authorityresearch.com

The Soviet System is the Consensus Process.
(see also Soviet-Politburo System)

"Has authority been banished in these later days? Has the world reached a point where it will condone the formation of pupil soviets?" (Will C. Woods, Superintendent of Public Instruction of the State of California, March 1921)

1)  A diverse group of people (which must include the deviant, i.e., disenfranchised),
2)  dialoguing their opinions to a consensus,
3)  over personal-social issues,
4)  in a facilitated meeting,
5)  to a pre-determined outcome—that all policy decisions must be made through the soviet (dialogue) system.

"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 key to the soviet is the use of dialogue, i.e., "equality," since in dialogue no one authority can take control of the outcome or "equality" is stymied. Therefore it is necessary to have a third party, i.e., a psychologist, a group psychotherapist, a facilitator of 'change,' a Transformational Marxist (vanguard party) orchestrate the dialogue session, keeping dialogue freely flowing, cutting off any preaching, teaching, and/or discussion ("negativity") which would limit participation. There is no father's/Father's authority in dialogue, only the child's carnal nature, i.e., "human nature."  Dialogue is such a key part of our lives—"self" lives for and through it—it is difficult, if no impossible, for us to see the consequence (danger) of making right and/or wrong dependent upon it, i.e., our hearts desires. The soviet 'logic' is, if man, through dialogue 'justifies' his "self," i.e., his "lust" for the carnal pleasures of the 'moment,' which the world stimulates, 'justifying' his rejection of, i.e., hatred toward the father's/Father's authority, then when dialogue is done in a group—aiming for consensus (affirmation)—not only is the individual 'liberated' from the father's/Father's authority, society is 'liberated' from the father's/Father's authority as well.

"It is not individualism [the child subject to the father's/Father's authority, i.e., humbling, denying, dying to, controlling, disciplining his "self" in order to do the father's/Father's will] that fulfills the individual, on the contrary it destroys him. Society ["human relationship based upon self interest," i.e., finding one's identity in "the group," i.e., in society, i.e., in "self "] is the necessary framework through which freedom [from the father's/Father's authority] and individuality [being "of and for self" and the world only] are made realities." (Karl Marx, in John Lewis, The Life and Teachings of Karl Marx) By making the individual subject to the cognitive, affective, and psycho-motor domains ("sense experience") only, Karl Marx (and Sigmund Freud) negated the soul of man, which is made in the image of God, knowing right from wrong according to established commands, rules, facts, and truth, resulting in man having a guilty conscience for doing wrong.

"The real nature of man is the totality of social relations." (Karl Marx, Thesis on Feuerbach #6) In other words: when doing wrong, disobeying, sinning, when it is done for the "good" of "the people," it is right.

"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 come to ask himself, 'What does it mean to me?'" (Carl Rogers, on becoming a person: A Therapist View of Psychotherapy)

A soviet is a method used by socialist governments in order to establish policy, make laws, deal with social issues, etc., preventing local control by the citizens, i.e., negating the father's/Father's authority system from having any input in making decisions, 'liberating' the participants from the father's/Father's authority, uniting them as one in the process.

"In the dialogic relation of recognizing oneself in the other, they experience the common ground of their existence." (Jürgen Habermas, Knowledge & Human Interest, Chapter Three: The Idea of the Theory of Knowledge as Social Theory)

"Has authority been banished in these later days? Has the world reached a point where it will condone the formation of pupil soviets?" (Will C. Woods, Superintendent of Public Instruction of the State of California, March 1921, responding to the dialectic process and the soviet system which was creeping into California's school system back in the 20's.) The "group grade" in your child's classroom is a soviet.

Blooms' Taxonomies (with Marzano and Webb updating it; Webb updated for Obama's Common Core), which all certified teachers are required to use in the classroom and all accredited schools are required to use in their system, states its "testing" and "grading" system as a "psychological classification system."   It is the same classification system and procedure (pattern) as "was," i.e., is still being used in the "former" Soviet Union, called a soviet. The "group grade," i.e., "safe zone/space/place," i.e., "positive," i.e., dialoguing opinions to a consensus, brainwashing classroom (patterned after it) is indoctrinating children (the next generation of citizens) in the application of the soviet system in setting policy, not only in the workplace and government, but in the "church" as well.

The soviet (consensus process) is:

1) a diverse group of people (in this case students)—inclusive of the deviant (perverse) student (who is antithetical to patriarchal authority, requiring all to 'change,' i.e., set aside their position, i.e., suspend the truth, as on a cross, in order to include him in the dialogue),

2) dialoguing their opinions to a consensus (to a "feeling" or sensation of "oneness")—there is no father's/Father's authority in dialogue, in an opinion, or in consensus, there is only the children's feelings and thoughts of the 'moment (with their thoughts being subject to their feelings of the 'moment—with their feelings of the 'moment' being subject to the situation or environment of the 'moment' which is influencing them, which is being manipulated by the facilitator of 'change'—i.e., their love of pleasure and hate of restraint, i.e., their love of the world, which includes the love of approval from others who approve their love of the world, i.e., affirmation, and their hate of the father's/Father's authority which inhibits or blocks them from becoming at-one-with the world, i.e., which prevents them from building relationship with those who, like them, are in love with the things of the world), with consensus, i.e., all the children identifying with one anotheraffirming their carnal nature, void of the father's/Father's authority as being the "norm." Opinions 'liberate' the children from the father's/Father's authority. Dialogue makes all children equal. And consensus unites all children upon their "feelings" of the 'moment,' with the children affirming each other's desire for the carnal pleasures of the 'moment' (which the world stimulates) and their resentment toward restraint, i.e., hatred toward the restrainer, i.e., toward the father/Father and his/His authority, thus fulfilling the three platforms of the French Revolution: "Liberté, Equalité, Fraternité"—with opinions = Liberté, dialogue = Equalité, and consensus = Fraternité.

3) over social issues—where "relationship" with self and others (according to their natural impulses and urges of the 'moment' or "self interest") become the focus of life (instead of doing things right and not wrong according to the father's/Father's commands, rules, facts, or truth),

4) in a facilitated meeting—since according to all the training manuals this process (globalism/universalism based upon dialectic 'reasoning') does not come naturally but needs an "expert," i.e., a facilitator of 'change,' i.e., a "group psychotherapist," i.e., someone trained in how to seduce, deceive, and manipulate all 'willing' participants into "right praxis," i.e., into right social action—not only negating the father's/Father's authority in themselves but in others, i.e., in society as well as they "encourage" all participants to be "positive," i.e., share their "feelings" of the 'moment' in the 'light' of the situation, and not "negative," i.e., insisting that their position is "right" and others are "wrong," being 'judgmental,' i.e., "hurting feelings," causing division,

5) to a pre-determined outcome—that no decision is to be made without the forgoing procedure (1-5), inducting from personal feelings and thoughts of the 'moment,' which are stimulated by the world, i.e., by the current situation rather than deducting from the father's/Father's authority, i.e. thinking and acting, i.e. responding to the given situation according to his own feelings and thoughts of the 'moment,' i.e. living in the 'moment,' walking by sight, rather than thinking and acting, i.e. responding to the given situation according to the father's commands, rules, facts, and truth, i.e., (according to dialectic 'reasoning')living in the "past," walking by faith.

