Under the Tower of Babel
Copyright ©1995 by Dean Isaacson : All rights reserved - ISBN 1-887008-00-4
Chapter Seven :: This Is For Our Children
Politicians understand the importance of involving the well being of our children when painting a picture of the glories and wonders of their new regulations. So children are always brought into the formula of government regulation and salvation. To sell us on the international park, the promoters mask their intent with words. They want to make us think that we are preserving opportunity for our children, when, in fact, we are removing their ability to provide for themselves and their families.
We recognize that the economic, environmental, and social needs of the nation must be met without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their own needs.[1]
This vast mountain wilderness, in its entirety, needs to be protected for us and our children.[2]
In turn, the government schools are establishing a global world view in the classrooms. Our children are taught that no borders and world peace are more important than selfish enterprises, such as getting a job and feeding a family. If we continue to teach our children to abandon their Judeo-Christian heritage, their lives and economy will become pagan and third world.
1,400 US public schools have accepted the "children's global flag" which is flying beside the national and state flags in government school classrooms. Schools which fly the flag have signed an agreement to teach the children the moral code of ethics which includes world government and a pagan form of worship which teaches that "Mother Gaia[3] (or mother earth) is the fountainhead (or source) of life." The children must pledge to "preserve this amazing planet as the fountain of life." This program is designed to teach children an internationalist mentality, and that they are children of a universal pagan deity.[4]
Why are we restructuring education? I have heard that it is because we want to develop world class students. Most of the world's students, however, are third world. We have always had first class schools with first class results, declining only in these last thirty years. We have been tinkering with education and it is getting worse. Why don't we just go back to what we lost three decades ago? What is wrong with school prayer, absolute values, basic curriculum and discipline?
Some reformers contend that by forming public private partnerships, industry and schools together will produce a labor pool that will excel in the global economic climate. However, I have heard others just tell it flat out for what it is; that industry leaders perceive labor unions to be out of control. Education is the tool they will use to reach the future employees before the labor unions get to them. In this way they hope to obtain an efficient, yet controllable labor pool. Schools will produce workers trained to perform necessary functions, but not sophisticated enough to be entrepreneurial or marketably competitive.
It does fit that the current emphasis on self esteem, sexual confidence and saying 'no' to drugs would aid this scheme to 'dumb down' the students. The goal of the student will be to feel good about themselves, rather than to get ahead, or to be their best. Economist Nugent, in her third approach to "economic enhancement and stability," calls for a managed approach to jobs and job training. She repudiates competition and calls for an end to private enterprise.[5] For the sake of saving our planet, we will remove all hope of economic prosperity and independence for our children.
Outcome Based Educators
Recently, Goals 2000 and the restructuring of education have drawn a lot of fire from conservative parents. An Associated Press story discussed the concerns that many parents have about the new History standards. One of their problems is that, "They belittle Western Civilization in the name of multiculturalism."[6]
The same day, Scripps Howard News Service carried a story on the newly recommended geography standards. According to the story, Roger Downs, a teacher from Pennsylvania State University, claims that, "we are not trying to produce a generation of mini geographers. The goal is to get someone who's geographically informed."[7]
While on a recent plane trip to Cincinnati, I had the opportunity to talk to an educator who was heading for the annual convention of the National Council for Geographic Education. I asked her about the function and goals of the conference. She explained that this has been an annual convention for over eighty years, but that in recent years they have been concentrating on developing curriculum to accommodate the Goals 2000 program.
When I asked her why she would politicize geography,[8] she responded that "geography is much more than just maps and cities." She explained that it was much better for children to be able to look at a map and understand the conflicts that could arise between the countries. If they could learn how to solve the conflicts, it would be more beneficial than learning the names and locations of the countries.
"But why should we abandon the basics?"
"The basics don't teach kids how to think," she responded.
I countered that it was hard to understand how the student could think constructively without a foundation in the basic principles of the subject. Then I asked her if she believed that knowledge was changing so rapidly as to render instruction in the basics obsolete. She heartily agreed and affirmed that by the time the student could learn the basics, the national borders would be different.
I had heard this same line from our local school superintendent and the vice super. So I asked her if she would be able to help me with a problem that my district's administrators were unable to handle. She was interested in the challenge.
