Beware Robot Emotions: ‘Simulated Love Is Never Love’

Humans already have a strong emotional tendency to transfer attachment to inanimate objects. If robot makers exploit this tendency, then robot owners may have no idea they are being led into an emotional addiction. ⁃ TN Editor

When a robot “dies,” does it make you sad? For lots of people, the answer is “yes” — and that tells us something important, and potentially worrisome, about our emotional responses to the social machines that are starting to move into our lives.

For Christal White, a 42-year-old marketing and customer service director in Bedford, Texas, that moment came several months ago with the cute, friendly Jibo robot perched in her home office. After more than two years in her house, the foot-tall humanoid and its inviting, round screen “face” had started to grate on her. Sure, it danced and played fun word games with her kids, but it also sometimes interrupted her during conference calls.

White and her husband Peter had already started talking about moving Jibo into the empty guest bedroom upstairs. Then they heard about the “death sentence” Jibo’s maker had levied on the product as its business collapsed. News arrived via Jibo itself, which said its servers would be shutting down, effectively lobotomizing it.

“My heart broke,” she said. “It was like an annoying dog that you don’t really like because it’s your husband’s dog. But then you realize you actually loved it all along.”

The Whites are far from the first to experience this feeling. People took to social media this year to say teary goodbyes to the Mars Opportunity rover when NASA lost contact with the 15-year-old robot. A few years ago, scads of concerned commenters weighed in on a demonstration video from robotics company Boston Dynamics in which employees kicked a dog-like robot to prove its stability.

Smart robots like Jibo obviously aren’t alive, but that doesn’t stop us from acting as though they are. Research has shown that people have a tendency to project human traits onto robots, especially when they move or act in even vaguely human-like ways.

Designers acknowledge that such traits can be powerful tools for both connection and manipulation. That could be an especially acute issue as robots move into our homes — particularly if, like so many other home devices, they also turn into conduits for data collected on their owners.

“When we interact with another human, dog, or machine, how we treat it is influenced by what kind of mind we think it has,” said Jonathan Gratch, a professor at University of Southern California who studies virtual human interactions. “When you feel something has emotion, it now merits protection from harm.”

The way robots are designed can influence the tendency people have to project narratives and feelings onto mechanical objects, said Julie Carpenter, a researcher who studies people’s interaction with new technologies. Especially if a robot has something resembling a face, its body resembles those of humans or animals, or just seems self-directed, like a Roomba robot vacuum.

“Even if you know a robot has very little autonomy, when something moves in your space and it seems to have a sense of purpose, we associate that with something having an inner awareness or goals,” she said.

Such design decisions are also practical, she said. Our homes are built for humans and pets, so robots that look and move like humans or pets will fit in more easily.

Some researchers, however, worry that designers are underestimating the dangers associated with attachment to increasingly life-like robots.

Read full story here…




propaganda

Propaganda Coup: China Infiltration Into U.S. Education System

China has riddled U.S. education with propaganda promoting Technocracy, from universities to kindergarten. Partly for dogma and partly for espionage, these ‘Confucius Centers’ have been established throughout America with no restraint or alarm from U.S. government officials. ⁃ TN Editor

The Chinese government has infiltrated nearly every sector of the U.S. education system via a package of programs and monetary schemes that seek to indoctrinate American children and bring the Communist government’s propaganda into the classroom, according to a new report by a Senate investigatory body.

The wide-ranging report by the Senate Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee has found that China has spent nearly $200 million on educational entities known as Confucius Institutes. These programs have been instated in U.S. schools across the country with the mission of indoctrinating students and painting a sympathetic portrait of the Chinese Communist government, according to the report.

The institutes are shrouded in mystery and have been the cause of much consternation on Capitol Hill and elsewhere as information about their reach and power in the United States becomes clearer.

While the programs appear on their surface to be mundane—mainly focusing on language and cultural issues—the Senate committee found that these institutes constitute a threat to the United States. The Chinese government, the committee found, “is attempting to change the impression in the United States and around the world that China is an economic and security threat.”

There are more than 100 Confucius Institutes currently operating in America—the most of any country—and China has plans to open many more, according to the report.

“As China opened over 100 additional Confucius Institutes in the United States over the last 15 years, the Department of Education remained silent,” the Senate committee warns in its report.

While Confucius Institutes have become a mainstay on college campuses across the United States, the Chinese government also has plans to expand into the kindergarten through 12th grade curriculum.

“The Chinese government also funds and provides language instructors for Confucius Classrooms, which offer classes for kindergarten through 12th grade students,” according to the report. “Confucius Classrooms are currently in 519 elementary, middle, and high schools in the United States. Continued expansion of the program is a priority for China.”

Sen. Rob Portman (R., Ohio), a member of the Senate committee that conducted the investigation, said the bipartisan report shows a “stunning lack of transparency” about how these Chinese institutes function in the United States

“As China has expanded Confucius Institutes here in the U.S., it has systematically shut down key U.S. State Department public diplomacy efforts on Chinese college campuses,” Portman said in a statement. “We learned that schools in the United States—from kindergarten to college—have provided a level of access to the Chinese government that the Chinese government has refused to provide to the United States.”

“Absent full transparency regarding how Confucius Institutes operate and full reciprocity for U.S. cultural outreach efforts on college campuses in China, Confucius Institutes should not continue in the United States,” Portman said.

As the committee investigated these programs, it found that some U.S. schools contractually agree to uphold both Chinese and U.S. laws in order to get money for various programs.

Additionally, “the Chinese teachers sign contracts with the Chinese government pledging they will not damage the national interests of China,” according to the report. “Such limitations attempt to export China’s censorship of political debate and prevent discussion of potentially politically sensitive topics.”

