Tag: indoctrination

The Deceived vs. the Indoctrinated

The American public has been subjected to massive propaganda efforts by both our government and our media for years. It’s important to understand the impact this has on the current presidential campaign.

That starts with understanding the difference between deception and indoctrination.

Those who have been merely deceived may be surprised when the deception is exposed. They may even be angry. But they will change their positions when confronted with facts that contradict them.

The indoctrinated will not.

The Oxford English Dictionary defines “indoctrinated” as “accepting a set of beliefs without question, refusing to consider any others.” For the indoctrinated, those beliefs become part of their identity; they will not let go of them, even when faced with contrary evidence or explicit falsehoods.

Millions of Americans have been propagandized to believe that former President Donald Trump is “literally Hitler” and “a threat to our democracy”; that he will “destroy this country” or “start World War III.” You can provide all the proof to the contrary you want; it will not change their minds.

I’ve had conversations with friends and loved ones who profess to be terrified about the possible perils of another Trump presidency. In those, I point out just some of the actual conduct of the Biden administration:

— Imprisoning Americans and depriving them of their constitutional rights to due process

— Collaborating with Big Tech companies to censor truthful information about the 2020 elections, the origins of COVID-19, the United States’ role in funding gain-of-function research at the international virology laboratory in Wuhan, China, the efficacy of drugs like ivermectin in treating COVID-19, and the illness and deaths caused by the mRNA vaccines that were forced upon Americans

Keep reading

“Many Educators Portrayed Trump As An Existential Threat. Moving Forward, A Narrative Shift Is Essential”

We may never know what motivated Thomas Matthew Crooks to become Trump’s would-be assassin, but as we seek answers, we must recognize the role educators across the country have played in perpetuating a discourse that fuels animosity and normalizes political violence. Specifically, many educators have portrayed Trump as an existential threat to America. Moving forward, a narrative shift is essential.

Days before the attempted assassination, retired Seattle teacher Michael McSweeney penned an editorial in the The News Tribune, expressing concern that Trump may win the presidency again, issuing a dramatic “apology” to former students, admitting he had misled them about the U.S. government’s checks and balances. “I lied to you because I never could have imagined one person as evil and dangerous as Trump could ever be elected president,” McSweeney wrote, echoing the ideological stance many educators have taken since Trump rode the golden escalator.

In 2016, when I was a freshman history student at the University of Southern Mississippi, professor Dr. Tyler used her lecture on World War II to draw a comparison between Trump’s “Make America Great Again” slogan and Hitler’s rhetoric, alleging that Hitler said, “Make Germany Great Again.” How could impressionable students interpret this intellectually dishonest comparison as anything other than equating Trump with an evil dictator?

This sentiment wasn’t unique to my college in South Mississippi.

A year later, College Fix reported that University of Southern California professor Charles H.F. Davis defended controversial tweets that included obscenities directed at President Donald Trump and calls for the destruction of “whiteness” and the “white supremacist heterosexist patriarchy.” Davis, then an assistant professor and Chief Strategy Officer at the USC Race and Equity Center, argued that Trump’s rhetoric and policies embody oppressive systems. His Twitter background photo showed a black woman shooting a pig dressed in a police uniform.

Even after the horrific events of this past weekend, this rhetoric persists. 

Louise A. Kelly, an associate professor of exercise science at California Lutheran University, posted on Facebook her hope for another assassination attempt, even wishing to assassinate Trump herself. Stacey Patton, an associate professor at Morgan State University, wrote that she hoped the attempt was successful and argued that killing Trump would be justified because “Republicans are racist”—minorities did incredibly well under the Trump administration.  

The same rhetoric surfaced in Crooks’s neck of the woods. In 2019, a Pennsylvania middle school teacher had to apologize to parents after assigning homework in which students pretended to be refugees amid a scenario where President Trump was attempting to seize control of the country.

Without a doubt, this education has profoundly warped the minds of young people everywhere.

Keep reading

California teachers were right to severely punish girl, 7, for writing these words under Black Lives Matter drawing she gave to friend, judge rules

A California judge has ruled that teachers were right to punish a seven-year-old girl over a Black Lives Matter drawing because ‘she’s too young to have First Amendment rights.’

