PROPER GRAMMAR IS RACIST ACCORDING TO QUACKADEMIC EXPERT

PROPER GRAMMAR IS RACIST ACCORDING TO QUACKADEMIC EXPERT

It has been a while since I've indulged in one of my rants about Amairikuhn egdykayshun and the Gramscian cultural Marxist nitwittery prevailing in Amairikuhn quackademia. While some, for example, are applauding President Trump's selection of Betsy Devos as edgykayshun sekretairee, I have my misgivings, not the least because of her apparent advocacy of vouchers and charter schools and so on. Now, just for the record once again, I'm a real radical when it comes to Amairikuhn edgykayshun and Common Core and all that: things would be far better if the federal government were not involved at all, and on this score, vouchers and so on strike me as just another form of welfare, and yet another clever way the idiots in the swamp can dictate to states and localities. I'm of the John Taylor Gatto philosophy. There's no fixing the system; the system is the problem. The key pillars of that rotting edifice, standardized computerized tests and all the testing companies, teacher licensing requirements, all of it, has to go. Out. Not a penny more on all this claptrap.

Well, the latest nitwittery is that proper English grammar is racist, and that to be compassionate, we must view corrections of grammar as condescension and inherent racism:

College Writing Center Director Says Proper Grammar is ‘Racist’

Here, as always, the goal of the cultural Marxist is to break down the culture so that another can be imposed, and language is always crucial to this process, for it's fundamental that there be no common ground of communication on which any cultural cohesion or institutions can be based. This leaves the raw power of the state to be exercised to settle all disputes: perpetual division, in other words, is essential to the agenda. I would go farther, and say that the same attitudes are behind the "push" of modern "art" and "music", for the goal is the same: break down anything that carries tradition, whether language, or the arts. This is the Gramscian insight into how to cause genuine and lasting revolutionary change, and the American progressives - they are no longer liberal for now they openly censor, through their corporate media organs, any opposing ideas - follow this agenda to the "t".

But there's also hope, so this is not my usual nor conventional "rant," for there is also growing resistance to the continual treadmill of testing (which, remember, is designed to reinforce the above "values" in many cases); this article was shared by many readers of this site:

http://www.thecollegefix.com/post/28902/

Here's the crux of the article:

Indeed, PARCC, like assessments around the country, are used to measure school performance as a whole, and in some cases to also evaluate teaching performance. It’s federal law that schools must test students every year in grades 3 through 8, and then once in high school. Ninety-five percent of students must take the tests for schools not to be penalized.

Keep in mind, too, that we’re not talking about just one test. Students often must take multiple assessments several times a year in order to gauge their progress. Gone are the days when kids took one such exam per year which gave them (and their parents) a snapshot of how they were doing compared to their peers across the country.

And this is precisely why testing “opt-out” movements have been springing up all over the country: The sheer quantity of testing simply has gotten ridiculous.

Note that in the United States and several other western countries, tests are mandated by law, and that means, to put it as plainly as possible, that certain corporations which make the tests and sell the texts, are guaranteed an income at the public trough. And whenever there is guaranteed income at the public trough, standards plummet, and crud creeps in (think vaccines here, for a moment). But on optional tests, students increasingly opt out, and I suspect it's about more than just sheer exhaustion at the ridiculous numbers of tests they must take; I suspect it is also because the students themselves are not as stupid as the test-makers think they are; students increasingly, and not just intuitively, realize the system they are subjected to is both fraudulent, and a sham.

Here I have a confession: back in my public college teaching days, privately and on more than one occasion, I would tell students what they already knew: the vast majority of their education, and a significant number of their professors, were fraudulent. That is, they were being subjected to dumbed-down tasteless pudding, fraudulent assessment techniques (i.e., the standardized test), and that if they wanted an education, they'd have to read read read on their own while getting their first, second, and master mason degrees from their local lodge of quackademia.

Some are now recognizing this in yet another way: http://www.thecollegefix.com/post/31219/

Here one notes another obvious flaw of the standardized testing regime:

“Tests teach, they don’t just evaluate,” he said. “And I thought what was being taught on the SAT and ACT didn’t necessarily correspond to a Christian or Catholic worldview and in some ways, it seemed to undermine that.”

