authorityresearch.com

"Trust in the Lord with all thine heart, and lean not unto thine own understanding. In all thy ways acknowledge him, and he shall direct thy paths." Proverb. 3: 5-6

With Impunity.
(Personal note.)

by
Dean Gotcher

"For all that is in the world, the lust of the flesh, and the lust of the eyes, and the pride of life, is not of the Father, but is of the world." 1 John 2:16

That which is of the Father is objective truth. That which is "of the world," that is "the lust of the flesh, and the lust of the eyes, and the pride of life" is subjective truth. 1 John 2:16

Jerome Bronner in his book Of Critical Theory and its Theorists stated: "Every form of objectification results in alienation" "Alienation is the experience of 'estrangement' (Verfremdung) from others." "Alienation has a long history. Its most radical sense already appears in the biblical expulsion from Eden." "God is thus the anthropological source of alienation." "Alienation will continue so long as the subject engages in an externalization (Entausserung) of his or her subjectivity."

"I had not known sin, but by the law: for I had not known lust, except the law had said, Thou shalt not covet." Romans 7:7

Karl Marx, in Critique of Hegel's 'Philosophy of Right' wrote: "To enjoy the present reconciles us to the actual."

Abraham Maslow, in his journals, The Journals of Abraham Maslow wrote: "One could reinterpret Marx into a self-actualization-fostering Third- and Fourth-Force psychology-philosophy." In his book The Farther Reaches of Human Nature Maslow stated: "Self-actualizing people have to a large extent transcended the values of their culture. They are not so much merely Americans as they are world citizens, members of the human species first and foremost," that is "globalists."

Therefore, according to Karl Marx and Abraham Maslow, self is actualized in lust, that is only in that which is "of the world," not in the father's authority. The objective of Marxism is to sin, that is lust with impunity. By making man subject to stimulus-response, that is only "of the world," the father's authority is negated, that is by excluding the father in defining and establishing law, being judged, chastened, condemned, cast out for doing wrong, disobeying, sinning is negated.

"Lie not one to another, seeing that ye have put off the old man with his deeds;" Colossians 3:9

The Greek word for deeds is praxis. The lie being you can lust after the carnal pleasures of the 'moment' that the world stimulates without being held accountable, that is you can sin with impunity.

"The philosophy of praxis is the absolute secularization of thought, an absolute humanism of history." (Antonio Gramsci, Selections from the Prison Notebooks) The name for the national test for teachers is Praxis.

"For they being ignorant of God's righteousness, and going about to establish their own righteousness, have not submitted themselves unto the righteousness of God." Romans 10:3

God's righteousness is based upon His Word, that is being told. Man's rightousness is based upon his "carnal nature," that is his "sense experience" or stimulus-response. In other words by "creating" a "healthy environment" a "healthy person" can be "created" or rather be made manifest, which God's Word condemns.

"Know ye not, that to whom ye yield yourselves servants to obey, his servants ye are to whom ye obey; whether of sin unto death, or of obedience unto righteousness?" Romans 6:16

"And even as they did not like to retain God in their knowledge, God gave them over to a reprobate mind, to do those things which are not convenient; Being filled with all unrighteousness, fornication, wickedness, covetousness, maliciousness; full of envy, murder, debate, deceit, malignity; whisperers, Backbiters, haters of God, despiteful, proud, boasters, inventors of evil things, disobedient to parents, Without understanding, covenantbreakers, without natural affection, implacable, unmerciful: Who knowing the judgment of God, that they which commit such things are worthy of death, not only do the same, but have pleasure in them that do them." Romans 1:28-32

"And for this cause God shall send them strong delusion, that they should believe a lie: That they all might be damned who believed not the truth, but had pleasure in unrighteousness." 2 Thessalonians 2:11, 12

It is the father (both Heavenly and earthly) who establishes law and enforces it, that is who tells those under his authority what is right and what is wrong behavior and holds them accountable to what they have been told. The father's authority in the home and the Father's authority in the heart of man is being negated today, with impunity. None dare question the method being used in education today, which excludes, that is negates the father's authority in establishing right and wrong behavior. If they do, they risk their job and their reputation. That method being used in education today negates the parent's effort to train up their children to do right and not wrong according to established commands, rules, facts, and truth, labeling them as instilling 'prejudice' in their children. All educators are certified and schools accredited today based upon their use of what are called "Bloom's Taxonomies" in the classroom. Benjamin Bloom in his second "taxonomy," Taxonomy of Educational Objectives Book 2: Affective Domain stated: "There are many stories of the conflict and tension that these new practices are producing between parents and children." In his first "taxonomy" Taxonomy of Educational Objectives Book 1: Cognitive Domain he stated that his "taxonomies" are "a psychological classification system" used "to develop attitudes and values ... which are not shaped by the parents." What is missing, that is negated in the "taxonomies" is the father's authority. The exclusion or negation of the father's authority in establishing behavior is the essence of Marxism. It is the reason Bloom listed two Marxists, Erick Fromm and Theador Adorno as the "taxonomies" "Weltanschauung," that is as the "taxonomies" world view (explained below).

Karl Marx, in his Fourth Thesis on Feuerbach wrote: "Once the earthly family is discovered to be the secret of the Holy family, the former must then itself be destroyed [vernichtet, that is annihilated, that is negated] in theory and in practice."

"He is antichrist, that denieth the Father and the Son." 1 John 2:22

While the Heavenly Father is Holy and the earthly father is born into sin both have the same authority system, commonly referred to as the Patriarchal paradigm, 1) preaching commands and rules to be obeyed as given, teaching facts and truth to be accepted as is (at first at least by faith) and applied, discussing with those under his authority any questions they might have regarding his commands, rules, facts, and truth, providing he deems it necessary, has time, those under his authority are able to understand, and are not questioning, challenging, defying, disregarding, attacking his authority, 2) rewarding those who do right and obey, 3) correcting and-or chastening those who do wrong and-or disobey, that they might learn to humble, deny, die to, control, discipline, capitulate their "self" in order to do right and not wrong according to the established commands, rules, facts, and truth they have been taught (told), that is in order to do the father's will, and 4) casting out (expels or grounds) those who question, challenge, defy, disregard, attack his authority, which retains the father's authority system in the child's and man's thoughts, directing effecting his actions, resulting in the those under the father's authority KNOWING right from wrong from being told (especially when it comes to behavior). Traditional education is based upon the father's authority system, being told what is right and what is wrong behavior instead of 'discovering' it for your self via dialogue.

Karl Marx wrote: "The life which he has given to the object sets itself against him as an alien and hostile force." (Karl Marx, MEGA I/3)

The Marxist Max Horkheimer, who was for a time director of the Institute of Social Research (commonly referred to as "The Frankfurt School") in his book Vernunft and Selbsterhaltung; that is Reasoning and Self Preservation wrote: "Protestantism was the strongest force in the extension of cold rational individualism."

"Doing your best as unto the Lord," "The priesthood of all believers," "Putting no one between you and the Father," that is individualism under God, which is the hallmark of the Protestant Reformation stands in the way of socialism, which requires compromise in order to "get along."

Karl Marx wrote, as sighted in John Lewis book The Life and Teachings of Karl Marx: " 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."

Denying the Heavenly Father's authority (that is being held accountable for their carnal thoughts and carnal actions) Karl Marx, and all who think like him (who reason dialectically, who establish behavior upon dialogue, that is make behavior subject only to "human nature," that is subject to "the lust of the flesh, and the lust of the eyes, and the pride of life," to that which is only "of the world" ) see it as their duty to negate the earthly father's authority, which they perceive as engendering the Heavenly Father's authority in the mind of the individual and "the people." By children submitting their self to their parents' authority, that is accepting the father's authority in the home, according to those who reason dialectically, God the Father is 'created.' Therefore, when you negate the father's authority, you negate the issue of sin, you negate the judging, condemning, and casting out of anyone for sinning. In dialogue there is no judgment, condemnation, or being cast out for disobeying or doing wrong since in dialogue commands, rules, facts, and truth are only opinions. The 'logic' then follows, without the law there is no judgment for sinning, therefore there is no need for a savior, that is there is no need of the Heavenly Father to send His only begotten Son, Jesus Christ to redeem man from his sins.

