Publius-Huldah's Blog

Understanding the Constitution

How Progressive Education and Bad Philosophy Corrupted The People & Undermined The Constitution of The United States

By Publius Huldah.

Throughout human history, the prevailing belief system changes from time to time & place to place;  most people unthinkingly absorb whatever happens to be the prevailing dogma of their time & place. Here, I will show the radical differences between the philosophy of our Founding Era and the philosophy of today. And when I have done so, you will understand why our Country is declining and what you can do about it.  In a nutshell, the Enlightenment philosophy of our Founding Era, which was based on Reason and the recognition of the existence of Fixed Principles, was taken away from us; and replaced with the subjective philosophies of Pragmatism & Existentialism, both of which reject Reason and deny the existence of  Objective Truth & Fixed Principles. These are now the prevailing dogma of our Time; and unless we promptly repudiate them, we will fall.

Alexander Hamilton, James Madison, & John Jay (authors of The Federalist Papers), and others at the Federal Convention of 1787, embodied the best aspects of The Age of Enlightenment. They were well educated, exquisitely knowledgeable in statecraft & political philosophy, embraced the concepts of Objective Reality & Fixed Principles, knew Logic, and could think. George Washington, a man renowned for his Moral Character, which was based on Judeo-Christian ideals, presided over the Convention.

The Fruit of the Philosophy, Religion, & well-trained Minds of our Framers was a Constitution which ordained and established a Federation of States which united only for THE LIMITED PURPOSES enumerated in the Constitution: national defense, international commerce & relations; and domestically, the creation of an uniform commercial system:  Weights & measures, patents & copyrights, a monetary system based on gold & silver, bankruptcy laws, and mail delivery. 1

Progressive “Education” & the Conditioning of the American People

But during the 19th Century, Progressives took control of public schools & teachers’ colleges. They then conditioned teachers and children to abandon our Founders’  Enlightenment philosophy of Reason, Fixed Principles, & Judeo-Christian ideals; and to accept a new ideology which replaced Reason with “feelings” and denied the existence of an Objective Reality & Fixed Principles. They thus primed the objects of their conditioning to accept whatever attitudes the Progressives chose to instill in them. And the objects of this conditioning did not – do not – know what was done to them!

Samuel L. Blumenfeld explains the two opposing philosophies of education:

the “progressives”…viewed public education primarily as a tool for social and cultural reform to be achieved through the remaking of human nature; and the traditionalists …viewed education, public or private, primarily as a development of an individual’s intellectual skills in combination with moral instruction based on Judeo-Christian ideals. [“Is Public Education Necessary?”, Ch. 12]

Thanks to the traditional education they received, our Framers knew history, political philosophy & statecraft, Logic, Judeo-Christian moral ideals, and could think!

Thanks to progressive “education”, Americans have been so dumbed-down that they can’t read, 2 know nothing, and can’t think. After the Progressives ripped moral instruction based on Judeo-Christian ideals out of the public schools, and replaced it with the view that morality is a matter of  subjective personal opinion or group consensus, 3 we became an amoral people who kill babies, reject altogether the concept of personal responsibility, insist on a claimed “right” to live at other peoples’ expense, and believe that the only guide for our conduct is our own likes, dislikes, & “feelings”: “I like it” or “I don’t like it”; “I feel like it” or “I don’t feel like it”. We became so shallow and morally blind that we elect fools & tyrants to high office. Thanks to “self-esteem” classes, we believe that our views & “feelings” on subjects of which we have no knowledge whatsoever are as important as anybody else’s.

With our untrained & empty minds and instilled amorality, we were rendered incapable of  resisting the conditioning of the Progressives.  And this, Folks, has been the purpose of public “education” ever since the Progressives took it over.

2000 years of Western Philosophy on Metaphysics & Epistemology 4 in One Paragraph

So!  In Western Civilization, we had the Age of Faith (There is an Objective Reality & Truth 5 and they are revealed in the Bible & Works of Creation); the Enlightenment (There is an objective Reality & Truth and we discover it by use of Reason); the Age of Romanticism (“Truth” is found in your emotions & feelings); and now, Pragmatism & Existentialism (There is no Objective Reality; “Truth” is a concept which has no meaning; there are no fixed principles, there is only “opinion” and one man’s “opinion” is as good as another’s).

