NAZIs, Fascists, Socialists, Communists, and Capitalists, oh my!

Our headlines today are filled with pundits, commentators, influencers, and countless individuals accusing folks on the "other" side of being <fill in the blank with one or more of the following> {NAZIs, Fascists, Communists, etc.}. 

Often these terms are used so interchangeably, however, they are not truly interchangeable. Each is these -ists and -isms have distinct, although often overlapping, meanings. 

I have always felt that when you want to throw a label at someone else, if you don't really know what it means, then it shows the accuser's ignorance more than it reveals about the accused. So, let's jump into this.

NAZI

NAZI is an acronym. Translated from the original German it means National Socialist German Workers' Party or in German "Nationalsozialistische Deutsche Arbeiterparte" (Gunner, 2021). The term NAZI and fascist are often used interchangeably. This is because the NAZI party was both socialist and fascist, as well as nationalist. 

Socialist

Socialism is commonly used interchangeably with communism. According to ThoughtCo, "The main difference is that under communism, most property and economic resources are owned and controlled by the state (rather than individual citizens); under socialism, all citizens share equally in economic resources as allocated by a democratically-elected government." (Longley, 2024). In both of these -isms, the government is authoritarian and controlling everything. The primary distinction is the socialists let people "own" private property, but they still must use it only as the state dictates, and the state can revoke ownership at anytime. To me, this seems to be a mere pretense of private property ownership. 

The ThoughtCo article cited above (Longley, 2024) notes that socialism includes the notion that people receive according to their contribution, rather than simply according to their need. In that regard, socialism is less altruistic in its implementation.

Communist

In contrast, communism doesn't pretend that individuals own anything. Everything is owned by the state and administered by the oligarchs and the bureaucracy according to what they believe is in the best interests of the people, without regard to the opinions, feelings, or actual needs of those same people.

For me, socialism and communism are, in their effects, identical and interchangeable. Although, for years I have labored under the notion that communism was expressly aimed at forcibly imposing these principles on the entire in an egalitarian manner, not favoring one nation or ethnicity over another. Socialism, I was taught, was a bit more nationalistic in scope, which is consistent with the notions of Aryan supremacy that seems inextricably linked with Nazism. 

Fascist

Fascism is an authoritarian approach to governing which, although it allows personal property, the government maintains a shallow form of capitalism. They coopt businesses (personally owned enterprises) into arms of the government to carry out the regulations and laws. 

Although fascist parties and movements differed significantly from one another, they had many characteristics in common, including extreme militaristic nationalism, contempt for electoral democracy and political and cultural liberalism, a belief in natural social hierarchy and the rule of elites, and the desire to create a Volksgemeinschaft (German: “people’s community”), in which individual interests would be subordinated to the good of the nation. (Soucy, 2024)

Pulling from the citation above allows me to create a list of attributes of fascism:

• Militaristic, 
• nationalistic, 
• contempt for democracy, 
• contempt for political liberalism, 
• contempt for cultural liberalism, 
• rule of the elites, 
• individual interest subordinated to the good of the nation 

To better understand this list requires some further elaboration and definition of these terms.

• Militarism - meaning a tendency to resort to organized violence using military and paramilitary groups to intimidate or eliminate opposition.
• Nationalism - the notion of one nation being superior to another. However, it is worth noting that the proponents of the United Nations and "one world government" are merely a different flavor of nationalism rather than being anti-nationalist.
• Contempt for democracy - Setting aside the distinctions nuances democracy, constitutionalism, and republicanism, and representative democracy leaves us with the term democracy as shorthand for respect for the sovereignty of individuals, and their deliberate acceptance of a social compact as the source of legitimate government. Contempt for democracy translates into contempt for the inalienable rights of individuals to govern themselves.
• Contempt for liberalism (political and cultural) - in this context, Britannica goes on to define liberalism as "protecting and enhancing the freedom of the individual." (Minogue, 2024). Note that today's so-called "liberals" are markedly at odds with support for the freedom (AKA self-sovereignty) of the individual.
• Elitism - the rule of elites being the preferred approach of fascists of all stripes. Elites may qualify for this 'designation' either through their academic achievements, excessive wealth, political power, or celebrity. 
• Subordination of individual well-being to the "good of the nation" - Doing horrific things to individuals and minorities in the interest of promoting "the greater good," was the driving force behind Hitler's genocide against the Jews and has been used by tyrants, oligarchs, and conspirators to justify terrible crimes throughout history.

