Recently, I published a piece which said that we never really own our because we are forced to pay property taxes, one of the planks of the Communist Manifesto. Private property should never be taxed because this means the government will be ultimate owner of your property.
Since that publication, I have produced a short documentary on why our education system is racist and favors affluent people, most of whom are white. And don’t blame the white people, this is the product of the rich and powerful who select the politicians who will represent them. And the George Soros’ of the Deep State celebrate the resulting racial division.
The current education system, the way it is managed by the governed by the government is racist and favors the children of the wealthy, who are pimarily white. Keep in mind I have strongly criticized George Soros and his types for inventing racial conflict in this country. I am a conservative, but in education, we are funding neighborhood schools in a manner that favors the rich.
The primary funding mechanism is property taxes. Why is this a problem? Ask yourself the following questions:
- Is there a correlation between race and poverty in this country?If so, wealthier neighborhoods get better schools when primarily supported by property taxes.
- Why would a fair-minded nation ever support a funding mechanism for schools that favors the rich and by default, victimized many children of color?
When I pointed out these inequities, here was a response I received from a recently created video.
I agree with one point made by Sara Shepherd. The Department of Education should be abolished. It is unconstitutional. But this person did not consider the fact that the local funding mechanism is racist, and remember, I am a conservative saying this. Sara totally ignored the funding inequities I raised and responded with a “to hell with them” attitude. Here was my response to Sara.
How then do kids from tough backgrounds get educated? Where’s your compassion? A desire to have a level playing field? You may not like socialism, but you must love feudalism and that is what your attitude will bring. I hope for your kids sake, you have $$$ to privately educate them. But for the grace of God go I…… Having been a college basketball coach, I have seen the backgrounds that some black and Latino kids come from. I witnessed the transformation in their lives just because they could shoot a basketball and they got an education as a result. I coached many so-called “ghetto kids” who became very successful. Many became teachers, coaches, lawyers, accountants and some run their own businesses. When we make funds available to effectively teach the poor, amazing things happen. And since most people in poverty, over 65%, are minorities, a system of education supported by property taxes is not fair and discriminates against people of all races that are poor. However, it hits more people of color than not.
What about poor black and Latino kids who are not good at sports and don’t have a chance to go to college because they cannot afford it or their inferior neighborhood school did not prepare them adequately? Who levels their playing field? It wont be the racists who support the current system.
Doesn’t God command us to love ALL people? If we love all people, we would care about their future and not support the current system, which has historically driven minorities to the “promise you everything” Democratic Party. And who can blame minorities for flocking to the Democrats, even if they are being promised fools gold?
The answer to this problem is a voucher, equally applied to all, that can used to attend any school. And please spare me the “you must home school your child”. I agree it is often a good option. However, it is not a practical, universal solution.
Here is the video that sparked the controversy.
Many say that public education is broken and should be done away with. However, these same people never have a practical solution to help all of our children be the most that they can be. What’s the answer? If you have a better idea, that does not promote opporunity based on economic inequality, then please enlighten me.
FOR A LIMITED TIME ONLY
CLICK HERE TO FIND OUT MORE- USE THE COUPON CODE “5COMMON” TO TAKE 5% OFF
Source Article from http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/DaveHodges-TheCommonSenseShow/~3/MX1U7aNrixk/
Every year on university campuses across the country, students like me navigate a variety of disciplines in pursuit of numbers that will open the door to our career of choice. Whether we yearn for a high grade point average (GPA), a high grad school test score, or a high paying job, numbers are what matter to those of us who see university as an important gateway to future happiness and prosperity. However, in certain disciplines, it can be difficult to reconcile this aspect of the student experience with the freedom to pursue our studies in a spirit of open and disinterested inquiry. In the liberal arts programs in particular, activism and ambition can conflict so that students must choose between writing what they think and getting the grades they want and need.
Of course, this ought to be a false dilemma. That it exists at all raises troubling questions about academic liberty-a cornerstone of any educational institution-and what a university education is actually for. Although most schools continue to affirm free inquiry as central to their pedagogic mission, this honorable commitment is being eroded as the humanities and parts of the social sciences become increasingly insular and politicized within a wider climate of hyper-polarization.