Pragmatism & Existentialism

During the late 19th century, the philosophy of Pragmatism (William James, Charles Saunders Peirce, John Dewey) arose.  It rejected the concept of an Objective Reality with its Timeless Truths.  Instead of concerning oneself with the question of whether something is “True”, the pragmatist asks, “What difference will it make in my life whether I believe it or don’t believe it?”  So one looks to the “utility” of believing it or not believing it. If it has a good result for me, it is “true”.  If it has a bad result for me, it is not “true”. What is “true” for me may not be “true” for you, so an idea can be “true” for some and not “true” for others.  Furthermore, what is “true” for me today may not be “true” for me tomorrow, so “truth” evolves.

Do you see?  They tossed the concept of Objective Truth – Objective Reality – Fixed Principles & Standards – out the window.

Pragmatism morphed into Existentialism (Jean-Paul Sartre). Existentialism rejects an objective basis for life in favor of a subjective basis: 6 Humans are merely biological organisms living meaningless lives, making “choices” on the basis of no criteria whatsoever other than their own likes or dislikes.  Since there is no basis for any external Principles or Standards to which we must conform, people are free to do whatever they want.

Again, it was the Colleges of Education and the public schools which were the vehicles for dumbing-down the American People and conditioning them to reject the Philosophy of our Founders, and to accept the pragmatist & existentialist mind-set.

A friend recalls an incident which happened around 1960 in English class in an American public high school.  The students read a story.  The teacher asked each student to say what the story meant to him. Whatever a student said was praised by the teacher. But my friend said, “It doesn’t matter what it means to me.  What matters is what the author says.”  The teacher was most displeased with that remark.

Do you see?  Under the pretext of teaching literature, the teacher indoctrinated her students into rejecting the concept of  Objective Reality & Fixed Principles, and accepting a subjective world-view devoid of objective meaning.  The teacher most likely had no idea what she was doing – she was just following her teacher’s manual.  She was thus one of the millions of useful idiots who graduate from our Colleges of Education and set about assisting in the destruction of  the minds & morals of  the American People. 7

Do you not remember hearing over & over in your public schools,  “There is no black or white, there is only gray.”  “What’s true for me may not be true for you”.  “If it works, it’s right.”  “What does it mean to you?”  And when one is facing a moral decision, one is asked, “How do you feel about it?”  One’s “feelings” are set up as the criterion for making moral decisions!  There is no appeal to objective standards of Right & Wrong.  That was ripped out of the public schools by the Progressives.  And we are mystified by the high crime rates among our children? 8

Most Americans are now existentialists, even though they never heard of John Paul Sartre. We see our own “likes”, “dislikes”, & “feelings” as the only standard.  We just want to “feel good”.  That our personal likes & dislikes are irrelevant when they conflict with objective Standards of Good & Bad, Right & Wrong, is unthinkable.  I’ll illustrate:  It is painful, but we have no time left to pussy-foot:

Standards of Conduct:  What’s Right By Objective Standards?  Or, What do I like?

Talk to an obese person about what he eats:  He will most likely say something like, “I’ll eat what I like.”  He thus follows a subjective standard: his likes & his dislikes. Because he is an existentialist (though doesn’t know it), he rejects the idea that there is an objective standard by which one can decide what to eat and what to avoid:  That of health – Is the food healthy? Or unhealthy?  And if you tell him of this objective standard, he’ll say, “I don’t care – I’ll eat what I like.” The essence of the existentialist mind-set is that the existentialist sees no reason why he should set anything above his own “feelings”, likes, or dislikes.

There was a stay-at-home Mom. When her young children were hungry, she tossed them a box of crackers or cookies, or took them to a fast food joint.. Why?  Because she didn’t like to cook.  That she had a DUTY to provide her children with healthy food, never entered her mind.  She didn’t “like” cooking, she “felt like” going to the mall instead, and that was the end of the matter.

Couch potatoes don’t exercise because they “hate” exercise.  They reject the objective fact of Reality  that exercise is necessary to be healthy.

