In 1934, the Technocracy movement categorized education as a “continental system of human conditioning.” Today’s Technocrats think in exactly the same way as they mold young brains into the predetermined image of model workers. ⁃ TN Editor
Ultra-creepy technology that George Orwell could not have imagined in his most terrifying nightmares is invading government-school classrooms — and children’s minds — all around the world. While many of the Big Brother innovations are coming out of Communist China, they are making their way into American schools quickly as well. Parents, beware.
In a video report by the Wall Street Journal on artificial intelligence in Communist Chinese schools, children in a communist indoctrination camp masquerading as a school are shown wearing bands around their heads. The devices feature colored lights on the front that indicate for the “teacher” whether the child is paying attention or distracted. Red is for “deeply focused.” Blue means “distracted.” White is offline.
The technology is supposedly aimed at helping the indoctrination facilitators (misleadingly described as “teachers” by the WSJ and the regime) and authorities determine whether the young victim is concentrating and absorbing the regime’s propaganda. Basically, the headbands use what are known as “electroencephalography” (EEG) sensors to monitor the brain activity and signals of the user. The data is then collected and shared with parents and government agents.
As this writer reported in February for The Epoch Times, a U.S. company called BrainCo developed a headband that purports to measure and collects data on students’ “brainwaves.” The company is funded in part by the mass-murdering regime in Beijing via its state-run “companies,” with the devices being deployed against thousands of Chinese children at schools.
However, despite criticism from all angles, the Orwellian technology is already in America, too. According to the U.K. Daily Mail, the Massachusetts-based company also deployed the devices at a high school in Boston. The scheme was supposed to offer “focus and relaxation neurofeedback training” so that the students could “enhance their learning efficiency and education outcomes.”
The privacy implications are huge. According to the CEO of the company, the plan is to build the “world’s largest database” using the brain-activity data compiled from students. That information will then be analyzed by “artificial intelligence” to help gain insights into detecting individuals’ emotional states. Chinese communists also boast that the data will feed their AI algorithms.
And that is just the start. Another technological nightmare being deployed in schools in both Communist China and the United States: facial recognition cameras and data-gathering robots. According to the Journal’s video report, the cameras spy on students and monitor their activities, while the robots in Chinese classrooms analyze student “health and engagement levels.”
In America, as The Newman Report documented in 2017, the federal government spent large amounts of tax money to create a robot named “EMAR.” Investigators figured out that children would be more likely to share their private mental health data with a robot than a human, and so, EMAR was born. The robots are basically gathering massive amounts of “mental-health” information on children — data that may follow them around for life.
Combined with other techno-tracking tools, it is clear that a monstrous machine is being created for humanity that will eliminate privacy, liberty, and even independent thought if this is not stopped. A big part of the reason for the technology is to ensure that the children are absorbing the “social” and “emotional” goals demanded by the government, including attitudes and values.
To global-minded Technocrats, children are the window into the homes of citizens. Government schools are vulnerable to a massive wave of contact tracing that could affect millions of parents forced into quarantine or isolation. ⁃ TN Editor
We seem to be divided as a country when it comes to privacy, civil liberties, and the tracking and tracing of citizens. Some are willing to submit to a surveillance state in order to track the spread of the coronavirus. Others see the pandemic as a weapon used to infringe on our privacy and freedoms. As an active member of the national advocacy group Parent Coalition for Student Privacy
I have been researching and tracking violations of pupil privacy in Texas for several years. I maintain two education-related Facebook pages called Educray and my old school board campaign page. I use LinkedIn to publish articles on data privacy, smart cities, and privatization agendas attacking our public schools. I’m a conservative public school parent who believes we should preserve Article VII in the Texas Constitution which makes provision for public free education.
Our elected representatives in both parties have sold out to special interests and abandoned their oath to uphold the Constitution and defend our rights as taxpayers and citizens.
Last month Governor Greg Abbott appointed a “Strike Force” to assess the pandemic and devise a strategy to get Texans back to work. More than half of the panel on reopening Texas are his campaign donors. The Dallas Morning News reported, “Since 2015, 25 of the 39 members of his Special Advisory Council have given Abbott’s political arm at least $5.8 million, a Dallas Morning News analysis found.”
Abbott’s business advisers include proponents of education technology, for-profit charter schools, school choice vouchers, K12 Inc., and policy insiders working to collapse our traditional public school in favor of privatization, including his appointment of software entrepreneur Mike Morath as commissioner of the Texas Education Agency. For more information about Morath and Texas-Moscow oil money ties to education technology read here:
The Super Lobby
The strike force advisor that concerns me most is Abbott’s Chief Operating Officer Mike Toomey, a BigPharma superlobbyist and former chief of staff for Governor Rick Perry. He is known for his controversial work with Perry when they attempted to mandate the Gardasil HPV vaccine for all girls in Texas. Before you even think about labeling me as an anti-vaxxer, just stop right there. My kids are vaccinated. However, I believe in parental choice and the right to decide which vaccines are safe for our kids. Period.