U.S. school officials who spoke to Senate investigators disclosed that Confucius Institutes shun controversial topics, such as China’s poor human rights record and other hot button topics that could be damaging to the country’s reputation.

“Confucius Institutes exist as one part of China’s broader, long-term strategy,” the Senate committee concluded. “Through Confucius Institutes, the Chinese government is attempting to change the impression in the United States and around the world that China is an economic and security threat.”

There are provisions mandating that Chinese law be upheld on U.S. soil and the amount of public disclosure surrounding the institutes is extremely low. If a U.S. school were to spill the beans about these programs, the contracts—and money—would dry up.

“The Subcommittee obtained a contract between Chinese teachers and Hanban that requires Chinese instructors at U.S. schools to “‘conscientiously safeguard national interests.'” The contracts are terminated if the Chinese instructors “‘violate Chinese law’ or ‘engage in activities detrimental to national interests,'” according to the report.

Read full story here…




Parents Take Warning: A Generation Of Child Web Addicts

The natural  human inclination toward addiction is bad enough, but YouTube’s algorithms purposely lead youth to inappropriate and disturbing material that should not be impressed on young minds. If you have children or grandchildren, this is a must-read article. ⁃ TN Editor

Children have become such screen addicts they are abandoning their friends and hobbies, a major report warns today.

Researchers found under-fives spend an hour and 16 minutes a day online. Their screen time rises to four hours and 16 minutes when gaming and television are included.

Youngsters aged 12 to 15 average nearly three hours a day on the web – plus two more hours watching TV. The study said YouTube was ‘a near permanent feature’ of many young lives, and seven in ten of those aged 12 to 15 took smartphones to bed.

It concluded: ‘Children were watching people on YouTube pursuing hobbies that they did not do themselves or had recently given up offline.’

A growing number of parents admitted to researchers that they had lost control of their children’s online habits.

Campaigners described the report from media watchdog Ofcom as frightening.

‘In the early years, children need interaction with other people, and play – it is key to their social skills,’ said Sue Palmer of the group Toxic Childhood.

‘If that doesn’t happen when they are small, I don’t know where it leads. There is the screen time itself, and then there is what the screen time is displacing.’

The annual report, which was based on 2,000 interviews, also revealed that:

  • Children aged five to 15 spend 20 minutes more online a day than watching TV;
  • One in five pre-schoolers and two fifths of five- to eight-year-olds have an iPad or tablet device;
  • A fifth of children aged eight to 12 are on social media – despite a supposed ban on under-13s;
  • Nearly one in five children aged 12 to 16 have accidentally spent money online.

Children aged three and four still watch more television than online videos, but their TV consumption is shrinking whilst their time online is rocketing.

Many flock to YouTube and spend hours watching child-friendly videos such as how to make slime or draw animals. Others seek out ‘unboxing’ videos in which YouTube stars unwrap new products.

Some youngsters are becoming so obsessed with YouTube celebrities that they idolise them as role models, the Ofcom report said.

Some upload videos of their own, hoping to make a career for themselves. Disturbingly, many watch the lifestyle ‘vloggers’ pursuing hobbies and interacting with friends instead of doing so themselves.

Read full story here…




Made In USA: Chinese Schools Scanning Kid’s Brains For Attention

Technocrat engineers are attempting to disrupt education by measuring student attention/focus and giving ‘teachers’ a window into the mind.  Not surprisingly, China jumped at the opportunity for mass testing on 1.2 million students. ⁃ TN Editor
 

US-made devices could be used to collect data on 1.2m pupils in China.

Headbands that monitor concentration by reading brain signals have been trialled on thousands of Chinese schoolchildren.

The devices could soon be used on millions of students across China, according to the US tech company which designed them.

Massachusetts-based start-up BrainCo says its Focus 1 headbands can help teachers identify pupils who need extra assistance.

However, neuroscientists have questioned the devices’ effectiveness and the technology has also raised privacy concerns.

The headbands use electroencephalography (EEG) sensors to detect brain activity when the wearer is engaged in a task.

The devices were worn by 10,000 schoolchildren aged between 10 and 17 during a recent trial in China, according to New Scientist.

Teachers monitored pupils’ attention using an app which received information from the headbands. Lights on the front of the devices also show different colours for varying concentration levels, flagging to staff if students are not paying attention.

Students also played a smartphone game aimed at improving their concentration for 25 minutes at home each day.

Read full story here…




Weaponizing Child Protective Services To Enforce Adherence to Public Education

Public schools teach government propaganda, conditioning students to be good global citizens without questioning the rhetoric. When home schooling fails to teach the same propaganda, the state moves to force them back into public schools. Such persecution of home school parents is seen in virtually every nation on earth. ⁃ TN Editor

Schooling is adept at rooting out individuality and enforcing compliance. In his book, Understanding Power, Noam Chomsky writes: “In fact, the whole educational and professional training system is a very elaborate filter, which just weeds out people who are too independent, and who think for themselves, and who don’t know how to be submissive, and so on—because they’re dysfunctional to the institutions.”

This filtering process begins very early in a child’s schooling as conformity is rewarded and divergence is punished.

Public Schooling Breeds Obedience

Parents are increasingly required to obey, to conform to a school’s demands even if they believe such orders may not be appropriate for their child.

Most of us played this game as schoolchildren. We know the rules. The kids who raise their hands, color in the lines, and obey succeed; the kids who challenge the rules struggle. The problem now is that the rules are extending beyond the classroom. Parents are increasingly required to obey, to conform to a school’s demands even if they believe such orders may not be appropriate for their child.

