Relying on Mass Emotional Stimulation to Coerce Transition to a Society Organized by the Public Sector

Because I still have a large body of facts from history located quietly and portably within the privacy of my own mind, I have a nice cushion to fall back on when I encounter troubling open declarations about reorganizing the nature of business and the economy and society. Especially when these plans originate among parasitic taxpayer funded international bureaucrats, higher ed administrators, and Big Business wanting to protect its current turf and revenue by simply hiring more lobbyists. In case you did not think about what the acronym UNPRME stood for in the last post’s linked report, it means United Nations Principles of Responsible Management Education. Think of the United Nations realistically as a place dominated by dictatorships wanting to snuff out liberty in any part of the world or areas of society where it still currently exists.

The reason I brought up that body of knowledge is it lets me respond to that report and the Great Transition pursuits generally and everything I have compiled and written about what is called the Belmont Challenge and the Future Earth Alliance by walking over to my bookshelves (plural at this point in my research) to reread something on point. This time I pulled a book first published in 1936 called Collectivism: A False Utopia. Written by a Christian Science Monitor reporter, William Henry Chamberlain, who was stationed primarily in Moscow in the 30s, he also spent a great of time in Berlin, Germany. Given what he had seen, Chamberlain opens the book with the point that even more crucial than the question of where the line should be “between public and private enterprise in economic life” was “whether the people are to own the state or whether the state is to own the people.”

Those are still the crucial issues today in 2014. When I listen to a state legislator boast that the schools have never been very good at academics so now we only want them to ensure that all students are “competent,” he is treating students like subjects under his oversight. When the EU Economic and Social Committee pushes itself as the bridge between Europe and an “organised civil society,” it intends to do the organising so it can dictate what is allowed or impermissable. When it announces that it is “unnatural” for hunger and obesity to coexist in the same society we can just imagine the extent of the meddling that will now be required in people’s personal lives.

When the Common Core pushes teachers to instruct students that certain groups are “right wing” with “extremist views” and thus should be called “Fascist” they are using the term ahistorically as an insult to slime ideological opponents about the proper role of governments.  They are also making Fascism a “metaphorical lens” for students to view certain types of political activity. When I use the term or allude to it, it is based on going back to someone like Chamberlain or Hayek or Von Mises who lived with people who openly proclaimed this as their organizing philosophy. I go back to these older resources written before World War II or even the annexation of the Rhineland or Kristallnacht because they are based on personal informed observation. They are untainted by knowing the tragic end of the story. That’s what makes the modern day parallels to declared intentions so troubling.

When we look at 21st century skills and see nothing but mind arson or at the manipulated perception of obuchenie and wonder why, consider this passage from Chamberlain:

“In the collectivist state, on the other hand, every influence within the control of an omnipotent government is mobilized for the purpose of creating a uniform type of personality, disciplined and regimented to the last degree, trained to regard anything ‘the leader’ advocates as right and to change its mind as quickly as the leader may change his. It is easy to imagine the kind of individual that is becoming a standardized product under the collectivist dictatorship; it is a sort of human gramophone which plays without a hitch whatever tune the official thought-controllers may call.”

Human gramophone was the metaphor in those radio, pre-TV days. Just imagine what the thought controllers intend to do with adaptive software, gaming, and embedded virtual reality. And before you dispute claims of collectivism, it’s all through all these cited documents from this blog. That’s also what all those references to the obligation to promote the common good are about. I am not claiming anyone is planning in 2014 in the West to be a dictator. I am asserting though that all these documents assume that majority will may now impose terms on all citizens down to the nitty-gritty details of life. Dictatorships don’t have to be about a singular individual in charge of all.

Chamberlain made an important point about the nature of envy and when it becomes explosive to a society. Tell me if you don’t believe that politicians and NGOs and international figures and the media and college professors and think-tanks are currently, and deliberately, using rhetoric about inequality to ignite an explosion of just the type Chamberlain worried about:

“Envy is as inescapable a condition of human life as the inequality that provokes it. It becomes a formidable form of social nitroglycerine under two conditions: when the masses are conscious of a worsening in their condition, and when a considerable number of individuals endowed with genuine force and ability feel themselves excluded from normal opportunities of advancement, from a fair chance of enjoying a satisfactory livelihood.”

“Liberty” on the other hand, as long as it is properly nurtured and respected for the mass prosperity machine it has historically proven to be, is a “constant agency of self-renovation.” But that of course is a danger to politicians and bureaucrats wanting to direct society and the economy and being well-paid for life for just showing up and pushing as told. Hence we get the mind arson and no Axemaker Minds all while asserting these education initiatives promote “critical thinking” and innovation. The small print about the innovation being a reenvisioning of society and the economy gets left unread and unremarked on in public.

It is interesting that Chamberlain believed that “if American democracy should ever be overthrown, it would yield place to fascism, not to communism.” I will interject here that he was not using democracy in the John Dewey transformative sense so common today. To Chamberlain, communism was the Stalinist variety where if there were 15 collaborators in a scheme, another 185 would be selected at random to be executed to dissuade future participation and encourage squealing over any overheard plans. It’s not the little ‘c’ communism variety various professors in the US and the West generally still think we should try in the 21st century that now seems deeply embodied in the current UN and OECD initiatives. Now I continue with the rest of the quote because it remains a relevant, prescient point:

“Both communism and fascism are forms of despair politics. But communism is calculated to appeal to people who never had anything, while fascism is the preferred expression of despair for people who once had something, but have lost it.”

