A Defense of Education

I study media, teach, and hike all four seasons. I read voraciously. That causes this... There has been a lot of misrepresentation about education and teaching so this stared as a response.  It has evolved into a little more...  

[mikejryan]

Cautionary Tales

I’ve read quite a bit about the events that led up to WWII and then the pathway through and in the few immediate decades following the war.  Most of it is cautionary, warning us of the dangerous paths we can easily fall into, how simply the masses can be trapped in a nightmare of their own making and see no clear way out, even if they wanted one and were not caught up in the fervor.  There is much to learn about us as a species, about the ways we slip loudly and easily into madness, how we respond to crises, and how we aren’t very good at taking criticism, accepting responsibility, and cleaning up the messes we obviously created through hideous decision-making or other behaviors/statements.  .

Here’s a sampling of the reading:

The Diary of Anne Frank [millions of people have read it, but I truly wonder how many people actually learned the moral and ethical lessons from its content]

An Interrupted Life, Etty Hillesum

The Origins of Totalitarianism, Hannah Arendt

Eichmann in Jerusalem: the banality of evil, Hannah Arendt

Men in Dark Times, Hannah Arendt

Responsibility and Judgment, Hannah Arendt 

Auschwitz, Bernd Naumann

Sawdust Caesar, George Seldes

Facts and Fascism, George Seldes 

Alfred Hugenberg: The radical nationalist campaign against the Weimar Republic, John Leopold

I Paid Hitler, Fritz Thyssen

Mein Kampf, Adolf Hitler

The Politics of Memory, Raul Hilberg

Four Perfect Pebbles, Lila Perl and Marion Blumenthal

Propaganda, Jacques Ellul

Propaganda, Edward Bernays

Nazism, 1919-1945, Volume 1, Jeremy Noakes 

Pilgrim of the Absolute, Leon Bloy

From Weimar to Hitler, E. Feuchtwanger 

The Weimar Republic 1919-1933, Ruth Henig

The War Against the Jews, 1933-1945, Lucy Dawidowicz 

The Political Diary of Alfred Rosenberg and the Onset of the Holocaust, Jurgen Matthäus and Frank Bahjor

The Origins of Totalitarian Democracy, J. L. Talmon

Perpetrators, Victims, and Bystanders: The Jewish Catastrophe 1933-1945, Raul Hilberg

Man’s Search for Meaning, Viktor Frankl

I Will Bear Witness 1933-1941: A diary of the Nazi years, Victor Klemperer

There are a few missing from the list, but you get the picture… 

When merging these together, looking at multiple perspectives and seeing, as best as possible in the brief shared opportunity provided by these memoirs, analyses, biographies, and explorations, some common threads thrust themselves forward and some deep and dark insights into the time period and the psyches of various folks from the top of Nazi leadership to the person grabbed off the streets rise up out of the ashes and dust. 

For anyone with a relatively impartial brain, all of these present a tremendous cautionary tale.  From the obvious signs of where things were going to the odd belief from many people that this would pass, it would be a rough patch, but it would dissipate and reason and common sense would prevail, from the racist and nationalistic approach of the Nazis from day 1 to the inevitable destruction, genocide, and degradation, and all points in between, we have much to learn from this terrible and terrifying time.  

This has been an area of study and exploration close to my heart for over 20 years, and between reading and viewing other primary source documents and films online, I think I have a decent grasp of all the mindsets.  Sadly, here in 2025, 92 years after the Nazis came to power, not even 100 years distant, we have lost track of the realities and the proper and accurate definitions and understanding of the circumstances of 1933 [and several years before] and everything that happened leading to the defeat of Nazi Germany.  We have failed to learn the lessons from the catastrophe of appeasement by Neville Chamberlain and the British, as well as several other European countries, and we have failed to see with any clarity the similarities between then and now.  Today’s media machinery is hyperspeed fast, so maybe that can act as our feeble excuse, but we in the United States are heading down an extremely dark and slippery path.  Too many points of direct comparison and almost word-for-word statements by leaders today echoed from the Nazi past.  Just saying you’re not a Nazi doesn’t mean you’re not a Nazi.  If you walk and talk like one, if your words and deeds copy the playbook from 1933-1945, then guess what?  You need to own it and just admit that you’re a Nazi and simply be honest with yourself and the rest of us, unless you fear the potential repercussions, which speaks volumes for your true nature and spirit and your knowledge of the cowardly behaviors and acts attached to all this.  At least be honest, with yourself and with us, and maybe that clarity will allow everyone to take appropriate steps in moving forward into the unknown future.  

[mikejryan]

Just a few questions...

How can anyone support ICE and claim they only want immigrants to enter legally when we have …

Randomly profiled and detained over 175 legal US citizens and almost all were incarcerated without any form of due process [legally guaranteed by the US Constitution and at least formerly by SCOTUS]?

Detained and deported [without due process of law or with a strong-arm form of expedited legal gamesmanship where immigration judges were ordered to reject claims or documents] former military and US personnel translators, embassy workers/employees, and allied soldiers and people of various sorts from warzones we created in Afghanistan and Iraq who were here legally and sent them to their obvious execution in their country of origin?

Detained and deported [again without due process of law as per above] people here with legal documentation and who followed all proper protocols and processes, many of whom came from dangerous situations in their country of origin [policemen from drug infested locations who worked with the US in the so-called war on drugs, sex trafficked children and women, and various people abused by drug lords and political strongmen]?

Detained and deported people who have lived legally in the US for decades but were found to have committed a minor crime [one bad check, an unpaid speeding ticket…] that they had long since taken care of and cleared and whose entire known and immediate family resides in the US and they have not lived in their country of origin since they were children, if at all?  One argument that comes up is the morals clause or idea that they need to be good citizens/people, but doesn’t this argument weaken when the transgression was very minor/slight, they have paid the fine or dealt properly with the offense, it was a one-off, and the person is/was contrite?  Is it a potential issue/legal argument that our president is an unrepentant convicted felon which runs counter to the morals and citizenship idea?

Deported people [yet again without due process] not to their country of origin but to a third party country that we pay to hold these folks as prisoners?  Since they do not even speak the language of this third country, how are they to survive and ensure proper treatment? 

Explain how these and similar wrongs make a right.  How does harm to even one of these people and therefore also to our reputation in the world [because we send people back to their deaths in their country of origin] serve the nation in any way?  How can we, in any way, shape, or form, justify harm to even one person in the pursuit of what some deem justice or some other concept?

