Government Agenda : Making People Useless

Children used to be taught that their role in life was to be a farmer, doctor, lawyer, businessman, etc.

Now the schools teach children that their job is to either save the planet, or get on the government dole and vote for Democratic politicians. But I repeat myself.

About stevengoddard

Just having fun
This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

13 Responses to Government Agenda : Making People Useless

  1. gator69 says:

    Schools used to teach children how to think, but now teach them what to think. To me this is one if the most vile forms if child abuse, as it can cripple for a lifetime.

  2. A short and painful life time at that.

  3. Streetcred says:

    In Australia … at least there’s an awakening:
    High praise is damaging our ‘special, gifted’ kids
    http://www.couriermail.com.au/news/opinion/opinion-constant-overpraising-is-damaging-our-kids/story-fnihsr9v-1226930940041

    AT THE Positive Schools Mental Health and Wellbeing Conference held at the Brisbane Convention Centre last week, teachers were told the emphasis on self-esteem in education and parenting has failed our children.

    Rather than creating happy, confident kids, the self-esteem movement has contributed to what behavioural psychiatrist Dr David Sack calls “a generation of self-obsessed, irresponsible and unmotivated kids”.

    Other experts describe kids unable to deal with adversity, anti-social behaviour, gross egotism, selfishness and an overweening sense of entitlement.

    Described sometimes as cottonwool, eggshell and even teacup kids (because they’re so fragile), children raised under the self-esteem banner have no resilience and crumble at the first sign of criticism or difficulty.

    Where and how did something so well-intended go so wrong?

    • Andy Oz says:

      100% agree.

      And then we have the Australian watermelon greens who promote communist ideology as the ideal basis for eduction. What happened to “Save the Whale?”
      https://www.greenleft.org.au/node/56535

    • Gail Combs says:

      A companion piece: The Hand that Rocked the Cradle: A Critical Analysis of Rockefeller Philanthropic Funding, 1920-1960

      Abstract

      Past research into the mental hygiene movement in Canada and the United States has tended to view it in isolation from co-temporary projects funded by Rockefeller philanthropy, such as mass communications research. The mental hygiene campaign aimed to modify adult-child relations by reducing the influence parents and teachers held over children’s personality development; the central aim of mass communications research was the development of conformity of opinion. One a project of social engineering, the other of social control, the two projects combined appear to have possessed considerable potential to work in concert to shift weight in the socializing matrix from families and schools to the media at the outset of the post-World War II baby boom.

      (Site has link to full paper)

      Remember that in 1915 the news media was ‘bought’ by J.P. Morgan interests so that they could feed Americans propaganda.

  4. Gamecock says:

    Children are now taught what group they are part of.

  5. Andy Oz says:

    “Australia is one of few countries where a person can remain on the dole indefinitely”
    http://www.crikey.com.au/2013/01/16/dole-around-the-world-how-does-australia-stack-up/?wpmp_switcher=mobile

    Progressives don’t want people to work for the dole in Australia. They say its demeaning. With new technology in mining, a boneheaded playstation junkie can operate ore trains and mining dump trucks from in front of a TV. There is no excuse.
    The same with many on disability pensions. A job will return some pride to these people. But Progressives want people utterly dependent on the government.
    Totalitarian heaven.

    • Dave N says:

      I have at least 2 friends (here in Adelaide) on DSP that want to work, yet the government gives businesses virtually no incentive to employ them.

      • Andy Oz says:

        Dave, I reckon the government shouldn’t get involved except as the safety net. I know there are all types of disabilities, but for example, most paraplegics could get a job in any commercial office in Australia. Govt Workplace regulations have made it harder not easier to employ a disabled person. Employers will therefore take the easy track and deselect candidates to minimise difficulties. I reckon a person on a DSP would value a chance more highly than most of the kids who think they deserve a job. I’d like to see more in my workplace and less narcissistic self centred kids pretending to be victims.

        • Gail Combs says:

          Boy you have that right. In the USA most companies want to employ young people because they are cheaper. If you are over 45 and out of a job you are just not going to get one and that was happening a decade or two ago. No longer do companies look at people as long term company assets. Instead they are just replacable pegs.

          I had that argument over at Forbes with an idiot who was trying to pedal Obunmmer as being good for the USA. He finally agreed that those over 55 were being forcibly retired but not counted by the government as “unemployed” because there WERE NO JOBS for that age group. They were ‘Too Expensive’ for companies to hire.

          When I was a Lab Manager and hiring I did not want anyone under thirty-five.

          Narcissistic self centred kids is a very good description of the losers I was forced to fire. Some had degrees in chemistry from good schools too. They would be horrified to think I hired a blue color construction worker to replace them and found him to be a really great worker and intelligent too. Unlike the lazy, brain dead, narcissistic, self centred young chemist I fired.

    • Gail Combs says:

      “A government that robs Peter to pay Paul can always depend on the support of Paul.” – George Bernard Shaw

      Shaw was one of the founders of the Fabian Society whose goal was the gradual take over of governments from within the system in stead of the violent revolution their brethren the Communists advocated. The ultimate goal of both flavors of socialism is the same. Universal Serfdom.

      Under Socialism, you would not be allowed to be poor. You would be forcibly fed, clothed, lodged, taught, and employed whether you liked it or not. If it were discovered that you had not character and industry enough to be worth all this trouble, you might possibly be executed in a kindly manner; but whilst you were permitted to live, you would have to live well.

      George Bernard Shaw: The Intelligent Woman’s Guide to Socialism and Capitalism, 1928, pg. 470)

      You did not have “character and industry enough” ???

      “whilst you were permitted to live”???

      Good Grief, is Shaw talking about Cattle or Chattel?

      The roots of the words are the same:

      chattel (n.)
      early 13c., chatel “property, goods,” from Old French chatel “chattels, goods, wealth, possessions, property; profit; cattle,” from Late Latin capitale “property” (see cattle, which is the Old North French form of the same word). Application to slaves (1640s) is a rhetorical figure of abolitionists, etc.
      http://www.etymonline.com/index.php?term=chattel

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s