Indoctrinating Children To Hate Freedom Of The Press?

from the lovely dept

I just listened to a recent podcast from This American Life with the theme of "Kid Politics." As per usual, it's an entertaining hour, but the First Act struck me as especially interesting, given the current debates about Wikileaks and free speech. In that story, reporter and TAL regular Starlee Kine visits the Ronald Reagan library, where a bunch of school children visit and run through an exercise in which they get to simulate the invasion of Grenada and get to make all the decisions just like Reagan did. They're prepped for this with a bit of laughably propaganda-filled version of history (e.g. if we didn't invade Grenada, then Grenada, Cuba and Nicaragua would have invaded the US and made us communist). Then, they go through this simulation -- in which they're told there are "no right or wrong answers." However, it later turns out that if you answer differently than Ronald Reagan actually did, an angry buzzer buzzes and the students are told they're wrong -- if you answer the same as Reagan, a bell dings, and the students are told they made "the correct choice." In most cases, of course, the students are lead to the "easy" answer being exactly what Reagan did.

Then, suddenly, in the middle of the exercise, the evil press ruins everything, by revealing that two US carriers have been rerouted to Grenada, ruining the element of surprise. To be honest, if you look through historical reports of the invasion of Grenada, the press leaking this bit of information is pretty hard to find. Yet, in the Reagan Library, it's the key to the whole story. The element of surprise has been blown, and now the faux-Reagan needs to decide whether to move forward with the invasion. The "correct" answer, of course, is yes -- and woe is the poor child Reagan-stand-in who suggests that perhaps it's best to focus on just evacuating the US medical students in Grenada first, and consider an invasion at a later date when the element of surprise has returned.

But after the story plays out to the inevitable, rose-tinted-glasses-of-retrospect conclusion, the library staffer makes sure that the kids in the fake Oval Office know that everything would have worked much better if that darn press hadn't interfered. And while freedom of the press is discussed briefly, the woman encourages students to think about the value of self-censorship of the press, reinforcing it by asking the students if the press should have reported on the news, to which they all say no. She follows this up immediately by suggesting that the 19 soldiers who lost their lives in Grenada was really due to the press and their big mouths, with an amusing hedge about how "we can't directly say that's because of the press, but... did it help that they released the story?" The students (who had been divided into different groups -- including some who play "the press") are brought back together, and the child-politicians immediately start attacking the child-press for killing 19 soldiers. The child-press are suddenly being accused of being murderers, and are pressured into agreeing that the press should simply shut up when it has information like this.

It's really disturbing to listen to this.

In an era when we're having a number of important and active discussions about the importance of free speech and the freedom of the press, it seems quite unfortunate that school kids are being walked through an exercise, whose sole purpose appears to be to suggest that the press should never report on what a government is doing -- especially if it might involve activities that many considered to be illegal (as was the case at the time of the invasion of Grenada). I'm sure as the kids grow up, many will realize just how silly this particular lesson was at the time, but it still seems quite odd that the entire purpose of an exercise at the Reagan Library appears to be about attacking the press for actually doing what it's supposed to.


Reader Comments (rss)

(Flattened / Threaded)

  •  
    icon
    johnjac (profile), Jan 18th, 2011 @ 8:15am

    Why is TechDirt irresponsibly reporting on this?

    What if some harm comes to the library or worse its staff due this report?

    For Shame. For Shame.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  •  
    icon
    :Lobo Santo (profile), Jan 18th, 2011 @ 8:16am

    We need a new word!!

    What do you call a nation who pretends to be a freedom-loving libertarian democracy, and in reality is a propagandist fascist repressive oligarchy--who admittedly gives lip service to the ideals of freedom and attempts to maintain the illusion of freedom, the gilded cage, for those who can see no further than the pretty gold bars and satin pillows...

    Anyway, is there a concise word for describing such a thing?

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    •  
      icon
      iamtheky (profile), Jan 18th, 2011 @ 8:21am

      Re: We need a new word!!

      A prostitute nation.

       

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    •  
      icon
      Trails (profile), Jan 18th, 2011 @ 8:55am

      Dose of reality please!!!

      Sorry, but that's too extreme.

      Yes this is disturbing, and clearly white washing things which are, AT LEAST, open debate. The fact that it's inflicted on schoolchildren is disturbing.

      But, the US is not a facist a country. The fact that the press reported on the carrier movements without repercussions, and that Mike can report on this without repercussions speak to that.

      The library and its staff need to get smacked down, hard, for this. But cherry picking disturbing incidents and building some notion of a caged populace is, to say the least, an extreme exaggeration. Much like we expect of the library, let's keep it within the bounds of reality.

       

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

      •  
        icon
        :Lobo Santo (profile), Jan 18th, 2011 @ 9:24am

        Re: Dose of reality please!!!

        "But, the US is not a facist[sic] a country."
        Oh really?

        I've seen civil disobedience result in police brutality, on multiple occasions. If fact, if you do a little homework you'll learn that mildly covert violence is the SOP when it comes to any politically motivated disobedience, or just disobedience in general.
        Fascism:A political philosophy that advocates governance by a dictator, assisted by a hierarchically organized, strongly ideological party, in maintaining a totalitarian and regimented society through violence, intimidation, and the arbitrary use of power.

         

        reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

        •  
          icon
          Trails (profile), Jan 18th, 2011 @ 9:58am

          Re: Re: Dose of reality please!!!

          Sorry, no sale. There have certainly been actions of police against protesters, both recent and not so recent, that are deplorable. Inferring from that that the US is fascist is to look at the issue with blinders on.

          The US gov't is a huge, chaotic organization. Many parts of it are corrupt to varying degrees, others are violent or oppressive. While some of these parts, in isolation, could be perceived as having fascist tendencies, that is not enough to make the country fascist.

          The people who have lived through REAL fascism, or other forms of highly oppressive gov't, would most likely find your categorization highly rhetorical and more than a little spoiled. Fight the injustices, yes, but throwing around "isms" and cherry picking to demonstrate some greater conspiracy theory of fascist subversion of the US is more than a little ludicrous.

           

          reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

          •  
            icon
            jenningsthecat (profile), Jan 18th, 2011 @ 11:00am

            Re: Re: Re: Dose of reality please!!!

            I suspect that the people who "have lived through REAL fascism, or other forms of highly oppressive gov't" would tell you that this is often how it all starts.

             

            reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

            •  
              icon
              Trails (profile), Jan 18th, 2011 @ 11:39am

              Re: Re: Re: Re: Dose of reality please!!!

              Yet again, the US ain't there yet. I'm not suggesting complacency, only realism.

               

              reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

              •  
                identicon
                JEDIDIAH, Jan 19th, 2011 @ 7:15am

                Dose of reality please!!!

                Oh really?

                Next time I fly I might have to be put in the enviable position of deciding whether or not to allow the TSA to grope the private parts of my minor children or face arrest.

                No. We're already there.

                 

                reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

              •  
                icon
                weneedhelp (profile), Jan 19th, 2011 @ 10:59am

                Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Dose of reality please!!!

