Posted tagged ‘Indoctrination’

If You want Real Change, Start with Education

March 9, 2017

If You want Real Change, Start with Education, Front Page MagazineBruce Thornton, March 9, 2017

(Is it still possible to “make education great again?” Oh well. Here’s a flash from the past from Andrew Klavan:

— DM)


It is easy to put a low priority on our how progressive ideology has corrupted higher education, and spend our time and energy on reforming the tax code or reining in the EPA. But remember the Jesuit maxim: “Give me the child until he is seven and I’ll give you the man.” Education today gets children at five, and in some cases continues to mold them until they’re 21. Changing the laws that empower bureaucratic ideologues to indoctrinate our children is the necessary first step to dismantling deep-state tyranny.


The first eight weeks of Trump’s administration have been filled with executive orders attacking the unconstitutional excesses of the Obama presidency. He’s also pledged to kill the regulatory Hydra, increase defense spending, reform the tax code, and restore America’s prestige. And all these changes and promises have been met with vicious attacks and outlandish charges from the media, and scorched-earth obstructionism from Congressional Dems.

All of which is as entertaining as an MMA blood-fest. But to effect real change, we need to get beneath the telegenic food-fight and transient click-bait, and start dynamiting the foundations of the deep state. And that means going after higher education, the one institution that more than any other shapes the young and indoctrinates them with progressive ideology.

But it’s not enough to go after the ideologically biased professoriate and administrators, or ridicule the pretentious “research” churned out by pseudo-disciplines in the humanities and social sciences. No doubt such critical exposure of the “higher nonsense” is important, for those bad ideas trickle down from the research universities to the state colleges, where most of the K-12 teachers get their teaching credentials. And most of those teachers inflict these political prejudices and false knowledge on the impressionable young, who by the time they reach college will already have been primed for even more pernicious indoctrination.

Take, for example, the silly notion of “microagressions.” This is the preposterous idea that systemic racism, sexism, etc. are so pervasive that people can subconsciously inflict injury on women, homosexuals, “people of color,” and all the other certified victims due special treatment like “safe spaces.” This wacky idea got started back in 2007 with a scientifically dubious paper called “Racial Microagressions in Everyday Life.” An even more influential bad idea, “Islamophobia,” traces its origins to Edward Said’s 1978 Orientalism, a “work of malignant charlatanry,” as Middle East scholar Robert Irwin described it, and one of the most-assigned books in social science and humanities courses. Like bacilli, such ideological prejudices disguised as scholarship have infected curricula from grade school to university, and from there sickened the whole culture. And they replicate themselves through the education industry’s monopoly on training, hiring, and tenuring of teachers.

Beyond this sort of research, however, lies the mother of all bad ideas, “diversity.” This pseudo-concept became part of national law in the 1978 Bakke vs. University of California case. In the Bakke decision, Justice Lewis Powell promulgated the idea that a vaguely defined “diversity” could justify racial discrimination in violation of Title VII of the 1964 Civil Rights Act’s ban on–– racial discrimination. How? Because “diversity” along with its alleged pedagogical benefits is a “compelling state interest.” Yet despite the continuing failure to specifically identity, define, or empirically substantiate this “state interest” or its benefits, the Supreme Court has continued to justify race-based policies by invoking “diversity.” Backed by the highest court in the land, promoting “diversity” now has become the dominant policy in nearly all colleges and universities. The result has been the institutionalizing of an illiberal identity politics that corrupts curricula, compromises liberal education’s traditional mission to promote “the free play of the mind on all subjects,” stifles free speech, and privileges politically selected “victims.”

Another example of how the deep state polices institutions to ensure their compliance with progressive ideology is the unconstitutional and unjust campus tribunals created to adjudicate claims of “sexual misconduct.” Robert L. Shibley, the executive director of the Foundation for Individual Rights in Education, has explained how the political corruption of Title IX of the Civil Rights Act has put the coercive, fiscal, and investigative power of the Department of Education behind ideologically based violations of the Constitution.

