+ Reply to Thread
Page 4 of 5 FirstFirst 1 4 5 LastLast
Results 61 to 80 of 88

Thread: When Vested Interests Take Education over...

  1. Link to Post #61
    United States Avalon Member Foxie Loxie's Avatar
    Join Date
    20th September 2015
    Location
    Central NY
    Age
    75
    Posts
    3,079
    Thanks
    67,683
    Thanked 17,330 times in 2,953 posts

    Default Re: When Vested Interests Take Education over...

    Well...after trying to digest all this, I would have to conclude that Josephus was a "court historian" & there we have it!

  2. The Following 4 Users Say Thank You to Foxie Loxie For This Post:

    Bill Ryan (7th March 2018), BMJ (29th March 2018), Hervé (4th March 2018), Michelle Marie (7th March 2018)

  3. Link to Post #62
    France Administrator Hervé's Avatar
    Join Date
    7th March 2011
    Location
    Brittany
    Posts
    16,733
    Thanks
    59,971
    Thanked 94,698 times in 15,443 posts

    Default Re: When Vested Interests Take Education over...

    Suppose you write to your child and then remember he can’t read?

    by Jon Rappoport Mar 5, 2018

    You wouldn’t want to be that kind of parent.

    But schools can preempt you. They can bring your child along, all the way to graduation from high school—and it turns out he’s illiterate.

    I want to describe several levels of illiteracy that afflict the young. There are more, but I’ll focus on three.
    One: At age 16, he can’t read words and understand them beyond, say, a fourth grade level. He can’t read an article. He can’t read a food label. He can’t read a sign at a pond that says swimming is dangerous.

    Two: He can read a newspaper article at a 10th grade level. He knows what most of the words mean. But he doesn’t know what the author is saying—he doesn’t know and can’t explain what each paragraph is stating. He can’t articulate that.

    Three: He can read the same article and tell you something about what it means. He can articulate the meaning of most paragraphs. But he doesn’t know and can’t tell you what final point the author is making. Perhaps he isn’t even aware that the author is trying to make a point. And he certainly can’t explain HOW the author is reasoning, how the author is moving through a series of inferences to arrive at a conclusion.
    The number-one level of illiteracy is easy to spot. But the other two aren’t, because people (including many teachers) never make proper inquiries of the student. They don’t ask what each paragraph of an article SPECIFICALLY means. They don’t ask for the overall point the author is making. They don’t ask how the author is arriving at his conclusion. So these aspects of literacy are shrouded in darkness.

    You can find estimates of the amount of illiteracy in your home country, but these assessments, gloomy as they are, don’t cover all the basic issues I’m raising here. This is called a clue. The researchers themselves don’t recognize all the aspects of a literate person.

    If you had access to a high-school class, and you started asking students pointed questions about the issues I’m raising here, with respect to a particular newspaper article, you would discover a giant hole in education.
    “Look, here is an article about White House foreign policy. You just read it. What the is author telling you? What basic point is he making in the article?”
    Then stand back and watch what happens. Very little. Lots of blank faces.

    Now, if you, as a parent, want to go even deeper, if you understand the article about foreign policy is driven by an agenda and the author is biased…what chance do you have? The students can’t even grasp what the author is SAYING.

    A school teacher—or better yet, a home schooling parent—could undo all this damage. He could gradually take children through the three levels above and make sure the students emerge with a firm grasp of what it means to be literate. Not “in general,” but specifically.

    When students are up to it, go over one article a dozen times (or more). Home in on each sentence, each paragraph, until the meanings become clear. Search for the conclusion the author is driving at. Finally, examine in detail HOW the author is arriving at his conclusion. Dig in. Dig in deep. Teach literacy as if you’re teaching anatomy, piece by piece.

    The devil is in the details, as they say. Train students to find, appreciate, and understand details. Train them to be able to articulate the details. Don’t go for gloss and vague surface.

    Over the course of a year, analyze a dozen or two dozen articles and watch what happens. Light bulbs go on. Students catch on. They begin to see through the fog. They turn into detectives. The glazed look in their eyes disappears. They move from passive to active. They show excitement. They’re alive. They’re alive to real education. Goofy transforms into sharp.

    The potential ability was there. It was always there. It just needed to be brought out, step by step.

    And then there is this: all the indoctrination that had been unleashed on students, all the training in “values” begins to vaporize. The students no longer accept it as a substitute for learning. They realize it was fluff and vapid generality.

    They can find better values. They can find values based on the self-realization that they’re now alive and inquisitive and discerning—they’re capable, they’re not disabled. They don’t need fake learning and fake teachers and a fake system to push them along to graduation on a smooth river of pretense.

    The conspiracy of pretense is gone, like a fever that the immune system demolishes.

    Out of the vague and confusing mist, a literate person emerges.

    Two basic cover stories permeate education these days.
    One, cooperative learning. In this setting, small teams of students are assigned projects. No individual student is responsible for his own work (a disaster).

    Two, the teacher asks students for their opinions about an article, an issue, a book.
    It’s assumed (by moral and cultural relativity theory) that students will have different and equally valid ideas about what they read. This skirts the fact that the students don’t truly understand what they’re reading in the first place. Therefore, what value do their opinions have?

    All sorts of acrobatics are performed in the classroom to avoid the core fact of illiteracy.

    This is a catastrophe. Every society and civilization has language. If the young aren’t taught that language successfully, they can’t function in many areas of life. Yes, some of them will succeed anyway, but the majority won’t. They’ll founder on the rocks of ignorance. The “culture” will concoct all sorts of reasons to support and excuse that ignorance, but the effort doesn’t wash. It merely postpones a day of reckoning.

    To make true literacy come to pass, teachers and parents have to be literate themselves. This is a major issue, too. But a start needs to be made somewhere. To execute a course correction, somebody at the helm of a ship has to be able to steer. Somebody has to learn how.

    Any person who has looked into the history of education in America soon learns—from authors John Taylor Gatto and Charlotte Iserbyt, for example—that the system has been intentionally rigged and degraded, because who in power wants millions of independent, literate, logical minds out there questioning and analyzing what elite power is really doing?

    The way back from the swamp of incompetence and futility isn’t a short journey. But it can be accomplished, one teacher and one student at a time. One class at a time.

    If not in a school, then at home.


    Jon Rappoport
    "La réalité est un rêve que l'on fait atterrir" San Antonio AKA F. Dard

    Troll-hood motto: Never, ever, however, whatsoever, to anyone, a point concede.

  4. The Following 11 Users Say Thank You to Hervé For This Post:

    avid (7th March 2018), Bill Ryan (7th March 2018), bluestflame (7th March 2018), BMJ (28th March 2018), Ewan (7th March 2018), Foxie Loxie (7th March 2018), Jayke (25th September 2018), Merry Mom (13th March 2018), Michelle Marie (7th March 2018), Sophocles (13th June 2018), Valerie Villars (24th January 2019)

  5. Link to Post #63
    France Administrator Hervé's Avatar
    Join Date
    7th March 2011
    Location
    Brittany
    Posts
    16,733
    Thanks
    59,971
    Thanked 94,698 times in 15,443 posts

    Default Re: When Vested Interests Take Education over...

    Illiteracy leads to censorship

    by Jon Rappoport Mar 7, 2018
    “…intellectual freedom is a deep-rooted tradition without which our characteristic western culture could only doubtfully exist. From that tradition many of our intellectuals are visibly turning away. They have accepted the principle that a book should be published or suppressed, praised or damned, not on its merits but according to political expediency. And others who do not actually hold this view assent to it from sheer cowardice.”
    (George Orwell, 1953)
    When those who control public discourse, in a nation, see that they are losing to upstarts, that their flimsy ideas are being supplanted by much stronger ideas from these newcomers (who are actually traditionalists), the shocked controllers turn to the more direct strategy of censorship.

    In terms of substance, and even popularity, the ministers of truth are losing; so they abandon reasoned discourse altogether. They desert this fertile, competitive, and NECESSARY territory. They no longer debate. They ban.

    Among their supporters are crowds of illiterates.

    There are many people who, because their education was a vaporous thing, have no interest in the written or spoken word.

    The reason is obvious: they can’t read.

    Their natural impulse is to make excuses. “Who needs books?” “People who write books are showing their privilege.”

    For these excuse-makers, book burning would mean NOTHING. All that matters is: what slogans should I shout?

    For the illiterate, a book is a mystery. How could anyone put all the words together and write one? Somehow, the author must have a secret method of downloading the book from an elite source, a cloud, a machine, a trick in their DNA.

    A book, a report, an article, a study, an essay—millions of people in “advanced societies” don’t have a clue. When censorship tightens, who cares? It’s just words.

    IT’S JUST WORDS.

    Long ago, when I taught school, I had an experience I wish many people could share. Twenty children in a 10th-grade classroom. No student was reading up to that grade level. Each student was reading at a DIFFERENT (sub-standard) level. Time to teach reading. How could it be done? It couldn’t.

    Elite societal players welcome illiteracy. They love it. It’s one of their cherished goals. Ignorance is good. More than that, illiterate people are easy to convince that repressive censorship isn’t a problem. It’s just something that “happens.”

    If you don’t have “the right ideas,” you should be censored.

    IT’S JUST WORDS.

    Words are useless “things” like tacks and marbles and crayons and paper clips. Who cares?
    “Don’t you see that the whole aim of Newspeak is to narrow the range of thought? In the end we shall make thoughtcrime literally impossible, because there will be no words in which to express it. Every concept that can ever be needed, will be expressed by exactly one word, with its meaning rigidly defined and all its subsidiary meanings rubbed out and forgotten.”
    (George Orwell, “1984”)
    At its root, illiteracy becomes a form of reductionism. What can be comprehended, discussed, debated, or reasoned shrinks.

    IT’S JUST WORDS.


    Illiteracy is more effective than political correctness. Untold numbers of people can’t understand the sentences that are floating and flying by them every day. They register this by building up anger. Unfocused anger. They are perfect fodder for know-nothing social and political movements that requite violence and repression. After all, they were repressed, weren’t they? Weren’t they left hanging out in the wind by their education, their schooling? Now is the time for revenge.

    Along the way, censorship becomes a very good thing. They were limited in what they learned; therefore, limit everyone else. Why not?

    IT’S JUST WORDS.


    There is a sub-text percolating in many, many schools:
    “All right, you students, this is your education. We’re going to keep you from learning the language. We’re going to hold it back from you. At the same time, we’re going to praise you and push you ahead from grade to grade. You’ll know something is wrong. But you’ll accept what we do to you. It’s easier. You’ll take a ride through school, and then we’ll dump you out into the world. We’re making rebels wholesale. Ignorant rebels. Rebels without the tools for THINKING. You’ll have find a place where thinking isn’t important. Good luck. Here’s a suggestion. Find a group where all you have to do is yell and throw rocks. Learn what to yell. Demand your right to get EVERYTHING FOR NOTHING. That is all.”
    Do you want a piece of interesting news? I can offer it, based on my experience of the past 17 years writing online. The declining system of education creates a vacuum. And into that vacuum, writers who do value language step forward, and they do present actual ideas. This is a large vacuum, so it can accommodate many writers.

