Rescuing Our Kids and Country From Karl Marx

2010-06-29
By

It bears repeating: If we hope to halt, reverse and permanently alter America’s descent into the gutter of debauchery and that political tyranny that is forever its companion — “education is the key.” (1)

And if so, it must be, it can only be that that education is initiated, financed, and controlled by parents, not by Karl Marx and the Almighty State; no, nor by anyone far removed from our home, our values, our input, and our right to say, “You’re fired!”

Of course, Marx, and every godless statist there ever was and is, knew the road to their Godless tyranny was lined with schools, colleges, and universities created, funded, and controlled by the state … and the more centralized that control the better.

He also recognized the absolute necessity of an ongoing propaganda and legal campaign against parent controlled models like home schools, church schools, private schools, and small locally funded-locally controlled public schools; and this too: against any and all curricula that defends or promotes God, eternal truth, moral responsibility, the traditional family, limited government, the United States Constitution, the Free Enterprise System, and of course, private property. In short, an ongoing war against the very foundation, tools, weapons, and inspiration of free men.

A Brief Review From the Mouth of Marx and Co.

In 1932 Communist Party USA founder, William Z. Foster, outline in his book Toward Soviet America “the elementary measures the American Soviet government will adopt to further the cultural revolution.” His target was America’s schools. His strategy:

[S]tudies will be revolutionized, being cleansed of religious, patriotic and other features of the bourgeois ideology. The students will be taught on the basis of Marxian dialectical materialism, internationalism and the general ethics of the new Socialist society. Present obsolete methods of teaching will be superseded by a scientific pedagogy. (2)

There is much to behold in that 1932 statement; and it has all come to pass. Religion and patriotism has been replaced with materialism, internationalism, the ethics of socialism, and the scientific pedagogy. Can anyone doubt it? Certainly John Dewey would concur.

But Foster didn’t stop there. As to those “other features of the bourgeois ideology” that were to be ‘cleansed’ the traditional family topped the list. Recall, if you will, communism founder Karl Marx bragging that he and his comrades would “Abolish the family!” Why? Because the traditional family was the transmission belt of christian and capitalist values. Plain and simple. The traditional family had to go; and with it home schools, private schools, and old-styled public schools where parents were the employers, the curriculum chiefs, the bosses over the neighborhood school. (3)

“The bourgeois claptrap about the family and education, about the hallowed co-relation of parent and child … [is] disgusting,” Marx wrote. Marx’s plan? “We destroy the most hallowed of relations when we replace home education with social.” (4)

To help make this a reality, confusion as to who really pays teachers had to be created. Thus in plank ten of the Communist Manifesto Marx called for “Free education for all children in public schools.” (5) This was a ploy – the beginning of a propaganda war in favor of the nonsense that the government, not the parents who are taxed by the government, pays the bill.

To strengthen their nonsensical case the communists and their fellow travelers then worked unceasingly to centralize wherever and whenever possible the paymaster, curriculum, testing, teacher education, and teacher licensing laws. To help bring this about Communist Party Chief Foster envisioned the day when all “the schools, colleges, and universities [would be] coordinated and grouped under the National Department of Education.” (6) Why? Because he recognized, as all dedicated Marxists must, the more things appear to flow from the center, the more teachers and principals will look away from parents and toward Big Brother. Likewise, the more parents feel disenfranchised, the more they will tend to shy away from involvement in the public school system.

It’s only natural. It was destined to work. It did.

The U.S. Department of Education came into being in 1980 under President Jimmy Carter. But movement toward a fully empowered department level agency began four decades earlier under Presidents Roosevelt and Truman with the 1941 Lanham Act, the 1944 G.I. Bill, the 1946 George-Barden Act, and the 1950 Impact Aid laws.

With federal education funds now flowing into state, county, and local school district coffers, and federal agencies set up and empowered to administer those funds, the Supreme Court was by 1961 ready to start playing God over parent and child. Classroom prayer had to go, they ruled. The rationale: “that which the federal government subsidizes, it has the right to control.” (7)

The removal of prayer was followed by the removal of God from every textbook and the replacement of the Judeo-Christian ethic with the humanistic, ‘progressive’ ideology of Karl Marx and John Dewey, a viewpoint that would step-by-step tolerate everything and anything in the classroom — anything and everything, that is, but Judeo-Christian values. Needless to say, Communist Party USA founder William Z. Foster called for that hypocritical and hostile approach as well. “Freedom will be established for anti-religious propaganda,” (8) he wrote.

Which brings us up to date. “Christians and Jews: Shut up!” However, “Atheists, agnostics, communists, humanists, adulterers, homosexuals, abortionists, and new to the list, practitioners of Islam: Say whatever you please! Your take on religion and morality — or against them rather — will be in the textbooks and shouted from the house tops! Say Hallelujah! … And, oh, by the way, if any of those old school religious fanatics and constitutionalists criticize anything you have to say or anything that you do, anything mind you, just let us know; we”ll have them prosecuted for hate speech!’

