Winston & Education

Dear Winston,

Thank you for taking the time to respond to my thread on titled, “And You are Being Taxed To The Hilt For This.”

https://ironink.org/index.php?blog=1&cat=29

It is so seldom that a government school teacher responds to these types of quotes that I find it delightful to engage them when they do. I do wish, however, that you would have engaged more with the substance of the quotes, perhaps even explaining how it is that you viewed them as being deficient.

However, as your methodology was just to give a general repudiation of the quotes, I will answer your “insights” in a conversational manner below.

Once again I thank you for your willingness to converse.

Winston Fox writes,

Sure, a large part of the educational system is geared towards getting children to jump through hoops or conform, but let us not throw the baby out with the bath water. Public education could indeed be used as a method of endoctrination, so it is always important to be vigilant and suppliment a child’s education with parental guidance, but current educational systems in Canada and the United States are a far cry away from brainwashing. Schools can’t get students to stop drinking, having sex or doing drugs, let alone walking in lockstep with each other.

Our educational system is socialistic and it explicitly and implicitly teaches humanism in various ways. Many of the quotes I provided sweep up against that truth and yet your only response is that let’s not the baby out with the bathwater.” I guess the question that I return to you is; ‘Where is the baby (that which is good) in the bathwater that is your government schools? =

Certainly all can agree on the necessity of parental guidance but were parents taking seriously the necessity of parental guidance they wouldn’t put their children in government schools to begin with. Parental guidance would see that government schools aim at deconstructing children from the best of parents belief system and reconstructing them in the direction of a materialistic, atheistic, globalist world and life view.

Second, I would ask why is it the case when God has given a child to the parents that the parents are only to “supplement” the education the child is receiving from the government? I think we have to be honest and admit that teachers are (realizing there are always exceptions to the general rule) some of the most under-educated ill qualified people which staff a particular profession and calling. (See Thomas Sowell’s “Inside Public Education” for the hard statistics on this.) Now, no one doubts the good intentions of teachers but in terms of skill, intelligence and ability there is no way that they should be the ones with the primary input into the life of the child.

And in terms of brainwashing, well the results of the PEERS testing done by such organizations as “Wall-builders” indicates that you are just wrong on this matter. Students that graduate from government schools do, philosophically speaking, walk in lockstep.

Winston wrote,

There is a need for some order in schools and in society, unless you are for complete anarchy, but in some cases policy makers, the PTA and/or the schoolboards, go overboard with things like Zero Tolerance because they are unwilling to leave things like the use of utensils or tylenol up to a person’s individual judgement.

One way to bring order to government schools is by simply getting rid of them. In my estimation there is no need for order in our current government schools because there is no need for the government schools themselves. In my estimation order in society should come from the preaching of the Gospel of Jesus Christ and the instruction by parents of their children in what it means to think as Christians. The public schools are a albatross around the neck of the intelligence of the American citizenry.

However, I must say, that I do not think that the disorder that would result in closing government schools could be any worse than the societal disorder that we currently have.

Really Winston, the things you mention in the above paragraph as problems are really the smallest of problems that the schools have. The real problems are not “zero tolerance” or the use of utensils or Tylenol. The problems are the pagan ideological pre-commitments of the teachers and administrators and the dynamics that arise when you congregate large numbers of adolescents in one place thus creating a “Lord of the flies” youth culture.

Winston, you simply are not seeing the whole picture. There are many books I might recommend to you on this subject but perhaps you could start with John Taylor Gatto’s “Underground History of American Education.”

“I can see where it is easy to lose faith in an education system where, after 12 years, they still do not think that a child is qualified to make a judgement about when to use a steak knife or take something for a headache. Even before “No Child Left Behind” forced teachers to teach to the (pardon the term) dumbest of the class (in order to improve test scores and get enough funding to hopefully keep their jobs), children who struggled were the main focus while those who grasped the subject easily were left to their own devices. I’m not opposed to the squeaky wheel getting the grease, raising the overall number of educated people is a good thing; even if it is inadequate, it is better than nothing. There does need to be more done for the children at the other end of the spectrum however, perhaps the one teacher per classroom model should be reexamined.”