    They are creating new realities.

    And readers show up.

    Miracle of miracles.

    These writers and readers are the “replacement team.” They are standing in for the colleges and universities and the sloganeers.

    They are not censoring themselves or anyone else.

    They are proliferating language, not reducing it.

    Here is the secret: the history of humans reveals that language does, in fact, expand. It doesn’t lie down and die. It doesn’t wait for know-nothings to catch up. It doesn’t wait for anyone. Poets and novelists and playwrights and essayists find and invent new branches of word and thought.

    Their present is the future. They are making the future every day.

    And as far as pure ideas go, no matter how hard some people have tried, Jefferson and Madison and Tom Paine and John Adams are not dead yet. Their shaped principles embedded in sentences live on.

    If at some point, the entire population of the planet were illiterate, except for four writers, those four would invent a new ocean that can’t be contained—and somehow, readers would show up.

    Perhaps you think I’m describing a kind of magic, and maybe I am, but I’m also giving you ironclad fact. It has always been so.

    The Internet may have been invented with machine language, but the writers who have appeared on it are multiplying their own language.

    They are outdistancing the machine.

    They always will.

    Jon Rappoport
    "La réalité est un rêve que l'on fait atterrir" San Antonio AKA F. Dard

    Troll-hood motto: Never, ever, however, whatsoever, to anyone, a point concede.

  6. The Following 8 Users Say Thank You to Hervé For This Post:

    avid (7th March 2018), Bill Ryan (7th March 2018), BMJ (9th March 2018), Constance (28th September 2018), Ewan (7th March 2018), Foxie Loxie (7th March 2018), Jayke (25th September 2018), Sophocles (13th June 2018)

  7. Link to Post #64
    France Administrator Hervé's Avatar
    Join Date
    7th March 2011
    Location
    Brittany
    Posts
    16,733
    Thanks
    59,971
    Thanked 94,698 times in 15,443 posts

    Default Re: When Vested Interests Take Education over...

    Now, now... hear, hear... who would have thunk of such a devious thing... here, here...

    Saudi prince admits spread of Wahhabism was on request of the West during Cold War

    RT
    Wed, 28 Mar 2018 11:58 UTC


    Saudi Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman. © Hamad I Mohammed / Reuters

    The Saudi-funded spread of Wahhabism began as a result of Western countries asking Riyadh to help counter the Soviet Union during the Cold War, Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman told the Washington Post.

    Speaking to the paper, bin Salman said that Saudi Arabia's Western allies urged the country to invest in mosques and madrassas overseas during the Cold War, in an effort to prevent encroachment in Muslim countries by the Soviet Union.

    He added that successive Saudi governments had lost track of that effort, saying "we have to get it all back." Bin Salman also said that funding now comes mostly from Saudi-based "foundations," rather than from the government.

    The crown prince's 75-minute interview with the Washington Post took place on March 22, the final day of his US tour....

    [...]

    Full article: https://www.rt.com/news/422563-saudi...ern-countries/

    Related:
    You can't understand ISIS if you don't know the history of Wahhabism in Saudi Arabia

    Saudi Arabia tops the list for foreign financial support of Wahhabi British terrorists, Theresa May is keeping a lid on it

    Beyond Islamophobia: The Truth About Salafism and Jihadism

    London terror attacks: Why we need to talk about Saudi Arabia and Wahhabism

    Saudi Arabia: A rogue state with never ending history of human rights violations

    =============================================

    Of course, this:

    Quote an effort to prevent encroachment in Muslim countries by the Soviet Union.
    ... was the coverup sale's pitch for this one:

    Quote "The Third World War must be fomented by taking advantage of the differences caused by the "agentur" of the "Illuminati" between the political Zionists and the leaders of Islamic World. The war must be conducted in such a way that Islam (the Moslem Arabic World) and political Zionism (the State of Israel) mutually destroy each other. Meanwhile the other nations, once more divided on this issue will be constrained to fight to the point of complete physical, moral, spiritual and economical exhaustion…We shall unleash the Nihilists and the atheists, and we shall provoke a formidable social cataclysm which in all its horror will show clearly to the nations the effect of absolute atheism, origin of savagery and of the most bloody turmoil. Then everywhere, the citizens, obliged to defend themselves against the world minority of revolutionaries, will exterminate those destroyers of civilization, and the multitude, disillusioned with Christianity, whose deistic spirits will from that moment be without compass or direction, anxious for an ideal, but without knowing where to render its adoration, will receive the true light through the universal manifestation of the pure doctrine of Lucifer, brought finally out in the public view. This manifestation will result from the general reactionary movement which will follow the destruction of Christianity and atheism, both conquered and exterminated at the same time."
    "La réalité est un rêve que l'on fait atterrir" San Antonio AKA F. Dard

    Troll-hood motto: Never, ever, however, whatsoever, to anyone, a point concede.

  8. The Following 6 Users Say Thank You to Hervé For This Post:

    Bill Ryan (19th April 2018), BMJ (28th March 2018), Ewan (28th March 2018), Foxie Loxie (28th March 2018), Jayke (25th September 2018), Sophocles (13th June 2018)

  9. Link to Post #65
    France Administrator Hervé's Avatar
    Join Date
    7th March 2011
    Location
    Brittany
    Posts
    16,733
    Thanks
    59,971
    Thanked 94,698 times in 15,443 posts

    Default Re: When Vested Interests Take Education over...

    Education, not income, a better predictor of life expectancy



    Medical Xpress
    Mon, 16 Apr 2018 14:42 UTC



    Curve showing the relationship between income and life expectancy in 1970, 1990 and 2010 © Lutz/Kebede

    Rising income and the subsequent improved standards of living have long been thought to be the most important factors contributing to a long and healthy life. However, new research from Wolfgang Lutz and Endale Kebede, from IIASA and the Vienna University of Economics and Business (WU) has shown that instead, the level of education a person has is a much better predictor of life expectancy.

    In 1975, Samuel Preston developed the Preston Curve, which plotted the GDP per person on the horizontal axis against life expectancy on the vertical axis. The curve shows a clear but flattening upward trend in life expectancy with increasing GDP. The curves also shift upwards over time which has been explained by better healthcare.

    In 1985, John Caldwell and Pat Caldwell suggested instead that lowered mortality resulted from better female education. In their new paper, Lutz and Kebede used global data from 174 countries from 1970-2015 to test the two hypotheses. Whether income or education is more important for improving health and life expectancy is an important question for policymakers deciding where to direct funding.

    Lutz and Kebede also plotted life expectancy against the mean years of schooling of the adult population. The curve created is much more linear, suggesting that education is a much better predictor. There is no upward shift of the curve requiring explanation by other factors. Data was subject to multivariate analyses to validate the findings. The same link was found when the curves were adjusted for child mortality.


    Curve showing the relationship between education and life expectancy in 1970, 1990 and 2010 © Lutz/Kebede

    The researchers point out that better education leads to improved cognition and in turn to better choices for health-related behaviours. Recent decades have seen a shift in the disease burden from infectious to chronic diseases, the latter of which are largely lifestyle-related. As time goes on, the link between education and better health choices, and therefore life expectancy, will become even more apparent.
    "This paper is more radical than previous analyses in terms of challenging the ubiquitous view that income and medical interventions are the main drivers of health. It even shows that the empirical association between income and health is largely spurious," says Lutz.
    Previous lines of research at the Wittgenstein Centre, a collaboration between IIASA, WU and the Vienna Institute of Demography, have emphasised the importance of improving education for poverty eradication and economic growth, as well as the ability to adapt to climate change. These findings further back up the call for improved access to education.

    The apparent link between health and income found by Preston can be explained by the fact that better education results in both better health and higher incomes.
    "The findings matter for the entire global health research community, and they matter for everybody in global development and deciding on funding allocations for the different aspects of development," says Lutz, adding that funding quality education for all around the world should be a much higher priority.


    Related:
    "La réalité est un rêve que l'on fait atterrir" San Antonio AKA F. Dard

    Troll-hood motto: Never, ever, however, whatsoever, to anyone, a point concede.

  10. The Following 6 Users Say Thank You to Hervé For This Post:

    avid (18th April 2018), Bill Ryan (19th April 2018), BMJ (24th April 2018), Ewan (18th April 2018), Foxie Loxie (18th April 2018), Sophocles (13th June 2018)

  11. Link to Post #66
    France Administrator Hervé's Avatar
    Join Date
    7th March 2011
    Location
    Brittany
    Posts
    16,733
    Thanks
    59,971
    Thanked 94,698 times in 15,443 posts

    Default Re: When Vested Interests Take Education over...

    A short recap on how things got started (plucked from here <---) and how much out of hand they've gotten now:
    The New World Order is a fait accompli. They put "mission accomplished" (annuit coeptis) on the US dollar in 1929.

    [...]
    Nicholas Rockefeller admitted to Aaron Russo that his family foundation started Women's Lib to get women out of the home, expand the tax base and indoctrinate the children from a young age. In 2000, Rockefeller foretold Sept. 11 and invited Russo to become part of the coming Fascist state.

    The Rockefeller Foundation is also the major sponsor of Planned Parenthood (Formerly "The Eugenics Society") contraceptive research and Feminism. There are 87K hits for the "RF and Women's Studies" on Google.

    Previously, the Rockefellers sponsored Josef Mengele's research on how to make a human slave at Auschwitz. Feminism is also dedicated to this long-term goal. (See this video on the history of Rockefeller Social Engineering)

    There you have it, that "BIG" picture, in the most succinct nutshell possible:

    Quote Nicholas Rockefeller [...] his family foundation started Women's Lib to get women out of the home, expand the tax base and indoctrinate the children from a young age.
    ... and one gets:
    • the perpetuation of gender wars and a systemic, systematic gender "paygap" that starts with a "No fair" and ends in riots.
    • nanny-state Children's Aid Societies fighting home schooling and placing plucked out children in more "beneficial" environment.
    "La réalité est un rêve que l'on fait atterrir" San Antonio AKA F. Dard

    Troll-hood motto: Never, ever, however, whatsoever, to anyone, a point concede.

  12. The Following 6 Users Say Thank You to Hervé For This Post:

    avid (23rd April 2018), Bill Ryan (22nd April 2018), BMJ (24th April 2018), Foxie Loxie (22nd April 2018), Sophocles (5th June 2018), Tintin (24th January 2019)

  13. Link to Post #67
    Avalon Member Sophocles's Avatar
    Join Date
    19th February 2011
    Location
    Nanset
    Age
    38
    Posts
    752
    Thanks
    13,649
    Thanked 3,849 times in 713 posts

    Default Re: When Vested Interests Take Education over...

