In Portland, the Islamic Revolution Begins in Kindergarten thumbnail

In Portland, the Islamic Revolution Begins in Kindergarten

By The Geller Report

Mirroring the Jew hating indoctrination of children in Gaza, Portland’s public school is brainwashing American children to hate and kill Jews. Kindergarten through high school. Hitler youth.

In Portland, the Intifada Begins in Kindergarten

The local teachers’ union encourages students to resist “Zionist bullies.”

By: Christopher Rufo, City Journal, June 5, 2024:

[…]

I have obtained a collection of publicly accessible documents produced by the Portland Association of Teachers, an affiliate of the state teachers’ union that encourages its more than 4,500 members to “Teach Palestine!” (The union did not respond to a request for comment.)

The lesson plans are steeped in radicalism, and they begin teaching the principles of “decolonization” to students as young as four and five years old. For prekindergarten kids, the union promotes a workbook from the Palestinian Feminist Collective, which tells the story of a fictional Palestinian boy named Handala. “When I was only ten years old, I had to flee my home in Palestine,” the boy tells readers. “A group of bullies called Zionists wanted our land so they stole it by force and hurt many people.” Students are encouraged to come up with a slogan that they can chant at a protest and complete a maze so that Handala can “get back home to Palestine”—represented as a map of Israel.

Other pre-K resources include a video that repeats left-wing mantras, including “I feel safe when there are no police,” and a slideshow that glorifies the Palestinian intifada, or violent resistance against Israel. The recommended resource list also includes a “sensory guide for kids” on attending protests. It teaches children what they might see, hear, taste, touch, and smell at protests, and promotes photographs of slogans such as “Abolish Prisons” and “From the River to the Sea.”

In kindergarten through second grade, the ideologies intensify. The teachers’ union recommends a lesson, “Art and Action for Palestine,” that teaches students that Israel, like America, is an oppressor. The objective is to “connect histories of settler colonialism from Palestine to the United States” and to “celebrate Palestinian culture and resistance throughout history and in the present, with a focus on Palestinian children’s resistance.”

The lesson suggests that teachers should gather the kindergarteners into a circle and teach them a history of Palestine: “75 years ago, a lot of decision makers around the world decided to take away Palestinian land to make a country called Israel. Israel would be a country where rules were mostly fair for Jewish people with White skin,” the lesson reads. “There’s a BIG word for when Indigenous land gets taken away to make a country, that’s called settler colonialism.”

Continue reading.

AUTHOR

Pamela Geller

RELATED ARTICLES:

Scholastic Book Publisher Offers ‘Pride Guide’ to Teachers During LGBT Campaign

High Schooler’s Diploma Withheld for Telling Classmates to ‘Find Jesus’ in Graduation Speech

Montessori and Drag Queen Story Hour

Hamas Terror Mob Descends On Weill Cornell Medical College in New York City “We Don’t Want no Zionists Here.”

EDITORS NOTE: This Geller Report is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved.

Scholastic Book Publisher Offers ‘Pride Guide’ to Teachers During LGBT Campaign thumbnail

Scholastic Book Publisher Offers ‘Pride Guide’ to Teachers During LGBT Campaign

By The Geller Report

This obsession with sexualizing children is indicative of a sick and depraved society. It must stop.

“Hey, teacher, leave them kids alone!”

Scholastic Publishes ‘Pride’ Guide for Teachers, Vows to Distribute LGBT Books Banned by Schools

Book publisher Scholastic announced a “Read with Pride” campaign, providing educators a list of “LGBTQIA+ stories” for “kids and teens” and vowed to use company resources to fight efforts by local school districts and parents to determine what content is appropriate for students.

In its section on “why it’s essential to support LGBTQIA+ youth,” Scholastic states that almost 10 percent of teens in the United States are “lesbian, gay, bi, or trans,” that “about half (52%)” of all Americans who fall under the “LGBTQIA+” umbrella are “people of color,” and that a quarter of children and teens who fit that description …

Continue reading.

Scholastic releases Pride educator guide with resources for fighting anti-LGBTQ+ book bans

The book publisher Scholastic has published a Pride guide giving educators and child advocates a list of LGBTQ+-themed books for children of all ages as well as support resources for mental health and fighting right-wing book bans.

The guide comes eight months after the company was widely criticized for allowing schools to opt out of offering “diverse” books on racial and LGBTQ+ issues at its school book fairs. Though Scholastic introduced the policy to help educators adhere to state legislation and district policies banning queer content and “critical race theory” in schools, it reversed the opt-out policy after authors and educators blamed the company for complying to book banning rather than challenging such bans.

“As a teacher, librarian, educator, or caregiver, how you interact with all children and teens around queerness matters,” Scholastic’s guide states. “What literature you provide them with, and how you talk about both literature and identity, can have an immense, life-changing impact on the young people in your life…. Whether or not they are out to themselves or you, you absolutely know queer children and interact with them in your classrooms, libraries, and communities.”

Continue reading.

AUTHOR

Pamela Geller

RELATED ARTICLES:

Scholastic’s 2024 ’Read with Pride’ Initiative Makes No Attempt to Mask Its Radical Agenda

‘Just a Disaster’: Biden’s Title IX Rule Empowers LGBTQ Movement, Erases Women and Justice

LaBarbera Explains to ‘Crosstalk’ Radio Why Most ‘Queer’ Activists Cannot Say NO to LGBTQ+

Smartfood Gets Dumb: Bud Lights Itself With “LGBTQ” GLAAD Bag

EDITORS NOTE: This Geller Report is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved.

MAGA: The Revolt Against the Elites thumbnail

MAGA: The Revolt Against the Elites

By Neland Nobel

“I would rather be governed by the first 2,000 people in the telephone directory than by the Harvard University faculty,”

William F. Buckley, Jr.

“Sometimes I think this country would be better off if we could just saw off the Eastern Seaboard and let it float out to sea.”

Barry Goldwater

The tension between America’s governing elites and the people has likely never been wider, although the quotes above suggest it did not begin with MAGA. However, the rift was not as huge as today, largely because our elites have drifted far to the extreme left and government power is now centered in an unelected bureaucracy which they dominate.

At one time, not that long ago, Progressives and Liberals prided themselves on associating themselves with the common man: industrial workers, farmers, miners, ranchers, and construction workers.  This was before they decided they were all deplorables defiling the environment.

Perhaps this was because they saw the world through a Marxist lens,  the workers versus the owners and they saw workers and unions as their supporters, as indeed some were.  Now they see things through the lens of race, class, and ethnicity.

As part of the New Deal’s emergency relief for the unemployed, millions were spent employing unemployed artists.  Franklin Roosevelt put his close aide Harry Hopkins in charge of PWAP or The Public Works of Art Project in 1934, which employed thousands of artists.

It is not quite the same as forgiving the debt of thousands of Gender Studies majors, but it is pretty close.

The New Deal made a big deal of subsidizing a distinctive style of art, a kind of American-tinged Soviet new realism.  Often this took the form of murals similar to what we created above.  Many of the works of art can still be seen today in older public buildings and older Post Offices.

The common feature was extolling the common man.  The New Deal collected songs of rural people and subsidized photographers to record the travails of the people.  As we noted before, the New Deal even tried an experiment in collective farming, with a big experiment here in Arizona.

Hopkins was a special character within the New Deal and later played a key role in advising Roosevelt on foreign policy.  He was more than just a tad left of center. He quickly advanced from running art projects to being FDR’s closest confident, even living with the President full time at the White House.  He evolved to become the most important advisor on important subjects like how to deal with Josef Stalin.  He reportedly got along great with Joe Stalin.

We now know why. The Venona Project dispatches, coupled with files from Soviet Intelligence that were open for just a few years after the Wall fell,  allowed scholars to tie both sides of encrypted wartime cables together for the first time.  This allowed historians to finally get hard evidence on the multitude of Americans working for the Democrat Administration willing to betray their country. This was at the time of Stalin.  We don’t mean the Stalin of the early years as a bandit. We mean the Joe Stalin of gulags and kulak liquidations, the mass starvation of the Ukraine, the Hitler-Stalin Pact, and proxy wars that killed Americans in Korea.  But still, many Americans supported the Communist cause, including Harry Hopkins.

It appears Mr. Hopkins was a Soviet agent who not only had the President’s ear, but apparently his mind, and policy. He was also in charge of art, extolling “the common man.”

But New Deal art was also part of the flavor of the times.  Besides government-subsidized murals, others such as American composer Aaron Copland was composing, “Fanfare For the Common Man”, “Appalachian Spring” and “Rodeo.” It was the time of the “Grapes of Wrath”, the great Oklahoma diaspora, and its journey to California.

Incidentally, Copland had his own flirtations with Communism. Although his membership in the party is still in question, it was not uncommon for important Communists not to join the party for tactical reasons.  Copland attended  Communist meetings, and conferences,  and was active in the Composers Collective.  If not a party member, he functioned as one would.

Talk to most “common men” today, travel Appalachia, or go to a rodeo,  and you will most likely find Trump supporters in great abundance.

How did the Progressives evolve to hate the common man?  The connecting thread seems to be education at a handful of elite Ivy League universities.

A recent study of elite opinion by the pollster Scott Rasmussen undertaken by the Committee To Unleash Prosperity is causing considerable commentary.  Elite opinion in the study is defined as someone making at least $150,000 per year, possessing at least one postgraduate degree, and living in a population-dense city.

The study starts with this perceptive analysis  from a famous novelist of an earlier era,  F. Scott Fitzgerald:

“Let me tell you about the very rich. They are different from you and me. They possess and enjoy early, and it does something to them, makes them soft where we are hard, and cynical where we are trustful, in a way that, unless you were born rich, it is very difficult to understand. They think, deep in their hearts, that they are better than we are because we had to discover the compensations and refuges of life for ourselves. Even when they enter deep into our world or sink below us, they still think that they are better than we are. They are different.”

Here are some salient findings from the study:

While most Americans are suffering economically, 74% of this elite say they are doing better, versus just 20% for the general population.

Almost 6 in 10 say there is too much freedom in the US.

More than 2/3 are ready to ration energy to combat climate change.

More than 70% say we should trust the government to do the right thing, most of the time.

Again, more than 2/3 say education professionals should decide what children are taught, not parents.

Between ½ to 2/3 favor banning SUVs, gas stoves, air conditioning, and non-essential air travel to protect the environment.

84% give Joe Biden a favorable job approval rating.

There is much more to the study, but it is clear that America’s elites are not only out of touch with common people of all types, their political leaders have gone out of their way to insult and degrade the common people.  Leftwing professors are even out with new books about the danger of rural people such as “White Rural Rage”, by Shaller and Waldman.

We are deplorables, clinging to our God and guns as Hillary and Obama put it,  and they have a strong feeling that they are our natural rulers.  The so-called pro-democracy crowd of the Democrat Party is not too different from a royal family supporting the divine right of kings.

Critics are correct that modern Conservatism now has a populist tinge to it.  The study shows that Republican elites are not quite as extreme, but share many of the same cultural attitudes, hence the existence of the Uni-Party and the resistance to that by the rank and file of the Republican Party.

Perhaps the most disturbing finding was that nearly 2/3 of politically active elites would be willing to cheat in an election to win, versus just 7% for the general public.

They believe they have a natural right to rule and are not about to let democratic processes get in their way.

We also saw their totalitarian instincts at play at the local level with all manner of unconstitutional restrictions on travel, speech, and assembly during the manufactured Covid crisis.

This underscores something we observed some time ago.  Progressives argue for “democracy”, and the common man, but by taking authority out of the hands of families and businesses to determine their own destiny, and by creating a giant unelected Administrative State that rules without Constitutional checks and balances, they undermine the freedom and democracy they say they are for.

They do this under the name of planning. Planning by “experts” like them. What that kind of planning really means is substituting their plans for your plans.  Your money does not belong to you, your property does not belong to you, your body does not belong to you, and your children are not yours.

They further claim they are not “racists” but recent survey data also shows they are willing to discriminate against white people, and Asians to a somewhat lesser extent.

This chart from a site called End Wokeness shows the stunning racial bigotry of Democrats at large, not just the veneer of elites.

Now the ultra-rich educated have a right to their views and can live the “green life” if they want to.  How they spend their own money and raise their children is their business. They can marinate in their white guilt and loathe the American Founding. However, they have no right to impose those views on the rest of us.  Bill Gates and George Soros have the means to attempt this, but they don’t have the right.  Political legitimacy only comes from the voluntary consent of those governed.

I don’t speak for others but I never voted for Bill Gates, George Soros, or the World Economic Forum.

This election is not so much about party affiliation anymore.  It will be about freedom, class, culture, and yes, prejudice against white people.  It will be about the freedom not to be dictated to and ruled by this bunch of presumptuous SOBs. It will be, in short, a revolt against the elites, their ideas, their policies, and their arrogance.

TAKE ACTION

The Prickly Pear’s TAKE ACTION focus this year is to help achieve a winning 2024 national and state November 5th election with the removal of the Biden/Obama leftist executive branch disaster, win one U.S. Senate seat, maintain and win strong majorities in all Arizona state offices on the ballot and to insure that unrestricted abortion is not constitutionally embedded in our laws and culture.

Please click the TAKE ACTION link to learn to do’s and don’ts for voting in 2024. Our state and national elections are at great risk from the very aggressive and radical leftist Democrat operatives with documented rigging, mail-in voter fraud and illegals voting across the country (yes, with illegals voting across the country) in the last several election cycles.

Read Part 1 and Part 2 of The Prickly Pear essays entitled How NOT to Vote in the November 5, 2024 Election in Arizona to be well informed of the above issues and to vote in a way to ensure the most likely chance your vote will be counted and counted as you intend.

Please click the following link to learn more.

The Ten Commandments Make Wise Laws thumbnail

The Ten Commandments Make Wise Laws

By Family Research Council

The Louisiana legislature has passed a bill that “requires schools that receive public money to post the Ten Commandments in classrooms,” Family Research Council President Tony Perkins said on Thursday’s “Washington Watch,” and “the anti-Christian Left is convulsing.”

It isn’t hard to imagine their cry: “But what about the separation of church and state?” Posting the Ten Commandments in school classrooms “was common,” Perkins countered, “until the Supreme Court ruled in 1980 that such a display was in violation of the Establishment Clause of the Constitution.” Of course, the Establishment Clause was in effect for 189 years before that, and for most of that time no one objected to the Ten Commandments in schools. Doing so does not establish any religion.

“We’re focused on the historical aspect of the Ten Commandments, which all of our laws are derived from,” bill sponsor Louisiana Rep. Dodie Horton (R) explained to Perkins. “We also included that, if a school would like to put up other historical documents like the Mayflower Compact, the Northwest Ordinance, the Bill of Rights, they’re able to do so.” In other words, displaying the Ten Commandments will teach Louisiana schoolchildren about American history and about how American law developed.

Skeptics will still ask, but why are the Ten Commandments displayed and not other religious ethical statements, like the writings of Confucius or Native American myths? One answer is America’s historical development. This great nation was not built by Confucians or Muslims, but by people informed by the Bible and the moral teachings found therein.

A second answer is that the moral principles found in the Ten Commandments are so wise that even people from other nations, religions, and cultures will recognize the wisdom they contain. “See, I have taught you statutes and rules, as the Lord my God commanded me,” declared Moses.

“Keep them and do them, for that will be your wisdom and your understanding in the sight of the peoples, who, when they hear all these statutes, will say, ‘Surely this great nation is a wise and understanding people.’ For what great nation is there that has a god so near to it as the Lord our God is to us, whenever we call upon him? And what great nation is there, that has statutes and rules so righteous as all this law that I set before you today?” (Deuteronomy 4:5-8)

After this exhortation, Moses proceeded to recite the Ten Commandments in Deuteronomy 5. These form the outline for the rest of the laws set forth in Deuteronomy 6-26, which simply apply these 10. The Ten Commandments, in turn, can be reduced to two: “You shall love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your mind” (Deuteronomy 6:5, Matthew 22:37), and “you shall love your neighbor as yourself” (Leviticus 19:18, Matthew 22:39).

Who could dispute this? Who would take issue with laws that prescribed, “You shall not murder, and you shall not commit adultery, and you shall not steal, and you shall not bear false witness against your neighbor” (Deuteronomy 5:17-20)? None of America’s problems are from people following these rules too closely. “When we look at what’s happening in our schools, we look at what is happening in our culture, and we wring our hands, and policymakers try to figure out what they’re going to do,” Perkins said, “it’s pretty simple: go back to the Ten Commandments.”

Of course, real life offers endless applications for these commandments, and people will differ on exactly when and where they apply. Some people would affirm these principles in theory but then deny obvious practical implications.

For example, some people would assent to the statement, “murder is wrong,” but also support abortion, the premeditated, unjust killing of an unborn human being. “I’ve operated on babies that were 25, 26, 27, 28 weeks gestation, and you have to give them anesthesia. They can feel everything,” said retired neurosurgeon Dr. Ben Carson on “Washington Watch” Thursday. “What about all those people who are trying to save snail darters? Now a snail darter is considerably less complex than a fetus, even at a few weeks. So, why are you trying to save the one and not the other?” Caring for animal life is arguably related to the prohibition on murder, but caring for unborn human life certainly is.

Yet this backwards reasoning is more common than might be expected. At this week’s World Health Assembly in Geneva, Switzerland, Family Research Council Vice President for Policy and Government Affairs Travis Weber reported on “Washington Watch” that national representatives were giving speeches with “references to animal health, about the rights of animals to receive relief,” but also about “reproductive health,” a “euphemistic phrase that includes abortion.” Animals’ lives are never more important than human lives.