"They tell us that knowledge is doubling every seven to ten years," I postulated.
She agreed with this assertion.
"If change is increasing exponentially, why did they say that knowledge was increasing at this very same rate when I was in school, twenty to thirty years ago?"
She pondered for a moment and then acknowledged that she had heard the same theory for quite some time. "If one stopped to think about it, it doesn't make much sense that the ratio would remain the same for so long," she acknowledged.
So I explained to her that I believed that bureaucrats were trying to deceive us so that we would submit to a wholesale restructuring of our educational system. The crisis would cause us to accept their social experimentation with our children. She looked defensive.
Then I continued, "Maybe you could help me understand something else." Her eyes lit up with the prospect of a second chance.
"History, with the exception of recent developments, has not changed exponentially, has it?" I asked.
"No, it has not," she agreed.
"Take Geography. Excepting a few boundary revisions due to wars and natural disasters, has it changed faster than you are able to teach it?" I appealed. She affirmed that it really had not changed that fast.
"Then take Math. Aside from new math, which doesn't provide any real world usefulness (she shook her head in agreement), has it changed dramatically? Can we no longer keep up with the changing multiplication tables, addition, subtraction or division?" I submitted. She was smiling.
"Aside from graffiti and rap music, has our language changed?" I continued my argument. Now she was laughing.
"Maybe Science."
"Yes," she agreed. "Science has changed considerably."
"Science is probably the only field that we can maintain the possibility that our knowledge has doubled every seven to ten years," I suggested. Once again, she nodded her earnest agreement.
"But," I continued, "has it really changed exponentially, to the degree that we can no longer keep up with the basics? Have the chemical or periodic tables changed radically?" She agreed that they had not changed much, aside from an element or two in the last fifty years.
"Maybe the electronic sciences is where this radical change is taking place," I mused. Her eyes lit up with hope.
"But isn't the most complex microprocessor just a series of transistors?"
I summed up my argument by affirming my belief that a strong foundation in the basics is necessary for the development of true critical thinkers. It is important for students to grasp the basics if we hope for them to comprehend these great 'changes' that are taking place in our world. Then I consoled her that my local school authorities had also been unable to settle my questions regarding these issues.
"Well," she defended, "it is good that you are communicating with your school administrators."
Not admitting defeat, her concession was true to form with bureaucrats: They may not be able to answer your questions, or defend their position, but they will always be positive. This is the outcome of years of seminars and conventions.
Backyard Environmentalists
For the parents of project oriented children, the National Wildlife Federation has a program, which is promoted in our government schools. They want our children to register our backyards as habitat. For your payment of a fifteen dollar registration fee, they will process your 'sensitive area' into their national database. This will be used by environmentally concerned government officials and non-government organizations (NGOs) who will restrict or confiscate your property for the protection of these new plants and animals that you have attracted.
For example, you may be looking for a constructive, educational project to help your young child understand the environment. So together you raise wild flowers and attract squirrels, frogs or butterflies. You might have created a mini wetland area using depressions, peat moss, etc. Then your child becomes of teen age. They enjoy having friends over and you are considering putting in a swimming pool. So, you hire a pool installer and apply for the permit, only to find out that your backyard is now a protected area and cannot be disturbed. You will never get your back yard back.
Here are a few of the instructions that the NWF supplies your children:
No matter where you begin your efforts to improve wildlife habitat your home, school or business you'll be able to see a positive response quickly. Providing food, water, cover and places where wildlife can raise their young will become an even more exciting process as you learn more about the plants and animals with which you share your part of the planet. As you improve your yard, please consider joining the tens of thousands of others. . . who have become certified in our. . . program.[9]
When your application is received, it will be reviewed by naturalists. . . . When your yard is certified, you will receive a handsome, personalized certificate from the National Wildlife Federation. . . . your yard will be assigned a unique number, and it will be entered into our computer based National Register of Backyard Wildlife Habitats.[10]
A form is given to describe plantings, feeders, watering and visitors, cover, places to hide, places to raise young animals, etc. . .