    Three great minds share the same observation:

    Noam Chomsky (1928 - ):



    «He (Alan Bloom) was saying that a couple of smart guys will decide what the great thoughts are. And every student will memorize them. And that is education

    «The purpose is just to impose authority.»

    Edward Bernays (1891 - 1995):

    “The conscious and intelligent manipulation of the organized habits and opinions of the masses is an important element in democratic society. Those who manipulate this unseen mechanism of society constitute an invisible government which is the true ruling power of our country. ...We are governed, our minds are molded, our tastes formed, our ideas suggested, largely by men we have never heard of. This is a logical result of the way in which our democratic society is organized. Vast numbers of human beings must cooperate in this manner if they are to live together as a smoothly functioning society. ...In almost every act of our daily lives, whether in the sphere of politics or business, in our social conduct or our ethical thinking, we are dominated by the relatively small number of persons...who understand the mental processes and social patterns of the masses. It is they who pull the wires which control the public mind.”

    Karl Marx (1818 - 1883):

    "Within this system an unequal social order was maintained through ideological coercion which created consensus--and acceptance of the values, expectations, and conditions as determined by the bourgeoisie."

  14. The Following 10 Users Say Thank You to Sophocles For This Post:

    Bill Ryan (11th July 2018), BMJ (12th July 2018), Bruno (14th June 2018), Foxie Loxie (14th June 2018), Hervé (14th June 2018), Hym (24th January 2019), Ivanhoe (28th February 2019), onawah (14th June 2018), Tintin (24th January 2019), Valerie Villars (28th January 2019)

  15. Link to Post #68
    Avalon Member Sophocles's Avatar
    Join Date
    19th February 2011
    Location
    Nanset
    Age
    38
    Posts
    752
    Thanks
    13,649
    Thanked 3,849 times in 713 posts

    Default Re: When Vested Interests Take Education over...

    Again it struck me just how easily the "human potential" can be manipulated or destroyed (if one has the right tools and knowledge) when listening to Jordan Peterson in this interview (recommended also if you just want to see how to keep your cool while being verbally attacked). It`s about the gender pay gap but it also touches on a lot of other interesting subjects.

    When keeping the following points (a, b, c, d) in mind (while viewing the interview) it might be a bit easier to see the (ideological) importance and the divisive potential of the educational system (and the media).

    a) Muzafer Sharifs et al findings from the social experiment called "The Robbers Cave Experiment" (1954): "As each group became distantly aware of the presence of the other group they seemed to become re-inforced in their own sense of being a group"

    b) Group identity - an aspect of social identity and arises form internal processes of identification and the external group processes that lead to individuals strongly associating themselves with a group and its members,the group characteristics and practices etc. This identity may develop on the basis of shared beliefs, ethnity, language, values etc.

    c) Social identity - that aspect of self image which arises from a social context provided by, for example, in group or ethnic values and membership of such groups. Social identity theory addresses many of the issue surrounding this topic.

    d) Social identity theory - A social identity is the portion of an individual's self-concept derived from perceived membership in a relevant social group.[1][2] As originally formulated by Henri Tajfel and John Turner in the 1970s and 80s,[3] social identity theory introduced the concept of a social identity as a way in which to explain intergroup behaviour.



    Interviewer: «Why should your right to freedom of speech trump a trans persons right not to be offended?» JP: «Because in order to be able to think you have to risk being offensive» (22:08).

    Source
    Last edited by Sophocles; 24th June 2018 at 04:39.

  16. The Following 9 Users Say Thank You to Sophocles For This Post:

    Bill Ryan (11th July 2018), BMJ (12th July 2018), Foxie Loxie (11th July 2018), Hervé (24th June 2018), Hym (24th January 2019), Ivanhoe (28th February 2019), Reinhard (23rd July 2018), Tintin (24th January 2019), Valerie Villars (28th January 2019)

  17. Link to Post #69
    France Administrator Hervé's Avatar
    Join Date
    7th March 2011
    Location
    Brittany
    Posts
    16,733
    Thanks
    59,971
    Thanked 94,698 times in 15,443 posts

    Default Re: When Vested Interests Take Education over...

    The sordid history of infant formula and how the USA bullies, blackmails and threatens 3rd world countries

    R.S. Ahthion The Greanville Post
    Tue, 10 Jul 2018 00:01 UTC



    The 1974 article titled The Baby Killer blew the lid off the Nestle bottle formula scandal. (1) Companies like Nestle used women in nurses uniforms to sell their baby formula. They provided free samples to mothers who would use the formula. These women would then find their breasts had stopped giving milk after a month of using the infant formula. Now they were hooked and needed to pay for the formula yet the family income in many cases was only $7 a week. What unfolded was a tragedy: from mixing the baby water with unsafe water sources to not being able to afford the expensive baby formula and diluting it to make it last longer. The result was deaths of babies in the millions, malnourished babies with stunted growth condemned to a lifetime of physical and mental disability.

    A stunning example of free-market murder feeding the world's children to a $11.5 billion industry.

    A million infant deaths a year are blamed on a reliance of infant formula rather than breastfeeding. (2)

    The recent attempt by the United States to overturn 40 years of World Health Organisation consensus that breast feeding is universally better for babies is a prime example of the desperation of United States capital and how entwined corporate interest has become within the government.

    American officials first sought to water down the resolution by removing language that called on governments to "protect, promote and support breast-feeding". When that failed they resorted to threats of trade measures and withdrawing military aid to help assisting in the drug wars. (3)

    The press has blown up because under an internal code of the World Health Organisation baby formula companies are banned from explicitly targeting mothers and their health carers. Advertising is also controlled. This is what 3rd world nations were trying to achieve.
    "We were shocked because we didn't understand how such a small matter like breast-feeding could provoke such a dramatic response," said the Ecuadorean official, who asked not to be identified because she was afraid of losing her job.(3)
    South American countries should be least shocked of all on the ideology of the United States. Profit over everything. Even over the corpses of a million babies a year to keep the $11.5 billion Infant Formula industry going. This new era of naked and brazenly corrupt capitalism from the United States is prime evidence of a desperate and shamelessly awful system struggling to make profits in a time of Great Power rivalries. Because in an era of great power rivalry, making some profit is not enough. Making super profits is what is required.
    "In the end, the Americans' efforts were mostly unsuccessful. It was the Russians who ultimately stepped in to introduce the measure - and the Americans did not threaten them."
    Millions more grow up in conditions of malnutrition and stunted growth at a key time of their development. All so corrupt companies like Abbot Laboratories & Nestle can earn that sweet, sweet profit. It has been common consensus for decades now that breastfeeding is the preferred method of feeding your child. Even under conditions that are ideal for infant formula (ie. in the first world with easy access to clean water etc).

    Abbot Laboratories was one of the companies to produce infant formula for sale in the 3rd world. Abbot Laboratories also contributed to a part of $107 million to Trumps inauguration. (4)
    "For a time, many companies employed ''mothercraft'' nurses, most of whom wore white uniforms, who visited women in maternity wards and in their homes. As they helped mothers to cope with infant-rearing problems, many of the nurses also promoted their company's formula. Dressed in traditional nurses' uniforms, they conveyed the false impression that independent health professionals - not company employees - were recommending formula feeding." (2)
    But conditions in the 3rd world aren't ideal. A lack of access to both money to buy the formula and access to clean water has meant mothers are watering down their baby formula with dirty water.

    "Director general of the W.H.O., says that 'evidence from developing countries indicates that infants breast-fed less than six months, or not at all, have a mortality rate 5 to 10 times higher in the second six months of life than those breast-fed six months or more.'"(2)

    Infant formula was a terrible solution to a problem that never should have existed outside of fringe cases where a mothers milk has dried up due to stress/health reasons. The current corporate drive to replace breastmilk with a profitable artificial product is convincing women perfectly capable of producing wholesome, plentiful breastmilk to become consumers of expensive, imperfect and sometimes lethal infant formula(8). But it does showcase brilliantly how innovative capitalism is. It can create a market from anything. It also shows how the capitalist world uses the full arm of its advertising, propaganda and cultural penetration to make profit from the world where there should be none. It is a scandal that it remains a $11.5 billion and growing market. (5)

    A big problem in the third world was that the advertising portrayed Infant Formula as the best thing for their children despite the World Health Organisation saying it wasn't and the companies themselves knowing it wasn't. Aggressive advertisement by these companies has led to women in Third world nations believing it to be superior to breast milk. The advertisements (though subtly) hinted that formula milk was better and breastfeeding was for the lower classes.(8)
    Banned from entering maternity wards directly in Singapore for example, Dumex milk nurses would wait just outside the hospital gates to catch new mothers with free samples on their way home.(8)
    This naked display of power and aggression by a waning United States that no longer feels it can get what it wants via diplomacy and soft power, particularly with an issue as benign as Infant formula and mortality rates should offer a glimpse into just how corrupt the country is.

    In January of this year David Norquist, the Under Secretary of Defense in the US department of Defense, declared an end to the war on terror and opening the $686 billion budget for the military said,
    "Great power competition, not terrorism, has emerged as the central challenge to U.S. security and prosperity. It is increasingly apparent that China and Russia want to shape a world consistent with their authoritarian values and, in the process, replace the free and open order that has enabled global security and prosperity since World War II."(6)
    Those values he ascribes to appear to be "profit over the lives of babies". And he is prepared to pursue those values, of unfettered free market violence, via a three front war against Russia and China. (7)

    The resolution on breastfeeding was introduced however purely because the Russians chose to throw their weight behind it. A Russian delegate had this to say on the matter.
    "We're not trying to be a hero here, but we feel that it is wrong when a big country tries to push around some very small countries, especially on an issue that is really important for the rest of the world." (3)
    I deliberately, in my writings, do not use the terms "developed" or "undeveloped countries". It is not accurate to describe nations in Africa/Asia or Latin America as "undeveloped" which implies some kind of fault on their behalf. Third world nations have been systematically under-developed by the first world. Every corporation from the west has come to those shores to extract their pound of flesh from the people which leaves them in abject poverty or outright kills them. The infant formula scandal is just one example of a thousand in seeing how western corporations make their super profits off the backs of the Third World. And they are happy to do it with the result of quite literally millions of dead children and millions more who are stunted in the first years of their lives ensuring that they will endure physical/mental suffering the rest of their lives.

    Beware the foreign 'nurses' that come bearing gifts.

    (1) http://archive.babymilkaction.org/pdfs/babykiller.pdf

    (2) https://www.nytimes.com/1981/12/06/m...pagewanted=all

    (3) https://www.nytimes.com/2018/07/08/h...dor-trump.html

    (4) https://www.spectrumnews.org/news/he...-inauguration/

    (5) http://uk.businessinsider.com/nestle...dont-comply-14

    (6) https://fpif.org/the-pentagon-is-pla...na-and-russia/

    (7) https://www.defense.gov/News/Article...e/GovDelivery/

    (8)https://newint.org/features/1982/04/01/babies/

    Related:
    "La réalité est un rêve que l'on fait atterrir" San Antonio AKA F. Dard

    Troll-hood motto: Never, ever, however, whatsoever, to anyone, a point concede.

