ExtremeWisdom

Who is BIG ED?

BIG ED is my name for "The Education Industry" or "Big Education", which is also often described as easily described as the "Education Establishment."  BIG ED is corrupt, lazy, overfed, and prone to believing it has the right to stay that way.

BIG ED is made up of interlocking directorates (Japanese call them Kiretzu) which include Teacher's Unions, Associations of Superintendents, Associations of School Boards, Associations of Associations, Education Schools, PTOs, Text Book Publishers, connected Building Contractors and a whole slew of Accounting firms, Bond Dealers, and Law Firms that specialize in concealing and obfuscating the skeletons in BIG ED's publicly-funded closet.

All of these organizations have bought and paid for legislators and legislation to protect BIG ED from competition and proper oversight, all for the purpose of extracting ever greater amounts of money from the taxpayers.  This money is then distributed to the various parts of the interlocking directorate known as BIG ED.

BIG ED is not about educating children.

BIG ED is about using children as stick with which to beat taxpayers. 

BIG ED offers an increasingly shoddy product (a MASSIVELY UNDEREDUCATED populace) at an ever increasing cost. 

BIG ED is corrupt to the core.  BIG ED is as corrupt in your idyllic little suburb as it is in the inner cities (maybe more so).

It is my opinion that America cannot survive much longer as a just society if BIG ED isn't stripped of its political clout.

Many (not all) of the people who work for BIG ED want you to believe that they are an untouchable cadre of high priests bringing the gift of knowledge to your children.

Disabuse yourself of that silly notion! 

Many (not all) of the people who work in BIG ED are union shop worker bees (or parasitic "semi-private" companies/firms) who want the most money for the least amount of work.  Some BIG ED workers are better than others, but BIG ED refuses (through legislation and contracts) to let you discern the differnence.

BIG ED despises "merit pay" because many of it's workers don't merit pay.

Remember that BIG ED is an industry, and because of its unobstructed access to nearly $500 billion of taxpayer dollars with out any competition, BIG ED is MUCH MORE corrupt than any private industry and/or business out there.

BIG ED is just like BIG TOBACCO or BIG OIL - only without the oversight.

___

"BIG ED" is also a soundbite, a meme (my post on memetics), as well as an opportunity for all of you to become more persuasive in attacking the bloated education industry.

Depending on your audience, another VERY effective meme that effectively attacks public education are the words "Governmental/Educational Complex".  For those of you educated enough to know where that comes from, you should immediately recognize why using this term will be effective.

Here is some advice for discussions, debates, and conversations. Practice using "BIG ED" and/or "Governmental/Educational Complex" in your discourse.  Be prepared for a question like "What do you mean by that?"

Presto. A remarkable opportunity to stick a small wedge in a previously closed (or unconscious) mind. Be nice, but firm.  Remember, it isn't about the number of conversions. It's about the number of conversations.

"Raw Political Power" and BIG ED

Let me start by putting this post in context.  I'm on various e-mail lists, and I ocassionally get into debates on "education policy."  Surprised?!

The debate below takes place in the context of one of my detractors accusing me of seeking "raw political power" over principle.  This charge is mostly baseless, though I do advocate building political power - which is a function of addition, not subtraction.

I finished my points with the assertion that BIG ED is the most powerful political force in the nation, that it is bent on increasing this power, and that the only way to dislodge this parasite is to defeat it legislatively with countervailing political power ("raw" where needed).

Needless to say, this seems to be controversial in some parts of the "school choice" and "home school" community, where many people just don't seem to have the stomach for political activity.

Upon arguing for increased political activity, one person on the list implied that people in the school reform movement  who were bent on seeking power are only interested in "control." They proceeded with what I thought was a poor argument.

There's the context.  Here is the argument. It starts with JJ asking me who will protect people from ME...

Can you imagine?!  JJ is blue text, I'm black text. (remember - this is on an e-mail list)

____

JJ <shaking her head> asks:

And . . . what will protect us from *your* unchecked raw power?

Bruno writes:

It must be your suburban, mellow, female, & possibly Oprahfied instincts that automatically reinterprets things like "countervailing power" as "unchecked raw power." Is this a hold over from your "training" inside the beast?

Frankly, BIG ED, as powerful as it is, falls way short of "unchecked power" - except maybe here in Illinois & California, where they have succeeded in bankrupting both states.

Here, you attack me for merely trying to attain parity. BIG ED is writing its own laws through political control of parties & judges, miseducating millions while spending profligately, and you are worried about Bruno rampaging through the nation on a power trip.

How droll.

