Education and Freedom – Part 2
This article is part two of three and was written by guest-author Will Porter.
Tailoring Education for War in the 20th Century
The 20th century has taken a much darker turn in regards to both schooling and to human freedom in general. An extremely valuable illustration of this is found in the story and testimony of Norman Dodd. In 1953, Congress established the Reece Committee[i] to investigate the operations of tax-exempt foundations such as the Rockefeller Foundation, the Carnegie Endowment, and the Ford Foundation; the conclusions of the investigation were shocking.
The Director of Research, Norman Dodd, recounts his fascinating discoveries in a 1982 interview with G. Edward Griffin.[ii] Dodd states that The Reece Committee’s specific goal was to investigate subversive or “un-American” activities of certain groups of trustees under the tax-exempt foundations mentioned above and groups similar to them.
During the inquiry, a letter was written by Dodd to the Carnegie Endowment asking a number of questions pertaining to their operations. He soon got a phone call from Joseph Johnson, President of the Endowment, and was invited to a meeting in New York. The result of this meeting was that Dodd was to assign a staff member to dig through the records, or “minutes”, of the group.
What was discovered was that beginning in 1908, the year the Carnegie Endowment began operating, the trustees met for the first time and posed a question:
“Is there any means known more effective than war, assuming you wish to alter the life of an entire people?”
Their conclusion was no. The second question they raised, then, was:
“How do we involve the United States in war?”
It was determined on record that to accomplish this, the Endowment would have to manipulate the State Department and “take over and control the diplomatic machinery of this country…”
Soon after, whether from their actions or not, World War 1 began. In the Endowment’s archives, a telegram to then President Wilson is found urging him not to let the war end too early. Eventually, of course, the War did end, so the Endowment moved on to prevent what they called “reversion” of the way of life in the U.S. to its state before the War. To accomplish this, it was decided they would have to control education.
The Endowment made agreements with the Rockefeller Foundation to take action to begin building their own stable of historians to place throughout academia to attempt to further this agenda. The essential content of their desired curriculum included the inculcation of collectivism, and “to orient [the] educational system away from support of the principles embodied in the Declaration of Independence, and implemented in the Constitution”, those principles mainly being the rights of the individual.
Dodd also claims that during the investigation, H. Rowan Gaither, who helped to turn the Rand Corporation into a “non-profit” institution[iii], and was also a powerful administrator with the Ford Foundation, (at the time President)[iv] invited him to his office. Upon his arrival, Gaither posed the question as to why Congress was investigating the Ford Foundation and other institutions like it, but added that he wished the discussion to be off the record. Before Dodd could answer, Gaither said (Dodd likely paraphrasing):
“Mr. Dodd, all of us who have a hand in the making of policies here, have had experience either with the OSS during the war, or with European economic administration after the war. We have had experience operating under directives.
The directives emanate, and did emanate, from the White House. Now, we still operate under just such directives. Would you like to know what the substance of these directives is?”
Dodd: “…I would very much like to know.”
Gaither: ”…We are here to operate in response to similar directives, the substance of which is that we shall use our grant-making power so to alter life in the United States, that it can be comfortably merged with the Soviet Union.”
Dodd went on to tell him that this is likely why Congress is investigating such organizations, and that while they had rights to make grants for that purpose, that they were probably entitled to tell Congress and the public about it, to which Gaither replied that they wouldn’t think of doing such a thing.
When these revelations were brought to Congress in the form of testimony, Norman Dodd was harassed and attacked, but there were never any attempts to refute what he was saying. Needless to say, nothing happened and the hearings on the matter were eventually terminated.
Boiled down, Dodd’s central conclusion of this investigation was that “…the determination of these large endowed foundations, through their trustees, [was] actually to get control over the content of American Education.”
Written around the same time as the Reece Committee Investigation was a book called “The Impact of Science on Society” by Bertrand Russell. In the book, Russell essentially lays out the exact methods of collectivistic indoctrination through schooling that such foundations could use to accomplish the result they sought to reach.
According to Russell:
“The populace will not be allowed to know how its convictions were generated. When the technique has been perfected, every government that has been in charge of education for a generation will be able to control its subjects securely without the need of armies or policemen.”[v]
“Ordinary men and women will be expected to be docile, industrious, punctual, thoughtless, and contented. Of these qualities, probably contentment will be considered the most important. In order to produce it, all the researches of psycho-analysis, behaviourism, and biochemistry will be brought into play…”
“All the boys and girls will learn from an early age to be what is called ‘co-operative,’ i.e., to do exactly what everybody is doing. Initiative will be discouraged in these children, and insubordination, without being punished, will be scientifically trained out of them.”
“It is to be expected that advances in physiology and psychology will give governments much more control over individual mentality than they now have even in totalitarian countries.
Fichte laid it down that education should aim at destroying free will, so that, after pupils have left school, they shall be incapable, throughout the rest of their lives, of thinking or acting otherwise than as their schoolmasters would have wished.”[vi]
Bertrand Russell was not an unknown fringe thinker of his time; he was one of the world’s most prominent figures in mathematics, science, and philosophy. He came from a blue-blooded aristocratic background[vii] and, due to his wide popularity and renown, he was somebody who associated with highly respected and influential thought molders, academics, and government officials.
Russell’s essential goal in the realm of education was to, quoting Fichte, “…discover exactly how much it costs per head to make children believe that snow is black.” (Emphasis mine) In other words, to absolutely decimate the critical faculties of children so they would become un-thinking, un-questioning adults who could be steered in any direction by the commands of the state with zero resistance or dissent. This is the Prussian model taken to a scientifically precise extreme.
