Back to Tactics (Subversion of American Youth)

Back to A Short History or Communism - 2008

Back to The Communist Triumvirate - Dollars

Back to The Communist Triumvirate - Smaller People

Back to World Government

Main Menu



The Systematic Subversion Our Youth

First Section - Events through 1964
Second Section - 1964 to 1989
Third Section - Overview through 2006
Fourth Section - Enlisting Disenfranchised Groups
Fifth Section - Weakening the Military
Sixth Section - Some Current Propaganda
Academic radicals self-consciously drew their social strategies from the writings of
Italian communist Antonio Gramsci, around whom an academic cult formed in the 1970s,
just as they were ascending the tenure ladder.   Gramsci was an innovator in Marxist
theory, whose ideas focused on the importance of acquiring cultural "hegemony" as the
fulcrum of revolutionary change.   Gramsci explicitly urged radicals to gain control of the
"means of cultural production" to further their ends.   Foremost among those means were
the universities and the media.   The considerations that led Gramsci to these conclusions
would certainly have also encouraged faculty activists to seek institutional power
within the university by acquiring control of its hiring and tenure committees.
                                                                                        from The Professors by David Horowitz


To Beginning

Events through 1964

Second Section - 1964 to 1989
Third Section - Overview through 2006
Fourth Section - Enlisting Disenfranchised Groups
Fifth Section - Weakening the Military
Sixth Section - Some Current Propaganda

The information in the following section was taken, for the most part, from None Dare Call It Treason by John A. Stormer, which was copyrighted in 1964 - over forty-four years ago.   Much of it is direct quotes from Stormer's book and sometimes I comment on what he says.   His book has more meat in it than most of the later books and Stormer was a prophet because a lot of what he predicted in 1964 has come to pass.   The whole book should be read since this is only a large part of one chapter.   It is now December 7, 2008, and the result of the communist takeover of our educational system is a deliberately under-educated, brainwashed youth - who managed, without any pretense of common sense, to elect our first blatantly neo-communist President.

Through 1964

John Dewey was a "communist" educational philosopher in the sense that Leon Trotsky was a communist.   Trotsky was a Bolshevik before they changed their name to "communist".   Trotsky was kicked out of the party when Stalin became afraid of him.   Dewey supported Trotsky during his trial.   Some people, today, consider Dewey to be only an idiot.   I suspect that he was anything but an idiot.   He probably knew precisely what he was doing.   Actually, Dewey's work with children has had a beneficial effect when applied with common sense.   However, it was used by communist infiltrators in the Progressive Education Association to the point that even Dewey began to criticize the effects of his work as being applied with excessive rigidity and lack of balance.

Dewey was born in Burlington, Vermont, on October 20, 1859.   He died in New York City on June 1, 1952.   He received his bachelor's degree from the University of Vermont in 1879, his doctorate at Johns Hopkins University in 1884, and he taught at the Universities of Michigan, Minnesota, and Chicago before going to Columbia University where is was until he retired in 1930.   According to one authority, he "was the most distinguished American philosopher and influential exponent of pragmatism or "instrumentalism" (his name for his version of pragmatism).

According to one view, "One need not accept Dewey's entire philosophic system to reap educational benefits from his ideas.   Dewey's great emphasis on was on education as experience, as life, rather than as simply a prelude to life... However, the Progressive Education Association laid an almost exclusive claim on the meaning and application of [Dewey's] philosophy which came to be applied with a rigidity and lack of balance that was criticized by Dewey himself.   This happened despite the enlightened and vigorous leadership of many of the organizers and prime movers of the association."

Dewey introduced his ideas at a time when children were made to learn by rote memory as opposed teaching them to reason.   Dewey made the child's needs as a reasoning being the major emphasis of the teacher.   Schools developed which were "progressive" or "traditional" and people debated which was best.   In the long run, most schools compromised so that children were able to learn by rote when necessary and to reason when possible.   It was Dewey's disciples, especially Counts and Rugg, that first began to take Dewey's ideas to the extreme.

Dewey believed that education is essentially a social process because nature, mind, and experience are social in character.   Thinking is an educational method of solving problems.   Education should be based upon commitments to a democratic way of life. [Actually, a democracy - rather than a democratic republic with a bill of rights - is the worst form of dictatorship as it leads to the individual being subservient to the state.] Dewey was critical of both faculty psychology and purely biological psychology such as stimulus-response - because they denied the social character of intelligence.   Both the child's psychological nature and his environment should be examined.   The child is an active being with impulses to construct, communicate with others, and investigate.

Dewey did not believe in what he called metaphysics.   He found that it had no permanent, systematic, ultimate reality.   Speculation about human origins, ends, purposes, and meanings are pointless and we should consider everything as in the process of being made (evolution).   We may be able to guide changes toward desirable outcomes but pragmatic justifications are our only guide (God or gods did not have a role).   Yet Dewey was a naturalist who did not consider himself a materialist.   He believed "to decide truth or falsity of any theory or conception, we must appeal to the practical consequences that result from it [a theory, to be valid, must work]."

Dewey's five steps of thinking are (1) a difficulty surfaces, (2) man attempts to define and locate it, (3) possible solutions occur, (4) logical deductions are made and experiments are performed, and (5) possible solutions are either rejected or accepted.

Dewey used the experimental philosophies of his in a model school at the University of Chicago before 1900.   As a means of learning for children, they were dismal failures - but it is most likely that in Dewey's mind they were exactly what he wanted them to be.   In 1904, Dewey left Chicago and went to Teachers College, Columbia University, "where he became the dominant figure and the most influential man in American education."   Columbia University today is a hotbed of communist administrators and professors, and very likely it was Marxist even in 1904.

"Under Dewey's guidance, fully 20% of all teacher college heads received advanced degrees at Columbia. [It should be noted that in using new theories in education, a teacher could be considered more competent than one who is using the same boring methods currently employed.   It should also be considered that obtaining advanced degrees under Dewey's methods was relatively easy and required little real knowledge.]   They adopted Dewey's experimental theories, which came to be known as "progressive education"...   Under the pretext of improving teaching methods, they changed what was being taught to American children."

"In his writing and teaching, Dewey rejected fixed moral laws and eternal truths and principles.   He adopted pragmatic, relativistic concepts as his guiding philosophy.   Denying God, he held to the Marxist concept that man is without a soul or free will.   Man is a biological organism completely molded by his environment.   ... because man's environment is constantly changing, man also changes constantly.   Therefore,... teaching children any... absolute morals, government, or ethics was a waste of time." [Later, this argument was expanded to include geography, history, math, science, and more.]

"On this amoral philosophy, [Dewey] developed his teaching formulae [which was] commonly labelled Progressive Education.   Dewey published My Pedagogic Creed in 1897.   In it, he saw the destruction of a child's individualistic traits as the primary goal of education.   Once this was accomplished, the youngster would conform or adjust to whatever society in which he found himself [become a perfect sheep].   Ability to get 'along with the group' became the prime measuring stick of a child's educational 'progress'."

"[Thus] any child who finds himself in the company of thieves becomes a thief also.   The tendency to justify immoral or unethical conduct by rationalizing that 'everybody does it' is rooted to Dewey's teaching.   Dewey summarized his theories, saying Education, therefore, is a process for living and not a preparation for future living.   He went on to say We violate the child's nature and render difficult the best results by introducing the child too abruptly to a number of special studies, of reading, writing, geography, etc. out of relation to his social life... the true center of correlation of the school subjects is not science, nor literature, nor history, nor geography, but the child's own social activities [like partying, smoking, drinking, and taking drugs]."

"...Dewey's theories, as modified by his disciples, have eliminated the teaching of strict rules of grammar. [This is certainly obvious enough with some of the strange words creeping into the language such as woken, and the use of 'like' in every sentence.   Indeed, some of our younger people often sound less educated than the average chimpanzee.]   The student learns grammar by 'living' (talking) with the 'group' or by reading literature.   Old fashioned drills in spelling, the ABCs, penmanship, multiplication tables, and other basics has been deemphasized in favor of 'learn by doing'.   ...'learn by doing' can mean 'learn not at all'.   [Today, it is common to see a cash register with symbols on the keys to ring up the values of the items the symbols represent.   The person working the register cannot do the math needed to total the amount of the purchases when something new is introduced - and he cannot subtract the total from the amount tendered - or count the change.   Much of this is due to the modern equivalent of Dewey's teachings in which a calculator or computer is given to the child so that he never needs to learn any math whatsoever.]   Many parents have become dismayed to realize that children who have not memorized the ABCs through old-fashioned drill have difficulty in using a dictionary or telephone book without haphazardly paging through.   [Some pick up the telephone and ask for help from the operator.   When I first saw this happen I asked why the person was bothering the operator - and I was told that the operator would be out of job if she wasn't asked questions - the answers to which are in the telephone book already.]

"The group idea is the nucleus of the progressive system.   No child is permitted to forge ahead of another.   This would hurt the group.   Promotions become automatic.   Nobody is left behind because of poor work.   This would disrupt the "group".   Grading and graded report cards are frowned upon.   Grading promotes competition.   Competition breeds rivalry and encourages students to excel and rise above the group.   When competition is not permitted, children get the idea that personal excellence and trying to get ahead is not worthwhile." [2009 Valedictorians - At our local high school at the 2009 graduation, we had 8 valedictorians, almost as Dewey would have liked.   Why the 8-way tie?   We wouldn't like to have too much competition or individuality, so we lower the bar and let there be more be valedictorians.   This is easy when the students need to focus on such important things as the religion of Islam, the generosity of Hugo Chavez, and the need for a world government - all compliments of UNESCO-tainted textbooks and state regulation.   And I forgot to mention that one of the criteria was perfect attendance.   Progressive education is alive and well today in California.]

According to Rosalie Gordon, author of What's Happened to Our Schools, "The progressive system has reached all the way down to the lowest grades to prepare the children of America for their role as the collectivists of the future...   The group - not the individual child - is the quintessence of progressivism.   The child must always be made to feel part of the group.   He must indulge in group thinking, in group activity."

Herd-like behavior was forced upon those in the old Soviet Union.   Those who showed signs of individualism and thinking out of the box were "eliminated".   Much of the progress in the Soviet Union was the result of stealing secrets from the United States and other free-enterprise nations (where individuality was not stifled).   A population that is made of a herd - with informers within that herd - is more easily led into slavery.   In the Soviet Union, those thinking individuals who were not killed immediately were sent to work camps in Siberia where they usually died from lack of adequate food and clothing in the harsh winter climate.

At Columbia University, Dewey gathered about him a group called Frontier Thinkers.   Within this group were Dr. George Counts and Dr. Harold Rugg.   Dewey's theories had been mostly about teaching methods.   Counts and Rugg added the concept of using schools as a means of creating a new social order.

Counts was the director of research for a 17-volume study of American education produced by the American Historical Association and financed by the Carnegie Corporation.   The study was to serve as the authoritative guide for revising the philosophy and concept of American education.   The final volume, issued in 1934, contained the recommendations of the five-year project - of which the following is typical.   Cumulative evidence supports the conclusion that in the United States as in other countries, the age of individualism and laissez faire [freedom] in economy and government is closing and a new age of collectivism is emerging.

British socialist, Harold Laski, wrote of the study, At the bottom, and stripped of its carefully neutral phrases, the report is an educational program for a socialist America.

Counts hated free American economic and political traditions, and in one of his papers he presented to the Progressive Education Association he stated, Historic capitalism with its deification of the principle of selfishness, its reliance upon the forces of competition, its placing of property above human rights, and its exaltation of the profit motive, will either have to be displaced altogether or so radically changed in form and spirit that its identity will be completely lost.   Counts made it clear that his desired changes would result in (1) a coordinated and planned socialist economy, (2) changes in American ideals, and (3) new principles of right and wrong.   In other writings, Counts glorified the Soviet Union and its communist programs - although twenty years later, he became disillusioned with communism.

During his love affair with the Soviet Union, Counts wrote, ...that the teachers should deliberately reach for power and then make the most of their conquest is my firm conviction.   To the extent that they are permitted to fashion the curriculum and procedures of the school they will definitely and positively influence the social attitudes, ideals, and behavior of coming generation.

In "reaching for power" the Frontier Thinkers (1) rewrote the textbooks, and (2) gained the prestige of being the largest professional teachers' organizations by capturing the top jobs and control of the National Education Association (NEA).   At the 72nd meeting of the NEA in July 1934, Dr. Willard Givens, then a California school superintendent, in a report said: We are convinced that we stand today at the verge of a great culture...   But to achieve these things many drastic changes must be made.   A dying laissez-faire must be completely destroyed, and all of us, including the owners, must be subjected to a large degree of social control.

Dr. Harold Rugg continued the job of indoctrinating teachers and preparing teaching materials designed to influence the social attitudes, ideals, and behavior of coming generations.   He wrote a book and in it he stated: A new public mind is to be created.   How?   Only by creating tens of millions of new creative minds and welding them into a new social mind.   Old stereotypes must be broken up and new "climates of opinion" formed in the neighborhoods of America...   We know, now, that a large and growing group of middle men and manipulators of sales, money, investment, and credit have interjected themselves into our economic system...   Most of them, however, are exploiters.   The postulate follows that the economic system can be operated efficiently and humanely only by elimination, re-education, and assignment of productive work of the parasitical members of this group of middle men.   Ruggs was proposing the destruction of the small businessman and complete government control of every citizen's life and employment.   The schools were to be used to transform American political and economic institutions and create the new "public mind" which would accept such complete government control of the individual.

Ruggs proposed to consolidate in textbooks the traditional subjects if history, geography, sociology, economics, political science, etc. into one composite course called "social studies".   The idea was adopted and completely new textbooks were written by Ruggs.   All traditional presentations of subject matter was scrapped - and a variety of economic, political, historical, sociological, and geographical data were lumped into one textbook.   With such a large conglomeration placed one large volume, the deletion or slanted presentation of key events, basic truths, facts, and theories was less evident.

Five million American school children "learned" American political and economic history and structure in the 1930s from 14 social studies textbooks Rugg authored.   He also produced the corresponding teachers guides, course outlines, and student workbooks.   So blatant was the downgrading of American heroes and the U. S. Constitution, so pronounced was the anti-religious bias, so open was the propaganda for socialist control of men's lives, that the public rebelled.

Rugg told what had happened in an open letter to President Roosevelt in 1942.   Rugg proposed to the President that it would be a "thrilling experience" to sell the American people on the need for "social planning" through a massive program of government-sponsored adult education. He said: I know for I tried to do it during the great depression in my Man and His Changing Society - a series of books which was studied by some 5 million young Americans until the patrioteers and the native Fascist press well-nigh destroyed it between 1939 and 1941.

[This is believed by some to be what Obama is proposing with his "civilian army".   He wants to have a program of forced induction supposedly for a period of government service for all.   Those drafted would have a choice of the armed forces or the peace corps.   This sounds like a good idea on the surface - but remember that Obama is an Alinskyite - and one of Alinsky's principles is to do something supposedly for a certain published reason while actually doing it for another reason which is hidden from the public.   Quite likely, Obama (who studied Hitler's and Stalin's methods) wants his own means of indoctrinating the people with socialist/communist philosophy - and a draft would allow the basic training phase to do just that.   What has not been done already in brainwashing the individual would be done with Obama's basic training.   This is similar to Hitler's youth movement and leads eventually to the phase in which the young become informers on their own kin - and have blind loyalty to the Fuhrer (in this case Obama).   However, the idea of a draft is a good one if part of the training is to teach correct rather than politically correct history, government, geography, political science, economics, and other core courses that were either left out or distorted by the communist dominated schools (but an Alinskyite type communist would never let that happen).]

Rugg's textbooks went too far and too fast for complete acceptance by the public, and were replaced by those of other authors.   In 1940, the National Education Association began promoting a set of "social studies" texts known as the Building America series.   They were replacements for the Rugg texts.   They were widely adopted, but a few years later the Senate Investigating Committee on Education of the California legislature condemned them for subtly playing up Marxism and destroying American tradition.   The Senate committee report... found among other things that 113 Communist-front organizations [were involved with] some of the material in the books, and that 50 Communist-front authors were connected with it...   [Apparently, the California legislature in those days was very different from that of today - which passed a bill to allow Communists and those from Communist-front organizations to legally teach in California schools (Covertly, they have been for some time).   California was taken over by communists during the time when a communist California Supreme Court judge made a ruling that both houses of the Califorian legislature must be chosen according to population. - thus eliminating some of the key checks and balances found in the United States legislature.   This decision by that particular judge was decidedly anti-American.]   Seven years after these disclosures, the textbooks were still in use in the school systems of several states.

