Controlling Consciousness and Planning Society Via Politicalism-a New Helpful Description is Born

Before I turn the term-Politicalism-into the most apt metaphor since Axemakers Mind for describing the true intent behind K-12 education reforms, let me offer up some timely quotes on controlling consciousness. The first is from a December 20, 2016 report called “Behavioural Insights at the United Nations–Achieving Agenda 2030.” I will be bolding or italicizing the passages or phrases I most want everyone to remember.

“Agenda 2030 can only be achieved if we critically examine the behavioural factors that lead people to utilize programs effectively and efficiently. Research in behavioural science–regarding how people make decisions and act on them, how they think about, influence, and relate to one another, and how they develop beliefs and attitudes–can inform optimum programme design. Behavioral science research reveals that even small, subtle, and sometimes counter-intuitive changes to the way a message or choice is framed or how a process is structured, can have an outsized impact on the decisions we make and the actions we take.”

So the areas aimed at by what is now called competency-based education and that used to be called Transformational Outcomes-Based Education (both covered in depth in my book Credentialed to Destroy) are the areas the UN believes are crucial to achieving its agenda of Equity for All globally by 2030. Let’s use a shorter quote from another paper released by UNESCO yesterday from the WEF in Davos, Switzerland. The report on the vision for education needed to achieve that 2030 Agenda was called “Partnering for Prosperity: Education for Green and Inclusive Growth” and its section on the Social Determinants of Health and Inequity led with this quote from Professor Bell Hooks:

“There must exist a paradigm, a practical model for social change that includes an understanding of ways to transform consciousness that are linked to efforts to transform structures.”

If that seems vague please search out the papers on Equity and Empowerment Lenses from Multnomah County, Oregon that public health policymakers are now quietly nationalizing. Many of the links are in the most recent comments to the previous post. Finally, we have a quote from a 2013 edition of the book Violence and Social Orders: A Conceptual Framework for Interpreting Recorded Human History. Before I get to that, I want to reiterate how I research at this point in my work.

I am literally working off of footnotes where people with money and political power are confessing what they intend to do with the models and theories they are creating. One of these books cited a Professor Douglass North and that he had been a Marxist and then laid out a quote from that book that struck me as still thoroughly Marxian in its view of the mind and molding consciousness. That’s not an insult, but a shorthand phrase for a particular view of history and how it can be used to mold consciousness deliberately. When a used copy of the book arrived, the authors thanked the Hoover Institution profusely as well as the Bradley Foundation for its financing of the project of a “new framework for the social sciences.”

So the Hoover Institution behind the Koret Task Force and what I regard as an attempt to create a deceptive narrative around the Common Core in the 2011 paper Closing the Door on Innovation, which is also one of the named partners in the PEPG–Program on Education Policy and Governance at the Kennedy School of Government we have covered, wanted this new framework. And the Bradley Foundation behind that concept-based approach to History from the 80s that also finances PEPG’s publication Education Next and many of the think tanks and other entities pushing School Choice and that owns the book publisher, Encounter Books, financed the framework. Let’s take a look at what it aims at.

In the chapter entitled “A New Research Agenda for the Social Sciences,” we find an explanation for what I keep finding when I dig behind the facade of the ‘School Choice’ slogan.

“A full account of human behavior would begin by asking how the mind deals with the process of change. A necessary preliminary is to understand how the brain interprets signals received by the senses and how the mind structures the results into coherent beliefs. ..How do we think about social processes when individuals, at best, have a limited understanding of what is happening to them as they continue to confront new experiences and novel situations that require an awareness of the dynamic nature of the process of change in which they are participants? How do we deal with the novel problems that emerge as humans reshape the human environment in ways that have no historical precedent?”

So we know that both Hoover and the Bradley Foundation are quite interested in consciousness, how it works, and its use for examining and driving cultural change. Before I get to one more quote, let me go ahead and define Politicalism. Politicalism is how politicians at all levels of government, public policy think tanks across the spectrum, academics, and others believe they can use the law and education to force the transformation by 2030 to what Marx called his Human Development Society where human needs are supposedly met. Politicalism feels empowered to ignore the prohibitions of the First Amendment where governments are rarely allowed to restrict speech and go straight ahead to restricting thought by using education reforms to control consciousness. That’s why the phrase ‘decisionmaking’ just keeps coming up.

