Concerning education ("Education Nation"):
With all branches of government united as one under the banner of "Education Nation" (Health Care, Social Reform, etc.)


Dean Gotcher


"Work done by Horkheimer in the thirties identified 'neurosis' [Romans 7:14-25, when a person is caught between what he does naturally and what he does that is not natural, i.e. obey his Father even when it thwarts him from doing what he wants to do] as a social product, in which the family [the Father's authority over the children, Hebrews 12:5-11] was seen as a primary agent of repressive socialization.'" (Erich Fromm, Marx's Concept of Man)  His idea being that by 'changing' the family, the nation and the world can be 'changed,' i.e. negation of the "neurosis" condition caused by the traditional family environment, requires negating the Father's authority in the home thereby negating his influence upon how society functions.  By negating the Father's authority to shape how the next generation of citizens think and act while in the home, "neurosis," i.e. "top-down" thinking and acting, can be negated, replaced with "equality" thinking and acting.  It was not enough to change the children, the parents must be changed as well if a nation of 'change' was to take place.  "Social environmental forces must be used to change the parents behavior toward the child." (Theodor Adorno, The Authoritarian Personality)  Of concern was how to come between the Father and the children, in a effort to produce 'change,' without the Father reacting against it (regarded as "potential Fascism").  Warren Bennis (of National Training Laboratory fame, an off-shoot of the "Frankfurt School") wrote:  "[A]ny intervention between parent and child tend to produce familial democracy regardless of its intent.  The consequences of family democratization take a long time to make themselves felt—but it would be difficult to reverse the process once begun. [O]nce the parent can in any way imagine his own ["top-down"] orientation to be a possible liability to the child in the world approaching [a world of "equality"], once uncertainty is created in the parent how best to prepare the child for the future, the authoritarian family is moribund, regardless of whatever countermeasures may be taken.  The state, by its very interference in the life of its citizens, must necessarily undermine a parental authority which it attempts to restore." (Warren Bennis, The Temporary Society)

Max Horkheimer, a Marxist, a past director of the "Institute for Social Research," known as the Frankfurt School, a group of Transformational Marxist's who, fleeing Fascist Germany, came here in the early 30's, who greatly influenced ('changed') our nation (despite being a Marxist) wrote this regarding the framing of the Constitution of the United States of America. "For the men who made the Constitution there was no principle that did not derive its authority from a religious ["top-down"] source." (Max Horkheimer, Eclipse of Reason  1947)  Quoting Dickinson, Horkheimer wrote: "Government and its trust is 'found on the nature of man, that is, on the will of his Maker and . . . [is] therefore sacred. It is an offence against Heaven to violate that trust.'" (Max Horkheimer, Eclipse of Reason)  If the Marxists recognize the Constitution as coming from a biblical foundation, why then doesn't the American public.  Maybe it is because the Marxist told them it didn't and they believed them.  Karl Marx wrote: "The justice of state constitutions is to be decided not on the basis of Christianity, not from the nature of Christian society but from the nature of human society."  (Karl Marx,  Critique of Hegel's 'Philosophy of Right')  That is why children are writing (re-writing) the constituent, according to their feelings and thoughts, in classroom's today, ignorant of who conceived its framing and what motivated its ratification.

The Transformational Marxist idea was to use the social setting, i.e. the "group" setting of the classroom, of the workplace, of the subcommittee, etc. to 'change' people. "It is not individualism that fulfills the individual, on the contrary it destroys him.  Society is the necessary framework through which freedom and individuality are made realities." (Karl Marx)  Through the dynamics of a group setting people are more adaptable to change.  "It is usually easier to change individuals formed into a group than to change any one of them separately."  (Kurt Lewin in Kenneth Bennie, Human Relations in Curriculum Change, a large .pdf file)

 Kurt Lewin, the father of "group dynamics" (how you are more easily 'changed' in a group setting), "force field analysis" (how to analyze where you are in the process of 'change'), and "unfreezing, moving or 'changing,' and then refreezing you" (how to make the 'change' process' stick in you), all key components of brainwashing, was a part of the Frankfurt School, only through his (along with Wilhelm Reich) editing of their newsletter Zeitschrift für Sozialforschung before he came to the U.S. in the early 30's, at the same time they came here.  The "approval of men" (the basis of "equality," the foundation of socialism), can supersede the "approve of God" or of the Father (the basis of "top-down" thinking, the foundation of capitalism) more easily through a group setting (how it is conducted) than in a one on one setting (including teachers in front of the class inculcating facts to the students).

