 |
| George Washington Carver was dynamic about being dynamic. |
(1) Can a partial decentralization of political, governmental responsibility, (2) through the advent of a dynamic educational curriculum that integrates core academic standards with enterprise inspire individual duty and responsibility unto others, (3) energize our national economy?
(1) Does a partial redistribution of social responsibility increase cost efficiency, innovation, creativity, and individual financial wealth? What factors would have to be present to effect such a reality? (2) The increase of a transfer of many of the practical responsibilities away from the government and unto the private sector would be positively disruptive in the sense that the process and its final effect would hearken back to the non-political conservatism that (3) favors the spirit of the fundamental laws of individual human rights as written and intended in our Declaration of Independence. This creates a political shift and increases national community advocacy and discussion: an effect that political groups with self-interests would abhor, because of its decentralization effect that shifts fiscal oversight from a few unto many.
 |
| Because of his scientific work, George Washington Carver got funding to educate Americans on how to improve their farming efficiency and efficacy. |
An increase in the transfer of decentralization of the responsibilities that state and national government have unto the private sector, can only be to the degree that there is an increase in the (1) number of willing and able individuals and private enterprising organizations (non-profits, B-Corporations, self-proprietorships) that assume the responsibility to take on local & national community projects that serve the greater good, (2) and the success of these to render excellence that is practical to the local & national good.
The focus on reshaping educational curriculum to trim and sharpen its objective of what educational success is, will require sustained national discussion that places political pressure on state & federal government to order a curricula that brings together (1) financial independence, (2) critical thinking, and (3) a fine regard and understanding of the fundamental laws of our Declaration of Independence and our Constitution.
The favoring of educating a solemn sense of individual duty becomes tremendously dynamic and practical, (1) if the right leadership is in place to bring this about, and (2) if the individual is afforded a financially independent construct that empowers him or her (and their families). Otherwise, who can afford to be compassionate critical thinkers and doers of social good, altogether assuming a responsibility ‘to care?’ The well-known doctrine “to care” often brought to national recollection by the writings and works of George Washington, Abigail & John Adams, their son John Quincy Adams, Frederick Douglass, Abraham Lincoln, George Washington Carver, Martin Luther King, and Ronald Reagan, was exemplified in their life’s work; they having found a means of employment that allowed them to endeavor to care for others in their own unique ways. These champions were public speakers, writers, worked in government, and worked as scientists, soldiers, and farmers, often times these leaders took on a variety of aptitudes in order to keep themselves, their families, and their endeavoring spirits moving ahead. A study of each of their lives would prove that they were dynamic about staying dynamic; they were critical thinkers, and they continually had a prescient care to align America with the fundamental principles found in our Declaration of Independence; itself a legal document championing the protection of individual liberty.
 |
| George Washington Carver worked on increasing and diversifying American energy independence with Henry Ford. |
It can be safely said then that a financially-independent citizen taught to value such principles directly supports the American tradition of safeguarding individual liberty, and is in the best situational dynamic to continue to endeavor in this regard.
The alignment of an educational curricula that welds the dynamism of financial independence, social good, individual critical thinking, the tradition of national duty, and an understanding of the connection of all these to our fundamental laws and that spirit of 1776, also requires and banks on a non-political leadership that can deftly maneuver past political self-interest to soundly arrive upon the journey of putting into place the metrics to support the final destination: dynamic, critical thinking, financially-independent renaissance Americans.
Such a national leadership would not limit competition and favor industries to the detriment of others, but would help support and set the educational metrics to unleash the individual human potential of Americans. Undoubtedly, this leadership of stewardship would not have its own competing agenda (self-interest), but would seek a non-divisive route of empowering individual self-determination with a denominator of financial independence, and a critically thinking adherence that does presciently anchor itself upon the only foundation that Americans can agree on, the shared ideas that make us a national community of so many different ethnicities, religions, skin colors, and walks of life: our fundamental natural rights found in our Declaration of Independence and our Constitutions.
Comments