                10 steps to fascism
                1. Invoke a terrifying internal and external enemy
                2. Create a gulag
                3. Develop a thug caste
                4. Set up an internal surveillance system
                5. Harass citizens' groups
                6. Engage in arbitrary detention and release
                7. Target key individuals
                8. Control the press
                9. Dissent equals treason
                10. Suspend the rule of law
                Many many examples of this have been reported here on TD.

                 

                reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

        •  
          icon
          nasch (profile), Jan 18th, 2011 @ 7:38pm

          Re: Re: Dose of reality please!!!

          Or: "Fascism is a radical and authoritarian nationalist political ideology. Fascists seek to organize a country according to a particular nationalist strand of corporatist values and perspectives, with an emphasis on enforcing a collectivist form of political and economic organisation based on a tightly prescribed national identity."

          That doesn't sound too far off. Wikipedia also notes that there is a great deal of disagreement about what fascism means.

           

          reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

      •  
        identicon
        smith, Jan 20th, 2011 @ 11:45am

        Re: Dose of reality please!!!

        what you dont know will enslave you. you are part of the 80 to 90% of the population that is blind, programed, cut off from the reality of what is happening. I suggest you get in a plane fly to a country besides EU and start watching the news. Then call a friend state side and ask what he or she is hearing. Spend at least a few month out side the US and you will see how bad it is. you are owned and do not even know the half of it the more you know the more you will want to just deny to try and stay in your safe place. What has happened can not be reversed. To extreme you are not in America it slowly was sold right out from under you.

         

        reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

      •  
        identicon
        smith, Jan 20th, 2011 @ 11:46am

        Re: Dose of reality please!!!

        what you dont know will enslave you. you are part of the 80 to 90% of the population that is blind, programed, cut off from the reality of what is happening. I suggest you get in a plane fly to a country besides EU and start watching the news. Then call a friend state side and ask what he or she is hearing. Spend at least a few month out side the US and you will see how bad it is. you are owned and do not even know the half of it the more you know the more you will want to just deny to try and stay in your safe place. What has happened can not be reversed. To extreme you are not in America it slowly was sold right out from under you.

         

        reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    •  
      icon
      Seth (profile), Jan 18th, 2011 @ 8:57am

      Re: We need a new word!!

      The "United Crypto-fascist States of America"?

       

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    •  
      identicon
      Anonymous Coward, Jan 18th, 2011 @ 9:39am

      Re: We need a new word!!

      I think Ghost in the Shell has it right: Let's just starting referring to ourselves as the American Empire.

       

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

      •  
        icon
        Chargone (profile), Jan 19th, 2011 @ 2:33am

        Re: Re: We need a new word!!

        At least then the rest of the world can start calling you 'Imperials' and use the word 'American' properly again. (and the Canadians won't have to call themselves Antarcticans anymore, allowing the penguins to reclaim that one)

        It's not like anyone else has been using 'Imperials' since ww2 anyway.

        heck, even without it's global actions, the USA rules Half a freaking Continent. if Brazil can be an empire (and i believe it was/is at one point? or is that just my alternate history reading coming back to bite me?) and China can be an Empire... then the USA is certainly an empire. heck, it's bigger than Europe, and there have been legitimate empires There that included only 1/6th to 1/8th of that...

        so yeah... add in the tendency towards actions beneficial to achieving and maintaining a global hegemony (at least in theory... many failures there) and you'd be hard pressed to say it was Inaccurate, at least.

         

        reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    •  
      icon
      The Mighty Buzzard (profile), Jan 18th, 2011 @ 9:53am

      Re: We need a new word!!

      Ok, this story gives me as big a WTF as it does anyone else but "fascist"? Really? Pick an actual fascist regime, say Cuba, and compare before using this word in the future, please.

       

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

      •  
        icon
        :Lobo Santo (profile), Jan 18th, 2011 @ 9:56am

        Re: Re: We need a new word!!

        "carefully veiled fascist"?
        "terrifically disguised fascist"?
        I'll not apologize for saying exactly what I meant to say. I used a word the definition of which I am very aware, with the knowledge that it does, in fact, apply. However, you believe whatever you wish to believe. What saves everyday Americans from being shot in the streets is the need to maintain the illusion of freedom, nothing else.

         

        reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

        •  
          icon
          The Mighty Buzzard (profile), Jan 18th, 2011 @ 10:45am

          Re: Re: Re: We need a new word!!

          Wasn't asking for an apology, just a reality check. And holy crap, how screwed up is it when I get to call someone else bitter and cynical?

           

          reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

          •  
            icon
            :Lobo Santo (profile), Jan 18th, 2011 @ 10:47am

            Re: Re: Re: Re: We need a new word!!

            I spoke hastily, I think I do not believe that last sentence...

             

            reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

            •  
              icon
              The Mighty Buzzard (profile), Jan 18th, 2011 @ 10:54am

              Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: We need a new word!!

              You mean you fired something off on the Internet without thinking it through first? Oh no! You've destroyed my faith in the sanctity of Internet discourse for all time! Heh, hyperbole and sarcasm are fun. No worries, mate.

               

              reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

      •  
        identicon
        Enrico Suarve, Jan 18th, 2011 @ 10:25am

        Re: Re: We need a new word!!

        For an example of an 'actual facist regime' you pick Cuba?

        Semi communist yes but facist? Get real ;0)

        Those of us lucky enough to live outside the US have friends who regularly visit Cuba and despite being poorly run in some ways, Cuba still doesn't qualify as 'facist'.

        A hint for you, just because the US government doesn't like somewhere doesn't make them facists.

        Please try harder.

         

        reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

        •  
          icon
          The Mighty Buzzard (profile), Jan 18th, 2011 @ 10:49am

          Re: Re: Re: We need a new word!!

           

          reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

          •  
            icon
            crade (profile), Jan 18th, 2011 @ 1:37pm

            Re: Re: Re: Re: We need a new word!!

            I see facism kind of like a "Patriot Act" type of government. There is some crisis, and everyone must sacrifice their freedoms and all work together towards the good of the country, or some other specific goal. It's generally only temporary until the goal is reached.

             

            reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

          •  
            identicon
            Enrico Suarve, Jan 19th, 2011 @ 3:11am

            Re: Re: Re: Re: We need a new word!!

            OK - quotes from your second source

            There are some areas in which Cuba matches the definition but on the whole these tend to be the areas which Facism and Communism have in common


            "Fascists seek to organize a country according to a particular nationalist strand of corporatist" ... Nope

            "Though normally described as being on the far right, there is a scholarly consensus that fascism was also influenced by the left, but with a focus on solutions from the right".... Nope

            "They identify violence and war as actions that create national regeneration, spirit and vitality."... How many wars has Cuba been in again? Contrast that to say America in the same period...