  18. The Following 6 Users Say Thank You to Hervé For This Post:

    Bill Ryan (11th July 2018), BMJ (12th July 2018), Foxie Loxie (11th July 2018), Hym (24th January 2019), Michelle Marie (23rd July 2018), Sophocles (11th July 2018)

  19. Link to Post #70
    France Administrator Hervé's Avatar
    Join Date
    7th March 2011
    Location
    Brittany
    Posts
    16,733
    Thanks
    59,971
    Thanked 94,698 times in 15,443 posts

    Default Re: When Vested Interests Take Education over...

    The US Democratic Party is Communist--David Horowitz

    henrymakow.com July 22, 2018

    My view that Communism is a fait accompli in the US is confirmed by no less an authority than David Horowitz, editor of frontpagemag.com, a man who was a Communist for most of his life. He says Obama, Bernie Sanders and Nancy Pelosi are Communists.

    Curious that Zionist Jews like Horowitz oppose the Communist threat most vigorously.

    Communism is an aspect of Jewish Satanism (Cabalism).

    Satanism uses a pretense of seeking "social justice" to destroy Western Civilization. It erases all racial, religious, national and gender distinctions and inverts morality and reality itself. It makes government the instrument of its tyranny.

    In the article below, Horowitz describes how they have enslaved the mind by capturing the American university system. While I welcome his spirited defense, I am wary because both Communists and Zionists are Freemasons (Cabalists). Horowitz spins his anti-Communism to pretend that Eisenhower et al. were not themselves creatures of Bernard Baruch and the Masonic Jewish central banking cartel. We suspect the Left-Right (Communist-Zionist) conflict may be a charade to control discourse and ultimately determine outcome. Nevertheless, I appreciate the good Horowitz does do by exposing Communism.

    -------------------------------------------------------

    THE LEFT IN THE UNIVERSITY

    by David Horowitz

    The eighth volume of the series of my writings called The Black Book of the American Left is about one of the under-appreciated tragedies of our times: the successful campaign of the left to subvert the curricula of collegiate institutions and transform entire academic departments and schools--including Schools of Education--into doctrinal training centers for their social and political causes. This transformation of the educational system, in turn, has underpinned the steady dismantling of America's social contract, which has been the ongoing project of the left since the 1960s....

    ...Progressive activists have taken control of liberal arts curricula and reverted them to their 19th-century origins as instruments of religious indoctrination. ... These "progressive" doctrines, however, share with traditional religions the same impulse to redeem a fallen world and to suppress what they regard as hostile--therefore heretical--ideas in the name of human progress.

    One can measure the current corruption of the academic profession through a summary observation about the views of academic historians that was published in the peer-reviewed Journal of the Historical Society. The summary appears in an article written by Jennifer Delton, a tenured history professor at Skidmore College--a top-tier liberal arts school. It describes a purported orthodoxy in historians' views of Cold War anti-communism.




    According to Delton, this historical consensus regards Cold War anti-communism as an irrational phenomenon and a species of political persecution. Equally as striking as this problematic characterization is Delton's assumption that an orthodoxy about so controversial an issue can and should be a normal condition of academic scholarship.

    Here are her words: "However fiercely historians disagree about the merits of American communism [sic!], they almost universally agree that the post-World War II red scare signaled a rightward turn in American politics. The consensus is that an exaggerated, irrational fear of communism, bolstered by a few spectacular spy cases, created an atmosphere of persecution and hysteria that was exploited and fanned by conservative opportunists such as Richard Nixon and Joseph McCarthy. . . . We may add detail and nuance to this story, but this, basically, is what we tell our students about post-World II anti-communism, also known as McCarthyism." (emphasis added)

    In other words, it is the professional opinion of this tenured professor, the editors of the Journal of the Historical Society and, apparently, academic historians generally that concern about a domestic communist threat during the Cold War was equivalent to "McCarthyism"--a witch-hunting mania about imaginary demons. This, according to Delton, is what academic historians "tell our students," and not as mere opinion but as a historical consensus, and thus an academic fact.


    (Bernard Baruch was the George Soros of his day, a Rothschild agent. Here he is with two of his muppets.)

    This consensus exists, apparently, in the face of easily established, indisputable facts that refute it: the fact that McCarthy was censured by an anti-communist Senate, including senators who sat on his committee; the fact that he was opposed by an anti-communist president, Dwight Eisenhower, and by anti-communist liberals such as Arthur Schlesinger, Jr., who wrote one of the seminal anti-communist books of the period, The Vital Center; or the proven fact that the federal government had been penetrated by communist agents at the time, and at the highest levels.

    It goes without saying that no conservative scholar could agree with the conclusion of Professor Delton and her colleagues, and thus no conservative scholar could be readily regarded by the consensus she describes as a reasonable member of her profession.

    To ideologues like Delton, the contents of this volume will seem an extreme view of what has taken place in American liberal arts colleges and graduate institutions. But to recognize the intellectual corruption of the contemporary academy is hardly what is extreme; what is extreme is the politicized state of academic discourse, the confusion of scholarship with propaganda, and therefore the widespread debasement of the academic enterprise. What is extreme is the general comfort level of the academic community with this travesty of scholarship and, worse, with the practice of indoctrinating students in the classroom.

    The ramifications of this reversion to doctrinal instruction and pre-scientific standards of scholarship have been destructive not only to higher education but to society at large. Since collegiate institutions are the training grounds for all professions, this corruption has adversely affected a widespread array of policies, both foreign and domestic; it has warped cultural attitudes towards race and gender (see volumes 5 and 6 in this series); and it has intruded political biases into such civically crucial professions as the law, journalism and secondary school education.

    The contents of this volume were immediately inspired by a campaign I conducted to counter these trends and promote a restoration of the academic values associated with the modern research university, in particular, the identification of scientific standards of inquiry with academic professionalism.5 The goal of the campaign, which lasted for roughly seven years and ultimately failed, could also be viewed as an attempt to restore a professional standard appropriate to education in a democratic society--that teachers should teach students how to think and not tell them what to think. This standard was established in a famous "Declaration on the Principles of Academic Tenure and Academic Freedom" issued by the American Association of University Professors (AAUP) in 1915, and until recently verbally embraced by all reputable academic institutions.

    The campaign I organized to defend those principles was ferociously opposed by the tenured left, most strikingly by the very organization that had devised the original standard: the American Association of University Professors, whose governance had fallen into radical hands. Although my campaign failed, it revealed the extent of the AAUP's defection from its original purposes and its determination to protect a new professorial "right"--the "right" of faculty to indoctrinate their students. This was made indisputably clear in the AAUP's opposition to a crucial passage of the Declaration that I regularly cited in my campaign, and which had been adopted verbatim by Penn State University as its academic freedom policy. There can be no better introduction to the present volume than to recount the fate of this policy at the hands of the AAUP and its academic agents.

    Known as HR 64, the Penn State policy read: "It is not the function of a faculty member in a democracy to indoctrinate his/her students with ready-made conclusions on controversial subjects. The faculty member is expected to train students to think for themselves, and to provide them access to those materials, which they need if they are to think intelligently. Hence, in giving instruction upon controversial matters the faculty member is expected to be of a fair and judicial mind, and to set forth justly, without supersession or innuendo, the divergent opinions of other investigators."

    The AAUP's attack on this specific policy was launched in the winter of 2010, just after events in Pennsylvania convinced me of the futility of my reform efforts. Legislative hearings to inquire into the state of academic freedom in Pennsylvania--hearings in which I played a seminal role--were effectively subverted by the AAUP and the teacher unions, while the Republican Party and conservative groups that should have supported the reform effort sat on the sidelines. Without their active involvement, there was little more that I could do.

    [...]

    continued

    -------------------------------------------------------

    Related:
    Michael Collins Piper
    - Did Cold War result from Internal Jewish Feud?
    - The Communist Jews Behind Sen McCarthy

    Makow
    - What is Communism?
    "La réalité est un rêve que l'on fait atterrir" San Antonio AKA F. Dard

    Troll-hood motto: Never, ever, however, whatsoever, to anyone, a point concede.

  20. The Following 5 Users Say Thank You to Hervé For This Post:

    Bill Ryan (23rd July 2018), Foxie Loxie (21st September 2018), Hym (24th January 2019), Michelle Marie (23rd July 2018), Sophocles (23rd July 2018)

  21. Link to Post #71
    France Administrator Hervé's Avatar
    Join Date
    7th March 2011
    Location
    Brittany
    Posts
    16,733
    Thanks
    59,971
    Thanked 94,698 times in 15,443 posts

    Default Re: When Vested Interests Take Education over...

    Destroying the careers of those who defy the diktat

    by Robert September 20, 2018

    A chilling effect on dissent
    __________________
    Destroying the careers of those who defy the diktat
    (Originally entitled Earth on the Brink of an Ice Age)

    By Gregory Fegel

    Professionals and academics who disagree with the theory of Anthropogenic Global Warming (AGW) have been ostracized for their contrary views, resulting in termination of their employment, or in forced retirement.


    Schwan Glacier region – Photo courtesy Josh Cooley

    Polar bear expert Mitchell Taylor, Ph.D., says that the polar bear population has been increasing for the past 40 years, and that polar bears are not currently threatened by warming. Because of his contrary opinion, Taylor was not invited to the 2009 meeting of the Polar Bear Specialist Group, although he had participated in every PBSG meeting from 1981 to 2018. This shunning by the PBSG effectively ended Taylor’s career in polar bear research, and it forced him to retire.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mitchell_Taylor

    A similar fate has happened to many professionals and academics who have defied the diktat of the AGW “consensus”. The punishments meted out to Taylor and other skeptics by the professional and academic establishment have had a chilling effect on dissent, and the result is that today, few professionals and academics will question the AGW theory, for fear of losing their jobs and their careers. In academia, and in public forums, the AGW theorists continually and consistently refuse to debate the subject of AGW with qualified skeptics.

