False Democracy Consensus Science
by Joe Kelley
1-21-2022

Classroom discussions should prioritize evidence over lived experience and identity, bipartisan group advises
[thecollegefix.com]

From the article:
"Additionally, while 82 percent said that higher education should familiarize students with “a variety of viewpoints including liberal, moderate, and conservative philosophies,” only 46 percent rated schools as “excellent” or “good” at meeting that mark.

"The gap between adults’ desire for universities to teach a range of views and the efficacy with which colleges are doing so underscores the major points of the bipartisan report. Colleges can and must do a better job at fostering free and productive truth-seeking.

"Said Cullen: “We emphasize reviving a culture of free expression and inquiry, and that involves certain norms and habits … above all, an attitude of getting things clearer rather than seeking victory in a dispute.”

Each individual viewpoint is potentially the best viewpoint available to all of humanity in defense against the worst threats to humanity. To ignore the best viewpoint in favor of the worst viewpoint is homicidal.

What has modern man found to be the best viewpoint when dealing with those who have the goal of dictating their false solutions to the problems they create so as to solve their fraudulent problems with their fraudulent solutions: purposeful misdiagnosis leading to purposeful mistreatment?

Example:

“The first function of schooling is adjustive. Schools are to establish fixed habits of reaction to authority. It is fixed habits of reaction. Notice that this precludes critical judgment completely. Notice too that requiring obedience to stupid orders is a much better test of function one than following sensible orders ever could be. You don’t know whether people are reflexibly obedient unless they will march right off the cliff.
“How can you establish weather someone has successfully developed this automatic reaction, because people have a proclivity when they are given sensible orders to follow? That is not what they want to reach. The only way to measure this is to give stupid orders, and people automatically follow those. Now you have achieved function one.” The Six Purposes of Schooling, John Taylor Gatto

Those in power to "teach" children from birth to death teach their slaves one set of rules, and their fellow dictators another set of rules, as explained in forensic detail by John Taylor Gatto in his many works on the topic.

Is there a better viewpoint on this planet worthy of the best credit for both diagnosis and treatment in public education?

If someone says no, then they confess their reluctance to keep looking for something better.

Survival of a Fitting Quotation. "There is a principle which is a bar against all information, which is proof against all arguments, and which cannot fail to keep a man in everlasting ignorance—that principle is contempt prior to investigation."

Back to the Treasonous Fraud Dogma:

"Additionally, while 82 percent said that higher education should familiarize students with “a variety of viewpoints including liberal, moderate, and conservative philosophies,” only 46 percent rated schools as “excellent” or “good” at meeting that mark."

Modern Liberal is the same meaning as National Communism.
Modern Conservative is the same meaning as National Socialism.
Modern Moderate is the same meaning as Nationalism.

Do all those words have a common meaning?

Past Liberal was individualism adding to collective defense of everyone with accurate accounting of the facts that matter in any case of controversy.

Past Conservative was individualism adding to collective defense of everyone with accurate accounting of the facts that matter in any case of controversy.

Past Moderate was individualism adding to collective defense of everyone with accurate accounting of the facts that matter in any case of controversy.

Is there a common meaning from past competitive definitions of Liberal, Moderate, and Conservative compared to the modern Monopoly Nationalist meaning imposed upon mankind from Top to Bottom in Treasonous Fraud Institutionalized Propaganda Brainwashing Mind Control Indoctrination Systems?

Past Enemies of Mankind were criminals, organized criminals, and criminals fraudulently claiming to be religious, cultural, scientific, medical, or governmental leaders organized for the defense of individuals who maintain their defensive power with accurate accounting of the facts that matter in any case of controversy.

Past defenders of Mankind were extremely interested in defense, moderately interested in defense, and extremely disinterested in defense against enemies of mankind, so which of those in the past were easiest to turn from effective defenders into effective attackers destroying mankind?

Did you fail this test in Publick Skewl?

“There are faults of omission as well as commission. When you are legally called to try such a cause, if you shall shuffle out yourself, and thereby persons perhaps less conscientious happen to be made use of, and so a villain escapes justice, or an innocent man is ruined, by a prepossessed or negligent verdict; can you think yourself in such a case wholly blameless? Qui non prohibet cum potest, jubet: That man abets an evil, who prevents it not, when it is in his power. Nec caret scrupulo sosietatis occultae qui evidenter facinori definit obviare: nor can he escape the suspicion of being a secret accomplice, who evidently declines the prevention of an atrocious crime.”
Englishman’s Right
by John Hawles
1762

Treasonous Frauds - as a rule - cannot allow their slaves to organize against Treasonous Frauds, and therefore Treasonous Frauds create stupid people who are defenseless when stupid people not only don't have the facts, they are also too servile to even look for those facts.

Obey, do not question that order.

"It was a principle of the Common Law, as it is of the law of nature, and of common sense, that no man can be taxed without his personal consent. The Common Law knew nothing of that system, which now prevails in England, of assuming a man’s own consent to be taxed, because some pretended representative, whom he never authorized to act for him, has taken it upon himself to consent that he may be taxed. That is one of the many frauds on the Common Law, and the English constitution, which have been introduced since Magna Carta. Having finally established itself in England, it has been stupidly and servilely copied and submitted to in the United States."
Essay on The Trial by Jury, Lysander Spooner, 1852

Back to the Treasonous Fraud Dogma:

"The gap between adults’ desire for universities to teach a range of views and the efficacy with which colleges are doing so underscores the major points of the bipartisan report. Colleges can and must do a better job at fostering free and productive truth-seeking."