Granted, the commandments against murder, adultery, stealing, and false testimony are less controversial in our culture than the rest. But the others provide the basis for these good and wise laws. The tenth commandment, for instance, “you shall not covet…” (Deuteronomy 5:21), is not something governments are competent to enforce, since other fallen human beings can’t know the human heart. But coveting is often the root of many wicked deeds the government should deter. For an example of how coveting can lead to murder, theft, and false testimony, see the account of Ahab and Naboth’s vineyard (1 Kings 21:1-16).

The commandment that will likely provoke the most criticism in a public school setting is the first, “You shall have no other gods before me” (Deuteronomy 5:7). But proponents could respond with a de-escalatory admission followed by a provocative question. “That’s fine, you don’t have to agree with it. We recognize the American tradition of religious freedom. In fact, the God who gave these laws invented religious freedom,” they could say. “But, I wonder, what do you believe the basis is for laws prohibiting murder, adultery, theft, and false testimony?”

According to the Ten Commandments, the ultimate reason is the character of the God who ordered the world. But for a secular humanist, who believes there is no god, and that we are the result of random evolutionary processes, then how do they square these moral principles with the evolutionary principle of the survival of the fittest? Not only do the Ten Commandments present a wiser way to live together in society, they also provide a better reason for living that way.

Therefore, “We want our children to see what God’s standard for our moral conduct is,” urged Horton. “We’re not asking the teachers to teach it, but we want our children to be able to see one — that there is a God, and that he does have a moral standard [by] which they need to conduct themselves.” Perkins agreed. “Teach them that there is truth, and we’re accountable to it.”

Perkins appealed to President George Washington’s farewell address, in which the first president declared that morality and religion were the two indispensable supports for political prosperity. If the famously cautious president would publicly endorse morality and religion — after the Establishment Clause had been enacted — surely the mere presence of the Ten Commandments, a basic statement of morality without any proselytization for any religion, should pass constitutional muster. It might even make the students a little bit wiser, if they ever stopped to heed its wisdom.

AUTHOR

Joshua Arnold

Joshua Arnold is a senior writer at The Washington Stand.

RELATED ARTICLES:

‘Christian Nationalism?’ Texas Legislation Would Require Ten Commandments Be Posted in Schools

Do the followers of Mohammed Believe in the Ten Commandments?

Religion is the most powerful force for good in society. Why does the media ignore it?

EDITORS NOTE: This Washington Stand column is republished with permission. All rights reserved. ©2024 Family Research Council.


The Washington Stand is Family Research Council’s outlet for news and commentary from a biblical worldview. The Washington Stand is based in Washington, D.C. and is published by FRC, whose mission is to advance faith, family, and freedom in public policy and the culture from a biblical worldview. We invite you to stand with us by partnering with FRC.

High Schooler’s Diploma Withheld for Telling Classmates to ‘Find Jesus’ in Graduation Speech thumbnail

High Schooler’s Diploma Withheld for Telling Classmates to ‘Find Jesus’ in Graduation Speech

By Family Research Council

Five days after he graduated from Campbell County High School in Kentucky, Micah Price finally received his diploma from school officials Wednesday after it was withheld because he went off script in his commencement speech and encouraged his classmates to seek Christ.

Price’s defiance of school rules has been the subject of a feverish debate online since a video of his speech went viral, with many Christian supporters praising him with words such as “brave.”

Superintendent Shelli Wilson told WKRC that Price was selected by his principal to deliver an approved speech that allowed him to thank his “Lord and Savior Jesus Christ” but not proselytize. However, Price urged his classmates to find Christ, telling them “He is the light. He is the way, the truth and the life,” a paraphrase of John 14:6.

“I was told beforehand [that] I wasn’t allowed to bring up Christ, that He is the way, the truth, and the life in my speech,” Price said on TikTok after the event.

“I did anyways, and after the speech was over, one of the principals came and tapped me on the shoulder very politely and professionally and told me I was going to have to go in front of the board and explain what I did because I went off script,” he added.

As he waited in the days following his speech to meet with school officials, Price said people offered to stand with him before the board. He urged them not to support him but the message of Jesus. He also insisted that the school officials did nothing wrong and were just simply doing their job in reprimanding him for going off script.

He eventually learned that he would not have to meet with the entire school board for his speech, only the principals.

Shortly after meeting on Wednesday, he was beaming with his diploma in an interview with Chelsea Sick of WKRC.

“It was a very quick and painless process. Went into this very short meeting with two principals. They were very professional in everything they did very kind … an answered prayer. We got the diploma,” he declared.

When asked about the social media firestorm over the delay in getting his diploma, Price said he knew his witness was against the rules but felt compelled to share more about the goodness of God in his life.

“I did go against the rules. I should have been punished which I do agree with,” he said. “I simply cannot go anywhere without mentioning what my Lord and Savior has done for me and just what he’s brought to me and my life. I did deserve to be punished but through Christ we prevail.”

Price, who will be joining the Air Force in July, told Fox 19 that delivering a graduation speech that honors God has been a goal of his since the fifth grade.

“I always wanted to give it,” Price said. “I prayed about it a lot.”

His conviction grew stronger when he became a devoted Baptist in the eighth grade, and last Friday, he said he was prepared to pay the price for the message he delivered.

“My Lord and Savior is your answer,” Price said in his speech. “He will give you the truth, the way, and the light. I must give the honor, the praise, and the glory to Jesus Christ.”

This article originally appeared in The Christian Post.

AUTHOR

Leonardo Blair

Leonardo Blair is a senior reporter with The Christian Post.

EDITORS NOTE: This Washington Stand column is republished with permission. All rights reserved. ©2024 Family Research Council.


The Washington Stand is Family Research Council’s outlet for news and commentary from a biblical worldview. The Washington Stand is based in Washington, D.C. and is published by FRC, whose mission is to advance faith, family, and freedom in public policy and the culture from a biblical worldview. We invite you to stand with us by partnering with FRC.

Montessori and Drag Queen Story Hour thumbnail

Montessori and Drag Queen Story Hour

By Linda Goudsmit

Globalism is a replacement ideology that seeks to reorder the world into one singular, planetary Unistate, ruled by the globalist elite. The globalist war on nation-states cannot succeed without collapsing the United States of America. The long-term strategic attack plan moves America incrementally from constitutional republic to socialism to globalism to feudalism. The tactical attack plan uses asymmetric psychological and informational warfare to destabilize Americans and drive society out of objective reality into the madness of subjective reality. America’s children are the primary target of the globalist predators.


For readers who may be under the impression that private schools are exempt from the humanitarian hoax of whole child education and its sociopolitical intent, I have included an informative article written by retired Montessori educator Charlotte Cushman, published online in American Thinker[i]and on her website, Authentic Montessori Education,[ii] on January 21, 2023.

Charlotte Cushman taught the Montessori Method for over 40 years, and co-owned and operated two Montessori schools. She is appalled by today’s woke (Marxist) trend in Montessori, and advocates a return to authentic Montessori and its founder’s principles:

Not in the service of any political or social creed should the teacher work, but in the service of the complete human being, able to exercise in freedom, a self-disciplined will and judgement, unperverted by prejudice and undistorted by fear. —Maria Montessori

The Real Purpose of Drag Queen Story Hour

By Charlotte Cushman

Those who have voiced concerns about the dangers that drag events, such as Drag Queen Story Hour (DQSH), pose for children (namely, sexualization and grooming) have been told that those concerns are baseless, that the events are harmless, that it is all just entertainment and fun, and that attending drag events is a way to understand the gay culture.

On January 25, 2021 an academic paper entitled “Drag pedagogy: the playful practice of queer imagination in early childhood” was published online in Curriculum Inquiry, an educational journal. The paper, recently called out by James Lindsay here and here and also by Christopher F. Rufo here, was written by Harper Keenen and Lil Miss Hot Mess (a founder of DQSH), who describe themselves as “a genderqueer drag performer/scholar and a trans scholar.” (p. 443)

Right off the bat, the abstract tells us the purpose of DQSH:

Ultimately, the authors propose that “drag pedagogy” provides a performative approach to queer pedagogy that is not simply about LGBT lives, but living queerly. (p. 440)

Then the authors state,

Through this programme, drag artists…[are] positioning queer and trans cultural forms as valuable components of early childhood education. We are guided by the following question: what might Drag Queen Story Hour offer educators as a way of bringing queer ways of knowing and being into the education of young children?

The purpose of DQSH is not entertainment, nor to understand gay culture. The purpose is to turn children “queer” through an educational process.

What is queer, you might ask? Queer in this context comes from Queer Theory, the idea that asserts that sexual norms are oppressive, that actually anything normal is a problem. Ronald Pisaturo, author of Masculine Power, Feminine Beauty, a book that condemns the LGBT movement, defines a queer as “an activist dedicated to overthrowing capitalism, the system alleged to enforce oppressive sexual norms such as masculinity, femininity, and heterosexuality.”

Turning children into Marxist activists is the goal. Because capitalism has not produced a populace motivated to revolt, Herbert Marcuse, the father of the New Left, advocated creating discontented groups, one of which is sexual “queers.” This goal is supported by LGBT ideology. Pisaturo explains (p. 113) that, according to LGBT theory,

Infants are “polymorphously perverse,” to use Freud’s term. That is, an infant will be sexually excited by anyone and anything anywhere. Freud considered this infantile state an early stage of development. Marcuse and many LGBT activists, in contrast, consider this state the ideal end state for adults. According to Marcuse, people leave this ideal state only because they become repressed, limiting the kinds of sexual responses available to them. The repressed energy of such people becomes channeled into economic production…. That is, productive work is the repressed alternative to blissful, indiscriminate sex. Capitalism, of course the system of greatest economic production, is hence also the system of greatest sexual repression.

Therefore, capitalism must be destroyed.

The “Drag Pedagogy” paper tells us,

It may be that DQSH is “family friendly,” in the sense that it is accessible and inviting to families with children, but it is less a sanitizing force than it is a preparatory introduction to alternate modes of kinship. Here, DQSH is “family friendly” in the sense of “family” as an old-school queer code to identify and connect with other queers on the street. (p. 455)

Pisaturo explains, “The phrase ‘preparatory introduction to alternate modes of kinship’ means sexual and Marxist grooming. The authors want to eradicate the traditional family by grooming children to join the ‘family’ of queers.”

In her 1984 essay, “Thinking Sex,” leading queer theorist Gayle Rubin blamed capitalism for suppressing sexual deviancies and defended child pornography, pedophilia, promiscuity, sadomasochism, and other sexual perversions. One can see these perverse elements when the drag queen struts around like a slut, grooming children by exposing them to explicit sexual acts and/or private body parts. And when the queen invites the child to participate, that is sexual assault of a minor.

Attempting to turn children into queers is bad enough, but there are other alarming elements to DQSH. Drag queens teach the children that reality is fluid:

Drag similarly breaks boundaries between reality and fantasy in allowing performers to take on new identities and social relationships in material form, just by playing the part. (p. 449)

At many DQSH events, children ask genuine questions like “are you a boy or a girl?” … In many cases, drag queens may not respond with answers, but with questions meant to complicate perceptions of gender and society: “Why does it matter if I’m a boy or a girl?” (p. 452)

That response reveals an astonishing ignorance about child development. The answer matters a great deal to the child who is just beginning to learn about reality and form concepts. The first judgment anyone perceives about another person is whether the person is a girl or a boy. Man or woman? To destroy that demarcation and bring in the arbitrary to a child, that a man can be a woman, is to undermine the important, fundamental concept of reality, that reality is stable and cannot be wished away. Serious cognitive damage is done by blurring the child’s grasp of reality. For the child, an unstable reality confuses him, frightens him, and sabotages his ability to navigate the world.

Children are also taught to be defiant—not for a valid reason, but for the sake of defiance:

While drag has some conventions, it ultimately has no rules—its defining quality is often to break as many rules as possible! (p. 448)

An implicit objective of DQSH is acknowledged:

There is a premium on standing out, on artfully desecrating the sacred. (p. 451)

They do not want to broaden or enrich the sacred (sexuality) through some kind of deeper understanding. They want to desecrate, to vandalize, to destroy.

And this is disturbing:

She is less interested in focus, discipline, achievement, or objectives than playful self-expression. Her pedagogy is rooted in pleasure and creativity borne, in part, from letting go of control. (p. 451)

The authors are not teaching children how to use their minds. Instead, they are teaching children to be abnormal, to be queer, to be pawns in the movement to tear down the normal.

Do people really think it is harmless to bring children to see sexuality portrayed not as a sacred expression of love for one special individual, but as frivolous “desecrating” for the benefit of any and all strangers? To see sexuality divorced from thought and romance? To see sexuality portrayed as ugly caricature? To see sexuality, which is intensely personal, selective, and meaningful, made voyeuristic, indiscriminate, and meaningless?

The young child learns from observation; he learns from absorbing his environment. Everything that he sees and experiences makes an impression upon his mind before he has the ability to evaluate it. The “desecrating” of sexuality will make a child’s mind abnormal regarding sex and all cognition, and that is exactly the goal of the drag queens. The concerns about DQSH aren’t baseless, and DQSH isn’t harmless. It is precisely child abuse.

If the purpose of DQSH is to turn children “queer” through an educational process, the next questions to ask are: What is the social purpose of turning children queer and destroying their innocence? Why would governments participate in this process of destruction?

The catastrophic psychological damage done to children by destroying childhood innocence is a political goal, and normalizing sexual perversion exploits the perversion for political gain. Woke “culture warriors” are validating their own sexual perversions, and the enemies of freedom are using them as useful idiots to help collapse society from within.

Canadian cultural anthropologist Geoffrey Clarfield offers an interesting perspective on the impact of self-interest in changing social norms. His fascinating article “Nurture not Nature,”[iii] published June 19, 2023, in the National Association of Scholars publication Minding the Campus, presents a compelling argument that the findings of early American cultural anthropologists were self-serving. The article is subtitled “Wokeism and the Anthropological Origins of Gender Bending.”

American cultural anthropology has a lot to answer for.

Its icons—people like Franz Boas, Margaret Mead, Ruth Benedict, and Edward Sapir—were the indispensable precursors of the woke ideology now so deeply entrenched in our schools and universities, courts, politics, and business.

This is not to say that cultural anthropology is the sole source of wokeism, but that its contribution was seminal. Its mid-twentieth-century practitioners took what began as a simple field method, cultural relativism, and by insensible degrees transformed it into a philosophical movement. What started out as the common-sense proposition that you could only understand a culture from the inside was soon transformed into the rather different notion that every culture was just as good as every other culture, and that there was no ground on which to prefer one over the other….

But what if these early practitioners of cultural anthropology, driven by a desire to “normalize” their own behavior at home, committed the cardinal scientific sin of reading into cultures what they needed to find there, rather than describing those cultures as they found them? If so, subsequent anthropological investigations of those same cultures would not reproduce the pioneers’ original findings, and cultural anthropology’s contribution to the intellectual foundations of wokeism would be revealed as a sham and a travesty. This article presents the prosecution’s case against cultural anthropology’s American founders….

Mead and her colleagues succeeded in challenging the darker side of Western civilization (eugenics), but they threw out the baby with the bathwater. Alongside cultural anthropologists, radical feminists, Marxists, and haters of the West have given us a generation of Tenured Radicals, mostly baby boomers, who have indoctrinated Generation Z. They have created a generation that now sees Western civilization as the problem, not the solution, to the question of how one should live life….

When the president of the United States [Joe Biden] endorses the transhumanist agenda and encourages children to change their sex surgically without their parents’ permission, one may start to long for the good ol’ days of patriarchy. Margaret Mead and her followers clearly have won the culture war.

Early American cultural anthropology’s great legacy is the widespread adoption of the idea that nurture trumps nature. According to most of today’s mainstream cultural anthropologists, the very concept of an objective nature outside humanity’s control is just a propaganda tool of a power structure imposed by morally corrupt oppressors. If you publicly oppose that worldview, expect to be persecuted and prosecuted.

Geoffrey Clarfield’s article exposes the very personal underbelly of today’s woke ideology and its academic origins in the homosexuality of the American cultural anthropology icons whose self-serving findings provided its foundation. The real purpose of Drag Queen Story Hour is societal destruction––to build back better.

©2024. Linda Goudsmit. All right


Please visit Linda’s Pundicity page: goudsmit.pundicity.com  and here website: lindagoudsmit.com


[i] American Thinkerhttps://www.americanthinker.com/articles/2023/01/the_real_purpose_of_drag_queen_story_hour.html

[ii] Authentic Montessori Educationhttps://www.authenticmontessorieducation.com/

[iii] Nurture not Naturehttps://www.mindingthecampus.org/2023/06/19/nurture-not-nature/

Weekend Read: “The Talk” About Police thumbnail

Weekend Read: “The Talk” About Police

By Charles M. Strauss

What I have told my children and grandchildren

President Biden, in his address to the graduating class of Morehouse College, said:

“If Black men are being killed on the streets, we bear witness. For me, that means to call out the poison of white supremacy, to root out systemic racism.

I stood up for George — with George Floyd’s family to help create a country where you don’t need to have that talk with your son or grandson as they get pulled over.”

“That talk?” What is he referring to? In 2017, PBS presented a documentary called “The Talk: Race In America.” The premise was that black parents need to warn their sons about interactions with police, to protect them against racist police officers who might beat or kill them.