Why do we need a “strike force” anyway? Isn’t that why we have legislators; you know, the elected representatives? There may be some good patriots on the force but I haven’t seen any of them stand up to this blatant power grab by local politicians like Dallas County Judge Clay Jenkins or Abbott’s vague promises. I gave Judge Jenkins a piece of my mind a few weeks ago when he tried to hire his former campaign manager and another buddy of his for $76K each using federal CARES relief funds. Fortunately it was voted down 4-1.
Flush With Power
In the February 2017, Texas Monthly’s Flush With Power issue featured The Lobbyist: Andrea McWilliams. They wrote, “Of course, another way to exert political influence is with money, and the McWilliamses have gone that route too. Though not among the Austin lobby’s top political donors, they have served as bundlers, pooling money from others to give to candidates. Dean was a “Pioneer” bundler for George W. Bush’s presidential campaign, meaning he raised at least $100,000. In October of last year, Dean made a personal donation of $50,000 to Lieutenant Governor Patrick’s political committee. And in 2016 Andrea supported Texas Republican U.S. senator Ted Cruz for president.”
Texas Monthly underscored her lobbying efforts for K12 Inc, “While the McWilliamses might be described as a power couple, there’s no doubt it’s Andrea who dazzles at the Capitol and in the world of Austin society and philanthropy. She goes into this session with as much as $2.6 million in client contracts with the likes of Citibank, Verizon, Ryan tax consultants, and K12 Inc., an online education company. She has become an influential figure, “a consigliere to the powerful and political,” as a friend once described her.”
K12 Inc. is a for-profit education management organization founded by former banker Ronald J. Packard in 2000 and became publicly traded in 2007. Initial investors in the company included Michael R. Milken and Lowell Milken of education company Knowledge Universe. Andrew Tisch of the Loews Corporation and Larry Ellison of Oracle also contributed venture capital. The more kids on devices at home, the more cashflow.
The Texas Tribune featured them in their 2013 article titled A-List Lobbyists Disclosed Little After Swanky Parties. Jay Root wrote, “Among those represented by either Andrea or Dean McWillliams are the city of Laredo; K-12, Inc., the company that helps run online schools in numerous states, including Texas; Career Education Company, which offers online education services; and Ryan Inc., the tax preparation company headed by mega-contributor Brint Ryan.”
MTX Tracker Jackers and the K12 Inc. Lobbyists
The Houston Chronicle featured a story where Texas health officials awarded up to $295 million to MTX Group, an Albany-based contact tracing technology company with a second headquarters in Frisco, Texas.
According to the article, “The deal appears to have been put together within just a few days. On Wednesday, MTX hired Austin-based lobbyists Andrea and Dean McWilliams for up to $50,000 each, according to public disclosure documents.”
You may recall, in response to Trump’s executive order beginning on Sunday, February 2, 2020, the MTX Disease Monitoring and Control Appconnected all incoming flight passengers into the system in order to adhere to the 14-day mandatory virtual quarantine process.
MTX is also donating its newly launched tracking application to all public school districts in the U.S. That’s right. When it’s free, YOU are the product. The Dallas Morning News reporter Brandi Addison featured MTX here in March saying the donation was valued at $500,000 and is designed for use by health officials, airports and government officials. Addison wrote, “Users who are arriving from affected global regions are asked to check in through a process called a “digital quarantine,” which will track the development of their symptoms.”
They are setting our kids up for a future on blockchain. Think of a supply chain model, only it’s the kids and their outcomes to be traded. Handing out FREE apps is their access point. Data has been proven to be as good as gold.
Last week I featured an article on the national and statewide bipartisan efforts to “Reimagine Education” for our public school children. Governor Greg Abbott is teaming up with Dallas ISD, TEA Commissioner Morath to push “distance learning” for all kids in Texas in response to the coronavirus. Many of the people on Lieutenant Governor Dan Patrick’s Task Force and Governor Abbott’s Strike Force have deep ties in education technology, the Texas Virtual Schools Network (TxVSN), charter schools, and the unconstitutional school choice voucher movement. They view this virus as the perfect opportunity to kill public education and get every kid on a device for at-home learning. They seek to pervert Milton Friedman’s free-market approach by using it on schoolchildren. He said, “Only a crisis – actual or perceived – produces real change.”
Manufactured Unemployment and an Army of Contact Tracers
For ten years I have served as a career coach for unemployed people. I got a message yesterday from one of my jobseekers. Doesn’t it seem a little coincidental that we have a tidal wave of unemployment as they are now ushering in the need for an army of contact tracers? The lockdowns have had a devastating impact on our country and the worst is yet to come with 1.9 million unemployment claims in Texas. Governor Abbott said Wednesday that more than 2,000 tracers have been deployed and the state in ramping up to meet his goal of hiring an army of 4,000.