The exam’s parent company, Classic Learning Initiatives, was co-founded by Tate and David Wagner in fall 2015. They created a two-hour online test that prospective college students can take at a local testing center.

Scheduled on five dates per year, the test includes 120 questions and uses a 120-point scoring system. The test’s three sections – verbal reasoning, grammar/writing and quantitative reasoning – include 40 questions each. With an emphasis on classical education, the reading and writing sections include selections on religion and philosophy as well as historical founding documents.

Tate said the SAT and ACT’s promotion of globalization has eroded loyalty to any particular cultural or intellectual tradition. The CLT counters that. (Emphasis added)

This underscores something my co-author Gary Lawrence and I pointed out in our book Rotten to the (Common) Core, namely, that in the 1930s and 1940s - as the progressive movement captured American education and began its long and ultimately successful effort to turn it into quackademia and the breeding grounds for the shrieking and violent hysteria we see now - there were publications in the "professional education" field that explicitly stated the goal of education was socialization skills (echoing Dewey), and that students had to be trained to be good "world citizens." And that meant, of course, yet another severing of education as a means of preserving and conveying a cultural tradition, with its institutions of law and reason, its artistic and literary conventions, its philosophy and historical journey and evolution. Standardized tests are meant to convey, and enforce, a narrative approved by the corporations making and selling them, nothing more, nothing less. They are nothing but loyalty tests to that narrative.

Notably the second article implies something else, namely, that the large "big name" universities are now the laboratories of permanent revolution, offering nothing but continuous courses in how to feel (or induce) guilt, depending on one's race status. They have little to do with education in any traditional sense. Or to be more crisp about it: they are the hollowed-out husks of tradition, dedicated to the overturning of all tradition.You can tell because of their mandated courses in guilt-pandering: the courses that require them to use gender neutral language, or require them to "appreciate" other "cultures," and so on. It is the smaller, and predominantly liberal arts institutions, that are struggling to maintain the tradition of our culture and civilization.

So a word of advice: if you value your children's sanity and virtue, don't send them to institutions like Berserkley (our code name for the big American universities, state or otherwise)... they will come out knowing little of real value, and owing lots of money. They will come out mangled beyond recognition. If they are lucky, they will recognize they have been broken, and that they have been "had". Don't allow them to accept scholarships to those institutions if they are offered. They are corrupt to the core, and only offering a Faustian deal with the devil (which they can afford to do, since so many students are coming out of the public school system knowing nothing about Faust or deals with the devil, Marlowean, Goethean, or otherwise. Fewer still will have Dante's perspective about climbing out of hell on the back of the frozen devil). They will attend "schools" whose sole purpose is to desecrate and eventually destroy their soul; "schools" whose purpose is to rinse every blemish of the sublime, the good, the transcendent, the beautiful, or the divine from their memories; "schools" which will tell them it's ok to modify human DNA for the "promise of a brighter human future" while never permitting the debate to be had or aired.  I know students who have made that deal with the devil, and who have attended such quackademies, and the confusing rubble and debris of what used to be the ramparts of an individual  soul and an individual mind, is frightening, terrible, terrifying, and very, very sad.

See you on the flip side...

 

 

 

 

40 thoughts on “PROPER GRAMMAR IS RACIST ACCORDING TO QUACKADEMIC EXPERT”

  1. Using proper grammar? Just went to see the movie “Moonlight” because it won Best Picture at the Oscars … I could not understand most of what was being said, and the characters were black people in Florida speaking English. I am now completely mystified about why it won Best Picture … my vote would have gone to “Hidden Figures” or even “Hacksaw Ridge” . As a cheaply made movie ($1.6 million), “Moonlight” is strictly fodder for the Independent movie circuit. Then reading The Economist this week, a glowing review was given… with the sad tally of only 300,000 people having seen the movie so far. The Oscar win would mean more people would see it. wtf? Now I am starting to believe involvement from mind control/entrainment tech. “Moonlight” was a hackneyed, after-school-special of a movie, with a basic message–see what happens to poor black folks when they use drugs. People should be insulted by this movie. I can understand Hollywood giving up it’s last shred of credibility with a craven act of random Facebook likes … but The Economist? You want more people to see it. then speak with proper grammar.