Pragmatism, Existentialism & Federal Judges

So! With the rise of Pragmatism & its conception of evolving and subjective “truth”, American lawyers abandoned the concept of Law as a body of fixed principles (set forth in The Declaration, The Constitution, Blackstone’s Commentaries, Natural Law &/or the Bible), and embraced the concept of an “evolving” law and an “evolving” Constitution which means whatever they – the judges – say it means! Remember!  To the pragmatist, “truth” evolves. 9

So THIS is the philosophical basis for judges on the supreme Court tossing out The Federalist Papers as the objective standard of the meaning of The Constitution; and substituting their own opinions. When they were in school, they were conditioned to reject the concept of Objective & Fixed Standards, and to accept Pragmatism & Existentialism; and I bet you few (if any) of them ever thought it through.  They did not resist the conditioning – they just accepted what their Manipulators instilled in them.

We teeter on the brink of disaster. YOU must rise to the occasion.  Our Country & our Posterity depend on YOUR repudiating the destructive philosophies your conditioners foisted on you; and reclaiming the rational Enlightenment philosophy & Judeo-Christian morality of our Framers. We can not save our children unless we close the public schools. 10 Education must be privatized, and we better do it now. PH

Postscript added July 22, 2011:  Melanie Phillips shows how the abandonment of the concept of Objective Principles & Standards and the embracing of moral relativism & multiculturalism is leading to the islamization of  England:   Watch it!


Postscript added January 29, 2013:

My friend, Nancy Coppock, understands also how relativism is destroying Our Country:



1 Our Constitution follows the Biblical model: a civil government with defined powers which is subject tounder – the Law.  Civil government is not the source of Law! The law comes from a higher authority:  God is the source of Law in the Bible; The Declaration of Independence & The Constitution are the Source of Law in our Country.  Acts of the three branches of the federal government are lawful or unlawful depending on whether they are consistent with the Declaration & authorized by The Constitution.  These are the standard of what is “lawful” – NOT the fiat of the brain-washed judges who sit on our courts.

Lex, Rex by Rev. Samuel Rutherford (1644), is a masterwork of which modern American pastors are ignorant.  Rev. Rutherford proves that civil authorities have legitimacy ONLY to the extent they obey The Law. We see all around us the results of our pastors’ ignorance of these Biblical teachings.

2 Two/thirds of Wisconsin 8th graders can’t read proficiently! Yet their teachers are screaming for more benefits to be paid for by the taxpayers, while lying about being sick.  With the public schools, we have financed our own destruction.  And most Americans who can read,  are unable to read The Federalist Papers. Yet The Federalist is essential for a correct understanding of the objective (genuine) meaning of our Constitution & they were published in Newspapers in 1787-88!

3Values clarification” is the version of “moral guidance” foisted in the public schools on our children since the 1960’s.  Public school teachers are telling children that they are “…free to choose ethical and moral behavior that resonates with them.”  They thus “liberate” children from “authoritarian” teachings on morality.

4 “Metaphysics” deals with the nature of Reality; “Epistemology”, with theories of Knowledge.  The Ayn Rand Institute has an excellent lexicon for philosophical terms. Rand was a non-theist; PH is a Christian theist.  Hence, there are some differences.  But both see “Natural Law” (Physics, Mathematics, Logic, Morality, Politics, etc.) as woven into the Fabric of Reality.  Both see the Universe as governed by LAW; and that the duty of man is to learn & to obey these Laws.

Thus, the Great Divide is between those who accept the concept of Divine or “Natural Law”; and those, such as Progressives, Libertarians, Pragmatists, & Existentialists, who reject it. They deny the existence of any standard other than their own “feelings”, likes & dislikes.

5objective reality” means this: “Reality exists as an objective absolute—facts are facts, independent of man’s feelings, wishes, hopes or fears.”  In other words, things are the way they are regardless of what you like, don’t like, agree with or don’t agree with.

