Decoding Confusing Doctrine
Document # 029.0.1.1 #10 >>>>Disclaimer: This document may be
used
as you will except: If you change anything in the text, remove my name and
other Ident. You may use it without my identification also if you wish...I
only ask that people read it and think...think...think. Sources/Ref's if not
in the text will be found on the last page of Doc 000.0.0.1 and 000.0.6.
CLMsr.<<<<
We have a Constitution and our Bill of Rights (the first 10 amendments) that
makes us free. Right? Then visit:
http://www.trimonline.org
http://www.getusout.org
http://www.thenewamerican.com
http://www.givemeliberty.org
http://nca.mybravenet.com
http://www.jbs.org
Then take a look at these sites:
http://www.dixierising.com
http://www.dixienet.org
http://www.palmetto.org
http://www.southerncaucus.org
http://www.spofga.org
Part 1.. The following article will be of interest to people from any state,
because the goals and tactics shown here are occurring nation-wide.
Decoding St. Paul's "Education Blueprint". St. Paul Public Schools
recently published a document called, Education Blueprint: A
Practical Guide for Redesigning our Secondary Schools,1 (hereafter called
the Blueprint). Here we decode that document.
In 1999, St. Paul got a new superintendent of public schools, Patricia
Harvey. She came from the NCEE2 (National Center for Education and the
Economy) where she worked closely with its president, Marc Tucker.3 This is
the same Marc Tucker who authored the infamous "Dear Hillary" Letter, and
the same NCEE that figures prominently in all phases of the federal takeover
and restructuring of education, employment, and the economy, now underway.
It was published with virtually no media coverage or public notice, the key
legislation had already been passed at the federal level, with
corresponding legislation quietly passed here in Minnesota.
The public was in the dark. Patricia Harvey was brought in to actualize
the radical new system into Minnesota, with St. Paul as its centerpiece.
Under her direction, a number of focus groups were held to "gather input"
from the public, after which the St. Paul "Education Blueprint" was created
and published. It lays out a plan effectively identical to the one given
nearly a decade ago by the NCEE and Marc Tucker. The Blueprint displays many
of the goals and tactics of the new education radicals. All the following
quotes are from that document.
Small learning community: "Every student will be engaged in a small
learning community by 2005-2006." The Blueprint repeatedly emphasizes the
importance of creating a "small learning community" for the student. This
concept comes (as most everything else about the new system) from the NCEE.
(See it on the NCEE website.) They define it as a small group of students
(said to be typically from 200 to 400, and not more than 600 students) who
share many of the same classes (and perhaps teachers too) for years at a
time - thus forming a "community." But in most schools, the traditional
grade level (say, the tenth grade class) already meets that definition! So
why does the Blueprint call for a new structure?
Answer: A "small learning community" is pleasant sounding verbiage used to
restructure schools along vocational lines. It is political spin - ambiguous
and evasive about its real intentions - used to sell a radical reform
agenda.
In practice, a "small learning community" will correspond to a career
cluster (or embryonic version of it in the lower grades). A school will be
divided into a number of small learning communities, that cut across grade
levels - each aligned with a specific career cluster. "Every student" will
be in one of these. This division into "small learning communities" is one
of the ways the government (through its appointed workforce boards, etc.)
will railroad children into specified careers, even before the child
consciously makes any decision about it.
Centralized economic planning: "Based on federal and state research on
where job growth is anticipated, Saint Paul secondary schools will consider
six career clusters as a focus of their small learning environments" The new
system is centralized economic planning. "Federal and state" workforce
committees will make projections of "where job growth is anticipated", then
(together with various political considerations) schools and curricula are
planned to narrowly educate our children for those jobs! The central
planners will determine the "career clusters" offered in schools, and into
which our children will be corralled. "Six career clusters" have already
been specified for St. Paul. The above statement again hints at the real
reason for the small learning communities - each one is to "focus" on a
career cluster.
Mandatory work-based learning: "The Saint Paul Public Schools is committed
to ensuring growing percentages of student and
teacher participation in work-based learning opportunities directly
connected to classroom learning." "The percentage of students participating
in comprehensive, relevant work and community-based learning opportunities
will grow ... to 100 percent by 2005-06."