Politicians and public policy think tanks have a political, social, and economic vision for the future that requires the monitoring and control over the internalized basis of individual action in order to work effectively. If that aim does not justify a special Proper Noun descriptive term like Politicalism then what will? Not wanting to get called out in advance and have this behavioral science technique prohibited, we get all sorts of euphemisms like competency-based ed, Tranzi OBE, Higher Order Thinking Skills, or School Choice to name a few. The Hoover Framework, with Bradley financing, actively seeks to alter social science research by targeting institutions, which it italicized and defined as follows:

“…the rules of the game, the patterns of interaction that govern and constrain the relationships of individuals. Institutions include formal rules, written laws, formal social conventions, and informal norms of behavior.”

In other words, institutions are not necessarily physical things, but also the values, attitudes, beliefs, ethics, ideas and concepts, and desired behavioral norms we have come now to associate with social emotional learning or Positive School Climate, for example. Anyone sensing why a Bradley Foundation funded think tank would want to misrepresent targeting these areas that govern future action and decisionmaking and pretend it’s about Personally Identifiable Information or a Student Unit Record controversy? Before we leave that book, there was a statement that “we do not have a general theory of belief formation and human cognition,” which strikes me as absolutely not true. If it is technically true, go have lunch with your colleagues at CASBS in Palo Alto or the MBE professors at the ed school at Harvard or the constructionists in the AI work or Media Lab at MIT. They certainly do.

The rest of the statement though suggests our authors do know what their colleagues would pass on. “…we have tried to come to grips with two aspects of beliefs. First, beliefs about causal relationships ultimately affect people’s decisions. Second, the cultural environment–the political, economic, social context–fundamentally influences beliefs.”

That would explain why so much of the actual research at Stanford, MIT, Harvard, and other places goes to using education to influence both those aspects of beliefs. The new federal education legislation, ESSA, even calls for assessing for this at least annually. Note that changing these beliefs or any of the other internalized bases for decisionmaking is what is now called Learning. The reason Learning must be standardized, monitored, and regulated by governments is to get to a broader vision of how society and its people and their relationships are to be structured (both the regulation of Learning and the restructuring and planning are covered by the term-Politicalism).

There was one last recent report we need to cover, released yesterday, called “Communities in Action: Pathways to Health Equity.” It is intended to bind the federal agencies and governments at all levels to the UN’s 2030 Agenda and what is also called Marxist Humanism, whatever President-Elect Trump’s wishes. Apparently, his confirmed political appointees were never to even know. In this vision, ‘quality education’ is simply one of the Social Determinants of Health and public policy and regulation needs to be used to restructure “the conditions in the environments in which people live, learn, work, play, worship, and age that affect a wide range of health, functioning, and quality-of-life outcomes and risks. For the purposes of this report, the social determinants of health are: education; employment; health systems and services; housing; income and wealth; the physical environment; public safety; the social environment; and transportation.”

So first we had to wade through all the false narratives surrounding education reform and then accept that ‘quality education’ is a defined term tied to an all-encompassing plan of transformation. A plan that we are neither supposed to recognize in time nor object to. See why everyone involved wants to target consciousness? Now the reason I think it is not only us normal taxpayers and parents being snookered is that late in that report, we get the revelation that about one week after the Presidential election shocker, President Obama signed an Executive Order establishing a Community Solutions Council on the importance of equity and the determinants of health and well-being to foster “collaboration across [federal] agencies…to coordinate actions, identify working solutions to share broadly, and develop and implement policy recommendations that put the community-driven, locally led vision at the center of policymaking.”

As far as I can tell then all these changes started by President Obama that Hillary Clinton would have continued are still to roll along under President Trump unless he and all his appointees know of their existence and how they work. They simply cannot rely on anyone in Congress to tell them because they benefit from all this intended geographic redistribution and mayors, governors, or school boards will not tell either. The think tanks all seem to think pushing this while misrepresenting it to their readers and petty amount donors is why they exist.

It is up to each of us to appreciate that Politicalism targets all these different levels and sectors of society, down to the neural networks and emotions internalized in our students. Anything that an individual uses, consciously or unconsciously for decisionmaking, is regarded under Politicalism as fair game for manipulation and monitoring. Because the vision of Equity and Empowerment for ALL apparently justifies even the most Preemptive Authoritarianism.

Let me end with a tip to Ms DeVos after yesterday’s testimony. Please read up on Teaching for Competence and Teaching for Growth. When you said you were not familiar with either, you were saying you are unaware of the very tools being used to control and monitor what students internalize as the basis for decisionmaking. If everyone involved in education policymaking wants to target consciousness, best to know now the how and why.