    From the Oregonian:
    “In 2011 the Nobel Prize-winning physicist Ivar Giaever resigned from the American Physical Society after the group stated, “the evidence is incontrovertible: global warming is occurring.”
    Giaever’s response:
    “Incontrovertible is not a scientific word. Nothing is incontrovertible in science.”
    As a result, the 87-year-old Giaever has become one of the highest profile climate-change deniers. … He argues that the global temperature since 1800 has been remarkably stable and that carbon dioxide is not a “major climate gas.” He insists that global-warming data from NASA and other respected sources is wrong and explains why he believes that. He says there is no way to accurately measure the average temperature of the globe. (NASA, to be clear, states unequivocally that there is a “scientific consensus”: Earth’s climate is heating up.)”

    https://www.oregonlive.com/today/ind...an-caused.html

    From the Oregonian:
    “The Oregon Museum of Science and Industry has pulled the plug on a presentation from three scientists critical of the theory of man-made global warming, saying the panel wasn’t balanced. Oregon’s chapter of the American Meteorological Society had scheduled the scientists to speak Tuesday at OMSI, which has long provided free space to the group for meetings. … Gordon Fulks, a local physicist, was one of the scheduled speakers. He said the society tried to round up speakers with opposing viewpoints to join the panel, but they refused.”
    https://www.oregonlive.com/environme...arming_pr.html
    The AGW skeptics want to debate the subject of AGW, and the AGW alarmists refuse to engage in a debate. The AGW skeptics dispute the government and establishment position, while the AGW alarmists loyally support the government and establishment position. So yes, there is a psychological, attitudinal, and behavioral difference between the AGW skeptics and the AGW alarmists.

    Earth on the Brink of an Ice Age (2009), by Gregory Fegel

    See more here:
    http://www.pravdareport.com/science/...rth_ice_age-0/

    See also:
    http://climaterealists.com/?id=4138
    “The main flaw in the AGW theory is that its proponents focus on evidence from only the past one thousand years at most, while ignoring the evidence from the past million years — evidence which is essential for a true understanding of climatology.” – Gregory Fegel
    "La réalité est un rêve que l'on fait atterrir" San Antonio AKA F. Dard

    Troll-hood motto: Never, ever, however, whatsoever, to anyone, a point concede.

  22. The Following 8 Users Say Thank You to Hervé For This Post:

    avid (21st September 2018), Bill Ryan (21st September 2018), Foxie Loxie (21st September 2018), Franny (28th February 2019), Hym (24th January 2019), norman (21st September 2018), Sophocles (24th September 2018), Valerie Villars (21st September 2018)

  23. Link to Post #72
    France Administrator Hervé's Avatar
    Join Date
    7th March 2011
    Location
    Brittany
    Posts
    16,733
    Thanks
    59,971
    Thanked 94,698 times in 15,443 posts

    Default Re: When Vested Interests Take Education over...

    The end of scientific integrity? Cochrane Collaboration expels critic of Big Pharma - 4 other board members resign

    Brian Shilhavy Vaccine Impact
    Wed, 19 Sep 2018 12:00 UTC


    Dr. Peter Gøtzsche has become the first member to be expelled from the Cochrane Collaboration in 25 years.

    Dr. Peter Gøtzsche recently sent out an email to the public explaining that he is the first person in 25 years to be expelled from the Cochrane Collaboration. He writes:
    No clear reasoned justification has been given for my expulsion aside from accusing me of causing "disrepute" for the organization. This is the first time in 25 years that a member has been excluded from membership of Cochrane.
    Four other board members have resigned from the Cochrane Collaboration as a result of this action.

    Health Impact News has covered the work of Dr. Gøtzsche frequently over the years, as he is an outspoken critic of Big Pharma, referring to them as "organized crime."

    He is author of the book, Deadly Medicines and Organized Crime: How big pharma has corrupted healthcare.

    The Cochrane Collaboration is considered to be the "gold standard" in scientific integrity, but they have come under fire recently for what appears to be biased reviews influenced by the pharmaceutical industry.

    They received a $1.15 million "gift" from the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation to fund "project work" from 2016 to 2017. See: Gates Foundation Buys Cochrane Integrity for $1.15 Million: The Death of Scientific Integrity

    Earlier this year (2018), researchers from the Nordic Cochrane Centre published a critique in the British Medical Journal stating that the Cochrane's review of the HPV vaccine "does not meet the standards for Cochrane reviews or the needs of the citizens or healthcare providers that consult Cochrane reviews to make 'Informed decisions.'" See: HPV Vaccine Scandal Affects Cochrane Biased Review as Critics Speak Out in BMJ
    A moral governance crisis: the growing lack of democratic collaboration and scientific pluralism in Cochrane

    by Peter C Gøtzsche

    Cochrane Centre
    Rigshospitalet, Dept. 7811
    Blegdamsvej 9 2100 Copenhagen Ø, Denmark
    Tel: +45 35 45 71 12
    E-mail: general@cochrane.dk
    www.nordic.cochrane.org

    I regret to inform you that I have been expelled from membership in the Cochrane Collaboration by the favourable vote of 6 of the 13 members of the Governing Board.

    No clear reasoned justification has been given for my expulsion aside from accusing me of causing "disrepute" for the organization.

    This is the first time in 25 years that a member has been excluded from membership of Cochrane.

    This unprecedented action taken by a minority of the Governing Board is disproportionate and damaging to Cochrane, as well as to public health interests.

    As a result of this decision, and a number of broader issues concerning the inadequate governance of Cochrane, in accordance with its principles and objectives, four other members of the Board have resigned.

    As a result, the Cochrane Collaboration has entered an unchartered territory of crisis and lack of strategic direction. A recovery from this dire situation would call for the dissolution of the present board, new elections and a broad-based participatory debate about the future strategy and governance of the organization.

    In just 24 hours the Cochrane Governing Board of thirteen members has lost five of its members, four of which are centre directors and key members of the organization in different countries.

    Recently the central executive team of Cochrane has failed to activate adequate safeguards, not only technical ones (which are usually very good) to assure sufficient policies in the fields of epistemology, ethics and morality.

    Transparency, open debate, criticism and expanded participation are tools that guarantee the reduction of uncertainty of reviews and improve the public perception of the democratic scientific process.

    These are conditions and tools that cannot be eliminated, as has happened recently, without placing into serious doubt the rigorous scientific undertaking of Cochrane and eroding public confidence in Cochrane's work.

    My expulsion should be seen in this context.

    There has also been a serious democratic deficit. The role of the Governing Board has been radically diminished under the intense guidance of the current central executive team and the Board has increasingly become a testimonial body that rubber-stamps highly finalized proposals with practically no ongoing in-put and exchange of views to formulate new policies. On dozens of issues the Board can only vote yes or no with very little opportunity to amend or modify the executive team's proposals.

    This growing top-down authoritarian culture and an increasingly commercial business model that have been manifested within the Cochrane leadership over the past few years threaten the scientific, moral and social objectives of the organization.

    Many Cochrane centres have sustained negative pressure and a lack of productive dialogue with the CEO of the central office.

    Upon alerting the Cochrane leadership of these worrisome tendencies that negatively affect the operability and social perception of our scientific work, the Nordic Cochrane Centre has received a number of threats to its existence and financing.

    Many of the directors or other key staff of the oldest Cochrane centres in the world have conveyed their dissatisfaction with the senior central staff's interactions with them.

    While the declared aims of interactions with the central office is to improve the quality of our work, the heavy-handed approach of some of the central staff has sometimes created a negative environment for new scientific initiatives, open collaboration and academic freedom.

    There has also been criticism in Cochrane concerning the over-promotion of favourable reviews and conflicts of interest and the biased nature of some scientific expert commentary used by the knowledge translation department of Cochrane.

    At the same time, Cochrane has been giving less and less priority and importance to its civic and political commitment to promoting open access, open data, scientific transparency, avoiding conflicts of interest and, in general, not promoting a public interest innovation model.

    I feel that these issues are intricately related to providing "better evidence" as the Cochrane motto professes.

    Recently the Cochrane executive leadership has even refused to comment publicly on new health technology policies, open access policies and other key advocacy opportunities despite the fact that an auditing of Cochrane fulfillment of objectives has shown a total failure to comply with Cochrane advocacy objectives.

    There is stronger and stronger resistance to say anything that could bother pharmaceutical industry interests. The excuse of lack of time and staff (around 50) is not credible.

    There has also been great resistance and stalling on the part of the central executive team to improving Cochrane´s conflict of interest policy.

    A year ago, I proposed that there should be no authors of Cochrane reviews to have financial conflicts of interests with companies related to the products considered in the reviews.

    This proposal was supported by other members of the Board, but the proposal has not progressed at all.

    The Cochrane executive leadership almost always uses the commercial terms of "brand", "products" and "business" but almost never describes what is really a collaborative network with the values of sharing, independence and openness.

    To the chagrin of many senior leaders in Cochrane, the word "Collaboration", which is part of our registered charity name, was deleted from communications about Cochrane.

    Nevertheless, it is precisely "collaboration" that is the key to what distinguished Cochrane from other scientific organisations where competition is at the forefront.

    The collaborative aspect, social commitment, our independence from commercial interests and our mutual generosity are what people in Cochrane have always appreciated the most and have been our most cherished added-value.

    Often it is forgotten that we are a scientific, grass-roots organisation whose survival depends entirely on unpaid contributions from tens of thousands of volunteers and substantial governmental support throughout the world.

    We make a substantial contribution to people's understanding and interpretation of scientific evidence on the benefits and harms of medical interventions, devices and procedures that impact the population.

    Our work informs government legislation globally, it influences medical guidelines and drug approval agencies. Therefore, the integrity of the Cochrane Collaboration is paramount.

    We pride ourselves on being global providers of "trusted evidence" on a foundation of values such as openness, transparency and collaboration.

    However, in recent years Cochrane has significantly shifted more to a business - a profit-driven approach.

    Even though it is a not-for-profit charity, our "brand" and "product" strategies are taking priority over getting out independent, ethical and socially responsible scientific results.

    Despite our clear policies to the contrary, my centre, and others, have been confronted with attempts at scientific censorship, rather than the promotion of pluralistic, open scientific debate about the merits of concrete Cochrane reviews of the benefits and harms of health care interventions.

    Because of this moral governance crisis of the Cochrane Collaboration, I decided to run for a seat on the Governing Board and was elected in early 2017, with the most votes of all 11 candidates. It was considered an achievement, especially since I was the only one who had questioned aspects of our leadership.

    Regrettably today, I have been expelled because of my "behaviour", while the hidden agenda of my expulsion is a clear strategy for a Cochrane that moves it further and further away from its original objectives and principles.

    This is not a personal question. It is a highly political, scientific and moral issue about the future of Cochrane.

    As most people know, much of my work is not very favourable to the financial interests of the pharmaceutical industry. Because of this Cochrane has faced pressure, criticism and complaints.

    My expulsion is one of the results of these campaigns. What is at stake is the ability of producing credible and trustworthy medical evidence that our society values and needs.

    Peter C Gøtzsche
    Professor, Director, MD, DrMedSci, MSc
    Nordic Cochrane Centre
    Rigsho

    Brian Shilhavy is the Managing Editor and Founder of Health Impact News. He has a BA in Bible and Greek from Moody Bible Institute, and an MA in Applied Linguistics from Northeastern Illinois University. He is the founder of Tropical Traditions.




