Restoring Our Right to Govern

Posted on May 17, 2023 by Victoria M. Young

PART TWO

Dangerous political propaganda, aimed at destroying our governing structure, is subverting the consent of the People — our right to govern. This destructive marketing of political thought is based on a twisted interpretation of Public Choice Theory (PCT).

In PART ONE I asked, did “they” use our individual choices to manipulate our political decisions? You know they did, and do, and will continue to do so until we recognize and resist their manipulative tactics. (Read & review PART ONE, if you have not already.)

What Is Happening?

Once a Convention of States convenes, “representatives” set the rules. They decide what changes will be made. Source: Business Insider JUST 15 states to go!!!!

We all are playing a role in demolishing our republican structure of governing. But that means, if we can see our role, we can resist being part of the destruction. We can overcome what looks to be the imminent ruin of our republic. It requires enough people willing to take some simple actions to stop the march towards a Constitutional Convention (Article V Convention).

First, people must understand PCT’s role in sabotaging and overthrowing the will of the nation.

Those wishing to control us and our nation have applied Public Choice Theory (PCT) within the political marketplace to sell distrust and division rather than our unifying national ideals. Use of PCT taps into self-serving desires and emotions rather than commonsense consensus on solving our common problems. By keeping us divided, its use is torpedoing our right to govern through consent.

“… our reality is that economic theory fostered a political strategy to supplant our constitutional republic with ‘a private governing elite of corporate power.’”

Corporatists, globalists, oligarchies, robber barons, despots, totalitarians, authoritarians, white Christian nationalists, fascists — the label doesn’t matter. They are enemies of the United States when they choose to control the governing of our republic. Governing is “reserved to the people” (The Federalist No.1).

“To the People” never meant “a faction of the people”—one group over another. That is a truth — a guiding principle of the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution.

Why Weaponize PCT?

Achieving a Convention of States, as the mechanism for changing the Constitution, is a mammoth undertaking requiring that voters in two-thirds of the states give control of state legislatures to pro-Convention of States’ candidates. Then, in order to pass changes to the Constitution, those changes would require ratification by three-fourths of the state’s legislatures.

They argue, but have they explained that view? Are they being transparent about the changes they believe will save the republic? And, do those changes make sense in light of the exceptional reasoning the Founding Fathers used?

Changing the Constitution in this manner requires a massive number of voters to cast votes ensuring domination by pro-Convention of States’ lawmakers. But candidates aren’t openly running on the proposal. And voters don’t have it as a priority issue. Therefore, those wanting to change our constitution to fit their agenda need to entice voters using other reasons to vote for “their” guy or gal.

Now, think about how enemies of the republic might use the principles of PCT to analyze us and tap into what motivates us to buy what they are selling — an anti-government sentiment in a government designed for self-governance. It’s a twisted plot.

This was a primary race between two Republicans in North Idaho. Emotional propaganda? Precisely targeted messaging? It worked as planned.

And once our right to have a voice in the lawmaking process is further controlled or eliminated by changes to rules, laws, or the Constitution, we’ll have no chance at true representation. That’s the end of our democratic republic. So …

Here’s What’s Crucial To Understand

Three elements are essential to establishing any massive political movement of this magnitude (whether it is productive such as the American Revolution, or destructive like the Nazi regime):

weaken prevailing beliefs,
undermine established institutions, and
discredit those in power.

Once that preliminary work is done, people with differing priority issues (the economy, education, guns, religion, health care, immigration, abortion) need consolidating into one overwhelmingly powerful party. It’s being done using insight from PCT research to tap into what motivates the single-issue voters.

“Single issue voters do not need a deep understanding of every issue nor do they need to know where a candidate stands on every issue. … In general, single-issue voting gives more power to political parties.” [But] “the power to shape the government should belong to the people and not political parties.” ThoughtCo

Targeting and Using Voters

In PART ONE, I wrote “it’s PCT —not CRT (Critical Race Theory)—being used” in destroying our republic. Here’s why I said that and why I chose CRT to use as an example.

CRT was a theory unknown to most people. That made it easy to shape into a concept made-out to be divisive in nature. In that manner, it was aimed at our national belief in unity. So rightly so, it triggered patriotic passions. That passion, in the form of anger and distrust, was aimed directly at public education institutions and discredited all those seen as holding power in those institutions.

What do you call these actions? Manipulation, FOR SURE! But what else? Thought control? Triggering? Gaslighting?

Without direct knowledge of the (CRT) theory, the public was vulnerable to destructive political propaganda.

The words on the image are a quote from YouTube captioning (not added by me).Image taken from an April 5, 2022 Livestream presentation by Christopher Rufo at Hillsdale College, Michigan, titled, “Laying Siege to the Institutions.”

Those weaponizing CRT did so by controlling the narrative, the propaganda —our ability to have reasonable conversations. They weaponized PCT (Public Choice Theory) in a similar manner — only worse.

Unlike the massive media coverage and open debate over CRT, there’s little talk about PCT outside the circle of “political economists.” And there is little talk about changing the Constitution. That tactic leaves us all vulnerable to targeted propaganda and is sure to end our right to govern if we don’t counter it.

“Although public choice economists have focused mostly on analyzing government failure, they also have suggested ways to correct problems.” Public Choice Theory by Jane S. Shaw

As a research theory, PCT (like CRT) has a legitimate use. But its abuse in the political marketplace — in precisely targeting our voting behavior — is the danger to the republic most in need of addressing immediately.

Here’s Some Simple Actions You Can Take Right Now

We restore our right to govern ourselves by recognizing and resisting the influence Public Choice Theory has over us in the political marketplace.

Judge groups and people by their actions.

Watch your language for divisive words. Listen carefully to words others are using, especially when you find them troubling, confusing, or triggering some other emotion. Question whether or not you and others are being manipulated.

Confront lies. Don’t let them stand as truths when you are certain that what you are really seeing or hearing is destructive propaganda. Correct lies immediately as ” false … fake … untrue … incorrect … dishonest … wrong.” Stand firmly on the truth without arguing.

Decide what you will and can do.

Choose an issue or cause that will help on the local, state, or national fronts.
Determine how much time you can give, stay devoted to that commitment, and do it with a determination to not give up.
Research organizations that are already actively addressing your chosen pursuits, in a way that makes sense to you, and consider joining them. Make sure they are legitimate.

Know a candidate’s position on changing the Constitution.

Vote in every election! Do your best to inform yourself. Then go vote! If you find you don’t have enough information on some contests, it’s okay to leave them blank.

Everyday — try. In everything you read or hear, try to sort out the truth for yourself.

“In politics, being deceived is no excuse.” Leszek Kolakowski

Public Choice Theory: Unleashed

Posted on May 17, 2023 by Victoria M. Young

PART ONE

“Public choice [theory] should be understood as a research program rather than a discipline or even subdiscipline of economics.”* 2003

Those words are from a Hillsdale College speech by Nobel Prize winning economist, James M. Buchanan, in explaining “Public Choice Theory” (PCT). But his advice was too little, too late. PCT —a research theory— had already been weaponized and unleashed on the public.

While using PCT to manipulate the public, what started as a stealth attack aimed at the heart of American democracy is now a full-fledged, outright war against the People’s right to govern. “Winning” requires the crippling of public institutions essential to ensuring educated and informed voters. Therefore, with public education being imperative to educating the masses, the masses now need to understand how PCT —not CRT (Critical Race Theory)— is the weapon being used to destroy public education and the core of our republic.

Understanding is crucial to being able to repair the damage.

From the screaming matches at local school board meetings to the halls of Congress, the PCT strategy of tapping into passions—using people’s desires, fear, anger, and frustration as bait—is focused at American “Rule of Law.”

“Their” Problem Created A Problem for Us

As political economists have long viewed it, the problem is; how can democracy (majority rule) provide justice for all (not discriminate against minorities) and “yield net benefits”* to taxpayers?

That is the mixing of political theory and economic (market) theory that defines the group of scholars called political economists. But the problem for regular Americans is that we don’t think in their terms, or live our lives based on their theories. Unfortunately, it’s their theories applied to our rules of governing that is destroying the foundation of our country.

Our problem is we are feeling the negative effects of the “Us versus Them” War without being able to see who “they” are or understand how “they” are using us.

Here’s how I came to that conclusion — by looking more closely at PCT.

The Foundation of PCT

Buchanan explained the basis of PCT in reference to two levels of collective decision-making.

Ordinary politics is how decisions are made by legislative bodies.

Constitutional politics sets the rules for ordinary politics to function under.*

Reasonable enough?

We all have an opportunity to try and influence ordinary politics —vote, go to hearings, testify to lawmakers, work with organizations to influence the lawmaking process, etc. But it is within the rule-making process —of constitutional politics—where most Americans cannot remain vigilant enough to guard against those wishing to subvert the “consent of the governed.”

“From the perspective of both justice and efficiency, majority rule may safely be allowed to operate in the realm of ordinary politics, provided that there is generalized consensus on the constitution, or on the rules that define and limit what can be done through ordinary politics.” *

Hum…generalized consensus on constitutional politics? That is exactly what “we” have lost control over. “They” —those with enough money to play the political game they created— have ALMOST total control in a majority of states. Hold that thought.

John W. Gardner (R)(1912-2002). This picture probably was taken during his time working in the Kennedy administration. The price has only gone up since then.

Buchanan, and others, may have honestly wanted to contribute to solving the problem of maintaining stability, justice, and efficiency in government. But instead, PCT’s application —a research theory’s application— in the United States fostered distrust and dysfunction. It may lead to total destruction of our republic if we don’t stop its aim at the Constitution.

Our defense starts with understanding.

Precursor to Public Choice Theory (PCT)

Buchanan drew from the work of Swedish economist Knut Wicksell. Back in the 1800’s, Wicksell assumed majority rule produces discrimination against the minority along with government inefficiencies. He concluded collective actions require unanimity. However, knowing unanimous consent on all issues is impractical, qualified or supermajority votes seemed a logical solution.

There’s logic underlying the idea of a supermajority requirement in constitutional politics. But the problem now appears to be where that logic is applied and where it isn’t. For example, some states require supermajority votes for needed school building bonds. Yet, when determining life-long seats on the Supreme Court (a constitutional political action), the Senate supermajority rule has flip-flopped without so much as a thought to our general consent.

But back to the PCT story. Wicksell’s conclusions led Buchanan, with Gordon Tullock, to write The Calculus of Consent. On Amazon, some excerpts from the book’s description explain major points.