            "Fascism rejects the concepts of egalitarianism, materialism, and rationalism in favour of action, discipline, hierarchy, spirit, and will.[20] They oppose liberalism (as a bourgeois movement) and Marxism (as a proletarian movement) for being exclusive economic class-based movements"... nope

            "Fascism perceives conservatism as partly valuable for its support of order in society" ... I think they shot or threw out the conservatives, so nope

            Italian Fascism and most other fascist movements promote a corporatist economy ... again nope

            Just because you don't like something doesn't mean you get to call it facist. (although in cases such as Sarah Palin and Rush Limburgh it's probably OK)

             

            reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

      •  
        identicon
        JEDIDIAH, Jan 19th, 2011 @ 7:17am

        We need a new word!!

        I dunno.

        This whole nonsense reminded me very much of Goebels or the sort of nonsense one was subjected to in the Soviet primary education.

        Perhaps "Aspiring Fascists" would be a more accurate term.

         

        reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    •  
      identicon
      matt, Jan 18th, 2011 @ 10:27am

      Re: We need a new word!!

      The United States of America, or U.S. is a bit more shorter if you want to be brief.

       

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    •  
      identicon
      TSO, Jan 18th, 2011 @ 10:40am

      Re: We need a new word!!

      You mean, *other* than "USA"?

       

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    •  
      identicon
      MrWilson, Jan 18th, 2011 @ 11:09am

      Re: We need a new word!!

      The Tea Party Republic?

       

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    •  
      identicon
      Anonymous Coward, Jan 19th, 2011 @ 2:02pm

      Re: We need a new word!!

      usalike

       

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    •  
      icon
      gene reed (profile), Nov 7th, 2012 @ 12:31pm

      Re: We need a new word!!

      MERCANTILIST

       

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  •  
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, Jan 18th, 2011 @ 8:21am

    If there was one thing America is good at (in fact, there is only one thing USA is good at) its propaganda. For the nearly 40 years of the Cold War, the US government effectively shut out all foreign view points with caustic and vitriolic hate speech. It only failed once the internet started up. And its only a matter of time till the internet gets its punishment for ruining USA's propaganda machine.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    •  
      identicon
      Johnny, Jan 18th, 2011 @ 8:50am

      Re:

      Honestly, why always attack the entire USA for the actions of some Americans (in this case the Reagan Library)? You do realize that the country is split over many issues? Hell even I can see that from over here in Europe. There is not one USA but many. And Mike Masnick who is reporting to us, is also American, who is clearly standing on what I consider to be the good side of the fight for freedom.

      It would be great if there were some Mike Masnicks in Russia and China too, or some European countries for that matter. People who dare to criticize their own government, not just the governments of other countries.

       

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

      •  
        icon
        Nastybutler77 (profile), Jan 18th, 2011 @ 11:53am

        Re: Re:

        It would be great if there were some Mike Masnicks in Russia and China too, or some European countries for that matter.

        While I agree with your comment, to be fair to those living in Russia or China, the reprocussions for Mike speaking out against abuses of power in the US are much less severe than those for speaking out in those two other countries. Those who do tend to have short careers.

         

        reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  •  
    icon
    Benny6Toes (profile), Jan 18th, 2011 @ 8:28am

    Maybe this explains it

    I remember hearing about some survey of American high school students conducted, I believe, shortly after the Iraq "War" began (maybe a year or two after). The big question in the survey was whether the press should have to get permission from the government to print articles, and the answer was, frighteningly, "Yes."

    I wonder how many of those kids had this same kind of visit to the Reagan Library.

    Whoever put that exercise together ought to be ashamed, but we all know they're not...

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    •  
      icon
      The Mighty Buzzard (profile), Jan 18th, 2011 @ 10:13am

      Re: Maybe this explains it

      Look, the Reagan library went about it in about the worst possible way but they do have a point. At no time, ever, should the press be allowed to report on military asset deployment until it is too late to help the enemy.

      Yes, I know this will piss off the 1st amendment absolutists even though the only exceptions I wouldn't shout about myself are quite specific. No reporting on troop movements/strength until cleared by the military and when printing/airing retractions you put them in the same spot/time that you printed/aired the original error.

      That aside, I really freaking hate it when educators try to teach politics. I've yet to see one make the attempt and not splash their beliefs all over the students. It's hard enough to figure out for the first time that pretty much everyone in politics are douchebags without having a grade depend on regurgitating douchebaggery.

       

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

      •  
        icon
        pjhenry1216 (profile), Jan 18th, 2011 @ 10:28am

        Re: Re: Maybe this explains it

        If the press knew about it, so did the enemy. How much worse would it have been if the US thought they were surprising the enemy when in fact the enemy knew the US was coming?

         

        reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

        •  
          icon
          The Mighty Buzzard (profile), Jan 18th, 2011 @ 10:42am

          Re: Re: Re: Maybe this explains it

          Did they? You base this on what, exactly?

           

          reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

        •  
          icon
          Benny6Toes (profile), Jan 18th, 2011 @ 12:15pm

          Re: Re: Re: Maybe this explains it

          What Buzzard said.

          Just because the press knows something doesn't mean anybody else does (especially an enemy in another country). In fact, I'd say that, usually, if the press nows something, then most of the rest of the country, if not the world, probably doesn't.

           

          reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

          •  
            identicon
            Lawrence D'Oliveiro, Jan 18th, 2011 @ 1:49pm

            Re: Maybe this explains it

            Just because the press knows something doesn't mean anybody else does (especially an enemy in another country).

            Letís put it this way: which one has the greater motivation, and funding, to uncover the secrets that your Government doesnít want revealed?

             

            reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

      •  
        icon
        Benny6Toes (profile), Jan 18th, 2011 @ 12:13pm

        Re: Re: Maybe this explains it

        I don't believe anybody is saying that having a free press and freedom of speech doesn't require them to take on a huge amount of personal responsibility and to think before speaking. Should the press have held the story back? Probably, but what if the American public didn't want the invasion to happen in the first place? Should they have held the story back then? would have still been irresponsible if they were trying to prevent what was coming? Maybe the writers and editors discussed and argued about publishing the story for hours days?) or maybe they didn't, but I'm fairly certain that they didn't stand up and say, "hey, y'know what? we should publish this because it will make it easier for the enemy to defend themselves." And I said something similar when Geraldo published an examination of the geology of the background in videos when the USA first went into Afghanistan. After that, every video had a sheet or some other device blocking the view of where the enemy was hiding. Should he have run the report? Probably not, but he dind't do it to make things more difficult for our armed forces or to put them in greater danger (the report, arguably, did both). And I still supported him running the report even if I called him a dumb ass every time he opened his mouth. Saying that the press should never report on military movements is far too encompassing. The free press is an important part of defending our rights. Limiting the press means drawing a line, but who gets to decide where the line sits? And how is would the line be to move?

         

        reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

        •  
          icon
          The Mighty Buzzard (profile), Jan 18th, 2011 @ 12:23pm

          Re: Re: Re: Maybe this explains it

          Limiting the press means drawing a line, but who gets to decide where the line sits? And how is would the line be to move?

          Congress, then the President, then the courts, same as everything else. The President could try an executive order but it would be easier to convince the courts if it came from Congress first. As to moving the line? Don't. If you need another section cut out you make it jump the same hurdles to be approved. Be extremely specific and state in the law that it applies to nothing not explicitly spelled out within.

