With Kroger Brand products from Ralphs, you can make all your favorite things this holiday season. Because Kroger Brand's proven quality products come at exceptionally low prices. And with a money-back quality guarantee, every dish is sure to be a favorite. ♪ These are a few of my favorite things ♪ Whether you shop delivery, pickup, or in-store, Kroger Brand has all your favorite things.

Ralphs. Fresh for everyone. ♪ Sound? Yep. Alright. I'm going to slate. It's a day with John Taylor Gatto, roll three. I dropped my handkerchief. When we left off, we were talking about how the committees were investigating the foundations. So there was a Cox committee, there was a Reese committee, they were looking into the origins of the education system and what is it really doing versus what do people need to survive and thrive in this world.

And they discovered there was more than a crevasse, more than a Grand Canyon. There was a gap between what we need to survive and thrive and be successful entrepreneurs pursuing the American dream with a real hope of attaining it versus being a servile class. And these committees kind of snapshot it and said that there's some foundations and there's some things in action and they're trying to evoke real change and they're going after our children.

They were puzzled because they detected an agenda, but they couldn't figure the agenda out. And with the second commission, the Reese, a firestorm broke loose. In fact, Reese was never able to finish thanks to the chief counsel. Was that Cox? The chief counsel, well I know there was a lawyer involved with the Reese committee, Catherine Casey, who was the lawyer sent by Norman Dodd to go into the archives of the Carnegie Foundation.

And after being brought up in a traditional status quo education, she went there and saw the actual minutes and the words of these men in these meetings planning on how to take over this country and to take over the diplomacy and power of war. Was Dodd the chief counsel for Reese?

Dodd was the chief researcher. He was out of J.P. Morgan earlier and he had said, "You guys need to return to sound banking." And they said, "Norm, we're going to let you go." And then Carol Reese had called him up and said, "Norm, we want you to head up research because we think --" What they were describing is communist activity from my research, like in the comprehensive sense.

Well, they didn't see clearly. That was the bet noire of the moment. And so that was the easiest way to organize, but it was something far, far more profound than communism. Yes. Right. So that gets back into Pestalozzi, Lavater, other people who were intellectual elites who joined clubs. It's like the Bavarian Illuminati was one such club that has a lot of the intellectual elite of the area getting together, and in their drawing rooms, they're drawing out the plans for other people's lives.

And they basically, when you look at the origins of our education system in America, it goes directly back to Adam Weisshoff's plans, which are planned on earlier plans, but still there is an organized effort to go after our education system. Well, there's one more recent than that. There was the Metaphysical Club at Harvard right around the turn of the 20th century, and it contained such muscular figures as William James, who is the reason we have a course in college's academic psychology.

That's James' prestige brought that in, and James was a kind of-- he had a ligature to Wundt, although Wundt intimidated James a bit, because he wrote so much and so copiously about everything. In the Metaphysical Club, besides William James, was John Dewey, Oliver Wendell Holmes, and a number of other of the shapers of 20th century American institutions.

The most important figure, though, is not known to many people. He's perhaps the last major philosopher human history has produced. He was--it's pronounced Pears, but it's spelled as if it were Pierce. Charles S. Pierce, a strange figure, a part-time lecturer at Harvard, created the pragmatic philosophy that William James was probably the chief distributor of.

But your key man's Pierce, because he's much less--how would I put it? He's much more direct than James. James comes from a long intellectual tradition, a genteel tradition, and in a sense, James knows just what to say in every situation. Pierce is very nakedly describing that pragmatism--he doesn't make this connection, but I have-- is very similar to the Old Norse religion that said, "Praise Ice when crossed, a woman on her deathbed." In other words, no predeterminations until you see performance.

Pierce said that truth and justice flatly do not exist. This was picked up, by the way, by Oliver Wendell Holmes, who then said truth and justice are what the strongest members of society say they are, and any sane judge decides a case before he hears the arguments, because you don't want to rattle the framework of society.

I mean, this is big-time radicalism. Of course, they didn't see it that way at all. They saw it as nitty-gritty truth, and all these superstitious, sentimental additions had occluded the fact justice is what strong people say it is. Truth is the same thing. So that's an evolution of Kantian philosophy, where they remove cause and effect, and then their irrationality can be rationalized.

Yes, of course, they left out Kant's... Is it... It's one of the three critiques. Probably the best intellectual defense for the existence of God is from Kant. That was inconvenient for this group. But pragmatism, if you now connect pragmatism with the concept of justified sinning from Calvin, you have an absolute blank check in any situation to invent truth, invent justice, sacrifice biologically inconsequential people, and invent any excuse for doing that you want.

It seems to me that's been the driving force in American affairs for a long, long time there. But interestingly enough, it's been the driving force of an intellectual elite, I believe through history. It's just they didn't have the dominance that technology gave them. Well, Bertrand Russell has this quote.

He's often misquoted, but when you actually read the book, the sentence starts with, I'll paraphrase, "As Fischt would have wanted, the purpose of education is to remove individuality and self-reliance and all these other things." The idea was that Bertrand Russell was noticing that what Fischt in the 19th century was trying to do, but didn't have the technology to do, that they now in the Norbert Wiener, Bertrand Russell era of the 20th century, now had the ability to mass mind control billions of people at the same time.

It's all done on a basis of irrationality, a denial of cause and effect. That goes back, you can start looking at where the influence of utopia took place and took root in Francis Bacon with New Atlantis and how it goes up. Then it's just formalized by some people using other jargon, psychology in the 20th century, the pragmatism.

It's all just, they want to do what they want to do anyway, and they just keep using education to say, "Well, this is a good reason why we're doing this." Yeah, yeah, yeah. Well, here we are then. What thoughts do you have about the amount of people on the origins of this country that were literate versus the amount of people that are literate today?

It's quite fascinating because the political census of Connecticut, I believe it was 1690, but don't hold me to that, very, very early on, showed a population that was, for all practical purposes, entirely literate. We also have the more than circumstantial evidence. If you simply look at the popular writing in early colonial times, it's taught in a seminar level in colleges today.

As well-known a novel as Fenimore Cooper's Last of the Mohicans is, in truth, unreadable by college. Not because he's not a skillful writer, but the allusions to science, politics, history of all sorts is so comprehensive and interwoven that the allusions themselves defeat an ordinary reader, including an ordinary college reader.

The book I saw in your bathroom, Common Sense, sold 600,000, sold in a population of 3 million. You know, a country that was half serf, slave, and now you can find it on seminar level in Princeton and University of Chicago. Because so many people were literate at the origins of this country, they were able to publish these pamphlets.

So when you'd have propaganda on behalf of the elector of Hanover, better known as the King of England, and you had these retorts by Thomas Paine, who's not from America, he emigrated here, and he doesn't have a formal education, but somehow he figures out how to put things together for himself and speak in a way such that the common person can really get something from this.

And it's not so much his aspect, his propaganda, he's propagating an idea, but just describe the effect that just being able to have the printing press and somebody who could pick up these ideas without being through their formal schooling has the power to change and influence a country and inspire revolution, etc., etc.

Oh yes. And in Paine's case, what he had mastered is even today when I tell kids it's priceless to master. No complexity of ideas can't in fact, with the pains on the part of the speaker, the writer, be reduced to plain talk and speech without harming the delicacy of the idea.

And Paine really hit that on the button. He's quite a model in a sense. It's like if you want to write adventure stories, you want to read Edgar Rice Burroughs and the Tarzan books and the Mars books, because you're just propelled from beginning to end on a somewhat more rarefied level.

Dickens had that ability. And of course it could be distributed wholesale, but doing that would hand weapons to people you don't want to be able to be heard. You know, when you teach people to speak and think in academies, you reduce their effectiveness to their associates. So yeah, no, we had some very productive experiments in mass literacy, including a phrase, a label that's vanished from use.

There was constant talk of something called the act of literacy. As long as you read well, you can develop original thinking, but you can't communicate it. But to be able to master spoken speech, you can talk to anybody and they can actually understand what you're saying, or written speech were known as the act of literacies.

The British government made those a crime, a prisonable offense to teach ordinary people. The act of literacy is not reading because you want your flunkies to be able to read so they can follow your orders, so you can go and play golf or go fishing. But to actually communicate dissident thinking and writing, you can reach way beyond yourself.

So the act of literacies are, you find in the handful of elite private boarding schools, this tradition preserved. In fact, in the academy tradition all over the world, there's a clear understanding that to be able to blink your eyes and knock off 300 words on anything at all, including a subject you know nothing about, is de rigueur.

And so it is to be able to speak fluently, even on things you don't, where you can see. And I would love to know how it was done. The current president is masterful, not just good, he's masterful to nuances of speech that can only happen, doesn't happen naturally. There.

Where on earth was that training? There are little figures he uses that have fancy Latin names to them there. And of course, Bill Clinton was no slouch, but he comes out of a populist preacher tradition and is masterful with what he does. But the other is a formally trained science of speech.

And I listened to the modulations, you know, you can shift from one idiom to another. And I said, somebody with this odd background all over the world, who's my daddy, who's my mommy, you know, something intervened there. It's no accident, by the way, that Bill Clinton suddenly emerges from a state in which Rockefeller is the governor.

Who was Bill Clinton's mentor? Well, he has a variety of mentors, the very fact that he steered into Yale, which is probably of the elite universities, the one that keeps the class tradition, the British class tradition, most actively alive. In fact, they all fled from Harvard when the Unitarians took over and are talking, you know, we're all in this together.

So they bailed out of Harvard, headed west, dropped the biggest load, no pun intended, in New Haven, but continued on a line that you can trace all the way across to Seattle, leaving behind traces of this brilliant class-based thought. I once, years ago, and don't ask me to reclaim it now, but I once actually did trace the movement from the evacuation of Harvard in about 185, 1810.

What had happened was the Unitarians, who were one of the great heresies of, you know, the last 500 years, they worked out a way to initially convert to whatever religion had a church in the area, and then when they were the majority, they would vote the thing out of business, take the assets, and reopen as a Unitarian parish.

The entire Massachusetts school committee, no accident, every last member was a Unitarian, even though there were less than 1% of the Massachusetts population, because they understood leverage. So, how you, the wolf, what is the symbol of the Fabian Socialists in Britain? It's the wolf in sheep's clothing. They have a big laugh at how easy it is.

You know, to fool... The funny thing is that Kitty Mugridge, no, no, no, excuse me, Beatrice Webb, who is really Fabian Socialism, she carried her husband around, but Beatrice is the welfare state architect. She was the niece of Herbert Spencer, the most articulate intellectual racist in human history. Roothog, or Die, she sat with him on his deathbed for six weeks, and both of them agreed they were after the identical goals, but by different means.

He said, "Exterminate the brutes," the famous line from Heart of Darkness, and she said, "Kill them with kindness." You know, I noticed you had Ayn Rand on your shelf. The idea of taking care of somebody else, apart from the innocent charitable thing, is that you ruin them by doing that.

It doesn't take very long to ruin them. So Beatrice Webb, the Fabian, and the great conservative Herbert Spencer, same bloodline, same goals, different methodology. Fabian Socialists also founded the London School of Economics, among many other things. Sydney and Beatrice Webb were working with Arthur Balfour in the Society for Psychical Research, I believe.

One of the other characters that was spinning in that crowd was a guy named William T. Stead, who was editor of the Review of the Reviews, died in the Titanic, and was the editor-in-chief over that last Will and Testament of Cecil Johnson. Yeah, yeah, yeah. And of course, and I have no idea how he pronounced his name, but I would call it Stead, was the character in The Lady with the Black Leather, what was, oh, a sort of international spy series on television about 20 years ago.

Diana Rigg was the female lead. And Stead was an inside joke. Kind of like the James Bond films are an inside joke to MI6 and Ian Fleming's whole career. And James Bond was an ornithologist, which is a bird watcher, which is what James Bond is. He's watching girls and playing this whole game for the De Beers cartel, which controls.

And if you believe in justified sinning, that's what a license to kill is. As for Her Majesty or whoever. Well, and Thomas Paine had some words to write about, you know, where monarchies draw their idealistic power and who created crowns and these sort of ideas where somebody is born into a situation where they're allowed to rule over other people, and that's a collectivist mentality where they expect you to sacrifice yourself to the state.

So Prussian schooling is definitely created to uphold that status quo. What is the equal and opposite? How do people transition themselves and remain individual and grow and learn and do these things for themselves? Well, I think there are a variety of smaller inspirations besides the fact that if you and I are correct, it's the natural instinct of people who sort of been made aware of the life and the arc of a life.

