not on his actual experience. He had visited the schools there during the closed months and found inspiration from empty halls and barren school rooms. He was amazed that he saw not one teacher holding a school book, but instead teaching from their own inner dialogue. Where he saw these teachers one can only conjecture. “The finest collection of men I have ever seen,” wrote Mann. “Full of intelligence, dignity, benevolence, kindness and bearing...Never have I witnessed an instance of harshness and severity. All is kind, encouraging, animating, sympathizing.” On the basis of imagining this Utopian school, Mann made a special plea for the changes in the teaching of reading. He criticized the standard practice of beginning with the alphabet and moving on to collecting syllables. He urged his readers to instead teach the meaning of entire words from the beginning. “Our greatest error in teaching begins with the alphabet.” He said. Empty classrooms are a great basis by which to forge educational revolution.
Mann filed a report to the Boston school committee at this time called the “Seventh”, in which he described his so called experiences while in Prussia with the school system there. All on his own, he decided that we Americans were falling behind the superior educational system of the Prussians and he implored the board to adopt a professional corps of teachers in much the same manner as he had seen (remember, he actually saw nothing). The board members rejected his report as nothing short of propaganda. They charged him with elitism and an attempt to sway the ignorant for support of unsubstantiated information. They also claimed that the teacher oriented, non-book method of teaching promoted a kind of reliance upon others to do productive work and was aimed at breaking the habit of independent work by creating an audience of spectators. They also did not believe in the word method of teaching and defended the alphabet formation of words for reading. They also found it dangerous to insist that learning was better served by discipline than by interest. “Duty comes first,” they said. “Pleasure comes from the discharge of duty.”
Sixty years later... Industrialists and financiers of the day were busy attempting to transfer power over money and interest rates from elected representatives of the American people to a “federal reserve” of centralized private banking interests. On September 13, 1909, George Reynolds, the president of the American Bankers Association declared himself in favor of a central bank modeled after the German Reichsbank. As he spoke, the schools of the United States were being forcibly rebuilt on Prussian lines.
President Howard Taft, also supported the serious consideration of a centralized bank built upon the German model. The Wall Street Journal also reported that an important step in the education of Americans was about to take place and move from the realm of theory to practical politics in pedagogy as well as finance.
There is a book from 1935 called, The Life and Work of the Citizen, written by Howard C. Hill. This book was being used in the Chicago experimental high school being run by the University of Chicago. The book is covered by images of the fasces. An image that represents the binding of government and corporation together in one unit. It is a picture of a double headed axe surrounded by tied up wooden sticks. Wasn’t Mussolini a fascist? I think so.
For Americans however, the sticks are wrapped around a sword in the image. There are fierce military eagle images soaring around the pages. The title page of this book has a weird spiral looking interlocking of hands, arms and wrists that looks for all the world like an early incarnation of the German swastika, or should I say Nazi swastika. Law, order, science and trades, and their unification is the representation of united strength.
The strength of America is in the First Amendment guarantee of argument, the right to free speech and the ability to vote of the majority of the citizenry. The Prussian connection shifts the focus to one of cooperation. The working class becomes the watched puppet of the professional classes under the control of law and order.
Despite Mann being rejected for his ideas, the Prussian ideal had still managed to insinuate itself into American schooling. During the late years of the 19th century, as the American school system churned out its first phalanx of graduates infected by the Prussian system, there were those who witnessed the change over as it happened. These folks were all schooled in the old fashioned, productive methods not influenced by the government and corporate control systems put in place for the younger students coming up from grade school.
The year was 1867, and the world famous American physician and academic Vincent Youmans has this to say at a lecture to the London College of Preceptors as to the school institution that had just come into being: “School produces mental perversion and absolute stupidity. It produces bodily disease. It produces these things by measures which operate to the prejudice of the growing brain. It is not to be doubted that dullness, indocility, and viciousness are frequently aggravated by the lessons of school.”
Thirteen years later, another famous commentary had this to say:
“Many had hoped that by giving a partial teaching to great numbers of persons, a thirst for knowledge might be awakened. Thus far the results have not equaled expectations. Schools have not borne any fruit on which we have cause to congratulate ourselves.”
