The Quiet Revolution
By Lynn Stuter
November 30, 2005
Articles have surfaced recently concerning the writings of Antonio Gramsci; writings that figure predominately in what is happening in America today.
One such article is Gramsci and the U.S. Body Politic. This article is a must read for anyone wishing to understand what they are seeing happen in America today.
Antonio Gramsci was a transformational Marxist. As laid out in the above linked article, what Gramsci advocated was the transformation of a society to the communist state via gradualism — the gradual erosion of old ideals, replacing them with the new. As opposed to Hitler, Lenin, Stalin, and Mussolini, Gramsci advocated the quiet revolution.
The Hegelian Dialectic of thesis (and idea), antithesis (the opposite), and synthesis (the bringing together of opposites) to form a new thesis, ever evolving, plays a heavy role in the gradualism Gramsci proposed. Today, in America, the Hegelian Dialectic is played out in meetings at every level, all across America, under the name of consensus building using facilitators heavily trained in group dynamics.
The year 1939 is one that should be forever bookmarked in the pages of American history. In that year, several individuals from Austria arrived in the United States.
One was Peter Drucker who would become a good friend to Abraham Maslow, humanist, and father of Third Force Psychology and the Hierarchy of Human Needs. Maslow’s work, based on humanism, would be furthered in the works of men like Carl Rogers, the father of the Human Potential movement utilizing self-actualization (spirituality from within) and focus groups to break down the moral bearing and individuality of people, two very important concepts in the struggle to bring about the quiet revolution. Rogers’ works, although denounced by Rogers in his later years, are used heavily in education in America today, from the college and university classroom to the elementary school classroom.
The multitude of books written by Peter Drucker concern the semantics of the system (ie, systems philosophy) that must be in place if the quiet revolution is to be attained.
Also arriving in the United States at this time was Kurt Lewin. In the Foreword of the book, The Change Agents Guide, second edition, 1995, Mathew B Miles, of the NTL Institute for Applied Behavioral Sciences, a not-for-profit educational entity, has this to say of Kurt Lewin,
“The truth is that not until the late 1940’s, when American behavioral scientists began exploring and developing the ideas of émigré psychologist Kurt Lewin, did we really have anything like a systematic science and practical craft of planned change in the kind of social systems that matter most—families, small groups, organizations, communities.” (emphasis added)
Although Mathew Miles calls him a “social psychologist”, Kurt Lewin was also (like Gramsci) a transformational Marxist. Lewin spent the better part of his career at Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT).
MIT is also the home of Jay W Forrester who established the computer simulation model, World III, for the Club of Rome. Using information fed into the computer simulation model, futuristic projections (or future trends) were made relevant to population and natural resources.
The projections of the World III simulation model were the subject of the book Limits to Growth by Donnella Meadows, a “systems scientist” now residing at Dartmouth College. Although inaccurate, the projections of the World III simulation model are relevant from two aspects —
1. The “brown earth syndrome” that has become the mantra of every environmental group seeking to wrest control of planet earth from private ownership, not limited to, but including such groups as the Earth Liberation Front (ELF), Earth First, the Sierra Club, and the Nature Conservancy.
2. Earth can be saved if the humanoid population lives in a sustainable environment. If you thought this was a new term, think again. Like the term life-long learning, it was coined long ago.
The Gaia Hypothesis is the outreach of the environmental movement and reads as follows: the earth is a living, breathing organism (a living entity), irreducible to its parts (one system); what affects one part affects all parts (interconnected and interdependent); if we are to save spaceship earth, we must change our ways.
Another émigré also arrived on America’s shores in 1939. His name was Ludwig von Bertalanffy, considered the father of general systems theory or, more simply, systems theory. Bertalanffy, relying heavily on the works of Alfred North Whitehead, theorized that earth is a system of subsystems (also called systems) all interconnected and interdependent; what affects one system affects all systems; that within any one system is an infrastructure that is analogous across systems, irrespective of physical appearance. This is general systems theory defined.
It is easy to see, although worded differently, that the Gaia Hypothesis and system theory defined are the same, excepting the existentialist transcendentalism apparent in the Gaia Hypothesis but not apparent in, but present in the semantics of, systems theory.
Systems theory is the foundation of the works of the likes of Drucker and Deming and those who follow them. Ervin Laszlo, born in Communist Hungary, associate of Bertalanffy, consultant to the United Nations, is an avid writer and supporter of systems theory. His more recent book, How you can change the world, is yet another enlightening exposé on how systems theory is to play out.
Peter Senge, author of The Fifth Discipline; the art and practice of the learning organization, who claims as his mentor, Jay W Forrester, is referenced heavily in books advocating education transformation in schools. Senge does not come right out and say, but insinuates, in the above noted book, that Christians who refuse to become part of the learning organization, ie, part of the collective mind, willing to engage in existentialist transcendentalism, deny truth and are a liability to the business employing them.