"For the wages of sin is death; but the gift of God is eternal life through Jesus Christ our Lord." Romans 6:23

"Neither is there salvation in any other: for there is none other name under heaven given among men, whereby we must be saved." Acts 4:12

"For as by one man's disobedience many were made sinners, so by the obedience of one shall many be made righteous." Romans 5:19

"If we say that we have no sin, we deceive ourselves, and the truth is not in us. If we confess our sins, he is faithful and just to forgive us our sins, and to cleanse us from all unrighteousness. If we say that we have not sinned, we make him a liar, and his word is not in us." 1 John 1:8-10

"And death and hell were cast into the lake of fire. This is the second death.And whosoever was not found written in the book of life was cast into the lake of fire." Revelation 20:14, 15

"He that committeth sin is of the devil; for the devil sinneth from the beginning. For this purpose the Son of God was manifested, that he might destroy the works of the devil." 1 John 3:8

There is no father's authority in dialogue, in an opinion, or in the consensus process. There is only "the lust of the flesh, and the lust of the eyes, and the pride of life," that is there is only that which is "of the world" being 'justified.' Discussion is of the father (from being told right from wrong, an either-or, that is either do right or obey, that is do what you are told or be judged, corrected, reproved, chastened, condemned, or cast out for doing wrong or disobeying). Dialogue on the other hand is of the child, making his behavior subject to his feelings of the 'moment' that the world is stimulating—which consists of the spectrum of "feelings" from lust for pleasure to hate of restraint or from like to dislike, with each action taken in the direction of dialogue (when it comes to behavior) increasing the child's resentment toward, dissatisfaction with, and hatred toward restraint, toward the restrainer (and true discussion where the father has the final say). Discussion deals with what "is," dialogue with what "seems to be" or "ought to be." Discussion and dialogue are two opposing political systems. By bringing dialogue into an environment establishing (defining) behavior the father's authority (discussion—with the father having the final say) is negated. This applies (throughout the following issue) to both the earthly father and the Heavenly Father, with the understanding that whenever the word "father" is used the Heavenly Father is the final authority.

The famous social-psychologist, Carl Rogers, in his book on becoming a person: A Therapist View of Psychotherapy wrote: "The words 'seem to' are significant; it is the perception which functions in guiding behavior."

The scriptures tell us "There is a way that seemeth right unto a man, but the end thereof are the ways of death." Proverbs 16:25

You can dialogue regarding what your father has told you you can do, that is you can go "I feel" or "I think," or "I like" or "I do not like." But you can not dialogue regarding what he has told you you can not do. If you do you have, in your though usurped (negated) his authority, that is you have taken his position of authority, directly effecting (influencing) your actions.

"But every man is tempted, when he is drawn away of his own lust, and enticed. Then when lust hath conceived, it bringeth forth sin: and sin, when it is finished, bringeth forth death." James 1:14, 15

Across America (and around the world) "Bloom's Taxonomies" have been the curriculum used in classrooms to 'change' the way the next generation of citizens feel, think, and act toward their self, others, the world, and authority, using dialogue to negate their parent's authority in their thoughts directly effecting their actions. All educators are certified, and schools accredited today based upon their use of what are called "Bloom's Taxonomies" (Marxist curriculum) in the classroom. To question them is to put your job (and your reputation) in peril, despite the fact they are simply an opinion.

Forty years after the publishing of his first "taxonomy" Benjamin Bloom wrote, "Certainly the Taxonomy was unproved at the time it was developed and may well be 'unprovable.'" (Benjamin Bloom, Forty Year Evaluation)

Karl Marx's ideology as explained by Friedrich Engels was: "In the eyes of the dialectic philosophy, nothing is established for all times, nothing is absolute or sacred."

In Benjamin S. Bloom first "taxonomy," Taxonomy of Educational Objectives Book 1: Cognitive Domain Bloom (paraphrasing Karl Marx) wrote: "We recognize the point of view that truth and knowledge are only relative and that there are no hard and fast truths which exist for all time and places."

In the second "taxonomy," Taxonomy of Educational Objectives Book 2: Affective Domain Benjamine Bloom along with David Krathwohl wrote that the "taxonomies" are "a psychological classification system" used "to develop attitudes and values ... which are not shaped by the parents." They stated that "There are many stories of the conflict and tension that these new practices are producing between parents and children."

They continued: "In fact, a large part of what we call 'good teaching' is the teacher's ability to attain affective objectives through challenging the student's fixed beliefs . . .." "The affective domain is, in retrospect, a virtual 'Pandora's Box.'"

"Pandora's Box" is a mythological story of a "box" (originally a jar) full of evils, which once opened, can not be closed—once parental authority, that is the father's authority, that is fear of judgment, that is "the lid" is removed it is difficult if not impossible to put it back on again.

He continued: "It is in this 'box' that the most influential controls are to be found." You persuade with facts you manipulate with feelings, that is with the "affective domain." Therefore, as Bloom states: "[I]t is not so much what is learned, but how it is learned . . .." "What we are classifying is the intended behavior of students—the ways in which individuals are to act, think, or feel as the result of participating in some unit of instruction." "… ordering and relating the different kinds of affective behavior." "… we need to provide the range of emotion from neutrality through mild to strong emotion, probably of a positive, but possibly also of a negative, kind." "… organized into value systems and philosophies of life …"

This method of 'education,' that is 'liberating' the students "feelings," their "affective domain" out from under their parents' authority, that is out from under their parents' commands, rules, facts, and truth in the classroom, according to Bloom "... allows the individual [the student] a greater amount of freedom in which to achieve a Weltanschauung¹. "Weltanschauung" is the German word for World View. Bloom's "Weltanschauung" (as Bloom noted in his footnote) was that of two Marxists, that is "¹Cf. Erich Fromm, 1941; T. W. Adorno et al., 1950."

The Marxist Erick Fromm, in his book, Escape from Freedom, which Bloom sited as his Weltanschauung wrote: "We are proud that in his conduct of life man has become free from external authorities, which tell him what to do and what not to do." "All that matters is that the opportunity for genuine activity be restored to the individual; that the purposes of society [that is the augmentation of lust and 'liberation' from the father's authority] and of his own [that is the augmentation of lust and 'liberation' from the father's authority] become identical." "... to give up 'God' and to establish a concept of man as a being ... who can feel at home in it [the world] if he achieves union with his fellow man and with nature [that is union with his and other's carnal nature, that is their uniting upon what they have in common, their propensity to lust after the things the world stimulates]."

The Marxist Theodor Adorno, in his book, The Authoritarian Personality, which Bloom sited as his Weltanschauung wrote: "Authoritarian submission [that is the person humbling, denying, dying to, controlling, disciplining, capitulating his "self" in order to do the father's will] was conceived of as a very general attitude that would be evoked in relation to a variety of authority figures—parents, older people, leaders, supernatural power, and so forth." "God is conceived more directly after a parental image and thus as a source of support and as a guiding and sometimes punishing authority." "Submission to authority, desire for a strong leader, subservience of the individual to the state [that is the individual submitting his self to parental authority, local control, Nationalism], and so forth, have so frequently and, as it seems to us, correctly, been set forth as important aspects of the Nazi creed that a search for correlates of prejudice had naturally to take these attitudes into account." "Family relationships are characterized by fearful subservience to the demands of the parents and by an early suppression of impulses not acceptable to them." "The power-relationship between the parents, the domination of the subject's family by the father or by the mother, and their relative dominance in specific areas of life also seemed of importance for our problem." The error in Adorno's "logic" is that all forms of socialism, including Fascism must negate the father's authority in the home and in the individual in order to initiate and sustain the socialist's control over the individual, that is "the people."