I have not lost faith in the education system Winston. I have not lost faith because I never had any faith to begin with. Even if No Child Left Behind” had never been implemented the problems with the schools would remain. The primary problem is not holding the more intelligent back in order to accommodate the less intelligent. The primary problem is the schools teach from a pagan world and life view. They say that they are religiously neutral, but as religious neutrality is not possible they are teaching all of what they teach upon the foundation of humanism. Because they teach from this foundation they teach irrationality. In short, it is not the facts that are the problem in government schools so much as it is the philosophy of fact that they embrace.

I would go so far as to say Winston, that were I trying to devise a educational system that would most effectively lobotomize our citizenry, I would invent the precise government educational system that we have.

I pray, that it might be the case that the government schools continue to ignore our best and brightest in hopes that the best and brightest won’t be completely ruined by the time they graduate from school.

Winston wrote,

“If your gripe is with public over private, universities and colleges are more apt to turn out drones than an elementary school. If you believe that disseminating an idea is equivalent to endoctination, you should know that not everyone who learns their ABCs becomes a writer, or Newton’s laws a physicist. If your concern is that children may develop different beliefs or opinions than their parents, do not be such a hypocrite. The only way for children to grow into independent, autonomous people is to allow them to take what they have heard and make their own judgements about it. If children were completely dependent on their parents for every important decision, once the parents grew old and died, their children would be lost and unable to operate.”

You’ll be glad to know that I have no more use for our colleges and universities than I do the secondary schools.

Next you imply I’m a hypocrite for wanting my children to believe what their Father believed. My problem with what I generously call “your reasoning” is that government schools force feed ideological fecal matter to children and then turn around and insist that these same children must be allowed to make their own judgments. You can not draw out of children, in terms of judgments, what has not been first poured into children in terms of training. So, my concern, is that my children do not become idiot clones of their intellectually arid teachers.

Quite the contrary to your “wisdom” Winston, I would say that the only way for children to grow into independent, autonomous people is to train them in the way they should go and when they are old they will not depart from it. Once instructed and trained, only then can children make their own autonomous decisions about that which comes before them in life. Really, Winston, on this score it really comes down to your desire for the state to train the children so that the children can be little clones of the state and my desire for Christian parents to train the children so that the children can be little clones of Christ.

Winston wrote,

“Oh, and John Stuart Mill was a strong advocat of educating all women, despite the aforementioned perils of public education having the potential to be used as a tool for brainwashing. If you read the rest of On Liberty, I think you will find that Mill is in favor of an educated populace being able to hold its leaders in check.
If governments really wanted to endoctrinate us, they would stop wasting all that money on schools and just make proclamations to an uneducated and gullible public.”

You can’t be serious Winston.

Propaganda doesn’t work by just making pronouncements Winston. Propaganda, in order for it to work, as to be constant exposure beginning at the youngest of ages. I suggest that you give B. K. Eakman’s “The Cloning of the American Mind” a spin.

Why do you think the American citizenry keeps voting Republican and Democratic socialists into office? Because they are indoctrinated. Why do you think that the American citizenry has lost all interest in their civic responsibilities? Because they are brainwashed. Why do you think the average American almost never reads a book once graduating from High School? Because they are brainwashed. And the fact that you said what you said in this whole response suggests to me that you desperately need to take the red pill that Morpheus is offering you.

Winston,

“I have been a teacher, and I was educated in public schools, as I’m willing to bet you were too, as were millions of others who are not mere sheep. There is always going to be some level of cultural or political bias in everything because none of us has grown up in a vaccuum, but there are general things like civics, math, spelling, grammar, geography and other subjects that we can all form some general consensus about failing complete educational neutrality.”

