Common Core Curriculum:
is communist curriculum.
"The educator must himself be educated." Karl Marx
Instead of just dealing with the symptom, i.e. Common Core, which is just another program (another "face") of "the same old same old" (but more universal or totalitarian in practice, networking the parts together, making them as one, not only across this nation but around the world as well), I am going to address the problem itself, i.e. the dialectic process, i.e. the 'justification' of the child's nature over and against the father's/Father's authority, negating any "authority" higher than "human nature" itself, i.e. negating the Father's authority over the children, i.e. negating God's authority over man. I am going to address the use of dialectic 'reasoning in education to 'change' the world (through its use in restructuring or transforming the mind and the actions of the child, i.e. shifting the child's paradigm from accepting the father's authority to feeling, thinking, and acting, and relating with others according to his carnal nature alone). Without the restructuring of the child's mind, i.e. encouraging him to freely express how he is "feeling" and what he "thinking" in the 'moment,' evaluating the father's/Father's authority from his own desires, i.e. from his feelings and thoughts instead of evaluating himself (his desires) from the father's/Father's authority—restraining, inhibiting, or blocking his carnal desires—finding his carnal desires and his dissatisfactions with (resentment towards) authority restraining him from 'realizing' them, i.e. telling him what he can and can not do, to be the same carnal desires as all the other children of the world, correlating parental authority with leaders "oppressing" the citizens, bosses and landowners "oppressing" the workers, God "oppressing" man), the restructuring of "society" can not be initiated and sustained. To transform or 'change' the world, the community must be purged of parental authority, i.e. the children must be 'liberated' from their traditional "top-down" Father's authority, in not only their personal thoughts (their desires) but also in their social actions (their desire for approval from others). Common Core is built upon dialectic 'reasoning which is 'drive' by and 'purposed' in only one thing, 'liberating the children of the world from the father's/Father's authority, so that all the children (or mankind) can be united as one, thinking and acting according to "human nature" only, i.e. creating a "new" world order with no Godly restraint, "repressing" human nature, "alienating" man from himself and from others.
Unless you are willing to start with the Biblical understanding that the heart of man is deceitful and desperately wicked, including yours, you will not understand what Common Core is really about. You will approach it academically, giving it recognition for what it is not, academic, deceiving not only yourself but all who trust in you. It is spiritual, as anyone who cares to read this issue (or rather article) will come to find out.
"For we wrestle not against flesh and blood, but against principalities, against powers, against the rulers of the darkness of this world, against spiritual wickedness in high places." Ephesians 6:12
"Wherein in time past ye walked according to the course of this world, according to the prince of the power of the air, the spirit that now worketh in the children of disobedience: Among whom also we all had our conversation in times past in the lusts of our flesh, fulfilling the desires of the flesh and of the mind; and were by nature the children of wrath, even as others." Ephesians 2:2,3
"Mortify therefore your members which are upon the earth; fornication, uncleanness, inordinate affection, evil concupiscence, and covetousness, which is idolatry: For which things' sake the wrath of God cometh on the children of disobedience: In the which ye also walked some time, when ye lived in them." Colossians 3:5-7
I capitalize "Father" in that those of dialectic 'reasoning' (the 'reasoning' used in Common Core) seek to 'liberate' man from the authority of God by 'liberating' the child from the authority of his earthly Father. Dialectic 'reasoning' is the reasoning of the child, more exactly the reasoning of "the children of disobedience," using "human reasoning" (improperly calling it "higher order thinking skills" to deceive the innocent or naive) to 'justify' and 'liberate' the flesh, i.e. to 'emancipate' "human nature," i.e. to 'liberate' the child's "natural inclination" to be at-one-with nature, i.e. to become at-one-with the environment in the 'moment,' i.e. to 'unshackle' his spontaneity and sensuousness from his Father's authority which/who restrains it, making it and the child subject to His "top-down" way of thinking, i.e. that there is absolute right and wrong regardless of how the child "feels" or what the child "thinks" in the 'moment.' As you will see, dialectic 'reasoning,' i.e. Common Core exists only for one 'purpose,' i.e. the negation of the Father's authority over His children.
"Once the earthly family is discovered to be the secret of the heavenly family, the former must be destroyed [annihilated] in theory and in practice." (Karl Marx, Feuerbach Thesis # 4)
"'It is not really a decisive matter whether one has killed one's father or abstained from the deed,' if the function of the conflict and its consequences are the same." (Sigmund Freud in Herbert Marcuse, Eros and Civilization)
"The child, contrary to appearance, is the absolute, the rationality of the relationship; he is what is enduring and everlasting, the totality which produces itself once again as such." (George Hegel, System of Ethical Life)
According to dialectic 'reasoning,' life entails beauty and justice, beauty is "being at-one-with nature," justice is" being having the right to be so, i.e. to be at-one-with nature in the 'moment,'" which entails negating the Father's authority which/who inhibits or blocks beauty and justice from becoming one, i.e. prevents sensuousness and spontaneity from becoming united as one in the thought and action (theory and practice) of the child (basing right and wrong on the child's nature, i.e. upon "human nature," i.e. the flesh). The goal of dialectic 'reasoning' is to bring "theory and practice" together, i.e. to bring the child's thought (sensuousness) closer to his "human nature" (spontaneity), freeing him from His Father's restraints. As the famous Transformational Marxist György Lukács wrote (and yes I am dealing with Common Core here):
"... the bourgeoisie [the Fathers, united as one, demanding parental authority in the "community"] fighting on its own ground will prove superior to the proletariat ["the child of disobedience" united as "one," as "community" demanding 'liberty' from parental authority] ... it is self-evident that the bourgeoisie fighting on its own ground [demanding the "community" think and act according to established laws respecting and honoring parental authority] will be both more experienced and more expert… the superiority of the proletariat must lie exclusively in its ability to see society from the centre as a coherent whole [the 'purpose' of teaching-student partnership, giving the children an experience in the classroom "community" of "oneness" based upon "human nature" alone, freed of parental authority]. This means that it ["the child of disobedience" freed of parental authority, freed from the "guilty conscience"] is able to act in such a way [revolutionary, i.e. perceiving the Father as being "irrational" (not up with or adaptable to the 'changing' times, not 'reasoning' according to, i.e. "in touch with" the children's "felt" needs) and therefore responding to His authority as being "irrelevant" in a "rapidly 'changing' world"] as to change reality [to 'changing' reality (the meaning and 'purpose' of life) from the "old" world order, i.e. 'change' the world from the "top-down" system of the Father's authority, to the "new" world order, i.e. to the "equality" system of "the children of disobedience" united as "one," negating the Father's authority in their 'quest' for "equality"]; in the class consciousness of the proletariat ["the children of disobedience" united as "one" in their dissatisfaction with and contempt toward their Father's authority, i.e. toward his restraining of their "human nature"] theory and practice coincide [the "new" man is created in the image of man, no longer in the "old" image of God, i.e. the "new" child is created in the image of the child's nature, common to all the children of the world, no longer in the "old" image of his Father which divides the children of the world] ... The proletariat ["the children of disobedience"] cannot liberate itself as a class [free all the children of the world from "top-down" parental authority] without simultaneously abolishing class society [without eliminating parent-child, teacher-student, etc. hierarchy in the classroom environment as well as in social activities in the community, which engenders a "guilty conscience," i.e. "a fear of God," for disobedience to their authority] as such. For that reason its consciousness ["the children of disobedience" united as "one" in 'liberating' themselves from parental restraints, from divisiveness, from "authoritarianism" in their classroom experience], the last class consciousness in the history of mankind, must both lay bare the nature of society [with "We are 'one,' working for Us" thinking and acting according to our "human nature"] and achieve an increasingly inward fusion of theory and practice [where the child (united with "the children of disobedience") becomes at-one-with his own nature, i.e. freed from his Father's authority and the "guilty conscience," i.e. freed from the fear of God, unites with the children of the world, as "one" in community].
…the bourgeoisie [the parent's retaining their "old" world order, i.e. restraining the "new" world order, inhibiting or blocking the children from freeing themselves from parental authority] automatically obtains the upper hand when its opponents ["the children of disobedience"] abandon their own position [abdicate their will to their parent's authority]....destroy this unity [when the parents,' using force, get the upper hand, preventing their children from uniting their "feelings" with their "thoughts" with other children, and putting them into social action, i.e. take their children out of the school system, home schooling under the Father's authority, preventing them from 'justifying' themselves over and against parental authority] they cut the nerve that binds proletarian theory [where children are uniting as "one" through the dialoging of their opinions, i.e. how they "feel" and what they "thinks" in the given 'moment,' to a consensus, i.e. to a "feeling" or "quality" of "oneness"] to proletarian action [the child's natural reaction against parental authority (doing what they want to do after kicking the parent) is prevented from being put into praxis (into socialist action) overthrowing and making law's which negate the right of parents to have authority over their children]. They reduce theory to the ‘scientific' treatment of the symptoms [the rebellious child is seen as being selfish and therefore needing discipline instead of the parent being selfish and needing to be negated] ...and as for practice they are themselves reduced to being buffeted about aimlessly and uncontrollably [the children rebel but without a united front, without the aid of a facilitator of 'change' helping them become a "community" of "one," they have no effect for 'change,' only wondering "aimlessly" and "uncontrollably" throughout life]." (György Lukács, History & Class Consciousness)
"We must bring theory closer to practice." Rod Paige was Secretary of Education under president Bush Jr. at the time he made this statement on national news.
The system or pattern of the earthly father (called the patriarchal paradigm) is the same as the Heavenly Father (Hebrews 12:5-11). The earthly father, although being of the flesh (who is not righteous in and of himself), carries out the same system or pattern as the Heavenly Father, who is spirit (who is righteous in and of himself), initiating and sustaining the same "top-down" system (hierarchy), i.e. giving commands to his children, i.e. commands to be obeyed without questioning them or his authority, chastening those who disobey his commands, casting those out who disrespect or attack His office of authority. Again, the same pattern of the earthly father, who is flesh, is true of the Heavenly Father, who is spirit, introducing to his children a system or pattern of spirit, i.e. a "top-down" system of restraint of the flesh.
"The life which he [the child] has given to the object [to the Father by obeying his commands and accepting his chastening when he disobeys] sets itself against him as an alien and hostile force." Karl Marx
"Freud and Hegel are, like Marx, compelled to postulate external domination and its assertion by force in order to explain repression." "Capitulation enforced by parental authority under the threat of loss of parental love . . . can be accomplished only by repression." (Norman O. Brown, Life Against Death: The Psychoanalytical Meaning of History)
Hegel, Marx, and Freud had this understanding in common, i.e. the need to negate the Father's authority (put Genesis 3:1-6 into praxis, i.e. into social action) if 'change' (a "new" order of the world) was to become a 'reality.' For social 'change' to become a 'reality,' the classroom experience of the child had to be 'changed' from the "old" way of doing things, where the teacher:
to a classroom experience of the child, where the teacher, i.e.
In this way the classroom environment was 'changed' from the teacher preaching and teaching truth to be learned and applied "as given" from above, i.e. not of the child's "human nature," i.e. not subject to the child's "feeling," i.e. his affective domain, to a classroom environment where the teacher (the facilitator of 'change') united the students through the dialoguing of their opinions, i.e. how they "feel" and what they "think" in the given 'moment,' to a consensus, with the students 'discovering' common-ism with one another through their use of "human reasoning," i.e. "thinking through their feelings and the feelings of others," i.e. using the affective domain to 'liberate' "human nature" from the restraint of the Father's authority. According to dialectic 'reasoning,' without first negating the "guilty conscience," i.e. the effect of Romans 7:14-25, which is engendered by the condition of Hebrews 12:5-11, i.e. the Father's authority, the Father's authority in the thoughts and action of the child (which inhibits or blocks socialist harmony and worldly peace, i.e. which prevents the "new" world order) can not be negated. Creating an environment where a child can freely dialogue his opinion, i.e. how he "feels" and what he "thinks," with others of like mind, 'liberates' him from a "guilty conscience," since there is no Father's authority (or sovereignty) in the dialoguing of opinions.
Christ, the only begotten son of God, who came in the form of a man, i.e. who took on the flesh, showed us how a child of God is to think and act. He came to 'redeeming' us from His Heavenly Father's wrath upon us, i.e. for our disobedience against Him, i.e. for 'reasoning' dialectically, i.e. for 'justifying' our flesh, i.e. 'justifying' our sensuousness over and against His righteousness, i.e. making ourselves "righteous" in our own eyes i.e. as God's who are subject to the flesh. Those of dialectic 'reasoning' 'seek to 'reconcile' us back to our "human nature," i.e. 'redeeming' us from our Father's authority. Christ came not to 'redeem' us from His Heavenly Father authority, as those of dialectic 'reasoning' seek to do, but to 'reconciling' us to Him instead, which those of dialectic 'reasoning' seek to negate. By getting rid of, i.e. 'changing' the pattern, the system, the paradigm of thinking and acting of the children from the "old" to the "new," from the "old" patriarchal paradigm of "top-down" authority, i.e. of the children under the Father's authority, to the "new" heresiarchal paradigm of 'change,' i.e. of "equality," where there is no Father's authority, only the "children of disobedience," the fraternity perceiving themselves to be "righteous" in their own eyes, i.e. thinking and acting according to dialectic 'reasoning,' i.e. man can become himself again, as he was before his Father's first command and threat of chastening, i.e. restraining his "human nature." Common Core is based upon dialectic 'reasoning' (the dialoguing of opinions to a consensus), used for the 'purpose' of 'change,' i.e. 'liberating' the children of the world from their Father's authority so that man can become "one," thinking and acting according to his carnal "human nature," united as "one" upon that which he has in common with all mankind, his carnal "human nature."
It seems most people, who are dealing with the problem of 'change,' spend all their time and money (and other peoples time and money) chasing after the latest government program. Not knowing of its source, or refusing to recognize it, they are unable to properly expose it, therefore they are unable to stop it's takeover of their lives, much less the lives of others.
While I write upon the process itself, using many quotations by those who engendered its use around the world (why this issue, more like an article, has become so long), it is up to you to figure out how it is being applied within the institutions of your interest (including your home and/or "church"). Without knowledge of the 'drive' and 'purpose' of dialectic 'reasoning' you remain ignorant of Satan's devices. Genesis 3:1-6 is dialectic 'reasoning' being put into practice, i.e. praxis, negating the Father's authority, i.e. Hebrews 12:5-11 and the "guilty conscience, i.e. Romans 7:14-25. Genesis 3:1-6, i.e. man 'justifying' himself, i.e. 'liberating' himself from God's authority, is the same pattern being used by those "pushing" Common Core education, with the children 'justifying' themselves, i.e. 'liberating' themselves from their parents authority. Until you understand this you will not understand the 'drive' and 'purpose' of Common Core.
"And he said unto them, Ye are they which justify yourselves before men; but God knoweth your hearts: for that which is highly esteemed among men is abomination in the sight of God." Luke 16:5
Some hard facts, which requires the learning of some boring but important history. Ralph Tyler, advisor to six of our Presidents (regarding education policy), laid out the "contemporary" educational plan for this nation—the socialist agenda of regionalizing education, i.e. bypassing (circumventing) state and local control and thereby negating the citizen's (the Father's) right to train up his children in his own image. His agenda was to turn this nation into a nation of "common-ist." All education programs since the 50's have been either built upon or progressively built upon his ideology—circumventing the parent's right, i.e. undermining the Father's authority to train up His child according to His traditional way of thinking and acting (called a patriarchal paradigm). As Kenneth Benne stated it: "If the school [under socialists control] does not claim the authority to distinguish between science [socialist control with science being used in morals and ethics to materialize all things, with the intent of negating the Father's authority] and religion [parental control where the Father sets the standards of right and wrong, rewarding right thinking and acting, punishing wrong thinking and acting], it loses control of the curriculum and surrenders it to the will of the electorate [to the will of the Father's of the town, thus retaining the way of the "past" (with the Father's refusing to foot the bill of socialist re-educating, i.e. brainwashing their children, i.e. liberate' their children from respecting and honoring their God given office of authority, i.e. the child's authority now given to him by God, i.e. by the socialist, as long as he "serves and protects them" and their agenda of 'change')]." (Society as Educator in an Age of Transition, Ed. Kenneth Benne, Eighty-sixth Year of the National Society for the Study of Education) This is not to say John Dewey and followers did not seek to do the same, only that until Ralph Tyler, the Frankfurt School, Kurt Lewin, J. L. Moreno, the training laboratories, etc. were not able to set up the networking of Federal, State, and local government departments into a congruent web for the 'purpose' of 'change.' George Hegel believed that the process was not successful unto no one could escape, i.e. that the people could not be allowed to escape the process of 'change,' maintaining their old way of thinking and acting, but that all citizens must participate in the global village if the process of 'change' was to be initiated and sustained (where the children are freed from their Father's authority, i.e. the world is 'liberated' from the old "top-down" way of doing business). If the "new" world order (if the public-private partnership of "equality," i.e. the soviet system) is to be initiated and sustained (it is what sustainable development, i.e. Agenda 21, Common Core, etc. is all about) then the dialoguing of opinions to a consensus must become the way of thinking and acting for all citizens of the "new" world order, replacing (negating) the preaching and teaching of truth to be accepted "as given," i.e. by faith. Ralph Tyler beloved that there was no better way to achieve this goal than through the 'changing' of, i.e. through the Sovietizing (regionalizing, i.e. circumventing of State and local control) of the education system.
