Selling Remedies that Actually Destroy Precisely What the Sales Pitch Touts

Now if the Common Core and digital learning were being sold as destroying future American prosperity and allowing China and India to become the world’s dominant economies, politicians and taxpayers at all levels and in every other country would hopefully hit the brakes. So that’s not the sales pitch. In fact, as we have seen the book Endangering Prosperity: A Global View of the American School is getting touted in Brookings Institute programs and a September 12, 2013 Wall Street Journal article on “The Vital Link of Education and Prosperity” by authors Paul E Peterson and Eric Hanushek. Now I am also getting webinar invitations to discuss the book. A full court press would be the basketball term. And the fact that what we are actually getting is the OECD’s promotion of the humanist psychology practices into the classroom via PISA gets omitted from all the discussion. It is the sought remedy, transforming education to perform well on the poorly understood PISA, that actually will gut mass prosperity and promote a crony capitalism instead.

Politically directed public money that benefits a chosen few at the expense of the many, while gutting the transmission of knowledge and substituting a psychologized Curriculum of Affect and Guided Perceptions that are Politically Compelling in its stead, is a lousy deal for most of us. Something to be opposed vocally and frequently. Which is why the real implementation of the Common Core is hidden in side reports and accreditation standards and ridiculously erroneous readings of federal disabilities and civil rights laws.

Likewise, if the attached economic vision were accurately pitched as part of China’s policy of ‘picking corporate winners’ who will become multinationals and eventually become the dominant companies in the global markets, governors and mayors and Congress critters might surmise that this is not a good long term growth strategy for the US. If all of us properly understood that these education reforms are tied to a “collaborative relationship between state and business” we would immediately discount the Chamber of Commerce or political or media support that this is all “a good thing.” Only if you have access to that gravy train of public money taken from taxpayers or charged to them as debt and that prosperity cannot last with education determined to manipulate minds and changing higher ed to give diplomas out equitably to demographic groups.

Last week there was a World Economic Forum in Dalian, China that was invite-only. 1500 invites to movers and shakers from all over the globe for the New Champions annual conference that is now called the “Summer Davos.” It was the seventh such confab and I was quoting from the original intentions of this event from back in 2007 from a prof at Stellenbosch University. Should we be blindly adopting the education proposals that are tied to this vision of the future?

“Who then are the new champions? It is very apparent that China and India are fast becoming the winning economies. Their companies and government bureaucrats are equally impressive with their financial acumen and drive toward their objective–capturing markets and creating a winning national economy.” Note: They are not talking about the US economy being the winner but a loser. No wonder the Chinese are willing to finance so much of our public debt that then gets used to pay off states and localities and school districts to push a government-planned economy that seeks to extinguish individualism and high mental capacity. All at the same time. Does anyone think the Chinese will continue to finance all this deficit spending once the mental aptitudes of the US masses have been effectively extinguished?

Did the typical American attending the “Meeting the Innovation Imperative Summit” last week bother to check out the actual definition of innovation being used? I have it from the program materials. Innovation is “the effort to create purposeful, focused change in an organization’s or institution’s economic or social potential.” That’s not innovation of the ‘free lunch,’ Lever of Riches, capacity that created the current levels of economic prosperity that too many people take for granted. That’s innovation in the Governors-Governed distinction. Which is not terribly surprising since the promotional materials acknowledge that “For decades  the economies of China and India floundered due to the inability of their governments to create enabling environments of business. The state prioritized political ideology over the interests of business.”

So what is the current desired vision? Let’s go back to that 2007 document again:

“What then is the option for economies that are grappling to come to grips with the new competitive reality of the global economy that is being shaped in Asia? The most successful economy to understand as well as manage these competitive forces is Singapore. It has embraced global business through providing an enabling environment for business that is fully in line with the market. Rather than intervene in the economy, the Singaporean government creates the environment which allows business to effectively compete.”

Now I would argue that a conference planned by the Chairperson and founder of the joint US-China Collaboration on Clean Energy still has great intentions about intervening in the name of Green Energy, but then I do not tend to take self-interested statements at face value. But this IS the vision of the future that is tied to all the US Governors wanting to take control over education in their states so they can plan “Workforce Development” consistent with “Economic Development” and social equity. The last one gets marketed with its own concentric circle labelled “Justice Too.” People from both sides of the aisle are chasing after this dirigiste-vision that ultimately promotes a China as the ascendant power trajectory. And China, with its one-child policy and reams of corporate and public sector corruption, needs the US to unilaterally hobble its future capacity via poorly understood education reforms. Except I understand them and now so do you.