Part of the problem is that the marking of work in many liberal arts programs often lacks the same degree of objectivity and rigor found in disciplines like mathematics or the natural sciences. In disciplines such as philosophy, politics, and sociology, professors enjoy considerable latitude to teach and grade in any way they see fit. If a student views a given theory or interpretation differently to his professor or teaching assistant, he can either write what he believes, even though it is at odds with the views of the marker, or he can write what he thinks the marker wishes to read. Granted, there is often a middle ground, but the very existence of such dilemma in the minds of many students unnecessarily inhibits their intellectual freedom. While there is nothing directly prohibiting students from being intellectually honest and open minded, such an approach is hardly incentivized if simply regurgitating a professor’s preferred view is more likely to be rewarded with a higher mark.
The risk of writing an essay that contests the theories promulgated by a professor or teacher’s assistant may be too consequential when the goal is to secure a job or a place in grad school upon which a GPA may be heavily dependent. The intense competition for admission means that every grade and percentage point matters. There is more riding on grad school admission and career prospects than there is on intellectual integrity. As a result, students are implicitly encouraged to sacrifice the latter for the former, and learning what to think becomes more valuable and important than learning how to think. Why would a student such as myself bother to challenge the conventional wisdom and risk a B, when I can simply provide what I know is expected and receive an A?
Something has gone fundamentally awry. This is not to say that every professor will mark heterodoxy more harshly than orthodoxy. There are still professors who value clarity, originality, and consistency over conformity. But students holding views that differ fundamentally from those taught must nevertheless consider and evaluate the risk that they will be penalized for their opinions, particularly when writing about politically contentious topics. Speakers and authors now described as part of the ‘Intellectual Dark Web’ have become radioactive for many students writing for university courses. They hesitate to cite the work of these figures or even mention the names of thinkers deemed ‘controversial’ or beyond the pale by whoever is responsible for reading it and grading their work. In such cases, it is generally safer to avoid controversy and to rely instead upon those approved scholars already lauded by faculty. We are free to browse the ‘IDW’ on our own time, of course, but this only widens the chasm between learning in the true sense and the demands of a formal education.
This has implications for the meaning and value of university education. On the one hand, colleges are theoretically committed to placing open-mindedness and intellectual honesty at the center of the university experience. On the other, students who see high grades as the only route to success may conclude that conformity is an easier way to achieve that end than free thought. This requires a form of self-censorship that directly contradicts the values universities claim to defend and uphold. Which is not to say that students should be permitted to write whatever they like. But coherent and well-supported argument is surely a better yardstick of academic ability than the robotic repetition of the latest fashionable theory. Instead, a tear in the fabric of university culture is growing that privileges indoctrination and the suppression of academic freedom over open inquiry and the exploration of ideas.
The question for many students has become not “What do I think?” but “What do they want me to write?” For many us, this sacrifice may ultimately be the correct and easy one to make. If we want to be successful, we can curb our intellectual curiosity, not because we are prevented from using it, but because obedient co-operation is in our more immediate best interests.
Avel Ivanov studies Ethics, Society & Law at the University of Toronto. You can follow him on Twitter @av3ll
Every facet of our government from the federal government to the state, city and county level are under the control of the Deep State globalists. They create organizations such as the American Legislative Exchange Council (ALEC) which, in effect controls our local politics. If you wonder why your schools are underfunded and teaching porn disguised radical sex-ed that parents cannot opt out of, I just told you who is responsible.
The California bill which is trying to end Christianity in that state by forbidding the sale of the Bible, is a trial piece of legislation which came from ALEC. If successful, we will see this all across the country.
All the Agenda 21 legislation, which is virtually identical from state to state, is the product of ALEC. Regressive education reform, out of control managed health care practices have their roots in this organization as well. ALEC is deeply rooted in the Deep State which will become clear as we more closely examine this anti-American organization that controls every state-house.
ALEC was funded in 1973, in Bill Ayers/Obama town of Chicago. It was known as the Conservative Caucus of State Legislators at its onset.
Through ALEC, global corporations and state politicians vote behind closed doors to try to rewrite state laws that govern your rights. Legislators from all 50 states attend and they leave their “wine and dine” sessions with what they call “model bills” which directly benefit large corporations. In ALEC’s own printed words, corporations have “a VOICE and a VOTE” on specific changes to the law that are then proposed in your state, and sometimes in the federal legislature. This is how America became a corporatocracy from top to bottom. This is pure fascism at its core. But wait, it gets worse.