But oddly enough, the congregationalists are very little white-spired, beautiful churches that once I believe you couldn't vote in this state unless you were one. They taught that the Presbyterians, as Milton said, "New Presbyter is but old priest writ large," because they met together once a year. And he said, "That will ruin you having this collective mentality." The congregation is sovereign in a real congregationalist church.

I don't know how they've mutated through history. And the minister is simply the official of the moment to organize the back and forth. But the minute the minister becomes cheeky or out of line, out he goes. And usually if he asks for more money, because the minister is a functionary, the congregation gets the word directly from God.

This is of course Martin Luther's enormous breakthrough, which he couldn't sustain. That what is probably the great freeing line in human history, every man his own priest. No organization is necessary. The communication is direct. Constitutions modified it and said there's some value in other people's opinion, but not too many other.

The people who show up and donate to the church, yeah, we want to hear what they all have to say. But the minister, you know. So that was one source for a long time, these dissenting and independent religions that were unwelcome in Britain came here and there's so much space and it was so disorganized outside of cities.

And we had this infinite splintering. So that was one. I think the scale of the country itself, which couldn't be really monitored until very recently. Long ago it occurred to me that when you have to depend on say horses, no telephones, no iPads, when you get about 20 miles from the center, they don't know what you're doing.

Once a year, blue moon, they send somebody out and you say whatever the guy wants to hear. Back goes, it looks like everything's cool. That's how we had, there are no continuous governments in human history. None of them last very long and I'm sure it's because this ferment on the fringe, which isn't very far away, eventually is fatal to the idea that the hierarchy must be preserved.

I think that's just a sign that there's so many people in this country. When things can get that obviously irrational, that there's just no intellectual self-defense, there's no one left to form a sentence, let alone a paragraph, let alone have the power to get it printed in front of millions of people anymore.

And that's what I noticed. And no editor would dare print it anyway for fear the ads would dry up. Senator Oscar Calaway in 1917 addressed the Congress and he said that the JP Morgan interest, the shipbuilding powder interest, had all gotten together and bought the top, they placed editors at the top 25 newspapers in order to control the content on political policy and military policy.

So that was really the declaration, the first origins of the Council on Foreign Relations, which goal is to kind of control and mold the minds of the masses using official experts and historians and- So these clues won't leak. How about Harry Truman's speech before the US Senate in 1942 denouncing the Rockefeller interest as traitors because they were selling oil to both sides.

What he didn't know was that the Krupp cannon makers were doing the same thing, making the German cannon, selling them to the French or anyone else who would buy them. They had already become a virtual global society. But Truman's denunciation of the Rockefellers on the floor of the Senate, you would think that would be just elementary sharing with generations of school kids.

No, it doesn't exist for all practical purposes, unless you're willing to sit in the, well, I generally sit in the library stacks and go through. I did that in Columbia. I said, "I'm going to find out," oh, no, I'm going back to 1958. So I got a stack pass.

I've heard about stack pass. I'm down like in the sixth level. There's these huge stacks of popular magazines. You know, I'm interested to find out what the popular newspapers and magazines said about the Second World War before it started, for like the 90 days before it started. Let me tell you, to a publication, there not only was a certainty there was going to be war, but no worry at all, they all agreed that there was no ability on the part of any potential enemy to sustain a war, that all the gains would be right away, then they couldn't replace their losses.

I noted that Quigley said, "Not only did the British start the war with a larger air force than the Germans and more advanced technologically, but they could replace their losses and the Germans couldn't and the Japs couldn't at all. So they ended the war with the same plane they began the war with." Well, this was understood before we had a war.

This is a good way to get out of the depression. Good way to cow dissidents in the population always is to declare a national emergency. Then you have an excuse for foreclosing freedom of speech. What did Quigley do that was so unique or remarkable that no one else had done before?

Well, what Carol Quigley, the head of the Foreign Service Department at Georgetown University, no marginal school, what he did was use his invitation to be the only human being ever invited to view the files of the Council on Foreign Relations, and I believe its predecessor also. What he did was to actually write a major piece of nonfiction.

Must be 1,300 pages long, fairly small print, and he made the fatal mistake of being a superb writer and thinker so that it's accessible to anyone who gets a hold of a copy of the book. That was quite impossible beginning six months after the book was published, and I can just see the manuscript must have been this big.

So an editor asked to vet the thing and make sure. Yeah, yeah, yeah. And after all, Georgetown, this guy's safe. Out it goes. Macmillan publishes it. Sells out instantly. Instantly. And any conspiracy theory you've ever heard of is documented, not as a conspiracy theory. Gives you the name, the date, the time, the actual letters.

Good God. Well somebody got hung for that. Macmillan broke the plates, told Quigley there was no interest in the book at all. Broke the plate so it couldn't be reprinted. Quigley's on a tape recording right at the end of his life that's stored down in Georgetown in the stacks saying that they lied to him, that they had tons of who wouldn't want to read the book.

I spent six months looking for a copy of the book and finally found one in the rare book room at New York University and had it stolen. And then a couple of months later, because I'd looked in so many cities, I got a call, mysterious call from a fellow, I think turned out to be a dentist, had a radio show.

I know who he is. Okay. It's Stan Monti. Yeah, Stan Monti. He said, "I understand you're looking for a..." "Well," I said, "do you know where..." "Yes," he said, "I have some copies." Of course he had reprinted the copies. And after Monti, over the next couple of years, several other people had taken the Macmillan and reprinted it so much in fact that it became the basis for a growing number of aware people.

They weren't sure what they were aware of other than that the story was not as delivered, not in junior high and not at Harvard. It was a different story. It was a story that could accommodate two fraternity brothers at Yale running against one another for president. The big agenda.

But Quigley's real gift to the rest of us is his absolute mastery of prose and his really interesting mind and his confession that he agreed with the plot. He simply, as a good Roman Catholic, didn't apply it with the secrecy. He said, "I believe there's nothing anyone can do about this anyway." It was marvelous.

I go back whenever I feel despair. And not an easy... I mean, it's an easy read because it's so well written, but it's a big chunk. He says, for example, that the only times liberty's ever appeared in human society is when the population is privately armed with deadly weapons.

And to reach the acme of liberty, they have to have the same weapons available to them that the government has available to them. And yet we're not talking about some guy who rolls his collar up. We're talking about this internationally famous scholar. Well, at the beginning of the American Revolution, the people who were fighting against the British government had equal arms.

They were landowners. They had an interest to fight over it. That stopped being equal in the 1930s with mechanized warfare and mass production because they've had Prussian education in place for 80 years, and now everyone's an obedient worker. And Omsk Spraka allows a lot of people to do things that they normally wouldn't do, but now it's part of their job, and now it's their responsibility, and now it's their duty.

And all the things that Milgram drove home through his experiments. Look, these people will kill other people if you put a white coat on. Yes. Yes. Well, it's quite exciting. It's a hideous turn in human history, but it's quite exciting. The comprehensive surveillance mechanism prevents local groups from developing armament.

These Arabs have done the only thing of which there isn't a successful defense, and that's to blow, just what the Japs did at the end of World War II, to blow themselves up, to blow babies up, to blow, not women very often, but still they're beginning to appear as human weapons.

What you can do is suppress that activity, but you can't do it and say, "This is a free society and we're all in the game together." There are four copies, I think, of Tragedy and Hope around. Have you seen the first edition? I have, and I'm wondering when Macmillan has been forced to reprint it, very recently, the last year or two, and I'm wondering, you only have to delete key sections, still be a big book, to take the real sting out of it.

I thought somebody with young eyes and a lot of stamina ought to sit with the original edition and the reprint just to make sure. So we're doing it tomorrow afternoon. We have a first edition and we have several other reprints and we're going to... So do let me know, because I have other people I'm trying to see the idea and I could say there's projects underway and why don't you send them a little check.

Absolutely. What do you think about Quigley's book, Anglo-American Establishment? You know, I was, again, I was impressed by the thinking and the scholarship, but I think the presentation puts it beyond the reach, not beyond the understanding, but beyond the reach of ordinary people without a coach. And I do think we have a pressing need to find, without diluting the complexity, to find the idiom.

I think I said to Rich earlier, it drives me insane. Things I've been rewriting for years because I'll try them out and I'll feel that an audience misses how that plugs in. It's almost as if the audience needs a little bit of, you know, re-inspiring their curiosity, but then giving them a methodology by which they can start to reignite their learning.

And then once they bring their attention and consciousness up a little bit, then they can receive some of these other messages. In the meantime, we can be coaches and help them kind of get that. We mentioned this earlier, but the great favor Charles Darwin did for people like me is to indict the Irish as hopeless biology because my audience is a full Irish and I say, don't trust an old broken down school teacher.

Pick the book up and go to the Irish sections because it's unmistakable his scorn and contempt to dismiss them as irredeemable. The Spanish is irredeemable. It's quite a little catalog of people, not Swedish blondes, mind you. No, Darwin does that because instead of observing how things actually work, they were trying to carry out an agenda.

So he creates these ideas and he said under these ideas, you people can do what you want and it's going to make them hopeless. And if you think you're hopeless, then you're not really aspiring to climb up any ladder because there's no ladder because you've been told you're hopeless.

And he gets them to basically self-amputate their curiosity and then they bring in compulsory schooling and that cauterizes the whole thing and they're like, you won't be curious anymore. I think Darwin himself had a lot of, and he's not innocent, but he had a lot of innocence in his character.

Galton has none. None. Galton knows exactly where to drop these things to cause maximum damage and to institutionalize the anti-educational nature of school. Once it's institutionalized, nobody has to know what's going on. That's the way you make your living. If you were, for example, to extend the privileges of partial autonomy among school kids, you would shrink the establishment and that is no way to retain power or income.

If you were to find substitutions for the purchased supposed improvements in curriculum, I mean the truth is superb education doesn't cost a penny to deliver. If you understand what it is, what you're aiming for, and what you can use, it's a lot easier if you have money, but what money's usually used for is to purchase layer after layer of interventions and those interventions prevent the educational result.

Compare and contrast how Adam Smith felt about money and the earning of it to sustain oneself versus today where it's just earned to buy more and compulsory status symbols, conspicuous consumption. I must tell you, I used to be enough of a favorite at the Cato Institute that I was named the Secretary of Education in their shadow cabinet.

That has to be, oh, that's when, did you know Marshall Fritz? No, I don't know Marshall Fritz. He was a legendary member. When I discovered what Adam Smith actually said, which I wouldn't deny the key people at Cato also know, I became very, very problematical because in theory of moral sentiments, Smith, I'm going to give a shorthand here.

Smith says that to spend your time making money as a mark of insanity and what it'll buy you is a bad life, but we should be grateful to the people who do that because they assemble capital, they pay the biggest price and they create improvements for everybody else. I don't think the religion of libertarian capitalism wishes that complication to be well understood because there's no way to explain it away.

Just as he's very clear that the peasant son and the Duke son are the same people, he's very, very clear. You got to be nuts to assemble capital. What lessons can we learn from Ben Franklin? Franklin's life is the best lesson. Franklin was such, I almost slipped into Pittsburgh profanity, but I won't.

Franklin was not a morally nice human being in any way. In fact, his son broke off contact with him and never spoke to him again for 40 years for the rest of their life. So Franklin was the ultimate pragmatist. He masqueraded as a Quaker even though he had no ties whatsoever.

The French who financed the revolution talked about this marvelous Quaker. I mean, he was like a national sensation over there and he didn't disguise in his dress. I mean, he camouflaged himself. He always walked a line where he could justify what he was doing. But his life is evidence from a huge, probably a lower middle class family, a candle maker.

They always had food on the table, but his autobiography is worth its weight in gold many times because he explains how you can introduce the highest level curriculum imaginable to 10, 11 year old people. That his father, who had no touch with scholastic theory, would bring in every night a strange, stranger from the street, set an extra place at table so that the in-house culture could be infused with fresh input there.

That he and his friends decided that without mastering high level written prose, there are opportunities, I mean, he's 11 years old and they say, "How are we going to get a big time literary style when nobody?" They take the New Yorker magazine of the day, the Tatler and the Spectator, written, read by only the most hoity-toity, and they rewrote the articles in their own words and then would present the rewrite to strangers and say, "Pardon me, sir.

Could you tell me where this article might have come from?" And when everyone said, "Oh, that's Tatler or Spectator," they knew they had mastered that. Come on, they wouldn't do that at Harvard, Yale, and Princeton. These are 11, 12 year old boys and he's doing it while he's working a 60 hour week at labor and he's putting capital aside for his own business by selling beer to the printers at their lunch hour.

How does he get to do that? He goes to the owner of the print shop and he says, "Look, you're letting these guys go for lunch. Some of them are coming back woozy, some of them are not coming back at all. Let me bring the buckets of beer in, make a penny, and they'll be chained to the machine." That's Ben Franklin, mind you.