We also understand the significance of having Dennis Meadows, one of the original co-authors of the controversial 1970s Club of Rome book, Limits to Growth, leading a Dalian program this year on “Decision-making” and systems thinking. Leading no fewer than 3 different programs was the Institute for the Future’s Marina Gorbis who we met in this rather chilling post. . And when I wrote that I did not know Marina had spent years doing psychological research at SRI. Something she openly acknowledged here. Have you ever noticed it is a lot easier to accurately predict the future if you push a government-centric vision and education premised as a platform to push Humanist Psychology on unwitting parents and students? It’s also easier if you openly push radically new forms of political governance.

Since we were not invited, here’s the Rethinking Education visual put on there by MIT. . That would be where Peter Senge teaches and is a reminder of the tight links between digital learning and systems thinking. And the unappreciated economic and political vision attached. And here is the graphic that goes along with the envisioned New Roles for Business and Civil Society in the 21st Century. Might as well know what is intended for us. And here is the intended plan to use the powers of government and education to reverse income inequality.

That should give you a good idea of where this is all going and question whether this in fact is a vision US schools should be pushing without realizing it. I am going to close with a story that illustrated to me the extent to which US politicians are being told whatever story it takes to get them to sign on to supporting these transformative vehicles. Usually touted as “public/private partnerships.” Without having any clue what they are really advocating for. I listened to a presentation from an elected official recently whose bio indicated he was personally and politically quite conservative. He closed by citing to Peter Senge and his book The Fifth Discipline and how we could restructure businesses and governments to eliminate the current Limits to Growth and Prosperity.

Now clearly he had never actually read Senge’s books but someone had led him to believe Senge’s vision aligned with his own. Which it does not if you read the various posts under the Peter Senge tag. My point is pushing Senge’s vision and methods is about 180 degrees from his vision for the US and its future. All someone had to do was misrepresent Senge to gain his advocacy.

I think there is a tremendous amount of that going on now as we get a full court press in the US to get all these policies and practices in place without a protest. You align these misrepresentations to entities or people who want to continue to rely on taxpayer money funding their salaries and companies. But what is being advocated for is ultimately the equivalent of letting in a horde of locusts.

But the few who benefit either don’t know what is going on or they are not telling because the benefits of this cronyism are so huge right now. But the OPM-Other People’s Money will run out. And the WEF definition of innovation will destroy genuine innovation in the US.

And then where will we be? Asking the Gates and Rockefeller Foundations to help average Americans out instead of sponsoring the Dalian Annual Meeting to put this pernicious vision in place?

24 thoughts on “Selling Remedies that Actually Destroy Precisely What the Sales Pitch Touts

  1. Just some quick observations, Robin. First, I’m rather convinced at this point from what reading I’ve done that China has been way over hyped. For one thing its economy isn’t nearly as free as Westerners have been led to think by the MSM and popular treatments of the subject. There are massive government interventions and crony capitalism afoot there, and its still remains to this day, save for a small proportion of the citizenry, a very poor nation overall.

    Secondly, as the long, grey, monotonous battle with climatism has shown us, so long as the money holds out, all of these education initiatives will continue on into infinity, and what David Horowitz has termed “the shadow party” has financial power the likes of which it is almost impossible to conceive. The foundations, such as Ford, Rockefeller, Gates etc make all the conservative foundations combined look like nothing more than lunch money.

    You know, conservatives are now in the seemingly strange situation of being propelled into a period of what one could only term revolution, as revolutionaries bearing a revolutionary philosophy. The Left is now the status quo, fighting bitterly to complete its Frankfurt School vision of the world and to hold on to territory already gained.

    Now, I don’t mean M-16s in the streets, but I do mean that, at some point, conservatives are going to have to realize that they are, in very fact, in a culture war that one side sees as relentless, pitiless, and out of which there can only be one outcome. The Republican Party is, I fear, now all but worthless in this war of ideas, and unless a critical mass of the electorate begins its own “couterculture” that can assertively challenge and relentless pursue the Left politically and ideologically in the public square, the future holds a gathering darkness.

  2. Fascinating, in a macabre way. I followed your link to the IdeasLab page, and in that cartoon below the title, there are all those statements and slogans, one of which is:

    “Intelligence happens in groups.”

    So comforting, it is, to know that the people teaching the teachers who will teach out children, even at the youngest grades, actually take the concept of the Borg seriously.

    • We recognize that as Vygotsky and Marx before that but according to the influential Project Zero site at Harvard this is being pushed now there as Connectivism. Wiping out the concept of individualism and replacing it with the concept of our responsibilities to each other and government.

      I lost a comment to you last night with internet problems but I agree on China. Which is what makes our unilateral mental surrender and refusal to recognize the implications of what we are doing so appalling. The same premise, if you remember, underlay that Oceans of Innovation report from Michael Barber and Pearson. That the head of the New Schools Venture Fund and our ed secretary Duncan had cooperated with. The way that report talked about the changes in ed all over Asia ties in with what is being pushed at Dalian. Also fits what we saw laid out as the Global Cities Education Network.