Keeping with this trend, in the 1960s children began to be treated with a stimulant pharmaceutical called Ritalin (Methylphenidate) to treat what is termed “Attention Deficit Disorder” (ADD) or “Attention Hyperactivity Disorder” (ADHD). The companies that make this drug are heavily involved in sending cash-flow to the American Psychiatric Association (APA) and to the universities where psychiatrists conduct studies that result in favor for the drugs the company is currently pushing.
The drive to medicate children at younger and younger ages has been constant, with one study concluding that the “Later start of stimulant drug treatment of attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder is associated with academic decline in mathematics.”[viii] Despite the recommendations from the Physician’s Desk Reference (PDR), a publication released by certain drug companies, that children under 6 should not be put on Ritalin, there are many pre-school programs engaged in doing just that.
First of all, to diagnose ADD/ADHD, no physical tests are conducted on the child, no blood drawn, no brain scans, and no physical exam. I know this from first-hand experience, as I was myself diagnosed with this “disorder” when I was 12 years old and put on a brand of the same chemical as Ritalin, and then put on an analogue of Adderall, which is an amphetamine not molecularly far off from methamphetamine.
The “Diagnostic and Statistical Manual” (DSM), first published by the APA in 1952, is what is used to officially diagnose mental illness in the United States. As an aside, the Manual has gotten bigger constantly since it first appeared, starting with 112 pages in 1952, to 224 pages in 1980, to 374 by 1994.[ix]
The DSM describes the list of defining symptoms of ADD/ADHD as:
“1. Often fidgets with hands or feet or squirms in seat
2. Often leaves seat in classroom or in other situations in which remaining seated is expected
3. Often runs about or climbs excessively in situations in which it its inappropriate
4. Often has difficulty playing or engaging in leisure activities quietly
5. Is often on the go or often acts as if driven by a motor
6. Often talks excessively
7. Often blurts out answers before questions have been completed
8. Often has difficulty awaiting turn
9. Often interrupts or intrudes on others”.
Does any of this sound at all like a mental illness? I ask, does anybody reading this know a single child who doesn’t exhibit some, if not all, of these traits? I would contend that if a child didn’t display any of these characteristics, that then maybe I’d think there was something wrong.
A doctor doesn’t even technically have to make this diagnosis. It can be parents, teachers, coaches, principals, etc., really anybody who spends some period of time with the child. My personal experience was that my teacher told my mother she thought I might have ADD. My mother scheduled an appointment, I was asked less than 10 questions, and presto, I was now legally allowed to essentially get high on speed so I could “concentrate”.
I will leave out the entire story, but I will say that it was the start of a years-long escapade of drug abuse. People don’t get addicted to speed for no reason; it releases huge amounts of euphoric dopamine. I don’t completely blame ADD medication for my own experience, as it was a different class of substances that I ended up battling with, but it certainly was, and is for many children, my first time getting “high” and it introduces a huge potential for future problems with pleasure-seeking behavior.
According to a number of doctors from various fields, ADD is not even a real disorder:
“ADD does not exist. These children are not disordered.” – Thomas Armstrong, PhD –“The Myth of the ADD Child”
“Both the FDA and the DEA have acknowledged that ADD is not a disease, or anything organic or biologic.” – Fred Baughman, MD-“The Future of ADD”
“We have invented a new disease, given it medical sanction, and now we must disown it.” – Diane McGuiness – “The Limits of Biologic Treatment for Psychiatric Distress”
“Research does not confirm the existence of an ADD syndrome. There is no medical, neurological, or psychiatric justification for the ADD diagnosis.” – Peter Breggin, MD – “Toxic Psychiatry” P. 281
“Be forewarned that ADD is not a real disease, but rather a contrived illusion of a disease, a marketplace tool.” – Fred Baughman, MD.[x]
Despite the cries of foul play from many credible physicians, psychologists, and psychiatrists, it is claimed that over 5 million children have this alleged illness. This number will likely continue to rise.
To summarize what has been said here; in the early 20th century, a group of tax-free foundations made up of the world’s wealthiest, most powerful men set out to find a way to change the thinking of an entire society. They first tried to use war, but found that direct education would be a much more effective method.
Meanwhile, prominent intellectual figures such as Aldous Huxley and Bertrand Russell started advocating and talking about the scientific control and manipulation of the human mind, for Russell through education, for Huxley, through drugs.[xi]
Around the very same time that all of this was occurring, the “phenomenon” of Attention Deficit Disorder was discovered and slowly foisted upon a massive population of children in the form of essential chemical lobotomies. Is it any surprise that children can’t concentrate in a classroom environment designed not to educate, but to indoctrinate them?
The root of the word “government” comes from two Latin phrases, “Gubernare”, meaning “to steer/to rule/to control” and either “Mentus” meaning “the state of”, or “Mens”, meaning “mind”, there is some debate between which of these is the origin of the suffix, but none the less: “To control the state of” or “To control the mind”. Compulsory education is merely the extension of the primary function of the state.
[ii] 1982 Griffin-Dodd Interview: http://youtu.be/YUYCBfmIcHM,
Transcript of Interview: http://www.supremelaw.org/authors/dodd/interview.htm.
(Much, if not all, of what is quoted from Norman Dodd and the people he himself quotes are sourced from the interview, but Dodd also said most of those things on public record as well, as he says in the interview.)
[v] Bertrand Russell – “The Impact of Science on Society” P.41 . Exact quote can be found here: https://archive.org/details/TheImpactOfScienceOnSociety-B.Russell
[vi] Ibid. P. 61
[x] List of quotes: Ibid.
[xi] Not only did Aldous Huxley write the famous dystopian fiction, “Brave New World” in which populations were pacified with a drug called “Soma”, but it is also said that he was involved in the CIA’s mind-control experiments with MK Ultra, see the work of Jan Irvin of GnosticMedia.