Years later, in 1964, the typical text was cleverly done.   Direct attacks on basic truths are avoided when possible.   However, the destructive influence is clearly discernable.   The presentation of American history as a class struggle [Marxist philosophy] by widely used textbooks is a striking example of the continuing direct influence by Counts on the schools.   Once America was relatively free of class hatred.

Marx had developed his theories and written his books at a time when feudalism was ending.   During the time of feudalism, there were serfs and landowners (who used the serfs to till their land).   The serfs were essentially slaves.   In Marx' time, the predominant economic system was a combination of feudalism, mercantilism, and free-enterprise.   Marx took some old theories to develop a theory that was outmoded even as he developed it.   Thus, Marx classified society as either proletariat (workers, serfs) and bourgeois (land owners).   He called his current-day society capitalism.   In American society, so much is different from the time of Marx that his theories are even more obviously ill-conceived and outdated.   Consequently,   The progressivists (communists with a new name) realized it would be impossible in America to pit one class against another for political gain if such classes did not exist or were without basic antagonism.   Counts realized that schools teaching a class system in America could disrupt this stabilizing influence.

In The Social Frontier (a magazine) he wrote: In view of the absence of class mentality among workers, it would be reasonable to assume that it is the problem of education to induce such a mentality rather than to take an existing mentality and base a course of action upon it.   [It should be noted that in class-conscious nations, being in a particular class is a family tradition, while in the United States, a person can choose his or her occupation - even if the change is sometimes difficult due to external circumstances.   In other words, in the United States, one may choose his preferred trade or profession - or move from a trade to a profession - or move from a profession to a trade.   In most class-conscious nations, the person's occupation is essentially dictated by the class in which he was born.]

Counts' cruel and cynical admonition to the education of America to purposefully promote class strife and bitterness was an open acceptance of Lenin's strategy of "incite one against another".   Twenty years later, most textbook authors were following Counts' advice.   Class hatred is induced in students by presenting American history as a pro-longed class struggle.   The following are examples from such texts.

The upper class, numerically weak, consisted of those who owned so much wealth that they did not have to engage in manual labor.   They generally wore finer clothes to set themselves off from the masses.   [The words upper class and masses are taken directly from Marxism.   The thoughts presented are inflammatory and generally untrue.]

The rest of the upper class people joined in the American cause, but with the full intention of checking later the aspirations of the average citizen for a more democratic way of life.   [This sentence about the American revolution is a blatant lie and a textbook containing it should never have been allowed in schools.   The revolution was largely funded and carried out by Free Masons who were champions the world over for the overthrow of royalty, autocracy, and dictators with subsequent founding of democratic republics - America being only the first.]

They (the founding fathers) were determined to keep control of the government in the hands of the well-to-do, whom they considered more stable, more judicious, and more temperate than the poorer, and less educated people.   [Again we see a sentence designed to divide Americans and turn one against another.   Although Marx' words were not used and other words were substituted, the effect is the same - and the thought is, again, a blatant lie.]

And in regard to the Constitutional Convention: ...the delegates were conservative or slow to change.   And that is easy to understand.   They were the property-holding class...  Two important groups were not well represented...   First, the common man was not represented by any delegate who was a mechanic or a small farmer or the like.   Secondly, most of the Revolutionary "radicals" were absent.   [This appears to have been written by a disciple of Saul Alinsky as much of the words used mirror his writings.   The delegates were "conservative" in that they drew upon accumulated wisdom and experience of the past in framing the Constitution of the new nation.   To describe them as "slow to change" is absurd.   They were largely the group which instigated, financed, and fought the American Revolution.   Another deceit perpetrated by the author is in failing to tell the student that at the time the Constitution was written, over 90% of all Americans were property holders.]

This handling of the United States Constitution by textbook writers demonstrates a commonly-used propaganda technique.

Instead of directly attacked the provisions of the Constitution, they are ignored, and the motives of the men who wrote it are impugned.   F. A. McGruder in his American Government uses a different technique.   Instead of smearing the men who wrote the Constitution, he openly admits that important Constitutional safeguards are being by-passed today.   The student is given the impression that such infringement on constitutional guarantees against an all-powerful government is "sophisticated and progressive".   He says: The principle of checks and balances in government is not held in such esteem today as it was a century ago.   The people no longer fear the officers whom they elect every few years.

The people of Germany elected Hitler in 1933.   Because they ignored the checks and balances of the german constitution, they never had an opportunity to vote him out.   This the student never learns from McGruder.   [Obama was elected with a free pass from the press who failed to show that he was a student of Alinsky, that his methods were patterned directly from Alinsky, that he was a member of a socialist party, that he was the product of a political machine essentially begun by organized crime, that he was a confirmed liar and breaker of promises, and that he had numerous connections to organized crime, communists, and radical revolutionaries.   His methods included buying voters, voter fraud, intimidation of those who opposed him, and what Alinsky called political schizoid behavior.   The press is supposed to be a check against such methods by exposing them to the public, but that check has been lost due to communist infiltration of the media.   Even when such methods are exposed by other means, the brainwashed youth of America will not pay attention.   To date, the laws against such methods used during the election by Obama have not been enforced.]

In another history textbook we see: The real issue was whether the government should once again serve the needs of the toiling masses rather than the interests of special groups.   Again we see the Marxist words (toiling masses) expressing an implied slight by a supposed class which did not actually exist in America against a supposed class which did not actually exist in America.   What did require government intervention was accomplished by government - such things as the laws against child labor, etc.   The establishment of labor unions cured bad working conditions for those who "toiled".   After the depression, most of the conditions causing any suffering were no longer present.   [Today (December 2008), the communist triumverate in America (Obama, Pelosi, and Reid) has a series of bail-out proposals supposedly designed to speed a cure for the current economic crisis.   Their socialist "solutions" are all right as very temporary band-aids but terrible for the long term.   This is apparent to anyone who understands even a little bit about the American economy, so the sleeping public believes that the lack of decent measures is the result of stupidity by the triumverate.   Those of us who are awake realize that the triumverate is doing exactly what it has always intended to do - they want to destroy America as a free-enterpise nation.]

With the foundation for the class struggle firmly laid, business, profits, free enterprise, and profits are painted as the source of all evil, just as Counts , Rugg, and other Frontier Thinkers recommended.   One text says: Corporate industry represented a greater investment of capital and consequently a greater concentration of power in politics than the slaveholders had ever dreamed of possessing.

If this subtle equating of business with slaveholding was not an adequate condemnation, the authors recite in an approving manner this quotation from Lincoln Steffens: Big business was and still is, the current name of the devil, the root of all evil, political and economic.

Steffens is quoted and praised in many texts and students are not told that Steffens was a vocal supporter of the American Communist Party who said, Communism can solve our problems.

In another text we find a quote from Mary Lease, an English socialist, who said: Wall Street owns the country.   It is no longer a government of the people, by the people, and for the people, but a government of Wall Street, by Wall Street, and for Wall Street.   The Parties lie to us... the people are at bay; let the bloodhounds of money who have dogged us thus far beware!

The authors do not point out that nearly every American family has a stake in Wall Street.   Over 25% of American families own stock in industry directly.   Almost all others share in some way through private insurance policies, company pension plans, or union welfare programs whose assets are invested in Wall Street.

The class struggle is used to openly advocate cradle-to-grave welfare for all.   MacGruder equates opposition to the welfare state with selfishness of the few.   In a section blatantly entitled Welfare of the People from the Cradle to the Grave, he says: The United States has increasingly curbed the selfish and provided for the welfare of the many. The Government has established the Childrens' Bureau to look after the welfare of every child born in America.

MacGruder's text, American Government is a study in propaganda techniques in itself.     The The class struggle idea is reinforced in the following which uses a false premise to discourage thrift, saving, and family responsibility - and justifies welfare payments for all: Beause of sickness, accidents, and occasional unemployment, it is difficult or impossible for a laborer who has reared a family to save from his meager wages (This is untrue.).   And it is more just to place all the burden of supporting those who have been unfortunate, or even shiftless , on everybody instead of upon some dutiful son or daughter who is not responsible for the condition.

With school children of America being educated in this philosophy, is it any wonder that total government expenditures for welfare have risen from under $5 billion annually during the depths of the depression to $35 billion in 1961, the most prosperous year the nation has ever experienced [Bear in mind that inflation occurs and that this was stated in 1964 or earlier.]

This propaganda was not limited to high school students.   The brainwashing was begun in first grade.   Once we had a story about a squirrel who gathered and stored nuts for the winter.   The moral was "Work hard and save wisely for uncertain days ahead."   Today's six-year-old hears a revised version entitled Ask for It, in which the little squirrel (named Bobby) ate nuts from a tree during the summer while other squirrels suggested that he put some away for winter.   But Bobby did not like to work and he ignored the other squirrels' advice.   Winter came and one morning Bobby awakened to a snow-covered world.   He became hungry and remembered that a boy who lived in a white house had taken some of the nuts from his tree during the summer.   Bobby went to the white house and called out.   A door opened and a "fine brown nut" rolled out.   Bobby learned his lesson and the story concludes: "Well!" thought Bobby, "I know how to get my dinner.   All I have to do is ask for it."

The above story is in the first grade reader, Our New Friends, published by Scott, Foresman and Company in 1956.   The authors are Gray, Monroe, Artley, and Arbuthnot.   It was approved for use in most states.

MacGruder's high school text, American Government, uses nearly every classical trick to confuse students into accepting socialism.   Under the heading, Medical Service Under Our System of Free Enterprise is: In a democracy we believe in evolutionary methods rather than the revolutionary methods of a dictatorship; and under our system of free enterprise, competitition improves the standard of service and tends to reduce the cost.   Therefore, instead of jumping right into socialized medicine, why not have the Government support projects such as the following...

MacGruder acknowledges that free enterprise medicine works well, yet Macgruder takes the back door to introduce socialized medicine as an implied evolutionary alternative.

Since World War II, propaganda for world government under the United Nations has been added to textbook agitation for the collectivist society envisioned by Counts and Rugg.   This drive was again spearheaded by The United Nations Educational, Scientific, and Cultural Organization (UNESCO).   It received the official blessing of President Truman's Commission on Higher Education.   The Commission's recommendations included the following: ...Higher education must play a very important part in carrying out in this country the program developed by UNESCO... The United States Office of Education must be prepared to work with the State Department and with UNESCO.

UNESCO's program, found within a nine-volume study, included the blueprint for conditioning American children for the day when their first loyalty would be to socialistic one-world government under the United Nations.   The work of Counts and Rugg included two first steps - (1) the destruction of the United States Constitution and the free enterprise economy and (2) the merging of the United States into a socialistic world federation.

UNESCO's Director General, under whom the plan was prepared, was Julian Huxley, an atheistic philosopher and member of the Colonial Bureau of the British Fabian Society.   The goal of UNESCO is in the first volume of the study.   It recommended that children should be educated in... those qualities of citizenship which provide the foundation upon which international government is based if it is to succeed.

Under Huxley, UNESCO envisioned that destruction of the children's love of country and patriotism was the first step toward education for world citizenship. [Destruction of nationalism was used when Russia took countries into the Soviet Union through conquest.   Destruction of nationalism made virtual enslavement much more easily accomplished - and to destroy nationalism, at least a third of the population of each conquered country was moved out into other parts of the Soviet Union while Russian were moved into that country to take their place and act as informers.   Next, the children of the conquered people were brainwashed in Soviet schools.   However, the brainwashing was not very successful so long as the parents could teach their children otherwise - and their hatred of the Russian yoke continued within each subject nation.   It is the domination within the United Nations of Russia and China along with their conquered countries and their communist allies that make subservience under the United Nations such a terrible threat to citizens of the United States.   Communism has always been a means for an undeserving minority to subject a deserving majority to a form of slavery.   In communist countries people want to get out.   In free countries, people want to get in.]

Attack on the home and the parents is necessary for nationalism to be destroyed in the children.   The credibility of the parents must be destroyed.   On page 9 of volume V of the UNESCO report is: The kindergarten or infant school has a significant part to play in the child's education.   Not only can it correct many of the errors of home training but it can also prepare the child for membership, at about age seven, in a group of his own age and habits - the first of many such social identifications that he must achieve on his way to membership in the world society.

After guarded references to the "injurious influence" of the family on the child, the UNESCO study makes it plain that the errors in home training include parental encouragement of patriotism. [This technique was used in reverse by Hitler in Germany when he encouraged German nationalism and a blind loyalty to himself and the Third Reich.   If the parents did not consider him to be almost a God and the German master race the natural rulers of the world, the children were encouraged to inform on those parents and the parents could then be sent to the ovens while the children were kept as wards of the state.   UNESCO is attempting, to cause the children to develop a blind loyalty to a world government that is vastly inferior to the government of the United States or any other free nation.   Parental authority and family traditions are undermined - and in due course, any parents who believe in tradition and patriotism would be punished or eliminated entirely.   Fascism in any form is recognizable as it is in this case.   And it must be stopped if the United States is to remain free.]

Among the "means described earlier" are the suppression of American history and geography which might enhance pro-American sentiments in the children.   UNESCO gives specific suggestions on how this can be done.   In our view, history and geography should be taught at this stage as universal history and geography.   Of the two, only geography lends itself well to study during the years prescribed by the present survey (3-13 years).   The study of history, on the other hand, raises problems of value which are better postponed until the pupil is freed from the nationalist prejudices which at present surround the teaching of history.

Translated, this means that if the grade school student is taught American history objectively he is very likely to realize that the American system of government, economics, and social values outstrip those found anywhere else in the world.

Three pages later, UNESCO admits that detailed study even of foreign countries will lead the student to the conclusion that America is a better place to live [Otherwise why do people so often wish to leave their own country and come to the United States?].   This problem is resolved by recommending that teachers obscure the truth from their pupils in the following way.   Certain delicate problems, however, will arise in these studies and explorations.   Not everything in foreign ways of living can be presented to children in an attractive light.   At this stage, though, the systematic examination of other countries and manners can be postponed, and the teacher need seek only to insure that his children appreciate , through abundant and judicious examples, that foreign countries, too, possess things of beauty, and that many of them resemble the beauty and interest of his own country.   A child taught this about the different countries of the world will gradually lose those habits of prejudice and contempt which are an impediment to world-mindedness.

Thus, UNESCO recommends the deliberate "under education" of children.   The student who does not know or understand the accomplishments of America and shortcomings of the rest of the world is more likely to accept a "world government."   The student who knows nothing of the horrors of the communist system in Russia and the failures of socialism everywhere it has been tried might well agree to a communist-influenced socialistic one-world government.

Such deliberate under education is a theme which runs through the entire UNESCO program.   Karl W. Bigelow, another professor of education at Columbia, and a UNESCO board member, directed a seminar on Volume II of the Towards World Understanding series.   The seminar report, The Education and Training of Teachers recommended the following.   Therefore, we regard it as a matter of first importance for social and international living that educators should be more concerned with the child, and the healthy development of his body and mind, than with the content of various subjects which go to make a school curriculum... Because of failure to adopt a wise approach to child growth and development, the primary school still tends to function as if it were an institution for the abolition of illiteracy.

Should the school's primary function be the teaching of reading, writing, and arithmetic (the abolition of illiteracy) or the "conditioning" of the child for "social and international living"?   Bigelow's thesis, expressed in this UNESCO publication, is a simple restatement of John Dewey's original progressivist theories.   The ultimate result can only be the under education of the child.   The graduates produced by such "education" do not have the basic knowledge on which to make sound social judgements [nor can they vote intelligently - as was so blatantly apparent in the 2008 elections].   If they do not understand the source of America's strength, they cannot see the fallaces of a world collectivist order.

In short, UNESCO recommends that schools be converted into indoctrination centers for the production of emotionally-conditioned children who react like Pavlov's dogs rather than reason and think logically [the same thing that happened under Hitler in Germany - and in the Soviet Union - when the children were so well indoctrinated that they informed on their own parents].   The best-selling book, Rudolph Flech's Why Johnny Can't Read exposes the results of such under education in one curriculum area.

Teacher training institutions, textbook writers, and professional education organizations picked up the theme of "education for world citizenship".   Dr. Willard Givens, executive secretary of the National Education Association [NEA], joined the board of directors of the U. S. Commission for UNESCO.

Professional education journals and faculty members at Teachers College, Columbia University, started agitating for mandatory revision of textbooks to conform to UNESCO standards even before the standards were publicly announced.   Writing in the NEA journal in April 1946, Isaac Leon Kandel of Teachers College, Columbia University stated as follows.   Nations that become members of UNESCO accordingly assume an obligation to revise textbooks used in their schools... unilateral efforts to revise the [current] materials of instruction are futile.   The poison of aggressive nationalism injected into children's minds is as dangerous for world stability as the manufacture of armaments.   In one, as in the other, supervision by some kind of international agency is urgent.