           

          reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

          •  
            icon
            Benny6Toes (profile), Jan 18th, 2011 @ 12:50pm

            Re: Re: Re: Re: Maybe this explains it

            An executive order would hold no legal weight on a corporation; especially since there would be no penalty contained in an executive order. And any law passed by congress would be struck down by the Supreme Court ins about three second. Well, maybe not this Supreme Court, but it would be clearly unconstitutional.

            You seemed to ignore the rest of my reply though. I can't disagree strongly enough that the press shouldn't be limited by statute when reporting on the government. Should the press carefully consider the repercussions of publishing certain stories? Absolutely, but they already do.

             

            reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

            •  
              icon
              The Mighty Buzzard (profile), Jan 18th, 2011 @ 1:30pm

              Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Maybe this explains it

              I was thinking more of "in theater" reporting for the executive order angle. I'm not so sure on the congressional angle though. Courts have a pretty long history of allowing the Executive to temporarily suspend certain rights in regards with military action, declared war or not, and Congress being on board certainly wouldn't hurt the Executive's chances in court.

              I didn't reply on the rest because it was mostly either a simple difference of opinion or I didn't disagree.

               

              reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

      •  
        icon
        nasch (profile), Jan 18th, 2011 @ 7:46pm

        Re: Re: Maybe this explains it

        One problem with that is that somebody would then have discretion to determine what is and what is not permissible speech. That's a big first amendment no-no. I guarantee the rule would be abused instantly, extensively, and indefinitely to supress speech that would not actually endanger anyone.

        Another problem is that it could never actually prevent speech, only punish it after the fact. So you could question how effective it would be, at anything other than sending journalists to jail anyway. And do we really want to become a nation that puts journalists in jail because they report on things we don't want them to?

         

        reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

      •  
        identicon
        JEDIDIAH, Jan 19th, 2011 @ 7:22am

        Bullies don't need the element of surprise.

        > Look, the Reagan library went about it in
        > about the worst possible way but they do
        > have a point. At no time, ever, should the
        > press be allowed to report on military asset
        > deployment until it is too late to help the enemy.


        Oh Please.

        Unless we are planning on attacking the Russians or Chinese, there simply isn't any consequences of the enemy knowing we're coming. Watch a modern war documentary sometime. It will help give you a clue.

        This was GRENADA.

        If that's not a cake walk for us then we need to do some serious soul searching. It doesn't even matter if we give them our entire battle plan ahead of time. It's like an adult bullying a toddler.

         

        reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

      •  
        icon
        gene reed (profile), Nov 7th, 2012 @ 12:42pm

        Re: Re: Maybe this explains it

        "The Governments War Powers Under The Constitution Of The US"
        By William Whiting, Special War Counsel to Lincoln during The Civil War
        @amazon books.

         

        reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

      •  
        icon
        gene reed (profile), Nov 7th, 2012 @ 12:47pm

        Re: Re: Maybe this explains it

        "The Governments War Powers Under The Constitution Of The US"
        By William Whiting, Special War Counsel to Lincoln during The Civil War
        @amazon books.

         

        reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  •  
    identicon
    Eri, Jan 18th, 2011 @ 8:35am

    Poor kids. I can't help it but be glad that my school social program activities were limited to lighting candles for the thousands of kids killed during the Holocaust. Not as educational, but pretty pacific and non-controversial. Imposing freedom of speech issues on children is gross. Making choices in this sort of matter? Come on, give them some time to assimilate and find their own opinion. This pattern of providing the right answer can hardly facilitate the development of thinking individuals.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    •  
      icon
      :Lobo Santo (profile), Jan 18th, 2011 @ 8:42am

      Re: Children

      "Imposing freedom of speech issues on children is gross. Making choices in this sort of matter? Come on, give them some time to assimilate and find their own opinion."
      From religion--the acknowledged authority on brain-washing:
      Train up a child in the way he should go: and when he is old, he will not depart from it.
      -Proverbs 22:6

       

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

      •  
        icon
        Chargone (profile), Jan 19th, 2011 @ 2:46am

        Re: Re: Children

        ... does it really count as brainwashing when it's a description of fact?

        it is the nature of children that they learn from their parents, and that such experience forms the basis of how they make decisions for the rest of their lives... or at least part of it.

        What you teach them doesn't change this.

        it's like saying a lioness teaching cubs to hunt (if i'm getting the biology wrong here, adjust it as necessary). is it brainwashing? and, if so, is it better or worse than Not teaching them to hunt, given that, as carnivores, they'd then starve, or at least not eat well and/or get injured more than necessary.

        i get so sick of this little snippit showing up like it's evidence of absolute evil or something... it's in the book of Proverbs for a reason...

         

        reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    •  
      icon
      jenningsthecat (profile), Jan 18th, 2011 @ 9:29am

      Re: Poor kids indeed!

      You say that this "can hardly facilitate the development of thinking individuals". Your first mistake is in assuming that the purveyors of this crap WANT to develop "thinking individuals". The whole setup is pure propaganda, and its purpose is to indoctrinate children into uncritical acceptance of, and mindless acquiescence to, authority in general and the U.S. government in particular.

      The desired result is "The Land of the Free, (as long as you accept OUR definition of 'Free'), and the Home of the Brave, (as long as 'Brave' means risking your life for the money-making interests of our corporate overlords)".

      Constitution? We don't need no stinkin' Constitution!

       

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  •  
    icon
    Dark Helmet (profile), Jan 18th, 2011 @ 8:38am

    It gets worse...

    If you start digging into the way that big industry in America has infiltrated educational groups that set agendas and curriculum, not to mention hawk their wares within the school walls, what's going on at the Reagan Library is probably the least of our concerns.

    "I don't want a nation of thinkers, I want a nation of workers." -- John Rockefeller

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    •  
      identicon
      Chosen Reject, Jan 18th, 2011 @ 12:43pm

      Re: It gets worse...

      When you dig into the way that big industry has infiltrated educational groups, what you'll find is that big industry didn't infiltrate the educational groups, they created them.

       

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    •  
      icon
      Rose M. Welch (profile), Jan 18th, 2011 @ 12:49pm

      Re: It gets worse...

      This is one of the major reasons that we homeschool. Even now, my 9-year-old can reason better than many of the 20-year-olds I know. /sadface

       

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

      •  
        identicon
        Huph, Jan 18th, 2011 @ 1:46pm

        Re: Re: It gets worse...

        You know a lot of 20-year-olds?

         

        reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

        •  
          icon
          Rose M. Welch (profile), Jan 18th, 2011 @ 2:01pm

          Re: Re: Re: It gets worse...

          Yes.

           

          reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

          •  
            identicon
            Huph, Jan 18th, 2011 @ 2:20pm

            Re: Re: Re: Re: It gets worse...

            And these 20-year-olds can't out reason a 9-year-old?

            In what capacity do you have contact with 20-year-olds?

             

            reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

            •  
              icon
              Rose M. Welch (profile), Jan 18th, 2011 @ 2:40pm

              Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: It gets worse...