“… The authors acknowledge their unease as economists in analyzing the political organization, but they take the risk of forging into unfamiliar territory because they believe the benefits of their perspective will bear much fruit.”

“… We examine the [choice] process extensively only with reference to the problem of decision-making rules.’”

In other words, they looked through their economic lenses as to how individuals make marketplace purchasing decisions and used those observations in analyzing public decision-making —such as voting.

When all of us are seen as “self-interested players in the marketplace,” ** we are vulnerable to division. Competition for public services runs the high risk of destroying community values. The Fierce Urgency of Now

Now consider this, did “they” then use our individual purchasing habits to manipulate our political decisions?

And the rest of the story…

The Birth of the Public Choice Movement

Buchanan and Tullock’s book was so well received they organized a conference of scholars “that were engaged in research outside the boundaries of their disciplines.”* Then they formed the “Committee on Non-Market Decision-Making” (technically what PCT is) but soon changed it to a catchier name —“Public Choice Society.” Thus, they unleashed “the idea of the profit motive from the economic sphere to the sphere of collective action”* —politics.

I see this as taking the profit motive from the marketplace to the voting booth; it’s treating the public’s voting decisions as a commodity to capture —that pays dividends.

After a half century of studying the impacts and effects of his research program, Buchanan concluded this:

“both the punditry and the public are more critical of politics and politicians, more cynical about the motivations of political action…”*

But after a half century of this theory’s application to the politics of our country, where’s that leave regular Americans?

Where I live, distrust in government turned into distrust and disrespect of local school board members as well as neighbors of differing political persuasions. Ordinary people want the insanity to stop.

PCT —not CRT— has undermined trust in our foundational public institutions. Its twisted misuse violated the sanctity of representative government. PCT —not CRT— weaken the glue of unity in America, the Constitutional Rule of Law.

The weaponizing of Public Choice Theory is divisive.

We have to unite to take back our right to govern.

How? PART TWO

#####

* FROM THE WORDS OF JAMES M. BUCHANAN ⇒ “What Is Public Choice Theory?”, Imprimis, Vol.32 No. 3, March 2003, Hillsdale College, MI

** FROM A LIBERTARIAN POINT OF VIEW ⇒ Daniel J. “Dan” Mitchell, former senior fellow at the Cato Institute. “A Taxpayer-Funded Smear Job of Professor James Buchanan”

Hillsdale College & Their Weapons of Choice

Posted on April 23, 2022 by Victoria M. Young

Hillsdale College, 1776 Commission, Barney Charter School Initiative, American Classical Education, Inc., 1776 Civics Curriculum —those names should give us pause and set off alarm bells!!! But most people know little to nothing about a rapidly expanding plan aimed at framing the political thought of the next generation of Americans.

To say this is a serious threat to American democracy is no exaggeration.

Therefore —please— look at what is happening and consider this. Can you vilify and devalue an entire economic and political philosophy rendering it useless in stopping political corruption?

POLITICAL CORRUPTION An 1894 cartoon by Louis Dalrymple equating pay-offs made to the New York police with corporate contributions to senators. Posted by the Granger.

If you’ve heard it said — and believe it is plausible — that the philosophy in the school room in one generation is the philosophy of government in the next, take the facts seriously.

Start With Hillsdale College, “School Choice,” and the 1776 Commission

Since 1844, Hillsdale College has stood as a private conservative Christian college in Michigan claiming to pursue truth, defend liberty, and not take any federal funding. Additionally, Hillsdale runs a private K-12 school, manages the Barney Charter School Initiative (BCSI), and started a charter management organization. They also offer free on-line courses, the 1776 Civics Curriculum, summer seminars, a lecture series and “speech digest” carrying the lecture out to over six million readers.

Hillsdale College president sees teaching as their weapon.

Source: Salon

Larry P. Arnn is their president and prior to coming to Hillsdale, in 2000, he founded and was former president of the Claremont Institute (no affiliation with Claremont colleges). If the name Larry Arnn doesn’t ring a bell, maybe you’ll recall the short-lived presidential 1776 Commission that he co-chaired. Billed as an advisory committee to support “patriot education,” its declared purpose was to…

“enable a rising generation to understand the history and principles of the founding of the United States in 1776 …“

Excluded from this commission were historians specializing in the time-frame of our founding. But included was the politically-influential founder of Turning Point USA (TPUSA) — Charlie Kirk.Beginning in 2012, Kirk’s TPUSA has embedded itself in high school and college campuses across the U.S.. TPUSA’s “projects” include an annual Student Action Summit, Professor Watch List, DivestU (discourages donors to higher ed), Campus Leadership Project, “school board watchlist,” and more recently TPUSA (Turning Point) Academy and Turning Point Faith.

Source: TPUSA 2021 Investor Prospectus ExposedByCMD

Kirk wages political war using what people on both “sides” agree are deceptive tactics. All the while, he continues escalating the culture wars by building upon a network of influence and big money. ExposedByCMD

Since the 1776 Project began, Arnn and Kirk both expanded and amplified their strategies to build and enable “a rising generation” of “patriots.”

Leveraging Publicly-Funded, Privately-Operated “School Choice”

As Jeff Bryant explained back in December of 2016, the Barney initiative mission statement points to Hillsdale’s political agenda.

“[The] former mission statement, since taken down, … said the Initiative seeks to ‘recover our public schools from the tide of a hundred years of progressivism … ‘The charter school vehicle possesses the conceptual elements that permit the launching of a significant campaign of classical school planting to redeem American public education.’”

Hillsdale began Barney charters in 2012 and recently expanded their reach through their new charter school management organization dubbed American Classical Education, Inc. (ACE). Many Barney charters already include “Classical” in naming their schools.

Hillsdale doesn’t see ACE as contrary to their stance against taking federal money. Regardless, federal funding is supporting charter start-ups and expansions. Hillsdale reasons that ACE is only “associated” with the college.

Assistant Provost for K-12 Education Kathleen O’Toole explains, “It [ACE] was formed to carry out the mission of our work in K-12 education but it’s not a Hillsdale College entity.”

Explaining The Charter Management Business

Charter management organizations such as ACE allow a single board to manage groups of schools, instead of each school having its own board. This can improve efficiency and philosophical alignment, O’Toole said.

Hillsdale’s ACE CEO, Joel Schellhammer, explained further.

“ … he wants ACE’s schools to be places where Hillsdale graduates apply for jobs. ‘Hillsdale has a tremendous pipeline of graduates …’” Hillsdale Collegian

Hillsdale College and its “associates” have created a system. But it isn’t a public education system like this country has had in place for over 150 years. This network is designed to recruit, train and supply leaders, teachers, and curriculum —steeped in Hillsdale’s philosophy— and “plant” them in the public education system at public expense.

Hillsdale College associated charter schools and schools using their curriculum.

DID YOU HEAR about TN Gov. Lee initially asking Hillsdale to start up 100 charter schools in Tennessee? Arnn eventually agreed to 50. REVEALED: Charter school program favored by Tennessee governor rewrites civil rights history.

A Network of Dissemination of Information

The messages coming at the public —from this well-funded, politically-connected network—don’t make sense. That’s why it makes sense to pause Hillsdale’s expansion into our public education system.

“… the college has inconspicuously been building a network of ‘classical education’ charter schools, which use public tax dollars to teach that systemic racism was effectively vanquished in the 1960s, that America was founded on ‘Judeo-Christian’ principles and that progressivism is fundamentally anti-American.” Salon Investigates

The network is complicated. So briefly, look at one example from the Claremont Institute — the organization co-founded by Larry Arnn.

A Claremont Institute project, The American Way of Life, claims “A new Right is needed to defend the American way of life and restore political liberty.” This is how they frame the political struggle in America.

“America is currently engaged in a regime-level struggle that will preserve or destroy the purpose that has defined it. On one side stands the American way of life, characterized by republican self-government and the habits of mind and character necessary to sustain it. On the other side stands identity politics, … These two regimes are in conflict and cannot coexist.”

We cannot coexist with differing political philosophies? The message is released! …

“A new Right is needed, one that understands itself as rooted in the noble cause of the American Revolution — unabashed and zealous in its determination to restore political liberty and politics itself.” A New Conservatism Must Emerge

Words Become “Dog Whistles”

Will people stop to think about what “identity politics” really is and what it is used for? I did.

And I found one point agreed upon by both “sides.” Identifying with a group does “rouse” some individuals into becoming part of a “politically cohesive body.” But Hillsdale concludes identity politics is extreme and divisive. Think this through.

To contrast with Hillsdale’s opinion, here is an explanation from a more progressive perspective.

“Identity politics is when people of a particular race, ethnicity, gender, or religion form alliances and organize politically to defend their group’s interests. … Identity politics seems to be experiencing a surge in recent times, which has led some people to decry this approach to politics, calling it divisive.” Philosophy Talk Blog

If you have ever tried to organize people for a purposed action — a church or school fundraiser, a campaign for or against a law, or for a political party or candidate — you know it’s true that the first people to step up to help are those that can “identify” in some way with the cause.

Identifying with a group isn’t the problem; discrimination is.

“So long as some people are marginalized, victimized, or oppressed because of their identities, we will need identity politics.” Laura Maguire

Other Anti-Progressivism Claims Made By Hillsdale and Associates

In addition to “identity politics” being framed as divisive, a frequently repeated claim against progressivism is that it goes against the purpose of America and our “noble cause” as proclaimed in the Declaration of Independence.

Remember, the Declaration was about “one People” dissolving their “Political Bands” with another (Great Britain) in order to assume a “separate and equal Station” on earth. The main purpose expounded upon — which set American democracy apart— is the institution of a Government, “deriving its just Powers from the Consent of the Governed.” Therefore, as directed by the Constitution, it’s been up to us—through our representatives— to determine and legislate the role of our Government in establishing and maintaining the “Safety and Happiness” of our People.

So to determine if there was any truth to the claims against progressivism, time was put into reviewing its history, when it predominated American political thought, and what laws are attributed to it. The research presented some variations in details but consistent major themes.

Both “sides” agree progressives believed and acted upon the philosophy that progress on social improvements can be made through government actions. Most historians agree on what triggered the Progressive Era—corruption, greed, and the alliance of large corporations with “machine politics.”

Critics of progressivism claim it is un-American, “unpatriotic” and led to “the administrative state.”