And so it is.

Private christian schools are next. Wrote Foster, “The churches will remain free to continue their services, but their special tax and other privileges will be liquidated. Their buildings will revert to the State. Religious schools will be abolished and organized religious training for minors prohibited.” (9)

One thinks of the University of California’s recent rejection of high school credit from schools that study history, literature and science from a christian perspective. One thinks of the N.E.A’s opposition to school vouchers because “85 percent of private schools are religious” and because such a groundswell of students turning to religion “would only encourage economic, racial, ethnic, and religious stratification in our society.” (10) You see, only fully trained, dutifully certified, under-Big-Brother’s-thumb public school teachers can unify and bring peace on earth!

A far cry from the educational goal Horace Mann expressed in a speech published by the N.E.A. in its 1941 “American Citizens Handbook,” wherein Mann called for “an order of teachers, wise, benevolent, [and] filled with Christian enthusiasm.” (11) But then again, Mann was a European socialist too who was smart enough to soften his often vicious antagonism for homeschools, church schools, and private schools, by appealing to and promising to uphold the Judeo-Christian values then prevalent in America, by offering, I suppose, a heaven on earth, and this to get that socialist camel’s nose in the door. He and his camel got their way. We all know what happened next.

But what of tomorrow? If we wish to save our kids, and our country, it’s time to reclaim the tent, kick out the camel, and return the schooling of our children to where God and Nature assigned it: to us, to the parents, whether to ingenious little homeschools and private mentors, or to the next best thing, those schools most responsive to us as parents, namely: to church, private, and locally funded and controlled public schools.

It worked before. It can work again.

Steve Far­rell is one of the orig­i­nal pun­dits at Sil­ver Eddy Award Win­ner, NewsMax.com (1999–2008), asso­ciate pro­fes­sor of polit­i­cal econ­omy at George Wythe Uni­ver­sity, the author of the highly praised inspi­ra­tional novel “Dark Rose,” and edi­tor in chief of The Moral Liberal

Footnotes

1. An oft repeated line of John Birch Society founder Robert Welch.

2. Foster, William Z. “Toward Soviet America,” Elgin Publications, Balboa Island, California. 1961 (originally International Publishers, New York, 1932), p. 316.

3. Marx, Karl. Communist Manifesto.

4. Ibid.

5. Ibid.

6. Foster, p. 316.

7. First enunciated in Wickard v. Filburn, 317 U.S. 111, 131. “It is hardly lack of due process for the Government to regulate that which it subsidizes.”

8. Foster, p. 316.

9. Ibid.

10. See www.nea.org/vouchers/index.html under the subheadings “The Social Case Against Vouchers” and “The Legal Case Against Vouchers.”

11. Morgan, Jay Elmer. The American Citizens Handbook, The National Education Association, Washington, D.C., 1941, p. 254.

Tags: , ,

757 views

  • Eric Legge

    It is right to claim back the education system, both in the UK and USA, from the communists/socialists/feminists, which is now really just a marxoid propaganda machine, but to reitroduce the teaching of Christianity in the schools would be a backward step, for the obvious and simple reason that Christianity, with its emphasis on the poor in spirit, the meek, the ill-constituted being the children of God, spawned communism, socialism and feminism.

    Communism, socialism and feminism are so unnatural to human nature that it took Christianity 2000 years to prepare the ground (weaken human nature) before those ideologies started to take hold. Without the influence of Christianity, it is very unlikely that those ideologies would ever been able to establish themselves, because they all put the first last and the last first and that would not have happened has Christianity not set the ball rolling in that direction.

  • p gibson

    This looks like a heap of hyperbole to me. The way I see it, taxpayers revolted in California and other US states to reduce their property taxes/liability – the taxes that go to local school funding.

    It was a local, not a Federal thing.

    Marx???? – whatever.

    How ’bout we re-focus on entitlement-seeking America ? Who are these REAL LIVE people ? Forget the dead ones, like Marx. These entitlement folks simply got tired of funding frilly programs like music, and art so they should have more money in their pockets to buy fucking Winnebagos and expensive motorboats and second cars – the entitlements begin to roll in as Taxpayers just simply give up on education – (it hasn’t gotten any better at time moves forward) altogether.

    But now, you’ve got that Summer Home in the Sierras – you and your dumbasssed children ought to be real proud of yourselves.

    Marx? WTF?

    It was lazy-assed, short-sighted Americans that dumbed down America.

    They’re STILL doing it under the name of …conservatism and frugality, there’s no other choices as the US govt. is bankrupting itself in wars that were never meant to be waged, and we could have all done this on the cheap – but NOOOOOOOOOO.

    I guess in America, you’re entitled to strike back(at Al Queida), and do it with as few brain cells as possible. Yeah, that’ll teach them.