In my advocacy work with homeschooling families across the country, I frequently hear stories from parents who decided to homeschool their kids because schools were pressuring them to comply with various special education plans, push medications onto their children, or submit to other restrictive procedures they felt were not in their child’s best interest. Even more heartbreaking is the growing trend of school officials to unleash child protective services (CPS) on parents, homeschooling or not, who refuse to give in to a district’s demands.

Weaponizing Child Protective Services

An investigative report by The Hechinger Report and HuffPost released last month revealed that schools are increasingly using child protective services as a “weapon” against parents. It said:

Fed up with what they see as obstinate parents who don’t agree to special education services for their child, or disruptive kids who make learning difficult, schools sometimes use the threat of a child-protection investigation to strong-arm parents into complying with the school’s wishes or transferring their children to a new school. That approach is not only improper, but it can be devastating for families, even if the allegations are ultimately determined to be unfounded.

More troubling, these threats disproportionately target low-income and minority parents. According to the report:

Such families also have fewer resources to fight back. When a family in a wealthy Brooklyn neighborhood learned roughly two years ago that their child’s school had initiated an ACS [New York’s Administration for Children’s Services] investigation against them, they sued the city education department. Parents from lower-income, majority-black and Latino neighborhoods, few of whom can afford that option, say such investigations can be a regular, even expected, part of parenting.

Bullying Proactive Parents

For parents who are unhappy with their child’s school and decide to withdraw their child for homeschooling, threats of child welfare investigations can sometimes turn to actions. In Massachusetts, a mother is reportedly suing the Worcester Public Schools after school officials called the Massachusetts Department of Children and Families (DCF) on her for alleged “educational neglect,” even though the mother contends that she dutifully filed her homeschooling paperwork for her eight-year-old son mid-year.

Read full story here…




Rise Of The Machines: Automation Reshapes Job Markets

When the UN SDGs promise “lifelong learning experiences”, it means you will have to reinvent yourself multiple times in your lifetime in order to stay working. Your alternative will be to fall into a new class cynically called the “unemployables”.  ⁃ TN Editor

Looking at a map of California on a projector screen, Johannes Moenius, an economics professor at the University of Redlands, hovered his mouse over the Inland Empire, which glowed with a splotch of red pixels.

The colored dots signified how susceptible an area would be to job losses caused by automation. And the alarm-bell red that covered Riverside, San Bernardino and Ontario signaled high risk — roughly 63 percent of tasks performed by workers in the area could be automated in the future.

To Moenius, the rise of robots in warehouses, factories and fast-food restaurants presents danger for places like the Inland Empire, where most residents work in logistics and the service industry and just 21 percent of adults have four-year degrees. As technology transforms the nature of work in California, how do people most at risk find their way to new jobs?

“We’re facing a major challenge,” Moenius said. “If we don’t do anything, then it will turn into an apocalypse.”

Whether confronting an increasingly automated labor market or grappling with how the gig economy is reshaping the relationship between companies and their workers, California’s next governor will have to address the changing nature of work.

That could mean rethinking how to educate Californians, remaking labor laws or considering major social safety net proposals such as a universal basic income. State government might not be able to control change in the workplace, but it will have to deal with the fallout.

The coming years “will make or break California,” said Eloy Ortiz Oakley, chancellor of the state’s community college system.

“If we don’t find a way to provide the skills and education and training necessary for the majority of Californians,” he said, “there’s going to be a lot more have-nots than we have today.”

California’s economy is booming. Its 4.2 percent unemployment rate is a record low. But experts warn the state’s labor market is particularly vulnerable to disruption from widespread automation.

“We are seeing a pretty high percentage of our workforce in relatively low-paying, low-skilled jobs,” said Somjita Mitra, director of the Institute of Applied Economics at the Los Angeles County Economic Development Corp.

Since the 2007-09 recession, the prospect of getting a well-paying job with just a high school diploma is dim.

“The challenge in the economy right now is that the kind of jobs that are being created are either at the lowest wages or the very highest wages,” Oakley said.

The rise of automation has sparked considerable angst among American workers. A 2017 Pew poll found that 72 percent of adults said they were worried about a future where robots and computers can perform human jobs.

But there’s no consensus on what the future will look like. One 2013 study, which Moenius used to build his analysis, estimated that 47 percent of American jobs were at risk of being automated. A 2016 paper put that figure at only 9 percent.

A study in 2017 posited that 23 percent to 44 percent of work hours in the United States will be automated by 2030 — particularly in jobs with a high degree of repetition such as machinists, office support and retail sales. But that study also said jobs would be added, especially among care providers such as surgeons, nurses, and construction workers.

Artificial intelligence — computers performing tasks typically done by humans — takes many forms. Computer vision, which allows machines to glean information visually, can be used in agriculture to give crops water and pesticides based on a plant’s needs.

Virtual assistants such as Siri or Alexa are being used in hotels, standing in for concierges or front desk assistants. Self-driving vehicles could upend the country’s transportation and logistics sectors, but it’s not clear how quickly those cars and trucks will be widely deployed.

“Depending on who you talk to, that’s a couple of years away or 30 years away,” said Stephen Baiter, executive director of the Oakland Workforce Development Board.

It’s one thing for a technological breakthrough to be invented, and it’s another to see businesses adopt that technology on a large scale. Experts predict that the impact on jobs will not be sudden, but more like a rolling wave.

The level of upheaval could vary by region. Moenius’ research found the Bay Area — home to Silicon Valley and highly educated workers — faces relatively low risk of job loss. The threat is higher in Fresno and Orange County.