Big GERM and The TRACE Act from Hell (HR 6666)
Anyone following the Global Education Reform Movement (GERM) knows that Bill Gates is one of the most notorious philanthrocapitalists of them all. His Common Core (CCSS) experiment on America’s children has been documented and exposed by Lynne Taylor, Common Core Diva.
Her recent magnum opus regarding HR 6666 might be her most important to date. It’s not much of a leap to see the intersection of education and the pandemic as an access point. Lynne wrote, “As we know, Gates is also behind the CCSS Machine.”
She documented the The $100 Billion ‘Rushing’ Test Schemecoming through HR 6666, the TRACE Act. She explained, “Warriors, the full name of HR 6666 is “Testing, Reaching, and, Contacting Everyone Act“. In the image below, it’s one I created to illustrate ESSA’s hamster wheel for communities. TRACE will use this hamster wheel concept to address COVID-19 in your town. Because the cradle to grave alignment in education exists, the extension of the concept of tracking and tracing everyone just got a ‘green light’ from HR 6666’s purpose!”
She said, “From the Press Release on Rep. Rush’s website, you can see that not only will schools be used as testing sites, but college/university based hospitals and health care centers, too. However, since ESSA turned all public schools into quasi hospitals, they qualify as federally certified health care centers.”
So, what’s the big deal with contact tracing? I can think of one guy in history who would have loved to have had access to tracking software. It seems we are so afraid of dying, we are willing to stop living and protecting our freedoms. There’s no question the threat of the virus is real, but the projections and the extreme measures to mitigate it have gone beyond reason. Regardless of your stance on the risks, please consider the implications of allowing tech giants to control us through tracking, machine learning, blockchain, and artificial intelligence (AI). The Constitution doesn’t have an exemption for COVID-19.
Wrench in the Gears writer Alison McDowell featured a computer scientist “discussing plans to leverage” small data,” digital traces, from smart phones to influence “personal health management.” She wrote, “It is important to recognize that the move into contract tracing is an extension of this work. Once the state normalizes the practice of tracking people and their networks within the context of pandemic they can move into using these apps to influence health-related behaviors in subtle and overt ways. All of this will be linked to human capital markets, and all of it will be used to train AI.”
In closing, let’s think about the slippery slope of allowing MTX Group to have access to our public school children, as well as our citizens when they have been very clear about where they are headed. MTX founder and chairman Das Nobel said, “MTX is currently working on a new artificial intelligence platform to cater to the medical industry. There is a need to disrupt the industry with the use of genome sequencing and other technologies to get insights that will help in predicting appropriate healthcare models and analyzing symptoms to tackle diseases early. We want patients to take control on decision making. We not only want to serve the US market but also India.”
Study: Common Core Behind Historic Drop In Student Scores
Common Core State Standards curriculum were created and owned by two private non-profit organizations, both of which were heavily funded and influenced by Bill Gates of vaccine fame. CCSS has failed miserably and an entire generation has been mentally crippled. ⁃ TN Editor
As we approach the 40th anniversary of the establishment of the United States Department of Education in May, shocking trends in student performance should lead us to reconsider the federal role in education and whether the initiative for policymaking should be returned to local schools, communities, and states.
Breaking with decades of slow improvement, U.S. reading and math scores on the National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP) and other assessments have seen historic declines since most states implemented national Common Core English and math curriculum standards six years ago, according to a new study published by Pioneer Institute.
While Common Core was promoted as improving the international competitiveness of U.S. students in math, our international standing has remained low while the skills of average and lower performing American students have dropped in both math and reading.
Nationally, fourth- and eighth-grade NAEP math scores were rising gradually in the years before Common Core was implemented (2003-2013). Post-Common Core, scores at both grades have fallen, eighth grade at nearly the same rate as it was previously increasing.
The declines are most acute for the lowest-achieving students, increasing inequality. Scores for students at the 90th percentile have mostly continued their pre-Common Core trend of gradual improvement. But the farther behind students were, the more substantial the declines, with the biggest drops occurring for those at the 25th and 10th percentiles.
“The sustained decline we’re now seeing, especially among our most vulnerable students, simply cannot be allowed to continue,” said Theodor Rebarber, author of “The Common Core Debacle.”
U.S. students fare better in reading than they do in math when compared to international competitors, but U.S. reading trends are similar to those seen in math, with gradual pre-Common Core improvement replaced by declines after Common Core was implemented.
From 2003 to 2013, national fourth- and eighth-grade reading scores were increasing at an average of about half of a point each year. Since 2013, fourth-grade reading scores have been falling by less than half of a point each year, while eighth-grade scores have dropped by nearly a full point a year.
Rebarber also finds that Common Core is a product of the misguided progressive pedagogies and biases of the education establishment that developed it. “Several of us allied with Pioneer Institute have been pointing out, ever since it was introduced, the deeply flawed educational assumptions that permeate the Common Core and the many ways in which it is at odds with curriculum standards in top-achieving countries.” Unfortunately, the disappointing results of Common Core—particularly for lower performing students—were predicted in 2010.
