Social Engineering: Defining And Justifying Universal Conformity To The ‘Ideal’ Society

In my previous two posts in this series, Social Engineering: Creating A Ruling Elite While Undermining Society’s Ability To Think and Social Engineering: Justifying The State Takeover Of Our Children, I explained how our schools have been co-opted by people who wish to create what they see as a model or ‘perfect’ society and how they have attempted to seize government ownership of our children so they can use them as a weapon against us in the pursuit of this goal.  In this post, I will present just a fraction of the description these same people have given us of their ‘ideal’ society.  Because he is so important to understanding this agenda, and because he was so open about it in his writing, once again, I start with a quote from John Dewey:

“Education is a regulation of the process of coming to share in the social consciousness; and that the adjustment of individual activity on the basis of this social consciousness is the only sure method of social reconstruction.”

Now this is crucial to our understanding of what is going on in our world today.  Note what Dewey just said:

Education is the regulation of the process

Regulation requires force.  The government owns the monopoly on force in all societies – even a free and self-governing society.  Therefore, Dewey is stating that education is the use of government force.  Now, let’s expand on this and not assume that Dewey is referring only to elementary or even public education.  Given the greater body of work from his fellow Progressives, it is reasonable to assume that he was allowing for ‘education’ in college, and even in our media – to include the social and entertainment media and not just news media of the time.  After all, this would be necessary to reach those who had not gone through his public school system, and to maintain the ‘indoctrination’ instilled in those schools upon graduation and entry into the rest of society where the individual might be exposed to competing ideas.

of coming to share in the social consciousness.

First, ‘social consciousness’ is another word for the collective (which doesn’t exist).  And what is the collective but the State (which also doesn’t exist)?  We’ll set this issue aside for another post.  Instead, let’s consider this.  What if an individual student doesn’t want to share in the social consciousness?  What happens then?  Well, there is the ‘regulation’ (i.e. force) behind the ‘process’ (i.e. indoctrination).  And, if the student still resists, they fall under Dewey’s condemnation I explained in my previous post:

Anyone who has begun to think, places some portion of the world in jeopardy.

In this case, the part of the world jeopardized by people who think for themselves and resist the States “regulated process” is the State and its ‘social conscious.”  We continue:

and that the adjustment of individual activity on the basis of this social consciousness

In other words, Dewey is calling for the ‘correction’ of those who resist the State and its ‘social consciousness.’  This is exactly what ‘political correctness’ is all about: the ‘adjustment’ of those who refuse to fall in line.  Remember, Dewey already said this is a ‘regulated’ (i.e. forced) process, and the use of force in any society lies solely with the government.  Now, think about the implication of that in relation to the existence of a ‘free press’ in any ‘engineered society.’  Are you starting to understand why our news and entertainment media seem to support the government’s agenda more often than not?  We’ll touch on this in more depth in future posts.  Back to Dewey:

is the only sure method of social reconstruction.”

There it is: an admission that Dewey is after an intentional and purposely designed society, and the assertion that the use of government force to shape the citizen and force them into line is the only sure method of achieving this designed society.  Now I ask you, where is the allowance for the individual in any of this?  There isn’t any.  But then, this shouldn’t be a surprise.  If you understand how closely connected the American Progressive movement was (and still is) to the Fabian Socialists, European Fascists and Russian Communists, and you know what the leaders of these other movements have said about the ‘ideal society,’ then you see the common threads in all of them.  Here, allow me to ‘share’ a little history with you and you see if you can spot the common threads.  Just remember, the ‘socisl consciousness’ means socialism – in all its many forms:

For the Communists, Vladimir Lenin:

All our lives we fought against exalting the individual, against the elevation of the single person, and long ago we were over and done with the business of a hero, and here it comes up again: the glorification of one personality. This is not good at all.

The aim of socialism is not only to abolish the present division of mankind into small states and all-national isolation, not only to bring the nations closer to each other, but also to merge them.

For the Fabians, George Bernard Shaw:

I also made it quite clear that Socialism means equality of income or nothing, and that under socialism you would not be allowed to be poor. You would be forcibly feed, clothed, lodged, taught, and employed whether you like it or not. If it were discovered that you had not character enough to be worth all this trouble, you might possibly be executed in a kindly manner; but whilst you were permitted to live you would have to live well.

And for the Fascists, Hitler:

Why nationalize industry when you can nationalize the people?

Society’s needs come before the individual’s needs.

It is thus necessary that the individual should finally come to realize that his own ego is of no importance in comparison with the existence of the nation, that the position of the individual is conditioned solely by the interests of the nation as a whole.

And Mussolini (because the American Progressives loved him – at first):

Against individualism, the Fascist conception is for the State … Liberalism denied the State in the interests of the particular individual; Fascism reaffirms the State as the true reality of the individual.

I will continue this series, but you must read them all.  The order isn’t as important as the cumulative effect of the knowledge in them.  You also need to understand that this is all tied together.  Each of my posts is a piece to a larger puzzle.  This is how they have hidden it from you for so long, and why they can hide it in plain sight: because they have so shortened our attention spans and distracted us with entertainment that they have grown confident that we will not bother to learn what we need to know to put the puzzle together.  And, when a few of us do – as I hope you are trying to do by reading this – we are easily handled by isolating and ridiculing us.  However – and here is the key – if enough of us learn and understand what I am trying to show you, and we can explain it to other (or at least tell them where to find the information themselves), then the forces trying to snuff out individual rights and liberty will no longer be able to isolate and ridicule us because we will be too many.

The irony here is that the key to beating them is the very vehicle they seek to use to impose their tyranny: EDUCATION!


One thought on “Social Engineering: Defining And Justifying Universal Conformity To The ‘Ideal’ Society

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s