Capitalist

Unlike Socialism and Communism which combine both economic and political motives and means, capitalism is purely an economic philosophy. Capitalism is non-political in its definition. However, it does rely upon certain strongly political points.

Capitalism is fundamentally based on property rights and individual sovereignty. Drawing on Adam Smith's Wealth of Nations concludes that capitalism is about two parties making an exchange of goods, services, or both, absent any coercion.  It is this point of coercion that brings capitalism into conflict  in various degrees by communism, socialism, and fascism.

To be totally candid, the issue of coercion brings capitalism into conflict with all political regimens beyond the realm of self-governance. This is the primary point made by "card-carrying" libertarians.

Conclusion

I believe that most people bandy around these terms, hurling them at those who disagree with them, with little understanding or regard for the actual definitions of these terms. I hope that folks will take a moment and consider what each of these terms means. Then compare the meanings against the actions and words of those they want to paint with these labels. If the "shoe fits," then by all means use it. But please, stop hurling these -ists and -isms without knowing what you are talking about.

References

Gunner, Jennifer. (9 September 2021). Nazi: Meaning and Origin of the Word. Retrieved from:  https://www.yourdictionary.com/articles/abbreviations-nazi-meaning-origin 

Longley, Robert. (5 May 2024). The Differences Between Socialism and Communism. Retrieved from: https://www.thoughtco.com/difference-between-communism-and-socialism-195448 

Soucy, Robert. (21 October 2024). Fascism. Britannica, retrieved from: https://www.britannica.com/topic/fascism 

Minogue, Kenneth; Girvetz, Harry K. (5 September 2024). Liberalism. Britannica. Retrieved from: https://www.britannica.com/topic/liberalism 

See Tom's political views on Facebook at: https://www.facebook.com/TomSheppardPoliticalViews/
Follow Tom on Twitter: @ThomasKSheppard

Tom Sheppard is a business consultant and coach to small business owners and individuals. He is a recognized author with dozens of titles in business and fiction to his credit. One of his endeavors is to help those who want to see their own book in print. He does this through his trademarked Book Whispering Process (TM).

The author is not an official spokesperson for any organization or person mentioned herein.

(c) Copyright 2020 A+ Results LLC. All Rights Reserved.

Your comments are welcome... Please observe some ground rules. No profanity, vulgarity, or personal attacks. Profanity, vulgarity and personal attacks not only betray a lack of vocabulary and imagination, they also are the hallmarks of bigotry, and bigotry is the hallmark of someone who is fundamentally insecure in their views. Facts are always welcome.

If you believe Government is NOT the answer to all our problems, you will want to read
 Godvernment: Government as God

Embracing Intolerance

Image (c) Lightsource and Depositphotos.com

                              This article is an excerpt from Godvernment: Government as God 

Tom Sheppard

9/4/2020

The Hypocrisy of Intolerant Liberals

Once you understand that godless liberals, progressives, socialists, and communists cannot hope to succeed in their aims while the masses worship God more than man, then the hypocrisy of the left begins to make sense.

Their efforts to elevate the “wisdom” of men, in direct conflict with the commandments of God, are first defended with calls for loving, Christian tolerance and understanding from God worshippers, but as soon as any sort of critical mass of acceptance is achieved, the calls for tolerance quickly turn from pleas into accusations of intolerance.  They begin to attack and demonize those who aren't willing to wholeheartedly accept their patently ludicrous stances.

Consider the trajectory of liberal fascism that led to the recent controversy in North Carolina over HB2.

After gaining legal acknowledgement in the courts to support same-sex marriage, the liberal movement shifted its focus to gaining acceptance for transgenders.

The City Council of Charlotte passed an ordinance requiring that private businesses allow people to use women's and men's bathrooms and shower facilities at their own discretion, depending upon whether the individual “feels” like a woman or a man at that moment.

The government overreach in this case is appalling on its face, and the notion that a person with male genitals can stroll into a women's bathroom and shower facilities at will is preposterous.  If a man who wasn't claiming to “feel like a woman” walked into a women's shower facility, undressed, and used the showers, he would rightly be arrested for indecent exposure, at the least.  Perhaps he would be charged with some form of sexual assault, and, if there were minor girls present, he would be charged as a sex offender for exposing himself in that manner.

