The Strange Death of the University, Part 1: The Red Thread

15 comments

1. I always say that action is what determines the future. There’s been a lot of talk but only so much can be said one way or the other. What we do is consequential and it is hardly the time to think we have a lot of diverse yet good choices. Most of what we ought to do may well be forced.

   The one thing we can respect is that some people are calling for being alert because there is something wrong. But what you don’t want to have forced on you means you have to figure out something better, and it has to be done well in order to prove what could be a better future.

   Reply

2. Sustainability didn’t just show up at universities in 2015. It began in 1990.

   “History
   The Secretariat of University Presidents for a Sustainable Future was founded in 1992 as a direct result of the Talloires Declaration. This historic document was composed in 1990 at an international conference on “The Role of Universities in Environmental Management and Sustainable Development,” held in Talloires, France at the Tufts University European Center. It is the first official statement made by university administrators of a commitment to sustainability in higher education. It includes a concise introduction identifying the urgent need for leadership from higher education and a ten-point action plan for incorporating environmental literacy and sustainability into university teaching and practice. The twenty-two university presidents and chancellors participating in the conference signed the Talloires Declaration at the conclusion of the event and pledged to encourage their colleagues at other institutions to do the same.

   The tenth point of action in the Declaration calls for the creation of a Secretariat to continue the momentum, and to “inform and support each other’s efforts in carrying out this declaration.” Tufts University, as initiator of the Talloires conference, offered to host such an office at its Medford, Massachusetts campus in the United States. Thus the Secretariat of University Presidents for a Sustainable Future was inaugurated in 1992 with funding from the MacArthur Foundation.

   Tony Cortese, then Dean of Environmental Programs at Tufts, and an organizer of the October 1990 event, had been actively encouraging college and university presidents to endorse the Declaration. Within a year of the creation of the Declaration, about 125 institutions had signed on.

   Cortese hired Tom Kelly to direct the new Secretariat. Over the next few years, Kelly continued to cultivate and support a growing Talloires Declaration signatory network and to run the Tufts Environmental Literacy Institute (TELI), an annual faculty development workshop founded by Cortese in 1989. In 1995, Kelly changed the name of the Secretariat to the Association of University Leaders for a Sustainable Future (ULSF), reflecting both a new focus on all levels of leadership within higher education, including senior administrators, faculty, staff and students, and the introduction of a formal membership structure.

   Through mid-1997, ULSF maintained an institutional affiliation with Tufts University through the Fletcher School of Law and Diplomacy. In July 1997, ULSF moved to Washington, DC to become the higher education program of the Center for Respect of Life and Environment (CRLE). While continuing to serve as Secretariat for signatories of the Talloires Declaration, ULSF expanded its programs and services after 1997 to include sustainability assessment, research on theoretical models and case studies of sustainability initiatives in higher education, formative evaluation of sustainability initiatives, and forming new international partnerships to advance sustainability in higher education globally.

   ULSF became independent of CRLE in 2007, functioning as a virtual organization and maintaining its position as Secretariat for signatories of the Talloires Declaration.” http://ulsf.org/about/

   Since then, Anthony Cortese has been a very busy boy. Earth Day 1992 Rio, where Agenda 21 was launched, Anthony Cortese met up with John Kerry and Teresa Heinz where the three of them decided to create an organization called ‘Second Nature’ to promote Sustainability in Higher Education. One of the thing Second Nature created the ‘Presidents’ Climate Leadership Commitment’ 15 years ago. “How It Started In late 2006, 12 college and university presidents initiated the American College & University Presidents’ Climate Commitment (ACUPCC). Supported by Second Nature, AASHE, and EcoAmerica, the 12 presidents/chancellors, motivated by their conviction that higher education had the capacity and responsibility to lead on climate action and sustainability for the sake of their students and society, invited their peers to join the climate commitment. By the end of 2007, more than 350 campuses joined as Charter Signatories”. The commitment signed was to make sustainability a pillar of education. https://secondnature.org/15-year-celebration/

   Anthony Cortese has been also busy as keynote speaker on university campuses across the country promoting sustainability education. But, besides that he has helped launch other organizations such as AASHE (The Association for the Advancement of Sustainability in Higher Education) mentioned above. From their History of AASHE page under their about us tab

   “AASHE’s roots go back to the Education for Sustainability Western Network (EFS West), established by Second Nature in 2001 with funding from the Compton Foundation. EFS West served college and university campuses in the western U.S. and Canada, providing resources and support for their sustainability efforts.

