Public Education Indoctrinates

By Mark Alexander · August 27, 2014 Patriot Post


ObamaCore: 'Why Johnny [Still] Can't Read'

The Systemic Dumbing-Down of America

"If a nation expects to be ignorant -- and free -- in a state of civilization, it expects what never was and never will be." --Thomas Jefferson (1816)

In William Shakespeare's "Tempest," Act V, Miranda observes, "O wonder! How many goodly creatures are there here! How beauteous mankind is! O brave new world, That has such people in't."

It is those words from which Aldous Huxley drew the title of his 1932 novel, "Brave New World."

In that celebrated work, Huxley describes a utopian future in which a central authority maintains totalitarian rule and obedience by re-education -- replacing historical comprehension with a common core of indoctrination, utilizing sleep-learning, psychological manipulation and classical conditioning.

Huxley's utopian apparition compares with that of George Orwell's 1949 dystopian narrative, "Nineteen Eighty-Four," and that of Ayn Rand in her 1957 work, "Atlas Shrugged," but all three were, and remain, significant expositions of the loss of Liberty and its inevitable terminus in tyranny.

Each reflects the outcome of a worldview advanced by the architects of statist totalitarianism -- Karl Marx and Vladimir Lenin -- both of whom fully understood that state-controlled "education" was essential to thefundamental transformation from Liberty totyranny.

According to Marx's "Communist Manifesto," "The education of all children, from the moment that they can get along without a mother's care, shall be in state institutions at state expense."

Lenin followed with this chilling demand: "Give me four years to teach the children and the seed I have sown will never be uprooted."

The modern instruction manual for implementation of Marx's Manifesto is Saul Alinsky's "Rules for Radicals," considered the holy book of so-called "community organizers" like Barack Hussein Obama. It is the contemporary outline of how to restructure institutions in order to achieve a totalitarian state.

Indeed, Alinsky dedicated the book to the patron saint of community organizers: "Lest we forget at least an over-the-shoulder acknowledgment to the very first radical: from all our legends, mythology, and history (and who is to know where mythology leaves off and history begins -- or which is which), the first radical known to man who rebelled against the establishment and did it so effectively that he at least won his own kingdom -- Lucifer."

The current caucus of Socialist Democrats occupying the executive, legislative and judicial branches of our central government subscribe to the following Marxist/Alinsky maxim: "Democracy is the road to socialism," and for four decades have used the educational indoctrination of youth to pave that road.

In 1955, Time magazine published a cover story, "Why Johnny Can't Read," an early indictment of post-war centralized government education institutions, which were graduating students who couldn't make the grade.

Of course, statists claimed the problem could be solved with more money and centralization of academic standards.

In 1950, federal spending on K-12 was about $400,000. Since then, it has climbed to $71.2 billion. Spending for higher education has risen from $250 million in 1958 to $60 billion in 2013. Since the 1970s, spending per pupil has increased 138% while student enrollment has increased only 7.8%. Spending per student by state ranges from $6,000 to a whopping $29,000 in Washington, DC, where the graduation rate is a dismal 58%, and most who do actually graduate are unprepared for meaningful employment.

Obama insisted on an additional $60 billion last year “to keep hundreds of thousands of teachers on the job.” Since 1970, the number of teachers grew by 60% and non-teaching employees by 84%, while student enrollment increased, as noted above, by only 7.8%.

And what has all that centralization and spending achieved? Could it be that the problem is not the need for uniform curriculums and more spending? Arguably, federal government diktats regulating state and local government schools have resulted in a progressive and systemic dumbing-down of generations of young Americans. Indeed, Johnny still can't read.

Jimmy Carter codified this systemic progression by creating a cabinet-level secretary for the U.S. Department of Education. Ronald Reagan vowed to dismantle it, but as with most government programs once created, the union funding machines supporting Democrat majorities in the House and Senate created an insurmountable obstacle to that objective.