So his accomplishments, I mean, he's the reason we have a post office. He's the reason there's a University of Pennsylvania. He's probably the reason the German isn't a co-evil in Pennsylvania because all these little German pottish groups were not speaking English any more than they could get by with and he found ways to put political pressure and penalties on them if their kids weren't surrendered to English training.

Now he's a miraculous example of what nobody can do if they know what to do and have some discipline, mind you. I would say nobody should not read Franklin's autobiography very, very slowly. Do not read it for the story but for the details and you have a formula that anybody could use.

So there's for Ben Franklin. What could a student learn from the life experiences, young life experiences of Thomas Edison? Well, Mr. Edison from New Jersey begged his mother not to waste his time sending him to school. That's before he was 12 years old and to allow him to go west during the Civil War where opportunity was burgeoning and she let him do it a thousand miles from home.

He became a train boy. That's the lowest job imaginable. You know, at whistle stops you go out and buy sodas or coffee. You know, you're everybody's factotum. But he talked the train into letting him put a broken down printing press in the boxcar and then during the Civil War, because he was able to connect things into new realities, he knew that the train stations got Civil War news at the same time the newspapers did.

But the newspapers didn't come out to certain hours. He used his printing press to run current Civil War news. Instead of auctioning off children at the whistle stops, he sold the Grand Trunk Herald. And because he wasn't the nicest guy in the world, he varied the price from a nickel to a quarter depending on what the audience could pay.

He put together a substantial stake that founded his own. Plus, he used the stake in the years he was doing this to start three businesses, each one of which depended on the advantage he had by going up and down the Michigan length there. Now let me see, I'm years away from, one of them, one of them was that he could distribute magazines and newspapers free.

He'd just pick them up at some drop point and he could put anyone out of business because he didn't really have to charge much to do that. There were a couple of other, I think one was a food business so that when he ran out to get something for the passengers, he was the owner of the business.

And there was a third one. He of course has 1,007 patents. Without a day in college, in fact, when he founded GE, it wasn't called GE, that's what it became, he made the test for hiring executive staff so hard that he used to laugh and say nobody with a college degree can pass this test.

Now notice if all of this documented history was, and it's your birthright, if this were shared with you in third grade and fourth grade and fifth grade, notice that you would arrive at the age of 12 with a whole different idea of what your prospects were rather than your hands shaking because you got a C on your report card and that probably would doom your career.

I mean, it's a colossal crime and I'm speaking now as a detective story fan. I'm staying away from the moral high ground here because it's so far beyond what we define as good and evil. And for the people who do this, it is good because as Darwin's Malthus, as Thomas Malthus says clearly in his essay, climbing the mountain, the high ground, the moral mountain, he says it's a kindness.

These people are doomed to such miserable lives that to hasten their demise is a great kindness to them. You work them to death, you starve them. You're doing God's work. He of course was a parson of the Church of England, which Charles was trained to be, but left in Galton.

We had people like Lippman and Bernays who recognized that people were inherently irrational. And instead of trying to teach them critical thinking, they say, let's use fear and confusion to control them even more. And Spinoza as the author of that, get a hold of there around a translation of Tractatus Religio Politicus published in 1690.

And any outlook you have on Spinoza will change radically. You're in the hands of a man who could put Adolf Hitler and his high command in the shade. He had worked out all the ways. There weren't any escape loopholes. And he sold the plan to monarchs, you know, who had a long, hard slug to sell it to, you know, the traditional upper classes who still had scraps of morality, traditional morality.

They still hadn't become justified sinners. Thomas Jefferson in Notes on the State of Virginia. He's trying to assemble, because Spinoza's ideas are already in America, he's trying to assemble the possible good use that could come out of an institution of schooling. That's why shallow teacher college texts say that Jefferson was one of the pioneers.

But what Jefferson said was that unless five things are done, it will be a mere secular religion. And as soon as I saw that Spinoza's direct positive program to get rid of emotional religion, that's a wild card. Secular religion's okay. And that's what the Church of England did. Wasn't inspired.

Men sat around in committees and figured out what God would want. We have one minute left on this tape for today. My question would be in the last minute, who was Niccolo Machiavelli and why should every school child take a gander at what? You've got to take a gander at Machiavelli.

Machiavelli was a Florentine at a time when Italy wasn't a unified nation. It was a collection of powerful city-states, or at least some were. And Florence was one of the most powerful, but it had important rivals. And Machiavelli, he was a middle-level politician, call him. And he was ambitious.

So he wanted to, it was the famous Borgia. Cesare Borgia and Medici. He wanted to do what Henry Kissinger did, is to establish himself as a fountain of utility for the Borgias. And he really had an excellent mind. And it's hard to tell what his character was because he has other books that are rather morally grounded.

But for the first time in history, the secrets that have been talked about in drawing rooms, maybe leaked a little bit like Hobbes' Leviathan there, suddenly it was an unbroken presentation of how the prince should maintain and enlarge his power there. It electrified the planet. First of all, the people who already knew these things were ticked.

And the people who suspected them were put in a moral quandary of buying. Now it would be a deliberate choice. But for the great unwashed and for the religious power that represented them, here was, and his name was after all, Nick. There was old Nick. We could give us ten years and no one could pass through school without being aware of these high or low points in the creation of their own society.

Then at least they would have choices. And I know some would choose to sell on. But others, because of that romantic quality in the young, that's why we send them over to get blown up, would they do what they did in the 60s? It's a turning point in American history.

After national policy... I'll just mark where we are. Remind me tomorrow, I'll do this. After national policy was contradicted by the riffraff in colleges and high schools, word went out that was never to happen again. A group called the Trilateral Commission published a book, they subsidized it, NYU, it's worth picking up, it's called The Crisis of Democracy, 1975.

And in shorthand, the crisis is, if the people take it seriously, we've got trouble on our hands. So we've got to hide power and how decisions are made even more rigorously than they've done in the past. Just like Hobbes said, power is never where it seems to be. It's never there.

Those are always the, you know, the black catch. If only Hobbes was writing for the average person, if only the person was literate, if only they had critical thinking so that their literacy didn't make them a slave. Yeah, it makes you think of people like Hobbes. Oh, it's just another book.

It's a man's book. That's his opinion. Well, he was the advisor to the king, and the book stayed in print, you know, for 450 years. It's actually in the great books. It's in with Machiavelli. Machiavelli and Hobbes, volume 23. From that set over there. It's the great books of the Western world.

It's written by Chicago. I was accepted to the University of Chicago when I was in sophomore in high school. My mother wouldn't let me go, and my uncle graduated from there. It's all good for right now. Some won't be up there. I just wanted to make sure. That was loud and clear.

All right. First, I would like to present you with a book. Not that you don't have enough books, but this particular book was written by a friend of Thomas Beckett, and he wrote it for Thomas Beckett. For Thomas Beckett didn't have, in this author's opinion, enough intellectual self-defense to do what he was doing, and he was trying to help him out.

His name is John of Salisbury, and it was written in the 12th century. I thought, if there was such a thing as reincarnation, this guy reminds me of you, and that you would greatly enjoy this book. I will read it with pleasure. 12th century defense of logic and reason in a time of irrationality.

I took the liberty of, just in the prologue, I marked a couple pages there that has some, there's a couple quotes in there where he basically lays out why he's doing it. I thought, I got a chuckle out of it, and I thought you could always use a good laugh now and then.

This will be the very next thing I read. All right. Now I have one last bit of housekeeping. Let me see. If you could read that to the camera while, at the same time, holding this mug, and it'll be the intro for the episode. Or you can change it however you like.

Give me the high sign. Hi, I'm John Taylor Gatto, and this is What You've Been Missing. Awesome. Yesterday the name of R. Gordon Watson came up, and you raised your eyebrows. What does that name mean to you? Well, it means to me, Soma, the magic mushroom, and that Watson wasn't some fringe nut, but some Wall Street heavy hitter.

I read it with great pleasure, not once, but until it fell apart. Before you leave today, I have a DVD for you. I just have to burn it. I have the folder made and everything, and in there I put Watson's Russia, Mushrooms, and History book, which is very hard to find on PDF.

I just thought you'd get a kick out of it. I will get a big kick out of it. What does the name Antony Sutton mean to you? Actually, I corresponded briefly with Sutton. He made the contact after he read Underground History, and his books about the rise of Wall Street and the rise of the Soviet Union and Wall Street and the rise of Nazism were important parts in a slow process of overcoming my own skepticism.

I mean, I had all the pieces. I had many of the pieces, rather, but they seemed to add up to a reality that I could find no hint of recognition of. In the copious reading I had done and kept current, why weren't there any references to this at all?

For occasionally when someone like Ramsey Clark would seem to breach the wall of security, Ramsey was toast. He was marginalized. No one ever mentioned Ramsey again. He wasn't a guest on any show. Well, the same thing happened to Sutton because he worked for the Hoover Institute at Stanford University, which is very prestigious, and then once they started reading his work, they're like, "You can't write this." He said, "That's the ticket out of here.

I must go find out what's going on." I think he wrote nine or more books on these various subjects. When you see how Wall Street funded the Bolsheviks and Wall Street was funding the Nazis and the Bushes and the Harrimans and all those families that were also eugenicists and the ones that want to do compulsory schooling and tell you what to do with your kids and all these other things, there's a very small-knit group.

Once you try to understand the philosophy of what makes them the utopians that are trying to shape everyone else's lives and violate their volition, I thought it was like that's overwhelming to discover that, but then you discover someone like Lysander Spooner or Bastiat, Frederick Bastiat, and read the book The Law, and it's so simple, and yet if you don't understand the simplicity, it's easy for these other groups to take it away from us.

Yes. Very easy to marginalize as, "Oh, it's time for this nonsense." I mentioned in our session yesterday that as I was poking around for other reasons in the history of American adoption, I kept running into the people who were the architects of American schooling, and I said, "What possible correspondence?" The chapter in underground history, Daughters of the Barons of Runnymede, is actually a kind of lens into my brain trying to prove to myself there was some sense in following this road.

If the heirs of the people who fought at Runnymede had maintained an 850-year continuity, and then I found other organizations that had, I said, "It's possible that someone with an agenda other than this." So who was Ignatius Loyola? Well, Loyola was the founder of the Army of Jesus, the Jesuits who penetrated the Reformation and eventually produced the phenomenon in the history records as the Counter-Reformation.

They slowed the momentum down because the Reformation really is founded, although Calvin is the eminence Gris. Luther's "Every man his own priest" is this wild declaration of radicalism. To get rid of the religious priesthood is to get rid of all middlemen, yes. There were many countries that outlawed the Jesuits in the late 1700s, and one of those was the province or electorate of Bavaria.

And then there was a Jesuit professor of canon law named Adam Beischaupt who created a group. What influence specifically has that group had on the education system? Well, to pursue that line would require so many illusions. I prefer not to enter an area where I can't field the hardest questions with substantive facts, but certainly the sense of powers behind the scenes is very, very strong.

Let me give you a few specifics. It's been clear since the beginning of standardized testing that the tests do not predict, and the best American, the most prestigious American universities have either dismissed it or kept it in pro forma place. But actually, as Harvard and Princeton told me, it's not a significant determinant.

They just don't want to rock the boat, the glue that holds this pyramid together. They don't predict then why is 10% of the school year and school budget devoted to exerting stress on so many millions of people and through the children, their families, and why does so many innocently ignorant school teachers say this will determine your future when it only does if you convince yourself that it determines your future?

It has no predictive power at all other than to signal this is someone who will memorize whatever you ask him to memorize. This is a useful skill, an anti-skill. In the book, the Leipzig Connection, Basics in Education, toward the end of the book after talking about Pestalozzi, it talks about Pestalozzi's mentor, who was Johann Caspar Lavater, who was working and experimenting on Swiss lower privileged children in a universal schooling system.

He was also a grandmaster of the Illuminati. So since Pestalozzi and Lavater and all these other key figures that were in the Prussian education system were also members of the Prussian Illuminati, it just seemed natural to see the takeover and undermining of nationhood of our society, the taking away of our identity through the school system is also making we as a nation incoherent.

It just seems like there is a very militaristic strategy that's been in place a long time. Notice what the specific mechanism is. It's an artificial extension of childhood, theoretically to the grave, but certainly beyond the point where learning anything is easy. As long as you indulge childish fears and childish appetites long enough, you've effectively rendered somebody harmless.

You can see it in its crudest form in the military, in the training of recruits, or in fraternities in the hazing of freshmen. But actually, yesterday I hope we talked about Richard Branson and the turning point of his life at age four when his mother drops him miles from home.