   In 2004, EFS West held the first North American Conference on Sustainability in Higher Education in Portland, Oregon. The success of this conference and increasing demand for EFS West’s resources led it to transition from a regional network to an independent higher education association serving all of North America – the Association for the Advancement of Sustainability in Higher Education. AASHE was officially launched in December 2005, serving as the first professional higher education association for the campus sustainability community in North America.” https://www.aashe.org/about-us/aashe-history/

   Advancing Sustainability in Higher Education
   AASHE is the leading association for the advancement of sustainability in higher education. We serve a full range of higher education faculty, administrators, staff and students who are change agents and drivers of sustainability innovation. Established in 2005, AASHE is comprised of over 900 members across 48 U.S. states, 1 U.S. Territory, 9 Canadian provinces and 20 countries. Learn More About AASHE’s History
   By 2013 when I first ran across this stuff, every college and university I looked at was at a member of AASHE and they all had relatively new Offices of Sustainability on their campuses too.

   But don’t fret, many businesses and governments had them as well in 2013.
   All of this is nothing compared to what Michael M. Crow has done at Arizona State University. Crow became president of that university in 2002 and has turned it into a Sustainability University. He even wrote a book about it in 2015 called Designing the New American University. ASU has too many things to state as the whole redesign was around Sustainability, in fact as Michael Crow says in one video that he made Science and Sustainability the foundation of every class, program and degree at the university including the creation of the first School of Sustainability. Any staff who couldn’t figure out how to ground their work in sustainability he withed funding to them, hired people who would figure it out and give them the funding. This is from a video clip of him talking about intellectual design aspirations for ASU at a sustainability summit 10 year ago. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CSHLfnWSmxM

   Arizona State University is a research university, and they partner with corporations, NOAA, and even apply research expertise to Navy initiative. Students get to gain their research experience and the projects help with funding. https://research.asu.edu/stories

   Reply

3. Thought Reform and the Psychology of Totalism, p. 480 (Example of a confession document): “[…] I had already accepted the leading position of materialistic dialectics […] I then considered materialistic dialectics as a piece of red string linking up all different branches of knowledge.”

   Just in case anyone had any lasting doubts.

   Reply

4. That is a totem post JS on more than one level.

   Quite recently you provided links & in response to them i was charming and one, and brutal about the other. Soon after i realised that i didn’t need to do it that way. Slightly before i had mentioned Agnosticism. Here i can sincerely say there wasn’t a ‘point in time’ decided to be agnostic, there was not teenage fad over a bowl of lentils among other sheeple. There simply wasn’t any religion in my life path whatsoever. If anything i reacted by refusing to be atheist, perhaps as there was a lot of greek philosophy around me. I discovered it by chance – it wasn’t a provision, or influenced. It was found luckily and for whatever good such reading can bring, i feel it mainly acted as a catalyst in the avoidance of what otherwise could have been a vacuum. Thus rather than something life changing, it merely brought a way to sense ‘rationale’, which might otherwise have been absent & therefore defined a useful starting point rather than so great discovery. I do feel that a natural justice tips the scales here later in life to a degree. There was no great boost to personal prosperity on the way. But now years later these fundamentals are still personally inspiring.

   When richard dawkins and the other so called 3 horsemen of the apocalypse began their meaningless wind ups was when i first had critical contact with believers. Now i know James was once a follower & theres no wish to judge that. He and his friend are simply the best at this expose & if anyone wonders if there a neck & neck line with others out there. I feel the grievance studies set them way apart, but they are a cut above the rest anyway. I’d been a long time fan of dawkins works, but was always cautious of the man. Once they started the new atheism fad, legions of quite idiotic people disrupted platforms with meaningless fanaticism. Up to that time it had been enjoyable to obtain web contact with all kinds of people & hear their ideas about life – science – philosophy – religion. And suddenly there was a nu wave of mad people spreading hate at the believers. I can honestly state that this was the first time i noticed something very wrong with mass behaviour. Its a bit ironic it came through new atheists, but i would swear that they were the archetypal proto woke imbecile shit stirrers. One cannot tar all same brush etc & this will hold only as much as a person has sense and ability, On the whole Dawkins et al laughed as the way to the bank, leaving behind a tribe of sycophants who were working class & hoping to make an escape. This was an early sign of the mass delusion potentials, illustrating how desperate some people are to find a formula.

   Dawkins and the others had cheated. Really it is impossible to prove what we believe or not, let alone what exists or not. Everything we say online anonymously lacks the components that would define how likely it is that we represent what we believe. Its not that simple with physical insight, and as usual there is just probability. Its high or low one of those two, but isn’t fact. Online the divorce from that state is much greater & in a nutshell the 4 horsemen maximised their sales by using strong inferences that they’d collected proof against a god. Put it this way – that was the ontology follower after follower carried with them, if you read the 4’s books or listened to the lectures, the caveats were there. But – they definitely designed the narratives to feel absolute. Dawkins did stupid things such as go on the attack against Agnosticism. Pointless since this position is the only rational position HE had to stand by. As was proven when Dawkins was finally pinned to the wall be believers who realised that he could not even defend the existence of Atheism. In those notorious face offs – is their aliens ? – there could be. Is their a God – there could be. There came a point when the 4’s scam blew open & they could not even prove their atheism, since believers proved their Agnosticism. Which is what i knew was going to happen all along. I’d not be too cocky as the same holds for believers.