For a while, ALEC, was controlled by the Chicago-based Heartland Institute, and the Heartland Institute is now a member of ALEC. The Heartland Institute has also functioned as a publisher and promoter of ALEC’s model legislation, including all Agenda 21 legislation, education reform, healthcare reform, and corporate tax breaks at the state and local level. The Heartland institute is funded almost exclusively by the Koch brothers, both David and Charles, the former being a member of the globalist Aspen Institute. You remember the Aspen Institute’s former Director was the King of Agenda 21 and regressive education reform, Maurice Strong. All were controlled by the Heritage Foundation and they gave America some of her darkest legislative moment in that the Heritage Foundation fellow and CFR member, Richard Allen who drafted NAFTA, which led to open borders and America’s out of control immigration problem, and Stuart Butler wrote the white paper for the Heritage Foundation promoting the individual mandate in healthcare (ie Obamacare). They are all in the subsidiary control of ALEC and ALEC is where most of your major state legislative bills come from.
The American Legislative Exchange Council is a so-called think tank whose memberhips consist of state legislators and corporations who gather together behind closed doors to write legislation for the states. Deep Sate dark money funds ALEC, and the main funding sources are George Soros and the Koch Brothers
ALEC’s membership is 95% corporate along with 2500 of the 7500 legislators from every state. In other words, nearly one-third of all state legislators have their legislation writeen from the by this group. In effect, if you believe all politics is local, then this is the most dangerous organzation in America and almost nobody has heard of it. This is where almost all state legislation comes from.
The father of ALEC was Paul Weyrich. However, he had a great deal of help as George Soros, the Coors family, and Planned Parenthood promoter, Richard Scaife, the heir to the Carnegie Mellon fortune. Scaife has allegedly funded ALEC to the tune of more than $7 million. Scaife was connected to Rockefeller Chase Mellon Bank.
Weyrich, a dedicated communist, served as advisor to former Russian President, Boris Yeltsin of Chechnyan genocide fame. This is who founded the organization that writes your state’s laws.
The American Legislative Exchange Council (ALEC) is a corporate bill mill. It’s not just a lobby or front group, ALEC is one of the most powerful unelected councils in the country. It is the Trilateral Commission and The Coumcil on Foreign Relations all rolled into one and it is designed to control state legislators and the bills that they write. The idea of an unelected council is how socialist and communists rule their people. They councils are task forces, public-private partnerships, nongovernmental organization are examples of this “Sovietization of America’s local political etc, are the forms of government used to bypass the will of the people
Unlike school lunches in America and the UK, school lunches in Japan are a rich cultural experience. The students prepare the meals themselves and learn about the nutritional value of their food. Grown locally, the food includes a balanced menu of rice, fish, vegetables and soups. The japanese students also learn how to cooperate and practice etiquette skills as they help each other serve food and clean up too. This helps children acquire “a sense of gratitude” and “spirit to appreciate foods and social manners,” writes government school expert Nobuko Tanaka and Miki Miyoshi.
Though other countries struggle to design school meals that are healthy, sustainable and cost-effective, schools in Japan are able to give students the sort of food they would get at home. More than a whopping 10 million children recieve delicious fresh food that is far from the processed meals that one would expect to get in a typical American school. “Japan’s standpoint is that school lunches are a part of education, not a break from it,” Masahiro Oji, a government director of school health education in Japan. “What is most difficult for me to explain is why we can do this and other countries cannot.
“Everything is cooked on site,” school nutritionist Kimii Fujii said. “We even make our own broth.”
“Parents hear their kids talking about what they had for lunch,” Tatsuji Shino, the principal at Umejima Elementary School in Tokyo, told the Washington Post, “and kids ask them to re-create the meals at home.”
Given their approach to food, Japan does not struggle with childhood and adolescent disorders. According to government data, Japan’s child obesity rate, always among the world’s lowest, has declined for each of the past six years.
Image Credit: Osamu Iwasaki
Source Article from https://truththeory.com/2018/03/26/school-lunches-part-education-japan/
Mark Collett on home schooling and public education: National Bugle Radio, March 19, 2018
Patrick Slattery and Mark Collett talk about zombie-looking Theresa May and her Russian obsession. Then they go on to home schooling and public education. Also, fun information from Tree of Logic’s resume.
Check out Dr. Slattery’s website, NationalBugle.com
The Trump administration’s Education Department will no longer investigate complaints filed by transgender students who are kept from using the bathroom that aligns with their gender identity, a department official told BuzzFeed News.
HuffPost previously reported that the Department of Education had already started telling students who submitted these complaints that the issue no longer fell within its jurisdiction, but this marks the first time an official has referenced a concrete policy change. The news comes almost a year after the departments of Justice and Education rescinded joint, Obama-era guidance that any school receiving federal money must treat a student’s gender identity as his or her sex, which included allowing individuals to use the bathroom conforming to their identity.