No, I was not educated in state run schools. I spent 13 years in government schools but I can assure you that I was not educated. I daily thank God that I did not learn a blessed thing in government schools, because in not learning anything I had little need to unlearn later. I also lament that the first 18 years of my life were such a intellectual barren wasteland. I’ve tried to make up for those years since, but in the end one can never retrieve the years that the locust have eaten.

You say that there are millions of others who are not mere sheep. I would dearly love to meet these millions. In 50 years of life I think I’ve come across, at most, scores of people who are not sheep.

All of those subject matters that you mention could be just as easily mastered by a child being given a reading regimen starting at 5 and some Math tutorials. There is no need at all to take a child from their home at the tenderest of ages and throw him or her into the wolf pits that are government schools.

I have a great deal of commentary on Iron Ink Winston on government schooling. You can access more information that you desperately need just by clicking on the right on the topic titled “government schools.”

Regaining Speech Liberty

Roman historian Tacitus dated the beginning of the Roman end of Liberty with the end of free speech. America and the West has come to that same historical pivot point where, through the deadening effect of political correctness on our speech, we are nearing the end of liberty. We no longer have liberty to speak plainly about any number of subjects, and the inability to speak plainly about these subjects serves to further the religious and political ends of those who would disembowel the theological, ideological, and cultural underpinnings of the West.

Because of the corrosive affect of Political correctness upon our speech — and so upon our thought — we are in danger of no longer having the liberty to speak against inferior sexuality, against inferior ideologies, against inferior pagan religions, against inferior cultures, or against inferior political philosophies. The campaign of political correctness against liberty of speech has managed, through the craft of subterfuge, to convince or cow people into thinking that superior thought and speech is that thought and speech that doesn’t see anything as being inferior except the belief that some truths, or cultural arrangement are superior to other truths or cultural arrangements.

We have to restore our language. To restore our language is to, at the same time, restore our ability to think critically. In order to get back our liberty we are going to have to begin again to say what we think irrespective of those who don’t like it and regardless of how people howl at ideas they don’t like. With that beginning we can proceed to speak plainly to the West again and wrench it’s thinking away from the PC cultural Marxist thought police.

Go Figure

A few days ago the NAACP (the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People) accused the Tea Parties of being racist. Now, think with me a moment. Here we have an organization, whose very name communicates its reason for existence as the explicit goal of advancing, through affirmative action, law suits, quotas, protests, and contract set-asides unique advantages for blacks over non-blacks — accusing another organization of being motivated by race.

Sometimes it just hurts to think about irony.

Discussing Trueman Discussing Homosexuality

Tim Phillips

“The article by Trueman

http://www.reformation21.org/blog/2010/08/gay-marriage.php

is spot-on. He is not defending homosexuality, only stating that evangelicals need to be better equipped to explain why the practice is wrong — they can no longer argue from a cultural perspective, since the perspect…ive of the culture has been changing over the last few decades. When sinful practices like no-fault divorce and adultery are often tolerated in evangelicalism, a simple “ick-factor” argument is not going to be very persuasive. To use an analogous argument that James White once made, if you ask the average evangelical why he or she isn’t Roman Catholic, most cannot give a biblical/theological answer, only that they consider RC “strange” or something of the like. That’s just not a good response.”

Bret L. McAtee

If Trueman’s article is spot on he needs to learn how to write with more clarity so as to identify the spot he wants to be on. I found the article, because of its it’s ill written structure in the first couple paragraphs to be thoroughly confusing.

Tim Phillips

“What exactly was confusing about the first couple of paragraphs? All he says is that the decision wasn’t a surprise, a significant comment on a morning talk show, and the fact that there is a generational gap on the issue. One factor that you may not be accounting for — he is British. There’s a certain subtle rhetoric that can be somewhat more difficult to grasp. My point was that the substance of his argument (in the latter part of the article) was spot on.”

Bret L. McAtee

I would prefer to understand it as a certain subtle confusion that is more difficult to grasp precisely because it lacks clarity.

What was confusing is his search for a sociological answer to why there is a difference between the under 35 crowd and the over 35 crowd quite apart from the realization that the problem is theological.