   So we are respecting humanity or not. Your plaintive – elegant – well considered post lays out many of the obstacles in asking what makes a definitive unified statement against misanthropy. This form of misanthropy has designed itself to set various types of humans against others in the quest to control the world. Those seeking this control will turn against the humans they have set upon others in good time. You plead for a way for religious people to unite in one front, using one central message along with non religious people. I can state in all honesty that during the new atheist wave, that my most common line was just like that. I argued that if the religious buffer that stands between evil people and the other all people becomes eroded, that the world will have a problem. It is also true JS, that natural selection saw to it that stupendous numbers of people who are the the sweetest non problematic people live & die without one iota of religion. In my life i lived among a countless many, thus one flaw in religion always was the lack of explanation for this. I.E this seemingly tabla rasa state of human decency and sense, along with its strong sense of right – but with no known religious propulsion. Then theres the corrupt states of religion i’d not wish to bother you with. In the UK we have an Archbishop who was formerly an oil executive who seems to have been offered the task of a fast tracked religious education ( having had none) just in order to control the finances of the church of england. Its best to avoid such debate concerning the mess i’d agree.On this basic suggestion of yours for a unified peoples statement that is obtained somehow. You are right i’d feel confident personally. A major advantage the global agenda has against the people is that its orchestrated and uniform. Whilst the argument back is disparate and made of various bits of misconception as well as high probability in of variable measure.

   One of the things i have argued for strongly is that they are using Algorithms and that the systems thus maximise Probability. The obstacle in front of many before this can make sense, may rest with a needed realisation concerning how – configurations – arrays of words – systems of language can constitute algorithms. Other challenges concern the conceptualisation strategies used in order to propagate them in a phenomenological manner. Here on this site for instance James is hung up on Hegel using phenomenology. And what we’d have to do there is see that its irrelevant! If you want to counter an phenomenon you need a counter phenomenon << thats about as logical as it gets. Outbursts that constitute special pleading with these engineers to quit using Hegel will only make them laugh, But again its inappropriate as todays social engineering more shares common traits with Marx Marcuse- Freire et al that literally being any direct model. Thus misconception in that respect is only more funny default to counter revolutionary failure really.

   In a state where short and curlies is ultimate – as its a devil of a job to describe phenomenological behaviours to the average John. The masses are not going to take kindly to complex philosophy, and its strictly for experts types who need to understand the mechanisms on the way to simple messages The stuff i come out with here is useless for mass consumption. To a high degree that is true of James& co. The huge advantage the agenda has is that it has found a way to batter & bully the working class in ways they do not understand. Secondly sites like this tend to feel comfortable with its largely academic base. While 'the job' involves mainly the less educated.

   In my opinion we are speaking at a time of a pre abolition of the voting systems staging in this transition. Thus much of what is going on is also understood against that backdrop. After they'll devise engineering to cause the the whites & heteronormative to do the same and there will be complete civil unrest everywhere. Those in the now who happily took part in the agenda by attacking whiteness & women all scream blue murder. The police state just crunches that butt into their skulls.

   Thats the writing on the wall. How to d you inquiry nobody has much clue. My feelings are that we are very much repeating & repeating ad nauseam bits of this and that, but its algorithmic in nature. Thus by constantly going on and on about these bits is not pointless. It must be obvious that this site is helping many with profound difficulties at work for one thing. Ultimately it will be pointless, but so will working out any one algorithm be as they can alter them anytime. Paraconsistently ? – it doesn't matter as the agenda will always be dogged by having to use that kind of system, it isn't a case of 'solving' one. But it is a case of finding the best way to explain how it is done to the most people by as many in unison as you suggest.

   Thus this isn't yet the problem but could be. First the is the obstacle linked to agreement on the phenomenological transporting system of the propaganda.. Only then could there even be any quest for a unified field of response.

   Just in my humble opinion.

   Reply

5. I clicked a link that opened in twitter (can’t find the link or recall the name of the twitter account) that presented an A-Ha moment for me in terms of the fight against Woke. The twitter person asked a seminal question that defines the challenge for post-red pill anti-Woke dissidents who are seeking a comprehensively summative argument to counter Woke but who are NOT religious.

   The topic was the infamous Canadian high school teacher (‘Busty’ Lemieux), a male faculty who showed up for the school year sporting massive freakish false breasts (plus autogynephilic uniform of blonde wig and miniskirt) and has been teaching his class in this preposterous costume and whose school board just ruled it’s the male teacher’s “trans rights” to parade his fetish in front of the kids and nothing they can do about him (“her”) so just shut up, bigots.