The first grader was banned from recess and drawing pictures at Viejo Elementary in Orange County after she added the words ‘any life’ below Black Lives Matter on a picture she drew and and gave to a black friend.

The picture showed the words ‘Black Lives Matter’ with four round shapes in various different tones of brown, beige and yellow, which was intended to ‘represent her friends’ who were ‘racially-mixed’. 

The girl’s family filed a lawsuit last year against the Capistrano Unified School District, claiming her First Amendment Rights were violated during the 2021 incident.

But US Central District Court Judge David Card ruled that ‘Students have the right to be free from speech that denigrates their race while at school’. Card added that the drawing was not protected by the First Amendment because of the age of the girl, named B.B. in the suit, as reported by the San Francisco Chronicle. 

Judge Card wrote: ‘An elementary school … is not a marketplace of ideas… Thus, the downsides of regulating speech there is not as significant as it is in high schools, where students are approaching voting age and controversial speech could spark conducive conversation.’

Moreover, Judge Card wrote, ‘a parent might second-guess (the principal’s) conclusion, but his decision to discipline B.B. belongs to him, not the federal courts.’

Card added that ‘Undoubtedly, B.B.’s intentions were innocent… B.B. testified that she gifted the Drawing to M.C. to make her feel comfortable after her class learned about Martin Luther King Jr.’

B.B. was punished by her school after her friend, known as M.C. in the suit, took the picture home, where a parent saw it and found it offensive, emailing the school and demanding they take action.

This prompted principal Jesus Becerra to tell B.B. the drawing was inappropriate and racist. He then punished B.B. by making her publicly apologize on the playground to her classmates and teachers. B.B. was also banned from recess and from drawing pictures for two weeks.

Keep reading

California pushing radical “LGBTQ+” propaganda on state employees, reveals mental health professional

More than 250,000 people work for the state of California, meaning “We the People of the Golden State.” And from now on, all of them are required to undergo “diversity, equity and inclusion” (DEI) propaganda courses showcasing LGBTQ+ perversion in order to remain employed.

Elizabeth Jones, an employee for the California Department of State Hospitals (DSH), wrote an article for LifeSiteNews that explains what the forced indoctrination classes entail.

DSH employs about 13,000 people whose job it is to provide mental health services to around 6,500 patients at five state-run hospitals: Atascadero, Coalinga, Metropolitan (in Los Angeles County), Napa and Patton.

Jones spent about two hours clicking through a mandatory course within DSH called “DSH LGBTQ+ Training 2024” that instructs employees about what so-called “LGBTQ affirming care is, how to deliver it and why it matters.”

The beginning of the course features a psychologist and social worker at Napa State Hospital breaking down the difference between “sexual orientation” and “gender identity.”

“I was informed that ‘sexual orientations’ include ‘heterosexual, gay, lesbian, bisexual, asexual and pansexual,'” Jones writes. “Pansexual, according to my notes, ‘means that the person’s sexual behavior and attraction is rooted in connection with the other person, rather than the gender the other person chooses to adopt’ – denying our bodily reality.”

“‘Gender identities,’ on the other hand, describe ‘the labels we put on ourselves regardless of our sexual orientation’ and include woman, man, ‘trans-man, trans-woman, cisgender, transgender, gender non-binary, gender fluid and gender queer,'” added Jones.

Keep reading

Harvard Leftist Summer Reading List Recommends Book On How To Indoctrinate Students With CRT

Harvard University’s summer reading list includes various books covering topics like transgenderism, feminism, and racism, including one book that states that educators should teach their students ideas related to Critical Race Theory.

We’ve got recommendations from the Harvard community, titles from Harvard authors, and a glimpse inside some new releases,” the school’s website reads.

A page titled “Need a good book?” under Harvard’s “Summer Reads” section advertises “We Want to Do More Than Survive,” a book that argues that “the US educational system is maintained by and profits from the suffering of children of color.”

Harvard doctoral student, DeAnza Cook, says the book is a “powerful appeal to build transformative educational homeplaces rooted in abolitionist pedagogies for liberation,” and recommends it for “[diversity, inclusion, and belonging] educators and enthusiasts.”

The book urges that educators “must teach students about racial violence, oppression, and how to make sustainable change in their communities through radical civic initiatives and movements.”