In the documentary, Kenya Barris, a television writer and producer (“Soul Food,” “Black-ish”) said, “You know, my mom’s conversation with me is ‘Whatever they say, you do’… It was really like, ‘Yes sir, no sir, thank you sir’ is I think more of a contemporary phrasing that is – comes from the same ideology of ‘the police tell you to do something, you do it., because I want to make sure you come home.’ Um, it’s, you know, I think that, that, for me is sort of just parallel with being a black kid, you know, growing up in an inner city, like you understood that they were the boss – quote/unquote – ‘the boss,” and you do what they say, or something bad could happen, and they were above your parents being able to help you, even if they were wrong.”

Let’s get this straight. Doing what the cops tell you to do is good advice, but it’s the same advice that all parents – black or white – should give their sons (and daughters). There are not separate rules; we all need to do what police tell us to do, All parents are supposed to teach their children to say “Yes, sir,” “No sir,” “Thank you,” and “Please” to everybody, including police. All parents should tell their children that society has given police great power over us, and that we should do what they say – even when we think they are wrong – because (unless you are politically connected) police outrank all parents of all races.

Do Kenya Barris and Joe Biden genuinely believe that white parents tell their children that they should not do what the police say, not say “yes, sir” and “no, sir”, not keep their hands on the steering wheel, because their white privilege exempts them from the rules that apply to black people? Good luck with that! Do Kenya Barris and Joe Biden genuinely believe that if a black police officer (male or female) tells a black driver (male or female) to keep his or her hands on the wheel, that it’s OK to take their hands off the wheel? Good luck with that!

Watch Chris Rock’s hilarious video, “How To Not Get Your A** Kicked By The Police.” For those who are afraid of getting their a** kicked by the police (and for those parents who worry about their children getting their a**es kicked by the police), Rock offers helpful hints, several of which I have adopted in my own “Talk” to my children and grandchildren. Watch the video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lpjcdZpXrnk

The idea that police officers are racists who hunt down young black men for sport is false. Biden’s assertion that “Black men are being killed in the streets” is a damnable lie and slander, from a man who has been a liar and slanderer his whole life. (Not to mention a racist.) To the extent black men are being killed, they are being killed mostly by other black men, not by white supremacists., and not by white police officers. It is evil to teach that lie to children, and frankly it is a form of child cruelty to terrify them like that.

Here is the truth: most police officers are decent people, but some are not. The same is true of teachers, doctors, lawyers, priests, nurses and pretty much everybody else. There are always a few (in all walks of life) who are more interested in what they can do to people than what they can do for them. We have all heard of teachers who slap little kids around, of doctors who sexually abuse gymnasts, of priests who rape altar boys, and police who enjoy beating up people who are helpless – handcuffed and/or drunk. Sadly, some people are sadistic SOBs, but the proportion of sadistic white SOBs and sadistic black SOBs is about the same – low, but still problematic. There are sadistic SOBs (of all races) who are also racists, but they are a small subset of all sadistic SOBs. Mostly what sadistic SOBs look for in their victims is not race, but helplessness. They like that feeling of power.

We need to weed out the power-mad sadists in all occupations and in all races. Promoting the myth of “racist police” is counter-productive, because even if you weeded out the racists, you would still be left with the rest of the sadistic SOBs.

Despite the coroner’s report, which said that George Floyd died from drug overdose and heart disease – not from asphyxiation or neck trauma — police officer Derek Chauvin was convicted of murdering him. In the trial, the prosecution never produced any evidence that Chauvin was motivated by racism. None. Racism was simply assumed. Chauvin was white, and Floyd was black; what more proof do you need? Reportedly, Chauvin had 18 prior complaints of excessive force. Let’s see them. Were all the complaints from black people? All white? A mix? Was he an equal opportunity sadistic SOB, motivated by the helplessness of his victims rather than the race of his victims? When the prosecutors looked at his Facebook and Twitter postings, did they find praise for the KKK and the Aryan Brotherhood? Did his co-workers testify that he was a racist? No such evidence was presented in the trial. If it had been, we would be able to conclude Chauvin is a racist, but until we have some evidence, we can’t say for sure.

“But, but – systemic racism! The racism was baked into the system! Also, Trump’s fault!” Unlikely. Consider that in Minneapolis, the mayor, city council, city attorney, county attorney, and police chief are all Democrats (well, one Green on the city council, but zero Republicans). Is it likely that all those Democrats were inspired by Trump to “systemically” hire racist police officers? The chief of police, Medario Arradondo, a man of Hispanic ancestry, once sued the department for racial discrimination (along with four black officers), and was thereafter appointed as head of the department that investigates racial discrimination. After that, he was promoted to chief of police. Is it likely that with his background, Arradondo would systemically have racists in his department? By design, the racial makeup of the Minneapolis Police Department was and is in proportion to the racial makeup of the general population of Minneapolis. There is nothing “systemically racist” about that, is there?

In Atlanta, a white police officer, Garrett Rolfe, shot and killed a black man, Rayshard Brooks. “Black Lives Matter” riots erupted; the city burned. Thirty-one people were shot (five died) in eleven shooting incidents. A beautiful little eight-year-old black girl, Secoriea Turner, was one of the five fatalities, murdered by a mostly peaceful Black Lives Matter protester. The mayor of Atlanta is a black woman. The chief of police, Erika Shields, was white, but she was a lesbian woman, so it’s a pretty good bet she is not a MAGA Trumper. Sixty-two percent of Atlanta police officers are black. Does it seem likely that the Atlanta police department, with 62% black officers, is “systemically” racist, or that they would tolerate racists in their ranks, because Trump?

Here, then, is what I think The Talk should be for all children and grandchildren, of all races:

My Beloved Children and Grandchildren, most police officers are nice people, but there are a few who are really mean and nasty, and some who are purely evil. The police have great power over all of us, so you should avoid contacts with the police as much as possible, to reduce your chances of crossing paths with one of the bad ones. Here are some ways to avoid interactions with the police.

Obey the law.

If you don’t steal, kill people, assault people, sell/buy/use illegal drugs, drive drunk, or commit other crimes, you will be much less likely to be in a situation where you will be handcuffed, arrested, and/or imprisoned, all of which make you helpless, and which can therefore put you at the mercy of a sadistic, power-mad police officer, if you have the bad luck to run into one.

George Floyd was not walking down the street minding his own business, when the police randomly decided to attack him. He was trying to buy merchandise with a counterfeit bill, and the store owner called 911 to report that. The store owner also told the 911 operator that Floyd was acting crazy and appeared to be high on drugs. Sure enough, Floyd was high on drugs (fentanyl and methamphetamine), and he had a long history of crime – including violent crime.

At this point, some racialist is going to be outraged, and accuse me of saying that George Floyd deserved to die, that he had it coming, that I am “blaming the victim.” I am not saying that at all, and anybody who makes that accusation is, in the words of Joe Biden, a “lying dog-faced pony soldier.” George Floyd did not deserve to die – he deserved to be arrested and he deserved to go to jail.

Do What The Policeman Says.

When he saw the police lights flashing in his rear view mirror, Rodney King did not pull over, but led the police on a chase. He got brutally beaten – undeservedly, in my opinion. However, notice that his passengers did not get beaten. Why not? Because they followed the officers’ orders and did not try to fight with the police. Hmm, is there a lesson there?

Have you ever seen a police chase on TV? Of course. Have you ever seen one in which the driver got away? Mmmmnope. What does that tell you?

If you see the flashing lights, or if a policeman says “Stop,” then stop. Don’t try to run away, just stop. Do you think you are more likely to get your a** kicked if you pull over, or if you try to run away? Running away can only make things worse, not better, so just pull over, OK?

If the officer says “Stay in the car,” stay in the car. If the officer says “Get out of the car,” get out of the car. If the officer says “Show me your license,” show him your license. If she says “Get face down on the ground and put your hands behind your back,” then, as humiliating as it is, and even if the officer is wrong, swallow your pride, get face down on the ground and put your hands behind your back.

Be Polite.

“Yes sir, no sir, thank you sir.” That is not offensive or racist. That’s how all people – black or white (or Asian, Hispanic, Arabic, etc.) should address all other people – cops or not.

Don’t Be Impolite.

Don’t insult police officers or call them names or express anger or hatred toward them. But don’t insult anybody else, or call anybody else names, or express anger or hatred toward anybody else. That’s bad manners, and you should not have bad manners. Above all, whatever you do, never never never use the F-word, or flash your middle finger. The great majority of personal violence, police or otherwise, begins with somebody using the F-word.

Don’t Be A Stereotype.

If you don’t want to be profiled, don’t fit the profile. If you wear a white pointed hood, people are likely to think you are in the KKK. If you dress like an outlaw biker, people are likely to think you are an outlaw biker. If you wear your pants around your butt, people are likely to think you are a gangster. Look and dress like the person you want people to think you are. Look and dress like a responsible grownup. Choose a personal style that will make a police officer (or any other person) look at you and say “There goes a decent person. No way is that person a criminal.”

Smile.

Walk around with a slight smile on your face, like you know a happy secret. When asked to describe you, people should say “You know, the one that is always smiling.” Criminals never smile; it’s not cool; it’s not part of the tough guy image. In a contact with a police officer, smile pleasantly. What? You are going to get a ticket that will cost you $500? And it was from an unfair speed trap? And the officer is wrong? Relax. You are going to earn a million dollars or more over your lifetime. Five hundred dollars may be a hardship right now, but in the long run, it is going to be pocket change. Smile, take your ticket, and drive on.

Observe John Farnam’s Rules.

1 – Avoid stupid people.

If your friend says “You know what would be awesome? Let’s smash some windows!” then you need to drop that friend, and get a better friend.

2 – Avoid stupid places.

So many crime reports come from strip clubs and liquor stores. Don’t hang out at places like that. Did you hear there is a riot happening on Oak Street, or people breaking into the Capitol building? Don’t go there.

3 – Don’t do stupid things.

Car surfing is stupid. Eating Tide Pods is stupid. Graffiti tagging is stupid. Setting your hair on fire is stupid. “Partying” until you puke is stupid. Holding up convenience stores is stupid. Before doing anything, ask yourself, “Is this stupid?” If it is, don’t do it.

Don’t Get Drunk.

Grownups drink. Children and other fools get drunk. Alcohol is good for you. Getting drunk is bad for you. Apart from making you physically sick, it impairs your judgment, which causes you to hang around with stupid people, go to stupid places, and do stupid things. “Let’s try to beat that train to the crossing! It’ll be awesome!” No it won’t.

Pizza and Mexican food taste good. With beer, they taste better. Steak is good. With wine, it’s better. Just don’t drink too much. How much is too much? More than one drink. Seriously? Seriously. Have one beer, or one glass of wine, or one cocktail. Don’t gulp it down; savor the taste. It should take you as long to drink the wine as to eat the steak. Then switch to non-alcoholic beer or wine, or sparkling water.

Needless to say, lay off the drugs for the same reason. It makes you lose your judgment and violate Farnam’s Rules.

Be In Bed By Ten O’clock.

Most police reports involve stupid people in stupid places doing stupid things – at 2:00 in the morning. Don’t be out during the Stupid Hours. Be at home in bed getting a good night’s sleep. That way, you will miss most of the Stupid.

Beloved Children and Grandchildren, if you follow this advice, you will greatly reduce your risk of encountering or antagonizing one of the few bad policemen.

TAKE ACTION

The Prickly Pear’s TAKE ACTION focus this year is to help achieve a winning 2024 national and state November 5th election with the removal of the Biden/Obama leftist executive branch disaster, win one U.S. Senate seat, maintain and win strong majorities in all Arizona state offices on the ballot and to insure that unrestricted abortion is not constitutionally embedded in our laws and culture.

Please click the TAKE ACTION link to learn to do’s and don’ts for voting in 2024. Our state and national elections are at great risk from the very aggressive and radical leftist Democrat operatives with documented rigging, mail-in voter fraud and illegals voting across the country (yes, with illegals voting across the country) in the last several election cycles.

Read Part 1 and Part 2 of The Prickly Pear essays entitled How NOT to Vote in the November 5, 2024 Election in Arizona to be well informed of the above issues and to vote in a way to ensure the most likely chance your vote will be counted and counted as you intend.

Please click the following link to learn more.

HERO: Senator John Fetterman Whips off His Harvard Hood at Yeshiva University Commencement thumbnail

HERO: Senator John Fetterman Whips off His Harvard Hood at Yeshiva University Commencement

By The Geller Report

Senator John Fetterman received a standing ovation after he removed his Harvard Crimson hood during Yeshiva University commencement in outrage over the rampant antisemitism at Harvard.

“25 years ago I graduated from Harvard University. Today, I have been profoundly disappointed with Harvard’s inability to stand up for the Jewish community. And for me personally, I do not fundamentally believe that it is right for me to wear this today.”

Sen. John Fetterman dramatically whips off Harvard hood at Yeshiva University commencement: ‘Profoundly disappointed’

By: Victor Nava, NY Post, May 29, 2024:

Sen. John Fetterman told Yeshiva University graduates Wednesday that he was “profoundly disappointed” in Harvard University’s inability to address antisemitism on campus before removing the ceremonial crimson academic hood representing his alma mater.

The Pennsylvania Democrat expressed his disapproval of the Ivy League school during his commencement address at the private Orthodox Jewish university, which bestowed on him its “Hero of Israel” award, the institution’s highest honor.

“I have been profoundly disappointed [in] Harvard’s inability to stand up for the Jewish community after Oct. 7,” Fetterman, 54, told the new grads at Louis Armstrong Stadium in Queens.

“Personally, I do not fundamentally believe that it is right for me to wear this today,” the senator added as he removed the Harvard hood, identifying him as an alum, from around his neck.

Continue reading.

AUTHOR

Pamela Geller

RELATED ARTICLE: President Donald J. Trump’s verdict ‘Marks the fundamental transformation of America into a ‘totalitarian state’!

RELATED VIDEO: Arab Israeli IDF officer reflects on the Holocaust

EDITORS NOTE: This Geller Report is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved.

Enjoy the meltdown! Florida Governor Ron DeSantis ‘Warns Public Schools Might Close’ thumbnail

Enjoy the meltdown! Florida Governor Ron DeSantis ‘Warns Public Schools Might Close’

By Royal A. Brown III

YES! Public school systems are deservedly losing students to school choice options.

Duval, Broward and Miami Dade are three of Florida’s largest school districts that have lost substantial numbers of students.  Broward alone lost 49,000 students.  Across Florida private school attendance has increased by 50,000 and Home Schools by 50,000 last year.  Scholarships have increased by 217,000 for school choice.

Competition is the answer to better educated; less indoctrinated students.

Teach Florida’s youth how to think, not what to think!

One of biggest problems in public education is the negative influence of teachers unions like the National Education Association and local affiliates who are not concerned with student performance but rather with teacher benefits and support LGBTQ agendas.


Politico Panics: FL Gov. Ron DeSantis “Wildly Successful” In School Choice, Warns Public Schools Might Close

Posted by Fuzzy Slippers

American public schools have been declining for decades. We used to score at or near the top in the world for education in maths, the sciences, reading comprehension, writing skills, etc. Now? We trail behind (among other nations) China, Estonia, Korea, Finland, and Singapore.

American students actually graduate high school unable to read or write at the sixth grade level. But don’t worry, we’ve been long assured by the ludicrous left: students just need to be coddled, not taught; they need to achieve their best by ‘being’ and by discussion and group struggle sessions, not boring old lectures; they need to be embraced for their feewings about maths (2 + 2 = purple is just as correct as, say, “4” because feewings and ‘felt experiences’). Besides standardized tests are racist and scary . . . unless you actually know the freaking material and can answer the questions posed.

Add on the American public school teachers’ unions, the activist ‘teachers’ being churned out of activist campuses, and you have a clear recipe for disaster in terms of American public education.

Florida governor Ron DeSantis is having none of it. He’s not allowing DIE to kill Florida’s schools and colleges, and he’s not letting teachers’ unions kill Florida’s children’s futures. Instead, he has fought for years to allow parents to decide where their children are educated, to make the right and best choices for their children’s futures. Parents—finally given a choice—are deciding, in droves, that failed federal government-run public schools are not adequate for their dreams and hopes for their children’s future.

In keeping with his promise to stand with Florida’s families, to defend them against the federal government’s and public teachers’s unions assault on public education, DeSantis has championed school choice, vouchers, and homeschooling. He has remade the K-12 education system in Florida so that parents are free to choose what kind of education their child or children receive. This is wildly popular in Free Florida.

It’s not so popular at Democrat hactivist site Politico.

Continue reading.

Harvard Prevents Encampment Ringleaders from Graduating after U.S. House Investigation thumbnail

Harvard Prevents Encampment Ringleaders from Graduating after U.S. House Investigation

By Family Research Council

The Harvard Corporation prevented 12 seniors from graduating Thursday for their involvement with the illegal protest encampment in support of the terrorist organization Hamas. The decision is a rare instance of campus anti-Semitic activists facing real consequences for their lawbreaking. It only came after significant congressional involvement.

To inflict these real consequences, the Harvard Corporation, which governs the school, made the decision to override their own faculty, in favor of preserving the integrity of “Harvard College’s disciplinary processes,” the university newspaper noted. At a regular meeting of the Faculty of Arts and Sciences, which is usually poorly attended, 115 Harvard faculty turned out to overwhelmingly vote in favor of shielding the anti-Israel protestors from all consequences, and allow the seniors to graduate anyways.

That vote came only three days after the Harvard College Administrative Board had placed 28 students on suspension or academic probation for their involvement with the disruptive pro-terror encampment.

In deciding to overrule the faculty vote, the Harvard Corporation explained that the faculty had simply ignored the Student Handbook, which requires students to be in good standing in order to graduate. “Today, we have voted to confer 1,539 degrees to Harvard College students in good standing,” wrote the corporation. “Because the students included as the result of Monday’s amendment are not in good standing, we cannot responsibly vote to award them degrees at this time.”