Also, please be careful about throwing out Local Control as the panacea. That would be the Briar Patch in our Glocal, Community Solutions Council world, under Politicalism.

 

27 thoughts on “Controlling Consciousness and Planning Society Via Politicalism-a New Helpful Description is Born

  1. Following her usual masterful style, Robin provides local habitation and name for Tocqueville’s airy description of tyranny arising in America:

    “After having thus taken each individual one by one into its powerful hands, and having molded him as it pleases, the sovereign power extends its arms over the entire society; it covers the surface of society with a network of small, complicated, minute, and uniform rules, which the most original minds and the most vigorous souls cannot break through to go beyond the crowd; it does not break wills, but it softens them, bends them and directs them; it rarely forces action, but it constantly opposes your acting; it does not destroy, it prevents birth; it does not tyrannize, it hinders, it represses, it enervates, it extinguishes, it stupifies, and finally it reduces each nation to being nothing more than a flock of timid and industrious animals, of which the government is the shepherd.

    “I have always believed that this sort of servitude, regulated, mild and peaceful, of which I have just done the portrait, could be combined better than we imagine with some of the external forms of liberty, and that it would not be impossible for it to be established in the very shadow of the sovereignty of the people.”

    Tocqueville. Alexis de. 1835. The Republic of the United States of America, and its Political Institutions, Reviewed and Examined. http://www.gutenberg.org/

    • Alexis de Tocqueville and Karl Popper argue the State’s
      threat to the individual.

      Popper in ‘The Open Society and its Enemies’ criticizes
      Plato’s blueprint for his Ideal State Republic ruled by ‘the
      wise’ and requiring a state education system designed to
      control the succession of leadership by socially engineering selected students from the leader class in preparation for
      the role. This system would produce the ‘wise’ leader, a
      god-like philosopher king, proud possessor of received
      knowledge not accessible to those he ruled. How different,
      says Popper, is this ‘wisdom’ from Socrates curiosity and intellectual modesty. This, he says, ‘is what Plato made of
      Socrates demand that a responsible politician should be a
      lover of truth and wisdom rather than an expert, and that he
      was ‘wise’ only if he knew his limitations.’ (Ch. 7.)

      Once more Socrates the great teacher’s ‘care for your
      soul’ is undergoing a sea-change, K-12 … ‘WE will care
      for your soul.’

        • From fabbs.org:
          ‘Teach students to think critically about who the authorities are/should be on scientific matters. There are so many places to get information today that it’s more critical than ever for students to understand who to trust on scientific topics – and more importantly, why.’

          Uh oh, critical thinking as ‘great man’ respect? Cf that with Richard Feynman’s, ‘ It doesn’t matter how beautiful your theory is, it doesn’t matter how smart you are. If it doesn’t agree with experiment, it’s wrong.’

          • Except in the human sciences, which is what this vision of education is a part of, it can agree with the experiemnt. Changing the student and how they perceive and interpret experiences every day and what motivates them IS the experiemnt. It can work quite well while the parents and taxpayers remain confused.

          • That’s “the climate science” has been sold by the enviros. I don’t know of any credible physical scientists who endorse that view however. These supposed armies of “climate scientists” are nameless and without principles.

            All the scientists with respected names and scientific arguments come down on the other side.

          • Hey David. You should read Hugo Mercier’s talk “Toward the Seamless Integration of the Sciences” from HeadCon 14 I read this morning. The link is here. https://www.edge.org/event/headcon-14

            I was looking further at the Science of Humanity referenced in the footnotes and also Hideaki Koizumi’s work. Yikes!

            What I was quoting from yesterday is not so far from you and it’s the MBE resarch school-the Ross School on Long Island.

    • Thanks. The Rockefeller Foundation started that ‘framing’ with CHART in 1980 and then somehow the Bradley Foundation pops into existence in the mid-80s and suddenly wants to push it via its History Commission. I had it marked up but r4an out of room, but so much of the vision of the social sciences pushed in the book cited here reminded me of the November 1968 Bellagio Declaration on Planning that launched this vision that is now in overdrive.

      I am so tired of all the conferences I read about at that same gorgeous Rockefeller Foundation estate. I think I should get to go for all the attention I have brought to that property. Do you remember that was where the Brookings Learning Metrics Task Force was too?