But the area most susceptible to automation in California spans Riverside, San Bernardino and Ontario. According to Moenius, it is the fourth-most vulnerable metropolitan area in the nation, just behind other service-industry-heavy cities such as Las Vegas.

During World War II, the Inland Empire city of Fontana was home to Kaiser Steel, the Pacific Coast’s first steel mill, and was a crucial cog in the state’s vast shipbuilding industry.

But the steel jobs had withered by the 1980s — Fontana, like the rest of the region, became a bedroom community outside Los Angeles. It clawed its way back from the recession due in large part to warehouse and logistics jobs, and the service industry.

Now, on the campus of California Steel Industries Inc., the successor to Kaiser Steel, the Inland Empire is trying to reinvent itself again.

The Chaffey College Industrial Technical Learning Center, or InTech, is touted as the first public-private partnership in the state community college system. Originally envisioned as a place where companies could train workers for more advanced jobs, the program’s participants are now primarily unemployed or underemployed workers.

Training programs range from basic construction to more advanced skills like computer numerical control, which enables automated operation of machines. The center is run by local community colleges, but participants don’t earn college credits. Instead, they receive certifications based on input from local industry partners.

“Everything we do is designed by industry, for industry,” said Sandra Sisco, the center’s director.

Read full story here…




Technocratic Corporatocracy Hijacks Public Schools For Profit

In 1934, Technocracy, Inc. stated that: “A continental system of human conditioning will have to be installed to replace the existing insufficient educational methods and institutions.“ Today’s education usurpers are still bent on ‘human conditioning.” ⁃ TN Editor

Imagine if everything about you was on a giant billboard and you could see who was buying information about you and making lists. That is exactly what is happening without your knowledge or consent each time you use the Internet. Everything a user does online is tracked and monetized — Google, Facebook, Twitter, Amazon, apps — they all collect your data. A provider of computer-run education programs has admitted that they share the data they gather with 18 “partners.” Invisible analytics, profiling, sharing or selling of data collected without consent or knowledge makes every Internet user vulnerable to manipulation and control, ending personal privacy and sovereignty.

The process works like this: new data are collected covertly through apps; the collected data is transferred to data brokers who access the new data and combine it with existing data about an individual using nontransparent algorithms. The algorithms create a very detailed profile of individual users; vendors are sold access to the profiles and target individuals based on profile analyses. Google is by far the most used third party analytics tracker and makes 90% of itsrevenue tracking user searches. In attached bibliography includes multiple examples of how the tech industry not only sells data, but sells data collection programs and devices to measure behaviors and infer emotions and thoughts.

The documentary, The Creepy Line, explains how tech giants use algorithms to shape behavior and shape thoughts. Google used algorithms to influence voter behavior in the 2016 presidential election In a recently leaked video of a Google company meeting conducted shortly after that election, one employee asked if Google is willing to “invest in grassroots, hyper-local efforts to bring tools and services and understanding of Google products and knowledge so that people can “make informed decisions that are best for themselves.” Google CEO Sundar Pichai responded that Google will ensure its “educational products” reach “segments of the population [they] are not [currently] fully reaching.” Apparently, Google will ensure that Google Chromebooks and the Google manipulated search engine will be standard “education” materials in American schools so that students can make Google informed decisions.

Tracking and “Educating” Children

Schools funded with tax dollars allow the tech industry to collect billions of student data points about every aspect of every student using school issued personal devices by mandating students complete assignments using online tools and apps for classwork and homework on these devices. The data are used to build comprehensive profiles on each student. Every state has a database and students’ personal data can be shared with researchers and companies. Google launched a public relations campaign, Be Internet Awesome, that includes a curriculum and online game for Chromebooks, to promote itself as a “good” company; but a critical analysis of Be Internet Awesome concluded,

. . ., the program’s conceptualization of Internet safety omits key considerations. Specifically, it does not acknowledge the role of companies in keeping data and personal information secure. Instead, its focus on user-centered strategies obscures the degree to which users are often powerless when it comes to controlling how their personal data is used. [It] generally presents Google as impartial and trustworthy, which is especially problematic given that the target audience is impressionable youth. 

Transporting human beings without their consent for exploitation is human trafficking. Transporting human beings’ private data without their knowledge or consent is human data trafficking. Transporting children’s private data by collecting it in compulsory schools without parent knowledge or consent to exploit them in the data market is nothing less than institutional child data trafficking.

Failure of Government

Existing federal laws are inadequate for protecting student data privacy. FERPA generally does not apply to online data collection and FERPA was changed by executive rule in 2011, removing parental consent for data collection. FERPA now allows companies (such as Google) to be declared a “school official,” giving them access to student data on par with professionals who have a “need to know” to provide appropriate services to students. HIPPA does not apply to student records. COPPA does not generally apply to schools, and COPPA is rarely enforced even when complaints have been filed, and we know thousands of Android apps are improperly tracking children. There is no federal law regulating companies’ use of online student data.