While granting that faculty have the right to determine appropriate disciplinary measures for students, Harvard Corporation argued that they didn’t do that. “We respect each faculty’s responsibility to determine appropriate discipline for its students,” they said. “Monday’s faculty vote did not, however, revisit these disciplinary rulings, did not purport to engage in the individualized assessment of each case that would ordinarily be required to do so, and, most importantly, did not claim to restore the students to good standing.”

In other words, the faculty did not argue that the students had not done anything worthy of discipline or that sufficient discipline had already been implemented. They simply declared that the protestors should be immune from the consequences of their actions because it was all for Palestine. It was a political power play.

Acquiescing to this power play would inject more injustice into Harvard’s disciplinary process, protested the corporation. They considered “the inequity of exempting a particular group of students who are not in good standing from established rules, while other seniors with similar status for matters unrelated to Monday’s faculty amendment would be unable to graduate.”

The Harvard Corporation seems to be taking a much harder line against the illegal excesses of pro-Hamas protestors than it did several months ago. This is the same governing board that issued a statement defending Harvard ex-President Claudine Gay before her sudden resignation in early January. Gay faced criticism for refusing before Congress to condemn calls for a genocide of Jews and for widespread plagiarism among her published academic portfolio.

More recently, Harvard executives continued to signal toleration for the anti-Semitic protest. Gay’s replacement, interim Harvard President Alan M. Garber, agreed on May 14 to reinstate suspended protestors and reevaluate the universities investments in exchange for them dismantling their encampment. Harvard University subsequently reinstated over 22 students.

However, the Harvard Corporation seems to have done an about-face after the U.S. House Education and Workforce Committee released a report on Friday, which revealed the university had failed to implement the recommendations of its anti-Semitic task force.

House Republicans have held Harvard’s feet to the fire ever since Gay’s disgraceful December testimony, and apparently Harvard got tired of the scathing media attention. It’s relatively easy to defend the indefensible (failing to protect Jews or enforce campus rules) when no one asks any questions. But holding a giant spotlight over the misbehavior quickly makes it awkward for those tasked with defending it. In this case, it took just under a semester for the Harvard Corporation to decide they had had enough.

The Harvard Corporation can now expect to face “a faculty rebellion,” predicted (or promised?) Government Professor Steven Levitsky. An anti-Semitic campus activist group, Harvard Out of Occupied Palestine (whose name implies the Jews don’t deserve a state), also suggested the encampment might return, saying, “If Harvard won’t live up to their promises, we see no reason to live up to ours.”

The Harvard Corporation previously caved to pro-terror activists because it was afraid of the power of students and faculty. Its new willingness to brave their wrath suggests that it is now more afraid of the power of Congress to keep the spotlight on them if they continue to cave. Even if House Republicans can’t pass conservative legislation through a Democrat-controlled Senate or White House, their investigative power can still have an effect on the behavior of places like Harvard.

AUTHOR

Joshua Arnold

Joshua Arnold is a senior writer at The Washington Stand.

EDITORS NOTE: This Washington Stand column is republished with permission. All rights reserved. ©2024 Family Research Council.


The Washington Stand is Family Research Council’s outlet for news and commentary from a biblical worldview. The Washington Stand is based in Washington, D.C. and is published by FRC, whose mission is to advance faith, family, and freedom in public policy and the culture from a biblical worldview. We invite you to stand with us by partnering with FRC.

Italy: Muslim children exempted from studying Dante because he put Muhammad in hell thumbnail

Italy: Muslim children exempted from studying Dante because he put Muhammad in hell

By Jihad Watch

No one would dream of calling upon any other group to give up its own cultural, heritage and identity.

The way Italy is going, before too long all students will be completely exempt from studying Dante, or anything besides the Qur’an.

Backlash as Muslim children in Italy exempted from studying Dante

by Nick Squires, Telegraph, May 24, 2024 (thanks to The Religion of Peace):

An Italian school’s decision to exempt Muslim children from studying Dante because the mediaeval poet placed Mohammed in hell in The Divine Comedy has sparked a backlash and a debate over cancel culture.

Politicians from both the Left and Right said that Dante was a pillar of Italian literature and that it was unacceptable for children to be exempted from studying his writing because of their faith.

The row broke out after a secondary school in Treviso in the north of the country reportedly allowed two Muslim children, aged around 14, to not attend classes in which The Divine Comedy was being studied.

Written at the start of the 14th century, it is an allegorical poem that revolves around a man’s journey to Hell, Purgatory and Paradise, aided by two guides, Virgil and Beatrice.

In the epic work, Dante places the Prophet Mohammed and his cousin Ali in Hell, where they are tortured by sword-wielding demons.

“How is Mohammed mangled! Before me walks Ali weeping, from the chin his face cleft to the forelock,” Dante wrote.

The exemption was criticised by MPs from across the political spectrum.

‘Shameful case of cultural cancellation’
Simona Malpezzi, a senator with the centre-Left opposition Democratic Party, said it was “deeply wrong” to deprive any pupils of the chance to acquire the “deep knowledge of Italian culture that studying Dante brings. Knowing Dante does not take anything away from children’s religious faith and adds a great deal to their knowledge of Italian culture”.

Federico Mollicone, an MP from Brothers of Italy, the party led by prime minister Giorgia Meloni, said: “This is just the latest shameful case of cultural cancellation. An exemption like this not only undermines our national identity but deprives new generations of formative scholastic study.”

Continue reading.

AUTHOR

ROBERT SPENCER

RELATED ARTICLES:

Congress Still Grilling College Presidents About Anti-Semitism on Their Campuses

Australian Broadcasting Corporation: Hamas rockets into Israel a ‘show of resilience’

Harvard Weighed And Found Wanting In Washington

Israel recalls ambassadors from Ireland and Norway after they recognize ‘State of Palestine’

Former ICC official says Netanyahu should give himself up for arrest

Russia admits the involvement of ISIS for the first time in Moscow concert hall bombing, arrests 20

EDITORS NOTE: This Jihad Watch column is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved.

Welcome to the ‘Parent Revolution’

By Gabriella Hoffman

As conservatives, we aren’t naturally inclined to support and endorse revolutions. These movements are bloody, undemocratic, and often result in less freedom and more tyranny. Personally speaking, I have generational trauma from the Bolshevik Revolution’s lasting impacts on my family, particularly under evil dictator Joseph Stalin, so I generally balk at the term.

But there is one revolution, so to speak, I’m happy to lend my support behind: the non-violent, impactful, burgeoning “parent revolution” taking hold here in the U.S.

School choice advocate Corey DeAngelis has a namesake new book out this week, The Parent Revolution: Rescuing Your Kids from the Radicals Ruining Our Schools, that is essential reading. It’s a nice follow-up to Mediocrity – which he co-wrote and published with Connor Boyack last April.

Education has taken a slight backseat to the economy, inflation, and immigration ahead of the 2024 election but is still a Top 5 issue. But with 11 states now embracing universal school choice and countless recent elections – including Texas legislature primaries – being decided on school choice, DeAngelis’ book is very timely. It warns about the need to hold corrupt teachers’ unions and woke educators accountable for their misdeeds. 

He first dedicates the book to Randi Weingarten– the odious president of the American Federation of Teachers–and her union cronies. The dedication reads like this, “Thank you for overplaying your hand, showing your true colors, and sparking The Parent Revolution.” But he also praises empowered parents who now comprise the “parent revolution.”

He explains how Randi and her ilk, or “the government’s stormtroopers” – awoke the sleeping giant during the COVID-19 pandemic by prolonging school closures using faulty science and waging defamatory campaigns against parents, whom they actually report to because they dared question their actions. Schools going virtual, he argues, was a hidden blessing as parents, previously oblivious to shocking classroom curriculum and questionable lectures, saw firsthand the far-left and Marxist lessons their kids were being inculcated with. Who could forget the National School Boards Association (NSBA) sending a memo to Attorney General Merrick Garland to label and target concerned parents as “domestic terrorists”? That is one of the lowest points in American politics ever observed. Thanks to widespread backlash, the NSBA was forced to apologize. This resulted in many affiliates–26–pulling out or disassociating with the organization, thanks to folks like DeAngelis who amplified the story.

With the “parent revolution” in full swing, DeAngelis praises the new special interest group to be reckoned with. He also recognizes them notably taking charge ahead of the 2021 Virginia gubernatorial election. The oft-discussed blunder by former Virginia Governor Terry McAuliffe – who famously blurted “I don’t think parents should be telling schools what they should teach” – propelled now-Governor Glenn Youngkin (R-VA) into office. This, the author writes, was a turning point. But it didn’t stop there.

Between 2022-2023, school choice reforms were introduced and largely passed across a bevy of states. And Dozens of school board positions have been flipped due to concerned parents getting into a fight. DeAngelis is optimistic the momentum by parents will continue–especially if there’s a second Trump administration come January 2025.

While Corey primarily targets Democrats and their hypocrisy, he doesn’t let weakened Republicans off the hook either. He details how Twitter is his outlet of choice to call out reluctant GOP elected officials, especially those cozied up with unions, for not being attuned to the party’s pro-parent agenda. This often results in him getting blocked, he quips. But on two occasions, he recalls how he convinced two stubborn Oklahoma Republicans to switch their votes in favor of school choice legislation. DeAngelis also doesn’t shy away from elevating pro-school choice candidates either now that his organization, American Federation for Children, has a political action committee (PAC).

Due to his efficacy and boldness, DeAngelis is sought after by media outlets and elected officials for bill signings, photo ops, and legislative hearings. Last night, my organization – Independent Women’s Forum – honored him with the Education Freedom Center Students Over Systems Award. Former President Donald J. Trump, coincidentally enough, endorsed Corey’s book on his Truth Social platform Wednesday evening, writing, “Corey DeAngelis is a FIGHTER for Parental Rights. His new book, The Parent Revolution, is a great guide to help Moms and Dads take back control of their children’s education from the RADICAL MARXISTS ruining our schools.”

No matter your feelings on 45, if he’s praising Corey and his invaluable work, you should take notice.

Readers will appreciate DeAngelis’ personal connection to school choice. He, too, benefitted from this program while growing up in San Antonio, Texas, and credits a magnet school for changing his life. Soon, the self-described school choice evangelist and his wife will welcome their first child, a daughter, and join the “parent revolution” in due time.

If you support school choice and parent’s rights, get a copy of The Parent Revolution today.

*****

This article was published by The Independent Women’s Forum and is reproduced with permission.

The Stench From Arizona’s Acquisition Of Ashford thumbnail

The Stench From Arizona’s Acquisition Of Ashford

By Craig J. Cantoni

A rotten stench wafts from the muck surrounding the University of Arizona’s acquisition of Ashford University.

A rotten stench wafts from the muck surrounding the University of Arizona’s acquisition of Ashford University.

I need a shower. Maybe that will remove the stench from digging in the muck surrounding the University of Arizona’s acquisition in 2020 of the on-line college Ashford University.

While digging, I uncovered additional muck about higher education in general and about the bloated U.S. Department of Education.

Admittedly, the digging wasn’t very deep. It will take someone with more time and more tolerance for overpowering odors to get to the bottom of the rot.

The University of Arizona (UA) is in the throes of a leadership crisis and fiscal crisis. Many faculty members and outside critics claim that the crises were precipitated by the acquisition of Ashford. Given that UA paid one dollar to acquire Ashford, the claim seems unfounded.

On the other hand, there are cost-sharing and revenue-sharing agreements between UA and Ashford. But these are buried in a 340-page contract, which I have not read, and thus have no idea how the agreements have affected UA’s current finances and will affect future finances.

No doubt, the members of the Arizona Board of Regents also haven’t read the contract in its entirety.

It is a fact, though, that the U.S. Department of Education is trying to recoup $72 million in student loans from UA due to the acquisition. 

A story in the August 30, 2023 edition of Inside Higher Education explained why.

The federal agency had found that Ashford had repeatedly lied to students over a decade about the cost, time required, and value of its degree program. It concluded that an education at Ashford was “effectively worthless.” As such, the department has forgiven $72 million in student loans for more than 2,300 former Ashford students. It plans to recoup this amount from UA.

The Department of Education doesn’t have a high regard for Ashford, but, ironically, it’s difficult to have a high regard for the agency. That’s especially so after reading a report on the agency published by Open the Books in April 2019.

The report details the agency’s bloat, mismanagement, and doling out of billions of dollars to dubious institutions, including Ashford.

The report says that in fiscal year 2017, the department had given Ashford $283 million in direct payments and grants and indirectly through student loans. And in the fiscal years 2014 – 2017, it had given $2.4 billion. It gave this lucre in spite of Ashford having a graduation rate of only 16 percent.

Ashford ranked fifth in 2017 in the amount of money given to for-profit universities by the department. The University of Phoenix ranked first, having received $607 million, despite its graduation rate being only one percentage point higher than Ashford’s.

Amazingly, in the face of such rip-offs, the conventional wisdom is now saying that an on-line degree is just about as good as a brick-and-mortar degree and just about as accepted by employers—at least that is what the first ten pages of an internet search suggested when I researched the subject. However, none of the sources cited any scholarly studies showing that graduates of on-line colleges have gained as much knowledge, cognitive abilities, social skills, and marketability as graduates of brick-and-mortar colleges.

For sure, certain subjects can be learned just as well on-line as in-person. Yes, on-line learning is more convenient and less costly for segments of the population that can’t take four years out of their lives to attend college in-person and full-time. Traditional universities see on-line learning as the wave of the future and are making investments in it. There are many degrees that have little value in the marketplace, whether they are earned on-line or in-person.  And, artificial intelligence is going to have a dramatic impact on not only higher education but also K-12 education—assuming that enough energy will be found to power the massive server farms needed by AI.

This doesn’t mean, however, that a lot of strategic thinking has gone into the shift to on-line learning.  Moreover, there is too much public money sloshing around to understand the economics. Then there is this burning question: If on-line learning is so effective and the wave of the future, then why are universities, including the University of Arizona, continuing to build swank brick-and-mortar facilities, including massive and massively expensive sports facilities?

Don’t look to the U.S. Department of Education for answers. The agency has failed in achieving its founding mission and has become a bloated, bumbling bureaucratic behemoth—like so many of America’s institutions.

Big Government, Big Business, Big Education, and Big Media have gone from big to humongous.  Instead of technology disaggregating and decentralizing decisions and power, the opposite has happened. Citizens are buried in muck, squashed beneath huge unaccountable and unresponsive hierarchies, and led by elites with glaring ethical and mental impairments. In despair, citizens frantically pull the levers of democracy, only to find that the levers have been disconnected by their overlords.

On that note, I’ll end with an excerpt from the aforementioned 2019 report by Open the Books. The excerpt lists ten additional findings about the U.S. Department of Education. Be sure to pinch your nostrils while reading.

  1. The 25 colleges and universities with the largest endowments in the country reaped $6.9 billion in Department of Education (ED) funding despite holding a quarter-trillion in existing assets, collectively. This money was distributed as grants, contracts, and direct payments (FY2017) as well as student loans (FY2017-FY2018).
  2. The 50 lowest performing junior and community colleges in the nation received $923.5 million in ED student loans (FY2017-FY2018) and grants (FY2017). Of these 50 schools, the 10 which received the most federal funding had a 12 percent graduation rate, on average.
  3. ED overpaid $11 billion in Pell grants and loans over a two-year period (FY2016-FY2017).
  4. Nontraditional schools reaped millions of dollars in federal funding such as an international school for videogame design ($51.4 million), a school for wooden boat-making ($781,330), an Arizona college for gun-smithing ($10.4 million), a school for gambling and bartending ($9.5 million), and the Professional Golfers Career College ($4.5 million). These numbers are comprised of student loans (FY2017-FY2018) as well as contracts, grants, and direct payments (FY2017).
  5. The average wage at ED in FY2017 was $109,918. The average employee cost taxpayers $143,992, including benefits. In May 2018, ED disclosed 3,818 employees – a large decrease from 4,642 employees in 2012.
  6. Nearly $700 million in federal funding flowed to schools of cosmetology, beauty, and hair, including millions of dollars to industry juggernauts like Empire Beauty School ($65.6 million) and Tricoci University of Beauty Culture ($12.3 million) in the form of grants, direct payments, and contracts (FY2017), as well as student loans (FY2017-FY2018).
  7. Federal funding of $10.5 billion flowed to for-profit colleges in FY2017. Just 10 for-profit schools received nearly 30 percent of this funding. Many for-profit colleges have been cited for alleged discrimination, harassment, and even fraud. This funding is comprised of grants, direct payments, and contracts (FY2017) as well as student loans (FY2017-FY2018).
  8. ED spent $1.6 billion hiring companies to collect and disperse federal student loans.
  9. ED employees spent 6,522 working-hours (FY2016) doing union activities rather than working their department jobs. During this time, employees’ hourly wages are still taxpayer funded. This practice is known as ‘official time.’ In March 2018, ED eliminated this policy, saving taxpayers roughly $500,000 annually. Employee unions are private organizations, not public entities.
  10. The top five recipient states claimed 36 percent of all ED funding: California ($18.6 billion), Texas ($12.6 billion), New York ($11.9 billion), Florida ($9.5 billion), and Illinois ($7.2 billion). This funding included grants, contracts, direct payments (FY2017) as well as student loans (FY2017-FY2018).

TAKE ACTION

The Prickly Pear’s TAKE ACTION focus this year is to help achieve a winning 2024 national and state November 5th election with the removal of the Biden/Obama leftist executive branch disaster, win one U.S. Senate seat, maintain and win strong majorities in all Arizona state offices on the ballot and to insure that unrestricted abortion is not constitutionally embedded in our laws and culture.