The claim against the “administrative state” is that it is a centralized, “bureaucratic” system. But ask yourself, how does a government organize —institute— around the rule of law without “administering” those laws?

One Perspective: A Historian’s View of Progressivism

A well-respected historian of the past, Richard Hofstadter, viewed the general theme of “progressivism” as …

“the effort to restore a type of economic individualism and political democracy … and with that restoration to bring back a kind of morality and civic purity …” The Age of Reform, From Bryn to F.D.R., p5-6.

A Hillsdale College Supporter’s Perspective: A Critique of the Hillsdale Civics Curriculum

When assessing the 1776 K-12 Civics Curriculum, the Pioneer Institute Civics Audit noted the exorbitant amount of time devoted to progressivism. Yet, this is how they critiqued Hillsdale’s curriculum:

It is “the gold standard for civics curricula,” (p21), emphasizes “the Progressive movement’s gravely deleterious effects on America,” focuses on the “abhorrence of the Progressives,” and includes “an assessment of the malign effect of Progressivism on America.”(p22)

The Pioneer Institute includes charter schools among their priorities as well as “government transparency, privatization, economic development, government spending, and healthcare.” Source: SourceWatch

So now, having found reasons to question the civics curriculum’s bias against progressivism, the question becomes, are young American minds being indoctrinated with anti-progressivism lies?

Need More Facts About the Progressive Era? I did.

SOURCE: Addition of the time frames was mine. (Good Quick Overview/ Outline) American Historama

Reform Era Groups included the Grangers, Populists, Progressives, National Municipal League, Pragmatists, Woman’s Suffrage, Consumers’ Leagues, Labor Movement, Niagara Movement, Child Labor Committees, and Conservation Movement.

“Yet with all its variety in objectives and methods, Progressivism displayed far more unity than the forces of reform had been able to muster before 1900” (p311).

“The whole spirit of the Progressive movement involved opening the mind, not closing it; educating the public for change, not schooling it for subservience” (p329). Hofstadter, Miller, Aaron, “The American Republic”, Volume Two, 1970

Not wanting their efforts turned towards Marxian socialism, progressives sought solutions to the nation’s problems through lawmaking. They worked towards strengthening people’s participation in the democratic process.

Resulting state policies included:

the “secret ballot,”
direct primary,
initiative,
referendum,
recall processes, and late in the era,
women’s right to vote.

Other reforms that came out of the movement included:

the development of “settlement houses” for the poverty-stricken,
regulations on intrastate railroads, public utilities, child labour, worker’s safety, accident insurance for workers and their families,
“trust busting” laws against monopolies,
drug and food safety (including meat inspection), and
preservation of natural resources (conservation) —establishing our National Parks.

Additionally, several civil rights organizations arose and continue working towards advancing civil rights.

Also during this era was Prohibition (18th Amendment, 1919) and its repeal by the 21st Amendment in 1933. But another constitutional amendment still stands that perhaps Hillsdale crusaders found objectionable. If the 17th Amendment (1913), changing the appointment of U.S. Senators to election by the people, is seen as the problem with progressivism, then that is what we need to hear about and debate.

A Look Now at the Actual “Gold Standard” Hillsdale College 1776 Curriculum

Note the choice of words directed against progressives:

“they rejected the Founder’s views of … the pursuit of happiness”,
“rejection of the philosophical principles of the American founding”,
“reject the Declaration of Independence, natural rights, and social contract theory”.

As with most effective directives to teachers, there is instruction as to the focus, the lesson, and a post-lesson follow-up, labeled here as exercises for “The American Mind.” THAT is but a glimpse. So you are encouraged to at least take a look at what Phil Williams highlighted for NewsChannel5 Nashville.

The Aim of All This?

Hillsdale College is “planting” schools and filling the teacher and leader “pipeline” with graduates schooled in Hillsdale’s political and economic philosophy. Although Hillsdale’s system is clearly aimed at “training the young … to become leaders …”, it IS NOT clear where these unelected “leaders” are taking the country.

With federal and state money flowing through the charter system, taxpayers have the right to know what Hillsdale considers “timeless truths.” Additionally, Hillsdale’s aim is now our business. Obviously, the aim of Hillsdale College goes beyond serving its students in the traditional sense of what higher education provides. REALLY? Attacking social justice?

And let’s not forget to consider the other groups involved with Hillsdale such as the Turning Point USA network.

“In short, Turning Point’s new[est] aim is to … define education as a Christian nationalist dominion … [selling the strategy] … by saying what happens on campuses eventually reaches the halls of Congress.” “SOURCE:Charlie Kirk and Christian nationalist college team up for new propaganda campaign

“Taxation is Theft”? That’s Turning Point USA, USA, USA. USA? SOURCE of Images: TPUSA 2021 Investors Prospectus

Hillsdale College? Hum. Here’s What I Think.

I question Hillsdale’s motives. Why is Hillsdale College, a private Michigan Christian establishment, launching a national attack on progressivism?

And it is awfully odd they chose to use our Declaration in teaching that progressives rejected its principles. I think Hillsdale has rejected its principles. Think about it. One reason given for breaking ties with Britain was …

“HE [King of Great Britain] has excited domestic Insurrections amongst us…”

Yet, president Larry Arnn stands unquestionably with the former president of the United States. No doubt? Absolutely sure of the truth?

Violent extremists groups came together on January 6, 2021. Christian nationalism was a driving force of the insurrection. Report on Christian nationalism and the January 6th insurrection.

What Do You Think?

Are the anti-progressivism “teachings” in the Hillsdale College 1776 Civics Curriculum indoctrinating young Americans to loath progressive political thought?

What We Owe To Our Country

Posted on January 19, 2022 by Victoria M. Young

As citizens, we owe the United States a renewed commitment to unity as proclaimed in our Declaration of Independence.

“… we mutually pledge to each other our Lives, our Fortunes, and our sacred Honor.”

Okay, I’ll admit that pledge is too big a leap in today’s America!

But are we neglecting the sentiments behind the Declaration? Taking this republic for granted? And choosing to not honor each other? Without an obligation to preserving the idea of being one nation, our republic is definitely facing impending death.

Borrowed from A Republic Production motion picture company (1935-1967)

“… with a population once devoted to national service and personal honor, [the republic] was torn to shreds by growing wealth inequality, partisan gridlock, political violence and pandering politicians … the people … chose to let their democracy die by not protecting their political institutions…” — Historian Edward Watts, on the last century of the Roman Republic

Our nation is suffering from our neglect of it — and each other.

Our Chronic Ills Exposed

In the spring of 2020, the country faltered under a viral infection we knew little about. Many people recognized the preexisting conditions contributing to our inability to respond as a functioning commonwealth. Although we heard — “we are all in this together” — we weren’t. Thus, already diseased, our dysfunctional nation couldn’t mount a unified defense against a virus.

“Chronic ills—a corrupt political class, a sclerotic bureaucracy, a heartless economy, a divided and distracted public—had gone untreated for years. [So when this novel virus entered the country], the world’s richest power—[became] a beggar nation in utter chaos.”

Now — if we are willing to restore the health of American democracy — we owe it to our country to not simply treat some symptoms but to understand and cure the heart of the disease process itself.

Diagnosed as Political and Social Division

We know what unity feels like; in recent times, we’ve felt it. It was not created by us, but instead resulted from a wound inflicted by foreign terrorists. In that moment, we all shared a sense of shock and sorrow.

“… on September 11, 2001 … Our civic reflex was to mourn and mobilize together.”

Looking back, our sense of unity was short-lived. But it was long enough for political and greed-driven opportunists to take advantage of the crisis. While we were distracted, they used our lawmakers to further their agendas.

Then in 2008, created by lending instruments of financial destruction, and laws designed to allow these practices, the Great Recession hit. But while many low-wage and middle-class people experienced first-time homelessness, Wall Street gamblers cashed-in and walked away. We — the government paid for by the honest — bailed out those “too big to fail” while still digging out of the financial pit they left us in. We were not ALL in that together!

“Partisan politics and terrible policies … erased the sense of national unity …”

“Inequality—the fundamental, relentless force in American life since the late 1970s—grew worse.”

“The long recovery over the past decade enriched corporations and investors, lulled professionals, and left the working class further behind. The lasting effect of the slump was to increase polarization and to discredit authority, especially government’s.” We Are Living in a Failed State by George Packer, June 2020

In a Vulnerable State

As a federal republic established upon the Rule of Law and a strong central government, it’s our job to ensure laws serve to “secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity.” But instead, there is a corrupted ruling-class legally lording over the working-class. That means as much as we all want to believe “all politics is local”, we owe our government a firm resolve to address the sickness that has permeated what Madison saw as the primary position of authority — our Congress.

“… exercise of the different powers of government … [is] … essential to the preservation of liberty … In republican government the legislative authority, necessarily, predominates.” — The Federalist Papers, No. 51, James Madison

If the authority of the legislative branch is to prevail over the governing of our republic, why do we continue to turn a blind eye to what ails it?

What We Couldn’t See Mutated Into Something Else

Based on current global political unrest and research on dead republics, scholars believe when representative governing no long serves ordinary people, populist movements arise. But believing in populism — as acting on behalf of the common people — and actually governing with the people’s needs in mind are two different things. The allure of the concept too often results in violent destruction of a republican form of government with replacement by an authoritarian one.

“Populism is ‘a very complex phenomenon,’ said noted MIT political scientist Richard Samuels …”

“Moreover, Samuels said, the promises of populists during campaigns do not always match the reasons they seek power, making it all the more important to look under the surface of the movement.” 9/16/2019 MIT News, scholars wrestle with the dynamics of a global political trend

We Didn’t See It Coming AND Don’t Understand It !?!

While experts grapple with explaining how populism sounds good but often is disastrous for people and governments, I’m going to take my best shot at explaining how I see things right now.

The rise of populism in the U.S. has all the characteristics of a destructive mass movement.

Emotionally-driven — by frustration, discontent, fear and hatred — yet cultivating within its members — a sense of belonging and power, faith in the future, an “around-the-corner” brand of hope, a willingness to die for the cause — and is directing hatred towards what the leaders define as “evil.”

For example, look at how Charlie Kirk of Turning Point USA talks —about “liberals”, the “Democrat Party” and his movement— on stage at CPAC 2019.

[They,] “do not have good intentions” — “do not mean well” — [in higher education, they teach there is] “no such thing as right and wrong” [AND] “when we as a movement fight, we win.”

