Connect with us

Education

Malthusian humanism and death education, Part I

Published

on

“We ought to be trembling about the fact that the schools which have failed to teach academics are now presuming to teach matters of life and death.”

– Dr. William Coulson

“…I’ve sort of built my career in helping people try to die better,” explained California ICU physician Jessica Zitter during an NPR interview with host Michel Martin on February 25th of this year (NPR.org).  “I’ve also realized that this [death] is no different a taboo.” Recalling a recent visit to a high school classroom, Zitter philosophized the benefits of teaching children about death, emphasizing the possible impacts that the act of changing the attitudes of youngsters could have on society in the future. “And that’s the kind of thing that I think really starts to make change in our culture,” she said (emphasis mine). “I was once accused by a renowned professor of medicine of deceiving my ICU patients…” she wrote in a 2013, New York Times article entitled, They Call Me Dr. Kevorkian. Dr. Zitter’s presence in the classroom is evidence of a seldom-discussed, yet monumental effort to alter the thoughts, beliefs, and behaviors of Americans, specifically in regards to death. Predators always target the young.

Enter death education.

“Since death has been such a taboo topic, open and honest communication is essential. Such communication helps to desensitize students to anxiety-arousing items.”

– Death Educator Nina Rebak Rosenthal

Few times has something set off so many blaring warning bells in my mind as death education.  “No administrator should be surprised to find that his staff is afraid of handling this topic,” stated an article in Phi Delta Kappan (McLure).  Nevertheless, many educators – motivated by altruism and blinded by an unearned level of trust in the knowledge and intentions of the “experts” – willingly follow the leaders while remaining shamefully unaware of the harm that may result from their implementation of faulty, humanist eschatology and practices in their classrooms. I should know – I am a certified teacher.

I can hear the sales pitch now: First comes the generic, yet overreaching opening statement about “experts”: The experts all agree… blah, blah, blah…  Kids need this…  Blah, blah, blah… The opening remarks are usually designed to disarm teachers by appealing to the dutifully enforced, professional hierarchy. This is typically followed by two or three extremely brief arguments which appeal to educators’ rational thinking.  Brevity is key: if you give the teachers too much time to listen, they might start thinking for themselves… Finally, it is time for the kill shot. This is best described as the stress inducing bombardment of teachers with anecdotal language which directly plays upon their emotions and, thus, smothers all inclinations toward independent analysis or hesitation: Parents don’t talk to their kids anymore or teach them about death, and they are at a disadvantage in life. It’s such a tragedy in our society…. Kids will be confused by all of the misconceptions in the world around them… Do you want the kids to learn about it from their friends, or on the street? Or, don’t you think it’s better they learn about it at school? It might help prevent suicide! (Of course, “preventative education” hasn’t actually been successful at preventing much of anything.)It is actually pretty pathetic how easily we are tricked, how easily we are played.

Death education has been creeping into schools since the 1960’s/70’s, after the publication of Dr. Elisabeth Kübler-Ross’s “On Death and Dying” (Blumenfeld, Newman, 2014).  Kübler-Ross was the charismatic leader of a “New Age” death cult, spreading the message of a joyful acceptance of death. “The womb and the grave have been equated in mystery religions. … This is precisely the significance of Kübler-Ross’s choice of death and dying as her primary consideration as a charismatic leader” (Omega, 1985-86). Before long, the “progressive” teachers’ unions jumped into bed with the joyful death movement. We now have entire foundations dedicated to death education, such as the Association for Death Education and Counseling. Even Scholastic, Inc. is pushing death ed. Wolves travel in packs.

Thanatology (the study of death and dying) in the classroom can be summed up as the incorporation of death into the various academic areas of study. “Death by its very nature involves science and medicine, social studies and sociology, psychology, history, art, literature, music, insurance, and law,” wrote one death educator in the March 1973, NEA Journal (National Education Association). As death is so easily integrated into any subject, death education thus provides opportunities for classroom discussions on “the moral and ethical issues of abortion and euthanasia…” (emphasis mine).