"Much stress is laid on the creation of an atmosphere of freedom and spontaneity—voluntary attendance, informality of meetings, freedom of expression in voicing grievances, emotional security, and avoidance of pressure."  "A feeling of complete freedom and a heightened group identification are frequently more important at a particular stage of re-education [brainwashing] than learning not to break specific rules."  (Kenneth Benne,  Human Relations in Curriculum Change)

It is not that people (or children) are in a group setting that produces 'change,' it is how that group setting is conducted that produces 'change,' i.e. affects how people think and act.  "[C]hange in methods of leadership is probably the quickest way to bring about a change in the cultural atmosphere of a group."  (Kurt Lewin in Kenneth Benne, Human Relations in Curriculum Change)   The teacher, for instance, 'changing' the classroom setting from one imparting facts and truths to be memorized and applied, with some form of chastening for being wrong or not obeying ("Do this and not that" and "because I said so") to one where the students can freely share their own opinions, how they "feel," and what they "think" in an "open ended," "non-directive" (anti-father) environment, their paradigm, their way of thinking and acting is more easily 'changed.'   That is, by the person's attachment to the group he is more adaptable to 'changing' not only his values and beliefs but his paradigm itself, how he comes to his values and beliefs.  "The individual accepts the new system of values and beliefs by accepting belongingness to a group."  (ibid.)  "The individual is emancipated [from the "top-down," Father's authority, i.e. the Patriarchal Paradigm] in the social group."  (Norman O. Brown,  Life Against Death: The Psychoanalytical Meaning of History"Unfreezing. This term, also adopted from Lewinian change theory, refers to the process of disconfirming an individual's former belief system."  (Irvin Yalom, The Theory and Practice of Group PsychotherapyAs Yalom put it, the student or adult is "born again," not to obedience to a higher authority restraining "human nature," (a Patriarchal Paradigm) but to the belonging of a group which is helping him 'liberate' his "human nature" from the restraints of higher authority (a Heresiarchal Paradigm). "One of the most fascinating aspects of group therapy is that everyone is born again, born together in the group." (Ibid.)

[Kurt] Lewin emphasized that the child takes on the characteristic behavior of the group in which he is placed. . . . he reflects the behavior patterns which are set by the adult leader of the group.   (Wilbur Brookover, A Sociology of Education)  It is the 'shifting' from learning facts and truths which are preached and taught (as given by the authority figure up front), to the 'discovering' of "facts and truth" (which are 'changeable' according to and therefore adaptable to the 'changing' environment) through one's own "sense experiences" (Karl Marx), i.e. through his own feelings and thoughts of the 'moment,' i.e. in the "light" of his own opinion, (influenced by the group setting, i.e. by the opinions of others, i.e. by the contemporary environment, through the dialoguing of opinions to a consensus and putting that consensus into social actionpraxis) that the child or the adult's paradigm is 'changed.'  "In the dialogic relation of recognizing oneself in the other, they experience the common ground of their existence."  (Jürgen Habermas, Knowledge & Human Interest)  It is important therefore that the person is "protected" from a higher authority's intrusion upon his learning experience (including his conscience, i.e. the voice of the Father within him).  "In order to effect rapid change, . . . [one] must mount a vigorous attack on the family [the "top-down" way of thinking and acting] lest the traditions of present generations be preserved.  It is necessary, in other words, artificially to create an experiential chasm between parents and children—to insulate the children in order that they can more easily be indoctrinated with new ideas."  (Warren Bennis, The Temporary Society)

The negation of the conscience, the voice of the Father within the child, by replacing it with the so called "super-ego," replacing the voice of the Father with the voice of "the village," i.e. the group without, is critical to the success of dialectic 'reasoning.'  Kurt Lewin described the condition of the conscience and the condition necessary to 'change' it (sear it) for the 'purpose' of social 'change.'  He wrote: "The negative valence of a forbidden object which in itself attracts the child thus usually derives from an induced field of force of an adult.  If this field of force loses its psychological existence for the child (e.g., if the adult goes away or loses his authority) the negative valence also disappears." (Kurt Lewin, A Dynamic Theory of Personality: Selected Papers)  The "negative valence" is the conscience which prevents the child from relating with that which naturally "attracts" him (because of the fear of chastening by the Father, i.e. "the field of force of an adult").  According to Lewin, if the authority of the Father is negated, in other words if the learning environment in the classroom is "non-hostile," i.e. "open-ended" and "non-directive," as Lewin puts it, "the adult goes away or loses his authority," the mind of the child is freed from fear of the Father's authority and thereby the voice of the Father in the child, i.e. his conscience is negated by his attachment to the voice of "the village," the voice of "the group," the voice of "the people," the voice of man's social "felt" needs.  The "top-down" voice of God or the Father is negated by accepting the "equality" voice of man (the voice of the brotherhood, the voice of "the community").