The FBI recently issued a warning about privacy and security risks of educational technology and the U.S. Department of Education issued guidance that schools should not force parents to consent to third party terms of service. Yet, parents are told they cannot attend the school if they don’t allow their child to have a fill in the blank edtech app or program (e.g., Naviance, or NWEA, or Google Gsuite account). EdTech people say education is the most datamineable industry by farand we know now that students’ social-emotional data is the new goldmine despite the pseudo-science propping up social-emotional learning. The West Virginia teachers strike in Spring 2018 was in part sparked because, among other reasons, teachers were being forced to download Go365, a wellness and rewards app which would track their steps and other health data. Teachers were required to upload a variety of personal health information into the app and saw the program as an invasion of personal privacy

Google’s money wields an enormous amount of influence on U.S. education policy. Under the Obama Administration Google’s lobbyists had essentially unrestricted visits to the White House . A shocking number of White House officials now work for Google or vice versa. The U.S. Department of Education was heavily populated with former employees of organizations associated with Bill Gates, also advocating for computer-administered education. We know tech firms including Google have recently been lobbying the White House for a new federal privacy lawon their own terms; Google even provided their own framework for a favorable privacy bill that does not include opt-in consent. It is time for Congress and states to kick the fox out of the henhouse — reject corporatocracy and restore our Constitutional democracy.

Responsibility of Government

U.S. citizens are protected from the government’s invasion of privacy and from property theft. They must also be protected from corporations’ invasion of privacy and theft of their electronically created property. Sovereign citizens cannot be coerced into giving their data or penalized/denied public education services for not consenting to sharing their data. Given that the infrastructure has already been built, Congress must adopt strong privacy laws at least as stringent as the European Union’s global data standards established in its General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR). The FTC should be given rule-making authority and resources to investigate and directly prosecute violations; but by no means should Congress abdicate its responsibility to protect the general welfare of the Americans and allow Silicon Valley to dictate to Congress or the FTC.

Read full story here…




Political Correctness Serves The Arsenal Of Sustainable Development

The influence of historic Technocracy in American education is profound. Basically, they reasoned that education is nothing more than human conditioning used to mold young minds to the needs of the collective. ⁃ TN Editor

“At its worst, political correctness is nothing different from Orwell’s Newspeak – an attempt to change the way people think by forcibly changing the way they speak.” – Urban Dictionary

“Every child in America entering school at the age of five is mentally ill because he comes to school with certain allegiances to our founding fathers, toward our elected officials, toward his parents, toward a belief in a supernatural being, and toward the sovereignty of this nation as a separate entity. It’s up to you as teachers to make all these sick children well by creating the international child of the future.”  –  Chester M. Pierce, Harvard psychiatrist, speaking as an expert in public education at the 1973 International Education Seminar.

The “Dear Hillary” letter, written on Nov. 11, 1992 by Marc Tucker, president of the National Center on Education and the Economy (NCEE), lays out a plan “to remold the entire American system” into “a seamless web that literally extends from cradle to grave and is the same system for everyone,” coordinated by “a system of labor market boards at the local, state and federal levels” where curriculum and “job matching” will be handled by counselors “accessing the integrated computer-based program.”

Tucker’s plan would change the mission of the schools from teaching children academic basics and knowledge to training them to serve the global economy in jobs selected by workforce boards. Nothing in this comprehensive plan has anything to do with teaching schoolchildren how to read, write, or calculate.

Twenty-seven or eight years ago, I was interviewed by a reporter at the Sacramento Bee about my articles challenging the thinking of animal rights. The reporter said to me, “But they are politically correct and you are not.” I agreed, saying that if anyone ever called me politically correct, it would be time to slit my throat.

Why do I bring this up now? Back then I didn’t realize where p.c. was going; now it is full-force tyranny. Am I exaggerating? Few people who do not back socialist-leaning thought are allowed to speak on our campuses of ‘higher learning’, many sporting bumper stickers pro Trump or Christianity or pro life have their cars keyed or spray painted. You don’t hear about that happening when one has a coexist bumper sticker.

Political Correctness has become a tool, one of many in the arsenal of global tyranny. It is a tool that could not have been used 40 or 50 years ago; most people still had rational, thinking brains. Since my interview with the Sacramento Bee, the road to hell – or global government – or the death of Western Culture — has gotten so steep we may not be able to stop it or even slow it down.

Do I exaggerate? You tell me. Besides that loss of free speech on college campuses, we have social justice dictating what can, can’t, and must be done. Many campuses require you to intuit someone’s arbitrary choice of gender so that you may properly address them (it would take a perfect clairvoyant to achieve this). Let’s move on to the important stuff – academic learning, or the lack thereof.

College students used to take a liberal arts degree in their undergraduate work to give them a well-rounded base. Now that and most other true academic learning has been ditched for social justice studies, sustainable studies, gaming studies – anything that is anti Western Culture, anything that makes one unemployable, anything that dumbs down the next generations.

Textbooks are full of misinformation, propaganda and lies. Classic literature is banned for using outdated words. Books are ignored or shunned for promoting morality, literacy, reason, common sense, and civility. And while our institutes of higher learning preach, “question authority”, they don’t actually teach questioning anything but Western Culture and its values. They certainly don’t teach students to question the professors’ authority. No longer do students debate tough issues; no one wants to take the side of the non-politically correct.

How did we get from the Declaration of Independence to the State of Political Correctness? One major contributor was the book, The Ideal Communist City, (a design for No Child Left Behind, Common Core and all the other aliases of behavior modification of children) said here in public education, “The best opportunity for contact among children of preschool age occurs in the nursery, which is the best setting for developing the child’s imitative powers and individual activities. He expresses his inclinations most freely here, and his egocentricity is least harmfully repressed. The positive value of group activity, of course, is fully realized only when it is organized and directed by educators who have benefited from advanced social training.”

Or look at this from the BSTEP program our government (Department of Health, Education, and Welfare) hired Michigan State University to design. “A small elite will carry society’s burdens. The resulting impersonal manipulation of most people’s life styles will be softened by provisions for pleasure seeking and guaranteed physical necessities. Participatory democracy in the American-ideal mold will mainly disappear. The worth and dignity of individuals will be endangered on every hand. Only exceptional individuals will be able to maintain a sense of worth and dignity.”

