Category: Anthony J. DeBlasi

209184.jpg

Wars, Patriots, and Traitors: Recalling Korea and Vietnam


I was released from the Army reserve in January 1961, having served in Korea during the war. The timing was lucky for me, but not for the next generation of draft-age men because it was the year that a simmering stew in Vietnam was boiling over into warfare. This time. it was against the Communists under Ho Chi Minh, based in Hanoi. The conflict in Vietnam is a sordid tale of political plots and maneuvers, backstabbing, fall-guys, and the murder by insiders of South Vietnamese anti-communist leader, Ngo Dinh Diem. To identify the perpetrators of this bloody war that took the lives of more than 58,000 of our young men would require two fingers – one pointing to Moscow, the other to Washington. Whether President Lyndon B. Johnson (“LBJ”) was a culpable agent in this military holocaust, something historians were too eager to prove, the fact remains that the Vietnam War was America’s most unpopular war. It ignited protests and demonstrations not witnessed since the Civil War. Men burned draft cards and fled to Canada to escape the draft.

Open defiance by draft-dodgers in the performance of duty to country was something that I and my generation could not justify. In our world, such flagrant disrespect for the law was inexcusable – not because we could be sent to jail if we refused to heed the draft call, and not whether it was fact or fiction that we were pawns in games of chess played by power-hungry rulers. The draft call was obeyed because serving one’s country was the right thing to do – as was serving one’s family and serving God.

This authentic American morality [1] was echoed in a comment on war movies, made some years ago by Clyde N. Wilson. A good war film, he said, “shows Americans coming together to sacrifice their lives for their country. For their country: because it is…the right thing to do.” [Emphasis added.]

LeRoy Eaton, a fellow Korean War veteran, put it this way: “No sane person wants to go to war. But the war happened and…so it was our job to go to Korea. That was pretty much how we felt…We knew what was expected of us and hoped that we were able to give what was asked. Most of us went to Korea for ‘Honor and Country’…I grew up to believe that a person who fails or refuses his country is called a traitor… Most others at that time thought like I did. They went to Korea to do as their country asked without complaining.”

The honorable action displayed by the vast majority of military service members rests on the bedrock of this genuine morality, fast against the erratic currents of passion and politics. Though it was not clear to me at the time, the split in loyalties in America initiated by the Left, in tandem with violent demonstrations by ignorant social rebels seizing every opportunity to turn the country on its head for outrageous claims to “a better world,” “a better life,” would be the beginning of America’s social revolution. Sober reflection on the rebels’ claims revealed that they came straight out of communist dogma and instructions for revolutionary maneuver and takeover. The rebels had friends in the news media [2].

The most damning commentary of this period is that while GIs were dying in Vietnam, tens of thousands of their peers were “rocking” in Woodstock, high on drugs and deep in debauchery – a shameful episode in American history that has been celebrated by the mainstream press.

Night after night, in fact, Americans got front-row seats to gruesome battle scenes on television. TV news outdid anything shown in horror movies. These you-are-there, graphic, in-your-face “reports” departed radically from the matter-of-fact TV coverage of the Korean war or the sober radio and film broadcasts of World War II. The horrid scenes, dripping with morbid commentary, were sickening not because they showed that war is hell (ask any war veteran) – a cinch to point out in a short clip or two – but because the constant delivery of bloody war scenes into every home, with politically-barbed words, was obviously calculated to saturate one’s head with the idea that war – any war – is unjustified. Anti-war editorializing in the news served to indoctrinate the public, a violation of a reporter’s duty to keep one’s opinions out of the news. Although this may seem strange to a great many reporters today, a journalist worth the title still presents the available facts, free as possible of personal or political bias. The valid reporter leaves commentary and opinion to the viewer/reader and to editorial columns and commentary sections of the news media. I can hear howls of laughter. Those who don’t know that opinion and news are not synonymous have an enormous lesson to learn.

In one sound bite: Love of fellow human beings, love of family and country, love of freedom of mind and person are what motivate men and women to stand against traitors of civilized order and freedom.


[1] Judeo-Christian morality, to be specific, is the morality that the United States was founded upon – its heart heart and marrow of culture and supporting laws – a fact despised by the Left.

[2] The Soviet Union provided $1 billion to the US anti-war movement. This was an enormous sum in the 1960s.

Image credit: Manh Hai, via Flickr, CC BY-SA 2.0.