How can we not equate ICE, in its present form and with its present processes/actions [random street stops, pepper spraying people who merely stand in their way, physically abusing and assaulting US citizens, lying about detention processes…], with the SS from Germany in the 1930s and 40s?  Many of the SS serving in similar capacities as camp guards and rounding up folks in various locations were initially labeled or judged as not fit for military service, so they gravitated to these roles. Because of their background, they would later, almost to a man, claim they were just following orders or they were merely doing the job as best as they saw fit, even if it was against the actual written orders from the commanding personnel, so how do we not draw similarities?  

Explain to me how we can say we have a moral high ground in any of this?

How can we claim to support police, to back the blue, when we release January 6th insurrectionists after they were legally convicted of, in some cases, rather heinous crimes against those same men and women in blue and many of these people later committed often violent crimes resulting in reincarceration and in a few cases death in a shoot out with police?  How can we claim this when ICE [that same force mentioned above] personnel pepper spray police officers in the line of duty and service and when we usurp their local power by sending in the national guard without the consent of the state or its elected officials and leaders?  

How can we say things like “Thank you for your service” to members of the military, and then cry out about no new taxes, cut my taxes… all of which cut services for veterans?  Mind you, we as a nation have never treated our veterans properly dating back to the Revolutionary War and all the way to today.  Once it’s over, once we’re done with them, we say thank you and generally forget them, so it’s not a new thing, but the showiness of the “Thank you for your service” is new, so how can we justify saying it when we really don’t mean it?  How can we say this when we don’t want to pay for mental health services, drug treatments, long term [or in many cases even short term] proper and above average care, homeless relocation and assistance for these same veterans?  If we actually cared and meant it, why in God’s name would we need anything like Wounded Warriors?  

How can we claim, again in any way, shape, or form, to be a moral nation, a Christian nation, or a nation which exists on moral high ground [better than our neighbors and other nations/peoples] when we have a convicted felon as president, a man who has over 25 women who have justifiably claimed sexual harassment or assault, or worse, from the man who now sits in the White House, and a man who closely associated pedophiles, child abusers, and people who peddled them to the rich and famous and who himself, according to the sworn testimony of several of these young girls, partook of the sexual abuse/rape/assault?  Other than deny, attack, and threaten his accusers and obfuscate and delay any relevant information related to the pedophilia, where has he been contrite or remorseful?  Where has he demonstrated a desire for forgiveness and redemption?  Quite arguably, you can hate the sin but love the sinner, but does that mean electing/lifting the sinner to the highest office in the land and turning a blind eye to the sin or covering it up?  Are there no consequences for the sinner’s actions and statements?  If not, then on what possible ground can we claim to be a moral, Christian, or even slightly ethical nation?  Who or what would be our moral or Christian role model?  

Finally, and related to the Christian nation idea, how can any nation or group that uses violence, promotes it, speaks it, or supports it [verbally, physically, or in any way], claim to be followers of Christ?  The overriding message of Christ is to do no harm, that it is better to suffer harm than do harm, so how can anyone who does harm, says harmful things, or allows harm to come to others make this claim?  Doesn’t doing harm mean the opposite of Christ’s message and therefore nullify any subsequent claims?  

[mikejryan]

"Stalin's crimes were, so to speak, old fashioned; like an ordinary criminal, he never admitted them but kept them surrounded in a cloud of hypocrisy and doubletalk while his followers justified them as temporary means in pursuit of the 'good' cause..." - Hannah Arendt, 1966.

[mikejryan]

Why people see weakness in Christian Nationalists.

First and foremost, the words Christian and Nation should never be used is such close proximity. Where in the New Testament does Christ support one nation over another, accept a governmental system or leader, or say to make or force [through legislation or other forms of power or coercion] a nation into a system of believers? Where does He say to create laws to force people to obey His teachings? Again, I mentioned this before in other posts, but what do these idiotic and self-serving laws have to do with fulfilling the mission and walking in His steps?

Secondly, how can anyone see Christ through someone who falls at the feet of an earthly leader, particularly one who has said and done so many sinful and heinous things? No Christian should bow down before, worship, or idolize any leader or any human being... Period. No wiggle room in the Scriptures here. None. As much as I may respect and love a pastor, religious leader, or person, I do not make excuses for them and I would never idolize them or put them on a pedestal. No self-proclaimed Christian should ever even slightly put an earthly leader anywhere near Christ [although we may pray for them to have His wisdom, to see through His eyes and Words]. Who in the NT stands as a leader beside Christ? The closest is John the Baptist. That's it. Anything else is truly a golden calf. Truly, I say unto you that by following an earthly leader, you demonstrate your need for a visible/tangible heroic or God-like figure to worship because your faith in the unseen Christ is weaker than you can see or understand. You show, in every step and word, the lack of faith in Christ and the utter faith and devotion to an earthly power, dominion, or principality. If you look at yourself through the eyes of one seeking Christ, wanting to believe and have true faith, how have you shown that person the way through your actions and words in harmony with Christ and His actual words?

Finally [and there are more, but we'll stick to three, keeping with the Trinity], how can anyone want to follow people whose actions create deep divisions, who support ridiculing others, remove care for the less fortunate or needy, suckle up to money, power, and those who possess it? Where is Christ? Where is Love? Hope? Charity? Faith in the unseen but Almighty God?

[mikejryan]

Fascism in all countries is a form of government originated by great industrial empires and cartels, subsidized, placed in power and kept in power for benefit of the few -- and against the general welfare of the many." - George Seldes, One Thousand Americans, 1947

[christology101]

Relevance or Irrelevance of Christianity...

Let us begin with this premise: When we stop asking the challenging, difficult and uncomfortable questions, we stop thinking and growing, and we cease to be what God intends and diminish the gifts He has given to us. When we cease to explore and probe, we cease to be anything else than a simple beast, or in some cases flora or a solid rock [immovable and unthinking].  We must recognize what differentiates us from a rock, a tree, and the common beast [whether from an evolutionary perspective or a creation perspective, the answers are not too dissimilar].  To this, let’s add another: you cannot use laws, regulations, and force to transform someone’s soul and belief system [not in a single lifetime - through generations, you might transform the masses, but it would be inch-by-inch]. Perhaps one more: Christ is good, Christianity, not so much.  Tradition is also good, but traditionalism is bad. 