“Nearly a decade after states adopted Common Core, the empirical evidence makes it clear that these national standards have yielded underwhelming results for students,” said Pioneer Executive Director Jim Stergios. “The proponents of this expensive, legally questionable policy initiative have much to answer for.”
“It’s time for federal law to change to allow states as well as local school districts to try a broader range of approaches to reform,” added Rebarber. “With a more bottom-up approach, more school systems will have the opportunity to choose curricula consistent with our international competitors and many decades of research on effective classroom teaching.”
CFR Pushes Central Planning to Fuse Education With Economy
The CFR’s education policies are virtually identical to historic Technocracy that wanted to develop education as a “continental system of human conditioning.” This is the same mentality that produced Alphas, Betas and Deltas in Huxley’s Brave New World. ⁃ TN Editor
The globalist-minded Council on Foreign Relations is urging state and local officials, as well as other leaders, to transform the education system, claiming that looming changes in the economy and the workplace will require workers who are properly “educated” and “trained” for the new paradigm. The effort seeks to “reverse-engineer” every part of the education and workforce training system, and ensure that components are “all walking in lockstep.” In interviews with The New American, two of the CFR task force members involved in developing the recommendations warned of major problems ahead for America if the organization’s ideas were not acted upon — and soon.
However, also in interviews with The New American, education experts, critics of technocratic governance, and leading lawmakers all sounded the alarm about the CFR’s proposed schemes. One expert argued that the educational policies advanced by the task force resemble the tools used by totalitarian regimes such as the communist dictatorships of the Soviet Union and China. Another expert condemned the ideas as moving America toward technocracy. A prominent educator expressed shock that the report made no mention of the very real and very serious problems with the current education system. And considering the CFR membership’s long history of betraying America and liberty around the world to advance globalism and tyranny, lawmakers warned that there are very good reasons to be concerned.
According to the CFR’s Task Force report, dubbed “The Work Ahead: Machines, Skills, and U.S. Leadership in the Twenty-First Century,” America will be facing massive changes in the years ahead. Especially concerning to the CFR’s panel behind the report is the growth of automation and technology, which will displace large numbers of American workers across a broad range of industries. All of that is true, of course. But any effort to sell drastic changes including even bigger Big Government and an enormous array of new unconstitutional policies must have at least a kernel of truth to sound palatable. This effort is no exception.
The plot is audacious and comprehensive. In the article entitled “CFR: U.S. Needs More Mass Migration, Bigger Welfare State,” The New American explored the enormous transformations that the powerful CFR is pursuing relating to social-welfare programs and immigration. In short, under the guise of preparing America for the future, the CFR argued that the U.S. government must massively expand the size and scope of government, ranging from healthcare and retirement to increased immigration. Sweden and Denmark, two of the nations with the most bloated governments on Earth, are praised as successful models. Interestingly, even while warning of huge looming job losses for American workers, the CFR report advocated a surge in immigration.
The other key component of the CFR’s “Work Ahead” agenda deals with “education.” Indeed, the CFR report claims America needs “dramatic” so-called transformations in the education system. Much of this must be driven by government, the globalist group argued. Simply “waiting and hoping that the market will sort out the challenges,” according to the CFR report, “is not an adequate response.” It was not made clear why. Rather, the CFR claimed only that failure to provide “the education” that apparently helpless Americans supposedly “need” for the future would be dangerous. It was also not clear why Americans could not take responsibility themselves for their education.
In a phone interview with The New American, CFR task force project director Ted Alden said the goal of the effort was to “make it a top national priority to prepare the American workforce for the changes that are coming.” According to Alden, the thing that the United States did “better than any other country” was pushing ahead with tax-funded education for everyone. “In the early 20th century, the U.S. led every country in terms of moving Americans into secondary education, then into post-secondary education with the G.I. Bill,” he said when asked why the market system could not deal with the coming changes. “A lot of this came from state and local government. This is a familiar history that we handled well in the 20th century.”
Among the various changes and recommendations that the CFR is peddling:
• Ensure that college and university are “within the reach of all Americans,” presumably by either forcing taxpayers to pay for it all or by shackling young Americans to ever-greater levels of debt they cannot pay.
• Link “education more closely to employment outcomes.” “A change in thinking is needed, from seeing education and work as distinct and separate activities to considering them as closely linked,” the report continues.
• Provide “expanded counseling for students to set them on successful education-to-work paths,” since apparently government knows best what “path” those children should be on. The government schools should also lay out “guided pathways” to direct students toward what the central planners believe will be needed in the future.
• Collect more data on students to be disseminated by government, on everything from education to career, to make all the central planning work. “Washington should expand and improve its own data gathering and dissemination,” the report says, adding that the private sector must also be conscripted into this Big Data scheme.
• Concentrate greater emphasis on “lifelong learning,” which will “require changes in behavior” by employees. This means adults need to be constantly ready and willing to go back to the government for more so-called education to keep up with changes in society and the economy.