In his book Maslow on Management Abraham Maslow, noted for his "Hierarchy of 'Felt' Needs" (void of the father's authority) wrote: "I have found whenever I ran across authoritarian students that the best thing for me to do was to break their backs immediately." "The correct thing to do with authoritarians is to take them realistically for the bastards they are and then behave toward them as if they were bastards."

Adorno added: "Our aim is not merely to describe prejudice but to explain it in order to help in its eradication. Eradication means re-education."

The first communist dictator of the Russian people, Vladimir Ilyich Ulyanov declared: "The peasantry [that is the traditional middle-class family] constantly regenerates the bourgeoisie [that is the father's authority system]—in positively every sphere of activity and life." "We must learn how to eradicate all bourgeois habits, customs, and traditions everywhere." (Vladimir Lenin, Left-Wing Communism: an Infantile Disorder An Essential Condition of the Bolsheviks' Success May 12, 1920)

Karl Marx, in his Third Thesis on Feuerbach wrote: "Concerning the changing of circumstances by men, the educator must himself be educated [that is re-educated]."

Kenneth Benne, in his book Human Relations in Curriculum Change wrote: "Experiments on groups and leadership training suggest the following conclusions: (a) The change of a group atmosphere from autocracy or laissez faire to democracy through a democratic leader amounts to a re-education of the followers toward 'democratic followership.'" "(b) The experiments show that this shift in roles cannot be accomplished by a 'hands off' policy. To apply the principle of "individualistic freedom" merely leads to chaos [that is the process of 'change' does not come naturally]. Sometimes people must rather forcefully be made to see what democratic responsibility toward the group as a whole means." "It is true that people cannot be trained for democracy by autocratic methods [that is by being told]. But it is equally true that to be able to change a group atmosphere toward democracy the democratic leader has to be in power and has to use his power for active re-education. The more the group members become converted to democracy and learn to play the roles of democracy as followers or leaders, the more can the power of the democratic leader shift to other ends than converting the group members." "(c) ... lecture and propaganda do not suffice to bring about the necessary change. Essential as they are, they will be effective only if combined with a change in the power relations and leadership of the group. For larger groups, this means that a hierarchy of leaders has to be trained which reaches out into all essential subparts of the group. Hitler himself has obviously followed very carefully such a procedure. The democratic reversal of this procedure, although different in many respects, will have to be as thorough and as solidly based on group organization."

Abraham Maslow, in his book Maslow On Management wrote: "In a democratic society a patriarchal culture should make us depressed instead of glad; it is an argument against the higher possibilities of human nature, of self actualization." "In our democratic society, any enterprise―any individual―has its obligations to the whole."

John Dewey, in his book Experience and Education wrote "It is not the will or desire of any one person which establish order but the moving spirit of the whole group. Control is social." In his book Democracy and Education John Dewey wrote: "A democratic society repudiates the principle of external authority." "God is the source of corruption in individuals."

Kenneth Benne continued: "A change in the curriculum is a change in the people concerned—in teachers, in students, in parents . . . ." "Curriculum change means that the group involved must shift its approval from the old to some new set of reciprocal behavior patterns." ". . . people involved who were loyal to the older pattern must be helped to transfer their allegiance to the new." "Re-education aims to change the system of values and beliefs of an individual or a group." "For actual changes in 'content' and 'method' we must change the people who manage the school program. To change the curriculum of the school means bringing about changes in people—in their desires, beliefs and attitudes, in their knowledge and skill . . . curriculum change should be seen as a type of social change, change in people. Curriculum change means a change in the established ways of life, a change in the social standards. It means a restructuring on knowledge, attitudes, and skills in a new pattern of human relations. Educators and others in the role of change agents must have a method of social engineering relevant to initiating and controlling the change process."

"Re-education must be clever enough in manipulating the subjects to have them think that they are running the show." "The objective sought will not be reached so long as the new set of values is not experienced by the individual as something freely chosen." "An outright enforcement of the new set of values and beliefs is simply the introduction of a new god who has to fight with the old god, now regarded as a devil." (Principles of Re-education, Kurt Lewin and Paul Grabbe "Conduct, Knowledge, and Acceptance of New Values"; The Journal of Social Issues)

Bloom wrote, in the second "taxonomy": "To create effectively a new set of attitudes and values, the individual must undergo great reorganization of his personal beliefs and attitudes, and he must be involved in an environment which in many ways is separated from the previous environment in which he was developed . . . many of these changes are produced by association with peers who have less authoritarian points of view, as well as through the impact of a great many courses of study in which the authoritarian pattern is in some ways brought into question while more rational and nonauthoritarian behaviors are emphasized." "The effectiveness of this new set of environmental conditions is probably related to the extent to which the students are 'isolated' from the home during this period of time." ". . . objectives can best be attained where the individual is separated from earlier environmental conditions and when he is in association with a group of peers who are changing in much the same direction and who thus tend to reinforce each other." (Book 2: Affective Domain)

This nefarious effort to 'change' the nation through the use of therapy in the classroom, negating the parent's effort to train their children up in their faith took place in the 50's with the introduction of "Bloom's Taxonomies." Bloom dedicated his first "Taxonomy," Taxonomy of Educational Objectives Book 1: Cognitive Domain to Ralph Tyler who, in his article "Achievement Testing and Curriculum Construction," Trends in Student Personnel Work stated: "Should the school develop young people to fit into the present society as it is or does the school have a revolutionary mission to develop young people who will seek to improve the society?" "It is crucially important for children to see firsthand a society that encourages and supports democratic values [and I add that negates parental authority, that is the father's authority system in the mind of the next generation of citizens]. Ralphy Tylor, regarding the issue of education was adviser to six of our U/S. Presidents.

Warren Bennis, in his book The Temporary Society made it clear what effect coming between the parents and their children would have on the children, as well as the parents, especially when it comes to education. ". . . any 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. . .. once the parent can in any way imagine his own orientation to be a possible liability to the child in the world approaching." ". . . 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." "For however much the state or community may wish to inculcate obedience and submission in the child, its intervention betrays a lack of confidence in the only objects from whom a small child can learn authoritarian submission."

Irvin D. Yalom, in his book The Theory and Practice of Group Psychotherapy best explained the procedure being implemented in the classroom through the teacher's use of "Bloom's Taxonomies." "Without exception, [here I substitute patients or clients with children or students] enter group therapy [that is the facilitated, "group grade" classroom] with the history of a highly unsatisfactory experience in their first and most important group—their primary family [that is the traditional home with parents telling them what they can and can not do]." "What better way to help [the child] recapture the past than to allow him to re-experience and reenact ancient feelings [that is resentment, hostility] toward parents in his current relationship to the therapist [that is the facilitator of 'change]? The [facilitator of 'change'] is the living personification of all parental images [that is he takes the place of the parent]. Group [facilitators] refuse to fill the traditional authority role: they do not lead in the ordinary manner, they do not provide answers and solutions [that is they do not teach right from wrong according to established commands, rules, facts, and truth], they urge the group [that is the children] to explore and to employ its own resources ["encouraging" them to dialogue their "feelings," that is their desires and dissatisfactions of the 'moment' in the "light" of the current situation, that is in the light of their desire for "the group's" approval (affirmation)]. The group [that is the children] must feel free to confront the [the facilitator of 'change'], who must not only permit, but encourage, such confrontation [that is rebellion and anarchy]. He [the child] reenacts early family scripts in the group and, if therapy [known as brainwashing—washing respect for and fear of the father's/Father's authority from the child's brain, that is his thoughts] is successful, is able to experiment with new behavior, to break free from the locked family role [that is having to submit to the father's authority, that is doing the father's will] he once occupied. . . . the [child] changes the past by reconstructing it." In my words: 'creates' a "new" world order as he 'justifies' his "lust," 'creating a world void of the father's authority and the guilty conscience which the father's authority engenders for doing wrong, disobeying, sinning, that is for "lusting . . ."