Textbook revision to obliterate national history and geography, downgrade patriotism and love of America, and build a tolerance for the communist enemy in Russia has been accomplished in line with UNESCO recommendations.   A review of widely-used textbooks established this fact.

Patriotic impulses are generally belittled and equated with extremism, in line with UNESCO proposals for overcoming "injurious parental influences."   In The United States: Experience in Democracy, the authors, Craven and Johnson, say the following.   In the 1920s, many Americans were excessively nationalistic and intolerantly patriotic... The official (Ku Klux) Klan literature reflected the average middle class in its assertions of "100 per cent Americanism".

Note the linking of the "middle class" and patriotism with the Ku Klux Klan.   This is typical.   Another text, History of the American Way, by Faulkner, Kepler, and Merrill, says ...there was an increase in the number of so-called "100 per cent Americans" whose behavior was quite un-American and undemocratic.   The Ku Klux Klan, for example...

Gavian and Hamm in their high school text, The American Story put it as follows.   National feeling was very strong, and it was often shown in undesirable ways.   The strong nationalism of the years following the war [WWI] was commonly expressed in such slogans as "America first" and "one hundred per cent Americanism".

[The Ku Klux Klan was formed originally by racist fanatics who were similar to the Nazis in Germany who believed in the "supremacy of the master race" (the blond, blue-eyed race).   It was abhored by the American middle class and because it was illegal and generally unpopular, it was a secret organization.   It was the National Socialist Party in Germany under Hitler that initiated the theme of the master race and, subsequently, it was neo-Nazis in the United States that became the prime movers of the Ku Klux Klan - which met in secret and who's members were too cowardly to show their own faces in public during their illegal activities (they wore white sheets from the top of their heads to the their feet).   The linking of the American middle class to the Ku Klux Klan was absurd and insulting to the American middle class.   But this was typical of communist propaganda.]

Decent Americans deplore fanaticism.   However, with discussions of patriotism in textbooks limited to such slurring passages it is no wonder that love of country, one of man's most noble attributes, is in such disrepute; that today the citizen who is moved to express a patriotic remark feels impelled to preface it by saying, "I don't want to sound like a flag waver, but..."

Belittling references to patriotism in textbooks is not the only method used for downgrading love of country.   Display of the American flag in the classroom is neglected in many areas.   The Pledge of Allegiance to the flag was once a standard exercise for opening the school day.   This practice has been discarded to such a degree [this was written in 1964] that in 1961 members of the California State Legislature felt compelled to pass a law requiring that the Pledge of Allegiance or the singing of the Star Spangled Banner be used daily.   The bill passed - but by only one vote.   A similar bill was passed in Illinois in 1963 - but was vetoed by the governor.

[Today, December 2008, it is illegal to say the Pledge of Allegiance in school because the words "under God", either stupidly or with malice introduced into the Pledge by so-called Republicans in 1954, caused the Pledge to become a tool which linked church and state.   If these words (which have no conceivable purpose in the Pledge) were removed, the Supreme Court would once again allow the Pledge to be said in schools.   However, the Republicans are too full of pride to do the right thing in this case, and the Democrats today are dominated by communists who don't want the Pledge to be said it schools.   In fact, in 2008 the the California State Legislature managed to pass a bill (AB-1322) which allows communists to teach in our schools again - even though they want to overthrow our government.]

The downgrading of American heroes contributes to the downfall of patriotism.   Todd and Curti in their America's History have the following to say of George Washington.   Outwardly Washington seemed to most people somewhat cold and overdignified.   After his death, American patriots developed a myth of his godlike qualities...

After 15 or more years of such anti-patriotic propaganda in the schools, J. Edgar Hoover (head of the FBI) felt impelled to speak out.   At Valley Forge on February 22, 1962, he said: Too often in recent years, patriotic symbols have been shunted aside.   Our national heroes have been maligned, our history distorted.   Has it become a disgrace to pledge allegiance to our flag - or to sign a loyalty oath, or to pay tribute to our national anthem?   Is it shameful to encourage our children to memorize the stirring words of '76?   Is it becoming opprobious to state "In God We Trust" when proclaiming our love of country?   What we desperately need today is patriotism founded on a real understanding of the American ideal - a dedicated belief in our principles of freedom and a determination to perpetuate America's heritage.

UNESCO recommended that the textbooks should be revised to play down or eliminate certain facts about foreign countries - facts which are unattractive.   Similarities rather than differences between countries were to be emphasized.   In this way, according to UNESCO, children will gradually lose those habits of prejudice and contempt which are an empediment to world mindedness.   Compare that UNESCO recommendation with the description of the communist government of Russia in F. A. Magruder's text, American Government.   Magruder says that socialism in Russia is an example of totalitarianism but then proceeds to describe it this way: Under the Constitution of 1936, the Government is a federation.   It is a Union of 16 Soviet Socialist Republics (USSR) ... the powers are divided between the Union and the member republics somewhat as those of our Union are divided between the United States and the States.   Suffrage (voting) is granted to men and women of 18 years of age and over.   The voters directly or indirectly elect the two houses comprising the Supreme Council.   This body legislates and also chooses the Presidium, consisting of a chairman and 36 members which carries on the government.   There are also Ministers comparable to our Cabinet members.

At no point is the student told directly that the Soviet voter is given no choice, that the only candidates on the ballot are those selected from above by the Communist Party.

In describing the collective farms in Russia, Magruder says: The members of each collective have a sort of town meeting to determine policies and elect the manager.   But Magruder does not mention that 10 million Russians who had small farms were murdered before the remainder "accepted" the collective farm idea.

The summary of Magruder's discussion of the Russian communist government has the subtitle, Swing from the Radical to the Conventional.   Under this heading, he says: The Revolution of 1917 was fourfold: governmental, economic, religious, and moral.   An absolute monarchy was replaced by Soviets (Councils) dominated by a dictator, but the Constitution of 1936 granted direct suffrage (voting).

From this passage, the student would assume that Russia no longer has a dictatorship.   With such textbook descriptions of the Soviet Union, it is reasonable to believe that students might lose the "prejudice and contempt" for communism which UNESCO cites as an impediment to world mindedness.

The origin and growth of world communism, and the influence communist agents have had in influencing U. S. foreign policy toward communist objectives, have caused discernable textbook bias to be the rule rather than the exception in the treatment of American foreign policy.   Outright lies are in the textbooks are not uncommon.

The UNESCO-friendly Textbooks impart false information about the establishment of the communist state in Russia.   Lenin and the Bolsheviks are given credit for overthrowing the tyrannical Czarist regime.   The Czar was actually overthrown by Kerensky who established a constitutional republic, which was subverted and seized by the communists.   But Dumond, Dale, and Wesley, in History of the United States, say: At the end of World War I, the source of greatest danger was thought to be Russia, where after centuries of oppression the masses revolted and established a communist regime...

Harlow in Story of America described the rise of the totalitarian state this way: In 1917 revolutionists in Russia overthrew the government of the Czar and established a communist nation.

[Between March and November of 1917, the Communists used three classical methods of gaining power which they were to repeat later in almost identical fashion in other countries.   First, they presented themselves in their propaganda as a people's party dedicated to liberty, democracy, and social justice, opposed to all forms of reaction and social injustice.   In an agrarian country like Russia, the Communists played up, in particular, the need for agrarian land reform, and encouraged the seizure of land by the peasants even before they were in control of the government.   A generation later, the Chinese Communists were portrayed as just "agrarian reformers," thus following the pattern of propaganda established by the Russian Communists in 1917.   The second technique which the Russian Communists employed was to infiltrate other political parties as well as trade unions, soldiers' councils, and local government authorities.   In particular, the Communists managed to infiltrate, and gradually disrupt, the Social Revolutionaries, the largest party in Russia, dedicated to political democracy and social reform, and especially concerned with the questions of the peasants (they had been serfs for generations - very much like slaves).   This technique of infiltration was again employed by the Communists during and after World War II, when they tried to take over Socialist parties in a number of countries.   Their most notable successes in that endeavor were in Italy and, to a lesser extent, in Czechoslovakia after World War II.   The third method used by the Russian Communists in their revolution was force.   In free elections, the Communists polled about one-quarter of the popular vote.   Though this represented a far from negligible proportion, considering their fanaticism and activism, the Communists accepted the fact that in a free election they could not hope to win.   In November 1917, therefore, the Communists seized the key positions of power in Moscow, and from there the revolution quickly spread all over Russia.   Opposition to the Communist revolution sprang up spontaneously in various parts of the country, and a civil war ensued which lasted until 1921.]

The cruel, harsh, inhumane methods used in the Russian communist state are ignored or deliberately distorted, while Soviet progress is praised.   Mowrer and Cummings in The United States and World Relations are guilty in this way.   Notable progress has been made in many sections of the country (Russia), particularly in those that are remote from Moscow, as shown by the really remarkable expansion in the Arctic.   The fact that this expansion was accomplished mostly by 20 million inmates (usually political prisoners) of Soviet labor camps - many of whom died from excessive forced labor, and lack of food and clothing - is not mentioned.

The pro-Soviet bias of the textbooks becomes obvious when descriptions of Nazism are compared with passages on communism.   Nazi methods, governmental structure, and plans for world conquest were similar to those of the communists.   Not a handful of Nazis remain in the world.   We are threatened by a world-wide communist conspiracy of 33 million fanatically-dedicated revolutionaries who have enslaved one billion people.   Yet while textbook writers use justifiably vicious words to describe Nazism, the communists get a "neutral" appraisal.   Harlow is typical.   He writes of brown-shirted Nazi gangsters and black-shirted Fascist plunderers in describing the rise of totalitarianism in Germany and Italy - but of communism he writes: Meanwhile, Russia had organized the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics and was ruled by a handful of Communist Party members led by Joseph Stalin.

The bias becomes obvious in the treatment of the rule of Russia and Germany in World War II.   Of the early part of the war when Russia and Germany were still allies, Gavian and Hamm use these words to describe the joint destruction of Poland: ...While the Nazi storm troops quickly overran the western part of [Poland], Russian armies occupied the eastern half.   Note that the German armies are described as Nazi storm troops [who overran the western part of Poland] while the Russian armies are not called communists or the red army [and they are described merely as occupiers rather than those who overran the eastern part of Poland].   Communism has rightly been described by J. Edgar Hoover (head of the FBI) "Red Fascism".   As such it deserves equally condemnatory textbook treatment with Nazism.

The Yalta Conference, one of the most sordid episodes in American diplomatic history, gets only passing mention in UNESCO-favored textbooks although agreements made there by Roosevelt, Stalin, and Churchill resulted in the enslavement of 700 million people by the communists.   Here is how several textbook authors describe the agreements which resulted in communist domination of Poland, Yugoslavia, Hungary, Bulgaria, Rumania, China, and six other nations.   Craven and Johnson say: In February 1945, Roosevelt met with Churchill and Stalin at Yalta to make plans for the final blows against Germany and Japan.   Gavian and Hamm wrote: At the Yalta Conference... Roosevelt, Churchill, and Stalin outlined a plan for dividing both Germany and Austria.   Faulkner, Kepner, and Merrill in their text go even farther in distortion by omission: At the Yalta Conference... Russia, Great Britain, and the United States agreed that the liberated peoples should create governments of their own choice.

Desmond, Dale, and Wesley come closest to telling the student that there might be something in the Yalta story worth studying.   They say: Some agreements between Russia, Great Britain, and the United States as to the postwar treatment of Germany were made at Yalta, though details still remain in dispute.

Alger Hiss, a communist and adviser to Roosevelt at Yalta, is ignored as an influence on the Conference and the agreements made there.   This is typical of the textbook "blackout" on high-level infiltration and subversion of the U. S. Government by communist agents.

Texts written in the 1950s ignore or belittle the influence of Hiss, Harry Dexter White, Owen Lattimore, and other high-level agents.   If their part in directing American policies toward communist objectives were thoroughly discussed, the student would likely gain an impression that communists were too treacherous to trust in any world government.   If the continuous string of over 50 agreements broken by the communists since World War II were detailed, the student might rightly decide that negotiations of further agreements is unwise.

If the true story U.S./Soviet relations were told, students would never accept textbook propaganda for a United Nations world government and disarmament.   Yet, these misleading themes run through the textbooks from which students are supposed to learn about American government.   Magruder, on the first page of his book says: We know that unity of our own states brought peace and strength to our country.   We believe that similar cooperation will bring peace and goodwill to the nations of the world.

Magruder ignores the conditions which made unity possible in America, conditions which do not exist in today's world.   These conditions included a 500-year heritage of seeking freedom under English common law from 1215 when the Magna Charta was signed; common language, religious and racial heritage; agreement on an economic system; and true acceptance of a common goal of freedom.

Today, nearly one-third of the "new" nations of the world have no traditional concepts of law.   Some have not completely rejected cannibalism.   Only a handful of United Nations members have concepts of private property and freedom similar to those which made America strong.   Racial and religious differences further complicate the problem.   Even if all these obstacles could be brushed away, the international communist conspiracy with its goal of world domination makes any form of unity, except eventual slavery for all, impossible.

Ignoring all these facts, Magruder repeats the same illogical reasoning in his text. We have peace in the United States because we have agreed to federal laws and have an army to enforce them.   When we have definite international laws and an army to enforce them, we shall have international peace.   When atomic bombs are made only by a world government and used only by a world army, who could resist?

Who could resist?   Certainly not the United States if the "neutralist" Afro-Asian bloc united, as usual, with the communist countries and voted democratically to enslave all Americans.   Would it be wrong?   Perhaps.   But it would be democratic.

[At this point it might be wise to mention that a pure democracy is the worst form of dictatorship.   Our Bill of Rights, the establishment of the checks and balances of our government, and the representative system of the electoral college, prevent us from having such a dictatorship.   It was the socialist/communist agents who tried to remove from public consciousness the word "republic" (which is what our nation is) and to substitute the word democracy (which our nation is not).   The United States is a democratic republic.   One reason that the communists wanted us to lose the Pledge of Allegiance was to elimate the word "republic" from our consciousness.   The Pledge has the word "republic" in it - NOT the word "democracy".

In a pure democracy, those who liked horses would not be allowed to have them because the majority did would not like horse manure.   Those who like motor cycles would not be allowed to have them because the majority would not like their noise.   Those who like to design and build their own homes would not be allowed to do so because the unions would not like them to take away work that the unions' people could do - and so forth.   In other words, in a pure democracy, everyone loses.   In fact, there is too much of this going on today in the United States where in one state, the majority has voted to have the dairy farmers and those passing through pay the bulk of the taxes, and in another state where the military people pay the bulk of the taxes.   The majority in a pure democracy can enslave a minority portion of the population.]

Throughout the book, the student is conditioned to accept world government, without discussing whether it would be good or bad.   Finally, in the last two chapters, Magruder spells out in detail the specific steps which should be taken to prepare for world government.

Give the U.N. absolute power to regulate international trade and commerce.   Immigration control now handled by each country would be relinquished to the U.N., [providing the U.N.] with the power to arbitrarily remove people from one part of the world and settle them in a place a U.N. planner determines their skills are needed.

Place control of the Panama Canal under the U.N.   Establish an international police force strong enough that no nation can resist its orders.   Give the U.N. power of taxation.   Place broadcast stations, press, speech, etc. under U.N. control to insure development of "cooperative" public opinion (brainwashing).

[These steps are essentially the same as those used by the communists of the Soviet Union (USSR) during the time before the revolution of 1991 - when the people became so opposed to the communists that the Soviet Union and the socialist system were overthrown.   Unfortunately, since that time, Vladimir Putin, once head of the KGB, eventually moved into power in Russia.   Putin nationalized the major industries and the media just as it had been under communism and has now introduced legislation (that will pass) making it a treasonous offense to criticize the government.]

As fantastic as many of these proposals sound, they were taught to the children of America as long as 12 years ago [that would have been since 1954].   Today, they are being discussed seriously as steps to be taken by the U.S. Government.

All those who support such programs are not communists.   Those who write such textbooks, put them into school systems, and vehemently defend them when they are exposed are not necessarily communists, or even pro-communists.   They are misguided socialist idealists (called useful idiots by Joseph Stalin) consumed with the idea of solving world problems through a one-world socialist government.   They believe that, if all human differences (economic, religious, political, etc.) are eliminated, all mankind's problems will disappear as well.   In striving for this idealistic goal, they emotionally banish all fact and reason.   Past communist treachery, which would be an obstacle to a world socialistic brotherhood, is pathologically ignored.

[In my own opinion, those who push communist principles - whether they are communists or not in the sense that they belong to the communist party - are still communists even if they do not consider themselves to be so and do not call themselves communists.   Since socialism is a merely an early stage of an evolution into communism, socialists are also communists even though they are not bright enough to know this.]

Under the protective cover offered by the misguided one-worlders, the communists have been able to operate in schools of America.