Finally Seeing the Danger

Another warning sign of impending disaster is the level of “preliminary work” done to set the stage for this movement. But don’t think for a minute this is a grassroots effort. The preliminary work was done exactly as outlined by Eric Hoffer in “The True Believer: Thoughts on the Nature of Mass Movements” (1951) except this movement is sponsored by an elite ruling-class of millionaires and global billionaires—the same ones infecting the heart of our government.

We have to do more than “look under the surface.” But our actions must be guided by the Founding Fathers’ political principles and the institutional goals as designed to protection this republic. We owe it to the republic to avoid falling for authoritarian or totalitarian rule.

But The Disease Will Continue Spreading, For Now

Frustrated by politics, citizens will consume snake-oil if they think it will give them a voice in governing. But what many fail to see is how their emotions leave them susceptible to propaganda. Therefore, what Hoffer called “men of words” are who we need to put under a microscope.

Propagandists targeted — continue targeting — our leadership, institutions, and ethical journalism.

“Mass movements do not usually rise until the prevailing order has been discredited.”

“The discrediting is … [done by] … the deliberate work of men of words … the man of words undermines the established institutions, discredits those in power, weakens prevailing beliefs and loyalties, and sets the stage for the rise of a mass movement.” (p130-131)

Every citizen needs reliable, relevant, unbiased, easy to access information. We owe it to our “Posterity” to renew and strengthen the institutions capable of serving in that endeavor.

Stop the Bleeding While We Administer A Cure

Immediately, we need to demand better information from our institutions, cleaner legislation, and laws ensuring balanced, ethical news sources. Our government owes us that. In turn, we need to become better consumers of news and help others do the same.

Six questions that will tell you what media to trust By Tom Rosenstiel October 22, 2013 (Summary of Six questions that will tell you what media to trust)

And no matter what happens tomorrow, we must protect our educators, librarians, journalists and other writers.

“It is the writer’s duty, Madeleine L’Engle argues, to continue reclaiming complex ideas from the grip of simplistic taboo…”

“The first people a dictator puts in jail after a coup are the writers, the teachers, the librarians — because these people are dangerous. They have enough vocabulary to recognize injustice and to speak out loudly about it.” From Dare to Disturb the Universe (The Marginalian)

Do We Have A Cure?

Our political and social disorder syndrome manifested itself with these symptoms.

“… a corrupt political class, a sclerotic bureaucracy, a heartless economy, a divided and distracted public.”

But, can we attribute all the symptoms to a single disease process? Well, in this nation of laws, the legislative branch is the heart of the republic. So consider this:

“There’s always been corruption in Washington, and everywhere that power can be found, but it became institutionalized starting in the late 1970s and early ’80s, with the rise of the lobbying industry.”

Source: The [Former] President Is Winning His War on American Institutions April 2020

We owe it to the country to understand the reasoning behind the design of the American “federal republic”. Understanding the principles and institutions this republic depends upon for survival Is crucial. Otherwise, she dies.

“It is profoundly dangerous when a politician takes a step to undercut or ignore a political norm, it’s extremely dangerous whenever anyone introduces violent rhetoric or actual violence into a republican system that’s designed to promote compromise and consensus building.”

“The solution to keeping a republic healthy, if Rome can truly be a guide, is for the citizens to reject any attempts to alter these norms … [Edward Watts] …” SmithsonianMag

We have to demand a return of function to the heart of the republic.

We owe it to the nation — our United States of America — to make the effort to save her.

Her dome has been maintained and restored. The proper functioning to the institution upon which she stands has not.

Anti-intellectualism in Today’s America!

Posted on December 2, 2021 by Victoria M. Young

In 2014, an article titled “The cult of ignorance in the United States: Anti-intellectualism and the ‘dumbing down’ of America” appeared in Psychology Today. But what the author saw then as a trend is now our reality.

“There is a growing and disturbing trend of anti-intellectual elitism in American culture. It’s the dismissal of science, the arts, and humanities and their replacement by entertainment, self-righteousness, ignorance, and deliberate gullibility.”

And the author, Ray Williams, warned …

“We’re creating … angry dummies who feel they have the right, the authority and the need not only to comment on everything, but to make sure their voice is heard above the rest, and to drag down any opposing views through personal attacks, loud repetition and confrontation.”

Many people anticipated the arrival of confrontational politics. Yet most overlook anti-intellectualism as a major contributing factor to our nation’s toxic political divide. Hence, we must acknowledge our history of anti-intellectualism so we can understand its ingrained influence on us.

Anti-intellectualism in America is nothing new.

Our anti-intellectual tendencies are historical. That history tells a story about our American character as a people — with an ever existing fault-line.

“We, the people, must redeem” … fulfill the pledge … make America again!

“Our anti-intellectualism is, in fact, older than our national identity, … [and our] regard for intellectuals … is subject to cyclical fluctuations …” wrote Richard Hofstadter in his 1964 book, Anti-intellectualism in American Life.

Hofstadter ventured “toward definition” of anti-intellectualism in terms of human attitudes and ideas. He chose words like “resentment and suspicion”. However, he saw a smorgasbord of political and emotional factors making anti-intellectualism “a broadly diffused quality in our civilization”. Therefore, he did not see the public as “simply divided into intellectual and anti-intellectual factions.”

[The public] “is infused with enough ambivalence about intellect and intellectuals to be swayed now this way and now that on current cultural issues.”

Our ambivalence means mixed feelings about a given topic leaves us vulnerable to simply following leaders — with or without good reason.

But Hofstadter died in 1970 so he did not witness the depth of our current cycle of anti-intellectualism. With the online culture becoming deadly to reasoned discussions, this anti-intellectual cycle looks more like a death spiral for rational policy debates.

Hofstadter saw “dissenting intellectuals” as necessary for “their services as an independent source of national self-criticism.” Yet he realized “the intellectual is either shut out or sold out.” They either aren’t allowed to be heard — unfiltered — or they become inclined to speak in-line with the organization that pays them.

So we can’t blame anti-intellectualism solely on the education system.

The public education system traditionally takes all the blame for the “dumbing down” of America. But what the public fails to recognize is how political forces took over the system to use for political and personal gains. The politics of education policies is transforming the mission of the public education system.

“We don’t educate people anymore. We train them to get jobs,” said Professor Catherine Liu in discussing the changing mission of universities.

In that 2014 article, Williams listed multiple statistics upon which the public and policymakers judge the quality and effectiveness of the U.S education system. But if researchers and educational writers —the public’s sources of information— continue to ignore the 1991 evaluation and conclusions by Sandia National Researchers, the nation will continue to be misled by misinformation. For this reason, the country must come to grips with its mistakes of the past.

A decade after the release of A Nation at Risk, researchers at the Sandia National Laboratories conducted their own study of elementary and secondary education.

Although education alone cannot change ingrained attitudes and beliefs, proper science education focused on fostering scientific habits can lead to more rational, critical thought.

“Students should develop a conceptual understanding of the natural world, critical-thinking skills, and scientific habits of mind, including curiosity, respect for evidence, flexibility of perspective, and an appreciation for living things.”

—2002 South Carolina Leadership and Assistance for Science Education Reform (LASER) Institute

Regrettably, education policies of the last three decades lessened learning opportunities in science and civics for too many students in under-resourced schools. Policymakers can correct this mistake now!

Anti-Intellectualism in America today?

“Today, we define American anti-intellectualism as a social attitude that systematically denigrates science-based facts, academic and institutional authorities, and the pursuit of theory and knowledge.” Source: Understanding Anti-Intellectualism

Today, political propagandists tap into American anti-intellectualism and use it to further divide us. But a nation founded upon the People’s consent can fight back against politically-cultivated anti-intellectualism. First, we must understand it. To that end, I ask readers to view the nation’s current political state of affairs as an assortment of “movements.”

Political and social movements — constructive or destructive— require the presence of certain emotions, including both discontent and faith in the future. But for a movement to grow, it requires people feel a sense of power in their ability to effect change. Therefore, when the powerful “ruling class” cultivates empowerment AND distrust of experts and institutions, they essentially sideline intellectuals while growing their movement.

Why exclude intellectuals — those that tend to question facts and reasoning?

Authoritarian rulers are in a better position to rise to power under a growing anti-intellectual movement. (Image from Anti-intellectualism in Nazi Germany slide serve.)

Multiple social and political movements are underway in the United States. From the continued march towards equality, to Tea Party resurgence, to rising White and Christian Nationalism, Americans are stirred up! But while citizens feel these movements underfoot, most still have trouble seeing how American democracy is under attack from within. Too few see how weaponizing anti-intellectualism has transformed well-meaning Americans into destroyers of the republic they believe they are defending.

“… anti-intellectualism is evoked as a way to halt the acquisition of new knowledge that would undermine groups with power and privilege,…”

“Politicians, corporations, and religious institutions stand to benefit from this most— to maintain or assert authority, anti-intellectualism is the default weapon employed to fuse patriotism, American identity, and support for their own agendas.” Source: Understanding Anti-Intellectualism

We’re never going to rid our culture, or even ourselves, from every anti-intellectual thought or action. But we must try to rid our political culture from accepting intentional use of anti-intellectualism against our republic.

When you recognize propaganda that is cultivating rejection of a person, institution or “fact”, you must question intent. Ask yourself, is there sufficient reason for rejecting a leader, an established institution, or prevailing belief? Or is there an ulterior motive at play?

Consider This:

We are all capable of logical, reasoned thought. But it does require a concerted effort to resist being ambivalent. Consequently, it requires people devote a little more of their time to looking for truths, thinking clearly, and calling-out propaganda and propagandists.

The capacity for intellectual thought exists in all of us. There is nothing “elitist” about it.

“Constant and delicate acts of intellectual surgery” (Hofstadter) will contain the ill-effects of anti-intellectualism .

Combat anti-intellectualism with facts, reasoned thinking, meaningful discussions, and a better understanding of the intentional use of politically-cultivated anti-intellectualism.

And please, respect existing intellectualism within your fellow Americans.

#####

Following the posting of this blog, I had the honor of being interviewed on Politics Done Right with Egberto Willies. Typically I shy away from a camera, preferring private one-on-one conversations. But the topic is important enough and the Times require stepping out of our comfort zone. Please join us!

Progress & Love in a Divisive Climate

Posted on May 6, 2021 by Victoria M. Young

In a nation divided, linking progress & love together feels sadly out of place. But progress & love are being packaged together and used against the American people. Now a weapon in the culture wars, progress & love are cloaked, vilified, and denounced under the label “critical race theory” and social justice “ideology.”