Now statists insist the solution to endemic academic decline is a uniform plan of indoctrination under the name "Common Core" -- a series of academic standards set by a horde of bureaucrats known as the Council of Chief School Officers. While some might argue that such standards could implement a degree of accountability, in reality what Common Core does is something far more perilous: It further centralizes the ability to craft and implement educational curriculums -- with the potential outcome of, well, I refer you back to Huxley and Orwell.


Forty-five states plus DC have embraced Common Core, although as conservative columnist George Will notes, they have done so in exchange for stimulus funds or waivers from federal regulations -- federal arm-twisting at its best. Even worse, some states adopted Common Core almost immediately after the June 2, 2010, release of the standards, leaving little to no time to evaluate their efficacy. Another Pelosian example of “passing” something to find out what’s in it.

According to Will, “The advocates of the Common Core say, ‘If you like local control of your school you can keep it, period. If you like your local curriculum you can keep it, period.’ And people don’t believe them for very good reasons. This is the thin end of an enormous wedge of federal power that will be wielded for the constant progressive purpose of concentrating power in Washington so that it can impose continental solutions to problems nationwide.”

Indeed, the ObamaCore mandates are the Department of Education's version of the Department of Health's ObamaCare mandates -- and the outcomes will be similar.

At a high school convocation speech to a youthful corps of what he hopes will one day become loyal Leftist sycophants, Obama claimed, “My administration has been working hard to make sure that we ... encourage the kind of change that’s led not by Washington, DC, but by teachers and principals and parents...”

Note the order in which he lists the agents of change: "teachers and principals and parents." And "the kind of change" led by teachers' unions and government school administrators across the nation is already in lock-step with what “Washington, DC” dictates. They’re both bent upon churning out, perhaps unwittingly, legions of "useful idiots" -- the necessary ingredients for ensuring the future envisioned by Huxley, Orwell and Rand.

For the record, there are tens of thousands of teachers across the nation who do not subscribe to these statist curriculums and the PC pacification of their students. They remain steadfast in their commitment to teach, not indoctrinate, and however few and far between they may be, in many communities they are the last defense against the socialist tide in classrooms. But the federal mandates are multiplying, and the net effect will further undermine any real educational opportunity for this and the next generations of young people.

Concern for the adulteration of educational curriculums to comport with the ideological objectives of the state, in effect asserting that ignorance is a virtue, has a long history.

Nineteenth century British Prime Minister Benjamin Disraeli wrote, “Wherever is found what is called a paternal government, there is found state education. It has been discovered that the best way to insure implicit obedience is to commence tyranny in the nursery.”

His contemporary, John Stuart Mill, warned, “A general State education is a mere contrivance for molding people to be exactly like one another; and as the mold in which it casts them is that which pleases the dominant power in the government, whether this be a monarch, an aristocracy, or a majority of the existing generation; in proportion as it is efficient and successful, it establishes a despotism over the mind, leading by a natural tendency to one over the body.”

A clear example of such "despotism over the mind" would be the Common Core complicit revised Advanced Placement U.S. History exam, which reflects a radically revisionist perspective on our nation's genuine history. The College Board, which sets the curriculum-testing bar, makes only two references to George Washington, one to Thomas Jefferson, and nowhere to be found are Benjamin Franklin and James Madison, among others.

To that end, here is the advice the College Board provided for the practice AP essay:

"[A good essay] might note, for example, that the outcome of the American Revolution saw no broad change in the composition of those who dominated the social, political, and economic structure of the former colonies. Those individuals who were wealthy, powerful, and influential before the event continued to possess wealth, power, and influence later. George Washington, John Adams, and Thomas Jefferson could serve as examples."


For the benefit of those whose understanding of American history is limited by Common Core and AP curriculums, I offer a few quotes from our nation's Founders --which appear nowhere in their syllabus.