This city ordinance would have wiped out all those protections against such lewd conduct and given them the protection of law.  It was the local government forcing private businesses to accept this change, regardless of their own views or desires.

North Carolina Governor Pat McCrory and the state legislators convened a special session of the legislature to address this case of government overreach and outrageous abuse of the principle of consent of the governed.  By an overwhelming majority, they passed House Bill 2 (HB 2), which prohibited local governments from requiring private businesses to implement rules requiring them to allow men to use women's bathroom and shower facilities.

This common-sense limitation of unfettered governmental overreach was met with a firestorm of cries of discrimination, intolerance, and accusations of being “haters” from the liberals.

I call this a common-sense measure because it is just that.  Regardless of whether a person “feels” like a man or a woman, their actual gender is manifested by their genitalia and by their chromosomes.  It is not at all a question of mental or emotional orientation.  It is wholly a matter of biology and science.

At this point, some will inevitably throw out the circumstance of true hermaphrodites—those unfortunate individuals that are born with both male and female genitals.  These individuals are more correctly referred to as intersex, rather than hermaphrodites, because they cannot reproduce asexually. 

Statistics on the occurrence of intersex births puts this biological phenomena between one-tenth of one percent to as high as 1.7% of all live births, depending upon the extent of the presence of both gender indicators present in the body.  So at the outside, this is less than 2% of the population.

As for transsexuals, people who are surgically altering their genitals to change their appearance, if their genitals are still what they were born with, then they need to look in their shorts and choose their bathroom according to what they see there, not by what they “feel.”

It does not make sense to allow men and women, boys and girls, to all use the same bathrooms and shower facilities simultaneously, just to accommodate less than 2% of the population and a few folks who haven’t yet completed their surgical transition.

There is no question in my mind that the next counter-intuitive legal foray on the sexual front will be to redefine pedophiles into a sexual identity that will require legal accommodation and the removal of legal sanctions for their behavior.  Coupled with that will be an effort to lower the age of sexual consent from the current standard of 16 years of age down closer to 8.  This will allow pedophiles to claim that their intercourse with a child of either sex was consensual and not subject to the legal sanctions of rape.

While liberals are trying to force social conservatives to first become tolerant of, and then embrace, all sorts of behaviors that are in direct contradiction of the commandments of God, they are working with the other hand to be utterly intolerant of the behaviors of God worshippers.  While fighting for the right of their own to behave as they want, they actively seek to deny the rights of those who disagree to behave as they want.  And, as was proven by the actions of the Charlotte City Council, they are perfectly willing to use the powers of government to force their views and behaviors onto both public and private businesses and individuals.

Food for thought!

See Tom's political views on Facebook at: https://www.facebook.com/TomSheppardPoliticalViews/ 
Follow Tom on Twitter: @ThomasKSheppard 

Tom Sheppard is a business consultant and coach to small business owners and individuals. He is a recognized author with dozens of titles in business and fiction to his credit. One of his endeavors is to help those who want to see their own book in print. He does this through his trademarked Book Whispering Process (TM). 

The author is not an official spokesperson for any organization or person mentioned herein. 

(c) Copyright 2020 A+ Results LLC. All Rights Reserved. 

Your comments are welcome. Please observe some ground rules. No profanity, vulgarity, or personal attacks. Profanity, vulgarity and personal attacks not only betray a lack of vocabulary and imagination, they also are the hallmarks of bigotry, and bigotry is the hallmark of someone who is fundamentally insecure in their views. Facts are always welcome.

If you believe Government is NOT the answer to all our problems, you will want to read
 Godvernment: Government as GodClick on the image below to buy your copy today

Godvernment is available in both paperback and ebook format through Amazon.

Lessons in the Virtues of Traditional Morality from Communist China?

Tom Sheppard

3/28/2018

In today's Wall Street Journal Opinion Page is an article by Wendy Wang, titled The Sequence is the Secret to Success.

In her article she cites studies in the US and experience in China that pretty authoritatively demonstrate that the formula for rising out of poverty is to go to school, work, get married and then have children, in that order.

The sitcom Murphy Brown glorified the notion of having children out of wedlock, and Dan Quayle foundered on the reef when he, correctly, pointed out that single parenthood is actually a formula for poverty.  The media wouldn't tolerate that story however, and facts notwithstanding, pilloried Quayle for his on-point observations.

Here are a few of Wendy's most powerful facts:

• Among childless and unmarried millenials 28 to 34 who followed the education and work steps, the poverty rate was 8%.

