In Part II of this series we stated: “The following curriculum, along with the rest of the proposals in this series, is intended to provide a roadmap for taking back our educational system – re-Americanizing it as we de-Progressivise it.” That choice of words was deliberate, for decades ago the Gramsci-inspired Leftists, the Progressives, identified our education system as one of the institutional lynchpins in their “long march through the institutions.” We see the results today in mediocre (at best) academic skills in our K-12 and college graduates, and near-absent intellectual integrity or rigor amongst their instructors. At the same time, the political correctness, ideological indoctrination, suppression of debate and forced conformity within our educational system are “world class” (at least by totalitarian standards).
As a thought exercise, imagine if our Founding Fathers had been cursed with transiting something equivalent to today’s education system and curriculum – had that been the case, do you believe that they would have been capable of later establishing our divinely inspired country? Of course not. There would never have been a United States of America. And that is the point, for the Progressives have long realized that while they can’t undo the past, they can (as they like to put it) “bend the arc of history” going forward … including the eventual undoing of what the Founding Fathers wrought. As a consequence of today’s Progressive-run education system, just imagine iall of the human talent idled or suppressed, the opportunities forgone!
But we can undo their undoing, and do so by (in part) wielding their own tactics back at them. We can turn Gramsci and Alinsky and Ayers on their pointy little Commie heads! Including our own “long march” through, and around, the institutions they’ve “occupied” (pun intended). And we can employ a variation of their “non-reformist reforms” mechanism.
A quick introduction to “non-reformist reforms” is necessary. In the excellent book “Radical in Chief” “ author Stanley Kurtz did a masterful job of explaining the concept; and while space doesn’t permit a full recounting, for our purposes first know that it was peddled by a French Communist strategist named Andre Gorz. The basic idea is that stealth revolutionaries who’ve burrowed into the system, to undermine it from within, introduce “reforms.” For public purposes the “reforms” are portrayed as fixing or alleviating some problem, but that actually are intended to create new and bigger problems to help undermine the system, or to achieve some other unspoken goal. Well, the “reforms” proposed in this series will effect genuine and beneficial reforms, they too will also be the catalyst for numerous after-effects that will emanate out – albeit in our case those effects will be beneficial and, because of that, we need not hide them, nor engage in subterfuge regarding our ultimate intentions. That ultimate intention being not just “re-Americanizing” and “de-Progressivizing” our educational system, but our entire body politic.
Let us present the proposals with a bullet-point cascade. As you read, note how typically the benefit of one enables, or produces, the benefit that follows – and that the benefits tend to expand from individuals into families, and then into society at large. After the bullet-points, we’ll briefly discuss and conclude.
- The higher-quality curriculum described in Part II will benefit all students, of whatever racial or socioeconomic group;
- In particular, minorities currently trapped in K-12 public schools would then acquire a meaningful path out of the economic apartheid in which current Progressive / Democrat Party policies (virtually) imprison them;
- This in turn will help promote “economic assimilation” as Americans of all backgrounds can realistically aspire to becoming middle class, and to enjoy the upward mobility that is characteristic of a vibrant middle class. They will embrace those “bourgeois” values to their own benefit, and greater benefit to their children;
- Speaking of children, that widening embrace of those “bourgeois” values will provide incentive to pursue a career, then get married, then start having children. As single parenthood is a (if not the) primary indicator of future poverty, this too will help lower poverty rates because;
- This resurgence of the nuclear family will (once again) provide children with positive role models, and help transmit those positive “bourgeois” values to the next generation. Tragically, poverty rates have remained stagnant (moving within a range) since the so-called Great Society / War on Poverty was launched over a half-century ago. This change back toward a traditional family structure could be the single catalyst that finally breaks the back of the Progressive’s policy structure that operates to maintain a perma-poverty voting bloc. Thus, it could herald-in declining poverty rates for as far as the eye can see;
- The heightened skill-set enjoyed by high school graduates of all socioeconomic backgrounds and ethnicities means that they will be ready to enter the workforce from day one, and without debt. Increasingly over recent decades the academic industry has been committing a fraud on the American public – for as the skill set denoted by a high school diploma became devalued, often granted to those with an 8th grade skill set (if not less) – employers compensated by requiring bachelor’s degrees even for (relatively) entry-level jobs. This was the employers’ attempt to limit their applicant pool to those with (at least) what once was high school level literacy in language and math. Simultaneously, the public was fed the mantra that “a college degree” was now necessary in order for their children to “get a decent job” and to “live a middle class existence.” As a result we now have multiple generations of people who’ve pursued a degree, saddled with a debt load that takes a good part of their working career to payoff, merely to get their foot in the door of an employer. It doesn’t have to be this way! If prospective employers can once again have confidence that a high school graduate brings with them a decent level of literacy in the “three R’s” (and more), they’ll recruit accordingly. And so, as stated, young people will be able to enter right into the workforce, in productive jobs, without student loan debt;
- That, in turn, should result in higher rates of savings and investment (recall the personal finance part of our proposed curriculum), with great benefit to themselves and their families, and with the economic stimulation increased savings and investment provides for our overall economy;
- The heightened skill-set enjoyed by high school graduates means that those who, whether by desire for, or need of additional education to advance their career, may have enough of a head start on their skill set to be poised to fulfill their additional needs without having to commit to a minimum of four years for a bachelor’s degree (and even more for a graduate degree). Thus increasing their earning-time in the workforce, and decreasing the amount of “student debt” they need incur. And increase our economy’s productivity overall.