I was released from the Army reserve in January 1961, having served in Korea during the war. The timing was lucky for me, but not for the next generation of draft-age men because it was the year that a simmering stew in Vietnam was boiling over into warfare. This time. it was against the Communists under Ho Chi Minh, based in Hanoi. The conflict in Vietnam is a sordid tale of political plots and maneuvers, backstabbing, fall-guys, and the murder by insiders of South Vietnamese anti-communist leader, Ngo Dinh Diem. To identify the perpetrators of this bloody war that took the lives of more than 58,000 of our young men would require two fingers – one pointing to Moscow, the other to Washington. Whether President Lyndon B. Johnson (“LBJ”) was a culpable agent in this military holocaust, something historians were too eager to prove, the fact remains that the Vietnam War was America’s most unpopular war. It ignited protests and demonstrations not witnessed since the Civil War. Men burned draft cards and fled to Canada to escape the draft.

Open defiance by draft-dodgers in the performance of duty to country was something that I and my generation could not justify. In our world, such flagrant disrespect for the law was inexcusable – not because we could be sent to jail if we refused to heed the draft call, and not whether it was fact or fiction that we were pawns in games of chess played by power-hungry rulers. The draft call was obeyed because serving one’s country was the right thing to do – as was serving one’s family and serving God.

This authentic American morality [1] was echoed in a comment on war movies, made some years ago by Clyde N. Wilson. A good war film, he said, “shows Americans coming together to sacrifice their lives for their country. For their country: because it is…the right thing to do.” [Emphasis added.]

LeRoy Eaton, a fellow Korean War veteran, put it this way: “No sane person wants to go to war. But the war happened and…so it was our job to go to Korea. That was pretty much how we felt…We knew what was expected of us and hoped that we were able to give what was asked. Most of us went to Korea for ‘Honor and Country’…I grew up to believe that a person who fails or refuses his country is called a traitor… Most others at that time thought like I did. They went to Korea to do as their country asked without complaining.”

The honorable action displayed by the vast majority of military service members rests on the bedrock of this genuine morality, fast against the erratic currents of passion and politics. Though it was not clear to me at the time, the split in loyalties in America initiated by the Left, in tandem with violent demonstrations by ignorant social rebels seizing every opportunity to turn the country on its head for outrageous claims to “a better world,” “a better life,” would be the beginning of America’s social revolution. Sober reflection on the rebels’ claims revealed that they came straight out of communist dogma and instructions for revolutionary maneuver and takeover. The rebels had friends in the news media [2].

The most damning commentary of this period is that while GIs were dying in Vietnam, tens of thousands of their peers were “rocking” in Woodstock, high on drugs and deep in debauchery – a shameful episode in American history that has been celebrated by the mainstream press.

Night after night, in fact, Americans got front-row seats to gruesome battle scenes on television. TV news outdid anything shown in horror movies. These you-are-there, graphic, in-your-face “reports” departed radically from the matter-of-fact TV coverage of the Korean war or the sober radio and film broadcasts of World War II. The horrid scenes, dripping with morbid commentary, were sickening not because they showed that war is hell (ask any war veteran) – a cinch to point out in a short clip or two – but because the constant delivery of bloody war scenes into every home, with politically-barbed words, was obviously calculated to saturate one’s head with the idea that war – any war – is unjustified. Anti-war editorializing in the news served to indoctrinate the public, a violation of a reporter’s duty to keep one’s opinions out of the news. Although this may seem strange to a great many reporters today, a journalist worth the title still presents the available facts, free as possible of personal or political bias. The valid reporter leaves commentary and opinion to the viewer/reader and to editorial columns and commentary sections of the news media. I can hear howls of laughter. Those who don’t know that opinion and news are not synonymous have an enormous lesson to learn.

In one sound bite: Love of fellow human beings, love of family and country, love of freedom of mind and person are what motivate men and women to stand against traitors of civilized order and freedom.


[1] Judeo-Christian morality, to be specific, is the morality that the United States was founded upon – its heart heart and marrow of culture and supporting laws – a fact despised by the Left.

[2] The Soviet Union provided $1 billion to the US anti-war movement. This was an enormous sum in the 1960s.

Image credit: Manh Hai, via Flickr, CC BY-SA 2.0.



Source link

208828.png

Toxic Humanism


“Making the world better” with no direction or assistance from God is a faith that rests on the belief that science and reason can deliver humanity from evil.  It is a faith that spawned a “humanism” that for over two hundred years has caused confusion and chaos concerning justice, wisdom, responsibility, love and hate, responsibility, the value of life…all the most important things in life…which are playthings to reason and impenetrable to science.

While the earlier humanism of the Renaissance magnified the importance of humans as humans, it acknowledged the necessary connection between human beings and their Creator.  But secular humanism abolished that link and trashed what is sacred in human life.  This faux humanism gave us the Humanist Manifesto of 1933 (updated in 1973 and 2003) and the Secular Humanist Declaration of 1980.  Manifest in these documents are distortions of reality that have been internalized by a great many people.  This should hardly surprise us, considering that secular humanism entered the field of education in the first quarter of the last century, through the public schools, acting as a wedge between past and present and putting America on a course toward a collective society – thanks to activists of the benighted left.

