Jean Jacques Rousseau in Exile, and Assassination of Francisco Ferrer Y Guardia Write-Up (a lil Copy/Paste)

10 Alternatives to Prussian-Industrial Totalitarian Fascist Autocratic Dictatorship Anti-Democratic Education: good leaders create good leaders, respective in their own fields; good leaders create, not followers, not a bunch of obedient uncle tom house niggers, a bunch of kiss-ass brown-nosing bitch ass nigger slaves, as Jerry Farber wrote so eloquently about in 1969 in his pamplet, the Student as Nigger, but more leaders;

The Post-Modern University for Revolutionaries

Jean Jacques Rousseau... man is born free, and everywhere, he is in chains. Jean Jacques Rousseau was the spirit and soul of the French Revolution.

1712-1778; Rousseau died 2 years after Declaration of Independence is written, and 1 year before the French Revolution began, and 3 years before the Haitian Revolution began.

1776-1783, the American Revolution. 1789-1799, the French Revolution. 1791-1803, the Haitian Revolution. Napoleon wanted to re-enslave the Haitian people because he didn't want Black folks to think they could run their own republic.

If France had not supported the United States in their Revolution against the tyranny of King George 3^rd, US would not be in existence today. Louisville carries the name of the French tyrant who helped to finance the US Revolution. The United States declared their neutrality when France and England went to war, during the French Revolution. George Washington went with Alexander Hamilton, and not Thomas Jefferson. Thomas Jefferson resigned his position as Secretary of State after Washington declared officially the US would be neutral. The neutrality declaration turned out to be a poor decision, since Great Britain would come back and burn down the White House in the War of 1812, when England tried to get her colonies back.

Rousseau considered himself a citizen of Geneva. He was born in Genera, Switzerland, and died in France. Rousseau considered him a Citizen of Geneva, and while it was in Switzerland, Geneva was an independent Republic, a city-state, with a Calvinist heritage. Rousseau liked the Italian language better than the French language. He felt like it sounded more natural than French.

1762, Rousseau his most famous works, Emile, and The Social Contract.

The State of Nature:

Rousseau holds that "uncorrupted morals" prevail in the "state of nature" and used the Caribbeans as an example of the “noble savage”, which simplifies Rousseau's views, even though he never actually used that term himself. Rousseau praised the admirable moderation of the Caribbeans in expressing the sexual urge despite the fact that they live in a hot climate, which "always seems to inflame the passions". Rousseau wrote that morality was not a societal construct, but rather "natural" in the sense of "innate", an outgrowth from man's instinctive disinclination to witness suffering, from which arise the emotions of compassion or empathy. Humans "in a state of Nature" may act with all of the ferocity of an animal. They are good only in a negative sense, insofar as they are self-sufficient and thus not subject to the vices of political society. In fact, Rousseau's natural man is virtually identical to a solitary chimpanzee or other ape, such as the orangutan as described by Buffon; and the "natural" goodness of humanity is thus the goodness of an animal, which is neither good nor bad.

Rousseau says that our souls become corrupts as science and technology progresses. Savages were civilized, and the civilized are the savage.

Emile, or On Education:

Rousseau urged that young people be given freedom to enjoy sunlight, exercise, and play. He recognized that there are definite periods of development in a child's life, and he argued that children's learning should be scheduled to coincide with them. A child allowed to grow up in this fashion will achieve the best possible development. Education should begin in the home. Parents should not preach to their children but should set a good example. Rousseau believed that children should make their own decisions.

L'Emile ou de l'education (1762) and Du contrat social (1762)... The Social Contract and Emile were both burned by the authorities in Geneva. his books were banned in several countries.

Emile: 'heretical’ education reform treatise; Social Contract and Emile. Two works caused uproar among French Catholics and Calvinist censors who were deeply offended and publicly burnt the books. Orders for his arrest were issued. L'émile was condemned (officially dissaproved of) by the Paris Parliament (the governing body) and heavily criticized by the archbishop of Paris. Both of the books were burned by the authorities in Geneva, Switzerland. In Paris, as in Geneva, they ordered the book to be burned and the author arrested; all the Maréchal de Luxembourg could do was to provide a carriage for Rousseau to escape from France. After formally renouncing his Genevan citizenship in 1763, Rousseau became a fugitive, spending the rest of his life moving from one refuge to another.