Here beginneth the lesson/questions:

If you look at others in disdain, feel better than or superior to others, feel ill-will to others, treat others poorly or as less than human, with a base form of inhumanity, or classify others as somehow different [and because of that, lesser], then how in any way do you reflect Christ?  How would you expect anyone to see Christ’s Light through your actions and words?  We need to remember that it is not our time in church, not our prayers, and not our sense of piety that delivers the loving light of Christ and His Word to others [and so spreads the message of peace, love, and joy which dominate the Word].  We need to listen attentively to criticism and test ourselves to make sure we actually send out Christ’s message, not our own, not that of another entity wrapped in a paper mache version of Christianity, and not an idol or power.  Since so many groups and sects claiming to be Christian have spewed or supported things like this, and we justly and logically lump them together under the banner of Christianity, what goods does Christianity demonstrate?  What value(s)?  Is Christianity, in the real world, representative of Christ and His Word?  

Consider the WWJD stickers, wristbands keychains and visual images…  If we truly ask What Would Jesus Do, would He put on a bumper sticker or somehow throw it in your face or would He behave and approach it differently?  How would Jesus speak AND act towards others that spoke volumes to their souls and let them see not just the Inner Light and Love but the Eternal Flame that only He can spark?  If we truly ask WWJD, then we would not need a constant personal reminder nor would we flaunt the idea in front of others.  Instead, by the Loving Light of His Guidance and Word, we would both demonstrate His Love and speak with His Beauty in every word.  

Something else for us to contemplate and meditate upon, and if truth be known it should not take us very long, is to which political party would Jesus belong?  By the way, the answer is NONE!  He would not side with any party or nation, period.  If you question this, then look back upon His walk with us.  Would He gravitate towards the Romans?  Would he side with King Herod [paying particular attention to the king part]?  Would He find more in common with and follow the Saduccees and Pharisees?  Since they are the only political and religious leaders with whom He interacted, where would be the basis for any claim that Jesus would support any political, religious, or other control mechanism or leadership?  You will hear someone say, with all fervor and conviction, that God loves their party or leader.  Like he loved Herod?  I would accept that as He loved all of us and forgave all, that yes, from that perspective He loved Herod, but would He follow Herod?  Would He do His bidding?  There is ZERO biblical evidence to even slightly suggest this as a possibility, so therefore He would not love a political leader.  Some will point to the Old Testament, the likes of Solomon and David.  Well, it is the Old Testament, and we were released from the sacrifices therein by Christ’s blood and as He taught from it, He also took us to the next level.  Would anyone, given Christ’s interactions with the leaders and powers of His time on earth, say that He loved those leaders or powers?  As God loved David, Solomon and other leaders, they also fell all-too easily from grace and failed.  We must recognize that we are all, these flawed humans, clothed in error and faults. Would anyone, with a soul emptied of the world and its influences, claim that any leader today is David or Solomon, Moses or Abraham?  If you remove the world, how can you?  

As a lesson or marker for the soul in its search for an earthly leader to gravitate toward and attach to [in some cases like a barnacle], should we not at least ask these questions:

1. What has this person done to show Christ-like character?  A moral center? 

2. What acts of kindness has this person done?  

3. What words of support, care, and encouragement, grounded in Christ, has the person uttered or shown? 

4. How can we see Christ through this person, if at all?

5. What policies, actions, and behaviors of this leader and his/her minions and followers demonstrate Christ?  

Where did Christ show exclusion and selectivity?  Where did He show cruelty or indifference to suffering?  Where did He mistreat His neighbors and associates?  Where was He rude or crass?  Where did He mock others?  Where did He treat women differently from men?  Where did He say to ignore suffering and cruelty?  Where did He say to follow a worldly leader?  Where did He say to hoard money and goods, to steal or swindle your neighbor, or to promote self over others?  I’ll wait…  

We as flawed human beings have a sincere problem dating back to the most ancient of recorded times and witnessed all through the Bible.  Even with God shining through and if not visible at least present, we desire a physical human being or idol to worship in His place.  We have used kings, political leaders, some civic leaders, but always a surrogate and petty replacement…  Not even a mere shadow of that which is Holy, but upon which and whom we laud all manner of imagined wonders and praise.  God warns us, time and again, not to fall into this trap, but our lack of faith drives us to find relief and strength in a human and worldly form.  We cannot fully place our faith in a God we have not seen, as much as we cry and screech that we do, as much as we claim we do, as much as we go to church and try to mimic and speak all manner of piety and belief, we throw ourselves at the feet of worldly leaders, powers, and dominions.  Only the soul which has dampened out the world and all the enemies, which has passed through darkness and emptied itself of the world and let Christ’s Light shine in and reignite and fully spark it, can see clearly and grow out of infancy and dependence upon something earthly upon which to suckle instead of something Divine and Eternal.  We know not, in doing this evil, that we quite literally suckle death and eternal suffering.  

“Long is the way and hard, that out of Hell leads up to light.” - John Milton, Paradise Lost. 

In our vain attempts to create a legislated heaven [notice the lower case] on earth, we have behaved in a manner equal to if not greater than the Saduccees and Pharisees, and we wonder why less people believe and why more people criticize.  If we have to pass laws, legislate, and force obedience to what we perceive as Christian doctrine and Christ’s teachings, if we rely upon that and make that our goal and ends [through support for the political parties, leaders, powers, and dominions], how is anyone supposed to see Christ’s Light?  How is anyone to see the light in you?  If you require force and coercion, what kind of Faith is that?  How are you demonstrating Faith in Jesus Christ?  Time to show AND tell.  By actions and statements, by grafting unto worldly and earthly leaders and forces, we SHOW those who do not believe, are lost in the forest or mire of the world, that there is no Faith, only laws.  That form of legalism is one of the many things Christ came to remove and replace. What possible worth can anyone see in a so-called Christianity riddled with government and earthly laws, rules, regulations, punishments, and restrictions?  Where is Free Will?  A just and valuable question from them, you say you believe in Faith and Free Will, yet at every point you restrict free will and deny faith through all these statements, rules…  How am I to see anything about those from you or the government?  How is Christ relevant to me or anyone if this is His world?  Are not all these methods, governmental rules, laws, restrictions…  attempts to make people throw on the costume and covering of Christ without any depth into the spirit, heart, and mind?  Do they not simply pigeonhole the individual into a form of obedience that mimics Christ-like behavior and lets people playact the role with no more substance than an actor on the stage?  Where is the actual acceptance of Christ?  The hard work to open the soul to Him?  Where is the light within kindled by Him and brought to full flame through a closer relationship with Him?  If we break it down, are we not saying, “Believe like us or die?”  Is this the way of Christ?  