Yes, you read that right. Here’s how I know.

Listening recently to critical race theorists speak about what sparked their interest in the theory, their use of it in scholarly research, and their discussion of recent events, several remarks stood out.

“It’s about progress.”

“It’s founded on the ethics of love.”

“Be equipped with truth and history.”

“Pursue what is just.”

“Commit to equity and excellence.”

“Live up to the promise of Brown v. Board of Education.”

Looking Further into the Love Connection

Historically, critical race theory arose when anti-discrimination laws appeared to no longer be moving us towards progress on equal treatment under the law. (See connection under: “Linking …”) But without being versed in scripture and seeing Martin Luther King, Jr. more as a a civil rights leader than a Reverend, the love connection gets lost. It’s found by looking through the perspective of a critical race theorist.

The Beloved Community. The goal of Critical Race Theory [CRT] in Christianity is the Beloved Community envisioned by Scripture and the biblical witness of Rev. Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr (Revelation 5:9-10, 7:9-10; Galatians 3: 28-29; John 10: 16; Ephesians 2: 14-21; Colossians 1: 15-20; Acts 10: 34-35). Done in the spirit of love … the ultimate goal of CRT in Christianity is the reconciliation of all people … Key Tenets of Critical Race Theory in Christianity

Rise of the False Narrative: Where to Begin?

It’s hard to say with certainty where – behind what closed door – the false narrative about critical race theory began. But we don’t need to look far to see and hear the claims. The false claims include:

False: it has “identity-based” Marxist roots (truth: it’s an offshoot of social justice, civil rights and critical legal studies).
False: it’s “injected into” primary school curricula (read true stories below).

From there, the false claims of “indoctrination” go off the rails!

“… the overthrow of capitalism … the end not only of private property, but also of individual rights, equality under the law, federalism, and freedom of speech … [the theory will] overturn the principles of the Declaration and destroy the remaining structure of the Constitution.” Christopher F. Rufo, Critical Race Theory: What It Is and How to Fight It

Christopher F. Rufo, lecturing at Hillsdale College on March 30, 2021, also made the following claim.

“Last year, one of my reports led President Trump to issue an executive order banning critical race theory-based training programs in the federal government.”

In this same lecture, Rufo, a young, talented, privately-schooled film-maker and right-wing journalist/activist, focuses his main criticism on the work of Ibram X. Kendi, refered to as a “critical race guru.” But Ibram X. Kendi, another privately-schooled talented young person, has his own definition of racism from which he puts forth his ideas on “antiracism.”

A new definition for racism!?! Who knew? But never-mind how confusing that is for us. The real concern is, what is actually happening in OUR public schools?

Is there some kernel of truth to allegations of “indoctrination”?

“I believe “antiracism” is misguided. Can I still teach Black children?” Catchy title! Written by a teacher!

In answering the nagging question of “indoctrination,” I thought I’d found a firsthand account. But alas, this author wasn’t “just” a teacher. He was a senior advisor to [DPPS] Democracy Prep Public [Charter] Schools, served as vice president for the Core Knowledge Foundation, and is senior fellow and vice president for external affairs at the Thomas B. Fordham Institute. His voice is amplified by a list of corporate-funded, politically right-leaning media outlets. And he provided a story!

(Subtitle) Does antiracism pedagogy demand—or even condone—inflicting emotional distress on children?

“The most chilling revelation to emerge earlier this month from a whistleblowing teacher at New York City’s private Grace Church School was the headmaster’s acknowledgement captured in an audio recording that “we’re demonizing kids, we’re demonizing White people for being born.”

Private schools have control over the content they teach —without interference or accountability to taxpayers. But I found another story, a lawsuit alleging indoctrination at a “public” charter school in Nevada. However, it is a story without an ending – to date.

On the surface, it looks straightforward.

Quoted from court documents, “My son is the only white student in this class, as far as we can tell. This teacher is blatantly justifying racism against white people thereby putting my son in emotional, psychological, and physical danger. This is not ok.”

… In the federal lawsuit [it’s alleged that the charter] violated the high school senior’s First Amendment rights by “repeatedly compelling his speech involving intimate matters of race, gender, sexuality and religion” during a required civics class. Las Vegas charter school sued for curriculum covering race, identity

This seems like a commonsense response.Yes?

But the rest of this story?

To date – this story shows a tangled web of people, money, power, loss of local control of curriculum and lack of public oversight for private providers.

Superintendent and CEO Natasha Trivers is a co-defendant in the case. Her role is to personally oversee staffing, design, and implementation of the charter school’s national curriculum program …

[The student] was originally enrolled in Andre Agassi Preparatory Academy in 2014. New York-based DPPS [Democracy Prep Public Schools ] acquired the Academy after receiving a $12.7 million grant from the U.S. Department of Education in 2016.

Parents were unaware of the ideological changes in the Civics Program, as Trivers had used the name of an existing program … and “inserted consciousness raising and conditioning exercises under the banner of ‘Intersectionality’ and ‘Critical Race Theory’” when she modified the Program in 2017. Lawsuit Alleges Leftist Indoctrination in Nevada Charter School

The founder of DPPS is Seth Andrew who also founded Democracy Builders, “a charter school advocacy group intending to create a hybrid college education system.” But students spoke up! Look at some of the allegations raised when Andrew attempted to purchase Marlboro College campus.

“We hope, through this letter, to give you some insights into the man behind Democracy Builders, the irreparable harm he has caused to the low-income and first-generation students of color that he served as the founder of Democracy Prep; and show you why the sale of the Marlboro College campus to Seth Andrew, is not only antithetical to the legacy of Marlboro, but a great human rights concern for the very demographics that he claims to serve,” the Black N Brown at Democracy Prep letter reads.

Marlboro Alumni condemn campus sale amid reports of racism at Democracy Builders

Then this story took an unexpected twist.

“Prosecutors say Andrew helped create a network of charter schools based in New York City in 2005, and left the network in 2013 for a job at the US Department of Education, and later became a senior adviser in the Office of Educational Technology at the White House, where he continued to be paid by the charter school network. Prosecutors say Andrew left his role in the White House in November 2016 and cut ties with the school network in January 2017.”

Natasha Trivers continues to be the CEO of the organization.

What and Who are We to Believe?

Going back to an earlier publication, Critical Race Theory: An Introduction (Delgado & Stefancic, 2001), the writers describe a collection of activist and scholars adopting and using the theory to explain racism as it relates to various aspects of the world we live in, our laws, and our history. But it was clear that differing “camps” of thinking exist – realists / materialists / idealists etc. Conformity to one way of thinking (or “indoctrination”) is not at all what you find in this introduction to the theory.

Throughout the book, there is a feeling of real desire to help people understand the effects of racism. Granted, there are two more editions of the book since 2001, but the same desire to help others understand what critical race theory is and its proper use is exactly what came through in the discussion among the higher education critical race theorists mentioned at the beginning of this post.

At this time of escalating public confusion, we see new laws emerging opposing the theory!?! That doesn’t make sense!

“Over the past few months, Republican legislators in Idaho, Iowa, Louisiana, Missouri, New Hampshire, Oklahoma, Rhode Island, and West Virginia have drafted bills that would ban the teaching of what they deem “divisive” or “racist and sexist” concepts.”

Good laws begin with at least some clarity about the subject central to the legislation. So why deliberately write state laws restricting academic freedom? Because you can? Because legislative creep has allowed more and more State and private control of curriculum “content” while pushing aside parents and other local controls.

In Ames, Iowa: “This bill is very intentional in its approach to shut down equity work in districts. I think they can sugarcoat it however they want. That is what the bill is intended to do,” said Jenny Risner, the superintendent of Ames Community School District.

In Idaho …

BOISE, IDAHO

Meanwhile: The Search Continues for Proof of Wrong Doing by the PUBLIC School System

In Idaho, a public claim of “propaganda” entering K-12 education was made in an article posted by a private, Dark Money-funded “non-profit” — after the law passed. But the claim is once again against a charter school. So that does warrant looking further at Idaho’s charters.

Author: Anna Miller

Idaho has a private charter-expansion organization, Bluum, that received at least $22 million to expand charters under the DeVos administration.

“Bluum is privileged to give voice to the work that the charter school networks [DPPS] Democracy Prep, Great Heart, Success Academies and the [Hillsdale College] Barney Charter School Initiative are doing … ” — Terry Ryan, Bluum CEO

And at the Idaho Hearing (Senate Ed 4/26/21) on the Anti-Critical Race Theory bill, Terry Ryan clearly voiced his opinion — “Pass the budgets.”

Hum? Follow the money if you can.

Idaho news spread quickly in “The Network” designed to undermine and defund higher education. “The Fix” isn’t a fix.

Author: Anna Miller writes, “Starving universities of public money is the only way to rein in a social justice university and force activists to find careers outside of higher education.”

The College Fix is a “news” website focused on higher education and funded by the Koch Foundation (among others).

It’s no coincidence that the author of both the “propaganda” and “The Fix” articles is Anna Miller, a George Mason University grad. With Idaho lawmakers passing a higher education budget cutting $2.5 million to “send a message about ‘indoctrination,'” it goes into the win column for the Koch Network.

Source: Open Secrets

George Mason University students recieve a Koch-backed curriculum. Yes, this really did turn out to be another story about money, power, and control.

“We’ve Lost the Narrative” said a Scholar of Critical Race Theory.

We are losing more than the narrative. We’re losing the truth, public control of public education, and the ability to communicate with the public ahead of the Misinformation Network.

The danger is not in theory; it’s in limiting discussion of race and social justice in places where it belongs. But the “elephant in the room” that we fail to see is State overreach and private control of public schools’ curriculum. Those issues are dismantling public education.

Our biggest risk? Losing opportunities to stand on the ethics of love and create progress towards the promise.

“Critical race theory allows us to see a path toward a truly just future where economic, social, and political power are decoupled from race.” U.S. Representative Jamaal Bowman

Social Justice: Dangers & Expectations

Posted on April 8, 2021 by Victoria M. Young

In the mid-1800’s, an Italian Jesuit gave rise to the phrase “social justice.” But today, its use as a political wedge leaves its meaning unclear to many. It’s meaning is based on Italian theologian “Thomas Aquinas’ idea that, in addition to doing the right thing, we should strive to do what is necessary for the betterment of others.” Five Principles of Social Justice, Kent State.