On May 27, 1762, Rousseau's Emile was put on sale in Paris, apparently with tacit permission from the censors. On June 3 the police confiscated the book. On June 7 it was attacked at the Sorbonne. On June 9 the Parlement of Paris (a court, not a legislature) condemned the Emile and ordered the arrest of its author. June 9, 2013. That afternoon, warned of these actions, Jean-Jacques fled the French capital. Two days later, the Emile was burned in Paris, while in Geneva both the Emile and Social Contract were confiscated. On June 19 the authorities of Rousseau's native city burned both books and ordered his arrest.

1762, Rousseau flees France. Forced to flee from France, Rousseau sought refuge at Yverdon in the territory of Bern. When Rousseau got to Yverdun, in the canton of Bern, than the government ordered his explusion.

Expelled by the Bernese authorities, he found asylum in Môtiers, a village in the Prussian principality of Neuchâtel. Here in 1763 he renounced his Genevan citizenship. Motiers, a territory controlled by Frederick the Great of Prussia (who granted Jean-Jacques's petition for asylum). Enduring this persecution but becoming paranoid and insecure, Rousseau lived in exile in Prussia.

More of Rousseau's books were burned later in the Hague and in Paris. The same year, Rousseau fled Motiers after a nearby pastor preached a sermon attacking him and his house was stoned;

The publication of his Lettres écrites de la montagne (1764), in which he defended L'Émile and criticized "established" reformed churches, aroused the wrath of the Neuchâtel clergy. His house was stoned, and Rousseau fled to the isle of St. Pierre in the Lake of Biel, the Isle of Saint-Pierre, immortalized in the Fifth Promenade, was abruptly ended by an order of expulsion by the Bernese.

Finally, through the good offices of the British philosopher David Hume, he settled at Wotton, Derbyshire, England, in 1766. Hume managed to obtain from George III a yearly pension for Rousseau. Rousseau believing Hume to be in league with his Parisian and Genevan enemies refused the pension and openly broke with David Hume. He returned to France under a false name after accusing Hume of disloyalty.

Xxxxxxxxxx

Francisco Ferrer y Guardia, a Spanish Anarchist, founder of the Modern School. The first and most notable Modern School in America was formed in New York City in 1911, and then later a community was founded around a school, known as Ferrer Colony and Modern School.

Francisco Ferrer y Guardia was a follower of Spanish republican leader Manuel Ruiz Zorrilla. Ferrer was exiled to Paris with his wife and children in 1885. Divorcing in 1899, he remarried a wealthy Parisian teacher shortly thereafter. In 1901 he returned to Spain and opened the Escuela Moderna (The Modern School) to teach middle-class children (then) radical social values.

In 1906 he was arrested on suspicion of involvement with Mateu Morral's attack on King Alfonso XIII and released uncharged over a year later. His school failed and closed while he was incarcerated.

Early in the summer of 1908, after his release from jail, he wrote the story of the Modern School. The work was entitled The Origins and Ideals of the Modern School and was translated into English by Joseph McCabe and published by the Knickerbocker Press in 1913.



Following the declaration of martial law in 1909 during the Tragic Week, he was arrested and, having been found guilty after a lengthy trial, executed by firing squad at Montjuich Fortress in Barcelona on 13 October.

October 12, 1909, Francisco Ferrer y Guardia was shot in the trenches of the Montjuich Fortress at Barcelona. A Military Council had found him guilty of being “head of the insurrection” which had, a few months before, lit the flame of civil war in the city and province. The clergy had openly petitioned the Spanish Premier, when Ferrer was arrested, to look to the Modern School and its founder for the source of the revolutionary feeling; and the Premier had, instead of rebuking them, promised to do so.