These are historical facts.  We are living with their consequences.  Among the saddest is that public school kids, “our future,” are schooled in the framework of the secular humanist religion[i] and are taught not how to think clearly and wisely but how to act correctly, according to state-defined criteria (“political correctness”).  The purveyors of God-free secularism don’t care if public schools dull the moral sense, common sense, and the ability to think clearly, in the mission to establish a collectivist society in an amoral “humanistic” world.  

The tug between the morality we taught our own children and the amorality imparted to a great number of societal drifters pushed one of our children to the brink of suicide.  Joining a herd of mixed up kids of the late 1980s, she took a crooked path of unending trouble…

…a road paved by educators of the political left obsessed with building a new social order by turning young minds away from their heritage and from their parents, purging their minds of a belief in God, and training them for a life of diminished quality in an amoral, state-controlled collectivist society.  Caught in the crossfire between two incompatible views of the world and of people, even children of stable families continue to risk losing their identity and their way and getting swept in the wave of drifters and mixed up kids unleashed by “progressive” schooling.

By the time our youngest child got to middle school, the intensifying toxic indoctrination of false humanism made it hard for her and other pubescent children to accept their richer heritage and deeper moral orientation.  Routine exposure to a worldview that contradicts home training regarding basics of right and wrong, replacing Judeo-Christian morality with do what you want (“situation ethics,” which in reality is no ethics), is a hazard to the mental and emotional development of a child.  The problem has led many to homeschool their children and many to fight the culture wars.

Are we now within reach of that “golden age” that “progressives” have promised themselves, an age likely to resemble a world of contented dummies having little heart and no soul?

Please let no one be fooled by partisan and advocate media that ignore history or distort it, while mindlessly (maliciously?) pushing flawed, outdated agendas of former socialists and Marxists.  Most don’t know the history of their own beliefs and convictions.  Teachers, editors, and other voices for society have swallowed the nonsense that the “enlightenment” they were taught to embrace and the faux humanism driving their ambitions will bring about a world free of want and war and name-the-evil-to-be-banished – a stand that betrays a degree of ignorance that voids any claim to enlightenment or authority to lead in any valid sense of justice.


[i] Not all religions center on God and follow divine inspiration.  In addition to the usual meaning of religion, the Merriam-Webster dictionary includes “a cause, principle, or system of beliefs held to with ardor and faith.”  Creeds like Marxism, Darwinism, secular humanism, and scientism are religions also.  That any zealously held belief can be a religion should be sobering, not surprising.

“Making the world better” with no direction or assistance from God is a faith that rests on the belief that science and reason can deliver humanity from evil.  It is a faith that spawned a “humanism” that for over two hundred years has caused confusion and chaos concerning justice, wisdom, responsibility, love and hate, responsibility, the value of life…all the most important things in life…which are playthings to reason and impenetrable to science.

While the earlier humanism of the Renaissance magnified the importance of humans as humans, it acknowledged the necessary connection between human beings and their Creator.  But secular humanism abolished that link and trashed what is sacred in human life.  This faux humanism gave us the Humanist Manifesto of 1933 (updated in 1973 and 2003) and the Secular Humanist Declaration of 1980.  Manifest in these documents are distortions of reality that have been internalized by a great many people.  This should hardly surprise us, considering that secular humanism entered the field of education in the first quarter of the last century, through the public schools, acting as a wedge between past and present and putting America on a course toward a collective society – thanks to activists of the benighted left.

These are historical facts.  We are living with their consequences.  Among the saddest is that public school kids, “our future,” are schooled in the framework of the secular humanist religion[i] and are taught not how to think clearly and wisely but how to act correctly, according to state-defined criteria (“political correctness”).  The purveyors of God-free secularism don’t care if public schools dull the moral sense, common sense, and the ability to think clearly, in the mission to establish a collectivist society in an amoral “humanistic” world.  

The tug between the morality we taught our own children and the amorality imparted to a great number of societal drifters pushed one of our children to the brink of suicide.  Joining a herd of mixed up kids of the late 1980s, she took a crooked path of unending trouble…

…a road paved by educators of the political left obsessed with building a new social order by turning young minds away from their heritage and from their parents, purging their minds of a belief in God, and training them for a life of diminished quality in an amoral, state-controlled collectivist society.  Caught in the crossfire between two incompatible views of the world and of people, even children of stable families continue to risk losing their identity and their way and getting swept in the wave of drifters and mixed up kids unleashed by “progressive” schooling.

By the time our youngest child got to middle school, the intensifying toxic indoctrination of false humanism made it hard for her and other pubescent children to accept their richer heritage and deeper moral orientation.  Routine exposure to a worldview that contradicts home training regarding basics of right and wrong, replacing Judeo-Christian morality with do what you want (“situation ethics,” which in reality is no ethics), is a hazard to the mental and emotional development of a child.  The problem has led many to homeschool their children and many to fight the culture wars.