But most of human history anywhere on the planet, childhood is over by the age of seven. And even in the most permissive cultures, it's over by the age of 11 or 12. People are, even in our own country at the beginning of the 20th century, a substantial number of young women at the age of 13 were married or becoming married.

I'm thinking in particular of, I'm thinking of an 18 volume History of the World that used to be for 20 years the premium of Book of the Month Club, written by a husband and wife team. And still a rather respectable history in an inside historian say, "It's not bad history.

It's very, very." >> They also do a history of philosophy set? >> Yes. >> I have it. Gino Denning just sent it to me last week. I just scanned in. It's on my desk if you want to go get it. All we need is the last name and it'll trigger.

In any case, the fellow who had been trained, I think at UChicago as a historian, marries his wife who becomes his co-writer and-- >> Will Durant. >> Will Durant and Ariel. Ariel was either 13 or 15. There's a dispute on the internet about how she wasn't older than 15.

And I suspect she was 13 when they married. Was Will some form of sexual oppressor? No. Instead of going to junior high school, Ariel studied professional historiography and its protocols. And she was a full partner in the writing. And Will died, pre-deceased her 10 years. And she continued to lecture, having begun her productive life when people began their productive lives.

To extend this to the late teens or beyond the late teens is to fly in the face of the first admiral in American history being in charge of a warship. >> Farragut. >> Farragut at the age of 12. Or George Washington being the surveyor of Culpeper County, Virginia in his mid-teens.

>> Very entrepreneurial attitudes that they have. >> Or Jefferson running a plantation, his parents both dead, 250 employees. He's 12 or 13. But these examples go on and on and on. Why have we marginalized the young who, whatever they lack in experience, more than make up for in resilience, in acuity, they bring new eyes to old situations, which is the secret of scientific invention.

So it's done because they're the most dangerous. They're the least overlaid with these conditioning. And of course, that must have been understood way, way back in history. Alexander the Great, after all. >> You're noticing, you're observing that values have changed since the time of our founding fathers who were literate, autonomous, entrepreneurial.

They also grew hemp. They knew the value of hemp. >> How about George? He did it for medicinal purposes, so I assume it wasn't. >> And Jefferson traveled the planet collecting different strains, and they had contests, and they wrote letters about their, "Hey, I've grown this strain, and it does this." And they're competing.

And so the fact that you're not taught about this in school, and the role that hemp played in making the sales and the clothing and everything was hemp dependent. >> Or to miraculous fiber. There are some rather sober accounts of the lengths to which the Hearst family went, because they were the largest forest owners in the country.

They supplied the wood pulp for newspapers. But hemp newspapers are infinitely superior to wood pulp. So they moved heaven and earth to create the narrative of re-ferment. >> So if we're using wood pulp paper to make books these days, we're not only killing trees which eat CO2 and produce oxygen to make paper towels and toilet paper and all these other things beyond books.

But I noticed that a lot of the books that are printed recently, the pages are disintegrating. And when you get old books from the 1800s, 1700s that are printed on hemp paper, they're still pretty existent. We have a Johnson's Dictionary from 1848, and it's not printed on the same wood pulp acid paper that we have today.

So can you comment on ... They undermine education, but they're also undermining just our ability to get our hands on the books to educate ourselves, closing libraries and using types of paper that basically turn to dust. >> Oh, yes. Since I've been in college in the '50s, there's been a prevailing wise guy ethic that you don't actually need to read these old books because there are plenty of abstracts, digests of these old books in existence, and that will give you the guts of the old book.

Well, let's take Marcus Aurelius' Meditations. What the digests don't give you is the wealthiest, most powerful man in the world. I mean, I don't know if that confluence has ever existed after Aurelius saying that nothing you can buy is worth having and nobody you can order around with your power is worth associating with.

It's a rather acid ... >> So how old were you when you first met Marcus Aurelius? >> I was initially in translation in sixth grade in a coal mining town in western Pennsylvania where it was offered in translation, and of course, it's eminently readable. And then in ninth grade, there was an option of reading it in Latin or doing something else.

So my mother insisted that I read it, Julius Caesar in Latin, "Gauleis omnis tuis in parte stres," at 75, or "Coram unum in colon belgio." I had to memorize the early part of it. But Caesar's Gallic Wars isn't some old piece of fustian that, you know, if you're an elitist, you read to plug into the ancient world.

It establishes the principle that a weaker force can whip a larger force by dividing. >> And being better prepared. >> Yeah. You can set the larger force against one another. And you see that in schooling, the ordinary classes are set against one another by constant meaningless testing and small inconsequential prizes being given to the people who test best and wiggle their hands in the air so that the ordinary classes are divided for a period of 12 years through meaningless competition.

I noticed when I was in basic training in the Army and was told that I was going to learn in three hours how to take a rifle with 57 parts of blindfold and put it back together, I knew that I could not do that. I knew I could not do that.

And yet in a room with 500 other scared young people, we all did it. And they didn't say, and he finished first, you know, the important thing is what do we learn that's enhanced by competition? I mean, what real do we learn? It gets in the way because now your rank becomes a factor rather than the quality of what you've learned.

I made these ideas clear to 13-year-olds at all times and found that after about 90 days, they became as addicted to ideas and the whys of things as I was. Never a new idea would emerge in the classroom. This is quite literally true. I would grab a piece of chalk and write it on the wall.

I'd climb a ladder, write it on the ceiling. Inside of that first 90 days, there were hundreds of digestive ideas everywhere. On the floors when there was no room left. On the backsides of the room, I had world maps and national maps and I could leap up and point to the origin of the idea as we know it or simultaneously they came.

As I say, it was roughly 90 days when classes that were considered the stupidest, people who'd never eaten off a tablecloth in their life were actually, they were hot to talk about ideas. We couldn't have that. How could we maintain the social order and the economic order if we had people who became fully alive when they were young and could get up when they're knocked down?

I think a lot of the problem, it's very easy to assign this completely to sinister motives and there are certainly sinister motives at work. But I think part of it is the problem of how we would manage a society that didn't require managing. I don't think anyone's been able to solve that problem.

The early America probably did it better than anyone we have easy access to. I think it's not about anarchy. Anarchy is just a void or a vacuum of government. It's about being autonomous. If you take away the government, it doesn't automatically give people critical thinking or the self-reliance that they need and the compassionate communication that they need to work together with other people to achieve goals.

Your explanation of how you learned the most powerful lesson of doing the impossible, you knew you couldn't do that and after an hour or so, you had just done something that you knew you couldn't do. I knew I couldn't do it. You took that experience and you taught younger people that they can do that because now they have more years.

You had to be at least 18 to be in the army. Now you're teaching 13-year-olds that the things that you know you can't do, you don't really know that. Right. You need to get that up here first. Right. The other question that I would follow up with is, in your third interview on Gnostic Media with Jan Ervin, I heard you mention these words, "trivium" and "quadrivium." I thought it maybe is something that was off your radar, but you spoke eloquently about it.

Where do you have familiarity with the trivium and quadrivium and what does it mean to you? I went to Jesuit boarding school in third grade. So I'm between the ages of seven and a half and eight and a half years old. The curriculum, reflecting back on it, which I first began to do 15, 20 years ago, the intellectual diet was not modified in any way for our tender years.

And the devices of discipline and motivation that would be used in an authoritarian world, they were not cherry of using. But I do believe that their hearts were in the right place. I remember being humiliated, I told you privately about this yesterday, by a Jesuit brother from St. Vincent's College, which is across the street from Xavier Academy where I went and was beaten on a daily basis by the Ursuline nuns, sometimes for mispronouncing French there.

But the brother was talking to us in the middle of the Second World War about the causes of the First World War. And he had written a list of causes on the board. I had a magnificent memory before Drink intervened. And he said, "Could somebody face the back of the room now and tell us all the causes?" And I, with my memory, I did, word for word.

And he burst into a harsh kind of laughter and he said, "You fool, you believe me." He erased the board and said, "These are the causes of the war. Now could you do it?" And now, chastened, I did, a lot less confidently. And this time, the room exploded with his scorn.

He did it again. He erased the board. He said, "You will never know the causes until you embed yourself into the primary documents and see how complicated a thing this is." That changed my life. I only wish I might have had a second year there. Before you can form your logical understanding, he said, you need to get in check with the knowledge, the actual grammar.

What are the artifacts? Where do these things document? And what's the primary sources? And this probably has occurred to other groups, but the intellectual part of the universal Christian religion, the Catholic Church, had a respect for scholarship. And what happens as you collect data is that it forms itself into patterns.

And if you record the patterns and test them to see that they hold true, eventually that suggests behaviors. So they created a two-formula, a basic formula, which Dorothy shares. And I'd urge all your listeners to read her essay, "The Lost Tools of Learning." She's a marvelous detective story writer.

And the detective stories really aren't genre stories. They're a comedy of manners about the British upper classes. But the trivium was becoming comfortable with a pattern of thinking in which you could dispel confusion. And then the quadrivium was pushing it farther into specialized areas. One of the huge mistakes that schooling makes, even homeschooling, is to organize the agenda and the goals in terms of subject learnings, English, math, social studies, science, because those categories, while better than chaos, are so crude they tend to mask what you're actually after.

Take the universal study of the English language. What you're after is a mastery of the written language, the spoken language, and your own writing. So you've got these three divisions. And now if you're after those things, your measurement's not through memory. It's through performance, which is so much more accurate, as we spoke about a little earlier in this session.

The standardized tests aren't predictive, and every first-class university knows that. You don't select people because they scored here on the SATs or whatever other tests are administered because they end up disappointing you, and you waste people who actually-- In real life, we don't use standardized tests to make decisions, whereas you actually do use the trivium to observe, to process that information, and to make informed decisions.

Right. And while there are personal variants-- so I think the fundamental thing, as every philosopher in human history has said, is know yourself. This is the fundament. Now you can take principles like trivium and quadrivium, and you can do a personal adaptation of the-- you know how they will work for you.

But the course I actually followed at the beginning was to say, I know this is not good for the kids I've been hired to teach, and where will I find an unerring structure? I said, obviously, it will be in the most expensive elite private boarding schools. So I made a 10-year study, although it paid off at the end of the first year, and I distilled the 12 secrets of the boarding school curriculum of power.

Now I'm talking about not private schools versus public schools at all, because most private schools follow the template that public schools laid down. I'm talking about the inner circle 20 or so. Let me just name a few of them. I'm talking about Groton, where Franklin Delano Roosevelt emerged. I'm talking about St.

Paul's, where the senator from Massachusetts who ran for president, the tall skinny guy John Kerry emerged. I'm talking about Andover, where the Bush family went. I'm talking about Choate, where John F. Kennedy emerged. I'm talking about one that not one person in 10,000 has ever heard of, Episcopal in Virginia, where John McCain, the populist, give me a break, emerged.

I learned about Episcopal from the sports section of a newspaper. I'm looking for the next Pittsburgh Pirate to feed, and suddenly I see a tiny item that says it's the homecoming football game for Episcopal Prep School in Virginia. 25,000 alumni showed up. I said, "Boy, it's got to be a misprint." I mean, I can understand a thousand.

25,000 people came from all over the world for a high school alumni game. So now I start to look and I discover that Episcopal, it's the naked revelation of the importance of religious tradition in upscale education. Over half of the elite boarding schools in the country and all of the inner circle ones are grounded on religion, almost all on the Anglican religion, which isn't faith-based.

It was put together by committees arguing about what must have been in God's mind. But also there's a respectable number that are Quaker-based. Now here we're talking about a tiny fraction of the population, no more than 100,000 people. It's produced in the 20th century, two presidents. How is that even possible?

Statistically, what would a bookie say? The odds of this little splinter group who we all are taught are innocent and unworldly and pious. So anyway, so I got the 12, I'd like to, if possible, go through a few of these because I adapted them instantly to Harlem kids and almost immediately began to produce results.

It was roughly 90 days because at first Harlem kids don't believe that anything useful to them is going to happen at a school. But after about 90 days, these kids start winning competitions with the inner circle kids of the Upper West Side of Manhattan. Instead of being amazed and wondered about, I'm called in and accused of child abuse.

What on earth are these people doing? You must have written that for, I said, I will confess. I corrected the spelling and the punctuation. But that steel trap set of ideas proving the case is not mine. I'm not up to that standard there. So I began to get hot water ever since.

Let me share a few of these. We all are vaguely aware that literacy is at the heart of an intellectual inner life. But what we don't understand is that prior to the First World War, literacy commonly was divided into passive literacy, reading, and active literacy, speaking and writing. And none of us are aware that in colonial days to teach active literacy to ordinary people was a crime.