Let’s not overlook UNESCO, here, “As long as a child breathes the poisoned air of nationalism, education in world-mindedness (one-world order) can produce only precarious results. As we have pointed out, it is frequently the family that infects the child with extreme nationalism. The school should therefore use the means described earlier to combat family attitudes that favor jingoism (nationalism). We shall presently recognize in nationalism the major obstacle to development of world-mindedness.” UNESCO publication #356, “In the Classroom: Toward World Understanding”

It took only about half the lifetime of our country to get us here.

In 1918, Mary Parker Follett wrote, in The New State, group organization – the solution of popular government, “The training for the new democracy must be from the cradle – through nursery, school and play, and on and on through every activity of our life. Citizenship is not to be learned in good government classes or current events courses or lessons in civics. It is to be acquired through those modes of living and acting which shall teach us how to grow the social consciousness. This should be the object of all day school education, of all night school education, of all our supervised recreation, of all our family life, of our club life, of our civic life.

“When we change ideas of the relation of the individual to society, our whole system of education changes. What we want to teach is interdependence, that efficiency waits on discipline, that discipline is obedience to the whole of which I am a part.. . . when we know how to teach social discipline, then we shall know how to ‘teach school.’ The object of education is to fit children into the life of the community.” P.363

So, according to Follett, our lives must focus completely on losing our individual rights and work to subordinate any freedoms we might consider to the cosmic one-ness, the group. The thought of that (if there are thinking minds left) would drive most of us to suicide.

John Dewey, the reformer of the education system, said, “I believe that the school is primarily a social institution. Education being a social process, the school is simply that form of community life in which all those agencies are concentrated that will be most effective in bringing the child to share in the inherited resources of the race, and to use his own powers for social ends. I believe that education, therefore, is a process of living and not a preparation for future living.”

“Humanist Manifesto” (1933) co-author Dewey calls for a synthesizing of all religions and “a socialized and cooperative economic order.” (Deanna Spingola, The New World Order, Programming the Masses)

America cannot last under this. Our country is based on Western Culture, Judeo/Christian Values, the Rule of Law, and other rational, reasoning social institutions. As we eradicate morality, common sense, values, attitudes, and beliefs, we become no different than the animals. Look at Venezuela. Do we want that at a magnitude of the nth degree? If not, now is the time to wake up, stand up, and speak out. We don’t have much time left. Look at the streets of San Francisco, Chicago, Nashville, New York, Los Angeles. Is this what we want to call our civilization?

Read full story here…




Education Secretary DeVos Signs On To Globalist UN Education Agenda For U.S.

Technocracy’s reach into the Trump Administration is deep and wide. The promise of dumping Common Core Education Standards and returning control to the states, has been abandoned in favor of piping directly into the United Nations globalist agenda, which is Sustainable Development, aka Technocracy. ⁃ TN Editor

U.S. Education Secretary Betsy DeVos signed on to a radical global “declaration” that calls for, among other absurdities, brainwashing children to believe in the United Nations-backed ideology of total government known as “‘sustainable development.” In fact, the pseudo-treaty inked by Trump’s education chief suggests that the purpose of schooling is to indoctrinate children with the right “values” and teach them to be obedient worker drones.

Under the un-American vision agreed to last week in Argentina, the governments purported to commit their nations to globalized brainwashing under the guise of “education.” To be clear, this is a dangerous policy document that, if implemented, will contribute to finalizing the destruction of traditional education in America and replacing it with a total indoctrination program aligned with the systems of some of the world’s most murderous autocracies. Americans should be outraged.

The declaration, produced at the first ever “Education Working Group” of the Group of 20 (G20) network of governments and dictatorships, was titled “‘Building consensus for fair and sustainable development.” How free nations can build “consensus” on “education” with murderous Islamist and Communist regimes that indoctrinate all children under their rule with evil ideologies of oppression was not made clear.

The whole education vision signed by the 20 governments and tyrants revolves around the United Nations Agenda 2030 Sustainable Development Goals. This extremist document, which demands national and international wealth redistribution as well as brainwashing of all children, is basically a road-map to global totalitarianism. It was literally developed by mass-murdering dictatorships. But it has never ratified by the U.S. Senate, as required by the Constitution of treaties.

The G20 education document is wild in terms of what it openly promotes. “Education is the foundation of personal development as it provides children, youth and adults with the knowledge, skills, values and attitudes necessary to reach their full potential,” declared the education ministers (emphasis added), including some whose regimes torture and slaughter opponents of communism or sharia law.

They also demanded more data-gathering and -mining. “We recognize the value of policies based on evidence and the importance of having robust and comprehensive learning assessment systems and data in order to measure progress and learning outcomes, to help ensure quality education for all at all stages of life,” the document says, one of many references to government-provided “education” from cradle to grave informed by perpetual, Orwellian vacuuming up of student data.

The agreement also demands further globalization of education, a process that has been underway for many years. For instance, it calls for “international investment in education,” a theme consistent with the ongoing globalization of education under the UN’s extremist “education” agency known as UNESCO. “We acknowledge the role of existing and potential international mechanisms for financing education,” the document continues.

They also vowed to push it further. “We commit to strengthening international cooperation… and developing joint initiatives at bilateral, regional and multilateral levels,” the mostly unelected education czars said. In fact, the document goes on to say it explicitly: “We commit to facilitating the internationalization of education.” That means education policy for American children, decided by foreign governments and tyrants, as well as dictator clubs such as the UN.