   The twitter questioner issued a rhetorical challenge: Other than religious reasons, what other arguments do people have against this teacher’s behaviour? Why is this teacher wrong on any level other than religious? The questioner was not supporting “Busty” nor criticizing religious people who have crystal clear logical arguments based on their religion why this teacher is a calumny against humanity. But for those of us who do not ascribe to any formal religious morality, what exactly is our legal or ethical or political or social values-based rationale and reason that clearly argues precisely why the behaviour of this transvestite teaching in school is wrong and should be stopped.

   The religious have made their stand well known and it’s been consistent all along. But the non-religious anti-Woke dissidents who abhor Marxism, totalitarianism, Woke, Trans/Queer, etc. may be able to describe in microscopic detail what is happening in Woke (as New Discourses has done for years) but all of us fail to articulate a plain and simple clear and concise argument WHY Woke is wrong. Ask a religious person why Woke is wrong and, Bang: Moral Reasons A, B, C. Consistent and clear every time because they’re all using the same moral sourcebook.

   But for the rest of us non-religious who are being societally asphyxiated by Woke, where is our equivalent argument? The twitter commenters were all over the map answering the challenge question: libertarian, freethinking, Kantian, common sense, anti-groomers, social rules, etc. All were partially “correct” and semi-convincing in what they wrote, but none could give a comprehensive summative big picture values-based reason that could be used by all anti-Wokes the way religious people have their singular consistent unified moral argument against Woke.

   Perhaps there is no other comprehensive argument against Woke except the religious one. I’ve been asked this question for years by family members trying to understand how to counter Woke but who don’t have a secular answer that is as clear and effective as “because it’s against God’s laws”. The number of “Nones”, i.e. non-religious people, who are non-Wokes is massive and similar in numbers to political Independents; and this mass of people holds the key to stopping Woke. The religious are the stated enemy of Woke and fight Woke heroically because they have a moral reason Why it’s wrong; but they don’t have the numbers to win against Woke because too many (especially younger) people reject the religious reasons and go along with Woke as a form of ongoing protest against perceived negative aspects of any formal religion.

   When a non-religious person confronts Woke, that anti-Woke person crumbles because the only counter arguments they have are either unrealistic and repellently reactionary (Q-Anon shamanesque) or are embedded within Woke itself, i.e., Trans Inc. is wrong because it’s misogynist; Queer is wrong because it’s homophobic; CRT is wrong because it’s racist, etc. Using the language of Woke is not a counter argument. It’s another tactic of Identarian self-preservation. The master’s tools will never dismantle the master’s house. We need something ELSE! We need a comprehensive and unified non-religious rationale for WHY Woke is wrong that can form the cornerstone of its secular dismantling by the mass of Nones, Independents and individualist anti-Woke dissidents who are motivated by fear of social credit-style cultural-revolutionary tech- panopticon/gulag Totalitarianism.

   I don’t have such a rationale. I’ve been too busy all these years trying to parse Woke to the complex and time-consuming level that New Discourses and others have finally mapped to completion. I and other Independent non-religious anti-Woke dissidents now understand Woke completely. We know the beast. We know the What, the When, the Where and the Who of Woke. What non-religious Independent anti-Woke dissidents need at this time is the Why. WHY is Woke wrong? Without a Why, we can do nothing but surrender to it in impotent inarticulateness.

   I think this challenge could be the next frontier for New Discourses and others to tackle in the war against Woke.

   Reply

   1. How about it’s all a lie? “WOKE” is a lie!!! They believe that the ends justifies the means and are simply using this tactic (Rules for Radicals – Saul D. Alinsky) until it no longer works. Then they will move on. No actual goal other than destruction of society. In my mind that fully believes the religious arguments you highlight also, the destruction of mankind as we know it is evil and should serve as a reason for everyone alive to reject “WOKE” Don’t know if I can be any help to someone so obviously more academic than myself, but that’s my two cents.

      Reply

   2. You are correct that this is now the important question.
      I suggest that the moral foundation you seek can be found in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (https://www.un.org/en/about-us/universal-declaration-of-human-rights), and the Declaration of the Rights of the Child (https://www.humanium.org/en/declaration-rights-child-2/).
      Once you know that you have a foundation, you are free to communicate it through myth, metaphor, and story–and religions are great repositories of those, many of which were pre-monotheism.
      However, “Woke” is more complex, including, for example, statements about the way the world is (only power, systemically racist, colonialist, etc.) and moral foundations will not directly address them. There, for example, one needs to quote works in other genres (history, anthropology, etc.) to offer alternative stories.

      Reply

6. I believe most sane and rational men and women understand what I’m going to post either consciously or subconsciously but I’m going to put it into words exactly the Juggernaut of evil that we are fighting..