Work-based and community-based education (at a job-site) is to become
mandatory, involving "100 percent" of students! The Blueprint refers to this
as "participation" in an "opportunity," which misleadingly suggests that
students have the option not to. On the contrary, it is a mandate, pure and
simple. The Blueprint proudly displays a photo of a schoolgirl at work,
holding a roll of film and pushing buttons on an automated film processing
machine. The caption boasts, "[She] got hands-on experience in media arts
at an internship in the Walgreens photo department." Working at Walgreens
instead of being in school! For most students, this is a tragedy in the
making. This menial job is not a fit education, (and that film processing
machine will be obsolete in a few years anyway). This illustrates a key
point of contention. The shift away from broad, knowledge-based education,
makes students dependent on authorities for even the basics. It leaves
students ill-prepared for life as free-citizens and voters. We say students
ought not be forced into narrow job-training that will leave them (and our
nation) susceptible to dependency and government control.
The typical high school student (even one interested in "media arts")
should be in school getting a rigorous, broad-based, knowledge-filled
education, suitable for a lifetime of liberty and making one's own choices.
Vocational training (especially work-based) should be un-typical, and always
and only at the choice of parents and student. Not mandated.
Systematic narrowing of education toward job-skills. The following group
of quotations document:
A shift away from broad, knowledge-based, academic education, and toward a
narrow focus on job-skills.
A student's lifework plan and structured career education are to begin in
elementary school (in kindergarten).
Mandatory work-based "career exploration", including mandatory volunteerism
or "service learning".
The new system invades student/family privacy by requiring each student to
supply a "comprehensive life plan", which will then be "considered" (by
various bureaucrats and workforce boards) in "planning" that student's
education.
Students are to choose (or be corralled into) one of the government
specified career clusters, through which the "standards" of their education
will be specified and "made relevant".
"Career clusters will help students focus in their preparation for careers
..." "Learning must also be more closely connected to industry standards,
... and the careers for which students are preparing."
"Students will participate in structured career education starting in
elementary school." "All students participate in a variety of career
exploration opportunities including job shadowing, mentor-ships, internships
and service learning connected with their life plan."
"Each student has a comprehensive life plan, which is considered in
planning learning experiences."
"Students identify a career cluster through which their work on standards
is made relevant ..."
Block scheduling. "Additional strategies for making schools 'feel smaller'
may include: flexible scheduling to allow extended class periods for ...
work-based learning" Block scheduling is a national phenomenon driven from
the federal level, and whose primary purpose is to allow easier scheduling
of longer blocks of time away from school - at work-sites. Its effect is
fundamentally anti-academic, pro-job-training. The Blueprint cynically
suggests its purpose is to make schools "feel smaller."
Minimum expectations. "Standards will end the practice of holding
different expectations for different students." The only way to "end the
practice of holding different expectations for different students" is to
have minimum expectations - which is precisely what the new system does, and
why it is such a tragedy. It reflects a key goal of the new system: one set
of outcomes for all. It intends to equalize outcomes by focusing on minimum
competencies, and defining those as the standard of "success" by which
educators will be judged. (See more on outcome-based education and its
peculiar measure of success). That is radically different from the
traditional goal of education, which is to provide opportunities for
students to become all they can be.
Predetermined consensus - the Delphi Technique. The Delphi Technique is a
range of methods for manipulating committees, task forces, or other groups
to give the appearance of group decision-making, when the outcome of the
group process has been previously established by those who set up the group
and orchestrate its activities. It is one of the common strategies of
central planners and is used to give the appearance of local decision-making
when none exists.
For example:
1.Hold input-gathering sessions "by invitation only", then invite
predominantly only people with the proper leanings.
2.Shape the "responses", by asking only particular types of questions.
3.If a person voices opposition, there are a range of techniques for
alienating, ostracizing, and effectively silencing that person. (For
teachers and administrators who oppose the new system, this includes subtle
threats to their job.)
4.Patiently collect input, then largely leave out (or misrepresent) the
opposition's views from the published results.