In 2011, the DOE’s Office of Civil Rights sent universities a “dear colleague” letter offering “guidance” about how schools should handle charges of sexual assault. As Shibley points out, the term “guidance” allows the agency to skirt the Administrative Procedure Act’s requirements that new agency regulations must notify those affected by the new rules and allow them time to comment. Thus the OCR in effect created two new laws, usurping the law-making powers of Congress. One allows both sides in a complaint to appeal the outcome of the proceedings, creating the possibility of double jeopardy if the accused is found guilty. Second, colleges have to use the “preponderance of evidence” standard, basically 50.01 percent certainty, when determining guilt, in contrast to the criminal justice system’s “beyond a reasonable doubt standard, a 98-99 percent certainty.

The result has been campus tribunals that violate the canons of justice and due process, leading to travesties of justice such as the falsely accused Duke lacrosse team, or the fake rape story published by Rolling Stone. In fact, the system is designed to be unfair. Administrators choose who presides over the hearing and who will be jurors––mostly other administrators with a vested interest in the outcome. Neither party has a right to counsel, cross-examination, or examination of the evidence, which can include even hearsay. As Shibley writes, “Such a system is not, by any stretch of the imagination, just, fair, or equitable.”

And huge difficulties face the unfortunate student found guilty who wants to sue, for his future in higher education could be compromised by allegations even if later proven false. Colleges and universities also have standing to sue, but either are ideologically committed to the politicizing of sexual encounters between adults, or fear the ever-present threat that the DOE can withhold federal money––$76 billion in 2013–– from colleges and universities that fall afoul of the agency’s diktats. Such leverage is so powerful that only one school, Oklahoma Wesleyan University, has filed suit against a Dear Colleague Letter.

The solution to this corruption of both the Constitution and the mission of liberal education is for Congress to pass legislation that reforms Title IX and corrects the over-vague and elastic language that gives the DOE scope for such bureaucratic tyranny. Yes, the DOE’s latest assault, the 2016 “Dear Colleague Letter” mandating that students can use whatever restroom fits their assumed sex identity, was suspended by Trump’s Executive order. But that’s a temporary fix that doesn’t get at the root of the problem, which goes beyond one federal agency. Congress must step up and reclaim its Constitutional right to make the laws. For just as appeasement begets appeasement, ignoring deep-state violations of the Constitution will create even more. The DOE’s tyranny permeates the federal bureaucracy, as we’ve seen under Obama with the politicizing of the IRS, the DOJ, and the intelligence community. That’s to be expected from a regulatory leviathan staffed by unaccountable partisan functionaries that every day encroaches on the Constitutional rights of American citizens and compromises their freedom.

It is easy to put a low priority on our how progressive ideology has corrupted higher education, and spend our time and energy on reforming the tax code or reining in the EPA. But remember the Jesuit maxim: “Give me the child until he is seven and I’ll give you the man.” Education today gets children at five, and in some cases continues to mold them until they’re 21. Changing the laws that empower bureaucratic ideologues to indoctrinate our children is the necessary first step to dismantling deep-state tyranny.

Islamic Extremism in France: A Primer (Part I)

April 17, 2016

Islamic Extremism in France: A Primer (Part I), Clarion Project, Leslie Shaw, April 24 [sic] 17, 2016

France-Soldiers-Patrol-IP_4A French soldier patrols after the Charlie Hebdo attack (Photo: © Reuters)

In 732, the town of Sens in Burgundy was invaded and looted by the troops of Abd el-Rahman as a diversionary tactic to divide the French armies who went on to defeat the Saracens at the Battle of Poitiers later that year. Thirteen centuries later, the town again made the history books.

On November 20, 2015 following the Islamist terror attacks, a state of emergency was declared and the first curfew was announced in Sens following a series of raids in the Champs-Plaisants district that uncovered stockpiles of weapons and fake identity papers.

Two weeks later, French law enforcement raided the Lagny-sur-Marne mosque east of Paris. Among objects seized were a 9mm revolver, a concealed hard disk and jihadist documents. The raid led to nine house arrests and prohibitions on leaving France against 22 people.