   First a short lesson on totalitarianism as it was laid out in 1918 by Lenin when he unleashed the Red terror.

   Martin Latsis, head of the secret police, instructed his agents as follows..

   Do not look in the file of incriminating evidence to see whether or not the accused rose up against the Soviets with arms or words. Ask him instead to which class he belongs..what is his background his education his profession. These are the questions which will determine the fate of the accused..

   In other words it doesn’t matter whether you’re guilty or innocent only in how you identify and what group you belong to..

   Fast forward to Today the so-called social justice warriors play a similar role in our society that the Bolsheviks played in late imperial Russia..

   In the new social justice ideology it fulfills the same psychological and social needs that religion once filled.. it is a true religious cult…

   This is why arguments with the zealots are about as productive as theological disputation with a synod of Taliban divines..

   For the social justice inquisitors, much like the inquisitors of the Dark ages, dialogue is the process by which opponents confess their sins and submit in fear and trembling to the social Justice Creed..

   For SJWs everything in life is understood through a relationship of power.. those who resist social justice are practicing hate and shall not be reasoned with or in any way tolerated… Only conquered..

   To the SJW there is no such thing as objective truth there is only Power.

   The value of Truth is solely dependent on who is making the claims.. the more you can claim victimhood the more your truth becomes valued..

   An example would be a white Pentecostal man living on disability in a trailer park is an oppressor but a well to do black lesbian ivy league professor is oppressed..

   Justice is not a matter of working out what is rightly due to an individual but what is due to an individual as the bearer of group identity..

   SJWs tightly police the spoken and written word, condemning speech that offends them as a form of violence.

   Many conservatives or even just sane and rational people think that SJWs can be countered with Superior arguments and if conservatives stick with the liberal proceduralism they will prevail..

   This is a great fundamental error that blinds people to the radical nature of the threat..

   You cannot know how to judge an act in the face of these challenges if you cannot see the social justice warriors for what they truly are and where they do their work..

   It is easy to identify the shrieking student on the university’s quad, but it is more important to be able to spot the subversive presence of older SJWs and fellow travelers throughout institutional bureaucracies where they exercise immense power..

   Intellectual, cultural, academic and corporate elites are under the sway of this left-wing political cult built around social justice. It is militantly illiberal ideology that shares alarming commonalities with Bolshevism.

   Mainstream media are the shills.. the propaganda arm promoting all of this insanity..

   These radical left elites know exactly what they’re doing and they have been indoctrinating and brainwashing our youth for decades…

   Many students in universities are in the grip of the religion of social justice, as such, they consider their subjective beliefs to be a form of uncontestable knowledge, and disagreement is an attack on their identity…

   They have been turned into mindless soulless genderless slaves to their sick ideology…

   It is an absolute demonic Titanic Juggernaut of evil that has its roots in Satan and his spiritual Army of Darkness..

   In the new religion of social justice and Marxism it has been wildly effective stripping God from the consciousness of most men and women…

   They believe that God is the enemy of his own creation and a source of danger and a threat to man..

   In Western Civilization today, we are living under decadent, pre totalitarian conditions.

   This is Huxley’s Brave New World of the 21st century.

   It is coming and it is coming fast.. but we can resist

   At the core of anti totalitarian resistant is truth..

   This totalitarian ideology being foisted on the American people and Western Civilization is built on lies… And can only survive as long as the lies continue..

   When you speak the truth you break the rules of their game you disrupt it and expose it..

   It only takes a small minority to declare that the emperor is indeed naked and begins to break the stranglehold of the lies perpetrated by this sick ideology..

   It is truly up to us today to live not by lies but to speak the truth which defeats evil..

   They would have us cower and accept a society built completely on lies.. WE WILL NOT.
   .

   .

   Reply

7. I began to be exposed to anti-university ideas before I graduated from high school in 1972. Both my parents were college graduates and my father was a professor of Social Work. I was a smart kid and got very high SAT scores.

   But I didn’t want to go to college. I was convinced that I would not find out what I wanted to know by going to college. My parents went to college and they didn’t have a clue. My teachers were college graduates and they didn’t have a clue. So that “evidence” along with the writings of people like Ivan Illich who argued that schools were little more than institutions to create people who would fit into the corporate world – the world that was providing most of the funding for schools, for governments – for everything.

   The answer was out there. It was in Hare’s work. It was in Hubbard’s work. The most important thing to be aware of in politics, from my point of view, is that beings exist that are anti-life and thrive on crime, violence, and confusion.

   This has become the “red thread” in my online writing. (As mentioned above, “red thread” is a diversely-used slang term that is not directly connected to Communism.)