• Insist state and local governments do a better job of central planning and incorporating their ideas about what society and the economy need into the education system. Among other policies, taking a page out of the Soviet playbook, authorities must “undertake detailed skills assessments of the population and the workforce needs of local employers,” the CFR task force argued. “Devising and implementing appropriate educational options depends on a solid assessment of the workforce needs of local employers and the education and skills level of the state workforce.” Also required: “close collaboration among state governments, educational institutions, and employers.”
• Include new “workplace readiness standards” in middle- and high-school curricula, requiring the education establishment to predict the future of the economy and prepare all children accordingly. “Skills readiness standards would be aligned with skills that are or will be in demand for quality jobs in the future or present,” the report added, noting that the standards would be continually revisited by “standard setters.” These standards should include “habits of the mind,” the CFR said cryptically, without elaborating.
• Have the federal government create “lifelong learning accounts” to provide money for everyone to pursue “lifelong learning.” This would be “a national program to help finance mid-career retraining,” the CFR said without citing any provision in the U.S. Constitution that would authorize such a program.
• Have the federal government develop a national ranking system for schools, building on the Obama administration’s efforts. While this would ostensibly help students decide which colleges offer the best value, it would also help the federal government demonize and marginalize educational institutions such as Christian colleges that resist the growing extremism that has infected higher education.
• Launch propaganda campaigns through the federal government and state governments involving public figures from sports and entertainment to “encourage young people to make the best possible educational-to-work choices.” It was not immediately clear how authorities would determine what the best possible education and work choices would be. Social media and other tools should be used, the report said.
Technocrats have long since hijacked the American education system for their own agenda. What once was a system of actual education of students has now become a system intended to produce nothing more than conditioned Technocrat workers. When this is understood, modern education programs – President George Bush’s “No Child Left Behind” policy and President Barack Obama’s Common Core Education Standards and the Trump Administration signing a UN agreement that states “We commit to facilitating the internationalization of education” – will become crystal clear.
When the Technocracy Study Course was written in 1934 by M. King Hubbert and Howard Scott, it was literally intended to be the “bible” of Technocracy. It contained all of the basic elements of societal construction along with rules and principles for living.
Hubbert and Scott names education as one of the pillar service sectors of Technocracy was education. On page 232, they listed “The end products attained by a high-energy social mechanism on the North American Continent” as:
a high physical standard of living,
a high standard of public health,
a minimum of unnecessary labor,
a minimum of wastage of nonreplaceable resources,
an educational system to train the entire younger generation indiscriminately as regards all considerations other than inherent ability—a Continental system of human conditioning. (emphasis added)
William Akin elaborated on this in his book, Technocracy and the American Dream (1978, p. 142).
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.
Since the basic need of society was technical expertise, their education system would abolish the liberal arts, which addressed outmoded moralistic solutions to human problems. It would essentially replace the humanities with the machine shop. In the process, members of society would be conditioned to think in terms of engineering rationality and efficiency. Man, in short, would then be conditioned to assume the character of machines, to accept “a reality understood in terms of machine-like function.”
Early Technocrats, thoroughly captivated by the vain religion of Scientism, believed that truth about man and the universe could only be discovered through science. As a result, the pioneer of behavioral psychology, B.F. Skinner, was a principal contributor to Technocrat understanding of human conditioning. It was a theory that they eagerly embraced and applied to their utopian model of Technocracy.
Skinner’s association with the Technocracy movement has been well documented in academic literature. Alexandra Rutherford, for instance, wroteB. F. Skinner and Technology’s Nation: Technocracy, Social Engineering, and the Good Life in 20th-Century America in the History of Psychology, in which she stated,
Skinner’s efforts were part of a much larger social engineering tradition that received one of its fullest expressions in the Technocracy Movement of the 1930s.
The balance of Rutherford’s paper detailed the “several philosophical and structural similarities between the Technocrats’ and Skinner’s social visions.”
The Technocracy Study Course is thoroughly dependent on this line of thinking, and every chapter stresses the importance of and need for “conditioning” of all members of society in order for Utopia to materialize. Of course, this goes well beyond just education, but early conditioning of young students was of paramount importance:
No conditioned response to a given stimulus can ever occur unless the subject has previously been through the conditioning experience involving this stimulus and the corresponding response. (p. 187)
Enter Common Core Education Standards
Although the modern drift of education toward Technocratic conditioning started in the early 1980s, it is not the purpose of this paper to present details that others have presented over the years. Rather, I will skip forward to the latest program called the Common Core Education Standards Initiative (CCESI) which has swept the American education system over the last 10 years.
CCESI was sponsored by the National Governors Association (NGA) and the Council of Chief State School Officers (CCSSO), both of which are non-governmental organizations. CCSSO is a progressive advocacy organization that focuses on “education workforce; information systems and research; next generation learners; and standards, assessment, and accountability.”The NGA’s membership is exclusively the Governors of each state and territory, but it presents itself as a political organization.