    Related:
    Last edited by Hervé; 24th September 2018 at 16:52.
    "La réalité est un rêve que l'on fait atterrir" San Antonio AKA F. Dard

    Troll-hood motto: Never, ever, however, whatsoever, to anyone, a point concede.

  24. The Following 5 Users Say Thank You to Hervé For This Post:

    Bill Ryan (24th September 2018), Foxie Loxie (24th September 2018), Franny (28th February 2019), Hym (24th January 2019), Sophocles (24th September 2018)

  25. Link to Post #73
    France Administrator Hervé's Avatar
    Join Date
    7th March 2011
    Location
    Brittany
    Posts
    16,733
    Thanks
    59,971
    Thanked 94,698 times in 15,443 posts

    Default Re: When Vested Interests Take Education over...

    Freedom from mind-controlled education

    by Jon Rappoport Sep 24, 2018

    Over the past few years, I’ve written extensively about clap-trap higher education, which is turning out to be a combination of values-indoctrination, peer pressure, conformity, Leftist ideology, peppered with an astounding number of vague unexamined generalities. It adds up to intellectual starvation by attrition. It’s a war against the mind carried on by attempting to shape and control and limit the mind.

    If you took the worst features of fake discourse and analysis and rolled them up into a ball, you would get college.

    This is one reason why I wrote a basic logic course for high school students and included it in my collection, The Matrix Revealed.

    From my own experience as a student, and from teaching teenage students, I discovered an encouraging fact: a little bit of logic goes a long way. Students respond. They wake up, for example, when they find out what a generality is, when they read examples, when they run them to ground, when they discover how many generalities end up in blind alleys with no factual support.

    It’s as if the mind says, “I didn’t realize this before! I’ve been waiting for this! I want to analyze information. Here is a basic tool. I’m ready. Let’s go. I don’t want to be fooled anymore.”

    The basic condition of a mind is ALERT. It’s only through the introduction of nonsense, contradiction and vagueness that the mind sinks into the mud and gives up and goes on autopilot.

    There is a problem for the denizens of higher education: Students armed with logic eventually become independent. They resist indoctrination of any kind. They can perform their own investigations. They can handle information. They can discount and reject nonsense. They see through hidden agendas.

    A teacher has to be ready for that and welcome it. Most teachers don’t want to face such intrusions. Open territory, open inquiries, far-ranging questions upset the planned status quo.

    What should be the most exciting aspect of learning is taken as a threat.

    In this regard, too many teachers are cowards. They can’t face the music of logic.

    Higher education is mainly a group of designed set-pieces, whose purpose is arriving at a predictable result. Students armed with logic will rip those pieces to shreds, look at the elements, put them back together in new ways, and expose shortcomings and outright fraud. What students take to be an adventure most teachers look at as a deeply disturbing tornado.

    This is the most profound meaning of censorship. The teacher essentially says to the student, “You can’t go there. Don’t think about what you’re thinking about. Don’t ruin the pattern. Don’t go into spaces where the truth is up for grabs. We’re trying to arrive at a destination, and I decide what that destination is.”

    True education always contains factors of rebellion against authority—but this isn’t a mindless attack, it’s done with logic and evidence and honed thought. It can be done with a decent attitude and respect, so long as the teacher is willing to open the door to deeper and deeper analysis.
    Then the classroom would be an exciting place.
    Then students would come in with bright eyes and minds.
    Then all bets would be off.
    Then teachers would learn new things.
    Then the atmosphere would crackle with possibility.
    Then both students and teachers would look forward to discovering what they don’t know.
    Then the real party would begin.
    Then mind control would be a laughable absurdity.
    Welcome to real school.

    The lights go on. The minds go on.

    The world is revealed to be a different place.


    Jon Rappoport
    "La réalité est un rêve que l'on fait atterrir" San Antonio AKA F. Dard

    Troll-hood motto: Never, ever, however, whatsoever, to anyone, a point concede.

  26. The Following 7 Users Say Thank You to Hervé For This Post:

    Bill Ryan (27th September 2018), Constance (28th September 2018), Foxie Loxie (25th September 2018), Franny (28th February 2019), Hym (24th January 2019), Sophocles (26th September 2018), Valerie Villars (27th September 2018)

  27. Link to Post #74
    Avalon Member Sophocles's Avatar
    Join Date
    19th February 2011
    Location
    Nanset
    Age
    38
    Posts
    752
    Thanks
    13,649
    Thanked 3,849 times in 713 posts

    Default Re: When Vested Interests Take Education over...

    Swedish professor accused of bigotry for saying men and women ‘biologically different’

    RT
    Published time: 17 Sep, 2018 15:18
    Edited time: 18 Sep, 2018 10:51



    © Robin Olimb / Getty Images

    A Swedish university is investigating a professor for “anti-feminism” and “transphobia” after he said there are biological differences between men and women. He is being urged to retract his comments.

    The professor, Germund Hesslow, who works in neurophysiology at Lund University, was accused by a student of making “transphobic” and “anti-feminist” statements in a lecture — but he has refused to back down.

    During his course on ‘Heritage and Environment’ at the leading academic institution, Hesslow cited empirical research which supports the idea that there are differences between men and women which are “biologically founded” and therefore genders cannot be regarded as “social constructs alone”.

    The complainant suggested that Hesslow’s comments were at odds with the Swedish “value base” — a concept which requires all schools in Sweden to adhere to a common ethical policy, which includes upholding values like egalitarianism, individual freedom and equality of the sexes.

    In an interview with RT, Hesslow said that some students, “for ideological reasons,” don't like to hear certain scientific facts about biological differences between men and women. He said that the comments which prompted the complaint were not even necessarily part of his course material, but that they were answers to students’ questions during the course of the lecture.

    If you answer such a question you are under severe time pressure, you have to be extremely brief — and I used wording which I think was completely innocuous, and that apparently the student didn't,” Hesslow said.

    Hesslow was summoned to a meeting by Christer Larsson, the chairman of the program board for medical education, after one female student complained that the professor had expressed his “personal anti-feminist agenda,” Academic Rights Watch reported.

    The university asked Hesslow to “distance” himself from two specific comments; that gay women have a “male sexual orientation” and that whether transsexuality is a sexual orientation is “a matter of definition”. The professor refused to back away from the comments, saying that he had “done enough” already to “explain and defend” his choice of words.

    At some point, one must ask for a sense of proportion among those involved. If it were to become acceptable for students to record lectures in order to find compromising formulations and then involve faculty staff with meetings and long letters, we should let go of the medical education altogether,” he said in a written reply to Larsson.

    In his response, Hesslow also rejected the notion that he had a “political agenda” and said his only agenda was to let scientific fact, not new conventional wisdom, steer university proceedings. “Ideology, politics and prejudice form the conventional outlook, not science,” he said.

    Asked whether or not he thought the incident had been a “misunderstanding” or part of some broader pattern, Hesslow told RT that he believed the student in question was simply “someone who dislikes the lecture and is trying to find various pretexts for attacking it.”

    Hesslow also told RT that the university rector had ordered a “full investigation” into the case and said that there “have been discussions about trying to stop the lecture or get rid of me, or have someone else give the lecture or not give the lecture at all.” He also suggested that the university could use his age as a “pretext” to take him off the course, because he is past retirement age.

    Source

  28. The Following 7 Users Say Thank You to Sophocles For This Post:

    Bill Ryan (27th September 2018), BMJ (28th January 2019), Foxie Loxie (26th September 2018), Franny (28th February 2019), Hervé (26th September 2018), Hym (24th January 2019), Valerie Villars (27th September 2018)

  29. Link to Post #75
    France Administrator Hervé's Avatar
    Join Date
    7th March 2011
    Location
    Brittany
    Posts
    16,733
    Thanks
    59,971
    Thanked 94,698 times in 15,443 posts

    Default Re: When Vested Interests Take Education over...

    BBC bans AGW skeptics

    by Robert September 26, 2018

    The BBC has told staff they no longer need to invite climate-change deniers on to its program.



    It instructs staff:
    “Be aware of ‘false balance’: as climate change is accepted as happening, you do not need a ‘denier’ to balance the debate.”
    “There may be occasions to hear from a denier” but only “with appropriate challenge from a knowledgeable interviewer”.
    BBC journalists “need to be aware of the guest’s viewpoint and how to challenge it effectively.”
    “To achieve impartiality you do not need to include outright deniers of climate change in BBC coverage.”
    A section of the new policy entitled ‘What’s the BBC’s position’ asserts that “man-made climate change exists.”

    So much for the myth of ‘balanced news.’

    https://www.thegwpf.com/bbc-freezes-...mate-sceptics/
    Thanks to Jimmy Walter for this link
    “This BBC memo puts in writing what most people have known for the past ten years, which is that anyone sceptical of climate alarmism isn’t allowed on the BBC.”
    — Benny Peiser
    ================================================== =

    ... from the Holy Chair of the Great Grand Inquisitor...

    Click image for larger version

Name:	galileo-telescope-church.gif
Views:	15
Size:	42.0 KB
ID:	39165
    "La réalité est un rêve que l'on fait atterrir" San Antonio AKA F. Dard

    Troll-hood motto: Never, ever, however, whatsoever, to anyone, a point concede.

  30. The Following 7 Users Say Thank You to Hervé For This Post:

    Bill Ryan (27th September 2018), BMJ (28th January 2019), Foxie Loxie (27th September 2018), Franny (28th February 2019), norman (27th September 2018), Sophocles (27th September 2018), Valerie Villars (27th September 2018)

  31. Link to Post #76
    Avalon Member norman's Avatar
    Join Date
    25th March 2010
    Location
    too close to the hot air exhaust
    Age
    63
    Posts
    4,884
    Thanks
    7,333
    Thanked 22,774 times in 4,212 posts

    Default Re: When Vested Interests Take Education over...

    Now it's official, but there has been a solid barrage of "Climate Change" mind control for years on BBC radio. It's been spoken about as foregone conclusion and joked about and dramatised.


    The most infuriating thing about this is that most of the people they condemn as climate change deniers don't even deny it. They just don't agree about what's causing it. We can't go there, because that would be a conspiracy theory. Another thing the beeb makes a lot of fun of.


    Arrrrrgh . . . . they are like little children. There's arrested development all around us now. Makes me want to leave.
    .................................................. my first language is TYPO..............................................

  32. The Following 6 Users Say Thank You to norman For This Post:

    Bill Ryan (28th September 2018), Foxie Loxie (27th September 2018), Hervé (27th September 2018), Hym (24th January 2019), Sophocles (27th September 2018), Valerie Villars (27th September 2018)

  33. Link to Post #77
    France Administrator Hervé's Avatar
    Join Date
    7th March 2011
    Location
    Brittany
    Posts
    16,733
    Thanks
    59,971
    Thanked 94,698 times in 15,443 posts

    Default Re: When Vested Interests Take Education over...