  2. The emphasis on Collectivity in the language of these papers boggles my mind. Now, I get that they are written for fellow travelers and collectivity is not emphasized quite so heavily in the propaganda that is disseminated to the masses ( although I hear the drum beat rising ) but still…I expect it from UNESCO and the UN but when Frameworks is on board with collective consciousness control I find it chilling. I should not at this point but I do. I graduated from college in 1988 and Collective anything was a dirty word. The fact that it is not any longer not only makes me feel old but demonstrates how indoctrination in education has been working its magic for the last 30 odd years. The New Civic Mindedness being hustled in schools now is dripping with the collectivity emphasis even if they don’t use the word. No one pictures Gulags anymore when they hear Collective. They picture hand holding kumbaya singing yarn bombing love ins….for Equality!

    • The emphasis on Collectivity though is quite clear in that Greg Forster paper on the Accountability vision that ties to the School Choice vision so many of the think tanks are pushing that pretend to be ‘conservative,’ libertarian, or pro-market.

      You can see why I was so worried I shifted from what I had intended to write to a broader Heads Up. This is really the first part of a two-parter because I can see the link now between this and the “Architecture of Innovation: Institutionalizing Innovation in Federal Policymaking” released in October. https://mccourt.georgetown.edu/sites/mspp/files/documents/the_architecture_of_innovation_mccourt_beeck_center_georgetown_university.pdf

      Look at page 7 and remember that controlling Consciousness and Culture are the aims of the Moral and Spiritual ed Framework that bears such a marked resemblance to both the Classical ed template Barney and others from Hillsdale are pushing, Classical Conversations for homeschoolers, Great Heart Academies, as well as the Catholic Curriculum Framework with its desire to control Knowledge, Skills, and Dispositions. The Pioneer Institute announced back in December that the same template would work for Jewish schools.

      Quoting from page 9 of that linked report we can see why the same people and think tanks are pushing for School Choice, competency-based ed (Michael Horn defines that Knowledge, Skills, and Attributes or Dispositions as competency-based ed in an interview with Ed Surge talking about higher ed), and a ConCon, it all makes sense if you are going for the kind of wholesale transformation all these papers admit to.
      “As society moves toward a more digital economy, data and technology are critical to creating a twenty-first century government. New tools and approaches alone are not sufficient to achieve systemic change unless linked to the outcomes that government is trying to achieve.”

      Part of those outcomes are the internalized “Knowledge, Skills, and Dispositions (or Attributes) that make a ‘citizen’ amenable to collectivism. That is what Politicalism wishes to do. It also wants to be able to physically plan cities and have workplaces operate as planners desire. I reread that Architecture of Innovation yesterday after these other cited reports and it almost took my breath away. Right now I am rereading the papers from that 1968 Bellagio Conference and it too is clearly focused on anticipating and hoping for what is now coming to fruition. If you look at the graphics in these papers on the Social Determinants of Health, there really is no arena of daily living that is left out for any of us.

      If you, like me, read the daily campus newsletter for your college kids, it is heartbreaking what these Millenials are being led to believe in the name of education. Let’s run the world on theories and see what happens.

      • I had a “hit upside the head” moment in the past day or two when I was rereading the material that accompanies the Catholic Curriculum Standards. The verbiage is at pains to make clear that the Standards are not dictating content, ie curriculum itself. It helpfully make available a list of texts, many of them good ones, that the teachers can use to fulfill the Standards. Of course, this is the argument that the Common Core contingent has always made — “it’s not dictating curriculum.” The CC, too, provides suggested texts in its appendices.

        Well, duh. Of course it’s not dictating curriculum. The standards are “empty skill sets,” to use Sandra Stotsky’s description, by design. The abstractions represented by standards — any standards — are the point; the curricular content is to be subordinated to them and to be used as their payload.

        This is why the standards movement is poisoned at its root. It puts ascending from the abstract to the concrete into practice. It converts content from an end to a means.

        It seems obvious now, but it had never struck me before.

        • Except it’s not just skills sets. By insisting on stipulating the ideas, concepts, and categories used by the mind to guide perception and interpret daily experiences and then calling that, not facts, Knowledge with a Capital K as well as desired internalized Dispositions in the case of that Catholic Curriculum Framework, the Standards are specifying not only how the mind is to work, but the desired personal characteristics, values, and ethics that guide when and whether a student chooses to act and for what ends. It is fundamental to shifting the future reality away from a linear progression from the present to the sort of Pie in the Sky collectivist visions laid out in these cited documents.

