The New Discourses Podcast with James Lindsay, Episode 92
We have to talk about Social-Emotional Learning (SEL). It’s not the first time it’s been addressed here on the New Discourses Podcast, but the full picture hasn’t been painted for you yet. Social-Emotional Learning is evil and must be stopped. It isn’t a nice little program to help at-risk kids deal with the difficulties of learning. It’s the central pillar of a nefarious attempt to remake and control society. Host James Lindsay walks you through a number of sources promoting and describing Social-Emotional Learning in unprecedented depth, breadth, and clarity in this long but crucial episode of the podcast. Join him to understand why Social-Emotional Learning and the mechanisms that enable it must be removed from our schools as soon as possible and the people who have implemented it need to be investigated and held accountable.
Subscribe to the New Discourses Podcast on SoundCloud, Apple Podcasts, Google Podcasts, Spotify, Stitcher, YouTube, or by RSS.
Additional episodes of the New Discourses Podcast are available here.
Follow James Lindsay: https://linktr.ee/conceptualjames
14 comments
I literally just saw a spot on PBS about pushing SEL. And it’s in a school district near where I live. All I could say was “oh no…”
Thank you. There is SO MUCH in here. I would LOVE it if you’d publish a precis version of your pint – bullet points, outline or whatever to share with others. I have shared a link to this with others, but many busy school moms and dads just don’t have time for a 4 hour podcast.
Agreed.
We need an accessible documentary laying it out such that anyone can see the development and issues.
Excellent podcast. Can you please post the sources you were reading from? I would like to check them out and share with others. Thank you.
Me too
Thank you for combing through all these policies and documents to pull out the evil agenda hidden within. As I listened to this podcast, I immediately thought of another recent podcast featuring an interview with Yuval Harari (the WEF futurist/transhumanist guru). What I thought was the stuff of science fiction is being meticulously brought into our present reality. Understanding the (mind numbingly dull) tools and techniques “they” are using to achieve their lofty goals of “perfecting” humanity is the only chance we have to stop it before the traps close. Thank you for taking on this work and waking the good people up to what is happening.
Orwell’s The Road to Wigan pier was his discover that the liberal elites backing socialism had *zero* interest in having g it imposed on them.
Nothing new under the Sun…
I broadly agree with James that this whole project is totalitarian; the megalomaniacal dream of these intellectuals is the fully administered and managed society with themselves at the top of the tree. Consequentially, of course, it will just result in chaos and anomie.
Where I disagree with James is in explicitly (or implicitly) denouncing anything Climate Change related and/or sustainable alongside all this crap. By sustainable I mean in the narrow sense (ecological footprint, etc) rather than the strategic prefix it’s become in the hands of the WEF et al. whereby it’s used to shuttle in whatever they want.
Conservatives (and old-school liberals) need to wrestle the mantle of Climate Change out of the hands of the Totalitarian Left. We cannot let these loons monopolise solutions to Climate Change because it’s only a means to their political ends, i.e., to grab power. Moreover, by being tempted to deny Climate Change, because it’s ostensibly a ‘left wing’ project, conservatives look dumb.
commenter wrote: “…by being tempted to deny Climate Change, because it’s ostensibly a ‘left wing’ project, conservatives look dumb.”
Are these 1200 scientists from around the world “dumb conservatives”?
“World Climate Declaration
The climate view of CLINTEL can be easily summarized as: There is no climate emergency. Guus Berkhout therefore initiated the World Climate Declaration, a one-page summary of the view of many climate realists in the world. The Declaration is a living document that is frequently changed based on input from all its ambassadors and other experts.
https://clintel.org/
“The World Climate Declaration (WCD) has brought a large variety of competent scientists together from all over the world. The considerable knowledge and experience of this group is indispensable in reaching a balanced, dispassionate and competent view of climate change.
From now onward the group is going to function as ‘Global Climate Intelligence Group’. The CLINTEL Group will give solicited and unsolicited advice on climate change and energy transition to governments and companies worldwide.