“The results actually attained under our present system of instruction are neither very flattering nor very encouraging.”
In 1895 the President of Harvard said:
“Ordinary schooling produces dullness. A young man or woman whose intellectual powers are worth cultivating cannot be willing to cultivate them by pursuing phantoms as the school now insist upon.” It had been 43 years since the inception of forced schooling when the President made the above remark.
Following this there was a great transformation into an even more scientific form of pedagogy that took place in the early 1900’s. Four years before WWII broke out, a well known European thinker and school man, Paul Geheeb, who was buddies with Einstein (Yes! THE Einstein.) Herman Hess, and Albert Schwietzer, made a commentary on English and German schooling types: “The dissatisfaction with public schools is widely felt. Countless attempts to reform them have failed. People complain about the over burdening of schools; educators argue about which parts of the curriculum should be cut; but school cannot be reformed with a pair of scissors. The solution is not to be found in educational institutions.”
In 1930, the yearly lectures at Harvard made the same case: “We have absolutely nothing to show for our colossal investment in common schooling after 80 years of trying.”
Thirty years later, the Annual Report to the Carnegie Corporation in 1960 added this: “Too many young people gain nothing from school except the conviction that they are misfits.”
Much to the pain of the makers of the film, Waiting for Superman, the record after 1960 doesn’t improve. The stupidity of 1867, the fruitlessness of 1880, the dullness of 1895, the cannot be reformed of 1910, the absolutely nothing of 1930, and the nothing of 1960, has continued into the 2000’s. We drop three times more cash into the school system than we did in 1930, and thus we buy only more of what mass schooling has wrought upon us. If there was ever an argument for a return to home schooling, this is it.
Cultic Practices
The best record of the changeover from old style American free market schooling to the laboratory variety under the watch of Big Brother, is a tome long out of publication. It’s a book written by insiders that will raise the hair on the back of your neck. It’s called the Principles of Secondary Education (1918). It offers an account of the experiment from the personal experience of an important revolutionary. His name is Alexander Inglis.
If you think all this I have written about there being a government purpose behind forced schooling is a lot of “hooey”, find this book and you’ll be in for a surprise. Clearly, he states in this book, that the number one priority of the vast enterprise was to place control of the new social and economic machinery out of the reach of the general public.
These social engineers had a real problem, however, namely, working in a democracy. It isn’t all that efficient or predictable, and therefore proposes specific challenges. School was designed, in fact, to be antidemocratic. How many high school teachers can I name that often said things like, “This isn’t Burger King, you can’t have it your way.”
Nelson Aldrich Jr., wrote to his grandfather, Senator Aldrich (one of the principle architects of the Federal Reserve, constructed while Inglis’ cohort built the schools, both sharing the same prime directive: to remove the economic machinery from the reach of the general public) caught the attitude of the builders in their essence in a book named: Old Money. Grandfather, Aldrich Jr. wrote, believed that history, evolution and saving the world were to be found in men like himself, his family and those just like them all the way through history, from the dawn of time. But, the price of such heroism was eternal vigilance against those who could never emerge. Those who would resent the idea that for them to ever get ahead would take the wildest stroke of luck.
Alexander Inglis was also of Aldrich’s class. He wrote quite plainly about the number one purpose of school being created to serve a common economy and command society. A “command society” being one in which THEY could “command”. This controlling coalition was to be drawn from important institutional stakeholders in the future. A future that always saw them at the top of it. For Inglis, school was a referendum on creating a fixed reaction to authority. Therefore, when children grow and become employed, they accept whatever management throws at them. Money and power are the new god.
The second function of school is a diagnostic function. School determines each student’s proper role that they are to fill. This is logged mathematically on cumulative records to justify the next function, sorting. Individuals are to be trained only so far as their pre-judged likely destination in the great machine will take them. And this is to hold them from taking one step beyond this point.
The fourth function is conformity. Kids are to be made alike in order to serve the predictability of service to the market and political research. Since these fellows have all the bucks, is it no wonder rap music has become the success it has, and yet, how legitimate is rap to music at all?