However, since that time, the Trump administration has been mum on information about how the Education Department’s civil rights division would officially handle these cases. In June, an internal memo from the department’s Office for Civil Rights told attorneys that these cases could be dismissed, but it was not necessarily a requirement. But a spokeswoman for the Department of Education told BuzzFeed that the administration does not interpret Title IX, the federal law prohibiting sex discrimination, to cover these types of cases.
“Where students, including transgender students, are penalized or harassed for failing to conform to sex-based stereotypes, that is sex discrimination prohibited by Title IX,” Liz Hill told BuzzFeed. “In the case of bathrooms, however, long standing regulations provide that separating facilities on the basis of sex is not a form of discrimination prohibited by Title IX.”
Hill told the outlet that transgender student complaints could still be investigated, just not those centered around the use of intimate facilities.
The Obama administration interpreted Title IX to include discrimination based on gender identity. Notably, a wave of recent court decisions have also interpreted the law this way.
In January, HuffPost learned of at least three recent cases in which the Office for Civil Rights dismissed complaints filed by transgender students regarding access to bathrooms, locker rooms and gender specific sports teams. The Office for Civil Rights wrote back to complainants and said their office was no longer required to deal with this type of discrimination.
HuffPost also previously learned that the number of complaints filed with the Department of Education related to the treatment of transgender students dropped precipitously, by about 40 percent, between January 2016 through January 2017, and January 2017 through January 2018. At the time, advocates for LGBTQ students told HuffPost they worried that the Trump administration was having a chilling effect on the students who would otherwise submit complaints of discrimination.
Upon rescinding the Obama-era guidance last year, Education Secretary Betsy DeVos met with a small group of transgender children and families to discuss issues facing this group of students. Vanessa Ford attended the meeting with her six-year-old transgender daughter, Ellie. During the meeting, DeVos mentioned that she had a young granddaughter, just like Ellie.
Ford told HuffPost that she found the news today “mind boggling.”
“We put our family at risk meeting with her in hopes it would make change. She now made the decision for the Department of Education that my daughter and thousands of daughters and sons shouldn’t have the protection her grandchildren should be afforded,” said Ford.
Eliza Byard, executive director of the Gay, Lesbian and Straight Education Network, said that after the Trump administration first rescinded the student guidance last year, they saw school districts who had been supporting transgender students suddenly change course. She is now focused on making sure they feel supported and affirmed across the country.
“They are not alone,” said Byard. “It is ultimately most important right now every transgender student understands right now that this is wrong.”
- This article originally appeared on HuffPost.
Would you consider yourself a creative genius? If you asked other people that question, perhaps some might answer in the affirmative. But the vast majority of individuals, when confronted with that question, might say no. It’s not that they don’t really think they are the type of person to be considered creative or a genius. It’s just that they no longer see themselves as creative individuals. The older the person, the higher the chance that they would answer no to the question. This is based on the results of a shocking new study that posits that all people are creative geniuses at birth. It’s just that the system of education ends up dumbing them down as they move through it.
According to Dr. George Land, he was once contacted by the National Aeronautics Space Agency (NASA) and another expert named Beth Jarman in order to develop a special cognitive test that would be able to determine the so-called creative potential of NASA engineers and rocket scientists. After formulating the test, they gave it to NASA for it to be used, and it was found to be highly effective in fulfilling NASA’s wishes. It wasn’t long after that when scientists began to wonder certain things about creativity in the human brain.
So to find out the answers to their questions — like where creativity comes from, or whether it’s a learned trait or inborn — they gave the highly specialized test to 1,600 children over the age of four and five. They found that a whopping 98 percent of all the test participants fell under the genius category. Now, that might look like a major find, but the scientists didn’t stop there.
They went further and gave the tests to a progressively older set of individuals. First were kids who were 10 years old. They were surprised to find that these 10-year-olds, most of whom were from the original set of test takers, failed to meet a similar percentage of so-called creative geniuses; only 30 percent of them fell under that category.
Meanwhile, adults performed even worse at the test. According to the data, only two percent of participating adults recorded test scores that fell under the creative genius bracket. So what exactly does this all mean? Is there any way we can make sense of it?
Remarkably, Dr. Land himself has come forward and done it for the benefit of everyone. That is, in a recently conducted TEDx talk, he shared all details of a study that concluded that people somehow lose their creative side mainly because of the dull education system that they underwent. According to another expert named Gavin Nascimento, it should be no surprise.
