The liberal attack on Ann Romney goes much deeper than a disagreement over working women. Liberals see stay-at-home moms as a threat to the regime. Non-governmental schools are also looked down upon. Homeschooling is especially seen as a threat to the State. Sweden bans homeschooling. A curriculum that is not developed by the Swedish government is not “objective.” This means that it does not extol the virtues of the Swedish Socialist State.
There can’t be independent thinking that might lead to challenges to the Statist status quo.
Adolf Hitler knew that the way to capture a nation and establish a new way of governing the world was to redefine the family, educate the children, and put women in positions to support the State. But who would care for the children? The following is taken from William L. Shirer’s book The Rise and Fall of the Third Reich:
“When an opponent declares, ‘I will not come over to your side,’ he said in a speech on November 6, 1933, “I calmly say, ‘Your child belongs to us already. . . . What are you? You will pass on. Your descendants, however, now stand in the new camp. In a short time they will know nothing else but this new community.’” And on May 1, 1937, he declared, “This new Reich will give its youth to no one, but will itself take youth and give to youth its own education and its own upbringing.”1
Hitler understood that the way to insure long-term loyalty to Nazi ideals was to take the youth and educate them in a new way of looking at reality.
Every person in the teaching profession from Kindergarten through the Universities was compelled to join the Nationalist Socialist Teacher’s League, which by law was held responsible for the execution of the ideological and political coordination of all of the teachers in accordance with the National Socialist doctrine. The State was to be supported without reservation and teachers took an oath to be loyal and obedient to Adolph Hitler.
Like Hitler, Vladimir Lenin saw the value in monopolizing education and bringing it under the exclusive control of the State. The process for change had to begin with the children. The sooner they could be taken from their parents and broken from their links to the past, the sooner the reprogramming could take place. In his Principles of Communism of 1847, Engels had advocated the “education of all children, as soon as they are old enough to dispense with maternal care, in national institutions and at the charge of the nation.”2 All facets of society must conform to the new ideology:
We are bringing the women into the social economy, into legislation and government. . . . We are establishing communal kitchens . . . infant asylums . . . educational institutions of all kinds. In short, we are seriously carrying out the demand of our program for the transference of the economic and educational function of the separate household to society. . . . The children are brought up under more favourable conditions than at home. . . .3
Education was centralized. The “separate household” was transferred “to society.” Mothers would be encouraged to enter the work force in ever greater numbers. This would allow the State an opportunity to care for the children in “educational institutions of all kinds.”
Liberals want women out of the home, and they want their children in government schools. The strategy has worked. Government-educated people put Barack Obama in the White House.
Now it’s time to reverse the trend.
- William Shirer, Rise and Fall of the Third Reich New York: Simon and Schuster, 1960), 249. [↩]
- Quoted in Francis Nigel Lee, Communist Eschatology: A Christian Philosophical Analysis of the Post-Capitalistic Views of Marx, Engels and Lenin (Nutley, NJ: The Craig Press, 1974), 351. [↩]
- Quoted in Lee, Communist Eschatology, 350. [↩]