Are we now within reach of that “golden age” that “progressives” have promised themselves, an age likely to resemble a world of contented dummies having little heart and no soul?

Please let no one be fooled by partisan and advocate media that ignore history or distort it, while mindlessly (maliciously?) pushing flawed, outdated agendas of former socialists and Marxists.  Most don’t know the history of their own beliefs and convictions.  Teachers, editors, and other voices for society have swallowed the nonsense that the “enlightenment” they were taught to embrace and the faux humanism driving their ambitions will bring about a world free of want and war and name-the-evil-to-be-banished – a stand that betrays a degree of ignorance that voids any claim to enlightenment or authority to lead in any valid sense of justice.


[i] Not all religions center on God and follow divine inspiration.  In addition to the usual meaning of religion, the Merriam-Webster dictionary includes “a cause, principle, or system of beliefs held to with ardor and faith.”  Creeds like Marxism, Darwinism, secular humanism, and scientism are religions also.  That any zealously held belief can be a religion should be sobering, not surprising.



Source link

The Political Abuse of Science


It has always bothered me that while science cannot explain things like hate and love, good and bad, and many of the most important things in human life, it is used as “authority” for meddling in human affairs. The impulse to explain everything with science has generated a group of pseudoscientists that provide a great tool to power hawkers for their agendas.

When I first heard the term “social science,” for example, I wanted to laugh but couldn’t. We all know – has it been forgotten? – that there is no science for that which science cannot define, the case with almost everything important associated with being human. That politics and fake science have been partners for a long time is no secret. That their illicit relationship is hardly recognized is inexcusable. Enthralled by science, as the public for good reason tends to be, a majority are prone to accept any nonsense in the name of science.

The great successes achieved by scientists have unfortunately given science a prestige and an authority beyond its unquestionable utility. That so many lean on science for their take on just about everything should bother us all since it promotes a confidence in a way of thinking and a way of acting that continually shuts more doors than it opens – a fact recognized by science professionals who fully appreciate their craft and its connection to reality and accept its limitations.

It is important to see that the reduction of human reality to bits of data stuffed in mathematical packets – aping scientific practice – forms a line to lunacy.

Making sense of the world, necessary as food and air for being human, is a tricky balancing act of keeping one foot on matter and one on spirit. It leads many to church and temple. Until recent times these were places where mind and heart could find a line to their Creator. Today, far too many of them have become places where attendees get a line to the latest politics.

Making the church follow, instead of lead the way, became obvious in the 1970s/80s, a time when I sometimes filled-in as layman minister when the pastor of the Newfield (Maine) Methodist church was away. And I was in front of the West Newfield Congregational church on Lay Preacher Sunday. I tried to show that a good heart is not enough to promote the general welfare. It requires a good mind as well. And both were being abducted by pop culture, aided and abetted by pseudoscience. It was essential, I asserted, to understand that in our uncertain world there is a constant need to discriminate between fact and nonsense, science not excluded.

I once used the song “Material Girl” (“…we are living in a material world, and I am a material girl…”) as a springboard for my argument. What kind of world do we actually live in, I asked? When you boil down all the discoveries of all the best minds, you find that every attempt to grasp it slips like dry sand through dry fingers. It amazes me that in a world which physicists have long given up trying to nail the reality of, people at large − sociologists and songwriters among them − still think of the real world as being material.

It is a false notion. How, to sharpen the point, does “matter” arrange itself into hummingbirds, rainbows, smiles, recipes for soup, instructions for safety in an emergency . . . and so on, and so forth? Given the (im)possiblity, such a world would be a huge, dead heap.

The insistence on fragmenting the world and us into bits and pieces of “manageable data” – without regard to their relevance to who we are and the reality we face every day, not just as creatures but as as humans – is a madness worth dumping.

The bluff of self-anointed reformers who wrap themselves in “science” to turn heads away from the human in social, political, and economic policies and practices can and must be called. What is really smart for those who would improve the way we live, not just as creatures but as humans, is to stop thrashing about in their own ignorance and seize upon the wisdom of the One who put them here and gave us a heart, a brain, and the freedom to use them wisely.

Anthony J. DeBlasi is a lifelong defender of Western culture.

It has always bothered me that while science cannot explain things like hate and love, good and bad, and many of the most important things in human life, it is used as “authority” for meddling in human affairs. The impulse to explain everything with science has generated a group of pseudoscientists that provide a great tool to power hawkers for their agendas.