Then there is the hygienic function, this not having to do with cleanliness, but with suitability. Those deemed not fit for reproduction are tagged socially in such a way that they grow old and alone and probably die that way too. This is some of the horse hockey that Darwinian ideas, adopted as a solution to Biblical truth by the school system, have brought to the social landscape. You think I am kidding? You think I am wrong? Just ask any black woman if black men secretly believe that the more beautiful females belong to another color. Men in general have been brainwashed to think so.
Lastly comes the propaedutic function, a big word that means that a small section of the children in school will be marked early on as the future managers to be trained to take over the system. These are the new guardians of the system, watching over a dumbed down public, rendered sophomoric, in order that the government and economic life can be managed with a minimum of hassle. Think about this the next time you see the mandatory health bill coming out of Washington with its 40 million pages and the President says, “Don’t worry about what it says, trust me, it’s best for all of us.” Is the comedy show “Two and a Half Men” one of your favorites? It’s supposed to be, you won’t find a better living example of social sophisms.
And there is the formula for today’s schools: adjustment, diagnosis, sorting, conformity, racial hygiene, and continuity. According to James Bryant Conant, another elitist big money man, the school transformation had been ordered by industrialists who were altering the nature of the industrial process. His book, “The Child, The Parent and The State (1949), reads like the worst of science fiction Utopian societies that go wrong. The difference is that now we can’t just turn the page. We can’t just put the book up on the shelf for later. You and I might think we are where we are in life because of free will and our own individual talents and abilities, but industrialists of the past would have something more chilling to say about that concept.
More on this in the final installment.
Hitler loved the Sci Fi Book: Metropolis
The House had discovered that this school board of unitarians were actually out to install a Prussian system of education in Massachusetts. This would put a monopoly of power in just a few hands, a paradigm adverse to the true spirit of democratic systems. Interestingly, this didn’t stop Mann and his political cronies as the vote of the House went into the majority in Mann’s favor. One has to wonder how many House of Representatives sold their souls that day and the future of education down the river. Even in this day there was an argument over illegal immigration coming into the country to provide cheap labor. Mann thought the religious orthodox of his day was his greatest enemy, but to the contrary, Baptist, Congregational and Presbyterian all supported the idea of government schooling being a necessity to combat the influx of those immigrants who were mostly Catholic. Little did they realize the harbinger of doom secular schooling would provide for their denominations.
In much the same fashion as Kierkegaard constructed his thesis on existentialism, Mann forged his love for the Prussian school system based upon what he felt it was, not on his actual experience. He had visited the schools there during the closed months and found inspiration from empty halls and barren school rooms. He was amazed that he saw not one teacher holding a school book, but instead teaching from their own inner dialogue. Where he saw these teachers one can only conjecture. “The finest collection of men I have ever seen,” wrote Mann. “Full of intelligence, dignity, benevolence, kindness and bearing...Never have I witnessed an instance of harshness and severity. All is kind, encouraging, animating, sympathizing.” On the basis of imagining this Utopian school, Mann made a special plea for the changes in the teaching of reading. He criticized the standard practice of beginning with the alphabet and moving on to collecting syllables. He urged his readers to instead teach the meaning of entire words from the beginning. “Our greatest error in teaching begins with the alphabet.” He said. Empty classrooms are a great basis by which to forge educational revolution.
Mann filed a report to the Boston school committee at this time called the “Seventh”, in which he described his so called experiences while in Prussia with the school system there. All on his own, he decided that we Americans were falling behind the superior educational system of the Prussians and he implored the board to adopt a professional corps of teachers in much the same manner as he had seen (remember, he actually saw nothing). The board members rejected his report as nothing short of propaganda. They charged him with elitism and an attempt to sway the ignorant for support of unsubstantiated information. They also claimed that the teacher oriented, non-book method of teaching promoted a kind of reliance upon others to do productive work and was aimed at breaking the habit of independent work by creating an audience of spectators. They also did not believe in the word method of teaching and defended the alphabet formation of words for reading. They also found it dangerous to insist that learning was better served by discipline than by interest. “Duty comes first,” they said. “Pleasure comes from the discharge of duty.”