Please click the TAKE ACTION link to learn to do’s and don’ts for voting in 2024. Our state and national elections are at great risk from the very aggressive and radical leftist Democrat operatives with documented rigging, mail-in voter fraud and illegals voting across the country (yes, with illegals voting across the country) in the last several election cycles.

Read Part 1 and Part 2 of The Prickly Pear essays entitled How NOT to Vote in the November 5, 2024 Election in Arizona to be well informed of the above issues and to vote in a way to ensure the most likely chance your vote will be counted and counted as you intend.

Please click the following link to learn more.

In Their Own Words: The Sexual Revolution Begins in Kindergarten thumbnail

In Their Own Words: The Sexual Revolution Begins in Kindergarten

By Linda Goudsmit

Globalism is a replacement ideology that seeks to reorder the world into one singular, planetary Unistate, ruled by the globalist elite. The globalist war on nation-states cannot succeed without collapsing the United States of America. The long-term strategic attack plan moves America incrementally from constitutional republic to socialism to globalism to feudalism. The tactical attack plan uses asymmetric psychological and informational warfare to destabilize Americans and drive society out of objective reality into the madness of subjective reality. America’s children are the primary target of the globalist predators.


Planned Parenthood[i] is the instrument of “transformative sexual change” in the United States. Marketed as scientificand evidence-based, transformative sexual change advocates changing restrictive laws that hinder the exercise of reproductive rights, and transforming social norms that perpetuate prejudices on reproductive rights. Over 40 percent of the organization’s revenue comes from your tax dollars in the form of government reimbursements and grants. Planned Parenthood (PP) is a political organization that disguises its political agenda as health education. My last book, The Collapsing American Family: From Bonding to Bondage (Chapter 10, “The Scheme and the Schemers Determined to Reeducate America”), exposes Planned Parenthood’s infiltration of the classroom, and its catastrophic Marxist agenda.

In an August 20, 2020, Daily Signal article, “Problematic Women: Planned Parenthood Ideology ‘Killing the Family,’ Ex-Volunteer Says,”[ii] Monica Cline, former volunteer and “comprehensive sex educator” at Planned Parenthood, is quoted. She explains how children were being pressured and deliberately sexualized in school because no adult was offering them the alternative of abstinence.

At one point she asks a group of thirteen- and fourteen-year-olds, “Guys, do you realize you don’t have to have sex? You don’t have to have oral sex, vaginal sex, or anal sex. And if you don’t, you never have to come in contact with someone else’s body fluids.” A little girl raised her hand and said, “Ma’am, no one has ever told us that.” That was the turning point for Monica Cline. She finally and fully understood:

There is a “huge movement to normalize childhood sex.” The sex education program of Planned Parenthood is “encouraging children to dehumanize themselves and each other, making them sexually active at a young age, normalizing every sexual behavior…. By doing that those children become dependent on getting condoms and contraceptives and getting treated, and yes, even getting abortions. And so, once that dependency occurs, and the parent who is purposely left out of the picture, there’s no one else who’s really guiding those children…. They empathize with them and say, “Oh, yeah. Your mom and dad would probably be really mad to know you are sexually active. But we know it is perfectly normal, and we’re here to help you.” … It sounds so positive. But what they are really doing is creating a barrier between a family and their child, the guidance of a parent.

Cline explains that parents have absolutely no input or control over the sex ed content. PP and other comprehensive sex education organizations consider parents a barrier to services. The goal is to mandate their sex education, which is really an ideology, and change the sexual attitudes of our entire nation by influencing our children. PP volunteers are not supposed to be in schools unless invited, but volunteers are sneaked into schools by sympathetic teachers and administrators. Cline describes the radical sexual ideology being taught by teachers and supported by school administrators and local school boards entrusted with educating America’s children:

They believe that children are sexual from birth. And they use a little bit of truth, and then distort it completely. And just because we’re born with sexual parts doesn’t mean that we should be sexually active.

According to Planned Parenthood and “The Future of Sex Education,”[iii] [an initiative based on the National Sex Education Standards (Second Edition),[iv]] they believe in the sexual rights of children. They do believe that children at any age, even infancy, have the right to sexual pleasure. You can read that in their own mission statements. You can go to their websites and learn that. They’re not hiding it anymore. And they believe it’s normal, and so they’re really trying to change the sexual attitudes of a whole nation and across the globe that this is true.

And so, you’re going to see that they are now creating programs for parents, to start convincing parents that their children are sexual beings, and that they should be able to learn about their bodies and pleasure themselves, or with other children…. They use a lot of Alfred Kinsey’s research, which is incredibly unethical and should have been illegal. But yet, Alfred Kinsey has influenced public health education and has influenced our laws in this nation as well…. Kinsey, they consider him a hero because he loosened the belt of people, of sexual repression, and gave people the spectrum of being from homosexual to straight and everything in between.

And now they are using that same “spectrum” for gender identity as well. So, I think parents need to be very concerned, because even if the curriculum is not in your school, I get phone calls from parents all over the country that progressive teachers are teaching their children this in class, even if it is history, or whatever it may be….

A big piece of this, which for some people, it’s something I think is hard for them to understand, is that there is a huge movement through socialism that really wants to do away with the nuclear family. They want to do away with anything that is of [one’s own], whether it’s private property, or private family.

And so, they believe that children do not necessarily belong to their parents, but that they can educate the children in the way that they want them to go. And sex education is a big piece of that, because when you teach children to dehumanize themselves, to take intimacy and family and marriage out of sex, even to the point of killing your own children through abortion, you are essentially killing the family. You’re destroying the family.

And of all the tactics they are using—you can read any curriculum—not only is it going to be graphic, but they will not ever guide a child to talk to their own parent ever. You won’t hear a word about the parent. A parent is completely eliminated from this education.

They want the children dependent on the government, or on public health, whatever it may be, but they do not want the children to be depending on the parent anymore. And so, all of this really is to break down the family. And they’re essentially…we’re watching it happen…they basically have been given words in school. And they go home and tell their parents, “You’re just old fashioned, or you are worshipping a god of hate, or you’re very conservative. You don’t understand the culture.”

And these kids are learning all this at school.

The primary source of school sexuality education is the Sexuality Information and Education Council of the United States (SIECUS). The organization was founded in 1964 by Dr. Mary Calderone, then medical director of Planned Parenthood, to be the national resource for teaching sex education in public schools. In 2019 the organization changed its name from the Sex Information and Education Council of the United States, to the Sexuality Information and Education Council of the United States, to reflect its expanded perspective.

Wikipedia reports[v] that SIECUS disseminates the SIECUS State Profiles, which monitor sex education in all fifty states, the District of Columbia, Puerto Rico, and the other U.S. territories. Each profile includes an overview of current sex education laws, policies, and guidelines, newly introduced legislation, and relevant action that advocates have taken to advance or defend sex education in their communities. SIECUS funds and manages The Future of Sex Education (FoSE) project, which promotes institutionalizing Comprehensive Sexuality Education in public schools. (Comprehensive Sexuality Education is discussed at length in Chapter 19.)

In 2019, the organization officially rebranded itself and added a tagline to its name, SIECUS: Sex Ed for Social Change,[vi] acknowledging that it is no longer a single-issue organization. That same year, it launched the Sex Education Policy Action Council (SEPAC),[vii] a movement to have Comprehensive Sexuality Education (CSE)become compulsory in all fifty states. SEPAC began with twenty-four participating states: Alabama, Arizona, California, Colorado, Georgia, Kansas, Kentucky, Michigan, Minnesota, Mississippi, Missouri, Nevada, New Mexico, New York, North Carolina, North Dakota, Oregon, South Dakota, Tennessee, Texas, Utah, Virginia, Washington, and Wyoming. SEPAC lists Planned Parenthood as an active member in almost all states listed.

SIECUS: Sex Ed for Social Change is part of the international consortium of organizations fomenting seismic social change across the globe. SEICUS is working to fundamentally transform America. How can sexuality education fundamentally transform a society?

James Lindsay provides an extraordinary explanation in his series of podcasts on “groomer schools.” The first podcast, “Groomer Schools 1: The Long Cultural Marxist History of Sex Education,” The New Discourses Podcast with James Lindsay, Episode 54,[viii] which aired on November 21, 2021, is introduced with the following:

Through brand names like “comprehensive sex education” and one of its parent programs, “Social Emotional Learning (SEL),” our government schools have been turned into Groomer Schools, and parents are beginning to notice. What many will not understand, however, is that this isn’t just a fluke of our weird and increasingly degenerate times. It is, in fact, a long-purposed Marxist project reaching back into the early 20th century. In this episode of The New Discourses Podcast, join James Lindsay as he explains the long history of the sexual grooming that has come into our schools through Critical Gender Theory and queer theory as they have crept into educational programs. If you want an explanation for how sexually explicit materials, gender ideology, pornography, and strippers have made their way into our government schools, including for young children, this is a must-hear.

One of Lindsay’s most profound and shocking insights is that sexualization of children through critical theories of identity is purposely designed to dismantle the innocence of children. Critical theorists see the innocence of children as a fundamental problem that must be overcome in order to achieve their dreams of sexual liberation, gender liberation, and racial liberation. The woke consider children’s innocence evidence of a hegemonic narrative that maintains the existing social order and relations of society. Their innocence must be destroyed in order to achieve revolution. The woke intentionally destabilize children as early as possible for maximum political gain. It is horrifying.

Being sexualized is extremely damaging to children, and queer activism attacks a child’s most primary identity—his or her sexual identity. Yet queer activists see themselves as righteous. Lindsay explains the definition of queer theory as an identity without essence. This is an extremely important consideration, because the objective is beyond destroying a child’s sexual identity; the goal is to literally dissolve self.

Queer theory is by far the most regressive sociopolitical construct imaginable. It advocates the boundaryless existence of infancy as liberation while ignoring the powerlessness and total dependence of infancy. Infantile bliss is appropriate in infancy because the ability to reality-test does not exist in newborns. In adulthood, the inability to reality-test—to perceive reality or experience self, or both—is insanity.

Civilized and sane people have a great deal of difficulty wrapping their minds around such malevolence. Yet in the Orwellian madness of Marxist subjective reality, the justification for the assault on children is that children are being rescued from current capitalist hegemonic normativity. In the perverse spirit of globalism’s build back better, the woke are unapologetically destroying children’s sexual identities to groom them to become angry Marxist radicals who will destroy capitalist society and its hegemonic normativity.

Identity is the universal conundrum of the human experience. We want to know who we are, where we came from, and if our lives have meaning. So, who are we?

We begin with our most basic identity. “It’s a boy!” “It’s a girl!” After sexual identity comes family identity, national identity, religious identity, educational identity, professional identity, and so on. Our various identities add up to give us one distinguishing identity.

We have identification cards that verify our identity—passports, driver’s licenses, diplomas, marriage certificates, etc. We verify our identity because we value our identity personally, and because ordered liberty requires verification that we are who we say we are. We trust that a board-certified surgeon is operating on us. We trust that a licensed pilot is flying our plane. We trust that teachers are teaching our children fundamental skills of reading, writing, arithmetic, and basic knowledge.

Identity is an integral part of the universal human experience because it defines and identifies reality. We either are, or we are not, who we say we are. In politics and international affairs, identity has both domestic and international implications. National identity is predicated on both family identity and individual identity.

Without an identity, children become depressed, anxious, politically malleable, and groomable. Groomer schools are designed to dismantle children’s family identity, individual identity, and sexual identity. Because the earlier that grooming begins, the more effective it is, children in kindergarten are targeted for psychological destruction and build back better educational reprogramming.

The compulsory sex education that George Lukács brought to Hungary is parallel to the Comprehensive Sexuality Education disseminated throughout the United Nations institutions and taught in American schools, public and private, under the umbrella of Social and Emotional Learning (SEL), specifically the Marxist version of SEL, transformative SEL.

SEL is an educational method marketed to the public as fostering social and emotional skills within school curricula. It is designed to have the same emphasis as classical subjects such as math, science, and reading. It is important to understand that SEL is not equivalent to what was once called good citizenship in school, defined as cooperative, respectful, courteous behavior. SEL is ideologically driven, and it focuses on feelings.

The program began in the 1960s as an effort to address the poor academic report cards of low-income African American communities in New Haven, Connecticut. Its approach supported a whole child perspective that focused on the social and emotional needs of the children. Over the years the program developed SEL strategies across K–12 classrooms, and its framework was adopted by the New Haven public schools. In 1994, the Collaborative for Academic, Social, and Emotional Learning (CASEL) was founded and three years later published its training manual, Promoting Social and Emotional Learning: Guidelines for Educators, which formally defined the field of SEL. The concentric circular framework for applying SEL strategies is called the CASEL wheel.

The CASEL[ix] website describes its continued advocacy for expanded systemic implementation of its program through federal policy in the U.S. that supports state-wide and district-wide implementation of social and emotional learning in K–12 schools. CASEL also seeks to expand SEL in support of workforce preparation and career readiness. The website drop-down menu Systemic Implementation[x] directs users to an overview that explains the approach:

A systemic approach ensures that SEL is woven into all students’ educational experiences. More than a single lesson or activity, SEL is integrated across key settings where students live and learn: classrooms, schools, homes, and communities. It also aligns school district and state policies, resources, and actions to support SEL. Federal policies play a role in creating ripe conditions for supportive environments and rich learning experiences.

The “whole child” approach of Social and Emotional Learning expanded again in 2019 to become Transformative Social and Emotional Learning(TSEL)[xi] to “critically examine root causes of inequity, and to develop collaborative solutions that lead to personal, community, and social well-being.” You will notice the similarity in the language of transformation that describes TSEL, Marxist critical (criticizing) theories, Obama’s promise to “fundamentally transform America,” and the United Nations 17 Sustainable Goals. TSEL is the parent program of Comprehensive Sexuality Education (CSE).

CSE is designed to destabilize existing morality, destroy childhood innocence, collapse sexual identity, and tear down the existing culture in the classroom, away from parental oversight. Children are assaulted with graphic sexual literature, including scenes depicting oral sex, anal sex, same-sex sex, and adult-child sex. Monogamous sex is mocked and promiscuous sex promoted as freedom and liberation. It is sexual and psychological grooming to bring about societal destruction. That is what transformative education means to the Marxist ideologues in charge of curriculum content. Let’s take a look.

Drag Queen Story Hour (DQSH) is the most publicized demonstration of queer theory being foisted on children in schools, public libraries, and bookstores across America. DQSH is the creation of San Francisco author and queer activist Michelle Tea. Started in 2015, it is geared toward children ages three to eleven and is disingenuously marketed as promoting reading and diversity. Drag queens, men dressed as glamorous, sexualized women, read children’s books featuring LGBTQ characters and themes to the children, and engage in other “learning activities” including nightlife events and sing-alongs.

Wikipedia[xii] reports:

As of February 2020, there are 50+ official chapters of DSH [DQSH], spread internationally, as well as other drag artists holding reading events at libraries, schools, bookstores, and museums. In October 2022, the nonprofit organization officially changed its name to Drag Story Hour, to be more inclusive and “reflect the diverse cast of storytellers.”

From the Drag Story Hour[xiii] website:

What Is Drag Story Hour?

It’s just what it sounds like! Storytellers using the art of drag to read books to kids in libraries, schools, and bookstores.

DSH captures the imagination and play of the gender fluidity of childhood and gives kids glamorous, positive, and unabashedly queer role models.

In spaces like this, kids are able to see people who defy rigid gender restrictions and imagine a world where everyone can be their authentic selves!

Clemson University,[xiv] a public university in South Carolina self-described as a place where purpose-driven students, faculty, and staff collaborate on projects that impact our state, country and world, promoted its Drag Storytime with the following invitation:

Beginning with author and activist Michelle Tea in 2015, Drag Storytime aims to “inspire a love of reading, while teaching deeper lessons on diversity, self-love, and an appreciation of others.” Gather your friends and family and join us for Clemson’s first Drag Storytime picture book reading! Saturday, April 17, 2021 at 1:00p to 2:00p.

Clemson’s invitation reveals both the bait, the love of reading, and also the switch, the sexual politics embedded in DQSH. Investigative journalist Christopher F. Rufo’s Autumn 2022 City Journal article, “The Real Story Behind Drag Queen Story Hour,”[xv] explains:

Families with children find themselves caught in the middle. Drag Queen Story Hour pitches itself as a family-friendly event to promote reading, tolerance, and inclusion. “In spaces like this,” the organization’s website reads, “kids are able to see people who defy rigid gender restrictions and imagine a world where everyone can be their authentic selves.” But many parents, even if reluctant to say it publicly, have an instinctual distrust of adult men in women’s clothing dancing and exploring sexual themes with their children.

These concerns are justified. But to mount an effective opposition, one must first understand the sexual politics behind the glitter, sequins, and heels. This requires a working knowledge of an extensive history, from the origin of the first “queen of drag” in the late nineteenth century to the development of academic queer theory, which provides the intellectual foundation for the modern drag-for-kids movement.

The drag queen might appear as a comic figure, but he carries an utterly serious message: the deconstruction of sex, the reconstruction of child sexuality, and the subversion of middle-class family life. The ideology that drives this movement was born in the sex dungeons of San Francisco and incubated in the academy. It is now being transmitted, with official state support, in a number of public libraries and schools across the United States. By excavating the foundations of this ideology and sifting through the literature of its activists, parents and citizens can finally understand the new sexual politics and formulate a strategy for resisting it.