The signers, including DeVos, agreed to “promote the development of curricula … which have a strong focus on … values and attitudes.” They also committed to “foster the inclusion of non-cognitive skills such as socio-emotional skills across the curriculum,” which is basically educrat psycho-babble to conceal a program of psychological conditioning aiming to bring about the values and attitudes demanded by the establishment in all children.

Finally, the education chiefs vowed to “provide education that supports better integration of common values like … sustainable development.” As far as the nebulous, totalitarian concept relates to education, the UN has already made clear that it considers real education and educated people a threat to its grotesque notions of “sustainability.”

“Generally, more highly educated people, who have higher incomes, consume more resources than poorly educated people, who tend to have lower incomes,” explains a UN “toolkit” for global “sustainable” education, ‘which is still posted online at UNESCO’s website. “In this case, more education increases the threat to sustainability.”

The declaration also undermines true human rights — free speech, freedom of the press, gun rights, and other God-given rights — and promotes the communist-inspired notion of government-granted privileges as rights. “We stress that access to quality education is a human right,” the education ministers declared, as if mass-murdering communist tyrants had the same vision of “quality education” as liberty-minded Christian parents in America.

Common Core Diva Lynne Taylor, a respected education researcher, was among the voices sounding the alarm. “DeVos’s global roots are showing, as they have been since she was sworn into office. The question is exactly what will she do with all the ideas, policies, and, the damning Declaration for not only education, but our very freedoms,” Taylor warned. “I can tell you we all need to brace for impact.”

Trump should fire DeVos — and not just for participating in this dangerous effort to further globalize education and standardize the indoctrination of children worldwide. But rather than replacing her, Trump should work with Congress to shut down the entire unconstitutional department and get the feds completely out of education. The alternative is the continued subversion of education in America — and ultimately, the death of freedom.

Read full story here…




Technocracy In Education: “A Continental System Of Human Conditioning”

Dr. Tim Ball doesn’t mention it by name, but what he describes is pure Technocracy at heart. In 1934, the Technocracy Study Course defined education as “A continental system of human conditioning will have to be installed to replace the existing insufficient educational methods and institutions. This continental system of general education will have to be organized as to provide the fullest possible conditioning and physical training… It must educate and train the student public so as to obtain the highest possible percentage of proficient functional capacity.“  ⁃ TN Editor

I write this article from 40-years of direct involvement in education at all levels from kindergarten to postsecondary, in several countries. Overall, it is an unmitigated disaster for the majority of citizens. It only favors a few elites who created it and work to keep it isolated. It is not surprising that Trump, who finally recognized this group politically, also speaks to their educational needs. These are people who barely exist in the minds of professional politicians or those controlling the academic world. The education system that the academics and politicians created doesn’t fit the nature of human intelligence or how that evolves during the growth of the child. It imposes education decreed and dictated by a small group who are escapees from the real world and have no idea what is relevant. This is proved by the comment people make when they say something is ‘purely academic.’ What they mean is that it is irrelevant to the real world.  It does not fit or serve individual needs and therefore society loses.

Here are a few of the problems with the educational system they devised.

  • It doesn’t prepare young people for the real world.
  • It doesn’t fit the way the mind develops.
  • It doesn’t allow in even basic ways for the vast range of talents, abilities, interests, or skills found in the human population.
  • It doesn’t have mechanisms or ways of improving itself.
  • It operates outside the control of society and only serves to perpetuate itself.
  • It is designed to make students fail.
  • It measures success only by those who reach the end, a university degree, but never cares about or investigates those who ‘drop out.’

The truth is only about 10% of the population should go to university or college. The other 90% don’t need to go because what they learn will not prepare them for the real world. In addition, they don’t have the type of thinking required to be an academic. For them, whether it is a university or a three or four-year college degree, it is simply grades 13, 14, and 15. Despite this, Americans spend billions sending their children to university or college. They do this because they are led to believe that this type of education is necessary to ‘get ahead’ in the society.

This came about because America allowed so-called ‘intellectuals’ to take over the educational system. It was effective because, as an immigrant nation of people from lower and middle classes in their home countries, they never had an opportunity to go to university. It was the preserve of the power elite; look at the arrogance and elitism of Oxford, Cambridge, Harvard and Yale. As a result, the politicians created a system that is useless for most of the people of middle America. Once established, this system perpetuates itself for the same reason professional politicians reject Trump. If you are a corporate executive or management, you usually get the job because you have degrees. This means if you hire someone without degrees and they can also do the job it devalues your degrees. It is the same reason professional politicians must attack Trump. If he can do the job, it underscores how bad they are beyond the corruption.

There are only two positive things I can say about any system in any country. First, they are so misdirected, misleading, and self-serving that students are successful in the purely Darwinian sense of survival of the fittest. They would succeed, regardless. Second, universities and colleges are a socially acceptable form of unemployment for at least 80% of the students.

Universities and colleges evolved at a time when only a few could afford to attend, and society realized that only a few needed the type of education they provide. The problem is, it is still only a few that need that type of education. In the meantime, societies realized, correctly, that they benefitted from an educated citizenry. Unfortunately, especially in the second half of the 20th century, the socialist thinking took over, and it was assumed that all students had equal abilities, and all should have equal access to the entire system from kindergarten through to college or university.

These are commendable goals, but they don’t fit the reality. People have a wide range of abilities and society has a wide range of needs. The education systems ignore the range of abilities and assumes that all students entering kindergarten will end up in university. This automatically makes failures of those who don’t go to university.