Death education can take on two formats: didactic (lectures, videos, etc.) and experiential (simulation exercises). Twelfth graders may design their own headstones during art class or visit a funeral home to view a human cadaver as a science exercise on organ donation. After the suicide of a classmate – a “teachable moment” – eleventh graders may compose their own suicide notes. During a health and wellness class, ninth graders may be instructed to close their eyes and enter a deep trance in which they are to return to the moment that a loved one died. Seventh graders may add up the costs involved in planning their own funeral during math class or write their own wills in language arts. The words corpse, morgue, and cadaver may be added to the fifth grade’s spelling list. Third grade children may be asked to compose their own obituaries as a part of their creative writing unit. The kindergarten class may take a field trip to a mortuary or a cemetery while learning about communities. The preschool class may build caskets in the “blocks center” and take turns playing “the dead person” as a part of dramatic play.

“Class assignments were for students to write their own obituaries and suicide notes. They were told to trust their own judgment in choosing to live or die.”

– Jayne Schindler

Incorporating death and dying into curriculum requires teachers to abandon the role of instructor and, instead, assume the role of facilitator, quasi-therapist, and “reflective listener”; a reckless recipe for disaster. The classroom is transformed into a forum for group, pseudo-psychotherapeutic, “conversation circles.” Unfortunately, from these “’death and dying courses’, there are preliminary indications that this kind of education also leads to a greater likelihood of violence against self” (emphasis mine) (DiGirolamo). In fact, numerous educators have long acknowledged the harm that can be inflicted upon a student as a result of studying death in the classroom. There have even been several recorded suicide attempts by students which coincidentally followed periods of exposure to death education, such as in the case of Tara Becker who attended Columbine High School in Littleton, Colorado in the 1980’s.

“Death arouses emotions. Some students may get depressed; others may get angry; many will ask questions or make statements that cause concern for the instructor… Students may discuss the fact that they are having nightmares or that the course is making them depressed or feeling morbid…”

– Death Educator Nina Rebak Rosenthal

Psychologist William Coulson, who was one of the innovators of the psychotherapeutic techniques most often used in death education and who can be credited with the overly-psychologizing of America’s schools, has emphatically spoken out against the techniques he once championed. As it turns out, facilitating value-clarification or being a “reflective listener,” also called “nondirective education,” has been found to actually cause harm rather than prevent it, especially in children. Rather than helping young people understand death, our atheistic classrooms, dripping in moral relativism, are causing young people to feel immense confusion and anxiety.  Teaching with ambivalence – failing to providing students with concrete knowledge of or a declarative sense of right and wrong – forces students to create their own set of values and ideas, regardless of how potentially dangerous or destructive those values and ideas may prove to be. As Teddy Roosevelt once said, “To educate a child in mind and not morals is to educate a menace to society.” Yet, in the secular, humanist classrooms of America’s schools that is precisely what is occurring.

Back in 1990, Dr. Coulson was interviewed for an episode of ABC’s 20/20, “Death in the Classroom,” during which host Tom Jerrial asked, “Aren’t kids seeing more of death these days on television and with crack and violence in the streets… Isn’t there a need to educate them younger about death?” “It sounds like one of those things, Tom, that would be a good idea, except apparently it’s just not working out that way,” Coulson explained. “See, these interventions aren’t powerful enough, if you will, to keep the troubled kids out of trouble, but they are powerful enough to draw the untroubled kids into becoming troubled… What makes us think that American education is going to do a good job teaching death education? We ought to be trembling about the fact that the schools which have failed to teach academics are now presuming to teach matters of life and death.”

Yet, the Malthusian humanists who live amongst us – and those who pull the purse strings from abroad – do not have time for reflection or evaluation; not when there is an entire culture that must be changed, a world population that must be decreased, taboos that need normalizing, and generations of children that need desensitizing. Their eyes are always fixed on the prize, the pot of gold at the bottom of the rainbow.

…Which brings us to the next problem of death education.

Enter George Soros, master puppeteer.

(…to be continued)

Citations + Resources:

 

Advertisement
1 Comment

1 Comment

  1. Marc

    June 5, 2017 at 7:11 pm

    This is news to me and it’s scary. If it has got this far, God is the only one who can help us. God bless America….. again!

Leave a Reply

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

Education

George Washington University students triggered by their mascot

Published

on

George Washington University students triggered by their mascot

George Washington University is the home of the Colonials. You know, those people who came to America from Europe and eventually fought against the oppressive government of England in order to win independence for America. These heroes of the American Revolution are now being condemned by the students of George Washington University itself.