Why? Because reading, you're locked in your own head and you still have the benefit of being able to read the boss's instructions about what to do. But if you can speak well, as our current president can, or write well, you can reach way beyond your own skull and recruit allies.

That's a no-no for ordinary people. They're supposed to be so inarticulate, or their writing will look so funny with ink blots and things in it that no one treats them seriously. So strong competencies in the active literacies are at the core of elite private boarding schools like Groton, St.

Paul's, Choate, Lawrenceville, Gunnery, Hotchkiss. And each one of those schools, by the way, has some legendary tycoon as a patron, or sometimes more than one. Canton, Connecticut is J.P. Morgan's baby. And this is in no particular order. It's in all institutional forms. You're supposed to know the logic, the steps that we arrived at a prison system, or a library system, or all the other, the military system, obviously.

Third, some of your listeners, watchers, viewers will be school teachers. And if you teach history or literature, you will run into a great deal of difficulty moving kids. But if you approach those subjects and share this with the kids, that what we're after here is not a good story or memorizing details from Jane Austen for the test.

We're after a theory of human nature. And anyone who's written a book that lasts more than their own time has spent years closely observing people in interaction. And the trace left behind is an insight that you might spend a lifetime and never have. So that's what we're after, a theory of human nature drawn from history or philosophy or literature or law.

Or the greatest trove that's unexamined is theology. I used to go to auctions and there'd be boxes of religious books, 50 cents or a dollar from a century ago. Nobody wanted them at auctions. But I bought them because they were cheap. And one day I have a barn in upstate New York.

I picked one up idly and I was in the hands of an intense thinker who was drawing on all history and philosophy to create an insight into human nature there. And I said, "Interesting that theology is something that we don't regard at all if we're ordinary people." So a few other of the secrets of the boarding school curriculum of power, mastery of the social forms.

And I would say it didn't take more than two days to take kids who had never eaten off a tablecloth and get them to see that the signs they give off when there's an egg glass spilled on the shirt or when they walk down the street listening to the radio or when they're too aggressive in approaching somebody shuts off opportunity.

They're like little badges that I don't want to speak to that person. And a lot of what we consider as racial or ethnic prejudice is simply that the disguise of these social forms is unknown to the person who then is discriminated against. And I said, "Don't believe me." I said, "I'm going to instruct you in a superficial gloss of how to approach people and then the intellectual excuse we'll use is I'm sending you out of school for days to gather data for statistical processing.

We're going to test the local comparison with what the New York Times says the nation is thinking. And I'll teach you the elementary statistics in one class session that you need." And it's a legitimate project. But meanwhile, you don't want to approach somebody and have them jump back or say, "If you don't get away from me, I'll call the police." And that's what you think will happen because of the overt racial prejudice on the liberal West Side of Manhattan.

But it won't happen, I guarantee. Nor did it. Nor did it. The transition, I won't say it was 100%, but it surely was 80% simply from having a gloss on these social forms. And then this should tickle people watching this segment. Then suddenly I saw that the rules of access to the great institutions of New York City by young people, which required, let's say at the sub-treasury building where the gold is kept down in Wall Street, one teacher for every five students.

Well, a public school class of 30 students, you're not going to muster six teachers. And I said to the kids, "How do they know you're not a teacher?" "Well, we're only 13." Nobody knows that. They know it because you're chewing gum with your mouth open. They know it because you're scratching your head.

They know it because you slouch. They know it because you giggle. They know it because you carry a notebook that falls on the ground every few minutes and paper goes everywhere. Why don't we master what a college student who could be a student teacher, what signs they would give off.

They'd carry a clipboard. They'd cock it at an arrogant angle on their hip. They would be slightly nasty in taking attendance every few minutes or saying, "When your mother hears about this, Jack." I said, "Let's see if we can pick five people out of this class and penetrate security at the sub-treasury building, at the mayor's office, anywhere.

We were never caught, not once. Now, the Bronx Zoo says one for every 15 kids, but how are you going to even get two teachers to take kids to the Bronx Zoo there?" Well, it's easy if the kids can shift from being 13 to being arrogant college student teachers.

Never caught in eight years of doing this. Well, that's real self-esteem. It gives them real confidence from experience. To be able to go into Columbia, sit in the back of a class and see what college is like before you have to go to college takes away a lot of anxiety.

I don't know why you said that. Oh, okay. We were only 20 blocks from Columbia, and I have a degree from Columbia, so I understood that the law school classes, there are 300 people in these banks of seats. The only way, no one takes attendance there. Your grades on the tests are evidence of whether you've been attending or not.

But if you sit there slouch and pulling gum out of your mouth, yeah, someone will say, "Who are you?" Never caught once. So our age, this artificial extension of childhood that we talked about at the beginning of this particular session, is a secret of crowd control where people become their own prisoners by adopting the cultural signs that they're immature or they're not of our group.

And simply by seeing these things as languages, there isn't one English language, there are none that are modified according to the... Someone like Obama, how, I'm not sure, they understand this and they can shift effortlessly from one idiom to another. And I would say that to the kids. I would say, "Look, here's why you're reading English poetry." Now, there are a lot of reasons, but here's why we're doing it.

You're going to find that the ordinary unit of meaning in the English language is three hard stresses long or sometimes four, but often it's two, three or four. But as you enter the realm of intellect and you have more to say or more nuances to say, you need larger units of meaning.

Five, that's iambic pentameter. Even six, that's hexameters. The Greeks use seven septameters. And I want you to feel that and you'll feel it by reading and memorizing some of this poetry. You'll have the models built into your head to shift back and forth according to your audience there. Shakespeare to the ignorant writes iambic pentameter lines.

And one of the reasons you don't want to even look at Shakespeare is all the lines seem to be pretty much the same length. But I'm going to teach you something that he knew four centuries ago. It looks like they're all the same length. But there's a breath pause in this speech after two heartbeats.

The next breath pause is 12 before you've delivered your meaning, three, four. There's this inner jazz at work underneath this regular pattern. You can learn to do that once someone exposes the secret to you. That's half the game. And the other half of the game is simply building the models into yourself so you don't have to think, "Hmm, now here." And yet we use an exercise that if I tell you immediately turned horribly dull writers into at least modestly interesting writers, and it's totally mathematical, I said it'll take you a while to incorporate what I just said.

So what I'm going to ask you to do is write one to 20 on 20 pieces of paper, put them in some sort of container and draw them out at random and then list what you've drawn out at random. And I said, "Now you're going home, not for homework, but to learn this massive skill.

And you're going to write a paper on X subject, and if one is the first number that came out, the first sentence will be one word long, one beat long. If the second one is 20, it'll be 20 long." Immediately these horrible... Remember, I had to read 120 of these things at a time.

And one of the reasons they were horrible is they were all... everyone had either a three or a four unit or a mixture in there. Now they had the kind of jams that readers aren't completely conscious of, but they record as something interesting about it, even when he's writing about a milk separator.

And you as a filmmaker, remember Eisenstein's film of the peasants watching milk being separated on a Russian farm in the 1920s. Why is it so awfully interesting? Because he understood things that the eye is looking at the movement of light around the screen. It's looking at entrances and exits.

Thirteen-year-old kids from Harlem can master these secrets just as well as 25-year-old Harvard students can. And then they become preternaturally sophisticated. What on earth? How do you know these things? Because they're our birthright. We're biologically equipped to learn this way unless somebody sticks their oar in and intervenes and says, "Read Jack London and memorize." That's the school system.

We've all heard about the hardwood. What's going on with this girl? >> Okay, I just need you to, for a minute, if you could just reframe this camera because I think something happened. >> No, when I came in, the camera was moved. I guess someone was monitoring on it or something.

>> Either way, I just want you to make sure that you focus. >> I think, and I won't be as windy and the rest, but I think that everyone will profit. And you'll see some evidences of the trivium at work here. These are the 12 secrets of the elite boarding school curriculum of power.

Are we on yet? >> Just one second. We'll be back on. >> Because the next one- >> That's what people don't learn in public school, specifically what is different. They're doing this and this is about their success in life and managing the other people who don't know it. >> Oh, yeah.

>> Right. >> So the next one will be an absolute eye-opener that took me about five years to tease out of the admissions procedures at Sarah Lawrence or the other inner circle colleges. >> You guys might as well do a tape change now. >> Yeah. >> No, mine's out.

>> I'll turn these lights off. >> The 70, I have to do manually anyway. >> Okay, all right, cool. >> We've all heard about the hard way to learn, John. Is there an easy way to learn? >> If you begin and understand yourself thoroughly and you have a lot of raw experience, I think natural powers are released.

And I do believe that all the graceful, easy learning comes from people who are comfortable inside their own skin because they understand and people who've had a lot of early experience. And I operated on those principles even though it was illegal in a public school setting. I set aside one full day a week.

I won't get into the politics of how this was pulled off, but it was never easy, where the kids could follow their own instincts anywhere in New York City they wanted to go. One full day a week where I took them on group projects, different parts of the five boroughs in New York City, group projects that would end up with a tangible goal, such as testing.

Remember, this one might amuse the people watching this. The New York Times announced on the front page about three weeks before the Ed Koch, Dave Dinkins election of, let me say, 1980, somewhere around there, that Dinkins was hopelessly behind by 17 points. And I had a black kid in the class come up and ask me why the city was so prejudiced.

And I said, "Why do you say that?" And he said, "Well, look at this." And I said, "Why do you believe that's true? Maybe that's to get you not to go and vote." "I don't know," I said, "but I do know that it says here in small print that they only interviewed 300 people.

There's 8 million of us." I said, "There's 120 people in my five classes. Of each one, you do 20 interviews, and we do it according to the way you get a random distribution, and that's easy enough to find out. Well, we can have many times larger samples than—" So that happened.

We gathered the data. We processed it. And we discovered about a week after the Times said he was hopelessly behind that he actually was ahead by a fraction of one point. That's quite askew. The election came. He won in the closest race in New York history, but noticed that a random group of 120 13-year-olds had produced more accurate information.

The math in the statistical processing is hardly daunting for a fifth grader. So why aren't the 70 million captive schoolchildren involved in, if nothing else, data gathering, since obviously it's a crucial part of commerce? Well, there must be a reason they're not used that way, nor do they hear about statistical sampling until they're in college, for the most part.

Why not? According to Alfred North Whitehead, one of the major mathematicians of the 20th century, other than addition, subtraction, multiplication, and division, the only crucial piece of math for everyone to learn is statistical sampling predictions, because the society, the economies organized around those things, the politics is organized around those things.

He said that in Aims of Education, which I think was published in the mid-1940s. Well, you know, 60 years have gone by, and where is it? He's hardly a radical. Is it possible to train fleas before you break their will? And what can one learn from the gene sequencing hobbies of 11-year-olds?

I got a foundation award at a fancy hotel in Washington, D.C., I guess about 15 years ago. It was certainly a while ago. And sitting next to me was an 11-year-old boy receiving the same award from the foundation. And I mean, I was tickled. He was this little skinny Chinese kid, and he has made some scientific breakthroughs.

So you know, I'm patronizing him the way I've been trained to do. And I said, "Well, how did you learn to sequence genes, you know, instead of swimming?" I'm a swimming champion. I remember he said that to me. I have a lot of medals. And he was a well-balanced 11-year-old kid.

And these days, I understand he's a college professor in Seattle. But in any case, he said, "My uncle or my grandfather explained to me that the way you train fleas," he had a soft part in me because I used to go to Hubert's Flea Circus on 42nd Street and watch fleas draw Roman chariots and swing on trapezes.

He said, "You've got to break their spirits. If you put fleas in a container, they'll instantly leap off and head off in all directions because they have flea agendas. And even they don't all off in the same direction. They have individual agendas." So he says, "You've got to break that autonomy in the flea first.

And the way you do that is you put them in a container, small, with a lid on. And the fleas keep attempting to follow their own agenda. And they strike themselves over and over again. And if you come back in an hour or so, they're all huddled in a mass together.

Now when you take the lid off, they don't even try to escape." Now he said, "You can impose your will on the flea." The minute the 11-year-old kid said that to me, I knew that I had been hired as the lid on the container. Not that I hadn't sabotaged it somewhat, but nevertheless, that's what we all had been hired to do.

And this principle was understood. Training fleas was a delight of emperors thousands of years ago. And whoever trained those fleas understood the principle and saw they could be applied, as it is in military training, to human beings, as it is in much religious training. Not all, but much. So you've got a character like Wundt who believes that children have no soul, and he's designing an education system.