              Normal interactions, in which conversations are conducted, on a myriad of topics. Unfortunately, these people have very little skill in critically examining anything, while my 9-year-old has quite a bit of skill in critically examining ideas and topics.

              Also, Huph, I'm not very far from 20-years-old, myself.

               

              reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

            •  
              icon
              Rose M. Welch (profile), Jan 18th, 2011 @ 2:41pm

              Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: It gets worse...

              To be fair, she can reason alot better than most of the 60-year-olds I know, so it's not an ageist issue.

               

              reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  •  
    icon
    Chris in Utah (profile), Jan 18th, 2011 @ 8:39am

    Laughable?

    Remember 10/10? http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aXo2L58C8a4

    Yeah it backfired badly but this increasingly becoming the standard operating procedure for propaganda campaigns. Cant make it settle? Go for in your face!

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  •  
    icon
    Overcast (profile), Jan 18th, 2011 @ 8:48am

    It's amazing how complacent people get about Freedom...

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  •  
    icon
    RikuoAmero (profile), Jan 18th, 2011 @ 8:55am

    Why are Americans so interested in politics

    Just to comment on this, but here in Ireland, no-one gives a sh*t about politics. There was never any of these class elections when I went to school - there were a couple of brief lessons on the legal powers of our president (sign bills into law, c-in-c of armed forces) but other than that, nothing.
    I wish something like this happened here. Say a scenario of the 1916 Easter Rising - and a big wrong beep if you say, as Pearse, "No, we won't run around and proclaim an independent republic, even though the majority of Ireland don't want to fight for it"

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  •  
    icon
    Seth (profile), Jan 18th, 2011 @ 9:00am

    If the primary of objective of government run school system is to indoctrinate children to worship the state, and I submit that it is, then this story comes as absolutely no surprise.

    http://www.schoolsucksproject.com/

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    •  
      identicon
      SkDo, Jan 18th, 2011 @ 11:50am

      Re: Guvmnt Run Skools

      Yeah, only a Charter School, run by Xtian fundmentalists sucking public taxpayer money off into the church coffers could happily endorse this brainwashing and obvious propaganda campaign of our children. Yeah, look towards "waiting for superman" to endorse a privatized school system with tax-revenue dollars that will openly and honestly embrace this kind of blatant "serve your corporate master" rhetoric.

       

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    •  
      icon
      gene reed (profile), Nov 7th, 2012 @ 12:56pm

      Re:

      ever read charlotte izerbyts book "the deliberate dumbing down of america"? she was in reagans admin as he promised to take down dept of education. instead he signs a treaty effectively merging the country's education system w/russia. funny how this story involved the reagan library.

       

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  •  
    icon
    Chris Rhodes (profile), Jan 18th, 2011 @ 9:05am

    Not The Only Example

    People complain that our public school system is ineffective at teaching our nation's children, but I'm beginning to think those people are mistaken about what the school system is intending to teach.

    They fail at teaching reading, writing, and arithmetic, to be sure, but if their goal is teaching children blind obedience to authority, they are very much succeeding.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    •  
      identicon
      Anonymous Coward, Jan 18th, 2011 @ 9:16am

      Re: Not The Only Example

      Yes, because teenagers are the most agreeable, studious and hard working people out there.

       

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

      •  
        icon
        Chris Rhodes (profile), Jan 18th, 2011 @ 9:25am

        Re: Re: Not The Only Example

        Part of the reason teenagers are such a disagreeable lot, in my opinion, is that they have the life systematically choked out of them by the school system, which is bent on teaching them "respect" for people in authority instead seeking out and fanning the flames of any sparks of individuality.

         

        reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

        •  
          identicon
          Anonymous Coward, Jan 18th, 2011 @ 10:34am

          Re: Re: Re: Not The Only Example

          I'd like to think that there is a silver lining to that educational approach. The kids that resist and prevail will learn that a good government is defined as one that doesn't intersect with their lives at all because certainly whenever it does it results in misfortune and injustice. That's how it worked out for me anyway.

           

          reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

          •  
            icon
            Chris Rhodes (profile), Jan 18th, 2011 @ 10:42am

            Re: Re: Re: Re: Not The Only Example

            I hope so.

            I'm not really certain, however, that it doesn't turn out that even most of the "rebels" end up intellectually neutered in the end.

            I feel rather lucky that I had exposure to a mix of educational techniques when I was growing up, including home-schooling, private schooling, and public school. Public schooling was by far the worst.

             

            reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

            •  
              identicon
              Huph, Jan 18th, 2011 @ 2:28pm

              Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Not The Only Example

              I don't know about this anti-public school sentiment. Sounds pretty pretentious to me. I went to public school, although I'm 29, so maybe I was attending more recently than many here. I learned pre-calculus and trigonometry with no problems, aced genetics and physics, I learned Latin and French, I can program in C++, I performed Shakespeare, I built an underwater simulator, played elaborate semester-long strategy games in order to learn about the Civil War/Roman Empire (That was a cool teacher), learned photography, took art classes, I played sports, was part of student governments, was taken on field trips to observe proceedings at the state capital, I even took one class that was solely for self-motivated research and required a thesis; a pretty heavy task in high school (I did my two semesters on the Geometry of Origami, and a theory on how to collect and catalog recorded audio of personal anecdotes about life during wartime)... do I need to keep going on?

              And this was at a public school in Mississippi, a place which does not rank high in standards. I think I still managed to get a good education. I had college credits before graduating high school, and I wasn't even anywhere near the top of my class.

              Am I the only one who had a positive experience in public school? I also went to a private elementary school for a few years, but I much preferred the public system. Private schools, in the southern US at least, are too small, leading to a lot of close-minded clique-ishness in the educational and social atmosphere. And home schooling down there is mostly done by very devout religious people. The variety of opportunity and people afforded me by public education was much more vibrant.

               

              reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

              •  
                icon
                Rose M. Welch (profile), Jan 18th, 2011 @ 2:56pm

                Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Not The Only Example

                I don't know about this anti-public school sentiment. Sounds pretty pretentious to me.

                What makes you think it sounds pretentious?

                I went to public school, although I'm 29, so maybe I was attending more recently than many here.

                I'm younger than you are, so my experience is equally up-to-date. :)

                I learned pre-calculus and [lots of awesome stuff that's practically unheard of in the average public school]...

                I went to one of the best high schools in my state and it didn't have any of those things. Your school sounds seriously awesome, and I'd like to know the name of it, and what year you graduated.

                In addition, most of those things are not listed in the Common Core Standards (which are the standard in 40 out of 50 states, including Mississippi), so it's pretty doubtful that the average public-schooler has the opportunity to take those classes, or would even be ready for them if they were offered.

                Am I the only one who had a positive experience in public school?

                It's not about having a positive experience. It's about having an educationally valuable experience.

                And home schooling down there is mostly done by very devout religious people.

                Do you mean in Mississippi? What makes you think that? Less than 40% of American homeschoolers do so for religious reasons, and those statistics are even mirrored here in Oklahoma (the proverbial buckle of the Bible Belt).