  2. In Fascism they ban books.
    Howard Zinn’s, People’s History of the United States was banned by the Arizona School District[2012] & an Arkansas[just keep giving Waltons, Clintons…] State Representative wants to ban all Zinn’s books. Stephen Lendman then offered free copies to all Arkansas teachers who requested it[up to 250 at present count].

  3. One must recognize that the system itself is corrupt. That’s how it rolls. So any changes must be paradigm in pulling out the systemic roots of the system. For example, the corruption of the debt system that imbues its subject with the falsehood that your in their debt, that you owe them. As I/’ve related they’re whole basis is this planet is dead rock to be exploited. It’s NOT. This is a living planet to be enjoyed and nurtured for all beings to live to they’re fullest in loving, sharing, and in a spiritual awareness beyond life itself. We are being subjected from the very roots of our being, language, and other tools toward serving destruction and death of all that is living, and worth living for.
    Is not they who should be in a hurry to round us up; it’s us who should organize they’re last grip on control. It want be our first or last rodeo, but will make it they’re last.

  4. Doc, I think I see Lost’s point.
    All, you have no idea how much it pains to write that line.
    Lost, do us all a favor and look at Basta’s comment. As ever I think he nailed it. In this particular case, I think Doc is right. Marxism is a bear. That is the Hegelian dialectic direction of the day. I infered from Basta that’s simply the flavor of the day. Push hard enough and stop that cultural Marxism and be sure, right wing fascism will more than creep in. Pretty quick we’ll see some tripe from another Reagan presidency telling us to just say no. To any number of ideas we have absolutely no control over.

    Just moments ago I saw RT selling the meme that mankind has been a greedy pig and wrecked the planet. As if you and I and anyone who communicates at our level of income and education ever had a chance to play any decisive roll in how or how much mankind has polluted and looted this planet.

    Now this should be required reading at the freshmen level. In HIGHSCHOOL.
    https://www.amazon.com/As-World-Burns-Simple-Graphic/dp/1583227776/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1488599318&sr=8-1&keywords=derrick+jensen+denial

    Lost, I think as ever you’re splitting hairs over whether the fascism comes from the right or left.

    Basta, thank you for making the point I think you made: that the fascism just is. It comes from both right and left. Eventually and inevitably.

    Doc, please stop getting sucked into impertinent points by the likes of Lost and/or the political shadow puppet production companies who appear to be running this planet.

    By the way, did anyone notice any improvement in my grammar here?

    Thank you. Good night. zdb

    1. Nope, not splitting hairs.

      That Fascism is fundamentally corporate, and private business, (e.g. Krupp steel) oriented can’t be disputed without massively abusing the meanings of words.

      Then these private parties, very wealthy landowners in the case of Fascist Italy, use the state to keep their power.

      “Doc, please stop getting sucked into impertinent points by the likes of Lost and/or the political shadow puppet production companies who appear to be running this planet.”

      Darn if only I were being paid to post.

      1. Lost, by definition, that is correct. fascism is corporate governance. mussolini said exactly that.

        it’s what the royals are pushing with their PPP public private partnerships. it all sounds good. in fact it’s standard hostile takeover. privatize the profits and socialize the costs.

        whether it comes from right or left hardly matters. the banksters work with both sides. aka they own both sides. more accurately the own all sides. about the only folk i’ve seen who are probably not owned by such are the likes of john r wooden, marcin jakubowski, urbanfarmingguys.com,….

        so far i count doc in that list as well. even though none of us can say we’re not deeply influenced by rottenchildren et al.

        ironic really that i have this same argument day in and out with leftists and rightists everywhere. and they all count me as a member of the other side. even as i feed them far better ammunition against their foes than they get anywhere else.