Rufo’s article provides a valuable history of queer theory and its stated objective: to destroy that which exists in order to build back better. He begins with lesbian writer and activist Gayle S. Rubin, who launched the academic discipline of queer theory with her 1984 seminal essay, “Thinking Sex: Notes for a Radical Theory of the Politics of Sexuality.”[xvi] In the paper, Rubin compliments Alfred Kinsey’s “positive concept of sexual variation,” saying, “his scientific detachment gave his work refreshing neutrality.” (Kinsey’s work is discussed in Chapter 17.)

Rufo quotes Rubin:

“Modern Western societies appraise sex acts according to a hierarchical system of sexual value,” Rubin wrote. “Marital, reproductive heterosexuals are alone at the top erotic pyramid. Clamouring below are unmarried monogamous heterosexuals in couples, followed by most other heterosexuals…. Stable, long-term lesbian and gay male couples are verging on respectability, but bar dykes and promiscuous gay men are hovering just above the groups at the very bottom of the pyramid. The most despised sexual castes currently include transsexuals, transvestites, fetishists, sadomasochists, sex workers such as prostitutes and porn models, and the lowliest of all, those whose eroticism transgresses generational boundaries.” …

For Rubin and later queer theorists, sex and gender were infinitely malleable. There was nothing permanent about human sexuality, which was, after all, “political.” Through a revolution of values, they believed, the sexual hierarchy could be torn down and rebuilt in their image….

“There [are] historical periods in which sexuality is more sharply contested and more overtly politicized,” Rubin wrote. “In such periods, the domain of erotic life is, in effect, renegotiated.” And, following the practice of any good negotiator, they laid out their theory of the case and their maximum demands. As Rubin explained: “A radical theory of sex must identify, describe, explain, and denounce erotic injustice and sexual oppression. Such a theory needs refined conceptual tools which can grasp the subject and hold it in view. It must build rich descriptions of sexuality as it exists in society and history. It requires a convincing critical language that can convey the barbarity of sexual persecution.” Once the ground is softened and the conventions are demystified, the sexual revolutionaries could do the work of rehabilitating the figures at the bottom of the hierarchy––”transsexuals, transvestites, fetishists, sadomasochists, sex workers.”

Where does this process end? At its logical conclusion: the abolition of restrictions on the behavior at the bottom end of the moral spectrum—pedophilia. Though she uses euphemisms such as “boylovers” and “men who love underaged youth,” Rubin makes her case clearly and emphatically. In long passages throughout “Thinking Sex,” Rubin denounces fears of child sex abuse as “erotic hysteria,” rails against anti–child pornography laws, and argues for legalizing and normalizing the behavior of “those whose eroticism transgresses generational boundaries.” These men are not deviants, but victims, in Rubin’s telling.

Rubin’s prism is thoroughly Marxist. She perceives a Marxist oppressor/oppressed infrastructure of capitalism as the hidden politics of modern sexuality, and insists that both must be destroyed in order to fundamentally transform society. From the conclusion of “Thinking Sex”:

Like gender, sexuality is political. It is organized into systems of power, which reward and encourage some individuals and activities, while punishing and suppressing others. Like the capitalist organization of labour and its distribution of rewards and powers, the modern sexual system has been the object of political struggle since it emerged and as it has evolved. But if the disputes between labour and capital are mystified, sexual conflicts are completely camouflaged.

Rufo continues his history of queer theory with quotes from Rubin’s collaborator, Pat Califia, a sexually confused individual born female in 1954 who became a lesbian until transitioning into a bisexual trans man. From Califia’s essay “The Age of Consent: The Great Kiddy-Porn Panic of ’77“:[xvii]

American society had turned pedophiles into “the new communists, the new niggers, the new witches.” For Califia, age-of-consent laws, religious sexual mores, and families who police the sexuality of their children represented a thousand-pound bulwark against sexual freedom.

Quoting from Califia’s 1991 article, “Feminism, Pedophilia, and Children’s Rights“:[xviii]

“You can’t liberate children and adolescents without disrupting the entire hierarchy of adult power and coercion and challenging the hegemony of antisex fundamentalist religious values.”

Califia is a member of the third wave of feminism launched with Judith Butler’s 1990 book, Gender Trouble: Feminism and the Subversion of Identity.[xix] Gender Trouble presents Butler’s theory of social change based on the concept of performativity. Performativity claims that gender identity results from enforcing a series of repetitions of verbal and nonverbal acts that generate the “illusion” of a coherent and intelligible gender expression and identity, which otherwise lack any essential property. Basically, Butler is saying that gender is a social construct derived completely from nurture, not nature. Performativity is the foundation for using DQSH and its related interactive drag events to collapse the “social construct” of gender.

Rufo’s City Journal article beautifully summarizes Rubin and Califia’s position, and how TSEL is being used to fundamentally transform America: “All of it––the family, the law, the religion, the culture—was a vector of oppression, and all of it had to go.”

Rufo continues his analysis with references to college professor and drag queen performer Harris Kornstein (aka Lil Miss Hot Mess) and queer theorist Harper Keenan. Kornstein and coauthor Keenan published drag pedagogy’s manifesto, “Drag Pedagogy: The Playful Practice of Queer Imagination in Early Childhood.”[xx] Its goal was the application of queer theory to the education system. Rufo continues:

“The professional vision of educators is often shaped to reproduce the state’s normative vision of its ideal citizenry. In effect, schooling functions as a way to straighten the child into a kind of captive alignment with the current parameters of that vision,” Kornstein and Keenan write. “To state it plainly, within the historical context of the USA and Western Europe, the institutional management of gender has been used as a way of maintaining racist and capitalist modes of (re)production.”

To disrupt this dynamic, the authors propose a new teaching method, “drag pedagogy,” as a way of stimulating the “queer imagination,” teaching kids “how to live queerly,” and “bringing queer ways of knowing and being into the education of young children.” As Kornstein and Keenan explain, this is an intellectual and political project that requires drag queens and activists to work toward undermining traditional notions of sexuality, replacing the biological family with the ideological family, and arousing transgressive sexual desires [those violating socially accepted standards of behavior] in young children. “Building in part from queer theory and trans studies, queer and trans pedagogies seek to actively destabilize the normative function of schooling through transformative education,” they write. “This is a fundamentally different orientation than movements towards the inclusion or assimilation of LGBT people into the existing structures of school and society.”

Queer theory presents the sexualization of children as a human rights issue—specifically children’s human rights. The delivery system is Comprehensive Sexuality Education under the umbrella of Social and Emotional Learning (SEL), specifically transformative SEL, the Marxist version of SEL. Drag Story Hour is Marxist transformative SEL that exploits word obfuscation and deconstruction to advance queer theory in public/private American schools, libraries, and bookstores. It is George Lukács’s dream come true in America.

In conclusion, Rufo provides multiple examples of the spread of drag events across America and issues a warning to parents never to forget the purpose of DQSH:

As the movement behind drag shows for children has gained notoriety and expanded its reach, some drag performers have let the mask slip: in Minneapolis, a drag queen in heels and a pink miniskirt spread his legs open in front of children; in Portland, a large male transvestite allowed toddlers to climb on top of him, grab at his fake breasts, and press themselves against his body; and in England, a drag queen taught a group of preschoolers how to perform a sexually suggestive dance.

Scenes from drag events hosted across the United States in bars, clubs, and outdoor festivals have been even more shocking and disturbing: in Miami, a man with enormous fake breasts and dollar bills stuffed into his G-string grabs the hand of a preschool-aged girl and struts her in front of the crowd; in Washington, D.C., a drag queen wearing leather and chains teaches a young child how to dance for cash tips; in Dallas, hulking male figures with makeup smeared across their faces strip down to undergarments, simulate a female orgasm, and perform lap dances on members of a roaring audience of adults and children.

Advocates of Drag Queen Story Hour might reply that these are outlier cases and that many of the child-oriented events feature drag queens reading books and talking about gender, not engaging in sexualized performances. But the spirit of drag is predicated on the transgressive sexual element and the ideology of queer theory, which cannot be erased by switching the context and softening the language. The philosophical and political project of queer theory has always been to dethrone traditional heterosexual culture and elevate what Rubin called the “sexual caste” at the bottom of the hierarchy: the transsexual, the transvestite, the fetishist, the sadomasochist, the prostitute, the porn star, and the pedophile. Drag Queen Story Hour can attempt to sanitize the routines and run criminal background checks on its performers, but the subculture of queer theory will always attract men who want to follow the ideology to its conclusions.

Parents must understand that the attacks on their children’s sexual, individual, family, and national identities are weapons of war disguised as whole childeducation. The sexual revolution that begins in kindergarten can be defeated only by parents, grandparents, and other concerned citizens who understand the weaponization of education and oppose its sinister ideological and tactical purpose of whole child destruction. We the People must stand up to defy whole child education and prevent whole child destruction by protecting children’s innocence.

Our defiance is rooted in education. We fight fire with fire—we protect our children with lessons about secrets. We teach our children that secrets are danger signals. If anyone tells them don’t tell your parents, it is the signal that they will be hurt. Children must be taught to tell their parents the secret. Just like a red light means STOP and a green light means GO, being asked to keep a secret means TELL.

Math Lessons Are Racist, as per the Gates Foundation thumbnail

Math Lessons Are Racist, as per the Gates Foundation

By Kali Fontanilla

When you were in 4th grade frantically completing a timed multiplication test, if you were any color other than white, you were being oppressed by the pressure to get it done quickly. Were you penalized for an incorrect answer? Doubly oppressed! Was your grade lowered because your handwriting was illegible on your answers? No doubt, you are now owed reparations!

As ridiculous as this sounds, this is the current reality our black and brown public-school students are facing. Especially if their left-leaning math instructors have bought into the ridiculous ideology that “rigid” (and practical) math instruction is “white supremacist” and has been set up to “oppress” minorities. Since practically everything is “racist” now, including drinking milk and asking your students to speak proper English, why not add math instruction to the mix?

Loony Lessons

You may wonder where teachers have procured this loony idea. Unsurprisingly, the Gates Foundation is behind the push to label most traditional math instruction as white supremacist. In May of 2021, my last year teaching in public school, a free guide was published for all math teachers in California titled Dismantling Racism in Math Instruction: A Pathway to Equitable Instruction. The cover has a picture of a young black boy. The guide should be titled How to Teach Oppressed Black Kids Math or How to Dumb-Down Math So Black Kids Can Pass. I wish this were an exaggeration. The guide’s second and only other picture is of a young black girl—two visual representations of the students the guide is targeting.

As for the dumbing down, the point of the guide is to “dismantle white supremacy by making visible the toxic characteristics of white supremacy culture with respect to math.” But what, pray tell, does the guide deem characteristics of white supremacy? It lists “perfectionism, sense of urgency, defensiveness, quantity over quality, worship of the written word, paternalism, either/or thinking, power hoarding, fear of open conflict, individualism, only one right way, progress is bigger, objectivity, right to comfort,” etc. So, of course, the guide emphasizes that getting the “right” answer in math should not be the focus; it should be understanding the concepts and reasoning. It also emphasizes making sure students learn about mathematicians of color, “particularly women of color and queers of color,” including guest lectures. Math teachers need to find the one queer black mathematician in their community to speak to their class, or their math instruction is seeped in white supremacy, apparently.

Although 80 pages, the guide only has about 10 pages of substance. The rest of the guide consists of extensive reflection questions for the teacher to evaluate how white supremacist (or not) are their math lessons. I’m almost surprised it doesn’t come with a whip for self-flagellation. I suppose repentant liberal white teachers can ease their guilty conscience by kneeling in front of the picture of a black student on the cover.

The Gates Foundation

Back to the Gates Foundation. With a quick scroll to the bottom of the website equitablemath.org, you will find that the guide and the teacher training that goes along with it are generously funded by the Bill And Melinda Gates Foundation. One million dollars was given to the Education Trust West an advocacy group based in Oakland, California. The irony is that Bill Gates built his monumental wealth on computer science, a discipline entirely dependent on mathematics and one that might never have flourished if someone else had engaged in similar activism while he was growing up.

While all of this correct-answers-are-racist madness is happening, only about 26 percent of 8th-grade students are testing proficient or above in math. But why stop there? We might as well take that number to zero! Who needs a nation that is proficient in math? Who needs engineers obsessed with perfect calculations or pilots calculating the correct distance for a perfect landing? I’m sure everything will be fine when these students grow up and take their place in the workforce. Everything is being taken over by AI anyway.

*****

This article was published by Capital Research and is reproduced with permission.

TAKE ACTION

The Prickly Pear’s TAKE ACTION focus this year is to help achieve a winning 2024 national and state November 5th election with the removal of the Biden/Obama leftist executive branch disaster, win one U.S. Senate seat, maintain and win strong majorities in all Arizona state offices on the ballot and to insure that unrestricted abortion is not constitutionally embedded in our laws and culture.

Please click the TAKE ACTION link to learn to do’s and don’ts for voting in 2024. Our state and national elections are at great risk from the very aggressive and radical leftist Democrat operatives with documented rigging, mail-in voter fraud and illegals voting across the country (yes, with illegals voting across the country) in the last several election cycles.

Read Part 1 and Part 2 of The Prickly Pear essays entitled How NOT to Vote in the November 5, 2024 Election in Arizona to be well informed of the above issues and to vote in a way to ensure the most likely chance your vote will be counted and counted as you intend.

Please click the following link to learn more.

GATES FOUNDATION: Math Lessons Are Racist thumbnail

GATES FOUNDATION: Math Lessons Are Racist

By Kali Fontanilla

When you were in 4th grade frantically completing a timed multiplication test, if you were any color other than white, you were being oppressed by the pressure to get it done quickly. Were you penalized for an incorrect answer? Doubly oppressed! Was your grade lowered because your handwriting was illegible on your answers? No doubt, you are now owed reparations!

As ridiculous as this sounds, this is the current reality our black and brown public-school students are facing. Especially if their left-leaning math instructors have bought into the ridiculous ideology that “rigid” (and practical) math instruction is “white supremacist” and has been set up to “oppress” minorities. Since practically everything is “racist” now, including drinking milk and asking your students to speak proper English, why not add math instruction to the mix?

Loony Lessons

You may wonder where teachers have procured this loony idea. Unsurprisingly, the Gates Foundation is behind the push to label most traditional math instruction as white supremacist. In May of 2021, my last year teaching in public school, a free guide was published for all math teachers in California titled Dismantling Racism in Math Instruction: A Pathway to Equitable Instruction. The cover has a picture of a young black boy. The guide should be titled How to Teach Oppressed Black Kids Math or How to Dumb-Down Math So Black Kids Can Pass. I wish this were an exaggeration. The guide’s second and only other picture is of a young black girl—two visual representations of the students the guide is targeting.

As for the dumbing down, the point of the guide is to “dismantle white supremacy by making visible the toxic characteristics of white supremacy culture with respect to math.” But what, pray tell, does the guide deem characteristics of white supremacy? It lists “perfectionism, sense of urgency, defensiveness, quantity over quality, worship of the written word, paternalism, either/or thinking, power hoarding, fear of open conflict, individualism, only one right way, progress is bigger, objectivity, right to comfort,” etc. So, of course, the guide emphasizes that getting the “right” answer in math should not be the focus; it should be understanding the concepts and reasoning. It also emphasizes making sure students learn about mathematicians of color, “particularly women of color and queers of color,” including guest lectures. Math teachers need to find the one queer black mathematician in their community to speak to their class, or their math instruction is seeped in white supremacy, apparently.

Although 80 pages, the guide only has about 10 pages of substance. The rest of the guide consists of extensive reflection questions for the teacher to evaluate how white supremacist (or not) are their math lessons. I’m almost surprised it doesn’t come with a whip for self-flagellation. I suppose repentant liberal white teachers can ease their guilty conscience by kneeling in front of the picture of a black student on the cover.

The Gates Foundation

Back to the Gates Foundation. With a quick scroll to the bottom of the website equitablemath.org, you will find that the guide and the teacher training that goes along with it are generously funded by the Bill And Melinda Gates Foundation. One million dollars was given to the Education Trust West an advocacy group based in Oakland, California. The irony is that Bill Gates built his monumental wealth on computer science, a discipline entirely dependent on mathematics and one that might never have flourished if someone else had engaged in similar activism while he was growing up.

While all of this correct-answers-are-racist madness is happening, only about 26 percent of 8th-grade students are testing proficient or above in math. But why stop there? We might as well take that number to zero! Who needs a nation that is proficient in math? Who needs engineers obsessed with perfect calculations or pilots calculating the correct distance for a perfect landing? I’m sure everything will be fine when these students grow up and take their place in the workforce. Everything is being taken over by AI anyway.

*****

This article was published by Capital Research and is reproduced with permission.

TAKE ACTION

The Prickly Pear’s TAKE ACTION focus this year is to help achieve a winning 2024 national and state November 5th election with the removal of the Biden/Obama leftist executive branch disaster, win one U.S. Senate seat, maintain and win strong majorities in all Arizona state offices on the ballot and to insure that unrestricted abortion is not constitutionally embedded in our laws and culture.

Please click the TAKE ACTION link to learn to do’s and don’ts for voting in 2024. Our state and national elections are at great risk from the very aggressive and radical leftist Democrat operatives with documented rigging, mail-in voter fraud and illegals voting across the country (yes, with illegals voting across the country) in the last several election cycles.

Read Part 1 and Part 2 of The Prickly Pear essays entitled How NOT to Vote in the November 5, 2024 Election in Arizona to be well informed of the above issues and to vote in a way to ensure the most likely chance your vote will be counted and counted as you intend.

Please click the following link to learn more.