      We have an assault from the public sector, NGOs, charitable foundations, and cronies of any of these to push a We Get to Decide How You are to Live and What You May Be economy in the 21st. I am going to another meeting this weekend and one of the speakers is pushing this collaborative consumption/sharing economy as the future. It’s completely intertwined with the ed vision I have been writing about according to the program. It’s why I am attending. To confirm that from in-person notes. According to her bio, she is a Young Global Leader for the World Economic Forum. Yet another of the 1500 invited to Dalian to plan where we are all to go. In a country with no respect for the individual.

  3. Robin,

    Hiding here on your blog talking to members of your private capitalist commune will not effect your cause of perpetuating sophist education in service to the exclusive use of private capital.

    If you expect to be successful you will have to sustain your argument with those who do not agree with you, rather than run and hide like a little child when you are confronted by disagreement with your propaganda.

    • I am neither running or hiding Thomas. I just find your invasion of proprietary space and insistence you have a right to be here and speak on behalf of the Occupy Movement to be delusional.

      I warned you about insulting me or the other commenters. I will let this stand because I have been deleting your comments because they are a broken record in the way of a dialogue.

      Again if you want an unfettered right to get your message out, start your own blog. Quit trying to piggyback on mine.

      Time is a finite commodity and I get to decide who and how much of it to use in a discussion with anyone. You may desire the capacity to command other people to perform as you wish but too bad.

    • If you have a problem with “capitalism,” then you essentially have a problem with freedom, and if you have a problem with individual liberty, then you have a problem with a gnawing thirst for either power or destruction, or both.

      I do believe Robin is working on a book, so you and your commie commune can come out from behind the baseboards and we can hash that out when the time comes wherever you wish, including over at my Facebook page, where I will broadcast and link it far and wide.

      • I am a bit tired of the endless lectures so Thomas is in time out. The interesting thing is that the essentials of property to the rest of the liberties is precisely what I am focused on as a muse over the indisputable psych orientation coming at us.

        Book is with the Beta readers and I should have the footnotes in final, authoritative form by this weekend. The blog has been about the actual implementation of the Common Core. The book explains how it became a political weapon and why and the likely consequences and the real reasons for the reading and math wars. Lots of people no one has talked about before and how important they are.

        I created it not just to tell the story but to have so much detail on the political intentions to provide leverage in dealing with all this.

        • I think, to be honest, that I elicited Thomas’ whole story in the discussion we had a post or two ago. I haven’t seen anything new.

          Fair enough, he has the view that some sort of dialectical approach based on some Greek sources I haven’t read would be important for a liberal education.

          I can’t really disagree. My liberal arts education, such as it was, was very shallow, then I studied engineering. Liberal arts, as we teach them in K-12 school, suck.

          I am in no position to argue further with Thomas. I don’t know whether his sources say what he represents they do. It’s not really good form to give such nonspecific references, but there it rests.

          When I have time (unfortunately that could be after the next blue moon) I should go back and read those sources. They are a part of a classical education, which I missed by attending public school. My friends in the good private schools may have gotten a little more of that but not much.

          I should assign those readings in translation for my kids. Maybe I will.

          But I don’t see what it has to do with Common Core, which Thomas has also put down. I just don’t see that his further comments have relevance. If we could get rid of these Frankfurt School jerks and keep at least the idea of a knowledge-based curriculum, perhaps we could consider improving the knowledge-based curriculum along the lines Thomas espouses.

          • Thomas was attempting to hijack our discussion because we are approaching the Common Core from a different angle. The actual implementation and the reenvisioned society and transformation of the economy and political structures that it is explicitly and intrinsically linked to in the sources I have cited and many more that are either in the book or files I have yet to use in a post on this blog. No one was supposed to be talking about contemplative education or Positive School Climate or psychosynthesis as what is coming in now as a mandated social emotional approach in the classroom. Mandated because it allows all children to adopt and participate but in the end it produces the kind of values and attitudes uniformity that a comprehensively planned society that seeks to eliminate the distinction between the public and private sector requires.

            Thomas’ comments now get directed to spam. Which is honestly what they had become. If this were a public forum instead of a proprietary site, I would not be bearing the costs of that filter. We are well past the point on this blog where free filters were adequate for the traffic.

  4. “With regard to my appearance on your public forum, I speak wherever my people arrange for me to speak for the Occupy Movement and “We Are the 99″ that the Occupy Movement represents.”