When Ferrer was arrested the prosecution spent many weeks in collecting evidence against him, and granted a free pardon to several men who were implicated in the riot, for testifying against him. These three or four men were the only witnesses out of fifty who would have been heard patiently in a civil court of justice, and even their testimony would at once have crumbled under cross-examination. But there was no cross-examination, and no witnesses were brought before the court. Five weeks were occupied in compiling an enormously lengthy indictment of Ferrer; then twenty-four hours were given to an inexperienced officer, chosen at random, to analyse it and prepare a defence. Evidence sent in Ferrer’s favour was confiscated by the police; the witnesses who could have disproved the case against him were kept in custody miles away from Barcelona; and documents which would have tended to show his innocense were refused to the defending officer against the brutal injustice of the proceedings, the military judges found Ferrer guilty, and he was shot.

The Modern School was founded in 1901 in Barcelona by free-thinker Francesco Ferrer I Guardia, the school's stated goal was to "educate the working class in a rational, secular and non-coercive setting". In practice, high tuition fees restricted attendance at the school to wealthier middle class students. It was privately hoped that when the time was ripe for revolutionary action, these students would be motivated to lead the working classes.It closed in 1906. Shortly after, Ferrer was executed for sedition.

On the first of September, 1909, the Spanish government--at the behest of the Catholic Church--arrested Francisco Ferrer. On the thirteenth of October, after a mock trial, he was placed in the ditch at Montjuich prison, against the hideous wall of many sighs, and shot dead. Instantly Ferrer, the obscure teacher, became a universal figure, blazing forth the indignation and wrath of the whole civilized world against the wanton murder.
The killing of Francisco Ferrer was not the first crime committed by the Spanish government and the Catholic Church. The history of these institutions is one long stream of fire and blood. Still they have not learned through experience, nor yet come to realize that every frail being slain by Church and State grows and grows into a mighty giant, who will some day free humanity from their perilous hold.

In any case, by the time Ferrer had reached twenty he had declared himself a Republican, an anticleric, and joined the Freemasons, the traditional haven for liberal thought and political conspiracy in Spain.

The Modern School:
Francisco Ferrer y Guardia: planned to establish a curriculum based on the natural sciences and moral rationalism, freed of all religious dogma and political bias. Although students were to receive systematic instruction, there were to be no prizes for scholarship, no marks or examinations, indeed no atmosphere of competition, coercion, or humiliation. The classes, in Ferrer's words, were to be guided by the "principle of solidarity and equality." During a period when "wayward" students in clerical schools were required to drop to their knees in a penitent fashion and then be beaten, the teachers in the Escuela Moderna were forewarned that they must "refrain from any moral or material punishment under penalty of being disqualified permanently." Instruction was to rely exclusively on the spontaneous desire of students to acquire knowledge and permit them to learn at their own pace. The purpose of the school was to promote in the students "a stern hostility to prejudice," to create "solid minds, capable of forming their own rational convictions on every subject."
To Ferrer, however, "the education of a man does not consist merely in the training of his intelligence, without having regard to the heart and will. Man is a complete and unified whole, despite the variety of his functions. He presents various facets, but is at the bottom a single energy, which sees, loves, and applies a will to the prosecution of what he has conceived." One of the most important tasks of the Escuela Moderna, Ferrer insisted, was to maintain this unity of the individual, to see to it that there was no "duality of character in any individual -- one which sees and appreciates truth and goodness, and one which follows evil." The school itself must be a microcosm of the real world, embodying many different sides and human personalities. Hence, Ferrer insisted not only on coeducation of the sexes but on a representative variety of pupils from all social classes. Every effort must be made to bring the children of workers together with those of middle-class parents in order to create a milieu for the young that is fully liberatory, a "school of emancipation that will be concerned with banning from the mind whatever divides men, the false concepts of property, country, and family." Much of this is pure Anarchism and reveals the influence of Lorenzo and Kropotkin on Ferrer's mind.