Public-private partnership (the teacher-student partnership, i.e. the soviet system in the classroom), as espoused by Ralph Tyler, is key to initiating and sustaining global dominance over and against the individual citizen's rights, i.e. circumventing the citizens (the Father's) inalienable rights as guaranteed by the Bill of Rights of the Constitution. Norman O. Brown explained the use of the dialectic process—the public-private partnership, i.e. the soviet system (where "the children of disobedience," i.e. the proletariat take "ownership" of that which is of the Father and His children, i.e. the King and the bourgeoisie—as two in a garden took "ownership" of that which was not theirs, i.e. declaring that God's tree, i.e. the "forbidden tree," is everybody's tree as Karl Marx declared that the King's horse was everybody's horse—this way: "By dialectic, I mean an activity of conscious [where everyone recognizes that they are "one," i.e. that all children are the same in regard to "human nature" and "human reasoning," i.e. everyone "thinking" through their "feelings," therefore the earth (the land) is not under any one's authority but instead belongs to "all the people," under the facilitator of 'change's, i.e. the 'liberator' of the children from their Father's authority, control—Hegel believed, since the child's nature is the absolute, the parents and all they own belongs, not to them but to everyone], struggling to circumvent, the limitations imposed by the formal-logical law of contradiction ["struggling to circumvent" the Father's restraint of the child's "human nature," establishing the standard for right and wrong behavior, the child 'discovering' in the classroom how to overcoming his Father's inhibiting or blocking of his "human nature" by his 'discovering' how to use "human reasoning" to 'justify' his "human nature," i.e. overcoming the Father refusal to dialogue, i.e. refusing to 'discovering' oneness ("equality") with his child, i.e. instead initiating and sustaining his ("top-down") position of authority over his child through his use of "Because I said so" along with his threat of chastening if his child disobeys—in other words, for the child to "opt in" to his "human nature" (sensuousness, i.e. abomination) he must "opt out" of his Father's authority (righteousness, i.e. doing his Father's will) or rather, for the child to "opt in" to his "human nature" the Father must "opt out" of his authority to restraint his child's "human nature," i.e. it is easer to have the Father "opt out" (transformational Marxism) than to "opt him out" by force (traditional Marxism)] ." (Norman O. Brown, Life Against Death: The Psychoanalytical Meaning of History)
Without a crisis, the 'change' process (the public-private partnership, i.e. the soviets system) can not be initiated and sustained, i.e. can not negate the restraints of limited government which gives the Father authority to rule over his home, his business, and his land—George Hegel had this in mind, the negation of the Father's authority over his children, when he wrote his philosophy (as will be covered in detail below since it directly applies to, i.e. is the foundation of Common Core, i.e. common-ist, i.e. communist education). "The eclipse of a way thinking cannot take place without a crisis." (Antonio Gramsci, Selections from the Prison Notebooks) "The community needs, therefore, to be explored and, if necessary, purged from undesirable cultural conserves .... The community must be 'deconserved' from the pathological excesses of its own culture, or at least, they must be put under control." (J. L. Moreno, Who Shall Survive)
George Hegel wrote: "For a state to become a state it is necessary that the citizen cannot continually think of emigrating, but that the class of cultivators, no longer able to push to the outside, presses upon itself and is gathered into cities and urban professions. For a real state and a real government only develop when there is a difference of classes, when riches and poverty become very large and a situation [a crisis] arises where a great number of people can no longer satisfy its needs in the accustomed way." (G. W. F. Hegel as quoted in Carl Friedrich, The Philosophy of Hegel) This was written some 30 years after the framing of the Constitution of the United States of America, declaring our sovereignty to be the enemy of worldly peace and socialist harmony.
Without being dissatisfied with the way things are, i.e. without the children being dissatisfied with their Father's authority, restraining their "human nature," there can be no 'change.' "Persons satisfied with things as they are must be helped to acquire convictions for change and arrive at that state of dissatisfaction." "Persons will not come into full partnership in the process until they register dissatisfaction." (Kenneth Benne, Human Relations in Curriculum Change) The child's dissatisfaction with his Father's "top-down" authority is where the 'change' process begins and ends (with the child along with the children of the world, i.e. in adult bodies, negating the Father's authority, not only in their thoughts but also in their socialist actions, i.e. thereby negating God's authority over man, from the face of the earth, doing so without a "guilty conscience"). Without gaining access to the child's dissatisfaction, 'change' ("the individuals 'potential") can not be initiated or sustained. "The individual may have ‘secret' thoughts which he will under no circumstances reveal to anyone else if he can help it. To gain access is particularly important, for here may lie the individual's potential." (Theodor Adorno, The Authoritarian Personality) It is in the child's opinion, i.e. regarding how the child "feels" and what he "thinks" the world "ought" to be like, that his Father's authority (the Father's "Can not" and "Because I said so," i.e. God's "Thou shalt not" and "It is written") is negated.
Bloom's Cognitive and Affective Domain Taxonomies (re-worked by Marzano's over the past forty years then by Webb the last couple, Webb's arrangement being used as the foundation for Common Core), is dedicated to Ralph Tyler. Ralph Tyler, in his article ADMINISTRATIVE ARRANGEMENTS FOR A COMPREHENSIVE EDUCATIONAL SYSTEM (Frank Brown, Education for Responsible Citizenship), laid out a politburo type governance, i.e. a Globalist-Nationalist-Regionalist system of networking where local control is circumvented by regionalizing (redistricting), with policies being orchestrated through departments (public-private partnerships using the consensus, i.e. soviet process, bypassing, i.e. circumventing our representative form of government), facilitated by socialist-scientists (transformational Marxists—psychoanalyst's, who merge Marx with Freud or visa versa, tying the individual's worth, i.e. their 'drive' and 'purpose' in life, to their socially useful work), initiating and sustaining control over the education system—negating (circumventing) the limits which the Constitution placed upon the Federal, State, County, City governments over the authority of the parent's in raising their children—which prevented National/International government (totalitarianism) from having control over the education system, i.e. giving the national government the authority to negate the father's authority to train up his children in his own image (or preferably in the image of God), i.e. doing right and not doing wrong, according to his standards, i.e. according to the father's will.
Whoever controls the education system (where the next generation learns how to establish policy, i.e. how right and wrong is initiated and sustained, whether it is established by a higher authority than "human nature" or by "human nature" alone) controls the American citizen (how the next generation of citizens will think and act and relate with others). According to dialectic 'reasoning,' without the education system being 'changed,' i.e. used to negate the next generation's thinking and acting according to their parent's beliefs and values, without education being used to negate the parent's control over their children's education, without education being used to negate the father's "prejudiced" do right, don't do wrong way of thinking and acting, the creation of a "future" world of 'change," a "new" world order void of the father's authority restraining "human nature," is not possible. "Parents have no right upon their offspring except a psychological right. Literally the children belong to universality." "We propose, therefore, the specialization of the notion of parenthood into two distinct and different functions-the biological parent and the social parent. They may come together in one individual or they may not. But the problem is how to produce a procedure which is able to substitute and improve this ancient order." (J. L. Moreno, Who Shall Survive?) "If the school does not claim the authority to distinguish between science [universality, i.e. environmentalism, i.e. globalism, i.e. "equality"] and religion [parental "top-down," "right-wrong" authority, i.e. local control, i.e. "prejudice"], it loses control of the curriculum [the paradigm used to shape the next generation] and surrenders it to the will of the electorate [to parental, i.e. local control]." (Society as Educator in an Age of Transition, Ed. Kenneth Benne, Eighty-sixth Year of the National Society for the Study of Education) "We know how to change the opinions of an individual in a selected direction, without his ever becoming aware of the stimuli which changed his opinion." "We know how to influence the behavior of individuals by setting up conditions which provide satisfaction for needs of which they are unconscious, but which we have been able to determine." "…our potential ability to influence or control the behavior of groups. If we have the power or authority to establish the necessary conditions, the predicted behaviors will follow." (Carl Rogers On Becoming A Person: A Therapist View of Psychotherapy) The curriculum establishes what is called climate or environment control in the classroom. Whoever establishes the climate (determines the curriculum) controls the outcome, i.e. influences how the next generation will feel about, what they will think regarding, and how they will respond to the father's (parental) authority. 'Change' this perception and you 'change' the world.
Keeping track of each individual's, "group's," school's, "communities," etc. progression (transformation) down the pathway of 'change' is essential if 'change' is to be sustained. Therefore the test questions must be 'changed' (from "right-wrong," either-or questions to opinion question, i.e. asking how the children are feeling and what they thinking in the 'moment' regarding the given situation) if the answers are to be 'changed' (how the person, the group, the community, etc. is to respond to the given situation). Right-wrong questions (based upon the Father's position) must be changed to opinion questions, i.e. how the child "feels" and what he "thinks" regarding the current social situation. The answers are in the questions or rather the questions are in the answers. If the answer to the worlds problems is the negation of the Father's authority, then the answer must engender the right question, i.e. the right question being: how did the child feel when told to do something which did not make "sense" to him, i.e. was not, according to the child's "sense perception," in his "best interest," or told he could not do something which made "sense" to him, i.e. the child "sense perceived" was in his "best interest." Whoever determines the answer (the outcome, i.e. the end) determines the question (the means whereby they are to get there). Whoever determines the question (the means whereby to accomplish the outcome) determines the answer (the outcome, i.e. the end). According to Bloom, whoever develops the "test," i.e. whoever selects the questions, determines the right answers and therefore must be the only one given the right to grade the "test." The dialectic "test" "Taxonomies'" (classifies ) your child's worth along a sovereignty-globalist spectrum or continuum, from sovereignty (the Father's authority) being a failing grade to communitization (socialist involvement) being a passing grade. Therefore, when the socialist-globalist's develop and grade your child's test, what is your child's answer going to be, i.e. what is your child's socialist worth going to be? If he gets a good grade, that more than likely means that he is no longer your child, as far as his values go, as well as how he arrived at them.
While, with most people, the issue of concern is the government's agenda of 'change,' i.e. its encroachment upon and usurpation over a persons private life, the real problem has come from the "church's" lack of response to the socialist's agenda of 'change.' This is because of the "church's" participation within and utilization of the same process of 'change' as used by the world (the "new" world order), embracing and using the same system of 'change' which was advocated by Ralph Tyler in the late 40's and early 50's—using "human reasoning," men's opinions, i.e. how man "feels" and what he "thinks" in the given 'moment,' to evaluate himself, the world, the "church," and the Word of God from, i.e. determining "right" from "wrong" according to "human nature" (making all "one," i.e. man, the world, the "church," and God himself as "one" in 'drive' and 'purpose'—for the "betterment" of man's living conditions, i.e. augmenting pleasure for all on the earth and not just for a few), so that unrepentant and unregenerate "Christians" could "enjoy" the things of this world, i.e. the pleasures of this life, and be "saved," i.e. have no "guilty conscience" for their "human behavior," i.e. 'justifying their wicked and deceitful heart as being "normal," using man's carnal nature to establish the "norm," i.e. making the world and the Lord, the flesh and the spirit as "one," even doing so "in the name of the Lord." Thus the "church," which once addressed the issue of man's hearts (in the private and the public, the sacred and secular realm), exposing it for its wickness, now condones it, making 'change' ("human relationship," i.e. "the approval of men") the 'drive' and the 'purpose' for the "church."
As the education system goes, the "church" goes, the nation goes. "Christians," taken captive to the sensuousness, i.e. to the pleasures of this world, are running away from the Word of God (the "approval of God") as fast as they can go, running away from righteousness as being the only true issue of life. They are running after the opinions of men (the "approval of men"), i.e. showing the effect that the process has had upon them, i.e. their attempt to use the process of 'change' to combat the process of 'change,' i.e. to use "human nature" and "human reasoning' to combat " nature" and "human reasoning."
That being said, the system of 'change' is now in place, being set in concrete through the use of Federally (International) authorized (mandated) education programs, progressing from Goals 2000, No Child Left Behind, All Children At Risk, Education Nation,, to Common Core (all based upon the use of "Bloom's Taxonomies" and its agenda to "challenge the student's fixed beliefs"). Without knowing what it is, i.e. the 'change' process (Bloom's Taxonomies), all you will ever end up doing is spinning your wheels, chasing after the symptoms of 'change,' i.e. chasing after the government's "newest" program of 'change,' doing what they want you to do, spin your wheels until you run out of money, give up, or die.
A taxonomy is necessary if you are to classify what it is that you want to 'change.' Knowing what it is that you want to change to, you must know what it is that you want to change from. Without a taxonomy, controlled 'change' can not take place. You must know how the 'change' is to take place so that 'change' can become predictable, i.e. controllable, i.e. sustainable (so that the 'change' process can not only be initiated but also be sustained in the thoughts and actions of the next generation, i.e. in the thoughts and actions of "the people" who have now been taken captive to the process of 'change').
The concern for transformational Marxist's was how to prevent Communism from reverting back to traditional Marxism, where a select group of people or one person rules the country (tenement, in their opinion, to Fascism), preventing "the peoples voice" from being heard in setting policy. There emphasis is upon how to initiate and sustain the dialoguing of opinions to a consensus, which engenders the 'change' process, circumventing the majority vote, which inhibits or blocks the 'change' process. It is imperative, therefore, to identify (taxonomies) each participants paradigm, i.e. his way of thinking and acting, to guarantee a predominance of participants in the "group setting policy" who are not tradition in paradigm, i.e. who inhibit or block 'change,' i.e. who are facts based, but transition and transformation in paradigm, i.e. who are adaptable to, positive towards, and supportive of 'change,' i.e. who are "feelings" based.
Kurt Lewin wrote: "Before effective plans for change can be made the present state of affairs must be defined as accurately as possible." "Whenever change is planned one must make sure that the new condition will be stable. We need to develop in our analysis as clear a picture as possible of the forces which will exist when the new condition is achieved ... what are the forces which are keeping our methods in the present 'groove'?" (Kenneth Benne, Human Relations in Curriculum Change) In other words, either fear of the one (fear of being chastened by the parent or God for doing wrong—thereby supporting a "negative" force field of the so called "past" restraining the impulses and urges of the "present") or fear of the many, "sense perceived" as being "one" (fear of missing out, i.e. of being rejected by the group, i.e. the "village," i.e. society, etc. i.e. for not supporting the socialist cause—for not supporting a "positive" force field of the "present," i.e. 'liberating' the impulses and urges of the present from the restraints of the "past," i.e. working for a "future" world freed of the restraints of the "past") keeping the person "in the present 'groove,'" not reverting back to the "past." "Class consciousness," i.e. the awareness that you have more than one option, that you have a 'choice' (to either obey the Father and submit to His authority and be created in His image, or free yourself and the world from His authority and create yourself in your own image) is why the taxonomy was developed and is being utilized in the classroom to 'change' the world. Correlating the Father's authority as being the source of religion (which divides people) and which engendered Fascism (which oppressed people), those of dialectic 'reasoning' see the 'purpose' of life as being the negation of the Father's authority, i.e. 'redeeming' the world from the God, reconciling it back to itself only, as it was before His first command and threat of judgment. Without the taxonomy, obedience to the Father (the Father's authority) remains in place, i.e. unquestioned, making the "present" 'unchangeable,' making 'change,' i.e. the "future" new world order unattainable, (a "new" order of the world where the Father, the one ruling over the many, restraining the child's carnal nature, no longer rules over the children, but rather the children, the many, "sense perceiving" themselves as being "one" in nature, i.e. living, i.e. thinking and acting according to their carnal nature, are controlled by the impulses and urges of "human nature," i.e. mans sinful nature—abomination).
The 'purpose' for 'change' is to create something "new" (a "new" arrangement of things) out of the "old" (out of the "old" arrangement of things). To create something "new" requires the destruction-rearrangement (negation) of the "old." Therefore, to create a "new" world order (to create a world built upon the "feelings" and the "thoughts" of the children, which initiates and sustains 'change') the negation or annihilation of the "old" world order (the negation of a world of the Father's authority, i.e. His "can's and can not's," i.e. His "Thou shalt not," i.e. His "It is written," i.e. His "Because I said so," which inhibits or prevents 'change') is necessary. "To create effectively a new set of attitudes and values, the individual must undergo great reorganization of his personal beliefs and attitudes and he must be involved in an environment which in many ways is separated from the previous environment in which he was developed. ...many of these changes are produced by association with peers who have less authoritarian points of view, as well as through the impact of a great many courses of study in which the authoritarian pattern is in some ways brought into question while more rational and non-authoritarian behaviors are emphasized." (David Krathwohl, Benjamin Bloom, Taxonomy of Educational Objectives: Book 2 Affective Domain) Hegel knew the importance of philosophy (one's dissatisfaction with the way life is, i.e. the child's dissatisfaction with his Father's authority to restrain his impulses and urges, and therefore his thinking, i.e. his thinking or "reflecting" upon how his life, i.e. the world "ought" to be) if 'change' was to be initiated and sustained. Without this mental activity, i.e. of a child's (or adult's) desire for and "reflection" upon 'change,' there can be nothing "new" made out of the "old."
"Mapping the room" is key the the process of 'change.' It is imperative that the facilitator of 'change' identify where along the spectrum or continuum of 'change' a person currently resides if 'change' is to be successfully initiated and sustained (the seeds of 'change' being the persons dissatisfaction with the way things are). This means that you must know the measure or amount of dissatisfaction a person has regarding the way things are (the amount of resentment he is harboring against authority—the way of the "past" restraining the desires of the "present," inhibiting the hopes of the "future")—from the person who is holding firmly to his "old" values and beliefs, i.e. holding to his Father's ways, his Fathers "Thou shalt Not's," therefore resisting 'change,' i.e. through his 'willingness' to expressing his personal "feeling" and "thoughts," i.e. willing to share his personal "Ought's," i.e. willing to participate in the process of 'change,' to his active participation within the process of 'change,' uniting with others in finding and acting upon common "feelings" and "Thoughts," i.e. 'discovering' and synthesizing with others upon "common ground," i.e. uniting in collective "thought" with "the people" in consensus, 'purposed' in the augmentation of 'change,' thereby in praxis (in social action) negating the Father's "Not's," not only in his own life but also in the lives of others. The spectrum or continuum of 'change' is from the Patriarchal Paradigm of commands (obeyed the Father without question, i.e. living according to faith), through the Matriarchal Paradigm of "feelings" (living according to his own urges and impulses of the 'moment,' i.e. doing his own thing yet with a "guilty conscience," i.e. with a fear of "getting caught"), to the Heresiarchal Paradigm of 'change,' i.e. "thinking" through ('justifying') his and others "feelings," with his actions from then on 'driven' by his own "feelings" and the "feelings" of others, 'purpose' in 'liberating' himself and others from the authority of the Father, from the resistor to 'change.' With "human nature" (unrighteousness) now 'justified' in his own eyes (and in the eyes of other) he is 'purposed' in removing (negating) that which inhibits or restrains "human nature," thereby negating righteousness as being the issue of life, not only in his own life but also in the life of others. In this way, through the use of a materializing "taxonomy," i.e. by the "educators" (facilitators) ability to "map the room" with a tool used to 'change' material objects only, a child's (or adult's) Paradigm can be more easily identified and manipulated, i.e. 'shifted' ('changed') from obedience to a "higher authority" without question, requiring faith, belief, and obedience, through doing his own thing according to his own "feelings," yet with a "guilty conscience" for disobedience, requiring doubting, questioning, disobeying, and permissiveness, to propagandize and propagate the dialectic process, i.e. requiring seducing, deceiving, and manipulating others into 'willful' participation in the process of 'change,' for the 'purpose' of 'change' alone, thereby creating a "new" world order, i.e. a world freed from the Patriarchal Paradigm, i.e. a "new" world order where everyone, in thought and action (in theory and practice) is freed from the Father's authority. Therefore, the dialectic 'shift' in Paradigm is from righteousness (from the child's honoring of the Father's authority), through unrighteousness (through the child "doing his own thing," yet still bothered by the "guilty conscience"), to unrighteousness (the children "doing their thing," freed from the "guilty conscience" via. their socialist "support group," i.e. the children thinking and acting according to their carnal nature, no longer having their Father's authority in their thoughts and actions, restraining it).
Key to the success of those promoting the dialectic process is the identifying and utilizing of a person's Affective Domain, i.e. a person's "feelings," i.e. his "felt needs" (his carnal needs, i.e. that which is of the world only) to initiate and sustain control over him and "his world." Without identifying its importance to the person (the person's heart's desire being "restrained"), where it lies within the person's thoughts and actions, the process of 'change' can not be properly initiated and sustained. "Human nature" is based upon man's "natural inclination" to approach pleasure and avoid pain, i.e. to become at-one-with the world in pleasure, in the 'moment,' i.e. to attain and retain the gratifying objects of the world for the 'purpose' of pleasure. It is only upon this ground, i.e. the 'augmentation' of pleasure, that 'change' can be made. "1. All human behavior is directed toward the satisfaction of needs, 2. the individual will change his established ways of behaving for one of two reasons: to gain increased need satisfaction or to avoid decreased need satisfaction, and 3. 'augmentation' in the possibilities of needs satisfaction." (Douglas McGregor in Kenneth Benne, Human Relations in Curriculum Change) Bloom's Cognitive Domain Taxonomy was therefore established upon his Affective Domain Taxonomy, i.e. man's "natural inclination" (his "felt" need) to be at-one-with the world, in pleasure, in the 'moment.' Without this knowledge (or this understanding), Bloom's Cognitive Domain Taxonomy simply remains (is naively perceived by the public as being) a taxonomy of academics and manipulation (science and technology) regarding rocks, plants, and animals, in the eyes of the deceived.
Abraham Maslow's Hierarchy of "felt" needs, which addressed temporal needs only, starting with physical needs (water, food, sleep, and exercise) and then moving up the ladder through security needs (freedom from fear, need for order, and rules to guide action), social needs (love, affection, and belonging), esteem needs (self-respect and esteem of others), and eventually self-actualization needs (fulfillment of individual abilities), all tied to social 'purpose,' i.e. the adult's (or child's) contribution to the socialist order being the deciding factor of their worth, negating man's eternal need, i.e. those needs which are perceived as being external to and therefore "irrelevant" to the current situation—negating any one who thinks and acts like the Lord Jesus Christ, i.e. "Man does not live by bread alone, but by every word that proceeded out of the mouth of the God." Jesus quoting Deuteronomy 8:3) and Lawrence Kohlberg's dilemma questions (pitting the child's "feelings," i.e. his "felt" need as well as the "group's" or societies "felt" need to survive over and against the extablished right and wrong of the Father, who's standards of the "past" are perceived as being "irrational" and therefore "irrelevant" to the "present" situation, i.e. by pitting life, truth, property, affiliation, erotic love and sex, authority, law, contract, religion, conscience, punishment, civil rights, etc., against one another, i.e. for example life against conscience, to find where a person is willing to compromise, i.e. giving him, in the process, the experience of doing so) were all about the identification of and utilization of a persons Affective Domain (his "felt" needs) for the 'purpose' of 'change' (the "feelings" of the children in the "present" in conflict with the "right and wrong" of the Father's standards of the "past"). By finding the difference between where a person needs to 'change,' for the sake of the "group" (in the "present" and "future), and his resistance to change, to maintain His Father's authority (of the "past"), i.e. where the person is willing to participate in the process of 'change' and where he will not, the social engineer can determine the course of action which is needed to initiate and sustain the 'change' process in the person (and the group), a procedure that must continue to be put into practice throughout the life of the person and the group for the rest of their lives. The beast is in the process (the process is the beast). You can not buy or sell without having it, i.e. the beast on your mind (in your thoughts, 'driving' you) and in your work (on your hands, giving you 'purpose').
The parent's, not aware that the "contemporary classroom" is re-structured with the intent to 'change' their children, the next generation, into agents of 'change,' i.e. for the 'purpose' of world domination (globalism), foolishly sacrifice their children to the "beast," i.e. to the "fires of Moloch," i.e. to the system of 'change,' naively thinking that education is only about academics, with children learning to get along with one another as much as is possible, which, without sacrificing belief to the "'common'-ist cause," is not a bad thing. Belief can take may forms. It can be used to remove the "infidel" from the earth, remove the "infidel" from the nation, or witness to the lost that they might come to know the Lord and His Love. Only the latter recognizes the need to limit the power of government, guaranteeing to the citizen his right (and the family its right) of freedom from despotism and tyranny, i.e. freedom from socialist nationalism and socialist globalism. The middle desires national dominance. While the former is 'driven' by and is 'purposed' in global dominance. This nation was founded upon the latter but is now being 'changed' into the former. Education has played a major part in that 'change.' Those of dialectic 'reasoning' (those of Common Core) can only use that belief which is 'driven' by and 'purposed' in making the world a "better" place for man to live within (making belief an opinion amongst opinions), i.e. in support of a socialist, globalist agenda.
The Word of God instructs us to: "Set your affection on things above, not on things on the earth." Colossians 3:2 Dialectic 'reasoning' can not function until it finds out where we are setting our affections, i.e. finding out that we are either setting our affections on the thing on the earth below (by sight, i.e. according to our "human nature," and therefore 'changeable') or upon the things above (by faith, i.e. according to the Father's commands, and therefore 'unchangeable'). Without identifying and manipulating this "belief-action dichotomy" (redefined as belief-"feelings" conflict), 'change' can not be initiated, much less sustained. Yet, unlike with rocks, plants, and animals, with man, seduction and deception are necessary if manipulation, i.e. 'change' (sustainable development, continuous improvement) is to become a 'reality.'
Benjamin Bloom, Taxonomy of Educational Objective Book 1: Cognitive Domain, 1956
Early version of Bloom's Cognitive Domain in NOUN form.
(progressing from bottom up; from simple to complex; from concrete to abstract; from belief to theory)
Later version of Bloom's Cognitive Domain in VERB form.
To properly understand the intended purpose for the use of Bloom's "Cognitive Domain Taxonomy" within the classroom environment (within the "learning" environment) you must first understand that it is a "scientific" method. It can only be used to understand and then manipulate ('change') the material things of the world, i.e. to make the world a "better" place to live in. Therefore any use of it on the values or ethics of students (or adults) materializes ("humanizes") them, i.e. making them worldly in their thoughts and actions—which, since we are not rocks, plants, or animals, requires seduction and deception if manipulation is to take place. I don't think you woke up this morning wishing that somebody would "manipulate" you, even for the "common" good ("I just can't wait to be manipulated." "I hope that whoever does it does it so well that I will never know it was done to me."). Therefore, if you are of the opinion that you are "human resource" then you have not right to complain when you loose your freedoms because you have accepted the condition that natural resource finds itself in, i.e. if it is not manipulatable or 'changeable,' then it is worthless, it is a barrier to 'change' and therefore must be negated for the "good" of the outcome.
When Bloom, on page 6, identified his "Taxonomy" as being a "psychological classification system," he made it clear what his intended purpose was, to 'change' the child's and/or adult's paradigm from faith in God, i.e. spirit, to dependence upon man only, i.e. flesh, turning the children from the authority of their Fathers, i.e. from the patriarchal paradigm of absolutes, to the nature of the children themselves, i.e. to the heresiarchal paradigm of 'change,' i.e. 'changing' their way of thinking and acting, i.e. 'shifting' their paradigm from above to below, from faith to sight, as they 'willingly' participated within its "scientific" method. On page 32 Bloom made it clear which paradigm he wanted the child to 'willingly' participate in (for the purpose of 'change'). Paraphrasing Karl Marx, he wrote: "But, as has been pointed out before, we recognize the point of view that truth and knowledge are only relative and that there are no hard and fast truths which exist for all time and places." Marx wrote: "In the eyes of the dialectical philosophy, nothing is established for all time, nothing is absolute or sacred." (Karl Marx) Karl Marx wrote eleven Thesis on Feuerbach. The eleventh (the summation of the former ten) reads: "The philosophers have only interpreted the world in different ways ["believing" that their "opinion," on how the world should be run, is the right one], the objective however, is change [to make no decision outside of the consensus process, i.e. the dialectic process which excludes and therefore negates the Father's authority in the outcome]." (Karl Marx, Feuerbach Thesis #11) The objective of the 'change' process is to prevent "opinions" from being turned into a beliefs, i.e. preventing the children from returning to the Father's authority by treating all beliefs as opinions, where all beliefs become adaptable to 'change,' and therefore negated.
This ideology (dialectic 'reasoning'), if embraced, effectively 'changes' a person's belief into an opinion, making him, and therefore society, adaptable to 'change,' i.e. making it illegal to preach and teach the truth ("as given") since "truth" from now on can only be 'discovered' through the dialoguing of opinions i.e. facilitating the next generation into "believing" that truth is not inherent in any higher authority than "human nature," i.e. that it can only be found within the experiences of "human nature," i.e. found within that which we have in common with all mankind (from which we derive "common"-ism AKA Common Core AKA Communism—"common-union-ism," i.e. where we are all "united as 'one' in that which we have in common," i.e. for the "common 'good'"), i.e. "human nature," i.e. "sense experience," which, as Karl Marx wrote, can only proceed from "sensuous need" and "sense perception," which can "only proceed from Nature." (Karl Marx)
Bloom's Taxonomy (and therefore Common Core) is structured upon "dialectic philosophy." What is it? Who pushes its use? When did it originate? Where is it used? And how does it affect those who participate within its domain.
The "what" is: that it is "a process," i.e. a process of 'change.' 'Changing' how a person thinks and acts, i.e. how he will respong in a given situation, i.e. 'changing' his paradigm from a traditional, right-wrong, above-below, "top-down," Father ruling over family, i.e. Patriarchal Paradigm of absolutes, i.e. from a system of righteousness (and holiness with God—only God is righteous in and of Himself, so righteousness itself must be imputed to those of faith in Him while thesystem of righteousness itself is common to all of mankind under God), with the Father manifesting mercy and grace toward a child with a repentant heart, to a transformational, approach pleasure-avoid pain, "there is no absolute right or wrong," sensuous based system of "equality," where facilitator's of 'change' seduced, deceived, and manipulated their "followers" ('liberating' children by showing them how to 'justify' their "natural inclination" to "approach pleasure and avoid pain," i.e. their "human nature" to become at-one-with the world around them, in pleasure, in the 'moment,' 'liberating' them from their Father's right-wrong authority system of righteousness which restrained their "natural inclination" to become at-one-with the world around them, in pleasure, in the 'moment'), engendering a Heresiarchal Paradigm of 'change' (a system of relativism, situation ethics, "tolerance of ambiguity"), i.e. a system of sensuousness (the approach pleasure-avoid pain spectrum of 'changeability,' unrestraining, 'justifying,' 'liberated' the children, leading them into the land of abomination, to be used by the facilitator's of 'change' for their own pleasures of abomination).
The "who," is: those who reject and oppose, i.e. seek to negate (annihilate or destroy) the system of righteousness (and thereby righteousness itself—see Hegel's statement below reveals), i.e. negating the Father's authority to restrain "human nature" so that the child (and man) could be 'liberated' to become at-one-with the world, in pleasure, in the 'moment' again. George Wilhelm Friedrich Hegel is the person most noted in regard to dialectic 'reasoning,' although it was Immanuel Kant, through his book "Critique of Pure Reason," who helped piece together the process, i.e. the process of 'change.' By elevating 'reasoning' and making it "equal" with faith, he was able to negate faith, i.e. by elevating the child and making him equal with the Father he was able to negate the Father's authority. Kant's logic was: hope is found in happiness, happiness is found in pleasure, pleasure is found in the mind (which we now know correlates to 'emancipated' or 'liberated' hormones and neurotransmitters, such as dopamine, which engender the sensation of pleasure within us whenever we come into contact with or think upon objects of gratification within the environment, including objects of gratification created within our own mind).
According to dialectic 'reasoning,' the idea of Hope being found in God or anything outside of the immediate world of sensation must be made "equal" to (and therefore negated by) man finding hope in this world (pleasure), making all things (including God) subject to nature ("human nature"), i.e. subject to man's "natural inclination" of approaching pleasure and avoiding pain (stimulus-response), and therefore (like rocks plants, and animals) subject to the "scientific process" itself. The dialectic idea being, by filtering all thought and action through dialectic 'reasoning' (the "scientific method") the person and therefore society can be "detoxified," i.e. "redeemed" from the paradigm of "promises to be kept" and history (of the past) which places hope in someone or something greater than "human nature" (restraining, i.e. inhibiting or blocking "human nature," restraining man's "natural inclination" to become at-one-with the world, in pleasure, in the 'moment,' i.e. restraining or blocking his 'changeability,' preventing him from uniting with the world, preventing mankind from become as "one" in a "new" world order of "equality"), be it a man who insists upon "top-down" authority (the Father, the bourgeoisie, a King) or God Himself, i.e. equated to a Hitlerian way of thinking and acting (a Patriarchal Paradigm).
Therefore, by making the Father and the child (the King and the citizen, God and man) "equal," both subject to "human nature" (by making the approaching of pleasure and the avoiding of pain the issue of life), the Father's (the King's, God's) authority is negated. Karl Marx simply took Hegel's idea and put it into praxis (social action), killing the Father, i.e. the King, i.e. God, at least in the thoughts and actions of men (known as "theory and practice," "practice" meaning man's carnal "human nature," "theory" meaning his opinion, how he "feels" and what he "thinks" in the sensuous 'moment,' which, when put together as "one" ("theory" united with "practice," man's "thinking through his feelings" united with his urges and impulses stimulated by the world around him in the 'moment') makes man pure man, with the child no longer accountable to his Father, the citizens no longer accountable to the King, and man no longer accountable to God, making all things "possible," according to man's eyes, i.e. according to his carnal "sense perception," materializing him). Sigmund Freud simply made it applicable to the individual ('liberating' the "child within" of all individuals from their Father's authority, i.e. 'liberating' the adult's "natural inclination" to approach pleasure-avoid pain, i.e. the adult's "human nature," being the same as the child's, from the Father's authority, negating the "guilty conscience"). Hegel, Marx, and Freud are built upon this one 'purpose, "negating of the Father's authority, i.e. negating His judgment upon the child's (and therefore the citizen's, i.e. man's) thoughts and actions, in the thoughts and actions of the children (of the citizen, i.e. of man), detoxing society of "religion" and division.
The work of the "Frankfurt School" AKA the Institute for Social Research, i.e. Max Horkheimer, Theodor Adorno, Erick Fromm, Herbart Marcuse (who built upon the work of György Lukács), along with Kurt Lewin, J. L. Moreno, and Wilhelm Reich, i.e. all who merged Marx and Freud (social-psychology—Transformational Marxism, i.e. what I call user friendly Marxism, communism with a smile), was carried on by men like Abraham Maslow, Carl Rogers, James Coleman, Warren Bennis, and Benjamin Bloom (just to name a few), putting theory into practice (putting a person's opinion, i.e. his feelings and his thoughts which are in agreement with "human nature," into practice over and against his Father's authority, negating his "guilty conscience" for his being "human," i.e. for his carnal thoughts and actions). Some forty years after his publishing of the Cognitive Domain Taxonomy, Bloom stated: "Certainly the Taxonomy was unproven at the time it was developed and may well be 'unprovable.'" (Benjamin Bloom, Bloom's Taxonomy: A Forty Year Retrospect) His attitude is the same as held by those who implemented Kurt Lewin's and J. L. Moreno's work not only in the classroom but also in the workplace and government as well (the National Training Laboratories). "No hypothesis in this body of writings has been fully tested. Nor will it be tested fully until it has been used widely in thoughtful experimentation with actual social changes. The school offers an important potential laboratory for the development of a truly experimental social science. Experimentally minded school workers can develop and improve the hypotheses suggested in these readings as they put them to the test in planning and evaluating changes in the school program." (Kenneth Benne, Human Relations in Curriculum Change) The "experimentation" will go on until all have participated, i.e. till no one can excape "participatory democracy."
Carl Rogers himself called it brainwashing, i.e. washing the Father's authority (sovereignty, individuality) from the brain of the child, i.e. from the thoughts and the actions of the next generation, i.e. washing the one above, i.e. the Father (his authority to give commands and chasten), from the one below, i.e. from the individual below, so that the child can be "himself," carnal, so that he can become at-one-with the "We," i.e. become as "one" with the collective below, "working with the Us," so that all men can become united as "one" with the world, united according to their "human nature" alone. "For all that is in the world, the lust of the flesh, and the lust of the eyes, and the pride of life, is not of the Father, but is of the world." 1 John 2:16
"The heart is deceitful above all things, and desperately wicked: who can know it?" Jeremiah 17:9
It must be noted from the onset that man's heart is the problem, i.e. whether national capitalism or global capitalism is in control (or both united as one as is happening today), both "ism's" from the same mother, one "ism" going national, the other "ism" going global, both depended upon the same pattern, the use of man's envy and greed, using his "human nature," his "lusting" for pleasure, for "enjoyment," for "leisure and guaranteed sustenance," to take him captive to totalitarian ideology, i.e. to socialism, i.e. thinking that nothing will be impossible to him if he works with and for the "team." Kurt Lewin wrote: "Hitler himself has obviously followed very carefully such a procedure. The democratic reversal of this procedure, although different in many respects [covert authority from above replacing overt authority from above only, yet with both depending upon "human nature," i.e. man's wicked and deceitful heart, i.e. envy, greed, and the approval of men, to achieve its end, i.e. socialist unity at the cost of individualism—where every soul is ultimately accountable to God], will have to be as thorough and as solidly based on group organization." (Kurt Lewin quoted in Kenneth Benne, Human Relations in Curriculum Change)
Adorno wrote: "What The Authoritarian Personality was really studying was the character type of a totalitarian rather than an authoritarian society─ fostered by a familial crisis in which traditional parental authority was under fire." (Theodor Adorno, The Authoritarian Personality) In other words, Transformational Marxists studied how the traditional family might react against Global Socialism (a Communist takeover of America and the world via "environmentalism," i.e. "green-ism"), to prevent them from turning to Nationalism (Fascism) in their effort to preserve their authority, i.e. thereby succumbing to National Socialism, i.e. Hitler. In either case the Father's authority (for which the Constitution was written, i.e. limiting government's encroachment upon the Father's authority over His family) is negated, i.e. negating the "guilty conscience" of the citizenry, i.e. searing the conscience (negating the voice, i.e. the commands of the Father) by replacing it with the "super-ego" (the voice, i.e. the "feelings" and "thoughts" of the "village"), the citizen's mind now possessed by (conditioned according to) "social cause," be it ethnic or environmental in nature. In either cause, love of ____ (whatever it is), socially approved, engenders hate against the Father, i.e. the barrier to "socialist unity and worldly peace."
What is missing in the dialectic formula is that the Lord changes the heart of man. Rejecting the work of God on his heart all man has is his carnal heart to work from, leaving him in a world of sin. Don't blame the Lord for what the "church" or "religions" men have done and continue to do, who are not living and walking according to the Word of God. The gospel message instructs no man to kill or oppress another man for the sake of the gospel or to make the world or the environment "a better place to live within." Having rejected or being ignorant of the gospel message, all man can do is blame God, as the child blames his Father, as Adam blamed the woman and the woman blamed the devil, as socialist blame capitalists and capitalists blame the individual and the individual blames the system, etc. unrepentant before God for his carnal thoughts and actions.
"Every one that is proud in heart is an abomination to the LORD: though hand join in hand, he shall not be unpunished. By mercy and truth iniquity is purged: and by the fear of the LORD men depart from evil." Proverbs 16:5-6
When (and where) did the dialectic process originate? It originated in a garden in Eden. Genesis 3:1-6 is a descriptive of how the process works, i.e. with "feelings" (the affective domain) drawing man (in this case a woman) towards nature, and "reasoning" 'justifying' the action taken (the Psycho-motor Domain) over and against the will of God (the command the Father). Hebrews 12:5-11 gives us a descriptive of the Father's authority and Romans 7:14-25 the condition of conflict it engenders, creating an antithesis, a condition, according to dialectic 'reasoning,' known as neurosis, i.e. the conflict between the spirit and the flesh, i.e. God and man, i.e. the Father and his child (the Father's command and the child's "feelings"), which those of dialectic 'reasoning' 'purpose' to negate. According to dialectic 'reasoning,' negating the condition of Hebrews 12:5-11 (negating the Father's authority to give commands to his children, which are to be carried out without question, along with His authority to chasten them when they do disobey) 'redeems' the children from "repression." Then through their social fellowshipping and working together in solving social issues, they are 'reconciled' back to the world, i.e. back to "human nature." By negating the "guilty conscience," i.e. negating the condition of Romans 7:14-25 (the children caught between obeying their Father's command and their "natural inclination" to be at-one-with the world, in pleasure, in the 'moment'), the children are 'redeeming' from the condition of antithesis. Their "human nature" of approaching pleasure and avoiding pain, i.e. of becoming at-one-with the world, in pleasure, in the 'moment,' along with all the children of the world is now 'liberated,' i.e. made a 'reality.' Then, with all the children united as one, i.e. united in the social action (praxis) of augmenting pleasure and attenuating pain for the cause of "humanity," socialist action (the praxis of Genesis 3:1-6 on a global scale) becomes the only 'purpose' of life (negating the Father's authority in all of society).
As the Transformational Marxist Max Horkheimer stated it: "This mentality of man as the master can be traced back to the first chapters of Genesis." (Max Horkheimer, Eclipse of Reason) "Alienation is the experience of 'estrangement' (Verfremdung) from others," "Alienation has a long history. Its most radical sense already appears in the biblical expulsion from Eden." "God is thus the anthropological source of alienation." "Alienation will continue so long as the subject [the child] engages in an externalization (Entausserung) of his or her subjectivity [makes himself subject to his Father's will]." (Stephen Erik Bronner, Of Critical Theory and its Theorists) Only by negating the Father's authority, i.e. negating His right to give commands to His children (to be obeyed without question) along with negating His right to chasten them when they disobey Him, can the children, and therefore society, become "free," thinking and acting according to "human nature" only, i.e. according to that nature which all men have in "common." "Humanism asserts that the test of human conduct must be found in human experience; concern for man replaces concern about pleasing God [concern for worldly peace and socialist harmony replaces concern about pleasing the Father]. Humanism elevates man to the rank of God. Tillich's message is that God is man, mankind, humanity. Tillichian salvation is a symbol, a symbol for becoming ultimately concerned about humanity―salvation in an "eternal" present. The answer to man's predicament lies in the realization by individual man, that all men are essentially one and that the one is God. This self-realization is a 'return' to union:" (Leonard Wheat, Paul Tillich's Dialectic Humanism)
This "'return' to union" is Gnostic in concept (and construct), that man was "human" (of nature only, "good" or "righteous" in and of himself) until God came along and gave him a command to be obeyed without question (which was not of his "natural inclination" to be at-one-with the world, in pleasure, in the 'moment'), i.e. judging and condemning him if he disobeyed. Only through the introduction of dialectic 'reasoning' (Genesis 3:1-6, the 'justification' of human nature wanting to be at-one-with nature, i.e. nature wanting to become-at-one with itself, i.e. sensuousness over and against righteousness, i.e. i.e. the children over and against the Father, man over and against God, i.e. the flesh over and against the spirit, i.e. making "God's tree, everyone's tree" as Marx stated it "the King's horse is everyone's horse"), via the "help" of Satan, the master facilitator of 'change,' was man (in this case the woman) able to free himself ('liberate' his carnal thoughts and actions) from God and His authority.
Before God's first command and threat of judgment (for disobedience), man was only 'conscious' of the world around him. Therefore, according to dialectic 'reasoning,' it is God who engendered the condition of antithesis. But by God making man dissatisfied with His restrain upon his nature, i.e. "repressing" his urges or impulses, i.e. his desire, to be-at-one with nature, man became aware of himself, i.e. self-conscious. By man seeking for a 'rational' solution to his dilemma he (through the aid of a facilitator of 'change') became aware of dialectic 'reasoning,' i.e. self justification, i.e. his ability to 'justify' himself, i.e. 'justify' "human nature." Dialectic 'reasoning' (man 'justifying' himself according to himself, determining right and wrong from his own nature) therefore freed man from God ("freed" him from his fear of judgment and thereby "liberated" him from God and His commands) by helping him 'realize' that he was common only with nature (with the world), making him 'self-actualized,' i.e. purely "human," i.e. "himself" again, doing that which is of his own nature again, as he was before God's first command and threat of judgment, only this time (with his thoughts and actions totally focused upon nature, i.e. upon the world, i.e. upon humanity, i.e. making the world a "better" place for all mankind) doing it in a "group," i.e. all the "divine sparks," i.e. 'reasoning,' i.e. God (the Gnostic God) united as one again ("This self-realization is a 'return' to union:"), i.e. the group of children 'realizing,' through their use of dialectic reasoning, that "We" are "one" in "spirit," i.e. in 'reasoning' justifying sensuousness, i.e. in "human nature," in "We, working for Us," i.e. working for the earth, i.e. working for the world, i.e. creating a "new" world order of "equality," where all is "one", all is of the same nature, united in thought and in action (in "theory and practice").
Marxism and Freud-ism (socialism and psychology—united as one in social-psychology AKA Transformational Marxism) is simply "demythologized" Gnosticism, i.e. secularized Satanism, i.e. intellectualized witchcraft, disguised as "academics," grounding all things to a spirit of "oneness" (in a" feeling" of "oneness" via the consensus process) of the creation only, of nature only (void of the Father, i.e. void of the creator, i.e. void of God setting the standards for what is right and what is wrong). Psychology, sociology, anthropology (the praxis of individual-social issues), i.e. all of the "scientific method," are not neutral to faith, they are antithetical to faith, i.e. they negate faith. I call Bloom's Taxonomies "secularized Satanism, intellectualized witchcraft," which they are (being structured after the pattern of Genesis 3:1-6—in 1 Timothy 6:20, 21 the Apostle Paul warned Timothy of its effect upon those who use it, i.e. their loss of faith). According to dialectic 'reasoning,' man (the child) only has the "potential" for becoming "good" ("human") again through his participate in the dialectic process, i.e. cleansing himself (and therefore society) of the influences of his Father's authority, i.e. the "guilty conscience."
It must be remembered that while dad and mom are not perfect (they may be tyrants), the parental office they serve in is perfect. It is an office given to them by God, whether they realize it or not, that the next generation might come to know Him (understand their need for direction from an authority greater than their own nature, i.e. looking for a savior to rescue, i.e. redeem them from their carnal nature of death). But by 'liberating' the next generation from their Father's authority and His plan of salvation, i.e. redemption for their disobedience (their repentance and His forgiveness), i.e. their "moral practice is no longer tied to the individual's expectation of salvation," the next generation looses "the strongest motive for obeying moral commands." "With the loss of its foundation in the religious ["top-down"] promise of salvation, the meaning of normative obligation [what is right and what is wrong behavior] also changes. The differentiation between strict duties and less binding values, between what is morally right and what is ethically worth striving for, already sharpens moral validity into a normativity to which impartial judgment [personal opinion, i.e. how a persons "feels" or what he "thinks"] alone is adequate." (Jürgen Habermas, Communicative Ethics: The inclusion of the Other) "In order to insure to citizens the freedom of conscience [freedom from the "guilty conscience," freedom from the Father's authority], the church in the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics is separated from the state and the school from the church. Freedom of religious worship [as long as you keep your faith private, out of public sight] and freedom of anti-religious propaganda [your duty to make humanism public, "tolerating," if not indorsing, abomination, i.e. pressuring all to embrace it as well] is recognized for all citizens." (Article 124 of the "former" Soviet Constitution) The only difference being, today the church has embraced men's opinions (which have no Godly, i.e. Father's authority, i.e. with no condemnation, conviction, contrition, i.e. need for repentance before God alone, in them), insisting upon the opinions of men as the only mean's of communication, thereby making the government and the "church" "one" in the Heresiarchal Paradigm of 'change.'
The sole 'purpose' of dialectic 'reasoning' (those who use it, i.e. the facilitators of 'change') is to negate the Father's office (the parent's office) of authority, so that they can take control over the children, so that they can use the parent's children (and the parent's money, i.e. the children's inheritance) for themselves (for their own pleasure) without a "guilty conscience" (thereby negating, in the thoughts and actions of the next generation, faith in, belief in, and obedience to God, as well as negating the acceptance of God's chastening of them when they disobey Him—no longer allowing anyone to make known, in the public domain, God's wrath upon "the children of disobedience," i.e. his judgment upon those who reject his chastening, i.e. his judgment upon those who 'justify' themselves before themselves, who esteem themselves, who exalt themselves above the Father God, loving their flesh and the things of this world instead, i.e. refusing to humble themselves, refusing to deny themselves before the Lord, refusing to love Him and hating their flesh, i.e. refusing to hate their carnal thoughts and actions, i.e. refusing to hate their love for and desire to control the world for their carnal gain). "For what is a man profited, if he shall gain the whole world, and lose his own soul? or what shall a man give in exchange for his soul?" Matthew 16:24-26
The dialectic process is known as having a thesis, an antithesis, and a synthesis, which then becomes a "new" thesis, with the process continuing (repeating itself) until there is not longer an antithesis. To make sense of this it is necessary to start with the Father, not with the child (as is done in dialectic 'reasoning'). The reason being, if we start with the child, as the thesis, the child's nature to approach pleasure and avoid pain predominates over the Father's authority to give commands and use chastisement to initiate or sustain obedience to Him, makes the Father's authority the antithesis, engendering the need for the synthesis, i.e. the need for 'change,' if the child is to come to know himself as he really is, i.e. thinking and acting according to his own "human nature." But, if we start with the Father as the thesis, the antithesis stays in place, i.e. the child's "natural inclination" to become at-one-with the world, in pleasure, in the 'moment,' remains subject to the Father's authority and therefore there is no possibility for synthesis, i.e. preventing a condition where the Father and the child would become "one" ("equal") in nature—which would negate the Father's authority (negate right and wrong, i.e. negate righteousness, doing right and not doing wrong according to the Father's commands, as being an issue of life, sensuousness, i.e. "human nature," the approaching of pleasure and the avoiding of pain having taken its place).
This difference in paradigms is easily understood in language, since language reflects the person's paradigm (reveals a person's way of thinking and acting—body language being as important an indicator of his paradigm as the spoken or written word). The child's language is based upon his "feelings" of the 'moment.' His thoughts are generally subject to his "feelings," i.e. subject to his pursuit of pleasure in the 'moment.' But the child perceives his Father's language as a language of commands, i.e. of "do right" and "don't do wrong," i.e. obey me and you will be blessed or else you will be punished, i.e. chastened or condemned. The child's language is "sense perceived" as being "positive" in his own eyes while the Father's language, when it restrains him from his heart's desire, i.e. inhibits or prevents his "human nature" from becoming at-one-with nature, in pleasure, in the 'moment,' is "sense perceived" as being "negative." The Father's language of restraint, i.e. "Can not," "Do not," "Thou shalt not" (not being in harmony with the child's nature) is therefore antithetical to the child's "human nature." Therefore, it requires faith, on the child's part, to accept and obey the Father's command, i.e. accept the Father as authority, His commands as being right, i.e. to be obeyed "as given." Therefore, the patriarchal paradigm requires faith, belief, obedience, and the acceptance of chastisement for disobedience on the part of the child while the heresiarchal paradigm of 'change' requires seduction, deception and manipulate (all subject to nature, i.e. subject to sight, i.e. subject to the "scientific process") if the child is to be 'liberated' from the Father's paradigm of restraint.
While the child's nature is to approach pleasure (attain the gratifying objects of nature which are around him, for the purpose of dopamine 'emancipation'), the Father's command "No" or "Can not" prevents its realization. If the child disregards the Father's command and attains the object of gratification he will experience pain (chastening, which includes the pain of missing out on other events of pleasure). If the child strikes out against the Father, challenging His authority (manifesting the Karl Marx, hate of authority, in his heart), he will experience intense pain, inflected by the Father.
Therefore the child's only recourse is found in language, i.e. in the question "Why?" But the Father's preaching and teaching, which is antithetical to dialogue, restrains that which dialogue seeks to attain, the child's nature, desiring to be at-one-with nature, in pleasure, in the 'moment,' i.e. the Father's preaching and teaching of things to be obeyed "as given," obstructing the "nature" of things (obstructing that which makes the child subject to 'change,' i.e. subject to the changing world of nature around him). For the Father to initiate or sustain his position of authority He must negate the child's "Why?" especially when it challenges His authority (goes counter to His standard of what is right behavior and what is wrong behavior). This is why He uses the phrase "Because I said so?" ("I cause to be." as in "I am the creator and your are the created."). While the command is found in the Father's "Not," the child's only avenue for 'liberation' from the Father's command is through the use of dialogue, which would make the child and the Father "equal," i.e. "equal" on the basis of "feelings," "thoughts," and "actions."
It is not that Fathers (parents) don't dialogue with their children. They do. But there are times, when the child's "Why?" forces the Father into a condition of "equality" which would go counter to His standards of right and wrong (the condition which 'justifies' His "top-down" authority). It is here that He has no recourse but to "Set his foot down." to maintain or restore the patriarchal office of authority He resides in, using the phrase of authority "Because I said so!" (carrying with it the threat of punishment if the child persists in his intended course of action).
There is more than one of you (and one of me). While there is "I" and "Me," as in "I can talk to you." and "You can talk to me." there is also "self" in me (and in you). I can talk to my "self," and you can talk to your "self," but we can not talk to the other's "self," i.e. you can not talk to my "self," and I can not talk to your "self." Our "self" is always in agreement to the approaching of pleasure and the avoiding of pain, i.e. to "human nature." Therefore, when you can no longer talk to your Father, i.e. get him into dialogue regarding your "feelings" (which gravitate toward pleasure), you can talk to your "self" and find agreement in that which the Father said you can "Not" do or have (the gratifying object of pleasure in the environment). That language of "feelings," manifested in "you speaking to your 'self,'" is expressed in the word "ought" (as in "I ought to be able to ____"), i.e. the wolf within you (desiring to take that which is of the Father's and use it for yourself, 'justifying' yourself along the way). (A room full of "ought's," united in consensus, is a pack of wolves 'purposed' in devouring the sheep, i.e. taking that which is not theirs to take, i.e. using it for themselves, for their own pleasure). It is here that dialectic 'reasoning' finds its dynamo (your 'justification' of your "self," according to your carnal desires, expressed with your "ought") for 'change,' i.e. creating a world the way it "ought" to be (a world of pleasure and "enjoyment"), run only according to "human nature" (run according to unrighteousness), freed of the Father's authority (freed of the restraints of righteousness).
Karl Marx wrote: "The unspeculative Christian also recognizes sensuality as long as it does not assert itself at the expense of true reason, i.e., of faith, of true love, i.e., of love of God, of true will-power, i.e., of will in Christ. [Therefore man lives] not for the sake of sensual love, not for the lust of the flesh, but because the Lord said: Increase and multiply [to initiate and sustain the "top-down," Patriarchal family structure]." (Karl Marx, The Holy Family) Without 'discovering' and 'liberating' the person's "sensuality," his 'hidden' carnal desires, i.e. his "ought" wanting freedom from parental authority (freedom from the denial of self, i.e. freedom from "repression," and freedom from the "picking up of his cross," i.e. freedom from social rejection, i.e. freedom from "alienation," and freedom from following Christ as He brings all things, i.e. the flesh, into obedience to His Heavenly Father), the 'change' process can not be initiated and sustained.
"We have to study the conditions which maximize ought-perceptiveness." "Oughtiness is itself a fact to be perceived." "If we wish to permit the facts to tell us their oughtiness, we must learn to listen to them in a very specific way which can be called Taoistic [creating an environment where the child can recognize and express his "feeling" of "oneness," i.e. his natural desire for or inclination to "oneness," i.e. his heart's desire to be at-one-with nature and self, which is expressed in his "ought"]." (Abraham Maslow, The Farther Reaches of Human Nature) Our hearts desire (our affective domain) to be at peace (to be at-one-with) nature (with the world) always appears as "good" within our own eyes, thus deceiving us into believing "human nature" is "good," i.e. blinding us to the wickedness of our heart and its carnal desires. "The heart is deceitful above all things, and desperately wicked: who can know it?" Jeremiah 17:9
Facilitators of 'change' are the blind leading the blind. "And [Jesus] spake a parable unto them, Can the blind lead the blind? shall they not both fall into the ditch?" Luke 6:39 "Therefore seeing we have this ministry, as we have received mercy, we faint not; But have renounced the hidden things of dishonesty, not walking in craftiness, nor handling the word of God deceitfully; but by manifestation of the truth commending ourselves to every man's conscience in the sight of God." "But if our gospel be hid, it is hid to them that are lost: In whom the god of this world hath blinded the minds of them which believe not, lest the light of the glorious gospel of Christ, who is the image of God, should shine unto them." "For we preach not ourselves, but Christ Jesus the Lord; and ourselves your servants for Jesus' sake. For God, who commanded the light to shine out of darkness, hath shined in our hearts, to give the light of the knowledge of the glory of God in the face of Jesus Christ. But we have this treasure in earthen vessels, that the excellency of the power may be of God, and not of us." "We are troubled on every side, yet not distressed; we are perplexed, but not in despair; Persecuted, but not forsaken; cast down, but not destroyed; Always bearing about in the body the dying of the Lord Jesus, that the life also of Jesus might be made manifest in our body. For we which live are alway delivered unto death for Jesus' sake, that the life also of Jesus might be made manifest in our mortal flesh." 2 Corinthians 4:1-11
While you can take your child out of the land of (or "classroom environment" of) "oughtiness" (at least limiting his contact or association with it), you can not take his "ought" out of him (while God took Israel out of Egypt he could not take Egypt out of Israel). Without the Lord changing the child's heart (without his repentance to God for his sins), he can not be freed from the control of sin over his life. "But every man is tempted, when he is drawn away of his own lust, and enticed. Then when lust hath conceived, it bringeth forth sin: and sin, when it is finished, bringeth forth death." God's solution being: "And you, that were sometime alienated and enemies in your mind by wicked works, yet now hath he reconciled In the body of his [Christ's] flesh through death, to present you holy and unblameable and unreproveable in his sight: If ye continue in the faith grounded and settled, and be not moved away from the hope of the gospel," Colossians 1:21-24
While those of dialectic 'reasoning,' claim that war comes from the Father's authority, they refuse to recognize that it comes from their own heart's desire, i.e. their own carnal 'drive' to control the world around them, gaining control over it to use it for their own carnal 'purpose.' "From whence come wars and fightings among you? come they not hence, even of your lusts that war in your members? Ye lust, and have not: ye kill, and desire to have, and cannot obtain: ye fight and war, yet ye have not, because ye ask not. Ye ask, and receive not, because ye ask amiss, that ye may consume it upon your lusts. Ye adulterers and adulteresses, know ye not that the friendship of the world is enmity with God? whosoever therefore will be a friend of the world is the enemy of God." James 4:1-4
According to dialectic 'reasoning' (Hegel, Marx, Freud, Bloom, and Common Core), as long as the child is subject to his Father's will, his "human nature" is "repressed." His ability to relate with others of the same nature is also inhibited. By his defense of his Father's position, holding others accountable to his Father's will (sustained by his "guilty conscience"), he alienates not only himself from his own "human nature" but also alienates others from theirs as well. In this way he sustains his Father's way of thinking and acting, not only in himself but in society as well, creating an "in-group, out-group" situation, with the "in-group" being those who are subject to his Father's will and the "out-group" being those who are not subject to his Father's will. Interestingly it is the believer who declares himself of the "out-group" and the world of the "in-group," at least regarding where those of the world will spend eternity. "How can ye believe, which receive honour one of another, and seek not the honour that cometh from God only?" "And if any man hear my words, and believe not, I judge him not: for I came not to judge the world, but to save the world. He that rejecteth me, and receiveth not my words, hath one that judgeth him: the word that I have spoken, the same shall judge him in the last day. For I have not spoken of myself; but the Father which sent me, he gave me a commandment, what I should say, and what I should speak. And I know that his commandment is life everlasting: whatsoever I speak therefore, even as the Father said unto me, so I speak." John 5:44, 12:47-50 "If ye were of the world, the world would love his own: but because ye are not of the world, but I have chosen you out of the world, therefore the world hateth you." John 15:19 "Then shall they deliver you up to be afflicted, and shall kill you: and ye shall be hated of all nations for my name's sake." Matthew 24:9 "Blessed are ye, when men shall hate you, and when they shall separate you from their company, and shall reproach you, and cast out your name as evil, for the Son of man's sake." Luke 6:22 "And fear not them which kill the body, but are not able to kill the soul: but rather fear him which is able to destroy both soul and body in hell." Matthew 10:28
Thus, according to dialectic 'reasoning,' the Father's authority is the dynamo for capitalism and nationalism, i.e. the inhibitor of socialism and globalism (preventing worldly peace and socialist harmony). The role of education, as Paulo Freire stated it, is to 'liberate' the child from the 'violent' repression of the Father and His authority to give commands to his children, i.e. commands to be obeyed without question, and chasten them when they disobey them. By negating the Fathers' right to use chastening, to initiate and sustain his office of authority, the "guilty conscience" (the "negative" feeling which is engendered when thinking or act in disobedience to the Father's commands) is negated, freeing the child to be himself again, i.e. human, i.e. worldly, i.e. carnal, i.e. "normal," i.e. "of the world," i.e. "reprobate."
"For all that is in the world, the lust of the flesh, and the lust of the eyes, and the pride of life, is not of the Father, but is of the world." 1 John 2:16
"If any man love the world, the love of the Father is not in him." 1 John 2:15
"This know also, that in the last days perilous times shall come. For men shall be lovers of their own selves, covetous, boasters, proud, blasphemers, disobedient to parents, unthankful, unholy, Without natural affection, trucebreakers, false accusers, incontinent, fierce, despisers of those that are good, traitors, heady, highminded, lovers of pleasures more than lovers of God; Having a form of godliness, but denying the power thereof: from such turn away. For of this sort are they which creep into houses, and lead captive silly women laden with sins, led away with divers lusts, Ever learning, and never able to come to the knowledge of the truth. Now as Jannes and Jambres withstood Moses, so do these also resist the truth: men of corrupt minds, reprobate concerning the faith." 2 Timothy 3:1-8
"For the time will come when they will not endure sound doctrine; but after their own lusts shall they heap to themselves teachers, having itching ears; And they shall turn away their ears from the truth, and shall be turned unto fables." 2 Timothy 4:3, 4 They will "turn their ears from the" Word of God, "and shall be turned unto" the opinions of men.
While traditional Marxist use bullets and blood to "deliver" "society" from the Father's authority, transformational Marxist use a special environment: a diverse group of people, dialoguing (opinions) to consensus, over social issues, in a facilitated meeting, to a predetermined outcome—that no decision, in regards to a social issue, should be made without a diverse group of people, dialoguing (opinions) to consensus, in a facilitated meeting, to "deliver" all the individual members of "society" from the Father's authority. This is the same procedure which is used in all grades of Common Core. It is also the same procedure which is called a soviet. The soviet was a special meeting (as described above) to resolve social issues (solve 'crisis') while at the same time 'changing' the participants by preventing a Father's authority from taking control of the meeting (and therefore determining the outcome of the meeting, i.e. thereby controlling social action) while 'changing' the participants paradigm, negating the patriarchal paradigm (their Father's authority) within them. Through their 'willing' participation in the heresiarchal paradigm of 'change' they negated (annihilated, killed, destroyed, etc.) the Father within them, i.e. the "guilty conscience."
By "helping" the child (through the facilitated meeting of 'change') focus upon his own "human nature" (upon his own "feelings" and "thoughts") instead of upon the voice of the one restraining it (instead of focusing upon the Father's commands, stimulating his fear of chastening for disobedience), the child 'changes' his paradigm from the Patriarchal (from the one above) to the Heresiarchal (to the many below). He will, from then on, make the many (united in "feelings," in consensus, united in that which they have in common, i.e. "human nature") the "new" "one," united in a "new" 'purpose,' that of negating the one restraining "human nature." In this way the super-ego (the voice of the many, i.e. "the village" below, i.e. the community AKA "common"-unity below) negates the conscience (the voice of the one, the Father above) in the child, making it easier for him to perceive his Father, i.e. His commands (and His use of chastening to enforce them—initiating and sustaining His office of authority) as being "irrational." He will, from then on, regard the Father and His office as being "irrelevant." He will disregard it in a "rapidly 'changing' world," making it easier for him to create a "new" world order made in his own image, made according to "human nature," made according to that which he has in common with all the world (from which Common Core derives its name and its 'purpose').
There is no Father's authority in dialogue. Therefore by coming to a consensus with others, through dialogue, the Father's system of authority is negated, not only in the individual's thoughts but also in his social action, freeing all other individuals (society) of the Father's authority as well. The problem comes to the forefront when the Father's ability to use force, to defend his office of authority (to train up the next generation in His image, to become individuals of authority themselves), is negated. It is impossible for him to restore his position of authority (his authority to say "Mine. Not yours" and therefore recognize other citizens' private property rights with "Yours. Not mine.") when the government he is subject to prevents him from doing so (passing "common-ist" laws which force him to say "Ours. Not just mine or yours."). When the critical mass comes, when there are more people who are subject to "common" cause then to "Because I said so," the world is 'changed,' i.e. from then on the citizens are controlled by the "common" cause.
This is because the "guilty conscience" (developed in the individual child when the Father chastened him for his personal actions of disobedience to His commands) is negated (is seared) in the consensus process, his conscience now turned into a "super-ego," i.e. his "feelings" (which were restrained by the Father) now 'liberated' by the environment (which engendered them)—thereby anyone who controls the environment, controls him. "What we call 'conscience' perpetuates inside of us our bondage to past objects now part of ourselves: the super-ego 'unites in itself the influences of the present and of the past.'" (Norman O. Brown, Life Against Death: The Psychoanalytical Meaning of History) The child's "natural inclination" to seek relationship (approval) within the environment, i.e. his feelings, thoughts, and actions are now made subject to the diverse group, i.e. subject to the village, as a result of his participation in the consensus process, where all are (the group is, the people are) punished because of his refusal to participate in the process ("holding up progress," taking society "captive" to his ideals), for his insistence upon doing it his own way, i.e. maintaining his Father's "top-down" way of thinking and acting (the way it was done "in the past"), thereby inhibiting or blocking "equality" (unity, i.e. "We working for us."), the way of thinking and acting necessary if 'crisis' (which effects everyone) is to be dealt with (resolved) in a so called 'rapidly changing world.' "One of the most fascinating aspects of group therapy is that everyone is born again, born together in the group." "Few individuals, as Asch has shown, can maintain their objectivity [independence] in the face of apparent group unanimity;" (Irvin D. Yalom, Theory and Practice and Group Psychotherapy) This is where we are finding ourselves today, teamwork (comradeship, public, communitization, socialism, "Ours, not just yours.") replacing entrepreneurship (individualism, private, personal interest, capitalism, "Mine, not yours.") as the way of "doing business."
While Bloom's Cognitive system (listed above) describes his desired outcome it is impossible to understand it from his "point of view", i.e. "that truth and knowledge are only relative and that there are no hard and fast truths which exist for all time and places" It is only from the Father's position that you can apprehend what its intended 'purpose' is (to 'redeem' the children from their Father's authority, to 'reconcile' them back to the world, so that they can used as objects of pleasure by those who control the environment which influences their thoughts and deeds). The environment of 'change' does not allow you enough awareness, in and of itself, to warn you of where it is taking you. "We know how to change the opinions of an individual in a selected direction, without his ever becoming aware of the stimuli which changed his opinion." "'We must accept the fact that some kind of control of human affairs is inevitable. We cannot use good sense in human affairs unless someone engages in the design and construction of environmental conditions which affect the behavior of men.'" (B. F. Skinner) "In client-centered therapy, … we institute certain attitudinal conditions, and the client has relatively little voice in the establishment of these conditions." "If we have the power or authority to establish the necessary conditions, the predicted behaviors will follow." (Carl Rogers, on becoming a person: A Therapist View of Psychotherapy)
But if we evaluate Bloom's Cognitive system (Common Core) from the Father's perspective we can clearly understand it's 'purpose.' When the child is given a command by the Father, he now knows. When the Father looks the child in the eyes and states "Do you understand?" the child understands that he had better obey or else. If the child, in disobedience to his Father's command, decides to apply his own feelings to his actions (disobey his Father's command), his analysis is that he had better pay attentions to knowing as his Father "takes him to the woodshed." By Bloom introducing synthesis, it becomes imperative that the child disobey the Father's authority so that he can gain an understanding of his own "human nature," i.e. making it possible to initiate and sustain common ground with the other children of his own nature. This is the basis of "common"-ism AKA communism AKA Common Core. His evaluation is that we all hold in common our "human nature" of approaching pleasure and avoiding pain while we are not the same regarding our diversity, i.e. regarding a position on the spectrum of 'change' (some more advanced than others). It is only here that the next generation, freed of its Father's authority, is able to create a "new" world order, built according to its own image, i.e. initiate and sustain a "new" world run according to "human nature."
We are now a nation (and a world) run by the "children of disobedience" (children of rebellion in adult bodies), negating the Father's authority, i.e. "redeeming" the children of the world from their Father's authority, "reconciling" them back to the world, thereby engendering a people who are slaves to worldly peace and socialist harmony, their inheritance, i.e. their Father's money, now in the hands of the facilitators of 'change,' using it to "control" the children and adults of the world, using them as servants for their own pleasures, i.e. for their wicked ways. Those of dialectic 'reasoning' equate the Father's authority as the initiator and sustainer of Fascism, when in truth Fascism negated it for the cause of "nationalism." Those of dialectic 'reasoning' are simply doing the same, negating the Father's authority, for the cause of "globalism."
By means of the dialectic process (the use of Bloom's Taxonomy), i.e. seduction, deception and manipulation, this generation is now putting dialectic 'reasoning' into social praxis, negating righteousness (the right of the Father to train up his children in his own image by means of commands and chastening) as they propagate their way of abomination, as they were programmed to do in the classroom, participating in the consensus process of 'change.' We have rejected the warning which comes from God's word. "Children, obey your parents in the Lord: for this is right. Honour thy father and mother; which is the first commandment with promise; That it may be well with thee, and thou mayest live long on the earth." Ephesians 6:1-2
In his "Taxonomies of Educational Objectives" (the curriculum used by Common Core) Bloom wrote: "By educational objectives, we mean explicit formulations of the ways in which students are expected to be changed by the educative process . . . change in their thinking, their feelings, and their actions." (Benjamin Bloom, et al. Taxonomy of Educational Objectives Book 1: Cognitive Domain, page 26) "… objectives can best be attained where the individual is separated from earlier environmental conditions and when he is in association with a group of peers who are changing in much the same direction and who thus tend to reinforce each other." "To create effectively a new set of attitudes and values, the individual must undergo great reorganization of his personal beliefs and attitudes and he must be involved in an environment which in may ways is separated from the previous environment in which he was developed." "The affective domain is, in retrospect, a virtual 'Pandora's Box [a box of abominations, i.e. man's deceitful and wicked heart, that which is only of this world]." "It is in this 'box' that the most influential controls are to be found." "The affective domain contains the forces that determine the nature of an individual's life and ultimately the life of an entire people." (David Krathwohl, Benjamin Bloom, et al. Taxonomy of Educational Objectives Book 2: Affective Domain, pages 82, 84, 91...) Therefore any condition or action which engenders a "guilty consciences" (maintaining the Father's authority) must be negated for the sake of unity, i.e. socialist harmony and worldly peace, for the sake of a world of abomination.
"For all that is in the world, the lust of the flesh, and the lust of the eyes, and the pride of life, is not of the Father, but is of the world." 1 John 2:17 "No servant can serve two masters: for either he will hate the one, and love the other; or else he will hold to the one, and despise the other. Ye cannot serve God and mammon." Luke 16:13 "And he said unto them, Ye are from beneath; I am from above: ye are of this world; I am not of this world. I said therefore unto you, that ye shall die in your sins: for if ye believe not that I am he, ye shall die in your sins." John 8:23-24 "Jesus saith unto him, I am the way, the truth, and the life: no man cometh unto the Father, but by me." John 14:6 "Neither is there salvation in any other: for there is none other name under heaven given among men, whereby we must be saved." Acts 4:12
Quotations and Notes:
Those promoting Common Core Curriculum do not like to consider it a curriculum, which it is, because curriculum sounds too structured or rigid to them. But, as you will see, it is built upon the curriculum, i.e. classroom "learning environment" of Benjamin Bloom, et al.
Force field analysis: "Driving forces [forces of social approval, i.e. of sensuous "feelings" and "thoughts"—"positive" forces of "human nature," of augmenting pleasure] are those forces or factors affecting a situation which are 'pushing' in a particular direction; they tend to initiate a change and keep it going. Restraining forces [forces of parental right and wrong restraining "human nature"—"negative" forces of parental commands] may be likened to walls or barriers. They only prevent or retard movement toward them." "The present condition (the present level of the method) is at that level where the sum of all the downward forces and the sum of all the upward forces are equal [personal desires and fear of parental "reprisal"]." "When we have determined the nature of forces which are affecting the present state of affairs ["negative" parental forces of restraint vs. "positive" group forces of approval] we can think more clearly in selecting the forces or factors which should be modified if the conditions are to change in the direction we desire . . . our task then becomes either to increase the total strength of the driving forces for change [increase carnal "needs" satisfactions] or to decrease the total strength of forces opposing change [decrease parental authority] or both." "The component forces can be modified in the following way: (1) reducing or removing the forces [removing the traditional minded parents and teachers involvement in controlling the classroom environment]; (2) strengthening or adding forces [increase the socialists minded parents and teachers involvement in controlling the classroom environment]; (3) changing the direction of the forces [convert the traditional parents and teachers into socialist minded parents and teachers]." "...the first step may be to determine what forces, if any, must be dealt with [remove any fear of parental reprimand for "doing your own thing," i.e. for disobedience, i.e. negate the "guilty conscience] before a change can occur." "We might select, as a first step, for instance, getting parents interested in having more pupil participation in planning in the classroom [permitting their children to determine for themselves, in a collective experience, what is right and wrong (regarding values and beliefs) in their own eyes]. With increased skill ["educators" programmed in the 'change' process, 'willingly' participating in the process of 'change' out of fear of lose of job or lose of job advancement] and increased parent interest [thinking it is just education] two important forces in the situation have been modified and the level of equilibrium of forces should move upward toward more teacher-pupil planning [where socialist engineers, disguised as "educators," now control, i.e. seduce, deceive, and manipulate the thoughts and actions of the children into their outcome, i.e. into the "new" world order, void of parental controls]." (Kurt Lewin in Kenneth Benne, Human Relations in Curriculum Change) Teachers themselves are graded along the same spectrum of 'changeability,' i.e. from 0-sabatage (fighting against the system of 'change,' i.e. insisting upon the teaching of established facts and truth as being the 'purpose' of education) to 8-committed (promoting the system of 'change,' i.e. insisting upon promoting the praxis of "thinking" through "feelings" as being the 'purpose' of education), according to the Redding change-acceptance scale.
"Philosophy [thinking of a world that "ought" to be, freed of the Father's "can not" be] is a free and not self-seeking activity, … This activity contains the essential element of a negation, because to produce is also to destroy; … as Mind passes on from its natural form, it also proceeds from its exact code of morals and the robustness of life to reflection and conception. The result of this is that it lays hold of and troubles this real, substantial kind of existence, this morality and faith, and thus the period of destruction commences." "It may be said that Philosophy first commences when a race for the most part has left its concrete life, when separation and change of class have begun, and the people approach toward their fall; when a gulf has arisen between inward strivings [the child's desires] and external reality [the Father's restraints], and the old forms of Religion [looking to the Father for direction], &c., are no longer satisfying; when Mind manifests indifference to its living existence or rests unsatisfied therein, and moral life becomes dissolved [no longer satisfying]." "Then it is that Mind takes refuge in the clear space of thought to create for itself a kingdom of thought ["ought"] in opposition to the world of actuality, and Philosophy is the reconciliation ['reconciliation' to the "new" world order] following upon the destruction of that real world [the "old" world order] which thought has begun." (Hegel's Lectures on the History of Philosophy Introduction B. Relation of Philosophy to Other Departments of Knowledge.)
A continuum of 'change': "A natural step in the present study [how to negate the Father's authority from the individual's life and therefore from society], therefore, was to conceive of a continuum extending from extreme conservatism [unquestioned obedience to parents] to extreme liberalism ['driven' by "human nature," 'purposed' in negating parental authority from society] and to construct a scale which would place individuals along this continuum." (Theodor Adorno, The Authoritarian Personality) "Life, at its best, is a flowing, changing process in which nothing is fixed." "The more that the client perceives the therapist as empathic, as having an unconditional regard for him, the more the client will move away from a static, fixed way of functioning, and the more he will move toward a fluid, changing way of functioning." "Consciousness, instead of being the watchman over a dangerous and unpredictable lot of impulses, becomes the comfortable inhabitant of a society of impulses and feelings and thoughts." "Individuals move not from a fixity through change to a new fixity, though such a process is indeed possible. But [through a] continuum from fixity to changingness, from rigid structure to flow, from stasis to process." "The good life is not any fixed state. The good life is a process. The direction which constitutes the good life is psychological freedom to move in any direction [where] the general qualities of this selected direction appear to have a certain universality." "When the individual is inwardly free, he chooses as the good life this process of becoming." "The major barrier to mutual interpersonal communication is our very natural tendency to judge, to evaluate, to approve or disapprove, the statement of the other person, or the other group." "the whole emphasis is upon process, not upon end states of being … to value certain qualitative elements of the process of becoming, that we can find a pathway toward the open society." (Carl Rogers, on becoming a person: A Therapist View of Psychotherapy) To "redeeming" the child from the "ethno-centric" system of doing right and not doing wrong, i.e. the duality way of thinking and acting, where a "top-down" structure is in place, he must first be moved through an "ego-centric" system of approaching pleasure and avoiding pain, i.e. through the plurality way of thinking and acting, i.e. where there is no one right answer to a problem, where his "personal feelings" system (which conflicts with the "ethnocentric," "top-down" structure) can be 'discovered' and liberated, so that he can 'willingly' unite with a "socio-centric" system of thought and action, where he can find commonality with everyone else's "personal feelings" system of thinking and acting (which conflicts with the "ethnocentric," "top-down" structure), where all the children can experientially become united as one, "rationally" 'justifying' the praxis (social action) of negating the "ethnocentric" system ("top-down" structure) of thinking and acting. Without the spectrum, i.e. the plurality of approaching pleasure and avoiding pain, i.e. the dialoguing of opinions, the duality of antithesis (the Father's authority over the child's feelings) would remain in place and synthesis (socialist harmony and worldly peace) would remain unrealized.
I capitalize Father to emphasize God's authority over man, i.e. all authority is of God, not that our earthly fathers are righteous in and of themselves (they are not). Only God is righteous in and of Himself (why only He can impute righteousness to men of faith in Him, i.e. to those who believe upon His only begotten Son, Jesus Christ). But, as will be explained in more detail below, God has established a system of righteousness upon the earth, i.e. the father's authority to give commands to his children, to be accepted as given, along with the right to chasten them when they disobey, that they might have some semblance of His way of thinking and acting. "Furthermore we have had fathers of our flesh which corrected us, and we gave them reverence: shall we not much rather be in subjection unto the Father of spirits, and live?" Hebrews 12:9 "That which we have seen and heard declare we unto you, that ye also may have fellowship with us: and truly our fellowship is with the Father, and with his Son Jesus Christ." "Who is a liar but he that denieth that Jesus is the Christ? He is antichrist, that denieth the Father and the Son." "Behold, what manner of love the Father hath bestowed upon us, that we should be called the sons of God: therefore the world knoweth us not, because it knew him not." 1 John 1:3; 2:22; 3:1 "Whosoever transgresseth, and abideth not in the doctrine of Christ, hath not God. He that abideth in the doctrine of Christ, he hath both the Father and the Son." 2 John 1:9
"For all that is in the world, the lust of the flesh, and the lust of the eyes, and the pride of life, is not of the Father, but is of the world." 1 John 2:16
Abraham Maslow's Hierarch of "felt" needs: with socialist needs being the highest need, i.e. the advancement of socialism (one for all and all for one) over and against individualism, i.e. negating one under God, i.e. negating the child's honoring of his parent's office of authority. "Self-actualizing people [people 'liberated' from their Father's or God's "top-down" way of thinking and acting] have to a large extent transcended the values of their culture. They are not so much merely Americans as they are world citizens, members of the human species first and foremost." (A. H. Maslow, The Further Reaches of Human Nature)
Lawrence Kohlberg's dilemma questions: to pit the child's desire to survive in this life (and/or group survival) over and against his belief (negating his Father's values and beliefs, i.e. negating his Father's "Thou shalt" and "Thou shalt not" way of thinking and acting in his thoughts and actions). Kohlberg's six step 'change' of the person's paradigm was from obedience to God or to the parent to Cosmic principles or pantheism: "1. Obedience, 2. Fairness, 3. Mutual Trust, 4. Maintain Social System, 5. Autonomous Moral Action, 6. Cosmic Principles/Pantheistic." (Lisa Kuhmerker, The Kohlberg Legacy for the Helping Profession, p. 160-161) As explained in the Harvard Graduate School of Education News: "Kohlberg found that young children assumed that they had no choice but to obey rules handed down by powerful authorities." "But once children realize that more than one way of doing things exists, they move to making moral decisions from a position of self-interest (Stage 2). Furthering individual relationships becomes the main concern in Stage 3, whereas by Stage 6, a person works for a moral society—for justice—to the point of disobeying unjust laws." (http://www.gse.harvard.edu/news/features/larry10012000_page2.html) If you believe in absolutes, i.e. in obeying God and/or in children obeying parents, there are no right answer to Kohlberg's dilemma questions except not to answer them, i.e. not to participate.
George Hegel: "The child, contrary to appearance, is the absolute, the rationality of the relationship; he is what is enduring and everlasting, the totality which produces itself once again as such." "On account of the absolute and natural oneness of the husband, the wife, and the child, where there is no antithesis of person to person or of subject to object, the surplus is not the property of one of them, since their indifference is not a formal or a legal one." (George Hegel, System of Ethical Life) "I remark here that the general principle to be laid down as a foundation for all judgments on the varying modifications, forms, and spirit of the Christian religion is this – that the aim and essence of all true religion, our religion included, is human morality, and that all the more detailed doctrines of Christianity, all means of propagating them, and all its obligations (whether obligations to believe or obligations to perform actions in themselves otherwise arbitrary) have their worth and their sanctity appraised according to their close or distant connection with that aim [thus augmenting "human morality" over and against righteousness]." (emphasis added Hegel, The Positivity of the Christian Religion; Part I. How Christianity became the Positive Religion of a Church; Written: in 1795 (aged 25) while a private tutor in Berne, Switzerland; Source: Early Theological Writings, pp. 67-181, University of Pennsylvania Press, 1971, excluding all notes; Translated: by T. M. Knox, 1947; First Published: Chicago University Press 1948; Copyright: reproduced here under "Fair Use" provisions; Transcribed: by Andy Blunden, May 2007) "When a man has finally reached the point where he does not think he knows it better than others, that is when he has become indifferent to what they have done badly and he is interested only in what they have done right, then peace and affirmation have come to him." (G. F. W. Hegel, in one of the casual notes preserved at Widener; source: Carl Friedrich, The Philosophy of Hegel)
Karl Marx: "Once the earthly family is discovered to be the secret of the heavenly family, the former must be destroyed [annihilated] in theory and in practice." (Karl Marx, Feuerbach Thesis # 4) "The life which he [the child] has given to the object [to the Father by obeying his commands and accepting his chastening when he disobeys] sets itself against him as an alien and hostile force." Karl Marx "For one class to stand for the whole of society, another must be the class of universal offense and the embodiment of universal limits. A particular social sphere must stand for the notorious crime of the whole society, so that liberation from this sphere appears to be universal liberation. For one class to be the class par excellence of liberation, another class must, on the other hand, be openly the subjugating class." (Karl Marx, Critique of Hegel's Philosophy of Right) "Concerning the changing of circumstances by men, the educator must himself be educated." (Karl Marx Thesis on Feuerbach # 3)
Sigmund Freud: "'It is not really a decisive matter whether one has killed one's father or abstained from the deed,' if the function of the conflict and its consequences are the same." (Sigmund Freud in Herbert Marcuse, Eros and Civilization)
The "Frankfurt School": "As the Frankfurt School wrestled with how to 'reinvigorate Marx', they 'found the missing link in Freud'" (Martin Jay, The Dialectical Imagination: The History of the Frankfurt School and the Institute of Social Research 1923-1950) "Freud speaks of religion [the children's love of the Father] as a 'substitute-gratification' [instead of their love for their "human nature" and the world] – the Freudian analogue to the Marxian formula, 'opiate of the people [the "guilty conscience" for disobeying the Father].'" "The guilty conscience is formed in childhood by the incorporation of the parents and the wish to be the father of oneself." "The new guilt complex appears to be historically connected with the rise of patriarchal religion (from the Western development the Hebrews are decisive)." Children "have not acquired that sense of shame which, according to the Biblical story, expelled mankind from Paradise, and which, presumably, would be discarded if Paradise were regained." "We must return to Freud and say that incest guilt created the familial organization." (Norman O. Brown, Life Against Death: The Psychoanalytical Meaning of History) In other words, get rid of the Father's commands and threat of chastening for disobedience and the child could be "himself" ("normal") again. "Freud noted that … patricide and incest … are part of man's deepest nature." (Irvin D. Yalom, Theory and Practice and Group Psychotherapy)
Norman O. Brown: "Freud and Hegel are, like Marx, compelled to postulate external domination and its assertion by force in order to explain repression." "Capitulation enforced by parental authority under the threat of loss of parental love . . . can be accomplished only by repression." "Eros is fundamentally a desire for union with objects in the world. Eros is the foundation of morality." "The individual is emancipated in the social group." (Norman O. Brown, Life Against Death: The Psychoanalytical Meaning of History) "To experience Freud is to partake a second time of the forbidden fruit; and this book [Life Against Death] cannot without sinning communicate that experience to the reader." (Source: the March 23-30, 2005 issue of Metro Santa Cruz, an article written by Mike Connor "Apocalypse Now, A new book about radical UCSC philosopher Norman O. Brown sheds light on the Freudian scholar of the Dionysian apocalypse." Connor writes "But Brown believed that the payoff was worth the price of sin―namely, that alienation would be overcome, and the return of the repressed completed, rendering problems of sin permanently moot." [According to dialectic 'reasoning,' sin is not the estrangement of man from God but "'Sin' is the estrangement of man from man." (Leonard Wheat, Paul Tillich's Dialectical Humanism])
Max Horkheimer: "The family is one of these social forms which ... cannot be changed without change in the total social framework." (Max Horkheimer, Kritische Theori)
Theodor Adorno: "God is conceived more directly after a parental image and thus as a source of support and as a guiding and sometimes punishing authority." "The conception of the ideal family situation for the child: (1) uncritical obedience to the father and elders, (2) pressures directed unilaterally from above to below, (3) inhibition of spontaneity, and (4) emphasis on conformity to externally imposed values." "An attitude of complete submissiveness toward 'supernatural forces' and a readiness to accept the essential incomprehensibility of 'many important things' strongly suggest the persistence in the individual of infantile attitudes toward the parents, that is to say, of authoritarian submission in a very pure form." "Authoritarian submission was conceived of as a very general attitude that would be evoked in relation to a variety of authority figures―parents, older people, leaders, supernatural power, and so forth." "The power‑relationship between the parents, the domination of the subject's family by the father or by the mother, and their relative dominance in specific areas of life also seemed of importance for our problem." "A tendency to transmit mainly a set of conventional rules and customs, may be considered as interfering with the development of a clear-cut personal identity in the growing child." "What is particularly important here is that recognition of one's own individuality ["human nature"] is the basis for recognition of the individuality of everyone, and for the democratic concept of the dignity of man ["equality" of man, man freed from "top-down" authority]. The individual may have 'secret' thoughts [dissatisfaction with authority and carnal desires which authority condemns] which he will under no circumstances reveal to anyone else if he can help it. To gain access is particularly important, for here may lie the individual's potential." Social 'change' can only be achieved by 'changing' the families internal structure from "top-down" (Patriarchal) to "equality" (Heresiarchal) by "Using social environmental forces to change the parent's behavior toward the child." "Obedience and loyalty are the first requirements of the ingroup member. What is called power‑seeking and clannishness in the outgroup is transformed into moral righteousness, self‑defense, and loyalty in the ingroup." "The ingroup must be kept pure and strong. The only methods of doing this are to liquidate the outgroups altogether, to keep them entirely subordinate, or to segregate them in such a way as to minimize contact with the ingroups [this would only be true for those of the world system, but is not true of the believer, who lets God Himself be the "liquidator," the gospel message gives no believer the right to defend his faith by force, by government power, government only limiting its power to allow believers to be an "ingroup" (or "outgroup," depending upon how you look at it), not of this world, free to share the gospel message of salvation to those of the world, i.e. to the "outgroup," i.e. to the lost—this is what Adorno knowingly refused to admit, lumping all into one system for the 'purpose' of negation]." (Theodor Adorno, The Authoritarian Personality)
Erick Fromm: "In Escape from Freedom, Fromm offered the sado-masochistic character [the Father's chastening of his children for disobedience and the children submitting to it] as the core of the authoritarian personality." "The antithesis of the 'authoritarian' type was called 'revolutionary.'" "By The Authoritarian Personality 'revolutionary' had changed to the 'democratic.'" (Martin Jay, The Dialectical Imagination: The History of the Frankfurt School and the Institute of Social Research 1923-1950) "We may call this new order by the name of democratic socialism but the name does not matter; all that matters is that we establish a rational economic system serving the purposes of the people [a people freed from the Father's authority, i.e. 'liberated' from a "guilty conscience" for doing wrong according to the Father's standards]. Only in a planned economy in which the whole nation has rationally mastered the economic and social forces can the individual share responsibility and use creative intelligence in his work. All that matters is that the opportunity for genuine activity be restored to the individual; that the purposes of society and of his own become identical." (Erick Fromm, Escape from Freedom) "It is not individualism that fulfills the individual, on the contrary it destroys him. Society is the necessary framework through which freedom and individuality are made realities." (Karl Marx) "In the process of history man gives birth to himself. He becomes what he potentially is, and he attains what the serpent—the symbol of wisdom and rebellion—promised, and what the patriarchal, jealous God of Adam did not wish: that man would become like God himself." (Erick Fromm, You Shall Be As Gods)
Herbart Marcuse, quoting Freud, wrote: "Individual psychology is thus in itself group psychology ... the individual ... is an archaic identity with the species." "This archaic heritage bridges the 'gap between individual and mass psychology.'" (Freud, Moses and Monotheism in Marcuse) "Freud's theory is in its very substance 'sociological.'" "Freud ... stressed the role of religion in the historical deflection of energy from the real improvement of the human condition to an imaginary world of eternal salvation." "If the guilt accumulated in the civilized domination of man by man can ever be redeemed by freedom, then the 'original sin' must be committed again: 'We must again eat from the tree of knowledge in order to fall back into the state of innocence.'" "The primal father, ... the archetype of domination, initiates the chain reaction of enslavement, rebellion, and the reinforced domination which marks the history of civilization." Those who use the dialectic process for 'change,' negating the Father's authority, are 'driven' by and 'purposed' in "uniting the whole person, the universal and particular under pleasure ... reconciliation of the individual with the whole, of desire with realization, of happiness with reason ... the fulfillment of man and nature, not through domination and exploitation, but through release of inherent libidinal forces [the carnal laws of the flesh]." "On the basis of Kant's theory, the aesthetic function [sensuousness 'justifying' reasoning and reasoning 'justifying' sensuousness, i.e. the praxis of dialectic 'reasoning' over and against righteousness] becomes ... the philosophy of culture ... a non-repressive civilization, in which reason is sensuous and sensuousness rational ...." (Herbert Marcuse, Eros and Civilization: A philosophical inquiry into Freud)
Kurt Lewin: "The group to which an individual belongs is the ground for his perceptions, his feelings, and his actions." (Kurt Lewin, Resolving social conflicts: Selected papers on group dynamics) "The individual accepts the new system of values and beliefs by accepting belongingness to the group." (Kurt Lewin in Kenneth Benne, Human Relations in Curriculum Change) "Kurt Lewin emphasized that the child takes on the characteristic behavior of the group in which he is placed. . . . he reflects the behavior patterns which are set by the adult leader of the group." (Wilbur Brookover, A Sociology of Education) "Educators and others in the role of change agents must have a method of social engineering relevant to initiating and controlling the change process." "Curriculum change means that the group involved must shift its approval from the old to some new set of reciprocal behavior patterns." "A change in methods of leadership is probably the quickest way to bring about a change in the cultural atmosphere of a group." "Changing a group atmosphere from autocracy toward democracy through a democratic leadership means that the autocratic followers must shift toward a genuine acceptance of the role of democratic followers." "To change a group atmosphere toward democracy the democratic leader has to be in power and has to use his power for active re-education." "The more the group members become converted to democracy the more can the power of the democratic leader shift to other ends than converting the group members." "To apply the principle of 'individualistic freedom' merely leads to chaos. Sometimes people must rather forcefully be made to see what democratic responsibility toward the group as a whole means. It is true that people cannot be trained for democracy by autocratic methods. But it is equally true that to be able to change a group atmosphere toward democracy the democratic leader has to be in power and has to use his power for active re-education." "Re-education must be clever enough in manipulating the subjects to have them think that they are running the show.' "The objective sought will not be reached so long as the new set of values is not experienced by the individual as something freely chosen." "The re-educative process has to fulfill a task which is essentially equivalent to a change in culture." (Kenneth Benne, Human Relations in Curriculum Change) "The negative valence of a forbidden object which in itself attracts the child thus usually derives from an induced field of force of an adult." "If this field of force loses its psychological existence for the child (e.g., if the adult goes away or loses his authority) the negative valence also disappears." (Kurt Lewin, A Dynamic Theory of Personality: Selected Papers) "Change in organization [paradigm] can be derived from the overlapping between play and barrier behavior. To be governed by two strong goals is equivalent to the existence of two conflicting controlling heads within the organism. This should lead to a decrease in degree of hierarchical organization. Also, a certain disorganization should result from the fact that the cognitive-motor system loses to some degree its character of a good medium because of these conflicting heads. It ceases to be in a state of near equilibrium; the forces under the control of one head have to counteract the forces of the other before they are effective." (Child Behavior and Development Chapter XXVI, Kurt Lewin, Frustration and Regression, Kurt Lewin)
J. L. Moreno was a Marxist from Vienna Austrian, who came to the USA promoting his "new" method of 'change,' i.e. role-playing. He stated: "I told Freud he put people on a couch and isolated them, which was entirely wrong. We don't live on a couch; we live in groups from birth to death. Freud took people into the past, I take them into the present and future. Psychodrama deals with the Here-and-Now." (Jane Howard, Please Touch: A Guide Tour of the Human Potential Movement) "Religion and science can be kept apart, indeed, one is able to do conscientious screening and not let one activity impede the other―in short, it is an exercise in 'role playing.'" "My God idea, out of which the idea of the sociometric system grew, was therefore ultimately the greatest barrier to my going to
Wilhelm Reich: "The more gratifying one's sexual life is, the more fulfilling and pleasurable is one's work." "It is necessary to establish not only the best external conditions of work, but also to create the inner biologic preconditions to allow the fullest unfolding of the biologic urge for activity." "Hence, the safeguarding of a completely satisfying sexual life for the working masses is the most important precondition of pleasurable work." "Sex-economy sociology was born from the effort to harmonize Freud's depth psychology with Marx's economic theory." "Since work and sexuality (in both the strict and broad senses of the word) are intermately interwoven, man's relationship to work is also a question of the sex-economy of masses of people." "Every effort must be made and all means employed to guard future generations against the influence of the biologic rigidity of the old generation." "The principle weapon on the arsenal of freedom is each new generation's tremendous urge to be free. The possibility of social freedom rests essentially upon this weapon and not upon anything else." "Every physician, educator, and social worker etc., who is to deal with children and adolescents will have to prove that he himself or she herself is healthy from a sex-economic point of view and that he or she has acquired exact knowledge on human sexuality between the ages of one and about eighteen." "… the education of the educators in sex-economy must be made mandatory." "Work and sexuality derive from the same biologic energy." "Psychoanalysis is the mother, sociology the father, of sex-economy." "The child's and adolescent's natural love of life must be protected by clearly defined laws." "Those forces in the individual and in the society that are natural and vial must be clearly separated from all the obstacles that operate against the spontaneous functioning of this natural vitality." "It is the elimination of all obstacles to freedom that has to be achieved." "Natural sociability and morality are present in men and women. What has to be eliminated is the disgusting moralizing which thwarts natural morality and then points to the criminal impulses, which it itself has brought into being." "Sexually awakened women, affirmed and recognized as such, would mean the complete collapse of the authoritarian ideology." "the right of the woman to her own body." "The termination of pregnancy is at variance with the meaning of the family, whose task it precisely the education of the coming generation – apart from the fact that the termination of pregnancy would mean the final destruction of the large family." "The preservation of the already existing large families is a matter of social feeling; . . the large family is preserved because national morality and national culture find their strongest support in it." (Wilhelm Reich, The Mass Psychology of Fascism)
Carl Rogers: "Prior to therapy the person is prone to ask himself 'What would my parents want me to do?' During the process of therapy the individual comes to ask himself 'What does it mean to me?'" "Individuals move not from a fixity through change to a new fixity [a patriarchal paradigm], though such a process is indeed possible. But [through a] continuum from fixity to changingness, from rigid structure to flow, from stasis to process [a heresiarchal paradigm of 'change']." "'Now that we know how positive reinforcement works [dialogue with "feelings" and "thought's," i.e. a heresiarchal paradigm of 'change,' i.e. of revolution], and why negative doesn't' [preaching and teaching truth to be accepted "as given," and chastening when it is rejected, i.e. a patriarchal paradigm of revelation] ... 'we can be more deliberate and hence more successful in our cultural design. We can achieve a sort of control under which the controlled, though they are following a code much more scrupulously than was ever the case under the old system, nevertheless feel free. They are doing what they want to do, not what they are forced to do. That's the source of the tremendous power of positive reinforcement―there's no restrain and no revolt. By a careful design, we control not the final behavior, but the inclination to behavior―the motives, the desires, the wished. The curious thing is that in that case the question of freedom never arises." (Carl Rogers, on becoming a person: A Therapist View of Psychotherapy)
Abraham Maslow: "I have found whenever I ran across authoritarian students [Jesus' statements: "For I have not spoken of myself; but the Father who sent me, he gave me commandment what I should say, and what I should speak." John 12:49 "For whosoever shall do the will of my Father which is in heaven, the same is my brother, and sister, and mother." Matthew 12:50 and "And call no man your father upon the earth: for one is your father, which is in heaven." Matthew 23:9 makes him, and anyone who follows him, an authoritarian.] that the best thing for me to do was to break their backs immediately. The correct thing to do with authoritarians is to take them realistically for the bastards they are and then behave toward them as if they were bastards." "In a democratic society a patriarchal culture should make us depressed instead of glad; it is an argument against the higher possibilities of human nature, of self actualization." (Abraham Maslow, Maslow on Management) "Yet nakedness is absolutely right. So is the attack on antieroticism, the Christian & Jewish foundations. Must move in the direction of the Reichian orgasm." "So it looks as if nudism is the first step toward ultimate fee-animality-humanness. It's the easiest to take. Must encourage it." "Marxian theory needs Freudian-type instinct theory to round it out. And of course, vice versa." "The whole discussion becomes species-wide, One World, at least so far as the guiding goal is concerned. To get to that goal is politics & is in time and space & will take a long time & cost much blood." ". . . A caretaker government could immediately start training for democracy & self-government & give it little by little, as deserved." "This is a realistic combination of the Marxian version & the humanistic. (Better add to definition of "humanistic" that it also means one species, One World.)" "Only a world government with world-shared values could be trusted or permitted to take such powers. If only for such a reason a world government is necessary. It too would have to evolve. I suppose it would be weak or lousy or even corrupt at first--it certainly doesn't amount to much now & won't until sovereignty is given up little by little by 'nations.'" (The Journals of A.H. Maslow) "In our democratic society, any enterprise--any individual--has its obligations to the whole." "Tax credits would be given to the company that helps to improve the whole society, and helps to improve the democracy by helping to create democratic individuals" (Maslow on Management)
James Coleman: "For equality of opportunity to exist the family as a unit must be weakened." (James Coleman, The Adolescent Society)
Benjamin Bloom: "The major impact of the new program is to develop attitudes and values toward learning which are not shared by the parents." "There are many stores of the conflict and tension that these new practices are producing between parents and children." "In fact, a large part of what we call 'good teaching' is the teacher's ability to attain affective objectives [how the children feel regarding their parents authority] through challenging the student's fixed beliefs and getting them to discuss issues [discussing the social issues which they have in common negates their parent's principles which divide]." On page 166 Bloom acknowledges that the paradigm of Theodor Adorno (The Authoritarian Personality) and Erick Fromm (Escape from Freedom) is his "Weltanschauung." (David Krathwohl, Benjamin Bloom, et al. Taxonomy of Educational Objectives Book 2: Affective Domain, page 83) "They further state that 'the superego [the voice of the "village" in the child's mind]. . .is conceived in psychoanalysis as functioning substantially in the same way as conscience [the voice of the Father in the child's mind].' Superego development is conceived as '. . . the incorporation of the moral standards of society…' Internalization (incorporating as one's own) is thus a critical element in superego development and in the development of conscience. Therefore the levels of the Taxonomy should describe successive levels of goal setting appropriate to superego development." "To create effectively a new set of attitudes and values, the individual must undergo great reorganization of his personal beliefs and attitudes and he must be involved in an environment which in may ways is separated from the previous environment in which he was developed." "...many of these changes are produced by association with peers who have less authoritarian points of view, as well as through the impact of a great many courses of study in which the authoritarian pattern is in some ways brought into question while more rational and nonauthoritarian behaviors are emphasized." (David Krathwohl, Benjamin S. Bloom, Taxonomy of Educational Objectives: The Classification of Educational Goals: Handbook 2, Affective Domain) emphasis added. Kenneth Benne wrote: "If the individual complies merely from fear of punishment [the voice of the Father, i.e. the voice of the one] rather than through the dictates of his free will [his "felt" needs, i.e. his own "feelings"] and conscience, the new set of values he is expected to accept does not assume in him the position of super-ego [the voice of the "group," the "village," the common-unity AKA "community," or society, i.e. the voice of the many united as "one"], and his re-education therefore remains unrealized." (Kenneth Benne, Human Relations In Curriculum Change)
Warren Bennis: "In order to effect rapid change, . . . [one] must mount a vigorous attack on the family lest the traditions of present generations be preserved. It is necessary, in other words, artificially to create an experiential chasm between parents and children— One must teach them not to respect their tradition-bound elders, who are tied to the past and know only what is irrelevant." ". . . any intervention between parent and child tend to produce familial democracy regardless of its intent. The consequences of family democratization take a long time to make themselves felt—but it would be difficult to reverse the process once begun. … once the parent can in any way imagine his own orientation to be a possible liability to the child in the world approaching." "… Once uncertainty is created in the parent how best to prepare the child for the future, the authoritarian family is moribund, regardless of whatever countermeasures may be taken. The state, by its very interference in the life of its citizens, must necessarily undermine a parental authority which it attempts to restore." "Any non-family-based collectivity that intervenes between parent and child and attempts to regulate and modify the parent-child relationship will have a democratizing impact on that relationship. For however much the state or community may wish to inculcate obedience and submission in the child, its intervention betrays a lack of confidence in the only objects from whom a small child can learn authoritarian submission, an overweening interest in the future development of the child―in other words, a child centered orientation." (Warren Bennis, The Temporary Society)
Negating private, as in private property, Jean-Jacques Rousseau put it this way: "The first man who, having fenced in a piece of land, said 'This is mine,' and found people naive enough to believe him, that man was the true founder of civil society. From how many crimes, wars, and murders, from how many horrors and misfortunes might not any one have saved mankind, by pulling up the stakes, or filling up the ditch, and crying to his fellows: Beware of listening to this impostor; you are undone if you once forget that the fruits of the earth belong to us all, and the earth itself to nobody." (Jean-Jacques Rousseau, Discourse on Inequality)
Neurosis: "Work done by Horkheimer in the thirties identified 'neurosis as a social product, in which the family was seen as a primary agent of repressive socialization.'" (Stephen Eric Bronner, Of Critical Theory and Its Theorists) "Parental discipline, religious denunciation of bodily pleasure, . . . have all left man overly docile, but secretly in his unconscious unconvinced, and therefore neurotic." "The bondage of all cultures to their cultural heritage is a neurotic construction." "Neurotic symptoms, with their fixations on perversions and obscenities, demonstrate the refusal of the unconscious essence of our being to acquiesce in the dualism of flesh and spirit, higher and lower." "Freud saw that in the id there is no negation, only affirmation and eternity. The instinctual reality is Dionysian drunkenness 'We can come nearer to the id with images, and call it a chaos, a cauldron of seething excitement.'" "The true life of the body is also the life of the id. In the id, says Freud, there is nothing corresponding to the act of negation. The key to the nature of dialectical thinking may lie in psychoanalysis, more specifically in Freud's psychoanalysis of negation. There is first the theorem that 'there is nothing in the id which can be compared to negation,' and that the law of contradiction [the Father's authority] does not hold in the id." "The foundation on which the man of the future will be built is already there, in the repressed unconscious; the foundation has to be recovered. The repression of normal adult sexuality is required only by cultures which are based on patriarchal domination" (Norman O. Brown, Life Against Death: The Psychoanalytical Meaning of History) "In psychology, Freud and his followers have presented convincing arguments that the id, man's basic and unconscious nature, is primarily made up of instincts which would, if permitted expression, result in incest, murder, and other crimes. The whole problem of therapy, as seen by this group, is how to hold these untamed forces in check in a wholesome and constructive manner, rather than in the costly fashion of the neurotic [where the Father's authority restrains the child's "human nature," engendering a "guilty conscience" when the child tries to be "normal"]." (Carl Rogers, on becoming a person: A Therapist View of Psychotherapy) The problem with Bloom's "Pandora's Box" (a box full of evils) is that once you open it you can't close it.