  5. sorry , not enough time for learning, I am spending most of my spare time unlearning cause as Lloyd Pye said, everything you know is wrong.
    gotta get me an uneducatiun
    I spotted ‘tiny houses’ as a Sorosium first time someone mentioned it to me. tiny houses for tiny minds.

  6. Tie all this together with Common Core, Tiny Houses, skyrocketing autism, trans-humanism, and global collectivism and you’ve created the “holy grail.”

  7. I used to prefer math over English because the communication was precise. Simple formulas could be derived from complexity. English was ambiguous and communication lost in translation.
    Then I came to realize both were instruments; and both were being corrupted by powers that were using them to benefit their means to an end.
    Subtly at first; but it has evolved now to the point where all manners of discipline are coalescing around a common den[m]om[n]inator/FAKE.
    Fake news, fake science, fake history, fake math, fake English, and on and on like the fake eveready bunny. And ultimately ending where they’re purposed: fake humans/fake souls/fake life, fake living.

  8. Extremes in politics end up fusing — go far enough left or right, towards communism or fascism — and the two join. Ideologies are not linear but arcing.

    That said, these are cultural Marxists, who have infiltrated education throughout he West, and they are cultivating the next generation of Lenin’s useful idiots. It is no surprise that once the Fed Gov got a hold of education, it went straight to you-know-where. That was purposeful, and those who should know said the program was modeled on Communist China’s system of indoctrination.

    This entire ideology encouraging youth to celebrate their failures as successes and their deficiencies as strengths is of course not “empowerment” but enslavement. This too is purposeful, ensuring a generation too ignorant to question authority or challenge the status quo.

    It’s a hideous, destructive, psychopathic mindset that would consciously set out to do this to the youth of the country, but then these monsters are bent on wrecking the country, ordo ab chao, to loot it and enslave it.

  9. This has a long pedigree when one culture conquers another they usual impose their culture on them. This just part of that conquest system so called Marxism is just the latest façade behind which enslave and destroy new man creation machine continues to march on. An language is usually the hub of this machine since all languages all come with their worldview and cosmology they ban the conquered language and impose their own to complete the enslavement including names.

  10. Joseph’s ‘lecture’ bears/bares much truth. I wanted to take it a little further:

    Potential skills atrophy when they are not used. Where – especially in the early grades, when the mind is still open – are the classes in applied telepathy, empathy, telekinesis, meditation/prayer, shapeshifting, channeling (with safeguards), manifesting, etc?

    From my viewpoint, the intentional leaving-out (even ridicule) of these ‘skill sets’ says a LOT about those who would rule over us…

      1. ZDB, I think a lot of the answer is just to have the parents get out of the way. (And, do home schooling with fellow parents who are ‘in’ with the alt program.) I know a parent who – when her kid talked about seeing colors around people – didn’t poo-poo it or withdraw affection/love. Instead, the parent ‘pretended’ that this vision was natural. The kid grew up to be able to see auras – still – as an teen. By the time the negative reinforcement started to kick-in from the culture, the teen was strong-enough to withstand the flak. Generalize that to other ‘gifts’…

        Kids are easily mind-controlled via the Skinner behaviorism techniques: positive reinforcement, negative reinforcement, and non-response. We have to note those PTB ‘techniques’ in-play around non-consensus abilities, and protect the kids from being shut down – long enough for the kids to grow their inner strength to resist. They will take it from there…

        1. yeh. i can relate to that. seems that’s most of what james redfield’s about. that’s probably the whole point for ai doing what it’s doing. the whole software simulation of life think. how ya gonna get your hands on and control the one aspect that defines life unless you simulate life exactly? and since 100% exact simulation is not possible, then….

  11. I somehow suspect that these self-proclaimed “enemies of grammar” would take an entirely different attitude regarding any interpretation, to their disadvantage, of clauses in their employment contract or rent contract…

  12. “Here, as always, the goal of the cultural Marxist is to break down he culture so that another can be imposed, ”

    Why this be limited to Marxists? The Nazis did this. Defenders of the delusions of Reaganomics did/do this. Defenders of the 2003 invasion of Iraq, and there are many in the mainstream press, do it all the time in 2017.