    You do not represent any “99%” of anything. The occupy movement is a manifestation of a cabal of anti-free market, socialist, communist, neo-Marxist, neo-Stalinist, and assorted leftist special interest groups including public sector parasites such as the SEIU, AFSCME, and the United Federation of Teachers; the rhizomes of ACORN, the CPUSA,, the notorious Fenten Communications, the Democratic Socialists of America, the International Socialist Organization, the Revolutionary Communist Party (the Maoist group behind the Ramsey Clarke’s International Action Committee and International ANSWER); the notorious National Lawyers Guild, and numerous radical environmental groups and pro-jihadist, anti-Semitic interests. Leftists of a feather have always flocked together.

    The entire movement was a complete exercise in Astroturfed agitprop funded by the shadow party and its supporters in the long march through the institutions, now complete, who can now taste the blood of the constitution on their flicking tongues. Looking for Soros money? Its there too.

    The only 99% here is the 99% of the tiny fraction of anti-human ghouls and their drones who cried, heads downcast, when the Soviet Union fell and when Che Guevara’s end ended separated from his torso and who would have supported Stalin, Hitler, and Mussolini with equal gusto, as many on the progressive Left did in the thirties, had they been there to pine for the “wave of the future” represented, each in its own way, by each system.

    And I’m just getting warmed up…

  5. Here’s an exhaustive list of the enemies of Western, classical liberal/Judeo-Christian civilization and the entirety of its foundational principles, that lie at the very dark heart of the Occupy movement.

    This is a rogues gallery of much of the mainstream anti-American Left in America, and represents, if you have followed and studied the Left for as long as have, nothing short of an intellectual and moral carnival of horrors:

    Reply ↓

    • Loran,

      Have you seen the Chinese Ghost Cities stories that illustrate how wrongheaded this “planning” is for what creates propserity?

      As you probably know Abraham Maslow is tied to the Frankfurt School through his friendship with Erich Fromm. Willis Harman used to work with Maslow and Marina used to work with Harman at SRI. Marxist Humanism as a philosophy needs humanist psychology as a method which simply called on the schools to change their focus in 1962.

      All the outcries later, this time we have charters that mandate and accreditation and what OECD is actually measuring and what 21st century skills are actually grounded in. And that’s just a start.

      The historical norm is that rulers control the economy but the price has always been a lack of mass prosperity. The ‘rulers’ and friends want that power back and they are using ed to get it. Globally.

  6. I had heard about the ghost cities quite a few years ago. One can only imagine the utter chaos and social upheaval that would be wrought by the bioregionalism/Rewilding plans under the umbrella of sustainable development. Talk about “that which is not seen.”

    The wedding of the early Marx (at his most nihilistic, which belies the “humanism” label attached to his ideas at this phase of his life) to neo-Freudianism was probably a stroke of diabolic genius, even though Freudian psychodynamics essentially died after the fifties as it became clear that it was, for the most part, a very expensive and long-term navel gazing program.

    I will say that Maslow was an interesting fellow, definitely given to utopian dreaming and generally on the Left (and politically naive), but with some good ideas that were, unfortunately, corrupted by his unconstrained vision of the human condition and his intellect and that of others like him.

    • And now we will have ‘personalized’ digital learning to monitor “how are we doing?”

      The Harman Willis quote in the Gorbis post I linked about how imagining can make things as if it physically happened coupled to gaming is truly dangerous. And MacGonigal said the game designers were taking all this into consideration. I am glad I know this in time as it is being rolled out. But it is darn unpleasant to contemplate.

    • Will go down , along with AGW, as one of the greatest ruses since the Trojan Horse. And at least that series of tragedies was relatively contained.

    • The author of this piece is just an automaton of the Ruling Class and its utterly vacuous inability to say anything of substance about any issue.

      Its all about power and the latest intellectual fad among the Anointed.


  7. I guess it’s in the nature of deceiving the unwary reader, see above in my fishwrap, not to mention the prolefeed administered in the schools, however when knows the methodology behind the mind arson, the rebuttals end up being weak, derivatives of dependency theory, Frankfurt school gymnastics like those perfected by Marcuse and Althusser,

    • I have an astonishing level of proof for what I am asserting.

      And I finally finished my footnotes and biblio in MLA form this afternoon. Ready to go to my editor.!!

      It was amazing how many connections I saw as I systematically went through each footnote and cited doc and books and then recognized corollaries from blog.

      Now I feel like I need to join a gym and go for a walk and start getting my life back.

  8. Interesting graphic from the World Economic Forum you linked to above. I found it interesting that they see “talent” as a challenge to the future they envision. I guess we have a new educational acronym, “NT” (no talent), to associate with this imagined utopian ecosystem.

    • Like Axemaker Minds. Those graphics are chilling. Much like those from Peter Senge’s Camp Snowball.

      These people really are trying to eliminate unapproved technological innovation because they want to decide who the winners and losers will be. Which ultimately means we all lose.

      I hope everyone looks at and backs up those graphics. They really do illustrate what is intended for us.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.