In the US, they tried to downplay this by creating pseudo-universities called three and four-year colleges. In the UK, they produced what they called the ‘new’ universities that are equally a waste of time and money. In most systems, you see a gradual ‘dropping out’ of students along the way. In studies we did in Canada we discovered that barely 50% of students survive first-year university and another 15% don’t make it to graduation. The charade continues because there are far more universities and colleges and the number of academics grown exponentially. This generates thousands of people doing little or nothing. They don’t know how to teach because they are hired on the basis of research degrees and they only publish enough for promotion and tenure. They are not required to have any teacher training at all. They produce volumes of useless research published in journals that only a small specialized group read and adds nothing to human understanding or scholarship. The situation generates many accurate observations.

“A professor is a person whose job it is to tell students how to solve the problems of life which they avoided by becoming a professor.”

“A professor is one who talks in someone else’s sleep.”

“Intellectuals are people who believe that ideas are of more importance than values; that is to say, their own ideas and other people’s values.”

“You can always tell a Harvard man – but you can’t tell him much.”

“Education: the inculcation of the incomprehensible into the indifferent by the incompetent.”

“Arrogance, pedantry, and dogmatism are the occupational diseases of those who spend their lives directing the intellects of the young.”

“Today’s public education system is a failed monopoly: bureaucratic, rigid and in unsteady control off dissatisfied captive markets.”

Aristotle identified a major issue central to any educational process. There is information you have innately as you develop the skills necessary as a human. Then there is information you learn from experience. Aristotle pointed out that you can have a mathematics genius of 6 years old but will never have a philosophical genius of that age. He recommended students go to school until approximately puberty (12 years) then they get out of school and work, travel, to learn about life to return to school when they are about 30. The UK and North American systems not only ignore this natural divide it exacerbates it by dividing it into three segments, Elementary, Middle, and High schools. This isolates students as they go through puberty. Research shows the brain develops very little during this time as all energy is directed to the chemical and physical changes of puberty. No wonder Middle schools are renowned for disciplinary problems.  An education system that is a continuum would better reflect the continuum of life.

The Aristotelian system would not work today because the education system is designed around the industrial society and must produce human work units. In too many homes children must be cared for while the parents work. So, it is expedient to keep them in school and teach them subjects that have little meaning. What is the point of teaching history to young people for who a week is forever? More important, as President Trump noted, why force them to take subjects when their talent is automotive repair or some other trade skill.

Some jurisdictions recognize that students have different abilities. The UK system used to distinguish those who were talented with their hands from those who lacked those skills. The problem is a class distinction was involved so that the latter went to Grammar Schools, the former to Secondary Modern. Just the use of the word “Secondary” had enormous implications. Presumably because of claims of inequality or discrimination the UK created Comprehensive schools that moved away from the reality of people and society and ignored the diversity that is society.

In North America, they didn’t consider even this basic separation. All students are put in the same stream and only separated by a system designed to fail those not suitable for the academic’s definition of intellect. I say academics, not universities because the faculty controls the universities by dominating the Senate and ensuring that all executive positions, including Presidents and Deans, are academics. What you have is a prison system run by the prisoners, and the guards are promoted prisoners.

The story about the Mother Rabbit who sent her child to nature school explains the process of designed failure. After the first day, the Mother asked how the day went. The young rabbit replied, it was great we learned to run. After the second day, the answer was the day went great because we learned to jump. The answer on the third day was, it was not good, we learned tree climbing. The Mother encouraged the young rabbit saying you have to experience a variety in life, everything is not as you like. On the fourth day, the answer was more negative as it involved learning to fly. The young rabbit was ready to quit, but the Mother persuaded the child to give it one more try. On the fifth day, the young rabbit went to school and was told she did well in running and jumping so they would not do anymore. However, since she failed in tree climbing and flying, they were going to work on those until she got it right. The young rabbit quit school.

The academics use Intelligent Quotient tests as if they are an indicator of ability. They are not. Worse, they are no measure of wider abilities necessary for most jobs in life. The current system assumes that education will increase your IQ. It doesn’t.

Scores from intelligence tests are estimates of intelligence. Unlike, for example, distance and mass, a concrete measure of intelligence cannot be achieved given the abstract nature of the concept of” intelligence”. ” IQ scores have been shown to be associated with such factors as morbidity and mortality, parental social status, and, to a substantial degree, biological parental IQ. While the heritability of IQ has been investigated for nearly a century, there is still debate about the significance of heritability estimates and the mechanisms of inheritance.

The academic obsession with IQ led to another major mistake that permeates modern education, the failure to realize the difference between knowledge and intelligence. People assume that because people in the past didn’t know something they were not intelligent. The school system assumes because young people don’t know much they are not intelligent. The result is they designed a system that insults the student’s intelligence, and as a result, most of them are bored silly most of the time.

Trump’s ventures with education from turning it back to the States and then on down to the family are an enormous step in the right direction. His creation of vocational schools, apprenticeship programs, and the realization that most people don’t need the type of education created by a small elite whose only goal is to perpetuate their control are a huge first step. Prince Philip summarized it when he said, universities are the only truly incestuous system in our society. Everybody that is in them is a product of them.

If you don’t think schools are just babysitting agencies consider that most parents have no idea what their children are learning in school. Most of them never investigate or even want to know. However, consider what happens when the school sends the children home early the phone rings off the wall.

I am not in favor of government involvement or control of education. What we need is to follow the trend Trump has initiated. Teach all students the basics then create education in conjunction with the business world, both small and large, to prepare programs that have a real-world market value. Let the individual decide what is relevant to them, not what some academic escapee from the real-world decrees. People who want to study art, read classic literature or learn about Shakespeare can and will choose to do so in their own time.  With a job to survive in the real world they can afford to do it.