As early as 1940, the Rapp-Coudert Investigation Committee of the New York State Legislature disclosed that the 11,000 member Teachers Union in New York city was under complete communist control.   Over 1,000 communists were teaching in New York city schools.

In the Committee's final report, it was stated: The communists and those under their influence in the Teachers Union comprised nearly one-fourth of all personnel in the city colleges.

After exposure by the Rapp-Coudert committee, communist influences in the schools lessened for a brief period.   However, in 1952, the Senate Internal Security Subcommittee learned that no real clean-up had been accomplished.   In a series of hearings on subversive influences in education, the committee learned that 500 or more communists were still teaching in New York city.   Administrative red tape, Supreme Court decisions, and opposition of teacher organizations have hampered efforts to utilize the information developed be the investigations.

Efforts to remove communist teachers from positions of influence have been strongly opposed by such influential organizations as the American Association of University Professors.

Decisions of the U.S. Supreme Court have made nearly impossible the job of concerned school authorities in clearing their own ranks.   In the case of Sweezey vs. New Hampshire the Warren Court reversed the New Hampshire Supreme Court and held that the Attorney General of New Hampshire exceeded his authority in questioning Professor Sweezey about suspected subversive activities.   Questions which the Court said that Sweezey properly refused to answer included "Did you advocate Marxism at that time?" and "Do you believe in communism?"

In another case, the Court reversed the decisions of three lower courts and held that it was unconstitutional to discharge a teacher because he took the Fifth Amendment when asked about communist activities.   The Court ordered this identified communist to be rehired in his former position and given $40,000 back pay.

Through the combined actions of the communists, and the disciples of Dewey, Counts, Rugg, and other Frontier Thinkers, many of our schools have become instruments for producing the "new social order".   On the other hand, because of local control over the schools, alert parents, informed school board members, and patriotic school administrators and teachers in many areas have been able to unite to do an outstanding job in their schools.   For this reason, the "progressive" thinkers are actively advocating a massive program of federal aid to education which would ultimately remove control of schools from the local level and transfer it to Washington.   Then, the appointment of one "progressivist" as head of the Office of Education would insure that the amoral socialist theories could be permeated into all schoolhouses and textbooks.   The National Education Association's National Commission for the Defense of Democracy through Education can, and will, rush it's trained propagandists to the scene.

In the past, charges of socialist bias in education has been vehemently denied or ridiculed.   The Pasadena Story, and impressive publication issued by the NEA Defense Commission when parents in Pasadena rebelled at the indoctrination of their children, is typical.   Of the Pasadena parents, the report says, They apparently claim that this country has already moved into, or is rapidly moving toward, some form of socialism, collectivism, or statism.   They contend that the subversive elements have sifted into public education and that many teachers are seeking to change the American way of life.   They charge that John Dewey's progressive education is an instrument designed to break down American standards and weaken the fabric of society...   They oppose certain educators who they assert are seeking to indoctrinate the youth of the country for a changed social and economic order.

This report was issued in June 1951 by the NEA.   The NEA executive secretary at the time was Willard Givens, who himself had publicly stated: We are convinced that we stand today at the verge of a great culture...  But to achieve these things, many drastic changes must be made.   A dying laissez-faire must be completely destroyed, and all of us, including the owners must be subjected to a large degree of social control.

Today [1964], the NEA's Defense Commission, in Gestapo-like fashion, maintain a blacklist of individuals and organizations which publicly question or criticize the quality of education.   The NEA Commission for "Defense of Democracy" in its 1961 annual report admitted: About 1,000 requests for information concerning individuals or groups thought to be causing trouble for the schools or the profession were received during the year.   Several new fact sheets and information bulletins concerning critics of education were prepared.   The Commission has, probably, the most complete files of their kind of critics of education.

The Tulsa Tribune, after determining that a dossier on its editor was in the NEA files of "critics of education", asked editorially: What is the function of the National Education Association - to improve the education of America's children or to stifle criticism of present educational methods?"

This concludes information that was found, for the most part in None Dare Call It Treason by John A. Stormer (copyrighted in 1964).   We recommend it as an excellent source of much more information.


To Beginning
First Section - Events through 1964

1964 to 1989

Third Section - Overview through 2006
Fourth Section - Enlisting Disenfranchised Groups
Fifth Section - Weakening the Military
Sixth Section - Some Current Propaganda

The information in the following section was taken, for the most part, from John A. Stormer's second edition of None Dare Call It Treason - Twenty-Five Years Later, which was copyrighted in 1990 - over eighteen years ago.   Again, there are direct quotes from Stormer's book.   Again, his book has more meat in it than most of the later books and a lot of what he predicted in 1989 has come to pass.   The book should be read in its entirety since this section consists of only a small number of its parts and comments by me.

From 1964 to 1989

Since None Dare Call It Treason was published in 1964, seven million people have read it.   [This was a lot, but not enough.   The steps taken by those who read the book merely delayed the onslaught of communism in the United States.   Most of the population remained asleep.]   Twenty additional countries became Marxist.   Millions of people were slaughtered by their communist "liberators".   Over 3 million people were murdered in Cambodia by communists.   Other millions starved to death when communism came to Ethiopia.   Students wanting to institute some basic reforms in the communist system in China were massacred in Tiananmen Square.   Multiple millions of other who were free in 1964 now (1989) live in poverty and bondage - in Soviet puppet states or single-party "socialist" regimes which are sufficiently Marxist so that they are no longer targets of communist aggression.   [All of these have KGB clones within them which report to the KGB in Russia.]   Israel, South Africa, South Korea, the Phillipines, and El Salvador were top Red targets as the 1990s began.

During this 25-year period, Americans were caused to make numerous mistakes {the list is too long to show here} which led to communist victories.   Now (in 1989), the communists control more of the world's people and more of the world's land mass than any other would-be world conqueror in history.   Communists have enslaved 2 billion of the world's people and control one-quarter of the earth's surface even though their system and all of their great plans are dismal failures.   During the seventy years since Lenin and his Bolsheviks brought communism to Russia, no communist country has ever been able to feed its people.

Slaves do not produce and socialism will not work without a gun at the back of the worker and the threat of a Siberian labor camp to keep that worker in line.   Wherever communism takes over, walls and fences must be erected to keep the slaves from fleeing.   The tragic pattern has been repeated in China, Cuba, Nicaragua, Ethiopia, and Southeast Asia - wherever communism seizes power.   Vietnam was once the rice bowl of the Orient.   Today it imports food.   Czechoslavakia once had 1.2% of the world's trade.   After thirty years of communist rule, its share dropped to .15% - almost a ten-fold decline.   Communism fails to meet the basic needs of people wherever it is tried.

In the United States, the subversion of American youth is a primary objective of both Communist Party members and those they succeed in influencing (the ones they call the "useful idiots").   Infiltration into the U.S. school system by communists is the rule rather than the exception and is typified by a most successful example which follows.

Communist infiltration into the U.S. news media, underground agitators like the Weathermen, and communist professors on campuses in the U.S. resulted in the Kent State Tragedy in which a group of students were rioting.   The National Guard was called in to keep order.   When students charged the Guardsmen, they were fired upon and some were killed.   This incident was used to further destroy the war effort in Vietnam and to further the communist cause on campuses.   Political pressure forced the U.S. to pull out of Vietnam at a time when they were defeating the communists in battle - and many of the college students in the U.S. were further indoctrinated into communism.

One college professor, Dr. Sidney Jackson, played a key role in developing the pressure which resulted in the tragedy at Kent State and the subsequent withdrawal of troops from Vietnam.   Jackson was a professor of library science at Kent State and a faculty adviser of the Kent Committee to End the War in Vietnam - which was the organization that laid the foundation for the protests which ended in the student deaths, thus producing the martyrs the communists needed to spark worldwide opposition to the war in Vietnam.   Had you called Sidney Jackson a communist in 1970, you might have been sued.   His Communist Party membership and his role in the Kent State tragedy were only made public after his death - made public by the communists themselves.   His obituary was published after his death in 1979 in the Daily World, an official communist newspaper.   KENT, Ohio, May 15 - Over 350 faculty members, students, unionists, and townspeople attended services here for Dr. Sydney Jackson, senior professor of library sciences at Kent State University.   Dr. Jackson died in his sleep on May 7.   He was 64 years old.   He had been a member of the Communist Party since 1936.

While they are alive and working to gain influential status in organizations, communists hide their party memberships.   Once they die, however, the Party brags about their party affiliation and their activities.   Jackson's importance to the Communist Party is made obvious by the list of top communist leaders who attended his funeral.   The article says Among the speakers were Henry Winston, Chairman and Gus Hall, General Secretary of the Communist Party U.S.A., and Jim West, Ohio Chairman of the CPUSA.

Communists are activists, gaining positions of influence in whatever organization they join because they are willing to accept responsibilities.   This is shown in the following quote of Ohio Communist Party Chairman Jim West.   ...Jackson authored many books and over 1000 articles and reviews; had helped organize a faculty union, edited a number of publications, and held leading responsibilities in state and national library associations...   He was Vice President of the Kent State Chapter of the NAACP... [and] served as the first faculty adviser of the Kent Committee to End the War in Vietnam.

The appearance of America's two top communists, Hall and Winston, at Jackson's funeral indicates his importance.   They were honoring their hero.   Top officials of the college participated in the funeral service with the Committee leaders.   Those who joined Gus Hall and other top communist leaders in paying tribute to the professor whose activities resulted in the deaths of six students [and the waste of millions of lives during and after the Vietnam War] included: Dr. Herbert Goldsmith, Dean of KSU University School; Dean A. Robert Rogers, KSU School of Library Science; Dr, Kenneth Calkins, KSU Dept. of History and president of the Faculty Professional Association; Dr. Dennis Carey, KSU Center for Peaceful Change; Anita Bixsdenstine, KSU Honors and Experimental College; Alvin Jones, Kent NAACP; William Arthreil, student, Kent Committee Against the War in Vietnam; and Greg Rambo, student, May 4th Task Force.

[The Vietnam War was waged to prevent the spread of communism in Southeast Asia.   The U.S. was winning that war militarily and the communists were about to give up due to excessive casualties.   It was imperative to the communists that the U.S. be crippled at home politically so that the U.S. troops would leave and Vietnam would be in the hands of the communists.   After the U.S. pulled out of the war, the communists killed 2 million Vietnamese and proceeded to call the war a "Civil War" in which the United States had intervened.   Vietnam was only the door for more conquests in Southeast Asia by the communists.   Had we been able to stay the course and win politically at home and in Vietnam, Laos and Cambodia would most probably not have been threatened later.   This is why Jackson was such an important communist agent.]

Jackson's work and influence goes on even afte his death.   A note in the obituary says: Miriam R. Jackson, daughter of Dr. Jackson and a peace activist student, had been welcomed home by her father just before he died on her return last Sunday from the Washington demonstration.

The Washington demonstration was the May 4, 1979, peace demonstration held in the nation's capital.   Professor Jackson had been an adviser to the group which planned the meeting.

Those who refuse to face the communist danger often point to the relative handful of dues-paying members of the Communist Party in the United States - ten to twenty thousand - as evidence that the communists are weak and ineffective.   The record of Dr. Sidney Jackson shows the tremendous and tragic impact just one communist has had and can have through stirring and agitating [useful idiots] to do the communists' work.   At his funeral, Ohio State Communist Party chief Jim West said: We in the Communist Party are proud of his membership and his life's work.

The official program for the memorial service showed that West's eulogy of Jackson was followed by the playing of The Internationale, the anthem of the world communist movement.

Jackson's obituary was also published by the Kent, Ohio, Record-Courier, the college's Daily Kent Stater, the Cleveland Plain Dealer, and the Akron Beacon Journal.   None of them mentioned Jackson's Communist Party membership nor the participation of top communist officials in the small town funeral.

However, the communists and the news media have made the results of Jackson's work at Kent State as much a part of the American vocabulary as McCarthyism, the word the communists placed in our language to label any form of anti-communism.   The tragedy at Kent State and news media use of it was the turning point in public's attitude toward the Vietnam War.   The specter of "Kent State" continues to be the banner raised against any proposed efforts to stop communist aggression anywhere in the world.

The United States could have ended the war in Southeast Asia within 30 days at any time during the unfolding of the eight-year struggle.   Bombing the dredges which kept the Haiphong harbor open for Soviet shipping would have ended the war.   Several million lives - American and Asian - would have been spared.   A few well-placed bombs on the dikes in North Vietnam would have flooded key areas through which supplies and men were channeled.   These targets and most other strategic sites were off-limits for American bombers through most of the war.

The Red plan to destroy the American "will to resist" communist aggression was exposed six years earlier by the U.S. Senate Preparedness Subcommittee.   The committee had warned that the Johnson Administration by "overly restricting" military efforts to win the war in Vietnam could fall into the communist trap.   Recall the words of the subcommittee report which said: The enemy strategy is to engage us in a protracted war of attrition which will tax the patience and undermine the determination of the American people to resist...

The warning wasn't heeded.   The no-win policies continued and the communist plan succeeded.   Millions died and other millions live in communist tyranny today.

Communists stirred several thousand San Francisco area college students to riot against the House Committee on Un-American Activities (HCUA) in May, 1960.   The HCUA was attempting to hold hearings on Communist influence in the Bay Area.   Tbe FBI director, J. Edgar Hoover, issued a special report on the riot titled, Communist Target: Youth.   In it Hoover said the following.

The successful communist exploitation and manipulation of youth and student groups throughout the world today are a major challenge which free world forces must meet and defeat.   Recent world events clearly reveal that world communism has launched a massive campaign to capture and maneuver youth and student groups.

In the relentless struggle for world domination being waged by them, communists are dedicated to the Leninist principle that "youth will decide the issue of the entire struggle - both the student youth and, still more, the working-class youth.

The communists demonstrated in San Francisco just how powerful a weapon communist infiltration is.   They revealed how it is possible for only a few communist agitators, using mob psychology, to turn peaceful demonstrations into riots.   Their success there must serve as a warning that their infiltration efforts aimed not only at youth and student groups, but also at our labor unions, churches, professional groups, artists, newspapers, government and the like, can create chaos and shatter our internal security.

Congressman Francis Walter (Democrat - Pennsylvania), Chairman of the House Committee on Un-American Activities at the time, issued a similar warning.

Although the overwhelming majority of the young people of this nation are of unquestioned patriotism, this must not beguile us into feeling that because communist infiltrators among our youth are numerically in a minority, their threat is necessarily insignificant.

The strength of the communist movement bears little relationship to the number of its members; that instead, its strength and effectiveness are in direct ratio to the intensity of the efforts of the few who are trained and disciplined agents.   It was with only a relative few that Lenin seized control of the government of Russia.   Only a few - some 3 or 4 percent - in Soviet Russia today are communists.

The communist conspiracy operating on American soil - let it be emphasized and re-emphasized - is part and parcel of the world conspiracy, and the thousands of communists in the United States are, for all intents and purposes, foreign agents on American soil who are dedicated to our destruction.

Stirring warnings like these are no longer given to the American people.   The longtime communist goal of abolishing the House Committee on Un-American Activities was accomplished in the mid-1970s.   Today's FBI is no longer permitted to investigate and educate to keep the American public informed as they once did.

Meanwhile the communist efforts to ensnare and use America's youth has continued.   During the 1960s and 1970s the communists demonstrated their ability to agitate young people to do the Reds' bidding.   Multitudes burned their draft cards or went to Canada to escape Vietnam war service.   ROTC buildings on nearly 100 campuses were bombed or burned during protests against the war.   An armed mob of militants seized control of Cornell University at gunpoint.   Pictures of the grubby terrorists with their guns and bandoliers of ammunition slung over their shoulders ran in newspapers across America and on the front cover of the May 4, 1969, Newsweek.   (Even though New York had the strictest gun laws in the nation at the time and the heavily-armed terrorists could be easily identified in the photos, none of them was prosecuted.)   The mounting pressures and lawlessness continued to mount and culminated in the Kent State tragedy in May 1970.

Red successes in reaching young people continued in the 1980s.   Over 200 student leaders from dozens of campuses participated in a Young Communist League meeting held in April 1989 at Brown University in Providence, Rhode Island.   The president of the United States Student Association, Fred Azcarte was a special guest speaker.   He told the communist conference: It is important to work together everywhere we can...   Unity is the key.   That's our future: working together.

In a full-page interview in the People's Daily World Azcarte said, "We're going to be a thousand voices of dissent.   The United States Student Association he heads is the largest and oldest student organization in the country.   It has chapters on 250 campuses which have over 2 million students.

A leader of the Young Communist League, Jason Rabinowitz, was elected co-president of the student body at the University of Massachusetts-Amherst in 1988.   (Communists triumph when men do nothing.)   The Red won when only 2,000 out of 25,000 students bothered to vote in the election.

Communists say that "intellectuals because of their aspirations as intellectuals can be led into ever closer union with communists".   A story from the July 25, 1981, Daily World, the official communist newspaper, uses the communist Aesopian language to tell of growing Red influence in the teachers' unions.   One paragraph in the story tells of communist success in influencing the National Education Association (NEA).

Nowhere in the basic documents of the NEA, in their resolutions or their new business items, are there any anti-Soviet or anti-socialist positions.   This is susceptible to change, of course, if progressive forces are not vigilant.

Careful study of the resolutions passed by NEA conventions in the eight years since fails to show any anti-Soviet or anti-socialist resolutions.   Communist publications regularly feature favorable articles on the NEA, interviews with NEA leaders such as Mary Hatwood Futrell, etc.

The NEA has become one of the most powerful lobbying organizations in Washington and in state capitals across America.   Its clout is built on the people power and the big warchests in can use on election day.

The NEA move into political activism was announced by the NEA executive secretary, Sam Lambert, in the NEA Journal in December 1967.

NEA will become a political power second to no other special interest group...  NEA will organize this profession from top to bottom into logical operational units that can move swiftly and effectively with power unmatched by any other organized group in the nation.

That political clout has developed.   In the January-February 1974 Today's Education NEA president Helen Wise told the teachers: Teachers are 2-million strong, and any politician who can count knows how much power an active, determined group of that size can generate.

The leftist ideological commitment of the NEA's leadership was demonstrated in 1980.   The board of directors endorsed the Carter-Mondale presidential ticket over Reagan-Bush by a vote of 118 to 4.   The leadership's leftist leanings do not represent the views of most of the NEA's 1.5 million teacher members.

In 1985, Congress made it illegal to use lead pigments in any inks, dyes, and paints in children's books - even though there was no evidence that a child has ever been harmed from them (in fact until this day no evidence has ever been found that indicates a child was ever harmed from them).   This was called the Consumer Product Safety Improvement Act and made a perfect excuse for the communists to remove children's older books so that newer books in which there was communist propaganda would be more widely and completely accepted.   This act included a fine of up to $250,000 and 5 years in prison for selling or distributing pre-1985 books (including antique volumes, family treasures, etc.).   People fear anything that might threaten their children - and they are too emotional to think when communist propaganda uses such a ploy.   Consequently, the entire glorious heritage of early-20th-century children's illustrated books were sent to garbage dumps.   (From the March 9, 2009, issue of National Review.)

In 1988, NEA President Mary Hatwood Futrell told delegates to the NEA Convention in New Orleans on July 4:

...I have decided that the most electable and desirable candidate is Michael Dukakis...   Our job is to turn out every one of our 1.9 million members...   Fortunately, we have an effective weapon...   That weapon is our political power...   We have succeeded in building one of the most powerful political networks in the nation.   There are literally thousands of organized and motivated NEA members in each congressional district in America.

Starting today, we are going to completely mobilize that network, and we are not going to rest until midnight, November 8, 1988.

The highly effective NEA political machine did not elect Dukakis, but its efforts helped keep control of Congress in leftist hands.   The NEA political machine promotes an updated version of the Dewey/Rugg/Counts/Givens "progressive" agenda outlined previously, promoting world government and denigrating nationalism in any form.   It was introduced by communists and communists love it.   On June 25, 1987, the People's Daily World ran a glowing two-page tribute to "A Fighting Teachers Union".   The Red paper applauded NEA resolutions supporting ...the Equal Rights Amendment, affirmative action, nuclear disarmament, and ratification of SALT II; its opposition to apartheid and U.S. aid to the anti-communist Nicaraguan contras; and its support for such communist-originated demonstrations as the massive 1981 Solidarity Day effort.

The communist paper concluded its tribute to the NEA saying, The union's progressive policies and united actions indicate that the 1987 convention will continue to provide leadership for its membership and set an example for the labor movement as a whole.

The 1987 NEA Convention, which the communists were anticipating, passed a host of resolutions which supported ...abortion and, lesbian, and AIDS-infected education and access to birth control methods without parental consent ...AIDS education including the prevention option of "medically accepted protective devices"... a nuclear freeze... absolute teacher control over curricula, books, etc. without accountability... education emphasizing "global citizenship"...

The NEA, as evidenced by the leftist orientation of the resolutions passed at its conventions and absence of any anti-Soviet or anti-communist positions, lines up comfortably with the agenda of the communist-mobilized All People's Front.

In addition to pushing a leftist agenda, NEA resources are also committed to fighting the leaders and activities of groups which oppose their leftist, anti-morality agenda - and those who support pro-American, pro-family, and anti-communist positions.

NEA targets include groups favoring school prayer, gun owners' rights, free enterprise, a strong military defense, and traditional American religious and family values.   Opposing abortion, homosexuality, school sex education, communism, etc. also gets individuals and groups on the NEA "enemy" list.

The Western States Regional Staff of the NEA developed a 50-page training manual for teachers and NEA leaders titled "Combatting the New Right".   It targeted as enemies the leaders and activities of just about every conservative, pro-God, pro-America political and educational organization in America.   NEA executive board member, Jim Lewis, spoke to over 200 groups.   In his appearance before the Kansas NEA Assembly on April 27, 1985, he listed most of those targeted in the manual and added the Readers' Digest and its senior editor, Eugene Methevin.   He denied that these people were conservatives and labeled them as dangerous "radical rightists".

Now we've had radical right movements throughout history, and you can't have a radical right movement if they don't have a scapegoat enemy.   For instance, for the Nazis it was the Jews.   For the Romans in was the Christians.   For the Catholic Church it was the heretics.   For the Protestants it was the witches.   For the know-nothings it was Catholics, Jews, and Blacks.   For McCarthy it was the communists.   But for the New Right, the enemies are public education and secular humanism.   Radical right groups always polarize and emotionalize their issues.

[The reader may have noticed, if he had read Saul Alinsky's rules, that Alinsky's principles are being used in the above.   Lewis is accusing the right of what the left is actually doing in (1) the use of a scapegoat, (2) the use of polarization, and (3) the use of emotion in propaganda as opposed to reason.]

As the NEA has developed its left-leaning political machine, the education of American children has suffered a tragic decline.   Headlines told that scores on the SAT and ACT college entrance exams were dropping.   Functional illiteracy in cities reached epidemic levels.   The crisis in education steadily worsened.   Then in April 1983, President Reagan's National Commission on Excellence in Education issued its historic report, A Nation at Risk.

The educational foundations of our society are presently being eroded by a rising tide of mediocrity which threatens our very future as a nation and as a people...   If an unfriendly foreign power had attempted to impose on America the mediocre educational performance that exists today, we might well have viewed it as an act of war.

The NEA responded with proposals for giving the NEA-dominated education establishment more money and more control while resisting teacher accountability measures.   Their proposals were among the "reforms" passed by legislatures in the Excellence in Education acts in the mid-1980s.

This "band-aid" patching of education did not work.   By 1989, the Chicago Tribune's September 12th front-page headline screamed College Entrance Test Scores Show Further Decline.


To Beginning
First Section - Events through 1964
Second Section - 1964 to 1989

Overview through 2006

Fourth Section - Enlisting Disenfranchised Groups
Fifth Section - Weakening the Military
Sixth Section - Some Current Propaganda
Most of the information in this section is taken from The Professors by David Horowitz, copyrighted in 2006.   Much is direct quotes that have been re-organized in a more chronological sequence.   And much is information that has been reduced to a more concise form for inclusion in this section.

The principles of academic freedom date back to 1915, were developed by the American Association of University Professors, and were universally accepted by American Colleges and Universities.   They are elaborated in official faculty guidelines.   One rule found in the University of California's Academic Personnel Manual, written in 1934 by its President, Robert Gordon Sproul, states:

The function of the university is to seek and to transmit knowledge, and to train students in the processes whereby truth is to be made known.   To convert, or to make converts, is alien and hostile to this dispassionate duty.   Where it becomes necessary, in performing this function of a university, to consider political, social, or sectarian movements, they are dissected and examined, not taught, and the conclusion left, with no tipping of the scales, to the logic of the facts...  Essentially the freedom of a university is the freedom of competent persons in the classroom.   In order to protect this freedom, the University assumed the right to prevent exploitation of its prestige by unqualified persons or by those who would use it as a platform for propaganda.

On July 30, 2003, - sixty-nine years after this statement was written - the passage was removed from the Berkeley personnel manual by a 43 to 3 vote of the Faculty Senate.   The clause was replaced by one that omitted any distinction between indoctrination and education - which made the faculty the arbiter of the standard.   Academic freedom requires that teaching and scholarship be assessed only by reference to the professional standards that sustain the University's pursuit of achievement of knowledge.   The substance and nature of these standards properly lie within the expertise and authority of the faculty as a body...   Academic freedom requires that the Academic Senate be given primary responsibility for applying academic standards...   In other words, academic freedom is whatever the faculty says it is.   Gone is the injunction against making converts to political, social, or sectarian agendas; gone is the admonition not to exploit the prestige of the university as a platform for political propaganda.

The modern university is a decentralized unit, consisting of quasi-independent faculties that create their own intellectual standards.   Thus, the hard sciences have remained relatively free from ideological intrusions; the traditional humanities and social science fields - history, philosophy, literature - much less so; and the various inter-disciplinary "studies" departments generally not at all.   The university is also by nature and structure a conformist institution regardless of who controls it.   It is heirarchical in organization and the apprenticeship required for admission to its ascending levels of privilege is long in duration and closely observed.   The committees that manage its hiring and promotion processes are collegial and secretive, and its ruling establishment is accountable only to itself.   Because the performance on which advancement is based is ultimately the production of ideas, the pressure to share common assumptions and common attitudes is far greater in universities than in other social institutions, whether governmental or corporate.   In these circumstances, university and departmental elites create faculties in their own image.   Consequently, far from being eccentric or peripheral figures, the professors are integral to the intellectual life of the institutions they inhabit and to the course of higher education in America.

Prior to the 1960s, there were "old boys' networks" in which candidates were hired and promoted on the basis of who they or their faculty mentors happened to know in positions of departmental power.   Supposedly as a means to cure this problem, during the 1960s complex procedures were developed for hiring and promoting.   The supposed goal of these procedures was to maintain the highest professional standards in hiring, to create a system in which the most qualified person judged by objective merit would be offered a position.   Under the new system, positions are nationally advertised in the appropriate academic journals and the number of candidates for any one position can be well over a hundred.

A "search committee" is chosen by the chair of the department, which normally consists of three faculty members who in the view of the department are known both for their diligence and for their good sense.   The search committee sifts through and evaluates the applications, which include letters of recommendation and samples of written work, and chooses between 12 and 15 people to interview at the annual national convention of the profession.   From these personal interviews, the search committee chooses three or four people to come to the campus for several days.   The high point of such campus visits is the presentation of a scholarly paper before the assembled department.   Candidates may be asked to teach a class in front of observers.   They may meet for extensive interviews with the chair of the department, and often with the dean as well.   After the visits, the search committee writes a detailed report on the top candidates and ranks them.   The assembled department then votes on whether to accept the nominee of the search committee.   If accepted by majority vote, the search committee report then goes up to the dean with an accompanying letter from the chair.   This process is so painstaking and careful that it normally lasts nine months, from middle or late summer to the spring of the following year.

Obviously, the departmental chair who selects the members of the search committee and the members themselves play a crucial role in determining both the long list of 12 to 15 and the short list of 3 to 4.   It is easy to see how this system can be exploited by faculty members with activist agendas.   Although very detailed, it is actually just another "old boy network".   Among the faculty left, this is called Revolution by Search Committee.

Hamilton College is a small liberal arts college in rural upstate New York.   Along with sister schools like Williams and Colgate, Hamilton aspires to be a "second-tier Ivy", and generations of graduates have sent their children there to carry on a family legacy and reap the intellectual benefits of the school they remember.   It is this loyalty to tradition that maintains a flow of donations, which sustains Hamilton and attracts students who pay a yearly tuition to attend.

Along with other American universities in the last several decades, Hamilton has undergone a sea change.   Significant departments of the school have ceased to be a part of the ivory tower that its alumni recall.   Many faculty members are no longer devoted to pursuits that are purely "academic", and the curriculum has been expanded to include agendas about "social change" that are overtly political and make an invitation to a convicted terrorist seem appropriate rather than merely appalling.

This transformation has been the work of an academic generation that came of age as anti-war radicals in the Vietnam era.   Many of these activists stayed in school to avoid the military draft and earned PhDs, taking their political activism with them when they became tenured-track professors in the 1970s.   As tenured radicals, they were determined to do away with the concept of the ivory tower and scorned the contemplative life that liberal arts colleges like Hamilton created.   They rejected the concept of the university as a temple of the intellect, in which the term "academic" described a curriculum insulated from the political passions of the times.   Instead, these radicals were intent on making the university "relevant" to current events, and to their own partisan agendas.   Accordingly, they set about re-shaping the university curriculum to support their political interests, which appeared in their own minds as grandiose crusades for "social justice".

At first the new departments were presented as part of a broader social movement to "serve" minority groups previously neglected.   But as the cohort of activists on academic faculties grew, the new desciplines proved insufficient to encompass the social and intellectual agendas the radicals favored.   Cultural studies, peace studies, whiteness studies, post-colonial studies, and global studies - even social justice studies - came into being as interdisciplinary fields shaped by narrow, one-sided political agendas.   Some of these programs attacked American foreign policy and the American military, others America's self-image and national identity.   Collectively they marked a dramatic departure from the academic interests of the past, providing institutional settings for political indoctrination: the exposition and development of radical theory, the education and training of a radical cadre, and the recruitment of students to radical causes.

Because these new activist departments were "interdisciplinary", they were able to spread their influence through the traditional fields until virtually every English Department, History Department, and law school now draws on Women's Studies and African American Studies Departments for courses and faculty.   The intellectual movement created has been so powerful in shaping university curriculum that it has affected the educational philosophy of the institutions themselves.   Modern research universities once defined their purposes in official templates as institutions "dedicated to the disinterested pursuit of knowledge".   Under the new dispensation, they embrace the mission brought to them by radical academics and now often refer to themselves as institutions devoted to "social change".

In the fall of 2004, a convicted terrorist named Susan Rosenberg was invited to join the faculty as a "visiting professor" to teach a course called "Resistance Memoirs".   As the course title suggested, far from repudiating her political past, Rosenberg embraced it.   She had been (and may still be) an active member of a network of veteran radicals, many still in jail, who remained loyal to the causes they had violently served.   Rosenberg had been apprehended in 1984 as she was moving more than six hundred pounds of explosives into a Cherry Hill, New Jersey, warehouse.   She had been sentenced to 58 years in prison, but was released as one of President Clinton's last-minute pardons after serving only 14 years of her term.

Nancy Rabinowitz was one of the tenured radicals who had come to Hamilton to promote the new dispensation.   Though formally a professor of comparative literature, she was unable to leave her activist passions at the campus gates and became the guiding influence and head of the Kirkland Project for Gender, Society and Culture, where she implemented her extra-academic agendas by inviting radicals like Susan Rosenberg to teach.

Rabinowitz' connection to Rosenberg was also something more than academic.   Rabinowitz had married into a famous radical family, which was linked to Rosenberg through her infamous crime.   Rabinowitz' father-in-law was the celebrated communist lawyer Victor Rabinowitz, whose clients included Fidel Castro and other violent radicals, including the political terrorists of the Puerto Rican FALN.   Victor Rabinowitz' lifelong friend and law partner was Leonard Boudin, also a communist, and the father of Kathy Boudin, one of the leaders of the Weather Underground, a terrorist cult that had declared a formal "war" on "Amerikkka" in the 1970s and carried out bombings of the Pentagon, the U.S. Capitol, and other official buildings.   The principal leaders of the Weather Underground later became professors.

When the terrorist cult dissolved in 1976 [there is great doubt that it has really dissolved] Kathy Boudin joined the "May 19 Communist Movement", a Weather Underground network splinter group, which in 1981 robbed a Brinks armored car in Nyack, New York, murdering two guards and a policeman, and leaving nine children fatherless.   Susan Rosenberg was part of the Weather Underground network and was indicted for the Nyack crime.

Kathy Boudin was convicted for her role in the Nyack robbery-murders, but Susan Rosenberg, though indicted, was never tried.   Prosecutors in the Nyack case saw no reason to pursue her after she received her 58-year sentence from which Clinton - petitioned by New York Democratic congressman Jerrold Nadler - finally released her.   Susan Rosenberg was only one of several Weather Underground terrorists who had recently surfaced and begun touring college campuses.

The professors running the Kirkland Project has presented Susan Rosenberg as "an award-winning writer, an activist, and a teacher who offers a unique perspective as a writer".   She was further described as a victim of government persecution, imprisoned because of her "political activities" with the Black Liberation Army.   No mention was made of her crimes or theirs, which included several murders.   Schools like Hamilton had become so exclusively politicized towards the Left that decisions like the one Nancy Rabinowitz made had come to seem normal by university standards.

In January 2005, Professor Ward Churchill became a figure of national revulsion when his impending visit to Hamilton College was linked to an article claiming that the victims of 9/11 were "little Eichmans" who deserved their fate.   Churchill's article produced an outcry of such force that it led to the removal of the faculty head of the host committee at Hamilton and resignation of the president of the University of Colorado where Churchill was professor of ethnic studies.   As a result of the uproar, Churchill was removed as department chair, and the university authorities began an investigation into how he had acquired his faculty position in the first place.

Although Churchill was a department head who received an annual salary of $120,000, he had no doctorate, which was a standard requirement for tenured positions, not to mention chairs.   Moreover, his academic training had been in communications as a graphic artist rather than an academic field related to ethnic studies.   The master's degree he held was from a third-rate experimental college, which did not even award grades when he attended in the 1970s.   He had lied to qualify for his affirmative action hire, when he claimed on his application that he was a member of the Keetoowah Band of the Cherokee tribe.   In fact, his ancestors were Anglo-Saxon and Keetoowah Band had publicly rejected him.   An investigative series by the Rocky Mountain News also maintained that he had plagiarized other professors' academic work and had made demonstrably false claims about American history in his own writing, literally making up American atrocities that never happened.

The University of Colorado had a tenure review process which was supposed to be administered annually.   But the policy had not been observed in years.   Nor was it conceivable, even if the procedures were observed, that Churchill's tenure would be put in jeopardy simply because he has abhorrent views.   An attempt by the City University of New York to fire a racist professor had failed in the courts because it was based upon his public speech rather than his classroom performance.   Even his racism in the classroom was not considered by the university as possible grounds for his dismissal.

The national publicity generated by the Hamilton crisis dramatically altered the situation by bringing Churchill's views to the attention of the public at large, who regarded them as the incomprehensible ravings of a fringe radical.   The fact that the nation was at war with a ruthless enemy with whom Churchill clearly identified caused an uproar in the Colorado media, and led the governor and other officials to demand that he be fired.

Despite these revelations, hundreds of professors and thousands of students across the country sprang to Churchill's defense, signing petitions and protesting the "witch hunt" of academic liberals - such was and is the extent of the communist take-over within large and small, private and state-supported, educational institutions.

How could the university have hired and then raised to such heights an individual of such questionable character and views as Churchill?   How many professors with similar resumes had managed to acquire tenured positions at the University of Colorado and other institutions of higher learning?   How pervasive was the conflagration of political interests and academic pursuits on university campuses or in college classrooms?   Why were the administrators seemingly unable to assert and enforce standards of academic excellence?   Such were the issues that the Churchill scandal raised.

Far from being a marginal crank, Ward Churchill was (and still is) prominent at the University of Colorado and in the academic world at large.   A leading figure in his field and widely published, his appearance at Hamilton would have been the 40th at college campuses in the years after 9/11.   The opinions expressed in his infamous article were far from obscure to his academic colleagues.   First published on the Internet in October 2001, they reflected views that were part of the intellectual core of his academic work, familiar both to university authorities in Colorado and to his faculty hosts at Hamilton.   Although Churchill's invitation to visit Hamilton was only one of many such invitations for communists and prominent radicals to visit, it was the first to become public enough to implicate the academic culture itself.

Those mentioned in Horowitz' books follow.   They are only a few examples (101 of them) drawn from public and private universities, from small and large institutions, and from schools that are both secular and religious.   Among them are individuals prominent in their institutions and at the forefront of their professions. They are the authors of books widely used as texts in their fields.   They have been funded by prestigious foundations and awarded the highest professional honors in their fields.   They are department chairs and directors of academic institutes and programs, and head of large professional associations.   Among them are presidents and former presidents of the American Historical Association, the National Ethnic Studies Association, the American Philosophical Association, the American Anthropological Association, the Modern Language Association, the American Sociological Association, and the Middle East Studies Association.   As tenured faculty, they have a prominent role in the hiring and promotion of future generations of university professors.   They are representative figures, widely influential in the academic world.   There are several pages on each but no room for more than a couple of paragraphs here.

At the same time and notwithstanding their impressive credentials, these professors (as their profiles demonstrate) are capable of making disturbingly shallow intellectual judgements and expressing alarmingly crude political opinions.   Like those of Ward Churchill, their excesses implicate not only themselves but the academic culture itself.

Professor M. Shahid Alam, Professor of Economics, Northeastern University, Boston - likens the 9/11 terrorists to America's founding fathers - claims that al-Qaeda's jihad is a defensive jihad agains western aggressors.

Alam is one of thousands of tenured academics at American universities whose intellectual guide is Marxism and who thinks that America's terrorist enemies are freedom fighters against the Great Satan (America).

Professor Hamid Algar, University of California, Berkeley - Professor of Persian and Islamic Studies - supporter of the Ayatollah Khomeni - a member of the faculty since 1965.   Algar spat upon members of UC Berkeley's Armenian Student Association, who were commemorating the genocide of Armenians by the Turks.   He has stated: Let us remember the clear analysis of the West that Imam (Khomeni) gave us... as a collection of international bandits... which has consolidated itself since Imam's death.  : Let us also remember his insistence that the abominable genocide state of Israel completely disappear from the face of the globe.

Professor Lisa Anderson, Columbia University - Professor of Political Science - Dean of Columbia's School of International and Public Affairs - former president of the Middle East Studies Association - views 9/11 attacks as the Muslim world's response to "the fact of American political power in the world, and the fact of inequitable distribution of power within the United States" - regards America's wars of liberation in Afghanistan and Iraq as "an assault on the entire region"

Professor Gil Anidjar, Columbia University - Assistant Professor of Comparative Literature - anti-Israel activist and apologist for Islamic radicalism - identifies good teaching with pro-Palestinian activism and dissent.

Professor Anatole Anton, San Francisco State University - Professor of Philosophy - former chair of Philosophy Department - co-coordinator of the Radical Philosophy Association.   The Radical Philosophy Association is an anti-capitalist group of Marxist professors who "believe that fundamental change requires broad social upheavals but also opposition to intellectual support for exploitative and dehumanizing social structures, [including] capitalism, racism. sexism, homophobia, disability discrimination, environmental ruin, and all other forms of denomination".   Although some of this sounds noble, the Association supports Cuba's communist dictatorship and opposes U.S. economic and military aid to Israel on the grounds that such aid is perceived as supporting the enemy of Muslim nations.

Professor Bettina Aptheker, University of California, Santa Cruz - Professor of Women's Studies - describes her teaching philosophy as "revolutionary praxis" - is a Marxist-Feminist.   She is the daughter of a famous American communist who was honored by the Columbia University history department and hired as a visiting law professor by the University of California (Berkeley) and as a history professor at several prestigious academic institutions.

Bettina Aptheker proudly admits to being communist and a lesbian activist.   Her course teaches Marxist/Leninist philosophy and lesbianism as the highest stage of feminism.

Professor Sami al-Arian, University of South Florida - Professor of Engineering at the University of South Florida - North American head of Palestine Islamic Jihad, a terrorist group responsible for the suicide bombing murders of more than 100 civilians in the Middle East - "Civil liberties activist".   Along with others in a video who praise the killing of Jews and Christians, al-Arian states: God cursed those who are the sons of Israel, through David and Jesus, the son of Mary...   Those people, God made monkeys and pigs...   Let us damn America, let us damn Israel, let us damn them and their allies until death.

After being under investigation by the FBI since 1996, al-Arian appeared on September 2001 on Fox News Channel's O'Reilly Factor.   When confronted with his video-taped calls for terrorist Jihad, he declared: If I was the CIA, I'd follow you wherever you went.   The ensuing public uproar caused the University officials to suspend him with no pay.   Al-Arian played the role of the victim and the ACLU, the Center for Constitutional Rights, the University of South Florida faculty union, and the American Association for University Professors came to his aid.   The faculty at Duke University invited him to be the featured speaker at an academic symposium on "National Security and Civil Liberties".

In February 2003, al-Arian was arrested for his terrorist activities.   In December 2005 he was acquitted of eight of seventeen charges and a mistrial was declared on nine others when the jury failed to agree.   In his summation, al-Arian's attorney conceded that al-Arian was an operative for the Palestine Islamic Jihad.   A reporter covering the trial summarized: The trial exposed the professor as having been deeply enmeshed in the internal workings of Palestinian Islamic Jihad - a terrorist group that has killed well over a hundred people in Israel, Gaza, and the West Bank, mostly through its favored technique of suicide bombings.

Professor Leighton Armitage, Foothill College, California - Adjunct Lecturer in political science.   Believes Jews control the U.S. government, and the Israelis are Nazis.

Armitage's academic expertise is in Europe and Japan, but his classroom focus is on Israel, a nation that he loathes.   He denounces both the U.S. and Israel for destroying safe houses of Iraqi terrorists, and Israel's destruction of safe houses of Palestinian terrorists.   His remarks have been so public and outrageous that the college president has had to apologize for them - but the college administration refuses to fire him.

Professor Stanley Aronowitz, City University of New York, New York - Professor of sociology.   He states: We know that the charges against us - that university teaching is a scam, that much research not "useful", that scholarship is hopelessly privileged - emanate from a Right that wants us to put our noses to the grindstone just like everybody else.

Aronowitz has been the director of the Center for Cultural Studies since 1988.   Before his academic career, he was a union organizer for the Clothing and Oil and Chemical Workers unions (see Alinsky on this site for details of what organizers do).   He states in his memoirs that he was originally hired "because they believed I was a labor sociologist".   In fact, as he admits, this was just a scam: "First and foremost I'm a political intellectual... [I] don't follow the... methodological rules of the discipline."   He created the Center for Cultural Studies to escape the rigors of his supposed original professional discipline - thus he could better pursue his Marxist politics and pass them on to his students.

Professor Regina Austin, University of Pennsylvania, Pennsylvania - She is the William Schnader Professor of Law, believes that the black community should accommodate criminal behavior and find a "good middle ground between straightness and more extreme forms of lawbreaking", and "Law is useful as a supplement to activism."  

She is an outspoken advocate of racial separatism and has made race/class/gender conflict the centerpiece of her courses - which view legal issues through the narrow prism of identity politics.   The intention of one of her courses (Advanced Torts) is to encourage students, especially minority students, to regard the law not as a body of rules applicable equally to all citizens, but rather as a malleable concept, subordinate to one's perceived identity interests.   She claims that minority status confers the privilege of interpreting the law as one pleases.   In an interview she stated that she views her role as a legal scholar as one that "should start with the premise that black people are at the center of the universe and go on from there".

Professor Bill Ayers, University of Illinois, Chicago - distinguished professor of early childhood education and senior university scholar - leader of the domestic terrorist group called "The Weathermen [see Highlights and Comments on KGB Connections for a more comprehensive explanation - Ayers should have been executed, but got off on a technicality].

The Weathermen were responsible for numerous bombings in the United States and have been aptly described as "an American Red [communist] Army".   Members were recruited and trained in Cuba under KGB supervision.   Ayers is unrepentant and still quite active as a recruiter and author for communism in the United States.

Currently, Ayres is on the Board of Directors of one of the largest textbook companies in America.

Professor Ihsan Bagby, University of Kentucky, General Secretary of the Muslim Alliance of North America, black convert to Islam.

He has declared the Muslims can never be full citizens of the United States because there is no way they can be fully committed to the institutions of America.   The Muslim Alliance of North America is predominantly African-American headed by a Siraj Wahhaj, a suspected conpirator in the 1993 bombing of the World Trade Center.   Bagby is also a board member of the Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR) which co-sponsored a rally at Brooklyn College where militant speakers advocated Jihad, characterizing Jews as "pigs and monkeys".   Bagby also sits on the advisory board of the Islamic Society of North America, which is responsible for enforcing Wahhabi theological writ in American mosques.

More examples will follow as time permits.

Higher Educational Institutions with Anti-American Faculty
(Found in The Professors)

Anti-American faculty means brainwashed students who perform anti-American acts.   As of July 2012, the targeting of Israel has been all too obvious in such institutions where such faculties exist.   In March 2010, a student who was at a pro-Israel rally holding a sign that read "Israel wants peace" was viciously rammed from behind with a loaded shopping cart (she required medical attention).   This took place at the University of California, Berkeley, a school known for its Communist indoctrination of students.

At Indiana University, rocks were thrown through windows of that campus Chabad and Hillel, a Menorah was vandalized, a display case was smashed, and several sacred Hebrew texts were stolen from the library.   The texts were distributed to eight different bathrooms and then urinated upon.

At Rutgers University, Jewish students have been threatened, harrassed, and discriminated against.

At the University of California, Santa Cruz, a Jewish student was vilified and called a nazi when she made a presentation on Zionism and the right of Jews to live in Israel.   The professor remained silent, allowing his student to be vilified for expressing her views.

At the University of Illinois, the instructor in a class on Arab-Israeli conflict demanded that a Jewish student leave class after the student respectfully challenged the anti-Israel lies being taught by the instructor.   After the student left, the instructor slammed the door behind him and muttered "A**hole".

These are a sampling of the many higher educational institutions that have professors who are conditioning our youth against America.   We are actually paying to have our young people brainwashed so that we will lose our country to communism.

California State, Fresno
California State University, Long Beach
Foothill College (Northern California)
Occidental College, Los Angeles
San Franciso State University
Stanford University
University of California, Berkeley
University of California, Irvine
University of California, Los Angeles
University of California, Riverside
University of California, Santa Cruz
University of Southern California

Metropolitan State College, Denver
University of Colorado, Boulder
University of Denver
University of Northern Colorado

University of Southern Florida

Emory University, Atlanta

University of Hawaii, Manoa

DePaul University, Chicago
Northwestern University, Evanston
Saint Xavier University, Chicago
University of Illinois, Chicago
University of Illinois, Urbana-Champaign

Ball State University, Muncie
Eartham College, Richmond
Purdue University

University of Kentucky, Lexington

Boston University
Brandeis University
Holy Cross College
Massachusetts Institute of Technology
Northeastern University, Boston

University of Michigan, Ann Arbor

Truman State University

New Jersey
Rutgers University, Stony Brook
Montclair State University, Montclair

New York
Brooklyn College
City University of New York
Columbia University
Cornell University, Ithaca
New York University School of Law
Rochester Institute of Technology
State University of New York, Binghamton
State University of New York, Buffalo
State University of New York, Stony Brook
Syracuse University

North Carolina
Duke University, Durham
North Carolina State University

Kent State University, Kent
University of Cincinnati
University of Dayton

University of Oregon, Eugene

Arcadia University
Penn State University
Temple University, Philadelphia
University of Pennsylvania
Villanova University

Rhode Island
University of Rhode Island

Baylor University
Texas A&M
University of Texas, Arlington
University of Texas, Austin

University of Washington
Western Washington University

Washington DC
Georgetown University


To Beginning
First Section - Events through 1964
Second Section - 1964 to 1989
Third Section - Overview through 2006

Enlisting Disenfranchised Groups

Fifth Section - Weakening the Military
Sixth Section - Some Current Propaganda
The communists in the United States prefer to infiltrate various groups and take new names so that we cannot readily identify them and their various organizations.   They have called themselves "radicals", "progressives", "liberals", and - since they have taken over the Democratic Party - "democrats".   There are still many who think of themselves as radicals, progressives, liberals, democrats, etc. in the original sense of those words.   The communists like it that way because they can maintain their camouflage more effectively.

International Communist organizers have always chosen "disenfranchised" groups to recruit as what they call "useful idiots".   The communist organizers first infiltrate the group and learn to become one of that group.   Second, they begin to magnify the complaints of the group - whether real or imagined - until the group is passionately involved.   The raw emotion of the group is then used as a political force that the organizer guides to accomplish communist goals.   A typical example follows.

The attitude of the Christian majority in the United States toward homosexuals has been - and still is - very negative.   It was easy for the communists, early on, to turn the majority of homosexuals into a rabid anti-American force.   The next step was to use emotionally-charged propaganda to make communists of them - even though they did not know that they were becoming communists (here, the definition of a communist is one who embraces the same personal philosophy and who acts in the same manner as a communist).

"Feminist" was once the name given to one who embraced feminism, the doctrine which declared the equality of the sexes - and advocated equal social, political, and economic rights for women.   However, communists infiltrated many of the feminist groups and turned them into groups promoting lesbianism and anti-male propaganda.   The groups were then easily forged into a communist political force.   The lesbian communists created (or took over existing) feminist studies for high schools, colleges, and universities.   The preferred name was "women's studies" and the lesbian communists called themselves "radical feminists".

According to Michelle Easton, president of the Clare Booth Luce Policy Institute, one lesbian communist - Eve Ensler - wrote a play called The Vagina Monologues which the publisher and the communists promote as "The New Bible for Women".   In many educational institutions in the U.S., this play is the highlight of an annual event known as "the Vagina Day" or simply "V-Day".   The play is usually required for those taking "women's studies" - and "women's studies" is often a required course for certain majors.   The play portrays men as cowards, abusers, and rapists, thus promoting the communist objective of turning one group of the target nation against another group of the target nation (in this case women against men).   The play glorifies lesbianism so that more young women will be recruited as lesbians and eventual communist "useful idiots", and glorifies prostitution (which tends to bring down women to a lower level).   Generally speaking, whenever there is an effort in this nation to generalize as evil a major segment of the population, communism is at work attempting to pit one part of the population against another.   This is their primary weapon for dividing us into opposing groups and then taking over when we are weak from internal friction.

The communist lesbians are (1) recruiting impressionable young students for "feminist" campaigns, (2) founding more than 900 "women's studies" programs at American colleges, (3) weakening the United States military with social experiments such as forcing women into combat and using taxpayers' dollars for abortions on military bases, and (4) lobbying for homosexual marriage and legalized adoption for lesbian "couples".   Whether or not one believes women in combat, abortion, or same-sex marriage, it is wrong to make parents pay for communist/lesbian recruitment - as is the case with tuition expenses in institutions that have key members of the faculty who are communists.

Those who promote "V-Day" and the showing of Ensler's play are usually faculty members or administrators in the educational institutions.   Therefore, it is safe to say the very likely at least one - and probably many more - faculty members or administrators in any particular school in which "V-Day" is celebrated are anti-American (usually communist) agents.   According to Michelle Easton, as of December 10, 2008, the following educational institutions will be participating in V-Day 2009.   More will be signing up for the event.   Bear in mind that some may be signing up because of propaganda in favor of V-Day, and others have dropped out when enough irate people have complained to the college administrators.

University of Alabama, Tuscaloosa
University of Montevallo
University of North Alabama
University of South Alabama

Arizona State University
Arizona Western College
Chandler-Gilbert Community College
Northern Arizona University
Prescott College
University of Arizona

University of Arkansas

Antioch University Los Angeles
California Polytechnic State University, San Luis Obispo
California State Polytechnic University, Pomona
California State University, Cerritos College
California State University, Chico
California State University, Fresno
California State University, Fullerton
California State University, Sacramento
Chapman University
Citrus College
College of the Desert
Grossmont Community College
Keck School of Medicine at University of Southern California
Los Angeles Mission College
Mills College
Occidental College
Pitzer College
Riverside Community College
Sacramento City College
San Diego State University
San Jose State University
Santa Clara University
Soka University of America
Sonoma State University
Stanford University
University of California, Berkeley
University of California, Davis
University of California, Davis School of Medicine
University of California, Irvine
University of California, Los Angeles
University of California, Merced
University of California, Riverside
University of California, San Diego
University of California, San Francisco
University of California, Santa Barbara
University of California, Santa Cruz
University of La Verne
University of the Pacific
University of Redlands
University of Southern California

Colorado Mountain College
Colorado State University, Pueblo
Fort Lewis College
Johnson and Wales University
Mesa State College
University of Colorado at Boulder
University of Colorado at Colorado Springs
University of Denver

Central Connecticut State University
Connecticut College
Eastern Connecticut State University
Fairfield University
Quinnipiac College
Southern Connecticut State University
Trinity College, Connecticut
University of Connecticut
University of Connecticut, Stamford
University of Hartford
Wesleyan University
Yale Divinity School

University of Delaware

District of Columbia
American University
Gallaudet University
George Washington University
Georgetown University
Georgetown University Law Center
Howard University

College of Osteopathic Medicine
Florida Coastal School of Law
Florida Gulf Coast University
Florida International University
Jacksonville University
Miami-Dade Community College
Pasco-Hernando Community College
Nova Southeastern University
Seminole Community College
Stetson University
University of Florida
University of Central Florida
University of North Florida
University of South Florida
University of Tampa
University of West Florida, Tampa

Augusta State University
Berry College
Darton College
Emory University
Georgia College and State University
Georgia Institute of Technology
Georgia Southern University
Medical College of Georgia
North Georgia College
University of Georgia
Valdosta State University
West Georgia College

University of Hawaii at Hilo

Boise State University
Idaho State University
University of Idaho

August College, Illinois
Bradley University
Chicago-Kent College of Law
College of DuPage DePaul University
Illinois College
Illinois Institute of Technology
Illinois State University
Lincoln Land Community College
North Park College and Theological Seminary
Northwestern University
Northwestern University Feinberg School of Medicine
Parkland College
Rock Valley College
South Illinois University at Edwardsville
Southern Illinois University at Carbondale
Waubonsee Community College
Western Illinois University
University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign

Ball State University
DePauw University
Earlham College
Hanover College
Indiana University, Bloomington
Indiana Universiy School of Law
Indiana University School of Medicine
Manchester College
Purdue University
Valparaiso University

Coe College
Grand View College
Iowa State University
Luther College
University of Northern Iowa
University of Iowa, Iowa City
Wartburg College

Fort Hays State University
Kansas City Kansas Community College
Pittsburg State University, Pittsburg, Kansas
Washburn University

Bellarmine University
Berea College
Eastern Kentucky University
Lindsey Wilson College
Louisville Presbyterian Theological Seminary
Murray State University
Northern Kentucky University
University of Kentucky
University of Louisville

Louisiana Louisiana State University, Baton Rouge
Nicholls State University
Tulane University

Bates College
Bowdoin College
Colby College
University of Maine at Orono
University of Southern Maine

Allegany College of Maryland
College of Southern Maryland
Frostburg State University
Harford Community College
Howard Community College
Johns Hopkins Medical Institute
McDaniel College
Montgomery College, Takoma Park/Silver Spring
Morgan State University
Peabody Conservatory of Music
Saint Mary's College of Maryland
Salisburg State University
University of Baltimore
University of Maryland, Baltimore County
University of Maryland, College Park

Babson College
Bentley College
Boston University
Boston University School of Medicine
Brandeis University
Bridgewater State College
Clark University
College of the Holy Cross
Framington State College
Hampshire College
Harvard Divinity School
Harvard University
Lesley University
Massachusetts Institute of Technology
Mount Holyoke College
Nichols College
Northeastern University
Regis College
Salem State College
Simmons College
Simons Rock College
Smith College
Springfield College
Tufts University
University of Massachusetts, Amherst
University of Massachusetts, Boston
University of Massachusetts, Dartmouth
Wellesley College
Western New England College
Westfield State College
Wheaton College, Massachusetts
Wheelock College
Worcester State College

Albion College
Alma College
Aquinas College
Bemidji State University
Central Michigan University
Delta College
Eastern Michigan University
Ferris State University
Grand Valley State University
Michigan State University
Mott Community College
Northern Michigan University
Oakland University Olivet College
University of Detroit Mercy
University of Michigan, Ann Arbor
Wayne State University
Western Michigan University

Carleton College
Gustavus Adolphus College
Minnesota State University
Minnesota State University, Moorhead
Saint Cloud State University
Saint Olaf College
Southwest State University
University of Minnesota, Duluth
University of Minnesota, Twin Cities
Winona State University

Mississippi State University
Mississippi University for Women
University of Mississippi

Avila University
Cottey College
Drury College
Maryville University
Missouri Southern State University
Northwest Missouri State University
Southeast Missouri State University
Stephens College
Truman State University
University of Central Missouri
University of Missouri, Kansas City
University of Missouri, St. Louis
Washington University in St. Louis
Webster University

University of Montana

Hastings College
University of Nebraska at Kearney
University of Nebraska at Omaha

Community College or Southern Nevada
University of Nevada, Las Vegas

New Hampshire
Chester College of New England
Keene State College
Plymouth State University
University of New Hampshire, Durham

New Jersey
Bloomfield College
College of New Jersey
Drew University
Montclair State University
Monnmouth University
Princeton University
Ramapo College of New Jersey
Raritan Valley Community College
Rider University
Rowan University
University of Medicine and Dentistry of New Jersey - Newark
University of Medicine and Dentistry of New Jersey - Piscataway/New Brunswick
University of Medicine and Dentistry of New Jersey - Stratford
William Paterson University

New Mexico
New Mexico Highlands University
New Mexico State University
University of New Mexico

New York
Albany Medical College
Bard College
Binghamton University
Brooklyn College
City University of New York
Colgate University
College of Saint Rose
Columbia University
Columbia University Medical Center
Cornell University
Elmira College
Finger Lakes Community College
Fordham University, Lincoln Center
Hobart and William Smith Colleges
Hofstra University
Hunter College
Julliard School, The
Manhattanville College
Marymount Manhattan College
Medgar Evers College
Nazareth College
New School, The
New York Graduate School for Psychoanalysis
New York University
Niagara University
Pace University, New York Campus
Pace University School of Law
Pratt Institute
Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute
Rochester Institute of Technology
Saint Lawrence University
Sarah Lawrence College
Skidmore College
State University of New York
SUNY College at Albany
SUNY College at Brockport
SUNY College at Buffalo
SUNY College at Fredonia
SUNY College at Geneseo
SUNY College at New Paltz
SUNY College at Oswego
SUNY College at Potsdam
Union College
University of Rochester
Utica College of Syracuse University
Vassar College
Wells College

North Carolina
Appalachian State University
East Carolina University
North Carolina Central University
Salem College
University of North Carolina at Asheville
University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill
University of North Carolina at Charlotte
University of North Carolina at Greensboro
University of North Carolina at Wilmington
Wake Forest University
Warren Wilson College
Western Carolina University
Winston-Salem State University

North Dakota
North Dakota State University

Bowling Green State University
Case Western Reserve University
Columbus College of Art and Design
John Carroll University
Kent State University
Kenyan College
Miami University, Ohio
Ohio State University
Ohio University
Ohio Wesleyan University
Otterbein College
Shawnee State University
University of Akron
Xavier University

Northeastern State University - Broken Arrow Campus
Northeastern State University - Tahlequah Campus
University of Central Oklahoma
University of Oklahoma
University of Science and Arts of Oklahoma

Clackamas Community College
Oregon State University
Pacific University
Portland Community College
Portland State University
Southern Oregon University

Albright College
Arcadia University
Bloomsburg University
Bryn Mawr College
Bucknell University
California University of Pennsylvania
Cedar Crest College
Clarion University of Pennsylvania
East Stroudsburg University of Pennsylvania
Franklin and Marshall College
Gettysburg College
Haverford College
Juniata College
Kutztown University
Lebanon Valley College
Lehigh University
Mansfield University
Millersville University
Moravian College
Penn Law School
Penn State Dickinson School of Law
Penn State University, Abington
Penn State University, Altoona
Penn State University, Berks
Philadelphia College of Osteopathic Medicine
Philadelphia University
Temple University
Thomas Jefferson University
Shippensburg University of Pennsylvania
Susquehanna University
Ursinus College
University of Pennsylvania
University of Pittsburgh
University of Pittsburgh at Greensburg
University of the Sciences in Philadelphia
Washington and Jefferson College
West Chester University
Westminster College, Pennsylvania
Wilkes University

Rhode Island
Brown University
Johnson and Wales University
Rhode Island College
Roger Williams University
University of Rhode Island

South Carolina
College of Charleston
Francis Marion University
University of South Carolina

South Dakota
Augustana College, South Dakota
Northern State University
South Dakota State University

Maryville College
Pellissippi St. Community College
Rhodes College
Tennessee State University
Tennessee Tech University
University of Tennessee, Chattanooga
University of Tennessee, Knoxville
Vanderbilt University
Vanderbilt University School of Medicine

Southern Methodist University
Tarrant County College
Texas A&M University, College Station
Texas A&M University, Corpus Christi
Texas Christian University
Texas State Technical College
Texas Tech University
Texas Woman's University
University of Houston
University of Houston, Clear Lake
University of North Texas
University of Texas at Austin
University of Texas at El Paso

Southern Utah University
Weber State University
Westminster College

Green Mountain College
University of Vermont

Averett College
George Mason University
Christopher Newport University
College of William and Mary
Hollins University
Northern Virginia Community College
Union Theological Seminary and Presbyterian School of Christian Education
University of Richmond
University of Virginia
Washington and Lee University School of Law

Evergreen State College
North Seattle Community College
Pacific Lutheran University
Seattle University
Spokane Falls Community College
University of Puget Sound
Washington State University
Whitman College
Whitworth College
Yakima Valley Community College

West Virginia
Shepherd College
West Virginia University

Beloit College
Lawrence University
University of Wisconsin - Baraboo/Sauk County
University of Wisconsin - Eau Claire
University of Wisconsin - Fox Valley
University of Wisconsin - La Crosse
University of Wisconsin - Madison
University of Wisconsin - Milwaukee
University of Wisconsin, Stevens Point


To Beginning
First Section - Events through 1964
Second Section - 1964 to 1989
Third Section - Overview through 2006
Fourth Section - Enlisting Disenfranchised Groups

Weakening the Military

Sixth Section - Some Current Propaganda
"By virtue of the upbringing that this society had allowed us, and the myriad opportunities that had been extended our way simply because we were Americans, it was incumbent upon us to offer our services to our country... We reject the pernicious belief, commonly held at our most highly esteemed institutions, that fighting our nation's battles is someone else's job." - A quote from and regarding Michael Knapp and Ethan Melford, 2008 graduates of Dartmouth, Marine 2nd Lieutenants - National Review, August 18, 2008.

"Military service has become a taboo subject in many corners of America; supported in principle by the ubiquitous yellow ribbon car magnets, yet silently considered to be outside the realm of 'enlightened options' for an educated young person.   This sentiment is reinforced by college administrators who block ROTC programs from campuses.   Such reactions expose the need for Americans to reform preconceived notions and place the armed forces back where they belong, as a legitimate, compelling and satisfying form of national service."   Colleen Reiss, Army ROTC graduate who served with the 20th Engineer Brigade in Iraq - Christian Science Monitor, July 14, 2008.

"The upper and upper-middle or 'elite' social classes seem to be conspicuously absent [from America's armed forces]... Precious few have ever engaged in military service themselves... With the abdication of the upper classes from military service, most elites in the media, private sector, and government service, don't have the intimate human context for the realities of war... America today must overhaul its school history curricula to engage students in military culture." - Peter A. Gudmundsson, CEO of Beckett Media LP, former Marine field artillery officer - Christian Science Monitor, January 8, 2008.

The following is from VFW (Veterans of Foreign Wars) magazine, January 2009, regarding the new book, AWOL:The Unexcused Absence of America's Upper Classes from Military Service by Frank Schaeffer and Kathi Roth-Douquet.

Schaeffer and Roth-Douquet went on an Ivy League tour that included Harvard, Yale, Dartmouth, Princeton and a number of other schools, speaking about their book.   "We spoke to groups of students who normally are not asked to consider national - let alone military - service."

Students received their message largely without contention: "What surprised us was that a lot of groups on campus that normally would be hostile toward military service actually agreed with us that class plays a large role in military service.   So often generation Y people are viewed as selfish.   Actually, we found the reverse.   They were looking for someone to challenge them, even during wartime amidst an unpopular war.   It's quite striking how open they are to the fact that they're being treated differently than people like them were treated in other times of American history."

More so than opposition, Roth-Douquet says she found a large amount of "ignorance" on campus.   This combined with misinformation [a communist tactic] about the purpose of the military, is what the authors tried to combat during their tour.

Schaeffer states: "We've got to decide what it means to be an American.   We're talking about restoring our sense of idealism and serving our country as a country."

[The communist or communist-loving administrators will not allow ROTC on their campuses.   Columbia, Harvard, Yale, and Brown ban ROTC from their campuses.]


To Beginning
First Section - Events through 1964
Second Section - 1964 to 1989
Third Section - Overview through 2006
Fourth Section - Enlisting Disenfranchised Groups
Fifth Section - Weakening the Military

Some Current Propanda

Victor Davis Hanson is a classicist and military historian at the Hoover Institution, Stanford University, where he is the Martin and Illie Anderson Senior Fellow.   He has written 17 books on ancient and military history, and is currently a weekly syndicated columnist with Tribune Media Services and the National Review Online magazine.   The following excerpts are from his article, Why Does Japan Keep Revising Its Wartime Past?, in the April 2009 issue of the magazine published by the Veterans of Foreign Wars. Comments in brackets are mine.