6subjectivism” is “…the belief that reality is not a firm absolute, but a fluid, plastic, indeterminate realm which can be altered, in whole or in part, by the consciousness of the perceiver—i.e., by his feelings, wishes or whims.  It is the doctrine which holds that man—an entity of a specific nature, dealing with a universe of a specific nature—can, somehow, live, act and achieve his goals apart from and/or in contradiction to the facts of reality, i.e., apart from and/or in contradiction to his own nature and the nature of the universe…”

7 In “The Abolition of Man“, C.S. Lewis illustrates how the concept of “objective value” was ripped out of the hearts of British school children by their teachers.  He also discusses the “Natural Law” and how it has been universally recognized. His book is only 113 pages, double-spaced, & one of the most important books ever written. Read it. Outline it. Tell all in your spheres of influence.

8 But at least we can take comfort in the knowledge that our children are not being taught in public schools such things as, “thou shalt not kill”, “thou shalt not steal”, “thou shalt not bear false witness”, “thou shalt not covet”, and other such “authoritarian” & offensive rubbish.

9 In “The Second American Revolution“, attorney John W. Whitehead (Rutherford Institute) writes of this.  This is a valuable book which shows how bad philosophy corrupted our judges.

10 Glen Beck and others are showing that under the pretext of teaching reading, progressive “educators” are now telling our children the Lie that our Constitution institutes socialism! PH

March 6, 2011

Add to DeliciousAdd to DiggAdd to FaceBookAdd to Google BookmarkAdd to MySpaceAdd to NewsvineAdd to RedditAdd to StumbleUponAdd to TechnoratiAdd to Twitter

March 6, 2011 - Posted by | Existentialism, Pragmatism, Progressive Education


  1. Reblogged this on Bob's Opinion and commented:
    I was reading some of the past posts of Pubiliushuldah a favorite resource for constitution and found this on our education system. Hope you will enjoy it as much as I have. It is a treasure-trove of solid information.
    Thanks, R.S. Helms


    Comment by R.S. HELMS | November 9, 2019 | Reply

    • Thank you, R.S. But I don’t seem to be able to get thru to The People on this. They don’t do meta-cognition – they unthinkingly absorb their belief system from the prevailing dogma of their time – and once they “believe” something [no matter how absurd their belief is], they don’t question it.

      Here is another paper on the same general topic which is excellent and perhaps more helpful to the Public than mine: Ideas That Are Destroying America

      Americans want to do what they feel like doing. How do we get them to see that they must do what is “right” – not what they “feel like” doing?


      Comment by Publius Huldah | November 9, 2019 | Reply

  2. Reblogged this on Topcat1957's Blog and commented:
    Politicians today don’t even give lip service to the Constitution most of the time. They govern by what seems right to them and their friends.


    Comment by topcat1957 | June 12, 2017 | Reply

    • That’s what they do. It is so sad. They are so much in love with their own ignorant opinions on matters of which they are totally ignorant.
      I hope you are well, my dear Friend.


      Comment by Publius Huldah | June 12, 2017 | Reply

  3. […] of what he thinks or his constituents want.  Van Susteren, Morris and Krauthammer thus display the existentialist mindset: That there is no objective standard outside of our own subjective “views”; and the one with the […]


    Pingback by Why Republican Politicians Sell Us Out. « Publius-Huldah's Blog | June 14, 2014 | Reply

  4. Publius, how are you? We have talked over email and on the comments sections of these blogs and I think that we agree on just about everything from ‘natural born citizen’ to the proper role of the SC, to nullification, etc. However, I’ve noticed that you believe that “Libertarians” are part of the problem in the US. This is a quote from the above article: “Thus, the Great Divide is between those who accept the concept of Divine or “Natural Law”; and those, such as Progressives, Libertarians, Pragmatists, & Existentialists, who reject it. They deny the existence of any standard other than their own “feelings”, likes & dislikes.”