The former president of the Lagny Muslim Association had already fled to Egypt in December 2014 with 10 members of his congregation. Two other mosques were closed down, one in Lyon and one in Gennevilliers, a northern suburb of Paris.

Less than one month after the state of emergency was declared, French police had carried out 2,235 raids with 232 people detained and 234 weapons seized. This was just the first phase in the uncovering of the radical Islamic ecosystem financed by foreign states and organized crime that emerged and spread throughout France from the 1990s.

The terrorist attacks of November 2015 and January 2016 came as no surprise to French defense and security services, who had issued a warning at the beginning of 2015 that thousands of Islamic radicals “willing and able to out-wait the capacity of the state to dedicate scarce resources to watching them” were ready to strike. That assessment proved to be correct.

France is now confronted with a permanent terror threat from a section of its population, and despite the deployment of 10,000 troops to support 100,000 police and gendarmes, more attacks will occur in the coming years and decades. French people can no longer live in security in their own country, thanks to bad policy decisions made over the past 50 years.

The Kervenanec district of Lorient in Brittany is one of France’s 762 zones euphemistically labelled “Sensitive Areas” by the Ministry of the Interior, where endemic crime has reached critical proportions. Lorient is also one of the strongholds of radical Islam in Brittany, where the number of mosques serving the region’s 180,000 Muslims doubled from 27 in 2003 to 53 in 2015, the most notorious being the Sunna mosque in Pontanézen run by Salafist Imam Rachid Abou Houdeyfa, who is notorious for indoctrinating children.

In one religious education class, he told children that “people who listen to music will be swallowed up by the earth and turned into monkeys and pigs.”

More and more young Bretons, seduced via social media, are converting to Islam and repudiating their families. At least 15 are fighting in Syria and Iraq, and the DGSI (secret service) is currently investigating 110 individuals linked to jihadist networks.

The indigenous Bretons are up in arms, notably the sheep farmers, because of widespread sheep-rustling in the weeks leading up to the Islamic feast of Aïd-el-Kebir. Around 120,000 sheep are ritually slaughtered each year in France, often illegally and with great cruelty, in homes and apartments.

The scourge of radical Islam that is sweeping the country is impacting children as well as adolescents and young adults. In January 2015 pupils at Daniel-Mayer public junior high school in the 18th district of Paris brandished knives and meat cleavers in a rap video posted on YouTube.

Further south, a 13-year-old boy was arrested in Ariane, an eastern suburb of Nice. He was suspected of having fired a dozen shots with an airgun at a nursery school playground, wounding 2 girls aged 4 and 5, one in the head, the other in the back. Ariane is referred to in the press report as a “quartier sensible” or “sensitive neighbourhood,” which is coded language for a ghetto. These incidents demonstrate that the culture of jihad is spreading like wildfire among the children of a certain sector of the French population.

In yet another case, a 15-year-old high school student shouting “Allah Akbar” shot his physics teacher with an airgun after threatening to kill his French teacher. This happened on the same day that Le Parisien newspaper revealed that over 50% of French school teachers have taken out private insurance coverage against the risk of verbal and physical violence involving pupils and their parents.

Aside from private schools and state schools in middle-class areas, the French education system has become a difficult and dangerous place to work in. Meanwhile, the government continues to relax standards to accommodate unruly pupils who have no interest in learning, and Islam has become a standard part of the curriculum. An exercise in the chapter on Islam in the French 7th grade History/Geography course requires pupils to answer six questions about this text entitled Rewards for Combatants of Islam:

“Not equal are those of the believers who sit at home, except those who are disabled, and those who strive hard and fight in the Cause of Allah with their wealth and their lives. Allah has preferred in grades those who strive hard and fight with their wealth and their lives above those who sit at home. Unto each, Allah has promised good, but Allah has preferred those who strive hard and fight, above those who sit at home, by a huge reward.”

Is there a valid reason that 12-year-old children should be reading this, let alone memorizing the tenets of jihad?