"During the last 60 years a now predictable postwar narrative about WWII has emerged from contemporary democratic Japan...   Sometimes the argument maintains the imperial Japan committed no atrocities either in its Asian territories or against prisoners of war.   On other occasions the theme is more racial; the Japanese Co-Prosperity Sphere was a protective order aimed at rolling back Western colonialism and liberating kindred Asians from European oppression."

[The Japanese military influencing a teen-age emperor began the Japanese expansion into Asia in a quest for oil to fuel more military expansion.   China was the logical nation to invade because they were close and militarily weak as compared to a Japan that had been preparing for conquest.   The full extent of the atrocities committed as the Japanese invaded China were not disclosed until 25 years after the trials of the Japanese war criminals because they were too heinous to show those parents who had lost their children in the war.   These atrocities included torture, rape, murder, literal butchering while the victim was alive and screaming, and eating parts of the victim after each butchering (refrigeration was not available and the victim was kept alive to prevent his body from spoiling).   A directive given to the Japanese army stated that they were not allowed to eat Japanese - non-Japanese were considered to be animals and could be eaten accordingly.   The Japanese army was expected to fend for themselves and were not given supplies of food adequate for their survival.   Human organs such as the heart, liver, and kidneys were special delicacies reserved for the Japanese officers and there were gourmet recipes used by the Japanese cooks to prepare such delicacies.   George Bush senior narrowly escaped being eaten by Japanese Naval officers.   The Rape of Nanking by Iris Chang goes into much detail of Japanese atrocities, but James Bradley used the Freedom of Information Act to find the truth after the 25 years during which it was suppressed by our government.   He published it in his book Flyboys: A True Story of Courage.]

"That the Chinese, Filipinos, and Koreans overwhelmingly welcomed American wartime help in freeing their territories from Japanese occupation is forgotten...   These examples of Japanese revisionism are legion.   During the 1995 50-year commemoration of the end of WWII there was renewed effort on the part of Japanese historians to convince a younger generation that stories about the use of 'comfort women' from Korea and China - who forced as prostitutes to serve Japanese soldiers - were exaggerated, if not altogether false."

Hanson goes on to say that attempts to expose the problem led to apologies from the Japanese authorities - followed by more revisionism.   Hanson blames us for allowing our own history to be re-written - however, he does not link this to the communist influence as he should, meaning that he is still asleep as are many other Americans at this time.   Hanson calls it "political correctness run amok" without realizing where political correctness originated.   Of this he gives examples.   "The doctrine of moral equivalence and proportionality stressed that there was not at all that much difference between Japanese aggression on Dec. 7, 1941, and American 'overreaction' in Aug. 1945 (the month the atomic bombs were dropped).   The new narrative now went that the Japanese had killed only a few thousand American combatants at a distant base to begin the war.   Yet we had vaporized tens of thousands of Japanese civilians to end it over the skies of the Japanese homeland itself."

"Rarely now do American students, whether in primary schools, our high schools, or at universities, know much about the Bataan Death March.   The horrors of Okinawa and the savagery of street fighting in Manila might as well be ancient history...   In many contemporary American schools, the Pacific Theater is presented largely through three themes: the atomic bombing of Hiroshima and Nagasaki; the wartime internment of Japanese nationals and Japanese-Americans in camps in the American West; and the heroic labors of American women - the millions of once-neglected Rosie the Riveters - in our factories at home...   The annihilation of Japanese citizens through nuclear weapons seems to have been more a war crime rather than directed at military targets to shorten the war."

[The war in the Pacific was extremely costly to America in manpower and material.   The decision to drop the bombs was made because Japan was and would have continued to be a threat to the United States (in fact, it was later discovered that the Japanese were working on their Atomic bomb in facilities in captured Korea).   Invasion was the only option other than the bomb, and that would have cost up to five million American lives.   Although the Japanese civilians were often treated badly by the Japanese military, they had still been brainwashed to defend their land to the death.   Only an overwhelming new weapon could gain the emperor's attention sufficiently to force a surrender.]

According to the communist propaganda "Our [internment] camps... were about the same as the enemy's abroad where millions perished.   And women on the home front, not our... soldiers on the islands of the Pacific, were the real forgotten heroes that won the war."

[Note that this is in keeping with the communist effort to turn American women into man-hating lesbians.   The internment camps for the Japanese here were set up as best could done for the comfort of the Japanese.   Food and shelter were adequate and only liberty was curtailed with fences about the enclosed quarters.   On the other hand, the Japanese military considered prisoners to be inferior (they should have died rather than be captured).   Prisoners were routinely tortured or killed.   There were instances where prisoners were given the command to run and then decapitated while Japanese soldiers made bets on how far each headless body would run before toppling over.   It was common to have Japanese army personnel kill prisoners just to be sure that each soldier would remain ferocious and unfeeling - the Japanese officers would kill the prisoners by using their swords (beheading) and the Japanese enlisted men would kill the prisoners by bayonetting them in the midsection.]

"If Japanese society never underwent a necessary re-examination about its wartime aggression, its American counterpart most surely did concerning its own retaliation.   But it proved as distorted in demonizing our military heroes as the Japanese efforts to whitewash its militarists...   This reinterpretation was not lost on contemporary Japanese elites: of America itself was unsure of who really started the Pacific War and why, and which side bore the greater culpability for atrocities, then why should Japan worry much about reverting to a view that similarly blamed the Americans?"

[Once again, we should realize that communists and their useful idiots, with the intent to cause friction between allies, are found in both America and Japan, and found in bodies that may be Japanese as well as American.   And it is the communist influence (largely UNESCO) that causes our youth and the youth of other nations to accept a false history that brings down the United States.]

"If we are to remind Japan that our present cordial alliance... hinges on honest acceptance of our once-shared wartime history, it is not enough... to express outrage at each successive example of unapologetic Japanese revisionism... A better approach would be to discuss WWII more honestly here at home.   We need to apprise the next generation of American youth that a mostly underarmed democracy was attacked in time of peace... And its subsequent defense was not the moral equivalent to the aggression of a fascist military power, bent on further conquests in the course of an ongoing war in Asia and the Pacific against its neighbors."

[The truth is that Japan attacked U.S. bases in the Pacific other than Pearl Harbor, and countries and islands from China to Indonesia.   Japan dominated the Pacific for a time with their large navy and were "invincible" until our code-breakers, three remaining U.S. carriers and their escort vessels, and a lot of good luck (Divine Aid) caused us to sink four Japanese carriers in the battle for Midway Island.   Later, our newly expanded wartime industrial capacity and our gallant heroes took the Pacific from the Japanese at a great cost in American lives.]

Hanson concludes: "Once we relearn the truth of the Pacific Theater, it is more likely the Japanese will too."

[The truth cannot be relearned in the United States until we make a concerted effort to take back the education of our young from the communists.]

There is another article with the title GIs Did Shoot Back in WWII by Fred Smoler from the same magazine.   It is an expose' of propaganda put forth by Brigadier General S.L.A. Marshall.   Among other lies, Marshall stated that only 25% of U.S. soldiers in WWII fired their rifles at the enemy.   Marshall claimed that his statistics came from interviews with various officers and enlisted men.   This proved to be untrue.   Apparently, Marshal was pushing his supposedly superior training methods.   This originally had nothing to do with communist propaganda, but was later used in various communist-dominated media outlets such as PBS to malign our GIs and to show peaceniks that even military men don't want to do their duty.

In Men Against Fire, Marshal had written: "men may face danger but they will not fight... In the workshop or the office, or elsewhere in society, a minority of men and women carry the load... the majority in any group seek lives of minimum risk and expenditure of effort plagued by doubts of themselves and by fears for their personal security."

Harold P. Leinbaugh, who commanded K Company, 333rd Regiment in Europe, stated: "If you're over 60, have earned the Combat Infantryman Badge, and were lucky enough to survive a month without picking up a Purple Heart, you know Marshall's charges are absurd, ridiculous and totally nonsensical.   How many six-man patrols would have to be dispatched before Marshall's odds give you one or two men who are willing to fire their guns?   Statistically, it wouldn't be at all difficult for a rifle company to end up with a platoon entirely devoid of firers."

In the April 6, 2009, issue of National Review, we see "Adidas has been marketing a hat showing the hammer and sickle.   How do they sell the hat?   They say, 'Show your love for the former USSR during training time.'   Yeah, feel the burn, show your love - for a brutal system that killed tens of millions and immiserated many more.   Well, at least Adidas has given us something to wear with our Che shirts."

In the July 9, 2009, issue of News from the Front is an interesting bit on the campus battle.   The Freedom Center Campus Division organized a number of speaking engagements for David Horowitz which included appearances at Tufts, Emory, Syracuse, George Washington University, the University of Pennsylvania, Arizona, Arizona State, Texas, Penn State, Temple, and Columbia.   At the University of Texas at Austin, Marxist professor Dana Cloud organized a loud protest outside the hall where Horowitz was speaking, in an attempt to co-opt his appearance and use it to further her own socialist agenda.

Horowitz had invited Cloud to debate with him, but she had refused his offer and decided to disrupt his activities instead.   About 40 protesters greeted him with derogatory placards and slogans, they were threatened with arrest, and they calmed down somewhat.

In the last two years, the Freedom Center has been battling to halt indoctrination of America's youth on campus by Islamic Fascists.   There has been a large movement against the Jews.   A sociology professor, William Robinson, is the leading propagandist.   He uses lurid photos to inflame students and is careful make his propaganda devoid of and educational material.

Horowitz told the facts about Marxism, even mentioning that Marxists killed over 120,000,000 people in the last century.   Professor Cloud represented herself as a devoted teacher and mother when see stepped up at the end of Horowitz' presentation.   She then accused Horowitz of being a "McCarthyite menace", and disregarded the facts he had mentioned in his talk.   Her rhetoric went on from there.   Horowitz had needed armed guards to prevent Cloud's crowd of hooligans from completely disrupting his speech during an earlier visit.

Some good news is that Horowitz' Academic Bill of Rights has now been adopted in its actual text by Dupage College in Illinois.   The bad news is the Board of Trustees who adopted the Bill of Rights was replaced two weeks later by the teachers unions so that the new Board could revoke the Bill of Rights.   As usual with communist organizations, the unions had begun organizing a disinformation campaign early on.   Horowitz says the fight is not over.   Without the Academic Bill of Rights the college can continue to legally brainwash students as opposed to educating them.

September 25, 2009 - Indoctrination of Young - Eliminating Old

Yesterday, we saw a video of grade-schoolers being indoctrinated by their teachers who had them singing, dancing, and chanting praises to Barack Obama.   This is blatant Obama worship.   Part of this comes from teachers' unions who have been overrun with "progressives".   Obama is not God - if anything he is the anti-Christ.

The goal of the UNESCO program is to destroy the influence of the parents and family so that no pride of country remains in the child. This is being done by undereducation and propanda. The child is taught to worship the current dictator and his ideas as if he were God. In Hitler's Germany and in the Soviet Union this technique was so successful that children were informing on their parents when their parents did not worship the new "God". In the U.S., each new generation is more thoroughly indoctrinated than those before it, and each older generation is less indoctrinated than those which follow it.

The Communists are patient, but would like to speed up the process by eliminating the older generations which tend to cling to national traditions and upset the indoctrination of the children. One means of eliminating the older generations during the passage of time is to cut their healthcare benefits so that they will die more quickly. Our Communist legislators have many ways to accomplish this that are too complex for the brevity needed in this update. Suffice to say, this administration and this congress must not be allowed to pass their healthcare program. Healthcare problems can be cured when we have a friendly administration in the future. For you younger people who have been cheated of a decent education and will be forced to pay vastly greater taxes in an era when the dollar (and your paycheck) is worth very little, remember that you will be older someday and ready to be sacrificed for the greater good.

January 4, Report by Young America's Foundation

Last September, on the tenth anniversary of 9/11, Sarah Snow organized a candlelit vigil and flag memorial at Marietta College, Ohio, honoring those murdered in the terrorist attacks.   The "liberal" school administrators tried to shut down the vigil and censored Sarah's tribute to America's fallen heroes because "We have a global outlook at this school and we cannot ignore the Chinese and Muslim students who also suffered losses."

The Young America's Foundation successfully defended Sarah's right to free speech, and the vigil went ahead as planned.

July 2012
From a Young America's Foundation report, 800-USA-1776
Placed here on July 12, 2012.

Recent polls of college students prove that our children are not learning real and unbiased American history.

Only one in three know that General George Washington was the American General at Yorktown during the Revolutionary War.

Seventy-eight percent don't know about Lincoln's Gettysburg Address.

Nearly 2/3 of our teenagers don't know the purpose of our Bill of Rights.

Just one percent of eighth graders can correctly identify and explain a photo labeled "Berlin, 1989," of the Berlin wall being torn down.

Some young people do not know about World War Two, and others can't name our enemies at that time.

When told that the U.S. fought Japan in World War Two, one young person asked "Who won?"

In schools today, young people are taught atheism, political correctness, multiculturalism, and more relativism.   The left is teaching our kids their anti-God, socialistic message.

UCLA's Higher Education Research Institute found that once students walk onto a typical American campus, they quickly become more liberal on key issues facing our country.

We have an entire generation that does not know what the Founding Fathers fought for.   Some ask "What are the Founding Fathers?"

Some information from Imprimis, a publication of Hillsdale College

Imprimis is available for free by calling (800)437-2268 or by emailing
This Imprimis features a talk by Richard Vedder, a professor of economics.
Some points of his talk are paraphrased and summarized here. Placed on this website on July 12, 2012.

Federal student financial assistance programs are costly, inefficient, and fail to serve their stated purpose.   Supposedly, sending more students to college will help the United States.   This is not true.   The relationship between education and economic growth seems to be either non-existent of negative.   The relationship between current-day education and economic opportunity is not there.   Higher education today does not promote economic equality.

Today, financial institutions lend to college students and make car loans on credit cards.   This being the case, there is no reason for them not to make student educational loans.   There is no reason for the government to become involved in student loans.   Yet student loans from the government have been growing by eight to ten percent each year, and much of these have been to people over age 33 (the median of those with loan obligations is age 33, and 40 percent is from people over the age of 40).

When the government is involved, student loan interest rates are not set by the forces of supply and demand.   They are set by politics when politicians vie for popularity that will allow them to be elected.   In the real world, interest rates vary with the prospects of the borrower repaying the loan.   When politics are involved, the chance of the loan being repaid are reduced considerably.   An engineering degree produces a job that will provide an income that will allow a loan to be repaid.   But an ethnic studies degree that is given to one with a GPA of 2.0 will produce a job with low pay IF the student does not simply quit.   Furthermore, colleges do not have anything invested in the students.   They can be responsible for allowing loan commitments, but face not penalties for defaults which are paid by taxpayers.

Federal student grant and loan programs have contributed to tuition prices going up.   Colleges are not obliged to keep tuition prices low when they have no incentive to do so.   They will always raise prices when the government is willing to pay the higher prices.   The government has no incentive to stop paying taxpayer money to the colleges.   The result is that the colleges can collect more money and spend it as quickly as they receive it.

Because no private company will be stupid enough to make student loans that will not likely be lucrative for the company, the government has a clear field and becomes a monopoly.   To obtain a student loan from the government, the student must fill out a form that is very intrusive and allows information of a very personal nature to go to the government, providing a means of more government control of the student throughout his lifetime.   Therefore, the government student loan program becomes another means for a fascist take-over by the government.

Since the increase in federal programs, the number of students graduating exceeds the number of jobs available to them.   So currently, we have 107,000 janitors and 16,000 parking lot attendants with bachelor's degrees, as well as hair dressers, bartenders, mail carriers, telephone cleaners, and politicians.   Also, now more kids are going to college who have problems with cognitive skills, discipline, academic preparation, and ambition.   They are not able to graduate on time or, in many cases, to graduate at all.   To minimize this problem, many colleges have lowered their standards (after all, a higher drop-out rate leads to less income for the college, its administrators, and its faculty).

With so many funds readily available, there is a tendency for persons to acquire low-interest student loans with the intention of dropping out of school quickly and use the proceeds to for other purposes - such as starting a business.   Lazy or mediocre students can acquire greater subsidies than hard-working students.   The lazy one may take six years to graduate and twice as much money as the industrious one who can graduate in three years.

Government programs with best of intentions can have unintended consequences while free-enterprise programs such as student loans based upon profit for the lenders can actually be much better in the long run.   In the 1950s and 1960s, before the government programs became so large, we enjoyed a golden age of American higher education.   Enrollments were rising, lower income student access was growing, and American leadership was in higher education was becoming well established.   The system flourished without the government programs.   Since then, the government programs have proven to be counter-productive with massive growth in government spending.  


Back to Tactics (Subversion of American Youth)

Back to A Short History or Communism - 2008

Back to The Communist Triumvirate - Dollars

Back to The Communist Triumvirate - Smaller People

Back to World Government

Main Menu