Those techniques are being used here in Minnesota to sell the new system,
and the Blueprint builds upon those illusions:
"On June 5 and 6, 2000, at Superintendent Patricia Harvey's request,
Governor Jesse Ventura opened the governor's residence for a two-day
conference. In attendance were local CEOs, representatives from higher
education, Saint Paul Public Schools, and community leaders. The purpose of
this meeting was to gain community perspectives on two fundamental
questions:
'What knowledge and skills do our students need to be prepared?' and 'How
should schools change to ensure all students gain needed knowledge and
skills?'
Participants expressed many ideas about what today's students need to learn
to achieve personal, academic and career goals. In addition, the community
offered to help the Saint Paul school district address these issues.
On July 18, and through the summer and fall, this discussion was repeated
several times with various community, student, and district employee groups.
Each group added its input to our growing database of ideas on what students
need to be better prepared for the future, and how schools should adapt to
ensure student success."
The above language suggests the new system was designed through abundant,
meaningful input from the community. But that is nonsense: (1) The public
never gave permission or acceptance of this radical new system. On the
contrary, they are still in the dark about its true nature. (2) The
so-called "result" of all this community input - the Blueprint - happens to
be identical to the system specified by Marc Tucker, the NCEE, (and Patricia
Harvey) nearly ten years ago! The various meetings and focus groups are a
farce, used for presenting a predetermined outcome as though the public came
up with it.
Change the keywords. When people became aware of the radical
School-to-Work agenda, they began to oppose it, and it started getting a bad
name. In response, its proponents left its legislation entirely intact and
simply changed its name! For example, in year 2000, the Minnesota
legislature passed a bill changing all its previous occurrences of the
phrase "School-to-Work" to "Career and Technical", thus keeping its purpose
and effect, but changing only the name. With this simple mischief, many
legislators (mistakenly) proclaimed, "There is no School-to-Work in
Minnesota!" The Blueprint follows that same prescription, for the words
"School-to-Work" occur nowhere in it. Instead, the Blueprint uses the words
"School-to-Future". But the agenda, purpose, and effect, are identical!
Portfolios. "Students maintain a portfolio that reflects academic and
applied skills within the context of their life plan." "Portfolios and exit
interviews will be a graduation requirement for students in the class of
2005 and beyond."
Performance-based learning is a peculiar (and usually bad) teaching method
mandated by the new system. Instead of direct classroom instruction, it
relies on tasks and projects, that are often menial and performed in small
groups (where group members tend to receive the same score). The "portfolio"
is to contain results of these projects, usually in the form of subjective
evaluations of the student's behavior. This is different from the
traditional academic tests, which objectively measure the student's mastery
and knowledge. The emphasis on portfolios (especially as a "graduation
requirement") further signals the shift away from academics and knowledge,
and toward vocation and the performance of job-skills.
Mentor/Advocates. "Every student will have a mentor/advocate by the
2005-06 school year." Students already have a guidance counselor. So why
does the new system require "every" student to also have a mentor/advocate?
(1) It will further strain educational resources. (2) It is a further
government takeover of the rights and duties of parents. (3) It signals a
more complicated - government controlled - education system, where the
student has an "advocate" to fight against the arbitrary restrictions of
government control and regimented career clusters. (More about
mentor/advocates and lifework plans.)
Footnotes:
1 See also St. Paul's online version of the document: "St. Paul Public
School Education Blueprint - A Practical Guide for Redesigning our Secondary
Schools" It appears to be similar (but not identical) to the printed
version of the document likewise published by St. Paul Public Schools and
analyzed above.
2 For more information about Marc Tucker and the NCEE, see: Allen
Quist's book, The Seamless Web especially Appendix F, "The New Standards
Project" Also see the report by Diane Fessler:
Origin of the National Center on Education and the Economy (NCEE)
Original NCEE Board Members
Clinton Administration Receives NCEE's Plan
NCEE's Agenda
NCEE's Family of Programs for Accomplishing the Agenda
Overview of NCEE's System of Standards, Assessments and Certificates
National Impact of the NCEE Programs and Funding
How State Standards Become Linked to NCEE's New Standards
3 Patricia Harvey and Marc Tucker at the NCEE produced their
"America's Choice" curriculum book, called "The Portraits of Learning",
which (unknown to the Minnesota legislators and the public) was the origins
of Minnesota's "Profiles of Learning". They are effectively identical,
right down to the names.