"Enlighten the people, generally, and tyranny and oppressions of body and mind will vanish like spirits at the dawn of day. ... Knowledge is power." --Thomas Jefferson

"Law and liberty cannot rationally become the objects of our love, unless they first become the objects of our knowledge." --James Wilson

"A popular Government, without popular information, or the means of acquiring it, is but a Prologue to a Farce or a Tragedy; or, perhaps both. Knowledge will forever govern ignorance: And a people who mean to be their own Governors, must arm themselves with the power which knowledge gives." --James Madison

"For no people will tamely surrender their Liberties, nor can any be easily subdued, when knowledge is diffused and Virtue is preserved. On the Contrary, when People are universally ignorant, and debauched in their Manners, they will sink under their own weight without the Aid of foreign Invaders." --Samuel Adams

"Genius without education is like silver in the mine." --Benjamin Franklin

"In vain are Schools, Academies, and Universities instituted, if loose Principles and licentious habits are impressed upon Children in their earliest years..." --John Adams

"[W]e ought to deprecate the hazard attending ardent and susceptible minds, from being too strongly, and too early prepossessed in favor of other political systems, before they are capable of appreciating their own. ... Let us with caution indulge the supposition that morality can be maintained without religion. Whatever may be conceded to the influence of refined education on minds of peculiar structure, reason and experience both forbid us to expect that national morality can prevail in exclusion of religious principle." --George Washington

And again, let me reiterate these timeless words from Thomas Jefferson...

"If a nation expects to be ignorant -- and free -- in a state of civilization, it expects what never was and never will be."


Utopian dictators like Stalin, Hitler, Pol Pot, and Mao are criminals genocidal psychopaths who have killed more human beings in the last hundred years than any other ideologues in history. They don't limit their murder to individuals, but to entire nations. In the United States another form of utopians, the progressives; have tried to destroy traditional America by strategically dumbing down her people. 

America's future is being crippled on purpose in order to fundamentally transform the nation, its values, and its system of government. Laid out a century ago by progressive luminary John Dewey, the fruits of his schemes are plain to see today. Dewey got rid of the traditional intensive phonics method of instruction and imposed a look-say; sight; or 34;whole-word; method that forces children to read English as if it were Chinese. The method is widely used in today's public schools, which is a major reason there are so many failing public schools that cannot teach children the basics. This can only be considered a blatant form of child abuse. 

American author and veteran educator Samuel Blumenfeld and journalist Alex Newman have taken on the public education establishment as never before and exposed it for the de facto criminal enterprise it is. Crimes of the Educators reveals how the architects of America's public school disaster implemented a plan to socialize the United States by knowingly and willingly dumbing down the population, a mission closer to success than ever as the Obama administration works relentlessly to nationalize K-12 schooling with Common Core. 

The whole-word method of teaching children to read introduced by John Dewey and colleagues in the early twentieth century and which permeates Common Core is a significant cause of dyslexia among students. Public education's war against religion, the great American math disaster; promotion of death education, and the government's plan to lower standards for all so; no one is left behind; is destroying the logic, reasoning, and overall educational prowess of America's next generation. 

According to the Program for International Student Assessment, which collects test results from 65 countries for its rankings. In reading, students in 19 other locales scored higher than U.S. students. In science, 22 education systems scored above the U.S. In mathematics, 29 nations and other jurisdictions outperformed the United States. Journalist Henry Mencken said it best in 1924 when he wrote that the aim of public education is to reduce as many individuals as possible to the same safe level, to breed and train a standardized citizenry, to put down dissent and originality. It is time to hold the Department of Education accountable for the crimes of the educators.


"Why Johnny Can't Read..." is an excellent handbook for homeschoolers, elementary teachers and teacher trainers. The book offers a convincing argument why knowledge of phonics holds the key for decoding any word one encounters. Learning to read in any other way is but an exercise in memorization of word form - word correspondence which takes up about 600,000 memory slots in our brain. Such memory space could have been better used for other functions. In contrast, just by knowing the 44 phonemes of the English language one can read anything. The book clarifies that because there are 44 sounds and we only have 26 letters of the alphabet, some phonemes are represented by single letter symbols while others by a combination of letters. There are also several forms (letter combinations) of representing the same phoneme. The book further eliminates confusion of spelling by giving the rules for spelling such as the double consonant rule. The book systematically leads the reader to the sequence of learning these phonemes and reading carefully chosen words in a word list, utilizing only the phonemes so far introduced. This method facilitates mastery of new phonemes introduced as well as give suficient review of phonemes thus far learned. With only five main steps illustrated in 72 lessons, at the rate of one lesson a week, one can expect to master phonics in two school years (40 weeks per school year). This handy, systematic and comprehensive guide is a classic, a "must have" book for everyone, especially for those of us who never were taught phonics in our schooling.