But what if the public sector is the primary driver behind the conditions of despair? What if what has been lost and is being taken away is due to an ever-expansive, self-justifying, public-sector, and a non-profit sector that benefits from its alliance and its grants from the public sector without having to pay its dues in taxes, and a cronyistic Big Business sector that wants to operate with impunity due to its political connections?

Out of the frustration of what has been lost and with misleading pitches and propaganda from politicians, the media, and education, are we now shaking the social nitroglycerine described above?

Are we increasing the programs that created much of the dysfunction in the first place?

Next time we will return to Chamberlain’s concern over what he called “straitjacketing of the mind” in both collectivist ideologies and compare it to known current pushes in the schools and classrooms.

15 thoughts on “Relying on Mass Emotional Stimulation to Coerce Transition to a Society Organized by the Public Sector

  1. Could Chamberlain be referring to that fact that Stalin when he reached the top then disobeyed his bankster bosses and did it his way? The paranoia Stalin was not paranoid from his childhood but the fear that his transgression would land him the swift execution disobedient Igores inevitable receive. Maybe fascism is an answer to a learned lesson. I cannot be sure.

    Greedy Wallstreet addicts are so busy feeding the beast that has a hold on them certainly they will sell us out at the very thought of having to get sober. So private sectors problems need a more honest evaluation and more restrictions. Hedge fund trader addictions are documented online and there is a new story out about “the wolf”. This man describes a Roman Circus in the office complete with drugs, sex and midget tossing. Should we be surprised that we are gulog bound by fascism?

    • Liz-he was writing before the show trials but he did relate the story about using murder as a means of terror. He also used the 200 people with just that break out. By 1936 he was under no delusions about either philosophy, but it was before things really got bad. I would argue that one of the reasons things got so much worse was all the effort that went into removing the aspects of the personality and knowledge that can say ‘no’ to the herd. It’s not unusual for me to read that PLCs, Professional Learning Communities, exist to manipulate adult faculty via the herd instinct. It relates to some quotes and examples of current prof devt techniques I will go into next time.

      I have not seen the movie you are talking about but I believe it is intended to nurture a belief that Wall Street=capitalism. Instead it does tend to be the height of a Cronyistic heads goes to insiders and tails to taxpayers relationship with lots of movement between govt positions and private firms that nurture access to public officials and the ability to loan out while pay 0 interest to the fed.

        • Yes you are so right on access and paying no interest to the Fed, the goals institutionalizing risk, we pay so they don’t have too. But who is the fed is a whole other show for a whole other day. It’s a creature from Jeckyl Island.

          • Liz,

            I just listened to the full hour speech and questions from Terrence Moore called “The Story-Killers: How Common Core Destroys the Mind and Soul.” is the link. Good anecdotes that regular blog readers and especially the book readers will listen to and appreciate precisely why Moore found what he did.

            It complements what I do on this blog, what I did in book, and what I have researched but not yet written up. It makes no sense for all of us to target the same aspects of the story.

        • Liz-I thought this article that came out this week was helpful.

          I find the fallacy that public sector spending is as good as private to be quite common in documents especially that are coming out of the UN entities or the OECD. There is a refusal to admit that the private sector creates goods and services that are real. Government takes or incurs obligations that taxpayers now owe. Not the same at all even though both represent a dollar of spending.

  2. Robin you are so very spot on. Lucid and on point yet again.

    Don’t know if you caught the announcement by President Obama yesterday about some new federal initiative involving curbing incidents of rape on college campus’ nationwide. I thought it was weird. I did not stay to listen to the whole agenda but right off the bat I questioned the premise that, ” Most rapes occur on college campus’.” I think that is probably fuzzy math. Among a certain demographic perhaps, but rapes occur everywhere to all age groups. Anyway, what is the government trying to control within Higher Ed now? The whole gambit smells.

  3. I hear the fascism comment is supposed to come from Prentice Hall’s The British Tradition, Volume 2, both the student and the Teacher editions. The complete story is found in Mr. Moore’s book. The sad part of this is that you have so many common core opponents not wanting to deal with this claim because it involves politics. Some say proponents will use messages like this against the anti-ccss crowds because this is not directly written in the standards, therefore, it is not valid. The proponents are bolstering their campaign by pushing the message through the chamber of commerce (I am certain I read here that they are in this deeper than I currently recall), taking out television and radio ads. (Does this mean we are making a dent if they have to campaign?) This week one of the more popular local conservative radio hosts even had a member of Achieve on his show to tell how innocuous the standards are, and to dispel some of the myths. (Yes, this radio host is taking a lot of heat for not standing with other conservatives that are concerned) You can take a listen to the Achieve employee here.
    I wonder how much Mr. Colby was paid, or if he may be member of your ignoramus club?

    • narciso-What makes the new teacher standards higher is that they are behavioral, not knowledge based. Teachers must show their ability to create that obuchenie Mindset in students.

      This all ties to what Michelle Rhee was really pushing at the New Teachers Project. I plan to write it all up next week, but I located definitive proof last week that the Common Core is to be the Learning part of the obuchenie and the new teacher evals centered on student growth and new definitions of what constitutes achievement are the teaching. Let us be for ever thankful that arrogant administrators just keep bragging about what they are doing. I listen, appreciate the real significance of the confession, and fish for the final proof.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.