    I consider myself, for the most part, a Libertarian, although I try to avoid classifying myself under a label. I also accept the concept of federalism and social contract, so I understand that we cannot simply pass libertarian legislation such as “universal gay marriage” (not that I would want that) or something similar at the federal level – this must be done, if at all, through the states. The reason being that the federal government was not granted authority to legislate marriage in the Constitution. However, Libertarianism as I understand it is based on “Natural Law”. It states that individuals have certain unalienable rights: Life, Liberty, and Property. These are derived from logic and the basis for Classical Liberalism and is the standard for right and wrong on a Logical/Legal level and not a moral one (it is my understanding that morality cannot be legally imposed unless someone consents to its imposition and that there exists a stark contrast between morality and legality). Perhaps our disagreement is on the meaning of “Liberty” – a libertarian would say that “Liberty” is the right to do anything which does not violate the rights of others. But even so, there is certainly an objective standard in Libertarianism and the view is perfectly compatible with our US Constitution, federalism, and social contract. This “Libertarian” standard is “Natural Rights”.

    I guess my question then is what are you referring to when you say “Libertarian”?


    Comment by Zach_Nap | February 8, 2013 | Reply

    • Thank you, Zach,

      We’ll need to address this later when I am not so squeezed for time. But for now: You said,

      “…standard for right and wrong on a Logical/Legal level and not a moral one (it is my understanding that morality cannot be legally imposed unless someone consents to its imposition and that there exists a stark contrast between morality and legality)…”

      Ayn Rand saw “Law” as Transcendent and as woven into the Fabric of Reality. It didn’t come from GOD, it just was and is. The Transcendent Law Rand recognized addresses morality as well as logic, economics, & physics. The reason I, a Christian theist, have such affinity with Rand is that we both see the Moral Law as Fixed, Objective, and Transcendent; and that it is the duty of Man to learn it and to obey it.

      Our Constitution and Legal system were based on Biblical law as set forth in the Bible. We also saw “Law” as being an expression of Fixed Moral Principles: Laws punishing murder, kidnapping, rape, arson, fraud, negligence, slander, etc. all had their source in Biblical Law.

      It was the modern doctrine of LEGAL POSITIVISM which severed the link between morality & Law. With the rise of legal positivism, Law became merely an expression of the will of the law makers and it was unconnected with principles of “morality”. Indeed, the legal positivist denies that there is any such thing as “moral principles” – there is only your opinion and my opinion, and the person with the power wins.

      You said:

      “Perhaps our disagreement is on the meaning of “Liberty” – a libertarian would say that “Liberty” is the right to do anything which does not violate the rights of others.”

      Oh yes! And this is the crux of the matter: A Christian or Jewish theist, or advocate of Natural Law, believes that Moral Principles are fixed, immutable, and transcendent. The standard is NOT “whether other people are hurt”, but “Is this Right or is it Wrong? And we have fixed standards by which to determine whether something is Right or Wrong. So adultery, taking addictive drugs, gorging on food, homosexuality, group sex, etc., etc. are “Wrong” according to the fixed Standards which theists and natural law advocates embrace [ though there is not a 100% correlation: E.g., Ayn Rand had no problem with adultery if everyone “consented”. Of course, the married man with whom she had an affair and his wife later got divorced; and Ayn’s husband became an alcoholic.]

      But the libertarian says, “no one is hurt if I engage in group sex with consenting adults”; if I stuff myself into morbid obesity, if I take heroin, etc., it’s my life – I’ll do what I want as long as I don’t hurt anybody.

      But the theist or natural law advocate says, “Ah, but you are hurting others: You are hurting your marriage and your children; you degrade the others in your orgy; you set a bad example for others with your gluttony, drunkenness, and drug induced stupors. And you are hurting yourself.”

      You said,

      “…But even so, there is certainly an objective standard in Libertarianism…”

      Not so! The libertarian focuses on his own subjective predilections – his own pet sins – and makes a subjective evaluation of whether anyone else will be “hurt” by it. So, he can, if such is his predilection, look at porn all day. He says, “no one is hurt by it”. But he is wrong: HE himself is being harmed by it, and this affects how he treats others and his views on the social & political issues of out time.

      Dr. Alan Keyes, whom I admire greatly, discusses the issue you raise.

      And then look at my paper on the 14th amdt. where I discuss how Justice Anthony Kennedy, who wrote the majority opinion in Lawrence v. Texas, shows the court’s conception of “Liberty” as freedom from moral restraints.

      The Christian theist sees “Liberty” as both freedom from the bondage of Sin and the condition which results when GOD’s Model of Civil Government is in place. And that is a VERY limited civil government – with few powers!

