Jan 22, 2010

Preservation and Prohibition

I'm having a bit of friendly exchange with a Lefty over at Big Hollywood regarding indoctrination of our school systems with Marxism. The attendant inability of young minds to properly digest the meaning behind the shining ideals is real, and recognizing the need for teaching logic and giving children to the tools for thinking, instead of indoctrinating their thoughts, is sorely lacking.

My Leftist debater has taken exception to my assertion that, "transparency is what is lacking on the Left's educational agenda. And our media. And our current presidency. Objectivity is the process of examining facts. If both sides would be transparent, objectivity would find its proper place in education, as a tool for exploration, not a guide for morality. When we have neither transparency nor objectivity in education, all we have is capricious moralizing."

Particularly, they snort at the idea that the Right never capriciously moralizes. Other than putting words into my mouth, they also totally missed the point of the word capricious. I have no problem with moralizing and it's not a dirty word or practice. It is another word for guidance.

However, the Left's agenda is to indoctrinate Socialism by other means. They dare not do it in a forthright manner as it repulses the independent human spirit, so they hide their moralizing within the sins against unaccountable gods; i.e., "the earth" or "energy resources" or vanishing species or climate change.

Moreover, I did not lightly employ the word "capricious". When the Right moralizes, if you will, it is not based on political expediencies or situational fads. The Right seeks to conserve what gives strength to individuals and countries. The Left's only counter to that is to claim that the Right seeks in some way to limit one's personal rights. It's a perspective that has real meaning, to differentiate between preservation and prohibition. A prohibition that seeks conformity of action is not the same thing as a preservation of value that conforms the will.

The Left has, in deed more than word, sought more control of individuals than any Conservative has ever dreamed or cared to. And where the pernicious political payoff is absent (abhorrent on both sides) it remains that the ideology of the Left is ever a thrall to the present expediency of controlling others in order to find meaning, and it is never about freeing others to create their own meaning.


PeggyU said...

Joan: I think I need to drag my friend Cheryl over here to read this. She is embroiled in a similar battle of words on the subject of indoctrination vs. education. This was very timely!

Francis W. Porretto said...

"I have no problem with moralizing and it's not a dirty word or practice. It is another word for guidance."

All very well, if done in a spirit of constructive criticism from one free mind to another. But "guidance with gun in hand," which is what moralizing becomes when backed by the power of government, is quite another matter.

Remember the Gospel According to John, Chapter 8.

Joan of Argghh! said...

Yes,exactly. The argument was about indoctrinating younger minds in an atmosphere of supposed education.

The problem is about the purposely obscured agenda, for fear of a mind thinking freely and openly about the proffered theories.

A well-armed mind is as important as a well-armed militia. As an old Mexican preacher used to say of his gun being next to his bible on the pulpit, "One is for the sons of God, the other is for the sons of bitches."

dick said...

Good folks like you have my admiration, as I'd just soon strangle em as try to talk some sense into em.
Just seems quicker.

patti said...

Bravo Joan!

ditto dick.

pamibe said...

Few can make a point as succinctly and elegantly, Joan!

And, yes... ditto Dick. ;-)