I am going somewhere with all this, so hang in there. Irvin Yalom mentioned in his book Kurt Lewin's use of Unfreezing, Moving or Changing, Refreezing People, Force Field Analysis, and Group Dynamics to 'change' a person paradigm. "Unfreezing. This term, also adopted from Lewinian change theory, refers to the process of disconfirming an individual's former belief system." Edger Schein and Warren Bennis in their book, Personal and Organizational Change Through Group Methods: The Laboratory Approach , quoting Kurt Lewin, explain it father: "A successful change includes, therefore, three aspects: unfreezing the present level, moving to the new level, and freezing group life on the new level." They state: "In brief, unfreezing is the breaking down of the mores, customs and traditions of an individual – the old ways of doing things – so that he is ready to accept new alternatives." What "unfreezing" does is engender a condition known as cognitive dissonance—"The lack of harmony between what one does and what one believes." "The pressure to change either one’s behavior or ones belief." (Ernest R. Hilgard, Introduction to Psychology). It is the desire for the group's approval (affirmation) that belief, that is the father's authority is sacrificed at the altar of self or rather lust preservation.

Warren Bennis, along with Edgar H. Schein, David E. Berlew, and Fred I. Steele in their book Interpersonal Dynamics: Essays in Readings on Human Interaction, ed. describe the method used by the Communist Chinese to brainwash our soldiers during the Korean and the Vietnam War. Hunter's book only describes the results not the method. Bennis described the method itself. The same method, as will become apparent as I go along, that teachers, using "Bloom Taxonomies" are using on American students in the classroom—replacing physical torture with the torture of being 'rejected' by "the group" (if the student does not participate with the process of 'change'). Irvin Yalom explained it this way: "few individuals, as Asch has shown, can maintain their objectivity [their loyalty to the father's/Father's authority] in the face of apparent group unanimity; and the individual rejects critical feelings toward the group at this time to avoid a state of cognitive dissonance. To question the value or activities of the group, would be to thrust himself into a state of dissonance. Long cherished but self-defeating beliefs and attitudes may waver and decompose in the face of a dissenting majority." Now to the method used on our solders to wash nationalism from their brain, that is to wash respect for the father's authority from their brain. Having read from "Bloom's Taxonomies" it should sound familiar. "The manner in which the prisoner came to be influenced to accept the Communist's definition of his guilt can best be described by distinguishing two broad phases—(1) a process of 'unfreezing,' in which the prisoner's physical resistance, social and emotional supports, self-image and sense of integrity, and basic values and personality were undermined, thereby creating a state of 'readiness' to be influence; and (2) a process of 'change,' in which the prisoner discovered how the adoption of 'the people's standpoint' and a reevaluation of himself from this perspective would provide him with a solution to the problems created by the prison pressure." "Most were put into a cell containing several who were further along in reforming themselves and who saw it as their primary duty to 'help' their most backward member to see the truth about himself in order that the whole cell might advance. Each such cell had a leader who was in close contact with the authorities for purposes of reporting on the cell's progress and getting advice on how to handle the Western member . . . the environment undermined the (clients) self-image." ". . . Once this process of self of self re-evaluation began, the (client) received all kinds of help and support from the cell mates and once again was able to enter into meaningful emotional relationships with others."

Did you know all this was going on in the classroom?

As explained above, when it comes to defining and establishing behavior when dialogue is used in place of discussion the father's authority system is negated (denied access, that is silenced, censored, and removed). "Bloom's Taxonomies" have been used for decades (well over seventy years) in our classrooms, negating the father's authority in the thoughts of the students, with impunity, unabated.

Carl Rogers, in his book on becoming a person: A Therapist View of Psychotherapy wrote: "Prior to therapy the person is prone to ask himself, 'What would my parents want me to do?' During the process of therapy the individual come to ask himself, 'What does it mean to me?'"

By replacing discussion, "What would my parents want me to do?" with dialogue "What does it mean to me?" a person paradigm, that is his way of feeling, thinking, and acting toward his self, others, the world, and authority is 'changed.'

Bohm and Peat, in their book Science, Order, and Creativity explained what discussion is: "In an ordinary discussion people usually hold relatively fixed positions and argue in favor of their views as they try to convince others to change."

This is reflected in the Word of God.

"And ye have forgotten the exhortation which speaketh unto you as unto children, My son, despise not thou the chastening of the Lord, nor faint when thou art rebuked of him: For whom the Lord loveth he chasteneth, and scourgeth every son whom he receiveth. If ye endure chastening, God dealeth with you as with sons; for what son is he whom the father chasteneth not? But if ye be without chastisement, whereof all are partakers, then are ye bastards, and not sons. Furthermore we have had fathers of our flesh which corrected us, and we gave them reverence: shall we not much rather be in subjection unto the Father of spirits, and live? For they verily for a few days chastened us after their own pleasure; but he for our profit, that we might be partakers of his holiness. Now no chastening for the present seemeth to be joyous, but grievous: nevertheless afterward it yieldeth the peaceable fruit of righteousness unto them which are exercised thereby." Hebrews 12:5-11

"Train up a child in the way he should go: and when he is old, he will not depart from it." Proverbs 22:6;

"Children, obey your parents in the Lord: for this is right. Honour thy father and mother; which is the first commandment with promise; That it may be well with thee, and thou mayest live long on the earth." Ephesians 6:1-3

"Hear, ye children, the instruction of a father, and attend to know understanding." "He that refuseth instruction despiseth his own soul: but he that heareth reproof getteth understanding." Proverbs 4:1; 15:32

While discussion supports the father's authority, that is his established commands, rules, facts, and truth dialogue supports the child's carnal nature, that is his self interest(s) of the 'moment' that the world is stimulating.

Bohm and Peat, in their book Science, Order, and Creativity explained what dialogue is: "A dialogue is essentially a conversation between equals." "The spirit of dialogue, is in short, the ability to hold many points of view in suspension, along with a primary interest in the creation of common meaning."

Karl Marx, in his Critique of Hegel's 'Philosophy of Right' wrote: "Laws must not fetter human life [that is inhibit or block lust]; but yield to it; they must change as the needs [that is the lusts] and capacities [that is the interests or attractions of lust] of the people change."

The Marxist, György Lukács, in his book History and Class Consciousness: What is Orthodox Marxism? wrote: "... the central problem is to change reality.… reality with its 'obedience to laws.'"

When God created man, He did something which he did with nothing else in the creation, He made him a "living soul." "And the LORD God formed man of the dust of the ground, and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life; and man became a living soul." (Genesis 2:7). He then did something which He did with nothing else in the creation, He told him what was right and what was wrong behavior and the consequence for disobedience. "And the LORD God commanded the man, saying, Of every tree of the garden thou mayest freely eat: But of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, thou shalt not eat of it: for in the day that thou eatest thereof thou shalt surely die." (Genesis 2:16, 17). Only man can be told or tell others what is right and what is wrong behavior. Only man can read or write a book. All the rest of the creation is based upon stimulus-response—for living organisms, approach pleasure and avoid pain.