Please include a rough sketch or landscape diagram of your yard. . . Remember to submit the $15 Program Enrollment. . . . The health of our environment depends on how we treat it. . . . try to put the landscaping suggestions below into practice. . . eliminate most turf grasses. . . grow native plants. . . If you don't have property or want to work on another. . . consider adopting a school, a business, a zoo, botanical garden, homeowner's common ground, natural area or nursing home. If you're involved with a habitat in a non traditional setting, let us hear about it.[11]
It is time for parents to become actively involved in the instruction of their children. If you do not have time to find out what the government educators are teaching your children, you may find yourself spending your time and assets trying to reclaim your progeny and your property.
Spending Our Children's Inheritance
According to the Washington State Constitution,[12] the bulk of the money for school construction comes from the sale of timber on State lands. How do we finance these capital improvements if we do not cut any trees? Even before the international parks are established, the Department of Natural Resources believes that they are able to supersede State statute. With no coercion from the legislature, this bureaucracy has decided that it is in the best interest of the State to produce less yield. They blame this upon the 'changing regulatory requirements,' but they make the regulations.
State statute only requires the department to harvest timber at a 'sustainable yield,' which is a more flexible formula. . . . The department historically has adopted the more rigorous. . . and does not plan to change this policy. . . . timber sales and harvesting activities must respond to changing regulatory and environmental requirements.[13]
The simple fact is that we now have less money to build new schools. The revenue will have to be gained another way, which means that taxes will have to be raised. This could be another listing to the reasons why environmentalism cannot sustain an economy in chapter three.
What have we done for our children? Earlier in this chapter, I mentioned that as parents, we would be willing to endure regulations and taxes for the sake of our young. When it comes to the larger picture, however, we forget all about their futures. We go along with taxes, regulations and bad court decisions as long as we do not directly feel any pain because someone else will pay for it. We are ignoring the impact upon our children's generation and forgetting that they will live under these taxes, regulations, bad laws and debt.
What I am getting at is that we are unselfish with our children, but inconsiderate toward other taxpayers. Wake up; our children are the 'other taxpayers.'
Over and over, we have heard the phrase, 'the children are our future.' I would like to correct that right now. We are the children's future!! and we are spending it. We are squandering their potential on our gratification. We have duped ourselves to believe that the children are our future to justify wanton spending. The spending has accomplished nothing and it is destroying their future. We can chose to give them hope and prosperity, but we have given them debt and death. Then we have the audacity to mollify them with empty slogans such as, 'just say "no" to drugs.'
There is a passage in the Bible that says, "A good man leaves an inheritance for his children's children."[14] We have forgotten that principle and have opted for the philosophy of the bumper sticker that says, "We are spending our children's inheritance." Individually and collectively, it is nothing to be proud of. If we truly love our children, we will foreclose the blank check that we have given our government. We will also handle our resources responsibly so that we can take back the raising of our children ourselves.
Footnotes:
[1]op. cit., BLM, Internal Working Document, "Subject: National Performance Review Initiatives."
[2]op. cit., Lowry.
[3]'Gaia' refers to the earth. The actual spelling for the ancient Greek goddess of the earth is 'Gaea.'
[4]Evangelical Methodist (Jun. 1994), reprinted in Network, Grapevine Publications, vol. 3, no. 1 (Jan./Feb. 95), p. 1.
[5]ed. cit., Nature Has No Borders, the newsletter.
[6]Cassandra Burrell, AP, "History Teaching guidelines Draw Conservative Fire," Times Recorder (22 Nov. 94).
[7]Kenneth Eskey, Scripps Howard News Service, "Panel Recommends Geography Teaching Standards," Times Recorder (22 Nov. 94).
[8]That is exactly what I asked. She did not act surprised at the question nor did she ask me to explain.
[9]Craig Tufts, Naturalist and Manager, Backyard Wildlife Habitat Program, letter to "Dear Friends," National Wildlife Federation.
[10]Your Special Place in the Backyard Wildlife Habitat Program, National Wildlife Federation.
[11]Backyard Wildlife Habitat Program, Application for Certification, National Wildlife Federation.
[12]Washington State Constitution, art. 9, sec. 3. "There is hereby established the common school construction fund to be used exclusively for the purpose of financing the construction of facilities for the common schools. The sources of said fund shall be: (1) Those proceeds derived from the sale or appropriation of timber. . ."
[13]Washington State Department of Natural Resources, Final EIS For The Forest Resource Plan, (July 1992), p. 26, 31.
[14]Proverbs 13:22 (NIV).