As viewed through its religious origin, social justice is based on moral uprightness (rectitude).

Social Justice: Born from Revolution

When economic inequality produced economic distress, the resultant turmoil of the French Revolution birthed the social justice concept. Over time, its meaning began to vary based on “political orientation, religious background, and political and social philosophy.” Therefore, speaking in general terms, social justice is the concept “that people have equal rights and opportunities; everyone … deserves an even playing field.” Tricia Christensen

America’s Declaration of Independence proclaimed that “all men are created equal.” But that declaration is merely the foundation for the promise of America.

“… the Declaration of Independence … was a call for the right to statehood rather than individual liberties, says Stanford historian Jack Rakove. Only after the American Revolution did people interpret it as a promise for individual equality.” Stanford News

Thus, America’s journey towards equality of individual rights and opportunities is guided by the U.S. Constitution. But we haven’t reached our constitutional obligation to “promote the general Welfare.” Regrettably, our roadblock is in determining what opportunities to provide equally. So consider this:

“By and large, it is for Congress to determine what constitutes the “general welfare.”

“… Congress may enact legislation ‘necessary and proper” to effectuate its purposes in taxing and spending.” Spending for the General Welfare: Scope of the Power

Linking Social Justice, the Civil Rights Movement, and Critical Race Theory

Social justice is America’s target while civil rights’ work is to protect all citizen’s rights — in theory. But social justices’ progress apparently requires constant strife —examples being the Civil War and Civil Rights Movement. Currently, progress faces new roadblocks.

The Civil Rights Movement spawned new laws — Fair Housing Act, Voting Rights Act, the 1964 Civil Rights Act, and 1965 Elementary and Secondary Education Act — all to protect citizens against discrimination. But over time, changes to enforcement and the laws have us backsliding. Awareness of that reversion is what brought Critical Race Theory (CRT) into existence.

What is the Theory?

CRT is an academic response to Critical Legal Studies —which sees “the law as necessarily intertwined with social issues …” emphasizing socioeconomic factors. But other scholars saw race as playing a more critical role than socioeconomic identity. Those scholars focused critically on the factors underlying racial inequality.

Here is a summary based on Dennis Fabrizi’s explanation of the three core themes of the theory.

The theory sees racism infused in the everyday fabric of society.
CRT raises the concept of ‘interest convergence’, a notion that white people have little incentive to eliminate racism except when the idea of greater equality operates in their own interests.
It emphasizes ‘storytelling’ as a way to advance understanding of what it is like to be racially “minoritised”.

Why Is this Background Information Important?

By mid-September of 2020, the country fell prey to misinformation and disinformation! We all saw it happen but didn’t know enough to stop it.

“Perhaps the most controversial proposition of critical race theory is the idea that racism is built into American law and everyday life.” …

“Ironically, Trump’s most recent executive order banning racial sensitivity training confirms critical race theory’s central point: Racism is embedded in the law.” Victor Ray, Professor of Sociology, University of Iowa

The former president’s executive order halting all federal employee’s “diversity training” was a temporary setback. But it’s trickle-down effect is disastrous. By declaring the theory to be “un-American propaganda,” the political strategy of de-funding public education spread from K-12 up to higher education and down to pre-K.

“We’re indoctrinating our children at a younger level here. … the curriculum’s is already written, there’s social justice in it” said Rep. Heather Scott, R-Blanchard [Idaho]. And [organizations] indoctrinate children with its own beliefs regarding “anti-bias education.” …. Idaho House rejects pre-K federal grant

This Big Bucks-funded “non-profit”, Turning Point USA, is a piece of the propaganda network set up to undermine the institutions of public education.

Misinformation Turns Into Bad Policies

Through networks of media sources, intentional messaging linked critical race theory to “dismantling all social norms” to “replacement of all systems of power” to being so “dangerous” it warrants laws to restrict its subject matter in schools! Let’s be clear. The messages make everyday words—like diversity and inclusion—sound like something we don’t welcome in America!

Messages heard; misinformation consumed. The result? Many state legislatures fell in lock-step to control the curriculum content in schools and de-fund those that don’t comply.

This Facebook post is from Idaho House Representative Tammy Nichols. Her rampage to de-fund Boise State University went public in September, 2019 and continues to the present.

“What’s happening in Idaho is not unique. All over the country, state legislators are trying to curtail teaching about racism and sexism, in universities as well as elementary schools.” Michelle Goldberg

We Have to Stop the Destruction of Our Language

If public institutions can provide opportunities for ALL citizens to participate in American life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness, then our policies must focus on what is “necessary and proper” to achieving that goal. But to do so, we must first stop the corruption of our political language. Equal, equality, equity, racism, sexism, privilege, diversity, “identity politics” — all of these words and more have been vilified and used to divide us.

If critical race theory helps explain why social justice is no closer to becoming a reality in America than it was in the 60’s, then let’s hear it. But if there are individual professors, teachers, or trainers misrepresenting or misusing the theory, by all means, stop those individuals. Do it without undermining public education and halting progress towards the promise of America.

The Dangers?

There is a real danger in forgetting the self-evident truism upon which America assumed independence— “all men are created equal”. Those written words only launched America’s journey towards building a nation capable of providing opportunities for all to live free, as equals. Social justice is the means to that end.

The danger is the fear created by those wishing to keep us divided. But it’s misinformation and misunderstandings producing the fear. Most Americans rightfully want acceptance without prejudice waged upon them due to their looks, speech, or individual choices.

The biggest danger is in vilifying the very meaning and goals of social justice.

A false narrative is circulating that social justice, critical race theory, and anti-bias education creates division. The propaganda claims that social justice advocates set a goal of giving everyone the same (equal) outcomes in life. In reality, we know that human differences (motivations, talents, etc.) play a role in “the outcome” of our lives. Life has never been a pie where we all get an identical slice.

The Expectations

In America, we expect fairness. We expect to not face discrimination when it comes to housing, voting, employment, and public education opportunities.

“Equality, in the American sense of the word, is not an end but a beginning. It means that, so far as the state can do it, all children shall start in the race of life on an even line. The chief agency for this purpose is the public school system.”

— Edwin E. Slosson, 1921

So yes, anti-bias education —of our young— has a role to play in providing equal rights and opportunities. But without understanding the intended meanings of words used by any anti-bias author or speaker, we risk falling prey to “altered meanings.” Expect clarification.

Is anti-bias education indoctrination into a political ideology? Or is it the concept of “love your neighbor as yourself”?

“The heart of anti-bias work is a vision of a world in which all children are able to blossom, and each child’s particular abilities and gifts are able to flourish.” Anti-Bias Education for Young Children and Ourselves

Did I mention participation, diversity of ideas and opinions, and inclusion of minority views make for a policy process MORE LIKELY to represent the People of the United States? Expect the policy-making process to work as intended.

“[T]he laying of taxes is the power, and the general welfare the purpose for which the power is to be exercised.” — Thomas Jefferson

Congress decides our national Welfare.

Attacks on Educators

Posted on December 4, 2020 by Victoria M. Young

Historically, attacks on educators were confined to attacks on “liberal” professors. Not any more!

Photo Credit: Posted by Gen Z Conservative

“As Trump clearly signals an escalated attack on teachers, remember that these right wing groups from Turning Point USA to Campus Watch are not only targeting professors but high school teachers. He has blown his dog whistles, so watch out for the vicious dogs now.” (First Posted by Hyung Nam on Facebook 10/31/18. Updated:7/5/2020 )

Attacks on educators— and the whole public education system —will continue. Raging since the 80’s, this modern-day battle for control of education will not simply end with the election of a new president. Any single president is not integral to success of the plan. The plan requires organized control of the rules of governing.

Enter: Turning Point USA Coupled with Leadership Institute

Founded in 2012, Turning Point USA (TPUSA) is led by Charlie Kirk, an affluent young man that sees no need to continue his own formal education. Partnering with the Leadership Institute, the multi-million dollar TPUSA offers activism grants for conservative students around the country.

“Tax filings show the organization is funded by many of the same groups that support the Leadership Institute ... “

“Turning Point USA trains students in the art of viral filmmaking. The goal is to document campus ‘snowflakes’ – a derogatory term for young liberals viewed as easily offended – whenever they’re caught pushing leftist agendas. Conservative superstars such as commentator Ben Shapiro and Campus Reform Media Director Cabot Phillips speak at the group’s conventions and encourage college kids to always be prepared to film. They even offer to help student-made videos go viral by reposting them on their websites.”

“The Professor Watchlist is another product of Turning Point USA. The blacklist of professors, many sourced from Campus Reform articles, seeks to ‘expose and document college professors who discriminate against conservative students and advance leftist propaganda in the classroom.’ Would-be saboteurs are encouraged to submit tips to the watchlist along with photo or video evidence of the offending professor.”

And the Leadership Institute?

Founded in 1979, Leadership Institute claims non-partisan 501(c)(3) status but clearly “identifies, recruits, trains and places conservatives in government, politics, and the media.” That is their mission.

“The Leadership Institute’s tax filings show net assets of more than $25 million in 2016, just over $1 million of which was funneled into Campus Reform. Roughly two-thirds of the institute’s income comes from philanthropist groups such as the Charles Koch Foundation, The Lynde and Harry Bradley Foundation and DonorsTrust and Republican super-donors such as Richard Uihlein.”

“According to The Chronicle of Higher Education, publications such as Campus Reform and The College Fix pay student reporters about $50 per article. Many of the stories are sourced from the Leadership Institute’s network of close to 1,600 conservative student groups across the country.”

“A liberal influence guide on the Campus Reform website, titled, ‘The Evil Empire on Campus,’ lists college groups supported by ‘major, national leftist organizations’ as one of the many examples of liberal indoctrination at universities.”

Orchestrated Attacks on Educators and the Results

“When a teacher is featured on Fox News, Breitbart, Campus Watch or The Red Elephants, the harassment follows in short order, making high-profile cases easy to count. But a recent report by Abby Ferber, a sociology professor at the University of Colorado, Colorado Springs, suggests that many professors experience targeted online harassment even when stories or videos about them don’t go viral. Those teachers still suffer racial epithets, misogynist comments and death threats out of the public eye.” (Hyung Nam)

These attacks on educators aren’t making headlines across the country. Yet, “according to The Chronicle of Higher Education, editors at Campus Reform’s headquarters in Arlington, Virginia, keep careful track of their ‘victories’ — instances in which a report published on their website results in a change in university policy or the sacking of a professor” (Hyung Nam). Consequently, harassment by politically-motivated, well-financed NON-PROFITS are changing education policies and curriculum. DAMN!?!?!!