    But not U.S.

    Marx? He’s been dead for some time now.

  • Ken

    The internet revolutionized and empowered people with information. From travel to auctions to entertainment delivery, but it has yet to impact the education oligarchy in any big way. Online schools would have huge momentum if “working moms” weren’t essentially paying for day care through property taxes or rent and the incredibly powerful teachers unions weren’t fighting against it tooth and nail.

    Parents could choose whatever school they want regardless of where it is. Some parents are all ready opting for these types of schools, yes religious themed and online. These are not the same mothers who exclaim “I can’t wait til school starts!”, to get the little bastards out of their hair for the day I suppose.

    What really is the value vs the cost of an in person teacher, brick and mortar and admin support? So kids have a daytime babysitter and sports teams? The answer to our educational demise is right in front of us if we choose to take it. The new classroom is in your house with a broadband connection. It’s so simple and cost effective that we’re too scared to do it. But then who could have processed the power of the internet 20 years ago?

  • Jabberwocky

    Politics Explained

    FEUDALISM: You have two cows. Your lord takes some of the milk.

    PURE SOCIALISM: You have two cows. The government takes them and puts them in a barn with everyone else’s cows. You have to take care of all of the cows. The government gives you as much milk as you need.

    BUREAUCRATIC SOCIALISM: You have two cows. The government takes them and put them in a barn with everyone else’s cows. They are cared for by ex-chicken farmers. You have to take care of the chickens the government took from the chicken farmers. The government gives you as much milk and eggs as the regulations say you need.

    FASCISM: You have two cows. The government takes both, hires you to take care of them and sells you the milk.

    PURE COMMUNISM: You have two cows. Your neighbors help you take care of them, and you all share the milk.

    RUSSIAN COMMUNISM: You have two cows. You have to take care of them, but the government takes all the milk.

    CAMBODIAN COMMUNISM: You have two cows. The government takes both of them and shoots you.

    DICTATORSHIP: You have two cows. The government takes both and drafts you.

    PURE DEMOCRACY: You have two cows. Your neighbors decide who gets the milk.

    REPRESENTATIVE DEMOCRACY: You have two cows. Your neighbors pick someone to tell you who gets the milk.

    BUREAUCRACY: You have two cows. At first the government regulates what you can feed them and when you can milk them. Then it pays you not to milk them. Then it takes both, shoots one, milks the other and pours the milk down the drain. Then it requires you to fill out forms accounting for the missing cows.

    PURE ANARCHY: You have two cows. Either you sell the milk at a fair price or your neighbors try to take the cows and kill you.

    LIBERTARIAN/ANARCHO-CAPITALISM: You have two cows. You sell one and buy a bull.

    SURREALISM: You have two giraffes. The government requires you to take harmonica lessons.

    BUREAUOCRATIC FEMINISM: You have two cows. A feminist panel on gender equity decides the cows are being oppressed and sets them free in the wild where they incapable of surviving and then die. You are still blamed.

    (Please add to or adjust the list. The last one is mine. The original author of this list is apparently unknown, but it appears people are constantly adding to it.)

  • http://avoiceformen.com/ Paul Elam

    @ Jabberwocky

    CORPORATOCRACY- You have two cows. A corporation, with government backing, makes it unprofitable for you to keep them because they have 25,000,000 cows under one roof hooked to machines to feed them, administer drugs and extract the milk. And because they pass a law requiring a $10,000 per cow permit for all cow owners with less than 1,000 cows.

    Then they force you to sell them your cows on the cheap, leaving you with no milk and a net loss. From then on they sell you inferior, semi toxic milk which the government subsidizes with your tax dollars, which also helped them put your cow business under to begin with.

  • jon

    Jabberwacky needs attention. Poor guy, I’ve been there.

  • ernie1241

    If one really wants to make Marxism more unattractive than it already is, one need only resolve the issues which Marx thought would ultimately undermine capitalist societies. Public schools are not a \”Marxist\” idea anymore than wanting to find cures for diseases or improving quality of life are \”Marxist\” ideas. When we employ such lowest-common-denominator reasoning, we put ourselves in the position of always making decisions based upon whatever somebody claims is a \”Marxist\” tenet. Instead, why don\’t we make our decisions based upon what we think is best for our nation — whatever the lineage of the idea?

  • charles

    I think this article is overstating the case, particularly in regard to our college system, which really is the best in the world (in spite of its misandrist, politically correct biases). But our public education system is a mess, which needs to be replaced with private schools. A vigorous voucher program would help immensely with that.

  • jms

    Steve Farrell you rock! You are dead on. PGibson, why don’t you just continue to keep your head in the sand. Clearly, you have no idea what you are talking about. I suggest you study, REALLY STUDY, history… then THINK CRITICALLY about your empty, devoid of any value, don’t have a clue, comments. YOU are a product of the very thing we are trying to correct!






Search