- The content of our proposed curriculum, and their heightened skill-set, means that a large portion of future college attendees will be more discerning about what they want, and so more discriminating in their course of studies (i.e., less likely to pursue frivolous gender / race / grievance “studies” degrees). They will have less tolerance for the current diet of “required” indoctrination courses on “diversity,” “gender” and other Progressive causes célèbres. This even more so, since …
- The significantly lowered demand for college degrees enabled by meaningful high school diplomas will help burst the college bubble, because the pool of people pursuing a bachelor’s degree just to have their ticket-punched to meet entry level job requirements will dry up. That will, in turn, disproportionately impact the “professors” of frivolous gender / race / grievance “studies” because much of their classes are comprised of those who are there to just get a “bachelor’s degree” – any “bachelor’s degree” that doesn’t require too much rigor – no matter that once out in the real world they will find that their majors qualify them only for employment in fields such as: an academic peddling the same material, a “community organizer,” a union organizer, Democrat Party staff, or the proverbial “Starbucks barista with a bachelor’s degree.” (Ponder the billions of dollars this country has wasted over the years incurring tuition and student loan debt for courses of study that produce neither economic nor societal benefit.) As the future slots for academic positions peddling such “studies” shrinks, and declining poverty rates decimate the “demand” for “community organizers” and other jobs for which there’s not a free-market demand, a self-reinforcing cycle of fewer and fewer students wasting their time on such nonsense degrees will take hold;
- As colleges and universities struggle trying to fill seats in a significantly declining market, they’ll get a firm reintroduction into the immutable laws of economics. In recent decades they’ve been unjustly subsidized by the dynamic of devalued high school diplomas forcing parents and young persons to pursue bachelor’s degrees, merely so that they’d possess the hallowed “B.A.” threshold required for an ever-increasing number of middle-class level jobs. With that subsidy gone, the higher education industry will find that it has to entice customers, rather than parasitically gorge itself on the backs of a captive clientele. In turn, that will require responding to what the customers want and need, rather than imposing a Progressive sociological experiment cum indoctrination regime on students. Plus, the declining revenues will force decisions setting priorities and, as the “grievance studies” programs become increasingly non-revenue generating, they will be reduced, if not eliminated;
- That, in turn, means that the hatching grounds and academic think tanks for some of the most noxious cultural effluent that that can be dreamt up by Progressive minds will be damaged, if not hobbled;
- In turn, those forces will be far less able to oppose the increasing adoption of our curriculum and transmission mechanisms, so that the beneficial effects of those will become even more widespread. (If that isn’t a virtuous circle, what is?);
- On the world stage, the increased percentage of our people gainfully employed in the workplace, with their higher skill-set, will make us more economically competitive;
- Which will provide fertile economic ground for our growing, vibrant middle-class composed of all races, creeds and colors;
- And so all of the foregoing, once it takes hold will, like the proverbial silver spike through a vampire’s heart, will inflict a fatal blow on the Progressives’ / Democrats’ identity politics, and so will derail their agenda. We will indeed accomplish de-Progressivising, and so achieve re-Americanizing our great nation.
In conclusion, just as the anti-American Progressives identified decades ago, our education system is a lynchpin for their intended “fundamental transformation” into the Collectivist utopia they intend to impose (history informs us that promised Collectivist utopias actually deliver dystopian hells). Well, our education system can also be a lynchpin for our “fundamental restoration” back to an America consistent with that divinely inspired vision of our Founding Fathers.
Mr. Wigand is the author of Communiqués From the Vast Right-Wing Conspiracy, which is available on Amazon in both print and Kindle versions. Comments or questions for Mr. Wigand may be sent to: firstname.lastname@example.org — he will make every effort to personally respond to every email.