Will We Allow This To Continue?

Not everyone put on the “Watch List” had the same experience. Here’s how Heather Cox Richardson described what happened to her four years ago.

“I will never forget standing in my dark kitchen in my pajamas, at the counter, reading my laptop in shock as I found out that some young grifter named Charlie Kirk had found my name online and put it onto his new website as a danger to students (send money to resist left-wing professors like Richardson!). As I stood there, watching in horror, messages came in from all over the country telling me people had my back. And then I wrote a post to reassure my friends that I was used to this sort of harassment and it would be okay, and then that post went viral, and I came off the list within days.”

Professor Richardson’s story ended well. But we can’t count on that being the case for others going forward. There is no certainty that things will go well for the nation’s education system.

Professor Richardson views the “Conservative” warfare waged against “Liberal” educators as follows.

“That the only way Movement Conservatives have managed to stay in power is to game the system through gerrymandering and voter suppression, hatred, and now the intimidation of people like me says to me that even they know they are in danger of losing control of the country. As a friend of mine says, a dying mule kicks the hardest.”

But it feels like we are far from the end of the attacks on educators.

A good first-line of defense includes:

being aware of the organizations sponsoring the destruction of public education,
being able to hear the dog whistles, and
knowing how fervently the ruling class wants control of the whole public education system.

Stopping the overthrow of our government institutions requires we do more.

Image by Xeno Phrenia

“People have asked what they can do in this moment. Across the political spectrum, I would urge everyone who believes in this nation to focus on the mechanics of government … call out official actions that you would find unacceptable … call out those who make assertions without factual evidence … call your representatives constantly to register your opinions — it matters … “

“And try to stop demonizing political opponents who fall within the normal political spectrum so we can all stand together against those who are trashing our institutions and our legal system.” Heather Cox Richardson

Turning Point USA: Aiming to Win

Posted on September 23, 2020 by Victoria M. Young

Turning Point USA fits the criteria of an astroturf — fake grassroots — organization. But what makes them a real danger are three things: their strategies, target audience, and mode of operations. Even real Republicans have warned about this far-right danger. It behooves us all to take note!

SOURCE: Political Dictionary

Turning Point USA (TPUSA) began with the discovery of a charismatic young speaker named Charlie Kirk by Tea Party activist William (Bill) Montgomery. Through Montgomery, Kirk became further connected to the influential and well-to-do. Together they launched TPUSA in 2012. Montgomery left TPUSA in April and recently died due to COVID-19.

“In Kirk’s telling, he started the group in his parents garage as a teenager in Chicago and grew it to be a powerful political force through sheer grit and hard work.”

Discrepancy? Or deception? Your call.

“The Storm Is Here” is a QAnon rallying cry. Another slogan is “Where we go one, we go all” thus the hashtag #WWG1WGA

Growing Fear: Let’s Connect the Dots

First, breathe. Politics is out of control. But knowing the truth about America’s current power struggle is the first step towards gaining back control of our country. It starts with understanding the rise of people like Charlie Kirk and organizations like Turning Point and QAnon (dots in need of connecting). Start by considering what others fear.

“Today’s politics and social tensions are dominated by three fears: fear of other social groups, fear that those other groups are encroaching on one’s territory, and fear that the state no longer has the ability to protect the people.”

Those fears underlie Turning Point’s strategies. But the strategies are not new. They’ve been used historically and have worked well for President Trump — to date.

“Trump’s aim is to incite fear—fear of violence, disorder, change—and to paint himself as the bastion of law and order.”

BUT “things do not have to get worse.”

“… there is still time for political leaders—locally and nationally—to calm the storm, douse the flames, and stifle the violent provocateurs across the spectrum…” Is America in the Early Stages of Armed Insurgency?

First, The Charlie Kirk Story

After launching TPUSA, Charlie quickly rose through the Trump ranks.

“By the time the 2016 election rolled around, Turning Point was a well-funded outfit and Kirk had become increasingly influential. He met Donald Trump Jr. at the GOP convention that year and glued himself to the president’s eldest son.” USA TODAY

In 2018 the Washington Examiner dubbed Charlie “Kid Trump.” The title fit! But it wasn’t simply due to Charlie’s efforts. He already had much in common with Donald J. Trump. Charlie shares a similar background — he’s from a “well off family”— and both operate similarly in keeping their dealings under-wraps.

“Earlier this year, leaked records revealed TPUSA efforts to secretly funnel thousands of dollars into multiple college student government elections to elect conservatives.” Who Funds Conservative Campus Group Turning Point USA? Donors Revealed

Kirk’s TPUSA is a tax-exempt 501(c)(3) and as such “may not be an action organization (may not attempt to influence legislation & may not participate in any campaign activity for or against political candidates).” But Charlie Kirk walks a fine line and few will calling him out when he crosses it.

TRUTH: According to the FBI, militants on the radical-right have committed more acts of domestic terrorism. QAnon members included..

Utilizing Kirk’s Charismatic Appeal

TPUSA targets 18-24 year olds (and the larger millennial voting block) with anti-government, anti-leftist propaganda. In the process, Charlie effectively campaigned for Trump in 2016 and has never stopped.

“Don Jr. came in and announced, ‘If it weren’t for Charlie Kirk, my dad would not be president of the United States today.’”

“’If there’s one person this president admires, it’s Charlie Kirk,’ House majority leader Kevin McCarthy tells a roomful of high school students ….”

You see, Charlie is “the hook” at TPUSA meetings, conventions, and social media blitzes. His job is to fire-up the crowds. He is a provocateur.

“Charlie Kirk … has made it his business to ‘own the libs,’…”

“Own the libs” is slang for “triggering the liberals” into reacting. It’s one of Charlie’s favorite games enjoyed by his young audiences.

“He sees himself as a general in the ‘culture war’ and TPUSA’s members as ‘culture warriors’—effective ‘disrupters’ of the left on campus and eventually across America.”

Will TPUSA Turn the Tide for Trump in 2020? And what is the Long-Term Goal?

Look at Turning Point USA’s 2018 fourth annual High School Leadership Summit.

“On July 23, hundreds of students gathered … The four-day event … [was] punctuated by speeches by prominent conservatives, from House whip Steve Scalise and Education Secretary Betsy DeVos to rabble-rousers like Sebastian Gorka and Anthony Scaramucci.”

“For four days, speaker after speaker, hour after hour, the audience is enraptured by such political entertainment and by the performative politics they’ve come to D.C. to join in.”

“The nation’s villains are obvious at TPUSA: liberals and the media …”

This “us-versus-them” discourse is nothing new in politics. But Kirk’s provocative style of using disinformation targeted at young people must be recognized for the danger it is creating. Therefore, prepare yourself to believe the unbelievable.

“… asking him [Charlie Kirk] about the further growth of TPUSA and whether he’d be interested in bringing the organization abroad. ‘I wouldn’t rule it out,’ he says. ‘It’s something we’re considering. We have groups in Canada.’ Is it something you could see in Europe? ‘Oh, without a doubt. I would love to take this global. Yes.’” (2018 Kid Trump)

“Conservative Boy Wonder”

Not So Fast Say Traditional Republicans

Some Republicans are questioning Charlie Kirk and his tactics. Look at what Jordan Lancaster, a contributor to “Red Alert Politics,” had to say in 2019 about TPUSA’s growing influence among high school and college students.

“Turning Point’s entire existence is deceptive.”

“Turning Point claims to exist for the mission of ‘promoting the principles of fiscal responsibility, free markets, and limited government.’ In reality, it’s an organization that pulls kids too young to know any better into a group that’s deeply troubled and dishonest at its core.”

“To make matters worse, TPUSA has a troubling track record with racism.”

“Young conservatives should avoid Turning Point USA at all costs.”

Going Global?

That idea did not go on a back-burner.

“Kirk … is … a smooth-talking, telegenic salesperson pitching Trump’s ‘Make America Great Again’ agenda to a young audience. Now he has radical ambitions to import its confrontational brand of activism to the UK.”

“But already some of the Tory activists Kirk recruited to launch Turning Point in the UK are having second thoughts about its war on ‘cultural marxism’ … ” Days After Its Disastrous British Launch

This is THE strategy. Find a cause, twist a few facts in with lies, ignite emotions, and later aim the enthusiasm at the real goal. But people are catching on. The question is, will enough catch on in time?

Back in the U.S.A.: Followers & Influence Grow

2015: “ … Turning Point has a presence … on more than 800 high school and college campuses.”

“GOP donors, strategists, and even presidential candidates are awed by his [Kirk’s] composure, his intellect, his passion for politics …”

2019: “… Turning Point has become the largest student movement in the USA, with 150 staff, a budget of $15 million, and a presence in no fewer than 1400 educational institutions.”

2020: “… $10 [ or $15?] million budget comes mostly from conservative billionaires and the oil and gas industry … funding … student training … including leadership conferences at the White House, attended by President Trump himself. Most of the money comes from very rich conservative donors … including … the in-laws of Education Secretary Betsy DeVos.

So, where does QAnon fit into the Kirk & Trump Show?

Well, for starters, both Kirk and Trump have promoted QAnon posts on Twitter. But much of the public is still unfamiliar with Q, QAnon, and Twitter. So again I remind readers, you might find this story unbelievable.

Is there “a simple explanation“? …… But, is it acceptable behavior for a U.S. president?

In short, the anonymous “Q” first posted comments on what was called 8chan. Less than a month after Q’s first post, Trump tweeted the “QAnon-promoting Twitter account MAGAPILL” (2017).

Innocent enough? No, it isn’t ! It’s deceptive.

This is the mechanism being used to shape the “culture wars.” This is how the Trump arm of the 2020 Disinformation War is being waged.

“Q” releases a post (sometimes cryptic in nature). Others pick up on it and social media is flooded. Here’s an example.

“On July 7, [2018] Charlie Kirk …. published a tweet that contained startling but inaccurately sourced statistics about the alleged growth of human trafficking arrests under the Trump administration.”

When Charlie was called out on it his tweet quickly disappeared. But the fake news spread over social media. Really? Is this THAT important? Yes! This disinformation feeds into the QAnon followers beliefs.

This is how it happens — by design. A fake story is released.