The gospel message is all about the Son of God, Jesus Christ doing the Father's will, that is doing what he was told, even dying on a cross, by his shed blood covering our sins (propitiation), doing so in obedience to the Father ("O my Father, if this cup may not pass away from me, except I drink it, thy will be done." Matthew 26:42) asking all to follow Him doing the Father's will as He leads; "Casting down imaginations, and every high thing that exalteth itself against the knowledge of God, and bringing into captivity every thought to the obedience of Christ." 2 Corinthians 10:5.

"I can of mine own self do nothing: as I hear, I judge: and my judgment is just; because I seek not mine own will, but the will of the Father which hath sent me." John 5:30

"For I have not spoken of myself; but the Father which sent me, he gave me a commandment, what I should say, and what I should speak. And I know that his commandment is life everlasting: whatsoever I speak therefore, even as the Father said unto me, so I speak." John 12:47-50

"For whosoever shall do the will of my Father which is in heaven, the same is my brother, and sister, and mother." Matthew 12:50

"Not every one that saith unto me, Lord, Lord, shall enter into the kingdom of heaven; but he that doeth the will of my Father which is in heaven." Matthew 7:21

"And call no man your father upon the earth: for one is your Father, which is in heaven." Matthew 23:9

"For we must all appear before the judgment seat of Christ; that every one may receive the things done in his body, according to that he hath done, whether it be good or bad." 2 Corinthians 5:10

All the facilitator of 'change' has to do (in a "positive" environment, that is in an environment which will not judge, condemn, or cast you out for lusting after pleasure or for being wrong) is ask you how you feel and what you think regarding the commands, rules, facts, and truth you have been taught (that get in the way of your carnal desires), especially when it comes to behavior and the facilitator of 'change' "owns" you. This applies to all who participate in the facilitated, dialoguing of opinions to a consensus process (establishing lust over and therefore against the father's authority).

"The heart is deceitful above all things, and desperately wicked: who can know it?" Jeremiah 17:9 In other words: "your heart, thinking pleasure is the standard for "good" instead of doing the Father's will "is deceitful above all things." Therefore, hating anyone taking any pleasure it is enjoying away (imagined or real) it becomes "desperately wicked" in its effort to retain it.

George Washington, in his Farewell Address stated: ". . . despotism . . . predominates in the human heart." The Constitution, with its "Bill of Rights," unique amongst the nations of the world did not negate the King's authority, as did the Directorate of the French Revolution, but simply made the father in the home the King, giving him the right to train up his children, the next generation of citizens to know right from wrong according to his established commands, rules, facts, and truth, thus establishing "rule of law," in their mind over and therefore against the tyranny of "the masses," that is their carnal heart.

The unregenerate (carnal) heart (the Karl Marx in you) can not see its hatred toward the father's authority as being evil, that is "wicked," that is "desperately wicked" because its lust for pleasure is standing in the way, 'justifying' the hate. (Mark 7:21-23) Karl Marx, in his paper entitled The Holy Family described the human heart (that is his heart) this way: "Not feeling at home in the sinful world, Critical Criticism [that is dialogue, which is subject to the human (carnal) heart] must set up a sinful world in its own home." "Critical Criticism is a spiritualistic lord, pure spontaneity, actus purus, intolerant of any influence from without." Karl Marx simply sided with sin, establishing it over and therefore against the father's authority. In his Critique of Hegel's Philosophy of Right, he wrote: "Criticism is now simply a means. Indignation is its essential pathos, denunciation its principal task. Criticism is criticism in hand-to-hand combat. Criticism proceeds on to praxis [that is social action]." "The critique of religion [that is hatred toward the father's authority] ends with the categorical imperative to overthrow all conditions in which man is a debased, enslaved, neglected, contemptible being [that is man being called a sinner, thus being judged, condemned, cast out for his carnal thoughts and carnal actions]."

Karl Marx, by establishing the child's carnal nature as all there is to life, that is lust for pleasure as the 'drive' of life and its augmentation the 'purpose' made any act of the father, restraining the child's carnal nature illegal, 'justifying' the "overthrowing" of the father's authority." Years prior, Georg Hegel expressed the same sentiment. In his paper System of Ethical Life he wrote: "The child, contrary to appearance, is the absolute, the rationality of the relationship; he is what is enduring and everlasting, the totality which produces itself once again as such [and I would add for clarity, once he is 'liberated' from the father's authority to become as he was before the father's first command, rule, fact, or truth came into his life, separating him from his "self" and the world that stimulated lust within him, making his self "of (and for) the world" only." Sounding more like Karl Marx than Karl Marx himself, who was not yet born Georg Hegel then continued: "On account of the absolute and natural oneness of the husband, the wife, and the child, where there is no antithesis of person to person [that is there is no "top-down" order] or of subject to object, the surplus is not the property of one of them, since their indifference is not a formal or a legal one." In this 'logic' your spouse, your children, your property, your business, and even your soul is not yours but are all subject to the socialist, that is subject to Georg Hegel's and anyone else who thinks like him, including Karl Marx who write: "The proletariat (Karl Marx and all who think like him) thus has the same right as has the German king (that is the father) when he calls, the people his people and a horse his horse."

Prior to Hegel, Jean-Jacques Rousseau, in defiance to "the earth is the Lord's, and the fulness thereof," that is rejecting the Father's authority where the Father has the final say, wrote: "The fruits of the earth belong to us all, and the earth itself to nobody" and I would add for clarity, except to the one making this statement who, in his thoughts and his actions "owns" whatever he sees, as did the woman in the garden in Eden. 1 Corinthians 10:26, Jean-Jacques Rousseau, Discourse on Inequality, Genesis 3:1-6

"From whence come wars and fightings among you? come they not hence, even of your lusts that war in your members? Ye lust, and have not: ye kill, and desire to have, and cannot obtain: ye fight and war, yet ye have not, because ye ask not. Ye ask, and receive not, because ye ask amiss, that ye may consume it upon your lusts. Ye adulterers and adulteresses, know ye not that the friendship of the world is enmity with God? whosoever therefore will be a friend of the world is the enemy of God." James 4:1-4

"For men shall be lovers of their own selves, covetous, boasters, proud, blasphemers, disobedient to parents, unthankful, unholy, Without natural affection, trucebreakers, false accusers, incontinent, fierce, despisers of those that are good, Traitors, heady, highminded, lovers of pleasures more than lovers of God;" 2 Timothy 3:2-4

"Now the works of the flesh are manifest, which are these; Adultery, fornication, uncleanness, lasciviousness, Idolatry, witchcraft, hatred, variance, emulations, wrath, strife, seditions, heresies, Envyings, murders, drunkenness, revellings, and such like: of the which I tell you before, as I have also told you in time past, that they which do such things shall not inherit the kingdom of God." Galatians 5:19-21

"He that committeth sin is of the devil; for the devil sinneth from the beginning. For this purpose the Son of God was manifested, that he might destroy the works of the devil." 1 John 3:8