When I first heard the term “social science,” for example, I wanted to laugh but couldn’t. We all know – has it been forgotten? – that there is no science for that which science cannot define, the case with almost everything important associated with being human. That politics and fake science have been partners for a long time is no secret. That their illicit relationship is hardly recognized is inexcusable. Enthralled by science, as the public for good reason tends to be, a majority are prone to accept any nonsense in the name of science.

The great successes achieved by scientists have unfortunately given science a prestige and an authority beyond its unquestionable utility. That so many lean on science for their take on just about everything should bother us all since it promotes a confidence in a way of thinking and a way of acting that continually shuts more doors than it opens – a fact recognized by science professionals who fully appreciate their craft and its connection to reality and accept its limitations.

It is important to see that the reduction of human reality to bits of data stuffed in mathematical packets – aping scientific practice – forms a line to lunacy.

Making sense of the world, necessary as food and air for being human, is a tricky balancing act of keeping one foot on matter and one on spirit. It leads many to church and temple. Until recent times these were places where mind and heart could find a line to their Creator. Today, far too many of them have become places where attendees get a line to the latest politics.

Making the church follow, instead of lead the way, became obvious in the 1970s/80s, a time when I sometimes filled-in as layman minister when the pastor of the Newfield (Maine) Methodist church was away. And I was in front of the West Newfield Congregational church on Lay Preacher Sunday. I tried to show that a good heart is not enough to promote the general welfare. It requires a good mind as well. And both were being abducted by pop culture, aided and abetted by pseudoscience. It was essential, I asserted, to understand that in our uncertain world there is a constant need to discriminate between fact and nonsense, science not excluded.

I once used the song “Material Girl” (“…we are living in a material world, and I am a material girl…”) as a springboard for my argument. What kind of world do we actually live in, I asked? When you boil down all the discoveries of all the best minds, you find that every attempt to grasp it slips like dry sand through dry fingers. It amazes me that in a world which physicists have long given up trying to nail the reality of, people at large − sociologists and songwriters among them − still think of the real world as being material.

It is a false notion. How, to sharpen the point, does “matter” arrange itself into hummingbirds, rainbows, smiles, recipes for soup, instructions for safety in an emergency . . . and so on, and so forth? Given the (im)possiblity, such a world would be a huge, dead heap.

The insistence on fragmenting the world and us into bits and pieces of “manageable data” – without regard to their relevance to who we are and the reality we face every day, not just as creatures but as as humans – is a madness worth dumping.

The bluff of self-anointed reformers who wrap themselves in “science” to turn heads away from the human in social, political, and economic policies and practices can and must be called. What is really smart for those who would improve the way we live, not just as creatures but as humans, is to stop thrashing about in their own ignorance and seize upon the wisdom of the One who put them here and gave us a heart, a brain, and the freedom to use them wisely.

Anthony J. DeBlasi is a lifelong defender of Western culture.



Source link

The Road to Global Oz


“Watchdogs or pit bulls?” I was asking over 30 years ago, as TV newsrooms were turning into kangaroo courts and bully pulpits for journalists of the left, waging war on Western culture.  I wished that an electronic virus could flash a message across the screen whenever a newscast was about to begin: “What you are about to see and hear may be pure bunk.  Discretion advised.”  Why shouldn’t such a warning precede the flow of partial truths and outright lies from the mouths of apparently intelligent people with pleasant faces?  The regular doses of distortion, misinformation, and smearing were calculated to build a case against America’s fundamental values and blur the public’s perception of their country and the world they lived in.  I called it then, and I call it today, treason.

The washing of American minds with leftist BS became a late 20th-century feature of mainstream publishing, school programs, entertainment, and church sermons.  “It’s the ’90s now!” was a popular cry, generally understood to be an excuse for brewing cultural chaos.  In this sound bite with its corny ring against “the past” lay the justification for any and all BS in the name of “progress.”  

Americans had been primed for a leap into a leftist new age decades before the ’90s.  Hadn’t the Supreme Court helped prepare for it by inventing justifications for trashing time-honored values, redefining even murder according to rules of political instead of moral correctness?  Intentional killing of children in the womb and murdering abusive parents and spouses became justified for the first time in American history.  I don’t recall this revolutionary change in justice ever making it to the History Channel or explained in any mainstream journal.  And hadn’t schoolkids been taught that what they felt was right for them was OK, while filling their minds with acceptable OKs?  In this educational legerdemain, progressive educators were tapping the left’s “value-neutral doctrine.”  The (intended) result of making values valueless was necessary for reprogramming young minds and making the newer generations ready for the “new age.”  If, to get there, what is right one day becomes wrong the next – and what is wrong one day becomes right the next – what of it? 

With value devalued, except for what pleases, even brainwashed church leaders were dropping “sin” from their vocabulary and reserving places in Heaven for everyone in their flock who obeyed the “acceptable OKs” coded in the Politically Correct Commandments.  The mainstream news media, all too happy to report on this  progress in spirituality, applauded.