It is imperative that people understand that in order for the quiet revolution to see fruition, the structure (or system) built on systems theory, must be in place. The Goals 2000: Educate America Act — Public Law 103-227, and the School to Work Opportunities Act — Public Law 103-239, both passed in 1994, were to put in place the structure needed to bring systems education (Marxian education) into being.
I’ve heard ever so many say that the federal Goals 2000: Education America Act has sunset; is no longer an enforceable law; and this is true, just as the STWOA act also sunset. However, the system both these laws put in place is very much alive and well and providing the structure needed to implement systems education by whatever name called: outcome-based, performance-based, outcomes-driven developmental model, competency-based, etc. In the end, however, it is systems education: education based on outcomes delineating what the child should know and be able to do as a result of his “educational” experience, the goal of which is to produce a “world-class worker” — a decidedly Marxist term.
In sum total, systems education changes the focus of education from educating the child for intelligence to producing a worker; the school becomes a workforce development center, producing workers according to regional economic development strategies and regional labor market needs as determined by the regional Workforce Development Boards (established under the federal Workforce Investment Act of 1998) under the auspices of the federal government.
Nazi Germany and the U.S.S.R. were both built on a system finding basis in systems theory. A paper put out by the National Center for Research in Vocational Education (NCRVE), University of California, Berkley, is very telling in its praise of the polytechnical education system of the U.S.S.R. Of particular note is that the system described in Polytechnical Education: a Step is the system of education implemented in America under the Goals 2000: Education America Act and the School to Work Opportunities Act. This paper, comprising a total of 51 pages, was paid for by a $4,000,000 grant from the Office of Vocational and Adult Education, U.S. Department of Education. The mission statement of NCRVE was “to strengthen school-based and work-based learning to prepare all individuals for lasting and rewarding employment, further education, and lifelong learning.”
Nazi Germany, of course, ended with the death of Hitler and surrender to Allied Forces. The U.S.S.R. as a union no longer exists. This is not to say, however, that communism is dead in Russia or the satellite communist republics that once made up the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics. Far from it. Many Americans are quick to claim that we won the Cold War. Not likely. Khrushchev said, in 1956,
“If you don’t like us, don’t accept our invitations, and don’t invite us to come and see you. Whether you like it or not, history is on our side. We will bury you.”
While American’s were busy laughing at this foolish little bald-headed man, after all we have our constitution to protect us — as though it were some indestructible entity capable of rebuffing the evil intent of any nation or individual, the transformational Marxists and systems thinkers were busy fulfilling Khrushchev’s prophecy within the borders of the United States.
Rules for Radicals
By Saul Alinsky – 1971
Saul Alinsky’s tactics were based, not on Stalin’s revolutionary violence, but on the Neo-Marxist strategies of Antonio Gramsci, an Italian Communist. Relying on gradualism, infiltration and the dialectic process rather than a bloody revolution, Gramsci’s transformational Marxism was so subtle that few even noticed the deliberate changes.
Like Alinsky, Mikhail Gorbachev followed Gramsci, not Lenin. In fact, Gramsci aroused Stalins’s wrath by suggesting that Lenin’s revolutionary plan wouldn’t work in the West. Instead the primary assault would be on Biblical absolutes and Christian values, which must be crushed as a social force before the new face of Communism could rise and flourish. Malachi Martin gave us a progress report:
“By 1985, the influence of traditional Christian philosophy in the West was weak and negligible…. Gramsci’s master strategy was now feasible. Humanly speaking, it was no longer too tall an order to strip large majorities of men and women in the West of those last vestiges that remained to them of Christianity’s transcendent God.”
“The means-and-ends moralists, constantly obsessed with the ethics of the means used by the Have-Nots against the Haves, should search themselves as to their real political position. In fact, they are passive — but real — allies of the Haves…. The most unethical of all means is the non-use of any means… The standards of judgment must be rooted in the whys and wherefores of life as it is lived, the world as it is, not our wished-for fantasy of the world as it should be….”pp.25-26
“The third rule of ethics of means and ends is that in war the end justifies almost any means….” p.29
“The seventh rule… is that generally success or failure is a mighty determinant of ethics….” p.34
“The tenth rule… is you do what you can with what you have and clothe it with moral garments.… It involves sifting the multiple factors which combine in creating the circumstances at any given time… Who, and how many will support the action?… If weapons are needed, then are appropriate d weapons available? Availability of means determines whether you will be underground or above ground; whether you will move quickly or slowly…” p.36
Notes: Apparently, Michelle Obama referred to these words during her Democratic National Convention speech:
“She said, ‘Barack stood up that day,’ talking about a visit to Chicago neighborhoods, ‘and spoke words that have stayed with me ever since. He talked about ‘The world as it is‘ and ‘The world as it should be…’ And, ‘All of us driven by a simple belief that the world as it is just won’t do – that we have an obligation to, fight for the world as it should be.”