It is important to note that both the NGA and CCSSO are completely independent of any government authority or accountability.
Did funding for CCESI come from the federal government? No! Instead, the primary financier was the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation, controlled by Microsoft pioneer Bill Gates – a Technocrat. In fact, over a 10 year period, Gates provided almost $500 million to various organizations to develop the curriculum according to his own personal vision of education.
Furthermore, according to its own website, the resulting copyright for CCESI is tightly held by these same organizations:
NGA Center/CCSSO shall be acknowledged as the sole owners and developers of the Common Core State Standards, and no claims to the contrary shall be made.
Parents today wonder why the nature and focus of education has changed so radically over the last 10 years. The simple reason is that it has been hijacked by private Technocrat-oriented organizations and funded by Technocrats like Bill Gates. To call this a monumental coup would be an understatement.
Of course, the Technocrats had help and full cooperation from the federal government which had distributed Common Core to the individual states, -proof of how deep the Technocrat influence runs within our political structures.
In sum, Akin’s observation of Technocracy’s “Continental system of human conditioning” has proven correct: “It would essentially replace the humanities with the machine shop.”
ASU President Michael Crow Leads Sustainable Charge
Michael Crow is a consummate Technocrat who has created a new kind of educational experience at ASU, one that is measured by its social impact rather than traditional statistics like awards or intellectual rigor.
Notably, Crow is also Chairman of the Board of the CIA’s venture capital firm, In-Q-Tel. His In-Q-Tel bio states,
Michael M. Crow became the sixteenth president of Arizona State University on July 1, 2002. He is guiding the transformation of ASU into one of the nation’s leading public metropolitan research universities, an institution that combines the highest levels of academic excellence, inclusiveness to a broad demographic, and maximum societal impact—a model he designed known as the “New American University.”
Under his leadership ASU has established major interdisciplinary research initiatives such as the Biodesign Institute, Global Institute of Sustainability (GIOS), and more than a dozen new transdisciplinary schools, and witnessed an unprecedented academic infrastructure expansion, tripling of research expenditures, and attainment of record levels of diversity in the student body.
Crow was previously professor of science and technology policy and executive vice provost of Columbia University, where he served as chief strategist of Columbia’s research enterprise and technology transfer operations. ⁃ TN Editor
To those who ask what ASU’s ranking “#1 in innovation” actually means, ask no further. Perhaps if you’ve seen a billboard or two (or three) on the Price Freeway, you may have noticed that Arizona State University has been rated first in innovation from US News and World Report for five consecutive years.
“Great,” says ASU student Lorenzo Rios, “so what does that actually mean?” Rios’ voice echoes that of countless other students, many of them turning the university’s capitalization on the achievement into a light-hearted joke.
Although these young scholars now exploit the ranking by sarcastically granting their friends nicknames like “innovator” when they complete insignificant tasks, the real-life accomplishments from ASU President Michael Crow are no joke.
In his recent presentation to the Chandler Chamber of Commerce, Crow highlighted he numerous ways that he and his staff have worked toward putting Arizona State at the top of America’s list of robust academic institutions.
Crow served as deputy provost and a senior faculty member of Columbia University in New York City for 12 years before coming to ASU where he has been president for 17 years. Columbia, as Dr. Crow describes, was “too small an arena in too rigid a place,” despite the incredible opportunities he had there.
The level of success we desire in the United States, he says, will not emerge from the establishment institutions like Columbia University, but rather from new places that are able to do new things like ASU.
He continues, “The opportunity here and the reason that I was hired was to take this very large public university which had not yet matured and see if you could actually build a new kind of university.”
Building this new class of education in America is something ASU certainly has accomplished, with many well-established universities following Dr. Crow’s example of innovation.
Becoming #1 in the U.S. for innovation is determined by a peer-based survey from Crow’s counterparts in other academic institutions.
According to the U.S. News and World Report, nominees must demonstrate innovative ways within their campuses to improve in categories such as curriculum, students and faculty or campus facilities and technology.
Dr. Crow describes the process of growth and development as a long and hard-fought game, but the outcome has proven to be worth the fight.
“ASU today is one of the 10 most significant patentors of all universities on the planet. We weren’t even in the top several hundred when we started that process,” he says.
If the logical end of Progressivism is total insanity, then we are very close to or at the end on most college campuses. The United Nations uses its SDG’s to incessantly push for ‘inclusiveness and equality for every person everywhere’. Be careful what you wish for.
As documented in Technocracy Rising: The Trojan Horse of Globalization, Progressivism is part of the root of Technocracy and Transhumanism. In the latter stages, Progressivism leads to mental instability, breaks with reality and other severe emotional problems. ⁃ TN Editor
In an Iowa State University classroom recently, students began discussing the touchy issues of abortion and birth control when a student spoke up and declared those topics to be “women’s issues.”
Yet one dissatisfied student took to the university’s Campus Climate reporting website to complain that the discussion, which took place in September, was offensive to the trans community.