                The variety of opportunity and people afforded me by public education was much more vibrant.

                Really? That's strange, because in most states, including Mississippi, your classmates are drawn from your neighborhood, meaning that they're your social and financial equals. Not much variety there.

                 

                reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

                •  
                  icon
                  Almost Anonymous (profile), Jan 18th, 2011 @ 3:02pm

                  Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Not The Only Example

                  I can vouch for pre-Calc in high school, it was an AP course at my Mississippi high school, along with a decent bundle of other pretty good AP college prep courses.

                   

                  reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

                  •  
                    icon
                    Rose M. Welch (profile), Jan 19th, 2011 @ 6:56am

                    Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Not The Only Example

                    Yeah, pre-calc isn't that odd, which is why I wrote 'pre-calculus and [lots of awesome stuff that's practically unheard of in the average public school]...'. The pre-calc is separate from the awesome stuff. :P

                     

                    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

              •  
                identicon
                Joe Blackboard, Jan 18th, 2011 @ 2:57pm

                Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Not The Only Example

                I never got to do any of those things. Living in a small town in the Great Plains doesn't lead to the kind of funding where any of that is possible. It really was just Reading, Writing, 'Rithmetic for me. All I had to do was show up and pay attention.

                I graduated with a great education, knowing plenty to get me started in university. Maybe it was the teachers, maybe it was me, maybe it was my parents, maybe it was all three, but either way, my school turned out to achieve what it set out for me.

                 

                reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

        •  
          icon
          Rose M. Welch (profile), Jan 18th, 2011 @ 12:51pm

          Re: Re: Re: Not The Only Example

          Agreed.

           

          reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

      •  
        icon
        freak (profile), Jan 18th, 2011 @ 10:33am

        Re: Re: Not The Only Example

        I would say that yes, yes they are. They only think they're being rebellious by being slightly off the strict path enforced by the school environment.

         

        reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    •  
      identicon
      Anonymous Coward, Jan 18th, 2011 @ 10:07am

      Re: Not The Only Example

      I have a question for you then. Where do children go after their brain-washing session? You mean to say that parents can't undo whatever it is you think the schools are doing to indoctrinate children.
      Mike talks about hyperbole from the govt and you guys eat it up, but no one calls any of you on it. No wonder reform never goes anywhere. Its always an "us vs them" argument with you guys.

       

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

      •  
        icon
        Chris Rhodes (profile), Jan 18th, 2011 @ 10:36am

        Re: Re: Not The Only Example

        "Where do children go after their brain-washing session?"

        Society?

        "You mean to say that parents can't undo whatever it is you think the schools are doing to indoctrinate children."

        Of course some can. I think the more generations go through the system, however, the less likely it is that a parent was not subject to the same effect. I still remember all the bullshit flag-waving revisionist history they forced down my throat when I was a kid; I'm still busy unlearning it.

        "Its always an "us vs them" argument with you guys."

        When one party in a negotiation declares that they have granted themselves control over every aspect of your life, and that they have all the means at their disposal necessary to carry out their decrees by force, then there's not much middle ground left.

        I guess you can try negotiating with a mugger when he puts a gun to your head and tells you to give him your wallet, but I would consider that an "us vs. them" scenario.

         

        reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

      •  
        icon
        Robert Ring (profile), Jan 18th, 2011 @ 10:45am

        Re: Re: Not The Only Example

        "Its always an "us vs them" argument with you guys."

        Oh, the irony.

         

        reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

      •  
        icon
        Chargone (profile), Jan 19th, 2011 @ 2:53am

        Re: Re: Not The Only Example

        "Its always an "us vs them" argument with you guys."

        is this irony? I'm never really sure if I'm using that word right. sarcasm's essentially deliberate irony, right?

         

        reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

      •  
        icon
        Rose M. Welch (profile), Jan 19th, 2011 @ 6:57am

        Re: Re: Not The Only Example

        You mean to say that parents can't undo whatever it is you think the schools are doing to indoctrinate children.

        I'd like to point out that parents generally have three to four hours with their kids, during which they're cooking, eating, bathing, doing homework and housework, and so on. Schools have eight hours with their kids. That's a pretty significant imbalance there.

         

        reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  •  
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, Jan 18th, 2011 @ 9:23am

    THINK ABOUT THE CHILDREN!

    Hopefully they can't visit techdirt, otherwise the get indoctrinated in the other direction.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    •  
      icon
      Nastybutler77 (profile), Jan 18th, 2011 @ 12:02pm

      Re:

      Hopefully they can't visit techdirt, otherwise the [sic] get indoctrinated in the other direction.

      And what direction is that exactly? When has Techdirt ever expressed a political leaning? I guess you think anyone who respects the Bill of Rights is out of line. What do you have against freedom exactly?

       

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

      •  
        icon
        Chargone (profile), Jan 19th, 2011 @ 2:54am

        Re: Re:

        well, if one calls 'away from stupid' both a 'leaning' and 'political' then technically, yes, probably.
        *tilts his laptop for a different version of leaning, ponders methods of inserting politics into it*

         

        reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  •  
    icon
    harbingerofdoom (profile), Jan 18th, 2011 @ 9:24am

    the entire thing sounds like a smattering of revisionist history with a generous helping of DERP!.

    its more likely that they are just trying to raise regan to demagogue status and the bit about the press is where the revisionist history comes in. the press was not doing anything they had not done in reporting other military conflicts before that point from what i remember.


    oh, in full disclosure, this is presented by someone who thinks very highly of regan. great president... but seriously folks, please no demagoguery k?

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  •  
    icon
    Hugh Mann (profile), Jan 18th, 2011 @ 9:39am

    I wonder...

    ... if the slant here counteracts the slant there such that we get to some neutral ground in the middle?

    The press is not made up of magical creatures who act only out of noble purposes. They are people who have bills to pay, bosses to satisfy, egos to feed and all sort of other things that are also apt descriptors of the evil government and corporate people that get complained about here.

    I certainly do not trust that the press is acting in my best interest, especially since I don't get to vote for them, or call them onto any sort of official carpet when they act irresponsibly. You can't impeach a reporter or vote him out of office at the next election. Indeed, we are often told that we have to put up with the extremes of the press in order to preserve the ability of the more responsible members of that profession to do their job (I don't really buy this).

    I think the press should be viewed with at least as much skepticism as the government they are reporting on.

    HM

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    •  
      icon
      Mike Masnick (profile), Jan 18th, 2011 @ 11:08am

      Re: I wonder...

      The press is not made up of magical creatures who act only out of noble purposes.

      No one claimed otherwise. Why would you even say that?

      I certainly do not trust that the press is acting in my best interest, especially since I don't get to vote for them, or call them onto any sort of official carpet when they act irresponsibly. You can't impeach a reporter or vote him out of office at the next election.

      Nor does the press tax us or send us to war. Seems like an important point.

      I think the press should be viewed with at least as much skepticism as the government they are reporting on.


      Of course they should. But that's not what was being taught here. There was no question of skepticism about the press (and, let's face it, we've been quite vocal on skepticism about mainstream press reporting).