The wisdom of 1960s hotshots knowing more than all who came before them had at last enlightened the collective “we” of Americans, now finally getting things right.  It was time, was it not, to open the gates of that golden age predicted by Marxists at the time our grandparents were toddlers – that “new world order” harped on by globalists of whatever political persuasion at the end of World War I.  Yes, the world would at last be free of war, free of want, free of hate, free of God…

…well, not all of us agreed with this trip to Global Oz.  Most of us saw the bull in it, early on, and knew that the Yellow Brick Road was being paved by people who hated America, God, and family.  It was clear to us that any goal that destroyed what makes us human was a call for a fight, not an embrace.

Building a new social order for a new world order kept men like John Dewey busy inventing and pushing methods for turning schoolchildren into compliant adults, able, willing, and ready to live in a socialist society.  Progressive education was designed to weaken dependence on self and strengthen dependence on group, shifting loyalty away from family and toward policies in keeping with the godless, purely secular goals of the first Humanist Manifesto (1933).  That the process was manipulative and dishonest meant nothing to these pioneers of deconstruction and reconstruction of the minds and hearts of children for the purpose of establishing a secular, god-free, collectivist society.  If the new schooling dulled minds, lowered expectations for achievement, created problems of “self esteem,” weakened individual responsibility for one’s actions – to mention some of the side effects of “progressive” education – what of it?

With growing unease, reaching a point of alarm for me and many others in the 1980s (I was in my fifties then),  I witnessed the young think and speak less clearly, saw them lose self-direction, watched them rely increasingly and more heavily on peer identity, drugs, counseling, digital props, and substitutes for the real world.  I was stunned when, for the first time in my life, I heard a young adult tell me with a straight face that he “didn’t like to think.”

As we approached the 21st century, it was plain to me and others with intact memory of recent history that our culture was in mortal danger and that a future fit for human beings was fading from sight.  The “new social order” planned by amoral social reformers in the early decades of the 20th century was in place, ready for the Global Oz they called “progress.” 

Progress?  It was interrupted a long time ago.

Anthony J. DeBlasi is a Korean War veteran and lifelong defender of Western culture.

“Watchdogs or pit bulls?” I was asking over 30 years ago, as TV newsrooms were turning into kangaroo courts and bully pulpits for journalists of the left, waging war on Western culture.  I wished that an electronic virus could flash a message across the screen whenever a newscast was about to begin: “What you are about to see and hear may be pure bunk.  Discretion advised.”  Why shouldn’t such a warning precede the flow of partial truths and outright lies from the mouths of apparently intelligent people with pleasant faces?  The regular doses of distortion, misinformation, and smearing were calculated to build a case against America’s fundamental values and blur the public’s perception of their country and the world they lived in.  I called it then, and I call it today, treason.

The washing of American minds with leftist BS became a late 20th-century feature of mainstream publishing, school programs, entertainment, and church sermons.  “It’s the ’90s now!” was a popular cry, generally understood to be an excuse for brewing cultural chaos.  In this sound bite with its corny ring against “the past” lay the justification for any and all BS in the name of “progress.”  

Americans had been primed for a leap into a leftist new age decades before the ’90s.  Hadn’t the Supreme Court helped prepare for it by inventing justifications for trashing time-honored values, redefining even murder according to rules of political instead of moral correctness?  Intentional killing of children in the womb and murdering abusive parents and spouses became justified for the first time in American history.  I don’t recall this revolutionary change in justice ever making it to the History Channel or explained in any mainstream journal.  And hadn’t schoolkids been taught that what they felt was right for them was OK, while filling their minds with acceptable OKs?  In this educational legerdemain, progressive educators were tapping the left’s “value-neutral doctrine.”  The (intended) result of making values valueless was necessary for reprogramming young minds and making the newer generations ready for the “new age.”  If, to get there, what is right one day becomes wrong the next – and what is wrong one day becomes right the next – what of it? 

With value devalued, except for what pleases, even brainwashed church leaders were dropping “sin” from their vocabulary and reserving places in Heaven for everyone in their flock who obeyed the “acceptable OKs” coded in the Politically Correct Commandments.  The mainstream news media, all too happy to report on this  progress in spirituality, applauded.

The wisdom of 1960s hotshots knowing more than all who came before them had at last enlightened the collective “we” of Americans, now finally getting things right.  It was time, was it not, to open the gates of that golden age predicted by Marxists at the time our grandparents were toddlers – that “new world order” harped on by globalists of whatever political persuasion at the end of World War I.  Yes, the world would at last be free of war, free of want, free of hate, free of God…

…well, not all of us agreed with this trip to Global Oz.  Most of us saw the bull in it, early on, and knew that the Yellow Brick Road was being paved by people who hated America, God, and family.  It was clear to us that any goal that destroyed what makes us human was a call for a fight, not an embrace.

Building a new social order for a new world order kept men like John Dewey busy inventing and pushing methods for turning schoolchildren into compliant adults, able, willing, and ready to live in a socialist society.  Progressive education was designed to weaken dependence on self and strengthen dependence on group, shifting loyalty away from family and toward policies in keeping with the godless, purely secular goals of the first Humanist Manifesto (1933).  That the process was manipulative and dishonest meant nothing to these pioneers of deconstruction and reconstruction of the minds and hearts of children for the purpose of establishing a secular, god-free, collectivist society.  If the new schooling dulled minds, lowered expectations for achievement, created problems of “self esteem,” weakened individual responsibility for one’s actions – to mention some of the side effects of “progressive” education – what of it?

With growing unease, reaching a point of alarm for me and many others in the 1980s (I was in my fifties then),  I witnessed the young think and speak less clearly, saw them lose self-direction, watched them rely increasingly and more heavily on peer identity, drugs, counseling, digital props, and substitutes for the real world.  I was stunned when, for the first time in my life, I heard a young adult tell me with a straight face that he “didn’t like to think.”

As we approached the 21st century, it was plain to me and others with intact memory of recent history that our culture was in mortal danger and that a future fit for human beings was fading from sight.  The “new social order” planned by amoral social reformers in the early decades of the 20th century was in place, ready for the Global Oz they called “progress.” 

Progress?  It was interrupted a long time ago.

Anthony J. DeBlasi is a Korean War veteran and lifelong defender of Western culture.



Source link

at-painter-og-image.png

Education: When the Dare's on to Build a New Social Order


“Progressive Education” came to my school when I was a student at Halsey Junior High School in the 1940s (P.S. 85, Brooklyn, N.Y,).  Principal Stella Sweeting was thrilled as a little girl getting a doll house for Christmas, but the rest of us, teachers included, thought this “experiment” in schooling was silly.  Oh, it was fun to cut classes and paint murals in the hallways – the brainstorm of class buddy Bob and I that, to our surprise, was approved.

Such “official cheating” didn’t faze those with A’s and B’s in their subjects – we’d catch up later (in high school maybe?) – but what of the students who might stumble from such sliding and find it difficult to overcome the challenges ahead?  While this loosening of educational standards at Halsey was, in a word, pleasant, most of my teachers took a dim view of a theory of education that not only ditched authority and tradition but dismissed academic achievement as well – the stance of early 20th Century Marxist education reformers with a mission to prepare America for a socialist future.  Why did the “progress” they envisioned in their “progressive” educational method of indoctrination include dumbing?  

How serious a problem this watered-down schooling would be became clear to me when the principal of my high school (Bushwick High School, Brooklyn, N.Y.), Milo F. McDonald, published a report entitled “‘Progressive’ Poison in Public Education” which he delivered to the American Education Association in 1951.  The McDonald Report exposed in detail the so-called “activity program” – better known as “Progressive Education” – that was sprung on the New York City Schools in 1935 in the guise of an experiment, and was being pushed since then.  It was in fact a stealth program launched by John Dewey and a group of like-minded educational theorists to prepare future citizens for a coming socialist age.  It was time, claimed one of them, George S. Counts, to “dare the teachers to build a new social order.”

Since the facts presented in the McDonald Report and the strong case it made against Progressive Education would undermine the Progressive agenda, the one path open to the report was to the bottom of the dustbin of education history.  I have kept a copy of that forgotten report all these years, aware of its importance; it is now accessible at Don Potter.

The dumbing down of successive generations of school children has become documented history.*  The contrast in general school smarts before and after 1960 is plainly visible to older Americans. Less conspicuous is the collateral damage to our culture.  A hint of this negative “side effect” showed in the blight that crept into entertainment in the second half of the 20th Century.  I call it blight because increasing groupthink and decreasing originality fed my perception that independence and creativity in the communication and other arts was declining.  The trend, in numerous ramifying ways including academics, was diminishing the quality of mainstream life in America.

This dumbing trend became the subject of books like The Closing of the American Mind by Allan Bloom in 1987. Much has been written about this trend since, but little has been done to correct it.  The intellectual dimming and cultural downsliding in America long before alarms sounded in books and alternative publications was more than worrisome for those of us who became culture warriors.  Even The American Scholar, signature publication of the Phi Beta Kappa Society, was showing signs of cultural decrepitude after 1960.  An article by Ruth Bader Ginsburg on “sex discrimination” was a hint of the lunacy infecting America’s mental assets.  Ginsburg’s intellectual hubris on the pages of a respected journal was for me a warning that academics were slipping away from reality.  (Ruth Bader Ginsburg would go on to become a Justice of the Supreme Court.)

