How our elites have sold out Americans

When women starting taking over the education system, it was finished. You can’t run a kiddy penitentiary (which, in effect, they are) with dreamy wishes and self-esteem vibes. You need order and discipline, first and foremost. Bullshit walks. And the focus is then not on how you “feel” but learning how to read, write, etc.

I believe there’s a lot to be learned from some of the harsher methods used in, for example, Old Europe.

I’d certainly agree with that. We’re not blind men, but…



I felt the udder.



That’s a saying that I’ve often heard from conservatives. And there’s nothing wrong with it, per se. The problem is, we most certainly do need to teach students what to think. We must program the computer with basic, true, and worthwhile information and ideas. Leaving them a blank slate to figure it out all by themselves (a learning process forwarded by the loony methods of the Left) is a disaster.

In order to do so, we ourselves can’t be ideological kooks, have the mindset of an adolescent, or just be candy-ass pansies when it come to taking on the responsibilities of an adult, setting boundaries, and dispenses heaping teaspoons of Vitamin N.

And all that we teach the next generation will stem from what we value. Do we value preparing a little black boy or girl by giving them the skills to enter the marketplace and taking charge of their own lives or are they to be coddled with (one of the few intelligent things that George W. Bush said) “the soft bigotry of low expectations”? Most of today’s schools have chosen the latter.

From what I’ve seen and read (sometimes from our own contributors at StubbornThings), elementary schools, in particularly, are now a type of emotional Disneyland. It’s bad enough that Anti-white Race Theory and other Communist junk is entering the curriculum. But the groundwork for this stuff was established when the adults began to shirk their responsibility as tutors and preparers and instead became like Disneyland workers making sure that everyone was having a good time.

And feminism has everything to do with this. For parents (particularly women), the actual content of the school system did not matter as long as they were there to free the women to work full time by taking the children during the day. Full stop.

Computer paradigms make the most sense to me. In order to run any kind of software on a computer, you first need to have a pretty much hard-wired operating system underneath. You can’t play Tetris on Pong with this OS. But you can use it run these and just about any other free-from program you can imagine.

So…we take these little skulls-full-of-mush and load them up with an operating system that has the rote skills of numbers, the alphabet, reading, and perhaps basic logic. And obviously the lines (especially with human beings) between rote hard-wired stuff and free-form software is often blurred. That’s why these analogies of “learn to think, not what to think” never really work. We must do both.

But, to my mind, the whole issue stems from why we are filling the little skulls-full-of-mush. Are we doing so to make them independent, free-thinking people or are we making them little robots to carry our pet ideologies?

Clearly there is way too much indoctrination into pet ideologies going on than just nuts-and-bolts learning. This is indisputable. Test scores and teaching techniques clearly show this.

So we need to send Napoleon and a few million troops to go conquer the Moscow of the public school system and hope to hell this time he doesn’t encounter sub-zero weather.

Our elites, fascist almost all, distain the role of capitalism = freedom but choose to supposedly take a higher note. My answer comes from a 1957 book. I'll let you guess what book. 

"You stand in the midst of the greatest achievements of the greatest productive civilization and you wonder why it’s crumbling around you, while you’re damning its life-blood – money. You look upon money as the savages did before you, and you wonder why the jungle is creeping back to the edge of your cities. Throughout men’s history, money was always seized by looters of one brand or another, but whose method remained the same: to seize wealth by force and to keep the producers bound, demeaned, defamed, deprived of honor. That phrase about the evil of money, which you mouth with such righteous recklessness, comes from a time when wealth was produced by the labor of slaves – slaves who repeated the motions once discovered by somebody’s mind and left unimproved for centuries. So long as production was ruled by force, and wealth was obtained by conquest, there was little to conquer. Yet through all the centuries of stagnation and starvation, men exalted the looters, as aristocrats of the sword, as aristocrats of birth, as aristocrats of the bureau, and despised the producers, as slaves, as traders, as shopkeepers – as industrialists."

Good quote. I was thinking Ayn Rand as well.

I watched yesterday and a good bit today. I found DR. Douglas Frank to be very creditable. Finding algorithm that explains the swings in voter registration and the actual votes in every state was very convincing of fraud in every state. 

There are also some ties to the KFF and voting patterns that make sense. I will be very interested to see if any state takes up the ball Mike and his people have uncovered. 

Here is the link to Dr. Frank analyst 

home.frankspeech.com/tv/video/scientific-proof-internationally-renowned-physicist-absolutely-proves-2020-election-was

A good short synopsis of what was done at Mike Lindell's Cyber Symposium. 

Cyber Symposium

Well, how about “Nobody benefits more from puffed-up positive self-imagery of how the world should work than pompous prognosticators from the sidelines.” There. I fixed it.



Call that the synthesis of the Progressive/Libertarian/College-Boy (I’m talking to you, George W.) view of the world. All the conflicts are just us silly humans being distracted by “ideology” from buying yet more toothpaste and toilet paper. It is the vision of man as Homo economicus. People won’t be making war on each other if they are too busy selling each other stuff.

And to some extent, there is merit to that. But only to some extent. The “selling of stuff” is not something you can overlay onto a culture to “fundamentally transform” it from, say, a primitive tribal culture to the Federal Republic of Germany. As we saw in Afghanistan, you’ll just be temporarily playing Santa Claus by putting lots of trinkets in people’s hands.

No, it takes much longer to implement the dogma of Homo economicus. But it can be done. We’ve done it to ourselves. I’m still astonished by the lack of pushback from religious leaders from the state shutting down freedom of worship. A few notables did push back but they were few and far between. That shows you that the reigning influence among church-goers isn’t Jesus, it’s Tesla or Procter & Gamble.

But some cultures (say, Poland) have seen what Homo economicus (especially the Homo part) has wrought. They see how it turns human beings from creatures with souls to creatures with little more than credit cards in the pursuit of never-ending distractions and pleasure. As much as I think the Taliban is simply the Nazi aspect of Islam in purer form, you can’t blame a number of cultures around the world for rejecting our supposedly superior way of life. That life is so superior that we’re not even reproducing ourselves.

As you noted, “increased trade solves all problems” is a pie-in-the-sky idea. Interesting analogy of the Shah of Iran. I don’t know all that much about the nitty-gritty details. Here’s a synopsis:



So, although we could say that Shah was better than what came after, we might understand that simply overlaying “increased trade” is not a panacea. Societies are more complicated than consuming products by Procter & Gamble. Or should be. Ours once was.

Right on. Ditto. Absolutely.



If that means "I consume, therefore I am," I couldn't agree more.