Deputy Prime Minister Nick Clegg said that schools should recruit only credentialed educationalists and; that they should stick to the national curriculum.
Nevertheless, the national curriculum is there only to ‘dumb down’ children in the education network. The syllabus will be composed of an unlimited catalog of spelling, facts and rules, that will not help to expand the child’s capacity to think or resolve problems.
Children will be enforced to learn a range of detail for English, maths and science without comprehending it. A lot of the curricula will demand too much too young and, this will put stress on teachers to rely on mechanical studying without the understanding of it.
These unsuitable demands will lead the way to lack of success and demoralisation. Nonetheless, this is what the government desire because if they can dumb down the children, in the end they will not be intelligent enough to attack the system.
The recently developed curriculum comprises a strategy for students to remember their times tables up to 12 by the age of nine, multiply and divide fractions by the age of 11, as well as acquire knowledge of subjects such as geometry, long division and multiplication and decimals.
This would be excellent for a number of children, but the rest will fall by the wayside because they clearly will not be fast enough to keep up, or they will simply not be able to do it because of their ages.
This has in fact been going on for years, but at present the government are raising the stakes so that the extremely intelligent will get the instruction that is obtainable in a very short time, which means that the other pupils they can throw to the wayside, leaving them illiterate and demoralised because their brains were not advanced enough to manage this inflexible system.
Nick Clegg said that it was so that parents could be sure their children were being given a high standard of education, but of course that is not the case in almost all children.
Almost all schools work well without being made to employ qualified educators and, have done so for some time. It would as well be good to give schools certain liberties because it’s not the government that are in charge of the schools and, teaching of the children, it’s the teachers that teach these children, so as a result they should be in charge of whom they employ and fire, so long as they’re evaluated first.
They should as well be allowed to hire voluntary teachers who are prepared to work in their free time for free as supply teachers, particularly when educating the disabled and, special education units in mainstream educational institutions.
That does not mean that those who are out-of-work should be assembled to work in schools for their benefits, this would be absurd, but maybe people who have disabled children at school and they want to contribute during school hours to others who need further assistance.
There should be a lot more free schools that have been set up by parents and other groups, but that are operated outside local authority control because free schools have discretion over what they teach.
Nick Clegg might be wondering what the purpose of having a national curriculum is when really he knows what the purpose of having it is, the purpose of having a national curriculum is so that the government can control the masses in a very small space and time.
In schools we have a peer group pressure where they subdue uncertainty and opposition to new ideas by utilising the need to belong and, accelerate acceptance of new lifestyles by constantly condemning previous ways of thinking.
Installing subconscious communication by stressing certain code words or idioms in lengthy, bewildering speeches and, attaining the loss of ability to assess logically by stopping personal examination.
Detaching originality by demanding conformity to the group clothing regulations. Producing disorientation and enlarged susceptibility to emotional arousal by stripping the brain of required nutrients used through the use of school meals.
There are certain ideas of re-education: repetition, going through the same subject over and over until it’s known by heart. The subjects (pupils) are at no time left alone, or given any private time of their own, they are always in activity.
We’re educated to think that it’s an education we’re permitting our children to have, but in fact it’s an indoctrination. Simply mind control in schools.
It’s the intentional dumbing down of our children by design. It’s about government control and, it’s not about teaching children.
Brainwashing is about mildly applied psychological operations and, education in all likelihood is the most trouble-free way for them to do that.
The education our children are going to get has nothing to do with education, it’s teaching our children to be human resources because that’s the way that the government talk about us, to spin off financial gain for the globalists.
In addition the aim of state instruction is not to spread insight to all, it’s only to reduce as many individuals as feasible to the same safe level, to reproduce a standard citizenry and, to put down dissent and inventiveness.
The most considerable barricade to discovery is not ignorance, it’s the misapprehension of understanding and, that’s what the 15,000 hours and, obligatory schooling trains and conditions us and, you’re told particular realities and, so you assume you know all that’s going on and, it’s not until later on in life when you might come across additional particulars that you perceive what’s going on.
So until you have this other bit of information to bring everything into focus, you understand that what you were taught in state education throughout that 15,000 hours, was really was what was going on and, it’s not until you pump up against the real world, as George Orwell said, usually on the field of battle, that you have to contemplate that at which you were taught to believe, against the impartial proof that exists.