Murphy Brown was a fictional character.  The sitcom writers didn't have to let reality influence the posh lifestyle this single mother enjoyed.  The reality for the overwhelming majority of single parents is constant financial struggle on the edge of poverty and homelessness.

In contrast with those who assert that society and racism hold the keys that keep the poor imprisoned in poverty, Ms. Wang shows that behaviors and choices open the doors out of poverty.

• Among young adults who grew up in low-income families, those who followed all three steps had a poverty rate of only 6%, compared with 35% for their peers who missed one or more steps.

• Eighty percent of those with lower-income backgrounds made it into middle- or upper-income brackets when they followed all three steps, versus only 44% for those who missed one or more steps.

SURPRISE! Following the same old-fashioned notions that were accepted for centuries in the US works to lift people out of poverty, even in the face of those who claim 'the American Dream' is dead.

• Brookings scholars Ron Haskins and Isabel Sawhill call it the "success sequence": getting at least a high-school diploma, working, and then marrying before having children--again, in that order. ... Following the success sequence is associated with a much lower chance of being poor and much better odds of realizing the American Dream.

One of my personal heroes, Star Parker, has been preaching the solution of personal choice instead of government programs as the path out of poverty for years now.  Her approach flies in the face of the likes of Al Sharpton and Jesse Jackson, who never met a government handout they didn't like.  If you are tired of reading the race baiters preach white-guilt, government programs, and income redistribution, you will enjoy her book, Uncle Sam's Plantation: How Big Government Enslaves America's Poor and What We Can Do About It.

Tom Sheppard is a business consultant and coach to small business owners and individuals. He is a recognized author with dozens of titles in business and fiction to his credit. One of his endeavors is to help those who want to see their own book in print. He does this through his trademarked Book Whispering Process (TM). 

The author is not an official spokesperson for any organization or person mentioned herein. 

Your comments are welcome... Please observe some ground rules. No profanity, vulgarity, or personal attacks. Profanity, vulgarity and personal attacks not only betray a lack of vocabulary and imagination, they also are the hallmarks of bigotry, and bigotry is the hallmark of someone who is fundamentally insecure in their views. Facts are always welcome.

Learn more about Tom Sheppard at his Amazon Author Page:

https://www.amazon.com/Tom-Sheppard/e/B0073GEHIK

Get your own copy of Tom's blockbuster Godvernment today.

(c) Copyright 2018 A+ Results LLC. All Rights Reserved. 

The Legislative Branch of Government is DEAD, And State Governments Too

Four Things You Can Do to Magnify the Power of One to Preserve Your Freedom

Saturday, I published an article that raised a warning about the devastating effects recent legislation will have on our Constitutional Rights.  This article continues that warning and provides both the wording from the legislation that is the root of this problem and shows how it conflicts with the Constitution.  As well as how it sets us up to lose our Constitutional Rights. And I provide specific things you can do as an individual to try to thwart this oppressive power play.

I hereby call on all our elected officials at State and Federal levels and all citizens of this country to immediately take legal action to enjoin against the enforcement of as well as repeal and annul The Iran Nuclear Agreement Review Act of 2015 - and this call has nothing to do with Iran and everything to do with the destruction of our Constitutional Rights.

The Iran Nuclear Agreement Review Act of 2015 threatens to totally destroy our Constitutional Rights and protections and indeed, our very Republic.

This is not about Iran.  It is about Congress passing an Act that establishes a precedent which will destroy the very fabric of checks and balances which protects the freedom of individuals of the minority and the majority, regardless of their party affiliation or politics.  

This will destroy the rights of Conservatives, Liberals, Progressives, LGBT, straight, gay, transgender, Christians, atheists, Libertarians, Republicans, Democrats, independents, Greens, Communists, Tea Party, 99%ers, anti-gunners, NRA, … in short ALL AMERICANS will lose their freedom if this one Act is allowed to stand.

While aimed specifically at Iran and the treaty that President Obama has signed with them, that is irrelevant because it establishes a precedent.  And under the English Common Law system which prevails in this country, a precedent is extremely important.

The bill was written with good intentions.  It appears to be aimed at blunting some of the most offensive and dangerous parts of the treaty with Iran.  Unfortunately, it allows the President of the United States (POTUS) to implement this treaty without requiring that the Senate first ratify the treaty, as required by the US Constitution.