When you bring dialogue, your carnal desires into the realm of discussion, that is your "feelings" into what the father has told you not to do, you negate the father's authority, replacing it with "the lust of the flesh, and the lust of the eyes, and the pride of life," that is with only that which is "of the world." In his paper The Holy Family Karl Marx wrote: "The unspeculative Christian also recognizes sensuality as long as it does not assert itself at the expense of true reason, that is of faith, of true love, that is of love of God, of true will-power, that is of will in Christ. Not for the sake of sensual love, not for the lust of the flesh, but because the Lord said: Increase and multiply." He then explained what he meant by sensuality: "It is not sensuality which is presented ..., but mysteries, adventures, obstacles, fears, dangers, and especially the attraction of what is forbidden." Karl Marx understood that even the believer is subject to temptation, that is to that which is "of the world." Drawing him into dialogue, regarding what is "forbidden" in its very act 'liberates' him from the father's authority. György Lukács wrote, regarding overcoming the father's authority: "a scientifically acceptable solution does exist . . . For to accept that solution, even in theory, would be tantamount to observing society from a class standpoint [that is from the children's perspective] other than that of the bourgeoisie [that is from that of the parents']. And no class can do that-unless it is willing to abdicate its power freely." By parent's going into dialogue with their children, when it comes to behavior, sensuousness takes control of the conversation, negating their authority. "Science" when applied to behavior 'liberates' children from parental authority. Karl Marx wrote: "Sense experience must be the basis of all science." "Science is only genuine science when it proceeds from sense experience, in the two forms of sense perception and sensuous need, that is, only when it proceeds from Nature." (Karl Marx, MEGA I/3) Carl Rogers in agreement with Karl Marx put it this way. "Experience is, for me, the highest authority." "Neither the Bible nor the prophets, neither the revelations of God can take precedence over my own direct experience." "In this process the individual becomes more open to his experience. It is the opposite of defensiveness or rigidity. His beliefs are not rigid, he can tolerate ambiguity." It is a subtle 'change' to move from discussion to dialogue when it comes to behavior, but it has major ramifications, changing a person's paradigm, that is his way of feeling, thinking, and behaving toward his self, others, the world, and authority. As Yalom stated it: "There is no type of past behavior too deviant for a group to accept once therapeutic group norms are established."

"Now the serpent was more subtle than any beast of the field which the LORD God had made. And he said unto the woman, Yea, hath God said, Ye shall not eat of every tree of the garden? [this is a neurolinguistic construct (an imbedded statement in a question, sensitizing a person to their lusts, when it comes to right and wrong behavior, beginning the process of liberating a person's lust out from under their fear of judgment, that is out from under the father's authority, bring dialogue forward out from under the restraint of discussion)—which is one of the most powerful forms of hypnosis] And the woman said unto the serpent, We may eat of the fruit of the trees of the garden: But of the fruit of the tree which is in the midst of the garden, God hath said, Ye shall not eat of it, neither shall ye touch it [she therefore revealed her lust], lest ye die. And the serpent said unto the woman, Ye shall not surely die [thus removing the "negative," that is fear of judgment (which was not a lie regarding the here-and now, that is the tree itself did not kill her—or Adam—but a lie regarding the there-and then, with God removing her—and Adam—from having access to the "tree of life" for their disobedience, then, after death both coming to judgment, that is inheriting eternal life or eternal death)]: For God doth know that in the day ye eat thereof, then your eyes shall be opened, and ye shall be as gods [which dialogue does, everyone is a god in dialogue], knowing good and evil [according to their carnal nature]. And when the woman saw that the tree was good for food, and that it was pleasant to the eyes, and a tree to be desired to make one wise [evaluating (aufheben) from her senses, that is from her understanding she made her self the establisher of right and wrong behavior], she took of the fruit thereof, and did eat, and gave also unto her husband with her; and he did eat." Genesis 3:1-6 (emphasis added)

What the woman and Adam did was a "land grab," with the master facilitator of 'change' in control. What was God's garden (He set the standards) was now the facilitator of 'change's' (he now set the standards). What those "of (and for) the world" see, like the woman in the garden in Eden they "own," giving control of the land along with their self to the master facilitator of 'change.' By 'discovering' what you covet (that is not yours), and offering to "help" you attain it, the facilitator of 'change' not only "own" you, he "own" it as well, with you (as "human resource") maintaining it for him.

"And the man said, The woman whom thou gavest to be with me, she gave me of the tree, and I did eat. And the LORD God said unto the woman, What is this that thou hast done? And the woman said, The serpent beguiled me, and I did eat." Genesis 3:12, 13

When confronted with their sin's, that is their lusts they became the first 'liberals,' that is Marxists. Instead of admitting they were wrong, showing remorse for their sins, and repenting they ('justifying' their self, that is their lusts) blamed the situation and someone else for their "bad" behavior (for their behaving "badly"), with Adam blaming the woman—"throwing her under the bus" (along with God for creating her, that is for creating an "unhealthy environment" for him to live in)—and the woman blaming the Serpent, that is the master facilitator of 'change'—"throwing him under the bus" for "helping" her 'justify' her lusts.

"And through covetousness shall they with feigned words make merchandise of you." 2 Peter 2:3

All I have to do is find what you are lusting after, that is that you are dialoguing with your self about that you do not have, offering to "help" you attain it, and I "own" you. Carl Rogers explained clearly the deceitfulness dialogue has when it comes to behavior.

"If we have the power or authority to establish the necessary conditions, the predicted behaviors [our potential ability to influence or control the behavior of groups] will follow." "We can choose to use our growing knowledge to enslave people in ways never dreamed of before, depersonalizing them, controlling them by means so carefully selected that they will perhaps never be aware of their loss of personhood." "We know how to change the opinions of an individual in a selected direction, without his ever becoming aware of the stimuli which changed his opinion." "We know how to influence the ... behavior of individuals by setting up conditions which provide satisfaction for needs of which they are unconscious, but which we have been able to determine." We can achieve a sort of control under which the controlled though they are following a code much more scrupulously than was ever the case under the old system, nevertheless feel free. They are doing what they want to do, not what they are forced to do." "By a careful design, we control not the final behavior, but the inclination to behavior—the motives, the desires, the wishes. The curious thing is that in that case the question of freedom never arises." (Rogers)

Whenever behavior is established through dialogue, as was done in the garden in Eden (with the "help" of the master facilitator of 'change,' that is the master psychotherapist) whatever the person sees they "own." This is what happens to anyone in government who is intoxicated with, addicted to, and possessed by dialogue, perceiving their duty is to control whatever they see, for the "good" of "the people," that is for their self.

"And he said unto them, Ye are they which justify yourselves before men; but God knoweth your hearts: for that which is highly esteemed among men is abomination in the sight of God." Luke 16:15

"Building relationship upon self interest" is the hallmark of Marxism, turning all who participate against the father and his authority. It is a sad day when you have to explain Marxism in order to explain what is happening in the world around you today. Without restraint all we have is our carnal nature, that is lust and the world that stimulates it—sinning with impunity, that is without having any sense of judgment, condemnation, being cast out for doing wrong. There is no "wrong" in dialogue (except insisting upon discussion, that is not letting someone share their opinion, that is dialogue).

"For we know that the law is spiritual: but I am carnal, sold under sin. For that which I do I allow not: for what I would, that do I not; but what I hate, that do I. If then I do that which I would not, I consent unto the law that it is good. Now then it is no more I that do it, but sin that dwelleth in me. For I know that in me (that is, in my flesh,) dwelleth no good thing: for to will is present with me; but how to perform that which is good I find not. For the good that I would I do not: but the evil which I would not, that I do. Now if I do that I would not, it is no more I that do it, but sin that dwelleth in me. I find then a law, that, when I would do good, evil is present with me. For I delight in the law of God after the inward man: But I see another law in my members, warring against the law of my mind, and bringing me into captivity to the law of sin which is in my members. O wretched man that I am! who shall deliver me from the body of this death? I thank God through Jesus Christ our Lord. So then with the mind I myself serve the law of God; but with the flesh the law of sin." Romans 7:14-25

Wilfred Bion, who was director of The Tavistock Institute for a time, very clearly explained the agenda in his book A Memoir of the Future: The objective is to "prevent someone who KNOWS from filling the empty space."

The Communist dictator over China, Mao Zedong stated that "Words and actions should help to unite, and not divide, the people."

The father divides upon being or doing right and not wrong. The children uniting upon "self interest" must set aside "wrong," that is the father's authority for the sake of the relationship—making pleasure the drive and its augmentation the purpose of life, not doing the father's will.

Karl Marx, in Critique of Hegel's 'Philosophy of Right' wrote: "To enjoy the present reconciles us to the actual."