One of the root questions has to be, how is Christianity and Christ relevant?  What have we done to make Him and it relevant and what have we done to make Him and it irrelevant?  It’s not sacrilegious to ask the questions because they should increase our strength in Him if we honestly explore and answer.

Want to make Christ and Christianity completely irrelevant?  Say you are a Christian nation. Besides being vainglorious and self-serving, it flies in the face of everything Christ said and taught. Where did Christ say he wanted to establish an actual nation?  A people, yes, a nation with leaders and a government of any sort, no.  Considering your answers above, where would relevance be found?  Other than the comfort of followership and simplistic obedience, why would anyone follow Christ based upon the answers above?  Where have His people shown and spoken in manners that would make Him relevant, real, and a light through the darkness?  

Another interesting behavior to explore relates to thin skinned responses to questions and whining or decrying if there is any sort of perceived persecution.  Where did Christ or His disciples whine, complain, and cry about their mistreatment?  Where did they demand apologies from or assault those who spoke ill of them or whom they perceived as having somehow wronged them?  When someone asks a question or challenges an aspect of your faith, to get angry, to shrug it off, to get upset or cry about unfairness or some aspect of self defense, where does that person see Christ and His light reflected in your responses, words, and actions?  How can they, the potential thorn in your side, see Christ through you and see quite literally WWJD?  If you respond in the manner of Christ, then you model Him and perhaps, just perhaps, that person or entity takes a step close to Him.  Think of how Rome was converted.  It wasn’t through getting angry, it was through sacrifice and modeling faith in Christ in all words and actions.  It was where the Word, through the followers as models and first missionaries, was both spoken and shown through their actions and responses that reflected their savior, Christ, even in the face of disaster and death.  It was through acts of kindness and love, respecting life and love, where these actions spoke even louder than the Word.  

Sadly, all too many people rely on talking heads who unjustly and falsely claim God’s favor, strength, or support on so-called news shows, talk shows, pulpits, or podiums.  They model the WRONG responses, the anti-Christian ways of dealing with problems, stress, and issues. Show me a person on any of these shows that demonstrates Christ-like behavior and shows others through the kindness and genuine concern in their words that they model Christ in as close to 100% of their words and deeds as possible.  Name the person(s) and provide specific examples that encompass all they do and say, that show the vast majority of them is of Christ.  

If you look around the world, which countries at least try to behave in a Christ-like manner towards its people and outward to the people of other nations?  Ask yourself if your country shows this so that the model of Christ, His life and words, is visible and sensed for all to experience and find comfort. The more you yelp about being a Christian nation, the less the folks on the edge or completely on the other side will believe you.  Why do you have to say it so much?  Can’t you show it?  Why do you have to make so many rules and regulations for others and yourself?  Can’t you show it?  

Seriously…  Why can’t you show it?  You know why?  Because it’s difficult and requires depth and breadth of faith.  It requires not attaching to things of this world, particularly principalities, powers, dominions, and thrones.  It requires tempered actions and words, altruism, and walking the walk, not just talking the talk.  Quite literally, many are called and few will follow, truly follow with all their being.  Most are lukewarm, even though they sign the loudest and pray the hardest on Sundays [masking the insecurity of their faith or lack of it, even though they might not have the capacity or self-reflection to recognize it].  It’s not easy. It’s not the path of least resistance and the short road.  It is the arduous journey, it is the steep climb, and it is the walk in darkness with just a glimmer of light, but as we fulfill our calling, as we follow in His footsteps, and when we put our trust in Him and humbly throw ourselves at His mercy, then we can begin to walk the walk.  Many claim to walk, but few have taken but one faithful footstep.  

My personal belief is we will see MORE people turning from Christianity in the next four years.  With no Christ-like models visible anywhere, with pulpits attaching themselves to principalities, powers, dominions, and thrones, and with people who usurp God and claim God’s powers unto the nation trying to force their visions of God upon the masses, those various evils turn people away, fail the people at every turn, and deny the power of Christ. More reasons should be obvious if the above questions were answered honestly and truthfully, with a heart open to Christ and a soul deeply inspired and covered by Him. 

Is the situation hopeless?  No.  Never.  Will it be darker before we can see the light?  Probably if history and the Bible teach us anything.  To stand up for what is right, true, and good, for what Christ would ACTUALLY do and say, and to treat others BETTER than you want to be treated, then we can take a stand, show our true heart, and help others to find the light and see Christ.  

Allow a perspective from someone else:

“What does not create authentic unity is the centralized power tactics of the Caesars, the Inquisitors, or any other patriarchs or paternalists. A monarchical decree is quicker than careful listening, but is usually wrong.  A quick majority vote may reach a decision more rapidly but without resolving the problem or convincing the overpowered minority, so that the conflict remains.” - John Howard Yoder, Body Politics, p. 70

“If reconciliation between peoples and cultures is not happening, the Gospel’s truth is not being confirmed in that place.”  - John Howard Yoder, Body Politics, p. 38

Food for the spiritual journey, for the soul to come to fruition…  

[mikejryan]

Yup...

[mikejryan]

P.L.A.T.O. and Stanford...

Several years ago, in the early stages of this whimsical idea of teacher accountability and how to score/grade/gauge it, I received an interesting phone call from the Advanced Placement folks asking if I was free for a few days to attend an educational scoring opportunity at Stanford. Sure, why not?

Flight paid for, so I was picked up by a limo at the airport, driven to a hotel right beside Stanford's beautiful campus, and given an itinerary...

The next morning, I, along with about 20 other educators, showed up in a small conference room in the Education Building. We were met by a team of researchers and Carol Dweck, the author of Mindsets, then a new book just recently on the shelves but with years of background and prep. They told us we were there to help them fine tune and gauge the potential of a teacher observation program funded by the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation. It was called: PLATO [and there were others around the nation working with different observational tools and criteria for each subject in school] - the Protocol for Language Arts Teacher Observation.