"The President may not waive, suspend, reduce, provide relief from, or otherwise limit the application of statutory sanctions with respect to Iran or refrain from applying sanctions pursuant to an agreement for:

12 days after the date of passage of a congressional joint resolution of disapproval, and

10 days after the date of a presidential veto of a congressional joint resolution of disapproval.

Specified deferrals, waivers, or other suspensions of statutory sanctions are excepted from such prohibitions."

Senate Bill 615: Iran Nuclear Agreement Review Act of 2015, Emphasis Added

https://www.congress.gov/bill/114th-congress/senate-bill/615

Unfortunately, that last line gives away the farm.  It means that POTUS can make a million specific suspension of sanctions, individually, and they take effect regardless of what Congress says.  He just has to do it individually instead of making a blanket ending of sanctions.  So, even the good intentions of the Act are destroyed by the wording of the Act.

Remember, the word “agreement” here is being used in place of the word “treaty.”  That is because if they had used the word treaty, it would have caught everyone’s attention and folks would have clued into what exactly was happening here.

And what is happening here?

Three things are happening here, and the second is far, far worse than the first, and the third may be even worse than the first two.

ONE Really Bad Thing Happening Here

“[The President] shall have Power, by and with the Advice and Consent of the Senate, to make Treaties, provided two thirds of the Senators present concur; …”

US Constitution, Article II Section 2, emphasis added

http://www.archives.gov/exhibits/charters/constitution_transcript.html

1)  This act overturns how the US Constitution requires the handling of treaties. 

Under the Constitution, the President has sole power to enter into treaties for the United States.  Individual States cannot enter into treaties, and Congress cannot enter into treaties. 

However, no treaty entered into by the President is valid and binding until it is ratified by the Senate.  And then, it becomes the law of the land, even overriding the Constitution.

"This Constitution, and the Laws of the United States which shall be made in Pursuance thereof; and all Treaties made, or which shall be made, under the Authority of the United States, shall be the supreme Law of the Land; and the Judges in every State shall be bound thereby, any Thing in the Constitution or Laws of any State to the Contrary notwithstanding."

Article VI, US Constitution, emphasis added

http://www.archives.gov/exhibits/charters/constitution_transcript.html

This required ratification is a significant check on the power of the President.  It prevents him from entering into treaties such as the one proposed last year in the UN, and endorsed by then Secretary of State (and current Presidential hopeful) Hilary Clinton,  that would have required all of us to turn in our handguns under an international standard designed to disarm individuals all over the world which would have had the effect of leaving firearms only in the hands of outlaws and governments.

Or if the President should sign a treaty allowing the practice of Sharia Law inside the US, it would make it lawful inside the US for Islamic Councils to order the death of people who decide to leave Islam because they convert to another religion, such as Christianity.  And it would allow them to burn homosexuals alive, as ISIS has been doing under Sharia Law in the Middle East.

As you can see, treaties can be very powerful and dangerous things.  That is why the Founding Fathers established this significant check on the power of the President in making treaties. 

What is more, is because the Constitution requires the Congress ratifies a treaty before it can take effect, it means that if Congress simply ignores a treaty and does not vote on it, then it never takes effect.  And there is nothing the POTUS can do about that.

And, if the Congress brings a treaty up for a vote and the Senate votes against it by a simple majority, POTUS cannot override that vote and here is where we begin to enter the second, and worst area of precedent and problem created by this Act.

TWO - Really, Really Bad Things Happening Here

2) Under the Constitution, the POTUS cannot enact legislation.  He cannot write a bill and submit it to Congress.  All legislation must originate in Congress.  And, under the Constitution, once Congress has enacted a bill, it does not become law until the POTUS signs it, or if he ignores it for a time, then it becomes law automatically.

However, if the POTUS really doesn’t want a bill to become law, all he has to do is veto it.  When he vetoes it, it goes back to Congress and it is not a law.  If Congress feels really strongly that this should be a law, they vote on it again.  And, if they get a 2/3rds majority in favor of the bill, then the bill will become law, because the Presidential Veto cannot override the force of a 2/3rds majority vote.

In allowing the POTUS to enter into a treaty (agreement) and allowing it to take effect unless Congress votes against it, the POTUS can now craft laws (agreements) and they will take effect unless 2/3rds of the Congress votes against the law.