And then you've got these Machiavellian techniques being layered in on top of it of how to break the will of animals, and it's being used to train our children. Yeah, what's surprising is that these insights and even these activities that don't depend on modern technology, these are understood a long time ago.

And the only subject at the Roman Collegia in the fifth century was, I'll put an umbrella over it, crowd control. You know, how you divide to conquer, what buttons on the human organ you press to produce certain sounds. I mean, that's 16 centuries ago. What has happened in the intervening 16 centuries?

They forgot that? Or was it added to? Has it become amazingly sophisticated? Less and less people necessary to produce more and more leverage. Is there a connection between the ideals of someone like Calvin and his espousing a theocratic state and modern states like Israel, which are also built along the same theocratic terms?

I think, and I'm trying to be as fair as possible to the villains in this, I think there's some impulsion in everyone to have certainty that even as babies were aware of how many accidents, how much menace is out there, jeopardy, certainty. So to follow a list of rules, algorithms, you know, is emotionally very satisfying, but it doesn't work if everyone's not doing it.

You know, and the minute everyone's doing it, you don't have to do it. You now are handed freedom because the menace has been reduced of other people experimenting with humanity, enlarging its boundaries. And then economically, of course, your capital's at risk. If that's the overproduction thing, I hope we talked about that yesterday, because it finally was the tipping point in the late 19th century as corporations were enlarging and layering themselves.

Men like Carnegie and Rockefeller and Anster, they were fully aware that human ingenuity was a tremendous risk to capital formation, because to talk people out of their wealth on the grounds that you can multiply it doesn't work. If too many people invent ways to do something better than your investment, you know, the capital's destroyed.

So the easiest way to manage the future and the present, of course, they saw a series of financial crises all through history, but especially in the 19th century, where the boot of the master had been lifted off ordinary people, and they were recklessly inventive. I mean, America's producing more inventions than all the rest of the world put together.

You can't have that, because on that new base, the next base is going to be frightening. So a term existed and exists, but it's been camouflaged in the 21st century called overproduction. You have to use government to control overproduction, dumping too many goods or services on the market that it can't absorb.

And the easiest way to do that, at first you try licensing, you know, and other kinds of government subsidy to favored groups. But ultimately, the killer app is to remove the ability to be inventive from the ordinary mass. These days, it's called overcapacity, because to penetrate what that means is much harder than to see instantly what overproduction means.

Then a second menace emerged in the late 19th century, but by the late 1960s, it was clear it too would have to be controlled. That's called hyperdemocracy. If too many people take democracy seriously and understand how to form alliances with one another to confront power with power, then power becomes much less effective.

So when the kids stopped the Vietnamese War, waves of them, I mean, this was so intolerable, the cost to privileged classes of this reign of money, the cost to the government of not being able to suppress dissent on the grounds that this is an emergency. This couldn't be allowed to happen again.

The Trilateral Commission gave me the break I needed to understand this more precisely. They underwrote the publication of a book called The Crisis of Democracy in 1975, published by New York University Press, in which you have to have training in reading between the lines because the sophisticated power brokers aren't nakedly making these statements.

But if you read Crisis of Democracy carefully, you will see that the crisis is too many people took it seriously and translated the principles into action and cost the industries and the hierarchy a war that, you know, now the next war would be harder to run. I mean, to get together, it would be more absurd.

At least you can make a case in those jungles, but now you're going to have to make a case in the arid deserts of Iraq or in the mountains of Afghanistan. Why national security depends on suppressing these barefoot people and people whose weapons are blowing up their feet and their underwear?

Hey, they're going to take the bread out of your family's mouth. I remember the attempt in Nicaragua under the Sandinistas to communicate the idea that it was just a stone's throw from our southern border and these people might pile into their 20 and 30 year old vehicles and that'd be this thousand mile drive north and into Texas and come.

Well, you know, our economy, of course, cannot function without warfare so that when these things are over, count on the fact that if we have to attack the South Pole, the penguins will are clear and present danger. In the Paris Peace Conference 1919, pre-CFR formation, Colonel House and these characters are hanging out and Ho Chi Minh comes in and says, "We want to be free like America.

We love democracy. We want to do this." And instead of helping them out, helping them to become free, they're like, "Well, we're going to have to take them out. That makes a good place to have them." We need enemies. We have to have enemies. The interesting thing about the book, The Crisis of Democracy, is that spreading out like ripples from a stone thrown in a pond, the popular magazines and press, Time Magazine did a cover story on too much democracy, question mark.

Of course, they concluded, you bet, in a complicated high-tech world, you can't allow non-experts to make decisions there, but it was everywhere. So the Tom-Toms, they're interconnected and they beat simultaneously or nearly so. What's the role of curiosity? Is it not the lever that produces invention? I mean, it forces you really in a fun way to think for yourself there.

And then it turns out that the secrets of nature or society aren't really very hard to penetrate as long as you remain curious. How do you destroy curiosity? We all say little babies are always curious. How do you destroy curiosity? Well, one good way is to sit people in chairs, tell them to speak when you're spoken to, threaten them with upcoming tests if they don't memorize usually erroneous material.

It's fascinating. Show me a school book that deals with Admiral Perry's opening of Japan. And the school book, the last one I looked, was nominally under the aegis of the Librarian of Congress, so a major scholar. And it will say that, essentially it will say that we decided that Japan should be part of the modern world.

It wasn't fair to leave them in medieval. And so Admiral Perry sailed over there and negotiated and they said, "Okay, you can have coaling bases or we'll take care of sunken warehouse." What no one says is that Perry had 11-inch naval rifles, the standard of the day. The Japanese had medieval cannon with a range for about 75 yards and Perry's guns could reach 10 miles.

And that Perry emphasized the destructive impact of his force of three black gunboats. I mean, somebody had to actually paint the boats black by destroying some structures on the shore. And they rode out fast enough and said, "Please, Masa." When did the American Dream become one of lifelong servitude and debt and slavery?

It's so fascinating that the American Dream is enunciated in 1859 by Abraham Lincoln speaking to the Wisconsin Agricultural Association. That's 152 years ago. And he says the American Dream is to write your own script to have an independent livelihood. That's why we don't have giant corporations like Britain and Germany have.

People only work for somebody else long enough to put a stake together and they figure out what people need and then they do. So the American Dream was as elementary school books, it was liberty, freedom, personal sovereignty. And it was rather unique in the history of political nations around the earth or even tribal bodies.

And did it work? It almost immediately propelled us into a paramount position among the, just because there's a, I'm not hostile to, but I'm also a stranger to IT and the high tech world. But I do try to keep up with the theory of what's going on. About three or four years ago, there was a wonderful analytical book called The Cathedral and the Bazaar.

Are you familiar with it? I don't remember who wrote it. And I read it and I saw almost immediately what I thought nature was about proving itself through IT. The author or authors maintain that the crowd collectively has more wisdom and insight collectively and gave some hair raising examples.

A huge gold ore body in Canada was discovered by the company putting its limit, it knew that there had to be an ore body there, but it also knew that if it used the normal procedures and the hole proved dry, excuse the mixed metaphor there, that they would be exhausted and they would have to sell what they knew.

It's a gold corp today, GG on the exchange. So how did they discover the ore body? Instead of going to the recognized engineers and blowing all their water on one shot, on the internet they globally put out to anyone at all from any background at all, they wanted a theory of how to find that ore body.

And somebody who had nothing to do with mining pick up the book because I'm losing the richness of the details. But it's the essence of how non-experts can make some of the biggest discoveries. Oh well, there is a book, I made a note to bring up here. There's a book that used to be required reading at MIT and maybe still would be.

It's by a middle level physicist named Robert Scott Root-Bernstein. It's called Creativity. It's this thick and the structure internally is so maddening. It's done in the form of a group discussion among different people why he did that. But eventually I forced myself to read it and what just comes pouring out of it is how actual life world changing discoveries are made.

This is an MIT textbook. Apparently by adding funds and assistance to a project you almost destroy your ability to make these breakthroughs. People who have to saw ice cube trays in half to make a piece of lab equipment, etc., etc. are the people who transcend the conventional. Now that's often then taken over by a big project.

One of the most recent dramatic examples, and I'm sure you can Google or whatever the search engine term is, there was a two or three years ago in 60 Minutes, there was an account of a new way to treat cancerous tumors with radiation without any side effects at all and it had been discovered by a man in his garage who had nothing to do with cancer research.

John Kanzias is who you're talking about, right? John Kanzias? Yes, Kanzias. And he worked in radio and television and he- He was a kid. He was an enthusiast and he knew that if you shot radio waves through metal that it heated up and he wondered if it would kill a tumor but not leave the devastation that radiation does and in fact it did.

Now we don't have to take it on faith. The leading cancer researchers in the world said this is a whole new ballgame, you know, and some key research hospitals then took the process over. And Kanzias' motivation was he was in the terminal stages of cancer himself and he knew that the established treatments wouldn't help him and in fact he was too far gone and he died.

I think the thing is that you- Pittsburgh now but it's at some major universities but I heard the reigning expert in the world say this is- makes all the past, you know, irrelevant. But that's a commonality. I copied some notes out of the Ruth Bernstein book. He said that intensive and narrow scientific training will guarantee that you never make a scientific breakthrough.

You know, you can get the best Johns Hopkins, it doesn't matter. It's the narrowness of training. The people who make these breakthroughs have as wide a range of mental and physical tools as possible. They almost invariably play musical instruments, are good at languages, etc., etc. Most successful people in physics make it by going off by themselves and learning whatever they want to, not following the history of the physical sciences.

What they learn from mentors is how to deal with ambiguity. But the established bodies of scientific knowledge get in the way of thinking afresh. You know, as soon as you hear these things, they're so common sensical, you say, of course, why didn't I think of that? Just a couple more here.

Virtually every scientific pioneer, men like Edison, Franklin, Einstein, Planck, Maxwell, many others, had early opportunities to do absolutely independent research. All of them were in their early 20s, which has given rise to an understanding in the higher levels of the sciences that if you haven't made a major breakthrough by your middle 20s, you're not going to.

What you can do is head up a project and be a bureaucrat and take credit, as many college professors do, for the discoveries of your students. But you're not going to be worth gambling on. It isn't the age in itself that limits insight. It's the imprint of rigid patterns of habits.

Now, I happen to dig up a wonderful quote from William James' psychology, I think printed in 1890, and the book giving credit for establishing psychology as an academic subject. And James was, of course, he had ambivalent feelings, but he certainly was a disciple of Wundt there. Now, this is a direct quote from William James' psychology 121 years ago.

"Habit is the enormous flywheel of society, its most precious agent. It alone saves the children of fortune from the envious uprisings of the poor. It alone prevents the most repulsive jobs from being deserted. It holds the minor in his darkness. It keeps different social strata from mixing." Well, I'll just complete.

One of the insights of discovering that really electrified me as I was reading it is how frequently the great discovery in the scientific arena is not made by the specialists in that area, by somebody from another area completely divorced who transfers into chemistry or physics, has fresh eyes, cuts through the habits that lock the mind in place, and makes the discovery.

It says, "Freedom and flexibility is much more valuable than planning. It comes only by getting out of ruts and plugging into a variety of methods." So these great truths, it isn't that we're discovering them now. We're taking them out of the burial places and saying, "Hey, look, wake up.

The world is much bigger and much different than you believe it is because you've been conditioned to believe it's that way." I have something here. I have the six purposes of schooling as laid down in 1917 by the man who Harvard named their honor lecture in education for. So far from being a fringe individual, this guy is the reason the Harvard honor lecture in education is named as it is, the Ingalls lecture.

Looks like Inglis, but it's pronounced Ingalls. And I would like to read you the six purposes of schooling. I moved heaven and earth and it took years to find this book, just like trying to find in past years copy of Carol Quigley's Tragedy and Hope. I learned about Ingalls from the 20-year president of Harvard, James Brian Conant, who was a poison gas specialist in World War I, was very inner circle of the atomic bomb project World War II, was the high commissioner of occupied Germany after the war.

So he wrote, oh, there must be 20 books about the institution of schooling of which he was completely a proponent. And I forced, he's a very, very bad writer. I forced myself to read most of these books and in one of them, he says that if you really want to know what school is about, you need to pick up the book that I'm referring to here, Principles of Secondary Education.

Two years it took me to find a copy of the book, 750 pages, tiny print, and as dull as your imagination can conceive. And furthermore, it's not until you get to the very middle of the book in an unlabeled section that he spills the beans. Let me spill them for you.

These are the six purposes or functions as he calls them. The first he calls the adjustive function. Schools are to establish fixed habits of reaction to authority. That's their main purpose, habits of reaction to authority. That's why school authorities don't tear their hair out when somebody exposes that the atomic bomb wasn't dropped on Korea as a history book in 1990s printed by Scott Forsman distributed and why each of these books has hundreds of substantive errors.