JJ wrote:

If you actually can seize the raw power to govern education, then I need to keep as close an eye on you as I do on anyone else grabbing power in the name of "my" freedom.

Bruno writes:

Utter nonsense.

Since being on all these lists, message boards, and blogging, I've consistently advocated (re: education)

• the removal of compulsory education laws
• the freedom of parents to choose how to educate,
• that any system allows for everyone to "opt out."

That's hardly an agenda to "control" education.

To achieve these goals, people must attain the political power to defeat the power of BIG ED. That's all I've ever advocated. Further, for some one to the think that these goals could be achieved with out attaining such power is pure naiveté.

JJ wrote:

If my vision of educational freedom and self-determined learning doesn't match yours, why then -- philosophically, morally, reasonably or any other way -- should yours prevail? Simply because your political machine can enforce it more ruthlessly? Sounds like "might makes right" to me, not real freedom.

Bruno writes:

Utter, utter nonsense. Show me any writing, letter, or phrase that would indicate any truth to your assertions above. All of my harsh rhetoric and political activity re: education has been directed at undermining BIG ED. Nothing else.

Why paint a new devil on the wall when there is a perfectly evil one (BIG ED) already in existence?

JJ wrote:

Why should the future of American education for all parents and citizens be dependent on any faction's vision and seizing of power?  Isn't that exactly what you started this fight to END?

Bruno wrote:

You seem incapable of making the distinction between "seizing power" and "attaining enough power to enact better policy." Why?  Let's try this.  Let's assume there is a crisis of sorts in education.

What is your proposal to improve things? Do we even need a proposal?

Is the situation so bad that we must act, or can it go on like this ad infinitum? If not...

What is the best course of action?

Take your kids out?

What about the other 98% who your kids will have to live & work with?

I submit that the moment you put forth a proposal, I'll be able to ask how you propose to enact it. That is the point at which "raw political power" becomes necessary. (BTW, if your proposal is 'easily enacted', then it isn't sufficiently aggressive, IMO.)

JJ wrote:

Education and principled self-control (not raw power used to control others) ....<snip>

Bruno writes:

This is getting hilarious. Bruno says "we will need raw political power to achieve legislative victories (choice)" and JJ reinterprets this as "Bruno wants to control others."

Hogwash.

Here is an apt analogy. A 98 pound woman feels threatened by the advent of muggers in her neighborhood. She buys a gun for self defense. JJ says "that woman just wants to kill everyone."

Silly, isn't it? So is your assertion that "I want to control everyone."

JJ wrote:

Destroying the entire existing judicial system isn't the answer. Stacking the benches is a more practical answer but antithetical to the freedom we say we seek. 

Bruno writes:

I don't know how you got onto judges & benches, but the example goes a long way to proving MY point. Implicit in your arguments is the idea that things are "neutrally balanced" and that BIG ED is already held in check some how. Interesting that currently, in YOUR state, JUDGES are about to overturn the OPPORTUNITY SCHOLARSHIP program on extremely shaky grounds.

Who put THOSE judges there? Whose clout placed every mandate, constitutional clause, and administrative rule in the context that ONLY BIG ED wins? Again, you are worried about some ephemeral exercise of political power by some future party or person while your current society is in the grip of a REAL foul & dangerous industry (BIG ED).

JJ wrote:

In other words, encouraging and sufficiently arming adults to educate themselves about education, to do the hard thinking for themselves, with historical perspective and important new knowledge being discovered constantly, is the real answer.

Thank goodness I don't need to convince Bruno personally of this, or even fight him myself in hand-to-hand combat -- not if I can win the hearts and minds of enough other Thinking Citizens to the view that raw political power is as dangerous to freedom as conservative avenger hands as in anyone else's.

Bruno writes:

Nicely put, but not good enough for the task at hand. (Defeating BIG ED)

Your paragraphs above smack of the Rev. Niemoeller nicely warning Germans of the dangers of Nazism during afternoon tea as Hitler is gearing up for the "night of long knives".

Did you know that even as Hitler was racking up his early military victories, a few generals were trying to figure out ways to kill him. You JJ, would have cautioned them not to "seek power."

Perhaps our greatest issue is that we differ on the nature of the enemy. You are too timid to call BIG ED an "enemy" and I call BIG ED "evil." If the truth is somewhere in between, I'll bet it falls much closer to my view.

As for quip about "conservative avengers".... You seem to forget that most of them (individualists fighting for their freedom) - after winning their battles - gladly put down the tools of war to get back to living a life, while the enemy (BIG ED, collectivists, collectivism) never rests.

Each time around, there are fewer and fewer "conservative avengers" to take up the tools. One day, there will be too few.

On that day JJ will say..