Effectively, this Act eliminates the Legislative Branch of the Government at a stroke.  Oh sure, they can keep passing laws and doing their thing.  But if the President wants something different than Congress, all he has to do is have the State Department create a treaty with some other country and then POTUS signs it and it automatically becomes the law of the land unless Congress can muster a 2/3rds majority to create a veto-proof rejection of the President’s latest law.  And POTUS can always find at least one foreign head of state out there who will agree to sign a treaty that destroys the Constitutional Rights of Americans.  I can think of a half-dozen right off the top of my head, with Iran being right there with them.

THREE - As if ONE and TWO Weren't Bad Enough

3) In addition to eliminating the Legislative Branch of our Federal Government, this Act will have the effect of overriding all the State Governments of each of our individual states.  They will become puppets at best, or utterly irrelevant at worst.

"This Constitution, and the Laws of the United States which shall be made in Pursuance thereof; and all Treaties made, or which shall be made, under the Authority of the United States, shall be the supreme Law of the Land; and the Judges in every State shall be bound thereby, any Thing in the Constitution or Laws of any State to the Contrary notwithstanding."

Article VI, US Constitution, emphasis added

http://www.archives.gov/exhibits/charters/constitution_transcript.html

There is very little we can do about this, but there is something we can do.  If you are as alarmed about this destruction of our Constitutional protections as I am there are four things you can do, each of which will magnify the voice of The One (you) and turn it into many.  The Power of One is more than you realize.

"I am only one; but still I am one. I cannot do everything; but still I can do

 something; and because I cannot do everything, I will not refuse to do the

 something that I can do."

Edward Everett Hale

1) Share this information with everyone you can.

• Send emails about it to everyone in your email Address Book.
• Post about it on Facebook, LinkedIn, Twitter and all other social media accounts that you have.
• Tell anyone who will listen to you (one-on-one or in groups)

2) Contact each member of the Congressional delegation from your state that is currently serving in Congress.  This site http://www.contactingthecongress.org/ seemed to have the quickest and easiest access to contact information for all 50 states.  Urge them to repeal this Act immediately and to immediately take an expedited appeal to the Supreme Court so that this Act can be declared unconstitutional - which it is.

     A.    Write them letters.

     B.     Send them emails.

     C.     Send them faxes.

     D.    Phone their offices.

     E.     Do all of the above if you want them to realize how important this really is.

3) Contact the office of your state Governor and let him or her know what is going on and that the sovereignty of the state is about to be permanently and completely overridden and destroyed by one thoughtless Act of Congress.  Urge him or her to immediately order the State Attorney General to file suit in Federal District Court asking to have this Act declared unconstitutional.

     A.    Write them letters.

     B.     Send them emails.

     C.     Send them faxes.

     D.    Phone their offices.

     E.     Do all of the above if you want them to realize how important this really is.

4) Contact all your in-state legislators and let them know that their authority is being wiped out by a single act of the Federal Government.  Urge them to immediately pass resolutions condemning this usurpation of states’ rights and urging their governor to immediately file suit against the US Government in this matter.
     A.    Write them letters.

     B.     Send them emails.

     C.     Send them faxes.

     D.    Phone their offices.

     E.     Do all of the above if you want them to realize how important this really is.

I am sure that if you have read any of my previous articles in this blog, you know that there are many points of disagreement I have with different groups in our country today.  And this issue transcends all those disagreements we may have between us.  Because, if this Act stands, then we will all be oppressed together and our government will truly become the “jack-booted” regime that radicals have called it for many years.  And that boot will land firmly on the neck of everyone who doesn’t agree with what our POTUS wants to 

Related Link to this Article:

• Senate Bill 615: Iran Nuclear Agreement Review Act of 2015: https://www.congress.gov/bill/114th-congress/senate-bill/615
• US Constitution, http://www.archives.gov/exhibits/charters/constitution_transcript.html
• Contact each member of the Congressional delegation from your state that is currently serving in Congress. http://www.contactingthecongress.org/ 
• Edward Everett Hale - the source of the quote, "I am one..."
• The Citizen's Constitution: An Annotated Guide by Seth Lipsky

Tom Sheppard is a business consultant and coach to small business owners and individuals. He is a recognized author with dozens of titles in business and fiction to his credit. One of his endeavors is to help those who want to see their own book in print. He does this through his trademarked Book Whispering Process (TM). The author is not an official spokesperson for any organization or person mentioned herein. 

The author is not an official spokesperson for any organization or person mentioned herein.