   Later I was exposed to the idea that materialistic and behaviorist theories of psychology were introduced into schools via colleges of education starting in the early 1900s. These ideas served the corporate masters. They developed in people a sort of sophisticated rationale for accepting corporate hegemony. They didn’t make robots. They made people who acted like robots but considered themselves “free.” In the process, they also ruined the ability of lower education to teach the basic skills of life. They have been a real tragedy.

   Reply

   1. Larry you are not wrong you are 100% correct… I did some research recently and wrote a lengthy paper this is an excerpt

      Paul warns in Roman 1:25

      They exchanged the truth about God for a lie, and worshiped and served created things rather than the Creator

      The same lie told Adam and Eve at the fall materialized again in the 1960s in America in life-altering ways. Having thoroughly worked its way through our educational institutions, this vain ideology now advances in nearly every aspect of our civil and cultural experience..

      This radical left religious cult today teaches that man is God and the human will is the holy standard, it consists of satiating the unrestricted human appetite by any means necessary..

      The nightmare we are living today began a hundred years ago in our educational institutions..

      William Foster the national chairman of the American Communist party in his 1932 book Towards Soviet America wrote..

      We will take over the national department of education the studies will be revolutionized, being cleansed of religious, patriotism, and other features of the bourgeois ideology IE capitalism and democracy.

      The students will be taught the basics of marxian dialectic materialism, internationalism and the general ethics of the new socialist society..

      The Frankfort School and adjunct of the Goethe University in Frankfort whose aim was developing and promulgating Marxism in Germany.

      Came to New York in 1935 and joined with Columbia University. John Dewey a Soviet sympathizer and the founding father of modern education facilitated Bringing the dramatic convergence of marxist philosophy, Freudian psychology, rank perversion, and all manner of lurid ideas and practices introduced for the destruction and dismantling of Western culture by way of the destruction and dismantling of the family.

      More on John Dewey, a despicable depraved POS who was revered by the radical left communists…

      John Dewey was perhaps the most influential figure in modern American education.. in 1928 made a pilgrimage to Soviet Russia.. upon his return he wrote of his admiration and desire to replicate the way in which the Soviet education system was used as a political tool.

      He loved and appreciated how they embedded collectivist mindsets into the children and began to dismantle the need for a family unit..

      Dewey came to be known as the father of progressive education..believed education is a tool for social engineering and the raising of the consciousness of children towards activism and that Reading writing and arithmetic were secondary..

      Marxism, social and critical theorists at the Frankfurt School are often dismissed as marginally influential, existing only in The Faraway world of left-wing academia..

      On the contrary these ideas have become deeply ingrained not just in the University but now in Western culture and mainstream media.

      Further influencing the direction of Marxism was the Italian communist Antonio Gramsci. Who put forth that to destroy Western capitalism you must do the Long March through the institutions of family, education, and culture.

      He said you must replace Western Christianity with the religion of Marxism.

      Gyorgy Lukacs and Wilhelm Reich we’re fellow Frankfort alumni promoted that traditional family, respect for the past as a guide to the Future, God and family were the greatest obstacles to freeing children from parental authority by ending religious instruction and replacing it with radical sex education curriculum.

      The revolutionary mission of the Frankfort School held a dual purpose.
      .

      They knew by corroding the student’s faith in the pillars of Western culture they could undermine the future stability of that culture.

      Secondly they knew they would raise less suspicion and communicate more freely by being in the academic world then they would be in a political organization.

      The ideology of the Frankfort school would shape future generations of children not just by destabilizing the family but by revolutionizing the educational system to which naive American parents delivered up their children and in particularly teachers colleges..

      In their minds, and they’re not wrong, the training of teachers would prove to be the most affected method of the revolution. The effects of the agenda of the Frankfurt Institute are pervasive to this day.

      Chester M. Pierce a professor of education and psychiatry at Harvard who is the consultant for shows such as Sesame Street says.

      Every child in America entering school at the age of five is mentally ill because he/she comes to school with certain allegiances to our founding fathers, towards his/her parents and a towards a belief in a supernatural being, God, and towards the sovereignty of his/her Nation as a separate entity.

      It’s up to you teachers to make all these sick children well by removing these thoughts and creating the international child of the future.

      The National education association grew under the thumb of Marxism and communist organizers in its commitment to override the influence of parents over their children..

      Charles Francis Potter believed that secular humanism was not the end of religion but the beginning of a new one based on man, not God. Schools he believed would become secular seminaries indoctrinating the future.. he goes on to say what can a theistic Sunday meeting for 1 hour once a week compare to the tide of a 5-day program of humanistic teachings..

      The revolutionary goal for the Early elementary years was to separate children from parents, not only physically, but also by undermining and fracturing the influence and authority of parents by injecting a slow drip of ideology into the school system..

      Essential to this effort is the introduction of the child, as early as possible, to adult sexual practices..