In other words, according to Karl Marx it is lust, that is enjoying the carnal pleasures of the 'moment' that the current situation and-or object, people, or person is stimulating that makes us at-one-with the world, establishing lust over and therefore against the father's authority that gets in the way. Self is therefore "actualized" in lust, not in doing the father's will.

Karl Marx, in his Sixth Thesis on Feuerbach wrote: "The real nature of man is the totality of social relations."

As sited in John Lewis's book, The Life and Teachings of Karl Marx Karl Marx wrote: "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."

In other words, according to Karl Marx the child having to humble, deny, die to, control, discipline, capitulate his "self" in order to do the father's will is not what "fulfills" the child. "On the contrary" it is the father's authority, that is the child having to do right and not wrong according to the father's established commands, rules, facts, and truth that "destroys him," that is that prevents him from becoming his self, thinking and acting according to his carnal nature, that is according to what he has in common with all the children of the world. The child's desire for approval from others, requiring him to compromise in order to "get along," that is in order to build relationship "is the necessary framework through which freedom" from the father's authority and "freedom" to lust after pleasure, that is to do what he wants without having a guilty conscience (which the father's authority engenders) "are made reality."

The Marxist Norman O. Brown, in his book Life Against Death: The Psychoanalytical Meaning of History (explaining how psychology and Marxism are one and the same in agenda and outcome) wrote: "The individual is emancipated in the social group." "Freud commented that only through the solidarity of all the participants could the sense of guilt be assuaged." "Self-perfection of the human individual is fulfilled in union with the world in pleasure." "According to Freud, the ultimate essence of our being is erotic." "Eros is fundamentally a desire for union with objects in the world." "Eros is the foundation of morality."

According to Sigmund Freud the guilty conscience is a product of the father's authority, which sustains the father's authority in society. It is only in the "social group" that the guilty conscience can negated. According to the Marxist, Norman O. Brown without the "social group" the child and society remains subject to the father's authority. Therefore the child and society can only be liberated from the father's authority and the guilty conscience which the father's authority engenders in the "social group," which 'justifies' the child's carnal nature, that is Eros, that is lust.

Kurt Lewin, in his paper Resolving social conflicts: Selected papers on group dynamics wrote: "(T)he group to which an individual belongs is the ground for his perceptions, his feelings, and his actions."

Kurt Lewin, as sited in Kenneth Benne's book stated that: "It is usually easier to change individuals formed into a group than to change any one of them separately." "The individual accepts the new system of values and beliefs by accepting belongingness to the group."

Kurt Lewin in Wilbur Brookover, A Sociology of Education wrote: "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."

"Change in methods of leadership is probably the quickest way to bring about a change in the cultural atmosphere of a group." "Any real change of the culture of a group is, therefore, interwoven with the changes of the power constellation within the group." (Barker, Dembo, and Lewin, "frustration and regression: an experiment with young children" in Child Behavior and Development)

It is the guilty conscience, which is engendered by the father's authority that sustains the father's authority in the child and in society that those of dialectic 'reasoning' are out to negate. The Marxist Norman Brown, explaining how the guilty conscience is engendered wrote: "The guilty conscience is formed in childhood by the incorporation of the parents and the wish to be father of oneself." "What we call 'conscience' perpetuates inside of us our bondage to past objects now part of ourselves:'"

Dr. Robert Trojanowicz, in his book The meaning of "Community" in Community Policing wrote: "The personal conscience is the key element in ensuring self-control, refraining from deviant behavior even when it can be easily perpetrated." "The family, the next most important unit affecting social control, is obviously instrumental in the initial formation of the conscience and in the continued reinforcement of the values that encourage law abiding behavior." ​​​​​​Trojanowicz then promotes bringing the police and the community together with the dialoguing of opinions to a consensus process, negating local control, that is the father's authority system. Done with the use of 'crime' to bring "the people" together.

There is no father's authority, that is judgment, condemnation, fear of being cast out in dialogue therefore using dialogue to establish right and wrong behavior negates not only the father's authority it negates the guilty conscience as well.

Kurt Lewin, in his book, A Dynamic Theory of Personality explained how the guilty conscience, what he called a "negative valence" is created and how it can be negated: "The negative valence of a forbidden object which in itself attracts the child [that is the guilty conscience] 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."

While the guilty conscience ties the child to the father or rather the father to the child the "super-ego" ties the child to society.

Benjamin Bloom in his book, Book 2: Affective Domain explained that the "Taxonomy" was all about promoting the super-ego, not the guilty conscience: "Superego development is conceived as the incorporation of the moral standards of society. Therefore the levels of the Taxonomy should describe successive levels of goal setting appropriate to superego development."

Sigmund Freud had the same agenda as Karl Marx, negating the father's authority, not only in society, as Karl Marx sought to do but, in the individual as well. Sigmund Freud, as explained by Herbert Marcuse, in his book Eros and Civilization: a psychological inquiry into Freud established the children's agenda to "kill and devour" the father as the purpose of psychology: "... the hatred against patriarchal suppression—a 'barrier to incest,' ... the desire (for the sons) to return to the mother culminates in the rebellion of the exiled sons, the collective killing and devouring of the father." "'It is not really a decisive matter whether one has killed one's father or abstained from the deed,' if the function of the conflict and its consequences are the same [that is the husband and father no longer exercises his authority in the home, over his wife and children]."

Sigmund Freud's history of the prodigal son is not of the son coming to his senses, humbling his self, returning home, submitting his self to his father's authority, learning his inheritance was not his father's money but his father's love for him (Luke 15:11-24), but of the son joining with his "friends," returning home, killing the father, taking all that was his (the father's), using it to satisfy their carnal desires, that is their lusts, killing all the fathers in the land (devouring the fathers) so all the children could be the same, that is like them, thereby affirming them, that is their "incest," 'justifying' and supporting their control over them.

Abraham Maslow, in his journals, The Journals of Abraham Maslow explained that the agenda was to merge Marxism and psychology: "Marxian theory needs Freudian-type instinct theory to round it out. And of course, vice versa." "Third-Force psychology is also epi-Marxian in these senses, that is including the most basic scheme as true-good social conditions are necessary for personal growth, bad social conditions stunt human nature,... This is to say, one could reinterpret Marx into a self-actualization-fostering Third- and Fourth-Force psychology-philosophy. And my impression is anyway that this is the direction in which they are going now."

In other words society needs man's natural inclination to lust after pleasure in order to become one and man's natural inclination to lust after pleasure needs societies 'justification.' The 'liberation' of self, that is of lust out from under the father's authority "is necessary for personal growth," while submission of self to the father's authority "stunt(s) human nature." Marxism is philosophy and psychology becoming at-one-with one another. It is in dialogue (which does not recognize the father's authority) that all can become one, "bypass" the father's authority in making rules, policies, and law, that is in establishing right and wrong behavior—resulting in lust being right and the father's authority being wrong.

Jürgen Habermas, in Knowledge and Human Interest, Chapter Three: The Idea of the Theory of Knowledge as Social Theory wrote: "In the dialogic relation of recognizing oneself in the other, they experience the common ground of their existence."

Ervin Laszlo, the man who developed the theory of "climate change" wrote in his book A Strategy For The Future: The Systems Approach to World Order: "Bypassing the traditional channels of 'top-down' decision making our objective center's upon transformation public opinion into an effective instrument of global politics." "Individual values must be measured by their contribution to common interests and ultimately to world interests [that is common and world lusts or self interests], transforming public consensus into one favorable to the emergence of a stable and humanistic world order." "Consensus is both a personal and a political step. It is a precondition of all future steps."

Karl Marx's Eleventh Thesis on Feuerbach is inscribed on his tomb: "The philosophers have only interpreted the world in different ways, the objective however, is change."