    In other words the above quotation is itself an example of limiting language for a purpose.

    Also, the first link is just a rant, not an identifiable university/college program or philosophy. There aren’t even any citations of some offending program at a university.

          1. Phil:

            “Try as I might, Lost, I do not see that you have one–”

            Of course you don’t. That’s why you had to input excuses.

            No, I don’t approve of your trivialization.

    1. Essentially because in the end I see little difference between socialism, Marxist, Fascist, or otherwise. We have to remember Fascism was a movement of the Left, not the right. There’s an excellent book out called LIberal Fascism that goes into this tangled history.

      1. No, fascism is not of the left; it is a powerful state working for corporate power–private interests. There’s zero debate about this. Claims to the contrary are abuses of language and meaning to suit an end–irony. That there are leftwing totalitarian systems is an entirely different matter.

        The control of language used to induce a wished for result is hardly only of the left (And of course Marxists very much see the import of preserving languages, irony again). What do you think the Spaniards were doing from California south to Argentina circa 1600?

        Or the Romans, they destroyed a Druid library in what is now Paris, why?

        Or the French and the English driving Algonquin speakers out of eastern USA?

        1. Again, Lost, I must disagree. Don’t allow yourself to be persuaded by the usual branding of Fascism as a right wing phenomenon. It isn’t. I would urge you to read the book I mentioned before becoming truly Lost.

          1. Fascism is fundamentally corporate, private, this is the opposite of the left. That these private interests then use state power to enforce their agenda isn’t in dispute. They often call for a state religion too. Again, totally antithetical to leftist views.

            Goldberg is not a legitimate source on pretty much any subject. And even more extremely so here. He’s of the ilk who’d claim that Castro killed JFK.

            He has skewed definitions for his end.

            Authoritarian systems of both the left and the right can readily exist, but the former does not promote private interests or a single form of spirituality.

          2. I wanted to add this passage from page 88 of the expanded and revised edition of The Ascendancy of the Scientific Dictatorship, by Phillip and Paul Collins:

            “…[communism and fascism] were always little more than variants of the same Masonic concept. The core commonalities of these two political movements can be demonstrated through simple linguistic analysis.

            “The appellation of “communism” comes from the Latin root cummunis, which means “group” living. Fascism is a derivation of the Italian word fascio, which is translated as “bundle” or “group.” Both fascism and communism are forms of coercive group living, or more succinctly, collectivism. The only substantial difference between the two is fascism’s limited observance of private property rights, which is ostensible at best given its susceptibility to rigid government regulation. In 1933, the Fuehrer candidly admitted to Herman Rauschning that: “the whole of National Socialism is based on Marx” (Malachi Martin, The Keys of This Blood, 239). Nazism (a variant of fascism) is derivative of Marxism. The historical conflicts between communism and fascism were merely feuds between two socialist totalitarian camps, not two dichotomously related forces.

            “As systems of socialism, both fascism and communism represent a continuation of Francis Bacon’s technocratic tradition.”

        2. If you go far enough “left” and far enough “right” you end up with essentially the same thing: centralized dictatorship. The meanings of most of these political labels have lost their meaning, and indeed often mean the opposite of their origin. I think this partly explains why so many people get in a twist when using these labels, it’s because often people have very different conceptions of what they are talking about. Liberalism, for example, originally meant (roughly speaking) a check on the power of the state over individual rights. Now it refers to state capitalism. Liberalism now is a very authoritarian position because it accepts a large degree of state control and the massive accumulation of private power. In such a society of massive private, corporate and state power, what can be called liberal democracy is essentially a dictatorship with the illusion of meaningful democracy. Cultural hegemony is the ideological bars that constrain one’s view and subordination to power.

  13. Indeed, want to learn anything you have to do that yourself. But it is handy to get tidbits of info where to look and go off and educate yourself.
    I have learned more thru this site and Joseph’s vid chats then ever school provided.
    I can’t thank you enough for that.

Comments are closed.