      And it is nice to hear from you!

      P.S.: I don’t mean to suggest that all Libertarians are also libertines! But I remember that Libertarian group which went to New Hampshire, and were trying to recruit others to join them. They were having a multi-day event with many attractions, one of which was the group sex club.


      Comment by Publius Huldah | February 9, 2013 | Reply

  5. How would states select delegates if a convention to propose amendments to the U.S. constitution were held?…

    John, we are a radically different people today than we were in 1787. Alexis de Tocqueville wrote in “Democracy in America” that America is great because she is good. When she ceases to be good, she will cease to be great. Since the time of our Frami…


    Trackback by Quora | June 22, 2012 | Reply

  6. Publius,

    You’re on the right track–PC Academia and Education are designed to undermine traditional and normal America, and to destroy our values.

    It might help you to understand the roots of Political Correctness and why the PC-Progressives’ goal is to destroy our country.

    Please see the website for my book:

    When the Soviet Union discovered that the Marxist proletarian revolution would not naturally sweep over the United States, they were forced to resort to other means. They were experts in covert operations, so they naturally turned to covert influence.

    Dr George S. Counts, Columbia U. Teachers College professor of Education, was one of their most successful agents. After spending just one year in the USSR, he became an expert on Russian education. He wrote multiple books touting the superiority of the communists’ education to American education.

    Counts advocated “Change” for the American education system. He called for the end of “individualism” and the beginning of “communalism.” He was a rabid proponenet of Progressivism.

    I show, in my book, that Counts was a Soviet covert influence agent. The KGB provided him with his materials, his thoughts, his ideas, and his philosophy.

    Counts is studied and revered today in American Schools of Education. His (KGB-provided) philosophy is revered by PC-Progressive American educators as “Re-contructionism.” In truth, it was and is simple anti-American destructionism.

    Kent Clizbe


    Comment by Kent Clizbe | February 19, 2012 | Reply

    • Well yes, this is one of my fields. William Lind has also done great work on Cultural Marxism, the Frankfurt School, marrying Freud up with Marx, and political correctness. And since I was a philosophy major, and the professors there represented every shade of The Left, I am familiar with all the poison they spew. And I witnessed first hand the horrors of the American public schools, where the stated goal was to bring everyone down to the lowest common denominator.

      But it is hard to explain to people that the mindset which has been instilled into them is a Lie. Few are able to step outside of themselves and examine what they believe, ask themselves why they believe it, and reject it when they see that it is mere indoctrination.

      I despair of reaching the masses by means of Facts & Reason. It seems that while the masses can be brought to change their minds by means of manipulation & indoctrination; they are immune to Facts, Analysis, & Logic.

      I hope you can add the “cool” factor to what we are trying to do – to open the eyes and minds of our countrymen before it is too late. Americans have no idea what awaits them if we don’t make an 180 degree turn within the next few months.


      Comment by Publius/Huldah | February 19, 2012 | Reply

      • And thanks for your work in your field. This is important.

        What you’re missing is the espionage angle.

        PC was created by Muenzenberg in a covert influence operation. Not only did he create the massive front organizations, but his operation deliberately targeted American academia/education for inserting the KGB’s payload: “America is a racist, sexist, homophobic, xenophobic, capitalist hell-hole.” He also created the attitude that goes along with PC–elite superiority to the “moron millions.”

        George S. Counts was the premier KGB influence agent in academia/education. My research revealed Counts as an agent, and revealed his KGB handler–his translator/assistant, Nucia Lodge.

        Lind understands PC and its effects, but not the roots of PC.

        The “Frankfurt School,” or “Fabian Socialism” were results of the KGB’s covert influence operations. They are effects of the Muenzenberg operation, not causes. They are creations of the operation, just as PC was a creation.

        PC in America, and in American education and academia (as well as the media and Hollywood), was created by a deliberate espionage operation.

        I’d be happy to send you a copy of Willing Accomplices.


        Kent Clizbe


        Comment by Kent Clizbe | February 19, 2012 | Reply

  7. Excellent article. Really, I am so glad to see someone else talking about this. I am sending the link out to all my contacts.