While the movement and attached petition haven’t reached a tipping point, the idea of changing the mascot to the “Hippo” is gaining momentum. Why? Well, we’ll let the students themselves tell you what they think.

This video by Campus Reform takes us into the wacky world of triggered college students who are so much in opposition of the people who made this country possible that they’d rather be named after the “river horse” of sub-Saharan Africa.

 


NOQ Report Needs Your Help

Continue Reading

Education

Blocking Ben: GCU the latest school succumbing to leftist hordes

Published

on

Blocking Ben GCU the latest school succumbing to leftist hordes

Many secular universities in America have made a habit out of ending dialogue before it begins by blocking conservative events and speakers, with DailyWire editor Ben Shapiro as the most common target to ignorantly sweep under the rug. This practice is spreading to faith-based schools as Grand Canyon University joins the ranks of those who are unwilling to face the leftist hordes.

Their statement about their decision does nothing to justify it and many are noting they didn’t actually give a reason, opting to boast about their accomplishments instead.

Their Tweet of the statement was “ratioed” and the comments aren’t letting up a day later.

Here’s the biggest problem. What Shapiro brings to any campus where he speaks is cold, hard truth wrapped in an entertaining and often contentious series of debates as students who disagree with him try to paint him as Hitler, a fascist, and even a white supremacist. I covered why these accusations are far from reality in a post and video I did the last time his voice was suppressed:

The real danger of quashing voices like Ben Shapiro’s on college campuses

http://noqreport.com/2018/12/31/real-danger-quashing-voices-like-ben-shapiros-college-campuses/It isn’t just Shapiro, but he’s conspicuous for two reasons. First, the unhinged hatred towards him is not congruous with his level of offense. Yes, he will offend people sometimes as the truth invariably does, but he’s not David Duke or Louis Farrakhan. Somehow, he’s able to stir up such positive and negative responses on college campuses that one might think President Trump himself was making an appearance.

The second reason he’s conspicuous is because his protesters don’t have valid reasons to protest him. They’re forced to pull from their own irrational fears of him that have been conjured up out of fiction. He’s a devout Jew, yet protesters call him Hitler. He’s adamantly opposed to authoritarianism, yet protesters call him a fascist. He’s one of the most targeted journalists in America by white supremacists, yet for some reason protesters seem to think he’s a white supremacist.

The decision by GCU to prevent Shapiro from speaking is the next iteration of a systematic movement within the higher education system to indoctrinate social justice warriors rather than to nurture productive members of society. GCU may or may not be part of this movement, but they’re willful participants by succumbing to the pressure from the hordes. Therein lies the real challenge to America’s future.

Perhaps you haven’t heard of the “hordes.” Maybe you think you have, but you’re probably mistaken. The leftist hordes are not simply comprised of local protesters who do everything they can to disrupt the conversation and prevent students from hearing the truth. Those are the public-facing front line pawns of the hordes. The real dangers to freedom of thought are the power players who rally opposition against Shapiro and other conservative speakers by threatening to pull funding, contact alumni, and tarnish a university’s image in the press. They aren’t going on CNN or writing in the Washington Post. These are powerful people who have direct lines to university leaders around the nation. These are the people that you never hear about.

They don’t want you to hear about them.

It’s unfathomable that so many schools would be concerned about protests. Therefore, we have to assume the pressure is coming from somewhere other than on-campus underground Antifa groups who meet every Wednesday over pizza and beer. There’s a coordinated effort to prevent students from thinking. To do this, they act to prevent speakers like Shapiro from making students think. That should truly concern us all.

We can insult individual universities all day, but until we address the powers behind these attacks on Shapiro and the freedom of thought he brings to campuses, this problem will continue. Coordinated threats are being made. There can be no doubt of that.

 


NOQ Report Needs Your Help

Continue Reading

Culture and Religion

Collectivism 101: The origins of the epic fraud of socialism

Published

on

By

Collectivism 101 The origins of the epic fraud of socialism

It’s time to finally reject the something for nothing scam from polite society.

There are times when you have to wonder if people like Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez know they’re helping perpetrate history’s biggest scam operation. Most assuredly the terms swindle, fraud or shakedown are the nicest ways of referring to a set of ideas that have seen 400 years of death and oppression. As JD Rucker pointed out, today’s socialists no longer have an excuse to favor their ideology of societal slavery over Economic Liberty.

