By Kimberly Ells
Feb 13, 2023
Publisher: Daily Caller
The following is an excerpt from The Invincible Family by Kimberly Ells. It can be purchased here.
President Ronald Reagan withdrew the United States from UNESCO in 1984. The administration said the withdrawal came about because “UNESCO has extraneously politicized virtually every subject it deals with, has exhibited hostility toward the basic institutions of a free society, especially a free market and a free press, and has demonstrated unrestrained budgetary expansion.” The US also cited “excessive attention given to the so-called New International Economic Order, in which wealthy countries are supposed to transfer resources to the poorer ones” as a reason for the withdrawal. In short, the United States withdrew from UNESCO in large part because of the socialist policies it promotes which stifle basic freedoms and stunt economic prosperity in the name of equality. The convening of the World Government Summit in February 2018, attended heavily by representatives of the United Nations, suggests that the UN’s dream of uniting the world under one grand banner remains unchanged and is steaming forward.
In 2003, the US rejoined UNESCO under the direction of President George W. Bush. This may prove to be one of the most perilous decisions of our times. President Trump once again officially withdrew the US from UNESCO at the close of 2018. This could open a crucial window of opportunity to disentangle the US education system from the UN-directed global education system. However, since the OECD is the strong arm pushing UNESCO’s agenda forward, the deepest impact on UNESCO’s role in the US education system will occur when the United States not only defunds UNESCO but defunds the OECD.
But rather than loosening ties with the OECD, in 2019 the US administration officially adopted the OECD’s global artificial intelligence (AI) principles which may have significant impact on digital communications worldwide. In the AI principles document, an AI system is defined as “a machine-based system that can . . . make predictions, recommendations, or decisions influencing real or virtual environments.” Some outcomes from adopting this agreement may be positive. However, the international AI agreement gives deference to the UN’s Sustainable Development Goals and 2030 Agenda, encourages collaboration with UNESCO, and includes many statements that are open to wide interpretation. For instance, it says, “Stakeholders should proactively engage in…advancing inclusion of underrepresented populations, reducing economic, social, gender and other inequalities.” As you can well perceive by now, in those phrases lie the pernicious seeds of socialism, radical feminism, and sexual radicalism. In addition to distancing ourselves from UNESCO and the OECD, another key action that must be undertaken to regain local control of education is for individual states to cut the financial umbilical cord binding them to federal programs which increasingly feed them infected philosophies stewed in the womb of the United Nations.
Who’s at the Top?
Social change can be a good thing. Refining children’s attitudes on a host of issues can be a good thing. But a lot depends on who’s in charge. If an unfailingly noble, moral, generous, wise being or group of beings who are fundamentally motivated by love rather than money, power, or sex is at the top driving initiatives for children, then enormous good may come of such initiatives. However, if the people at the top are corrupted by ignoble influences, great damage can be done to the world and the children in it. If the people at the top prefer equality over liberty, if they love money more than people, if they promote sexual rights over sexual responsibility, then catastrophic social change is most certainly on the horizon.
Unfortunately, it appears the global education ship is run by a crew of socialist, feminist sexual rights activists whose misguided hands are steering the ship—and the children in it toward disaster. Here is a glimpse of several people at the top of the global education movement:
One other individual who has functioned in the upper echelons of the children’s sexual education movement for years is Ben Levin, former deputy education minister in Canada. Levin – who has written for both UNESCO and the OECD and presented at global education conferences hosted by them – “pled guilty in 2015 to creating and possessing child pornography and counseling others to commit a sexual assault” against a minor. His online encounters with undercover officers involved language reflecting what might be described as a sickening, deeply ingrained disregard for children’s well-being.
Whether or not the heads of UNESCO or the OECD knew of Levin’s sexual interest in children or of the presence of other child sexual predators in their midst, UNESCO, UNICEF, UNFPA, WHO, and their partners including IPPF have proven themselves to be tenacious advocates of CSE and/or sexual rights for children. Since this is the case, the global education structure being mounted by them is poised to spread sexual rights ideology like a contagion to children everywhere. UN-directed, tech-based education is the syringe through which comprehensive sexuality education is poised to be administered to the children of the world.
Am I claiming that everyone from UNESCO, UNICEF, OECD, CASEL, GPE, CoSN, and their partners is a children’s sexual rights advocate hell-bent on sexualizing and de-gendering the children of the world and establishing a sexually open society? No. Many of the well-meaning people working in these organizations would be appalled at such a prospect. Many who work for UN agencies and their partners are genuinely concerned about the future of the world and the children in it and believe that educational technology can be part of the answer to the world’s problems, and they are right. And yet, evidence overwhelmingly suggests that the intent of UN-based educational initiatives is to deliver comprehensive sexuality education—in tandem with a socialist, radical feminist, sexual equalist curriculum—to the children of all nations under the guise of equality, sustainability, and human rights.
You will remember from Part I that the objective of socialist designers from their earliest lessons at the feet of Marx and Engels was nothing short of global annihilation of capitalistic practices, the elimination of private property, the crushing of religion, and the annihilation of the family. They thought this would have to be accomplished through bloody revolution. It turns out it is being accomplished quietly (for now) through the cooperating, capitulating classrooms of the world. This is a perilous course. We must swiftly adjust our trajectory if we do not wish to see the social, emotional, moral, and economic vitality of the world reduced to wreckage through socialized, sexualized global education.