4 The radical new system was begun by the following key federal
legislation: Goals 2000, the School-to-Work (STW) Opportunities Act, and
the Workforce Investment Act (WIA). (Note: Goals 2000 and STW have been
likened to 'scaffolding', which is essential to setting up a new structure,
but which itself is later removed once the new structure is firmly in
place - these two federal laws
operate the same way. So, do not be put off by claims that those two laws
will be sunset-ed - the structure they put in place is being continued
through other legal means, having various other names.)
AMERICAN HERITAGE ACT. Minnesota House File 1028. Testimony by Michael J.
Chapman. Given before the Minnesota House Education Committee on March 6,
2001.
My name is Michael J. Chapman. I am a resident of Eden Prairie, a father
of two children, a full time technical writer, an author and education
researcher. I am the founder of American Heritage Research, and for many
years, I have conducted curriculum reviews given in-service training on
teaching accurate, balanced history to educators throughout the nation.
Thank you for the opportunity to speak in favor of House File 1028.
The purpose of the American Heritage Act is not about the state
"dictating" curriculum to local school districts. Rather, it is about the
preservation of freedom. President Woodrow Wilson once explained: "A nation
which does not remember what it was yesterday, does not know what it is
today nor what it is trying to do." How can the people of the state of
Minnesota "perpetuate the blessings of civil and religious liberty" as
stated in our state constitution, if we no longer teach the next generation
of leaders and citizens the truth about the source of our freedom?
Political indoctrination in Minnesota's school-books.
I have found that textbooks within Minnesota schools frequently omit the
truth of our heritage simply because of religious references. For example,
in order to determine the root ideas behind our government, this popular
eighth grade Minnesota textbook sites a study of 15,000 quotations from our
founding era that were matched to the sources most often quoted by our
founders. The textbook reports that the three most often quoted individuals
were Montesquieu, Hume and Lock. Attributing these three to the
enlightenment movement sweeping Europe, the authors conclude that America
must be enlightenment-based. 1
Unfortunately, the authors ignore some important facts from the original
study. Not mentioned in the textbook, but revealed in the actual study, The
Bible was directly quoted by our founders twice as often as the top three
individuals combined! Ignoring this fact, the textbook concludes, "Here
they were, the first people in history to have the chance to create an
entirely new government based on Enlightenment principles.". 2 Clearly,
the complete study indicates that the Bible had much more to do with our
founding era than the enlightenment.
The French revolution, based on enlightenment principles led to anarchy
and the reign of terror, and finally to the dictatorship of Napoleon.
France has been through seven completely different forms of government since
its revolution. America alone, has remained a stable nation and is now the
longest running constitutional republic in history.
This kind of omission is typical of lessons I've found in Minnesota from
second grade through college. For example, a popular second grade Silver,
Burdette and Ginn textbook, 3, includes the "pledge of allegiance to the
flag," but omits important phrases in a discussion list of definitions.
Not only is "under God" omitted from discussion, but also left out is the
entire phrase, "...and to the Republic for which it stands." These phrases
represent the real importance of our national symbol. According to the
accompanying lesson worksheet, children learn that "We say the pledge to
honor our flag," not the Republic for which it stands! Without a constant
reminder of our true heritage contained within this simple pledge, our
children will readily trade the "pledge of allegiance" for the new "pledge
to the earth" becoming popular in some schools. After all, isn't the "earth"
more important than a "flag?"
Minnesota textbooks often present a negative bias of our Founders and the
American Revolution, while portraying other nations in strictly positive
terms. Without an accurate foundation from which to draw, it is easy to see
how our students may come to view America negatively.
For example, even Thomas Jefferson, of all people, is accused of being a
sexist and racist because of his use of the phrase, "All men are created
equal" within the Declaration of Independence. This popular 4th grade Social
Studies textbook states, "When Jefferson wrote that 'all men' were equal,
he really meant 'all citizens.' Women and blacks were not included." 4.
This is just silly. The publisher has simply applied a 20th century
definition to a common 18th century use of the word "men." Jefferson was
clearly referring to the species "human-kind," not a specific gender or
race!
Likewise, this 8th grade textbook only mentions John Quincy Adams once,
stating: "Adams stood for the old republican values [and] he represented
the ruling elite, the wealthy, and the well educated. He was known as a
harsh, stubborn person... [he] was not a strong leader because he received
no popular support from the people."5.
Left out of this Minnesota textbook: At age 14, Adams received the
Congressional appointment to the Court of Catherine the Great in Russia; He
was a US Senator, US Minister to France and a US Minister to Britain, where
he negotiated the Treaty of Ghent, ending the War of 1812. He was Secretary
of State for President Monroe. He was our 6th President, and after his term,
he was re-elected to the Legislature and served as a US Congressman for 18
consecutive years! (This doesn't sound to me like "he received no popular
support!") He also tirelessly fought against the slave trade earning the
nickname, "The Hell-Hound of Slavery."
The American Revolution is often debased, and our founders often described
as "mobs of angry patriots." For example, this textbook describes our war
for Independence as, "a destructive civil war and a rebellion against
England"6.
Yet in World History textbooks, the Russian Revolution is portrayed as, "an
extremely important event in modern world history,"7, in which, "Lenin
captured the hopes of thousands."
Our children get fed a steady stream of inaccuracies supporting socialist
history. For example, this painting showing smiling peasants surrounding
the benevolent Mao Zedong is portrayed as true, and includes this lesson
text, "The Communists, meanwhile, had become very popular.Mao and his
followers talked with thousands of people. The Communists also worked
with farmers, showing them ways to produce more crops."8.
Compare that positive bias to the negative slant placed on this painting
by Paul Revere depicting The Boston Massacre. It is introduced as "a
propaganda piece," and the text states: "A band of unemployed laborers
attacked the [British] guard.Patriots immediately branded the incident a
"massacre" to gain sympathy for their cause. .Anti-British feeling ran
highest in...Boston...Samuel Adams.whipped up crowds of protesters and wrote
inflammatory newspaper articles."9.
Upon further study, one finds that these "inflammatory newspaper articles,"
were actually the "Committees of Correspondence," which were largely
responsible for the unity and cohesion of the Colonists preceding the
Revolution. The three goals of the committee were: 1) To delineate the
rights of Colonists; 2) To detail how these rights had been violated; and 3)
To publicize these rights and the violations throughout the colonies.
Samuel Adams labored for over 20 years as a Patriot leader. He instigated
the Boston Tea Party, signed the Declaration of Independence, called for the
first Continental Congress and served as a member of Congress until 1781. He
helped draft the Massachusetts Constitution, served as Lt. Governor, under
John Hancock, and later became the Governor of Massachusetts.
When it comes to economic lessons, the bias is even worse! While students
get political cartoons of our Founding Fathers such as these [display
examples]; they are treated to scholarly-looking pictures of socialist
leaders like this one of Karl Marx. The lesson text teaches the ideals of
Marxism without explaining that his ideas failed. Notice the "thinking
question:" "How might the point of view of a working class person differ
from that of a middle class person?"10.
Clearly, the lesson is meant to support the idea of Socio-economic class
struggle. The textbook doesn't mention that in America, the middle-class is
a working class. Without understanding the foundation principles contained
within our organic laws, children may never grow to understand the benefits
of America's equal protection under the law - regardless of one's station in
life.
Even the Soviet economy under Stalin is presented in positive tones. For
example this is a lesson from a typical 6th grade Social Studies textbook:
"An economy completely controlled by government is called a command economy.
Within just 20 years the Soviet Union became one of the world's strongest
industrial nations. Thousands of railroad lines crisscrossed the country,
linking towns and cities that had never been connected before. Around 1900
many Russian farmers had never seen a tractor. By the 1940s Soviet factories
were making more tractors than any other factories in the world."11.
The lesson? A "command economy" must be good! Look at all the tractors!
Likewise, this lesson on Cuba states: "For some people life became better
under Castro's communist dictatorship. There is less poverty since Castro
gained control"12.
Yet when it comes to the American free-market economy, students are taught:
"Understanding Imperialism." This lesson text states: "The chief motivation
behind imperialism is usually economic gain. Powerful nations can establish
new markets for their manufactured goods..Despite the importance of
economics, Americans usually cited other reasons to justify their
imperialism. Many Americans believed that they had a right and obligation to
extend what they considered their superior culture to people less fortunate
than themselves....Many imperialists believed that they had a God-given
mission to spread Christianity..."13.
Without an early understanding of the principles contained within our own
founding documents, students will not be prepared to defend America's
free-market system.
Under our content-poor Profile of Learning the situation is even worse. One
of the few things found favorable by the recent Achieve/CBE assessment of
our content standards, was a philosophy called "Constructivism," defined by
the state "as the premise that students use their prior knowledge to
construct a personally meaningful understanding."14.
This is the problem. Students are receiving incomplete and inaccurate data
with which to construct their understanding of contemporary and political
issues. For example, High school students are to complete a performance
package called "Themes of US History," in order to: "Understand the
importance of key events.in the historical development of the United
States."15. The state-model package does not utilize any foundational
documents; instead, students are lead to a 1996 book called "The nest
American Nation," in which the author accuses America's founders of being
racists who demanded that immigrants give up their cultures. American
citizens are portrayed, not as individuals with equal protection under the
law regardless of their cultural background, but as members of a racial,
gender, or Socio-economic group engaged in class conflict. The recommended
resources that help students "construct their personally meaningful
understanding of our heritage," include such books as: "The Free and the
Unfree: A New History of the United States" written in 1998; "We the Other
People" written in 1976; "Multicultural America" 1995; "The Female
Experience" 1977; "Freedom's Unfinished Revolution" 1996; and of course, no
study of America's founding ideology would be complete without studying, The
"Workingman's Declaration of Independence."
When this package finally addresses our founding era, it not only gets our
form of government wrong, but even suggests that our constitution came from
the Iroquois Confederacy!16.
Minnesota's 250 pages of new rules governing the licensing of teachers
reflect these same ideas. For example, all teachers - even gym teachers -
are required to "understand the cultural content, world view, and concepts
[of] Indian Tribal Government," and the "vital role of the American Indian
value system."17. While there is nothing wrong with studying Native
American History; there is no similar requirement for even teachers of
History to understand America's founding principles, world view, or the
vital role of our Founder's value system.
Several third-party evaluators of our education standards have given
Minnesota failing marks. Diane Ravich, for one, a Senior Fellow at the
Brookings Institute, said our "history standards lack content and clarity,"
and she advised us to "toss them out and start over." CBE and Achieve
suggested that Minnesota "consider ways to revise and supplement the
standards with additional detail and specificity."
Unfortunately, the report suggests we adopt the California standards for
US history, which include applying the "constructivist" philosophy to our
founding documents. For example, the report suggests that students "analyze
the changing interpretations of the Constitution [and] the Bill of
Rights,"18 There is no requirement to analyze the founders original meaning
of these documents. The standards also define America as a "constitutional
democracy," rather than a "Constitutional Republic" as guaranteed by Article
IV, Section IV of the Federal Constitution. Without studying having the
opportunity to study the warnings against pure democracy given in Federalist
number 10, our students may never learn the difference between these two
forms of government. They may even come to embrace what our founders warned
us against.
In conclusion: America's higher education system has traditionally been
about the free exchange of ideas. The American Heritage Act in no way
threatens that tradition, but rather guarantees it, by reinforcing and
re-establishing America's foundation principles that the rights of all
people come from God, and that the duty of government within a free society
is simply to secure those rights.
I am not advocating we proselytize children into any religion. What I ask
is that we do not bar our founder's writings and philosophy of government
from the school room merely because they include religious references. To
report history accurately is an exercise in open-minded liberalism. To
remove our founder's utterances upon a religious test is nothing less than
censorship.
