Latest Comments
|
| G. Edward Griffin: The Future is Calling - The Future is Calling Part One |
 |
 |
 |
| Commentary/Politics - Guest Commentaries | |||
| Written by G. Edward Griffin | |||
| Tuesday, 12 May 2009 14:20 | |||
|
Page 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | All Pages
THE REAL PURPOSE OF MODERN EDUCATION In 1932, the Commission released its first report entitled A Charter for the Social Studies in the Schools, which proclaimed its goals. This was followed in 1934 by its Conclusions and Recommendations. Here are a few examples from that report. Please note that, while this was written in the style of academic literature, it was created to the precise specifications of those who paid the bill. It must not be overlooked that, although these men held doctorates in history, they were writers for hire. They undoubtedly believed in the desirability of collectivism – that’s the reason they were chosen in the first place. Their mission, however, was, not to write past history objectively, but to present it in such a way as to create attitudes so as to influence future history. In other words, they viewed themselves as social engineers and were propagandists for their benefactors. The commission could not limit itself to a survey of text-books, methods of instruction and schemes of examination, but was compelled to consider the conditions and prospects of the American people as a part of world civilization now merging into a world order. ... The American civilization is passing through one of the great critical ages of history, is modifying its traditional faith in economic individualism and is embarking on vast experiences in social planning and control. ... Under the moulding influence of socialized processes of living ... there is a notable waning of the once widespread popular faith in economic individualism; and leaders in public affairs, supported by a growing mass of the population, are demanding the introduction into economy of ever-wider measures of planning and control. ... Cumulative evidence supports the conclusion that, in the United States as in other countries, the age of individualism and laissez faire in economy and government is closing and that a new age of collectivism is emerging. ... Almost certainly it will involve a larger measure of compulsory as well as voluntary cooperation of citizens in the conduct of the complex national economy. A corresponding enlargement of the function of government and in increasing state intervention in fundamental branches of economy previously left to individual discretion. ... The actually integrating economy of the present day is a forerunner of a consciously integrated society in which individual economic actions and individual property rights will be altered and abridged. ... The emerging economy will involve the placing of restraints on individual enterprise, propensities, and acquisitive egoism in agriculture, industry and labor and generally on the conception, ownership, management, and use of property. ... Organized public education ... is now compelled, if it is to fulfill its social obligations, to adjust its objectives, its curriculum, its methods of instruction and its administrative procedures to the requirements of the emerging integrated order. ... From this point of view, a supreme purpose of education in the United States ... is the preparation of the rising generation to enter the society now coming into being.1 If you have been puzzled by the bizarre results of government controlled education since World War II, please go back and read that summary again. Many exposés have been written about progressive education, the demise of national pride, and the dumbing down of America, but none do a better job explaining it than the words of the founders themselves. These Conclusions and Recommendations were not unanimously endorsed by the sixteen-member commission. Several of the group refused to sign because they thought the concepts were too radical. Others had no problem with the concepts but disliked the recommended curriculum. Their minority dissent, however, was of little consequence and soon forgotten. Reactions outside academia were more dramatic. Headlines in the New York Times blasted: “Collectivist Era Seen in Survey, Transition from Individualist Age Under Way.” The New York Herald Tribune carried a similar story. An editorial in the New York Sun on May 23 was entitled “Propaganda in Education.” The following year, the Philadelphia Evening Bulletin carried a story entitled “Breeding Communism.”2 In spite of a few outbursts of public indignation, the news value of this story soon faded, and Progressive Education continued a steady, unchallenged march of conquest over public education, while being quietly funded from behind the scenes by the Carnegie Endowment Fund and other powerful tax-exempt foundations under the appearance of philanthropy. Now let’s go to the words of Norman. Dodd, as he described these events before our cameras in 1982. He said: This group of twenty historians eventually formed the nucleus of the American Historical Association. Then toward the end of the 1920’s the Endowment grants to the American Historical Association $400,000 [a huge amount of money in those days] for a study of history in a manner that points to what this country can look forward to in the future. That culminates in a seven-volume study, the last volume of which is a summary of the contents of the other six. And the essence of the last volume is, the future of this country belongs to collectivism, administered with
|