The author of the book, Dr. Bettina Love, is a professor at Teachers College, Columbia University, who previously said her work focuses on “help[ing] white people become less racist.” She also previously wrote that educators should “[r]emove all punitive or disciplinary practices that spirit murder Black, Brown, and Indigenous children.”

Keep reading

Schoolchildren Are Being Indoctrinated With Hard Left Ideology Under the Guise of Teaching Them to be ‘Inclusive’

Not so long ago I rewatched the original Jurassic Park and was struck by Ian Malcolm’s monologue in which he says to John Hammond, “Your scientists were so preoccupied with whether or not they could, they didn’t stop to think if they should.” It struck me that this unintentionally captured the essence of a growing problem in today’s education system: EDI. School managers and teachers are so eager to rush into whatever is trending in EDI. So convinced are they, without any evidence, of EDI’s supposed moral, ethical, educational and societal benefits that they neglect to consider whether they should be promoting it. 

The virtues of EDI are extolled throughout the education system and my own school is no different. Schools openly bow down to EDI and an entire industry has developed to ensure EDI is embedded across the education system, despite evidence that it has had detrimental effects in the workplace. It is commonplace now to see schools advertising themselves as “inclusive” and numerous websites have popped up to promote EDI, such as the Inclusive Schools Network. The EDI approach has ostensibly been embraced because Britain is now a multi-cultural, multi-ethnic society and it’s supposedly essential to help tackle discrimination, break down stereotypes, facilitate better communication and foster social cohesion. However, I think the push for “inclusivity” distorts education, disempowers the individual and poses a threat to a free society.

One assertion that’s frequently made these days is that “inclusive language” should be used in lessons. But what, exactly, is it? Who defines it? And how can such a thing exist in any case? The economist Ludwig von Mises observed in Socialism: An Economic and Sociological Analysis how Marxism thrived on “dialectic artificialities” and a “word-fetishism” which made it “possible to unite incompatible ideas and demands” (e.g. Queers for Palestine). This linguistic sleight of hand can be used to brainwash the broader population, and this is exactly what “inclusive language” does. Those who advocate “inclusive language” claim it’s a tool for promoting open conversations. But for “inclusive language” to exist and function, it must by its very nature be at odds with intellectual diversity, free speech and democratic values. It requires a central authority to dictate what is or is not inclusive, thereby strengthening that authority’s power, while discriminating against those who are deemed to have said something offensive. 

The drive to use “inclusive language” and to be “inclusive” is in reality exclusionary and intolerant. A cursory glance through some typical ‘guidance’, such as that produced by the University of Leeds, reveals that it usually focuses on what not to say rather than on what to say. The implications of this are worrying as it’s a method of importing identity politics and ideological authoritarianism into schools. As John Stuart Mill noted in On Liberty, “all silencing of discussion is an assumption of infallibility”. By pursuing “inclusive language”, school managers are going along with this linguistic totalitarianism and, in my experience, are never open to any discussion about whether they are embarking on the best approach for pupils and staff. 

Keep reading

Schoolchildren Are Being Indoctrinated With Hard Left Ideology Under the Guise of Teaching Them to be ‘Inclusive’

Not so long ago I rewatched the original Jurassic Park and was struck by Ian Malcolm’s monologue in which he says to John Hammond, “Your scientists were so preoccupied with whether or not they could, they didn’t stop to think if they should.” It struck me that this unintentionally captured the essence of a growing problem in today’s education system: EDI. School managers and teachers are so eager to rush into whatever is trending in EDI. So convinced are they, without any evidence, of EDI’s supposed moral, ethical, educational and societal benefits that they neglect to consider whether they should be promoting it. 

The virtues of EDI are extolled throughout the education system and my own school is no different. Schools openly bow down to EDI and an entire industry has developed to ensure EDI is embedded across the education system, despite evidence that it has had detrimental effects in the workplace. It is commonplace now to see schools advertising themselves as “inclusive” and numerous websites have popped up to promote EDI, such as the Inclusive Schools Network. The EDI approach has ostensibly been embraced because Britain is now a multi-cultural, multi-ethnic society and it’s supposedly essential to help tackle discrimination, break down stereotypes, facilitate better communication and foster social cohesion. However, I think the push for “inclusivity” distorts education, disempowers the individual and poses a threat to a free society.