Sixty years later... Industrialists and financiers of the day were busy attempting to transfer power over money and interest rates from elected representatives of the American people to a “federal reserve” of centralized private banking interests. On September 13, 1909, George Reynolds, the president of the American Bankers Association declared himself in favor of a central bank modeled after the German Reichsbank. As he spoke, the schools of the United States were being forcibly rebuilt on Prussian lines.
President Howard Taft, also supported the serious consideration of a centralized bank built upon the German model. The Wall Street Journal also reported that an important step in the education of Americans was about to take place and move from the realm of theory to practical politics in pedagogy as well as finance.
There is a book from 1935 called, The Life and Work of the Citizen, written by Howard C. Hill. This book was being used in the Chicago experimental high school being run by the University of Chicago. The book is covered by images of the fasces. An image that represents the binding of government and corporation together in one unit. It is a picture of a double headed axe surrounded by tied up wooden sticks. Wasn’t Mussolini a fascist? I think so.For Americans however, the sticks are wrapped around a sword in the image. There are fierce military eagle images soaring around the pages. The title page of this book has a weird spiral looking interlocking of hands, arms and wrists that looks for all the world like an early incarnation of the German swastika, or should I say Nazi swastika. Law, order, science and trades, and their unification is the representation of united strength.
The strength of America is in the First Amendment guarantee of argument, the right to free speech and the ability to vote of the majority of the citizenry. The Prussian connection shifts the focus to one of cooperation. The working class becomes the watched puppet of the professional classes under the control of law and order.Despite Mann being rejected for his ideas, the Prussian ideal had still managed to insinuate itself into American schooling. During the late years of the 19th century, as the American school system churned out its first phalanx of graduates infected by the Prussian system, there were those who witnessed the change over as it happened. These folks were all schooled in the old fashioned, productive methods not influenced by the government and corporate control systems put in place for the younger students coming up from grade school.
The year was 1867, and the world famous American physician and academic Vincent Youmans has this to say at a lecture to the London College of Preceptors as to the school institution that had just come into being: “School produces mental perversion and absolute stupidity. It produces bodily disease. It produces these things by measures which operate to the prejudice of the growing brain. It is not to be doubted that dullness, indocility, and viciousness are frequently aggravated by the lessons of school.”
Thirteen years later, another famous commentary had this to say:
“Many had hoped that by giving a partial teaching to great numbers of persons, a thirst for knowledge might be awakened. Thus far the results have not equaled expectations. Schools have not borne any fruit on which we have cause to congratulate ourselves.”
- Francis Parkman
In 1885 the President of Columbia said: “The results actually attained under our present system of instruction are neither very flattering nor very encouraging.”
In 1895 the President of Harvard said:
“Ordinary schooling produces dullness. A young man or woman whose intellectual powers are worth cultivating cannot be willing to cultivate them by pursuing phantoms as the school now insist upon.” It had been 43 years since the inception of forced schooling when the President made the above remark.
Following this there was a great transformation into an even more scientific form of pedagogy that took place in the early 1900’s. Four years before WWII broke out, a well known European thinker and school man, Paul Geheeb, who was buddies with Einstein (Yes! THE Einstein.) Herman Hess, and Albert Schwietzer, made a commentary on English and German schooling types: “The dissatisfaction with public schools is widely felt. Countless attempts to reform them have failed. People complain about the over burdening of schools; educators argue about which parts of the curriculum should be cut; but school cannot be reformed with a pair of scissors. The solution is not to be found in educational institutions.”
In 1930, the yearly lectures at Harvard made the same case: “We have absolutely nothing to show for our colossal investment in common schooling after 80 years of trying.”
Thirty years later, the Annual Report to the Carnegie Corporation in 1960 added this: “Too many young people gain nothing from school except the conviction that they are misfits.”
Much to the pain of the makers of the film, Waiting for Superman, the record after 1960 doesn’t improve. The stupidity of 1867, the fruitlessness of 1880, the dullness of 1895, the cannot be reformed of 1910, the absolutely nothing of 1930, and the nothing of 1960, has continued into the 2000’s. We drop three times more cash into the school system than we did in 1930, and thus we buy only more of what mass schooling has wrought upon us. If there was ever an argument for a return to home schooling, this is it.