“The reasoning for this is not too difficult to apprehend; school, as we plainly call it, is an institution that has historically been put in place to ultimately serve the wants of the ruling class, not the common people,” said Nascimento. “In order for the so-called elite to maintain their lavish lifestyles of overt luxury — where they contribute the least but enjoy the most — they understand that children must be dumbed down and brainwashed to accept (and even serve) their rapacious system of artificial scarcity, unending exploitation, and incessant war.”
No matter where you stand on the creative spectrum, one thing is quite clear: if you can recognize the truth about your condition, then it isn’t too late to do something about it. According to Dr. Land, the key could be something as simple as dreaming like a child again. That way, you may unlock the secrets that made you such a prodigy when you were younger.
Learn more about how the brain works in Brain.news.
Dr. George Land and Beth Jarman were commissioned by NASA to help the space agency identify and develop creative talent. The two were tasked to research school children in an attempt to identify creative individuals from which the agency could pick to help with their many products. In a recent TED talk, Land described his team’s surprising findings on the education system which are nothing short of shocking.
It seems American schoolchildren lose their ability to think creatively over time. As students enter their educational journey, they retain most of their abilities to think creatively. In other words, children are born with creative genius. Employing a longitudinal study model, Land and Jarman studied 1,600 children at ages 5, 10, and 15.
Surprisingly, Land said they discovered if given a problem with which they had to come up with an imaginative, and innovative solution, 98 percent of 5-year-olds tested at the “genius” level. Simply put, their answers to how the problem should be solved were brilliant.
Upon entry into the school system, those numbers started to drop dramatically. When the team returned to test those same subjects at age 10, the percentage of genius-level imaginative and innovative thinkers fell to an unthinkable 30 percent. The indicators led the researchers to believe the current educational system is to blame. Not only did 68 percent of those students lose their ability to think with imagination and innovation, the thought that only 30 percent could still do is unfathomable.
The downward spiral continued to be demonstrated at age 15. When the researchers returned, the percentage of genius-level students had dropped to an abysmal 12 percent. Gasps could be heard all around the room as the audience attempted to process how such a brilliant group of students could sink so low in their imaginations and ability to solve problems with innovation.
Land blames the Industrial Revolution and its burgeoning factories for the demise of creativity. During that era, Land said the natural approach to teaching and learning led educators to develop “factories for human beings, too, called ‘schools’ so we could manufacture people that could work well in the factories.”
From a qualitative perspective, teachers point to governmental intrusion into the dumbing down of the nation’s school children. Starting with the development of the Department of Education, the federal government’s handprint is all over some of the worst decisions regarding public policy and education.
From the Clinton Administration’s mandated federal testing guidelines, to Bush’s No Child Left Behind Act, to the disastrous Obama Administration’s Common Core Curriculum, teachers everywhere have complained they’re not teaching any longer. They’re simply instructing students to achieve the minimum educational requirements necessary for them to pass a standardized exam.
Predictably, during those administration’s attempts to force a model of education upon the nation, the homeschool movement has flourished. Parents were forced to come to the conclusion their local public school was failing to provide an education sufficient for their children to be able to attend college.
As a result, Land’s team was not surprised to find only 2 percent of adults (Age 31) still retain their ability to think imaginatively, with creativity and innovation. He said:
Look, folks, if we’re going to enter the future with hope, that’s not going to do it. We have to do something about it.
Land says people can actually get back to thinking creatively with imagination if they will get rid of stinking thinking. He urges listeners to get rid of three aspects of education: judgment, criticism, and censorship.
When students come up with a brilliant idea they’re met with constant criticism, therefore they become conditioned to think like the masses, instead of coming up with an accepted alternative solution.
“Find the 5-year-old,” in yourself, Land implores. He says it has “never gone away” and can be accessed at any moment. Land said “So, The Great Designer said, ‘I’m gonna put that mechanism in so they exercise it every day in case they ever need an idea.’ You’ve got that capability, absolutely!”
But Land says we only exercise that genius part of our brains when we’re dreaming. So dream big! Dream often. And don’t let naysayers rain on your imagination.
Using brain scan imaging, Land demonstrated how the brain is practically useless when it’s afraid. In contrast, the human brain is exceedingly active when it’s imagining.
Without specifically criticizing the educational system, Land addressed the major problem with teaching students to get the “right answer.” He says, instead, students should imagine many possibilities to achieve innovation and problem-solving.
According to Land, in order for industry to survive, it must be continually innovating, and adapting to change, expecting the landscapes to evolve, and evolve with it. Instead of becoming fixated on one right solution, come up with 30-40 imaginative ones to become innovative.
Source Article from http://thefreethoughtproject.com/study-children-brilliant-education-dumbs-down/