One assertion that’s frequently made these days is that “inclusive language” should be used in lessons. But what, exactly, is it? Who defines it? And how can such a thing exist in any case? The economist Ludwig von Mises observed in Socialism: An Economic and Sociological Analysis how Marxism thrived on “dialectic artificialities” and a “word-fetishism” which made it “possible to unite incompatible ideas and demands” (e.g. Queers for Palestine). This linguistic sleight of hand can be used to brainwash the broader population, and this is exactly what “inclusive language” does. Those who advocate for “inclusive language” claim it’s a tool for promoting open conversations. But for “inclusive language” to exist and function, it must by its very nature be at odds with intellectual diversity, free speech and democratic values. It requires a central authority to dictate what is or is not inclusive, thereby strengthening that authority’s power, while discriminating against those who are deemed to have said something offensive. 

The drive to use “inclusive language” and to be “inclusive” is in reality exclusionary and intolerant. A cursory glance through some typical ‘guidance’, such as that produced by the University of Leeds, reveals that it usually focuses on what not to say rather than on what to say. The implications of this are worrying as it’s a method of importing identity politics and ideological authoritarianism into schools. As John Stuart Mill noted in On Liberty, “all silencing of discussion is an assumption of infallibility”. By pursuing “inclusive language”, school managers are going along with this linguistic totalitarianism and, in my experience, are never open to any discussion about whether they are embarking on the best approach for pupils and staff. 

On one level, the emphasis on “inclusive language” encourages others to find offence where none is intended and in doing so undermines resilience. It feeds a culture of victimhood and is hardly beneficial to learning, where failure is often a necessary precursor to success. On another level, it establishes a right not to be offended. This type of approach is fundamentally unworkable, as we have seen through inane legislation like Scotland’s Hate Crime Act. By seeking to protect certain identity groups from being offended, it introduces a form of bullying into a school since it provides bad actors, both pupils and staff, with the perfect cudgel to attack their opponents. 

Keep reading

LEGO Produces ‘Pride’ Video With Drag Queens And Furries

Children’s toy company LEGO has released a ‘Pride’ video featuring drag queens and even furries in toy form.

Yes, they are furries, not just random bears taking part in a Pride parade. 

Who exactly is this aimed at?

Actual real gay people are fed up of this crap.

The kids unfortunately don’t get a choice.

Keep reading

Woke Culture Declares War on Beauty: Morbidly Obese Female Wins Miss Alabama and a MAN Wins Miss Maryland USA

The despicable woke left continued its unrelenting war on American society by declaring two hideous-looking individuals beauty pageant winners, one of whom is male.

As WKRG reported, 23-year-old Atmore resident Sara Milliken won Miss Alabama on her third try over Memorial Day weekend.

She claimed her goal was only to make the top 10 after failing to place in her previous two attempts.

“Just making it to top 10 was my goal, ya know, I could leave the weekend saying I was better than I was the year before, and it’s all about bettering yourself for me,” Milliken told WKRG.

But Milliken would have been laughed right out of the room in an actual beauty competition. WKRG-TV Digital Reporter Summer Poole posed for a picture with Milliken following her asinine victory in the pageant.

Who do you think looks more worthy of the crown?

Keep reading

CNN Provides Parenting Advice; What To Do If Your 4-Year-Old “Comes Out As Trans”

CNN has a piece on its website offering advice for parents on what to do when children barely older than toddlers say they might be non binary or transgender.

Take a wild stab in the dark at what the advice consists of.

“When your kid comes out as trans, here’s what to do,” the column states before moving on to opinions provided by someone called Nova Bright-Williams, a trans identifying individual running something called the Trevor Project, a ‘crisis organization’ for LGBTQ+ children.

“When your child tells you they’re trans, your first response should be to thank them for sharing and learning about their experience,” Bright-Williams says.

Not entertaining the notion that a child with less than 1500 days life experience may have been born in the wrong body “could not only cause hurt and anger but also could ruin chances of a long-term relationship,” The report further advises.

The article offers a case study where a six year old asked questions such as “Mom, am I a boy? How do you know I’m a boy?”  

The mother told CNN “Once I clued in, I said, ‘The doctors make a best guess based on your body… but only you can know, and we love you no matter what.’”

What? Doctors guess biological sex? Since when?

Keep reading