In this excellent book Rudolph Flesch systematically destroys all the empty excuses offered by educators trying to hang on to Whole Word, most famously, "Your Child Isn't Ready," "We Do Teach Phonics," "No One Method Is Best," and seven others, ALL STILL USED TODAY.

Throughout his life, Flesch took on our education establishment and, in the short term, lost. Sure, his book Why Johnny Can't Read was a bestseller in 1956; and this second one on the same theme was a big bestseller in 1981. But Flesch was trying to save the country from what he viewed as a plague; and in that he did not succeed. He died depressed, thinking that the promoters of Whole Word had won. Indeed, this [...] actually reached its peak around 1995, almost a decade after Flesch died.

Read either of these books and you will be asking: How could Flesch's clear, concise and devastating analysis, presented in two bestsellers, be vanquished by the flimsy fallacy known as Whole Word??? Ah, that is a great question you ask there. Dare we mention that some publishers made mega-millions selling Dick and Jane nonsense? Or that some educators seem to have built stellar careers on the backs of functional illiterates? Can we speak of conspiracy? Let me just note one of the past century's most peculiar facts: as "progressive" educators worked tirelessly to discredit Flesch, our media and academics stood silently aside.

The saga continues. Today's educators use the phrase "Balanced Literacy," which seems to mean: as much Whole Word as they can get away with.


In early American history, a literate and well-educated majority of Americans thrived without a national, tax-funded educational program. In fact, few of the men who signed the Declaration of Independence and drafted the U.S. Constitution had ever seen a public school, and yet they benefited from a free system of education vastly superior to the imagined benefits of today's state-controlled schooling. What happened over the course of the last and a half centuries? Why did Americans surrender the educational freedom that produced such widespread academic excellence to embrace a state of functional illiteracy under complete government control? In his seminal book Is Public Education Necessary?, Samuel Blumenfeld unpacks two centuries of source material to present an accurate history of the religious and philosophical transformations that gave birth to the educational statism controlling America's children today. From the New England Puritan experiments in compulsory schooling to the Unitarian crusades to perfect man with the "strong arm of government", Blumenfeld shows that public education in America has always been more about religion than literacy. A colorful history full of fascinating characters and incisive commentary, Is Public Education Necessary? challenges American parents to discard the common wisdom concerning public schools to reshoulder the responsibilities that are rightfully theirs, to fight to keep the liberties they inherited, and to teach their children to do the same.


The teaching methods used in American classrooms are proven to be the most inefficient. Data show that about 30% of the people taught to read using the methods promulgated by the NEA and the Progressives will become functionally illiterate. Using more classical methods these people could have had lives as educated people. But the book develops much more than that. The founding of the NEA was during the Progressive Socialist era. The institution of public education was copied from the Prussians. The US abandoned a successful private education system to implement the dreams of the Progressive Socialists which includes indoctrination to socialism, the utopian dream of the elitists Progressive Socialists. This book will draw direct links to the NEA founders and Soviet Socialist philosophies and behavioral experiments. You probably know the NEA as a Union, but this is only a fraction of the history of this egregious, socialist elitist organization. See how proven techniques for learning are suppressed by NEA and its socialist cronies. You will not regret reading and being educated on how the socialist "chess" players, have dominated the area of public education - after creating the inefficient behemoth. Capture the education system and you own the future is one of the old National Socialist sayings - and see how ours has been nearly completely destroyed.