Climate science should be less political, while climate policies should be more scientific. In particular, scientists should emphasize that their modeling output is not the result of magic: computer models are human-made. What comes out is fully dependent on what theoreticians and programmers have put in: hypotheses, assumptions, relationships, parameterizations, stability constraints, etc. Unfortunately, in mainstream climate science most of this input is undeclared.
To believe the outcome of a climate model is to believe what the model makers have put in. This is precisely the problem of today’s climate discussion to which climate models are central. Climate science has degenerated into a discussion based on beliefs, not on sound self-critical science. We should free ourselves from the naive belief in immature climate models. In future, climate research must give significantly more emphasis to empirical science.”
https://clintel.org/world-climate-declaration/
Heavy duty , James .
I had a feeling about this , but , thanks to you being willing to wade in and just read what the heck they are saying , and breaking their gobblygook down to understand , i have a firmer grasp on how ominous this really is . We are already in it .
“This should all be illegal.” That’s a nice dream. Where real human rights violalations have occurred, it could even be made to stick.
But in the shorter run I think all we will be able to do is disagree with their programs, build our own structures and schools, and concentrate on cultivating our spiritual strength and survival.
We are facing an adversary that has been working on this for – how long? And who expects its actions to have lasting effects in society for – how long? More than one generation, I am sure of that, and likely for many many generations. Most of us have no idea what lasting effects have already been acheived. Not only do we need to escape their latest snares, we must also learn to free ourseleves from all the snares we have already stepped in.
Dear James,
Thank you for this labor of duty and, I think, of love. I have learned more from New Discourses than from any other source, academic or popular, regarding the corruptive evil we have been facing. After exhausting, I think, this worldly, secular explanations, I have come to believe that there may be forces at work globally, more potent than Freire, and I do not hesitate to call our oligarchs Satanic. I pray that the lessons you have energetically and carefully prepared will be shared beyond the audience that attends to New Discourses. Thank God it is you that have had to read the nauseating material, liberating me to enjoy other thinkers, such as Aristotle and Carl Schmitt (after all, life is short and enjoyments fleeting). Anyhow, at some point we all shall have to reply to Lenin’s question, “What is to be Done?”.
Respectfully,
Bill Baumgarth
You’re not alone, I have similar thoughts. I see what looks like people genuinely bent on starting a civil war and I can’t help but think there’s real evil out there.
Dear James
In over 20 years the availability online of learning material & information has surely brought a rapid nonetheless natural alteration in human mind. Thus much of this globalist designed sociological entanglement is to prevent persons from independently obtaining self efficacy in the critical self reflection all this access can help facilitate. Though learning tackle concepts to a higher capacity & able to produce unique work going forward is a confrontation with natural selection & the scholars that design social engineering know this. Thus they know of the challenge a human faces against their own psychological drives extremely well for instance. They’re particularly interested the unconscious mind, that is their target for propaganda regardless it arrives via social contagion. In addition natural selection itself is a hard task master against any persons self generated natural learning. Many desire to learn much more & quite rightly so should they wish. It can be difficult for some as there are people that cannot push on and defeat disorientating senses that natural selection flings at a human trying to gain grasp of subject & some that can. It may seem odd to implicate natural selection like this. But we’d also see that just by discussing this form of paradox, the mind of those reading is already scanning to consider if they are the words of a vain , patronising, or narcissistic person as it were. If i were the reader i’d do it also because we all do under certain conditions when learning paradoxes are challenged for their meanings. This effect does happen & its almost like NS indeed is beginning to pressure people to either fight back against the malaise or quit trying to be more capable / knowledgeable. In other words a phenomenal natural resistance that manifests whenever the subject of higher learning is pushed for answers like this. So we can see that a phenomenon does that place from nowhere & it knows how to tap sociological affect at least on a low level at first. My point is this – if you are a high powered social engineer, you design social architectures that cause disruption at this paradoxical line of leat resistance on the mass scale.
