Thread by @sunnshiiny

I found this paper that provides a helpful framework to examine and analyze the proposed changes to the Alberta curriculum.

core.ac.uk/download/pdf/2…

I encourage people in education to read it. Parents and other supporters as well.

It describes the differences between the design of a curriculum meant to indoctrinate & control the population and one that encourages critical thinking.

Written by an Eastern European academic.

When the Soviet Union crumbled, the benefit to modern contemporary politics is the research and efforts to document the change from a society that enforced autocratic ideology to be adopted and a more democratic approach to public education of children.

I suspect the efforts of Eastern European states formerly controlled by the Soviet regime have spent much resources to teach their children how to think critically. Which is why states like Hungary, Poland, Ukraine, Finland and others have better resistance to fascism.

Not that their resistance has stopped Hungary and Poland from being compromised in autocratic efforts at eliminating newly popular democratic systems and institutions. But those institutions have only been in existence since the 1990’s. New and young and easier to topple.

Change from an autocratically controlled society to democratic society takes several generations, and the transition was not complete.

Note it’s the millennial youth who were only raised in democracy that are the main resistance.

Established democracies have long standing institutions. They also have no appreciable experience with autocracy. So, how would the population be able to discern a change from democracy to autocracy, especially of its been done incrementally?

It would be those who have studied autocratic power that would be able to notice the change in policies and processes used to govern. And immediately recognize the abandonment of democratic methods.

Unfortunately, North America gutted curricula of info on fascism & autocracy.

The mere mention of the word fascism conjures images of Nazi Germany and Hitler, or Fascist Italy and Mussolini. But those are extreme versions of autocratic rule.

If people have no foundation of understanding of the subtle differences between democracy and autocracy, how can they reasonably be expected to assess and observe the changes made by covertly undermine democratic institutions by autocrats who manage to be elected to power?

They can’t.

That’s our current problem. The Albertan and Canadian electorate doesn’t recognize or fully comprehend the changes made and proposed by those attempting to undermine western democracy.

How many people recognized Harper & his 10 years in power as autocratic?

Many Canadians consider the CPC and UCP as centre right democratic ideology.

But the Progressive Conservatism of Peter Lougheed and Joe Clark are vastly different and incomparable in ideology to the Dominionist Christian and hyper libertarianism of contemporary conservatism.

The point is, Albertans can use research done in the efforts to escape an autocratic education system used to indoctrinate an autocratic worldview by formerly autocratically ruled education systems to gauge the intent and content of the proposed changes to Alberta curriculum.

And if you read this research paper and the associated research conducted by formerly autocratic states, it’s pretty easy to discern what UCP is planning.

The process of decision making and the content clearly indicate a dogmatic approach. A tell tale sign of autocracy.

Contemporary conservatives abandoned democracy roughly the same time of the fall of the Soviet Union. The ideology Canadian conservatives espouse has more in common with contemporary Russia than previous Canadian moderate conservatism.

The framework established in this research paper makes that abundantly clear.

I wasn’t sure if the paper was available. So I’ve pasted a copy of the information in the following tweets.

Pages 1-4

Pages 5-8

Pages 9-12

Pages 13-16

Pages 17-18

Other academics are studying this form of control and comparing it to western society’s methods of teaching.

This one is in the process of being conducted.

me.eui.eu/dani-sandu/blo…

China also has a rigorously enforced indoctrination process.

Indoctrination is enforced within the Chinese nation, but also throughout the globe on Chinese national students who study abroad.

freedomhouse.org/article/chines…

Another thesis on Education as Indoctrination studying the methods used by Hitler and Mussolini. Are there any similarities in approach that we can observe in the proposed Alberta curriculum?

scholarship.depauw.edu/cgi/viewconten…

More academic research on how autocrats indoctrinate the population. A general overview.

journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/00…

An Oxford academic teaching at the American university in Cairo offers her opinion on indoctrination using a curriculum.

opendemocracy.net/en/north-afric…

There is no shortage of material to use to gauge the newly proposed curriculum.

By not using the available research and analysis, we run the risk of politicizing the criticism.

We need to use the framework of academic research to assess and analyze the proposed changes.

Personal opinions are important.

But it’s easy for UCP to write off criticism as political opposition.

Inherently this is political opposition, but not partisan in nature. I’m certain that if people realized these changes are an attempt to indoctrinate our youth to adopt autocratic governance, all supporters of western democracy will object.

Whether they are democratic socialists, social democrats, liberals or moderate conservatives.

UCP is attempting to shift Alberta from a democratic society to a burgeoning autocracy. With themselves (Dominionist Christian extremists) as the ruling class.

That should raise the stakes in opposing this curriculum change.

It cannot be allowed to occur.

@threadreaderapp please compile