It should be obvious to anyone with even a modicum of intelligence that the results of Economic Liberty far exceed the fraud of socialism. Nevertheless, there are those who still insist on wanting to enslave their fellow-man for their selfish needs while trying to assert a false sense of moral superiority. How people who think they are owed a living simply because they exist is hard to fathom. At its core, socialism is predicted on the fraud of getting something for nothing. While Leftists excel in dressing it up as “Social Justice’ its basic tenets are of taking from some to set up a dependent majority.

The origins of history’s biggest fraud

How did this colossal fraud get started? How did the idea of enslaving people become enshrined as their ‘Liberation’?

To do this we need to look back at how human civilisation developed and prospered. In the beginning, mankind was very much like the rest of the animal kingdom having to work in order to survive, roaming the wild hunting and gathering food.

Then came one of mankind’s greatest inventions: farming. This meant staying in one place, planting seeds, harvesting crops and domesticating animals instead of wandering around. Property rights were a natural outgrowth of this great advance, since farming only made sense if one could reap what they had sown. [Galatians 6:7] Farming and property rights further meant that one could build permanent homes and store away food for use later on, transforming the struggle to survive from that of satisfying immediate needs to delaying or forestalling them. These incredible advances changed everything.

The products of their labor could be voluntarily exchanged – traded – leading to mankind’s other great achievements. Trade meant that humans could specialize in what they did to survive, with some farming while others made tools or other necessities.

Staying in one place meant that humans could gather together. Specialisation meant that people could use voluntary exchange to trade in the fruits of their labor to their mutual benefit. This also meant that people could also exchange recollections of the past or new ideas, so one wouldn’t have to literally reinvent the wheel. The advances that began with farming and property rights placed humans far above the animal kingdom to become its master.

It all worked fine until some people decided they wanted something for nothing.

There will always be a small segment of society that would rather live off the fruits of someone else’s labour instead of producing their own.

  • Those who took other people’s property directly were the first criminals.
  • Those who took other people’s property through government were the first Leftists.

The early Leftists felt they needed to differentiate themselves from common thieves, even though they had a natural affinity because of their mutual interest of living off other people’s work. Oddly enough, those who parasitically feed off the efforts of others in society are considered to be sinister and weak.

The early Leftists had to somehow justify their outright theft of other people’s property. In order to do this they created the mythical idea of collective property ownership, partnered with the absurd concept that there is a fixed amount of ‘wealth’ and that there are some who have too much of it. Never mind that both of these concepts made no sense, since individuals around the world are constantly creating wealth.

They also justified the stealing property as being morally correct over its original production. This is how they feign magnanimity by taking other people’s money while someone keeping what they have already earned as being ‘greedy’. What better way to be absolved of outright theft [not to mention oppression and mass murder] than to self-declare one to be morally superior for the very act of outright theft? Leftists will tell you that they are morally superior since their moral superiority determines that they are morally superior.

Later on these people would be known as socialists, communists, Marxists, communards, Statists, Bolshevists, Trotskyists Fascists, Democratic Socialists, National Socialists, Progressivists, Stalinists and over 30 other synonyms. Since it’s always a hallmark of honest people to avoid aliases.

Spotting the fraud of socialism

Every living being since the beginning of time has had to exert effort in order to survive. Nevertheless, there are some in society who would rather swindle their fellow-man instead working. Those who do this under the guise of government and moral superiority all known as Leftists.

Spotting this fraud is easy if one knows what to look for. Generally it will be some sort of allusions to getting something for nothing dressed up in the fraud of moral superiority. The free stuff offered can range from free college, free healthcare, free housing to free money. This can also involve allusions to safety if other people are deprived of the right of self-defense.

There is a reason why a decent society punishes theft since is very detrimental to the public order. To hear the Left talk of it, this is somehow different if the government does it. This must be rejected for the same reason that criminal theft is penalised.

The takeaway

At this point in history, we know that the something for nothing scam of socialism will never work. Those who persist in trying to perpetuate this fraud should be easy to spot and avoid. This would be anyone offering something for nothing. They should be asked where are they to get these wonderful gifts without enslaving others. If they cannot properly answer the question they should be rejected no matter what they call themselves.

 


NOQ Report Needs Your Help
 


Continue Reading

Facebook

Trending

Copyright © 2019 NOQ Report