U.S.A. Schooling
the Communist Way (Part 1)
Commentary
by Brannon S. Howse
Several weeks ago, I was sitting in a hotel
lobby sipping a Coke and visiting with my friend Michael Reagan who had just
given a speech before several hundred people. Mike, as you may know, is a
best-selling author, radio talk-show host, Fox News contributor, and eldest
son of President Ronald Reagan.
A few minutes into our conversation, Mike remembered
something he wanted to tell me. “Brannon,” he said, cocking his head in my
direction, “I thought of you this morning when I read the newspaper.”
I wondered if he was about to crack a joke
at my expense but noted that there was no trace of a smirk on Mike’s face.
“Really?” I wondered, “What made you think of me?” “Well,”
Mike said before pausing for an instant (I wonder where he picked up that mannerism) “I was thinking of you
because I read in the paper that Jeb Bush has become
the first governor in America to sign into law a state-wide 
requirement
that ninth-grade high school students pick a career major and focus on that
major from ninth through twelfth grade. You’ve predicted something like that
on my radio show more than once since 1993—also in your book for which I wrote
the foreword.”
Mike was correct. It’s a prediction I hoped
Americans would be wise enough to stop before it came to pass. As the education
reporter and often the guest host of Michael Reagan’s program I had spent
countless hours warning Mike’s listeners about Goals 2000, School-to-Work,
Outcome-Based Education, HR6, No Child Left Behind, and other federal plans
that have the goal of merging education with industrial production, thus turning
our schools into vocational centers where students are “trained” [And indoctrinated.]
rather than educated.
Republicans and Democrats alike are to blame
for nailing this tenth plank of the Communist
Manifesto into the educational foundation of schools right here in the
good old U.S. of A. Lest you think I exaggerate, the tenth principle of the
Communist Manifesto states that the goal
of schooling for society’s children should be the “combination of education
with industrial production.”
Starting in 1992, the transformation of America’s
schools into vocational centers greatly accelerated. T.G. Stict, who served under Secretary of Labor Robert Reich, has
observed, “Many companies have moved operations to places with cheap, relatively
poorly educated labor. What may be crucial, they say, is the dependability
of a labor force and how well it can be managed and trained, not its general education level.” In other
words, as long as we can control people, who cares what they know?
Through programs like School-to-Work the “State”
decides which children will go on to college and which go straight into the
workforce after obtaining their “training certification.” State education
authorities review a student’s educational history and determine the career
track the individual will follow. The desires of Big Brother, I mean, the
State take precedent over the wishes of the individual or their parents. Those
who conform to governmental standards are rewarded with further education
and a good job. Those who do not reflect the liberal, Secular Humanist worldview
will likely be pushed to vocational jobs where their Christian worldview is
less likely to have an impact on the culture. [See Publisher’s Note at the
end of this article.]
The California PTA has noted that “School-to-Work
is based on the premise that government control can do a better job of training
individuals, satisfying occupational demands and managing the development
of economic activities than can the effort and initiative of millions of individuals.”
The draconian educational measures of the past
fifteen years have made strange bedfellows. President George H. W. Bush gave
us America 2000. Although President Clinton later changed the name to Goals
2000, he supported the program and pushed through several federal bills that
further meshed education with industrial production. President George W. Bush
expanded what his father and President Clinton had begun when he cozied up with Ted Kennedy to give us a massive federal program
with the irresistible sound-bite name, “No Child Left Behind.” Florida Governor
Jeb Bush then took advantage of federal funds available
from his older brother’s program and on June 5, 2006 signed into law the ninth-grade
career major requirement. Florida is the first state in the nation to require
this state-wide. Under Florida’s new law, career exploration will begin as
early as sixth-grade. By ninth-grade, students will need to declare their
career major. Several other states are not far behind and will soon join Florida
in this radical American implementation of the Communist Manifesto.
Did you know what you wanted to do when you
were in the ninth-grade? Do you wish the government had decided for you then
what you would be doing for the rest of your life to earn a living? Would
that seem like a heavy-handed restriction on your freedom to be self-determining?
(In case you need help on this test, the right answers are No-No-Yes.)
Students will be encouraged to select a career
that will direct them either along a vocational track or a college-bound track.
With the assistance (or coercion, perhaps?) of school career counselors, students
will be channeled into the path that is “right” for them. But here’s one of
the big problems that is guaranteed to arise: If a ninth-grade student who
decides on the auto mechanic track, for example, changes his mind in the eleventh
or twelfth-grade, he’s stuck without the schooling needed to go to college
upon graduation. At that point, a vocational track student will not have taken
courses needed for acceptance into college.
Some of you may consider this a good idea since
not everyone should be college bound. And I agree that in many regards, college
is a waste of time and money unless a person aspires to be a doctor, 
lawyer,
nurse, engineer, or other such professional. Several studies reveal that many,
if not most, of America’s millionaires do not have college degrees. Such notables
as Rush Limbaugh, Bill Gates, President Harry Truman, and the late Peter Jennings
never graduated from college. Yet, while a college degree is not needed for
success, an academically sound education from kindergarten through twelfth-grade
is essential for every student regardless of their post-high school plans.
It is the only way to have an informed citizenry.
Perhaps even more critical, the federal government
is not qualified to project the supply and demand of the workforce two years—much
less ten years—from now. Trying to do so is one of the stultifying aspects
of centrally planned economies (remember the Soviet Union?). Whether the plan
is called Ready-to-Work, School-to-Work, School-to-Career, Small Learning
Communities, or any other sound-bite crafted moniker, it is still a fulfillment
of the Communist Manifesto, not
the Declaration of Independence
or any other foundational American document.