      Mary calderone an influential public advocate for the radical sexual education of children, stated her impatience with the time it took for the real goals of education to be fulfilled. The hypersexualization of our children.

      There is little daylight left between activists and educators Sophie Lewis the author of full surrogacy now argues in her book we must contribute to the revival of queer utopianism inspired by the Marxist rallying cry.. abolish the family..she is not alone..

      For several years now a number of trans liberals and marxists like Michelle o’brien, Kate Doyle griffiths, Madeline Lane McKinley Jules Joan Gleason are doing their best to raise the profile again of that old dream… Family Abolition..

      They have been wildly successful as evidenced today.

      One in three millennials believe that the Communist Manifesto is a better guarantee of freedom over the Declaration of Independence..

      One in five believe that private property should be abolished..

      The men and women on this forum know this is not hyperbole or exaggeration it began when they took God out of our schools in the 1960s then legalized abortion then legalized gay marriage..

      In 1941, even then the danger was apparent, Eugene Lyons wrote a book Enemy in our Schools about the corruption of the education system and the effort to lace lesson plans with Marxist ideology..he explains how college teachers slant their lessons to match the latest views out of Moscow.

      I’ll close with this… the combination of historic ignorance, the early sexualization of children through sex education and media, and the anti-family propaganda campaigns have all been seeded into the very institutions once tasked to impart knowledge, critical thinking, and good judgment.

      Instead of teaching them HOW to think, we teach students political narratives of WHAT to think.

      In effect, we teach them how to be activists and sex objects. In doing so we have encouraged shallow but sharp passions, and arrogance. Creating millions of narcissistic psychopaths..

      Worst of all the educational system has severed generations of youth from the patrimony of the parents who entrusted them to these institutions..

      There is an absolute War and our children are the targets..

      Anyone who cares about their children needs to remove them from these vile repulsive synagogues of evil whose sole agenda is to destroy them mind, body and spirit..

      God and scripture are the only bulwark against this insidious Juggernaut of evil.

      .

      .
      .

      Reply

      1. commenter wrote: “…remove [the children] from these vile repulsive synagogues of evil whose sole agenda is to destroy them mind, body and spirit.”

         Why synagogues? Why not mosques? It’s mohammedans and not Jews who are genociding Christians across Africa and the world in 2022 (see Raymond Ibrahim, Arab-American Coptic Christian historian/scholar who documents current mohammeddan atrocities/genocide of Christians). But of course if you directed your venom at mosques, you’d have to confront a real life enemy who wants you dead and not an historical scapegoat for your gas chamber revenge fantasies.

         I’ve tried for five years to tolerate fundamentalist Christians as potential “allies” against Woke Totalitarianism and I’ve reached my limit with them (they gave America back to the Democrat Wokes last week because of their deranged obsession with abortion — the whole world has the same normal laws dealing with abortion — why can’t the USA? because fundamentalists won’t let them — it must be their way or the highway so they wreck the country again.) Let the Woke and mohammedans take over. I’ve had it with fundamentalist Christians.

         I cannot stand to listen to any more of their obscene retrograde ugliness and I reject them, once again, because they are so fatalistically and arrogantly obsessed with their “afterlife” that they’ve made themselves incompatible with flawed and messy human life on the living Earth! I’ve listened to the same fundamentalist evangelical psychotic Hate-Spew that I, and the whole society, fought against and removed from the public square forty years ago. We abhor the Wokeness that’s replaced the evangelicals, but we can’t cure that Marxist virus by re-infecting the body politic with the disease of fundamentalist Christianity. Rock and a hard place. Thanks a lot, “Christians”. Like Gandhi said, “I like your Christ, but your Christians not so much.”

         The same toxic fundamentalist threats like the ones from your fiendish forebear, televangelist Jimmy Swaggart with his stolen donations, hookers and booze in the back of his limo screaming out the car window, Kill all the f-ing Jews and fags in the name of Jesus! Fundamentalist Christians are still screaming, Kill the Jews! but now on intellectual anti-Woke web sites like this one in 2022. Un-f-ing-believable.

         I am neither a Jew nor a Christian nor an Atheist (who is merely a reverse religionist, the photographic negative of a particular religion) nor part of any tribalistic Identarian blood feud moral hate clade. I am a Human Being. Period! And I am sick to death of “Abrahamic monotheists” and their tribal self-righteousness, whited sepulcher puffed up hatreds against one another and against everyone who they proclaim Other-Unclean-Infidel and not “pure” like they pretend to be. Leave Us Alone!

         You are merely the opposite of Woke: authoritarian Theocracy instead of authoritarian Totalitarianism. The other side of the same misanthropic life-hating Identarian coin. At this point, I would rather resign myself to Woke than align myself with Christian fundamentalism. What a mess you keep making of our short time on Earth!

         Reply

8. I also worked (very part-time contract) for the UNESCO Institute for Education (the former name of the current UNESCO Institute for Lifelong Learning) as a rapporteur (English only) for a series of conferences in Canada and Europe between 1994 and 1997.

   Your post on UNESCO sent me to their site where some of the 1990s publications I was involved with are still online. I threw out my paper copies when I purged the detritus of my misbegotten “adult education” career after my forced retirement (excommunication for anti-leftism) five years ago. Skimming through one of these online documents at the UNESCO site, I noted a quote from 1996 almost identical to a quote from New Discourses’ Sept 12/22 article about a 2007 Freire-modelled African project:

   “[A]cquisition of basic literacy skills did not make any meaning to [‘learners’] and in fact was irrelevant, with some of them asking the facilitators: What have you people, who are learned, done to change the situation, rather you (have) worsened the situation when you yourself get to the position.’’

   From my rapporteur notes quoted in ‘Alpha 96: Basic Education & Work’, UNESCO Institute for Education, 1996:

   “The intentions of researchers were often different from those of participants. Researchers were often looking at a community development process that questioned the hierarchical structure of work. The intentions of the participants were often to escape from the bottom of the hierarchy (‘to become the boss’) but not necessarily to challenge it. Researchers often assume that social change is the goal of participants.”
   https://uil.unesco.org/adult-education/alpha-96-basic-education-and-work

   For fifty years, professional academic and bureaucratic “leftist” transnationalist “educators” have channelled Freire (and others) to “empower” by force their captive “learners” to meet the political and corporate aims of high-status/high-salary governmental/NGO professionals’ UN-globalist paymasters’ world domination schemes, despite the “learners” hating and resisting their “projects” as useless to their real lives. The “learners” are merely widgets in the assembly-line of the Transnational Capitalist Class (TCC) Regime’s endless self-aggrandizing Nomenklatura make-work “conference” factory that’s designed to help maintain power for the UN world crime syndicate system.

   My Paris-based UNESCO supervisors confessed to me while they were drunk in a bar in Bratislava in 1995, “We work for hash and cash.” Another national Canadian literacy project I worked on in the 1990s had an annual budget of $60 million (taxpayers’ money) for ten years. 1990 to 2000 was the United Nation’s Decade to Eradicate Illiteracy. They spent billions on academic con artists and did not eradicate illiteracy. They merely morphed one fake cause, Illiteracy, into another, Sustainability, to keep their con alive. This is how their con game goes on and on forever. Bait and switch. Ca-ching! Ca-ching! Laughing all the way to the IMF bank.

   UNESCO and its entire cabal of international “educator” charlatans are merely the latest marriage of convenience in the TCC techno-oligarchy Regime’s current menage-a-trois with Leviathan and Mammon.

   Reply

9. The university has been dying for quite some time, since any commitment on its part towards the pursuit of truth or the development of the critical intellect has atrophied, at least during my fifty years of teaching. Currently, as you show, higher “education” is blatantly committed, instead, to evangelical )not even apologetical) work in behalf of the new religion. Thank you, James, as usual: I had no idea how pernicious this “sustainability” agenda is, nor was I aware that some of the elite is still reading Marcuse. My colleagues follow the old gent’s prescriptions, but none have read him. Or Marx. As a member of my university’s Faculty Senate and a sometime president of that body, time and again the faculty voiced, on one hand its opposition to the astronomical growth of the administrative staff, but, on the other hand, demanded additional apparatchiks, including a Chief Diversity Officer and staff. I am curious about when Fordham will appoint a Chief Sustainability Officer. It is bound to happen.

   Reply

10. You are a real hero of mine James

    I could never hope to monitor all this fanatical interference in decent society without your huge efforts to translate it

    Well done and thank you

    Reply

11. James, I agree with the majority of your assessment of this ridiculous document and appreciate you surfacing it to our attention.

    But I do disagree with your interpretation of the “red thread running through all the Sustainable Development Goals”

    I think the “red thread” is a lede meant to capture the attention of business management/consultant types of people. That’s the intended audience for this kind of paper. I don’t think it has to do with signaling communism/Marxism.

    If you google “red thread business management meaning” or “red thread meaning in business” you’ll see that it’s an obscure storytelling concept used by consultants and firms. Red thread shows up in Chinese, Jewish, and Hindu traditions.

    https://tamsenwebster.com/what-is-the-red-thread-and-how-do-you-use-it/#:~:text=So%20the%20red%20thread%20of,that%20also%20comes%20into%20play

    It seems to be a common term, even being used in the name of multiple consulting firms.
    https://www.red-thread.com/
    https://www.redthreadconsulting.co.uk/

    I will agree that the inclusion of Marcuse is sus though. So your reading is not unwarranted.

    Reply