This is the contemporary classroom (workplace, government, and church) setting today, as designed through the use of Blooms' Taxonomies (curriculum material used by teachers in the classroom which is based upon and purpose in promoting Transformational Marxist ideology, how to map the room, i.e. evaluate and taxonomize the students, i.e. how they feel, think, and act, i.e. to "help" them 'discover' their paradigm, i.e. to help them develop "class consciousness," i.e. learning that children are the oppressed and the Father is the oppressor, for the 'purpose' of 'change'; "The major impact of the new program is to develop attitudes and values toward learning which are not shared by the parents."  "There are many stores of the conflict and tension that these new practices are producing between parents and children."  Taxonomy of Educational Objectives: Book II Affective Domain).  In the Marxist training manual, Human Relations in Curriculum Change (what Phil Ring calls "A cookbook on humans") we read:  "In the area of human relations, individual and group process becomes the curriculum."  "A change in curriculum is a change in the people concerned—in teachers, in students, in parents, and other laymen, and in administrators."  "Curriculum change means that the group involved must shift its approval from the old [from a "top-down," Father over children, God's law over man system] to some new set of reciprocal behavior patterns [to an "equality," parents and children are equal, "human nature" is law system]."  (Kenneth Benne, Human Relations in Curriculum Change)  In such a pattern, what begins with man (the "masses," "human nature") being law (with man 'liberated' from the laws of restraint, restraining his "natural inclinations," his "human nature") always ends up with a man (a dictator, unstrained by law) being the law, over "the masses."  The objective of dialectic 'reasoning' is to make sure that the dictator (the anti-Christ) allows "the people" to continue to be 'driven' by and 'purposed' in the propagation of their own "human nature" over and against the restraints of the Father without doing the Father's paradigm, i.e.  making himself the law over and against the "people."  The anti-Christ is in truth anti-Father.  Liberty for those of dialectic 'reasoning,' is 'liberation' not only from the Father's restraint but also to with the augmentation of "human nature," i.e. man's "natural inclination" to unite with the world in pleasure (not fearing God but fearing man).  Liberty to those of righteousness is liberation from the controlling nature of the flesh to live right before God the Father (not fearing man but fearing God).

Having said all this you can better understand the warning of George Washington regarding the Constitution:  "If, in the opinion of the people, the distribution or modification of the constitutional powers be in any particular wrong, let it be corrected by an amendment in the way which the Constitution designates. But let there be no change by usurpation [through one branch usurping authority over another branch, for example the courts or the president making law instead of the legislative branch]; for, though this, in one instance, may be the instrument of good, it is the customary weapon by which free governments are destroyed."   "The spirit of encroachment tends to consolidate the powers of all the departments in one, and thus to create, whatever the form of government, a real despotism.  A just estimate of that love of power, and proneness to abuse it, which predominates in the human heart, is sufficient to satisfy us of the truth of this position.  The necessity of reciprocal checks in the exercise of political power, by dividing and distributing it into different depositories, and constituting each the guardian of the public weal [chastening or spanking] against invasions by the others, has been evinced by experiments ancient and modern;  some of them in our country and under our own eyes.  To preserve them must be as necessary as to institute them."  (George Washington,  Farewell Speech)

György Lukács, the founder of the "Institute of Social Research" (described above) wrote:  "The workers councils [the consensus meeting, i.e. a diverse group of people, i.e. from all branches of government―departments, under each branch of government, coming together as one, circumventing the separation of branchesdialoguing to consensus, over social issues, in a facilitated meeting, to a predetermined outcome, i.e. that no decision can be made outside of the consensus process, i.e. outside the soviet] will eliminate the separation of the legislature, administration and judiciary" (György Lukács, History & Class Consciousness)  By uniting all branches upon the issue of social 'change,' the traditional family (and the individual citizen) looses it's (his) constitutional right of protection (inalienable rights, which comes from God).  It is the same process being used in the classroom, the workplace, and even in the "church" promoting 'change.'

It is not that the Constitution is a holy document, it is not.  As Patrick Henry pointed out "We the people" and "more perfect union" were phrases of tyranny against liberty.  It is "We the states" (who all recognize in their constitutions the sovereignty of God) from where the Constitution derives it authority, not from "the people," as in "'the peoples' Republic of (Communist) China," where we are now going.  "More perfect union" meaning that only in the uniting of nations, making the world "one" (where we are also now going, i.e. negating sovereignty, i.e. negating the right of the Father to train up His children in His image), will there ever be perfection, i.e. world peace (worldly peace) and social harmony (socialist harmony). It, with the addition of the Bill of Rights (thanks to men like Patrick Henry), simply gave the greatest authority to the traditional family, which we have now lost (thanks to "higher education," according to Bloom's Taxonomies) to "Education Nation."  "Concerning the changing of circumstances by men, the educator must himself be educated. The changing of circumstances and of self can only be grasped and rationally understood as revolutionary practice [praxis, i.e. through the consensus process of 'change']." (Karl Marx, Thesis on Feuerbach # 3)

After all is said and done, liberty is not found in a nation, but in Christ, the only begotten son of God.  When you have given all, including your very own life to him, then and only then can you know liberty.  That liberty which no man can take from you, though he threatens to take your land, your family, and your very own life.  Without it there is no liberty in this nation. Only a semblance of 'liberty' (subject to the fear of men), the liberty of the flesh which leads only to oppression and death.

© Institution for Authority Research, Dean Gotcher 2012-2015