web analytics
Connect with us



Before the threat of a nuclear attack on our country, schools didn’t have serious safety issues. Back then, the biggest concerns in schools were smoking cigarettes, skipping classes, occasional fistfights, chewing gum in class, and maybe a couple getting caught holding hands or stealing a kiss. The school experience was fairly calm compared to today’s standards.

 If a student fell ill in school, the school nurse would examine the student and decide on the appropriate care. The nurse would then inform the principal, who would contact the parents or guardians, especially if the parents were at work. Back then, issues like these were typically handled locally without needing committees or multiple steps.

 As schools transitioned into the 1960s and became more urban, bomb threats emerged as a new safety concern. These were not the individual or group-made bomb threats we see today, but rather nuclear threats from countries like Russia. These times made the old fire drills seem much friendlier than the bomb threat drills, with kids having to hide under desks.

 Back when there were fewer students, school safety felt more personal. Nowadays, it has become a big business for corporations with far-reaching implications.

 Ushering in the 1970s, juvenile crime became more prevalent. It was a big issue related to school theft and vandalism. Many schools began implementing security systems and different types of detectors to deter this new method of attack.

 As the years passed, new security systems, metal detectors, and identification methods emerged to counter evolving intruder tactics.

 Back then, school safety relied heavily on corporal punishment and paddling. It was not only legal but also commonly practiced. Students would often receive discipline at school and then face additional punishment at home from their parents. Despite this, many of these students turned out just fine.

During the 60s, DEI was introduced into public education., but it was known as diversity, with the Higher Education Act of 1965, hoping to achieve racial equality during the civil rights movement.  As the years progressed, so did DEI, which multiplied into DEI, SEL, Critical Race Theory, and more.

Today, more programs, demands, and catchy alphabet terms mesh in and around similar practices blanketed under the School Safety umbrella.  This is where the multiplication morphs into division.  And this translates into indoctrination, suggestion, and oppression.  

In Reimagining School Safety: A Guide for Schools and Communities, this statement is interesting, and I’m amazed to find it in print that someone would say it publicly.

<quote>While school safety ideas and practices have evolved over the last several decades, the variety of school safety tools, policies, and degrees of success highlights a need for more conversation about the very concept of safety: what it is (and isn’t), who gets to define it, how it’s achieved, and at what cost.</quote>

Who gets to define it?  They do.  And at what cost?  The people foot the bill but the students suffer the cost of manipulation.

Physical school safety is not the only parameter in this equation.  There is emotional safety,  And there is digital safety.  I find it interesting that the educational system today strives to encourage students to express themselves, reach out, explore, and find out who they are, while at the same time, being careful regarding who knows what they’re doing.  You’ll learn that because of “who you are”, you’ll be oppressed.

The oppression will cause one to become bitter and angry.  The oppression will lead to a feeling of entitlement, leading to rebellion.  And then, they’ll begin to discuss mental illness.  Who can imagine why?

Now that the schools are incorporating mental health issues into their curricular concerns, the schools have become arbiters in pretty much every segment of the children’s daily lives.  

Another good primer is a set of articles written by John Amanchukwu, entitled Protect the Children.

Next, we’ll look at the many examples of materials and resources our children and grandchildren are exposed to, and why we should be concerned.