      You're conflating two separate issues: the quality of reporting and freedom of the press. I'm not sure why you would do that.

       

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    •  
      identicon
      David, Jan 19th, 2011 @ 10:35am

      Re: I wonder...

      You think you donít vote for the press? The ones you really donít vote for are the politicians. In politics, you cast one vote, and that politician has absolute power from then on. In the free market, you vote every time you choose one competitor over the other. If you donít like one journalist, you read another. People are constantly voting over and over again by choosing which sources they will read (and pay), and which they will ignore. Thatís competition, and itís what keeps competitors in check, because they want you. This is far more democratic than when you ďvoteĒ for politicians. Imagine if you actually had to vote for the press. It would be more like the Soviet Union or Nazi Germany, where the elected officials decided what the ďnewsĒ was.

       

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  •  
    identicon
    TDR, Jan 18th, 2011 @ 9:40am

    Oh, heaven forbid we actually teach our kids to believe in something, Lobo. We can't have that, now can we? No, better the phobiac panic reaction to any kind of faith and complete, total misinterpretation of what is quoted merely for the sake of slamming without reference or context. [/sarc]

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    •  
      icon
      :Lobo Santo (profile), Jan 18th, 2011 @ 9:52am

      Re:

      Anything which advocates blind acceptance without evidence is obviously a form of brain-washing, mind control, hokum, bunk, bullshit, etc, you get the idea.

      It's sad to see such practices continued in an allegedly "thinking" society. Obviously, this is because our education is so amazingly poor that grown people need a mental crutch in dealing with the unexplainable...

       

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

      •  
        identicon
        TDR, Jan 18th, 2011 @ 12:21pm

        Re: Re:

        Prove it, Lobo. You believe your own theory but are unwilling to admit it's based on misinterpretations and misrepresentations. Anyone who looks into the faith honestly understands that it never once asks for belief without question - Thomas' doubt is not rebuked, for instance, but simply addressed with the evidence he seeks. And in the letters the apostle John wrote, he explicitly urges believers to test first before believing what people say. Does that sound like blind obedience to you?

         

        reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

        •  
          icon
          Rose M. Welch (profile), Jan 18th, 2011 @ 1:07pm

          Re: Re: Re:

          Does that sound like blind obedience to you?

          Should I counter your Bible stories with the story of Lot's wife, or just with the fact that the majority of Christians do, in fact, advocate blind acceptance without evidence? Your choice. :)

           

          reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

          •  
            icon
            Chargone (profile), Jan 19th, 2011 @ 3:01am

            Re: Re: Re: Re:

            let's add in the part in the new testament (... i hate failing at references) about 'test everything, and keep that which is good'

            and Christians are humans.
            humans are things.
            90% of everything is crud
            the vast majority of humans, Christian or otherwise, are pretty darn stupid, at least collectively, and/or lazy. it's more efficient to get someone else to do the thinking about everything that's not in your immediate day to day for you.
            most humans are just generally predisposed towards blind obedience in anything that doesn't directly harm them in immediate and visible ways.

            ... efficiency is NOT the best option when the less efficient process has a better output and you can afford the resources to maintain the less efficient method. (this applies to thinking... and to the various content industries too, actually. problem is they Can't afford the inefficiency anymore, and their definition of a better output was/is skewed. that's a bit off topic though)

             

            reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    •  
      icon
      Punmaster (profile), Jan 18th, 2011 @ 11:28am

      Re:

      "Oh, heaven forbid we actually teach our kids to believe in something, Lobo."

      I'd rather have them taught to think and verify than simply believe. They'll be better citizens that way. :)

       

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

      •  
        icon
        Chargone (profile), Jan 19th, 2011 @ 3:02am

        Re: Re:

        think, verify, and having verified ... then what?
        verification of truthfulness leads to belief.

        at some point you have to assume Something to be correct to form the basis of your frame of reference or it is literally impossible to prove anything. (including this statement. what's that you say, a recursive loop? exactly.)

         

        reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

        •  
          icon
          Chargone (profile), Jan 19th, 2011 @ 3:04am

          Re: Re: Re:

          err, not that critical thinking and actually checking out the facts are a Bad thing. they're a huge help and a lack of doing that is a major problem in todays world. this doesn't actually conflict with my above point though. ... except maybe situationally.

           

          reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    •  
      icon
      Rose M. Welch (profile), Jan 18th, 2011 @ 12:56pm

      Re:

      ...heaven forbid we actually teach our kids to believe in something...

      Yes, exactly. Heaven forbid that we teach them what to think. Instead, we should teach them how to think.

      ...better the phobiac panic reaction to any kind of faith...

      This post wasn't about faith, so why would a potential reaction to it's mention be relevant?

      ...complete, total misinterpretation of what is quoted merely for the sake of slamming without reference or context...

      What was quoted and how was it misinterpreted? In addition, how do you know the motive of the person who quoted whatever it was that was quoted?

       

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

      •  
        icon
        Chargone (profile), Jan 19th, 2011 @ 3:09am

        Re: Re:

        ugh. techdirt's being weird on me. hope this doesn't cause a triple post.

        further up thread, Lobo said the following

        "From religion--the acknowledged authority on brain-washing:
        Train up a child in the way he should go: and when he is old, he will not depart from it. Proverbs 22:6"

        TDR is just failing at using the reply feature.

         

        reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  •  
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, Jan 18th, 2011 @ 9:41am

    Educating Children To Hate The Press

    There fixed your logic problem.

    As for hating a bunch of lying hate filled propagandist that emotion is not strong enough.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  •  
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, Jan 18th, 2011 @ 9:44am

    I guess school must still be out. Dunno why some people are trying so hard to provoke others. Teenagers... Anyways, I agree with Mike, it does seem weird to try and push such topics on kids. Last thing they should be worrying about is "The press cost American lives!"

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  •  
    identicon
    John Doe, Jan 18th, 2011 @ 10:01am

    Miss America agrees

    One of the Miss America contestants was on the news last night and was asked about WikiLeaks. She said she was interested in politics and that censorship should come before freedom of the press. I don't know if she was the winner as I don't watch it, but it is pretty sad if she is actually interested in politics but doesn't care for the constitution. But then again, she should fit right into Washington.

    BTW, she was hot, so I might be able to overlook her desire to take away my rights.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  •  
    icon
    Shawn (profile), Jan 18th, 2011 @ 10:13am

    I thought of TechDirt when I listened to the episode as I drove to work Yesterday. What was disturbing about the presentation was the part where they coached the "White House" kids into the argument with the press. "You Killed 19 soldiers" "you are a murderer" was difficult to listen to because little was done to balance that with the reality that the moment the President committed to sending troops in that death of US soldiers was a likely consequence.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  •  
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, Jan 18th, 2011 @ 10:36am

    Yanks does for most of the world.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • This comment has been flagged by the community. Click here to show it
     
    identicon
    Dan, Jan 18th, 2011 @ 10:56am

    Assange is a sellout

    Forget Assange and his $1,500,000 corporate book deal (some rebel, what a sell-out), instead read a book thatís really been BANNED like ďAmerica Deceived IIĒ by E.A. Blayre III.
    Last link (before Google Books bans it also]:
    http://www.iuniverse.com/Bookstore/BookDetail.aspx?BookId=SKU-000190526

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    •  
      icon
      nasch (profile), Jan 18th, 2011 @ 8:01pm

      Re: Assange is a sellout

      Is anyone who accepts money from a publisher a sellout, or does Assange espouse some anti-capitalist position that makes him a hypocrite?