All of us were dumbfounded and resistant. Suspicions about APs involvement, how the tool might be used, why this tool... and more popped poured out from various of my fellow educators. Then one of the researches said something like this: "This is the train we're on, and we want to build the best tool we can to make the ride work." Then most of us shut up. We realized that this new buzz phrase of accountability was here to stay, even though it appeared that nobody who created it [politicians and special interest groups] and promoted the mythos behind it [all media on all sides of the political and opinion spectra] were ever held accountable for their failures.

I won't go into the details of the scoring mechanisms other that to tell you that we watched videos of classroom Language Arts teachers in grades 3-6 from around the nation. They were paid a small stipend to allow a 360 and a front-facing camera in their classroom to record their teaching for a specified number of days/weeks. It was not all classes, and these were volunteers who believed they were doing a good job and whom the administrators in their schools believed were above average educators.

While watching these videos we scored the teachers on various things like feedback, direct instruction... and so on. Anyway, I got a chance to see educators from around the US giving it their supposed best, and I was appalled. We were instructed not to judge but to score, and for the purposes of the scoring mechanism, I did that, but as a professional educator who takes the process and importance of education very seriously, it was disturbing. Of the 50+ educators I witnessed and scored, only two showed any signs of actually doing anything productive and meaningful/useful... Some were utterly horrifying in the failures. Besides all this, later I was drowned out of the program. Ha, and here was the reason: my scoring was off. Ha, I asked for feedback, one of the criteria in effective teaching and instruction, and NEVER got any from Stanford. Ha, ha, ha... We were scoring other educators on their ability to provide it, but we never received it to help us with scoring. Lord love the system that created that.

Anyway, it's been a long time and PLATO, has not, to my knowledge, hit the administrative halls of education,even though several aspects of the system had promise. Likely the Stanford researchers and their failures to provide feedback to the evaluators was part of it.

[mikejryan]

If you actually think yourself a patriot, and if you actually love the US [or at least what it is supposed to represent]... read on.

For any US citizen who even slightly calls himself patriotic, if you care even the slightest for veterans of foreign wars, and if you dare to know history kept out of textbooks, out of classrooms, but that is 100% accurate and true, then read the story of Maj. General Smedley Butler, USMC.

The most decorated US Marine in history, and deservedly so, he foiled a plot by the powerful and monied interests to launch a coup to remove FDR from the White House and replace him with a person more in line with Mussolini. The industrialists and bankers, the oil men and their wealth, also controlled major media back then, so Butler was ridiculed and erased from history by the mainstream, even though the congressional hearings into the coup attempt said he was truthful and these events happened, but it was 1933, and money talks, like it does today.

After this fail, the monied interests played the long game to eliminate the New Deal and to impoverish the people of the US and make them more and more dependent upon them. The proceeded to purchase politicians and political parties, all so they could remove protections for the common folks [things like unemployment insurance, universal education, social security, medicare and health care... and to privatize everything and leave almost the entire government in the hands of their greedy tentacles]. Over the last 90 or so years, they have managed much success [look at Project 2025, the GOP platform, look at how we treat education and how the word "entitlement" is used for social security and medicare when working people have paid into it their entire lives, look at how they have managed to divide us into the most idiotic camps, how they've propped up a character who will do exactly what they want and do it for cash and judicial leniency...].

If it weren't for another journalist, mostly lost to history because he spoke the truth and called them out, George Seldes, I would never have known the amazing man Major General Smedley Butler. I would not have known his story, as initially told to me through Seldes, then through Butler's own writings... I would never have read "War is a Racket" and understood how vile Douglas McArthur and George Patton were, and how they smashed veterans.

If you actually care about this nation, its future, and the honor and integrity it should have, and if you care about your fellows and despise cruelty and ignorance, then read Butler. Do it for the sake of us all.

[mikejryan]

The US has never done it alone...

Several things have bothered me for years, festering if you will in the face of cries of self-proclaimed exclusivity to patriotism, a US-centered view of the world and history, denials/removals/avoidance of facts in our actual history, this apparent need by some factors of US citizens and residents to promote a very particular view of the nation without recognizing the long and complex history of our relationships with other nations and cherry-picking or completely rejecting the existence of such things – this idea that we did it ourselves and it’s all about us, and finally the cries and screeches that we are either perfect the way we are or should revert back to some woebegone era in the past that is either fantasy or a perversion of actual facts and evidence. 

Please permit a few questions, some facts, and perhaps a comment or two related to these various important aspects of our nation. 

First a statement of opinion: No person, group, organization, media, political party, state, or entity has a monopoly on or exclusive and singular ownership of this very idealistic and sometimes very dangerous concept of patriotism.  Is patriotism support for your country no matter what?  If it commits atrocities and crimes against its own citizens or against neighbors, do we owe a debt of “patriotism” [by whatever definition you decide and like] to it?  Is patriotism unwavering support for a person or group within the nation that claims to be the most patriotic?  Related to the prior questions, is patriotism the pure and simple obedience to any and all aspects of, statements by, and decrees from the nation’s leadership?   Is patriotism questioning the institutions and systems, the citizens, the groups, the parties, corporations, and finding ways to do what we do and serve all the people well?  Is it continuing the ideas and messages of our founding fathers or is it using their general concepts to build a greater future?  Is patriotism somehow related to religion?  Why and on what basis?  Is patriotism of any value at all?  Is it just getting all bubbly and warm inside, perhaps even shedding a tear during the national anthem at a sporting event or simply supporting our troops?  Is patriotism necessary?

Looking at these questions and exploring them is vital to our future, if indeed we are to actually have one.  Is there only one definition of patriotism, and is it found in Webster’s Dictionary?  Is the definition more fluid and dynamic or it it solid and static?  The answers to these questions speak volumes about your thought processes, morality, ethics, and belief systems, how you view the nation and its people.  By whatever definition and system you come up with for yourself, I would hope you would at least ask these questions and then take your answer to the extremes of how it might affect the nation and its people, the future. 

Personally, I believe that people who have to throw up flags on their cars or trucks, have so many on their property [to make it like a shrine of sorts], border on idolatry in the Christian sense and lean to followership and blind obedience, but not the government per se but to a leader or entity they believe fulfills their definition of patriotism.  If you have explored these questions or similar ones and have decided upon a necessity for the term and its related ideas to which you ascribe, and you have taken the exploration seriously and not relied on some group, person, or entity to drive the definition into your head and heart, then I respect your decision [although I may not accept your definition].  We are not clones and copies, so variation will exist and is absolutely healthy for our future and development. 