    Comment by Kathy | February 1, 2012 | Reply

    • Thank you so much, Kathy. Your encouragement and help mean very much to me.


      Comment by Publius/Huldah | February 19, 2012 | Reply

  8. […] of what he thinks or his constituents want. Van Susteren, Morris and Krauthammer thus display the existentialist mindset: That there is no objective standard outside of our own subjective “views”; and the one with […]



  9. Have you seen this you tube I find her to be very creditable Please watch.


    Comment by patriotdeb | January 18, 2012 | Reply

    • My dear, my internet access is so s l o w, I am not able to download anything over a fraction of an hour.


      Comment by Publius/Huldah | January 19, 2012 | Reply

  10. […] a previous paper, I explained the shift from the philosophy of our Framers, which was based on Logic, Fixed […]



  11. Excellent article, very well thought out. I really enjoyed it and will keep this site as a link from now on. And I am looking forward to looking at some of the others that have been written. Keep up the good work.


    Comment by Todd Stevens | March 14, 2011 | Reply

  12. Our children have not only been under-served and indoctrinated by leftist educators in our public School system but worse they have never been required to exercise critical thinking skills.

    Most kids do not know the simple difference between theory and fact.
    It is a sad truth that if you were to ask a teenagers in America today: What are the three branches of government, more than half would be clueless. However, ask them about Global Warming and they all would express an understanding, albiet a wrong minded belief that it is settled science and a fact.
    Parents need to get involved, even if it is just to suppliment their child’s education by provided an attitude such “don’t believe everything your teacher, teaches.” You are responsible for your own education.

    As my 4th grade teacher (nun) said “I am not here to teach you…I am here to help you teach yourselves.”


    Comment by Claudia | March 11, 2011 | Reply

  13. Hey PH,
    I found another good article on education. It is written by a Christian and explores teaching methods designed to desensitize students to traditional values.

    Teachers seek to instill “new thinking, new strategies, new behavior, and new beliefs”. Their objective “will require a change in the prevailing culture–the attitudes, values, norms and accepted ways of doing things,” says Marc Tucker, President of the National Center on Education and the Economy (NCEE), the master-mind behind the Certificate of Initial Mastery (CIM). He, like other leading change agents, is calling for a paradigm shift–a total transformation in the way people think, believe, and perceive reality.

    The new way of thinking puts a great deal of importance on group conformity.
    “When researching Pennsylvania’s EQA (Educational Quality Assessments) and its relationship to the National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP), she noticed an alarming emphasis on group conformity as a mark of good “citizenship.”
    While emphasizing the new attitudes for citizenship, the NAEP, which developed the measuring scale, did not even consider factual objectives “such as (a) knowing structure of government and (b) understanding problems of international relations.” Apparently, an understanding of the democratic process was considered unimportant–perhaps even a hindrance to the coming social order.

    Dr. Benjamin Bloom, called “the father of Outcome-Based Education.” In his book, All Our Children Learning, he admits that…. “the purpose of education and the schools is to change the thoughts, feelings and actions of students.”

    Again, we see emphasis on group conformity, and obediance, along with revisionist history.

    “One of the quickest ways to change people’s “thoughts, feelings and actions” is to hide or distort the basic facts and assumptions that have molded their culture. This tactic was effectively used to revolutionize the youth in Nazi Germany and Soviet Russia. Facts were censored. Only politically correct information was allowed. Literacy and general knowledge became less important than group conformity and obedience to the new leaders and their instructions.”

    The new emphasis in education is on feelings, INSTEAD of facts. By ignoring facts, students cannot effectively argue with teachers.