The soviet, i.e. the consensus process (with its emphasis upon regionalizing, i.e. generalizing) is used by all departments of government, such as the "department of human resource," to network all branches of government together as one (from the local, county, state, national, as well as the international level, regionalizing as it goes, to prevent a return to local control)—circumventing the separations of power (the limiting, representative form of government granted us by the Constitution)—making sure that the different branches of government are all on the same page in regards to social 'change,' manipulating the "feelings" and "thoughts" of the people (especially focusing upon those who are in government or in positions of influence, as well as those who are aiding them in the setting of policy) in order to initiate and sustain the process of 'change.'   Kurt Lewin wrote: "Hitler himself has obviously followed very carefully such a procedure. The democratic reversal of this procedure, although different in many respects, will have to be as thorough and as solidly based on group organization."  (Kurt Lewin in Kenneth Benne, Human Relations in Curriculum Change—what Phil Ring calls "a cookbook for humans," i.e., a training manual developed for the advancement of Marxism not only in America but around the world). Only in this case, instead of just taking the father's position, killing the local father's who resist his usurpation, removing the father's/Father's authority from setting policy by insisting that all be "positive," tolerant of deviance, i.e., accepting of those doing wrong, disobeying, sinning, instead of "negative," i.e., insisting upon everyone obeying the father's/Father's commands and rules as given and accepting his/His facts and truth as is, by faith, judging, condemning, rejecting, and casting out those who question, challenge, disregard, defy and attack his/His authority instead. Those in favor of the father's/Father's authority can attend the meeting, but the language of dialogue, i.e., of "I feel" and "I think," i.e., of opinion—negating the language of "It is written" (position, i.e., of doing right and not wrong) in the meeting—negates the father's/Father's authority in initiating and sustaining policy—as those of the father's/Father's authority, realizing that they have not true and lasting input in the outcome leave—are "encouraged" to leave.

"For to accept that solution [where all citizens, including parents, must participate in the dialoguing of opinions to a consensus process], even in theory, would be tantamount to observing society from a class standpoint [from the child's perspective, from the child's carnal nature] other than that of the bourgeoisie [from the parent's authority, i.e., from the father's/Father's authority]. And no class can do that-unless it is willing to abdicate its power freely." (György Lukács, History & Class Consciousness: What is Orthodox Marxism?) By parents going into dialogue with their children they abdicate their authority to the "feelings," i.e., "felt needs," i.e., carnal desires of their children. The same applies to adults in a group meeting, setting policy—where they must suspend, as upon a cross, any established command, rule, fact, or truth that get in the way of dialogue.

Robert's Rules of Order, when used from the first meeting to the last, and done with an honest chairman and knowledgeable members, prevents the consensus process from gaining control of the meeting, determining the outcome. Discussion rules out dialogue in Robert's Rules of Order. As with a chain, one meeting based upon consensus negates the outcome being true representation, all meetings from that meeting on being subject to that meeting's outcome. As a friend (Jack Phillips) used to say, "They take your newly elected school board members off to a weekend seminar and they come back with a lobotomy. You can not talk to them any more."

"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)

The is the same message that Lenin offered the Russian people during the Russian Revolution, with millions dying a violent death because of it.

"If we have the power or authority to establish the necessary conditions, the predicted behaviors will follow." "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 [children affirming each others carnal desires and dissatisfactions over and therefore against their parent's, i.e., the father's/Father's authority]—there's no restraint and no revolt." (Carl Rogers, on becoming a person: A Therapist View of Psychotherapy)

"We can choose to use our growing knowledge to enslave people in ways never dreamed of before, depersonalizing them, controlling them by means so carefully selected that they will perhaps never be aware of their loss of personhood." "We know how to disintegrate a man's personality structure, dissolving his self-confidence, destroying the concept he has of himself, and making him dependent on another. … brainwashing [where an environment is created which will wash from the child's brain respect for the father's/Father's authority (correlated to Nationalism), turning him against it instead]." (Carl Rogers, as quoted in People Shapers, by Vance Packard)

What begins in celebration, having 'liberated' yourself from Godly restraint, ends in your death, having 'liberated' yourself from His protective hand (His Mercy and Grace).

"There is a way which seemeth right unto a man, but the end thereof are the ways of death." Proverbs 14:12

 To "purge [man] of sin with all the aids of the dialectics [of "self" 'justification,' i.e., dialogue], therefore, is to rob him of true salvation, of his eternal destiny." (Rene Fulop-Miller, The Power and Secrets of the Jesuits)

"These are dialectical phantasies or opinions, that man can without the Holy Spirit love God above all things. ... They likewise said that human nature is untainted. All these ideas come from ignorance of original sin." (Luther's Works: Vol. 34, Career of the Reformer: IV)

© Institution for Authority Research, Dean Gotcher 2015-2017, 2019