Let’s debunk this idea that we formed our own country without any help from or allegiances to other nations or people, and that we have won all these wars or fought against terrorism all by ourselves, and while doing this dispel the incorrect ideas that we don’t have or don’t need allies and that we don’t need other countries for anything. 

Let’s begin with the Revolutionary War, our first president, and the founding fathers, who, while they stated outwardly the importance of not forming permanent allegiances formed many crucial ties and agreements with nations in order to survive and divide the nation from British rule.  Chief among our agreements, even before the first shots were fired, was with the French.  They supplied money, troops, weapons, and supplies to the Revolutionary Army but only after negotiations and agreements reached after some of our founding fathers spent time there.  We relied on the French and Spanish navies for support and defense against the British.  Spain also provided supplies and munitions to the cause of our rebellion against the British and by intervening in the West Indies, which was also in its own interests, and making New Orleans as a base for privateers and seizing the British posts in West Florida, thus seriously impacting all British shipping and supply lines.  The Dutch also provided much needed aid and went to war against Britain [opening another front], and the Czarina of Russia helped by obstructing British naval power… So how much of this do we study in our schools?  How much of this is accepted and considered in our present foreign policy and relations with the peoples of those nations?  How much should be?  Did we win the Revolutionary War all by ourselves?  The answer is NO. 

Oh, and that foreigner go home crap, well, please don’t forget that the Treaty [or Peace] of Paris signed after the Revolutionary War or War of Independence, allotted everything west of the Mississippi and everything south of a line which now creates Florida to Spain, so the Spanish owned it…  Just saying that when some folks in the US go off on or critique people of Spanish origin, well, they were quite literally here first.  In various ways, some of them very bloody, we took their homes. 

Okay, well certainly the Civil War was just all about us…  Nope.  What other countries helped the Union win the war?  Well, let’s start with the fact that no other nations recognized the Confederate States when they broke away, thus diplomatically and financially stranding and isolating the southern insurrectionist states.  So what?  Well, if these other nations, particularly the world powers of the day, decided to work against the Union, there was high probability that the war continues for years and years, hundreds of thousands more dead, and an uncertain outcome.  We also relied upon, yes, you guessed it, Britain for naval support to ensure the economic blockade of the southern states [as much as they were able due to their ships sailing all over the seven seas].  Oh, and here’s one for you.  Russia.  Yup, that place, pre-Lenin, sent naval vessels to help secure the northern states and support our small navy.  So did we do this ourselves?  Again the answer is no. 

The Spanish-American War, which engulfed the US in global conquests and issues because it involved not only Cuba and Puerto Rico, but also the Philippines and Guam, stretched our small military and navy to its maximum at home, near home, and far away.  Without agreements with France and Great Britain, and naval support primarily from Britain, we would have lost.  Period. 

Dammit…  Did we do anything without the help of other nations?  Well, honestly, no. 

Didn’t we save Europe during WWI and WWII?  Well, we certainly helped a great deal, but we often forget that the armed forces arrayed against our declared allies were often using US steel and manufactured goods in their military equipment, so when we fought in both wars not only were allied troops killed by US built machines, but later so young American lives were taken by materials formed in the US.  If we take the sinking of the Lusitania as the spark for our final decision to engage in WWI, then the submarine and the torpedo used to sink the ship contained hundreds of components either constructed by materials from or actually built in the US.  Given our history with Britain and France, complex though they were to this point, we kind of owed them something. 

In WWII, even with factions of people in the US supporting Hitler and Nazi Germany, chief among them the famous aviator Charles Lindburgh and the “America First” movement, when the Japanese [arguably not without some provocation] attacked Pearl Harbor, all our efforts went into defeating the Axis powers and so good ol’ Chuck and America First took a backseat to our revenge and re-establishment of deeper alliances with our European allies, France and Britain. 

Hey, how about more modern wars like Vietnam and Korea?  Gulf War I?  Afghanistan?  Iraq?  Present day war against terrorism?

Apparently we need a history lesson. 

Korea?  Yes, I know many countries were involved, but we did it ourselves, right?  We defended the Koreans from the nasty Chinese?  Well, besides the Koreans, you also had troops and support from Britain, Canada, New Zealand, Greece, The Philippines, Ethiopia, France, Belgium, and Colombia.  Some nations sent expeditionary forces: South Africa, Netherlands, Turkey, and Luxemburg.  Still other nations like India, Norway, Sweden, and Iran contributed support and medical personnel.  Hmmm, so not alone then.  We did not do it ourselves. 

Okay, screw you…  Vietnam was America’s War.  Ha, not so fast.  First it was the French-Indochina War, and we left the French out to dry after the end of the Korean War [they were plastered by US made artillery captured by the Chinese and shipped to Ho Chi Minh’s forces and then pounded by the best artillery the Chinese and Russians could provide].  Thank you Korean War…  However, when we got involved, we did it alone, right?  Nope.  Not even.  The South Koreans sent hundreds of thousands of troops and support personnel.  Other countries that provided troops?  Well, Australia, New Zealand, and Thailand with Spain, The Philippines, and Taiwan sending personnel.  This does not include UN troops used to man the DMZ…

Hopefully recent history does not forget the support from our NATO and other allies in the wake of 9/11, both militarily and otherwise in the War in Afghanistan against the Taliban.  If it does, well, all I can say is how sad that you have forgotten or neglected to consider all those who fought in support of our cause in that war.  At a peak, over 130,000 non-US troops served in the war, with countries like Denmark, Germany, Canada, Great Britain, Turkey, Italy…  the list is over 30 nations engaged in helping us on land and sea as well as in the air. 

Not as many helped in Iraq, but that was because the evidence was flimsy and in some cases deeply flawed, but we were on a mission [for what?  Since Saddam had nothing to do with 9/11 and spent much of his reign imprisoning or executing extremists and remember he fought a bloody war with Iran, our apparent sworn enemy], but still Denmark, Australia, Great Britain, Poland… and more helped out there. 

Heck almost everyone was involved in the Gulf War to kick Saddam out of Kuwait…  so that was a communal effort, even if it fired up Osama bin Laden and his band of idol-worshipping followers. 