In America, BIG ED first came for the homeschoolers, and I didn't speak up because I don't want to seek power. Then it came for the charter schools, and I didn't speak up because I don't want to seek power. Then it came for the private schoolers, and I didn't speak up because I don't want to seek power. Then it came for the Pre-Schoolers, but I didn't speak up because I don't want to seek power.

Then it came for me, and by that time there was no one who had the power to fight them."

Actual quote here.

___

To those reading and enjoying this debate, all I ask is two things. First, that you take the time to understand the nature of the enemy (BIG ED, The Left, Collectivists).

Second, at the appropriate time, you vote for the best candidate (school board, State Rep. etc.) and that you work for that candidate through donations, phone calls & precinct work. For extra credit, you could run for those offices your self.

People like me will help you while the JJ's of the world will caution you to "be nice." Ask yourself to whom you are "being nice" to.

Bruno

Blogs, Talk Radio, Moral Superiority & Memes

Here is a statement

Talk Radio and Blogs are Morally Superior to the Main Stream Media. Here's why.

As a foundation, we can begin with the Bill of Rights, which begins with the First Amendment. Rapidly simplified, If communication is good, then more communication is better, and the faster that communication cycles, better still.

[This generalization leaves out the issue of "communication clutter" brought about by excessive volume. However, it should be fairly clear that is the individual's responsibility to deal with clutter.]

The obvious next step in improving "communication" (aside from volume) is feedback. Talk radio and blogs offer instant feedback, which in turn offers the "communicator" the ability to immediately tailor his message, making it more robust. I find it fascinating that the mainstream media still seem to have no clue about this when discussing the "success" of talk radio in the early nineties, and now blogs in the early 21st-century.

The "phenomena" of this success is easily explained by the fact that blogs and talk radio offer feedback whereas newspapers and network programming do not. (Aside from the occasional letter to the editor or mass reaction to some broadcast.)

The "moral superiority" is simply a function of the available feedback loop. Obviously, the same goes for society in general. Societies that censor are destroying the feedback loop, and therefore less moral. Note that they function less well too.

The Meme Pool

My guess is that some of you have heard about "memes" before, but just in case, click the link.

Meme: an information pattern, held in an individual's memory, which is capable of being copied to another individual's memory.

Memetics: the theoretical and empirical science that studies the replication, spread and evolution of memes

Sure, the entire concept of the "meme" was developed by some post postgraduate big brains who had too much to drink one night.  But it is still a pretty good concept.

How do memes fit into communication, moral superiority, and societal evolution? Here's how.

If you are interested in politics, policy and moving people over to your viewpoint, the concept of memetics is important for you. Without going into all the academic mumbo jumbo about the metaphorical similarity between genes and memes (that's where the idea came from), it suffices to say that we need to package our communication in ways that are rapidly "replicated" by our audience -- even as they are completely unconscious of the fact that they're replicating anything.

Any idea that you wish to communicate should be able to be packaged into a 10 second soundbite, a 30 second summary, a 60 second speech, with a 60 minute chunk of information (policy study, web site(s), book, etc.)

It's amazing how much mileage I've gotten out of the 10 second sound bite calling the public education system the "Government/educational complex", and that's just one example.

To summarize, the main point of this post is that technology is giving us unbelievable advantages in the capability of promoting our ideas. Eight years ago, when a local political consultant talked about the "air war" and "ground war", he was talking about TV and radio ads (mostly bad) combined with knocking on doors and handing out literature.

These "tools" are old technology. (though still incredibly effective)

We're in an era where we can tailor our message so effectively that we can change minds more rapidly (smart bombs - air war). If you couple this with an equally sophisticated "ground war" that might allow today's precinct captain to target each and every home in their precinct with a tailored message, one begins to sense the opportunity to change minds (individually and collectively) much more rapidly.

Howard Dean is an Idiot

How stupid can you get before your party realizes that you are massive liability?  Under Dean, Democrat fund raising has crashed.  A few weeks ago, he was on record saying "I hate Republicans, and everything they stand for."

And now this...

Dean hits GOP on 'honest living'

Democratic National Committee Chairman Howard Dean yesterday said many Republicans don't make an "honest living" — the sharpest barb in a campaign-style speech to a conference of liberal activists.

...

Mr. Dean's remarks stand in contrast to a report released Tuesday by Third Way, a centrist Democratic advocacy group, that said Democrats are facing a crisis among middle-class voters and found that Republicans — at both the presidential and congressional levels — have a commanding lead among white middle-class households.

_____

This is what happens to your party when you allow it to be controlled by intellectual adolescents.  Either that, or he's been a Republican plant since the beginning.

