Via Sackers, this:
He makes the classic error, of course, in not considering the factor of intent in all this. He’s not wrong, of course but he just hasn’t filtered it through the prism of intent.
There are detailed arguments in every sphere of life, there are the GCSE results, there’s everyday anecdotal evidence but there is also this rambling aggregation of articles from my early blogging days and if you go to the one about research methods, [appendix h, points 56-59], there is evidence it’s hard to ignore.
It was no mistake to move to “learner-centred”, a seemingly self-evident truth until you see the implications of it and the people behind it. Explore the Lincoln School, Rockefeller and Wundt. There was clear intent here.
Combine that with the overall “lefting” of every sphere, from premarital sex moving on to pre-pubescent sex and the same in violent games etc. etc.
To this can be added groupthink, the whole basis of PCism.
It’s everywhere you turn, in everything you meet. The TED talks which some mistakenly believe to be impartially techie and futuristic – there was one of Geoff Mulgan of all people! Geoff Bloody Mulgan!!! Marxist starter of Demos, deeply into Total Information Awareness.
And of course, let’s not forget Common Purpose and its nasty agenda.
Just how much evidence does one need?