Public School Programs Grow Green PropagandaOn Feb 21, 2013 Comments Off on Public School Programs Grow Green Propaganda
Americans shouldn’t be surprised that liberals are forcing a “green” socialist agenda on us. After all, over the past century we have all been raised on a diet of public school progressive propaganda. We even pay for this propaganda and elect “conservative” representatives that reauthorize federal socialist programs. We ourselves say we’re conservative, and then faithfully send our children off to these public schools to become the next generation of liberals. Just one example of these progressive programs – the Mercedes of them all – is the International Baccalaureate (IB).
Since its inception, the IB has been partnered with UNESCO, the U.N.’s education arm. Yet President Reagan got us out of UNESCO calling it “anti-American.” One does not need to go beyond what IB leaders say to understand why. According to the IB history Schools Across Frontiers, its founders include Oxford’s finest “liberal humanists,” a/k/a Fabian atheists, agnostics and socialists – the intellectual hegemony that ostracized C.S. Lewis after he fell from godless grace to Christianity.
Recent IB speeches exude this liberal/progressive bias. The IB program is just one of many school programs that embrace ‘world citizenship’ as defined in documents the U.S. has not ratified, including The Earth Charter(EC), co-authored by Gorbachev himself, founder of the environmental-socialist non-profit, Green Cross International.The UNESCO PR spin is that “students must learn how to function in a global economy” with a “multicultural” perspective, taking “community action” to promote “sustainability” and other Green causes. Sound familiar? “What’s wrong with that?” you ask.
For starters, the EC regards government as the ultimate Giver. It requires global income redistribution through taxation, binding us to radical social and environmental policies, based on global-warming fallacies (a/k/a “climate change”). These socialist policies are undermining our culture, destroying our economy and stripping us of property rights and freedom.
These trendy school programs undermine traditional religious values using holistic approaches testing attitudes and values as well as academics, all controlled by the national assessment of No Child Left Behind and its international U.N. counterpart Education for All. One IB director even admitted that education is intrinsically religious, quoting T.S. Eliot: “…the problem turns out to be a religious problem.” The caveat: God is an uninvited classroom guest, replaced by the pantheistic, humanistic, agnostic religion of skepticism. Scrutinized under its epistemological microscope of “critical thinking,” faith-based knowledge routinely fails the test.
Yet IB examiners reward these values, hoping to convert more agnostic-skeptics into their fold. Our increasingly secularized world is a testimony of the effectiveness of such liberal/progressive evangelism, imposed upon conservative/traditional teachers.
No wonder elite, liberal colleges love the IB. It preps their dream student profile: the politically correct, postmodern, deconstructionist, relativist skeptic. President Clinton gave us a crash course in this “politics of meaning” when he said, “It depends on what the meaning of the word ‘is’ is.”
These underlying philosophies are in every public school. The IB is now in seven Utah schools, is governed and arbitrated under international law and bypasses the state office of education. The research shows no significant difference in effectiveness compared to other competitive alternatives yet its costs are 3-7 times higher.
When parents seek a piano teacher or doctor, they can research the background, practice or pedagogy of that teacher. Not so, with government-run schools. “Choice” should be about full disclosure of the curriculum’s worldview, its founders and funders, governance, cost and effectiveness. For the last century progressives have thrown conservative/traditional ideals off the bus, controlled the classroom, and lured progressive teachers. Isn’t it time to require full disclosure and give parents real options?
Watch two great debates: Dinesh D’Souza v. Atheist Michael Shermer as Dinesh defends religion v. science
Oregon State University Socratic Club – December 2012
Religion On Trial – Michael Shermer v Dinesh D’Souza – C-Span