A Liberal Blogger I'd be happy to call a friend

Keith Thompson appears to be a dying breed.  A reasonable liberal.

When his blog has the number of hits that the rabid Kos gets, the left will be viable once again.

___

"...Out of the corner of my eye I watched what was coming for more than three decades, yet refused to truly see..."

___

Read the whole thing.

Rush Limbaugh effectively exposes Democrat Hypocrisy

This came over the e-mail list transom.  Forward it to all your lists.  Don't go spineless on Tom DeLay.  Up to this point there is no evidence he's done anything wrong.

__

Limbaugh spent most of last week demonstrating the absolute hypocrisy of democrat and media charges against House Majority leader Tom Delay (R, TX). The two public charges are that he went on trips funded by lobbyists and that he hired family members in his campaign. Both practices are legal under existing federal law and House rules. In essence, the democrats and their leftist lackeys in the (formerly) mainstream media are charging Republican corruption for doing legal things that everyone in congress regularly does. Here's what Limbaugh reported last week:

- Harry Reid (D, NV), Senate Minority Leader - all four sons and a son in law are hired by companies that profit by Reid's legislative actions in the Senate. If a company doesn't have a family member working for them, they don't get the real juicy contracts, friendly land variances and transfers.  The companies have collected over $2 million in lobbying fees over the years and control everything in NV.

- Bernie Sanders (I, VT), the only admitted Socialist in the House hired wife and stepdaughter as campaign staff, but doesn't want anyone to know about it.

- Barbara Boxer (D, CA), has her son Doug is in charge of her political operation; also on her campaign payroll.

- Joe Lieberman (D, CT), paid wife and kids on campaign staff.

- Pete Stark (D, CA), paid wife and kids with campaign money.

- Jim Costa (D, CA), paid cousin Kim with campaign money.

- Chris Shays (R, CT), first House Republican publicly out against DeLay.  His wife was hired to head up AmeriCorps in 1998, a six-figure salary, six weeks before Clinton impeachment proceedings. Mysteriously, Shays also opposed Clinton's impeachment and trial.

- John Breaux (D, LA), was the top trip taker in congress from 2000 - 2004.

- Robert Wexler (D, FL), was the third top trip taker in congress from 2000 - 2004.

- 8 House members filed the same travel papers as DeLay for the Korea trip. One of them was "Baghdad" Jim McDermott (D, WA).

- Over 4800 lobbyist-funded trips wee taken by congress-critters over the last 4 years, costing $14.8 million. 62% of the money was spent on democrat members' travel.

- Finally, Nancy Pelosi (D, CA, paid a $21,000 fine to the FEC for essentially buying votes for her to be House Minority Leader. Story is buried.

EXTREME WISDOM provides a College-Level Primer on Social Psychology, Political Correctness, and how our Civilization will end

The following is the "curriculum" for my April 24th show.  The various links are connected by the text/audio in my show, but you'll have to stream it to get it all...and I don't have streaming yet.

Syllabus

1. A review the Asch Test - One of Social Psychology's most important experiments.

Links to various overviews of the Asch Test. Link 1, Link 2 (shows the actual lines).

2. Data on psychologist Kurt Lewin, National Training Labs, and the"National 'RE'-Education Association"

Background - Link 1, Connection to Dewey/Public Ed. - Link 2,  Sensitivity Training - Link 3, Red Markers Article 270 - Link 4

3. The false god "Consensus" and how it undermines the far better process of the "Rule of Law" through checks & balances.

Thatcher again

To me consensus seems to be: the process of abandoning all beliefs, principles, values and policies in search of something in which no one believes, but to which no one objects; the process of avoiding the very issues that have to be solved, merely because you cannot get agreement on the way ahead. What great cause would have been fought and won under the banner "I stand for consensus"?

Consensus is the absence of leadership

I am not a consensus politician. I am a conviction politician.

Margaret Thatcher

__

Leadership is the one thing that schools work hardest at to undermine.  This is the ultimate collectivist goal - the nail that sticks up get's hammered down.

Change Agents, any one?

"A new public mind is to be created. How? Only by creating tens of millions of individual minds and wielding them into a new social mind. Old stereotypes must be broken up and new climates of opinion formed in the neighborhoods of America." (p.32)

"…through the schools of the world we shall disseminate a new conception of government – one that will embrace all the activities of men, one that will postulate the need of scientific control and operation of economic activities in the interest of all people."