          Purpel’s Moral and Spiritual Framework talks of Knowing the Good. Feeling the Good. Doing the Good. When Classical Ed templates like what Joy Pullamnn is pushing via the Barney Charter Initiative and what she says in her Federalist articles talks about Beauty. Truth. Goodness. that is just a variation on letting an abstract idea guide future action. Terrence Moore of The Story-Killers is the Principal of Atlanta Classical Academy Charter School. Saw an ad in the local paper for it where it said students are trained for ‘Virtuous Living’ and “Good Citizenship’. The purpose of any academic materials in this vision is nt knowledge for its own sake to be poked and prodded within the privacy of the mind as both of us seem to spend our days. It is to create an activity so that a desired Standard–be it an idea, skill, or ethical viewpoint can be practiced in the classroom until it becomes a Habit of Mind instilled at a neurobiological level. The student is primed to act at an unconscious level based on someone else’s opinion of what is virtuous.

          I am rereading Eric Jantsch this morning in light of all this. You know what? When Obama said yesterday what would bring him back to public life, he was insisting Trump not interfere with his vision that the future can be willed by governments, the law, and the right vision of education reform. When university profs urge students to walk out of class tomorrow to show that the desired Progress cannot be changed by Trump’s election, they are doing the same. It is all premised on the vision that the future can be willed and then backwards designed for first laid out fully in the Bellagio Declaration in 1968. It fits everything, especially that Hoover/Bradley vision as I noticed. It’s why I am rereading it now.

  3. Robin, reposting a relevent comment from Jo Nova blog, Jan 22- re education
    and responsibility.

    Lionell Griffith
    January 23, 2017 at 1:42 am · Reply

    “The greatest moral challenge facing the current generation is science ignorance.”

    To be more exact, delete the word “science”.

    Here are a few examples of three types of ignorance.

    Social ignorance:

    The wide spread belief that to make something happen one only needs to wish, demand, demonstrate, protest, and vandalize private property. All the while chanting “What do we want? (whatever) When do we want it? NOW!

    Political ignorance:

    They should do something about it (again whatever). They being the politicians of whatever passes for a government.

    Scientific ignorance:

    The almost total ignorance of the consequences of the Three Laws of Thermodynamics.
    1. You can’t get more out of a system than it contains.
    2. The process of getting something out of a system consumes part of the content of the system.
    3. There is always a portion of a system that is beyond being touched by any process.

    Sadly, the social ignorance example is a demand that political ignorance example will allow the politicians to ignore the scientific ignorance example and will promise to produce something that is impossible produce. Which is then recycled at an increasingly staggering cost until the the whole charade self destructs.

    Our defense and recovery is as simple or difficult as the following.

    1. Reality is what it is.
    2. We can know what reality is.
    3. We must use logic applied to experience and experiment to gain that knowledge incrementally.
    4. To continue to live, we must act accordingly.

    Your fundamental moral choice is to live or not. If you don’t wish to live, do nothing and your wish will soon come true. Otherwise, you have a lot of work to do. The really hard part is that you are responsible for doing the work. No one can do it for you. Oh, others can help and provide both good and bad examples but you must do the work yourself.

    • Good examples after this weekend’s display of passion and ignorance in DC. Wish those women had been nearly as offended by President 42’s real offenses and assaults.

      Anyone reading this blog consistently or what I laid out in Credentialed to Destroy that just gets more timely (it actually outsells now what it did a year ago, which is rather unusual) knows I do the work myself. The problem with the constructivist, competency-based education/Tranzi OBE template that I warn about and others deceive about in a coordinated manner is that it is designed to invisibly change the neural circuitry. People then can believe they are informed when in reality they are simply responding predictably using those presupplied concepts and categories to guide their thinking. They interpret through emotion from a different part of their brain because that is what they practiced doing in school until this became an unconscious habit of mind.

      We end up with people who believe they are autonomous who are not in the least.

      Let me add to show I am not a total nerd: “Go Falcons!!”

  4. Beth, after enjoying your posts on several blogs over the last few years it is thrilling to run across your blog and learn more of what you think and how you approach issues facing us all. I look forward to reading your book as well. Having witnessed the corruption of big education at the local level, and having seen the impacts of an illiberal education on bright young minds up close, it is clear that real reform is desperately needed. For me, rooting education in logic and critical thinking skills of the Popper / Feynman / Classical liberalism is the most important. Public education is rapidly devolving into indoctrination guided by people who fundamentally hate the Western enlightenment tradition. I look forward to learning more from you.