Arrested in September 1909 in the wake of the popular and violent protests in Catalonia against Spain’s highly unpopular war against Moroccan tribesmen. The events of that week in July 1909 came to be known as the ‘Tragic Week’ (La Semana Tragica) for which the Spanish government and Catholic Church selected their most hated enemy, Francisco Ferrer, as the scapegoat — ‘the author in chief of the popular rebellion”. Within a month he had faced a mock military trial – a drumhead court martial – and on October 13 he was escorted to the ‘ditch of many sighs’ in Montjuich Castle and executed by a firing squad.

Francisco Ferrer Y Guardia's quotes:

“… It is a well-known fact that peoples’ knowledge about the condition of their lives is limited to what the master class wants them to know. Very few are those who think about what they read, and fewer still those who had an opportunity to study the anarchist ideal. People are still inclined to think that should the day come when the Anarchists shall “rule” nobody would be ‘safe in his person and nobody could feel sure in the possession of the smallest thing, since they aim at the “destruction” of property. Yet it must be remembered — and we ought to repeat this as often as we can – that in a well organised society, viz — an Anarchist society, everyone will have his own house, his furniture, his clothes, his works of art, his tools, everything in fact that will help to make his life comfortable and happy.

We shall not pass from the absurd and foolish system of today, founded on authority and property, to one of solidarity and the fraternity as rapidly as things are done on the stage, by a quick change of scenery: on the contrary it will require all the propaganda all the teaching, and, above everything, all the example that we can afford to give in order to make an impression upon the mentality of the irrational unreflective beings who today form the great majority of the population. We Anarchists desire to destroy property as it exists today because it is the result of the exploitation of man by man, of privilege assisted by the state and of the unjust right of the stronger.
We Anarchists think it is not just that there should be side by side owners of vast estates and people who have not a piece of land on which to stretch themselves: persons on whom all riches of the world descend by right of birth, and persons to whom all the sorrow and misery of the world are the only heritage.
We Anarchists do not think that a title deed or a will is sufficient justification for a person to spend his life without working without contributing to the common welfare.
In the Anarchist society the education and the instruction of children shall be such as to point out to them the duty and necessity of work, and that from this duty only those shall be exempt who are physically incapable.
Since in the anarchistic society there will not be any longer the bad example and the perverting influence of the sight of people slaving away all the day long side by side with others whose whole occupation is the change of amusements: since there will no longer be the disturbing moral influence that comes from daily seeing and taking for granted that there should be side by side hungry people and people over-fed, everybody will – as a matter of course — contribute to the production of the common social wealth, in proportion to his abilities and power, and food will be assured to all.
It will then be quite easy to the teachers and educators of the day to impress upon the young mind the duty, the pleasure and the necessity of work.
Mankind having attained to a certain degree of reasonableness it will also be comparatively easy to find out a working arrangement by which everyone could retain possession of the things he likes and cherishes, even without harm resulting to anybody from this right to a form of personal property, or that it should create a supremacy of a class of men over another.
In a few words: many today oppose Anarchism for no other reason than they are unable to conceive a rational and well-organised society. …”

as long as the education of children, the adults of tomorrow, was left in the hands of both the church and the ruling classes there would be no hope of attaining the libertarian society that he, as an anarchist, longed for.

“Education” means in practice domination or domestication. Teachers have inspired themselves solely with the principles of discipline and authority, which always appeal to social organisers; such men have only one clear idea and one will – the children must learn to obey, to believe, and to think according to the prevailing social dogmas. If this were the aim, education could not be other than we find it today. There is no question of promoting the spontaneous development of the child’s faculties, – or encouraging it to seek freely the satisfaction of the physical, intellectual and moral needs. There is question only of imposing ready-made ideas on it, of preventing it from ever thinking otherwise than is required for the maintenance of existing social institutions – of it, in a word, an individual‘ rigorously adapted to the social mechanism.” ²

“…The teachers are merely conscious or unconscious organs of their (the ruling classes) will, and have been trained on their principles. From their tenderest years, and more drastically than anybody, they have endured the discipline of authority. Very few have escaped this despotic domination; they are generally powerless against ii, because they are oppressed by the scholastic organisation to such an extent that they have nothing to do but obey …”³