It spreads like wildfire. The meme making apparatus goes into overdrive. But before fact-checkers can slap a label on the disinformation, it has been consumed with the result being two-fold. First, this story feeds the QAnon conspiracy. Secondly, the fact-checkers become the villains thickening the plot as a main-stream media (MSM) cover-up.

“Yeah, there was no trailer.” This was not a sex-trafficking operation.

You see, QAnon supporters believe that a “deep state” of “elites” exists where pedophiles are running a global child sex-trafficking ring. They believe that Donald Trump’s claim to “drain the swamp” was in reference to his working diligently to end the atrocities and stop the conspiracy waged —by evil Democrats— against America.

How Effective is QAnon’s Spread of Disinformation?

EXTREMELY!

“In July, Q believers co-opted the #SaveTheChildren hashtag and organized rallies that lured in a lot of well meaning people with no idea about the conspiracy theory behind it.” America’s Fastest Growing Cult

Remember, “Turning Point’s entire existence is deceptive.”

TPUSA’s influence runs high. Their effort to reach young hearts and minds runs deep. So with their leadership linked to QAnon, they are more than a threat to national tranquility. Their agenda includes winning seats at every level of government. Therefore, the public must believe that the threat posed by Kirk, Turning Point USA, QAnon, and the Trump family is real and serious.

Voters NEED TO KNOW If Their Candidates Are QAnon Supporters or Adherents

Back in May, Idaho political journalist Randy Stapilus wrote about Q and a 2017 remark where President Trump referred to “the calm before the storm.”

Mr. Stapilus went on to tell Idahoans about the Senate race in Oregon.

“[Jo Rae] Perkins [R], it turns out — this seems not to have been widely known beforehand — is a Q adherent. In announcing her win, she said on a video, ‘Where we go one, we go all. I stand with President Trump. I stand with Q and the team.’”

Stapilus called for QAnon candidates to stand up and let us know who they are and what they believe.

BELIEVE THE UNBELIEVABLE

“QAnon’s conspiracy theory is a rebranded version of the Protocols of the Elders of Zion.”

Compare for yourself. Q’s rebrand is a watered-down version of this.

“A secret cabal is taking over the world. They kidnap children, slaughter, and eat them to gain power from their blood. They control high positions in government, banks, international finance, the news media, and the church. They want to disarm the police. They promote homosexuality and pedophilia. They plan to mongrelize the white race so it will lose its essential power.” From : “the 1902 Nazi newspaper, Der Stürmer —derived from the German word for ‘Storm’.“

SOURCE: Just Security

The rise of Nazism began as a mass movement. But it did not have social media to use as an accelerant. However, consider this. Hitler understood how crucial it was to win over the youth to his side.

“Turning Point, funded by millions of dollars of dark money seems to have more in common with a culture war approach which embraces partisan gerrymandering and increasing restrictions on voting rights as necessary remedies to combat a liberal scourge.”

“But those things are profoundly undemocratic, as is running stealth student-government campaigns in order to enact an agenda which is hidden during the campaign itself.” SOURCE: Inside Higher Ed

THIS needs to be stopped NOW!

Remember, “things do not have to get worse … there is still time” for local and state actions to calm The Storm.

VOTE AGAINST Q CANDIDATES¦ SAVE AMERICA, STOP FASCISM

Black Politics & Neoliberalism In America

Posted on July 31, 2020 by Victoria M. Young

“Black Politics and the Neoliberal Racial Order” is an essay worth reading and serves here as the primary source quoted.* But don’t be fooled by the Obama and Jay Z quotes in the introduction. The authors go on to explain how “they represent the ascendance of neoliberal values in black politics.”

Photo credit:Pete Souza

To understand that claim, it’s essential to know how neoliberalism influences black politics and manifests itself in American policy. Furthermore, all of us —black, white and every color in between—must comprehend the effect neoliberal policies have on our nation. Only then can we move this nation from Black Lives Matter protests to fair policies that make sense for America.

Neoliberalism: Placing Profits Over People

Neoliberalism is an economic policy model that transfers control of economic factors … to the private sector … from the public sector.*

Neoliberal policies are based on market principles and theory. They serve as the foundation of “reforms” of all kinds. But the transfer of control of government programs and services to the private sector hasn’t served this nation’s people well, or fairly. Privatization has fueled widening inequality.

Neoliberal economic reforms include fiscal policies (particularly taxation policies) that favor capital accumulation. The result has been income redistribution … from the bottom … to the top.*

Although supply-and-demand (market-based, free trade) systems are foundational to private businesses, when neoliberal policies are applied to essential public services it means trusting the private sector to provide public services honestly and equitably. But based on experience, we know corruption and greed takes over. It’s not been fair because “neoliberals aren’t necessarily averse to picking winners and losers in the economy, and often do not oppose measures such as bailouts of major industries” (Investopedia).

Neoliberalism supports fiscal austerity, deregulation, free trade, privatization, and greatly reduced government spending.*

But when it comes to the “smaller government” demand, we’ve seen that ideology primarily applied to what should be our social safety net.

Neoliberalism, once associated with conservatives like Margaret Thatcher and Ronald Reagan, is now associated with Third Way politics, which seeks a middle ground between the ideologies of the left and right.*

Left, Right, or Middle? In policy-making, neoliberalism is neoliberalism. It’s the acceptance of privatization as a way to address problems because trust in government institutions has been intentionally undermined by corruptive political forces.

Neoliberal Values

By their very nature, market-based policies value competition thus putting “the individual” and wealth accumulation first and foremost. In a sense, that negates the whole idea of a government “of, by, and for the People” — effectively neutralizing a sense of mutual societal responsibility. So in a neoliberal world, there is privatization of public services, crippling of or eliminating state services, and favoritism towards globalization.

The end result of applying neoliberal values to government service policies is the removal of government accountability. What’s accomplished? It transfers accountability from public institutions to corporations that are beholding to shareholders —not to the American People.

Remember

Remember subprime loans being called “ghetto loans”? Predatory lending practices? Credit default swaps? The creation of financial instruments of destruction?

… Wall Street investors hedged their bets and reaped huge monetary rewards during the foreclosure crisis, while working-class minorities defaulted on payments and lost their homes and their futures.*

And what about the result of neoliberal ideology combined with racial discrimination in the criminal justice system? Remember history.

After Reconstruction, the criminal justice system became the institution at the heart of Southern efforts to strip African Americans of their citizenship rights.

Today, under the banner of “law and order” … the state and private corporations have profited from incarceration. (Note: Corrections Corporation of America (CCA) has a market value of over $2 billion.)

Prisons partner with Fortune 500 corporations (e.g., IBM, AT&T, and Bank of America) to employ prison labor.*

Remember the War on Drugs?

… the massive levels of incarceration especially of black youth …

[add to that]… the extremely dismal economic opportunities available to most poor black families, and the continued devaluing of black life as unarmed blacks are gunned down by both officers of the state and private citizens …*

Black Politics & The Necessary Revolution in Social Policy

Remember, and think again.

Neoliberalism facilitated a rebirth of two of the Jim Crow flagship elements: race-based crime policies and economic exploitation.*

But with policy-making controlled by moneyed interests, how will we reverse these discriminatory policy trends?

With the convergence of racial, political, and economic unrest, now is the time to insist that political leaders face the truth about their use of neoliberal ideology in the policies they favored. Only then can this country move from protests to better policies — with fairness and equality as guides.

… there has been under neoliberalism a reworking of blacks’ relationship to the economy with disastrous results, particularly for working-class and poor blacks whose very bases for economic success—the public sector and manufacturing— were no longer vehicles for black economic survival, let alone for black economic growth and social mobility.*

A better America requires better leadership on social policies.

Black Politics & The Narrative

Some offer-up a rebirth of family stability as the solution to what ails us. But how does that happen when the prison industry sees human beings as potential revenue and “law and order” policies militarized police departments? Stability isn’t happening. Instead, destabilization has resulted.

And with the election of a black president, much of the country accepted that we were entering a post-racial era.*

If we entered a post-racial era, we weren’t there long. And because President Obama embraced neoliberalism, our nation’s policies —on crime, finance, education, housing, and the development of global monopolies— did not change enough to make progress towards the promise of equal opportunity in America.

The “pull yourself up by the boot-straps” mentality, once a Republican ideology, crossed the political aisle and infected black politics.

Obama’s solution has been to redirect attention to individual choices … According to Obama, government institutions are rarely the source of continuing racial inequalities.

Jay Z has characterized his trajectory as that of the consummate hustler who, through his own hard work, lifted himself out of poverty and into worldwide stardom.

The understanding of the American dream that Obama and Jay Z embrace is one where individuals are, by and large, the sole architects of their fate.

The post-racial narrative is persuasive because it plays to the desires of a citizenry with race fatigue—the large majority of white Americans are convinced that blacks have achieved racial equality …*

That narrative is a barrier to progress. But with the killing of George Floyd caught on tape, the nation saw once again how discrimination becomes deadly. What people can’t easily see is that it’s neoliberal policies throwing the fuel of frustration on the flames of protests.

Civil Rights, Poverty & Economic Justice

Looking back at the Civil Rights Movement of the 60’s, it focused not only on blatantly obvious segregation but also on education, employment, and poverty. But in that era, policies changed to benefit the lower and middle-class. Now, the public must see how neoliberal values —competition, individualism, and wealth accumulation— replaced our national values of justice and fairness.

We became a nation of neoliberals!?! Yes? If so, then that explains why we quit addressing poverty through effective government policies. Most developed countries employ effective government solutions to address poverty. Why aren’t we?

“Where poverty is widespread, as most visibly demonstrated by the United States, there has been a failure to institutionalize equality.”

“Compared to other Western industrialized countries, the United States devotes far fewer resources to programs aimed at assisting the economically vulnerable.”

Source: Why is poverty higher in the U.S. than in other countries?

If we have accepted neoliberal values as our guide, then all that matters is our own monetary and material wealth. That mindset doesn’t allow us to consider that economic justice doesn’t mean taking anything from an individual. It only means setting rules that give everyone “a sufficient material foundation” — a fair shot, an opportunity.

Economic justice is a set of moral and ethical principles for building economic institutions, where the ultimate goal is to create an opportunity for each person to establish a sufficient material foundation upon which to have a dignified, productive, and creative life. (Investopedia)

Isn’t it time we replace neoliberal values with true American values?

#####

*Some quotes were altered to fit this format.