Recently, to express and enforce our foreign policy and keep our assets and corporate interests safe and sound, we have maneuvered the African Union nations and troops to do the fighting in our stead, so we use proxy troops to keep our global business profits alive and well.

Double and triple dammit… 

So the story of American Exceptionalism, the Monroe Doctrine, our growth into a world power, our might and size, our borders and our ownership of the land, now and always [even before we struck for Independence], our doing it all alone, not needing anyone, and all that related garbage…  It’s got a lot of holes and a lot of questions. 

If you truly look at our history, from BEFORE the first shot of the War of Independence to the last shots fired in Iraq, we have never done it alone.  Between foreign policy, agreements with nations, actual physical support from nations, and nations declaring war on our enemies at the moment to take pressure off of us [albeit often to also benefit themselves], we have relied heavily upon the generosity and support of other nations, big and small.  We should not be so quick to judge or dismiss these nations or any nation out there in the world. 

[mikejryan]

Other than laziness, stupidity, or selfish reasons, why do we have and support political parties?

Why? Even our forefathers in the first United States realized and understood the dangers and detriments of party politics and fictitious, convenient, and deliberately divisive nature of and forces behind them. Nothing has changed for the better over the decades.

Do we follow them out of habit, a form of simple-minded followership or idolatry? Because mom, dad, my friend... followed this artificial entity, and so I owe [and swear] my allegiance to it?

Do we fall in line and mouth the same words and mindsets because it gives us all manner of pre-packaged "ideas" and "opinions" about things we could never really know anything about [as in the present economy, the various global conflicts... oil pricing... unless we had multiple degrees and ongoing studies with fingers directly on the pulse of one thing, we cannot know all, but just a vague notion of it, like if we have never been to Paris, France but have ideas and opinions about the city]? Is it because we don't have to think? It's already done for us by the media, the talking heads, attached like a barnacle to some parties and then the actual party itself?

Do we simply want to feed our narrowed cultural and societal biases by gravitating to a group that feeds our need for acceptance, our need to feel and be right [and righteous], and our intellectual laziness combined with our need for instantaneous all-at-once answers and black and white thinking?

This issue of making any issue or aspect of governing and life ridiculously simpleminded by bifurcating everything into black/white, yes/no... types of and pre-packaged responses, pseudo-thoughts, and vagaries eliminates all exploration and probing into the gray areas, where actual helpful and deeply thought out answers and solutions exist and common ground and reduced idiocy can be found. This oversimplification into party-prepped and exported black/white, right/wrong, yes/no, good/bad... presses people and systems into a narrow window and forces confrontation and foments anger and division.

Or do we follow out of a sad and personally unrecognized need for fulfillment and simple acceptance by others - the need to belong?

People make up all sorts of feeble and truly vacant reasons for sucking up to and into a political party, anything other than deep reflection on choices, morality, ethics, and helping each other. What if we abolished parties and affiliations and simple voted for the best person for the job - the most qualified, the most moral, most ethical... most experienced? The person who had genuine ideas and possible answers, who could represent our interests, not merely follow the dictates and whims of the crowd?

Just a thought... and some questions to ask ourselves when we look in the mirror.

[mikejryan]

...A totalitarian movement. Its disregard for facts, its strict adherence to the rule of a fictitious world, becomes steadily more difficult to maintain, yet remains as essential as it was before. Power means a direct confrontation with reality, and totalitarianism in power is constantly concerned with overcoming this challenge. Propaganda and organization no longer suffice to assert that the impossible is possible, that the incredible is true, that an insane consistency rules the world; the chief psychological support of totalitarian fiction -- the active resentment of the status quo, which the masses refuse to accept as the only possible world -- is no longer there; every bit of factual information that leaks through the iron curtain, set up against the ever-threatening flood of reality from the other, nontotalitarian side, is a greater menace to totalitarian domination than counterpropaganda has been to totalitarian movements.

Hannah Arendt, 1966... And again, as someone who lived through it, who studied it, probed its depths, witnessed its horrors and manipulations, we should stand up and take note of what is going on in the US and several other countries, as they turn more and more towards totalitarian leaders and more and more away from reality and facts.

[mikejryan]

How tempting it was, for example, simply to ignore the intolerably stupid blabber of the Nazis. But seductive though it may be to yield to such temptations and hole up in the refuge of one's own psyche. the result will always be a loss of humanness along with the forsaking of reality.

Hannah Arendt, 1955. From someone who lived through it, who excavated through the time and its aftermath, who was unafraid of truth and not doing things and writing to be popular but to explore and probe truth, to seek answers, and all for the sake of improving our condition and our future, words to live by in today's era. All too many slip easily into nonsense and forsake reality and truth for the sake of party or leader, and not for the first time [but hopefully for the last]. Let us not be tempted into the black hole of ignorance and stupidity, yielding to our baser instincts and following people and groups who spout evil and lies.

[mikejryan]

The easiest, laziest thing to do is to sort out youngsters by their test scores and forget the complications. Teachers should combat this laziness; they should be constantly on the alert for other attributes that promise to strengthen and guide performance in later life.... To the extent that we insist on sorting individuals out on the basis of one or two scores that sum up one dimension of human performance, we are constricting reality and denying the richness of human possibilities.... It cannot be emphasized too often that the greatest enemy of sound and fair selection processes today is the apparent simplicity and efficiency involved in assigning a single score (or pair of scores) to each youngster.

John W. Gardner, 1984. We've fallen deep into this rabbit hole, thanks more to the political powers that be and their desire to quantify and reduce education and learning down to a simple number, predigested and easily swallowed by the public, and one that guarantees elimination of creativity, innovation, and actual critical thought [the results of which we see in the insanity in this era and the ease with which people fall into moronic obedience and beliefs in the absurd].

[mikejryan]

Between 1920 and 1940, in the cultural complexes first of Italy, then of Germany, culture attempted a form of suicide. The civilized word was replaced by the club, the truth by the lie, the private thought by public error, reflection by obedience. Schooled patience was supplanted by unthinking haste, analysis by emotion, intricate social co-operation by outlawry, the rule of law by pogrom and confiscation and trial by ordeal. The reversion exposed its most dramatic symptom in the astonishing revival of torture and genocide.