       

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  •  
    identicon
    Wolfy, Jan 18th, 2011 @ 11:34am

    Religion is even more insidious. The right-wingers got that old-time religion, for sure. They know what works.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  •  
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, Jan 18th, 2011 @ 11:37am

    Careful

    "This American Life" tends to strongly bias all their reporting. I'm sure that the situation was not objectively represented. Don't jump to conclusions with them as your only source.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    •  
      icon
      Shawn (profile), Jan 18th, 2011 @ 12:54pm

      Re: Careful

      The episode did not even really discuss the press issue. They covered the field trip and you heard how the situation was presented to the children and how they reacted. The Press issue was one of several in the scenario and was not even really talked about at all by the person in the segment.

       

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

      •  
        icon
        nasch (profile), Jan 18th, 2011 @ 8:03pm

        Re: Re: Careful

        I thought it was. She talked about how the library people pretty much pointed up the press leak as a likely reason for the 19 deaths, without mentioning the fact that war is simply a dangerous business and people generally get killed in it.

         

        reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  •  
    icon
    Killer_Tofu (profile), Jan 18th, 2011 @ 11:44am

    Religion, Politics, and _____

    Religion and politics should be treated like your penis.
    Best kept out of public and not shoved down children's throats.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  •  
    identicon
    ANNE KILEY, Jan 18th, 2011 @ 4:42pm

    This is the most disgusting story ...

    ... I have read in months. Reagan is still damaging this country even from the grave. The people who are treating children to this propaganda are irresponsible idiots, as are the teachers and educational institutions who take them to the library.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  •  
    identicon
    Tyler, Jan 18th, 2011 @ 5:59pm

    I listened to the exact same thing on the radio the other night. Oddly, I had the exact opposite reaction to it. Normally I would be in full support of freedom of speech. Even in this case, I am a supporter of freedom of speech.

    However, there are times when you are free to do something, and you really shouldnt do it. For instance, imagine America was planning a secret large scale invasion of China. Plans are going great, and we have multiple agents in place in every major city in China, we have Americans near the borders, posing as civilians of other countries. All this complex stuff, all this secrecy that led to this point.

    This information is leaked to one person, and one person only. They are the head of a major media company. Lets say CNN. Now, Does CNN choose to broadcast this, be the first one on this amazing story. It would boost ratings tremendously. Every person in America, hell, other countries as well, would be tuned into CNN, the only news station with this story. CNN is blowing away other news companies. However, it results in the complete foiling of America planned invasion. All americans already in China are reveled to the Chinese. All the borders are shut, or even worse, the Chinese stop them mid invasion, killing thousands, millions even, of Americans in the process.

    What could have been a very smooth invasion is now turned into an American bloodbath because of freedom of speech. No, wait, it wasnt freedom of speech that did this - it was a media outlet who didnt give a damned about Americas plans - they simply wanted more viewers

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    •  
      identicon
      Cipher-0, Jan 18th, 2011 @ 7:00pm

      Re:

      What could have been a very smooth invasion is now turned into an American bloodbath because of freedom of speech.
      Funny, I would put the blame for the bloodbath on the people who thought invading a country of 1.4 billion people was a good idea. And really, since when has the press in the past ten years been at the front of a story?

       

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

      •  
        identicon
        JEDIDIAH, Jan 19th, 2011 @ 7:33am

        Make them watch MASH, Kubrick style.

        It's just absurd. Our armed forces suffer thousands of dead and wounded even when we are playing the role of bully. That's nothing compared to the consequences of actually attacking a worthy opponent.

        Yes. War means death. It means death of American kids. The fact that this is unavoidable should be not forgotten by anyone.

        One wonders if these censorship weenies would have suppressed the first battlefield photos taken of Antietam.

         

        reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    •  
      icon
      nasch (profile), Jan 18th, 2011 @ 8:06pm

      Re:

      No, wait, it wasnt freedom of speech that did this - it was a media outlet who didnt give a damned about Americas plans

      +1 on Cipher-0, don't invade other countries and we won't have these problems to begin with. If the US is being invaded and the press leaked our battle plans, I would be more sypmathetic to your position.

       

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    •  
      icon
      techflaws.org (profile), Jan 18th, 2011 @ 10:16pm

      Re:

      Making up movie-plot BS does not really support your point.

       

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  •  
    identicon
    Passerby, Jan 19th, 2011 @ 10:37am

    Even at that age...

    There are no wrong answers, but I'll tell you when you were wrong. Remember, you're the one in charge but you need to follow my script. Nevermind history, I'll tell you what happened and what it really meant. Even at that age, more like especially at that age, I would have been capable of seeing the true nature of that little lesson plan. I questioned things as a kid, my parents taught me that repeating whatever I was told was right wasn't even similar to actually learning something. Caused them quite a few headaches down the road but by age twelve I was arguing the interpreted symbolism of the book Animal Farm with university proffessors... And holding my own. Teaching children from a young age to believe two conflicting things can be true at the same time without questioning them is going to render them vulnerable to manipulations of all kinds as they grow older and less able to question what they already 'know' about the world. Those kids in the 'simulation' might be the focus of this article, but it's easy money betting that more than a few of those teachers and some of the parents actually believed that's how it went down.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  •  
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, Jan 19th, 2011 @ 1:47pm

    Placing the Blame

    Yes, all military deaths are the fault of the press. The government has no responsibility whatsoever for people dying in combat.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  •  
    identicon
    Foobear, Mar 11th, 2013 @ 5:02pm

    Just came back from there

    I just ran through this simulation at the Ronald Reagan Library, and it was nothing like what you describe here in this article.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    •  
      icon
      nasch (profile), Mar 11th, 2013 @ 5:42pm

      Re: Just came back from there

      I just ran through this simulation at the Ronald Reagan Library, and it was nothing like what you describe here in this article.

      Care to share any details?

       

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    •  
      identicon
      Anonymous Coward, Mar 11th, 2013 @ 6:47pm

      Re: Just came back from there

      Remembering this artical is a couple of years old...

       

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]


Add Your Comment

Have a Techdirt Account? Sign in now. Want one? Register here
Get Techdirt’s Daily Email
Save me a cookie
  • Note: A CRLF will be replaced by a break tag (<br>), all other allowable HTML will remain intact
  • Allowed HTML Tags: <b> <i> <a> <em> <br> <strong> <blockquote> <hr> <tt>
Follow Techdirt
A word from our sponsors...
Essential Reading
Techdirt Reading List
Techdirt Insider Chat
A word from our sponsors...
Recent Stories
A word from our sponsors...

Close

Email This