So the question is – which of the globalist designed architectures contain further agenda potential & which don’t. For example – for me having spent much time analysis the phenomenology ‘Queering’ is a prime example of a technique they know will collapse under its own entropy. Its just that until then it is very disruptive, distorting, distracting, but is something of a finite blag.
There is a kind of dependence on Probability where it is technically impossible to obtain empirical data on the habits of a perpetual flux such as ‘The People’ – The Mass are. when you are one of the people. In the labs where social engineering is developed that is possibly less so. In any reasonable sense it is healthy that people see the opportunity to learn more. It has to be realised that going up against the loony left is one thing. But at the same time out stage in human development holds the technological causation that enabled common people to obtain such access – paid with – the perfect means to manipulate them. But so far we know the hardware – i’m not sure we’ve really got to grips with the social engineers ‘software’. so well There is a lot of people vulnrable to a pseudo existential chaos yes & the establishments know many were denied the means to have been routinely highly educated. It is hard to say how many people in the world now see the information age as a natural justice. However what none of us realised in advance was that deeply complex sociological engagement could happen.
In that sense an absence of empirical proof is not something which many within a self learning mass will trifle themselves with – the establishments know that too. But much more relevant is the way that the madness of the crowd, the implicit psychology of the individual, and so many other things in theory of mind can never have empirical backing in any case. Take the idea of a theory of everything in cosmology for example. Peoples wealth (often ivy league money that once was the peoples not the ivy leagues in the first place ) routinely funds research based on no facts – it is normal. Though the point here is that there really are no ways forward in many disciplines if concrete proof is required. Autism for example will be a theory for at least another what 500 years or more ? So lack of evidence is a normal state in many ways. And here it is almost as though the globalists, having noticed a growing culture of self education lacking in the desire to at least refine the strength of reasonable probability – seem to have decided to abolish it. At least where it comes to their latest sociological designs & naturally that radicalism is extremely fragile and indicative of the police state.
An emergent stimulation like the web was always going to alter human neurology en masse, but people were stable. In that sense an unnatural interest by the global establishment et al in seizing the opportunity to manipulate the shift appears to be one of the core reason so many are not anymore.
Globalists place negative overlay onto natural events they detect. Social engineers work closely with NS, as a sort of bedrock in the human behaviour rationale that influences their propaganda. Freire would never be an explicitly significant figure in a field effect scenario like this , but is implicit as your podcast several times infers. Establishments work with sociological topology, and perhaps the data mining elements are as much teaching their Ai how to work with various fields that layer in society as they are for the sake of the information . Although historically dictatorships are clever in mining out the ways to finance each subsection of the agenda, but decoding all this depends go the hierarchy of the design.
I would say that the person most responsible for influencing todays metalanguage is actually Lacan. He is the one who decided to manifest & unleash a spring of intellectual irresponsibility in reaction to Freud & which actually decodes to the same provision of techniques which helped facilitate social & intellectual mob rule using merely the ability to push the improbable via a lazy consensus. Foucault more or less founded himself on this & bullied derrida into it.
Luce Irigary when on lecture tours in the UK doesn’t even bother to try conceal the obvious decoupled logic she is compliling for somebody. The delegation just looks on in astonishment. Check her on tour at the video site – early her career her work as impeccably tight. But then ofc Liberal feminism et al won the trans debate in good faith for the trans people, Trans thought they won it themselves ( for lack of engagement in any philosophical reasoning processes at all ? ) – thus were clueless the feminists had worked tirelessly for them had got what they wanted over the line. Due to this unbelievable lack of awareness the trans didn’t even know they were shafting the fems as thanks for years of lobbying & a fem / trans war resulted .
Far as the UK is concerned thats a jackpot when it comes to stirring sociological unrest while planning to sneak in another referendum on europe tbh .