    Get 'em young: French TV indoctrinates children about 'Russian fake news'

    RT
    Thu, 24 Jan 2019 09:34 UTC



    A France 4 game show for teenagers has tried to take on the elusive - yet fearsome - Russian "fake news," teaching children that all the media in Russia is either suppressed or controlled directly by Vladimir Putin.

    The show, dubbed Escape News, was launched last year as an escape room-type game for teenagers. The program has quite a sounding motto - 'Avoid the traps of the info' - yet the way it does so, unfortunately, appears to be quite questionable.

    The recent issue of the show was dubbed 'Vladimir Putin - the tsar of disinfo?' and focused on the president personally, as well as on Russia in general - including RT. Despite the proclaimed goal of the show, the whole issue was borderline fake news itself.

    First, the children were asked why a doctored picture of Vladimir Putin, wearing makeup in front of a rainbow flag, was banned in Russia. While several images fitting such description are circulating online, at least one of them was indeed listed as extremist by a Russian judiciary.


    Screenshot from the France 4's Escape News show © France.tv

    The children were provided with photos and videos of several politicians - Barak Obama, Francois Hollande, and Putin and were asked by the show's host to determine which ones were "natural" and which were "controlled."

    While footage of Putin was only from some official - or, at least, serious - events, the former US president was shown dancing alongside with the R2D2 bot, while his French counterpart was pictured rain-soaked.

    Such a selective approach led the children to a conclusion that all the pictures and videos featuring Russia's President are actually "controlled," - and that's why the aforementioned doctored picture was banned.

    Seriously? It seems the makers of the show were not even trying - or seeking - to find footage of Putin where he's not all-round serious and official - since it's not that hard at all.

    Here, that's Russia's President goofing around in the snow with his dogs.


    © Sputnik / Alexey Druzhinin

    Or reacting to a topless protestor in Hannover, Germany back in 2013.


    © Agence France-Presse / Jochen Lübke

    RT France vs Le Monde
    The next task for the children was to compare articles by RT France and Le Monde covering anti-government protests in Russia on May 5 last year. The children were provided with five carefully picked excerpts from each article and tasked with putting them in the right order.


    Screenshot from the show, translated from French to English © France.tv

    The article by RT appeared to be telling the readers about law enforcement, detaining people during unauthorized meetings, while Le Monde's one seemed to be telling them about opposition activist Alexei Navalny and protesters who braved streets of "many Russian cities" to remind authorities of "millions of citizens who did not vote for Putin."

    The host then demanded the children make a conclusion on the two articles, with one of them carefully saying that they have shown two "different points of view." Such evaluation apparently was not enough, as the host pushed harder and ultimately received the needed response.

    "The articles are different, since one of them is from Russia, where everything is directly controlled by Putin, yet another one is from Le Monde, which is not controlled by Putin at all," one of the children stated.


    Screenshot from the France 4's Escape News show © France.tv


    In reality, however, the RT's article was quite brief, yet it covered the event as a whole, not just the activities of the law enforcement.

    "Thousands of protesters rallied in many cities across Russia on May 5 at the call of opposition figure Alexei Navalny, two days before the inauguration of Vladimir Putin, the winner of the presidential election, for the fourth term," the RT's article reads.

    The lengthy and details-galore article by Le Monde on its part comes with quotes from Navalny's supporters and opponents and other juicy stuff. Sadly, the piece lacks a couple of 'tiny' details.

    The unauthorized nature of the gatherings - which prompted the police response in the first place - was not mentioned in the article at all, while Navalny was described simply as a man "barred" from the elections. The fact that it was a criminal conviction which prevented him from running for the post was not mentioned.

    Trolls and hackers
    The final challenge enlightened children about the Internet trolls and briefed them the elusive "troll factories," allegedly operating in Russia to purvey false information. The show's participants were tasked to create a fake Twitter account of Putin, posting "I love fake news" online and to tell legit Twitter posts from "troll" ones - which yielded quite mixed results.

    Aside from the game itself, the show also featured several "experts," who provided equally valuable insights into Russia and its media. One of them, a 15-year-old citizen of France, Ukraine, and Moldova, stated that Putin is an "authoritarian president who sends opposition activists to jails." Another "expert" was a France 2 journalist, who actually worked in Russia. He claimed that Russia's government tries its best to "choke" free press in the country. He also revealed that he employed a team of "former hackers" to help encrypt his messages while in Russia to hide them from the ever-watching secret services.

    "At the end, there were no problems. It means that they [secret services] were more powerful than me, and I did not notice anything, or we were stronger and they could not do anything," he told his 12-year-old interviewer. Apparently, it's not an option that the pesky Russian secret agents might have not cared about the reporter at all.

    SOTT Comment: France has realized you have to get the kids young. That way, even if dissenting news is available, it will be ignored, as they have been inoculated against 'crimethink'.
    "La réalité est un rêve que l'on fait atterrir" San Antonio AKA F. Dard

    Troll-hood motto: Never, ever, however, whatsoever, to anyone, a point concede.

  34. The Following 8 Users Say Thank You to Hervé For This Post:

    avid (28th January 2019), Bill Ryan (24th January 2019), BMJ (28th January 2019), Constance (24th January 2019), Franny (28th February 2019), Hym (24th January 2019), Sophocles (24th January 2019), Valerie Villars (24th January 2019)

  35. Link to Post #78
    France Administrator Hervé's Avatar
    Join Date
    7th March 2011
    Location
    Brittany
    Posts
    16,733
    Thanks
    59,971
    Thanked 94,698 times in 15,443 posts

    Default Re: When Vested Interests Take Education over...

    Mis-education of an entire generation

    by Robert January 28, 2019

    One geologist’s viewpoint …
    __________________

    Mis-education of an entire generation

    Dr Roger Higgs
    Especially urgent is the need to get the truth into schools and universities, to correct the 30 years of damaging misinformation on the cause of climate change force-fed to our young people.

    Besides this mis-education of an entire generation, be angry also for:
    (1) being so completely misinformed and ill-advised by the insidious International Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) (run by the United Nations, need I say more?) and, in turn, by governments and the media, all of which have huge vested interests in promoting the ‘CO2 Delusion’ that man can affect climate (e.g. UN quest for global governance; more laws; ever-increasing taxes; university research grants; researcher salaries; etc.);

    (2) the forcing upon us of unnecessary and ineffectual wind ‘farms’ and solar ‘parks’ (note the feel-good names; government thinks we’re stupid), not only wrecking the scenery (see formerly gorgeous Cornwall and weep) and killing birds, but also destroying irreplaceable agricultural land;

    (3) being forced to pay far too much for energy (much worse to come), to cover the construction/installation costs and hopeless inefficiency of these ‘renewable’ wind and solar projects.
    Climate change is driven by the sun, not CO2 (see links below). Please don’t misunderstand – real environmental pollution (plastics, vehicle emissions inhaled by city-dwellers, chemical leaks, etc.) is a very different matter. All geologists adore and care deeply for the environment.

    Please feel free to forward this post anywhere/everywhere, as widely as you can, ideally to all your contacts (Facebook?), and encourage them to do the same.

    Please see my two previous posts here:
    https://www.iceagenow.info/geologist...arths-climate/

    https://www.iceagenow.info/ipcc-fata...ermal-inertia/

    (As a result of the above two posts, Dr Higgs website has received 10,000 reads in the past 5 days, climbing quickly …)

    Here’s some information about Dr Higgs:
    http://www.geoclastica.com/BudeGeoWalks.htm
    "La réalité est un rêve que l'on fait atterrir" San Antonio AKA F. Dard

    Troll-hood motto: Never, ever, however, whatsoever, to anyone, a point concede.

  36. The Following 4 Users Say Thank You to Hervé For This Post:

    avid (28th January 2019), Bill Ryan (28th January 2019), Franny (28th February 2019), Sophocles (28th January 2019)

  37. Link to Post #79
    France Administrator Hervé's Avatar
    Join Date
    7th March 2011
    Location
    Brittany
    Posts
    16,733
    Thanks
    59,971
    Thanked 94,698 times in 15,443 posts

    Default Re: When Vested Interests Take Education over...

    Creating ADHD is the new education

    That’s the goal

    by Jon Rappoport
    Jan 31, 2018
    “There is a form of mind control that is really mind-chaos. It shatters the processes of thought into, at best, vaguely related fragments. There is no direction, no development, no progress along a line of reasoning. This is how you disable a person. You disrupt his ability to move from A to B to C. At that point, he becomes passive. He’s willing to be programmed, because it’s easier. He wants to be programmed.” (The Underground, Jon Rappoport)
    “I learned twenty-four new things today at school,” the child said. “One right after the other. I felt so happy. My teacher told me I was learning accelerated. I wrote on my iPad. I saw pictures. I did group harmony. I added. I divided. I heard about architecture. The teacher said we were filled with wonder at the universe. We solved a problem. We’re all together. I ate cheese. A factory makes cheese.”

    The new education is ADHD.

    It’s a method of teaching that surrenders ground on each key concept, deserting it before it’s firmly fixed in the mind of the student.

    It hops around from idea to idea, because parents, teachers, administrators, students, departments of education, and educational publishers have given up on the traditional practice of repetition.

    Repetition was old-world. For decades, even centuries, the time-honored method of instruction was: introduce an idea or concept or method, and then provide numerous examples the student had to practice, solve, and demonstrate with proficiency.

    There was no getting around it. If the student balked, he failed.

    There were no excuses or fairy tales floated to explain away the inability of the student to carry out the work.

    For those students who have the desire to be in a classroom to receive instruction, repetition works. It may lack glitz, but it works because the vast majority of people can’t learn to read, write, or do math any other way.

    You can’t gloss over these subjects with a broad brush and a lot of personality or caring. It’s all about digging in the dirt, one scoop at a time.

    Some people would call it robotic education. I don’t think it is. It’s just doing what’s necessary—unless reading, writing, and math are deemed unimportant.

    Now, these days, if you want to induce ADHD, teach a course in which each new concept is given short shrift. Then pass every student on to the next grade, because it’s “humane.”

    Think of it this way. Suppose you want to climb the sheer face of a high rock. You know nothing about climbing. You engage an instructor. He teaches you a little bit about ropes and spikes and handholds. He briefly highlights each aspect and then skips to the next.

    So later…while you’re falling five hundred feet to the ravine below, you can invent stories about why the experiment didn’t work out.

    Since the advent of organized education on the planet, there has been one way of teaching young children…until recently. Explain a new idea, produce scores of examples of that idea, and get the students to work on those examples and come up with the right answers.

    Subtraction, division, decimals, spelling, reading—it all works the same basic way.

    For the last hundred years or so, however, we’ve seen the gradual intrusion of Teacher ADHD.

    School text ADHD.

    Not enough examples. Not enough exercises.

    Education has nothing to do with a full frontal attack to “improve the self-esteem” of the student. It has nothing to do with telling children they’re valuable. It certainly has nothing to do with trying to embed social values and team spirit in children.