    “The revolution… in curriculum is that we no longer are teaching facts to children,” said Dr. Shirley McCune, Senior Director with the Mid-Continent Regional Educational Laboratory at the 1989 Governor’s Conference on Education in Kansas. “We no longer see the teaching of facts and information as the primary outcome of education… We have to understand that the only way anyone ever learns is from their own frame of reference…”

    The author finishes the article with advice on protecting your children from this non-sense.
    “If you want to guard your child’s mind, … take time each day to train your children to….
    •Know biblical truth–the only source of genuine wisdom (Proverbs 2:6)
    •Learn the facts needed to defend what they know and believe
    •Recognize the difference between logic and speculation
    •Ground personal plans in reality, not fantasy
    •Base their understanding of the world on observation rather than imagination
    •Trust genuine science based on facts and logic, not social philosophy
    •Learn the lessons found in a factual study of history
    •Base actions in objective thinking, not subjective feelings.
    •Remember their individual responsibility before God and people
    God said, “Train up a child in the way he should go, and when he is old he will not turn from it.” (Proverbs 6:22)”
    This information came from the following website:

    It should be noted that UNESCO has an online project called “Memory of the World”. It sounds innoculous enough. It is an online repository of historical documents. I do not trust UNESCO however. If their historical documents turn out to be distorted as much as the so-called science presented by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), we may discover that the Founding Fathers were all Fabian Socialists.


    Comment by BILL | March 11, 2011 | Reply

  14. […] Huldah has a MUST READ article on […]


    Pingback by Spreading The Love…Links « That Mr. G Guy's Blog | March 9, 2011 | Reply

  15. PH,
    considering your last blog, I thought you might find this video interesting. This NPR guy is severely conditioned.


    Comment by Dave | March 8, 2011 | Reply

  16. Our public education. Pulling the individual’s brain out by the roots to make free will obsolete, and back-filling the void with dangerous fiction, and fantasy.

    Those who have been obsessed with human control have often experimented to gain the ability to control other mens’ thoughts and behavior.

    The institutionalization of this process using sinister techniques is high on the liberal agenda, and they are concerned with “outcomes.”

    One of the prime drivers for this manipulative shaping of what our children are taught is the National Council for Social Studies (NCSS), and they are becoming worried that they may lose control over how they direct what our children may learn.
    Parents are actually coerced into going along with these outcomes and unaware they ever were.

    Some of the most comprehensive information available on these social engineering influences and techniques employed in our public schools are found here:


    Comment by liberty4usa | March 8, 2011 | Reply

    • We need someone who is gifted in organization to design a system which people can present to their various State Legislature explaining:

      (1) How the privatization of education would work: Homeschools, homeschool co-ops, private schools funded by tuition & charitable donations, charter schools for the poor who can’t get into home school coops or the private schools. Retired people can donate their time to teach classes in homeschools, private schools and charter schools in their areas of expertise.

      (2) We must all disabuse ourselves of the notion that teachers must be “certified” by the States and that those people who graduate from the Colleges of Education are the ones must qualified to teach our children. I wouldn’t let one of them w/in 1000 feet of any young person entrusted to my care.

      (3) States must understand that it is an easy matter to nullify all federal “laws” which purport to speak on education. “Education” is not one of the enumerated powers of Congress. So any “law” which Congress makes which purports to tell States what they must do or not do in this area is an usurpation and deserves to be treated as such.


      Comment by Publius/Huldah | March 8, 2011 | Reply

  17. […] By Publius Huldah. Throughout human history, the prevailing belief system changes from time to time & place to place;  most people unthinkingly absorb whatever happens to be the prevailing dogma of their time & place. Here, I will show the radical differences between the philosophy of our Founding Era and the philosophy of today. And when I have done so, you will understand why our Country is declining and what you can do about it.  In a … Read More […]


    Pingback by How Progressive Education and Bad Philosophy Corrupted The People & Undermined The Constitution of The United States (via Publius-Huldah’s Blog) « That Mr. G Guy's Blog | March 6, 2011 | Reply

  18. […] is a matter of subjective personal opinion or group consensus, 3 we became an amoral … christian public school – Google Blog Search Lion of Judah Movie- Sponsor: Lion of Judah the Movie- Check out "The […]


    Pingback by How Progressive Education and Bad Philosophy Corrupted The People … – Christian Persecution News | March 6, 2011 | Reply

  19. PH stated, “Public school teachers are telling children that they are “…free to choose ethical and moral behavior that resonates with them.” They thus “liberate” children from “authoritarian” teachings on morality.”

    The prison system is full of those students……


    Comment by Dave | March 6, 2011 | Reply

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: