Connect with us

Education

At G20, Betsy DeVos puts America last

Published

on

On September 5th, 2018, in what can only be described as a mind-boggling stab to the gut of Americans, the US Secretary of Education committed US education to the globalist agenda of collectivism, corporatism, and social engineering; to a global agenda that was decidedly rejected by a diverse array of Americans through the election of Donald Trump in 2016.

DeVos attended the G20’s first ever Education Ministerial Meeting, held in Argentina. Out of those meetings came the eight-page G20 Education Ministers’ Declaration 2018. The document details the goals, priorities, and world-wide agenda of the G20 ministers in the areas of Education and Skills Policies, Financing Education, International Cooperation, and The Way Forward.

THE PURPOSE OF EDUCATION

The first statement of the document’s Preamble illustrates what the authors grievously believe to be the purpose of education (italics and spelling patterns in the original):

We, the Ministers of Education of the G20 members and invited countries, met in Mendoza, Argentina on 5 September 2018 to affirm the unique role of education as a key driver for sustainable development for all nations, recognise the need to place education at the centre of the global agenda and call for collective action.

This is a distressing indication that the US Secretary of Education’s philosophical beliefs are gravely inharmonious with those of most American parents who humbly and rightfully desire a quality education for their children; education which bestows the fundamental skills and knowledge necessary to thrive.

VOWS OF COMMITMENT TO GLOBALIZATION

Statements 20-22, among others, are especially illuminating: the statements therein shine a spotlight on both the relativistic-globalist mindset of DeVos and the other G20 education ministers, as well as these ministers’ narcissistic presumptuousness.

Reading the declaration, it becomes evident that the authors believe themselves to be the noble representatives of the “shared” aspirations and values of all peoples the world over, and the bearers of a fruitful philosophy which will usher in a new and prosperous future to be welcomed with open arms.

Key statements to this effect include:

We commit to facilitating the internationalisation of education.

We will work to meet our commitments affirmed in this Declaration… to building a robust set of education and skills policies from a global perspective that fosters inclusive and sustainable human progress in every nation.

ALLEGIANCE TO UNESCO’S AGENDA 2030

The second statement is quite curious, given that the United States has pulled out of the United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO), which will officially take place at the end of this year. Statement 2 reads (italics in original):

In line with the United Nations 2030 Agenda, we affirm our commitment to ensuring inclusive and equitable quality education and promoting lifelong learning opportunities for all.

In fact, loyalty to UNESCO and to UNESCO’s Agenda 2030 is communicated several times within the declaration.

At the time of the UN-member adoption of Agenda 2030, Alex Newman of The New American noted:

Top globalists such as former NATO chief Javier Solana, a socialist, are celebrating the plan, which the summit unanimously “approved,” as the next “Great Leap Forward” — yes, the old campaign slogan of the Chinese Communist Party.

Additionally, listed as having provided the “expertise” and “reports” on “key issues” which informed the G20 education ministers’ declarations on educational goals and policy are UNESCO, the Organization for Economic Development (OECD), the World Bank, and the Inter-American Development Bank.

This leads one to question whether Secretary DeVos is simply falling in line with the status quo or if she is quietly undermining the president’s America First agenda.

President Trump wouldn’t be the first American president to have his agenda thwarted by his education secretary.

As noted by Mary Byrne at Truth in American Education:

When President Reagan worked to keep his campaign promise to dismantle the U.S. Department of Education and restore control of education to parents and local school boards, his vice-president, G. H. W. Bush supported Reagan’s first Secretary of EducationTerrel Bell, in preserving the Department; and it was another Senator from Tennessee, Lamar Alexander’s mentor, Howard Baker, who thwarted Reagan’s effortsAlexander worked to get Devos confirmed as Secretary of Education (or is that Minister of Education?). Now, as President Trump works to keep his campaign promise to return education to the states, his efforts are thwarted by his own Secretary of Education and Senator Baker’s protégé. Trump would do himself a service by requesting Secretary DeVos’s resignation, and Tennessee would do America a great service by settling Senator Alexander’s quandary about running for re-election in 2020, and clearing the way for President Trump to accomplish what he was elected to do.

 

OTHER PROMINENT THEMES THEREIN

Almost too predictable to be worthy of mention, one theme reverberates throughout the G20 Education Ministers’ Declaration: the collectivist-corporatist social engineering of a world-wide labor force and the development of an idyllic, world-wide society.

I have already written an in-depth series on the topic of the Big Data/Workforce movement – within which DeVos is actively involved, attempting to persuade President Trump to merge the Department of Education with the Department of Labor – and the big money which is driving it. Thus, for the sake of brevity, I will not expound further. You may read about this subject here, here, here, and here.

“It is important that education keeps pace with societal and technological innovations such as Artificial Intelligence, Big Data and Internet of Things,” the ministers tell us.

What is worth noting are the education ministers’ emphasis on monitoring the implementation of their policies and measure the success of said societies-altering through the means of data-mining world-wide citizens and international data-sharing of said information.

As statement 13 declares (spelling in original):

We recognise the value of policies based on evidence and the importance of having robust and comprehensive learning assessment systems and data in order to measure progress and learning outcomes, to help ensure quality education for all at all stages of life. More broadly, assessments systems should provide quality input for decision-making at every level…

As elaborated upon in statement 16:

Strengthening governance, management, monitoring and accountability is key to addressing this shared challenge. Increased social and economic returns on investment can have significantly positive impact on human development, and encourage greater commitments in this area.

To assuage (likely anticipated) concerns, the authors commit to “highlighting the importance of interpretation and responsible use of results.”

Also worth noting are the education ministers’ intentions to install upon the peoples of the world a societal consensus which the ministers refer to as a “global and cultural competence” by means of an organized, world-wide, top-down communications effort, “sharing our common values among our education institutions.”

To the same ends, DeVos and the other G20 education ministers emphasize a recruitment process which will “attract and retain the most suitable and passionate individuals from a diversity of backgrounds into the teaching profession.”

“Suitable” teachers are identified as being individuals “equipped with the knowledge, skills, values and attitudes free from gender stereotypes…” The document does not identify which “values and attitudes” an individual must possess.

And, of course, the G20 ministers of education stress international funding for their scheme.

IT’S TIME TO SEND DEVOS PACKING

UNESCO has not changed in the years since an impassioned President Ronald Reagan said, “UNESCO has extraneously politicized virtually every subject it deals with. It has exhibited hostility toward a free society, especially a free market and a free press, and it has demonstrated unrestrained budgetary expansion.”

Why does Betsy DeVos believe that she has the right to circumvent the president and become a side-line partner with UNESCO? What happened to America First?

In what ways does Secretary DeVos believe that the unsustainable economic and social theories of United Nations bureaucrats, especially the euphemistically named “sustainable development” cause célèbre, have to do with ensuring American youths have the education necessary to succeed?

Under what authority does Secretary DeVos believe she may impose the G20 education ministers’ “shared values” upon American youth?

Who gave her the authority to employ the Department of Education in a scheme against the American people?

Is Betsy DeVos a naive stooge simply falling in line or, given that she has now declared herself a globalist through the full consensus of the G20 team, is the secretary quietly undermining the American First agenda?

Obedient to the status quo or cold betrayal and circumvention of the will of the people?

Truth be told, the answer doesn’t matter; both choices produce rotten fruit.

Americans need a George Washington; not a Benedict Arnold.

It’s time to send Ms. DeVos packing.

Advertisement

1 Comment

1 Comment

  1. Public Citizen

    September 15, 2018 at 3:43 pm

    We need a Secretary of Education who understands that the ~only~ job they have is to wind down the DOE as a Cabinet Level Position and return Education to the control of the individual states.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Comment moderation is enabled. Your comment may take some time to appear.

Culture and Religion

The real story here is that a radical activist took on high school kids

Published

on

The real story here is that a radical activist took on high school kids

The Covington Catholic School story has taken on a life of its own. What started as an attack against MAGA hat-wearing teens who supposedly went after a Native American Vietnam War veteran has turned into a witch hunt by leftist mainstream media to prove their righteous indignation towards the kids was justified.

But at the core of the story is something that most seem to be missing. Nathan Phillips isn’t a random activist. He’s an outspoken radical who intentionally inserts himself into situations to draw attention to his cause. We saw this clearly the day after the viral video was shot (but before it went viral) when he tried to storm a Catholic church to disrupt worship services. Those are not the actions of a peace-seeking, mild-mannered activist for Native American rights. They’re the actions of someone seeking trouble for the sake of attention.

Then, there’s the question of claims that he was a combat veteran who fought during the Vietnam War. To be fair, these are not necessarily his assertions, though I haven’t read everything he’s said about that period in his life. But mainstream media has painted him on multiple occasions as essentially a war hero. His claims have been that he was a “Vietnam times veteran,” which is obviously meant to insinuate he participated.

Thankfully, many of the publications that painted this picture of Phillips have since started editing their stories. Nevertheless, the damage is done. His reputation as a Vietnam War hero is still prominent in the eyes of those who read the initial stories and haven’t gone back to reread them since the corrections were made. We can assume that means nearly none of them have learned of the correction. That’s why he’s still being widely labeled as such on social media.

One of his claims to fame is that he starred in a Skrillex video that depicted armed opposition against law enforcement as a potential solution for those who are being forced from their homes by a land developer.

The sum of the parts of this story paint a very strange picture of Phillips. There is absolutely nothing wrong with activism for the sake of Native American rights. The cause is a righteous one and most activists are doing their part to properly bring awareness to the American people while working with governments in their plight.

Phillips doesn’t fall into that category. His stories keep changing, but the truth is still a mystery.

As our EIC noted yesterday, he claims to be a hero but he’s not.

Nathan Phillips claims to be a hero, but he’s the reason “MAGA kids” are now being demonized

http://noqreport.com/2019/01/22/nathan-phillips-claims-hero-hes-reason-maga-kids-now-demonized/There have been multiple shifts of the narrative being pushed by mainstream media about the Covington Catholic School “MAGA kids” since it first went viral. Each shift further demonstrates the far-left’s unhinged nature and mainstream media’s desire to attack conservative Christians no matter what the facts of the matter say.

All of this goes back to Nathan Phillips, the Native American who sparked the incident by trying to march through the group of kids. It wasn’t necessarily his actions that should be condemned, but how he portrayed the whole situation and his role in it have perpetuated the falsehoods that are being reported by mainstream media even today.

This all brings us back to his “opposition,” or at least the people he apparently opposes. By no means do I believe these kids are innocent. They’re kids. They were thrown into a situation they didn’t know how to handle, but even in those circumstances they handled it fairly well. Nick Sandmann, the “smirking MAGA kid” who was literally at the center of the initial controversy, is having to go on air to defend himself, his school, and to try to prevent the threats that have hit their community.

It’s a disgrace that these kids couldn’t just go to the March for Life unscathed. The trashy people who continue to dig into their pasts, shame them, and threaten their lives are being driven by the progressive worldview that is intolerant of the hats they wore.


Subscribe on YouTube

Continue Reading

Education

Tentative deal reached to end Los Angeles teachers strike

Published

on

Tentative deal reached to end Los Angeles teachers strike

LOS ANGELES (AP) — A crowd of teachers roared its approval after a tentative deal was announced Tuesday between Los Angeles school officials and the union that will allow educators to return to classrooms after a six-day strike in the nation’s second-largest district.

Los Angeles Mayor Eric Garcetti, accompanied by leaders of United Teachers Los Angeles and the Los Angeles Unified School District, announced the agreement at City Hall a few hours after a 21-hour bargaining session ended before dawn.

“I’m proud to announce that, pending approval by the teachers represented by UTLA and educational professionals and this Board of Education, we have an agreement that will allow our teachers to go back to work on their campuses tomorrow,” Garcetti said.

Union President Alex Caputo-Pearl said the 30,000 members would vote later Tuesday, and he expected approval. A union summary of the agreement called it “historic” and urged teachers to vote yes to ratify. Educators met with UTLA representatives to familiarize themselves with the details before casting ballots.

It wasn’t clear when the vote results would be known, but teachers were expected to be back at work on Wednesday.

The deal was broadly described by officials at the news conference as including a 6 percent pay hike and a commitment to reduce class sizes over four years.

Specifics provided later by the district and the union included the addition of more than 600 nursing positions over the next three school years. Additional counselors and librarians were also part of the increase in support staff.

Marianne O’Brien said the need for additional support staff was one of the main reasons she walked picket lines. “This is not just for teachers. It’s also for counselors, nurses, psychologists and social workers,” said O’Brien, who teaches 10th grade English.

The new contract also eliminates a longstanding clause that gave the district authority over class sizes, officials said. Grades 4 through 12 would be reduced by one student during each of the next two school years and two pupils in 2021-2022.

District Superintendent Austin Beutner said he was delighted the deal was reached. But he hinted that financial challenges remained.

“The issue has always been how do we pay for it?” Beutner said. “That issue does not go away now that we have a contract. We can’t solve 40 years of underinvestment in public education in just one week or just one contract.”

Under the tentative agreement, the district, the union and the mayor’s office will work jointly to “advocate for increasedcounty and state funding” for Los Angeles schools, according to the UTLA summary.

The Board of Education met in closed session on Tuesday and was expected to move quickly to ratify the deal, which would expire at the end of June 2022.

The deal came as teachers in Denver were finishing up a vote on whether to go on strike as soon as next Monday. The main sticking point is increasing base pay and lessening teachers’ reliance on one-time bonuses for having students with high test scores or working in a high-poverty school.

In Oakland, California, some teachers called in sick last week as part of an unofficial rally over their contract negotiations, which also hinge partly on a demand for smaller class sizes.

Thousands of boisterous educators, many wearing red, and their supporters gathered on the steps outside City Hall.

The crowd began cheering, blowing horns and chanting the initials of Caputo-Pearl as the smiling union leader emerged from the building and walked through the throng.

Joaquin Flores, a special education teacher, said he believed he would support the deal unless it weakened health care or didn’t go far enough to reduce class size.

“It’s almost like metaphoric,” Flores said. “The sun’s out. When we started, it was all rainy and cold. I feel like it’s a new day.”

Teacher Sharon Maloney said she was reluctant to support the deal without seeing the details. She was skeptical that the district had made enough concessions on class size, health care benefits for new teachers or that the superintendent would spend enough of about $2 billion in reserves.

“I suspect the motives of Beutner,” Maloney said. “If he doesn’t release some of that $2 billion and there’s no understanding for moving forward how he’s going to cut out this crap that we’re running at a deficit and yet our reserves are going up every year.”

Talks resumed Thursday at Garcetti’s urging. The mayor does not have authority over LAUSD, but he sought to help both sides reach an agreement after nearly two years of fruitless talks.

Clashes over pay, class sizes and support-staff levels in the district with 640,000 students led to its first strike in 30 years and prompted the staffing of classrooms with substitute teachers and administrators.

The district maintained that the union’s demands could bankrupt the school system, which is projecting a half-billion-dollar deficit this budget year and has billions obligated for pension payments and health coverage for retired teachers.

Teachers hoped to build on the “Red4Ed” movement that began last year in West Virginia and moved to Oklahoma, Kentucky, Arizona, Colorado and Washington state. It spread from conservative states with “right to work” laws that limit the ability to strike to the more liberal West Coast with strong unions.

___

Associated Press writers John Antczak and John Rogers contributed to this report.

___

Follow Weber at https://twitter.com/WeberCM .

Continue Reading

Culture and Religion

PragerU: Do college students support abortion or life?

Published

on

PragerU Do college students support abortion or life

Progressive indoctrination centers, better known as American universities, have been pushing students towards a leftist worldview for decades. One might start believing the mainstream media narrative that college students are overwhelmingly pro-abortion based solely on other things we’ve seen coming out of college campuses.

PragerU tackled the issue. While nothing in this video will shock anyone, it’s a good cross-section of perspectives that likely reflects what’s actually going on at universities like UCLA. Will Witt went there and found the standard answers on both sides of the board. While the majority were pro-abortion, two pro-life students were found. Their responses were clearly more thought through than the answers given by their pro-abortion counterparts.

This leads to my next article. I’m starting to believe that if people are given all the information about abortion, and more importantly about the life attributes of preborn babies, they’d be more willing to accept a pro-life perspective.

Of all the challenges facing America today, the abortion issue is the most directly tied to life and death, literally. A world without abortion can only be achieved when we’re willing to have the conversations with everyone regardless of their current stance.


Subscribe on YouTube

Continue Reading

Facebook

Trending

Copyright © 2019 NOQ Report