    And no matter how many fantasies educators spin, schools can’t replace parents.

    If what I’m writing here seems cruel and uncaring…look at the other side of the picture. Look at what happens when a student emerges from school with a half-baked, “dumbed-down” education.

    He can sort of read. He can sort of write. He sort of understands arithmetic. He tries to skate through the rest of his life. He fakes it. He adopts a front to conceal the large territory of what he doesn’t know.

    He certainly can’t think straight. Give him three ideas in succession and he’s lost. He goes on overload.

    He operates on association. You say A and he goes to G right away. You go back to A and he responds with R. He’s up the creek without a paddle.

    That’s what’s cruel.

    Forty years ago, I was on the verge of landing a lucrative job with a remedial education company. The owner gave me a lesson plan and told me to write a sample program.

    I did. He looked at it and said, “There are too many examples and exercises here. You have to move things along faster.”

    I told him the students would never comprehend the program that way. They had to work on at least 20 exercises for each new concept.

    He was shocked. “That’s not how it’s done now,” he said.

    “Oh,” I said, “you mean now the student and teacher both fake it?”

    And that was the end of that.

    Several years ago, I explained much of what’s in this article to a sociologist at a US university. His response: “Children are different now. They don’t have patience. There are too many distractions. We have to operate from a new psychology.”

    I asked him what that psychology was.

    “Children are consumers. They pick and choose.”

    While I was laughing at his assessment, he capped his display of wisdom with this: “There is no longer such a clear division between opinion and fact. They overlap.”

    Perfect.

    I know all about how the Carnegie and Rockefeller Foundations torpedoed education in America in the 20th century. But their major effort then was cutting off teachers and students from the history of the nation and the meaning of individual freedom.

    What I’m talking about here is a different perversion. The unhinging of the young mind from any semblance of accomplishment and continuity. This goes far beyond the agenda of outfitting children to be worker-drones in a controlled society.

    This is the induction of confusion and despair about what used to be called thinking. This is the imprinting of “gaps” that make it very hard for a person to operate, even as a drone.

    In addition, if you seed children with all sorts of debilitating psychiatric drugs, and you have a profound and dangerous mess that only dedicated parents can undo, one child at a time.

    People may wish it weren’t so, but that doesn’t change the facts of the matter.

    The upside is, when you explain a concept to a child, and you then take him through a great many exercises designed to help him understand that concept, he’ll achieve a victory.

    Then you’ll see the lights go on in his mind.


    Jon Rappoport
    "La réalité est un rêve que l'on fait atterrir" San Antonio AKA F. Dard

    Troll-hood motto: Never, ever, however, whatsoever, to anyone, a point concede.

  38. The Following 5 Users Say Thank You to Hervé For This Post:

    avid (1st February 2019), Bill Ryan (28th February 2019), Paul (6th February 2019), Sophocles (15th March 2019), Valerie Villars (1st February 2019)

  39. Link to Post #80
    France Administrator Hervé's Avatar
    Join Date
    7th March 2011
    Location
    Brittany
    Posts
    16,733
    Thanks
    59,971
    Thanked 94,698 times in 15,443 posts

    Default Re: When Vested Interests Take Education over...

    How Banksters Control the Professions

    Henry Makow
    February 28, 2019


    (The professor has no clothes)

    The Fed is owned by a syndicate of mostly foreign-based Jewish Masons.

    They create the medium of exchange ("currency" "credit") in the form of a debt to themselves, something our government could do debt and interest-free. This article from 2009 reveals why economists don't blow the whistle on this gigantic scam.

    The model described is duplicated in all the professions:
    • The American Historical Association,
    • American Psychological Association,
    • The American Bar Association.
    All are funded and controlled by the central bankers. It's a wonder this article was posted at Huffington Post and is still up.

    Back in the 1960's, we used to say the older generation sold their souls to the devil. Little did we know that this was literally true and that we would do the same thing.

    ------------------------------------------

    Priceless: How The Federal Reserve Bought The Economics Profession

    by Ryan Grim
    (excerpt by henrymakow.com)

    The Federal Reserve, through its extensive network of consultants, visiting scholars, alumni and staff economists, so thoroughly dominates the field of economics that real criticism of the central bank has become a career liability for members of the profession, an investigation by the Huffington Post has found.

    This dominance helps explain how, even after the Fed failed to foresee the greatest economic collapse since the Great Depression, the central bank has largely escaped criticism from academic economists. In the Fed's thrall, the economists missed it, too.
    "The Fed has a lock on the economics world," says Joshua Rosner, a Wall Street analyst who correctly called the meltdown. "There is no room for other views, which I guess is why economists got it so wrong."
    One critical way the Fed exerts control on academic economists is through its relationships with the field's gatekeepers. For instance, at the Journal of Monetary Economics, a must-publish venue for rising economists, more than half of the editorial board members are currently on the Fed payroll -- and the rest have been in the past.



    The Fed failed to see the housing bubble as it happened, insisting that the rise in housing prices was normal. In 2004, after "flipping" had become a term cops and janitors were using to describe the way to get rich in real estate, then-Federal Reserve Chairman Alan Greenspan said that "a national severe price distortion [is] most unlikely." A year later, current Chairman Ben Bernanke said that the boom "largely reflect strong economic fundamentals."

    The Fed also failed to sufficiently regulate major financial institutions, with Greenspan -- and the dominant economists -- believing that the banks would regulate themselves in their own self-interest.

    Despite all this, Bernanke was nominated for a second term by President Obama.

    In the field of economics, the chairman remains a much-heralded figure, lauded for reaction to a crisis generated, in the first place, by the Fed itself. Congress is even considering legislation to greatly expand the powers of the Fed to systemically regulate the financial industry.

    Paul Krugman, in Sunday's New York Times magazine, did his own autopsy of economics, asking "How Did Economists Get It So Wrong?" Krugman concludes that "[e]conomics, as a field, got in trouble because economists were seduced by the vision of a perfect, frictionless market system."

    So who seduced them? The Fed did it.

    THREE DECADES OF DOMINATION

    The Fed has been dominating the profession for about three decades. "For the economics profession that came out of the [second world] war, the Federal Reserve was not a very important place as far as they were concerned, and their views on monetary policy were not framed by a working relationship with the Federal Reserve. So I would date it to maybe the mid-1970s," says University of Texas economics professor -- and Fed critic -- James Galbraith.

    "The generation that I grew up under, which included both Milton Friedman on the right and Jim Tobin on the left, were independent of the Fed. They sent students to the Fed and they influenced the Fed, but there wasn't a culture of consulting, and it wasn't the same vast network of professional economists working there."

    But by 1993, when former Fed Chairman Greenspan provided the House banking committee with a breakdown of the number of economists on contract or employed by the Fed, he reported that 189 worked for the board itself and another 171 for the various regional banks. Adding in statisticians, support staff and "officers" -- who are generally also economists -- the total number came to 730. And then there were the contracts. Over a three-year period ending in October 1994, the Fed awarded 305 contracts to 209 professors worth a total of $3 million.

    HOW DOMINANT IS THE FED TODAY?

    The Federal Reserve's Board of Governors employs 220 PhD economists and a host of researchers and support staff, according to a Fed spokeswoman. The 12 regional banks employ scores more. (HuffPost placed calls to them but was unable to get exact numbers.) The Fed also doles out millions of dollars in contracts to economists for consulting assignments, papers, presentations, workshops, and that plum gig known as a "visiting scholarship."

    A Fed spokeswoman says that exact figures for the number of economists contracted with weren't available. But, she says, the Federal Reserve spent $389.2 million in 2008 on "monetary and economic policy," money spent on analysis, research, data gathering, and studies on market structure; $433 million is budgeted for 2009.

    That's a lot of money for a relatively small number of economists. According to the American Economic Association, a total of only 487 economists list "monetary policy, central banking, and the supply of money and credit," as either their primary or secondary specialty; 310 list "money and interest rates"; and 244 list "macroeconomic policy formation [and] aspects of public finance and general policy." The National Association of Business Economists tells HuffPost that 611 of its roughly 2,400 members are part of their "Financial Roundtable," the closest way they can approximate a focus on monetary policy and central banking.



    Robert Auerbach, a former investigator with the House banking committee, spent years looking into the workings of the Fed and published much of what he found in the 2008 book, "Deception and Abuse at the Fed". A chapter in that book, excerpted here, provided the impetus for this investigation.

    Auerbach found that in 1992, roughly 968 members of the AEA designated "domestic monetary and financial theory and institutions" as their primary field, and 717 designated it as their secondary field. Combining his numbers with the current ones from the AEA and NABE, it's fair to conclude that there are something like 1,000 to 1,500 monetary economists working across the country. Add up the 220 economist jobs at the Board of Governors along with regional bank hires and contracted economists, and the Fed employs or contracts with easily 500 economists at any given time. Add in those who have previously worked for the Fed -- or who hope to one day soon -- and you've accounted for a very significant majority of the field.

    Auerbach concludes that the "problems associated with the Fed's employing or contracting with large numbers of economists" arise "when these economists testify as witnesses at legislative hearings or as experts at judicial proceedings, and when they publish their research and views on Fed policies, including in Fed publications."

    GATEKEEPERS ON THE PAYROLL

    The Fed keeps many of the influential editors of prominent academic journals on its payroll. It is common for a journal editor to review submissions dealing with Fed policy while also taking the bank's money. A HuffPost review of seven top journals found that 84 of the 190 editorial board members were affiliated with the Federal Reserve in one way or another.

    "Try to publish an article critical of the Fed with an editor who works for the Fed," says Galbraith. And the journals, in turn, determine which economists get tenure and what ideas are considered respectable.

    The pharmaceutical industry has similarly worked to control key medical journals, but that involves several companies. In the field of economics, it's just the Fed.

    Being on the Fed payroll isn't just about the money, either. A relationship with the Fed carries prestige; invitations to Fed conferences and offers of visiting scholarships with the bank signal a rising star or an economist who has arrived.

    Affiliations with the Fed have become the oxygen of academic life for monetary economists.
    "It's very important if you are tenure track and don't have tenure, to show that you are valued by the Federal Reserve," says Jane D'Arista, a Fed critic and an economist with the Political Economy Research Institute at the University of Massachusetts, Amherst.
    ----------------

    Related:
    America's Secret Establishment: An Introduction to the Order of Skull & Bones By Antony C. Sutton
    "La réalité est un rêve que l'on fait atterrir" San Antonio AKA F. Dard

    Troll-hood motto: Never, ever, however, whatsoever, to anyone, a point concede.

  40. The Following 5 Users Say Thank You to Hervé For This Post:

    avid (28th February 2019), Bill Ryan (28th February 2019), Franny (28th February 2019), Sophocles (15th March 2019), what is a name? (28th February 2019)

+ Reply to Thread
Page 4 of 5 FirstFirst 1 4 5 LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts