The Belmont Challenge and the Death of the Individual Via Education

For those of you who have read all along and saw I was clearly moving somewhere in particular this is the magic moment when I get to holler “we’re here!” Unfortunately, all those mysterious defined terms like engrenage and dirigiste were created for a reason. I needed them to ultimately discuss the hows of the death of the individual. And the linked demise of economic freedom. And since as I keep saying that individual liberty and economic freedom for each person to pursue their dreams and buy and sell what seems to be needed have always been essential for widespread prosperity, we need to talk about this now. Right before the international UN sustainability conference called Rio+20 that is just cranking up as I write. I see our Secretary of State Hillary Clinton is leading the US delegation.

Not to be mean, well maybe just a little, but all the talk about charters and accreditation and gypsy principals and supers and Quality Learning and SEL and outcomes based education and UNESCO were all essential to lay a foundation. I needed you to stop thinking of education as necessarily being a good thing. It should be but now it has become the most valuable and potent weapon available for the scheming set. And their mediocre allies who are perfectly willing to push any idea that allows them to live at the expense of other people.

Now I happen to know for a fact that the Belmont Challenge goal that “global energy security be provided entirely by sources that are renewable and have neutral impacts on other aspects of global sustainability” is impossible. Even trying will send us all hurtling back towards the limited lives of Middle Age serfs without air conditioning or cars or widespread food production or distance travel. If not caves and fires.

So when you hear an education proposal from now on, ask if it is trying to strengthen individual independence, actual knowledge, genuine innovation, and people’s ability to interact and cooperate with each other as they see needs and wants. Without the need to get anyone’s consent. Otherwise I want you to think of locusts coming after a field of wheat ready to be made into life-sustaining grains. They are coming because they can and they are hungry. It is better to know they are coming if we are to have any chance of protecting the wheat. Maybe harvest it early and put it into padlocked silos. Otherwise we will be discussing what happened from a barren field with the threat of famine ahead. Mind arson may be a provocative term but it is also an accurate term for this official agenda we have been discussing.

I have not read or heard of any coverage of either the Belmont Forum or the Belmont Challenge. My knowledge of it comes from documents obtained as I tracked education initiatives from the March 2012 Planet under Pressure Conference. They were located on computer servers outside any of the participating countries. I guess that’s convenient. It will take me several posts to lay out what people almost everywhere should be aware of.

Right now we are in the 1-2 year “design and secure the necessary partners and support for a 10 year research mission” to transition to sustainable economies where official  “decision-makers” make all the necessary plans and decisions. In the 20th century we called this central economic planning and it had a terrible track record. But the lust for power and control is apparently eternal. And the computers are so much stronger now so here we go down that tragic path again. But this time we have education to be the “step-change in science-society bridging activities.”

The Belmont Forum is a high-level but deliberately informal body created in July 2009 when:

“the world’s major funders of environmental change research, and major international science councils, met at Belmont House, Maryland USA, to consider how best to align financial and human capital towards delivering the environmental science knowledge base that society will need in the 21st century.”

The US National Science Foundation and the UK Natural Environment Research Council manage the Belmont Challenge to lay out and mandate a Roadmap to ensure “equitable economic and social development”. The final version of the Challenge was issued March 2011.

The Challenge is founded on the basic belief that “the environment and human society” are “interconnected systems.” The problem is that is not a factual statement. It is a political aspiration. A global one. The kind that will take lots of taxpayer money and public policy directives and radical changes to the purpose and results of education. Public policies based on 10 year models or guesses about the world and what might happen in the future. Wishful thinking that if these desired changes we are seeing in those UN Millenium Development Goals and its Education for All initiatives are imposed all over the world through Quality Assurance and the US Common Core and Australia’s Core Skills Framework, these political theories may create human behavior that can be reliably predicted.

The exact words from the “integrated conceptual framework” adopted by the Belmont Challenge are these:

“the second requirement is to model interactions between humans and the weather-climate-biogeochemical system. This will introduce novel methodologies that account for societal drivers, impacts and feedbacks. This is a challenging endeavour requiring creative solutions and some compromises because human behavior cannot YET  be fully represented within the framework of present-day physical prediction systems.”

But with enough emphasis on basic skills and concepts accessible to all and emotion and limiting literacy, apparently the schemers hope that human behavior can become predictable. And desired priorities for future living will become automatic. A reflex.

We really are going to have to talk about this some more.  This is just cranking up and it’s time to really examine all this nonsense. Yes education and climate change are two related tools for the international scheming set. Also known as parasites poisoning the host and living at our expense. We are the hosts and financing all this modelling and scheming. And we will be the victims if nothing is done to talk about this “informal body.”

 

6 thoughts on “The Belmont Challenge and the Death of the Individual Via Education

  1. Just want to say that I really appreciate your efforts in exposing hidden and not-so-hidden Agenda. Have you had a chance to take a look at Communitarianism and ‘post-normal science’? Best of luck.

    • The answer on both is yes I have looked into both. And they are both relevant to what is going on.

      Thank you for your kind words. I think you will find today’s post especially relevant to your questions.

      In political ideologies somehow the hard sciences get soft to give way to power. The soft sciences get used as tolls of power. And pedagogy really has not been about how to best teach an academic discipline or transmit a body of knowledge for several decades. I have those documents in fact.

      Welcome aboard.

  2. As a public school teacher, I can give witness that DEM teachers’ unions are huge players in the destructive teachings of Utopianism, Environmentalism (not conservation)

    Many many teachers, mostly urban, preach atheist social justice tolerance gay rights multiculturalism anti-capitalism, pro-Communitarianism and should be called to account.

    • Thanks Jane. I am trying to give you teachers the flexibility to keep teaching content by telling this story.

      Keep up your dedication and I will keep writing about where this is really going and how it all fits.

      These professional learning communities are literally designed in part to use the power of the herd to compel compliance with the change the student model. Instead of teaching the content.

      As his biographers have noted, you do not base your education vision on John Dewey unless you are rejecting free markets and economic freedom for the average person. If we do that, widespread prosperity belongs to the past.

      One of the reasons little history is to be taught. Must not make students nostalgic for better times.

      Let me know if something comes up and you think I can help or provide an explanation.

      • Hi Robin,

        I’ve been doing some internet research at the website of our local university. I found a note in the faculty newsletter about the ongoing shift from a “teaching paradigm” to the “learning paradigm” and now I know why their graduate program is so bad. It’s the new methodology that no longer values instruction by professors but shifts learning to the students as “the active discoverers and constructors of their own knowledge.”

        Ugh!

        • Ugh, indeed. In a learner centered classroom, only the autodidact will know much. Let’s face it they did not need the prof.

          The learner centered classroom is really a rejection of the transmission of knowledge itself under the assumption we are not to be nostalgic for something we are leaving behind. If you think about it, there are few acts as individualistic as reading a book where your mind essentially has a conversation with someone else without an intermediary.

          Much too private.

          http://www.invisibleserfscollar.com/credential-inflation-how-reforming-higher-ed-with-learner-outcomes-can-damage-all-degrees/ is a post I did just on higher ed. I promise to get back to how higher ed is being changed to allow for “college ready” to be anybody who has the paper credentials. I have all that but at the moment K-12 is more urgent.

          Look at it this way. Anyone who knows there has been a paradigm shift can make sure they get the knowledge and skills they need even if they are acutely bored and annoyed by what will be going on in too many classes.

          Keep in tough with the higher ed reports!

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>