The "guilty conscience": "Social control is most effective at the individual level. The personal conscience is the key element in ensuring self-control, refraining from deviant behavior even when it can be easily perpetrated. The family, the next most important unit affecting social control, is obviously instrumental in the initial formation of the conscience and in the continued reinforcement of the values that encourage law abiding behavior. Unfortunately, because of the reduction of influence exerted by neighbors, the extended family and even the family, social control is now often more dependent on external control, than on internal self-control." "The community of interest generated by crime, disorder and fear of crime becomes the goal to allow community policing officer an entree into the geographic community." "The theme underlying much of the research is that once you can identify a community, you have discovered the primary unit of society above the level of the individual and the family that can be mobilized to take concerted action to bring about positive social change." (Dr. Robert Trojanowicz Community Policing The meaning of "Community" in Community Policing) emphasis added "Leaders of the community (law enforcement, government, business, education, health, civic, non-profit, medical, religious, etc.) collaborating to identify problems in the community… and suggesting solutions to those problems." "Identifying common ground, where all factions of a community can work together for the common good of the community in a broader problem-solving approach. Forming a partnership between police and the rest of the community where each is accountable to each other and the community as whole." "Shift in philosophy about police duties vs. community responsibilities to a team concept of Total Quality Management of the community. Reidentifying the police role as a Facilitator in the community." (COPS, Community Oriented Policing Services US Department of Justice ) emphasis added
György Lukács: "The dialectical method was overthrown―the parts were prevented from finding their definition within the whole." "... a scientifically acceptable solution does exist [i.e. the dialectic process] … For to accept that solution, even in theory, would be tantamount to observing society from a class standpoint [observing the world from the children's perception rather than the Father's, which would effectively negate the Father's office of authority] other than that of the bourgeoisie ["top-down," "Mine. Not yours." "I can, You can not," "I am right, You are wrong"]. And no class can do that-unless it is willing to abdicate its power freely." "... as soon as the bourgeoisie [the Father's "top-down" authority system] is forced to take up its stand on this terrain [in the children's "feelings" and "thoughts," i.e. creating "equality" through the use of dialogue, participate in the consensus process], it is lost." (György Lukács, History & Class Consciousness What is Orthodox Marxism?) Consensus requires the rejection of a "top-down" system (deductive reasoning), where abstract principles are applied to concrete situations. Consensus is like common law in that each case is reelected upon and agreement is reached by analyzing the current situation, making all prior cases changeable to the current conditions, thereby developing a "common morality" based upon the commonality of each case in light of the current situation and/or crisis resolution, i.e. laws are thereby adaptable to 'change,' made subject to "the light" of the 'changing' times (inductive reasoning).
Paulo Freire: "Any school which does not foster students' capacity for critical inquiry [recognizes and encourages the child's right to question the commands and office of the Father i.e. through the praxis of dialoging the Father's categorical imperatives] is guilty of violent oppression." (Paulo Freire, Pedagogy of the Oppressed)
Pupil soviets: "The institutions in socialist society which act as the facilitators between the public and private realms are the Soviets." (György Lukács, Process of Democratization) "No school worthy of the name can exist unless the principle of respect for authority is observed. No school can exist without discipline, without subordination of pupils to reasonable rules and regulations. Anarchy in school means anarchy in the nation later on. . . ." "Has authority been banished in these later days? Is there still such a thing as discipline? Has the world reached a point where it will condone the formation of a pupil soviets?" (Will C. Wood, Superintendent of Public Instruction of the State of California, California Blue Bulletin, 1920) A soviet is a diverse group of people (some more advanced in socialist dogma than others), dialoguing to consensus (there is no "top-down" authority in dialogue, making consensus, a "feeling" of "oneness" on a unified opinion, possible), over a social issue (a socialist issue), in a facilitated meeting (one trained in how to neutralize, i.e. get everyone's "opinion," marginalize, i.e. turn everyone against you because you refuse to treat your position of truth as an opinion, and remove any "top-down" system from taking control of the meeting, i.e. extrude you or "encourage" you to leave for the sake of everyone else, i.e. for the sake of worldly peace and socialist harmony), to a pre-determined outcome (that not public policy is to be made without going through the above procedure). In this way no Patriarchal ("top-down") way of thinking and acting can inhibit or block the "new" world order of 'change' from becoming a reality. Once you "opt in" there is no "opting out."
Politburo: The politburo is nothing more than (by government decree) the networking of soviets (the consensus process applied in all social events, i.e. in public-private settings) to initiate and sustain the 'change' process. The networking of departments and soviet style meetings are so intertwined, as soon as one department is identified and dealt with another takes its place, being already in service to continue the process of 'change.' "The philosophers have only interpreted the world in different ways [with their opinion on how things should be run], the objective however, is change." (Karl Marx, Feuerbach Thesis #11) It is in the consensus process where the Father's authority (true representation of the Father's, i.e. the constituent's position, i.e. by the children of the Father's position, i.e. by the representatives—a "top down" system of government with the traditional family, i.e. the citizens with a conscience, i.e. preaching and teaching the difference between right and wrong, at the top sending representative, i.e. their "children" to re-present their position) is negated. "Bypassing the traditional channels of top-down decision making, our objective centers upon .... transform public opinion into an effective instrument of global politics." "Individual values must be measured by their contribution to common interests and ultimately to world interests.... transforming public consensus into one favorable to the emergence of a stable and humanistic world order." "Consensus is both a personal and a political step. It is a precondition of all future steps..." (Ervin Laszlo, A Strategy for the Future: The Systems Approach to World Order) It is this system of soviets (department meetings under all branches of government networking between each other for the 'purpose' of 'change, i.e. global dominance, i.e. policy being made based upon globalist-environmentalist issues, thereby circumventing, i.e. negating the checks and balances of government of this nation, i.e. negating the issue of sovereignty) whereby we are loosing our freedoms. Laws are thereby readily 'changeable' (adaptable) to the needs of the socialist who facilitate the soviet style (consensus) meetings for the 'purpose' of 'change,' i.e. for the 'purpose' of globalism. "Jurisprudence of terror takes two forms; loosely defined rules which produces unpredictable law, and spontaneous changes in rules to best suit the state [to best suit "the peoples needs" of the world, i.e. according to the social engineer's, i.e. the facilitators of 'change,' perception]." (R. W. Makepeace and Croom Helm, Marxist Ideology and Soviet Criminal Law) Democracy is "the formation of a somewhat vaguely defined 'postconventional' consensus through which everyone affected by a decision must be able to participate in reaching it [you vote a man into office to re-present your position, you vote another person out of office so their position is not presented, the consensus process puts their position back into government, setting policy, thereby negating the system of re-presentation, your right to limit the power of government over your life]." (Stephen Eric Bronner, Of Critical Theory and Its Theorists) The lie is: "The rights of private judgment can be defensibly defined and enforced on a democratic basis only by processes of collaborative planning. They cannot be guaranteed by dogmas concerning the nature of man." "How to convert ... dogmas to 'hypotheses' [how to seduce, deceive, and manipulate the citizens into giving up their inalienable rights] remains a central problem for democratic social engineers." (Kenneth Benne, Human Relations in Curriculum Change) "Private judgment" ("Mine, not yours," i.e. "Your are wrong and I am right") is not democratic. It is dogmatic. The networking of soviets, within a Politburo system, negates private. Therefore in the public-private partnership of the soviet system, i.e. the consensus meeting, that which is nobodies business becomes everybody's (the collectivist governments) business.
Communism: "Citizens are obliged to concern themselves with the upbringing of children, to train them for socially useful work, and to raise them as worthy members of socialist society." "Socially useful work and its results determine a persons status in society." (Articles 66 and 14, "Former" USSR Constitution) "In a democratic society a patriarchal culture should make us depressed instead of glad; it is an argument against the higher possibilities of human nature, of self actualization." "In our democratic society, any enterprise—any individual—has its obligations to the whole." "Tax credits would be given to the company that helps to improve the whole society, and helps to improve the democracy by helping to create democratic individuals." (Abraham Maslow, Maslow on Management)
Fascism uses the same method as Communism, only 'purposed' in controlling the "masses" for it socialist aim on a nationalistic level (aiming for the global): In both cases, controlling the education system, i.e. shaping the next generation's thoughts and action, for the 'purpose' of 'change,' is at the heart of control, one 'programming' (conditioning) the children to use force on the parents, i.e. negating the parents, to get its way, the other 'programming' (conditioning) the children to condone its use of force on the parents, i.e. negating the parent's authority, to get its own way. Hitler said: "When an opponent declares, 'I will not come over to your side,' I calmly say, 'Your child belongs to us already.... What are you? You will pass on. Your descendants, however, now stand in the new camp. In a short time they will know nothing else but this new community.'" Adolf Hitler, Nov. 6, 1933. Quoted in William L. Shirer, "Education in the Third Reich," ch. 8, The Rise and Fall of the Third Reich (1959). "For actual changes in 'content' and 'method' we must change the people who manage the school program. To change the curriculum of the school means bringing about changes in people—in their desires, beliefs and attitudes, in their knowledge and skill . . . curriculum change should be seen as a type of social change, change in people. Curriculum change means a change in the established ways of life, a change in the social standards. It means a restructuring on knowledge, attitudes, and skills in a new pattern of human relations. Educators and others in the role of change agents must have a method of social engineering relevant to initiating and controlling the change process." "The method which we have discussed here is a general method which can be applied to any problem of changing human behavior. It supplies a framework for problem solving . . . the method can be applied to problems of changing the curriculum, changing pupil behavior school-community relations, administrative problems, etc." (Kenneth Benne, Human Relations in Curriculum Change, an NEA and National Training Laboratory manual) "An examination of the role of education in the revolutionary processes in Hitlerian Germany and Soviet Russia demonstrates that a new controlling group can use the educational system to advantage to bringing about the changes it desires. This illustrates the effectiveness of the educational system in indoctrinating the youth with a desire for the type of society wanted by those in control. . . . To do this they must persist in the maintenance of a new system long enough for controlling interests to be thoroughly indoctrinated in the new social system." "Some behavior involving sex, dishonesty, and defiance of school regulations that the teachers rated as serious was considered unimportant by the mental hygienists." (Wilbur Brookover, A Sociology of Education) "If the school does not claim the authority to distinguish between science and religion [the authority of humanist and the authority of the parent], it loses control of the curriculum and surrenders it to the will of the electorate [to the authority of the parent]." (Kenneth Benne, Society as Educator in an Age of Transition, Eighty-sixth Year of the National Society for the Study of Education)
Watch the following presentations on Common Core, produced by those promoting it, to gain an understanding of their marketing skills, used to bring our elected officials under their influence, used to gain power over and against the citizens (through the children) of this nation (through the education system). Hitler was told he could not win. He responded that he already had. He had the children (through his control over the education system, i.e. for the 'purpose' of "national security"). Take note (in the following You Tube) of the emphasis upon "experience" in the student's learning environment. It is not the math or english they are learning that is the issue but how it is being learned and applied, i.e. through socialist (dialectical) "modeling." In this way, "process" is learned and "standards" are established by (programed into) the students as they "learn" how to distinguish between "appropriate" and "inappropriate" information, selecting that information which is appropriate to advance of their vocation for the "good" of society, i.e. as they become socialist engineers themselves, working for the government (socialist) orchestrated workforce, with Federal, State, and local authorities working together, bypassing (circumventing) the parent's authority over their children (other than the parents insisting upon and supporting, i.e. verbally, physically, and financially, their child's participation in the "new" world order). https://www.teachingchannel.org/videos/common-core-state-standards-high-school?resume=0; https://www.teachingchannel.org/videos?landing_page=Common+Core+Landing+Page&gclid=CK2Fjca-6rQCFUqoPAodxl4AOQ
"Common"-ist can not see that what they are doing is the same thing Hitler did, i.e. destroying the Father's authority for the sake of socialist cause. The following You Tube, What was life like for young people in Nazi Germany? part 1, by a socialist (a Marxist, i.e. a former Nazi solider who, when his friend was mortally wounded, "took his revolver out and ...."), i.e. Henry Metelmann (showing Hitler's creation of and utilization of the "Hitler youth" to prepare the next generation to take over the world for Fascism), reveals the blindness of his own eyes, not recognizing that those of his mindset use the same methods for "global security," i.e. for "Making the world safe for Democracy," i.e. for global dominance, i.e. instead of keeping the race "pure" from the Jewish race, keeping the mind "clear" from parental authority, i.e. from Godly restraint—for the "good" (unity) of the "community," i.e. for the "good" (unity) of the future society (for the "new" world order).
"Protestantism was the strongest force in the extension of cold rational individualism." (Max Horkheimer, Vernunft and Selbsterhaltung, in Martin Jay The Dialectical Imagination: The History of the Frankfurt School and the Institute of Social Research 1923-1950) "It is not individualism that fulfills the individual, on the contrary it destroys him. Society is the necessary framework through which freedom and individuality are made realities." (Karl Marx) ". . . should fascism become a powerful force in this country, it would parade under the banners of traditional American democracy. . . 'rugged individualism'" The dialectic 'logic' is: the only way to prevent America from becoming a Fascist country is through the education system engendering a "democratic type of relationship, the ability of the subject to appraise his parents objectively, as contrasted with an inclination to put the parents on a very high plane." (Theodor Adorno, The Authoritarian Personality) According to dialectic 'reasoning,' the major obstacle to global dominance is true Christianity, i.e. bible believing Christians who refuse to get in step with the process of 'change,' i.e. who hold to the absolutes of the Heavenly Father, which prevent them from becoming "tolerant of ambiguity," i.e. tolerant of "human nature," i.e. tolerant of abomination. The gospel message instructs the believer to proclaim the good news of salvation (through belief in Christ), 'redeeming' man from the Father's condemnation upon him for his disobedience (his sins) against Him, as well as 'reconciliation' (through the resurrection of Christ) of man to God the Father. Yet it instructs no man to physically defend or promote the faith by conquest (by force), i.e. merging the church and the state, making them one. The reason true Christianity is correlated to a State-Church system of imperialism (which it is not), is because of its past association with the state through false teachings, associating it with a way of thinking and acting which oppresses the people of all nations. Because of this, the emotions of the next generation can be united against the gospel message, i.e. become hostel towards it, accusing those who share it as being guilty of propagating "middle class" ("top-down") values upon the third world, i.e. inculcating the "white man's religion," imperializing the world for financial gain (when believers are simply doing your best as unto the Lord, i.e. as unto the Heavenly Father, because of His love for them). According to dialectic 'reasoning,' it is only in the midst of global imperialism, i.e. by the paganization of the world (by negating the Father's authority through dialogue), that socialism can prevent nationalism (world division) and initiate and sustain world dominance (the "new" world order of globalism).
Needless to say, this nation is in deep trouble. But God is not hung up on this nation. He is hung up on you. He is looking at your heart to determine what to do with this nation. Is it worth saving?
"For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life. For God sent not his Son into the world to condemn the world; but that the world through him might be saved. He that believeth on him is not condemned: but he that believeth not is condemned already, because he hath not believed in the name of the only begotten Son of God. And this is the condemnation, that light is come into the world, and men loved darkness rather than light, because their deeds were evil. For every one that doeth evil hateth the light, neither cometh to the light, lest his deeds should be reproved. But he that doeth truth cometh to the light, that his deeds may be made manifest, that they are wrought in God." John 3:16-21 "Know ye not that the unrighteous shall not inherit the kingdom of God? Be not deceived: neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor effeminate, nor abusers of themselves with mankind, Nor thieves, nor covetous, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor extortioners, shall inherit the kingdom of God. And such were some of you: but ye are washed, but ye are sanctified, but ye are justified in the name of the Lord Jesus, and by the Spirit of our God." 1 Corinthians 6:9-11
© Institution for Authority Research, Dean Gotcher 2013-2015