As the graduates of a system of education that was geared to a socialist restructuring of society gained positions of responsibility and leadership in education, publishing, entertainment, and public service, the writing on the wall of the early 20th Century became the nightmare we face today.  

A disheartening fact of American education is that public school teachers don’t know the ugly facts of their own history.  Their collective loss of memory of what made them what they are – the stealth Marxist transformation of the public schools – is one of the great tragedies of the 20th Century.  Those of us who have remained awake through the years must make it our mission to enlighten the young, with the hope and prayer that the 21st Century restore the sanity that once prevailed in our country.

[*See the deliberate dumbing down of america by Charlotte Thomson Iserbyt, Conscience Press, 1999.]

 

Anthony J. DeBlasi is a 1953 graduate of Brooklyn College (Phi Beta Kappa), culture warrior, and Korean War veteran.

“Progressive Education” came to my school when I was a student at Halsey Junior High School in the 1940s (P.S. 85, Brooklyn, N.Y,).  Principal Stella Sweeting was thrilled as a little girl getting a doll house for Christmas, but the rest of us, teachers included, thought this “experiment” in schooling was silly.  Oh, it was fun to cut classes and paint murals in the hallways – the brainstorm of class buddy Bob and I that, to our surprise, was approved.

Such “official cheating” didn’t faze those with A’s and B’s in their subjects – we’d catch up later (in high school maybe?) – but what of the students who might stumble from such sliding and find it difficult to overcome the challenges ahead?  While this loosening of educational standards at Halsey was, in a word, pleasant, most of my teachers took a dim view of a theory of education that not only ditched authority and tradition but dismissed academic achievement as well – the stance of early 20th Century Marxist education reformers with a mission to prepare America for a socialist future.  Why did the “progress” they envisioned in their “progressive” educational method of indoctrination include dumbing?  

How serious a problem this watered-down schooling would be became clear to me when the principal of my high school (Bushwick High School, Brooklyn, N.Y.), Milo F. McDonald, published a report entitled “‘Progressive’ Poison in Public Education” which he delivered to the American Education Association in 1951.  The McDonald Report exposed in detail the so-called “activity program” – better known as “Progressive Education” – that was sprung on the New York City Schools in 1935 in the guise of an experiment, and was being pushed since then.  It was in fact a stealth program launched by John Dewey and a group of like-minded educational theorists to prepare future citizens for a coming socialist age.  It was time, claimed one of them, George S. Counts, to “dare the teachers to build a new social order.”

Since the facts presented in the McDonald Report and the strong case it made against Progressive Education would undermine the Progressive agenda, the one path open to the report was to the bottom of the dustbin of education history.  I have kept a copy of that forgotten report all these years, aware of its importance; it is now accessible at Don Potter.

The dumbing down of successive generations of school children has become documented history.*  The contrast in general school smarts before and after 1960 is plainly visible to older Americans. Less conspicuous is the collateral damage to our culture.  A hint of this negative “side effect” showed in the blight that crept into entertainment in the second half of the 20th Century.  I call it blight because increasing groupthink and decreasing originality fed my perception that independence and creativity in the communication and other arts was declining.  The trend, in numerous ramifying ways including academics, was diminishing the quality of mainstream life in America.

This dumbing trend became the subject of books like The Closing of the American Mind by Allan Bloom in 1987. Much has been written about this trend since, but little has been done to correct it.  The intellectual dimming and cultural downsliding in America long before alarms sounded in books and alternative publications was more than worrisome for those of us who became culture warriors.  Even The American Scholar, signature publication of the Phi Beta Kappa Society, was showing signs of cultural decrepitude after 1960.  An article by Ruth Bader Ginsburg on “sex discrimination” was a hint of the lunacy infecting America’s mental assets.  Ginsburg’s intellectual hubris on the pages of a respected journal was for me a warning that academics were slipping away from reality.  (Ruth Bader Ginsburg would go on to become a Justice of the Supreme Court.)

As the graduates of a system of education that was geared to a socialist restructuring of society gained positions of responsibility and leadership in education, publishing, entertainment, and public service, the writing on the wall of the early 20th Century became the nightmare we face today.  

A disheartening fact of American education is that public school teachers don’t know the ugly facts of their own history.  Their collective loss of memory of what made them what they are – the stealth Marxist transformation of the public schools – is one of the great tragedies of the 20th Century.  Those of us who have remained awake through the years must make it our mission to enlighten the young, with the hope and prayer that the 21st Century restore the sanity that once prevailed in our country.

[*See the deliberate dumbing down of america by Charlotte Thomson Iserbyt, Conscience Press, 1999.]

 

Anthony J. DeBlasi is a 1953 graduate of Brooklyn College (Phi Beta Kappa), culture warrior, and Korean War veteran.



Source link