— PROFESSOR D. ON THE ROLE OF PUBLIC EDUCATION
In order to maintain our system of power, the institution of universal public education is indispensable. The anarchy of private education in which any manner of dangerous ideas could be spread cannot be tolerated. Thus we make private education financially impossible to all but the few, mostly the elite offspring of our financial entourage, by means of burdensome taxation and regulation. The primary purpose of public education is to inculcate the idea that our crucial institutions of coercion and monopoly were created for the public good by popular national heroes to blunt the past power of the malefactors of great wealth. Crucial is to create the impression that, although the people have been exploited in the past, today the wealthy are at the mercy of an all powerful government which is firmly in the hands of the people or do-gooding liberals.
For those of more sophistication who reject this Pollyanna view of reality, we promote the “liberal reformer mentality” which holds that a new era of reform is on the verge of crushing forever the last vestiges of money lordism. Of course, the reforms, after taking shape as a bewildering myriad of regulatory agencies and taxes, are found to be ineffective in subordinating our power to the popular will, whereupon we stir up another era of progressive reform.
Our contrived Left-Right spectrum which our compulsory education helps to make universal is valuable in assuring that this charade does not get out of hand. The Pollyannas in the middle are neither dangerous nor useful in this endeavor. What is needed is a feeble, but persistent right-conservatism to moderate and emasculate the liberal reforms. Conservatives tend to resist all the advances in centralized, government power that we lead the liberals to see as necessary in order to totally end the “undemocratic” power of money in society. Conservatism would rather promote a “pluralism” of competing interests in which money is the medium of competition than risk the excesses of “big government.” When “liberal” reforms show signs of exceeding our intentions and actually threaten to place our key institutions in the hands of the people, we can always count on the conservatives to defend our power under the illusion that they are defending the legitimate rights of “free-enterprise capitalists.” On the rare occasions when conservatives call for subjecting our enterprises to laissez-faire competition, we can count on the dominant liberal reformers to insist on more government interference, unaware of our desire for such, in effect, self administered regulation.
The Right has such a fear of the Left’s dream of democratic collectivism and the Left such a hatred for what it sees as the Right’s elitist, rugged individualism that there is little danger that they will ever join forces to overturn our government-backed monopolies even though we violate the ideals of both left and right.
Centralization of control at the state, or preferably national level, assists in building the climate of opinion we require in public education. Failing to obliterate local control, other methods nearly as effective are available. Our overwhelming financial clout in the publishing industry can induce relatively uniform textbook selection. Further leverage can be created by promoting teacher colleges and teaching machines. National teacher’s associations and unions are also an excellent power base from which to foster our programs of indoctrination.
With our great influence in publishing and publicity we are able to selectively popularize educational theorists whose views are incidentally beneficial, compatible, or at least not in conflict with our own goals. This way we obtain sincere, energetic activists to propagate our desires without having to reveal our motives or even existence. We do not want an educational system that produces hard-driving individuals bent on amassing great wealth and power. Therefore, we discourage education that would develop the potential powers of students to their fullest.
“Liberal” education that stresses knowledge for its own sake or even sophistry and sterile mental gymnastics is of no danger to us. “Relevant,” vocational, or career oriented education also poses no danger to our power. Education that prepares students to accept a cog-like existence in our military-industrial-social-welfare regulation complex is ideal. Progressive education with its stress on “social adjustment” also produces the conformity we require of our subjects. Emphasis on competitive sports may produce a certain amount of disruptive competitiveness among the participants, but primarily has the effect of creating life-long voyeuristic spectators who will enthusiastically sublimate their competitiveness into endless hours of following college and professional sports on the boob tube. Space spectaculars and dramatic political infighting are also marvelous diversions with which to occupy the masses.
Anyone seeking social change will gravitate to the field of education. Our strategy is simple: Let only those succeed whose influence would be compatible with our power. Encourage all who would develop the passive or receptive mode of existence. Discourage all who promote the aggressive or active capacities. Build a great cult of salvation through endless education, touting it as the “democratic” path to success. Deride the frontal approach to success of the “outmoded” rugged individualist.
Before yielding the floor to Professor X., who will discuss the role of secret societies and prestigious clubs, I would like to comment on the demise of religious education as a vehicle for social control. Religion, in its time, was a remarkable weapon for inculcating subservience, altruism, and self-abrogation among our subjects. We did not give up this weapon voluntarily. Your grandfather, for one, supported the Baptist faith well after most finance capitalists had turned wholly to secular ideologies. However, a trend toward rationality in human affairs plods along inexorably quite outside the reach of our power. Only in our totalitarian dictatorships can this trend be quashed entirely. In the semi-open societies in which our money power is based, the forces of reason can only be impeded and diverted. Some have theorized that, eventually, widespread rational egoism will overturn our order. I am confident that secular faiths and just plain confusion will suffice to sustain our power for many centuries to come.
Part -> 9