The Declaration of Independence, Part One

It seems to me that it is darn difficult to advocate for something that you don't have a full understanding of.  When we're talking about saving the Republic, a clear understanding of the Republic's founding documents is important.  So, I Googled "The Declaration of Independence".  I read the entire thing, and then I went one step further.  I made sure I understood what I read.  When necessary, I did additional research to support an analysis.  Now, I'm going to share what I am learning and what I think about it with you.

So, what is the Declaration of Independence?  The last part of the first paragraph tells us very clearly what it is.  "...a decent respect to the opinions of mankind requires that they should declare the causes which impel them to the separation..."  This isn't something our Founding Fathers took lightly.  In simple terms, the Founding Fathers convened to put a stop to the long-standing tyranny, after years of attempts at redress had failed.  Here, in this document, they made their case to the international community, knowing that doing so would brand them traitors to the British crown if the effort failed.

"We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty, and the pursuit of Happiness."

A couple of things stand out to me about this sentence.  But first, let's be clear that we understand a few terms. 

Self-evident?  What is it?  According to Merriam-Webster, it is "evident without proof or reasoning".  Since I don't think it's very clear to define a compound word using part of that compound, let's look at evident.  "Clear to the sight or mind".  I'll add "obvious".

Endowed?  What is it?  "To freely or naturally provide (someone or something) with something."

Unalienable?  What is it?  "Impossible to take away or give up."

Liberty?  What is it?  "The state or condition of people who are able to act and speak freely" and "The power to do or choose what you want to do."

Now let's put that all together in modern language.  We state that these truths are obvious, that all men are created equal, that they are given by their Creator certain rights which are both impossible to take away and impossible to give up.  The rights are life, the freedom to act and speak freely, and to seek their own happiness.

What's interesting here?  The idea of truth has fallen out of fashion in our modern society.  Truth begs the questions: What is truth?  What makes them truth?  These are truths according to whom?  Our Founding Fathers believed that these rights were obvious.  They didn't leave the existence of these rights open for debate.  These rights are self-evident.  Our Founding Fathers believed in a Creator.  Our Founding Fathers believed that this Creator gave each of us life and liberty, and granted us the right to pursue happiness.  Note there that our Founding Fathers said absolutely nothing about achieving happiness.  None of us have a right to happiness.  Moreover, unalienable means that government cannot take these rights away, nor can we give them up.  These rights aren't owned by anyone, including the government.  They are gifts, from our Creator.  That leaves us with a conclusion that seems obvious to me.  Truth isn't relative.  Truth isn't "of man".  Truth, like the rights of life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness, comes from our Creator. 

What happens when we remove our Creator from the equation?  We must accept that life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness are privileges granted to us by our government.  If those things can be given by men, they can be taken by men for any reason, at any time.

A Quickie on P-20 Data Systems

Taken directly from the Achieve Inc, website....

States must collect, coordinate, and use K-12 and postsecondary data to track and improve the readiness of graduates to succeed in college and the workplace.

Longitudinal data systems should follow individual students from grade to grade and school to school, all the way from kindergarten through postsecondary education and into the workplace. Such systems would also provide more accurate measures of dropout and graduation rates, and provide the foundation for early warning systems.

For states to evaluate and understand the impact of particular policies around graduation requirements, assessments and preparedness for postsecondary, they must follow students through K–12 into postsecondary and the workforce and establish feedback loops to the relevant stakeholders to make informed decisions that improve policies and practices around increasing student preparedness.

Take that statement apart, and see if it raises any red flags.

"Longitudinal data systems should follow individual students from grade to grade and school to school, all the way from kindergarten through postsecondary education and into the workplace."

First, do you know what the "P" stands for here?  It's preschool.  These people want to begin tracking your children in preschool.  Postsecondary education?  Yeah, that's college - undergraduate and graduate.  The workplace?  You're supposedly an adult then, out of the institution of public education.  Why does the government need to track you then?  Does that raise eyebrows for anyone else?  The idea of the government tracking my children from the time they are three until they leave the work force gives me the creeps.  I cannot imagine what good will come of that, and I can easily come up with dozens of ways that can be abused.

This is a massive expansion of Big Brother.  Do you even know what these longitudinal data systems will contain?  Digging around a little, I haven't even been able to find out what exactly the Department of Education is mandating be in those systems.  In my mind, that is something that should be fully exposed, plain as day, and readily available for anyone who wants to know what information the government is acquiring.

A father in Nevada wanted to see exactly what information was being gathered about his children and was told that the price for retrieval of such records was an astonishing $10,000.  

"Such systems would also provide more accurate measures of dropout and graduation rates..."

It seems like simple enrollment - did the child attend school and was the child awarded a diploma - would be more than sufficient to provide that accurate measure of dropout and graduation rates.

"...provide the foundation for early warning systems."

One question: early warning systems for what?  Notice that they don't say.  Historically, what has happened when the government is able to amass large databases on its citizenry?  This raises a huge red flag for me.

"For states to evaluate and understand the impact of particular policies around graduation requirements, assessments and preparedness for postsecondary, they must follow students through K–12 into postsecondary and the workforce..."

Why, exactly, must students be followed into postsecondary and the workforce in order for states to evaluate and understand the impact of particular policies around graduation requirements, assessments and preparedness for postsecondary?  And, what particular policies are they talking about? 

 "...and establish feedback loops..."

Mmm-hmm...Anyone else have any concerns about the security of these feedback loops?

"...to the relevant stakeholders..."

One simple question: who are these relevant shareholders exactly?  Notice that they don't say.  Anyone else concerned?  Let's sweeten the pot even more...since the Family Educational Rights and Privacy Act was gutted in January 2012 by a stroke of the executive branch's pen without Congressional approval, your child's personally identifiable information is no longer secure.

"...to make informed decisions that improve policies and practices around increasing student preparedness."

What kind of information do these relevant stakeholders need in order to make informed decisions?  Should American citizens have the right to control and approve of whatever information about themselves may be distributed?  You have no control.  Your approval doesn't matter.

This is sick, sick stuff.  Orwellian, for sure.  Call me a barbarian, but I will not be silent.