Turning Your Child Into A Common-ist.
1) Take a class of twenty students, whose parent's disagree with one another on various issues, i.e., religious, political, ethical, etc.,
2) Ask the students to defend their position on a social issue, i.e., in other words ask them for their opinion.
3) They will discover they can not "defend" their position, i.e., they will discover that their position is not their position but their parent's position which they have accepted as is by faith or by force (out of fear of being reprimanded). Positions are based upon commands, rules, facts, and truth. Opinions are based upon "feelings." You discuss position, trying to persuade others, with facts and truth, that your position is right and that their position is wrong (having to put aside your "feelings" of being "offended" by the other persons position in order to respond rationally to it, with them having to do the same with you), building relationship with them based upon commands, rules, facts, and truth which you and they can agree upon, dividing from one other on those which you and they can not agree upon—the greater importance the command, rule, fact, or truth to the individual the greater (stronger) the division. While you and the other person might disagree on position you are willing to work with them on a project which is in both of your interest (without setting aside your position), recognizing the other persons right to hold to his position (while not agreeing with it since it is "wrong"—in other words you do not "agree to disagree," since their position is "wrong" and your position is "right—being "right" and not "wrong" is the issue in a discussion). You dialogue "feelings," finding common ground with others, building relationship with them based upon "feelings" which both you and they have in common, which requires the suspending, as on a cross any truth or fact which stands in the way. This is the basis of common-ism, where your "feelings" of the 'moment,' not commands, rules, facts, and truth direct your steps. This is antithetical to faith in and obedience to God. "It is not in man that walketh to direct his steps." Jeremiah 10:23
"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)
4) Not realizing that they can not defend their faith, i.e., their parents commands, rules, facts, and truth, but that their parents position, i.e., faith (as a shied) defends them (from seduction, deception, and manipulation), students will turn to their opinion, i.e., how they "feel" or what they "think" (which is based upon their "feelings," i.e., their "sense perception") in order to "defend" their position, having to compromise their parents position in order to keep "discussion" going in the classroom, which is now dialogue. Discussing "personal-social issues" is in essence dialogue., where the children's "sense experiences," i.e., own life experience, i.e., "feelings," i.e.., desire for the carnal pleasures of the 'moment' which the world stimulates as well as their dissatisfaction, resentment, hatred toward being restrained guide them in determining what is right and what is wrong behavior (way of thinking). By moving from discussion (facts and truth) to dialogue (feelings) in making a decision (in this case coming to a consensus, i.e., a feeling of oneness with the other students in the class on an issue), children 'change' the way they feel, think, and act toward authority. It is customary to divide students into groups—with the size of the group, from four to twelve being determined by space, time, subject, number of students in class, etc.,. Sociograms help "teachers" or "educators"—now taking on the role of a "group psychotherapist," i.e., a facilitator of 'change,' a Transformational Marxist (all three being the same)—determine which students should be in which group, their desire for belonging, their diversity of opinions, and their knowledge of how the process works, i.e., the "group dynamics," "force field analysis," "unfreezing, moving, refreezing" process, etc., being instrumental in making their "group" experience and the consensus process, i.e., the 'change' process—from tradition reasoning (reasoning from commands, rules, facts, and truth) to transformational 'reasoning' (reasoning from their "feelings" of the 'moment')—more successful. It is their parents position which prevents them from being themselves, i.e., prevents them from "doing their own thing" individually, i.e., which "represses" them as well as "alienates" them from one another, i.e., prevents them from finding common ground with one another based upon what they have in common, their desire for ("lusting" after) the carnal pleasures of the 'moment' which the world stimulates and their natural dissatisfaction with, resentment and/or hatred toward restraint, i.e., toward their parent's authority—which is the manifestation and foundation, i.e., 'drive' and 'purpose' of common-ism.
"It is usually easier to change individuals formed into a group than to change any one of them separately." (Kurt Lewin in Kenneth Benne, Human Relations in Curriculum Change)
"The individual is emancipated in the social group." (Norman O. Brown, Life Against Death: The Psychoanalytical Meaning of History)
"The individual accepts the new system of values and beliefs by accepting belongingness to the group." (Kurt Lewin in Kenneth Bennie, Human Relations in Curriculum Change)
Without the use of dialogue, the children, according to dialectic 'reasoning,' will remain divided (alienated) from one another, remaining loyal to their father's/Father's authority and position, defending their (their parent's) position.
"The dialectical method was overthrown—the parts [the children—obeying the father/Father, doing the father's/Father's will, accepting his/His preaching and teaching of facts and truth (authority) to be accepted as is, by faith] were prevented from finding their definition within the whole [within themselves and the world—which is only made possible through the dialoguing of opinions ("feelings") to a consensus—which the father's/Father's authority prevents]." (György Lukács, History & Class Consciousness: What is Orthodox Marxism?)
"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
5) By insisting upon the class being "positive," allowing all students to freely share their opinion, and not "negative," i.e., judging others opinions as being "wrong," or condemning them (putting them down, making them feel bad, hurting their feelings), their parent's belief, standards, political and religious position, etc., is negated in the classroom, negating the parent's authority in the children's thoughts and actions in the process, allowing the children's opinions, i.e., their feelings of the 'moment' to guide them in making decisions, 'changing' how they response to their parents authority when they get home. The guilty conscience for doing wrong, disobeying, sinning is negated in the dialogue (dialectic) process (replaced with the super-ego, i.e., feelings), allowing the children to do wrong, disobey, sin with impunity. As Kurt Lewin pointed out (below), through the use of dialogue (there is no parental authority in dialogue—all become equal) the "negative valance," i.e., the guilty conscience is negated, allowing the children to question, challenge, defy, disregard, attack authority with no sense of guilt, considering it their duty (to "the group," i.e., to society) to do so.
"The guilty conscience is formed in childhood by the incorporation of the parents and the wish to be father of oneself." "What we call 'conscience' perpetuates inside of us our bondage to past objects now part of ourselves: the superego 'unites in itself the influences of the present and of the past.'" (Norman O. Brown, Life Against Death: The Psychoanalytical Meaning of History)
"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)
"There are many stories of the conflict and tension that these new practices are producing between parents and children." (David Krathwohl, Benjamin S. Bloom, Taxonomy of Educational Objectives Book 2: Affective Domain)
The Berlin wall did not came down because Common-ism was defeated. It came down because Common-ism had succeeded. It was the precursor of a "borderless society," i.e., one world government, i.e., the "new" world order, with the consensus process and its facilitators of 'change' (the vanguard party) leading the way. Anyone standing in its way, i.e., in the way of 'change,' i.e., holding onto their traditional way of thinking and acting (being an authoritarian), must be converted, silenced, or removed. The process is not successful until all are forced to participate (can not escape).
"Authoritarian submission [children humbling, denying, dying to their "self" in order to do their father's/Father's will] 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." (Theodor Adorno, The Authoritarian Personality)
"I have found whenever I ran across authoritarian students [students who remain loyal to their parent's and/or God's authority] 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." (Abraham Maslow, Maslow on Management)
Almost all decisions are being made today through the dialoguing of opinions to a consensus, i.e., through the use of the soviet system, which children are learning (being programed) to think by in the "group grade" classroom—with the teachers use of "Bloom's Taxonomies," i.e., "feelings" (affective) based curriculum in the classroom. It is even being done (put into praxis) in the "church" (in order to "grow" it, i.e., in order to "build relationship" upon "feelings," i.e., upon "self interest").
"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 16:15
"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 4:4
"No man 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." Matthew 6:24
© Institution for Authority Research, Dean Gotcher 2018