What was confusing was his invoking the idea of culture w/o a corresponding understanding that culture is merely theology externalized. He writes about our culture informing us on the issue without seeming to realize that culture is theology a couple steps removed.

What was confusing is that the man made gross generalizations. Not everyone over 35 was clueless on the biblical reasons as to why homosexuality is wrong. Indeed, a person only need be conversant with Romans 1:16f.

Also, I found his use of the word “Bigoted” to be confusing. While, technically it is acceptable to speak of being bigoted against things like “Apple Juice,” or “GM products” most commonly the word is used to designate an antagonistic attitude towards something that is otherwise perfectly acceptable.

In terms of his bullet points … those weren’t confusing so much as they were “Captain Obvious” statements.

Tim Phillips

“Actually, that is not a very good definition of “bigoted” — it indicates utter intolerance for a belief or opinion that differs from one’s own. Acceptability is not the determining factor.

I agree with your first and second points in that the problem is ultimately theological, and culture ultimately reflects theology (whether good or bad). But I don’t think he would deny that either (the man teach historical theology at a major seminary). In fact, that seems to be precisely what he is saying. The culture has opposed homosexuality, but not necessarily for biblical/theological reasons. While that may not be true for everyone over the age of 35, he was reacting to a statement from a morning talk show; I’m over 35 and did not think for a moment he was including me in that demographic.

Obviously, if the last points were “Captain Obvious” statements, that would seem to mean you found them very clear.”

Bret L. McAtee

I found the latter points clear. It is the first couple paragraphs that remain thoroughly confusing.

If the culture has opposed homosexuality it has opposed it for theological reasons. Now, all of those theological reasons might not be Christian but they were nevertheless theological.

And in terms of teaching at a Reformed Seminary?

That and 50 cents might get a cup of coffee from me. I think the best thing that could happen to the ministry is to decentralize the training away from the Seminaries.

Tim Phillips

He teaches at Westminster Seminary. I did not make the comment to laud seminaries, only to point out that he understands theology. And culture. Read his _Minority Report_ or _The Wages of Spin_ as examples. I won’t dispute your last point about seminaries, except to be careful not to make a gross generalization there. Not all seminaries are bad. Actually, I’m of the opinion that one solution would be to have pastoral training done by pastors, which I think is similar to the point you are making.

I think it would be helpful to make a distinction between being “theological” and being “biblical.” The two should be — but are not necessarily — the same thing (i.e., cults have bad theology, but it is not biblical theology — at least not well-informed biblical theology). Not everyone opposes homosexuality for specifically biblical reasons. They oppose it because their parents told them to, Ozzie and Harriet society told them it was wrong, secular psychology told them it was deviant behavior. Or, they found it personally odd. His point was that this might coincide with biblical teaching, but the person did not arrive at that conclusion or necessarily biblical reasons.”

Bret L. McAtee

Tim,

Yes, but in a culture, such as ours, that has historically such deep roots in Biblical categories and Christian theology, even the culture holding people in place is a result of Biblical influence. Ozzie and Harriet, on this issue, were who they were, because deep deep down the culture had been shaped by Christian categories.

Now, I quite agree that perhaps people should have been more epistemologically self conscious regarding their belief systems but you know not everyone is called to examine the contours of a culture. Some people — indeed most people, including Christians — just swim in the culture w/o questioning the nature of the water. I don’t fault the over 35 crowd to much if it was the case that the remnants of a Christian culture was holding them in place and I certainly don’t refer to them as “Bigoted.”

Now that our culture has changed in the direction of pagan homosexuality people who are both under and over 35 need to work on understanding Biblically the most self evident of realities as to why men and women are exclusive fits.