4. The Connection of all of the above to "political correctness," which is NOT a benign annoyance, but an insidious destroyer of liberty.

de Tocqueville

"...but [enforced conformity] seeks, on the contrary, to keep them in perpetual childhood. . . . [I]t every day renders the exercise of the free agency of man less useful and less frequent; it circumscribes the will within a narrower range and gradually robs a man of all the uses of himself. . . . [T]he supreme power then extends its arm over the whole community. It covers the surface of society with a network of small complicated rules, minute and uniform, through which the most original minds and the most energetic characters cannot penetrate, to rise above the crowd. The will of man is not shattered, but softened, bent, and guided. . . . Such a power does not destroy, . . . but it enervates, extinguishes, and stupefies a people, till each nation is reduced to nothing better than a flock of timid and industrious animals, of which the government is the shepherd.

5. The three (VERY SIMPLE) things you can do to stop the erosion of our ideals. (Individual Sovereignty over Collective Control)

1. Be “Disruptive of the Class.”

Social Support

In Asch's later experiments, he introduced others who disagreed with the consensus. This disagreement led to a marked increase in the subjects' readiness to disagree with the dominant view. Other experiments have also shown that social support can help us to resist conformity, even if the person giving us the support is not particularly competent and even if she doesn't share our views. It seems that any old support will do. However, the support is more likely to be successful if she is competent and does share our views. It also seems to be especially important that dissent, if it is to be effective, should be voiced early on in the proceedings.

Look for Social Support – and provide social support - of like minded.  Do it openly, and always seek allies.

2. How to be disruptive – Pronounce Judgment

Be informed as you can.  Go Back to your Strongest Argument – a touchstone – The Individual over the Collective., Who is better at making decisions about your life, you, or the collective?

Pronounce Judgment – even if you are attacked or vilified.  This approaches a moral duty, IMO. 

Look at this in the context of all the “social psychology” we’ve just covered, and you’ll see it very clearly.

Failure to even register your opinion is an act of moral cowardice. Whatever the excuse – and I know there are some good ones, you have to start looking for opportunities to turn this tide around.

3. Turn the tables and use their own techniques against them.

Lewin – if you read the links above, didn’t do his research to have the world become more totalitarian – The techniques are neutral – YOU can use them.  Two well-informed conservatives can outperform a group of squishy-thinking left-leaners any time they make the effort.  This won’t necessarily occur in a single instance, but over time, you can’t lose.

Integrate – re-involve yourself in local & social institutions, and stand up for your beliefs.  I guarantee that if you do, at least one person will thank you for it afterwards.  Nurture THEM into the next person to take a stand.

YOU Become the "Change Agent"

"Consensus is the absence of Leadership"

The above headline is a Margaret Thatcher quote.  Below is more from her ladyship.

__

"Ah consensus … the process of abandoning all beliefs, principles, values and policies in search of something in which no one believes, but to which no one objects; the process of avoiding the very issues that have to be solved, merely because you cannot get agreement on the way ahead.  What great cause would have been fought and won under the banner 'I stand for consensus'?"

__

Most of you have no idea how easy it is to smash "consensus", thereby giving you the power to reformulate it more to your liking.

This is really nothing more than standing up for what you believe in, ignoring the "majority" and having the courage of your convictions.

This is why totalitarians - whether of the Stalinist or School Teacher variety - will do all they can to destroy "leadership".  They are uniquely trained to attenuate and undermine any hint of leadership in your children.

Educators today view themselves as "change agents".  All you need to do to be a "change agent" of a different type is to vocally and persuasively question everything the herd (consensus) puts forth.

Andrew Jackson said "One man with courage makes a majority."

But the Carcass still stinks

Donaldson - Network News is Dead

Even though 30 million viewers still turn to networks news each night and garner ratings well above CNN and Fox News, networks news operations long ago lost their role as the sources Americans rely on during time of major breaking news, said Donaldson

...

The three also agreed that that Internet bloggers have had a generally positive impact on news because mainstream reporters are forced to better verify their information and pare opinions out of their work or face he wrath of scrutinizing critics.

Two Goethe Quotes on Leadership

Goethe was my Dad's favorite philosopher/poet/writer.  I've ended my show with some Goethe quotes because they fit so well with the name 'Extreme Wisdom.

Here are some favorites.

___

"He who is firm in will molds the world to himself."

This one is about simple leadership.  In a world soaked in Oprah-induced estrogen, simply stating an informed opinion backed by a moral will results in followers.  Lead, and lead well.

___

Daring ideas are like chessmen moved forward. They may be beaten, but they may start a winning game.

Take risks, people! Playing "not to lose" is the fastest way to lose.  Our culture is becoming too afraid to be bold.  Stand up for your ideas. Listen to the responses.  Judge and re-assess accordingly.