top of page
  • Benjamin Celver

Two Roads Emerge

Updated: May 22

Our present condition, which is not unlike the moral crossroads that produced the Age of Enlightenment, is the result of ideas and social experiments that undermine individualism, freedom of thought, and freedom of economic activity. The Tyranny of [our] Good Intentions failed to protect the American form of natural-law capitalism—the only rational system capable of achieving egalitarian passions. Instead of a long and arduous task rooted in individual economic calculations, our collective wealth bought government policies that have created the world strictures of cartel capitalism, bureaucratic capitalism, and state capitalism: All in the guise of socialist policies and our desire to help others.

Dr. Evil Cue.

Now Pericles inspires us to spend more treasure to maintain this freedom called democracy. Our moral crossroad is a choice between the status quo and experience. The status quo compels a bureaucratic statism grounded in the sophistry of the 19th century French model which produced the Napoleonic Empire and the largest volunteer Army in the world. The observation of France’s egalitarian experiment and our collective experience compels an adherence to reason and principles of enlightened self-interest—principles that produced a popular belief that man can govern himself!

History and sociology declares that the egalitarian path of emotion leads to ruin while the egalitarian path of reason and experience leads to individual freedom and prosperity.

No-where in our public and private lives are the questions of principles and values of greater importance than in the status quo of education pedagogy. Pedagogy refers to the methods of instruction and ultimately the process of becoming a teacher. The stated policy of our Education Institutions is that the bureaucracy “shall not endorse or advocate a particular pedagogical approach…but shall focus on important, measurable indicators of student achievement.”

The national Assessment of Education Progress (NAEP) goes on to say that even though “broad implications for instruction may be inferred from the assessment [standardized test results], NAEP does not specify how reading [or any other subject] should be taught nor does it prescribe a particular curricula approach to teaching reading [or any other subject].”

Such a stated policy should lead the federal government to a hands-off approach toward the American education system while providing parents and educators with broad feedback to compare academic performance across the system. The stated policy implies that parents have a choice in choosing a school and pedagogy that produces the best or sought-after results—even if that pedagogy has deleterious goals found in the misconstrued methods of affective methodology: A behavior modification program designed to substitute work ethic with martial slogans related to the right to an education or other social Rights of Man.

The situation (of implied policy versus policy in fact) could not be further from the truth. Public education is situationally compulsory, and all public education draws its pedagogy from the same sources of power: The State certifies the quality of teachers, the teacher’s union defines quality, and the institutions of higher education breed the same pedagogy. The affective model is deleterious because it emphasizes changing human values and supporting emotional development as superior to intellectual development. The affective objectives are valuable; however, values are the primary responsibility of parents and their amendment freedom and freedom of conscience. The issue arises when affective models prioritize changing emotions and values above intellectual development, motivation, and Frontal Lobe Planning or control. The resulting effect destroys reason as a source of knowledge, diplomacy, and justice; children and adults are "trained" or "brainwashed" to believe that their emotions are a better source of rationalization as they seek to know truth, goodness, and ethics.

The secondary and often overlooked element is the expectation that results from the inversion of emotion over reason. On the one hand, the affective methodology arises because the expectation (within the model) is that the targets of emotional and value training are, in fact, broken! The children in these systems, whether broken or not, believe that they are broken because they are forced to learn and train in psychological methods necessary to change their thinking and values. On the other hand, the competing provisions completely undermine reason, which is the source of value and the cause of emotional development. In a normal system, which focuses on intellectual development and cognitive thinking, children learn to control their emotions and operate under the causes of liberty, justice, and ethics. They learn a civic virtue--which begins with their parents' values and becomes shaped, formed, and strengthened through their responses to success and failure--by responses to the environment, real world, and mother nature.

Thus, a model, beginning with the premise that values and emotions must be psychologically changed for the betterment of society, produces, within the education system, children incapable of rationalizing the reality of their own emotions. Their capacity to build through reason is weakened, and they tend to believe that something must be broken in order to fix it. They tear down through the force of emotion rather than lift up by the power of reason.

49 million children are subjected to the same pedagogy, and parents have little choice in taking actions that accord with clear inferences from standardized tests. Embedded deep within these sources of power is the federal government, which asserts god-like control over pedagogy and curriculum through Department of Education regulations and funding rules that govern State and local schools. The whole of our society has just begun to recognize that a forced education is not right, nor is it free.

State and Federal control of the established pedagogy and curriculum standards is an abusive form of statism that destroys self-governance and pre-eminent American values. The value we seek to reaffirm is that an education is never a right because thinking requires the full weight of reason, action, and ethics. Socialists and anti-progressives, however, argue that they have a right to enforce their civic virtue into the minds of our children. We need but gently inform them otherwise.

Our education system is clearly French and Prussian and directed by the USAID. Without establishing an alternate pedagogy, we can never hope to change how our people think or take the path toward enlightened liberalism and rational equality.

"Freedom is what you do with what has been done to you"

John Paul Sartre

Learn about Conceptual Teaching on our Homepage:

This essay, as with many others, has been read several thousand times and shared with many people before our going offline and changing providers. If you can read between the lines, please share the link. We are a large continuum of thought, deed, and action and are never alone.

Warm Regards,

CPT Kevlar, Justice Forthwith

SPQR, 1976-Present

144 views0 comments

Recent Posts

See All


Post: Blog2_Post
bottom of page