Do we in fact need to send our children to school, not that I’m saying it’s not necessary to teach our children, what I’m talking about is the regimented practice of mandatory or enforced schooling through a politically manipulated structure that is more designed to keep society, which begins with children, dumbed down, lacking the knowledge of either inventive or reasoned thought, or productive living, or any real consciousness of the real world.
John Taylor Gatto was a prize-winning teacher in New York who took children that couldn’t even read or write, who were headed for jail and made them into the highest level students.
In addition he then found out that he had been closed down by the substantial tax free infrastructure, so that he couldn’t teach these children this information. He found that by design they were dumbing people down to make them submissive biotic robots or replicants, that’s what we’re seen as, but now we’re outdated, we’re to be phased out.
I don’t believe you have to be a fortune teller to notice that what we call education is really not intended to better the lives of the children, their families and, society in general.
The motive of education, founded on observation and, the observation of others is to suppress humankind, to produce robotic clones that are purely cogs in the wheel and, they only know how to do their little job that they have been given to do, to prevent people from having self determination, to put down dissent and ingenuity.
Look at the great politicians and, other great men of the past, such as Thomas Jefferson and Benjamin Franklin. These people at no time graduated from a conventional secondary school, even though they were educated to a high standard.
By the age of about 13 to 15 almost all children were not even contemplated as children any longer and, were treated almost like grown-ups. They could read, write and, were well-informed about the arts and sciences.
They didn’t need new maths and, they could read all the finest written works, because their expertise in maths and language arts were in general far superior to our own today.
The purpose of education in the public sector should be to extend insight to all, so that they can have a more excellent life and share that understanding with others so that we can all work with each other to have a better society.
Yet evidence appears to shows that in state schools it is doing just the opposite and, it becomes visible that this is not by misadventure, but by design.
Any teacher who is caught actually trying to teach children through avoidance or divergence from the official curriculum will frequently be condemned, harassed and, in the end fired from their work.
View it this way, if you were positioned in charge of running the business of some large company and, you were a liar and a thief, but you couldn’t run it all by yourself and had to employ people to help you in running the equipment, would you want to use people who were generally honest, good with critical thinking skills, good with mathematics and, had a good ability to remember, of course not and, if you did, then they might get wise to your racket and turn you into the authorities.
Now apply what I just said on a public and even a global plane.
What if leaders of our countries beat the drums of war from time to time and brandished the patriotic flag with self serving allusions to keeping safe our liberties, when all along it’s simply an enormous trick.
Do you believe they would have an interest in keeping the people dumbed down.
On Star Trek they had an adversary called the BORG, a cube like construction that was a combination of human and machine. Their favourite proverb was resistance is futile and, you will be assimilated.
Is it just me, or is this a somewhat camouflaged allusion to our own present day society?
Following the establishment of the Outcome Based Education in the 1960s, the change from time-honoured schooling to the quantum disorder we have at the moment have gone into full assembly.
Following that period the centre of education would at all times be on the importance of the group and not the individual, so that we could all be very proficient or cogs in the wheel and, recently the No Child Left Behind agenda was devised on a national level.
Let me describe what that in fact means in layman’s terms. If some children get behind in particular areas, the educator has to stop teaching the more advanced learners and centre on those that are having difficulties.
While this may appear noble, the outcome is that the more advanced scholars are held back and, stopped from standing out as they should be allowed to do. So what is the real message of No Child Left Behind.
The real message is this, they can’t afford to permit any child to slid through the crack and, in fact become completely literate. If such a child were to in fact shine past the low level reflective expertise that they in fact want to see developed, then the child could present a difficult situation to them in time and, reveal their immense and grotesque scheme for what it actually is.
What they in fact want us to have is a restricted and, extremely centred education, that only educated us how to do a few particular things. That way, we will at no time be able to get the greater picture of what is actually going on and, so when we need something we will continually have to be contingent on their professionals to help us fix those things that we can’t mend and, keep us forever contingent upon that construction of social slavery.
George Orwell’s 1984 and Aldous Huxley’s Brave New World, we need not wait for the future fulfilment of these legendary tales, for we have already arrived.