According to the student, declaring abortion and birth control women-centric issues “erases trans men and people who are non-binary who get abortions and/or use birth control.”
The student then reported the professor to administration, complaining “there was no push back by the professor to get students to be more inclusive and instead repeated this erasure.”
This report was one of 49 filed with Iowa State’s “Campus Climate” staff over the last year obtained last week by The College Fix through a public records act request. (The names of the individuals involved were redacted by the university to protect their identities.)
The Iowa State climate program is similar to so-called bias response teams at other universities, and it aims to “provide support for those who report being impacted by hate, intolerance or bias on campus.”
According to the university’s website, the climate team may ask those named in complaints to engage in “constructive dialogue,” although officials insist there are no “disciplinary sanctions” imposed.
Iowa State spokeswoman Angela Hunt told The College Fix that information collected from the website is “shared with campus partners who follow normal protocols for their unit.”
Hunt said the campus climate reporting process has been in effect since 2017, and noted the Campus Climate Response Team includes members from the Office of Equal Opportunity, Diversity and Inclusion, Dean of Students Office, Department of Residence, ISU Police Department, Office of the Senior Vice President and Provost, University Counsel, University Human Resources and Strategic Relations and Communications.
“Reports through the website are referred to the appropriate partner who will determine what, if any, next steps will be taken by their administrative unit,” Hunt said in an e-mail to The Fix.
In the past year, the climate reporting system, which allows students and faculty members to anonymously report one another, has been used frequently by transgender activists to inform on professors and other campus institutions. Of the 49 reports, about 20 percent dealt with issues such as “trans erasure” or “misgendering.”
In August 2018, a student reported having a discussion with their music professor about gender and pronouns, but complained the professor was still having problems with “misgendering.”
“Today was worse,” the student wrote, “in that I corrected him twice and on the second time he said ‘He, she, it, whatever.’”
A week later, a student reported another professor for joking that students should be able to tell an individual’s sex just by looking at them. “He then made a face expressing uneasiness,” the student wrote.
In another complaint, a student last fall visited Thielen psychiatric services on campus, and while filling out the paperwork, noticed only women were asked when they had their last menstrual cycle.
“Women are not the only people who have menstrual cycles,” the student wrote. “Trans-men can have menstrual cycles, as can non-binary people, etc.”
The student was concerned that merely seeing the question could be damaging to trans individuals, saying it could “trigger dysphoria in people seeking health services at Thielen.”
And in December, a transgender student changed their name in the school computer system, only to later find out the computer switched back to their “dead name.”
“This is a possibly dangerous situation for me since I am a forestry major and my program is more conservative,” the student wrote. “Seeing or hearing the name causing me [sic] intense mental grief and I literally cannot take it.”
Pope Announces Global Compact On Education For ‘New Humanism’
Pope Francis called on global leaders to join in on May 14, 2020 to sign a new Global Compact on Education that will lead to a ‘New Humanism’. Channeling Hillary Clintons book, It Take a Village, he wants to ‘educate’ all young people into becoming global citizens. ⁃ TN Editor
In a renewed and enthusiastic endorsement of globalism, Pope Francis has announced he is hosting an initiative for a “Global Pact” to create a “new humanism.”
The global event, set to take place at the Vatican on May 14, 2020, is themed Reinventing the Global Educational Alliance.
According to a Vatican statement issued on Thursday, Sept. 12, the Pope is inviting representatives of the main religions, international organizations and various humanitarian institutions, as well as key figures from the world of politics, economics and academia, and prominent athletes, scientists and sociologists to sign a “Global Pact on Education” so as to “hand on to younger generations a united and fraternal common home.”
“A global educational pact is needed to educate us in universal solidarity and a new humanism,” Francis said in a video message to launch the initiative.
A Vatican-backed website launched to promote the pact added: “Educating young people in fraternity, in learning to overcome divisions and conflicts, promote hospitality, justice and peace: Pope Francis has invited everyone who cares about the education of the young generation to sign a Global Pact, to create a global change of mentality through education.”
The Pope’s message on the ‘Global Pact’
In a strikingly secular message containing only one throw-away reference to the Lord, Pope Francis called on people to “capitalize on our best energies” and to be “proactive” in “opening education to a long-term vision unfettered by the status quo.”
“This,” he said, “will result in men and women who are open, responsible, prepared to listen, dialogue and reflect with others, and capable of weaving relationships with families, between generations, and with civil society, and thus to create a new humanism.”
Quoting Hillary Clinton’s favorite aphorism, “It takes a village to raise a child,” Pope Francis asserted the need to create an “educational village,” in which “all people, according to their respective roles, share the task of forming a network of open, human relationships.”
At a time when the right to homeschool and the right to a free choice of school are threatened, and when countries throughout the world level taxes to provide public schooling to which no Catholic parents could safely send their child, Pope Francis omitted any reference to the prerogatives of parents as the primary educators of their children.