In other words, it is the father's authority system, that is the father's established commands, rules, facts, and truth (which differ from father to father) that divides the people. It is in the child's propensity to respond ('change' in accordance) to the situation and-or object, people, or person in the 'moment that is the objective of life. Without the "help" of the facilitator of 'change' the children remain subject to the father's authority system. The facilitator of 'change,' perceiving his self as being the personification of "the people," who, like him lust after the carnal pleasures of the moment the world stimulates, hating restraint, sees it as his duty to 'justify' the people's natural inclination to lust after pleasure in order to 'justify' his natural inclination to lust after pleasure. When you question the facilitator of 'change's' actions he will respond with "It is not just about you," really meaning "It is all about me, so I can lust after pleasure without having a guilty conscience, with your affirmation. If you refuse to affirm me, that is my lusts or get in my way 'the people' will remove (negate) you (since having 'justified' their lusts I now 'own' them). It appears I must keep an eye on you from now on for my 'good.'" This is the true meaning of "sight-based management."

"The transgression of the wicked saith within my heart, that there is no fear of God before his eyes. For he flattereth himself in his own eyes, until his iniquity be found to be hateful. The words of his mouth are iniquity and deceit: he hath left off to be wise, and to do good. He deviseth mischief upon his bed; he setteth himself in a way that is not good; he abhorreth not evil." Psalms 36:1-4

"For the wicked boasteth of his heart's desire, and blesseth the covetous, whom the LORD abhorreth. The wicked, through the pride of his countenance, will not seek after God: God is not in all his thoughts." Psalms 10:3, 4

"For the time will come when they will not endure sound doctrine; but after their own lusts shall they heap to themselves teachers, having itching ears; And they shall turn away their ears from the truth, and shall be turned unto fables." 2 Timothy 4:3, 4

"For men shall be lovers of their own selves, covetous, boasters, proud, blasphemers, disobedient to parents, unthankful, unholy, Without natural affection, trucebreakers, false accusers, incontinent, fierce, despisers of those that are good, Traitors, heady, highminded, lovers of pleasures more than lovers of God; Having a form of godliness, but denying the power thereof: from such turn away." 1 Timothy 3:2-5

"And what concord hath Christ with Belial? or what part hath he that believeth with an infidel? And what agreement hath the temple of God with idols? for ye are the temple of the living God; as God hath said, I will dwell in them, and walk in them; and I will be their God, and they shall be my people. Wherefore come out from among them, and be ye separate, saith the Lord, and touch not the unclean thing; and I will receive you, And will be a Father unto you, and ye shall be my sons and daughters, saith the Lord Almighty." 2 Corinthians 6:15-18

"Rejoice, O young man, in thy youth; and let thy heart cheer thee in the days of thy youth, and walk in the ways of thine heart, and in the sight of thine eyes: but know thou, that for all these things God will bring thee into judgment." Ecclesiastes 11:9

"But God commendeth his love toward us, in that, while we were yet sinners, Christ died for us. Much more then, being now justified by his blood, we shall be saved from wrath through him. For if, when we were enemies, we were reconciled to God by the death of his Son, much more, being reconciled, we shall be saved by his life." Romans 5:8-10

"If we confess our sins, he is faithful and just to forgive us our sins, and to cleanse us from all unrighteousness." 1 John 1:9

"For by grace are ye saved through faith; and that not of yourselves: it is the gift of God: Not of works, lest any man should boast." Ephesians 2:8, 9

See the Issues: Satan's Device. (pdf) (new Audio Part 1, Part 2, Part 3, Part 4, Part 5 - 1 hr. ea.) (second attempt Audio Part 1, Part 2, Part 3, Part 4, Part 5, Part 6, Part 7) (original Audio Part 1, Part 2, Part 3), and The "Group Grade." (pdf) (Audio Part 1 1 hr. 28 min., Part 2 52 min.) (Poison To The Soul.)

End Notes:

Facilitators of 'change,' that is psychologists, that is behavioral "scientists," that is "group psychotherapists," that is Marxists (Transformational Marxists)—all being the same in method or formula—are using the dialoguing of opinions to a consensus (affirmation) process, that is dialectic 'reasoning' ('reasoning' from or through the students "feelings" of the 'moment,' that is from and through their "lust" for pleasure and their hate of restraint, in the "light" of their desire for group approval, that is affirmation and fear of group rejection) in the "group grade," "safe zone/space/place," "Don't be negative, be positive," "open ended, non-directed," soviet style, brainwashing (washing the father's authority from the children's thoughts and actions, that is "theory and practice," negating their having a guilty conscience, which the father's authority engenders for doing wrong, disobeying, sinning in the process—called "the negation of negation" since the father's authority and the guilty conscience, being negative to the child's carnal nature, is negated in dialogue—in dialogue, opinion, and the consensus process there is no father's authority, that is no established aka absolute command, rule, facts, or truth to be accepted as is, by faith and obeyed; there is only the person's carnal desires, that is lusts of the past and the present being verbally expressed and 'justified'), inductive 'reasoning' ('reasoning' from or through the students "feelings," that is their natural inclination to "lust" after the carnal pleasures of the 'moment'—dopamine emancipation—which the world stimulates, that is their "self interest," that is their "sense experience," selecting "appropriate information"—excluding, ignoring, or resisting, that is rejecting any "inappropriate" information, that is established command, rule, fact, or truth that gets in the way of their desired outcome, that is pleasure—in determining right from wrong behavior), "Bloom's Taxonomy," "affective domain," French Revolution (Liberté, Égalité, Fraternité) classroom "environment" in order (as in "new" world order) to 'liberate' children from parental authority, that is from the father's authority system (the Patriarchal Paradigm)—as predators, charlatans, pimps, pedophiles, seducing, deceiving, and manipulating them as chickens, rats, and dogs, that is treating them as natural resource ("human resource") in order to convert them into 'liberals,' socialists, globalists, so they, 'justifying' their "self" before one another, can do wrong, disobey, sin, that is can "lust" after the carnal pleasures of the 'moment' that the world stimulates, with impunity.

"Thus saith the LORD, Stand ye in the ways, and see, and ask for the old paths, where is the good way, and walk therein, and ye shall find rest for your souls. But they said, We will not walk therein. Also I set watchmen over you, saying, Hearken to the sound of the trumpet. But they said, We will not hearken." Jeremiah 6:16, 17

Home schooling material, co-ops, conferences, etc., are joining in the same praxis, fulfilling Immanuel Kant's as well as Georg Hegel's, Karl Marx's, and Sigmund Freud's agenda of using the pattern or method of Genesis 3:1-6, that is "self" 'justification,' that is dialectic (dialogue) 'reasoning," that is 'reasoning' from or through your "feelings," that is your carnal desires of the 'moment' which are being stimulated by the world (including your desire for approval from others, with them affirming your carnal nature) in order to negate Hebrews 12:5-11, that is the Father's authority, that is having to humble, deny, die to, control, discipline, capitulate your "self" (your lusts) in order to do the Father's will, negating Romans 7:14-25, that is your having a guilty conscience when you do wrong, disobey, sin, thereby negating your having to repent before the Father for your doing wrong, disobedience, sins—which is the real agenda.

"And for this cause [because men, as "children of disobedience," 'justify' their "self," that is 'justify' their love of "self" and the world, that is their love of the carnal pleasures of the 'moment' (dopamine emancipation) which the world stimulates over and therefore against the Father's authority] God shall send them strong delusion, that they should believe a lie [that pleasure is the standard for "good" instead of doing the Father's will]: That they all might be damned who believed not the truth [in the Father and in His Son, Jesus Christ], but had pleasure in unrighteousness [in their "self" and the pleasures of the 'moment,' which the world stimulates]." 2 Thessalonians 2:11, 12

© Institution for Authority Research, Dean Gotcher 2024 (4/10/2024)