Cultic Practices
The best record of the changeover from old style American free market schooling to the laboratory variety under the watch of Big Brother, is a tome long out of publication. It’s a book written by insiders that will raise the hair on the back of your neck. It’s called the Principles of Secondary Education (1918). It offers an account of the experiment from the personal experience of an important revolutionary. His name is Alexander Inglis.
If you think all this I have written about there being a government purpose behind forced schooling is a lot of “hooey”, find this book and you’ll be in for a surprise. Clearly, he states in this book, that the number one priority of the vast enterprise was to place control of the new social and economic machinery out of the reach of the general public.
These social engineers had a real problem, however, namely, working in a democracy. It isn’t all that efficient or predictable, and therefore proposes specific challenges. School was designed, in fact, to be antidemocratic. How many high school teachers can I name that often said things like, “This isn’t Burger King, you can’t have it your way.”
Nelson Aldrich Jr., wrote to his grandfather, Senator Aldrich (one of the principle architects of the Federal Reserve, constructed while Inglis’ cohort built the schools, both sharing the same prime directive: to remove the economic machinery from the reach of the general public) caught the attitude of the builders in their essence in a book named: Old Money. Grandfather, Aldrich Jr. wrote, believed that history, evolution and saving the world were to be found in men like himself, his family and those just like them all the way through history, from the dawn of time. But, the price of such heroism was eternal vigilance against those who could never emerge. Those who would resent the idea that for them to ever get ahead would take the wildest stroke of luck.
Alexander Inglis was also of Aldrich’s class. He wrote quite plainly about the number one purpose of school being created to serve a common economy and command society. A “command society” being one in which THEY could “command”. This controlling coalition was to be drawn from important institutional stakeholders in the future. A future that always saw them at the top of it. For Inglis, school was a referendum on creating a fixed reaction to authority. Therefore, when children grow and become employed, they accept whatever management throws at them. Money and power are the new god.
The second function of school is a diagnostic function. School determines each student’s proper role that they are to fill. This is logged mathematically on cumulative records to justify the next function, sorting. Individuals are to be trained only so far as their pre-judged likely destination in the great machine will take them. And this is to hold them from taking one step beyond this point.
The fourth function is conformity. Kids are to be made alike in order to serve the predictability of service to the market and political research. Since these fellows have all the bucks, is it no wonder rap music has become the success it has, and yet, how legitimate is rap to music at all?
Then there is the hygienic function, this not having to do with cleanliness, but with suitability. Those deemed not fit for reproduction are tagged socially in such a way that they grow old and alone and probably die that way too. This is some of the horse hockey that Darwinian ideas, adopted as a solution to Biblical truth by the school system, have brought to the social landscape. You think I am kidding? You think I am wrong? Just ask any black woman if black men secretly believe that the more beautiful females belong to another color. Men in general have been brainwashed to think so.
Lastly comes the propaedutic function, a big word that means that a small section of the children in school will be marked early on as the future managers to be trained to take over the system. These are the new guardians of the system, watching over a dumbed down public, rendered sophomoric, in order that the government and economic life can be managed with a minimum of hassle. Think about this the next time you see the mandatory health bill coming out of Washington with its 40 million pages and the President says, “Don’t worry about what it says, trust me, it’s best for all of us.” Is the comedy show “Two and a Half Men” one of your favorites? It’s supposed to be, you won’t find a better living example of social sophisms.
And there is the formula for today’s schools: adjustment, diagnosis, sorting, conformity, racial hygiene, and continuity. According to James Bryant Conant, another elitist big money man, the school transformation had been ordered by industrialists who were altering the nature of the industrial process. His book, “The Child, The Parent and The State (1949), reads like the worst of science fiction Utopian societies that go wrong. The difference is that now we can’t just turn the page. We can’t just put the book up on the shelf for later. You and I might think we are where we are in life because of free will and our own individual talents and abilities, but industrialists of the past would have something more chilling to say about that concept.
More on this in the final installment.
Hitler loved the Sci Fi Book: Metropolis
Posts
No comments:
Post a Comment