The frightening reality is that codifying these
programs will only make an already dangerous situation worse. Even without
Florida-style programs solidly in place, many students are already finding
themselves channeled where they don’t want to go.
In part 2 of this series, we will examine several
examples of how honor students that are also conservative Christians have
been funneled into jobs as bartenders and waitresses. And bear in mind as
elections approach that you can’t simply assume a given Republican or Democrat
is for or against such programs just because of party affiliation. You’ll
have to find out where each individual candidate stands. Educational communism
is not a party-specific issue. So be careful not to vote for someone who will
add a communist plank to an election platform.
U.S.A. Schooling
the Communist Way (Part 2)
After Part 1 of this series appeared, I received
several e-mails that confirmed my fears: Far too many of my fellow citizens
actually think School-to-Work is a good idea.
“Why,”
I wondered, “would any American think the merging of education with industrial
production as found in the Communist
Manifesto benefit our children?” It must be because they are educated
beyond their intelligence, they love socialism and communism, or they don’t
recognize Marxism even when it stares them in the face.
Let me be very clear on a few things. First,
I think vocational education is a good idea. I also think apprenticeship programs
are an outstanding approach to career preparation for some people. Too many
students are pressured to go to college just because “that’s the way to get
ahead.” And I certainly do not believe
state and federal governments should be the ones pressuring students to go
to college or not or pressuring students to pick certain career majors. All
students from first-grade through the twelfth should receive a strong academic
education that will well prepare them to be thinking, creative persons in
life and in whatever career they choose.
If you think School-to-Work style education
reform is not occurring where you live, then you need to ask whether or not
your state receives any federal education funds. If your state is not receiving federal dollars, this communist
brand of education reform may not be taking place. But lest you be even slightly
optimistic, I’ll tell you plainly that I don’t know of a single state that
has rejected federal education funds and the accompanying mandates. That means,
it’s happening right where you live. Whether it is private grants, No Child
Left Behind, or some other U.S. Department of Education and U.S. Department
of Labor program, states are rushing to comply with federal requirements so
they can gorge themselves at Uncle Sam’s money trough. [Our
tax dollars.]
Florida, Minnesota, Illinois, Oregon, and Washington
are further along in their implantation of School-to-Work/Ready-to-Work/Small
Learning Communities, but make no mistake: Every state in the union has school
districts that are in some way weaving this reform package into their systems,
thereby moving America down the road toward a centrally planned economy.
Lynn Cheney, wife of Vice-President Dick Cheney,
is the former chair-woman of the National Endowment for the Humanities (NEH).
While serving with NEH, Mrs. Cheney wrote about the dangers of School-to-Work:
“A central thesis of School-to-Work plans, for example, is that eighth-graders
should choose careers. To help them along, schools administer interest and
personality assessments that direct students toward specific occupations,
often ones that have little to do with their ambitions. Kristine Jensen, a
Nevada mother, told me that her daughter, an honor student who wants to work
for NASA, had been advised to consider a career in sanitation or interior
design. Eunice Evans, a parental-rights advocate in Pennsylvania, described
a boy in her neighborhood that wanted to be a doctor but was told it would
be more appropriate for him to be a gas station attendant or a truck-driver.”
Mrs. Cheney also pointed out the goal of Workforce
Development Boards—backed profusely by federal funds—that now exist in almost
every state: “To consider future market needs and decide which 
career
choices schools should encourage. But predicting work-force needs is an iffy
business. In 1989, for example, a prestigious study declared that by 1997,
there would be a substantial shortage of humanities Ph.D’s,
when, in fact, there is now a glut.”
We need more public servants like Craig Hagen
who will take a stand for what is right. In her congressional testimony, Lynn
Cheney told Mr. Hagen’s story: “Concerned that schools in his state would
get in the business of enforcing politically correct thinking led Craig Hagen,
North Dakota’s Commissioner of Labor, to resign from his state’s School-to-Work
management team earlier this year. ‘I couldn’t remain in that position with
my principles,’ he said.”
But abuses abound. In Las Vegas, for example,
Rene Tucker’s daughter, Darcy, was pulled out of a geography class without
her parents’ consent in order to be given a computerized career assessment.
Although Darcy wants to become a veterinarian, the computer held that she
should be a bartender or waitress, and it spat out a list of courses she ought
to take toward that end. Mrs. Tucker said, “We’re Christians, and the school
stepped on my toes as a parent. It is my job to direct my child’s career path,
and it would not be in her best interest to be a bartender.” Given the gargantuan
hospitality needs of the state, it might be in Nevada’s best interest to turn
Darcy into one of the minions of the gambling and entertainment industry,
but that approach to career path development sounds more like it belongs in
the 1960s Soviet Union than in 21st century America.
A few years ago I testified before the Kansas
state senate along with Rene Tucker. We were joined by an economist from Hillsdale
College to urge Kansas not to implement School-to-Work in that state. The
anticipated tidal wave of federal funds was too much for the mere state of
Kansas to resist though, and on behalf of its people, the state legislature
instead rejected common sense and freedom to embrace the failed economic polices
of communism.
In his now classic book, Brave New World, Aldous
Huxley wrote, “To bring about the revolution we require…Enabling government
managers to assign any given individual to his or her proper place in the
social and economic hierarchy. Round pegs in square holes tend to have dangerous
thoughts about the social system and to infect others with their discontents.”
In other words, those who do not agree
with the State’s worldview or “standards” will not be encouraged to pursue
positions of power or influence either socially or economically.
A career exploration test already used in six
states features 100 true or false questions, including these:
