Here is a poll question:

“Do you support or reject the idea of owning and controlling a portion of your Social Security contributions?”

Let’s say 100 people are given that question, and 50 say they support the idea and 50 say they reject it. Now, we’ll make a small change to the polling question. Here’s the new language:

“Do you support or reject the Republican idea of owning and controlling a portion of your Social Security contributions?”

We “politicized” the second question. How do you think it will affect the results? My expectation is that the number of respondents saying they support the idea will decrease. That’s our anti-Republican culture at work. If you wish to shade an outcome one way or another, play on the anti-Republican sentiment in our culture. Simply adding a Republican connotation, even without using specific references, will color the results.

Our society seems to have very little interest in determining the nature and extent of the anti-Republican sentiment in our culture. But wouldn’t it be interesting to find out which American age-group is most charged with the anti-Republican emotions? I would imagine it is in the 20 to 40-year age group, just based on personal observation. But when exactly does it begin? We certainly aren’t born being anti-Republican. The behavior is learned.

By the time you are in your twenties, you are clearly aware of political influences. More than likely, at the age of 18, you were confronted with the issue of declaring a political party, whether Republican, Democrat or something else. But what is your earliest exposure to political preferences?

I know that my grandmother was a Republican, but I am just assuming my grandfather was a Republican. He died before I was in grade school, and I wasn’t aware of how politics fit into his life. I’m pretty sure I didn’t care about politics one way or another when I was in grade school.

What if that changed? What if there were a Democrat Children’s Movement in place?

On an informal basis, this program already exists. In Colorado, Representative Tom Tancredo received letters and drawings from the students of one of his constituents who was a grade school teacher. The students were requesting that he stop poisoning the water, ruining our forests, and killing animals. It was a bit troubling, and seemed to indicate that youngsters in at least one classroom in Colorado were being taught that Republicans are destroying the environment. It seems as if our children are being indoctrinated at a fairly early age.

At the High School level, a Geography instructor in Colorado lectured on the pervasiveness of American violence in the world. His point was that the United States is probably the most violent nation on Earth.

This on its face may not seem like indoctrination, but a bit of background knowledge gives a different perspective. Note that the idea presented is that a particular country is portrayed as being prone to violence, and that the prime candidate is the United States of America. The perspective to note is that other countries have engaged in violent acts in their domestic and foreign affairs, but that the individual country is typically not blamed. Rather, it is the country’s ruling body that gets singled out.

Take as an example the country of Cambodia. You rarely hear of Cambodia being characterized as a violent country. Instead, you hear of the two million people killed by the Khmer Rouge during four years of the Pol Pot regime. The same perspective applies to countries such as Russia and Germany where the countries themselves are not depicted as being violent, but the violence is attributed to the regimes of Stalin, Hitler and so on.

Here are some figures relating to the human cost of United States military actions, with military deaths rounded down to the nearest 10,000:
--The Civil War (550,000 military deaths) began when a Democrat (Jefferson Davis) took the southern states and seceded from the Union.
--World War I (110,000 military deaths) began when Woodrow Wilson (a Democrat) was president.
--World War II (400,000 military deaths) began when Franklin Delano Roosevelt (a Democrat) was president.
--The Korean War (30,000 military deaths) began when Harry S Truman (a Democrat) was president.
--The Vietnam War (50,000 military deaths) began when Lyndon Baines Johnson (a Democrat) was president.

In the space of a little less than 150 years, Democratic Party administrations have taken the United States into war at a cost of over 1 million American lives. And that’s just counting deaths in our military. Add the deaths of enemy soldiers as well as civilian deaths, and the violence is indeed catastrophic. But should the United States, the country, be blamed or should the blame rest with the political party that takes America to war?

Again, back to the issue of perspective: When the Democratic Party is involved in the loss of life, the country of America takes the blame. That’s historically evident in the perspective of the anti-war movement, and is still seen in the perspective of the Civil Rights movement. You will not hear of the work of the Democratic Party, George Wallace, Orval Faubus, or Lester Maddox in fighting against the Civil Rights movement. Rather you will hear of our American shame. It is America the country that is at fault. Just keep in mind that selectively casting blame toward a country or a political movement is an indoctrination technique, and the Democrat Party practices it well.

OK, so what’s the harm of shading one’s perspective to implicate Republicans for all things bad, and hold Democrats up as shining examples of purity? Nothing, really, except that a better job can be done. These feelings and beliefs can be firmly ingrained if the indoctrination starts at an early age.

That’s why The Democrat Children’s Movement would start in grade school with weekly assemblies and audio/visual presentations of the anti-Republican themes. The “Destroying the Environment” theme might appeal to the younger students, with the more social themes (harming children; stealing from our seniors; engaging in hate crimes) appealing to the middle grades. Themes associated with the Constitution and the economy would be presented in high school. The goal would be that upon graduation from secondary school, students would have an unquestioning belief in the negative qualities of Republicans. Our anti-Republican culture would be secure.

Doing a more effective job of teaching our anti-Republican culture: That’s the job of the Democrat Children’s Movement.

Back to Home Page