Tearing isn't the reason the texts are distributed. So first is the adjustive function, fixed habits. Now here comes the wonderful insight that being able to analyze the detail will give you. How can you establish whether someone has successfully developed this automatic reaction because people have a proclivity when they're given sensible orders to follow it.

That's not what they want to reach. The only way you can measure this is to give stupid orders and people automatically follow those. So when you've achieved function one, have you ever wondered why some of the foolish things schools do are allowed to continue? Number two he calls, he calls it the integrating function, but it's easier to understand if you call it the conformity function.

It's to make children as alike as possible, the gifted children and the stupid as alike as possible because market research uses statistical sampling and it only works if people react generally the same way. The third function he calls the directive function. School is to diagnose your proper social role and then to log the evidence that here is where you are in the great pyramid so that future people won't allow you to escape that compartment.

The fourth function is the differentiating function. Once you've diagnosed kids in this layer, you do not want them to learn anything that the higher layers are learning. So you teach just as far as the requirements of that layer. Number five and six are the creepiest of all. Number five is the selective function.

What that means is what Darwin meant by natural selection. You're assessing the breeding quality of each individual kid. You're doing it structurally because school teachers don't know this is happening. And you're trying to use ways to prevent the poor stuff from breeding and those ways are hanging labels, humiliating labels around their neck, encouraging the shallowness of thinking.

You know, I often wondered because I came from a very, very strict Scotch Irish culture that never allowed you to lure the girl. Well, when I got to New York City, the boys were pawing the girls openly and there was really no redress for the girls at all, except not showing up in the classroom.

You know, high absentee rates. Well, you're supposed to teach structurally that sexual pleasure is what you withdraw from a relationship and everything else is a waste of time and expensive. So the selective function is what Darwin meant by the favored races. The idea is to consciously improve the breeding stock.

Schools are meant to tag the unfit with their inferiority by poor grades, remedial placement, humiliation, so that their peers will accept them as inferior. And the good breeding stock among the females will reject them as possible partners. And the sixth is the creepiest of all, and I think it's partly what Tragedy and Hope is about.

It's a fancy Roman name, the propaedutic function. Because as early as Roman big time thinkers, it was understood that to continue a social form required some people being trained, that they were the custodians of this. So some small fraction of the kids are being ready to take over the project.

That's the guy in the honor lecture. It will not surprise you that his ancestors include the major general at the siege of Lucknow in India, famous for tying the mutineers on the muzzles of the cannons and blowing them apart, or somebody who was forced to flee New York City, a churchman at the beginning of the American Revolution, because he wrote a refutation of Thomas Paine's common sense.

They were going to tar and feather him. He fled and was rewarded by the British by making him the Bishop of Nova Scotia. Those are Engels' ancestors. So Al Engels is certainly, when I learned of this and wrote to Harvard asking for access to the Engels lecture, strike me dead, Lord, if I'm exaggerating at all, I was told, "Well, we have no, there is no Engels lecture.

It hasn't been for years and we have no records." It was the same thing that happened when I discovered that Elwood P. Cumberley, the most influential schoolman of the 20th century and the bionomics genius, had been the elementary school editor of Houghton Mifflin, and I wrote Houghton Mifflin, "Is there any records?" And they said, "We have no record of anyone named Elwood P.

Cumberley." Now Harvard's telling me there's no Engels lecture. A week passed and I got a call from Harvard, from some obscure office at Harvard, saying, "What is your interest in the Engels lecture?" I knew that I was on thin ice. And I said, "Well, James Conant referred me in his books to the man the Engels lecture is named after.

And I was wondering if I could get some background on this fellow and a list of the lectures." And in due time, I got a list of the lectures and instructions how to access the texts, but not easily. You know, enough hoops that someone who has to mow the lawn and burp the baby, you know, wouldn't jump through those hoops.

I was able to prove Harper's Wooden Publish, when they did the cover essay I wrote, which Lou Latham named against school, probably after Jeremiah's against. But I had called the Artificial Extension of Childhood, because I think that's the key mechanism at work here. So they wouldn't print the information about Coverley, because Mifflin denied it.

It was only months afterward that I looked through my extensive library of incredibly dull books about schooling and opened in the facing page, said, "Edward Coverley, Editor in Chief, Elementary School, Publishing Arm of Mifflin." By the way, the secondary editor in chief was Alexander Ingalls. So you see how this cousinage, the incest works.

If Martin Luther's idea was to cut out the middleman and teachers read books, why can't students just read books instead of going to the middleman for their information? The more highly placed the schooling is, the more likely it is that they do do that. They go to primary documents.

They understand how suspicious all secondary documents are. Not that they aren't useful, but they give the writer or the editorial staff the ability to shift the information. That's why in the reprints of Quigley's Tragedy and Hope, we really need some of you out there to sit with the original and sit with the reprint and make sure the key things aren't elated.

On perfectly reasonable grounds that we want to shrink this down from 1300 pages to a thousand or whatever. Oh, it was an oversize. We have eight minutes, nine minutes left. I have two questions and then we can do an informal book signing and get you out of here. Yeah, well, you should want to know what happens to an ordinary class of 13 year olds when they get a smattering of that.

I mean, as much as I can absorb in a short time. Well, many of you will have seen Strawberry Fields, the monument to the Beatles in Central Park. I don't want to pat myself on the back because I didn't much care for the Beatles and I hate using Parkland for it.

But I was approached by three girls, two of them here, bitterly complaining that the community planning board had denied Yoko Ono's petition to build Strawberry Fields. And they were furious that this had been done. And I said, well, you don't have to accept their decision. They're the lowest part of the pecking order.

First, according to protocol, you have to take your case to them. So we'll book you an appointment and you lay down the reasons you want to take three acres of Central Park and give it to this group who could only play three musical chords. But I told them, whatever you want to do, including building a pistol, I'll show you how you can learn how to do that.

I won't censor. So it had been voted down 45 to 8 by the community planning board and the community planning board unanimously rejected their appeal. I said, now you want to look who has to sign off on their decision. This is not a group of local big shots. This is the Landmarks Preservation Commission.

You don't get on that unless your ancestors come over on the Mayflower or you have $10 billion. I said, this is the elite of the elite. And now what you want to do is research the names are publicly accessible, 23 of them, and I'll bet four or five of them would already be in favor of this thing.

All you need is 12 of them to reject this for it to happen. So you find out who these people are and get as much biographical information. You know, IT has made this on these people and you will find the buttons to play them like an oval organ. You know, you can find out what causes they became noteworthy for, etc., etc.

And now what you're going to do, because there's 12,000 kids in this school district, is I'm going to free you from school for a month and you're going to split up. You go from school to school, find troublemakers and get petitions. Because what we need, because your letterhead will say committee of 5,000, we need 5,000 signatures on a petition.

And you're going to write an individual letter writing campaign to each of the 23 members of the community planning board asking them to please immortalize this group. Well, I get a phone call in the front office, I'm summoned out of class, I was six weeks later and the voice on the phone says, "Hello, this is Yoko Ono." You know, I thought it was one of my cockamamie friends.

I said, "You know, this is George Washington, Yoko, what's on your mind?" Fortunately, she didn't take umbrage, maybe even here in Santa. She said, "The decision has been reversed. I'm going to hold a party at the Dakota for these girls. Could they be released from school?" I don't know, Yoko, I'm going to miss a lot.

So that's one. Look at this one. Here's a 12-year-old C student from, well, he lived in, well, he was a C student but he's a polite young fellow. He was going nowhere there and he went to, he had the effrontery to go to a pizza parlor in all white Upper West Side in 1980.

The owner of the parlor, a 6'6" crazy Greek who happened to be a friend of mine, took his pizza, took his soda, threw them away. The charge was he had taken two straws. You only let one straw, right? So he comes over ranting about racial prejudice. I said, "It was the wrong thing to do and I'm going to show you how to deal with it." But I don't think it was racial prejudice.

His clientele at lunch comes from the collegiate school. They wear blue blazers, gold buttons. John F. Kennedy's kid went there. They leave big tips for his staff and he knows the public school kids, black or white, go in there for lunch and he's going to lose that blue ribbon trade.

Nonetheless, you're going to give him a chance to back down. This is an absolutely massive insane Greek who believes violence is the solution to all problems. Once Jerry Mulligan, the famous jazz saxophonist, bounced a $10 check. He had it blown up to billboard size and mounted outside the restaurant.

I said, "You go to the phone and I'll listen and you say, 'I'm the guy's pizza you took, but I'm willing to let bygones be bygones if I could.'" Nick hangs up on him. I said, "I'm going to give you what in law is called an affidavit that you attempted to solve this problem peaceably." Now I said, "You want to go over there in person tomorrow and I'll provide a long distance witness and you want to say, 'Look, it's just a slice of pizza.

Give me my slice of pizza back.'" But Nick had the bid between how the kid goes. And now I said, "You're going to call him one more time with a different teacher as a witness, then you're going to write him a letter, certified return receipt requested, 65 cents in those days.

And now you have four pieces of evidence to provide to the court and then you're going to sue his ass in small claims court." Only cost like $3 in those days, but it was 17 miles from the school. Kids can't sue. I said, "Anyone with $3 can sue. That doesn't mean you're going to win." But the way the referee in small claims court decides, since it's one person's, is who has evidence that they acted reasonably.

And you will have four pieces of evidence and this guy will be steam coming out of his ear while he was awarded triple damages. How about that? Now, what do you suppose the small claims court referee said when he got home that night to his friend? "You're not going to believe what I just adjudicated." So beginning about four days later, we got a call from the Brooklyn College Law School.

Could he come over and lecture? Of course he said no. And I said, "Listen, I'll ruin you if you don't. We'll work it out." And Columbia Law School called. Then we got daily calls from judges to take him out to lunch because isn't this a symbol that the system really...

Okay. He's the only kid in 30 years of teaching that took my advice not to waste your time in high school. I said, "Any number of very good colleges will take you in at the end of your sophomore year if you provide the documentation. You're ready." He went to Duke, full tuition scholarship, then Duke University Law School.

And by the way, these two events, Strawberry Fields and Pizza Palace, are from the same term in junior high school. Just a few more of these things. Here's a PhD from UCAL. Here's a 13-year-old girl who came to me complaining that her mother was a liar, said she could go to Paris alone that summer if she could raise the money.

I just checked and nobody... I mean, she was a single parent household. Mother was a secretary. She said, "Nobody." I said, "Well, you can't do it on a job, but it's not very much money if you have a little business." And she said, "13-year-old kids can't have businesses." I said, "If you have something people want, they don't care how old you are." I mean, Sean Fanning almost ruined the music business with Napster.

He was 17. So she takes a week out of school, figures out a really interesting exotic business that you can read my book and find out what it was, and raises enough money in a short time by cutting school for six consecutive weeks that she could afford to pay her mother's way to Paris.

She came to me and said, "I've got much more money than I need." I said, "Why don't you take your mother to Paris? She might appreciate it." On the basis of that, she went to what I believe is the finest college in the United States, Hampshire College, where you write your own curriculum and then you negotiate with the faculty.

My granddaughter goes there and will be graduating next year. Hello, Christina. That's all I'll say. >> What phrase in Icelandic means writing of God? >> Yes. It's a, her real name was, is carried popularly as Gudrun, but she wasn't satisfied, so she went to court and changed it to Christina.

So hey, you know, what are you going to do? >> If you could say something that would echo through time and each and every person from now until the end of humanity would hear it. >> Yeah. >> Sensible children do not wish to be incomplete human beings. And so when you impose a stage theory of human development upon them, you affect or tormenting them, you're limiting their opportunity.

The whole world for all history knew that childhood is over about the age of seven, and if it persists beyond the age of 12, you've got some hopeless human being on your mind. Don't be your kid's enemy because they're not a kid. That's a fellow human being, male or female.

Be their partner and enlarge the opportunities. No homework, please. >> What does a college education really get you in the 21st century? >> I think it's consistently given less and less. It essentially was the last hoop to jump through, but it never delivered much to most of the people who jumped through that hoop.

It is possible if you understand that an education is something you have to take to use the resources that are assembled there and actually stitch together an education for yourself, get some value. But most people, of course, follow a prescribed plan, which has been put together by a committee somewhere, and in fact, doesn't do much for most people.

I went to Cornell, Columbia, and Reed College, and I can guarantee from Cornell and Columbia, I remember nothing except the babes, the alcohol, hangovers, et cetera. From Reed, I got a little bit out of a Plato seminar that I do remember basically arguing with the professor who encouraged that.

It doesn't give you a bang for your buck unless you commit, which who does? Isn't it supposed to produce a certificate that certifies you as eligible? The funny thing is that IT has accidentally exploded a lot of that because so many people, I remember when my daughter graduated from MIT, and she used to bitterly complain that her classmates would vanish for months at a time doing jobs for various companies, then come back as if nothing had happened and nobody punished them.

Sorry to say that we were so slow picking up on. We judge people by performance, not by credentials, and real people, you'd be insane to hire on the basis of credentials because the skew between memory and application is so large that eventually you're top heavy with people who don't know how to do anything much.

I'm going to ask this last question. Go burn your DVD. That way you're not late. So just answer to Jitu and Tony and Kevin. What is the value of persistence as juxtaposed to the learning process? About 10 years ago, I helped to set up a foundation that at Edison High School in New Jersey awards $10,000 a year to the most persistent student in the class.

Persistence in the face of adversity is the final test. If you can stick to something, nothing is difficult to learn. I mean nothing at all, but the natural selection process operating on a low boredom quotient, and personal disrespect, I can't do that, and many other things eliminates almost everyone except the persistent.

Those are the ones who demonstrate merit. Now obviously a lot of the control mechanism is inherited or appointed, but the parts that aren't go to the persistent, and that includes the arts and the sciences as well as politics. I mean who could imagine, for example, that an obviously inferior human being, I'm not speaking politically here, like George W.

Bush, could pass through all the screens on the way up and then be elected not once but twice by the American population. He flunked his pilot's course, 25 out of 100, and now he's supposed to be given a jet to fly in combat, but of course he pulled strings he didn't do that.

Clearly he was an imbecile. He looked like an imbecile, he talked like an imbecile, and you cannot believe that any decisions attributed to him were actually made by him. No one would be crazy enough to put him in charge and say you mind the store and I'll go off.

But he was persistent and he did reject the negative assessments that occurred all through his life. What a rock is about, in my opinion, is showing daddy that the people who embarrassed daddy got their comeuppance and who the hell cares that the carnage is one of the great mass murders in history, but daddy's reputation was saved from disgrace.

What do you feel the role of UNESCO has been in the manipulation of the educational curriculum? Well, I'm bothered a little bit by the general mass of conspiracy literature attributes powers to the United Nations, which it simply doesn't have. That doesn't mean that it isn't filled with villainous intentions.

I mean that it never succeeded in becoming, people say it's a respectable institution, but they don't behave, no one says what does the UN say about, no one says that. And they've always given up trying. I mean there's now a minority opinion that it's not worth spending the money to have it in the United States, you know, because it's as much anti-American as it carries out our subtler designs.

I've noticed that UNESCO focuses a lot of their workings on the educational work of nations. Oh yeah, but you and I would too. Yeah, yeah, of course. Well, wouldn't anyone say it's easier to deal with unformed minds with no experience? Wean them away. Yeah, I mean, it just, it's an engineering sense what you would expect to happen.

And so we wouldn't be surprised if that's what does happen. Who was Johann Pestalozzi and what were some of his new ideas? The most intriguing thing about the followers of Pestalozzi are that they never count the fact that every single one of his projects quickly failed, every single one of them.

What he had that was intriguing to the Prussian hierarchy and really the global hierarchy was that his method of kindness, and it may have been sincere, his method of kindness was a new weapon in the arsenal of instead of whipping the poor, threatening them, menacing them, tormenting them, you killed them with kindness.

The written principles of the Fabians are Pestalozzian, you know, by extending this blanket of kindness to people. It's still effective in that, you know, lots of, a big fraction of the American population expects charity and sees it as a blessing. Now, it's not hard to see why on this day or that day it could be a blessing, but overall that you get weaker and weaker, like your arm gets weaker if it doesn't lift stuff above your head.

I mean, it's such a fundamental principle of human physics, including mental physics, that to pull the wool over so many people's eyes. I've got your disc, it's got all the transcripts from your Gnostic Media interviews, you also have a definition of liberal and some Gordon Watson information for it.

You also talked about the crews to open up Asia. This is Taft, it's Roosevelt's daughter, Roosevelt's president, Taft goes with her, and they open up, they go back to Japan after, who was the admiral that you mentioned that went over there? Oh, not Dewey. But you know what I'm saying, they had already gone over there, and this was the second one, and then this sets up the whole World War II, World War I, the whole scenario, the opium smuggling, it's all in there.

And this guy wrote Flags of Our Fathers and Flyboys? Oh yes. James Bradley? Yes. He's a great guy. I thought you might want to talk to him. Thank you, I will. You'll enjoy it. And you did an outstanding job. Hey, this has been a lovely course in how complicated it is, you know, to make a...

To get the word out. Have you seen this book? It's called The Perfectibilists, it's by Terry Mullinson. No. That was the name of the Illuminati before it was known as the Illuminati, it was the Perfectibilists, and they were a private club. And this means "per me caci vita," it means "through me the blind become sighted," so their top secret is the trivium and learning.

But they use it out of order, so they don't establish what exists first, they assert logic without... No, no, no. If you look in the back, it has a full glossary of individuals. Of all members. Yeah, he's cataloged. Now, this is my copy, but I want you to take it, and I can get another one.

And then you can... God bless. I'm Chris Milligan. God bless. This here is the reference of Carl Wundt, and it goes into some of his colleagues, and you'll have a lot of references to your own material. Thank you all, and certainly... Now you got a heavy bag to carry.

Now I got a heavy bag to carry. Let me get your mic off, yeah? Yes. You've now experienced the first step of the Ultimate History Lesson. We've done the hard work of organizing the facts, and now it's up to you to think, learn, communicate, and take action among yourselves.

But we don't expect you to do this alone, and in fact, since this message applies to all of us, it's truly a circumstance which unites us and makes us indivisible, so that we might deliver freedom and justice, not just to ourselves, but to people around the world. If there is a point to all of this, it might be in realizing that the system isn't broken.

It was built this way, on purpose. It serves those who created it, not those who are managed by it. As a result, our potential as human beings has been undermined. Our birthright has been stolen, and our adolescent period of life has been extended indefinitely. We have been numbed to these facts, which have been obscured further by the 15,000 hours of public schooling, which is mandatory in order to earn the right to live and work in our civilized culture.

We have been under the impression that public schooling was about educating us, as a measure to prepare us for life, but those assumptions were formed based upon information supplied to us by our natural predators, who may dress and speak like us, but in their minds, intentions, and actions, they hold us in contempt.

They manage us like livestock, and they poison us both figuratively and literally, as if we were pests. Each of us has a choice to make, and the question is, what is most important to us? Is it the products which money buys, or is it having a safe, happy, and healthy family?

Unfortunately, it doesn't seem that we can have both in this culture. We must choose to either put our full support behind that which is most important to us, or face losing everything. I made that choice eight years ago, and through the help of some friends, I transformed the materials around me into the resources which have delivered this message to you.

In the minutes before Patrick Henry spoke into existence the phrase, "Give me liberty, or give me death," in his speech to the Second Virginia Convention on March 23, 1775, he first addressed the convention's president, Peyton Randolph of Williamsburg. For my own part, I consider it as nothing less than a question of freedom or slavery, and in proportion to the magnitude of the subject, ought to be the freedom of debate.

It is only in this way that we can hope to arrive at truth and to fulfill the great responsibility which we hold to God and country. Should I keep back my opinions at such a time, through fear of giving offense, I should consider myself guilty of treason towards my country, and an act of disloyalty toward the majesty of heaven, which I revere above all earthly kings.

Mr. President, it is natural to man to indulge in the illusions of hope. We are apt to shut our eyes against painful truth and listen to the song of that siren until she transforms us into beasts. Is this the part of wise men, engaged in a great and arduous struggle for liberty?

Are we disposed to being of the number of those having eyes, see not, and having ears, hear not, the things which so nearly concern their temporal salvation? For my part, whatever anguish of spirit it may cost, I am willing to know the whole truth, to know the worst, and to provide for it." So if you realized that your family and/or community was in danger, how would you make them aware of it, as a measure to protect them from the peril?

Well, once you meet and surmount the mental obstacles by employing your use of reason, it would then be logical to organize the facts, connect and communicate with your loved ones and community, to learn together how to dispel confusion, how to take informed constructive actions, and when you meet resistance, how to learn your way forward.

It doesn't benefit anyone to continue to sanitize the world for our youth, as it prevents them from developing a strong immune system, and thereby undermines their chances of survival in this world. To that end, as I mentioned in the introduction, we've also created the UltimateHistoryLesson.com which specifically hosts the YouTube version of this interview in video form, as well as the MP3 versions for your downloading pleasure, as well as the transcript, references, notes, links, primary source materials, and every other piece of media associated with this interview set, all with the goal of helping you to understand.

And while this all might sound like a good idea, most people need a little help outgrowing the habits which enable us to be so easily manipulated. In order to help each and every individual tap into their internal natural resources, we created TragedyAndHope.com, which acts as a next step for those who seek to learn more after screening our productions.

Now that you've heard John talk about the book, Tragedy and Hope, a History of the World and Our Time by Dr. Carol Quigley, you will indeed appreciate the fact that we've created an international network of independent media producers, all of whom consistently provide educational films, podcasts, and video reports, commercial free and free to the public.

With over 1,400 people from all over the world posting videos, posting blogs, forming study and research groups, and learning the arts of intellectual self-defense and strategic problem solving, we have built a truly unique experience which has thus far been denied to the general public, and it is in every way designed to help you realize your birthright.

In this last hour, I was surprised to learn about John's key role in helping Yoko Ono get approval to create Strawberry Fields, a section of Central Park in New York dedicated to John Lennon, across the street from where he was shot in front of the Dakota Hotel. We've done a lot since creating Tragedy and Hope in 2009, so let me share a bit of synchronicity about how all this began.

These are the last few pages of the premier issue of our interactive magazine before it evolved into an interactive community of critical thinkers. I'd say that not only have we come a long way, but we've also stayed on track, and I think that's reflected in the synchronicity of these full circle moments.

We're serious about studying the big problems, identifying the root causes, and enacting constructive solutions, and we sure could use your help. And in return, we'll help you catch up on what you've been missing. We must ask the questions, "Can we have peace without understanding the root causes of war?

Can we have liberty without the responsibility and reason incorporated into our actions to bring it about? Why aren't we preparing our children for their lives? Why doesn't public schooling prepare us for the fact that we are entering a world where there are predators and systems of predation to be avoided?" And in learning the answers, we found that it's due to the fact that the predators designed the public schooling system.

It's time to reclaim our birthright, and this interview is aimed at delivering it to you. What you do with it is your choice. Figure out how to teach yourself anything by asking substantial questions and identifying valid answers. Help us create a network of affiliates and continue to spread this message of self-liberation.

By understanding the problems, the solutions become known. The truth is the future, and we want to see what the world looks like when you develop the habits which reveal your inner potential. Last but not least, learn how to use the active literacies to liberate yourself and share what you've learned with others.

Because the world is made up of words, and if you know the right words, you can make of the world what you will. Go and do likewise. Be persistent. Refuse to give your consent to irrationality and realize that in your heart and mind, we are only victims until we mature and take responsibility for our thoughts and actions.

And to that end, keep learning, keep moving forward. Thank you for tuning in and not dropping out. (soft music) (soft music) (soft music) (soft music) (soft music) (soft music) (soft music) (soft music) (soft music) (soft music) (soft music) (soft music) (soft music) (soft music) (soft music) (soft music) (soft music) (soft music) (soft music) (soft music) (soft music) (soft music) (soft music) (soft music) (soft music) (soft music) (soft music) (soft music) (soft music) (soft music) (soft music) (soft music) (soft music) (soft music) (soft music) (soft music) (soft music) (soft music) (soft music) (soft music) (soft music) (soft music) (soft music) (soft music) (soft music) (soft music) (soft music) (soft music) (soft music) (soft music) (soft music) (soft music) (soft music) (soft music) (soft music) (soft music) (soft music) (soft music) (soft music) (soft music) (soft music) (soft music) (soft music) (soft music) (soft music) (soft music) (soft music) (soft music) (soft music) (soft music) (soft music) (soft music) (soft music) (soft music) (soft music) (machine whirring) (beeping) (beeping) - With Kroger brand products from Ralph's, you can make all your favorite things this holiday season.

Because Kroger brands proven quality products come at exceptionally low prices. And with a money back quality guarantee, every dish is sure to be a favorite. ♪ These are a few of my favorite things ♪ Whether you shop delivery, pickup, or in store, Kroger brand has all your favorite things.

Ralph's, fresh for everyone. (dramatic music)