True, which makes him something of an enigma. For some of the most powerful arguments against socialism to come from a socialist gives one pause. That, however, does not detract from the legitimacy of his criticism.

Orwell was a Fabian socialist.

This is the tactic I've taken when confronted by a Sanders supporter: I say, "Would you agree with me that our government has become a lackey of a wealthy, self-serving elite, suppresses the middle class, and traps the poor into subsistence servitude?" When I get a "Hell, yeah!" response, I follow up with "Why, then, should that same oppressive, corrupt government be made bigger, and given more power to abuse?" The response is . . . crickets.

Interesting observation about the weed, Ben.

You are absolute correct about the Vodka. One of my Dad's employees brother was in the U.S.consulate office in Leningrad. He and his wife often visited the USSR from time to time and observed the dull look in peoples faces when they went to market to see what would be delivered that day from the farms. Most of the time they returned to their families with little produce. Vodka eased the pain and kept them subdued. Of course my friends had their private KGB people keep on them when in the USSR. We had great conversations about communism and it was clear it wasn't going to work long before the collapse. Today in the US I see medical marijuana as the vodka of Russia.

While the author's premises and conclusions are exactly right, is there anyone who hasn't read something similar, presented in a hundred different ways? To those who espouse the impossible promises or Bernie, all I can say is, "They are also blind who will not see."

Maybe it depends on the teacher. We started with a private school, had some problems, tried a public school, and have had a good experience so far. We haven't seen even a hint of it.

I don't believe in the left/right thing anyway, so I would see the Core Republican/Democratic Values thing as innocuous unless there was some other political element in the assignment. Even Core Democracy Values, would be questionable, since it downplays the limitations on majority rule in a republic. I would also dismiss that as a wording-choice issue, absent some other sign of politics.

The other day my kid's reader said something like "he put it further from the house." I struck a line through further in pencil and wrote farther.

Many years before the USSR fell, I read that a epidemic growing number of Russians dulled the emptiness felt in their lives with vodka.
I'm happy to say Bolshevik Bernie picked the right left-tilting country to lead the rest of the way into socialism.
We ain't just got vodka. We got all kinds of hard liquor to drink. Well, for the present anyway. There is always moonshine to fall back on.
There's also all kinds of funny stuff to smoke, pop and to shoot up with too.
Want to have any real fun in a socialist system? Be a black market profiteer! Just don't get caught by the red fuzz or knocked off by a rival cartel..

The author's bio makes it worth a read...

Socialism is promoted in a very subtle way. When my daughter was in public schools (bad idea) she had a fourth grade project titled "Core Democratic Values" assigned by her teacher who had Obama stickers all over her house. I re-titled it " Core Democracy Values" hoping not to piss off the teacher. Had i re-titled it "Core Republican Values" I surely would have pissed her off. If you read the Common Core history material you find glorification of very left wing people without a counter balance of right wing people.

One of the best descriptions of Socialism is found in Orwell's 1984. He describes ENGSOC as constructed like a pyramid. At the apex is the inner party. Membership is strictly controlled and limited to a select few. This is the true seat of power and its motives and machinations are hidden behind a veil of secrecy. This is where Socialism as a path to power is managed and controlled.
Below this lies the outer party. The outer party consists primarily of the "true believers". These are the people that actually believe in the promise of Socialism. For them Socialism is a secular religion complete with dogma, sinners and saints. Anyone that challenges the authority of the state is anathema and excommunicate.
At the base of the pyramid lies what Orwell referred to as the "Prols" or Proletariat. These accept Socialism because of its promise to separate action from consequence and the assurance the state will provide for all needs.
The fundamental flaw lies in the fact that while this kind of system functions well for social insects such as termites, ants and bees it is unsustainable when its members are individuals. It is for this reason that individuality is strongly discouraged in Socialist and Communist systems for the individual sows the seeds of destruction of the collectivist state.

socialism, communism, facism, collectivism; chose your poison as these are all one and the same.and regardless of what you think of the school system this is what is promoted.

"why are you astounded?"
The quote was from Dr. Conor's article, and I agree with it.

I do not accept the claim that the school system promotes socialism, but even if we assume for the moment it did, I would still be surprised by the support for Sanders. The reason is socialism has to take from the producers to help the poor. Sanders seems to have many promises for the middle class and even upper middle class. He only mentions the billionaires paying for this stuff. If you stole all the billionaires' wealth, it would not pay for all this. That's why I share Dr. Conor's surprise.

astounding; why? the educational system that has existed in the usa has been marching towards socialism for 100 years and that is what the present bulk of the population has been educated to think. si why are you astounded?

I am not sure these people are that aware or that smart...and that goes for sandwich, hiltery or trumpet supporters...but still, it does seem they are just widening the rabbit hole and more and more will get sucked in.

"The magnitude of Sanders’ supporters is truly astounding."
I know. When a fundamental change to the economy, like the introduction of agriculture or industrialization, shakes things up, it can lead to really bad decisions. I don't think we're on this path, but it's a real risk. It feels like people feel automation and IT shaking up the world in a radical way, and I looking for radical approaches. I hope we are not on this path.