    • Let’s just be careful not to use those terms in a way that simply sugar coats the same cybernetic control of the Simplex system, as Harvard’s MBE program now calls it. that we have laid out here. About two years ago now several of the US commentators who so vocally decry the Common Core and their think tank allies began to push Richard Paul’s Critical Thinking work. It was that same inductive template when looked at and when I wrote about it that push fizzled. Arthur Costas’ Creativity work now, frequently cited as a 21st Century skill needed by all, is simply a renaming on what he called Critical Thinking in the 80s and 90s.

      What I would look for is whether the template wants to provide the categories, concepts, ideas, themes, and images through which a student will view their experiences or a building up of facts that have happened and what was learned. Notice that the first, inductive model, is always tied to an activity push in the classroom. It is not an accident that the same American prof, Michael Cole, had Rockefeller F funding for his Vygotsky work while he was still in NYC; was a grad student with Luria and later translated his autobiography; created what we know by the acronym CHAT-Cultural Historical Activity Theory-to account for the change in prevailing culture that could come from an experiential education focused on altering consciousness and standards of personal judgment; and who worked on the Executive Committee of ISCAR with Lauren Resnick who developed the concept of Higher Order Thinking Skils (HOTS) that is now enshrined into at least annual assessment for all students under federal law. Resnck was co-director of the Common Core predecessor, the New Standards Project, that only about half of the US states signed on to. Common Core got it up to 50 since the non-joiners this time had already joined NSP previously.

      In the US the term Classical education now is being used to obscure this Ideas first focus that sounds good until you recognize it is a new coat of paint on the same “life roles’ template. Looking at the Classical Conversations homeschool template it seems to be the same.

      • Robin,
        Front page today’s newspaper ‘The Australian,’ Professor Michelle Simmons , quantum physicist, in an Australia Day address warned against dumbing down of high school
        physics courses with ‘feminised physics, replacing math formula’s with essays.

        • Because ‘physics,’ and ‘math’ beyond fairly basic arithmetic and history are no longer about the transmission of knowledge for a person’s on use. The are about instilling concepts to apprehend the world with as yesterday’s post put it and role playing possible responses to various scenarios until they become internalized as Habits of Mind.

          I have explained in the past that Australia adopted the ATLAS template created on the work of Howard Gardner, James Comer, and Ted Sizer in 2002. That acronym stands for Authentic Teaching and Learning for All Students. It’s basically the same goals as Competency-based Ed anywhere and what ESSA, our 2015 federal ed law, forced on the states and districts in addition to what the Common Core did. Nack in the early days of the blog, when I was still grasping that this was a global assault on the Western mind and its concept of the individual (that is what the tour of Tranzi OBE laid out in Credentialed to Destroy shows) I wrote a post on the Australian Wellbeing Framework and what is actually changes. http://invisibleserfscollar.com/if-education-transforms-values-and-feelings-and-beliefs-to-control-behaviors-are-we-free/

          Since I wrote that post more and more governmental edicts in various countries have announced that Subjective Wellbeing is now the true purpose of governments at all levels. Essentially with that mandate, there is nowhere they cannot intrude.

    • That would be the same Maurice Elias that I quoted from and warned about in Credentialed to Destroy on what the real implementation induced by the Common Core looked like and how it was actually global.

      Yes, the march in Atlanta was wet and led by John Lewis who must be spared every consequence of what he says because of Selma apparently. “We love you John!!” was the refrain. Seriously, if one is protesting something factual you disagree with, march away. Please don’t protest based on falsehoods though. Reminds me of when I began to see the world differently in my early 30s because if there were two areas I then knew cold it was healthcare law and Con Law. I knew the Planned Parenthood rep’s were deliberately lying to create outrage and thus contributions. I quit contributing and began to see the political process differently.

      Just finished the new NAS paper “Advancing Concepts and Models for Measuring Innovation” released today. Interesting as it was also headed by an MIT Sloan prof just like Eric Jantsch was at Bellagio in 1968. It builds on that paper without citing it just like what the Bradley F is pushing as a new social science framework. Finally, it once again reiterates just how fraudulent this False Narrative around the Commission on Evidence-bAsed Policymaking is.

      The falsehoods in education alone from these think tanks and others who seem to act in a coordinated manner with ties to the Bradley F amount to crumbs creating a clear pathway to what we are not supposed to know. It turns out all the deceit has been a tremendous illumination tool as to what must be hidden or misrepresented to the public.

Leave a Reply to Deborah Cole Cancel reply

Your email address will not be published.