Referencing the “Document on Human Fraternity and World Peace for Living Together,” which he signed with the Grand Imam of Al-Azhar in Abu Dhabi last February, Francis explained that, in this new global village, “the ground must be cleared of discrimination and fraternity must be allowed to flourish.”
Readers will recall that the Abu Dhabi document aroused controversy for stating that the “diversity of religions” is “willed by God.”
“In this kind of village,” the Pope also said an “alliance” must be forged “between the earth’s inhabitants and our ‘common home,’ which we are bound to care for and respect. An alliance that generates peace, justice and hospitality among all peoples of the human family, as well as dialogue between religions.”
Not everyone is convinced that peace can be achieved by promoting the Abu Dhabi document, however. Bishop Athanasius Schneider recently observed that “however noble such aims as ‘human fraternity’ and ‘world peace’ may be, they cannot be promoted at the cost of relativizing the truth of uniqueness of Jesus Christ and His Church.”
In his message, the Pope said that in order to reach these “global objectives,” as an “educating village” we must “have the courage to place the human person at the center” and to “train individuals who are ready to offer themselves in service of the community.”
He ended his message by inviting “everyone to work for this alliance and to be committed, individually and within our communities, to nurturing the dream of a humanism rooted in solidarity and responsive both to humanity’s aspirations and to God’s plan.”
Healing the Planet
Pope Francis has tasked the Vatican’s Congregation for Catholic Education with organizing the initiative. According to a website dedicated to the global pact, the Congregation oversees “216 thousand Catholic schools, attended by over 60 million pupils and 1,750 Catholic universities, with over 11 million students.”
In explanatory note accompanying the Pope’s message, the Congregation said that the May 14 global pact initiative seeks to involve “international organizations” and the “great ones of the earth” in helping to “heal the fracture between man and the Absolute” and the separation between “reality and the transcendent.”
It also aims to heal the “horizontal fracture” between men of difficult cultures, religions and backgrounds. And it intends to heal the “fracture between man, society, nature and the environment” in the face of an “urgent need” to create an “ecological citizenship” based on sustainability and an “austere responsibility.”
“The objectives set for the next few decades aim to set up training models that take into account a constantly increasing population, diminishing resources and the fact that climate change places everyone before a serious responsibility: that of developing our planet in a sustainable way, with an eye to the needs of future generations,” the Congregation said.
“The choice of education as a ground on which to make a global pact is a priority topic in the horizon of current and future scenarios,” it added.
Conferences and events will be held throughout the coming year to prepare for the May 14 signing of the “Global Pact” on education.
In May 2019, Pope Francis made a strong push for globalism, calling for a supranational, legally constituted body to enforce United Nations Sustainable Development Goals and to implement “climate change” policies.
More recently, during an inflight press conference on his return from a seven-day apostolic visit to Africa, Francis said our “duty” is to “obey international institutions,” such as the United Nations and the European Union.
California Unveils Huge ‘Cradle-To-Career’ Student Tracking System
This is the height of social engineering and far beyond Common Core Education Standards data tracking. SB-75 purposes to identify and track “predictive indicators” in order to “provide appropriate interventions” and “improve outcomes.” ⁃ TN Editor
The California legislature has approved legislation that will be signed by Gov. Gavin Newsom to set up an educational system that will use big data to track children from “cradle to career.”
Senate Bill 75 was approved by a vote of 31-7 in the Senate and 62-14 in the Assembly. It will create a “longitudinal” data system that profiles and manipulates pupils from the earliest of ages so they are guided into a career determined by the central planners.
“This is long overdue. Finally, California, the center of the tech world, has a government that is catching up to the 21st century,” said Arun Ramanathan, CEO of Pivot Learning Partners, a nonprofit that will be benefiting from this legislation.
“I’m encouraged we are moving forward and proceeding through the workgroup in a thoughtful and deliberate way,” said Hans Johnson, a senior fellow at the Public Policy Institute of California and director of its Higher Education Center.
The state bureaucracy is now tasked with determining exactly what data is collected from children to enable Big Brother.
This is apart of a national movement that is being spearheaded by failed Georgia Governor candidate Stacey Abrams, New York Times writer David Brooks, and Barack Obama’s former deputy secretary of Education Jim Shelton.
These centralizers hope to control and shape young minds from the earliest of ages using powerful technological tools.
“We refuse to settle for a world where a child’s potential is dictated by the conditions in which the child is born. We are committed to helping every child succeed in school and in life from cradle to career, regardless of race, zip code or circumstance,” said StriveTogether CEO and President Jennifer Blatz.
StriveTogether is responsible for the national Cradle to Career Network Convening. They coach their data sweep plan to treat kids like guinea pigs in the language of social justice.
“We know the systems designed to serve our youth are failing children and families of color and those living in poverty. We exist to give every child, every chance, cradle to career. We’re here to help create possibilities — giving children opportunities to go further and do better than the generations before them,” Blatz said.
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.