The 5 Monkey Story is intended to teach a natural law having to do with enslavement by generational conditioned responses programmed into victims by their criminal overlords. Once the new generation is ignorant, servile, and self-censoring, they are perfectly willing to remain inside Plato's Cave, and any attempt by anyone to shed light into the cave, will be ripped apart by those in the cave spontaneously in unison as a triggered Angry Mob of defenders hell bent on defending their stupidity and their servility to their rulers who roam freely outside the self-defended cave of ignorance.

5 Monkey Story

Back to the Treasonous Fraud Dogma:

"The advice was among several suggestions in the report, titled “Campus Free Expression: A New Roadmap,” a guide for college leaders to foster academic freedom and open debate."

Self-confessed "Open debate" means ONLY what those in "debate" are allowed to parrot on their pre-written prejudiced monopoly scripts.

National Socialists get their script.
National Communists get their script.
Nationalists get their script.

Anyone caught speaking about common law due process, The Ancient Law, The Law of the Land, Legem Terrae, with private prosecutors, independent grand juries, independent trial juries, will be ruthlessly attacked immediately, in unison, by all those with the pre-written scripts in their "Open debates," that are - as a rule - not debates at all, they are instead very carefully scripted self-confessing self-disarming, self-defeating, self-repeating, exchanges of falsehoods written into the script.

Back to the Treasonous Fraud Dogma:

"Free speech on campus is endangered, and college leaders need to step up to protect it, according to the November 2021 report released by the Bipartisan Policy Center, a Washington, D.C.-based policy think tank."

"Free speech" means - as a rule - freedom to say whatever your boss lets you say in the effort to destroy the character of your opponent, when dealing within Treasonous Fraud Dogma.

Actual ancient meanings for “freedom to speak” were defensive natural laws accurately accounting for the survival necessity to speak the truth to criminal power. Accurate accounting of Treasonous Fraud is derived from very basic common law principles, such as the principle of defense in the face of attack, leading to such things as accusation and trial by jury offered to the accuser and the accused in defense of the innocent from the guilty in a case of slander or libel.

Friend or foe, he said she said, false accusers, fact based accusers, a need to account accurately.

Where is the supply supplying to supply that need needed for the survival of mankind?

Past extreme defenders keep the most vigilant watch on those people choosing to injure innocent people with verbal or written lies, making sure that slander and libel never pays, which then deters someone from the path of causing injury to innocent people with false statements intending to harm the target of slander and libel on purpose.

Past moderate defenders did not care as much about defending the victims of slander or libel.

Past extreme non-defenders were most ready, willing, and able to resort to slander or libel to gain at the expense of their targeted victims.

Without peaceful resolutions of ongoing conflicts involving criminal attacks by aggressors upon defenders, those verbal and written attacks rapidly escalate into violence.

For example, Arron Burr shot and killed Alexander Hamilton over a case of slander involving damage intentionally done to Arron Burr by Alexander Hamilton whereby Arron Burr insisted that Alexander Hamilton make a public correction as to false statements made by Alexander Hamilton. Why was there no due process of law available to account for which individual was making false statements and which was telling the truth in that conflict that ended up with homicide?

Both were Nationalists. Neither were republican, patriotic, common sense, common law, federal voluntary defense association, vigilant defenders crediting accurate accounting of the facts that matter in any case, doing so through due process of law, such as the common law, with trial by jury in criminal slander or libel cases, or criminal cases involving Treasonous Fraud.

Both were modern day National Socialists, National Communists, or just plain old Nationalists.

If the boss says that there is no common law, then one may be asking the boss for advice when someone is facing falsehoods intending to injure an innocent victim. The boss may then advise the innocent victim victimized by the falsehoods being spread by the attacker to falsely accuse the attacker before the attacker has a chance to falsely accuse anyone.

If everyone is thereby following the order to attack everyone else, with false accusations, the boss can keep on doing whatever bosses do, while all those who might prefer liberty are preconditioned to attack each other until they are completely defenseless against totalitarian bosses.

On the other hand, if anyone were to attack anyone else, with one of those false accusations, and the target knows how due process of law works, then the intended victim would be duty bound to hold the attacker to account for the attack factually, doing so before a trial jury in a slander or libel criminal case.

On that hand, which is the other hand, those thinking about slander or libel are going to know in advance that they will be harming themselves if they choose to resort to slander or libel.

On that hand, which is not the Treasonous Fraud Dogma Script everyone is reading from hand, actual debate, where people are actually sharing their unique, individual, creative, adaptive, productive, viewpoints, not intending to cause harm to their targeted victims, on purpose, are offering the total of humanity a possible best viewpoint, to solve the worst problems facing humanity first, and then the least problems facing any individual at the same time.

“The condition upon which God hath given liberty to man is eternal vigilance,” said Curran.
[monticello.org]

Moderates moderate their jack asses into slavery on a routine basis, just not as quickly as Treasonous Fraud Elephants in the room shitting on everyone, but no one seems to notice, no one seems to care.

It is a big club, and you ain’t in it.

Caveat Emptor