Personally, I long for the a time when culture is so influenced by Christian categories I don’t need to spend my time proving from Scripture that men should only marry women.See

Tim Phillips

“Yes, I would agree with most of what you say (if not all with the last post). I suppose much of my reaction is can be summarized in a discussion I had with one gentleman, a congregant at a church in Mississippi. Let’s just say he was well over the 35 line. During a pastoral visit, he raised the question of homosexuality, and asked, quite honestly, if the Bible did indeed teach against it. I assured him it did, and I later preached a sermon on that very subject. The point is that he believed the right thing, even thought it to be biblical, but because the prevailing culture was changing, he was confused. Some were telling him the Bible taught something else. Some were telling him not to look at the Bible at all. That is one reason I recommended the book by White and Neill above. It addresses many of these issues and the objections that folks raise at the biblical teaching (the ol’ shellfish argument for instance). Plus, it’s much less confusing than Trueman.”

Bret L. McAtee

Rapprochement! You’ll remember that my point at the outset is that Trueman’s article in question was confusing.

Thanks for the discussion Tim. I am always for clarity.

Everyday People

Note to reader — This is a slightly embellished form of a set of events that happened to me last week.

Lee had finished helping his widowed mother with pruning and yard upkeep and rolled into his Toyota Camry to go home. One block from his mom’s place he noticed his car was on empty and so he pulled on into the local convenience store in order to fill up. He was in a upper middle class part of Holland, Michigan.

Upon getting out of his car he bumped into the 60 year old lady who was filling up her mini SUV. Lee couldn’t help notice that this 60 year old SUV lady was wearing a turquoise halter top with mini-skirt jeans. He figured that a 60 year old lady wearing a turquoise halter top w/ mini skirt jeans intended to be noticed.

Still, Lee managed to top off the tank and went in the store to pay the clerk. Lee waited in line behind the 60 year old SUV lady wearing a turquoise halter top with mini-skirt jeans and a gentleman wearing shin length “shorts” and a muscle man shirt. The waist of the “shorts” fit snugly around the lower half of his buttocks. Lee hadn’t realized they made the Boxer shorts beneath the “shorts” in such dynamic colors. Lee thought to himself, “I need to see if I can find me a pair of those.” On the upper bicep of “shorts” man was tattooed a huge map of Michigan, while just below the elbow daintily rested a artfully tattooed “Grateful Dead” skull logo. In “shorts” man’s right ear hung what looked to be a mid sized nut and bolt earring dangling from his pierced lobe. Lee stared at the nut and bolt wondering how the ear lobe could handle such a constant strain from the weight of the hardware.

Eventually Lee made his way to the Convenience store clerk to pay for his petrol. Across the counter from him stood a young lady with a name tag that spelled, “Shytillequi.” She sported Rastafarian dreadlocks and her first language was definitely Ebonics. Lee had never met a Rastafarian Ebonics speaking “Shytillequi” before but after meeting the turquoise lady and the tattoo-shorts-piercing man he was ready to meet just about anybody.

And anybody is who he bumped into next on his way back to his Toyota Camry. There waiting for him at his car was a Jesus thump-er, complete with handy dandy “Jesus loves you” salvation tracts and a ready explanation on how the rapture was certainly to take place any day now. Lee, not wanting to be rude, spoke with the Jesus man for a few minutes and managed to convince the Jesus man that his own soul was safe and that he might better spend his time speaking to either the 60 year old SUV lady wearing a turquoise halter top with mini-skirt jeans, or the tattoo-“shorts”-piercing guy or the Rastafarian Ebonics speaking Shytillequi. The Jesus man, upon hearing of such a target rich environment looked like a blue tick coon dog about to tree his first coon.

Lee was tempted to stick around the convenience store, if only for the entertainment value he was confident that the conversations of the Jesus man with the 60 year old SUV lady wearing a turquoise halter top mini-skirt jeans, or of the Jesus man with the tattoo-“shorts”-piercing guy or of the Jesus man with the Rastafarian Ebonics speaking Shytillequi would soon create, but Lee had already had enough exposure to the sublime and surreal for the next week and so he clicked his heels three times, hopped into his Toyota and prayed to God that he could find his way back to his Kansas.