E. A. Havelock, 1950. Our danger today is reflected all-too-clearly in this recent past. Because it was so close to his time and experience, Havelock in his studies and analysis, in his personal experiences in living in that era, has a perspective we have conveniently lost or twisted for political and party gain, for profit and power. We are on the precipice, and sadly so many people simply refuse to see and recognize it for what it is. Too late, they will see, but by then catastrophes could swallow up so many and so much.

[mikejryan]

If we indoctrinate the young person in an elaborate set of fixed beliefs, we are ensuring his early obsolescence. The alternative is to develop skills, attitudes, habits of mind and the kinds of knowledge and understanding that will be the instruments of continuous change and growth on the part of the young person. Then we have fashioned a system that provides for its own continuous renewal.... All too often we are giving our young people cut flowers when we should be teaching them to grow their own plants. We are stuffing their heads with the products of earlier innovation rather than teaching them to innovate. We think of the mind as a storehouse to be filled when we should be thinking of it as an instrument to be used.

John W. Gardner. 1981. Gardner was a Republican leader and the head of Health, Education, and Welfare under the Johnson administration, back when the two parties used to actually work together for the success of the nation rather than divide and conquer votes and entrench and abuse their positions for gain of party or leader. Gardner, for many reasons, his incredible wisdom and foresight high among them, remains a national treasure for me [and should be for us all]. In our world today, we see parties and states trimming education, reducing thought to pre-packaged tidbits of factoids and patriotic drivel, when we should be teaching them to think clearly and precisely, to create and innovate, and to not be held down by traditions or aspects of the past in attempting to forge a future for the nation and the entire planet. Their vessels should be open to grow and adapt, not shut and full of easily regurgitated quasi-/pseudo-facts.

[christology101]

Burning within, flowing outward.

It’s been on the edge of my tongue, so-to-speak, for many months, perhaps years.  Tonight, in deep prayer and meditation, asking and opening myself up to what God wanted from me, which direction He wanted me to go, He steered me back to writing and to helping set His people free from the bondage of this world.  

Here is what flowed forth in the 12 minutes of rapid typing and opening up to His Will, not mine:

I need more from you. If you are to fulfill yourself in me, in this mere mortal life, I need more from you.

I call you not to pass laws to force people to bend to your will, to what you perceive as My Will. This is the vilest form of legalism and allows you an excuse, a dark path away from Me and deeper into the world and its ways. Wherein did My Son, My Emissary and Missionary among you, who called you to me with Love and a beacon of Light and Truth, wherein did He exalt the need for laws or call on you to pass laws and attach to the world’s legal systems or try to somehow sway them to Me?  

I call you not to judge and heap judgment upon others, even in passing glances or in placing yourself in any way above others.  Did I not say that he who is least or last shall be highest or first?  In this life, every judgment, even the simplest ones that mark someone in your world’s heart and spirit, sets you farther from Me and farther from the Truth and Path.  

I call on you not to attach yourself to political powers, even at the smallest or seemingly harmless levels.  Beyond the idolatry it demonstrates, beyond the ease with which you have used this excuse throughout time, from the moment you demanded a king, an earthly leader, it says you replace Me and My Will, My Divine Power with an earthly one, even one feigning to rule and control in My name.  When you do so, you attach yourself to Rome, or you attach yourself to the Sadducees and Pharisees, no different from the those who fulfilled My Will in murdering My Son.  

I need more from you.

I call you to live every breath of your life through Me.  I call you to be a beacon of light and truth, to let My Light shine through your every deed and word, that you would shine out as models of love, caring, kindness, and all the wonders that are Me as shown clearly to you in My Son, Jesus Christ and in My Word before and then through Him.  

I call on you to be brave and to trust Me.  Have the courage and wisdom to trust Me.  Be emissaries of and for Me, and do not persecute others in My name, for that is the most vile form of judgment and Satan’s lie [in which he brings you deeper, in his sly ways, into the world and its ways, into the shams and feints that purport to be Me but are farthest from Me].  

I need you to be more. It is not easy, which is why so many fall off and away, so many seeds planted, but so many landing on rock, flowing away to the sea, or falling upon hard and infertile ground.  The Life is in Me, as it was, as it is, and as it always and eternally will be.  Be the Light, and do not mock Me by dimming the Light I placed within you and try, with every trial and tribulation to bring forth and rekindle and build upon so that the world may know Me through you, and you may know Me better through opening up to Me and turning away from the enticements of the world.  

Satan teases you, and he gets you to join in the world’s ways to try to make things more like he wants you to think I want.  Be warned, yet again, that the devil himself can speak with a sweet tongue, but he is always a deceiver.  He gets you to think that laws, that judgments, that world leaders of all manner are the way, the path, and the truth, whereupon nothing could be farther from My Truth, from My Will.  

Call upon me as I call upon you.  As I call you to be more, to be greater than the mere legalistic world, the simple solutions, and the world’s ways, if you ask for help, it is yours, joyously granted. Be the Light, not the shaft of darkness trying to reflect a dimmed and perverse version of Me and My Will.  Be more like my Son, in whom I was always, from the Alpha to Omega, most pleased.  Follow in His footsteps and be not afraid.  Satan’s greatest fear is that you listen to Me, and that you cast away his seemingly reasonable and godly enticements, and that through the way you walk in this life, the way you show the Spirit is within and living Truth is within you and radiating freely and openly, and that you demand more of yourself and I need more from you and that you become the powerful lamp to light the path for those lost in the world and its ways.  To walk girded against the evils and enticements all around you, to stand aside and in the holy place when the abominations start to grab power and dominions, this is the Light and will sustain you to BE the Beacon to all the lost.

Know that I am God. Trust Me, and allow Me to work freely in you and your spirit that you may show the way to all those who see or hear about you,

In those glorious smidgens of Light, each ray can rekindle the downtrodden faith in others and bring them to Me for eternity.  

I need more from you.

[mikejryan]

More I have, more I shall give and offer up.  

[mikejryan]

Men fear thought as they fear nothing else on earth - more than death. Thought is subversive, and revolutionary, destructive and terrible; thought is merciless to privilege, established institutions, and comfortable habits; thought is anarchic and lawless, indifferent to authority, careless to the well-tired wisdom of the ages. Thought looks into the pit of hell and is not afraid...  Thought is great and swift and free, the light of the world, and the chief glory of man.

Bertrand Russell, 1926.