Visit Tom's Amazon.com Author's Page

(c) Copyright 2015 A+ Results LLC. All Rights Reserved. 

 Your comments are welcome... Please observe some ground rules. No profanity, vulgarity, or personal attacks. Profanity, vulgarity and personal attacks not only betray a lack of vocabulary and imagination, they also are the hallmarks of bigotry, and bigotry is the hallmark of someone who is fundamentally insecure in their views. Facts are always welcome.

Back to School: Kill the Department of Education

Government Education – Many people do not realize that the takeover, makeover, and destruction of the locally controlled public school system has been an agenda item of Communists, Socialists, Fascists and other Liberal-Progressives at least since the days of President Woodrow Wilson. 

As the President of Princeton University, Wilson said, “Our problem is not merely to help the students to adjust themselves to world life…[but] to make them as unlike their fathers as we can.” 

The objective of these people is to brain-wash our children to think they way these elitists want them to think. To make this happen, they have steadily destroyed the concept and application of community-controlled schools and curricula, substituting centralized control over content and execution. In response, may have adopted home-schooling, a right which I defend. 

However, I believe that rejecting the “benefits” of centralized control and returning control of schools to local communities will result in students who learn how to think critically and how to read and write and do math, and will stem the tide of illiterate high-school graduates who think about things the way the state wants them to think.

Never forget that one of the primary ways masters have always kept control of their slaves is to limit the content and opportunity for education. The centralized control of the administration, curricula and funding of our public schools is a primary tool of those who do not want individual families and communities to pass on to our children our own values. They would rather teach our children what they want them to know and to believe.

1. Return control of schools to local communities. School boards should exist for each local community with the appropriate powers for raising funds, establishing curricula, hiring and firing of administrators and teachers, etc. These local boards should act under the supervision and authority of local elected officials such as Mayors, Town Councils, etc. The County Board of Education should be limited in its authority to schools that are not under any locally elected government oversight and should derive its authority from the County Commission. This will make local school management responsive to the needs, desires, and abilities of the local community.

2. Mandates from the State Board of Education and the Federal Department of Education should be resisted as a matter of course as unconstitutional usurpation of the rights of the citizens. The Constitution does not grant the right to management of education to the Federal Government, therefore the state and county have no basis in law for compliance with mandates from the Department of Education. If the State Constitution does not explicitly grant the State the right to manage education at the county and municipal level, then it too should be routinely rejected.

Mark Levin notes that some things should be added to the curricula:

“Encourage the creation of curricula that will educate young people about the intergenerational trap the [Welfare-State] has laid for them – which will steal their liberty, labor, opportunities, and wealth – thereby building a future electoral force for whom the elixir of entitlements is understood as poisonous snake oil.”

I agree and I propose further that we should:

3. Eliminate from curricula teachings designed to promote politically motivated concepts that are not based on the appropriate application of the scientific method. These politically motivated concepts include “global warming” and “man-made-climate-change.” Until a scientific theory has been demonstrated to be based on rigorous application of the scientific method, it should be taught in colleges as theory, rather than in elementary and secondary schools as fact.

Relevant Links to this Article:

• The School Revolution: A New Answer for Our Broken Education System, Presidential Candidate Ron Paul offers his prescription for fixing our educational system.
• Is College Worth It?: A Former United States Secretary of Education and a Liberal Arts Graduate Expose the Broken Promise of Higher Education, Former Secretary of Education William Bennett tackles a problem in higher education.
• The Global Auction: The Broken Promises of Education, Jobs, and Incomes, Authors Philip Brown and Hugh Lauder offer a timely expose about how the promise of education as a path for success is failing us.

Tom Sheppard is a business consultant and coach to small business owners and individuals. He is a recognized author with dozens of titles in business and fiction to his credit. One of his endeavors is to help those who want to see their own book in print. He does this through his trademarked Book Whispering Process (TM). The author is not an official spokesperson for any organization or person mentioned herein. 

The author is not an official spokesperson for any organization or person mentioned herein.

Visit Tom's Amazon.com Author's Page

(c) Copyright 2015 A+ Results LLC. All Rights Reserved. 

 Your comments are welcome... Please observe some ground rules. No profanity, vulgarity, or personal attacks. Profanity, vulgarity and personal attacks not only betray a lack of vocabulary and imagination, they also are the hallmarks of bigotry, and bigotry is the hallmark of someone who is fundamentally insecure in their views. Facts are always welcome.