Riding the Economic Rollercoaster: The Austrian Business Cycle Theory

By David Jäkle

Imagine the economy as a roller coaster—a ride with thrilling booms that must be followed by the inevitable dread of busts, at least if the booms are artificially enhanced. Welcome to the Austrian business cycle theory (ABCT), a theory that translates these physical rules to economic ideas and explains the volatile ups and downs of an economy. This theory isn’t just an academic exercise, but it’s also a practical tool that helps us anticipate and prepare for economic fluctuations. By understanding the ABCT, we can better navigate the financial markets and recognize the signs of an upcoming downturn. It’s like having a map of the roller coaster, allowing us to brace ourselves before the steep drops.

Mechanism behind the Curtain

While the founding father of modern macroeconomics, John Maynard Keynes, with his profound insights identified animal spirits as the causative factor for depressions, the Austrian School of Economics is the only school of thought providing an actual explanation for the emergence of economic busts. Fundamentally, the ABCT posits that business cycles are largely due to a manipulation of interest rates combined with an increase of the money supply (i.e., the daily business of central banks), which leads to a misallocation of resources.

When interest rates are artificially low, investors are misled into making unsustainable investments, creating a boom. However, this boom is not based on genuine consumer demand or resource availability, leading to an inevitable crash. Artificially low interest rates in combination with printing money distorts the natural rhythm of the market, causing a ripple effect that impacts employment, production, and savings. This theory is all about unintended consequences. A hands-off approach would provide a great way to prevent these cycles of artificial booms and busts.

The Origins of the Austrian Perspective

Origins of the ABCT can be traced back to the early twentieth century, with economists Ludwig von Mises and Friedrich Hayek at the forefront challenging the prevailing economic theories of their time by arguing that central planning and interventionism are the culprits of economic instability. Their work laid the groundwork for what would become a comprehensive critique of Keynesian economics. Whereas their contemporaries largely followed a collectivist approach, the Austrian School’s emphasis on individual choice and market dynamics offered a stark contrast.

Mises and Hayek actually were some of the few economists predicting America’s Great Depression before it happened. Thirty years later, Murray Rothbard explained in detail how the Great Depression arose. In his treatise America’s Great Depression, he shows how inflationism created the crisis and challenges notions of “unstable capitalism.” Herbert Hoover’s interventionist policies, he demonstrates, were responsible for its long duration and immense intensity.

However, while these ideas have since influenced some economists and policymakers around the world, they are barely even mentioned in current discussions about the market cycle. Everybody knows what went wrong and where the state needs to intervene more proactively. Very few people express the idea of scaling back the government apparatus. Moreover, while there are some exceptions, politicians seeking office do not want to limit their own power.

How Society Suffers

Creating business cycles by pumping artificial money into the economy as well as keeping interest rates artificially low impoverishes societies. Now, you might say we as humankind have made incredible progress on many fronts in the last fifty years, which were years of increasing influence for central banks. However, comparing conditions now to conditions fifty years ago is erroneous. Comparing conditions how they are to conditions how they could have been is the proper way to comprehend this topic. Relatively free markets, which we had during this time, improved well-being even with such negative pressures.

Additionally, one can make the argument that some significant aspects of life have been impaired: Your grandfather was able to buy a house or get a college education without getting into unfathomable amounts of debt. Further, ABCT portrays past recessions in another light. For instance, the Great Depression, which diminished living conditions for most of the American and worldwide population, would not have happened if the Federal Reserve had not started increasing the supply of money and artificially lowering interest rates. In fact, extreme, long-running, intersectoral recessions are a phenomenon of the present and happened rarely before the Federal Reserve was founded.

As long as the populace keeps behaving short-term oriented, politicians will continue printing money. Albeit there are some rare exceptions, politicians do not look beyond the next election cycle, and people with a high time preference are made happy by focusing on the present and ignoring the future. Policymakers neglect the ABCT, which champions economic sustainability over short-lived prosperity. When the long-term consequences inevitably happen, they can be blamed on other events and overshadowed by acute problems demanding some more high-time-preference solutions.

Life Lessons from the ABCT

How does the ABCT apply to everyday life? It teaches us to be skeptical of “too good to be true” economic situations. It encourages prudent financial decisions, avoiding the pitfalls of credit-fueled spending sprees that lead to personal financial crises mirroring the larger economic busts. Always consider the long-term impacts of your economic decisions. Furthermore, this rule can be applied to life in general: Lower your time preference and start paying more attention to long-term consequences. It might not, for instance, be the wisest choice to excessively drink every week.

Financially, there are some ways to profit from understanding the ABCT too. Recognize artificial booms and invest accordingly, managing risk and divesting from overvalued assets. Invest strategically and for the long run instead of behaving like a hyperactive beginner trader.

Embracing Economic Sobriety

In summary, the ABCT offers a sobering reminder of the perils of economic interventionism. By understanding and applying its principles, we can strive for a more stable economic future, both personally and globally. Remember, next time you’re enjoying economic highs, the ABCT advises caution, for the track ahead may take a sudden dip. If we listened to the ABCT’s teachings, while we wouldn’t have the intersectoral fantastic booms, we could avoid severe economic busts. The ABCT paints a picture of the negative consequences of focusing on short-term gains and ignoring unintended long-term effects.

*****

This article was published by the Ludwig von Mises Institute and is reproduced with permission.

Meet The College Student Whose Life Was Destroyed By A Hate Crime Hoax thumbnail

Meet The College Student Whose Life Was Destroyed By A Hate Crime Hoax

By The Daily Caller

Morgan Bettinger was just a regular college student — until one unlucky encounter with a Black Lives Matter activist brought her whole world crashing down. She was branded racist and forced to defend herself for years against a country determined to destroy her. The only problem: none of the accusations were true.

Hate crime hoaxes like the type perpetrated against Morgan have become an all-too-common part of American life. We all know the big stories: Jussie Smollet and his hired attackers; Bubba Wallace and the garage door noose; Michael Brown and “Hands Up, Don’t Shoot.” These stories faced hyper-scrutiny in the public eye and have been thoroughly debunked. It’s the little people like Morgan who don’t get obsessive media coverage — and have far less opportunity to clear their names.

The Daily Caller is determined to rectify this with our latest documentary, “Demand for Hate,” which exposes the rise of hate crime hoaxes in America today. Our investigative team takes a deep dive into Morgan’s story and shows the real damage that occurs when our cowardly leaders fail to stand up for the truth.

“Demand for Hate” is available to stream exclusively for Patriots subscribers. Catch a first glimpse below.

Morgan, like thousands of other college students in the BLM era, was just a normal kid caught up in a sea of radical leftist activism. When she got into her dream school, the University of Virginia, she thought she was going off to a place that valued free expression and open inquiry. She thought she would spend four years getting a rigorous education that would prepare her for law school and future career. She didn’t know that she had entered a campus that would come to reject all of these in the name of social activism.

The Daily Caller’s own Kate Anderson, who covered Morgan’s story since the beginning, breaks it all down.

POST ON X: EXPOSED: The Origin of the Morgan Bettinger Case

On July 17, 2020, there was a rally for Black Women Matter, a feminist offshoot of BLM, with hundreds of protesters blocking a street near campus. A dump truck was blocking part of the intersection to keep cars from heading down the street when Morgan got stuck driving home from work. She got out of her car and started talking to the truck driver about how she was thankful he was there to prevent the cars from turning protesters into speed bumps.

But the protesters in the street told a different story.

A UVA student activist Zyana Bryant said that Morgan threatened protesters, saying that they would “make good f–king speed bumps.” She tweeted a video of the incident to her thousands of followers and it quickly went viral, but the comments she accused Morgan of saying were conspicuously absent.

Almost immediately, Morgan became a target of vicious harassment online, as the incident came to the attention of university administrators and local media. She didn’t even realize what was going on until a friend texted her, “Are you okay?” It was then she saw the flood of hate pouring in.

Bryant launched a campaign She was called a “Nazi,”  a “racist,” and “coddled little white girl” who “promotes domestic terrorism.” Activists uncovered who she was, and spread her personal details publicly online. Students ostracized her, refusing to sit in a class with her — even virtually. Local journalists started going after her as well, uncritically reporting Zyahna’s account. A local outlet C-VILLE Weekly called Morgan’s alleged comments an “especially chilling and violent” threat. UVA’s student council president suggested she should be expelled, and even one of her professors condemned her, going so far as to suggest that she should be arrested.

University leadership offered little support to Morgan, saying only that they would investigate the matter fully. But Morgan could not get a fair trial under the circumstances. She was never even allowed to tell her side of the story.

After witnesses failed to corroborate the incident, the university investigators rightly determined that there was no evidence Morgan said what Bryant accused her of. Even if she had, it was simply a hypothetical statement, not a threat, the university correctly determined.

But in response to Bryant’s agitation, UVA submitted the case to another panel made up of students — the first time she was permitted to tell her side of the story. The student panel agreed with Morgan’s version of events, but nevertheless determined she was being insensitive about the issues BLM was supposedly fighting for. Punishment came swift and severe, in what political scientist Wilfred Rielly called the “most egregious” hate crime hoax he’s ever seen.

Morgan was sentenced to 50 hours of community service, leftist re-education classes, and put on probationary expulsion. If anyone complained about her, she would be expelled for real. While she eventually graduated, she still had the disgrace of expulsion on her permanent record. Meanwhile Bryant went on to have a feted career, securing a prominent partnership with the skincare company Dove.

Standing up to hate crime hoaxers like Zyahna Bryant is about more than any one individual. Morgan spent the prime years of her life defending herself against a college, media and society that would sacrifice her in the name of “justice.” By telling her story, we aim to reclaim a semblance of truth and fairness that used to be critical to our understanding of that word.

Watch “Demand for Hate” now to learn more about Morgan’s story — and how, after years of fighting, she finally found justice.

The Daily Caller’s documentary productions are made possible by our faithful Patriots members, and we wouldn’t be able to do it without them. To watch “Demand for Hate” today — and to help support future investigative documentaries — please consider becoming a member.

AUTHOR

GAGE KLIPPER

Commentary and analysis writer.

RELATED VIDEO: BLM CANCELLED Her: Justice For Morgan Bettinger | Savanah Hernandez

EDITORS NOTE: This Daily Caller column is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved.

State-Sponsored Qatari Children’s Magazine Justifies Terror, Incites Against Jews, Israel and the U.S. thumbnail

State-Sponsored Qatari Children’s Magazine Justifies Terror, Incites Against Jews, Israel and the U.S.

By Middle East Media Research Institute

Qatar | Special Dispatch No. 11336

Since Hamas’ October 7, 2023 terror attack and the outbreak of the ensuing war in Gaza, Jassim, a Qatari monthly magazine for children issued by the state-sponsored Dar Al-Sharq Group, has been publishing content that justifies terror and violence against Israel, as well as antisemitic content. Poems and comics featured in the magazine since October 7 incite against Jews and against Israel, deny Israel’s right to exist, condone terror against Israel, which is termed “Palestinian resistance” and even encourage the readers to seek martyrdom and attain Paradise. One of the comic strips also demonized the U.S., depicting it as a serpent baring its fangs to defend Israel.

The magazine issues published since October 7 include many maps of Palestine from the river to the sea, which deny Israel’s existence. In addition, one issue contained an illustration of a child holding a key, which symbolizes the Palestinians’ desire to return to the homes in Israel in which they lived before the 1948 war.[1]

This incitement in the Jassim children’s magazine is another expression of hostility towards Israel and support for Hamas in the Qatari press, which has been especially conspicuous since the October 7 attack, [2]  and joins the incitement evident in the Qatari school curricula.[3]

This report presents examples of antisemitic content and incitement to terror and violence against Israel in the Qatari children’s magazine Jassim.

Justifying Terror Against Israel While Adopting Hamas’ Red Triangle Symbol

Comic strips published in the Jassim magazine in the recent months justify Palestinian “resistance” against Israel, namely Hamas’ terror against it, including the October 7 attack. One of the comic strips even adopted the inverted red triangle symbol, which has been associated with Hamas since the outbreak of the Gaza war. The triangle first appeared in Hamas videos documenting the fighting in Gaza, which use it to mark Israeli targets about to be attacked.[4]

A comic strip featured in the January 2024 issue, titled “This Is My Nest,” tells of a resplendent quetzal, a bird with red, green, white and black plumage, which represents Palestine in the story, and a blue-and-white cuckoo with a yarmulke, representing Israel. The cuckoo chick tries to take over the quetzal’s nest until the latter strikes at it and kicks it out.

In the beginning of the story, the reader is told that “the cuckoo is the most loathsome bird in the world. The female cuckoo does not bother to build a nest or even care for its young. It lays its single egg in the nest of another bird while the parent [birds] are away. As for the resplendent quetzal, its colors are identical to the colors of the Palestinian flag.”

In the story’s first scene, the cuckoo comes to the quetzal’s nest with its egg and asks: “O noble quetzal, can I leave my chick in your nest for a while until I can build a nest of my own?” The quetzal replies, “O cuckoo, you are welcome and so is your chick.” But when the cuckoo chick hatches, it takes over the nest, throws out the quetzal’s eggs, and declares, “this is my nest.” When the quetzal comes back and asks where her eggs are, the cuckoo chick pretends ignorance, and the quetzal continues to care for it. Eventually the cuckoo  chick grows up and shouts at the quetzal: “This is my nest. Go find yourself a different nest.” The surprised quetzal answers, “No, this is my nest. You were only a guest, and now you are no longer welcome.”  At this point a serpent colored in the hues of the American flag appears and says to the cuckoo chick: “This is your nest. I attest to this!” In the next panels a red triangle appears above the cuckoo, marking it as a target for attack, and the quetzal, now wearing a kefiyyeh, strikes at the cuckoo and casts it out of the nest, saying “This is my nest and this is my land. I will not leave it as long as I am alive.” The inclusion of the red triangle, which, as stated, is a symbol used by Hamas in the context of its terror attacks, associates the scene with Hamas violence and hints at its October 7, 2023 terror attack, in which about 1,200 Israelis were killed and about 250 were taken hostage.[5]

From the comic strip “This Is My Nest”

The magazine’s director, Shafiq Saleh, noted that the story deals with “guarding the homeland and resisting the usurping occupier.”[6]

Comic Strip Glorifies “Resist[ing] Until Your Dying Breath”, Teaches That “Liberty Is Not Granted As A Gift But Is Taken By Force”

A comic strip titled “Resist!”, in the magazine’s April 2024 issue,  is also an allegory for the Palestinian-Israeli conflict. It tells of three birds – a mother, a father and a chick – who live in a cage but dream of being free. Outside the cage lives a cat who threatens to eat them. Despite the danger represented by the cat, “the father bird keeps trying” to find a way out of the cage. When the chick begs him to stop, “so the cat won’t eat us,” the father replies: “Son, he will try to eat us anyway. He has eaten members of our family before… [but] we must resist.” The mother bird says, “Do not cry, my chick. Be a man and know that you must resist until your dying  breath.” When the cat manages to open the cage door and grabs the mother and father, they urge the chick to flee, saying, “Do not let our deaths be in vain. Flee!” But the chick replies: “I shall not flee, I shall resist!,” and  strikes out at the cat, forcing him to let the parents go. The story ends with the three birds free, and the mother says, “Palestine teaches us that liberty is not granted as a gift but is taken by force.”[7]

The magazine’s director, Shafiq Saleh, explained that the story conveys the Palestinians’ right to wage resistance. The April issue, he said, “aims to familiarize [the children] with the Palestinian issue and establish the right of return [i.e., the Palestinian refugees’ right to return to their homes within Israel in which they lived before the 1948 war]… It features interesting comic strips that describe the steadfastness of the Palestinians in Gaza as they face the Israeli war machine and impart useful lessons for children and parents alike… The comic strips in this issue represent the steadfastness of the Gazan people and the Palestinian’s right to resist, thus lending a human dimension to this unique issue [of the magazine].”[8]

From the comic strip “Resist!”

The November 2023 issue contains a comic strip in which a father explains and justifies Palestinian resistance to his sons, saying: “In this manner the usurping occupier seeks to sow destruction and devastation in the land in order to make [the Palestinians] leave their soil and their homeland…  The usurpers came from different countries and stole Palestine by the force of arms in hope of making it their permanent homeland. But the proud Palestinian people refused, and resisted from the very first day until now.”[9]

The December 2023 issue features a similar comic strip in which a grandfather tells his grandchildren the history of Palestine and explains the roots of Palestinian resistance, saying: “Let me tell you the story of Palestine from its very beginning, from the time when it lived in peace and security until the invaders came from all the world in order to occupy it and make it their homeland, something we will never allow!”[10]

­­­Inculcating The Value Of Martyrdom: It Is “The Most Honorable Of Aspirations”

In addition to content justifying violent resistance against Israel, the magazine also glorifies martyrdom for the sake of Palestine as the noblest of aspirations. For example, the November 2023 issue features a poem titled “The Land Is Mine,” which stresses the importance of Palestine and the need to defend it from the “usurper” (Israel).  The poem says, “Palestine is my heart and the heart of the Arabs… We shall defend it with our hearts and souls, and attaining martyrdom is the most honorable  of aspirations…”[11]

The poem “The Land Is Mine”

As part of glorifying death and martyrdom, the magazine stresses the pleasures and delights of Paradise.[12] In an ongoing comic strip titled “Paradise the Most Beautiful,” a mother tells her children about the wonders of Paradise according to Islam and fills them with yearning for it. In the January 2024 installment, she relates details about Paradise from the Hadith: “Paradise is built of alternating bricks of gold and silver, and [the mortar] between them smells of musk…  How delightful is the fragrance of Paradise! Its pebbles are white pearls and rubies, its soil is white musk and its grass is red saffron, fragrant and fair of hue.” The daughter Mariam says: “O mother, I yearn for Paradise…”, and her mother relies, “Indeed, Maryam, this is a worthy aspiration.”[13]

In the March 2024 installment of the comic strip the mother tells the children about the Black-Eyed Virgins of Paradise who, according to Islamic tradition, will be the wives of the believing men and the handmaidens of the believing women in the afterlife.   The mother says: “When a believing woman arrives in Paradise, Allah restores her to youth and beauty, gives her beautiful clothes and grants her every wish at all times. He gives her palaces, servants and handmaidens from among the Black-Eyed [Virgins] of Paradise, and anything else she desires…” The daughter asks: “Mother, what are the Black-Eyed Virgins of Paradise?” The mother replies: “They are beautiful ladies that Allah created in Paradise. They will be the wives of the believers and they are also glad at the arrival of believing women and welcome them.”[14] It should be noted that, according to Islamic tradition, the Virgins of Paradise are also among the heavenly rewards of the martyr, who marries 72 virgins in Paradise.[15]

Demonizing The Jews: “They Came By Land And Sea Like Locusts And Spread”

A poem about Al-Aqsa published in the magazine’s December 2023 issue demonizes the Jews and incites against them, saying:

“The Jews came by land and sea like locusts, and spread.