The American Heritage Act is a reasonable and necessary action for the
state to take. It re-affirms our commitment to perpetuate the blessings of
civil and religious liberty to future generations, as promised by our state
constitution. It also re-establishes a base-line core-knowledge content
standard in U. S. History, as recommended by four separate evaluators.
Let this act also send a message to the education bureaucracy and
curriculum publishers, that the people of Minnesota wish to instill pride
and patriotism in our free-market economy, our limited form of government,
and our national and state heritage, once again.
James Russell Lowell said: "How long will the American Republic endure? As
long as the ideas of the men who founded it continue dominant."
Thank you for considering this important bill meant to pass on the ideas
that will secure freedom for your children and mine.
S/ Michael J. Chapman
Footnotes:
1...Not only did the textbook ignore the Bible, it also skipped over Sir
William Blackstone and listed Hume instead. "Blackstone's Commentaries on
the Law" served for 160 years as America's Law textbook. It was Blackstone
that defined the phrase, "The Laws of Nature and of Natures God" mentioned
in our Declaration of Independence. In Blackstone's original work, he wrote:
"As man depends absolutely on his maker for everything, it is necessary that
he should conform on all points to his makers will. .This law of nature
dictated by God Himself is of course superior in obligation to any other
law. This law of nature is binding over all the globe, in all countries at
all times. No human laws are of any validity if they are contrary to
this...No human law is to contradict this law of nature and natures God
found in the Holy Scripture." (Blackstone, Commentaries on the Law of
England, Vol I, Clarendon Press, Oxford, 1765, pp. 41-42)
Furthermore, Montesquieu recognized that true liberty in Civil government
must be based on Christian principle or nations would become despotic. My
copy of his 1748, "Spirit of the Laws" explains: "The Christian religion is
a stranger to mere despotic power. The mildness so frequently recommended in
the Gospel, is incompatible with the despotic rage with which a prince
punishes his subjects... The Christian religion...has hindered despotic
power from being established... Let us set before our eyes.the continual
massacres of kings and generals of the Greeks and Romans
[enlightenment-pluralism].and we shall see that we owe to Christianity, in
government...benefits which human nature can never sufficiently
acknowledge." (Montesquieu, Spirit of Laws, Vol. II, 4th printing, A.
Donaldson, London, 1768, pp. 146-147.)
2...A More Perfect Union, Houghton Mifflin 8th grade Social Studies, 1991,
p.83. see p. 109 also.
3...Living in Communities, teacher's edition, Silver Burdette and Ginn,
1995, p. 176
4...America Will Be, teacher's edition, 5th grade Houghton Mifflin Social
Studies, p.264
5...A More Perfect Union, 8th grade Houghton Mifflin Social Studies, p.
173.
6...Ibid., p. 72
7...Adventures in Time and Place; Macmillan; 7th grade, 1997, p. 252.
8...Ibid., p.513-514
9...A More Perfect Union, 8th grade Houghton Mifflin Social Studies, p.
57-58.
10..Adventures in Time and Place; Macmillan, 1997, p. 505.
11..The World Past and Present, Teachers edition Macmillan/McGraw-Hill,
1993, p. 538.
12..Ibid., P. 649.
13..Ibid, p. 534.
14..Achieve, Inc. "Aiming Higher," pre-publication copy, 11-10-2000, p. 10,
footnote 5.
15..Themes of U.S. History: "We the People," Oct. 1997 draft, see task 1,
especially page 2
16..Themes of U.S. History: "We the People," see task 1, Handout 1
"Introductory Essay"
17...Proposed Rules for teacher licensure, p.7, Sec. 8710.2000, Subp. 4G;
also p. 165, D.(4)
18..Achieve, Inc. pre-publication copy, page 62.
029.0.1.1 # 10 End.
"I do verily believe that a single, consolidated government would become the
most corrupt government on earth." Thomas Jefferson to Gideon Granger, 1800.
"Necessity is the plea for every infringement of human freedom. It is the
argument of tyrants, it is the creed of slaves." William Pitt speech to the
House of Commons.
"You shall have one world government, whether or not you like it, by consent
or by conquest." Former FDR aide, James Warburg CFR/TC, in testimony before
the US Senate Foreign Relations Committee, 17 Feb 1950.