They entered our [Al-Aqsa] mosque, desecrated it and murdered people.

The olive branches [of Palestine] cry out: ‘They took my land for their homeland,

‘They stole the fatherland and the dreams of the children.’

Bullets were aimed at the heart and the world watched in silence.

Which of you, my beloved ones, will one day restore the mosque to us?”[16]

Maps Of Palestine From The River To The Sea, And The Key Of Return

Many issues of the magazine feature maps that present the entire territory between the Mediterranean and the Jordan river as “Palestine,” thus denying Israel’s existence. When the November issue came out, the magazine’s director, Shafiq Saleh, referred to its cover art, which shows such a map, saying: “This month’s issue is devoted to solidarity with the children of Palestine. Its cover shows children in traditional Palestinian costume waving the flag of Palestine, against the backdrop of a map of the Arab state of Palestine.” [17]

The front cover of the magazine’s November 2023 issue

Below are some further examples:

  1. Coloring page in the January issue includes a map of Palestine from the river to the sea and the text “Palestine free and Arab”  (Twitter.com/jassimmagazine, January 10, 2024)
  2. Matching exercise in the January 2024 issue includes a map of Palestine from the river to the sea (Twitter.com/jassimmagazine, January 10, 2024)
  3. Poem about Al-Aqsa in the December issue printed on the background of a map of Palestine from the river to the sea (Facebook.com/jassimmagazin, December 9, 2023)

The front cover of the January 2024 issue shows a boy holding a key, symbolizing the Palestinian’s aspiration to return to their homes within the state of Israel in which they lived before the 1948 war. Upon the publication of this issue, director Shafiq Saleh referred to its cover art, saying: “The cover shows a Palestinian child wearing the famous Palestinian scarf [i.e., a keffiyeh] and holding tightly onto the key of his home, which symbolizes the return of the all the refugees to the homeland.”[18]

The cover of the January 2024 issue (Twitter.com/QATawseel, January 7, 2024)


REFERENCES:

[1] On this see MEMRI reports: Special Dispatch No. 10710 – Palestinian Authority Opens Exhibition Of ‘Keys Of Return’ In Hebron – July 14, 2023; See MEMRI reports: Special Dispatch No. 10623 – Nakba Day Events At West Bank Schools Assert Palestinian Refugees’ Right To Return To Homes Inside Israel, May 23, 2023; Special Dispatch No. 10597 – Ahead Of 75th Anniversary Of The Nakba, Palestinian Leadership Stresses It Will Never Relinquish Refugees’ Right To Return To Their Homes, May 8, 2023;  Inquiry & Analysis Series No. 950, The Narrative Of Return In Palestinian Textbooks, March 20, 2013.

[5] Facebook.com/jassimmagazine, January 22, 2024.

[6] Alarab.qa, January 13, 2024.

[7] Facebook.com/jassimmagazine, April 22, 2024.

[8] Twitter.com/jassimmagazine, April 7, 2024.

[9] Facebook.com/jassimmagazin, November 19, 2023.

[10] Facebook.com/qatarnanny, December 10, 2023.

[11] Facebook.com/jassimmagazin, December 2, 2023.

[13] Facebook.com/jassimmagazine, January 15, 2024.

[14] Twitter.com/jassimmagazine, March 10, 2024.

[16] Facebook.com/jassimmagazine, December 9, 2023.

[17] Twitter.com/jassimmagazine, November 4, 2023.

[18] Alarab.qa, January 13, 2024.

EDITORS NOTE: This MEMRI column is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved.

From Sex Education to Sexuality Education thumbnail

From Sex Education to Sexuality Education

By Linda Goudsmit

Globalism is a replacement ideology that seeks to reorder the world into one singular, planetary Unistate, ruled by the globalist elite. The globalist war on nation-states cannot succeed without collapsing the United States of America. The long-term strategic attack plan moves America incrementally from constitutional republic to socialism to globalism to feudalism. The tactical attack plan uses asymmetric psychological and informational warfare to destabilize Americans and drive society out of objective reality into the madness of subjective reality. America’s children are the primary target of the globalist predators.

UNESCO, the United Nations Educational, Scientific, and Cultural Organization, is a specialized agency of the United Nations and a member of the United Nations Sustainable Development Group (UNSDG), a coalition of thirty-six UN funds, programs, specialized agencies, departments, and offices aimed at fulfilling UN Sustainable Development Goals (SDG). The SDG is defined as “a collection of seventeen interlinked objectives designed to serve as a shared blueprint for peace and prosperity for people and the planet, now and into the future.”

Let’s look at the United Nations Department of Economic and Social Affairs Sustainable Development website and examine the 17 Sustainable Development Goals of the UN planetary 2030 Agenda. The UNSDG mission headline is Transforming our world: The 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development.[i] The 17 Goals are item number 59 on the 91 listed items in the UNSDG Declaration.

Sustainable Development Goals

  • Goal 1. End poverty in all its forms everywhere
  • Goal 2. End hunger, achieve food security and improved nutrition and promote sustainable agriculture
  • Goal 3. Ensure healthy lives and promote well-being for all at all ages
  • Goal 4. Ensure inclusive and equitable quality education and promote lifelong learning opportunities for all
  • Goal 5. Achieve gender equality and empower all women and girls
  • Goal 6. Ensure availability and sustainable management of water and sanitation for all
  • Goal 7. Ensure access to affordable, reliable, sustainable and modern energy for all
  • Goal 8. Promote sustained, inclusive and sustainable economic growth, full and productive employment and decent work for all
  • Goal 9. Build resilient infrastructure, promote inclusive and sustainable industrialization and foster innovation
  • Goal 10. Reduce inequality within and among countries
  • Goal 11. Make cities and human settlements inclusive, safe, resilient and sustainable
  • Goal 12. Ensure sustainable consumption and production patterns
  • Goal 13. Take urgent action to combat climate change and its impacts*
  • Goal 14. Conserve and sustainably use the oceans, seas and marine resources for sustainable development
  • Goal 15. Protect, restore and promote sustainable use of terrestrial ecosystems, sustainably manage forests, combat desertification, and halt and reverse land degradation and halt biodiversity loss
  • Goal 16. Promote peaceful and inclusive societies for sustainable development, provide access to justice for all and build effective, accountable and inclusive institutions at all levels
  • Goal 17. Strengthen the means of implementation and revitalize the global partnership for sustainable development

Acknowledging that the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change is the primary international, intergovernmental forum for negotiating the global response to climate change.

Item 91, the closing statement of the Declaration, confirms that the United Nations Sustainable Development Group 2030 Agenda is a planetary mission to fundamentally transform the entire world into its own vision of a betterworld. Agenda 2030 is a supremacist replacement ideology on a planetary scale:

We reaffirm our unwavering commitment to achieving this Agenda and utilizing it to the full to transform our world for the better by 2030.

Agenda 2030’s lofty language appeals to emotion, the desire to help people around the world. It is the bait. The next two items after the 17 Sustainable Goals, items 60 and 61, reveal the switch. Full implementation of Agenda 2030 requires “a revitalized and enhanced Global Partnership” and “the means required to realize our collective ambitions.” The price of full implementation is the surrender of individual agency and national sovereignty to the agencies and authority of the United Nations. Compliance is the universal objective of Agenda 2030.

60. We reaffirm our strong commitment to the full implementation of this new Agenda. We recognize that we will not be able to achieve our ambitious Goals and targets without a revitalized and enhanced Global Partnership and comparably ambitious means of implementation. The revitalized Global Partnership will facilitate an intensive global engagement in support of implementation of all the goals and targets, bringing together Governments, civil society, the private sector, the United Nations system and other actors and mobilizing all available resources.

61. The Agenda’s Goals and targets deal with the means required to realise our collective ambitions. The means of implementation targets under each SDG and Goal 17, which are referred to above, are key to realising our Agenda and are of equal importance with the other Goals and targets. We shall accord them equal priority in our implementation efforts and in the global indicator framework for monitoring our progress.

Goal 3 is of particular interest to this chapter, especially section 3.7:

By 2030, ensure universal access to sexual and reproductive health-care services, including for family planning, information and education, and the integration of reproductive health into national strategies and programs.

What, exactly, is the “information and education” young children will receive? Parents around the world will be shocked to learn what the United Nations and its specialty agencies consider appropriate sexual and reproductive information and education.

UNFPA, the United Nations Population Fund (originally United Nations Fund for Population Activities), is the UN’s sexual and reproductive health agency. Its motto is Ensuring rights and choices for all. The agency’s 2014 “Operational Guidance for Comprehensive Sexuality Education (CSE): A Focus on Human Rights and Gender[ii] is extremely enlightening. Its Introduction states authoritatively and unapologetically:

The Operational Guidance is founded on scientific evidence, international human rights conventions and best technical standards so that a common definition of CSE and associated best practices are promoted by the organization in discussions with counterparts….

The implementation of this Operational Guidance across UNFPA, and in cooperation with our partners, is designed to help achieve the vision of comprehensive rights-based, transformative sexuality education for young people throughout the world.

UNESDOC, UNESCO’s digital library, states unequivocally:

Sexuality education should start early, be age and developmentally appropriate, and should follow an incremental approach. This helps learners internalize concepts, make informed decisions, understand sexuality and develop critical thinking skills that mature as they grow older. Starting CSE early is important because children and young people need specific knowledge and skills at the appropriate time, for example, learning about puberty shortly before they go through it, not after. Moreover, in some countries, many students do not make the transition from primary to secondary school and therefore need access to critical information before leaving formal education.

The foundational assumption in CSE is that schools are the appropriate place for “sexuality education,” not the home. This assumption facilitates the Marxist objective of replacing family authority with the authority of the state in order to collapse America from within. So, let’s take a look at what the United Nations, the international state in this metaphor, considers “age and developmentally appropriate.”

In 2013, the Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights (OHCHR) launched UN Free & Equal,[iii] a global UN public information campaign to promote equal rights and fair treatment of LGBTIQ+ (lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, intersex, queer/queer questioning, plus others) people. Promoted as the United Nations’ global campaign against homophobia and transphobia, the UN Free & Equal campaign targets youth with the motto When #YouthLead, anything is possible! and tagline: In a fearless future everyone’s an ally. Take a stand with LGBTIQ+ youth![iv]

The United Nations is calling on the youth of the world to unite in common LGBTIQ+ cause:

Young people are leading us towards a fearless world. Together, they are standing up and fighting for a world free of poverty, racism, sexism, ableism and all forms of violence, inequality and discrimination.

For LGBTIQ+ youth, this is a fight for survival. LGBTIQ+ youth are more likely to experience family rejection, poverty, discrimination, bullying, violence, exclusion from education—based on their age as well as their sexual orientation, gender identity, gender expression or sex characteristics. As a result, they are at a higher risk of homelessness, poor health outcomes and suicide compared to their peers.

Trans youth are denied recognition of their gender identity and face high levels of hate speech, bullying and exclusion. Intersex children are often subjected to medically unnecessary interventions that cause lifelong pain and trauma. Lesbian, gay, bi and trans youth are subjected to unethical, harmful and traumatic so-called “conversion therapy”. Young LGBTIQ+ people who also face discrimination based on their race, ethnicity, gender, disabilities, religion and migration status are disproportionately affected by exclusion, discrimination and violence.

In a number of countries, LGBTIQ+ youth face censorship both when they seek information and when they speak about their issues, online or offline. In some contexts, discriminatory laws criminalize same-sex relations as well as trans people. Those who speak out and demand equality sometimes face imprisonment, hate speech, violence—even killings.

With great courage and resilience, young LGBTIQ+ people are leading change and standing up for a future that is safe, respectful, empowering and celebrates the beautiful diversity of humankind. A world where each and every one of us is free to be who we are and love whom we choose. Together, all of us can make this future a reality—when #LGBTIQ+ #YouthLead, anything is possible!

UNESCO’s International Technical Guidance on Sexuality Education (ITGSE) revised edition (2018)[v] is the United Nations’ updated platform for international instruction, and it bills itself as an evidence-informed approach:

Together with UNAIDS, UNFPA, UNICEF, UN Women, and the WHO, UNESCO completed the extensive technical and political process of updating the “International Technical Guidance on Sexuality Education” in January 2018. As a result, the UN has a unified stance on the justification, supporting data, and recommendations for creating and delivering comprehensive sexuality education (CSE).

The updated guidance expands upon the original guidance and incorporates updates and enhancements based on fresh research and verified best practices from around the world. The revision process was influenced and steered by user surveys and structured consultations with experts from a wide range of fields and interest groups.

The updated Guidance is a convenient and very important instrument to move closer to a tipping point for the widespread use of high-quality CSE because of its unified voice, forward-thinking attitude, and focus on significant implementation problems….

It examines frameworks and agreements at the global, regional, and local levels that can be utilized to assist CSE implementation at various levels. The updated Guidance also takes into account CSE’s role in achieving several SDGs, particularly Goal 3: Good Health and Well-Being, Goal 4: Quality Education, and Goal 5:Gender Equality.

It all sounds good. So, what is the problem?

First, sex education is no longer just about human reproduction. The new label, Comprehensive Sexuality Education (CSE), is far more expansive and is defined on the Health and Education[vi] section of the UNESCO website:

“Sexuality” is defined as “a core dimension of being human which includes: the understanding of, and relationship to, the human body; emotional attachment and love; sex; gender; gender identity; sexual orientation; sexual intimacy; pleasure and reproduction. Sexuality is complex and includes biological, social, psychological, spiritual, religious, political, legal, historic, ethical and cultural dimensions that evolve over a lifespan.” (International Technical Guidance on Sexuality Education, p. 17)

Key values of CSE include:

Transformative: CSE impacts whole cultures and communities, not simply individual learners. It can contribute to the development of a fair and compassionate society by empowering individuals and communities, promoting critical thinking skills and strengthening young people’s sense of citizenship. It empowers young people to take responsibility for their own decisions and behaviours, and how they may affect others. It builds the skills and attitudes that enable young people to treat others with respect, acceptance, tolerance and empathy, regardless of their ethnicity, race, social, economic or immigration status, religion, disability, sexual orientation, gender identity or expression, or sex characteristics.

CSE is weaponized education on a global level. Its universal curriculum is designed to collapse existing cultures into a singular culture of the planetary Unistate, and indoctrinate students with politicized education according to Marxist collectivist dogma. CSE grooms the children of the world to unite and become activists in preparation for global citizenship in the Unistate.

The deceitful manipulation of language is a weapon of war designed to dupe parents into accepting Comprehensive Sexuality Education as equivalent to the familiar and accepted Sex Education. There is no equivalence. Comprehensive Sexuality Education is a colossal deception that presents lessons in pornography as equal to lessons in human reproduction.

We can no longer trust American schools to teach basic foundational knowledge, or to support American Judeo-Christian values. We are the generation of parents and grandparents who must end the amoral, anti-American, anti-reality indoctrination in American schools. We must read what our children are reading, and see what our children are seeing. We must bring the offensive materials to our local school board meetings and read them into the record.

We the People must exercise our power by recognizing that political power begins locally. It is the foundation of community organizing. Now is the time to organize our community of parents and grandparents across America to oppose existing local school boards. We must run for election to our school boards. We must stand and unapologetically voice our objections at school board meetings, demand accountability, and remove the anti-American ideologues from power. We must protect the children.

©2024. All rights reserved.


Please visit Linda’s Pundicity page: goudsmit.pundicity.com  and her website: lindagoudsmit.com 


REFERENCES:

[i] Transforming our world: The 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Developmenthttps://sdgs.un.org/2030agenda

[ii] Operational Guidance for Comprehensive Sexuality Education (CSE): A Focus on Human Rights and Genderhttps://www.unfpa.org/sites/default/files/pub-pdf/UNFPA_OperationalGuidance_WEB3_0.pdf

[iii] UN Free & Equalhttps://www.unfe.org/about-2/

[iv] When #YouthLead, anything is possible! and tagline: In a fearless future everyone’s an ally. Take a stand with LGBTIQ+ youth!https://www.unfe.org/youthlead/

[v] UNESCO’s International Technical Guidance on Sexuality Education (ITGSE) revised edition (2018)https://unfpa.org/sites/default/files/pub-pdf/ITGSE.pdf

[vi] Health and Educationhttps://healtheducationresources.unesco.org/toolkit/what-comprehensive-sexuality-education-cse